Et Tu, Czechs?

                                                                                                                                           by Gerald A. Honigman

 

 

     Nauseating...but I'll get to that later.

     Israel has finally opened up its collective eyes and once again elected leaders who are willing to assert that Israel is indeed a sovereign nation and will act like one. The last Israeli leadership virtually relinquished Israel's sovereignty to the wishes of an American State Department which fought against Israel's rebirth in the first place and has been mostly hostile ever since.

     The first duty of any sovereign nation--whether an America which stretches 3,000 miles from coast to coast, Great Britain, France, Russia, Germany, China, or a miniscule Israel--must be the safety of its people. The security and survival of the sole Jewish State should not be placed in jeopardy so that Arabs can have their twenty-second.

     With the exception of Israel in those above examples, all others have travelled thousands of miles away from home to fight wars over perceived national interests. Additionally, all--including America--have conquered and acquired lands belonging to others in the name of their own respective manifest destinies and so forth.

     As I've written earlier, the ascendancy of Benjamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister and his appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as Foreign Minister are causing massive outcries among those who prefer their Jews ghetto-style instead, begging to just be allowed to exist.

     Bibi and Lieberman's alleged crimes? They demand that Arabs show true accountability and commitment to real peace before agreeing to any further territorial concessions and demand loyalty from all of Israel's citizens--Arabs included.

     Whereas Bibi's predecessor, Ehud Olmert,  acted blindly towards Israeli Arab intimidation, terrorism, and repeated acts of treason within Israel proper, perpetrated by the freest Arabs living anywhere in the region (Israel), Lieberman has said that such acts will finally be handled the same way any other sane nation would do in order to survive. For this, he has been branded a racist extremist by the same folks  who have watched Arabs enslave, gas, murder, subjugate, wage genocide against, and forcibly Arabize millions of non-Arabs in the region.

     Foreign Ministers of  the European Union recently met to discuss how they will deal with the new, non-groveling Jews. All are determined to force Israel to agree to disregard sanity, the facts, and its vital national security interests.

     While all--including America's new President--demand that the Netanyahu government announce its acceptance of the alleged "two-state" solution, none have confronted the alleged Arab moderates about their own open, continuous rejection of Israel as a Jewish State...the same Arab rejection which has prevented peace between Arab and Jew right from the getgo.

     President Obama and the EU's moderate buddy, Abbas has demanded that Israel allow itself to be swamped by millions of alleged Arab refugees--after its forced retreat to the sub-rump state status of the '49 armistice lines. Obama claims that Israel would be nuts to reject such a "peace" (the Saudi plan) that would essentially turn Israel into yet another de facto Arab state.

     That twenty-one nations--with scores of millions of non-Arabs living in them--are declared to be Arab, members of the Arab League (the PLO having observer status as the 22nd state in waiting), and press the claim that virtually the entire region is purely Arab patrimony, none of this is of interest to those who recently met in Prague in the former Czechoslovakia, now the Czech Republic, to complain about Israel's new, "anti-peace" government.

     Now add to this another fact that some of us insist on repeating since Arabs and their supporters constantly pretend otherwise...

     What the European Union, America, and most of the rest of the world is really calling for is not a two-state solution, but a three-state solution. They're demanding that a second Arab state--not first--emerge within the original Mandatory borders of Palestine.

     That the modern state of Jordan was carved out of almost 80% of the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine and was handed over by Colonial Secretary Churchill to Arab nationalism in 1922 is indeed relevant to all of this. So, again, the proposed new state--created after forcing Israel back to its suicidal, 1949 armistice lines, not borders--will be the Arabs' second, not first in "Palestine."

      Regarding these recent developments, Britain's Middle East envoy, former Prime Minister Tony Blair, has repeatedly and forcibly told reporters and others, "we need a combination of strong political negotiations towards a two-state solution..." Translate this as meaning tightening the screws, again, on the Jews regardless of the fact that what Israel got after its total withdrawal from Gaza--non-stop Arab terror, death, and destruction from thousands of Arab mortars, rockets, and so forth launched into Israel proper--will be the likely scenario after its forced withdrawal from virtually all of the "West Bank"...once again making Judea Judenrein. But this time, courtesy of its "friends" ( a lesson the Czechs should know all-too-well), a nine to fifteen mile wide Israel will have its capital, main airport, key population and industrial centers, and such exposed as the main targets.

     Blair, like many of his American political counterparts who also move through the revolving doors of business and government (Condoleezza Rice already has had one oil tanker named after her), has undoubtedly learned to milk the Arab petrodollar teat for all that it's worth. As just a few other examples, former State Department Secretary James Baker III, former Presidents Carter and Clinton,  as well as the entire Bush family are certainly no strangers to this either.

     While lots could be said about the hypocrisy of other European sycophants to the Arab potentate petrodollar, let's just stick with the Brits for now and only deal with just a few of the many aspects to their hypocrisy. The other nation which  I'll focus upon and which should be even more shamed will continue to emerge as we proceed...

     That Blair is allegedly concerned about peace should be a good thing, correct? Now, who could complain about that? Or does Tony believe that Netanyahu actually enjoys having Israel's kids and other innocents constantly targeted by his Arab pals? In a gesture to President Obama, Israel had recently caved,  removed some road blocks to make Arab travel easier--and just had a teenager axed to death and another one seriously wounded as a result.

     The problem, of course, is what we mean by "peace."

 

     You see, Bibi and Lieberman are finally calling for the Arabs to clearly define this--and that's deemed to be too much to ask of Arabs by their assorted supporters and derriere-kissers.

 

     One of Blair's predecessors, after all, had promised the former Czechoslovakia and the rest of the world "peace" over a half century ago at Munich. Hitler claimed he only wanted the Sudetenland, that part of Czechoslovakia which had millions of ethnic Germans in it...

 

     So, the Czechs and Slovaks (who had a respectable army) were sold out to Hitler in 1938 by their so-called "friends," Britain's Neville Chamberlain & Co. The world was soon at war anyway after the Nazi invasion of Poland.

 

      Blair and Britain's Foreign Minister, David Miliband, who recently called for the recognition of Hamas (an organization totally dedicated to Israel's destruction), know full well that even their darling Abbas's latter-day Arafatian "moderates" call all dealings with Israel merely a "Trojan Horse" that is used to win diplomatically what could not be won on the battlefield-- advancing the Arabs' well-known, decades' old destruction in phases strategy for Israel's demise.

 

     There is no difference between Hamas and Abbas vis-a-vis Israel in the long term. Abbas is willing to play the game to gain dhimmi gelt and support against his rivals.Recall that he isalso Arafat's (of Swiss bank account fame) hand-picked, Fatah successor.

 

     The Brits are no dummies when it comes to the Middle East. They've been meddling in it for centuries. Among numerous other results of this, some thirty-five million Kurds remain stateless to date because of their earlier shenanigans.

 

     Who amongst the EU Foreign Ministers is calling for a two-state solution in Iraq--the former Mandate of Mesopotamia--where Kurds were indeed promised independence after World War I?  And is anyone--especially the French, the former colonial rulers--calling for a state for tens of millions of long-oppressed, murdered, and subjugated Imazighen/Berbers in "Arab" North Africa? Where were the Foreign Ministers in Prague who threatened "Arab" Sudan with action if does not stop its racist, genocidal policies against its black population? Etc. and so forth...

 

     Better yet, if there must be another two-state solution involving Arabs, why not demand it in the master hypocrite Ahmadinejad's own nation?

 

     Iran's oil-rich western province of Khuzestan was known as Arabistan for centuries due to its primarily Arab population. Iranians have violently suppressed the latter in the name of their own national interests...all while demanding that Israel commit national suicide to achieve some other Arabs' aspirations.

 

     What makes matters even worse is that the  Brits also know the difference firsthand  between a hudna--the most that even those Arab "moderates" offer to Israel--andrealpeace.

 

     The former, modeled after what the Prophet Muhammad offered up to his enemies until he could muster the strength to deliver the final blow (the Peace of the Quraysh), is but a temporary respite from hostilities. One does not give away the store nor bare the necks of one's innocents--the Arabs' targets of choice--for such a "deal."

 

     Moving to  the other side of the world,  several decades ago, the Brits were engaged thousands of miles away from home, just a few hundred miles off the coast of Argentina.

 

     The Falklands War was fought in the name of Great Britain's national interests and sovereignty.

 

     Now think about this long and hard when you hear the Brits pretend that Israel has no right to be concerned over the violent happenings on its very doorstep and in its very backyard and the need for those secure borders--not armistice lines--promised to it after the 1967 War by the final draft of UNSC resolution 242 (which Britain's own Lord Caradon was one of the chief architects of).

 

     Closer to home, does anyone recall what the movie Braveheart was all about? Have a good chat with the Scots, Irish, and so forth about was done in the name of His or Her Majesty's realm...

 

     Okay, the stench of the Brits' hypocrisy and double standards regarding Israel could fill volumes--so I'll end the discussion of it now.

 

     But what's even more astounding and unbelievable is that the legendary 20th century victim of the Brits' machinations--the nation hand delivered to Hitler at Munich by its earlier British "friends"--is now itself demanding that Israel consent to a replay of this in the 21st century.

