Nothing much to report on. Hundreds, not thousands, took part in a few locations.
Easily dealt with.
Nothing much to report on. Hundreds, not thousands, took part in a few locations.
Easily dealt with.
By MARTIN SHERMAN, JPOST
In his endeavor to rebut my recent column “Disputing Dershowitz,” Alan Dershowitz displays a regrettable tendency to embrace the self-contradictory and the disingenuous, rather than concede error.
Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano just gave thousands of Syrian Muslims–all of them either sympathizers with Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood–permission to stay in the United States forever. Yup, even illegal alien Syrian Muslims. He granted all of them TPS–Temporary Protected Status, so they cannot be deported or even arrested by Immigration […]
Listen, Palestinian Arabs, If you want to march, march on Jordan.
By Matthew M. Hausman, Att’y
[Matthew M. Hausman is a trial attorney and writer who lives and works in Connecticut. A former journalist He is also one of the people who I have co-opted to support this cause.]
The “Jordan-is-Palestine” option for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict is an idea that, despite history and logic, was beaten into silence by Israel’s enemies and detractors. Critics denounced the concept as preposterous, reactionary and counterproductive.
And yet, the idea has been resurrected from within Jordan itself. There can be no dispute that Jordan was created in a sovereign vacuum on land that had comprised most of the Palestine Mandate. However, its creation as Transjordan in 1921 satisfied a geopolitical need unencumbered by a Palestinian national myth that had not yet been invented.
By Anshel Pfeffer
LONDON – Ribal Assad jokes that “being called Assad is not the best way to gain friends today, especially being a relative of Bashar.” Indeed, being the first cousin of the Syrian president who over the last year has overseen the murder of some 9000 Syrians in the bloody repression of the Syrian revolution is not a great distinction, but the 36 year-old son of the former vice-president and security chief is attempting, from exile, to clear the family’s name.
“Only two members of the Assad family are in the regime,” he insists. “The rest of the 99 percent of them are sitting at home without jobs” and he tells how the stooges of his cousin the president have persecuted his father, siblings and assorted cousins. He never calls the government in Damascus – the Assad regime. “It is a corrupt regime, a regime of killers, the worst dictatorship, but don’t call them the Assad regime, or the Baathist or Allawite regime. There are two million members in the Ba’ath party, most of them are members because that is the only way they can get a job, not because they are killers.”
This is not well reported. Keep in mind its Haaretz. All you should take away from reading it is that 10% of the the lands lying to east of the green line could be available for building on. Ted Belman
Newly released maps indicate Civil Administration secretly setting aside additional land for Jewish settlements, presumably with the intention of expanding them.
For years Israel’s Civil Administration has been covertly locating and mapping available land in the West Bank and naming the parcels after existing Jewish settlements, presumably with an eye toward expanding these communities.
The Civil Administration, part of the Defense Ministry, released its maps only in response to a request from anti-settlement activist Dror Etkes under the Freedom of Information Law.
In some places the boundaries of the parcels outlined in the maps coincide with the route of the West Bank separation barrier.
[Be sure to read the first two comments.]
By Timothy Stanley, Special to CNN
Editor’s note: Timothy Stanley is a historian at Oxford University and blogs for Britain’s Daily Telegraph.
It didn’t have to be this way. If Sarah Palin had entered the contest, I’d hypothesize two alternative realities. One, she’d have the nomination sewn up by now. Two, she’d be running even in the polls with the president.
What have proved to be problems for the top three candidates wouldn’t have been problems for Palin. For starters, she has none of Newt Gingrich’s intellectual hubris. There’s no way Palin would have promised to put a mine on the moon or suggest arresting judges who make decisions that are too liberal. Her conservatism is far more domestic and down-to-Earth.
Last week I asked “why is the administration helping Iran deter Israel from bombing its nuclear facilities?”
I suggested that the leak of a war game scenario that began with an Israeli attack on Iran and ended with several hundred dead Americans — of course this is only one possible outcome among an infinite number — was a deliberate attempt to influence sentiment in the US against Israel exercising its right of self-defense.
We don’t know whether National Security Council, State Department or US embassy legations have engaged in discussions with Israel’s neighbors in communicating possible concerns regarding control of GM2J contingents gathering on Israel’s borders for tomorrow’s protests.
What is of continuing concern is a chorus of stories in the media during the last 10 days warning Israel against making a pre-emptive attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities. That culminating in two stories today that appear to be part of an Administration orchestrated campaign. The New York Times published a Reuters’ story, “Could Bombing Iran Push it to Build the Bomb?“ addressing warnings by experts and fellow travelers of the Islamic Republic in Tehran. That report included comment from the respected Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. Also cited was former IAEA head, Egyptian lawyer and politician, Mohamed ElBaradei, a possible candidate for the Country’s Presidency, should a Constitution be adopted and the Supreme Armed Forces Council permit national elections. Our suspicions were aroused by comments from Trita Parsi, a Swedish Citizen of Iranian origins and head of the National Iranian American Council in Washington. Parsi is known to be someone who represents the views of the Islamic regime in Tehran, has direct access to the West Wing in the Obama White House, and has regularly prowled Capitol Hill.
The global atmosphere has been poisoned by an ocean of oily, bloody money that feeds those who incite anti-Jewish riots, promote divestments from Israel and spread blood libels under the guise of “objective journalism.”
