Middle East has been the most important and controversial international issue in the hard-fought French presidential election campaign. And depending on the results, the election may mark the first major change on that issue for over three decades.
Both Nicolas Sarkozy and Segolene Royal, the candidates of the center-right and Socialists, respectively, have promised major shifts in France’s stance on the Iranian, Lebanese, and Israeli-Palestinian issues if they win. They are reacting against the regime of outgoing President Jacques Chirac, who for 12 years–following in the footsteps of predecessors back to Charles de Gaulle–has allied with such Arab dictators as Yasir Arafat and Saddam Hussein. By making France the Arabs’ favorite Western state, Chirac and other Gaullists have tried to create an alignment to counter the great–and in France, much-despised–primacy of the United States. CONTINUE
By Adrian Morgan, FrontPageMag
(Oiginally published in FamilySecurityMatters.org | April 17, 2007)
The First Amendment to the US federal constitution was written in 1789, and was ratified by the States in 1791. It states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
The interpretation of the First Amendment and in particular its first clause, referred to as the “Establishment of Religion” or “Establishment” clause, has a direct bearing on how federally- funded public schools can teach religion. Alan Brownstein, a constitutional law expert from the University of California at Davis’ School of Law states:
“From a constitutional perspective, schools can’t teach the truth or falsity of religious belief, and atheism would fall in that parameter.”
By Prof Eugene Narrett
Many articles and books have been written, and many scholars of Arabic and Islamic history have spoken about the genocidal xenophobia seemingly hard-wired into the Koran and, as a result into all Islamic nations, particularly Arab ones. President George W. Bush prompted considerable research, rebuttals and scorn by reading a statement terming Islam â€œa religion of peace.â€ This seemed further confirmation that the internationalists within the State Department, NSC and abroad, in Whitehall and the EU were veiling a horror from their own peoples so that ensuing crises would hasten the world government they prefer.
This may be true; enabling jihad as an antithesis to the Westâ€™s thesis (constitutional democracy) may be leading to the synthesis of a World Order; and/or it may be achieving significant change within Islamic lands. Whether this leads to global fascism, corporate socialism or to grounds for genuine peace and human freedom remains in the balance and a challenge to all our faculties. But it seems clear that messages unheard for decades, even centuries are emerging from Muslim writers.
By: David Bedein, The Bulletin
One of the cardinal assumptions of Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was that the world would not recognize a government headed by Hamas. She had been proven wrong, because Mahmoud Abbas has successfully sold the idea to the world, since he is the figurehead leader of that government.
[It should be noted that the Arabs demand the west not only force Israel to surrender but that the west also provide the financing for the “Palestinians”. It is a form of Jizyah and dimmitude. It doesn’t matter how many the Palestinians kill or how many commitments they breach or whether they are dedicated to Israel’s destruction, the west will find a way to help them. Ted Belman]
By Ted Belman
I have been in Washington for a couple of weeks now and have been meeting with some influential people.
First I met with Jennifer Lazlo-Mizrachi , who is the founder and President of The Israel Project. She advised that they are to journalists what AIPAC is to politicians. Their mandate is to provide factual backgrounders to journalists in Jerusalem and Washington. As for their policy positions, they back the policies of the GOI whatever they may be. No help there but they do serve a useful purpose.
JONATHAN SCHANZER, Policy Director for the Jewish Policy Centre, catalog’s just how bad things are there
April 25, 2007 — HAMAS, the terrorist group that Palestinians last year elected to govern their territories, is failing to govern at all.
March alone saw at least 46 kidnappings of civilians in the Gaza Strip, as well as over 25 killings of Palestinians by fellow Palestinians.
Internecine violence has gotten so bad that one human-rights activist says Gaza “has become worse than Somalia.” Yasser Abed Rabbo, an executive-committee member of the rival Palestine Liberation Organization, calls it “anarchy.”