 

   Shame on them all...

 

     Let's hope Netanyahu and Lieberman have what it takes to resist what will likely follow...and, unfortunately, from America's new leader as well.

                                                                                                                                                                        Hey Kristof...You're Late!

                                                                                                                                                                                 by Gerald A. Honigman

 

     While The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof is no stranger to these positions throughout the year, he frequently comes out with his gems of Middle East wisdom right around Bike Week here in Daytona Beach, Florida, when tens of thousands of Harley enthusiasts arrive to also spread their hot air exhaust around town. This year Nick was a few weeks late.

     Like others of his ilk--Thomas Friedman (better of late), David Ignatius, Richard Cohen, just to name a few, who are also obsessed with creating  a 22nd Arab state (second, not first, Arab one within the original April 25, 1920 borders of the Mandate of Palestine before the Brits gave some 80% away to Arab nationalism creating Transjordan in 1922)--Kristof loves to lecture Israel, practically invisible on a map of the world, about the need to bare the necks of its kids so that Arabs, who conquered over six million square miles of territory from mostly non-Arab peoples  in the name of their nation, can have that additional state as well.

     Kristof's latest jewel published in the Daytona Beach News-Journal on March 20, 2009, "Like Minds Cluster When Grazing From The Daily Me," compared academics Juan Cole and Daniel Pipes as sources of information regarding the Middle East.

     Kristof prefers Juan Cole...shocking (not)!

      I have never met Cole, but I had--unfortunately--studied under a number of his academic clones in my own graduate school days.

      While also--but a bit more subtly than President Obama's dear friend, Rashid Khalidi, Juan Cole, et al--promoting the themes of nasty Zionists and the need to create Arab state # 22, Carter Findley never mentioned the plight of some thirty-five million Kurds who remain stateless to date. They had been gassed and slaughtered by Arabs repeatedly and had their one best chance at statehood aborted by a collusion of British petroleum politics and Arab nationalism after World War I. Indeed, the only time Findley ever mentioned Kurds in his doctoral seminar was when he mocked their plight in Turkey.
 
     In Juan Cole's Informed Comment blog of February 11, 2009, he proclaimed Israel's new incoming government as being prone to racism, apartheid, and so forth. Nothing new...his positions from the get-go. That has been how one gets ahead in Middle Eastern Studies for quite some time now. Israel is routinely placed under the high power lens of moral scrutiny, while a blind eye is turned to literally millions of victims of Arab massacres, gassings, genocide, enslavement, dhimmitude, subjugation, and so forth. And woe unto the student who dares to question such duplicity. Been there, done that...unfortunately.

     Turn the clock back several decades again as we return to Findley's doctoral seminars.
 
     I'll never forget one Greek Orthodox woman who I'm sure has a great position at some university today...can't think of her name, but remember her well. Unlike myself, she wasn't denied a Ph. D. dissertation advisor to finish her doctoral work. Geez...I wonder why?
 
     Her idol was Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who spent World War II in Berlin at Hitler's side and organized a division of Muslim Nazis, 'the Hanzar.' He also played a first-hand role in instigating the genocide of Europe's Jews, Serbs and Gypsies.

      When she presented her research on the Mufti at our seminar, all the above was either white-washed or ignored altogether. Findley, of course--her mentor and featured guest at her wedding--sat through it all approvingly.
 
     Now, contrast this with my own research about Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky…the man most responsible in the early Mandate era for Jewish defense against Arab slaughter. Findley had no problem emphasizing his alleged "fascist connections" and so forth.

     Unlike too many of his pipe-dreaming Zionist opponents on the Left, Jabotinsky was not delusional about what the Arabs' true intentions were regarding the resurrection of the Jew of the Nations--regardless of its size. A reading of his Appetite Versus Starvation speech in the early 20th century reveals a man truly concerned about justice for Arab and Jew alike. If the so-called Arab World had produced such "fascists," the Arab-Israeli conflict would have been resolved long ago. But none of this makes a difference to the Juan Coles...Kristof's sources of enlightenment.

     Jabotinsky's heirs are now set to take office in Israel. I hope they do justice to his memory.

     So, the Rashid Khalidis, Juan Coles, Nicholas Kristofs, and so forth now bemoan the end of the so-called peace (of the grave) process because at least most Israeli Jews have finally woken up to the reality that the end game for both the West's alleged Fatah good cops of Abbas and the bad cops of Hamas is the same regarding Israel. The façade of a difference is largely about who will gain access to the billions of dollars in foreign aid that is and will be pouring in. Arafat's stashed $$$ millions or more are legendary. Hamas is simply more honest.

     Daniel Pipes has long approached the Middle East with a far more realistic and objective appraisal of the facts at hand. He has been virtually prophetic regarding such things as 9/11, militant Islam, and so forth.

     On the other hand, the Juan Coles of the Ivory Tower have blamed solely Israel and America as the culprits.

     The fact that the vast majority of conflicts today, for example, involves militant Islam and/or real Arab racism is of no concern to them.

     What does the fight in the Philippines have to do with Israel?...Thailand?... Kashmir?...the Balkans?

     What do the murder and subjugation of Egyptian Copts, North African Berbers, Assyrians, those Kurds mentioned above, or Arab genocide in black Africa's Sudan have to do with Israel?

     The truth is that Israel--one half of whose Jews who are from refugee families from the "Arab World" where they were known as killers of prophets and kilab yahud, Jew dogs--is on the front lines of the age-old war the Arabs and Arabized have continuously waged for over thirteen centuries now, the conflct of the Dar ul-Islam versus the Dar al-Harb.

     Here's a few examples of the real problem, the one largely Arab petro-dollar sponsored, Arab, and hypocritical Lefty professors like Cole won't touch with a ten-foot pole...

     The Sudan's ex-president, Gaafar Muhammad al-Nimeiry, stated during the earlier slaughter of nearly a million blacks (over a million more since):

     The Sudan is the basis of the Arab thrust into... black Africa, the Arab civilizing mission ("Arabism and Pan-Arabism in Sudanese Politics," Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 11, no. 2, 1973, pp. 177-78).

     While Kristof's Juan Cole mentors are passionate about such things as Rudyard Kipling's late 19th-century poem, "The White Man's Burden," supposedly typifying continued Western colonialist and imperialist attitudes towards the Third World, why are such Arab racist attitudes and mindset ignored?

     Is it that the Arab Man's Burden is kosher but the White Man's isn't ? Recall, again, Cole's recent blog worries about alleged Israeli "racism."

     Consider also this quote from the Syrian Arab Constitution...something, I'm sure, Juan Cole's students never heard a peep about...

     The Arab fatherland belongs to the Arabs. They alone have the right to direct its destinies.... The Arab fatherland is that part of the globe inhabited by the Arab nation that stretches from the Taurus Mountains, the Pacht-i-Kouh Mountains, the Gulf of Basra, the Arab Ocean, the Ethiopian Mountains, the Sahara, the Atlantic Ocean, and the Mediterranean Sea.

     Can't tell for sure--are any Eskimos included in this Arab plan of conquest?

     The Juan Cole-type "scholarly" reaction: hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil...After all, these are Arabs we're talking about--not Jews. And besides, it's all just made up fascist Zionist propaganda anyway...

     As I like to remind folks and as exemplified above, Arabs have habitually referred to most of the region as purely Arab patrimony--the Arab-Israeli, Arab-Kurd, Arab-black African, Arab-Berber, and other such conflicts in a nutshell.

     So, summing it up, here's a rule of thumb for those truly interested in a realistic and objective analysis of what's really going on over there...

     When it comes to sources such as Juan Cole or Daniel Pipes, whatever Kristof tells you, choose the opposite.

    

                           Tall Ships, Netanyahu, And America

                                                                                                                                                                              by Gerald A. Honigman

 

          It was a moment in time never to be forgotten...July 4, 1976.

          And there I was, alongside the bay in Brooklyn, watching those spectacular tall sailing ships from numerous countries passing under the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge in salute to America's two hundredth birthday. Tears of pride were in many of our eyes that day--including my own. My own father and grandfather, of blessed memories, were American naval veterans of the two world wars themselves.

          I was there with my best friend, Arie, whom I met four years earlier while fishing under that same bridge.  Arie is from Israel, and something else was occurring back then--at almost the very  same moment that those tall ships were gloriously sailing by in full regalia--which would psychologically link Israel and America together in many a mind afterwards.

          In the night before and during the early morning hours of July 4, 1976, Israel launched Operation Thunderball aka Operation Thunderbolt aka...

          Operation Entebbe.

          On June 27th, Air France Flight 139 was hijacked by Palestinian Arabs and some European soul mates. The plane was taken to Idi Amin's Uganda, where the hijackers were met with open arms.

          As had happened a generation earlier, the passengers were  soon asked to form two lines--one for Jews, the other for Gentiles. Most of the latter were freed, the Jews became Idi Amin's "guests." Amin's buddies next announced that the Jews would be killed if their demands were not met.

