Wednesday, October 31, 2012

JIMMY CRACK CORN


By Simon Fischler 


Here is a photograph -- try to picture it -- on the website of The Elders. We see Jimmy Carter walking in East JERUSALEM (not East Al Qud, remember Jerusalem is a HEBREW name). Behind him is a person holding up a sign that states, “Stop Settlement in East Jerusalem!” 

What does that sign mean?

It means stop Jews from buying, building on or owning land in East Jerusalem! 

Could you imagine white Americans holding up signs outside a Co-op in New York City demanding that no Latinos or African Americans be able to buy or settle in the building? 

For that matter, could you imagine the outcry if Israeli Jews held up signs in Tel Aviv, Haifa or Jerusalem demanding that Arabs not be able to buy or live in a community, neighborhood or building? 

Former President Jimmy Carter says he is fighting for peace; yet he is fighting for the worst kind of racial discrimination! 

Carter, the Elders and their supporters’ actions are so blatantly anti-Israel that they are a perfect manifestation of what renowned French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy calls "the latest disguise for rampant anti-semitism."

To say it is only OK for Arabs to be able to live on and buy land in the eastern part of a united Jerusalem is nothing but discriminatory anti-Semitism, and these charlatans need to be called on their actions. 

As I have written on numerous occasions it is not Israel and Israeli Jews who are the racists or promoting discriminatory,  allegedly apartheid laws. 

It is and has always been the Arabs who promote, glorify and aspire to enact racist, discriminatory, anti-Semitic apartheid laws. 

After all Arab Nationalism was born from Nazism under Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini! 

It is legal for Arabs to buy and own land where ever they want in Israel. It is illegal and punishable by death under Palestinian Authority law for an Arab to sell land to a Jew. 

It is Saeb Erekat and Mahmoud Abbas who on numerous occasions have said there will be no Jews living in a Palestinian State! Remind you of something? Like pushing all the Jews into the Sea!

A prominent part of the American Christian community has written a letter suggesting that US aid to Israel be contingent upon Israel's adherence "to US laws and  policy," specifically calling for an investigation into possible Israeli violations of international human rights laws. Carter and his organisation (The Carter Center) has just come out in support of that letter. 

Egypt receives over $3 billion in US military aid, but no Christian group has called for an investigation into possible Egyptian violations of US laws and policies. Nor do they question the US' relationship with a regime such as Saudi Arabia, or the monies given to Palestinians that disappeared into corrupt pockets and biased, hateful schoolbooks for Palestinian kids. 

Why do you suppose that is? 

What is it about the Christians and the rest of the world that it's ok to judge Israel and the Jews by one standard, but not even to judge the Arabs/Muslims by any code at all? Are they simply cowards and bullies, as well as anti-semites?

And why is Good Ole Jimmy Crack Corn Carter so OK with the historically, blatant anti-Semitic attitude of the Arabs? Could it be ‘cause the po’ Georgia boy feels similar hatred towards Jews and their Nation State? 

Yassah! 


Tuesday, October 30, 2012

WAKING UP TO REALITY -- THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE STATE; ISRAEL


By Sig Demling

There are certain realities of life that cannot be denied. Viz and to wit:

* EXPLOSIONS: If a Grad rocket blows up in your vicinity, chances are you're going to get hurt; maybe even exterminated. It's a fact of life.

* IRON DOMES: The antidote to rockets is a device that is able to defuse Grads and Kassams before they wreak havoc. However, there are precious few Iron Domes and thousands of rockets. Thus, the Domes are limited in scope. It's a fact of life.

* TWO-STATE SOLUTION: It sounds good and looks good on paper. But since the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan was set forth the Arabs have rejected such a plan as well as rejecting Israel. It's a fact of life that has been repeated over and over. Attempts at a two-state solution have failed at every step, Oslo included.

As Hamas continues to intimidate the Israeli South with missiles it is gradually becoming apparent that the idea of a two-state solution is no more than a grand myth.

More importantly significant Israeli politicians are putting the two-state proposal where it belongs -- in the garbage heap.

That's why I'm so pleased that Kensset Speaker Reuven Rivlin has joined the chorus which is nixing any thought of establishing a Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria. 

"In so small a space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea," declares Rivlin, "there cannot be more than one country."

