Navigation:
Reporting on the Middle East, Science, and Education for March 11, 2010 - כ"ה אדר תש"ע
Pages
Archives
Toward a better future through tolerance and mutualism
Sponsored By:
Recent Comments:
Richard on Hamas Occupies Palestinian Lands.
Comments RSS
By Daniel Greenfield, Canada Free Press, March 10, 2010
“I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem” —Vice President Joseph Robinette Biden, March 09, 2010
For nearly twenty years the great sham of the Middle East Peace Process has dragged on. And this despicable scam has consisted of only one policy, only one platform and only one plan. Pressuring Israel for more concessions.
Year in and year out, new peace conferences were declared and new plans for peace were hammered out. All of them had one thing in common, they carved up Israel for a non-existent peace. When Arafat and his gang of terrorists made a concession, it was to demand 5 percent less of Israel in the current phase of negotiations. When Israel made a concession, it was to turn over another 10 percent of land to its worst enemies in this phase of negotiations… in exchange for them putting off their demands for that 5 percent into the next phase of the negotiations. And this sick charade in which Israel gave and the terrorists took was the peace process.
While this great surrender process was going on, outside the bombs went on exploding, tearing apart buses, restaurants, malls and families—the politicians and diplomats in charge excused the terrorists and damned Israel if it so much as lifted a finger to defend itself, or erected a single checkpoint to catch at least one of the terrorists on the way to kill a dozen people in Jerusalem. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Islam, Judaism, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 11, 2010 - כ"ה אדר תש"ע at 10:51 am
Comments Off
By Ted Belman, Israpundit, March 10, 2010
President Obama intends to impose a solution on Israel.
During the lead up to his election victory, he surrounded himself with a host of vehemently anti-Israel advisors including Lee Hamilton, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Gen Jones, many of whom advocated imposing a solution on Israel..
He also made common cause with Jewish leftists represented by J Street and Israel Policy Forum who were urging him to increase the pressure on Israel and if that didn’t work, to impose a solution on Israel.
So it was no surprise that he started his term of office by attacking Israel, America’s best and most steadfast ally, declaring that all settlements were illegal and demanding a complete settlement construction freeze east of the greenline including in Jerusalem. He went so far as to repudiate the US commitment set out in the Bush letter ’04 to Sharon, declaring there was no agreement. Elliot Abrams and others involved in the negotiations which led to the letter, testified otherwise.
This letter also affirmed that “as part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338.” Pres Bush had always supported a negotiated settlement and this letter did likewise. Noticeably absent was any reference to the Saudi Plan. The letter also contained a commitment, that “the United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan”.
By repudiating this letter as a U.S. commitment, Pres Obama opened the way for a settlement to be imposed according to the Saudi Plan rather than Res 242.
He set a goal of achieving an agreement in two years. One year is up, what has he accomplished? At first blush, it would appear, not much. But the reality is otherwise. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 10, 2010 - כ"ד אדר תש"ע at 9:56 am
Comments Off
Fodor, Nagel, and Plantinga don’t need to turn themselves into biochemists, but some awareness of the issues and advances would not be entirely misplaced.
By Michael Ruse, Chronicle Review, March 7, 2010
Last year was the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin and the 150th anniversary of the publication of his book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. The anniversary was marked by conferences the world over. I will not tell you how many I attended; ecologically sensitive readers of The Chronicle might start whining about carbon footprints and that sort of thing. Let me just say that I found myself going no fewer than three times through the Quad City International Airport, in Moline, Ill. Moline!
I mention this as background to the publication of a new book by Jerry A. Fodor, a professor of philosophy at Rutgers University, and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini, a professor of cognitive science at the University of Arizona. The title of the book, What Darwin Got Wrong (Farrar, Straus and Giroux), tells you their opinion of the old English naturalist and of his theory of evolution through natural selection. If Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini were an isolated case, one could dismiss their book with a grimace (if you were a biologist), or welcome them with a cheer (if you were a creationist). But in the philosophical community, there is an increasingly vocal cadre of eminent philosophers harboring doubts about Darwin. To understand their critique, we must first put the clock back a year, to the beginning of the celebrations.
