David Sternlight http://jta.org/user/profile/59452 Ph.D. Economist Chief Economist of two Fortune 50 companies including an international oil company. Selected by White House as a Presidential Interchange Executive Aspen Institute Council on Foreign Relations Consultant to the United Nations and UNESCO en-us marcus@infolink.com.br Copyright 2009 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 If Glenn Beck is a demogogue, then Barack Obama is a master demagogue, judging by his speeches. The difference is that when Beck makes a mistake he acknowledges it, while when Obama makes a mistake he spins it. It was clear to me who Obama was when he told AIPAC that Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel, and the next morning, when the Arabs didn't like it, he reversed himself. Can you say "Manchurian Candidate"? I knew you could. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 So don't call me to share your problems with your mother in law. It's ok. I'll sit here alone, in the dark, wearing the same cloth coat I've had for 30 years so you could become a comedian. Dad says you should call him, too, if you can find time from your busy schedule. That is, if he's still alive\ then. Mom 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 I'm shocked, shocked that the civil rights of mermaids are once again being exploited by a brutal coterie of fish-eating humans. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 1. Freedom of speech is freedom from government censorship; no more and no less. It does not apply to the press or any other nongovernmental party with respect to any other non-governmental parties. As a Justice once put it, freedom of the press applies only to those who own presses. 2. Given that the Palestinians and their friends have a long history of proven lying (it's even enshrined in Islamic doctrine as "al Takkiyya"), and more significantly of accusing Israelis of Palestinian crimes (using human shields, attacking civilians, etc.), it would not surprise me to learn that there is actually involuntary harvesting of human organs going on in Palestinian areas. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 I'm another Ph.D., former senior US government executive, and past Chief Economist of two Fortune 50 companies that thinks Gordon's advocacy is not only idiotic on logical grounds but also that he is an ingrate. He has the right to his opinions but not to incitement, and the rest of us who wish have the right to express our free speech by withdrawing any and all support from him and those who support him. Let him find like-minded individuals from whom to earn a living, just as Carter, Meersheim and Walt have with their Saudi money. My own alma mater, MIT, has its Noam Chomsky. It is far from clear to me whether Gordon, in contrast, has even the offsetting component of the academic and professional distinctions of a Chomsky in his chosen field of specialization. Academe has its fair share of cranks and no one should be surprised when one pops out of the woodwork from time to time. Those of us who disagree with them are obligated neither to support nor to encourage such behavior. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 From the sublime to the ridiculous: A past Medal of Freedom/Congressional Gold Medal recipient was the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson zt"l, who played a major role in reviving Judaism from the ashes of the Holocaust, and in whose honor and on whose birthday Presidents of both parties have declared "Education Day." for many years. How ridiculous were some of the subsequent awards by comparison. There are those who think the choice of Robinson was a deliberate attempt to tweak pro-Israel Americans. President Obama should have used the famous advice, "If you want to send a message, use Western Union." 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The article is somewhat misleading, in characterizing campuses as Hillel or non-Hillel. There are many Chabad Houses on college campuses throughout the country and traditional Jewish (and pro-Israel) values and outlook are pretty much there for all to see. Further, most Chabad campus Rabbis are young and dynamic, and thus easily create rapport and provide more credible role models than do many Hillels with older Rabbis. Further, such Chabad houses, locally funded and run out of the inherited spiritual resources of the individual Rabbis, are independent of any monolithic movement that has to satisfy both cool-to-Israel donors and others. Disclaimer: The above represents the writer's personal views; he does not speak for Chabad. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 It is simply false that this part of Jerusalem was "traditionally Arab". Jerusalem always had a Jewish majority. When the Arabs refused partition, the Jordanian army took the land from the UN by force, destroyed synagogues and used Jewish tombstones in the cemetery as paving stones, in an attempt to erase the traditionally Jewish character of this part of Jerusalem. I have personally visited Silwan after Israel recaptured it from the Jordanian invaders, and it was a wasteland of empty lots, ramshackle structures, and one very nice hotel (the Intercontinental) at the top of a hill, run by local Arabs, at which I stayed. Instead of squatters building on land that was not theirs, or submitting false claims, all parties need to obey municipal zoning laws, as is the case in any civilized society. Israel has not been even-handed in demolishing illegal structures; until recently they demolished lots of Jewish outposts, but let most of the illegal Arab housing alone to avoid incidents. This particular case, however, went through the courts as between private parties, and the Israeli courts, notorious for bending over backwards to rule in favor of Arab citizens, ruled that the Arab claims were forged and the Jewish documents genuine. Of course the Arabs, as is their wont, promptly turned the truth on its head by accusing the Jews of their own crime--forging documents. A Jewish friend living in Jerusalem, for example, had some Arabs approach him claiming that the house he lived in was theirs. "That's interesting", he replied, "I've been paying rent to the owner, who lives in ̆Beirut, for many years." The Arabs promptly disappeared. Finally, the arrogance of the Obama administration, in trying to dictate to Israel in violation of all norms of legality and international law, is appalling. Unlike the Arabs, Israel has a Western legal and court system, inherited in part from the British, and any fair-minded examination of the judicial process shows that it is scrupulously unbiased, if not (based on actual decisions) pro Arab. The courts have, at great cost to the government, ordered the anti-terrorist wall moved, for example, so as not to separate a few small Arab farmers from their traditional plots. I am sorry the JTA's reporter has fallen for the "traditionally Arab" scam. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 It is clear that the administration is following a deliberate policy of disenfranchising Jewish Americans who won't toe the party line on their strategy to throw Israel under the bus to placate the Saudis. From lies about past agreements about settlements, to an attempt to deJudaize Jerusalem, a city that has always had a Jewish majority, as the united and indivisible capital of Israel, to the refusal to invite those Jewish groups who strongly support Israel to the White House while giving a small minority, J Street, legitimacy, the message is clear. Mary Robinson is no accident; just the latest in a series of deliberately trying to emasculate pro-Israel Americans in order to have a free hand in selling Israel out for an oily mess of pottage. For me it is the last straw. We saw the same denial of reality by Jews when the fascists came to power in Germany, with consequences we remember all too well. It is time to recall the words of Pastor Niemoller. It is time to stop looking the other way, and call the Administration's actions for what they are; simple anti-semitism in the guise of following Carter, Walt, and others in removing pro-Israel Americans' right to petition their government and be counted. It's another case of the old calumny that "the Jews are too powerful" when they gained what they have on merit. It makes no sense to sacrifice Israel which has given the world Nobel Laureates, major medical and scientific breakthroughs, global agricultural technology, one of the world's largest Pharmaceutical companies supplying life saving drugs to Americans, world-leading musicians, and an example of democracy and economic development, in favor of a bunch of ignorant, murdering, irredentist, uncompromising Arabs who have contributed little to the world except the murder of civilians and having the good fortune of sitting on some oil, whose price is driven in any case by demand and not politics. The only language this administration and its chief of staff will understand is that of power. It is time for those who disagree with its policies on Israel and Jews to make it clear that they won't support its favorite hobby horses, most recently health care federalization,.If offered a choice between getting no more programs through Congress, and backing off the attacks on Israel's sovereignty, perhaps a few minds will be cleared. We may not be able to organize to persuade the administration, but we can certainly assist Congress to impede its programs. How many votes at the US ballot box do the Saudis have? For identification purposes only, the writer is the former Chief Economist of a major international oil company and has studied the Middle East and inter-Arab politics extensively over the years. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The New York Times ran a long piece on a tightly-knit foreign origin American Jewish community (don't recall if it was Iraqi or Syrian) pointing out the insular nature of that community and its intolerance of outsiders, Jewish or not. In such communities home country values fester, and there is little opportunity for American or American Jewish values to penetrate. Jews in American have been successful through the "melting pot" aspect of American and American-Jewish culture. Here in Los Angeles, we have seen, for example, a socialization of Iranian Jews who brought with them different values than those of the US about standing on line, pushing ahead, and false association of economic privilege with rights and behavior in public interaction with others. Fortunately the assimilation of that group has gone relatively well, to the point where the mayor of Beverly Hills is a very highly regarded Iranian Jewish American businessman of whom all Americans can be proud. There needs to be social action among other insular immigrant communities to re-awaken the melting pot idea; we have seen too many destructive consequences of the politics and sociology of separatism. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Not mentioned in your article are: 1. Chabad-Lubavitch sued in Russian courts and won in every court up to and including the Russian Supreme Court. The Russians refused to turn over the documents, fomented anti-Semitic riots, and finally illegally overruled their own Supreme Court and then passed a Duma resolution overruling their own courts. 2. Several US Presidents asked the Russian Prime Ministers for return of the documents. The Russians agreed but never honored their promises. 3. Russian Prime Ministers repeatedly promised Chabad the documents would be released "tomorrow" but their promises were never honored. 4. The anti-Chabad riots were participated in by the head of the Russian State Library himself. 5. Chabad's suit in US Federal Court was a last resort after all attempts to use the Russian legal system failed due to Russian non-performance of court verdicts. 6. The Russians defended the US suit, then didn't pay their lawyers. When they lost repeatedly in preliminary and jurisdictional motions, they withdrew from the suit, leaving it undefended. "If I can't get my way, I won't play" is a good summary of this history. 7. It is alleged that if Chabad gets a default judgment in US Court, they can seize Russian assets in the US. Time will tell. 8. This whole sad history gives the lie to the often-heard claim that the Russians have never defaulted on an agreement, and underlines their untrustworthiness. Note: The writer speaks here only for himself in his personal capacity and not for Chabad-Lubavitch. The above account is based on public sources. David Sternlight, Ph.D. Los Angeles 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 "Serious experts who are not Israelis look at the Middle East and say that if Iran is nuclear in 2015, the Middle East will be nuclear in 2020. And a multi-nuclear Middle East is a nightmare - five or six nuclear states in a jumpy and unstable region. " Uzi Arad, Head of Israel's National Security Council. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 When Palestinians (and other Arabs) say, "We will never recognize Israel as a Jewish Stzte, that is racist. When Palestinians say "We will destroy Israel", that is racist. When countries make Islam the official religion and forbid public worship by any other, that is racist. When Arabs boycott Jews, that is racist. When Arabs try to blackmail third parties into not dealing with Jews, that is racist. When Arabs lie about Jewish history and try to destroy its evidence, that is racist. Lieberman is simply stating the consequences of such Arab behavior from an Israeli security point of view, which is his job. Nothing racist about it. As usual, Arab apologists and anti-semites project the crimes of the Arabs and anti-semites onto the Jews. It's a very old tactic, but the world is catching on to it. The list of such big lies is very long, for example: Israel is using civilians as human shields; Israel is targeting civilians; Israel is an apartheid State; Israel is stealing water; etc. All of the above are gross black crimes of the Arabs, which they project onto the Israelis and all Jews in a propaganda attempt to convince the world that black is white, slavery is freedom, graft is economic development, and murder is liberation. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Unlike Livni if she were to join the coalition, Lieberman will not blackmail the government over existential issues in pursuit of a Chaloimis "peace". Unlike Livni, he can be counted on to put Israel's security ahead of "diplomacy". He is also a handy way for Netanyahu to say things Europeans and others may not like, while waving hid hands about, "Oh, that's Lieberman." By comparison he makes Netanyahu look like a strong liberal, thus advancing Israel's reception among some audiences and strengthening Israel's power abroad. Livni as Foreign Minister would quickly become the darling of the liberals, upstage and sabotage Netanyahu, and help creater a weakened Israel which will lose the next war. Here's a simple thought experiment: Does anyone seriously believe if Israel's existence were threatened, Livni would unleash a nuclear holocaust against the Arab States and/or Iran? If not, Israel's defensive bargaining position would be severely weakened. The basic policy of the current Israeli government is to protect Israel first. Decades of compromise have brought Israel no closer to peace. It's time for Israel to say to the Arab countries and the Palestinians, "put up or shut up". With Livni we'd simply see more successful salami tactics used against Israel. No sale. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Although you were not Jewish, the crowd had no way to know that. Absent visible identification as a foreign journalist (something like "ABC-TV USA"), you inserted yourself into a heated protest and the crowd assumed you were a local Jew, desecrating the Sabbath. It was a reasonable assumption, given where you were, which was not in the US on a quiet street but in the middle of a religious riot. When a journalist goes into a war zone (or anything similar) she assumes the risks. Lucky thing you weren't in Palestinian territory under parallel circumstances; you might have been stoned to death. Creating a piece about the "vicious orthodox" does you no credit under the circumstances. Playing with fire WILL get one burned. I'm shocked, shocked that by going into the middle of a riot you got rioted upon. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 1. If it's leaked, it's probably distorted. 2. If it's leaked, someone is up to something. Before freaking out, let's wait for the formal release. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The Arabs' fatal error. The Arabs fatal error under International law was to refuse the partition. Had they accepted it, and then made war against Israel and lost, they would be in a vastly different position with respect to international Law. They might even have confused the issue enough to try to get some international military support from sympathetic non-Arab Islamic countries such as Pakistan, which could have affected the outcome. I don't advocate this, but use it to point out the difference between the status some Palestinians would like to claim ("Palestinian lands" etc.), and their actual status. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 "A there’s no way Israel can claim control over an entire state without them having the right to vote in the Knesset" False. Can you say UN Trust Territory? Can you say pre-Statehood Alaska and Hawaii? Pre-independence Canada? The District of Columbia? Those statuses lasted for hundreds of years. Israel's "control" of the Palestinians is black letter international law. The geography is an occupied territory, but not an occupied State. The conditions of Statehood under such circumstances are negotiable between the parties and by treaty. ----- There's a big difference between home rule and Statehood. There are also Constitutionally demilitarized States, For example, under their Constitution, Costa Rica has no military; only local police to (in the words of a local joke) get the drunks off the streets on Saturday nights. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 There is no such thing as "Palestinian lands". Read some history. Palestinian Arabs outside Israel have simply appropriated the name of a Jewish-Christian-Islamic area that was the British Mandate; before that ruled by the Turks; the Romans, Greeks, Babylonians, Jews. The only independent country there, historically, was Jewish ancient Israel. There was never a "Palestine" as Arabs are trying to redefine it. No Palestinian King; no Palestinian national anthem; no Palestinian Arab government; no Palestinian culture. Jerusalem always had a Jewish majority; Tel Aviv was built from nothing by the Jews. The swamps were drained by the Jews. Before modern Jewish development, Palestine was (as described by "Mark Twain" when he visited it) a vast wasteland. Evan Arafat was an Egyptian with delusions of becoming a new Pharaoh over the Jews. Right now under International law it's ALL Israel from the river to the Sea, but the Israelis are willing to give "Palestinian" Arab areas their own State. But peaceful control of that process is legally in the hands of the Israelis, and their modest terms (insured non-belligerence and the acceptance of them as they are legally--a Jewish State) must be met. This is NOT a negotiation among equals, no matter what Arab grandiosity would like to believe, but voluntary Israeli gifts, arising out of both practicality and Israeli self-interest. And Israel has the de facto army to back it up; terrorism, though regrettable and tragic, is at most a stiff p.i.t.a for the Israelis, not an existential matter. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 In attempting to falsely equate Palestinian refusal of Israeli peace offers with Israeli refusal of offers, a fundamental error is made. Palestinians supposedly want a State. That is what the Israelis offered repeatedly, and the offer did not contain the seeds of destruction of the thing offered. To the contrary. the offer carried with it the promise of economic development and trade of that offered State, and further sovereignty as peaceful intentions were proven in practice. In contrast, the offer of peace with resettlement of refugees in Israel contains the destruction of Israel as a Jewish State. The Arabs know it; the Israelis know it. Thus it is no offer at all. As for Palestinian or Arab wishes for the destruction of Israel as a Jewish State. that is clearly specious as an offer of anything but war. ---- On another matter, one thing no one has yet commented on is Netanyahu's implied statement that the land of Israel extends from the river to the sea, but that since there are areas with Palestinian majorities, they will need a separate State. This is a dramatic shift from the notion that the starting point is a Palestinian State by right or international law, prevented by the Israelis. The Arabs refused that in 1947 and the offer and associated principle of international law no longer applies.. In other words, Netanyahu said it's ALL Israel but some of it can be given away through negotiations that meet Israel's basic conditions: non-violence/demilitarization and the acceptance of Israel as it legally exists--as a Jewish State. There's no dissonance about the idea of a Jewish State; there are plenty of Islamic States. If the Palestinians don't accept Israel as it is both de facto and de jure, then there is no one who can legally give them a State. This is something they don't yet get. The Israelis have the only game in town, and until the Palestinians shrink their hypertrophied superegos, they will live in poverty and submission forever, dreaming of a conquest that will never come. In the long run they can't even count on the Iranian bomb. The iranians are sophisticated, technologically advanced Aryans with strong international trading skills, not Arabs, and have far more in common with Israel than with the Arabs, except for the coincidence of oil as an economic interest shared by some Arabs (but neither the Palestinians, Jordanians, nor Egyptians). The US has vastly more to offer a peaceful Iran than do the Arabs. There is a huge base of well-to-do peaceful anti-fascist Iranians in the US who, in a peace scenario can provide a strong opening for greatly increased trade between the two countries. An Iranian-Israeli-US condominium in the long run is far more likely than an Iranian-Israeli war, on fundamental grounds ("anatomy is destiny"). A few nut cases need to be contained in the shorter run in order to allow these basic long run forces to develop. The key will be for the Iranians to accept that if they want to be Islamic, that is their business, but if they want to threaten their neighbors instead of tending to their own economic development, that is everyone's business. Perhaps it will clear some minds for the US to declare by treaty that a nuclear attack against Israel will be regarded as a nuclear attack against the US, with the concomitant response. Iranian leaders may have deluded themselves that they can survive a nuclear response from Israel, but they cannot survive a joint response from Israel and the US. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Following up on my own comment, I recall the words of a Supreme Court Justice: "The Constitution is not a suicide pact." 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The meaning of Friedman's remarks were wildly distorted by those with an axe to grind. What he said, in effect, was: If they think killing our women and children legitimate, then the only language they understand is having their own women and children killed in return. This is at least an arguable proposition. Let's recall Hiroshima, the fire-bombing of Dresden, and the use of flame throwers during wartime by the US. Though many were repelled by that, even more thought it was legitimate under the circumstances. That makes Friedman's remark a basis for discussion, not demonization. The issue is "becoming like them" and was widely discussed in the context, for example, of limiting civil liberties in response to terrorism. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 In the interview with the Israeli proprietor of BiteaPita, he claimed that only 35% of restaurants in Israel were Kosher. Can this be true? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 "The truth is managing the welfare of large populations of humanity is what socialism is." Sure it is. That's why the Soviets constantly said they were socialists, and that communism was their goal but they hadn't achieved it yet. In fact the name of their enterprise was the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics. As to managing the welfare of large populations of humanity, the murder of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Kulaks, and untold numbers of Jews and dissidents certainly was a final solution to managing THEIR welfare. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 1. It is not clear whether Friedman wrote this or it is a forgery. 2. The idea that Israelis in the Middle East, where there is no effective police power in the PA willing and able to protect Jewish holy sites, should behave like Americans when the Palestinians destroy Jewish Holy Sites is a bad one. There should be no immunity for Palestinian holy sites in such cases, especially since they are often used as terrorist bases and recruiting depots.. But the Palestinians are very good at creating Western outrage when the Israelis do to them a tiny fraction of what they have done to the Israelis. 