There are several reasons that underline Rivlin's point and they include more than geography. 

It has become apparent beyond a shadow of a doubt that turning over any more land --and I'm talking about inches as well as miles or dunams -- to the Arabs is akin to suicide.

What better proof than the three significant withdrawals: 1. Sinai; 2. Gaza; 3. Lebanon. 

With the Muslim Brotherhood now ruling Egypt, attacks on Israel from the Sinai must be taken as a serious possibility. As for the Gaza and Lebanon threats -- well -- we all know about them. 

Neither the Lebanese War nor Operation Cast Lead did anything useful in terms of long-range Israeli security from massive rocket attacks. The Israeli powers that be at that time were too impetuous when it came to signing what would be a useless truce in both cases. 

But that's old business. 

What's confronting Benjamin Netanyahu now is the challenge of finding the most efficient ways and means to obtain security on all fronts. 

Once and for all rocket attacks from Gaza must be stopped and not with a two-day truce that's immediately followed by more Grads hurled at Ashkelon, Sderot and Beersheba. 

Likewise, Bibi must unequivocally assert that the two-state solution will spell an end to his country's welfare precisely because of Speaker Rivlin's point; it clashes with two realities; 

1. WAR: No matter how you shake it the Arab mentality cannot abide The Jewish State. Given the opportunity, Hamas or Iran's proxy, Hezbollah will attempt to destroy Israel. (Don't rule Egypt out either.) They've tried before and they'll try again.

2. GEOGRAPHY: Israel requires a meaningful buffer between itself and its enemies. If a Palestinian state were to be created it would be annexed in no time by Hamas and by the same method that the terrorist organization employed in Gaza. 

Israel must remain defensible. Its main population and industrial centers cannot be put in jeopardy and certainly not by returning -- Obama-style -- to the pre-1967 lines. If the American president had his way, Israel would be reduced to a coastal strip of land only nine miles wide at its narrowest point.

Israel not only must maintain a military presence along the Jordan River, it must ensure that both Judea and Samaria remain in Israeli hands. 

For further proof take a gander at the memorandum of June 29,1967 authored by Earl Wheeler, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the United States Armed Forces:

"From a strictly military point of view," Wheeler concluded, "Israel would require the retention of some Arab territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders. In the West Bank, Israel should control the prominent high ground running north-south."

What was true just weeks after the Israeli victory in the Six Day War is true today; even more so.

Rivlin is right. A two-state solution would be Israel's worst nightmare; as Hezbollah and Hamas have so amply demonstrated.

There can be only one state on the available land; and that is The State of Israel!

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Dear Family, Friends and Supporters,


Dear Family, Friends and Supporters,

It has been almost 20 years since I had to undergo Heart Transplantation surgery. 

In these last 20 years I have had many battles against the symptoms that arise after transplantation.

More importantly I have been given twenty extra years to be with family and friends. I have been given the chance to make Aliyah to Israel (return home) and raise a family in the land of my people. 

On October 16th, I had the second angiograph to check my coronary arteries in the last six months; I was hoping for better news.

Six months ago in a catheterization my doctors found that my right coronary artery was blocked; they opened it up and put a stent in. 

October 16th. was a check up catheterization and they found that in six months my main Left coronary artery managed to get 95% blocked. 

This time they had to put in two stents, one on top of the other. 

Five years ago I got CMV, which is the main cause of Cardiac Allograph Vasculopathy in heart transplantations. 

This also happens to be the main obstacle of long life in transplants that make it out of the first year to five years. 

Thankfully the doctors here at Rabin Medical Center in Israel are amazing.

After speaking with Dr. Tovia Ben Gal my lead cardiologist it has been determined that I officially do have Transplant CAV. 

By changing my main immunosuppressant regiment we are hoping this will reverse the situation. 

Most importantly it is a miracle that I felt the angina six months ago, signifiying that my nerves had regrown to my heart; something that almost never happens. 

Sadly for most transplant patients they are not capable of feeling angina and they only discover the situation when it is way too late.

Had that not been the case things could have been much worse. 

My heart muscle is still in amazing shape and hopefully we can reverse the affects of the Cardiac Allograf Vasculopathy.

For those of you who know me personally you know I am a fighter and have learned to get up after being knocked down. 

Once again it is fighting time.

