Monday, September 17, 2007

Arabs FIRST class in Democratic Israel, literally

Arabs FIRST class in Democratic Israel, literally

Jimmy from Jerusalem writes:

Arabs in FIRST class in Democratic Israel, literally
To Arab lobby’s Jimmy Carter’s ‘Apartheid slur‘:

Young [horny] Arabs in the front, elderly Jews & pregnant women in the back!

You have already heard about the Israeli courts that favors Arabs over Jews.

You have already heard about the Israeli security that favors Arabs over Jews in access to holy sites like temple mount & Hebron’s ancient Jewish tomb.

You have already heard about the Israeli military that favors Arabs over Jews in “illegal” squattering, like in Jerusalem, Hebron, etc.

You have already heard about the Israeli universities that favors Arabs over Jews as an ‘affirmative action’ system.

But you have not heard about the ‘usual’ young Arabs flooding Israeli buses (many just ride all day long simply looking for Israeli girls & follow them around), the first seat they grab is of-course the front seat reserved for the elderly & pregnant women, etc.

As Israelis are extremely tolerant and sensitive to any “race” and “religion” issue, they normally refrain from commenting to the uneducated Arabs.

So pregnant women and elderly men women moan on summer hot days and the young cruel Arabs just smile, just like they smiled on 911.

Today a tourist couldn't take it any more, approached the Arab Muslims in the front seat and “explained” in broken Arabic to the “actors” who made that thing as if they had not noticed anything (reminds you of PALLYWOOD), before evacuating the seats to the staring eyes of dozens regular & super tolerant Israelis.


Technorati -

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Well maybe it's already time for liberals in Israel's too-much-of-an-open democracy to start restricting immigration to Jews only?

Well maybe it's already time for liberals in Israel's too-much-of-an-open democracy to start restricting immigration to Jews only in the only Jewish state? Israeli Police have busted a group of Israeli neo-Nazis in the Tel Aviv region and found a gun and explosives. The youths are non-Jewish immigrants from the Former Soviet Union.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

America's efforts to spy on Israel

America's efforts to spy on Israel.
Spy Gamesby Gregory Levey The New Republic Online Post date: 05.08.07

In George Tenet's new book, At the Center of the Storm, the former CIA director claims that, when the Israeli government sought the release of jailed Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard in 1998, it was at Tenet's insistence that the former Navy intelligence analyst was kept behind bars. People who say Israel cannot be trusted by the United States have long pointed to Pollard as the case in point. In 2004, Pat Buchanan wrote, "Washington today is rife with reports the FBI has been investigating whether or not a nest of Pollardites inside the Pentagon has been funneling secrets, through the Israeli lobby ... and on to Sharon." Anytime Israel is thought to be snooping on its closest ally--such as in the 2005 arrest of Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin for providing information to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)--commentators jump on it as an excuse to disparage Israel's trustworthiness. After Franklin's arrest, The Nation's Robert Dreyfuss wrote, "Did Ariel Sharon, the Prime Minister of Israel, run a covert program with operatives in high-level US government positions to influence the Bush Administration's decision to go to war in Iraq?"But this perspective is missing one whole side of the equation. While Israel has certainly spied on the United States in the past (and likely continues to do so), it may actually be the United States that is the nosier country--and the one that enjoys far more license in such covert activities. If one party should be paranoid about prying eyes--and I'm not sure either should--it should be the Israel.When I first started work at the Israeli prime minister's office as a speechwriter, I already held a security clearance from a previous job.
Still, to obtain the higher level of clearance required for my new position, I had to go through a battery of security tests, interviews, and background checks. Nothing strange there, but then I noticed that the security agents seemed most concerned that I might be spying--for the United States.