          I won't prolong this now...it's an amazingly true story which sired several movies and so forth. Look it up on the Internet, rent one of the movies, or whatever.

          But, what you need to know, is that on July 4, 1976, Israel raided Entebbe, freed the hostages, and showed the world that it was possible to defeat terror if the will to do so was there...a lesson some still need to learn today.  It was a wonderful present commemorating America's own liberty as well.

          There was one Israeli combat fatality.

          Lieutenant Colonel Yonatan Netanyahu, of Israel's elite Sayeret Matkal, commanded the strike force. He was killed by a Ugandan soldier and was buried on Jerusalem's Mt. Herzl soon afterwards.

          Yoni was an intellectual, a Dean's List Harvard scholar who returned  to Israel to resume his earlier combat officer role during the stressful years leading up to the 1973 Yom Kippur War. He was a truly remarkable human being--both a man of the world as well as a true son of Zion reborn.

          When my own son was born (G_d bless), we named his first name Jonathan, in honor of King Saul's son, Prince Yonatan--King David's closest friend--and Yoni Netanyahu.

          Today, the mainstream media would, no doubt, portray Yoni as a right wing extremist. Take a look at how it has dealt with Israelis going after the non-stop terror machine and its willing supporters in Gaza.

          Any Jew who refuses to stick his head in the sand regarding what the Arabs' true intentions are regarding the acceptance of a Jewish Israel is branded this way.

          So, that brings me to another Netanyahu...Binyamin (Benjamin--there's no "J" in the original Hebrew name)--Bibi.

          Like his older brother, Yoni, and his younger brother, Iddo,  Bibi also served in the Sayeret Matkal.

          And,  unlike too many other Israeli leaders who feel that they have to prostrate themselves and resume a ghetto Jew stance while begging the Gentile world just to be able to survive, this Netanyahu also refuses to fit into that pathetic mold.

          While I am not naive regarding Bibi's own real and/or potential flaws, I nevertheless support him.

          His main opponent, Tzipi Livni, was too comfortable with ex-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The latter's  non-stop, one-sided, suicidal demands (which her boss also had to approve) placed upon Israel right up until the very moment President Bush's team left office were an abomination and travesty in light of what Israel really faces regarding either Fatah's Abbas or Islamic Jihad and Hamas. The latter are merely more honest in their intent.

          Bibi knows this...

          And, G_d willing, he'll have the strength to resist the even more turns of the screw which will undoubtedly be coming in American President Obama's  new administration. That action has already started.

          Resuming his earlier role as Prime Minister, Netanyahu has now unabashedly promised a renewal of both the Jewish and Zionist spirit--something all too lacking in recent Israeli leadership. 

          Of course,  such "attitude" scares folks like the New York Times, National Public Radio, CNN, NBC, and so forth.

           He's a right wing, nationalist hardliner because he refuses to bare the necks of Jewish kids to either the  American State Department's alleged Fatah good cop or Hamas bad cop terrorists--neither of which show Israel on a map or in their own Arab kids' textbooks. Or because he refuses to have Israel return to its '49 armistice line--not border--nine-mile wide rump state status. I travel three times that distance, just one way,  to go to work.

          Arabs can claim twenty-one states to date in their Arab League, on over six million square miles of territory, conquered and forcibly Arabized from mostly non-Arab peoples (with Abbas's PLO having observer status as the 22nd in waiting), but how dare Jews claim a sole, miniscule, resurrected one of their own--about the size of New Jersey.

          On July 4, 1976, Yonatan Netanyahu, of blessed memory, re-sent both America and the entire world a message that Jews have been delivering for thousands of years.

          Rabbi Hillel, who lived during the Roman occupation of Judaea, restated by then already ancient Jewish teachings when he proclaimed...

          If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But, If I am not for others, what am I?

          Israel has tried very hard to come to an honest accommodation with current others who see the entire region as merely purely Arab patrimony. Justice, through Arab eyes only. That's what Darfur and the south of the Sudan is about, as is gassed, massacred, and/or subjugated Kurds, Copts, Berbers, native Jews, Assyrians, and so forth.

          Israel has tried to reach more than fair compromises with Arab others--certainly light years beyond what Arabs have offered to the scores of millions of non-Arabs whom they have clashed and competed with themselves.

          But nothing will really change until that above Arab mindset changes.

          Until then, Israel must concentrate on that other half of Hillel's famous quote.

          It's long overdue for Israel to once again have a leader who will place Israel's own crucial national interests first before consenting to any new deals (likely not worth the paper they may or may not be written on) with Arabs which will only endanger it further down the road. The Arabs have openly bragged about their well-known destruction in phases scenario.

         The West's alleged "moderate" sweet-talking Arafatians in suits, Mahmoud Abbas & Co., still refuse to recognize a Jewish Israel and still expect that Israel must consent to be swamped by millions of so-called "returning" jihadi refugees.

          Given this reality check, Bibi must send the same message Yoni did over three decades ago--a message I've often written about and have espoused my whole life as well...

          He must demand--not beg--empathy for live Jews, not crocodile tears of sympathy for dead ones.

          What would over three hundred million Americans in a three thousand mile wide America do  given the true--not State Department pipedream--nature of the beast Israel faces?

              If I am not for myself, who will be for me...  

    

                                                     Why Is This So Hard To Understand?

                                                       by Gerald A. Honigman

 

         

     Talk about close!

     The Israelis are rivaling America's Bush-Gore race of 2000 in their recent election. As this article goes to print, either Tzipora Livni or Benjamin Netanyahu may wind up the next Israeli Prime Minister.

     Both  now seek the support of an important third party to form a viable government, that of Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu.

     Lieberman's party has surged and will win  a substantial number of seats in Israel's Parliament, the Knesset.

     Lieberman and his growing popularity is giving heart palpitations to many, and so that's what this article is all about.

     News articles have highlighted Israeli Arabs fear of Lieberman. While focusing on their fears, I've found in none of those articles any attempt to seriously explain Leiberman's position--which we'll get to shortly. Years ago I wrote of such things as well ("Treason...Tread Carefully, Dear Arabs," and so forth).

      National Public Radio has also done its usual one-sided thing regarding this issue.

      Eric Westervelt interviewed Arabs regarding Lieberman's popularity, but decided to totally ignore finding out why this is so...leaving his listeners with same impression most of the rest of the main stream media is dishing out.

     Okay--Let's begin...

    Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines treason as...

     the violation of the allegiance owed to one's sovereign or state; betrayal of one's country and, specifically in the United States, "...consisting only in levying war against the U.S. or in giving aid and comfort to its enemies."

     A few years back, Arab students attending Hebrew University demonstrated against the visit of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, screaming--among other things--"we are all Ahmed Yassins." Pictures of Israeli Arabs appeared in newspapers all over the world holding up Yassin's portrait in protest marches. Yassin was the Israeli dispatched-to-Paradise leader of Hamas...the organization which openly calls for (and acts upon) Israel's destruction which Israel recently was forced to go after again.

     Increasingly, Israeli Arabs--who number some 20% of Israel's population with one of the highest birth rates in the world--have attacked fellow Jewish citizens simply because they're Jews. It has become common place for them to hold demonstrations in their towns similar to what we've seen above at Hebrew University.

     Not only do Jews have to fear Arabs outside of their borders, but they now have to increasingly fear those within. Israeli Arab Knesset members openly side with those who deliberately disembowel Jews. Too many Israeli Arabs have cheered when Jews have been targeted and terrorized by either bad cop Hamas or good cop Fatah terrorists.

     Israel was partially resurrected so that there would be at least one place in the entire world where this sort of thing would not happen. So such Arab actions are totally unacceptable.

     Totally...

     In reality, however, this is nothing new. Rabbi Meir Kahane warned of such things decades ago and was branded a racist for coming to the same logical conclusions which Lieberman and others have come to, and for which they too are now being portrayed as unreasonable racists, fascists, and the like. Listening to NPR--supported by many Jewish donors--that's certainly the message one receives.

      So, what makes Israeli Arabs shudder about Lieberman?

     He wants to demand that they show loyalty to the state in which they live or be denied citizenship.

     Racist...? Unreasonable...? Fascist...?

     What other nation would put up with such outright treason against both the state and its citizens? Please look at Webster's definition above again--especially how America itself regards such things.

     Let's make sure that this point is so clear that even NPR's crew can understand it...

     We're not talking about American students at Kent State University protesting American policies or the war in Viet Nam. 
    

     What we're talking about is the freest Arabs to be found anywhere in the Middle East (those in Israel)--whose language has been made the second official language of the State while Kurdish kids in Syria are forced to sing songs praising their "Arab" identity--supporting terror, murder, and the destruction of the very nation in which they live and the murder of their fellow citizens.

     As Lieberman and a growing number of others tired of the one-sided destruction-in-stages games Arabs have been playing have increasingly come to learn the hard way, it's long past time for Israel to act in its own crucial interests the way all other nations would act.

     Those Arabs who display such treachery as described above must, preferably, be expelled from the country.