I will continue to do all I can to write, blog and fight for Israel and the undeniable rights of the Jewish Nation to our land. 

Thank you all for your support.

Sincerely,

Simon Fischler 

CONGRATULATIONS


By Simon Fischler 

I would like to congratulate “The Elders,” a group of former world politicians, on the great accomplishments they have achieved in correcting the problems our world faces! 

If I were actually going to be giving out medals it would be hard to choose which of The Elders would get gold!

Should former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan claim gold? 

After all it was through Annan that the United Nations failed to act forcefully and instead pandered to the ruthless, dictatorial Assad regime, allowing the situation in Syria spiral into a civil war that has claimed far more than 30,000 people’s lives!   

Did Annan actually believe Bashar al-Assad would even contemplate his Six Point Peace Plan for Syria? Was it possible that Kofi Annan did not know that he was sitting down with a ruthless murderer? 

Or is it that Kofi has been dealing with these ruthless, dictatorial leaders for so long at the United Nations that he wouldn’t the honest truth or a straight dealer if he tripped over one?

What about former Algerian “Freedom Fighter” and U.N. big shot Lakhdar Brahimi?Following in the footsteps of Annan, Brahimi succeeded in buying the Assad regime more time, effectively breathing further life into its mortally threatened body. 

He did this with shuttle diplomacy paid for by the American tax payer and finally with a ceasefire for the Eid holiday. The first two days of this imaginary ceasefire saw 300 people killed, mostly civilians by Assad regime forces! 

Do not forget about failed former American President Jimmy Carter! Maybe it is he more  than any  other of  “The Elders” that truly deserves gold!  Almost all of Jimmy Carter’s time these days is spent ranting against Israel, blaming the Jewish Nation for all the self-inflicted problems of the Arab world. 

Somehow Carter can over look the peace proposals, granting full Palestinian Statehood, that were given to the Palestinians by former Israeli Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert. 

The “One Term” former President forgets that it was the Palestinians that rejected both offerings and with them statehood and peace! None of the facts appear to matter to Carter; only blaming Israel for the Arab rejection of peace is important to him. 


You see if Carter actually cared about Peace he would demand that Mahmoud Abbas and cronies in the Palestinian Authority stop stalling and return to the peace negotiations with NO, I repeat, NO preconditions!  

Continuing with this irrational behavior Carter states that the only way the Palestinians will be ready to negotiate is through Unity, i.e. Fatah and Hamas reconciling! But how is it that Carter can see a unified Palestinian Authority negotiating with Israel when Hamas refuses to recognize Israel and calls for its destruction on a continuing basis?

Ah, but perhaps the greatest damage Carter has done to the possibility of peace between the Palestinians and Israel is his fervent espousal of the catch phrase, “Israel is an apartheid state.” 

Carter’s tainting of the Jewish Nation with this outrageous, slanderous and utterly false interpretation of Israel’s relationship with her Israeli Arab citizens, let alone her dealings with the West Bank and Gaza, is both anti-semitic and criminal.

Several of Carter’s Elder buddies could have publicly set the record straight about Israel and apartheid: Founder Nelson Mandela and current Chair Desmond Tutu. The fact that they have said nothing makes it clear they, too, are tarred with the insidious brush of anti-semitism. 

And speaking of the great Desmond Tutu, is it he who deserves the gold medal? While Tutu has solid anti-semitic/anti-Israel, Arabist credentials, he lacks the failed peace accords and ceasefires that other Elders can claim. 

Thus it is “The Elders” as a whole who deserve gold! 

Performing like a horrific, sideshow, joke of a Marvel superhero team, this group of failed leaders, supposed freedom fighters and politicians of peace are the face of the Arab/Muslim hopes of global domination.

Just look at their composition: not a Jew among them, nor an Asian (Ela Bhatt, from India -- a part of Asia -- is indo-European), and all of the Europeans are Caucasians from northern countries which have a solid history of anti-semitism (Ireland, Norway, Finland). 

Lastly, with the exception of Lakhdar Brahimi (Algerian, Sunni Muslim), all of the Elders from Africa are from sub-Saharan countries which have smaller Muslim populations and few confrontational situations between Muslim and “infidel” (remember, that’s what we are all, if we’re not Muslim).