In fact, much of the questioning turned on this issue. And my clearance was twice delayed because I had a few (not very close) acquaintances who worked in American intelligence. It had never occurred to me that the Israelis were concerned about American espionage, which seemed to me like the least of their troubles, so I asked an Israeli counterintelligence agent if this was really such an issue. "Definitely," he nodded gravely. "They're trying to spy on us all the time--every way they can."When I recently brought this up to a former U.S. intelligence official who spent several years working on Middle East issues, he was quick to confirm it. "As an American, I would certainly hope so," he said, referring to the question of whether the United States spies on Israel; he added that he had himself analyzed information from "classified sources in Israel." There is "definitely an inordinate amount of focus" on Israel in U.S. intelligence, he told me. And, when I asked him if he thought there were people in the Israeli government and military who were feeding information to the United States--Israel's own Jonathan Pollards--he said, "It wouldn't surprise me at all." "The neocons ran the administration until recently," he added, but "someone who rides the fence on whether Israel is a true ally in the CIA or [the Department of] Defense would push for that sort of thing."For obvious reasons, it's impossible to provide current examples of this phenomenon. But there have been cases in the past that have been disclosed, only to be quickly hushed by both the Israeli and American governments (in a way that the Pollard issue, a festering wound to both countries, never was). One of the most telling such examples is the 1986 episode of Yosef Amit. Amit was a major in Israeli military intelligence. At one point, he worked in the secretive "Unit 504," which is responsible for coordinating spies in Arab countries neighboring Israel, and he also had close contacts in the Shin Bet, Israel's domestic intelligence agency. In the mid-'80s, Amit was recruited by Tom Waltz, a Jewish CIA officer based in the CIA's station in Tel Aviv. And, until his arrest, he furnished the CIA with classified information about Israel's troop movements and its plans in both the occupied territories and Lebanon.The incident got little press in either the United States or Israel, whose government barely even complained about it. Waltz stayed at his post in Tel Aviv, and, later, when officials inside the Israeli government considered offering to trade Amit for Pollard (or even to release Amit in exchange for leniency for Pollard), they quickly nixed the idea, because they feared stoking more anger in the United States. To some Israeli government officials I have spoken with, there is a lingering sense that Israel has been subjected to a "double standard," as one of them put it.Rafi Eitan, the legendary Israeli spymaster who was Pollard's handler (and who can no longer return to the United States for fear of arrest), is now a member of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's cabinet. Inevitably, he was circumspect about the specifics of U.S.-Israeli espionage and counterespionage, but when I asked about the extent of American spying on Israel, he said simply, "Some things you don't hear about." Then, laughing bitterly, he added, "Why don't you ask the head of the CIA about that? He knows."A senior Israeli diplomat I spoke to about this was a bit more open. "The way I see it," he told me, "there has been a switch. For many years, we knew that we could count on the Pentagon and the CIA, but we had to be careful of the State Department. Now it is the opposite. The State Department is more supportive of us, and we have to be more careful of the Pentagon and, especially, of the CIA." Then he shrugged and said that, if Israel is caught spying on the United States, it harms Israel, but if the United States is caught spying on Israel, the Israeli government brushes it under the rug for fear that this, too, will hurt Israel."What does America have to lose? Israel has something to lose," the former American intelligence official told me. "What is Israel going to do if it catches the U.S.? The U.S. has Israel by the short and curlies."To be sure, Israel almost certainly does continue to spy on the United States, despite occasional protestations to the contrary. But all countries, including allies, are constantly engaged in espionage against each other--especially when their relationships are so close. Not only does the United States return the favor, it also has far more leeway to do so because, if it were discovered, it wouldn't harm U.S. interests at all.In the coming months, the recently delayed trial of two former AIPAC staffers accused of passing classified information to the Israeli government will finally commence. When it does, some pundits in the United States will gleefully use it as a tool, once again, to cast doubt on the level of trust Israel deserves. But they're really living in glass houses.


Gregory Levey was Israel's United Nations speechwriter and senior foreign communications coordinator for Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. He teaches at Ryerson University and is writing a book, Shut up, I'm talking, about his experience in the Israeli government.


