Thursday, May 31, 2007

Confronting the boycotters

A must-read article by Leo McKinstry of the British newspaper the Daily Express about the antisemitism prevelant in left-wing intellectual circles, "SHAME ON THE LEFT AND ITS VICIOUS HATRED OF ISRAEL".
Yet it is a bizarre paradox of modern Britain that there is now a climate of increasing hostility towards Jews, particularly in those Left-wing intellectual circles which otherwise make a fetish of their concern for racial sensitivities.

Dressed up as criticism of the state of Israel, anti-Semitism is becoming not just tolerated but even fashionable in some of our civic institutions, including the universities and parts of the media.

Thanks to the Left’s neurotic hatred of Israel, we now have the extraordinary sight of self-styled liberal campaigners launching McCarthyite witch-hunts against anyone deemed to have Israeli connections, as in this week’s debate at the University and College Union’s annual conference at Bournemouth calling for a boycott of all Israeli academic institutions.

Respect for democracy, individual rights and freedom of speech are being crushed beneath the juggernaut of shrill indignation.

What is particularly disturbing is the way opposition to the Jewish state descends into vicious antagonism against Jews themselves, as shown by this sickening recent outburst from writer Pamela Hardyment, a member of the National Union of Journalists, which in April voted to boycott Israeli goods.

Explaining her support for the NUJ’s stance, Ms Hardyment described Israel as “a wonderful Nazi-like killing machine backed by the world’s richest Jews”.

Then, like some lunatic from the far-Right, she referred to the “so-called Holocaust” before concluding: “Shame on all Jews, may your lives be cursed.”

Such words could have come straight from Hitler or the most fervent supporter of Osama Bin Laden.

But Ms Hardyment is hardly unique.

Read the article in its entirety.

Also, academics and students hit back at the UCU
Among those condemning the UCU decision are the Russell group of research-led universities and the National Union of Students
In a hard-hitting statement, the Russell group "rejected outright" the boycott call.

Its chairman, Prof Malcolm Grant, who is also president and provost of University College London, said: "It is a contradiction in terms and in direct conflict with the mission of a university.

"It betrays a misunderstanding of the academic mission, which is founded squarely on freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech.

"Any institution worthy of the title of university has the responsibility to protect these values, and it is particularly disturbing to find an academic union attacking academic freedom in this way."

Prof Grant promised that its universities "will uphold academic freedom by standing firm against any boycott that threatens it".

Meanwhile, the executive director of the International Advisory Board for Academic Freedom (IAB), Ofir Frankel, accused the union of allowing itself "to act as a one-sided player in Middle Eastern politics".

He said: "The IAB is amazed that the extremists that led their union to such an initiative decided not to discuss the option to pass this initiative to a vote of all 120,000 members, a decision that could have allowed the majority to rescue their union from this discriminatory action by reharnessing the values of academic freedom, discourse and debate, as their own general secretary suggested."

The chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, Jeremy Newmark, described the union's decision as "an assault on academic freedom" that "damages the credibility of British academia as a whole". He called for the union to organise a full membership ballot before introducing any boycott.

The decision by the UCU was also condemned by the Academic Friends of Israel, which accused the union of having "failed to support the wishes of its membership".

Criticism of the UCU decision also came from student organisations.

Hat tip Israpundit

Israeli public figures express regret over Gaza withdrawal

It's clear to all except the most diehard peaceniks and self-hating radical leftist Jews, that relinquishing territory to Israel's enemies leads to more terror and war, not peaceful coexistence. The so-called "occupation" has never been the problem. Israel's genocidal enemies don't accept its existence period, yet Israel's critics never grasp this reality, they continue to insist upon surrendering territory and negotiating, even though every time they do so it results in increased terrorism.
( The Yesha Council of Judea, Samaria and Gaza communities has published a collection of statements by public figures who supported or helped implement the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria and have since expressed regret. The following are some of the statements:

Maj.-Gen (ret.) Yiftah Ron-Tal, IDF ground forces commander at the time of the Disengagement: In the year preceding the Disengagement, the army trained mostly for dismantling communities, and that prevented it from preparedness for the war in Lebanon. The training for the Disengagement not only prevented preparedness for such a war, but dragged it away from the consensus as a people’s army. It is nearly certain that the excitement of those who led the decision and implementation of this is directly tied to the big failure in Lebanon…I still cannot understand how Israel gave up parts of its land willingly and with abandon, and how the residents connected to that land were turned into criminals, instead of raising their dedication as a banner of preserving the Jewish identity of the state of Israel.
- Kfar Chabad weekly, October 6, 2006

Ilana Dayan, Journalist, Host of Popular ‘Uvda’(Fact) Program on Channel 2: How come nobody is standing up and asking where this rain of Kassams is coming from? Why didn’t we ask the deep questions? Why didn’t we wonder whether this was the right way – even for those of us who wanted to divide the land? Why did we only examine the Disengagement when ‘orange’ youth burned tires in the street? Why did [Sharon confidant and Disengagement architect] Dov Weisglas not tell us there would be a rain of Kassams on Sderot? Because this wasn’t popular and because there was a strong prime minister [Ariel Sharon] with a firm hold on the central hubs of the media.
- address at B’nai Brith journalism prize ceremony, June 22, 2006

Maj.-Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland, Chairman of the National Security Council and one of the Disengagement’s chief architects: There was no forward contemplation. The Disengagement contributed nothing to a solution to the conflict…There was no discussion of its merits. When I was tasked with planning it, all that existed was the word ‘Disengagement’ used by Sharon at the Herzliya Conference…I was given four months to plan, but Dov Weisglas was already committing to the Americans and leaking details of the withdrawal plans to the press…The paradigm of two states for two nations is not implementable. Perhaps the whole world agrees to it, but on the ground, it simply cannot be done.
- Haaretz, June 1, 2006

Read the rest
Hat tip to Israpundit

Another qassam victim dies

When does Israel finally say enough is enough and demolish the hamas jackals in Gaza? Isn't firing missiles at disabled children enough of a reason to take out these fiends en masse?
The 11th victim of Kassam rocket fire died of wounds he received last week, Israel Radio revealed Thursday morning.

Thirteen-year-old Chai Shalom suffered from cerebral palsy, and was deaf, mute, and confined to a wheel-chair. He was hospitalized after a rocket landed next to a bus transporting him and three other disabled children.

According to the report, all four children were wounded by the force of the blast. The driver of the bus fainted and Shalom's caretaker alerted his father.

The boy died last week in Soroka Hospital after his condition worsened.

His father asked that Shalom be recognized as a terror victim and was denied because his particular incident had not been reported.

Qassam hits Sderot apartment building

A Qassam rocket hit an apartment building wednesday night, causing temporary black-outs throughout the city and several people suffered from shock.
The rocket hit the roof of Dan and Osnat Ben Haim's house. The couple and their children were in the fortified room during the attack, but upon seeing the damage caused to the house by the Qassam they suffered shock and were treated by Magen David Adom paramedics.

The family was later taken to the municipal trauma center for further treatment.

"It's very hard for me to talk about what happened, it was a great miracle," Dan Ben Haim said about two hours after the attack. "The damage caused to the house is very big, but we were lucky that the damage was only to property and that we weren't hurt. This could have ended in a disaster."

Earlier Wednesday saw five Qassam rockets fired at Sderot and the western Negev.

One of the rockets hit a flat, causing six people to suffer shock. The apartment hit was empty at the time, but adjoining flats sustained heavy damages.

Salah al-Din Brigades, the military wing of the Popular Resistance Committees claimed responsibility for the attack.

Israel's security cabinet met Wednesday and unfortunately decided that Israel's Gaza policy will remain the same.
Several ministers called for harsher action against the terror emerging from Gaza. Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Eli Yishai called for the evacuation of Palestinian population from entire areas and obliterating those areas.

Earlier Wednesday the Knesset's Finance Committee sanctioned Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decree declaring Sderot and the Gaza vicinity communities confrontation line communities, making business owners in the area eligible for non-direct damage compensation.

UK academics boycott of Israeli universities approved

The UK's largest union of university lecturers approved Wednesday a proposal to boycott Israeli academic institutions.

The University and College Union (UCU) heeded calls from Palestinian trade unions for "a comprehensive and consistent boycott of all Israeli institutions." (Ynetnews)

What can be done about the blatant and increasing hostility towards Israel among the British elite? Herb Keinon of the Jerusalem Post suggests a different strategy on the part of Israel to confront the growing trend of boycotts on the part of the British establishment. He says Jerusalem needs to take a more forceful stand on this issue, and should follow the lead of Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas, who turned down an invitation to give a guest lecture at London's Imperial College in July because of the National Union of Journalists boycott of Israeli products. For example, some suggest that Israel respond to the British journalists union boycott by denying British journalists access to Israeli government officials.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

The Soviet role in the six day war

There is a new book out by husband and wife team Isabella Ginor and Gideon Remez, titled "Foxbats over Dimona: The Soviets' nuclear gamble in the six day war". They claim the Soviet politburo instigated the six day war as a scheme to eliminate Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona.

Daniel Pipes writes:
Moshe Sneh, an Israeli communist leader (and father of Ephraim Sneh, the country’s current deputy minister of defense), told the Soviet ambassador in December 1965 that an advisor to the prime minister had informed him about “Israel’s intention to produce its own atomic bomb.” Leonid Brezhnev and his colleagues received this piece of information with dead seriousness and decided – as did the Israelis about Iraq in 1981 and may be doing about Iran in 2007 – to abort this process through air strikes.