And yet, one of the Elders’ most fervently avowed missions is supposedly to “bring peace” to Israel. That appears to be working about as well as the “cease-fires” they’ve brokered!




Wednesday, October 24, 2012

QUESTION, IS BEING ANTI-ZIONIST BEING ANTI-SEMITIC? ANSWER, AN EMPHATIC YES!


By Simon Fischler 

Jew, Judea, Hebrew, Israelite

These are all just another names for the Jewish Nation. Zionism is nothing more than the Jewish Nations demand for its National rights to self-determination in the land that has always been Israel.

The Jewish Nation, the Children of Israel and Israel are all one and the same and they existed long before the Romans invented the name Palestinia and long before there was an Islam; or the Arabs had left the Arabian peninsula! 

So when someone tries rationalizing that he or she is not an anti-Semite, but just anti-Israel or anti-Zionist, don't buy that load of bullshit. Scratch through the p.c. rhetoric and you’ll find today’s version of a Nazi! Ask  why, if they don’t want shit on their hands, what it’s doing in their mouths!

Take 2- Zionism dates back to the fight of the Maccabees against the Greek puppet state in Israel and the fight of the Jews of Judea (notice it was not called Palestine) against the Roman (European) occupiers! 

Take 3-The Jewish National movement -- Zionism -- far precedes the Arabs’ emergence from feuding, Idol worshiping clans to a Nation. 

It may not have been called Zionism initially, but the basic precepts of what would later be called Zionism date back at least to Greco/Roman times!

LIKE IT OR NOT THOSE WHO STAND AGAINST ZIONISM ARE NOTHING MORE THAN AN ANTI-SEMITES. IN TRUTH MOST OF THOSE WHO STAND AGAINST ZIONISM ARE AWARE OF THIS FACT ... WORSE, THEY’RE PROUD OF IT! 

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

THE ABSURDITY OF EUROPEAN-MIDDLE EAST LIFE


By Sig Demling

The world is a perpetual caricature of itself; at every moment it is the mockery and the contradiction of what it is pretending to be.

The above commentary on life was written almost a century ago by the philosopher George Santayana but it very well could have been written today simply to describe the absurdity of European and Middle East. 

Here some good examples:

* THE FLOTILLA FOLLY: While the number of massacres in Syria continues to climb activists -- alias troublemakers with nothing else to do with their time -- continue threatening Israel with flotillas. 

Most recently such left wing generated boats have been launched from both Sweden and Finland, ostensibly to "break" the Gaza blockade. 

Now that would make sense if the death toll in Gaza had climbed past the 100 mark or 200 or 500 or even 1,000. But the known deaths in the terrorist-Hamas-land have been those killed after sending rockets into Israel. In death-dealing rockets were not endlessly launched at Israel, there would be no retaliation from the only real democracy in the Middle East. 

Meanwhile, the flotilla folly continues as if Syria is as peaceful as the Cocos Islands. You don't hear a word about the Assad-inspired killings from the hypocrites organizing the flotillas aimed at Israel. 

Talk about "a perpetual caricature of itself," that's precisely what these Silly, Sailing Sallies are all about. 

But do not forget that it's a tragic caricature and will remain so as long as Israel remains the flotillas target and not Syria! 

* WHO ARE THESE 'PEACEFUL' ACTIVISTS? Whenever an anti-Israel flotilla gets underway the media blandly describes those aboard as "activists." The suggestion is quite clear; the flotilla crowd is only interested in peace and means no harm; not even to israel. 

But time and again, the flotilla rosters tell another story; one of hate. 

There's nothing at all peaceful about radical, anti Israel extremist and terrorist groups.

One such flotilla included Amin Abou Rashed, a notorious Dutch Hamas leader. Others included Huwaida Arraf and Adam Shapiro, International Solidarity Movement founders. It was Shapiro who called for global attack on Israel and termed the flotilla movement part of the third Intifada. And many in the media term them "middle aged European pacifisits.

The press' attempt to minimize the flotillas' potential for violence has been evident since the 2010 crisis. Writing in The American Thinker, Andrea Levin observed, "The word 'scuffle' to characterize the attacks on Israelis was used when soldiers were beaten unconscious, stabbed and thrown off an upper deck."