Ms. G. Goldwater Switzerland, Geneva
Internet Correspondent and Commentator <<> FPC REPORT EXPOSES MASSIVE CONTRADICTIONS IN EUROPEAN AID TO PALESTINIANS AWARENESS To subscribe or unsubscribe to my mails, just email me at :
The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing. --Albert Einstein To paraphrase one of the greatest moral insights of the Talmud, those who show mercy to the cruel will be cruel to the merciful.You may pass articles, and/or any sections of our websites to your lists, under the condition that all Signatures and Links plus credits are incorporated in full. No excerpts can be used without permission.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 10, 2007

Hezbullah's mommy - Syria CRY BABY!

Hezbullah's mommy - Syria CRY BABY!

Analysis: Syria fumes as Arab world stays silent Ha'aretz, Israel There is considerable frustration in Damascus that key Arab countries have not bothered to denounce Israel and express their support for Syria.

Technorati -

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, September 09, 2007

The Arab Lobby Controls US Media and Foreign Policy

The Arab Lobby Controls US Media and Foreign Policy

Last year Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for programs in Islamic studies. The good prince also owns a chunk of Time/AOL the company who’s unit CNN employs the anti Israel Christiane Amanpour.In November of 2005, Fox’s O’Reilly showed live footage of the French Intifada as it raged in Paris. According to WorldNetDaily, Saudi billionaire Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, (aka Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin AbdulAziz AlSaud), who owns 5-6% of the Fox News Channel, personally called Rupert Murdoch and asked him to change the offensive (but accurate) caption: “Muslim Riots” to the less offensive (and less accurate) “Civil Riots.” Within thirty minutes, the Prince had his way.

In December 2005, Prince Al-Waleed donated $20 million each to Harvard University and Georgetown University to finance Islamic studies. The gift to Georgetown, which set up the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in his honor, was the university’s second-largest donation in history, and the gift to Harvard was among its 25 largest. Any idea of what the skew of thoses studies are.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is the largest single stockholder in Time and Citibank he is a one man Arab Lobby. But you wont hear Messers Walt and Mearsheimer talk about him or any of the other Saudi investors who challenge our free speech and influence American foreign policy.

What’s so nefarious about Jews exercising their right to speech?

By Jeff Robbins

September 7, 2007

A crop of Israel’s critics — most prominently Jimmy Carter and now Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, the authors of “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” — have managed something of a feat: They express no concerns about the massive pro-Arab effort, funded in significant measure by foreign oil money, taking American Jews to task for participating in the American political process; meanwhile, they inoculate themselves against charges of anti-Jewish bias by pre-emptively predicting that “the Jewish lobby” will accuse them of it.

Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer, in particular, have been heralded by Israel’s critics for their “courage” in attacking American Jews, who have allegedly “strangled” criticism of Israel. Their case seems one part laughable, and one part eyebrow-raising.

An anecdote from my own experience with the anti-Israel lobby may shed some light on the absurdity of the Walt-Mearsheimer offensive. Not long after Sept. 11, 2001, I received a call from a major defense contractor asking for a favor. I was serving as president of the Boston chapter of the World Affairs Council, a national organization that debates foreign policy, and the defense contractor was one of the Council’s principal sponsors.

The Saudi Arabian government was sponsoring a national public relations campaign to cultivate American public opinion, and was sending Saudi emissaries around the country to make the case that Saudi Arabia was a tolerant, moderate nation worthy of American support. Would the Council organize a forum of Boston’s community leaders so that the Saudis could make their case?

While this was patently no more than a Saudi lobbying effort, we organized the forum, and it was well-attended by precisely the slice of Boston’s political and corporate elite that the Saudis and their defense contractor benefactor had hoped for. The Saudis maintained that their Kingdom should be regarded as a promoter of Middle East peace, and that the abundant evidence that Saudi Arabia was in fact promoting a virulent brand of extremist Islam should be discounted.

Saudi Arabia paid for the trip of its emissaries to Boston, for the Washington, D.C.-based public relations and lobbying company which organized the trip, and for the Boston public relations and lobbying company that handled the Boston part of the visit. And it drew upon the resources and relationships of the defense contractor, which sells hundreds of millions of dollars of military equipment to Saudi Arabia, to support and orchestrate its public relations effort.