Rather than do so directly, however, Moscow devised a complex scheme to lure the Israelis into starting a war which would end with a Soviet attack on Dimona. Militarily, the Kremlin prepared by surrounding Israel with an armada of nuclear-armed forces in both the Mediterranean and Red seas, pre-positioning matériel on land, and training troops nearby with the expectation of using them. Perhaps the most startling information in Foxbats over Dimona concerns the detailed plans for Soviet troops to attack Israeli territory, and specifically to bombard oil refineries and reservoirs, and reach out to Israeli Arabs. No less eye opening is to learn that Soviet photo-reconnaissance MiG-25s (the “Foxbats” of the title) directly overflew the Dimona reactor in May 1967.

Politically, the scheme consisted of fabricating intelligence reports about Israeli threats to Syria, thereby goading the Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian forces to go on war-footing. As his Soviet masters then instructed, Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser moved his troops toward Israel, removed a United Nations buffer force, and blockaded a key naval route to Israel – three steps that together compelled the Israelis to move to a full-alert defense. Unable to sustain this posture for long, they struck first, thereby, it appeared, falling into the Soviet trap.

But then the Israel Defense Forces did something astonishing. Rather than fight to a draw, as the Soviets expected, they quickly won what I have called “the most overwhelming victory in the annals of warfare.” Using purely conventional means, they defeated three enemy Arab states in six days, thereby preempting the planned Soviet invasion, which had to be scuttled.

This fiasco made the elaborate Soviet scheme look inept, and Moscow understandably decided to obscure its own role in engineering the war (its second major strategic debacle of the decade – the attempt to place missiles in Cuba having been the first). The cover-up succeeded so well that Moscow’s responsibility for the Six-Day War has disappeared from histories of the conflict. Thus, a specialist on the war like Michael Oren, has coolly received the Ginor-Remez thesis, saying he has not found “any documentary evidence to support” it.

This is not the first time I have heard the claim being made that the Soviet Union instigated the war by fabricating intelligence to Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser that Israel was going to attack Egypt. But this is the first I have heard that their motivation was to prevent Israel from producing nuclear weapons, and that they actually intended to militarily strike the Dimona facility. I wouldn't be surprised if this revelation is true. This book sounds like a fascinating read.
Hat tip Israpundit

Arrested terrorist received U.S. weapons and training

Aaron Klein of WND reports that terror chief Khaled Shawish, who was arrested by Israel, had been trained by the U.S., served in a senior capacity on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' U.S.-backed security detail and was a ranking member of a team that received and distributed American arms shipments the past two years. He was an officer in Abbas' Force 17 presidential guards who doubled as the Ramallah chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group. The U.S Congress approved $59 million to fatah's militias last month. Terror leaders told WND that hamas, islamic jihad and the popular resistance committees have infiltrated fatah.
According to Israel and Palestinian security sources, Shawish, as a member of Force 17, received U.S. training in 1997 at an American managed military base in the West Bank city of Jericho. The base continues to train Force 17 members. A number of other Brigades members who also double as Force 17 officers previously received U.S. training. Congress approved $59million in aid last month to fatah's militias. Terror spokesmen told WND that they have infiltrated fatah militias.

The U.S. in recent months reportedly transferred large quantities of weapons to Fatah, purportedly to back Abbas' military organizations in recent deadly clashes against Hamas.

The last confirmed U.S. weapons transfer to the Palestinians took place last May and consisted of 3,000 assault rifles, but WND reported multiple other transfers later were delivered to Fatah, including a cache of 7,000 rifles last January and about 8,000 assault rifles in February.

The weapons mostly arrived in convoys through the Jordan-Israel border and then reportedly were trucked by the Israel Defense Forces to the Gaza Strip and to Ramallah. The Ramallah shipments were received at the Muqata and a neighboring Force 17 base in which Shawish lives, according to Israeli and Palestinian security sources.

The sources said Shawish was part of the Force 17 team that inspected and distributed the American weapons to other Fatah militia members. According to the sources, Shawish himself has taken possession the past two years of multiple American assault rifles.

The information comes after WND reported last week the U.S. has sent diplomatic messages to the Palestinians that if aid were requested, Washington would bolster Abbas' Fatah organization in clashes against Hamas, including providing Fatah with American weapons, according to senior Israeli and Palestinian diplomatic sources.

The sources said Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator for the Gaza Strip and West Bank, passed messages to Abbas that the U.S. would aid Fatah with assault rifles and ammunition if the assistance is needed. The sources also said Dayton urged Israel to provide assistance to bolster Abbas' security forces in Gaza, particularly Force 17.

Hat tip to Israpundit

The real antisemitism underlying the boycotters

Stephen Pollard on his blog over at the UK Spectator, focuses on the underlying antisemitism of those who are pushing for boycotts of Israel. He posts a letter from Pamela Hardyment to the Jewish Community Information, which is a service provided by the Board of Deputies of British Jews.
From: Pamela Hardyment

Sent: 26 May 2007 13:53

Subject: Darfur


You are worried about Dafur!!!!!!!!!!! Yet you have in a wonderful Nazi like killing machine (thousands of palestinians have died or are incarcerated in camps, including Gaza and the West Bank) backed by the world's richest jews and , you are joking about Darfur aren't you?

Whatever you say, and I don't want to hear what you have to say because it will be the same old rhetoric, we in the UK have had enough of Israel, we (the NUJ of which I am a member) have finally voted to boycott Israeli goods (I have been doing this since 1957 so it just legitimises it and spreads the word, all items with 7.29 in the bar code, Jaffa Carmel, etc) - universities will bring in an academic boycott and architects are now joining in too. It won't stop there, we will do all in our power to make sure that you do not take any more land (you have already taken mine and refuse to pay for it). We can no longer send money to the PLO or Hamas, but we are sending people, we are not afraid of your wall, your evil soldiers (and you worry about one missing soldier, ha!) and will continue. We used to be mild, respected you because of the so called holocaust (a nice round number 6 million, what about the homosexuals, gypsies, deformed, dissenters, they NEVER get a mention and my family were among them)

So yes, we are very angry, we are working against Israel whereas before we supported you, and we will do all in our collective power to make life as uncomfortable for you as you make it for the Palestinians, shame on you, shame on all jews, may your lives be cursed

Yours with no shame whatsoever and no fear

pam hardyment

That letter is a blatant example of the antisemitic motivation of just one particular boycott supporter, however most boycotters are not so open regarding their hostility towards Jews. But if one considers the fact that there are so many countries in the world which are dictatorships that deny freedom to their citizens, and actually do perpetrate human rights abuses, why the obsessive focus on boycotting Israel? How about boycotting Sudan, China, just about every arab and muslim country from the Middle East to Africa to Pakistan etc.? Given the fact that Israel is constantly being singled out for boycott campaigns and villification, while the actions of all of those repressive nations are being virtually ignored, one has no choice but to conclude that antisemitism is the main motivating factor behind the boycott Israel movement.

Jenin comes to Lebanon

Jonathan Kay writes an op-ed in Canada's National Post challenging the world community's hypocrisy in its response to Lebanon's current fight against islamic terrorists in a Palestinian refugee camp in Tripoli, vis a vis the world's hysterical response to Israel's Operation Defensive Shield in Jenin in 2002. I've dealt with this issue in previous posts here and here

Last week, the Lebanese army attacked a squalid Palestinian refugee camp that's become infested with Islamist suicide terrorists and guerilla fighters. On May 20, government troops surrounded the camp, with tanks and artillery pieces shelling it at close range. Army snipers gunned down anything that moved. At least 18 civilians were killed, and dozens more injured. Water and electricity were cut off. By week's end, much of the camp had been turned into deserted rubble. Thousands of terrified residents fleeing the camp reported harrowing stories of famished, parched families trapped in their basements.

How did the rest of the world react? The Arab League quickly condemned "the criminal and terrorist acts carried out by the terrorist group known as Fatah al-Islam," and vowed to "give its full support to the efforts of the army and the Lebanese government." EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also condemned Fatah al-Islam, and declared Europe's "support" for Lebanon. And the UN Security Council called the actions of Fatah al-Islam "an unacceptable attack" on Lebanon's sovereignty. As for the Western media, most outlets ignored the story following the first flurry of news reports.

At this point, please indulge me by re-reading the first paragraph of this column -- except this time, substitute the world "Israeli" for "Lebanese" in the first sentence. Let's imagine what the world's reaction would be if the ongoing siege were taking place in Gaza or the West Bank instead of the Nahr al Bared refugee camp on the outskirts of Tripoli, Lebanon.

First of all, a flood of foreign journalists would descend on the camp to document Israel's cruelty and barbarism, and the story would remain front page news to this day. Al-Jazeera would be a 24/7 montage of grieving mothers swearing revenge on the Zionist butchers, and rumours would swirl of mass graves and poison gas. The Arab League, EU and United Nations would condemn Israeli aggression -- as would the editorial board of The New York Times. The Independent would dispatch Robert Fisk to embed with Fatah al-Islam. And the newspaper's cartoonist, Dave Brown, would produce another award-winning rendition of his signature theme: Jews eating Palestinian babies.

