News and Opinion Based on Facts

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Boycott Durban II

President Obama: Boycott Durban II!
328 Signatures
Published by Assemblyman Dov Hikind on Feb 02, 2009
Category: International Affairs
Region: United States of America
Target: United States Government
Background (Preamble):
The 2009 Durban Review Conference has been billed as a continuation of the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance previously held in Durban, South Africa.

The 2001 Conference failed to meet its stated objectives of addressing issues of international racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, mutating instead into a tribunal which demonized Israel, calling her a perpetrator of racism and intolerance in the Middle East.

The 2001 World Conference Against Racism Draft Declaration equated Zionism with racism, and charged that Israel’s so-called occupation of Palestine was racially motivated and therefore relevant to the Conference agenda.

A working draft of the 2009 Conference Declaration espouses similar anti-Israel rhetoric, stating in part that: a homeland for Jewish people and Israel’s law of return is racially based; Israel is guilty of apartheid; and that the historical accuracy of the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust is subject to debate.

The George W. Bush administration made it a policy not to participate in the Review Conference or its associated preparations, and repeatedly voted against U.N. resolutions supporting or funding the Conference.



WHEREAS, The 2009 Durban Review Conference has been billed as a continuation of the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance previously held in Durban, South Africa; and

WHEREAS, The 2001 Conference failed to meet its stated objectives of addressing issues of international racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, mutating instead into a tribunal which demonized Israel, calling her a perpetrator of racism and intolerance in the Middle East; and

WHEREAS, The 2001 World Conference Against Racism Draft Declaration equated Zionism with racism, and charged that Israel’s so-called occupation of Palestine was racially motivated and therefore relevant to the Conference agenda; and

WHEREAS, A working draft of the 2009 Conference Declaration espouses similar anti-Israel rhetoric, stating in part that: a homeland for Jewish people and Israel’s law of return is racially based; Israel is guilty of apartheid; and that the historical accuracy of the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust is subject to debate; and

WHEREAS, the Conference organizers include violent dictators and virulent anti-Semites such as Muammar Al-Gaddafi of Libya, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, and Raul Castro of Cuba; and

WHEREAS, The George W. Bush administration made it a policy not to participate in the Review Conference or its associated preparations, and repeatedly voted against U.N. resolutions supporting or funding the Conference;

NOW THEREFORE, we the undersigned, call upon President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to denounce the U.N.’s relentless condemnation of Israel by officially boycotting Durban II and withholding funding from the Conference.

The President Obama: Boycott Durban II! petition to United States Government was written by Assemblyman Dov Hikind and is hosted free of charge at GoPetition.

Tell a friend | Signature list | Contact author | Forum | Viewed 1051 times and has 328 signatures

Promote this petition with a popular social bookmarking service [?]:

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Bruce's MidEast Soundbites: Israeli singer & peace activist Noa, supports Gaza War

Bruce's MidEast Soundbites: Israeli singer & peace activist Noa, supports Gaza War
This is an interesting letter from the beautiful songstress Achinoam Nini (Noa).
The letter makes me proud, and glad that I have been an ardent fan of hers for over ten years.
BTW, if you go to and search Noa, you will find some of the most lovely music ever produced.