The billions in petrodollars Arab states spend in the U.S. for defense, construction, engineering and consulting contracts position them nicely to win friends in high places, and friends are what they have. That is true all over the world, is true in this country, and has been true for quite some time. As U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull noted 60 years ago, “The oil of Saudi Arabia constitutes one of the world’s great prizes.” His successor, Edward Stettinius, opposed the creation of a Jewish state in the Middle East, stating “It would seriously prejudice our ability to afford protection to American interests, economic and commercial . . . throughout the area.”

The Saudis and their allies have not been shy about supplementing their considerable leverage in the U.S. by targeting expenditures to affect the debate over Middle East policy by funding think tanks, Middle East studies programs, advocacy groups, community centers and other institutions.

To take one obvious example, just last year Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for programs in Islamic studies. Prince Alwaleed, chairman of a Riyadh-based conglomerate, is the fellow whose $10 million donation to the Twin Towers Fund following the Sept. 11 attacks was rejected by then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani after the Saudi Prince suggested that the U.S. “re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinians.”

Georgetown and Harvard had no apparent qualms about accepting Prince Alwaleed’s money. The director of Georgetown’s newly-renamed Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center rejected any suggestion that the Saudi magnate was attempting to use Saudi oil wealth to influence American policy in the Middle East. “There is nothing wrong with [Prince Alwaleed] expressing his opinion on American foreign policy,” he said. “Clearly, it was done in a constructive way.”

In other words, for those who accept the Arab line on the Israel-Arab conflict — namely, that it is the product of Israeli intransigence in some form or another — the increasing proliferation of Middle East-funded enterprises all across the country aimed at advancing the Arab view of the conflict constitute “nothing wrong.” Nor are those hewing to the anti-Israel line troubled by the way in which the massive Islamic bloc of nations, by dint both of their number and their economic leverage over the rest of the world, are able to guarantee an incessantly anti-Israel agenda at the United Nations and other international fora.

Although the aggressive deployment of petrodollars and oil-based influence from foreign sources aimed at advancing a pro-Arab line constitutes “nothing wrong” as far as Israel’s critics are concerned, a new political fashion holds that there is something very wrong indeed about American Jews and other American backers of Israel expressing their support for Israel, and urging their political leaders to join them in that support.

Our major newspapers and networks, with correspondents in Israel able to take advantage of an Israeli political system that is a free-for-all and an astonishingly vibrant and self-critical Israeli press, report daily on every twist and turn of the conflict and are very frequently critical of Israel. As for American campuses, most objective observers would have little difficulty concluding that far from being criticism-free, they are in fact dominated by critics of Israel. Clearly, as strangleholds on criticism go, whatever stranglehold the pro-Israel community has on debate in the U.S. is a very loose one indeed.

If the charge that American Jews are able to stifle criticism of Israel is simply silly, the leveling of the charge that there is something nefarious about Jews urging support for the Jewish state raises questions about whether Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have descended into a certain ugliness. And the tactic of trying to neutralize those questions by loudly predicting that they will be asked, however clever a tactic it may be, does not neutralize them.

It is apparently the authors’ position that, even in the face of the overwhelming leverage of an Arab world swimming in petrodollars, with a lock on the U.N. and an unlimited ability to pay for pro-Arab public relations, American Jews are obliged to stay silent. In essence, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have repackaged the “the-Jews-run-the-country” stuff which has long been the bread and butter of anti-Semites.

Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer deny that they are anti-Semitic, and that is certainly good news. But where they are apparently content with foreign oil money being used to advance a pro-Arab position on the Middle East, but devote themselves to criticizing American Jews for lobbying their public officials in support of the Jewish state, one may legitimately wonder what phrase would apply. Surely, one’s denial that he is anti-Semitic, while welcome, is hardly dispositive; after all, the marked increase in anti-Semitism around the world is well-documented, and yet one rarely hears anyone actually announce that they are anti-Semitic, or that their views are anti-Semitic.