     Jail time only costs Israeli taxpayers money that there's much less of in Israel these days due to Arab rejectionist actions and attitudes --on both sides of the Green Line. Indeed, many Israeli Arabs have been actively involved in terrorism themselves. Jailing such folks only winds up with Israel getting blackmailed later--trading numerous, live Arab butchers and wannabes for the bones of a few dead Jews.

     In the broader perspective of the problem, Arabs could have had their 22nd state long ago if that's all that they wanted. Any objective assessment of the facts would show this. There's no need to rehash all the proposals yet again. I've certainly done that enough myself.
    

     The reality is that Arabs want their second state in mandatory "Palestine" (Jordan created in 1922 on 80% of the original territory mandated to Britain on April 25, 1920) to exist in place of--not along side of--Israel. And that goes for Mahmoud Abbas's alleged Fatah "moderates" as well.

     A visit to his Palestinian Authority or Hamas's websites, textbooks, media, maps, and so forth quickly confirms this,  as does a look at the polls which show that even if Israel withdrew to its pre-'67, nine-mile wide, UN-imposed armistice line (not border) existence, most Arabs would still reject its right to exist. 
     So...

     At the very least, kick those who articulate and exhibit such behaviors out of the country. I'd include treasonous, self-destructive Jews as well. Trade them for those Jews still trapped and living in fear in "Arab" and/or other Muslim countries.

                                    Ah, Parades...When Will Israel Finally Learn To Appreciate Them?
                                                                                          by Gerald A. Honigman
 
 
     How can you not like parades?
 
     I mean, just think of all those folks in all of their nice, fancy costumes or uniforms, showing off their prowess and wares of one kind or another. And all of that great music...
 
     And yet, after all of these years, Israel’s military leaders still don’t seem to get it. Can’t say I haven’t tried. I first attempted to persuade them years ago. You’d think this would be, as the kids say, a no brainer by now.
 
     Regardless, Israel still insists on ignoring such advice and being too darned predictable. You'll soon see what I mean...
 
     Despite all that the Arabs say, they know that the Jews will try their best to just kill the rats in their dens. They'll go house to house, endangering their own sons, trying to just target those involved in attacks on Jews as best as possible.
 
     The Geneva Conventions make perfectly clear that militants are not permitted to use their own non-combatants as human shields (as Arabs do constantly); that those non-combatants do not prevent an army from pursuing an enemy; and that any harm occurring to the civilian population as a consequence falls on the heads of those using their own people this way. Listening to the United Nations’ spokesmen in and out of Gaza, however (aka the Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil, See No Evil club when it comes to Arabs), you'd never know this.
 
     The reality is that there is no military anywhere in the entire world more careful in trying to limit "collateral damage" than that of the Jews. The Arabs know this very well. Who else drops leaflets telegraphing its punch or calling folks on their cell phones before an attack? Recall America's deliberate launch of cruise missiles and such against civilian restaurants and other facilities in order to take out Saddam. Any one interested in "collateral damage" caused by America's current fight in Iraq and Afghanistan? Let's just say that, putting it mildly, it dwarfs that of Israel's. And America, too, tries to not have this happen, but now faces similar enemies that Israel has had to deal with for almost a century.
 
     Recall that the enemy Israel constantly faces cuts out the entrails of Jewish victims to show off to cameras, hangs fake Jewish body parts up in rafters from museums to commemorate the "heroism" of actual blown Israeli teen night clubs and pizza parlors. Such stuff is all available on the Internet, by the way. Recall, as well, our last President’s wisdom regarding the handling of those who harbor and support terrorists.
 
     Despite what they say on CNN and elsewhere, Arabs know that their own wives and children will not be deliberately targeted on buses, in restaurants, shopping centers, and so forth. Their pregnant women won’t be deliberately stopped on roadways, massacred at point blank range, with their younger kids murdered while strapped to car seats. Arab children won't be kidnapped, having their heads smashed against walls inside of caves. No...but all of these actions--and much more--are Arab heroics that Jews have had to put up with while the United Nations and the rest of the world watched and did nothing until the Jews finally overdosed on such barbarism.
 
     Recently, as all know by now, Israel struck back after having its innocents once again deliberately targeted, murdered, maimed, and terrorized.
 
     And, after the latest cease fire--in which the Jews ceased and the Arabs still fired--that same U.N., which was deaf, dumb, and blind to thousands of mortar and rocket attacks over the years on Jewish civilians in Israel launched from Arab civilian population centers (a double war crime big time as referred to above), all of a sudden regained all of its senses to accuse Israel of alleged "war crimes"... and this time with President Obama’s new U.N. representative virtually jumping aboard as well.
 
     So, this all brings me back to an appreciation of parades...
 
     It’s obvious that Israel will always be in a no win situation regarding its fight to survive.
 
     It will be condemned by hypocrites who would have never put up with what they expect Jews to just merely accept. And I’m not even referring to Arab critics--who have blasted, gassed, and otherwise massacred their own real or perceived Arab and non-Arab native rivals by the scores to hundreds of thousands in the region.
 
     Given that no matter how hard it tries to do things "right," it’s going to be condemned anyway, it’s time for Israel to learn some lasting lessons from all of this instead of repeatedly finding itself in the same situation.
 
     Hamas and its ilk hold rallies and parades all of the time.
 
     The masters of blown buses--who readily use their own women and children to hide behind and fire at Jews from in schools, hospitals, homes, mosques, and such--just love to show off how nice they can prance around in their bandanas with weapons gleaming. They have similar rallies when burying one of their fallen comrades.
 
     Now, with hundreds of such uncontested "militants"--whose expressed raison d’etre is the very destruction of Israel and Jews (who else faces such an enemy?)--exposed front and center this way, Israel truly needs to learn how to appreciate a good parade...
 
     Why waste expensive bombs, endanger one’s own personnel, and so forth to take out such targets one at a time when hundreds or more can be sent to Paradise all at once...with a guarantee that the vast majority of those dispatched will be Jew-killers or Jew-killer wannabes?

     Wise up, Israel--before it’s too late.

     Stop fighting your war for survival as Arabs know you will...worrying too much about things which Arabs never give a thought to when fighting their own enemies. You're indeed too darn predictable...
 
     Stop trying to win favor with most others as well--practitioners of the double standard supreme. As soon as the last "cease fire" in Gaza went into effect, Arabs slaughtered and wounded your soldiers on your own side of the border. That's where playing by the Arabs' own rules and game plan get you.

     All right...let's end this for now with me trying to convey my years' old message yet again.
 
     Find out when and where that next Arab parade is scheduled. That "cease fire" you agreed to in order to appease the newly-elected American President won’t do you any good anyway. The recent American U.N. action is just a small taste of what’s now in store for you...courtesy of most American Jews, amongst others.

     It’s time for Israeli leaders and the military to finally learn the value of parades. The next such Arab military mass gathering must be attended by Israel in such a way that Arabs will never forget and that will be worth the condemnation which comes in the wake of all your attempts at self defense anyway.

 Between Ankara And Jerusalem...

                                                                      by Gerald A. Honigman


The Turks are, once again, upset with Israel.

 
Among other things, while hosting a banquet in honor of the visiting United Nations Secretary General, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoggan urged the world "not to turn a blind eye towards Israel's savagery."

In reality, the Arabs killed in the current fighting have been mostly fighters--despite Arab claims. The non-combatants killed have deliberately been used as human shields by their own "heroes."

Where have the United Nations, International Court Of Justice, academic, European Union, and other voices been about that above blatant Arab war crime? Unless it's Israel they can all jump upon, they're about as useless here as they are in stopping Arab genocide in black Africa and Arab atrocities elsewhere as well.

After putting up with about ten thousand mortars and rockets being deliberately fired at their civilian population years after a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the U.N. doing nothing to stop this, the Jews finally had no other choice than to move in to try to stop the terror themselves.
 
How long would Ankara have put up with these deliberate acts of war before reacting?

The Arabs who elected Hamas--an organization which exists primarily to destroy Israel--have been used by Hamas to commit a double war crime: Israeli civilians have been deliberately targeted from Arab civilian centers, while the latter have been used as human shields. The Perfidy and other clauses of the Geneva Conventions speak clearly about such cowardice and barbarism.

While I don't advocate adopting the Arabs' own tactics used against Jews (such as blowing up Arab buses, restaurants, shopping malls, schools, and such), any building, town, home, and so forth harboring murderers and their collaborators must be recognized for what the Geneva Conventions say it is...a fair military target.

Article 51/7

The presence of the civilian population shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attack...

Article 58b

The parties to the conflict shall...avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas.The rats' dens are typically set up in or adjacent to civilian apartment buildings, hospitals, schools, mosques, and so forth. Video tape is available showing Arabs launching missiles from schools.

Article 51/2

The civilian population...shall not be the object of attack. Acts of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited...Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Arabs typically target Israeli civilians.

Before I proceed with a reality check, let me state clearly that I am in favor of an alliance between Turkey and Israel...but one based on an equality in that relationship and the highest moral standards of behavior humanly possible by both parties towards others.
 
So, let's now begin...