Ethan Bronner, then bureau chief of The New York Times -- not surprisingly -- termed the violent clash a "tussle," suggesting a pillow fight rather than an attempt to murder Israelis.

Those "activists" were more like killers.

* WHEN IS A WAR NOT A WAR? Israel's decision to end Operation Cast Lead was based on the belief that no further rockets would be shot into Sderot, the Negev and Beersheva, among other places.

As was the case after limiting the Lebanon invasion, Israel was duped into believing that muzzling its guns would produce an end to hostility on the other side. 

The result, however, has been what amounts to a twin-pincer war. Hamas has delivered a continuous barrage of endless rocketry since Cast Lead ended while Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, not only boasts of a rocket armada aimed at Israel but also is now employing Iranian drones over Israeli airspace. 

If, say, a European country such as Sweden was faced with twin threats via Finland and Norway in the Israeli manner, the Swedes long ago would have launched the first full-scale war in that nation's recent history; no questions asks. 

Ditto for Uncle Sam if Canada was doing to America what Hamas has been doing to Israel while Mexico was imitating Hezbollah. 

Prime Minister Netanyahu, so far, has been playing it cool, calm and collected vis-a-vis the Gaza terrorists and Hezbollah-Iran. Hamas gets pounded every time a significant rocket attack is directed at Israel while Hezbollah is well aware that one more drone incursion will result in a lot more retaliation than Bibi's verbiage. 

What remains to be seen is whether the current Israeli strategy is practical, effective and realistic under the current circumstances.

It's easy to say that specific Israeli sites -- Sderot being the best example -- are being sacrificed to maintain a reasonable calm elsewhere. But is that fair to the citizens in that Southern town?

What cannot be argued is that the assaults will somehow continue from North and South simply based on past performances. 

They will stop, however, if -- and when -- Bibi decides that enough is enough and the next time the war will be a real WAR.

This is an eventuality that's not soft on the heart but then again the endless rocketry is hardly soft on one's soul, especially if you happen to live in Sderot or any one of the dozen Israeli towns within rocket range.

Meanwhile, the world outside Israel continues to be -- as Santayana once said --a mockery and contradiction of what it is pretending to be.

No more and no less!

Sunday, October 14, 2012

WHERE IS DEEP THROAT WHEN YOU NEED HIM?


By Simon Fischler

Looking at the Middle East section of the New York Times you would find plenty of material about the ongoing bloodbath in Syria.

You could read about the flight of a primitive Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (drone, to you) -- one that could have been bought at Toys R Us -- by Hezbollah into Israeli air space.  

You could also read the excuses and cover-up for the disastrous miscalculation by the Obama Administration in protecting the United States Ambassador to Libya (Yet another egregious mishap involving private security contractors. When will the US learn?)

Most important, though, is not what is IN the New York Times Middle East section, but what is NOT! 

Somehow this renowned media outlet, supposedly the bastion of all that is “fit to print,” omits the astounding fact that the head of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood has called on the entire Muslim Nation to wage Jihad “against the Zionists to liberate Jerusalem!”

Some peace Israel has with Egypt! And please, don’t bother with the bushwah about Egyptian President Morsi no longer being connected to the Muslim Brotherhood!.

How is it The New York Times could ignore such a significant story? 

This is a news story in which an American ally, Egypt, is verbally calling for war against  another American ally; one it supposedly has a peace treaty with! (One wonders how former US President Jimmy Carter will blame Israel for this one.) 

Somehow the Times missed a story in which an American ally, with a government aided into power by the Obama administration -- an ally that receives and cannot live without at least one billion dollars of American tax payers’ money annually -- is actively calling for adherents to harm American interests in the Middle East. 

The Times omitted even the mere mention of an American ally now spewing the worst type of anti-semitic, anti-Israel rhetoric; stuff that has not been heard coming out of the mouths of the Egyptian hierarchy since the 1950s and ‘60s! 

By not reporting this story, the New York Times does not have to deal with the fact that the Obama Administration has done nothing to censor or condemn Egypt or the Muslim Brotherhood. 

It is also withholding important information from American citizens -- information that could be seen as unfavorable towards the Obama administration -- right before the American presidential election.

The Times’ sin of omission is yet another tacit acceptance of the worst American foreign policy towards the Middle East in the country’s history, as well as silent approval for the worst attitude  -- ever -- of an American administration towards its unrelenting ally, Israel.  