3. As for draconian responses, the language of the Middle East, and behavior of the Arabs towards each other is to retaliate for killing their women and children by killing the women and children of the other. Anything else is seen as weakness and encourages even further violence, as we have seen. The Israelis are not "us", and to hold them to Western standards of behavior when they live in an anarchistic sea of terrorist murderers is proving ("Christian" morality aside) simply unworkable. The New Testament is not a suicide pact Friedman (if it is not a forgery) is suggesting that the Israelis adopt the local policy with respect to foreign terror. There is no suggestion it be applied to Arab citizens of Israel, who are biblically protected. Simply to announce publicly that when Palestinians kill Israeli civilians (Jewish AND Arab), their own civilians are no longer immunized might compel caution (or even have it forced by the Palestinian body politic). It's all a matter of "Political Will" on the part of the Palestinians--doing something unpleasant because the alternative is much worse. Western compromise, even to the point of unilaterally pulling out of Gaza, has been seen not to work. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Actually the latest demographic reports suggest that the Jewish birth rate is higher than the Arab birth rate. The consequences are obvious. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 There is no doubt that some in the security enforcement apparatus are, if not anti-Semitic per se, deeply suspicious of Jews and believe the whole "dual loyalty" canard. There is plenty of history of individual security clearance denial that never reaches the public eye to back this up. In many cases such distortion of due process affects the livelihood of those involved. It is especially ironic since many of those involved in vetting, graduates of Catholic University, are particularly susceptible to the same false charges of dual loyalty. It is long past time the administration rooted out this cancerous suspicion of Jews among some in the security enforcement apparatus. I see no comparable bias against members of other religions some of whose adherents have been _convicted_ of espionage. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Gary Wexler explains his strategy very persuasively. It only remains to add that there are many Mexican and other Latino Jews, both US citizens and international neighbors, and the relationship is close. Who in LA, for example, has heard of Chabad of Tijuana, much less knows that it is an element of Chabad of California/West Coast Chabad and Chabad's mission of social and educational services through acts of goodness and kindness. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 This is outrageous: 1. Whoever leaked the intercepts has violated not only a high level of classification (perhaps top secret) but also SCI Codeword material. They should be pursued with all of the FBI's resources, locked up and the key thrown away. 2. Before wiretapping a legislator (even indirectly) they better darn well have at least the written concurrence of the President of the Senate, and the Intelligence Committee chairman. 3. If AIPAC staffers are guilty of leaking classified information, as has been alleged, then certainly the CQ writer is equally culpable and should be prosecuted at least as strongly, as well as being dismissed from his job as was done to the AIPAC staffers. 4. This whole thing smells of rotten fish, with some anonymous "X" who is ALLEGEDLY an Israeli agent. I suspect we are looking at some antisemites in the policy bowels who are out to get Senator Harmon. 5. The security establishment has been notorious for being suspicious of Jews, and suspecting "dual loyalty" for hundreds of years. It was considered fashionable in the days of "Jewish quotas" even until the late 1950s. Ironically, most of the staffers involved were (and perhaps are) Catholics, yet they don't see the irony--they are equally vulnerable to (false) charges of first loyalty to Rome. 9. It is time for President Obama to root out this cancer in the American security establishment, root and branch. 10. This horror story is reminiscent of totalitarian governments' in Germany and Russia trying to smear those who might put a crimp in their takeover plans and frighten opponents into silence. 11. Most of the press comment so far has been a side show that missed the main points raised above. Is that also a coincidence? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Mitchell just doesn't get it. In the language and thinking of the Middle East, Israeli settlement expansion is a quid pro quo for terrorism. The alternative, again in the regional vocabulary, would be for the Israelis to raze a few villages harboring terrorists to the ground.Other Arab states who speak the regional language of action and reaction haven't hesitated to gas such populations to death as well. Speaking post-renaissance Western in the Middle East is taken as a sign of weakness and simply breeds more terrorism, as the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza proved. Which would Mitchell prefer? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 It would be very welcome if Saudi thinking is moving toward notions of Jews (and Israelis) benefits to humanity including Saudis, and reflecting on a comparison with Palestinian Arab contributions. There is no doubt that Israeli computer technology, embedded in Intel chips, has benefitted Saudi Arabia; same for agricultural developments including drip irrigation, other science and technology developments, and of course medical developments. If a fraction of the Saudi money sent to the Palestinians went instead to Israeli science and technology, think how much it could benefit the Saudis and mankind generally. When was the last time a Palestinian Arab won a science and technology Nobel Prize? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Probably the best comment about J Street is that they are delusional. The Israelis pulled out of Gaza and got a terrorist quasi-State, an arms buildup, and lots of dead Israelis. How will a two state solution produce something different? We already know that international "guarantees" are worthless--peacekeepers are co-opted and at the first sign of trouble they pull out. Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. It's not about Israel; it's about Palestinian character: they tried to overthrow every Arab government that gave them hospitality, and got kicked out--Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon. The solution is draconian control, either as provinces of Egypt and Jordan, or under effective international quarantine, coupled with resettlement under UNHCR for those who are willing to move to those few States that are willing to take them. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 US law is that everyone coming to the US is an intending immigrant. Applicants for visitor visas must overcome this presumption. Given that, I don't see that Israeli policy is significantly different. No need to polemicize the issue. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The problem isn't the rockets. The problem is the inability or unwillingness of the PA to control their firing, and other forms of terrorism. We've had domestic terror problems in the US; they get reported by citizens, get vigorously prosecuted, and those convicted end up in jail for a very long time or in some jurisdictions, get executed. As long as the PA isn't in de facto control of violations of international law, they have no right to a State.They only have the right to be occupied by those against whom they aggress. There is no inherent Palestinian right to a State; there is no such thing as Palestinian lands, as any student of either international law or history knows. Even Arafat himself was an Egyptian. The only right in the region (other than by force) is the right by history of the Jews, who had a State there for hundreds of years until it was conquered by Greeks (who aren't asking for it back), Babylonians (who don't exist any longer), Romans (who aren''t asking for it back), and Turks (who aren't asking for it back). Other occupying powers (such as the Brits) either gave up voluntarily or were defeated. Thus the problem is really quite simple. Where Israelis can be in a majority in the occupied territories they can annex such lands without either problems of international law or demographics. Where they cannot Arabs can either self-govern or be governed as "territories" depending on their ability to obey international law as a group. As for we Americans, that Arabs don't like the above is irrelevant; Israel isn't our country and international law binds all civilized States. There's lots that many (or even most) Arabs don't like: Jews, Christianity; women's rights, civil (non-Sharia) law are but a few examples. We aren't going to change US policy because of that. As to Israeli "concessions" they have been more than generous, compared to the way Arabs treat their refugees or many Arab states treat Jews.. They cannot, in the large, be faulted on grounds of fairness. They have, for example, bent over backwards to find separation routes and connection paths to enable Palestinians to be more than a set of many tens of small isolated barrios. They permit non-belligerents to travel to and work in the State of Israel. They have Arab Israelis as members of Parliament. their Supreme Court enforces Arab citizens' rights and even those of non-Citizens (viz rerouting the anti-terrorism wall). They tolerate an Arab citizen's "fifth column" instead of rounding them all up and putt6ng them in camps as the US did to Japanese Americans. Despite this they are "rewarded" with terrorist murder of their women and children. What other state would do so? History teaches that under similar conditions, people harboring terrorists would be put to the sword, solving the problem once and for all. As repugnant as it may have been to some, the Brits hanged their convicted Jewish terrorists, as was their right under international law. Perhaps it is time for Israelis to do the same to their convicted terrorists. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Woody Allen's latest short piece is worth a few small chuckles, but is not up to his "doubled over with laughter" standard. Who can forget the resonant underwear in his Hasidic tales? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 1. Rothkopf has finally decisively put paid to M&W;'s shameful advocacies clothed in polite academic language. Rothkopf's critique, more succinct and to the point than most, should be widely disseminated. 2. US ambassadors to Saudi Arabia are notorious for having been brainwashed by the Saudis, returning to the US as (in the words of the Washington in-joke) the Saudi Ambassador to the US. Ever since Jim Atkins urged a suicidal (and wrong) policy toward Israel to prevent us from "freezing in the dark" (it never happened), the Saudis have pursued this success, usually following up with generous funding for these puppets in the US. Freeman appears to be no exception and is thus unfit for any senior US position involving the middle east, though he has every citizen's right to voice his views. David Sternlight, Ph.D. Los Angeles (for identification purposes only, the writer has been Chief Economist of a major international oil company and a close observer of Middle East and Inter-Arab politics for over 20 years.)c 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Steve does not speak for anyone but himself. The Torah teaches that we are all Hashem's children and that the gates of Teshuva (return) are always open. The Jewish concept of forgiveness does not involve groveling and self-flagellation over past sins, but return to the right path. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Headline in an Arab newspaper; "Record heat wave; Israeli plot suspected." 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 If the Swedes would throw a few hundred rioters in jail that might clear minds wonderfully. Who would have expected tennis to become another soccer? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 We should make the argument so simple that even an intelligence chief can understand it: a senior intelligence official in a position to influence policy by shaping input data should not be pro-Saudi. He should be unbiased. Nothing to do with Israel. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Yes, just as we suspected it's the Jewish Bankers with their international conspiracy to commit deeds of goodness and kindness. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 If Dubai's leadership were smart, they would now invite Pe'er to a women's tennis exhibition match in the name of the universality of sports, and make the event a celebration of that principle, with no diplomatic implications. This would not only finally put paid to the controversy, but also earn much goodwill among activist women world-wide, reducing the fallout on Dubai of women's subjugation in some other, less enlightened Arab countries. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Some further thoughts: If the Obama administration is really smart they will capitalize (no pun intended) on the deep current of Jewish and conservative attachment to Jerusalem to immediately move the US Embassy there. With that lancing of some of the deepest fears of both Israelis, American conservatives, and Jews world-wide, they can then capitalize on the good will engendered to move to stabilize the division of territory on the West Bank to produce a Palestinian "state" there while keeping Israel's security needs in mind. Gaza cannot be part of such a solution; it is a relatively small territory and intractably hostile to Israel and the US. Gaza should be transferred from the UNRWA, a permanent dependency organization, to the UNHCR, a refugee resettlement organization, with a view to redistributing those who wish into far better living conditions outside the immediate region, and reducing the remaining Gaza population to a more manageable size, security-wise. The alternative is continued failure of US policy, continued terrorism and murder, and continued resentment of the US among other Arab countries and the so-called "Arab street". 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Those on the left who pseudospeciate Netanyahu miss two central things: 1. He did a brilliant job as finance minister; 2. He is a smart, MIT trained rationalist who thinks as most Americans do, not a right-wing ideologue. There is huge body of support for him among most American Jews, except for a few loud lefties and those in the pay of the Saudis; Carter and M&W;have gained little traction in the US. That will compel caution by the US President and could well split the US Congress from the Administration if the US President tries to go too far. For example, among most American Jews, at a deep psychological level Jerusalem is non-negotiable given the history of vicious antisemitism in those parts which once were under Arab administration, and given that every observant Jew prays "next year in Jerusalem": What is more, everyone knows that there are no negotiating partners among the Palestinians or, come to that, other Arab countries, that can be counted on to keep their word and, more practically, have the power so to do. Of course the left, as they always do, will continue to try to characterize him as some right-wing fanatic. But Israelis are pragmatic and all that will accomplish is to further marginalize the left. His first act has been to invite Livni and Labor into a national unity government. That is appropriate to Israel standing up to the inevitable pressures by the Obama administration. If they play politics as usual, he will form a coalition with the rightist parties; after a lot of posturing by the left he will still have a stable coalition, though not as popular a one. Finally, if they don';t already know it, the Obama administration will find out that Jerusalem is the third rail of American politics, both among most Jews and among the vast body of conservative Americans with whom both the Republicans and many Democrats can be expected to make common cause. Those forces are quite enough to vitiate any "we won" argument. David Sternlight, Ph.D. (MIT '54. LSE '62) Los Angeles 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The United States is a democracy. Its revolutionary founders included prominent Jews, some of whom (Haym Solomon) provided financial support for George Washington, for which he was grateful; there was no comparable Moslem support. The United States believes in and practices freedom of religion from its earliest days; Islamic states and Hamas do not. The oldest Jewish synagogue in Truro, MA dates back to Revolutionary times and is a historic monument. There is no comparable Islamic presence in the US as part of our founding. Give all the above, it is playing with less than a full deck of cards to suggest "even handedness" between Arab totalitarian dictatorships, and Arab terrorist regimes, and the Jewish Israeli democracy. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The careful reader will have noted that the college divested from a particular fund which included many companies having nothing to do with weapons or Israel. They moved their money to another fund--if that fund follows what can be onsidered anti-semitic investment strategies, the college is culpable; otherwise not. There is nothing wrong with pacifists investing in an anti-war fund. The pro-Palestinian student group, in an exaggerated and reprehensible display of self-importance, is trying to spin this as a divestment from specific companies and countries; it is nothing of the kind. They are essentially powerless loudmouths, best ignored, In effect the administration has given their targeted anti-Israel desires the finger. However, if the group's members move from this silliness to intimidation, as has been the case on other campuses, they should promptly be expelled. Delusions of Grandeur: Male flea, lying on his back on a leaf, floating toward a drawbridge--"Raise the bridge; i'm aroused." 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 A standard left-wing tactic is to smear, distort, and pseudospeciate aa "fascists" or "McCarthyites" those with whom they disagree. This tactic succeeded with Kach and is now being attempted with Lieberman. Fortunately, most Americans and Israelis, including those in senior positions, know better this time. Attempting to suppress Lieberman's views as fascist are now starting to backfire big time, both among the American opinion leader community and the Israeli voters, who know a fascist when they see one since they have had direct personal experience with real fascists. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Further to my previous post, here is what Israel National News says: "Observers have noted that the soldiers vote will be tallied Wednesday and Thursday (Feb. 11-12), and traditionally, their vote swings a seat or two towards the nationalist bloc. In addition, the party with the lowest number of votes at this time is the Arab Balad party. They have 2.60% of the vote which equals 3 Knesset seats. If they get pushed below the minimum threshold of 2%, then the Arab bloc will lose those three Knesset seats and those seats will be redistributed amongst bigger parties." 