Unfortunately, the same folks who have declared over one fifth of their own non-Turkish, Kurdish population (over twelve million people) to be "non-existent" in the past --they're really just "Mountain Turks, don't you know?--and have taken steps to outlaw Kurdish language and culture (Arabic is one of Israel's two official languages), are, once again, enraged at Israel for going after both Arab terrorists and their infrastructure in Gaza. These are the same folks who have killed tens of thousands of Kurds (and many others as well) over the years in the name of their own security, have invaded neighboring Iraq for similar reasons, etc., etc., and so forth.

Again, I favor alliances with Ankara, but that particular relationship with Israel must not be an unbalanced affair...something to use when relations are on the downswing with Syrian Arabs, for example.
 
Ankara complains about Israel being forced to take steps to prevent Gaza from becoming one giant base to launch death, destruction, and terror from--while Israel has agreed in theory to an Arab state being set up there--but totally nixes the idea of an independent Kurdish state being set up in adjacent northern Iraq for the Turks' own security reasons. Think about that for a minute. We'll return to this point a bit later.
 
For several years now, Arabs had a chance to begin to create that 22nd state they say they need in Gaza. All they did with the time and billions of dollars in aid which poured in was to use both to terrorize their Jewish neighbor instead. Gaza was a test--and the Arabs flunked it big time.

So, it's time to use that American expression and really "talk turkey (speak candidly) to Turkey," if you know what I mean.
 
Israel has neglected a brave people who have helped many Jews in the past. Just ask the hundreds of thousands in Israel who originated in Iraq. Israeli leaders have done this largely to not anger the Turks
over this painful issue. So the latter's policies towards the Kurds were treated in a hands off manner. Indeed, Israel has helped Ankara fight Kurds who have resorted to violent means to achieve their own political rights in Turkey...a highly controversial policy.

Since the Turks, however, insist on joining much of the rest of the world in applying hypocritical double standards towards the Jewish State, the time has come for certain truths to at long last come out in the open.

Some thirty-five million Kurds remain stateless today, often at someone else's mercy. At a time when much of the world insists that justice demands that there be yet another Arab state, there is a nauseating silence--in most of the media, in academia, at the United Nations, and so forth--over the plight of this people.

Spread out over a region which encompasses parts of southeastern Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and other adjoining areas as well, these modern day descendants of ancient Medes, Guti, and Hurrians continue to find themselves in very deadly and precarious circumstances.

Kurdish culture and language have periodically been "outlawed" in attempts to Arabize or Turkify them, and in an age when other dormant nations/national groups were able to seize the moment with the collapse of empires, Kurds were repeatedly denied this chance by an assortment of so-called "friends" and foes alike.

Having been promised independence after World War I, the Kurds saw their hopes dashed after the British received a favorable decision from the League of Nations on the Mosul Question in 1925. Mosul and Kirkuk were where much of the oil was located, and the main arm of British imperial power--the navy--had recently switched from coal to oil.

The Brits decided that their long term interests involved not angering the Arabs, who--by their own writings--declared that the rise of an independent Kurdistan would be seen as the equivalent of the birth of another Israel.
 
Regardless of scores of millions of non-Arabs living in the region (including one half of Israel's
Jews who were refugees from "Arab"/Muslim lands), Arabs declared a political monopoly over what they regarded as "purely Arab patrimony." We are living with the consequences of this mindset today along with the related confrontation of the Dar ul-Islam vs. the Dar al-Harb. Hamas and the current Gaza mess are but the latest manifestations of this.

For a number of reasons--such as not angering Arabs and Turks alike--the State Department insists, after hundreds of thousands of Kurds have been maimed, gassed, and slaughtered in other ways by Arabs just in Iraq alone over the last half century (not long ago, Syran Arabs and Iranians renewed their own previous slaughter of Kurds as well), that Kurds will never gain independence. Recall that the heartland of ancient Kurdistan had been in the oil-rich region around Kirkuk.

Both Ankara and the State Department insist that the Kurds remain part of a united Iraq, regardless
of the bloody consequences this will likely have for them in the future yet again once America leaves the scene.

America's autonomous federal dream, while looking good on paper, will probably not last far beyond America's withdrawal. The majority Shi'a, like the Kurds, massacred and long suppressed by Saddam's Sunni Arabs, now have other plans. Furthermore, as the Brits earlier armed Arabs in their confrontations with the Kurds, America has now done likewise in rebuilding Iraq's Shi'a Arab-led army.

The same State Department--which fought President Truman over America's recognition of a reborn Israel in  1948--insists that there be no partition of Mesopotamia/Iraq. Britain had earlier received the Mandate for Mesopotamia at the same time it received the Mandate for Palestine in the post-World War I era upon the break up of the Ottoman Turkish Empire. But, unlike Palestine (the name Rome gave to Judaea after the Jews’ second revolt for freedom), which would have proposed and actual partitions in attempts to arrive at a compromise solution between Arab and Jew, a much larger Mesopotamia was/is somehow declared to be incapable of doing this same bit of justice for its Kurds.

The main reason put forth for why Mesopotamia/Iraq is incapable of this sort of partition is the potential for instability it will cause in the region. Not only will oil-rich Arabs be miffed at someone else gaining national rights in "their" region, but the Turks, in particular, will supposedly have a fit due to their own large Kurdish minority. Not to mention that Iranian mullahs have been collaborating with Ankara to suppress Kurds as well.

While strong Turco-American and Turco-Israeli alliances are worthy of support, the Turks are wrong on this matter, and too many others have allowed them to get away with this for too long. While it is understandable that they're nervous about the potential problems, this does not give them the right to have a veto power over the plight of some thirty-five million long-oppressed, stateless, and politically abused Kurds.
 
Again, think of the irony here regarding Ankara's outrage at Israel over unabashedly rejectionist Arabs who could have had their additional state (#22) decades ago had they just not continued
to work towards the destruction of the sole, tiny nation of the Jews.

An independent Kurdistan set up in northern Iraq--under the right conditions--might actually be a blessing for the Turks. Those Kurds--like those diaspora Jews, Greeks, Armenians, etc.--wishing to live in an independent state could migrate to it. An arrangement could be made whereby the oil wealth of the area could be shared with the Turks as well, since they feel they got robbed via the earlier decision by the League of Nations on the Mosul Question.

Putting things into an even more important and broader perspective, consider the following
facts:

The CIA shows Israel to have a population of about 7 million people, of whom some 20% are Arab. Among the latter (the freest Arabs, by the way, anywhere in the region) are some extremely hostile elements. Israel's territory is about 20,770 sq km.

Turkey has a population of about 69 million people, of whom about 20%
are Kurds. Turkey's territory is about 780,580 sq km.
 
About 38 Israels would fit into Turkey.

Yet, despite its miniscule size, Ankara, Washington, and others have no problem demanding that Israel allow the creation of another Arab terrorist state, dedicated to Israel's destruction, right on its doorstep. Ignored are the repeated proclamations by even so-called Arab "moderates" that Oslo and all other such "peace initiatives" are but Trojan Horses, steps along the way in the Arabs' post-' 67 destruction in phases strategy for Israel.

Now, how will the fifth of Israel's population that is Arab react to this adjacent potential development? And how will the majority of Hashemite Jordan, which is also mostly Palestinian Arab (however you define that, since many, if not most, "Palestinians" entered Palestine from elsewhere in the region during the Mandatory Period), react to this?
 
Arafat's boys (Mahmoud Abbas's alleged current Fatah "moderates") had already tried a takeover of Jordan in 1970. They were crushed in King Hussein's "Black September." And Israel's mobilization in the north sent a message to Fatah's Syrian allies at the time as well. Yet no one seems to be worried about any destabilizing effects here.

The same hypocrites who declare that Israel must grossly endanger itself so that yet another Arab state might be born insist that Kurds must remain forever stateless because of some problems their freedom
might cause to a Turkey nearly forty times Israel's size in territory and over eleven times its size in population...and with the exact same 80% to 20% mix of potential "headaches."

There's no moral defense for this.
 
Indeed, the Turks definitely need to review the wisdom regarding those living in glass houses not throwing stones.

Asking Kurds to forsake the creation of their one, sole state for the pipedream of an egalitarian Iraq is a travesty of justice if ever there was one.
 
Regardless of their religious coloration, the vast majority of Arabs are in no sharing mood when it comes to questions about what they see as "purely Arab patrimony." They're the rulers, the rest are the ruled...Period...End of conversation.
 
Kurds do not aim to destroy Turkey in order to see their own dreams of independence--or, at minimum, a highly entrenched, sustainable autonomy--come true.
 
The reason Israel has fought war after war with Arabs is because the latter refuse to grant millions of other non-Arab peoples in the region even a tiny sliver of the very rights they demand for themselves. Many people besides Jews have been slaughtered and victimized by Arabs this way.
 
Ankara would be wise to reconsider its stance on all of these issues--especially since it insists on seating itself upon a moral high horse.

Gaza School Daze

by Gerald A. Honigman

So, there I was minding my own business eying the flat ocean on the way to work, wondering what fish were hitting in the surf.

I must be a glutton for punishment...why else would I turn on National Public Radio in the midst of renewed Arab-Israeli "festivities?"