Internationally renowned Israeli singer Noa [known in Israel as Achinoam Nini]
has written an open letter to Palestinians.
Dear Palestinian brothers,I have seen the peace process rise and fall and rise like the breast of a woman breathing in the night.
Today I say this; we have one joint enemy, one awful joint enemy and we must all work together to eradicate it!
That enemy is fanaticism my friends.
That enemy is extremism in all its ugly reincarnations and manifestations.I see the ugly head of fanaticism, I see it large and horrid, I see its black eyes and spine-chilling smile, I see blood on its hands and I know one of its many names: Hamas.
You know this too, my brothers.
You know this ugly monster.
You know it is raping the minds of your children.
You know it is educating to hatred and death.
I am privileged to live in a democracy where women are not objects but presidents, where a singer can say and do as she pleases! I know you do not have this privilege (yet…but you will, inshallah, you will…) I know you are SICK of being held hostage by this demon, this ugly beast!!! You are a people destined to flourish in peace! Your majestic history is overflowing with creativity, literature science and music, endless contributions to humanity, not crippling, torturing fanaticism, yelling Jihad and Shahid!
I see you sometimes, out in the streets, demonstrating with the monsters, yelling ‘death to the Jews, death to Israel!!
But I don’t believe you!
I know where your heart is! It is just where mine is, with my children, with the earth, with the heavens, with music, with HOPE!!
You want nothing of this but you have no choice! I see through your veil of fear my brothers, through your burka!
I embrace your hopes for they are mine!
But, now, today, I know that deep in your hearts YOU WISH for the demise of this beast called Hamas who has terrorized and murdered you, who has turned Gaza into a trash heap of poverty, disease and misery.
Who in the name of "allah” has sacrificed you on the bloody alter of pride and greed.
I can only wish for you that Israel will do the job we all know needs to be done, and finally RID YOU of this cancer, this virus, this monster called fanaticism, today called Hamas.
And that these killers will find what little compassion may still exist in their hearts and STOP using you and your children as human shields for their cowardice and crimes.
Enough my brother … you want some coffee?
Here, sit for a while…let's talk….we know the words, we know the songs, we know the road….Shalom...Salam...With a broken heart,

Sample Noa's music at:

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Uniting Against Hatred

Today Rupert Murdoch aplogized for a cartoon that was seen by most viewers as racist and containing violent impications.
In a statement on the website of his tabloid The New York Post, which printed the cartoon, Murdoch said: "Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize."
Murdoch said the cartoon poked fun at the economic stimulus plan pushed by Obama, America's first black president.
It "was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately it was interpreted by many as such," Murdoch said.
The cartoon featured Travis, a real-life chimpanzee shot last week by police in Connecticut, near New York, after it had attacked a woman.
In the drawing, two policeman stand over the chimp's body. One says: "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."
The cartoon had racist implications.

I thought it was demeaning and stupid.
Even if it referred to Pelosi et al, as Chimps who should be shot, it was in extremely poor taste.
However, the historic connection racists make between blacks and apes seemed pretty clear to me.
Those who are angry at black reaction to this cartoon need to try to put themselves in the place of someone who experiences racism on a daily basis.
An NAACP spokesman said that "African Americans have historically been compared to primates as a way to dehumanize the entire group. We were called monkeys while we were being brutally lynched and denied equal civil and human rights."
Although many republicans act as if "coming together as one people" is a foolish and sentimental idea, it really is the way to save and rebuild America.
As JFK said, "United there is little we cannot do. Divided there is little we can do."
One person at a time, turning his back on hatred, can make a difference.
I work at it every day.
I see it from both sides.
Blacks hating whites and whites hating blacks.
Its foolish, really, because we are basically the same.
We all, generally speaking, fall in love, love our parents, laugh at the same jokes, cry at sad events and so on.
A white can fall in love with a black person, and a black person can fall in love with a white person, and they can, and many times have, loved for a lifetime.

I've seen it.

Michael Blackburn, Sr

President Obama Appoints Zionist as Special Advisor to Middle-East

In still another blow to partisan conservatives, who seem befuddled by the skillful political maneuvering of President Obama, U.S. diplomat Dennis Ross has been appointed special adviser on the Gulf and southwest Asia, which includes Iran, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the State Department announced on Monday.

The Arab press was quick to jump on the story, according to Al Jazeera,
"If Dennis Ross is Appointed as a US Envoy to Iran, He Will Work for Israel, Not the US, Will Work for War, Not Peace
Dennis Ross was the main figure behind dragging the US to war against Iraq in 1991, instead of allowing Iraqis to withdraw from Kuwait without a war. He did that to guarantee the destruction of Iraq, as a strong Arab state, in order to safeguard the Israeli position in the oil-rich Middle East region
Thus doing, he paved the way for the Zionist Israel-firsters Wolfowitz, Pearle, and Feith to plan and execute the 2003 US invasion and occupation of Iraq."