The anniversary conferences usually had a smattering of professional Darwin types like me—I am a historian and philosopher of science specializing in evolutionary theory—but the bulk of the presenters and attendees were evolutionary biologists. For two reasons, the atmosphere was universally positive. First, scientists deeply respect Darwin and his achievements. These people are evolutionists—they take the past seriously. Second, there was not a person at these conferences who was not excited about the science today. Evolutionary biology is on a roll, and that was a cause for celebration—and frenetic presentations that jammed in as much new science as possible. Moreover, to a person, the scientists saw that the first point led smoothly into the second. Everyone appreciates the tools of Darwinism, above all the mechanism of natural selection. But great science doesn’t stand still. It picks up and carries ideas and findings way beyond the wildest hopes of its founders. Evolutionary biology today is deeply Darwinian, but it has outpaced the Origin in ways that its author could never have imagined. To use a hackneyed phrase, Darwin gave biology a paradigm, and biologists have been expanding it ever since.
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Evolutionary Biology, Opinion, Recent Posts, Science on March 8, 2010 - כ"ב אדר תש"ע at 3:15 pm
Comments Off
If Great Britain could have stopped the London subway attack by misusing passports, would M6 have allowed the terrorism to go forward in the name of preserving passport integrity? Of course not. The same is true of Spain with regard to the Madrid bombing and to every other country in the world that seeks to prevent terrorism. Well, if the Mossad did in fact kill al-Mabhouh, they too did it to prevent the killing of their innocent civilians.
by Alan M. Dershowitz, Aish.com, March 7, 2010
The complaints leveled against Israel by European countries and Australia, regarding the alleged misuse of passports by the Mossad in the assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, ring hollow and smack of blatant hypocrisy. Whoever did kill Mahmoud al-Mabhouh — whether it was the Israeli Mossad or someone else — clearly did have their agents use stolen or forged passports. Big deal.
Every good intelligence agency uses stolen and forged passports. The British have been especially adept at this means of spycraft. No country that uses fake passports in their intelligence operations has the moral authority to complain about the alleged misuse of passports in this case. The only ones that have a legitimate grievance are those individuals whose passports may have been misused without their knowledge.
I guess it’s the job of foreign ministries to complain publicly when other nations do what they themselves do secretly. Hypocrisy is, after all, the homage that vice pays to virtue. I’m reminded of the famous scene in Casablanca, when officer Renault declares, “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” A croupier then approaches Renault, and hands him a roll of currency: “Your winnings, sir.”
The hypocrisy in this case seems even more blatant than usual. Is it because Israel is the alleged offender, and the world has gotten accustomed to singling out Israel for double standard condemnation?
Shortly after the terrorist attacks in Bali, which killed a large number of Australian tourists, I had the opportunity to meet with the Australian Prime Minister. I was writing a book at the time on preemption, and I asked him whether he would have authorized a preemptive attack on the terrorist who killed Australian citizens, if such an attack would have saved their lives. His response was that Australia would have done anything it could, to prevent these terrorist attacks. Anything, I guess, except misusing passports? Is there anybody who believes that Australia would not have used forged or stolen passports to prevent the Bali massacres?
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 7, 2010 - כ"א אדר תש"ע at 9:29 pm
Comments Off
The nation must defend its historical ties to the land against those who deny them.
The increasingly global campaign to delegitimize Israel has been bolstered significantly by the reticence of past Israeli governments and other Jewish opinion leaders to assert the great Jewish legacy in this land.
By Aron U. Raskas
March 5, 2010
Jerusalem
JERUSALEM–The Israeli government adds two culturally rich, millennium-old historic sites to a list of national treasures, and riots break out, followed by international condemnation. Yet, it is precisely this cynical, albeit predictable, response that demonstrates why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was right to add the Tomb of Rachel and the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs to Israel’s National Heritage Sites.
There is no nation with firmer roots in a land than the Jewish people in the greater land of Israel. Yet, that great heritage has been under assault by Arab protagonists and their pusillanimous patrons for the longest time, and this has intensified in recent years.
As the Arab people began to recognize their inability to defeat the Jewish people on the battlefield, they began to cleverly craft a strategy of burying Israel’s legacy in the arena of world opinion. This strategy seeks to eradicate the Jewish connection to the land and erode the support for Israel’s legitimacy and very existence. Indeed, the increasingly global campaign to delegitimize Israel has been bolstered significantly by the reticence of past Israeli governments and other Jewish opinion leaders to assert the great Jewish legacy in this land.