Sure enough, on January 7th’s morning show, some woman reporter could barely hold back her sick glee at being able to report about Israel’shelling of a U.N. school causing numerous deaths. Anything that causes Israel to look bad, NPR jumps on.

While reporting the news is understandable, deliberately reporting only one side of the news is distortion. NPR has a history of this...but the lefty Jews keep funding it anyway. And many of those NPR reporters are also members of The Tribe. After a virtual dissertation of Israel’s alleged crime, you’re lucky to hear some passing footnote at the end posing as "the other side." Unbelievable...

And, of course, it’s not just NPR.

Jackson Diehl, deputy editorial page editor of the Washington Post, wrote a syndicated piece which appeared in my local paper on December 30^th singing praises to Ehud Olmert’s name...the guy perhaps most responsible for Israel’s current headaches, which were long in the coming. Diehl typifies too much of the mainstream media today. He also ended his op-ed ("...Israel’s hard-line show") by stating that "...it may be many years before Israel again has a leader as willing to make peace."

Guess what? Ever since Israel was forced to fight–again–for its life in 1967, every Prime Minister has held his or her hand out to the Arabs to make a real peace. General Dayan offered, right after the war, to return all the territories for such a deal. The Arabs’ collective answer has often been repeated–the "Three Nos of Khartoum." But Diehl and his ilk aren’t interested in such things.

As for the Arabs living in the portion of the Palestine Mandate left after Jordan wound up with most of it in 1922, they offered Arafat’s famous hudna (ceasefire), his "Peace of the Quraysh," to the Jews in return for the latter giving away what was left of the store. It was and is modeled on the temporary halt to hostilities the Arabs’ Prophet Muhammad agreed to until he could muster the strength to conquer his enemies. Even the most "moderate" of these Arabs still have this in mind...regardless of others’ wishful thinking. Think America’s Foggy Folks, the European Union, and so forth.

Back to the recent school casualties...

It’s no news that Arabs have a long history of using their own women and children as human shields. Pictures made the rounds of Hizbullah gun installations set up in apartment buildings in Lebanon a few years back. Offices of Hamas leaders, the PFLP, and so forth are routinely set up in such places as well, with arms and munitions stored in schools, hospitals, and so forth.

Shoot, maim, terrorize, destroy, and/or murder Jewish property or people--then cry to the assorted world hypocrites and idiots and show off your dead kids who you hid behind when Israel finally is forced to strike back.

Here’s a video of Arabs firing from just such a Gaza school a while back...

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/129266

It’s should be of no surprise, therefore, that Arabs are up to their same old tricks. And once again their own innocents–or, at least, non-combatants--pay part of the price. But while we’re at it, also please recall that the latter elected those "heroes... Know what I mean? By the way, all of this is contrary to the Perfidy and other clauses of the Geneva Conventions–war crimes, big time, as is deliberately targeting Jewish civilians.

Now, here’s what reasonable folks really deserve from NPR and all those other holier-than-thou media types who watched Israel take over ten thousand rocket and mortar hits since leaving Gaza a few years back and barely–if ever–wrote an editorial, produced a radio program, news broadcast, or such about this...

Where’s the NPR producer–after all of these years–who will do an in-depth program on the above repeated Arab war crimes?

Not newsworthy?

Where’s the producer and reporter who’ll ask Arabs what they’ve done with all the billions of dollars in aid they’ve already received–except acquire more and more means to attack their tiny Jewish neighbor which is practically invisible on a world map. Twenty-one Arab states (including one already sitting on most of "Palestine") on over six million square miles of territory (mostly seized and forcibly Arabized from non-Arab peoples) but they still can’t leave the Jews and their resurrected state alone. The second proposed Arab state in Palestine will be their 22nd.

As many of us have asked, is this issue really not a no brainer?

Would that gal chomping at the bit to embarrass Israel--a perennial NPR specialty--want her own government to ignore her own house, neighborhood, school or so forth being attacked this way...repeatedly? Duh...

Hey Jews! Be like good Christians and just turn your other cheek!

Sure...show me the Christian nations which do this.

Indeed, who but the Jews would have put up with this manure for so many years before striking back hard. Yet the Washington Post’s Diehl labels Israel as being "hardline" for trying to put an end to this terror–er, sorry Jackson, "militancy."

The sad, all important fact is that the goal of Israel’s Arab neighbors is still the destruction of the sole Jewish State–for both the terrorists and those who harbor and support them.

For Hamas, this is professed openly; for Abbas–a sweet-talking (sometimes) Arafat in a suit–this is a bit more disguised. As I like to say, blown buses bring bad press. And there’s lots of money at stake for those willing to say the right stuff to an all-too-willingly gullible West...in English. Recall that the rockets were hitting Israel when Abbas was in Gaza as well.

Gaza must be a lesson to the next Israeli leaders who will hopefully replace Olmert’s crew very shortly.

Israel cannot risk having its main population centers in its narrow waist exposed to Abbas’s Fatah, latter-day Arafatians--who remain as rejectionist as Hamas when it comes to the idea. Abbas and his crew do not deny this. They think they’re going to swamp Israel with millions of alleged returning refugees and so forth.

America is now in the process of building Abbas’s Fatah army up so it will be able to kill more Jews. That’s the reality here after Israel hands Fatah a victory over Hamas it couldn’t win itself. Look at the "moderate" Fatah and Palestinian Authority official web sites, maps, textbooks, and so forth if you think otherwise. Part of what Israel is doing to Hamas involves sending Fatah a message as well...

Even in an age of satellites and missiles, land is still important.

Israel must thus insist on a fair territorial compromise, giving it the somewhat secure borders it was promised via UNSC Resolution 242 after the June ‘67 war instead of the suicidal armistice lines which were imposed upon it after the Arab invasion in 1948 which did nothing but invite continued Arab aggression.

 

 

                                            Israel: Do It Right Or Don't Do It At All
                                                                     by Gerald A. Honigman
    
     

     Figures...the one day I don't read the paper or check my computer for news first thing in the morning...

     Ugh!

     Turns out the Jews finally overdosed and moved on Gaza while I was in the very midst of writing this article. So now, after having to plead my case with publishers I already drive crazy, please check it out anyway. Let's see how good the Israelis do. And hopefully, I'll be proven wrong...on at least some counts.

     One of the so-called "Arab World's" greatest scholars, Ibn Khaldun, singled out the Jews centuries ago when he wrote The Muqaddimah.
   
      Writing of the rise and fall of civilizations, he stressed the overwhelming importance of 'asabiyah--unique group consciousness--to the overall fate of any nation.
    
     While Ibn Khaldun noted that the Jews had one of the most "noble houses" in history, he explained that, as a result of losing their 'asabiyah, they had subsequently suffered constant humiliations as a result.
    
     The Muqaddimah stressed that the Jews were forced to wander in the desert for forty years due to their "meekness." Ibn Khaldun held that this was necessary so that a new generation would arise with a new, more powerful 'asabiyah.

     Prime Minister Olmert and his crew should pay close attention to this...Jews can't afford yet another of such wanderings.
    
     After putting up with countless mortar and rocket terror launched from Gaza since it unilaterally withdrew from there years ago, it looks like Israel, under Olmert and Livni, has gotten a green light from Washington to do what should have been done long ago. Unfortunately, these are not the leaders to do it right.
    
     Too many of Olmert's crew have much in common with the "post-Zionism" plaguing too much of Israel today.

     Too many of Israel's teachers, especially at the higher levels, lack that 'asabiyah Ibn Khaldun stressed and have spread the disease to their students as well.
    
     Israel's war against Hizbullah in Lebanon was a result of such new leaders. An Israel under Menachem Begin, David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir, or Arik Sharon would not have fought Hizbullah largely by the Arabs' own game plan. Olmert's crew did--with disastrous results.

     And now this same crew is telegraphing its punch to do a virtual Lebanon II in Gaza.
    
     More young Israelis will be sent on the ground into deadly booby traps set for human and tank alike.
    
     Arabs like to joke about how Jews value life...

     We'll, for starters, they don't believe that they'll have seventy-two virgins awaiting them in Heaven as a reward for blowing up Arab babes and other innocents the way Arabs see this picture for themselves. So, the Arabs are correct--for this and many other reasons as well.
    
     But, following up on this observation, Israel thus needs to play a very different game in Gaza.
   
     Hamas and the Gazan Arabs who elected it to office know that Israel can't lay low forever. It has deliberately been trying to bait Israel into fighting at this time. But I suspect that Hamas expects Israel to follow a game plan approved by Washington--especially the State Department--which will not allow it to do what really needs to be done here...actually win.

     Israel will be allowed to punish Foggy Bottom's bad cop terrorists for the sake of the alleged latter-day Arafatian good cop ones of its darling, Mahmud Abbas. In reality, both have the same long-term goal for the Jewish State. But there's billions of dollars at stake for the winners. Recall Arafat's legendary Swiss bank accounts and so forth.

     Israel must indeed answer terror, but at minimum cost to itself. Every soldier Israel loses is like America losing about sixty.

     No matter how "good" it tries to be here, it will be condemned anyway...So, do it as best as possible.