Some academic careers are funded by those who believe Jews have no right to exist. Saudi Arabia spent one hundred billion dollars to spread Wahhabism in the West, the most anti-Semitic version of Islam (the Soviet Union during the Cold War invested much less for its propaganda.)
Currently there are 17 federally funded centers on American campuses devoted to Middle Eastern studies: All of these support pro-Islamist and anti-Israel ideas. Stephen Schwartz, director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, just summarized these in a report for the Middle East Forum. Georgetown, the oldest Catholic university in the US, received 40 million dollars from the Saudis.
Now, why would a senior US official broadcast a thing like that which should not be trumpeted about? I can’t think of a single reason, except that the US administration is running interference for the Iranian nuclear program, protecting it from Israel, as it has been all along. And indeed, the “Obama administration reportedly unhappy about J’lem-Baku relationship.” Why? Because it means Israel is unwilling to entrust its survival to Obama? Or because it endangers the Iranian race to nuclear capability? And is there a difference? Jack Golbert
‘Foreign Policy’ article quotes senior US officials as saying “the Israelis have bought an airfield and the airfield is called Azerbaijan”; Obama administration reportedly unhappy about J’lem-Baku relationship.
Azerbaijan has granted Israel access to airbases in its territory along Iran’s northern border for potential use in a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, a report published Wednesday in Foreign Policy magazine quoted senior US administration officials as saying.
The Palestinians and their backers have long resorted to diplomatic war in order to undermine Israel’s legitimacy. The Global March to Jerusalem, scheduled for March 30, is a classic example of this tactic. The organisers claim they are seeking “freedom for Jerusalem” and an “end to the Apartheid, ethnic cleansing and Judaisation” affecting the city.
In reality, they are distorting the historical record for political purposes. They seek to depict Israel as a malevolent custodian of the Holy places and a usurper of Muslim rights, so as to buttress an Arab and Islamic claim to the city. But as it happens, their claim does not stand up to serious scrutiny.
Once again, Israel is confronted by a major threat to its existence, namely, the so-called Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) scheduled for March 30th. It is organized by the usual suspects—the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the swelling tribe of Ayatollah lovers, the devil’s spawn of radical Leftists—whose intention is to mobilize a million people to breach Israel’s borders and converge on Jerusalem. They are convinced that Israel will either find itself helpless before a “peaceful” onslaught of this magnitude or be forced to take action that would lead to a PR disaster. From their perspective, it’s a win-win situation. One way or another, Israel would be gravely weakened and, according to an unlettered exchange between some of the event’s organizers, “Thius will undermine the Israeli state…& the Zionist edifice which is unraveeling as we speak, will soon fall.”
While we struggle to come up with ways to cope with our own Kurdish problem, the issue is rapidly crossing borders and is on the verge of becoming internationalized. The Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq has substantial autonomy. 85% of our exports to our second-largest market — Iraq — actually go to the Kurdish region. The opening of bank branches, more than 1000 companies and ever-intensifying energy relations illustrate the strong bond between Turkey and the Kurdistan Regional Government.
By Gavriel Queenann, INN
Dubai’s police chief charged this week that Islamist forces which gained power in the Arab Spring are “plotting to take over” Gulf states.
Lieutenant General Dahi Khalfan singled out the Muslim Brotherhood, saying the group has a specific plan to take over Gulf regimes by 2016.
“My sources say the next step is to make Gulf governments figurehead bodies only, without actual ruling. The start will be in Kuwait in 2013,” he said in an interview with Kuwaiti daily Al Qabas on Sunday.
The Israel High Court is violating the law in order to thwart the settlement enterprise. In no way can the decisions mentioned herein be justified by a fair interpretation of the law. They are ideologically motivated. Ted Belman
By MOSHE DANN, JPOST
Beinisch and a few of her colleagues have usurped the role and powers of the legislature and sought to create new law. By Pool/Alex Kolomoisky Once again former chief justice Dorit Beinisch and a few of her colleagues have usurped the role and powers of the legislature and sought to create new law.
In a ruling last week, Beinisch and a panel that included Justices Edna Arbel and Miriam Naor, vehement opponents of settlements, held that Michael Lessans, a Jewish plumber who lives in Kedumim, in the Shomron, must evacuate 45 dunams (approx. 11 acres) of land on which he had planted 1,300 trees because Arabs claimed this area belonged to them.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a uniquely American organization supported by the majority of American Jews, is the most important global Jewish association engaged in Israel advocacy.
Jews on the far Left, like those associated with J Street, an organization created with the sole objective of discrediting AIPAC, seek to besmirch it. They accuse its leaders of being partisan right-wing extremists out of synch with the attitudes of the majority of American Jews. Other detractors, highlighted by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt in their book “Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” accuse AIPAC of imposing “a stranglehold on U.S. Congress” and distorting American foreign policy.
The UN’s top human rights body ended its latest session in Geneva on Friday by dealing a body blow to one of President Obama’s signature foreign policy moves. The extreme anti-Israel extravaganza has prompted Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman to cut ties with the body intimating Americans should also withdraw support, while administration officials have hit the airwaves to make the case that the demonization of Israel is troubling but tolerable. The message communicated: the President has the UN’s back, not Israel’s.
The Bush administration refused to lend the UN “Human Rights” Council the credibility offered by U.S. membership and withheld taxpayer dollars accordingly.