Actually, we don't need to speculate: What I have just written is exactly what happened when the Israeli army invaded the Jenin refugee camp to root out terrorists in April, 2002, a battle that was similar in scale to this month's siege at Nahr al Bared. (At Jenin, 52 refugee camp residents were killed -- most of them gunmen, according to Human Rights Watch. At Nahr al Bared, the figure is 45 and climbing.) The main difference between the two sieges is that Israel's army put its troops at far greater risk by invading Jenin with infantry -- whereas the less humane Lebanese army has simply pummelled Nahr al Bared with explosives from a distance. Jews apparently care a lot more about saving Palestinian civilians than do Lebanese soldiers.

read the rest

USS Liberty conspiracy theories resurface

An op-ed by Tim Fischer in the Australian newspaper "The Age", believes that Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty.
The reader can research the subject and reach a conclusion on deliberate or accidental. For my part, I now believe the evidence all points to it being a deliberate attack by Israel.

The two key issues arising from this are still relevant today. If Israel did deliberately attack the most powerful nation on Earth, it knows it can do so and get away with murder. Worse still, US military personnel now know that if the truth is politically inconvenient, they and their legacy are expendable.

The White House and Pentagon of the day, more so the US Congress, still need to get to the bottom of this saga.

Why is this important 40 years on? Because Israel needs to know that it will be exposed and held accountable for its actions and incidents, likewise Syria and the Palestinians, the latter of whom might contend the Liberty saga was one factor in delaying the creation of the nation state of Palestine.

We now know it is from this period that Israel cheerfully began building its own atomic bomb. We know Israel will push over the edge whenever it suits, because recent history shows that it can get away with such actions. Remember the thousands of cluster bombs that went into southern Lebanon last August after the ceasefire had been agreed but before its actual commencement?

The accusation that Israel deliberately sank the Liberty has surfaced from time to time from various conspiracy theorists, antisemites and anti-Zionists, which is really the same thing. Expect the 40th anniversary of the six day war to bring more of these people out of the woodwork.

The charge has been refuted by various sources. Among those are Michael B. Oren in his book, "USS Liberty: Case Closed".

Another refutation of the charges comes from top-secret documents released by America's National Security Agency, which concluded Israel's sinking of the Liberty was an accident. The documents are a transcript of conversations held by two Israeli Air Force helicopter pilots who were hovering over the Liberty as it was sinking. An American spy plane recorded their conversations, which refer to a search for Egyptian survivors from the "Egyptian warship" that had just been bombed.

In July 2002, the definitive study was published that puts to rest all conspiracy theories. "The Liberty Incident: The 1967 Attack on the U.S. Navy Spy Ship," is written by former Navy pilot and federal judge A. Jay Cristol.

Hat tip to HonestReporting

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Courageous Sderot mother

Israel21c profiles Mechi Fendel, an Israeli-American wife and mother of seven, who lives in Sderot and refuses to leave despite the daily bombardment of qassams.
"We were sent with a mission to try to strengthen others around us. When you go with a mission, you're strong and you don't get influenced by things that are not positive," she says. "It's really just my attitude and my husband's attitude. We don't get hysterical."

Fendel came to Israel 20 years ago from Staten Island, NY and met her husband, also a new immigrant from West Hempstead, Long Island. The pair came to Sderot 13 years ago with four children as part of the Sha'alei Torah movement in order to rehabilitate poor development towns in Israel and make them stronger. Her husband founded a yeshiva (a Jewish learning seminary) that grew in size from nine to 400 students in 11 years.

When 32-year old Sderot resident Shirel Feldman was killed last week in her car near a local bakery by a Kassam, Fendel made it a point the next day to visit the scene just to show her support.

"I wanted to give it business, but it was closed unfortunately," she says.

On Sunday another Israeli was killed in Sderot when a Kassam rocket hit the car in which he was driving. Thirty-five-year-old Oshri Oz, from Hod HaSharon was wounded in his neck by shrapnel and died when he was taken to Barzilai Medical Center in Ashkelon.

Owing to her religious observance, Fendel says her faith keeps her optimistic about the future, and instead of focusing on the ongoing missiles, she prefers to wax poetic about the miracles in Sderot.

"We have had up to 2,000 missiles launched at us, and only three or four people have lost their lives. I don't like using only, but every single one of those missiles could have killed," she said. "A miracle is that a Kassam fell at 11pm. on a Thursday at a shopping center and damaged 20 store fronts but no one was there. I see the miracles."

Read the whole story. Her courage and optimism are an inspiration. Pray for the safety of her and her family, and the people of Sderot who are currently under seige from their hateful, barbaric and genocidal neighbors. Contrast the wonderful people of Sderot with the vile and hideous culture of hatred and death that breeds in Gaza.

Palestinian Fatah-al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades group splits

Debkafile Exclusive Report:
The breakaway Fatah rebel group based in the West Bank has turned its back on Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and his senior adviser Mohammed Dahlan and established a separate suicide terrorist militia. Called the Martyr Abu Amar (Yasser Arafat) Brigades, the rebel group’s new commanders are Hamas Gaza operatives Hussein Hijaz and Abu Hilas (Abu Maher). They also take orders, as well as explosive supplies and funds, from the Lebanese Hizballah.

DEBKAfile quotes Israeli military and intelligence sources as rating this split as extremely dangerous. It affords Hamas a prime strategic asset for escalating its violent campaign against Israel.

Hamas managed in the middle of its factional war with Fatah to infiltrate the opposition’s West Bank strongholds and persuade a large faction to secede from the Fatah group and establish a Hamas-controlled militia. Israel did not prevent this happening.

The result, our counter-terror experts report, is a Hamas launching pad on the West Bank, previously controlled by Fatah, for a mass suicide bombing offensive against central Israel, projected by the Iran-backed Hamas as the next stage of its missile campaign from Gaza. The new Martyr Abu Amar Brigades have been given orders to gear up to stage multiple suicide truck bombings, Iraq style, in Israel’s main cities.

Hat tip to Israpundit

U.S.and Israel concerned about Russian test of Iskander-M missile

Debkafile exclusive report:, Israel has received information that Russian president Vladimir Putin is willing in principle to sell Iskander missiles to Syria. The Iskander has a 280km range and carries a 480-kilo warhead, and is considered one of the most advanced surface missiles in the world. US officials believe the Iskander-M is the new-generation missile to which Russian officials are referring as being capable of striking the interceptors and radar station which America plans to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic to shield Europe from Iranian missile attack. Israel is concerned that Syria would be able to mount a surprise attack undetected. The missile is going to be tested today.

The evil empire is back. It would appear we are entering a new cold war with Russia. Our government refuses to acknowledge that Russia is still our enemy, that putin is an enemy of freedom, democracy and human rights. He is still the same diabolical KGB agent as he was from the days of the Soviet Union.

Monday, May 28, 2007

Terror mastermind arrested

After seven years, fatah terror leader khaled shawish, who was behind dozens of attacks on Israeli civilians, including the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane's son, was arrested in a joint IDF and Shin Bet operation. Among the attacks he directed was a 2002 suicide bombing attack on King George street in Jerusalem, another 2002 attack carried out by a female suicide bomber at a checkpoint at a main traffic route outside Jerusalem, and a shooting attack at the French Hill neighborhood.

For seven years 36-year-old Khaled Shawish has evaded arrest by Israeli security forces, making the prominent al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigades commander one of the most wanted figures in the West Bank.

But on Monday afternoon a joint IDF, Police Counter-Terrorism and Shin Bet operation led a Special Forces team to arrest him in his private vehicle in Ramallah.

Originally from Jenin, Shawish has spent the past several years hiding in the Muqata compound in central Ramallah and was one of the many who barricaded themselves inside the compound during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002.

Israeli security forces have linked Shawish with dozens of terror attacks and attempted attacks inside Israel, all of which resulted in the murders of eight Israelis and the wounding of dozens more.

In December 2000 Shawish was involved in the attack on the car of Benjamin Kahane, son of Rabbi Meir Kahane, near the settlement of Ofra. Benjamin and his wife were shot dead and their five daughters were seriously wounded in the attack.

Terrorist cell ready to attack Jerusalem

World Net Daily is reporting that the al aksa martyrs brigades has established a terror cell in the area of Jerusalem in order to carry out attacks in the city.
"We have Israeli Arab brothers who are members of the Brigades who live in Israel and will [carry out] in the coming days and weeks shootings and suicide bombings," the unnamed Brigades leader told the news site. He added, "Even in the case that there will be a ceasefire in Gaza, [we] will keep attacking Israel."

Memorial Day 2007

Sunday, May 27, 2007

Another evil Zionist conspiracy

Treating a baby from Gaza with a heart defect. Here's another example of the superiority of our Judeo-Christian culture over theirs. While palestinians incite hatred and violence against Jews, and conjure up different ways to kill Israeli children, the Israelis are working to save the lives of palestinians every day, because their culture values the sanctity of life, as does ours, even the lives of the children of sworn enemies bent on their anihilation. This of course won't matter one iota to the critics of Israel, who, no matter what the facts reveal, insist Israel treats arabs cruelly, and turn reality on its head by portraying the arabs as victims of Israeli agression.

A Magen David Adom ambulance transferred an eight-day-old Palestinian baby from Gaza to the Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer Sunday evening.