     Those who deliberately set up terror shops amidst their own civilian human shields will be responsible for the deaths of innocents (and keep in mind that those "innocents" gladly elected the leaders they now have). The Geneva Conventions condemn such cowardice and further state that it will not prevent retribution. See the Perfidy Clause and so forth.

     So, here's the real plan...

     Bombers, not helicopters, will take the lead here.

     Israel has already telegraphed its punch loudly and clearly in the aftermath of all Gaza singing Hamas's praises for hundreds of mortars and rockets fired at Israel in just the past few weeks. Newspaper articles all over the world have reported of Israel's upcoming invasion.

     Massive, quick retaliation, following America's own Powell Doctrine for war, must be the guideline.  If having death and destruction fired non-stop at your towns by folks who don't recognize your very right to exist is not war, then what is?

     Bombers will need to seek out major groupings of armed fighters. So, the time for the strike should be set for when Hamas is having another of its major rallies or parades. Hopefully, Israeli intelligence can redeem itself here a bit. Hundreds must be sent to Paradise at one time--enough so that there will be a shortage of virgins.

     Qassam rockets and such must be answered by artillery. Forget the tit-for-tat manure that Arabs only laugh at... Massive barrages must target sites from which terror is launched. Prospective mine fields and booby traps must be blasted as well.

     Any suspected hideouts of Hamas leadership must be taken out. Israel had opportunities in earlier decades to do this and refused because of the human shield thing. Not this time...

     Hide with them, die with them. President Bush almost said those exact words himself.

     Many underground bunkers as well as tunnels have likely been constructed by Arabsin preparation for Gaza's virtual  Lebanon II. This is a good time to test those bunker-busters, assuming Israel has gotten some decent intelligence here before it uses those expensive bombs.

     Israeli teens and others should not be sent in on the ground until everything has been done to reduce their casualties. To Hell with those "innocents" who'd slit Jews's throats in an instant given the chance.

     It's time for Israel to fight to win...like any other country would. So...

     I don't recommend hitting Gaza now.

     Conventional wisdom states that Israel should attack before President Obama takes office along with his list of anti-Israel advisers.

     While this is a consideration, it is trumped by the make-up of Israel's current leaders and the wisdom of Ibn Khaldun.

     Israel has waited this long to strike. It must wait a bit longer...until new elections produce leaders for whom the Jews's Zionist 'asabiyah is once more calling both the political and military shots.

     At that time, it will be able to fight to win--not merely play the game that others have in store for it.
    

 

                                                                      Kurds, Jews, And Shi’a Shoes

                                                                   by Gerald A. Honigman

     As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, on a recent surprise visit to Iraq, President Bush had to duck when a Shi’a Arab journalist threw shoes at him in protest of American policies and presence in Iraq. During a news conference, Muntadhar al-Zaidi yelled out,"this is a gift from the Iraqis, a farewell kiss, you dog" and fired away. Thrown shoes and dogs are about as low as you go in the Arab world. Forget about Marley and Me, Rin Tin Tin, or Old Yeller.

     I wish I could say that I was shocked by this disrespect usually reserved for such folks as the tolerant Arabs’ kilab yahud—Jew dogs. I wasn’t.

     Polls show that most Arab Iraqis—especially Shi’a—supported al-Zaidi. While he was roughed up by those with a stake in the current regime, those later reports reveal the pulse of the nation. While the Sunni have no love for America either—they were Saddam’s folks—they now fear what’s in store for themselves later on.

     While estimates of the dead vary (some hundreds of thousands), the 60% of Iraq who are Shi’a had their own aspirations suppressed only via the iron fist of the Sunni Arabs’ Saddam. He employed the same murderous tactics against them as he did with non-Arab Kurds in the north. Similar bloody actions against others in neighboring Iran by the majority non-Arab, Persian Shi’a are probably not a bad model for what to expect after America leaves a Shi’a-dominated Iraq as well …Payback time, so to speak. And don’t expect a President Obama to move back in.

      Unfortunately, the Kurds will also be caught up in this murderous, age old Arab feud. The one thing both Shi’a and Sunni Arabs can agree on (just like with Israel, the black African Sudan, Berber North Africa, and elsewhere) is that Kurds should have no claims on alleged “purely Arab patrimony.”

     Having supported America’s move against Saddam, decades of intense study, publication in academic journals and elsewhere, and involvement with the region still made me very wary.

     While the Arabs owed Great Britain a huge debt for the very creation of a united, Arab-ruled Iraq out of the post-World War I Mandate of Mesopotamia, this didn’t stop them not long afterwards from rising up against what they only saw as British imperialism.

     No giving the devil his due here…Use him then lose him.

     I can understand that. Too bad Arabs can’t grant this same understanding to others though.

      Imperialism is only nasty when it’s not Arabs dishing it out. How do you think the region became “purely Arab patrimony” in too many an Arab mind?

     Without the Brits’ involvement, the Turkish phoenix rising under Ataturk from the ruins of the centuries’ old Ottoman Empire would have surely grabbed the oil-rich region around Mosul (which it formerly ruled) and probably would have extended its claim to the black gold of Kirkuk as well.

     To make the new prospective Arab state viable (the British navy had recently switched from coal to oil and was the main arm of the British Empire), the Brits had to attach the oil of the Kurdish north to the Sunni Arab center and Shi’a Arab oil of the south.

     In the process of siring the Middle East’s version of Yugoslavia, London thus shafted Kurds out of the best chance they ever had at regaining their own independence…something the Brits had promised them earlier as well.

     After having their very country created and handed to them by the Brits (who also supplied aircraft and such to fight the Kurds), the Arabs soon revolted to try to drive the Brits out.

     Granted, imperialism has its nasty side, and the Brits created an Arab Iraq for their own reasons, yet still…    

     So, the point here is that America should have known not to expect any gratitude from most Iraqi Arabs either. Hence the thrown shoes, the thrower now a national hero, and so forth.

     There’s yet another angle to this…

     Think of all the American blood, lives, money, and other aid which have been spent for the sake of Arabs in Iraq, giving them new freedoms which they have never had.

     Trillions of American dollars will be spent before it’s over, billions each month. Visit a local VA hospital to see just some of the other tragic, lasting costs…That shoe-thrower who called President Bush a dog would have literally been fed to the dogs if he tried that trick with the man America freed him from. The innocents who died whom the shoe thrower complained about mostly died because of the same cowardly Arab trick Israel deals with daily. Arabs love to use their non-combatants as human shields…against the Geneva Conventions, and so forth. They shoot and then run behind the skirts of their women and toys of their kids.

     Was/is America hoping to get something positive for itself as a result of its Iraq expenditures? Sure…But does that erase the above truisms?

     Think about those anti-Israel voices quick to protest about two billion dollars in aid sent to Israel each year…an investment whose return comes back to us positively in many ways.

     The current war in Iraq costs America more (for the sake of Arabs who mostly hate us as “infidels” in a context of a war for their Dar ul-Islam) in one week than Israel gets in foreign assistance in one year. And, in exchange for that assistance, the State Department feels it has the right to pressure Jews into suicidal concessions.

      America has already spent about $500 billion dollars for Iraq, with much more set to come.

     It would take Israel centuries to get this much aid from America. And Israel doesn't ask for American blood to be shed on its behalf or to be bribed to display America's own values and democratic inclinations. How long will the latter last among Arabs after America's exit from Iraq?

     Ironically, the one people in Iraq who better share our values--the Kurds--are the folks the Arabist James Baker types in the State Department are determined to shaft yet againon behalf of Arabs who want to be sure that oil in Kurdish lands remains part of the "purely Arab patrimony."

     Sound familiar?

     Same shafting game you read above…just different shafters.

     While I didn’t vote for the Obama-Biden ticket largely because of the long list of known anti-Semitic and anti-Israel friends and advisors Obama has aligned himself with (he’s already brought several into his future Administration), Senator Joe Biden has a better understanding of the Yugoslavian nature of Iraqi demographics than most politicians.

     I’m hoping against the odds that he’ll pull more weight than the shaft the Jews and the Kurds Arabist types which are all-too-common in the State Department (and among Obama’s buddies) which Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will soon be leading.

 

Of Mumbai And Beyond…

by Gerald A. Honigman

 

 

 
     The recent atrocities committed in Mumbai, India in the name of the ongoing quest for the spread of the Arab and Arabizeds' Dar ul-Islam is merely a continuation of a war waged by Muhammed's followers for about fourteen centuries now against the Dar al-Harb…the realm of war, i.e. all peoples and lands not yet conquered either in the name of what Arab pipedreams proclaim to be "purely Arab patrimony" or the faith of the Arabs' Seal of the Prophets.
 
     As Arab armies burst out of the Arabian Peninsula around the mid-7^th century C.E., lands native to other Semitic but non-Arab peoples (despite the wishful thinking of those who espouse the Winkler-Caetani Theory--Jews, Assyrians, Phoenicians/Lebanese, etc.), Copts, Berbers, Kurds, Persians and other Aryan peoples, Turks, black Africans, Indians, and others fell one after another to Arab and Arabized imperial conquests. Numerous millions of people were slaughtered in the process--continuing to this very day. Others willingly jumped on the Arab bandwagon to gain shares of the conquests.
 