According to Al Jazeera:
"He will work only for the Israeli occupation.
He is a Zionist Israel-firster, AIPAC operative, and agent of Israeli interests."

Ross's appointment as a special adviser dealing with Iran and the larger Middle East had been rumored since December. And it was met with pessimism in Tehran. IRNA, Iran's official news agency, described Ross as "a staunch supporter of the Zionist regime," who is likely to take an anti-Iranian stance.

State Department spokesman Robert Wood, in a statement announcing the appointment said "This is a region in which America is fighting two wars and facing challenges of ongoing conflict, terror, proliferation, access to energy, economic development and strengthening democracy and the rule of law,"

A former colleague, Dan Kurtzer (an Orthodox Jew and former U.S. ambassador to Israel), published a think-tank monograph containing anonymous complaints from Arab and American negotiators saying Ross was seen as biased towards Israel.

Ross was also critical of Yasser Arafat.
Ross supported the Iraq war, though he opposed some of the Bush Administration's policies for post-war reconstruction.

This morning at a State Dept. briefing, in answer to a question, State Department spokesman Robert Wood said "Israel has a special relationship with the U.S. which is strong, and will remain strong."

Monday, February 23, 2009

Heaven is for drug addicts

I recomend this excellent, thoughtul and different web site

To go to Christian Heaven one must have live a "good life" of some sort or believe in Christ as you savior, depending on denomination. Fair enough, I say, if that's what it takes, neither of these conditions sound too unreasonable.
However, actually going to Heaven sounds altogether unreasonable to me.
Consider what heaven is supposed to be like. Generally a place of happiness. A place of peaceful rest for the soul. Who would not want to enter such a place? What could be wrong with it?
I'll tell you what's wrong with such an awful place. What's wrong with it is that once you go there you're expected to be happy, despite the fact that some of those you love are being tormented in Hell for all eternity.
Could you imagine sitting in Heaven enjoying yourself and the company, or whatever is so great about the place, ignoring the fact that, say, your children who didn't quite cut it are having an awful time down there? I don't think many parents can think of anything worse than their children suffering. It would be like standing outside a burning building enjoying the sight and when someone walks over and asks why you aren't going inside, you answer that you like it better out here. When this person reminds you that your children are inside the burning building, you just answer that you already know that.
In Heaven, you are having a great time, when some saint comes over and asks you if you like it here. "Yeah, it's really nice, thank you very much for asking." "But your children are burning in Hell!?" "Yeah, I know. It's great!"
Heaven, in other words, only works if you're on drugs.
You tell me what the difference is between the two examples, please. If you say that people have to make their own choices, also concerning their path to Heaven, then how is that different from you warning them that they should leave the building, because it will catch fire soon?

So, I don't care what God will do with me, or if he is my creator. When I stand before him I will tell him to his face what I think of him. Anyone who can but won't save my children from excruciating agony shouldn't expect me to sit and enjoy myself in his garden of joy.


Thursday, February 5, 2009

Petition to Charge Hamas With War Crimes

Please sign this petition.

To: UN Secretary General
Mr Ban Ki-Moon United Nations Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General United Nations, S-378 New York, NY 10017 Tel. 212-963-7162, Fax. 212-963-7055 Thursday, January 8, 2009 /EMYM

The Honorable Secretary-General,

Mr Ban Ki-moon!

Subject: Hamas leadership to be brought to trial for War Crimes

Your Excellency! Wethe undersigned, request decisive action regarding a severe case of war crimes.

In the recent years and in the present ongoing military conflict the Hamas terrorist organization ruling in Gaza has committed a large number of diverse war crimes, as defined by International Law. The form of warfare the Hamas movement inflicted both on the Gaza population and on Israel has caused much suffering and heavy losses and damage both to Israel's civilian population and to the entire Gaza Strip.

The Hamas regime has fired 6,300 rockets targeting Israeli civilians. In Gaza the Hamas stored rockets and other weaponry and ammunition primarily in residential areas; in houses, mosques, and schools. Thousands of rocket and mortar grenade attacks were launched from within these areas, obliging Israeli military response which inevitably led to great suffering of the population and damage to property.