This humanitarian act took place during one of the more difficult days in terms of Qassam launchings, during which a 36-year-old Oshri Oz was killed in Sderot

The baby suffers from a congenital heart defect and without proper treatment will not survive long. He was transferred to the Erez crossing, where an MDA ambulance was waiting to transfer him to hospital ventilated and in an incubator.

"We transfer patients from the Gaza Strip under fire on a daily basis," said Moshe Vaknin, deputy manager of Lachish region of MDA. "Last week, our medics continued to treat a patient while shells were fired at the terminal at Erez. During the Shavuot holiday we evacuated another baby in an incubator, endangering our staff."

The baby is now hospitalized at the intensive care department at the Safra Children's Hospital at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer.

Contrasting the world's response to Lebanon vis a vis Israel

Joshua L. Gleis, writing in the Jerusalem Post, addresses the issue regarding the international community's double standard in how it is currently responding to the fighting in Lebanon as opposed to how Israel was treated during it's 2002 Operation Defensive Shield in the Jenin refugee camp. He mentions the fact that there has been no calls for an investigation into the Lebanese army's actions in the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp, no cries from the arab world over the deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians, and no demands by human rights organizations to access the area to scrutinize the actions of the Lebanese army. Also, the UN has not been called upon to examine the operation and newspapers are actually referring to fatah-al islam as terrorists, a word never used to describe attacks against Israel.

He also goes on to point out how the palestinians are oppressed by their fellow arabs, such as being denied citizenship by their arab host countries, restricted from jobs and educational opportunities, and deported from countries at the whim of security officials. He says the world only cares about palestinian suffering is when it is at the hands of Israelis and describes such hypocrisy as astonishing.

An editorial sympathetic to Lebanon published in the LA Times epitomizes the double standard. It says it is unacceptable for any government to shell a refugee camp, but equally unacceptable for a refugee camp to become a terrorist enclave. I don't recall such understanding and context when it came to Israel's war against hezbollah, who were operating amongst civilians in Lebanon. Instead, Israel was derided for killing civilians and using disproportionate force, and hardly any news outlets bothered to mention that the civilian deaths were caused by hezbollah's use of human shields.

Hat tip to Backspin blog.

Latest news roundup

A 35 year old man was viciously murdered in Sderot when hamas savages fired a qassam which hit the car he was sitting in. The man was identified as Oshri Oz, he is survived by two children and a wife in the advanced stages of pregnancy.

U.S. raided an al qaeda hide-out northeast of Baghdad and freed 42 Iraqis who were being held captive. Some were tortured and suffered broken bones. Great work from our soldiers.

Israel pledges more strikes on hamas
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday pledged more attacks on Hamas after a rocket from Gaza killed an Israeli, and brushed aside efforts by Egypt and Palestinian moderates to negotiate a new truce. "No one is immune," Olmert said of Hamas.

The taliban release 3 Afghan aid workers
The Taliban released three Afghan aid workers Sunday who were kidnapped with two French colleagues nearly two months ago, as the militant group announced a new operation targeting government and foreign forces.

Thousands leave Lebanon refugee camp. I'm still waiting for the world community's shrill cries of disproportionate force, war crimes and massacres.

The insane islamist regime in Iran pretends not to know anything about missing Iranian-Americans being detained in Iran. Among them are Kian Tajbakhsh, an urban planning consultant who has also worked for the World Bank. Ali Shakeri, who was supposed to leave Iran and fly to Europe on May 13 but never arrived at his destination. Haleh Esfandiari, director of the Middle East Program at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars. The government accuses Esfandiari, also an Iranian-American, of working for an organization that it claims was seeking to topple the government. Another Iranian-American, Parnaz Azima, a journalist for the U.S.-funded Radio Farda, has been prohibited from leaving Iran since her passport was seized in January. Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent, disappeared in March after going to Iran's resort island of Kish. And finally there is also a French-Iranian journalism student, Mehrnoushe Solouki, who was arrested in February.

Carter failed to tell Reagan about Israel's concerns over Osirak

The outgoing Carter administration failed to tell the incoming Reagan administration about Israel's concerns regarding Iraq's Osirak nuclear plant. Judith A. Klinghoffer writing in Political Mavens wonders whether the Carter administration tried to sabotage U.S.-Israel relations, or were they just incompetent.

A passage from Reagan's diary tells the story:

June 16 - We have just learned that Israel & the previous admin. did communicate about Iraq & the nuclear threat & the U.S. agreed it was a threat. There was never a mention of this to us by the outgoing admin. Amb. Lewis cabled word to us after the Israeli attack on Iraq & now we find there was a stack of cables & memos tucked away in St. Dept. files.

Unaware of the true nature of the threat due to the failure of the Carter administration to inform him, president Reagan initially expressed indignation over Israel's bombing of the reactor. Now we can all understand why.

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Terror spokesman: Forget Shalit if terror leaders are hit

The genocidal barbarians of hamas say that Israel can forget about the release of Gilad Shalit if Israel justifiably kills their leaders. It's not as if they had any intention of ever releasing him at all anyway.

Since I haven't heard anything lately about any sort of deal to free Shalit, I'm assuming that Israel has mercifully dropped the absurd idea of releasing hundreds or thousands of hamas terrorists in return for Shalit. We all want to see Shalit, as well as the two soldiers the hezbollah jackals have in their clutches return home, however making any kind of deal with these devils should be out of the question. It will only put Israeli soldiers and civilians in greater danger in the long run.

Two terrorists killed during foiled attack

Two palestinians opened fire at an Israeli security patrol in eastern Jerusalem before being shot dead by Israeli border police. Two Israelis were injured and evacuated to the hospital, one is in serious condition.

U.S. selling out Bosnian Christians

Bosnian Serb Prime Minister Milorad Dodik accuses the U.S. government of selling out Bosnian Christians to muslims. He says the State Department is pressuring him to hand over Christian Bosnia to its more powerful muslim neighbor.
Newsmax via Political Mavens has the story:
“At the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo, I was threatened that if I did not agree to these U.S. demands, I would have problems,” Bosnian Serb Prime Minister Milorad Dodik told NewsMax in an exclusive interview.

In a meeting on Wednesday at the State Department, Dodik said that Assistant Secretary Daniel Fried didn’t repeat the threats, but insisted that Dodik and the Christian Bosnian Serb government agree to dissolve its independent police force and parliament, and merge them into Muslim-majority federal institutions.

“The United States is trying to assimilate us into Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), which is a Muslim entity,” Dodik said.

Nearly 1.4 million Serbian Christians live in the Republic of Srpska, the autonomous Serbian entity that Serbs say was “forced down [their] throats” under the 1995 Dayton agreement.

Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. official who negotiated the 1995 agreement, told a forum marking the 10th anniversary of the Dayton accords in November 2005 that among his “mistakes” were the words “Republika Srpska.” He called for the Serbian entity to be dissolved into Muslim Bosnia

So this misguided, if that's what you want to call it, bipartisan American policy in the Balkans is in effect enabling the creation of an islamic terror base which will be used to attack America using 'white' al qaeda members.

“When I was asked by [former State Department official] Bob Gelbard why we have to stay in Bosnia, I said it was to prevent the creation of a Muslim state in the heart of Europe,” Dodik said.

Well before the Dayton accords, the Bosnian Muslim authorities forged a close relationship with Osama Bin Laden, even providing him a Bosnian diplomatic passport after his Saudi passport was revoked by the Saudi government.

Five of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were trained in Bosnian Muslim al Qaeda camps.

During the Clinton administration, “the U.S. gave its blessing as 4,400 jihadis came to Bosnia from Afghanistan,” Dodik said.

“The areas where these jihadis operated were also the scenes of horrible crimes against Christian Serbs,” he added. “Until now, there is no data on crimes against Serbs in the UN human rights data bases.”

Only a handful of the jihadis who came to Bosnia during the 1990s have been extradited to the United States and imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. More than 700 of the original group of jihadis have been given Bosnian passports and are still based in the country, Dodik said. Among them are 87 Egyptians, 75 Algerians, 80 Jordanians, 28 Lebanese, and 108 Syrians.

Dodik also warned of the involvement of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran in Bosnia.

“The Saudis have funded and built more than 1000 new mosques” in the Muslim areas, he said. “These mosques serve as bases for training Muslim extremists.”

Many of the humanitarian organizations funded by the Saudis in Bosnia have been identified as key elements of the Wahhabi jihadi movement. “Thirty percent of the Bosnian Muslims approve of or are directly involved in the Wahhabi movement,” Dodik said.

The situation in the Balkans is a vitally important issue regarding the global jihadist threat, and it is being ignored in the msm, and the American public is completely unaware of the fact that our government is promoting an islamic state in Europe.
Hat tip to Israpundit for this story.

Israel must go on the offensive

Two excellent articles featured on Israpundit urges the need for Israel to go on the offensive against terrorists and deliver them a crushing blow. One is by Yoram Ettinger called "DEFENSE SHMEFENSE :How NOT to combat Palestinian terrorism", and the other by Emanuel A. Winston titled "Little Mouse Steps".

Ettinger holds that since the Oslo accords Israel has taken on a defensive posture which has weakened its deterrence and strengthened and emboldened its enemies. The Oslo mentality of believing that there is no military solution to terror, and that the focus on retreat and fortifications rather than destroying the terrorist infrastructure and capabilites of palestinian terrorism has been a completely failed policy.