To say that the Obama administration has been bad for Israel is putting it ever so mildly.

To say that The New York Times is a silent partner to this travesty may not be “fit to print” in their eyes, but certainly it is the truth.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

DOES THE 'J' IN J STREET SIGNIFY 'JERKS?'


By Schmoel Yitzhak

Gimme a break!

That should be the singular reaction from any who believes that J Street actually is a "pro-Israel" and "pro-peace" outfit as it so piously claims.

Then again old-time carnival Snake Oil salesmen barked that their product could cure everything from backaches to heartaches. 

Some folks actually bought their product only to later discover that the only thing it cured was a few bucks from a sucker's pocket.

All signs suggest that J Street has deceived a bloc of otherwise sincere, well-meaning American Jews into believing that it is, in fact, pro-Israel. 

However, the facts are damning in another direction and if you don't believe me, check out the machinations of J Street's founder and president Jeremy Ben-Ami. 

From the get-go Ben-Ami & Co. has appeared to be more like a PLO propaganda machine than a supporter of the Middle East's only true democracy. 

Why then would Ben-Ami have produced a fallacy-filled op-ed column on December 24, 2011 that read like something that had been delivered by Mahmoud Abbas' printing press. 

Ben-Ami called it "Redefining 'pro-Israel" and produced a number of absurd suggestions to produce Arab-Israeli peace. 

For openers the J-Street maestro urged Israel "to proactively take bold, even risky steps to establish a state of Palestine based on the pre-1967 lines with land swaps." (Now if that isn't out of the Barack Obama playbook, I don't know what is.)

My response: Gimme a break!

Or, to put it in more animalistic terms, was Ben-Ami doing an ostrich imitation when the 1993 Oslo process was designed to lead to final-status talk on the West Bank and Gaza Strip by 1998. As we all know, Palestinian terrorism sabotaged that utopian plan.

What else has Ben-Ami forgotten? 

Eric Rozenman of the Committee For Accuracy In Middle East Reporting In America (CAMERA) cites plenty more of J Street's mistakes. 

CAMERA'S Washington director points to the joint Israel-U.S. proposal in 2000 for a West Bank and Gaza state with East Jerusalem as its capital. In return the Arabs would make peace with the Jewish state. The PLO's response was the al-AQSA intifada. That war produced more than 1,000 Israeli dead and 4,000 on the Palestinian side. 

"Ben-Ami," wrote Rozenman, "was silent, too, on the 2006 triumph of Hamas in Palestinian elections. He also said nothing about Hamas' violent takeover of the Gaza Strip the next year."

Likewise J Street's leader remains singularly mute when it comes to the endless rocket barrage delivered from Gaza into Israel not to mention the incessant anti-Israel incitement that echoes from every point in Gaza.

"Where have you been, Mister Ben-Ami?" asked Rozenman.

I put it another way: Ben-Ami gimme a break!

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

NIGHTMARES OF YOM KIPPUR


by Sarah Walton

There are times when I am convinced that the ONLY way a human being can truly learn is  by experience. We don’t know what’s real and true, nor what it feels like, until we actually experience it.

It didn’t matter how many “how to” books I read, there were inevitably myriad things I only learned about pregnancy and parenting by experiencing it. I can’t count the number of times I would look up and say to myself, “I wonder why they never told me this.”

The same thing applies to aging: virtually every day I think to myself, “How come they never tell you it happens like this?”

Take deafness for instance: it’s not really that one can’t hear; it’s more that the ambient noise (music, talking) gets louder and louder, drowning out human voices. But that’s not how it’s described. So I kept waiting for the sound of the crickets and the wind to disappear, when it was the voices of my husband, children and grandchildren that began to disappear!

Television has taken us all a step further removed from experience, because it gives us the “semblance” of reality or experience. We can watch the terrible devastation of a tornado, or see the ravages and violence of war -- all without actually feeling the pain, agony and terror.

Just a few days ago, I was watching one of the international television news channels, called France 24, when a headline ran across the bottom of the screen: a non-governmental organization (NGO) reported that “305 people were killed in Syria on Wednesday, and two thirds of them were allegedly civilians.”

It was so simple for those words to run across the bottom of the screen; they could even be missed if the observer was paying attention to the report on the screen instead of the “news crawl” at the bottom.

