Palestinian TV Celebrates Mass Murderer

Palestinian TV Celebrates Mass Murderer: At times, it seems for those who wish to blame Israel for the lack of peace in the Middle East, there is nothing the Palestinians could do to reassess their thinking. But surely even the most dedicated finder of fault with Israel would have to be shocked by the latest outrage promoted by the official television station [...]/p

Praise for killer of 5 members of Fogel family on Palestinian Authority TV

Turkey is Funding HAMAS

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=2887
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=1278

In the shadow of Wannsee

• http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/comment/62369/in-shadow-wannsee

By Shimon Samuels, January 20, 2012
Follow The JC on Twitter

The Holocaust is the most documented of genocides, yet the most covered up by its perpetrators and denied and distorted by its contemporary detractors.
All genocides have been couched in euphemism and their memory, after the fact, subject to political and mendacious assault. The victims are thus twice murdered, first physically and again as their name is erased from history – a phenomenon I have called “memoricide”.
Documents are a weapon in the battle for memory and in drawing its lessons. Thus in 1989 to 1991, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of Soviet Communism, the opening of the KGB, the STASI and other archives were a shock to established collective memory. An ineluctable wave towards transparency shattered the national myths of World War II combatants and neutrals alike: Austria (“the first victim of Hitler”), France (“resistance or collaboration”), Switzerland and Sweden (the meaning of “neutrality”).
The archives of the Holocaust - even audiovisual - have had limited effect in containing denial or sensitivity to resurgent antisemitism. The 70th anniversary of the Wannsee Conference provides a valuable opportunity to reengage the battle for memory, for – unlike any other genocide – it provides, in the Wannsee Protocol, a clear and horrifyingly dispassionate roadmap to mass murder. Albeit marked “Top Secret”, the 16th duplicate of 30 copies survived the war.
On 20 January 1942, fifteen Nazi officials, led by Heydrich and Eichmann, met in a lakeside mansion in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee. Representatives of government ministries, the railways and the military mapped out the Final Solution of the Jewish Question. There they signed the Protocol, and effectively broadened the racial definition of the Jew in the widest sense, to include mixed marriages and their issue (“mischlinge”).
33 countries and jurisdictions were listed with a total target of “over 11 million”.
The list does not spare the neutrals: Ireland (4,000), Portugal (3,000), Spain (6,000), Sweden (8,000), Switzerland (18,000), Turkey (55,500).
No community is missed: from the USSR (5,000,000) to Albania (200).
Figures are up to date for 1942: Estonia (“Judenrein” – cleansed of Jews), Lithuania (34,000 i.e. a quarter million were already murdered).
Moreover, the six million victims – or eleven million intended victims – of Europe were only part of the plan. The ultimate objective was every Jew on the planet.
The Jews of North Africa then under Vichy France, and of Fascist Italy (Libya), were in line, as, indeed, deportations began from Tunisia. Had Rommel not been checked at El Alamein, the “Yishuv” of 560,000 Jews of British Mandatory Palestine would have been doomed.
At a House of Commons roundtable marking Wannsee – organized by the Henry Jackson Society and the Simon Wiesenthal Centre – German historian, Matthias Kuentzel, showed a document on the Jews of Persia signed by Eichmann. Then occupied by Britain and the Soviet Union, Hitler planned an invasion to take the oil fields. Race theorists were debating whether Persians Jews were Aryans or Semites. The Eichmann document settled the question. They were placed under the dark penumbra of Wannsee.
Timothy Ryback, retained in the U.S. , was due to present a recently discovered 137 page report, “ Statistik, Presse und Organisationen des Judentums in den Vereinigten Staten
und Kanada” (Statistics, Media and Organizations of Jewry in the United States and Canada) compiled in 1944 by Heinz Kloss, marked on the cover, “Ex Libris Adolf Hitler”, “For Official Use Only” with an eagle clutching a swastika.
In the International Herald Tribune of 8 December, Ryback – author of “Hitler’s Private Library: The Books that Shaped his Life – calls the report “ a city-by-city, state-by-state guide to the location of America’s Jewish population… from Peabody and Brookline, Mass to Arkansas…” He continues, “In light of the Holocaust, it is a disquieting compendium”. We are checking into the volume’s authenticity before drawing further conclusions.
Born in the UK, even after the War, does not lessen my immense respect for the power of water. Thirty miles of Channel saved my family and the 330,000 British Jews on the list.
3000 miles of Atlantic is as much a safeguard today as those 30 miles. They provide no immunity.
The shadow of Wannsee’s reach was global and its contemporary implications terrifying. The Wannsee Protocol should be an early warning system to sensitize the ears of public opinion to impending danger.
Shimon Samuels is director for International Relations of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.