Winston believes Israel's leaders since Oslo are guilty of treason, including Ariel Sharon. He correctly says that treating the arabs and muslims with kindness is only perceived by them as weakness and vulnerability, which in turn is an invitation for them to attack ever more viciously. And he also correctly holds the Jewish and Israeli left responsible for restraining the IDF from executing a crushing response to terror.

U.S. airlifts weapons to Lebanese army

DEBKAfile Reports that the US is airlifting ammunition and advanced weapons to the Lebanese army in response to Beirut’s plea for aid against Fatah al-Islam gunmen barricaded in the Palestinian Nahr al-Bared refugee camp.

Voluntary transfer

Ted Belman at Israpundit raises the issue of voluntary transfer of Arabs from the territories. He points out that Iraq is paying Arabs to relocate from Kirkup, and France is going to pay immigrants to return to their nations of origin. There's also the historical precendent of refugee resettlement to solve international conflicts, such as the exchange of populations between India and Pakistan and ethnic Germans expelled from the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia after WW2. I'm in agreement with Ted Belman, however being that Israel is held to different standards, its likely that even with offers of compensation, the international community would still shout accusations of racism and ethnic cleansing. Be that as it may, I still think Israel should ignore the world's judgement and carry out a voluntary transfer.

Friday, May 25, 2007

IAF strikes near head hamas terrorist's home

The question is, why aren't the Israelis targeting haniyeh himself? To me all the so-called "political" leaders of hamas are legitimate targets. I really wish Israel would stop being so overly sensitive to world opinion and do what is necessary for its security and survival.
Israeli airstrikes hit two Hamas locations in Gaza early Saturday near the home of Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, Palestinian security officials said.

The army confirmed the attacks in the Shati refugee camp but stressed that Haniyeh himself was not a target. No one was injured in the airstrikes, which left two large craters, smashed surrounding windows and cut electricity in the heavily crowded camp.

It was the second day in a row in which the army targeted locations near Haniyeh's home.

The search for true moderates

Bret Stephens wrote an article "The last king of Java" which is about a group in Indonesia called Nahdlatul Ulama, an actual moderate muslim group represting about 40 million people.
Suppose for a moment that the single most influential religious leader in the Muslim world openly says "I am for Israel." Suppose he believes not only in democracy but in the liberalism of America's founding fathers. Suppose that, unlike so many self-described moderate Muslims who say one thing in English and another in their native language, his message never alters. Suppose this, and you might feel as if you've descended into Neocon Neverland.

In fact, you have arrived in Jakarta and are sitting in the small office of an almost totally blind man of 66 named Abdurrahman Wahid. A former president of Indonesia, he is the spiritual leader of the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), an Islamic organization of some 40 million members. Indonesians know him universally as Gus Dur, a title of affection and respect for this descendant of Javanese kings. In the U.S. and Europe he is barely spoken of at all--which is both odd and unfortunate, seeing as he is easily the most important ally the West has in the ideological struggle against Islamic radicalism.

Now why doesn't the west embrace true moderates like Nahdlatul Ulama and Abdurrahman Wahid, instead of pretending CAIR or the muslim brotherhood represent moderation? Yet virtually no one in the west has ever heard of Nahdlatul Ulama while our government reaches out to faux moderates in the muslim world.
Hat tip to Soccerdad

Lebanon PM vows to wipe out terrorists
TRIPOLI, Lebanon - Lebanon's prime minister vowed Thursday to wipe out an Islamic militant group barricaded in a Palestinian refugee camp, raising the prospect that the army will either storm the camp, in what would likely be a bloody battle, or dig in for a long siege to force its surrender.

I'm waiting any minute now for heads of state,the UN,EU,international human rights groups and the global media to hysterically accuse the Lebanese army of using disproportionate force, of war crimes and massacres. Oh yes that's right, only Israel is required to exorcise restraint, only Israel is required to sit by, do nothing and allow its citizens to be targeted for mass murder by terrorists. Every other country in the world is free to do what it deems necessary in the name of self-defense. Tell me again that Israel isn't a victim of an international double standard.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Israel and international law

From Melanie Phillips diary via Israpundit. Melanie defends the legality of Israel's presence in all of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. Her information derives from a pamphlet that features extracts from "Israel and palestine-assault on the law of nations" by the late professor Julius Stone published in 1980. Professor Stone is regarded as one of the leading authorities on the law of nations.

Some passages from the pamphlet:
By contrast, Israel’s presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defence. International law forbids acquisition by unlawful force, but not where, as in the case of Israel’s self-defence in 1967, the entry on the territory was lawful. It does not so forbid it, in particular, when the force is used to stop an aggressor, for the effect of such prohibition would be to guarantee to all potential aggressors that, even if their aggression failed, all territory lost in the attempt would be automatically returned to them. Such a rule would be absurd to the point of lunacy. There is no such rule….

International law, therefore, gives a triple underpinning to Israel’s claim that she is under no obligation to hand back automatically the West Bank and Gaza to Jordan or anyone else. In the first place, these lands never legally belonged to Jordan. Second, even if they had, Israel’s own present control is lawful, and she is entitled to negotiate the extent and the terms of her withdrawal. Third, international law would not in such circumstances require the automatic handing back of territory even to an aggressor who was the former sovereign. It requires the extent and conditions of the handing back to be negotiated between the parties.


Lauterpacht has offered a cogent legal analysis leading to the conclusion that sovereignty over Jerusalem has already vested in Israel. His view is that when the partition proposals were immediately rejected and aborted by Arab armed aggression, those proposals could not, both because of their inherent nature and because of the terms in which they were framed, operate as an effective legal re-disposition of the sovereign title. They might (he thinks) have been transformed by agreement of the parties concerned into a consensual root of title, but this never happened. And he points out that the idea that some kind of title remained in the United Nations is quite at odds, both with the absence of any evidence of vesting, and with complete United Nations silence on this aspect of the matter from 1950 to 1967?…

In these circumstances, that writer is led to the view that there was, following the British withdrawal and the abortion of the partition proposals, a lapse or vacancy or vacuum of sovereignty. In this situation of sovereignty vacuum, he thinks, sovereignty could be forthwith acquired by any state that was in a position to assert effective and stable control without resort to unlawful means. On the merely political and commonsense level, there is also ground for greater tolerance towards Israel’s position, not only because of the historic centrality of Jerusalem to Judaism for 3,000 years, but also because in modern times Jews have always exceeded Arabs in Jerusalem. In 1844 there were 7,000 Jews to 5,000 Moslems; in 1910, 47,000 Jews to 9,800 Moslems; in 1931, 51,222 Jews to 19,894 Moslems; in 1948, 100,000 Jews to 40,000 Moslems, and in 1967 200,000 Jews to 54,902 Moslems.


Whether the doctrine is already a doctrine of international law stricto sensu, or (as many international lawyers would still say) a precept of politics, or policy, or of justice, to be considered where appropriate, it is clear that its application is predicated on certain findings of fact. One of these is the finding that at the relevant time the claimant group constitutes a people of nation with a common endowment of distinctive language or ethnic origin or history and tradition, and the like, distinctive from others among whom it lives, associated with particular territory, and lacking an independent territorial home in which it may live according to its lights…

Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) leaders have frankly disavowed distinct Palestine identity. On March 3, 1977, for example, the head of the PLO Military Operations Department, Zuhair Muhsin, told the Netherlands paper Trouw that there are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese:
‘We are one people. Only for political reasons do we carefully underline our Palestinian identity. For it is of national interest for the Arabs to encourage the existence of the Palestinians against Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestine identity is there only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian State is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity.’…

The myth of the 1966 Palestinian Covenant that the Palestinian people was unjustly displaced by the Jewish invasion of Palestine in 1917 is widely disseminated and unquestioningly and dogmatically espoused in studies from the United Nations Secretariat. However, it is necessary to recall, not only the Kingdom of David and the succession of Jewish polities in Palestine down to Roman conquest and dispersion at the turn of the present era, but also that the Jews continued to live in Palestine even after that conquest, and were in 1914 a well-knit population there.

JNF land bought for Jews must be shared with Arabs

Aaron Klein of World Net Daily reports that Israel's Attorney General ruled that the Jewish National Fund, which collects Jewish donor funds for the stated purpose of the settlement of Jews in Israel, must equally allocate properties for Jews and Arabs. The JNF has allowed the Israeli government to manage lands it purchased.

An earlier report revealed that hundreds of acres of properties in Jerusalem, purchased by JNF for Jewish settlement were instead utilized for the illegal contruction of dozens of arab apartment buildings and United Nations facilities. Not only Jerusalem, but in the Galilee and areas outside Bethlehem, arabs are building on JNF owned property without permits. Arabs are also living illegally in JNF owned apartments in Jerusalem's Old City.

It's also been revealed that the JNF is being disproportionately influenced by a group of Jewish leftist real estate moguls from New Jersey, who also contribute to causes associated with Shimon Peres, who advocates the division of Jerusalem and withdrawal from the West Bank.