According to International Law any source of fire on civilian targets is a legitimate target itself. If that source of fire was located among civilians it still remains a legitimate target; and if that vicinity invites fire in return, causing casualties among the local population, these casualties are the full and sole responsibility of the party placing them deliberately in harm's way. In this case Hamas is fully responsible both for the deliberately targeted Israeli civilian casualties and for the civilian casualties of its own population used by Hamas as a human shield. Your Excellency, Mister Secretary General! We demand that the Hamas leadership be brought to international justice without delay, and tried for the following war crimes:

- Shooting rockets and grenades purposely on civilian targets in Israel.

- Shooting these rockets from within Palestinian civilian compounds such as schools or in close proximity of hospitals or residential buildings.

- Storing weapons and ammunition in schools, mosques, public offices and buildings and the sort.

- Regularly using their own civilians as human shield; particularly children, often forced to be in the most dangerous spots.

- During fighting with the Israeli forces the Hamas fighters, who wore uniforms at the beginning, changed to civilian clothing or IDF uniforms and continued to fight. - Hamas fighters have routinely hid among civilians in hospitals

- To the kidnapped Israeli soldier, Gilad Schalit, Hamas did not provide the most elementary rights of war prisoners, such as information given to the other side and Red Cross visits, rights Israel grants even to convicted Hamas terrorists.

- Children and minors were routinely used by Hamas for military tasks, both battle and auxiliary. The Hamas regime has also educated, indoctrinated and trained children and minors to murderous hatred, to will and techniques to kill.

- The Hamas leadership embezzled aid money received for the peaceful needs of Gaza's population and used these extensive funds for war efforts; weaponry, military equipment and constructions, and an enormous military build-up. A failure to prosecute the Hamas leadership in International Court would, no doubt, lead to their war crimes growingly become normative behavior, and to more of the same humanitarian catastrophes, to millions of victims of oppression and killings undefended by the UN.

Mr Secretary General, we would appreciate your considered reply, which, with your permission, we would publish, along with this letter. We shall follow your relevant activities with great honor, high expectations, and deep moral support.

The Undersigned

View Current Signatures

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Time for a three-state-solution?

Recently I saw a photo of three Arab women holding a sign saying, "The burka, a choice, not a demand." I'm sure, however, most women who wear this demeaning, suffocating apparel do so because to not wear it invites abuse, scorn and eventual beatings.

I wonder if somewhere in the Arab world there is a potential Caroline Glick wandering around, her back scarred from whipping, her soul restrained, subjected to Arab Muslim oppression of women. Its tragic, and its past time for the world to address this horror in a meaningful way.

At any rate, here is a thought provoking article from the prolific and insightful Ms Glick:

By Caroline B. Glick |Operation Cast Lead caused many people to reassess the viability of the sacrosanct "two-state solution." A growing number of observers have pointed out that Hamas's Iranian-sponsored jihadist regime in Gaza is proof that Israel has no way to ensure that land it transfers to the PLO-Fatah will remain under PLO-Fatah control.

This reassessment has also provoked a discussion of the PLO-Fatah's own failures since it formed the Palestinian Authority in 1994. Despite the billions of dollars it received from Israel and the West, its Western trained armed forces numbering more than 75,000 and the bottomless reserve of international political support it enjoys, the PLO-Fatah regime did not build a state, but a kleptocratic thugocracy where the rule of law was replaced by the rule of the jackboot. Instead of teaching its people to embrace peace, freedom and democracy, the PLO-Fatah-led PA indoctrinated them to wage jihad against Israel in a never-ending war.

These reassessments have led three leading conservative thinkers - former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton, Middle East Forum president Daniel Pipes, and Efraim Inbar, director of Bar-Ilan University's Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies - to all publish articles over the past month rejecting the two-state solution.