The arrogation to itself of the "Palestinian" mantle was the first formidable success for the Arab population that shared with the Jewish people the land that came to be known as Palestine. Likewise, 50 years ago, there was nary a reference to a "West Bank" until that term was introduced by Palestinian Arab propagandists to eliminate further references to the time-honored titles of Judea and Samaria, as the land had been routinely referred to in maps, travel guides, newspapers and even U.N. resolutions.
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Judaism, Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 5, 2010 - י"ט אדר תש"ע at 9:24 am
Comments Off
By Shaul Rosenfeld, YNet News, March 4, 2010
Part 1 of article
The events of “Israel Apartheid Week” in the world opened this year with “freedom fighter” Leila Khaled’s emotional plea to “continue the armed struggle against Israel.” Khaled, a certified airplane hijacker and a well-known favorite of the radical Left in Western European delivered her words of “reconciliation, peace, and brotherly love” in a videotape shown to participants of a Mideast studies convention held at University of London last weekend.
It is possible that on normal days, with mentally healthy academics and intellectuals who do not rush to worship Satan, such plea would have prompted a major outrage. Yet these are grim days; an era where all the horrors of the world have apparently passed, with the exception of Israel’s acts of injustice and crimes, the oppression of its Arabs, and its many conquests.
Hence, even polls indicating that more than one third of Britain’s Muslim students justify murder on behalf of their religion cannot overcome the “blood pact” being formed between the forces of progress from the East and West.
And so we don’t get confused, heaven forbid, neither Kedumim nor Ariel or Beit El are the main concern of participants. According to the “program” of the week’s events, the participants will devote most of their attention to the “intolerable combination” of a Jewish state, the equality Arab Israelis are being deprived of, the return of all refugees to their homes, and of course the Operation Cast Lead, which as we know befell Gaza residents who committed no crime. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Judaism, Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 4, 2010 - י"ח אדר תש"ע at 9:02 pm
Comments Off
Palestinian protests against the restoration of Jewish heritage sites are part of a campaign of delegitimisation against Israel
By Jeremy Sharon, Guardian UK, March 3, 2010
Palestinian men walk past the Al-Ibrahimi mosque, which Jews call the Tomb of the Patriarchs, a site holy to both faiths, in the West Bank town of Hebron on 24 February 2010. Photograph: Jack Guez/AFP
Speeches and comments made by Binyamin Netanyahu of late have been rather heavy on their biblical and historical references. In his speech at Bar-Ilan University last June, he declared: “The connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel has lasted for more than 3,500 years … This is the land of our forefathers.” And in an interview with talkshow host Charlie Rose in September, he mentioned a signet ring found by the western wall in Jerusalem, dating back 2,700 years and bearing the name “Netanyahu Ben-Yoash” inscribed on it in ancient Hebrew.
The context of these comments and the motivation for Netanyahu’s recent announcement of a plan for the refurbishment of national heritage sites are one and the same: Israelis view those elements that seek to erase the historical ties of the Jewish people to the land as part of larger strategy aimed at delegitimising the state of Israel. Senior politicians and Israeli thinktanks have identified this phenomenon as a serious threat to the country, and the heritage restoration project is an example of the Israeli reaction to this challenge.
Unfortunately, the inclusion in the restoration plan of two of the most sacred Jewish sites, the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb, has sparked riots in the West Bank and Jerusalem over the past few days and led supposedly moderate Palestinian leaders to burst forth with disturbingly inflammatory rhetoric. Mahmoud Abbas even raised the spectre of “religious war” in light of the inclusion of these two sites. The international community weighed in too, with the US State Department and the UN secretary general, both reprimanding Israel for the decision.
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Islam, Judaism, Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 4, 2010 - י"ח אדר תש"ע at 2:07 pm
Comments Off
Barry Rubin
Middle East and Terrorism Blog – 2010-02-28
Hussain Abdul Hussain gets it. He’s one of the most interesting Arab journalists and he also writes in English. His latest article-published in the “Huffington Post”-entitled “Lonely Obama vs. Popular Iran” [but you don't have to use the link as I quoted practically all of it] he points out what the most realistic people and more moderate rulers in the Arabic-speaking world are thinking.
He explains what I’ve been telling you but since he has “Abdul” in his name perhaps you’ll believe it when he says it.
Theme one: Popularity isn’t so important in the Middle East:
“A common perception is that under President Barack Obama, America’s image has improved, and perhaps its friends have increased. But such claims are unfounded, as the opposite proves to be true.
“International relations, however, are about interests, not sweet talk. As Bush went out recruiting allies, and making enemies, Obama lost America’s friends while failing to win over enemies.”