Here's the story via Israpundit:

Anti-Israel doc on Brit TV

HonestReporting's latest communique features former British MP Paddy Ashdown's channel 4 documentary "Battle for the Holy land". Carol Gould says that had she known nothing about Israeli, Jewish or Zionist history, she would have come away from the documentary with the impression that Jews were the most disagreeable race on the planet. Ashdown accuses the Jerusalem authorities of 'racism masquerading as bureaucracy,' 'discriminatory and inhumane'. All in all, which should be to no one's surprise, the palestinians are portrayed as victims and Jews as brutal, hate-filled and despicable according to Gould. Melanie Phillips comments on a Sunday Times preview by Rod Liddle. He too gives an unfair impression of Israelis. She says the problem with Liddle's piece and western hostility toward Israel in general are false assumptions and ignorance about Israel's history. She points out that people falsely assume Israel was artificially created as a result of holocaust guilt, and that European Jews usurped arab land. She reminds people that Israel was the nation state of the Jews centuries before the arab conquest and that Jews have had an unbroken presence in Jerusalem and other cities.

Another HonestReporting communique compares and contrasts the sympathetic coverage of the Lebanese army's fight against islamic terrorists in a palestinian refugee camp, to the coverage Israel received during the IDF's operation in Jenin.

IDF arrests senior hamas terror leaders

Clean out the vipers nest.
In the continued crackdown on Hamas in the wake of Kassam rocket attacks from Gaza, the IDF conducted a massive arrest sweep of senior Hamas leaders in the West Bank overnight Wednesday, arresting the Palestinian Authority education minister, three parliament members and several mayors.

In total, the IDF said it had arrested 33 Palestinians, the most senior of which was Hamas Education Minister Nasser al-Shaer. Other detainees included three parliament members, the head of the Wakf in Nablus, a top official in the PA Interior Ministry, the mayors of Nablus, Kalkilya, Bidya and El-Bireh, and 21 Hamas operatives and other officials.

The army also shut down 10 Hamas offices in towns throughout the West Bank, includin Jenin, Ramallah, Nablus and Bethlehem.

The IDF denied Palestinian reports that it had arrested the PA foreign minister.

According to IDF sources, the operation was part of the general crackdown on Hamas and in line with the current operations in Gaza.

"This is a terror group," an officer said, "and we will hunt them wherever they are."

In related news, now that Israel is finally targeting hamas terror leaders, the fiends are now calling for a ceasefire. This is typical of them whenever an Israeli operation is having success against terrorists, to call for a ceasefire to get Israel to retreat in order for the terrorist groups to replenish arms and fighters for a future confrontation and to continue their genocidal war against the Jewish state.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Tory leader surrenders to islam

Britain's Tory leader David Cameron spent 2 days living with a muslim family and determined that Britain should integrate into the Asian way of life-what he really means is muslim-rather than the other way around. He defends their refusal to assimilate due to the societal problems of Britain, such as family breakdown, drugs and crime, and basically says "Asian"(muslim)values and way of life are superior to that of his own country. I certainly prefer our western freedoms, even with all of the problems that come with it, over a culture which forces women into submission, having to be covered from head to toe, arranged marriages, the barbaric practices of "honor" killings and genital mutilation and so forth. Sultan Knish and Ted Belman of Israpundit comment on the story.

The Grand Delusion islam

Iranian born, naturalized American citizen Amil Imani, a pro-democracy activist, explains how young muslims are indoctrinated and brainwashed into what I refer to as the death cult of islam.
Islam is rooted in the primitive tribal mentality of “We against Them,” “We the righteous against the heathens,” “We the servants submissive of the Great Allah against the rebellious enemies of Allah.” Islam is a polarizer. Islam is an enemy-maker. To Islam, a non-Muslim is a combatant against Allah and he is fair game to be subjugated and killed.

When some billion and a half adhere to the pathological belief of Islam and use it as their marching order of life, the rest of humanity can ignore the threat only at its own peril.

Once again, a resurgent Islam is on a campaign of conquest throughout the world. Hordes of life-in-hand foot-solider fanatical Muslims are striving to kill and get killed. All they want is the opportunity to discharge their homicidal-suicidal impulse, on their way to Allah’s promised glorious paradise. And in the background granting the foot-soldiers’ wishes are their handlers, the puppeteers, who pull the strings and detonate these human bombs. Those who cherish life must recognize these emissaries of death, what makes them, what motivates them, and how best to defend against them.

The campaign of death waged by the Islamist-jihadist, be he a puppet or a puppeteer, is energized by the belief of delectable rewards that await the faithful implementer of Allah’s dictates. Through a highly effective indoctrination, the jihadist has come to believe firmly in Islam’s grand delusion. He believes that Allah is the one and only supreme creator of earth and heavens; that it is his duty and privilege to abide by Allah’s will and carry out his plans at all costs; he believes firmly in a gloriously wonderful immortal afterlife in paradise, for which a martyr’s death is the surest quickest admission.

Although the dominating theme of the delusion is quasi spiritual, the promised rewards of the afterlife awaiting the martyr are sensual and material. All the things and activities that the jihadist desires and cannot attain or practice, and rejects in his earthly life will be purified and proffered to him in the paradise of the next life. Thus goes the delusion.

He concludes by saying that many in the west are just as deluded in their own way, by insisting that islam is a religion of peace, and that the jihadists are only a small minority, and that we can reason with muslims. He says one cannot be a muslim without abiding by the dictates of the quran.

25% of muslim youths approve of suicide bombings

This poll reflects the attitudes of muslims in the U.S. And yet according to polls, this percentage is far less than muslims in other nations. A pew poll taken last year showed support for suicide bombings exceeded 50% in muslim countries. In Britain and Spain it was one quarter of the muslim population, in France, one third.
"We have crazies just like other faiths have them," said Eide Alawan, who directs interfaith outreach at the Islamic Center of America, one of the largest mosques in the U.S. He said killing innocent people contradicts Islam.

But other faiths don't have up to a quarter, half or third of their populations endorsing suicide bombings. Other faiths are not committing mass murder on a daily basis all over the world in the name of their religions. We have a growing fifth column in this country and in a few years may soon be finding ourselves in the same situation as Europe has with its own muslim fifth column.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Israeli doctors respond to British boycotters

Israeli doctors respond to a letter in the Guardian from a group of British doctors calling for a boycott of the Israeli Medical Association and urging its expulsion from the World Medical Association. Israelrules has reprinted the letter in its entirety.

Bush authorizes covert action against Iran

According to Brian Ross and Richard Esposito of ABC's The Blotter, the CIA has received what is now a not so secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabalize the thuggish Iranian mullahcratic regime. Current and former intelligence officials say that this means the Bush administration has decided not to pursue military action against Iran. Working to bring down the mullah terror regime from within is a good plan, however, I don't like the idea that the administration may have ruled out a military option.

Thoughts on Dhimmi Carter

I have to laugh at the irony of Carter referring to any other president as the "worst ever". This is the same president who almost singlehandedly created the situation we find ourselves in today with regards to the spread of islamic jihad all over the world, and the terrorist threats we now face. He stood by watching while the islamic revolution was taking place in Iran and allowed the Shah to be overthrown, thus letting Iran fall to the ayatollah komeini and the rest of the insane mullahs, which of course as we know led to the 444 day hostage crises. Iran had been a modern, westernized nation and was allied to us and Israel. Today it is the foremost supporter of worldwide islamic terrorism, not to mention the Iranian people being forced to live under sharia law, women being forced by islamic law to conform to repressive dress codes, and are punished for violations.

Let’s not forget the detrimental effect of Carter’s Mideast policies not only on the U.S. but especially on Israel. Carter’s overt hostility to Israel and to Menachim Begin during his presidency is well established. He brokered ineffective and damaging peace treaties which strengthened Israel’s enemies and led to further violence. He was completely unconcerned about Israel’s security. Since the Israel-Egyptian peace treaty at Camp David, Egypt’s hostility towards Jews and Israel has increased. In "My problem with Jimmy Carter's book" by Kenneth Stein, he explains the roots of Carter's animosity towards Israel and Menachin Begin:
Carter's grievance list against Israel is long: He believes the Israeli government's failure to withdraw fully from the West Bank is illegal and immoral; he condemns settlement construction; and he lambastes its current human rights abuse in the West Bank, which he labels "one of the worst examples of human rights abuse I know."[5] From the time he was president, he has criticized Israel's confiscation of Palestinian land, usurpation of water rights, and retaliatory bulldozing of Palestinian houses. Such policies, he has argued, are responsible for the moribund Palestinian economy. Carter holds particular animus toward the security barrier, first proposed by the late prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner Yitzhak Rabin,[6] as the latest example of what he believes to be a policy of de facto annexation of the West Bank.

Carter sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the root of both U.S. unpopularity in the region and the wider problem of Middle East instability. Once the historic injustice done to the Palestinians is resolved, he believes, other issues plaguing U.S. foreign policy will dissipate, if not disappear.

Carter believes the conflict's resolution to be simple: After the Israeli government agrees in principle to withdraw fully from the West Bank, a dedicated negotiator like himself can usher in an independent, peaceful Palestinian state. That this has not happened is, in Carter's view, primarily due to the legacy of late Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin, not the fault of poor Palestinian decision-making or the Palestinian embrace of terrorism. The intransigence of Begin and his successors, Carter believes, was compounded by a failure of U.S. political leaders to pressure the Israeli government to correct its policy. Washington's failure to lead, he believes, is heavily due to the failure of American supporters of Israel to criticize the Jewish state.

Carter believes that if the U.S. government reduces or stops its support for Israel, then the Jewish state will be weakened and become more malleable in negotiations. His underlying logic is based upon an imperial rationality that assumes Washington to have the answer to myriad issues besetting Middle Eastern societies. This plays into the notion in Arab societies that the cause of their problems lies with Western powers and other outsiders. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid will feed that belief.