Bolton, Pipes and Inbar not only agree that the two-state paradigm has failed, they also agree on what must be done now to "solve" the Palestinian conflict. In their view the failed "two-state solution" should be replaced with what Bolton refers to as the "three-state solution." All three analysts begin their analyses with the assertion that Israel is uninterested in controlling Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Since the Palestinians have shown they cannot be trusted with sovereignty, the three argue that the best thing to do is to return the situation to what it was from 1949 to 1967: Egypt should reassert its control over Gaza and Jordan should reassert its control over Judea and Samaria.

Bolton, Pipes and Inbar acknowledge that Egypt and Jordan have both rejected the idea but argue that they should be pressured to reconsider. They explain that Egypt fears that Hamas - a sister organization of its own Muslim Brotherhood - will destabilize it. Jordan for its part has two reasons for refusing their plan. The Hashemite kingdom is a minority regime. A large majority of Jordanians are ethnic Palestinians. Adding another 1.2 million from Judea and Samaria could destabilize the kingdom. Then too, both the PLO and Hamas are themselves threats to the regime. The Hashemites still remember how with Syrian support, the PLO in 1970 attempted to overthrow them.

As for Hamas, its popularity has grown in Jordan in tandem with its empowerment in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. By integrating the west and east banks of the Jordan River, the chance that Hamas would challenge the regime increases dramatically. If we add to the mix Syrian subversion and sponsorship of Hamas, and al-Qaida penetration of Jordan through Iraq - particularly in the event of a US withdrawal - the danger that merging the west and east bank populations would manifest to the Hashemite regime becomes apparent.

IT IS OFTEN NOTED that Hamas's popularity among Palestinians owes in part to the corruption of the PLO-Fatah-controlled PA. It has also been noted that due to the PLO-Fatah-controlled PA's jihadist indoctrination of Palestinian society, the population's transfer of political loyalty from PLO-Fatah to Hamas was ideologically seamless.

What has been little noted is the strategic significance of the nature of Hamas's relations with the PLO-Fatah from the establishment of the PA in 1994 until Hamas ousted it from Gaza in 2007. When the PA was established in 1994, then prime minister Yitzhak Rabin argued that the PLO-Fatah shared Israel's interest in fighting Hamas because Hamas constituted a threat to its authority.

What Rabin failed to recognize was that Hamas's threat to PLO-Fatah was and remains qualitatively different from the threat it poses to Israel. PLO-Fatah never had a problem with Hamas attacks against Israel, or with its annihilationist ideology as regards Israel. This ideology is shared by PLO-Fatah and is widely popular among the Palestinians. Consequently not only did the PLO-Fatah never prevent Hamas from attacking Israel, it collaborated with Hamas in attacking Israel and did so while disseminating Hamas's genocidal ideology throughout the PA. PLO-Fatah did crack down on Hamas when it felt that Hamas was threatening its grip on power, but in all other respects, it supported Hamas - and continues to do so.

THE SAME UNFORTUNATELY is the situation in both Egypt and Jordan. Hamas's Nazi-like Jew hatred is shared by the vast majority of Jordanians and Egyptians. Islamist calls for the extermination of the Jewish people and the destruction of Israel dominate the mosques, seminaries, universities and media outlets in both countries. Popular opposition to the peace treaties that Egypt and Jordan signed with Israel stands consistently at more than 90 percent in both countries.

In spite of repeated Israeli demands for action, PLO-Fatah never ended its support for jihadist anti-Semitism. The PLO-Fatah never believed - as Israel hoped it would - that its best chance for remaining in power was by teaching Palestinians to reject hatred, embrace freedom, democracy and the blessings that peace would afford them. So too, neither the Hashemites in Jordan nor President Hosni Mubarak's regime in Egypt have ever believed that the best way to stabilize or strengthen their own regimes is by preaching openness and peace and rejecting jihadist anti-Semitism. To the contrary, in recent years, Egypt has become the center for jihadist anti-Semitism in the Arab world and Jordan has one of the highest rates of Jew hatred in the world.

The situation on the ground in Jordan, Egypt, Gaza and Judea and Samaria make two things clear. First, a Jordanian reassertion of control over Judea and Samaria and an Egyptian reassertion of control over Gaza would likely increase the chances that the moderate regimes in both countries would be weakened and perhaps overthrown. Second, like Fatah-PLO, neither Egypt nor Jordan would have any interest in protecting Israel from Palestinian terrorists.