But it was not so simple for me to see those words. 

Why? Because I had listened for two days to those 305 people being massacred. 

My son and I drove to within a couple of kilometers of the border with Syria and watched the puffs of white and gray smoke rise from the outskirts of nearby New Quneitra. One shell even went awry and landed in one of El-Rom’s vineyards; that’s how close the warfare was.

I sat in the temporary Synagogue on El-Rom kibbutz on Wednesday and felt the rafters shake once or twice from cannon fire and artillery shells. I listened to the awful sounds of large guns and machine guns while prayers were said on that holiest of Jewish holy days, Yom Kippur.

But the worse of it was the nightmares. The fighting had actually begun two days earlier, and on Monday and Tuesday nights, I was plagued by horrific images as the burst of machine gun fire kept pounding away. It was windless both nights, so the rat-a-tat-tat of war sounded as if it were virtually outside my bedroom window.

Each time I heard the gunfire, images of people fleeing and children falling in ruined streets would fill my mind. The only way I could keep the images from forming was to stay awake. By Wednesday I was totally exhausted. 

The irony was that I had been listening to periodic heavy artillery and cannon fire for weeks, as tank units of the IDF conducted maneuvers up on the Golan Heights. I knew then, however, that it was not REAL; it was just pretend.

But the terrible noises of last week were not maneuvers; it was not young men and women in camouflage out playing war games. It was REAL war; REAL death.

It didn’t matter that it was potential enemies who were dying (Syria has never stopped declaring that it wanted the destruction of Israel), nor did it matter that they were Muslims and we next door were Jews. 

It was terrible, it was wrong and it was too, too real. 

I’m waiting for the terrible images to drain away, but it will take a long time.









Monday, October 8, 2012

PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD -- NOW YOU SEE IT, NOW YOU DON'T


By Sig Demling

The Palestinians on-again-off-again bid to achieve statehood through the United Nations comes and goes like roaches in my kitchen. 

Now you see them; now you don't.

Mahmoud Abbas, chief promoter of the UN gambit, is an inveterate faker.

Although his term ended nearly four years ago he remains artificially perched in the role -- as the Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick so aptly puts it -- of "invented position of Palestinian Prime Minister." (His pseudo-intellectual sidekick, Saeb Erakat, is no bargain either.)

But what of their UN charade? Does it have a smidgen of reality attached? Would it be legal?

Of course not but Yasir Arafat's longtime puppet and current master of Arab graft, doesn't care. The following are a few choice facts that Abbas chooses to ignore: 

ILLEGAL I: Any such attempts by the Palestinians would violate agreements with Israel. And if that's the case, it frees Benjamin Netanyahu to play ping-pong and start violating Israel's agreements with the Arabs.

ILLEGAL II: All major agreements between Israel and the Palestinians have required that disputes between the parties be settled through direct negotiations and not via third parties.

ILLEGAL III: The Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum (Sept. 4, 1999) bars unilateral moves proposed over the past few years by the Abbas-Erakat duet.

If the Palestinian route through the United Nations sounds like an old record, it should. After all, this is a very old song of the desert.

On October 1, 1948 the Higher Arab Committee, claiming to represent the Palestinian people, passed the Proclamation of the Independence of Palestine. And that was that until 40 years later, on November 15, 1988 the PLO declared an independent Palestinian state.  

"Under UN criteria," wrote Alex Safran, in the CAMERA Media Report, "the territory under the control of the Palestinians does not constitute a state."

That's because due to the Oslo Accords and other agreements the PA has limited and even temporary authority. Or, as Safran points out:

"In no sense does the PA have complete governmental control over a permanent population nor does it have control over a defined territory. The bottom line is that only through good faith negotiations with Israel can the Palestinians address these issues and achieve statehood."

If the Abbas-Erekat bid gains any traction it would be both a sham and a shame primarily because of Abbas career-long hatred of Israel not to mention the endless series of Arab Jew-slaughter that preceded the state of Israel.

FACT: On October 4, 1938 Arabs broke into the Tiberias house of Joshua Ben Arieh where they stabbed and burned to death, Joshua, his wife and one son. That done the Arabs then stabbed and burned to death three children of Shlomo Leimer. Not satisfied with their work, the murderers broke into the house of Shimon Mizrahi where they killed his wife and five children before setting fire to the house.