Theme two: What is important is that allies believe you will support and protect them. Obama isn’t doing that:
Example A, Iraq: “After losing more than 4,300 troops in battle and spending $700 billion [it says trillion but I assume that's a typo] since 2003, America today cannot find a single politician or group that would express gratitude to Americans for ridding Iraq of its ruthless tyrant Saddam Hussein, and allowing these politicians to speak out freely.
“On the contrary, shy of making their excellent backdoor ties with Washington known since they fear Obama will depart Iraq and never look back, Iraqi politicians started expressing dissatisfaction with the United States in public.”
Example B, Lebanon, before Obama took office, more than one-third of the entire population-most of them Sunni Muslims– demonstrated against Hizballah and Syrian occupation. And the Druze leader Walid Jumblatt said on television “that he was proud to be part of America’s plan to spread democracy in the Middle East.” Now Jumblatt has practically gone over to Hizballah or, at least, is heavily hedging his bets because he fears Iran and Syria more than he has faith in Obama’s policy. And so:
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 2, 2010 - ט"ז אדר תש"ע at 10:26 pm
Comments Off
By JPOST EDITORIAL, March 1, 2010
The male rabbinic establishment should start acting like, well, men – and allow women to prove themselves on an even playing field.
‘Assertive” Orthodox women are making some men very nervous. The haredi Agudath Israel of America’s Council of Rabbinic Sages (Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah) has excommunicated the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale, an Orthodox congregation in the Bronx, for recognizing Sara Hurwitz, a 33-year-old mother of three, as a rabbi.
“These developments,” wrote 10 of America’s leading Orthodox rabbis, “represent a radical and dangerous departure from Jewish tradition… and must be condemned in the strongest terms. Any congregation with a woman in a rabbinical position of any sort cannot be considered Orthodox.”
Even the more moderate Rabbinical Council of America is considering taking the drastic step of expelling from its ranks Rabbi Avi Weiss, the senior rabbi at Riverdale, who ordained Hurwitz and made her a full member of his rabbinic staff, according to the New York Jewish Week.
The Agudah, and apparently the RCA, are up in arms over Weiss’s unequivocal recent statement that Hurwitz, who last March was bestowed the title of “Maharat,” an acronym for halachic, spiritual and Torah leader (manhiga hilchatit ruhanit toranit), would now be called “rabbah.”
We would recommend that both the Agudah and the RCA calm down and stop using bullying tactics to intimidate rabbis and congregations into submission. A centralized rabbinic body dictating practice to the faithful is an anachronism. Today, individuals choose to belong or not to belong to Orthodox strictures of their own free will. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Judaism, Monotheistic Religions, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 2, 2010 - ט"ז אדר תש"ע at 6:12 pm
Comments Off
Israel has its faults, but apartheid isn’t one of them
By Richard Cohen, Washington Post
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Toward the end of last year, Jimmy Carter apologized for some of his very harsh statements about Israel. In an “open letter to the Jewish community” — and with a vagueness that ill becomes him — he airily mentioned criticisms that “stigmatize Israel” but omitted his own contribution: the implication that Israel is, like the racist South Africa of old, an “apartheid” state.
Carter used the term in his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” It could be argued that he meant the label to apply only to the West Bank, but even so the use of the term was incorrect and deliberatively provocative. Carter was waving the bloody shirt of racism, and he knew it.
What can be said about others who apply the term to Israel in general? No apology has come from them — and the way things are going, none will be forthcoming. The use of the word has become commonplace — Google “Israel and apartheid” and you will see that the two are linked in cyberspace, as love and marriage are in at least one song. The meaning is clear: Israel is a state where political and civil rights are withheld on the basis of race and race alone. This is not the case.
The Israel of today and the South Africa of yesterday have almost nothing in common. In South Africa, the minority white population harshly ruled the majority black population. Nonwhites were denied civil rights, and in 1958, they were even deprived of citizenship. In contrast, Israeli Arabs, about one-fifth of the country, have the same civil and political rights as do Israeli Jews. Arabs sit in the Knesset and serve in the military, although most are exempt from the draft. Whatever this is — and it looks suspiciously like a liberal democracy — it cannot be apartheid.
Posted by CNP Webmaster as Middle East Report, Opinion, Recent Posts on March 2, 2010 - ט"ז אדר תש"ע at 11:22 am
Comments Off