Bolton, Inbar and Pipes take for granted that Israel is uninterested in asserting or retaining control over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. This is reasonable given the positions of recent governments on the issue. However, the question is not whether Israel is interested or uninterested in asserting control over the areas - and most Israelis are uninterested in giving up control over Judea and Samaria in light of what happened after Israel withdrew its forces and civilians from Gaza.

THE SALIENT QUESTION is now that it is clear that the two-state solution has failed, what is the best option for managing the conflict? Not only would Israel be unable to trust that its security situation would improve if the areas were to revert to Jordanian and Egyptian control, Israel could trust that its security situation would rapidly deteriorate as the prospect of regional war increased. With a retrocession of Gaza, Judea and Samaria to Egyptian and Jordanian rule, Israel would find itself situated within indefensible borders, and facing the likely prospect that the Egyptian and Jordanian regimes would be destabilized.

Today Israel has the ability to enter Gaza without concern that doing so would provoke war with Egypt. It has minimized the terror threat from Judea and Samaria by controlling the areas with the massive help of the strong Israeli civilian presence in the areas which ensures control over the roads and the heights. IDF forces can operate freely within the areas without risking war with Jordan. The IDF controls the long border with Jordan and can prevent terrorist infiltration from the east.

If the current situation is preferable to the "three-state solution" and if the current situation itself is unsustainable, the question again arises, what should be done? What new policy paradigm should replace the failed two-state solution?

The best way to move forward is to reject the calls for a solution and concentrate instead on stabilization. With rockets and mortars launched from Gaza continuing to pummel the South despite Operation Cast Lead, and with the international community's refusal to enforce UN Security Council resolutions barring Iran from exporting weapons, it is clear that Gaza will remain an Iranian-sponsored, Hamas-controlled area for as long as Hamas retains control over the international border with Egypt.

So Israel must reassert control over the border.

It is also clear that Hamas and its terrorist partners in Fatah and Islamic Jihad will continue to target the South for as long as they can. So Israel needs to establish a security zone inside of Gaza wide enough to remove the South from rocket and mortar range.

From an economic perspective, it is clear that in the long run, Gaza's only prospect for development is an economic union of sorts with the largely depopulated northern Sinai. For years, Egypt has rejected calls for economic integration with Gaza. Cairo should be pressured to reassess its position as Israel stabilizes the security situation in Gaza itself.

AS FOR JUDEA and Samaria, Israel should continue its military control over the areas in order to ensure its national security. It should also apply its law to the areas of Judea and Samaria that are within the domestic consensus. These areas include the Etzion, Adumim, Adam, Ofra and Ariel settlement blocs and the Jordan Valley.

Israel should end its support for the PLO-Fatah-led PA, and support the empowerment of non-jihadist elements of Palestinian society to lead a new autonomous authority in the areas. These new leaders, who may be the traditional leaders of local clans, should be encouraged to either integrate within Israel or seek civil confederation with Jordan. Jordan could take a larger role in the civil affairs of the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria, by for instance reinstating their Jordanian citizenship which it illegally revoked in 1988. At the same time, Israel should end its freeze on building for Israeli communities in the areas.

It is obvious today that for the Palestinians to develop into a society that may be capable of statehood in the long term, they require a period of a generation or two to rebuild their society in a peaceful way. They will not do this in environments where terrorists are ideologically aligned with unpopular, repressive regimes.

The option of continued and enhanced Israeli control is unattractive to many. But it is the only option that will provide an environment conducive to such a long-term reorganization of Palestinian society that will also safeguard Israel's own security and national well-being.

While it is vital to recognize that the failed two-state solution must be abandoned, it is equally important that it not be replaced with another failed proposition. The best way to move forward is by adopting a stabilization policy that enables Israel to secure itself while providing an opportunity for Palestinians to integrate gradually and peacefully with their Israeli, Egyptian and Jordanian neighbors.

Every weekday publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post.

© 2008, Caroline B. Glick