But if anti-Semitism is too harsh a term, and if the word “bigoted” is also taken off the table, perhaps one can be forgiven for concluding that “anti-Jewish bias” fits the bill here. After all, where there is nothing wrong with foreign money from Arab countries advancing a pro-Arab agenda in Messrs. Walt’s and Mearsheimer’s world — but there is something very wrong with American citizens who are Jewish exercising their civic right to speak out on behalf of Israel and taking issue with the pro-Arab agenda — even the most vehement disclaimers of any bias against Jews lack a certain credibility.

The potency of the Middle East-funded anti-Israel lobby around the world and in the U.S. is difficult to ignore. Yet, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer and others who adhere to an anti-Israel line ignore it. In and of itself, this is not surprising. When at the same time they portray American Jews’ efforts to make the case for Israel as morally suspect, however, they open themselves up to reasonable charges of something far more troublesome than mere hypocrisy, and that is anti-Jewish bias, by whatever name.

Mr. Robbins, a U.S. Delegate to the U.N. Human Rights Commission during the Clinton administration, is an attorney at Mintz, Levin in Boston and represents David Project in the Islamic Society of Boston lawsuit.

Global domination

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

The 'Apartheid Slur' on multi-racial cosmoplitan Israel the gem & 'Darfurian Israelis'

The 'Apartheid Slur' on multi-racial cosmoplitan Israel the gem & 'Darfurian Israelis'

'Darfurain Israelis'

Dear Friends,

In this day and age, almost no matter where you live, it is hard to take pride in government. Here in Israel there's lots to brag about. Technological leadership, thriving economy, the warmth of our society, the way our youngsters defend their fellow citizens against attack in a never ending terror war ... but sadly, our elected leaders are not usually part of the positive images. So when they get caught doing something right, it's a noteworthy surprise. A story in today's Ha'aretz is one of those surprises.

Interior Minister, Meir Sheetrit, announced that hundreds of Darfur refugees will be granted citizenship of Israel. Estimates are that around 2,000 African refugees have found asylum in Israel, but the issue is not without its problems. With their pursuers having shifted whole new populations into the Sudanese homes and villages, they will have nowhere to go even after the fighting is over. It is clear that the 2.5 million who have been displaced cannot be absorbed by tiny Israel. It is also difficult to differentiate between economic opportunists and genuine refugees – not to mention the security risk associated with potential infiltrators from an enemy state said to harbour Al-Qaida. To date, the Israeli Muslim community has not come forward, and so those who are in Israel do not have a local community into which they easily integrate.

On the other hand, the Jewish state, which was rose out of the ashes of the Holocaust and became a haven for hundreds of thousands of Jews chased out of Arab countries and has a collective memory of exile to Rome and Babylon, dhimmitude in Arabia, the Spanish Inquisition, and European pogroms, cannot stand idly by.

Darfur is a world responsibility, and one in which it would be reasonable to expect the Arab and African nations to take a lead. Arab states, as yet have shown no inclination to reign in the racist Arab Muslims who are engaged in rape, pillage and plunder of the most barbaric dimensions. Nor have they shown the slightest inclination to protect the persecuted black Muslims. It is worse. In a most repulsive story, Egyptian border guards murdered Sudanese refugees trying to cross the border, seeking refuge in Israel. A physical "tug-of-war" with Israeli border guards over one of the refugees ended in an Egyptian "victory" after they pointed their guns at the Israelis. The poor refugee "prize" was simply dragged back over the border and clubbed to death. Nor have African nations offered succour to their Muslim and animist coreligionists. And the Western world has been equally unwilling to offer haven.

As we approach the Rosh Hashanna new year, we and the Sudanese refugees can only hope that the example set by Israel, absorbing a number so large in terms of its relative population, and granting the protection and benefits of citizenship to the stateless, will be part of fulfillment of the words of the prophet Isiah "The law will go out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." Press your government to take heed and act.


Technorati -

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Not about Iraq, "foreign policy" crap, or about the "middle east conflict"? - Osama bin Laden Tells Us to Embrace Islam or Else...

Not about Iraq, "foreign policy" crap, or about the "middle east conflict"? - Osama bin Laden Tells Us to Embrace Islam or Else...

Technorati -

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,