FACT: In March 2011 Udi and Ruth Fogel of Itamar and their three childen were stabbed to death and partially decapitated by Arabs -- who else?

FACT: Abbas, as Glick asserts, has been an "inveterate Jew-hater" not to mention a long-time member of a terrorist organization. What's more his "doctoral" dissertation is a denial of the Holocaust.

And the United Nations is going to take these guys seriously?

If so, then the UN might as well move itself to the bottom of East River!

Saturday, October 6, 2012

WHEN IT COMES TO IRAN, WHO'S DRUNK AND WHO'S UGLY?


By Schmoel Yitzhak

When Winston Churchill was Great Britain's heroic World War II Prime Minister he often relaxed with a big cigar and a glass of whiskey.

Occasionally the booze would betray the great man and turn him into a bit of a drunk. 

And so it was at one party Churchill drank a wee too much and became inebriated a wee too much until, finally, the prim and proper Lady Halifax assailed him with these words:

"Winston, you should be ashamed of yourself; you're drunk!"

Withstanding the verbal assault, the Prime Minister shot back: "Lady Halifax, I may be drunk but you're ugly. Tomorrow morning I'll be sober but you'll still be ugly."

Which brings us to the dreadful doings at the United Nations' General Assembly and the issue of which diplomats emerged sober and who still is ugly.

Not much guessing is needed for an answer because it all was evident to those viewing the annual sham on shame.

Representing Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described Israel as "uncivilized Zionists." If that wasn't libel enough, The Madman from Tehran added that Uncle Sam and leaders of Western powers have "entrusted themselves to the Devil."

In case you haven't heard, Ahmadinejad heads a country that features such amenities as, 1. Suppression of both freedom of speech and assembly; 2. Persecution of religious and ethnic minorities, homosexuals and women.; 3. Torture for those who dare oppose the regime along with cruel punishments, unfair trials and arbitrary detentions.  

And this guy has the chutzpuh to describe Israelis as "uncivilized Zionists." 

Unfortunately the media seems intoxicated -- a la Churchill -- by the Iranian's presence until the morning after when his diatribes are analyzed for their viciousness and vacuity. That's when the sobering up takes place. Meanwhile Ahmadinejad remains as ugly as ever.

No less troubling is the rather timid response to the Iranian madness by President Obama who, more and more, is coming across like a cross between Neville Chamberlin and Lady Halifax. 

Like so many of his ilk, the Chief Executive still doesn't get it; or doesn't want to get it because if he believes that the Iranians have only Israel in their crosshairs, the man is sadly mistaken. It would be useful if the White House gave a read to the latest insightful missive from the Committee For Accuracy In Middle East Reporting In America (CAMERA). Titled, "A Nuclear-Capable Iran Is A Threat To America," CAMERA zeroes in on the many reasons why Obama & Company had better awaken from their slumber.

The primary thrust is that Washington has as much to fear about Tehran as does Jerusalem. Specifically, CAMERA'S newsletter points out that a nuclear Iran would pose multiple threats to America especially when it comes to security. 

Here's how CAMERA so accurately portrays the unmitigated danger of a nuclear Iran:

* It would spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

* American military bases and thousands of American troops are already in range of Iranian missiles.

* Iran operates in Central and South America in cooperation with organized criminal cartels, terrorists including Hezbollah cells and governments hostile to the United States such as Venezuela.

* Iran is the world's leading state-sponsor of terror and even if it did not  share nuclear weapons technology with its terrorist allies and proxies, would have a shield under which to expand their operations.

This is real stuff not fiction and explains why Benjamin Netanyahu drew a "red line" before the General Assembly so as to awaken those who fantasize that Iran can be neutralized by sanctions.

If Tehran remains so utterly brazen at this point in time, imagine what would happen if it achieved its vicious nuclear ambitions.

Netanyahu: "Imagine their long range missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, their terror networks armed with atomic bombs.

"Who among you would feel safe in the Middle East? Who would be safe in Europe? Who would be safe in America? Who would be safe anywhere?"

Maybe some day soon, Obama will awaken from his drunken stupor, sober up and genuinely challenge Ahmadinejad who -- no matter how you color him -- remains ugly!