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Despite your headline writer, Livni did not yet “win”. The soldiers’ and diplomats’ votes are yet to be counted. They amount to 5 mandates, have traditionally favored the right wing, and could well put Netanyahu ahead of Livni by 2 or 3 seats by the time the official results are announced on February 18. President Peres has already said he will not invite anyone to form a government until the official results are announced. Liberal crowing is extremely premature and since Livni knows both the law and voting blocs, her claim of victory comes with ill grace and can be seen as a propaganda maneuver to steal the election. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Despite your headline writer, Livni did not yet "win". The soldiers' and diplomats' votes are yet to be counted. They amount to 5 mandates, have traditionally favored the right wing, and could well put Netanyahu ahead of Livni by 2 or 3 seats by the time the official results are announced on February 18. President Peres has already said he will not invite anyone to form a government until the official results are announced. Liberal crowing is extremely premature and since Livni knows both the law and voting blocs, her claim of victory comes with ill grace and can be seen as a propaganda maneuver to steal the election. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 This Bibi bashing on the eve of an election is unseemly and comes with ill grace. What is more, it might fairly be though to be a ham-handed (tref) attempt to swing the election. We Americans who did not vote for Obama are now giving him the benefit of the doubt; I suggest Netanyahu deserves no less. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 If an Israeli Foreign Ministry official said "F*** Arabs, F*** Moslems" in public, he would be fired. Why is there a double standard operating here? 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Give me a free hand with phrasing the questions and I'll produce any result you want. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Liberal principles seek to perfect human nature. They only work on those who seek to be perfected on liberal terms. Terrorists are focused on destruction, not perfection. Cheney is correct. He is so correct that he has been a target for liberals who deep down understand that their fundamental negotiating principles don't achieve their objectives, haven't achieved their objectives, and will not achieve their objectives with such people. But Liberala prefer to be "right" than successful. Insanity has been defined as repeating the same actions over and over again and expecting a different result. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Enough self-righteousness already The guy is a Holocaust denier. The Pope had no business reinstating him. Jewish groups have shown their displeasure in very public ways. There has not been an adequate remedy yet.. Until there is, dialogue won't be restored. Let's move on. Jews have better things to do than to get hung up on this and there are plenty of other, more important things than a Catholic Bureaucracy that doesn't get it, to repair in the world. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 "Like Hezbollah, Hamas believes that God is opposed to a Jewish state in Palestine" If this is true, then the God of Islam is not a universal God but a tribal one, and an irrational one at that. Islam believes that if they take land away from another party, it is Moslem land forever, even if that party eventually takes it back. They still dream of recovering the "lost territories of Andalus" even though they were originally, and subsequently not "theirs". Given that, neither Hizbollah nor Hamas are "educable". They are only situational tacticians, until next time. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 Fine. They should lose any 501(c)(3) tax status for interfering with the secular political process. Separation of Church and State cuts both ways. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 The PLO tried to overthrow the government of Kuwait and got kicked out; they tried to overthrow the government of Jordan and got kicked out; they tried to overthrow the government of Lebanon and got kicked out. Egypt and Jordan would be nuts to take on these sociopaths. An international quarantine is the only solution until a radical change in the Palestinian self-image takes place. Current education and press content in both Gaza and the West Bank does not augur well for such a change any time soon. David Sternlight, Ph.D. Los Angeles 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 As with the case of Jonathan Pollard, with which I do not compare the substance, the litmus test is whether the treatment by prosecutors is consistent with other, similar cases. There is good reason to believe in both cases it is not, and that raises the most serious concerns about equal treatment under the law. I do not enter into the merits of either case beyond the above. David Sternlight, Ph.D. Los Angeles 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 "I do not think the Jewish community is going to stop eating meat anytime soon, so we need to find a way to give them meat that is acceptable to our values.” I would hope such an elitist, arrogant, authoritarian position is not typical of this movement. There is nothing wrong with choosing one's own food preferences, but only Hashem can impose them on others. What do you want to bet that the speaker has no plans to "give" meat to the Jewish community.Instead his wishes will cost others. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00 It is important to provide support to those temporarily unemployed, and public and private mechanisms exist for that. More importantly, no one seems to have asked if the Rubashkin plant, if operated fully in compliance with the law, could be an economic "going concern" in today's market, given the existence of competition both from Kosher meat and from Kosher Chicken, and given the price response of consumer demand. Part of this demand is exposed tot the wider market, since Kosher meat and especially Kosher chicken (including in the past that from Rubashkin) are widely carried, suitably wrapped, by non-Kosher mainstream supermarkets, and chains such as "Trader Joe's' This is critical to long-term solutions starting now. If the plant isn't viable, relocation strategies are needed for workers; if it is viable, temporary worker support in-place is indicated. The longer we wait for (for example) the Iowa Economic Development authority to assist in such a determination, the more intractable the problem will become. 2009-11-22T;22:02:00-05:00