The violence is just the tip of the iceberg in “Hamasistan.” Other troubling signs include:
IMRA reports on a 2007 Survey of Israelis’ Attitudes on National Security
The question ranking four key values-a) a country with a Jewish majority; b) Greater Israel; c) a democratic country; and d) a state of peace is thus a loaded question in two ways:
#1 It asserts that the Jewish majority – in particular after the withdrawal from Gaza – is a trade-off with retaining the West Bank.
#2 It seems to leave out a “secure country” or perhaps a “defendable country” as a key value for policy making .]
Included in this link is the evaluations of the AJC
[..] The predominance of demography over geography is manifest in the readiness to evacuate certain settlements in the West Bank. Support for removal of all the settlements, including the large settlement blocks is negligible-18% in 2006 and 14 % in 2007. However, 46% in 2006 and 45% in 2007 support the removal of all the small and isolated settlements-taken together, 64% in 2006 and 59% in 2007 are ready to evacuate certain settlements in the West
Bank-this in the context of a permanent settlement. [..]
I recommend you read the whole evaluation.
In Jan ’06, I raised the question Is Israel’s greatest threat demographics or indefensible borders?
Honest Reporting reports on Straining a “Ceasefire”?
A 22 April Associated Press report says that: “Hamas militants called Sunday for a fresh wave of attacks against Israel after troops killed nine Palestinians in weekend fighting, straining a five-month-old cease-fire.”
Thus, Israel is blamed for “straining a ceasefire”. According to the AP: “The Gaza truce has largely held, though militants have frequently fired rockets into Israel and have attacked Israeli patrols along the border fence.” How serious must Palestinian actions be in the eyes of the AP before a “ceasefire” is broken? Why are Israeli counter-measures designed to protect this truce regarded as violations while constant Palestinian terror is not?
Recent Israeli operations against targets in Gaza are a direct response to the latest Qassam missile attacks. Yet, the AP saves this for the third paragraph of its report: “The fighting also included a Palestinian rocket attack on the southern Israeli town of Sderot that damaged a home.”
DEBKAfileâ€™s military sources report: Hamasâ€™ strategic decision to go back to its missile, terror and suicide operations was taken after the organization, which dominates Palestinian government, judged its stockpile of ordnance sufficient to sustain a heavy blitz of Israelâ€™s towns and villages, and its units equipped and ready to withstand a responsive Israeli military incursion.
Ten mortar shells struck Sderotâ€™s Hadar district by 8:30 a.m. local time; 6 Qassam missiles exploded in other parts of the W. Negev up to Ashkelon causing damage but no casualties. The Hamas military arm, Ezz-e-Din al Qassam, announced 80 missiles and mortar rounds had been fired at Israeli targets in retaliation for IDF operations.
Below is an exclusive report from Tuesdayâ€™s open hearing of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs:
At the hearing, titled â€œThe Outlook for the Independence of Kosovaâ€ (the Islamic and dhimmi spelling of the province), Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) â€” Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee â€” said the following:
Just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led government[s] in this world that here is yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. This should be noted by both responsible leaders of Islamic governments, such as Indonesia, and also for jihadists of all color and hue. The United Statesâ€™ principles are universal, and in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.
In other words, all this time, al Qaeda was just looking for us to create an Islamic state in Europe, and so after such a gesture, jihadists should be at peace with us. CONTINUE
[Essentially the US is fighting on behalf of Islamists whether in Kosovo or in Judea and Samaria to advance their cause. All in the name of showing the Muslims that the US is their friend.
It used to be a pillar of international relations that each nation respected the borders and sovereignty of other countries. Now when it suits, this stabilizing principal is giving way to the right of self determination. But this new right doesn’t apply to the Kurds, because the Arabs wouldn’t like it.
This right is an outcome of the anti-colonialist forces who wanted to undo colonialism. What principal will protect any country beset with a minority that demands cessation or extraordinary accommodation is not yet clear.]
By Mitchell Bard, FrontPageMagazine.com | April 24, 2007
When Israel retaliated against Hezbollah during last summerâ€™s war, it was forced to fight two battles: one against the Lebanon-based terrorist organization, and one against a hopelessly biased global media. The first serious study of the mediaâ€™s behavior throughout the conflict has confirmed this impression.