     Muhammad of Gaur first spread the Dar ul-Islam into India in the 12^th century C.E., and the highlight of these conquests came with the Moghul Empire several centuries later.
 
     The results were lasting, and the partition of the Indian subcontinent into a Muslim Pakistan and largely Hindu India in 1947 reflected this. During that same year, Arabs would reject a similar partition of what was left of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine after Arab Jordan was created from nearly 80% of it in 1922. Had Arabs accepted this, they would have wound up with about 90% of the whole with the creation of their 2^nd, not 1^st, Arab state in "Palestine"--the name the Roman Emperor Hadrian gave to Judaea after the Jews' second revolt for freedom in 133-135 C.E.
 
     There are, indeed, similarities between what Israel faces in Judea and Samaria today--renamed, as a result of 20^th century British imperialism and Jordanian Arab conquest, the "West Bank"--and what India faces in Kashmir and elsewhere. The one big difference, of course, is that there are about one billion Indians (who were never earlier subjected to a forced diaspora like the Jews were after taking on Rome) instead of some six million Jews facing similar threats from Arab and/or Arabized.
 
     Over the years, more and more Indians themselves have begun to notice this. As they do, they see the linkage between Arabs blowing up Jews on buses and restaurants, and Arabized Pakistanis blowing up and massacring Hindus and others in Parliament and in hotels in Mumbai.
 
     Before moving on, something else must be said about those partitions of the Mandate of Palestine and the Indian subcontinent mentioned earlier…

 
     While working for the liberation of India from British imperial occupation, Mohandas Gandhi opposed the partition of the Indian subcontinent into a Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan. He believed that people of all religious faiths should be able to get along in the same nation. He was assassinated by a Hindu nationalist.
 
     So much for getting along…Some places it works, some places it's laughable. The Mahatma didn't understand the nature of the enemy he was facing…an enemy who sees justice only in terms of its own ilk.
 
     Gandhi opposed Zionism--the national liberation movement of the Jews--to the very end; his major statement circulated as an editorial in the Harijan of November 11, 1938. Among other things, while first professing his supposed "sympathies" for perennially persecuted Jews, he next claimed that...

    

     Palestine of the biblical conception is not a geographical tract. 
    
     Actually, he did get that one right. Palestine wasn't...It represented a vague geographical area according to the ancient Greeks.
 
     As mentioned above, the name itself was bestowed on Judaea--the defined land of the Jews--by Hadrian, after the Jews' second major war (133-135 C.E.) for their independence against the Romans. To squash their hopes once and for all, he renamed the land itself after their historic enemies, the Philistines (Syria Palaestina), a non-Semitic Greek people from the area around the Aegean Sea.
 
     But Israel and Judaea were well-known nations/kingdoms peopled by Hebrews/Jews. As just one of many examples, the Habiru/Apiru--Hebrews--were written about throughout the extensive correspondence of ancient Pharaohs, their vassals, and others as well. And these folks evolved into a separate people with their own unique culture, language, history--and, yes, religion too. Gandhi saw the religious claims of Jews as their main, if not only, leg to stand on in this conflict...which he rejected.
 
     But the differences which separated Jews from Arabs were not simply theological. While Gandhi still has plenty of company here in his booboo (including academics), this doesn't excuse it. What made matters worse, if you don't really know, you shouldn't really say...especially if you see yourself, or are seen by others, as a major voice for justice and morality in this world.
 
     With all due respect to a man whom I otherwise greatly admire, Gandhi knew about as much about Jews and their history as most Jews know about the various Indian peoples. The difference, however, is that Jews would never have told the latter to remain forever victimized and at the potential receiving end of those with a long history of bloody conquest and persecution.
 
     While it would be nice if we all just really "got along," and there was no need for nationalism, national borders, and such, the reality is that this belief is too often fiction--and especially when it comes to the millennial Jewish experience...something Gandhi acknowledged himself when admitting "his sympathies."
 
     What else is new? In a post-Auschwitz age, people may grudgingly cry crocodile tears for dead Jews (a la the Holocaust and such), but have no room for empathy for live ones.
 
     Listen to Gandhi again:

     However...my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice...why should they (Jews) not, like other peoples...make that country their home where they are born...? 

    

      

     I guess he hadn't heard of the Dreyfus Affair in "enlightened" France, or had not seen pictures of Jews waving their medals from World War I in front of the Nazis, or had not heard of General Grant's order of expulsion for the Jews of the South during America's Civil War, or of the Damascus Blood Libel in 19th century Arab Syria, etc., etc., and so forth…Again, what you don't really know, you really shouldn't comment on…
 
     Imagine, for one moment, that India--as massive as it is--underwent the experiences that the Jews in their tiny state did in their fight for freedom and independence against an imperial power like Rome, culminating in much of the population massacred and most of the rest forcibly exiled in that great Diaspora already mentioned.
 
     Next, imagine that those hypothetical Indians (like those real Jews) in almost everywhere that they eventually landed--the Muslim East as well as the Christian West--never knew what the morrow would bring...massacres, forced conversions, expulsions, ghettoization (the mellah in the Arab world), demonization, and such culminating in a holocaust which wiped out one third of all Indian people.
 
     Would Jews insist that Indians remain forever at someone else's mercy and give up on a resurrected national existence simply in order to survive?
 
     I think not. Yet that's what Gandhi expected of Jews. Einstein had a famous disagreement with Gandhi over this. So I'm in good company.
 
     Unlike Indians, Jews were literally forced into those above positions and had earlier tried desperately to follow Gandhi's advice to be "accepted"... but to no avail. As nasty as some aspects of the British Raj were, they do not compare to those millennial experiences of stateless Jews.
 
     So, the real question that the Mahatma and others needed to ask is…
 
     Is a victim any less a victim because his victimization has been the longest and most enduring?
 
     Should Jews (those above victims) have not wanted something better for their children? Should they have continued to put their trust only in those who declared them to be G_d-killers, children of the Devil, killers of Prophets, sons of apes and pigs, dogs, and such with periodic and predictable consequences?
 
     Sadly, the otherwise wise Gandhi thought so.
 
     Take a look below at how the ancient historians saw this identity issue. Here's a few of my favorite quotes from Vol. II, Book V The Works Of Tacitus, which discussed the Jews' first major revolt in 66-73 C.E. for their freedom and independence against the Soviet Union (or British Empire, Mr. Gandhi)--of its day, Rome. There were others (Dio Cassius, Josephus, etc.) who wrote about such things as well:

     It inflamed Vespasian's resentment that the Jews were the only nation who had not yet submitted...Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea... he commanded three legions in Judaea itself... To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria... amongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations... 

     No, Rome was not just referring to the Jews' religious identity, which Gandhi spoke of, here, but to a distinct nation and people.
 
     If Indians can have a homeland, and Arabs almost two dozen created mostly via conquest of non-Arab peoples' lands, then why single out and deny Jews their miniscule, resurrected one?
 
     Towards the end of the movie made about Gandhi starring Ben Kingsley, there's a telling scene. Numerous people are seen walking in opposite directions, depicting the population exchange involving many millions of people going on after the Indian subcontinent's first partition.
 
     The same thing happened after the Arabs' attack on a reborn Israel in 1948.
 
      For every Arab refugee created as a result of this, there was a Jewish refugee fleeing Arab/Muslim lands--where they were commonly known as kilab yahud...Jew dogs. Unlike Arabs, however, the Jews didn't have almost two dozen other states (again, most conquered from non-Arab peoples) to choose from.
 
     Those in India and elsewhere who still demand that Israel agree to suicide so that Arabs can have yet another state must also take the following into consideration…
 
     How about allowing the creation of yet another Muslim state on Gandhi's own Indian subcontinent--besides Pakistan and Bangladesh?  
    

     Not that I agree with this (I obviously don't), but there are still Indians today making the same arguments that Gandhi made earlier in terms of Israel and Zionism. And there are, after all, about 160 million Muslims in India...
 
     With each new Arab or Arabized atrocity against India, those anti-Israel voices become fewer and fewer, but the ignorance leading up to those earlier positions must nonetheless be confronted head on.
 
     The wars of the Dar ul-Islam and/or Arabism target any and all who dare stand in their murderous, subjugating way--be they in Kosovo, Darfur, Kurdistan, Israel, Lebanon, Egypt, the Philippines, Thailand, North Africa, and elsewhere…including India. The war against what Arabs call "their" kilab yahud--Jew dogs--has never been how big Israel is --but that Israel is.
 
     Jews were murdered along with Hindus and others recently in Mumbai. Reports from Indian officials stated that the Jews were singled out for special torture… a rabbi and his pregnant wife included. The couple's bloodied two-year old son had been clinging to his mother's body and was saved by his Indian nanny.
 
     I have, at last, one final thought (for now, at least) on these matters…
 
     I'm hoping that, in death, this latest tragedy, committed in the name of the Dar ul-Islam, will bring closer together both India and the Jew of the Nations--Israel--to confront a common enemy which refuses to grant any justice whatsoever to any but its own.