In the book, Carter does not mention the counterproductive judgments made by Palestinian leaders or their embrace of terrorism over the last many years. While nineteenth- and twentieth-century European, Ottoman, Arab, and Zionist leaders all sought at various times to stifle Palestinian self-determination, the claim that the establishment of a Palestinian state rests only in the hands of Jerusalem and Washington is rubbish. By adopting so completely the Palestinian historical narrative, Carter may hamper diplomatic efforts enshrined in the "Road Map" and elsewhere that attempt to compel the Palestinian leadership to accept accountability for its actions. In pursuing this path, Carter violates the advice he gave eighty Palestinian business, religious, and political leaders on March 16, 1983, when, speaking to a gathering at the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem, he said, "Unless you take your own destiny into your own hands and stop relying on others," you will not have a state.[7]

Carter's distrust of the U.S. Jewish community and other supporters of Israel runs deep. According to former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, "Carter's feelings on Israel were always ambivalent. On the one hand, he felt Israel was being intransigent; on the other, he genuinely had an attachment to the country as the ‘land of the Bible.'"[8]

Carter's animosity toward Begin has grown with time. He blames Begin for refusing to negotiate over the West Bank. Not only did this deny Carter a more complete peace deal, but, Carter believes, it also institutionalized itself in Israeli policymaking, worsening the Palestinians' plight. Since Begin took office on May 17, 1977, ending the Labor movement's hegemony in Israeli political life, Carter has repeatedly blasted Israeli prime ministers for what he terms the creation of a "horrible" and "terrible" state of affairs for the Palestinians in areas of east Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.

The mistrust was mutual and began to surface before Begin's election. According to Eliyahu Ben-Elissar, then Begin's bureau chief, "Begin did not like [Carter's] March 1977 statement that the Palestinian refugees needed a homeland. None of us liked it. We resented it ... Begin considered it a major shift in U.S. policy."[11]

Indeed, skepticism of Carter's intentions may have convinced Begin to take a harder line about the West Bank, which, in line with biblical terminology, he called Judea and Samaria. During his tenure as prime minister, Begin forbade the negotiation agenda to include the West Bank and those portions of Jerusalem that the Israeli government annexed after the 1967 Six-Day war. This refusal to negotiate became Carter's core disagreement with Begin. Carter realized that with Begin adamant against further concessions, he had no tangible item to offer to the Palestinians or other Arab leaders to reach a broader peace agreement. With Begin not offering a fallback position, Carter could not initiate a conclusive Israeli-Palestinian negotiating process. He never forgave Begin.

Intertwined in the dispute over the West Bank was the issue of Israeli settlements. Samuel Lewis, U.S. ambassador to Israel at the time, explained, "Begin would never consider admitting that the [Israeli] right to settle wasn't a right, and Carter, basically, was asking him [Begin] to agree that settlements were illegal."[12] Begin refused. The subsequent expansion of settlements has further embittered Carter's relations with Israeli leaders and with Israel's supporters in the United States, whom he believes are willfully silent on the subject.

While Carter lauds Begin for his intelligence, a point he has repeatedly made when speaking to my students, his animus toward the late Israeli leader is limitless. This became evident when we were writing The Blood of Abraham, and Carter insisted on asserting that Begin "wanted to expand Israeli borders to both sides of the Jordan River." In fact, this is anachronistic. True, this had been Begin's view prior to Israel's independence in 1948, but it was not, as Carter implied, Begin's position after his twenty-nine years in the Knesset (parliament) or during his premiership. During chapter editing, I brought the error to Carter's attention. He declined to correct it.[13]

During the difficult negotiations between Egypt and Israel, Carter and his advisers tried to get Sadat to engage in a collusive scheme: They would encourage Sadat to make "deliberately exaggerated" demands. The White House would then intervene to "compel" Cairo to scale back its demands in exchange for Israeli concessions. Then-national security advisor Brzezinski explained that Washington would "apply maximum leverage on Israel to accommodate,"[14] by keeping the West Bank's political future on the table for future negotiations. That Carter risked possible Israeli-Egyptian peace in an effort to extract greater concessions from Begin underscores the tension in their relationship.

In 1983, the first time Begin met Carter after both had left office, Begin was icy toward the ex-president. Carter surmised that he may have "aggravated him [Begin] more than usual."[15] Begin's personal secretary later said Begin was angry with what he had learned in the books by Brzezinski and National Security Council staff member William B. Quandt about Carter's behind-the-scenes maneuvering. This anger grew after he read the claim in The Blood of Abraham regarding his alleged desire to expand Israeli borders across the Jordan River.[16] On our 1987 trip to Israel, Begin refused to see Carter, citing health reasons, but Begin's personal secretary told me it was because of the way Carter had treated Begin.

Carter also blames difficulties with Begin for undermining his re-election. In early 1980, with the critical New York Democratic primary looming, Mondale urged Carter to repudiate the U.S. vote for U.N. Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 465,[17] which had condemned Israeli settlement activity. According to Brzezinski:

Jewish voters swung heavily over to Senator [Edward] Kennedy, ensuring Carter's defeat. The set-back prolonged the Carter-Kennedy contest. Sadat did not want a final showdown on the Palestinian problem prior to the return of the Sinai to Egypt. Without pressure from Sadat, our own incentive to push Israel hard was much decreased. Begin proved himself to be a skilled manipulator ... adroit at delaying tactics and in diversionary public appeals ... by mid-June it was clear even to Mondale that Begin wanted Carter defeated.[18]

According to Brzezinski, Carter believed his disagreement with Begin to have both cost him critical primary victories and to have weakened his re-election bid.[19] But other issues—high inflation and mortgage rates, the Iran hostage crisis, a national sense of malaise, and the third party candidature of John Anderson—may have contributed more to Carter's loss.

Carter also had a cozy relationship with arafat.
From Frontpage mag:
No one quite realizes just how passionately anti-Israel Carter is. William Safire has reported that Cyrus Vance acknowledged that, if he had had a second term, Carter would have sold Israel down the river. In the 1990s, Carter became quite close to Yasser Arafat. After the Gulf War, Saudi Arabia was mad at Arafat, because the PLO chief had sided with Saddam Hussein. So Arafat asked Carter to fly to Riyadh to smooth things over with the princes and restore Saudi funding to him — which Carter did.

You who read Impromptus have heard me say: When I was growing up, I perceived the Arab-Israeli conflict as a great civil-rights drama. The white oppressors were the Israelis, and the black sufferers and innocents were the Arabs, in particular the Palestinians. Menachem Begin, I thought, was George C. Wallace, and his defense minister, Ariel Sharon, was Bull Connor. (This was in the early ’80s.)

Well, blow me down. I had never heard anybody else — a soul — say anything like this. But here is Carter, to Douglas Brinkley, Carter’s biographer and analyst: “The intifada exposed the injustice Palestinians suffered, just like Bull Connor’s mad dogs in Birmingham.”

The Carter-Nordlinger axis rides again (but, hang on, I’ve changed my mind — had “an evolution of thought,” as we say).

In The Unfinished Presidency, Brinkley writes, “There was no world leader Jimmy Carter was more eager to know than Yasir Arafat.” The former president “felt certain affinities with the Palestinian: a tendency toward hyperactivity and a workaholic disposition with unremitting sixteen-hour days, seven days a week, decade after decade.” Neat, huh?

At their first meeting — in 1990 — Carter boasted of his toughness toward Israel, assuring Arafat at one point, “. . . you should not be concerned that I am biased. I am much more harsh with the Israelis.” Arafat, for his part, railed against the Reagan administration and its alleged “betrayals.” Rosalynn Carter, taking notes for her husband, interjected, “You don’t have to convince us!” Brinkley records that this “elicited gales of laughter all round.” Carter himself, according to Brinkley, “agreed that the Reagan administration was not renowned as promise keepers” (this, to Arafat).

If you are sickened by the thought of a former U.S. president and a former First Lady of the United States and the career terrorist Yasser Arafat all sitting around bashing Ronald Reagan . . . you and I think alike.

Last month, Carter penned a remarkable op-ed piece for the New York Times, entitled "America Can Persuade Israel to Make a Just Peace." In it, he let it all hang out as an apologist for Arafat and a bulldog against Sharon. Before getting to that piece, however, we should be clear about just how attached to Arafat and his cause the ex-president is. As Brinkley writes in his book The Unfinished Presidency — about Carter's celebrated post-White House years — "there was no world leader Jimmy Carter was more eager to know than Yasir Arafat." The former president "felt certain affinities with the Palestinian: a tendency toward hyperactivity and a workaholic disposition...."

In their first meeting — held in 1990 — Carter boasted of his sternness toward Israel. For example, he said, "When I bring up the [PLO] charter, you should not be concerned that I am biased. I am much more harsh with the Israelis." Arafat, for his part, complained about the Reagan administration's alleged "betrayals." Rosalynn Carter, who was taking notes for her husband, interjected, "You don't have to convince us!" which, as Brinkley records, "elicited gales of laughter all round." The ex-president "agreed that the Reagan administration was not renowned as promise keepers" (this, to Arafat).