The study, released in February and titled â€œThe Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006: The Media As A Weapon in Asymmetrical Conflict” (pdf.), was written not by a partisan watchdog organization that would be expected to arrive at these conclusions; rather, it was produced by a respected journalist, Marvin Kalb, a senior fellow at Harvardâ€™s Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy. CONTINUE
[THIS STUDY IS INDEED DAMNING OF THE MEDIA]
[You might also read Melanie Phillip’s The deadly double standard of the anti-Israel media]
Malnie Phillips wrote an article in The Spectator titled “I found Saddam’s WMD bunkers”
She began it with
It’s a fair bet that you have never heard of a guy called Dave Gaubatz. It’s also a fair bet that you think the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has found absolutely nothing, nada, zilch; and that therefore there never were any WMD programmes in Saddam’s Iraq to justify the war ostensibly waged to protect the world from Saddam’s use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
Then she blogged on the subject under the title The questions that need to be asked about those WMD.
In it she raises a great deal of evidence in support and then extacts from Memorandum in Support of Request for Congressional Investigation of John Negroponte,submitted by John Loftus, President the International Intelligence Summit (www.IntelligenceSummit.org)
You won’t want to miss reading it all.
WINSTON MID EAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY April 22, 2007
It has been said, no doubt, by you Binyamin Netanyahu, that you have learned from your past mistakes and, therefor, would be a qualified leader of the nation of Israel. So, let us ask pertinent questions now, before all the electioneering hype and promises.
1. Ariel Sharon reversed himself on every commitment he made to Israel and her citizens to NOT surrender Jewish Land – by actually following his opponentsâ€™ platform to give away Gaza, Judea, Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Are you, Bibi, prepared to state categorically you will NOT abandon the above named territories?
2. Are you now or have you ever been on a leash to the U.S. State Department, CIA, or any other policy making U.S. institution with respect to Israeli doctrines?
By Ted Belman
In the Conspiracy to Shrink Israel a few months ago and now Amir Oren has added to the picture by advising that U.S. had emergency plan for attacking Israel in 1967 ,
The basis for the directive was Washington’s policy of support for the existence, independence and territorial integrity of all the states of the region. This translated into adherence to the Israeli-Arab armistice lines of 1949. The policy was not to allow Egypt, or any combination of Arab states, to destroy Israel, but also not to allow Israel to expand westward, into Sinai, or eastward, into the West Bank.
The American pressure in this regard brought the IDF back from El Arish in Operation Horev in 1949 and from Sinai in 1956. A version of it would appear in Henry Kissinger’s directives after the IDF encircled Egypt’s Third Army at the end of the Yom Kippur War of 1973.
[..] Conway’s reply to this, dated May 28, is described in the top-secret study as “a strong plea for complete impartiality.” The United States was liable to lose its influence to the Soviets, the general warned, and therefore it must demonstrate “strict neutrality” and avoid open support for Israel.
The true importance of the Middle East lay in the American-Soviet context of the Cold War, Conway argued, and the American stance must derive from those considerations, not from “local issues.”
Keeping Saudi Arabia’s royal family safe from radical Islamists is the West’s strategic concern and delusion.
The only intelligent question for America about Saudi Arabia is: Should we deal with the royals of the house of Saud or go directly to their bearded, Kalashnikov-toting Osama bin Laden-loving followers?
For half a century, the West has preferred to believe that its choice in Saudi Arabia is the moderate, friendly Saudi royal family or the wild-eyed, sandal-clad zombies of jihad, disregarding the seamless relationship between the two.
We have blithely ignored that Mr. bin Laden was a product and a protÃ©gÃ© â€” even a full-fledged member â€” of the ruling establishment in Saudi Arabia. Indeed, his 52 brothers and other members of his family have intermarried widely with the royal family.
Recently an Israeli photographer Oded Balilty was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for photographs taken at Amona of which this was one.