Later on, the parties exchanged gifts. "When Arafat presented Rosalynn with a dress for daughter Amy, decorated with Palestinian embroidery, he mentioned that he had followed Amy's political activities with great interest, especially her anti-CIA stance in Nicaragua and antiapartheid activities in South Africa." Then,

. . . in the course of conversation, Rosalynn began describing her revulsion and dismay over a story about Israeli troops dumping garbage in front of a Palestinian orphanage during the Carters' trip to the West Bank. Innocent Palestinian children were being treated as trash. As she recalled the inexcusable humiliation of their treatment, her eyes filled with tears. And the men, too, began to sob. Carter grasped the hands of his companions, and the three briefly prayed together. Then they dried their tears, embraced, and said farewell.

Shortly thereafter, Carter actually acted as PR adviser and speechwriter to Arafat. As Brinkley says, he "drafted on his home computer the strategy and wording for a generic speech Arafat was to deliver soon for Western ears . . ." The entire composition is nauseating, but its flavor can be captured in a single line: "Our people, who face Israeli bullets, have no weapons: only a few stones remaining when our homes are destroyed by Israeli bulldozers."

If Carter wrote Arafat's Western-ears-only speeches, Arafat could have written much of Carter's recent New York Times op-ed. The former president began by describing Arafat's 1996 "election" as a "democratic" one, "well organized, open and fair." (It was "well organized," all right.) Of course, this "election" was like any other in the Arab world, which is to say, rigged from beginning to end. As former CIA director James Woolsey told journalist Joel Mowbray recently, "Arafat was essentially 'elected' the same way Stalin was, but not nearly as democratically as Hitler, who at least had actual opponents." Arafat's "opponent" was a prop.

Carter then lit into his bogeyman, Sharon, declaring him an international outlaw whose "goals" are to "establish Israeli settlements as widely as possible throughout occupied territories and to deny Palestinians a cohesive political existence." Sharon has, in fact, accepted the concept and inevitability of a Palestinian state — but he unpleasantly insists on his own country's existence and security as well.

The ex-president conceded that "there is adequate blame on the other side" — meaning the Palestinian — but only insofar as Arafat has failed to "exert control over Hamas and other radical Palestinians" (forgetting the many "suicide bombings" carried out by Arafat's own Al-Aqsa brigades). Carter then wrote — in an excruciating sentence — "[Arafat] may well see the suicide attacks as one of the few ways to retaliate against his tormentors, to dramatize the suffering of his people, or as a means for him, vicariously, to be a martyr." This comes as close to an apology for terror as a president — ex- or current — ever gets.

The Carter mindset on the Middle East is perhaps best illustrated by the reaction of his key aide and emissary, Mary King, to the invasion and rape of Kuwait by Iraq's Hussein in 1990. She cabled her boss, "Saddam learned from the Israelis that might makes right . . ."

And of course in his book "Peace not Apartheid", Carter blames Israel rather than arafat for the failure of Oslo and rewrites history casting arafat, and even hamas as willing to make peace while Israel was intrasigent, as well as excusing terrorism against Israel. He also mistated what took place at the Camp David talks.

Carter has nothing —— literally nothing of subtance —— to say about the 2000 Camp David negotiations. He mentions them only in the middle of a single sentence (describing them as a 'fourteen day session in July 2000') before he turns to the Clinton Parameters issued to Israel and the Palestinians in December 2000, in the fourth month of the new war that Arafat brought after leaving Camp David without so much as a counter—offer.

Carter writes that '[t]here was no clear response from Prime Minister Barak' to the Clinton Parameters and that they envisioned 'at least two noncontiguous areas and multiple fragments.' Anyone who has read Dennis Ross's exhaustive, day—by—day account of Camp David and the Clinton Parameters in The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace knows this is a misstatement of both the Clinton proposal and the Israeli response to them. Israel accepted Clinton proposals that would have resulted in a state on all of Gaza and 97% of the West Bank.

Carter reproduces a map (without identifying its source) that he titles 'Palestinian Interpretation of Clinton's Proposal 2000' that purports to show large noncontiguous areas —— but Carter ignores the maps that Dennis Ross published of what was offered first at Camp David and then under the Clinton Parameters —— both of which show a contiguous Palestinian state with no 'fragments.'

Carter appears to have made the same factual mistake that Walt & Mearsheimer did (or perhaps simply borrowed their analysis without attribution), relying on tendentious secondary sources and ignoring multiple published primary ones. At least Walt & Mearsheimer provided a footnote that could be checked and refuted. Carter simply speaks ex cathedra.

Carter next asserts that '[a] new round of talks was held at Taba in January 2001, during the last few days of the Clinton presidency.' But the talks were not in the last few days of the Clinton presidency. They began on January 20, 2001 —— the day Clinton left office. And Carter's factual mistake in this regard is not inconsequential.

Carter has received arab money for his Carter center and presidential library, as well as having recieved arab money to bail out his peanut farm prior to his presidency. And I could go on about Carter's foreign policy in general, not just the Middle East, not to mention his failed record on the domestic side. Overall, considering Carter's track record, he is the last person who should be passing judgement on another presidency.

Ambassador Jones's lies about Pollard

Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA refutes U.S. ambassador Richard Jones' comments about Jonathan Pollard while speaking about U.S.-Israel relations Bar Ilan University Monday morning, where he made that controversial remark about Pollard being given mercy by the U.S. government by not executing him. He has since apologized for that remark. In his speech Jones accused Pollard of treason. Dr. Lerner points out that Pollard was not charged with treason, he was charged with the least serious of the
espionage statues:
one count of passing classified information to an ally.
The median sentence for this offense is 2 to 4 years. Jones also accused Pollard of taking money and selling out his country. But Pollard's indictment specifies that he was not charged with harming the U.S. If Pollard had spied for money, the court would have imposed a monetary fine, which it did not. James Woolsey, Casper Weinberger and Dennis Ross all say that he served his time and should be released. Weinberger said in a 2002 interview that the case against Pollard was minor and blown out of proportion to serve another agenda. No one in the history of the U.S. has ever received a life sentence for spying for an ally. Ronald Montaperto, a Pentagon analyst who spied for the Chinese for at least
10 years, was sentenced to 3 months in prison. Dennis Ross says that Pollard's continuing incarceration is intended to inflate his value to be used as a bargaining chip.

Ted Belman at Israpundit thinks that Pollard's real unforgivable sin is in exposing the true relationship between the U.S. government and it's arab allies, and that the U.S. has been duplicitious, in that it has worked to shrink Israel why posing as its ally. He says in effect that Pollard was spying for an enemy, Israel, rather than a friend, as far as the U.S. government is concerned.

Lebanese army pounds refugee camp

More than 70 were killed by the Lebanese army's shelling of the Nahr el-Bared camp, home to 40,000 Palestinians. I wonder if the EU and UN will accuse Lebanon of using disproportionate force. Lebanese officials accuse Syrian intelligence of putting the pro-al Qaeda Fatah al-Islam up to stirring up the violence to derail UN moves for an international tribute to try suspects in the 2005 assassination of Rafiq Hariri.,,2085288,00.html

Debkafile has the background on two palestinian fatah al-islam leaders fighting the Lebanese army.
Here's an excerpt:
After founding the Palestinian Fatah Uprising last year, Syrian intelligence discovered that the leader they had appointed, Mussa al Alama, a Palestinian born in Jerusalem known as Abu Khaled, had betrayed them. He had enlisted 300 members, recruited in Damascus’ refugee camps, to al Qaeda.

They arrested him on Dec. 21, 2006, accusing him of misusing Syrian intelligence funds allocated to pay and train Palestinians to fight in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. He had spent the money instead on opening an al Qaeda center in central Damascus. This center passed the trained men to Lebanon instead of Palestinian territory, together with Iraqi, Saudi, Yemeni and Sudanese fighters from Iraq.

On Dec. 10, 2006, DEBKAfile reported a esoteric ceremony that took place on Nov. 27, at the Nahr al Bared camp which is now under Lebanese army assault.

An armed Palestinian faction ceremonially changed its name from Fatah-Intifada (Fatah Uprising) to Fatah al-Islam. At the ceremony, its members showed off their new Taliban-style beards and said they had come to realize that the only way to achieve Palestinian goals was “by killing all the Jews and their crusader allies.”

Monday, May 21, 2007

Woman killed in Sderot

Israel's evil, barbaric neighbors, the ones who the world thinks should be rewarded with their own state, continue to fire missiles at Israeli civilians in the western Negev. Tragically, this time one of the rockets resulted in a woman's death.
As the IDF pushed ahead with its campaign against Kassam squads on Monday, a 35-year-old woman was killed in Sderot when a salvo of rockets pounded the western Negev and one hit her car.

Shortly after 8 p.m., five rockets were fired from Gaza and one struck the woman's car near Sderot's commercial center. She died en route to hospital, becoming the first Israeli to die in a rocket attack since November. Two other people were wounded in the attack, one moderately and the other lightly, and were evacuated to Ashkelon's Barzilai Hospital.

Meanwhile a hamas official declared there are no red lines anymore, that hamas will extend its attacks into Israel from the west bank. Also, a senior hamas leader declared that Israel will be wiped off the map and replaced by a palestinian state. When has hamas or any of Israel's savage enemies ever had any red lines when it comes to their genocidal war against the Jewish state? Why does the world insist on subsidizing this faux "palestine" and its outlaw terror regime, and demanding Israel make concessions to it? These people can't even live peacefully with each other, why does anyone in their right mind expect they would make peace with Israel?