Sultan Knish has blogged this story with additional pictures and most importantly covers what happened to the 15 year old girl, Nili, shown attempting to hold back the Kapos of Israel.
Her words are particularly poignant.
Cruelty and violence in Amona did not break us, on the contrary, they tempered us. Policemen in black do not frighten us. They can break our heads, but they will not break our spirit.
David Horowitz’s Freedom Centre
In one of the most extensive demonstrations ever staged by American college conservatives, close to one hundred university and college campuses across the country yesterday held an “Islamo Fascism Awareness Day.” Thousands of students were involved in the event, which was coordinated by the Terrorism Awareness Project, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center whose objective is to counter college students’ lack of awareness about the War on Terror and the disinformation about it propagated by radical faculty and student groups.
Last night I watched America at the Crossroads by PBS and was pleasantly surprised, knowing about the bias of PBS amd their refusal to air Islam v Islamists by Frank Gaffney Jr.
Salon has an article by Gary Kamiya complaining that it “veers to the right”. In that respect I agree with him. The article and comments are worth reading.
“Crossroads” came to the air as a result of right-wing pressure and intellectual timidity. The project began during the tenures of Ken Tomlinson and Michael Pack, two conservatives who held top positions at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the government-run nonprofit that oversees PBS and its more than 300 local affiliates.
Given the two films I saw last night, one by Ishad Manji and one on Indonesian Muslims it was harder to understand why Gaffney’s film was nixed.
CHICAGO A journalist for the Mississauga, Ont.-based newspaper The Pakistan Post was assaulted by two men, one armed with a cricket bat, who warned him to stop “writing against Islam” and a Pakistan-based religious organization, the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE) reported Thursday.
Journalist Jawaad Faizi was attacked on the evening of April 17 while sitting in his car outside the home of the newspaper’s editor, Amir Arain. The two men smashed the car windows, and repeatedly hit Faizi. They fled when they saw him call 911 on his cell phone.
During the attack, Faizi said, the men told him to stop writing critically of the religious organization Idara Minhaj-ul-Quran and its leader, Cleric Allama Tahir-Ul-Qadri. Allama Tahir-Ul-Qadri is a frequent visitor to Canada, CJFE said. CONTINUE
By Steven Plaut
The world is now well into the post-Oslo. post-911 era, in which the delusions and denials of reality that were the foundations of the “Middle East peace process” are at last being acknowledged for what they were. For those returning to the planet Earth from Fantasyland in the “Oslo” parallel universe, it behooves them and us all to bear in mind some of the unpleasant facts of life about the Middle East.
1. The Arab world has never come to terms with Israel’s existence within ANY set of borders whatsoever and is still seeking the annihilation of Israel and its population.
2. ANY Palestinian state, regardless of who rules it, will produce escalated violence, terror and warfare in the Middle East, and neither stability nor peaceful relations. ANY Palestinian state will seek warfare with Israel and not solutions to the economic and social problems of its citizens.
I just came across an excellent three part review of Saudi Arabia’s Export Of Radical Islam by Adrian Morgan published by The Family Security Foundation, Inc on January 15, 2007. It was prefaced with this,
We read that Saudi Arabia is guilty of sponsoring terrorism but that America is working with them to end this. But how many more heinous crimes must they commit, finally, to be condemned by our government? In this truly shocking exposÃ©, FSM Contributing Editor Adrian Morgan reveals just how mind-numbing Saudi Arabiaâ€™s many trespasses have been.
Over the last week, several items in the world news have highlighted the problem of Saudi Arabia, a supposed ally in the War on Terror, funding mosques which promote the same extremism and calls for jihad which create terror. There is a certain hypocrisy about the Saudis exporting any form of Islam abroad, as the undemocratic kingdom prohibits any symbols of other faiths from being imported. Crucifixes, Bibles are forbidden. Guest workers proliferate in the kingdom, but if any attempt to hold Christian prayer and worship, they are jailed.[..]
Another blog hot on the trail Wahaudi â€” the Wahhabi/Saudi watch recently was brought to my attention. We must keep the pressure on.