Muslim Hate Groups on Campus

Introduction: Muslim Hate Groups On Campus by Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a new Freedom Center pamphlet that exposes the radical origins and violent objectives of the main Muslim student organizations on our nation’s campuses. These organizations, principally the Muslim Students Association and Students for Justice in Palestine, are sponsors of the hate-fests known as “Israeli Apartheid Weeks” or “Palestine Awareness Weeks.” As Greenfield shows, they are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Several campus presidents of the Muslim Students Association have gone on to take up leadership positions in Al Qaeda.


Click here to read the entire post and to download the pamphlet by Daniel Greenfield

The Zionist Imperative

by Caroline Glick
Read entire article

This is one of the best articles written on why Jews are so divided on Israel.

As to American Jewry, the jury is still out.

In truth, American Jewry's diffidence towards taking a stand on Iran, or recognizing Obama's dishonesty on this issue specifically and his dishonesty regarding his position on US-Israel ties generally is not rooted primarily in American Jews' devotion to Obama. It isn't even specifically related to American Jewry's devotion to the political Left. Rather it has to do with American Jewish ambivalence to Israel.

The roots of that ambivalence - which is shared by other Western Jewish communities to varying degrees - predate Obama's presidency.

Indeed, they predate the establishment of the State of Israel. And now, as the US and the EU have given Iran at least another six months to a year to develop its nuclear bombs unchecked, it is worth considering the nature and influence of this ambivalence.

Today's principal form of Jew-hatred is anti- Zionism. Anti-Zionism is similar to previous dominant forms of Jew hatred such as Christian anti-Judaism, xenophobic and racist anti- Semitism, and Communist anti-Jewish cosmopolitanism in the sense that it takes dominant, popular social trends and turns them against the Jews. Anti-Zionism's current predominance owes to the convergence of several popular social trends which include Western post-nationalism, and anti-colonialism.

The problem that anti-Zionism poses for American Jewry is that it forces them to pay a price for supporting Israel. This is problematic because Zionism has never been fully embraced by American Jewry. Since the dawn of modern Zionism, the cause of Jewish self-determination placed American Jewish leaders in an uncomfortable dilemma.

American Jews confront internal rancor over Israel

Judy Saks quoted in this CNN article today...
Read complete article

"Judy Saks, the community relations director for the Jewish Federation of Nashville and editor of the federation-produced community newspaper, can attest to the vituperation.
In May, an online video surfaced about Muslims in Nashville that said they were fomenting pro-terrorist ideas. Called “Losing our Community,” the video was produced by a Boston-based group called Americans for Peace and Tolerance.
A video on the group’s website says one Nashville Muslim figure it regards as radical has been embraced by “self-described progressive Jewish religious leaders," including a rabbi, and is respected as an interfaith activist in the community.
Saks said that the original video blasted three Nashville rabbis but that two were removed after several weeks. Americans for Peace and Tolerance did not respond to a request for comment.
"It brought out such divisiveness in this community,” Saks said. “It pointed fingers at our rabbis for doing what rabbis do."
The organized Jewish community decided to draw up its own civility statement, which supports "robust and vigorous debate about critical issues – as long as it is civil and tolerant" and disagreement "without threats of reprisal."
"This willingness to listen to other points of view honors Nashville's spirit as an open, welcoming and friendly city, our nation's history and our Jewish heritage," it said. "We will not engage with those who threaten the safety and security of our community."

January 27 is International Holocaust Remembrance Day

Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day

NCJA DEMANDS OFFICIALS CONDEMN PA CALL FOR JEWISH GENOCIDE

DATE: January 25, 2012
CONTACT: Lorilowenthalmarcus@gmail.com
                  
Bethgilinsky@gmail.com


The National Conference on Jewish Affairs joins Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres in condemning the public call to kill Jews made by the supreme religious leader of the Palestinian Authority. 

The PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein urged Muslims to ensure Islam's destiny by fighting and killing Jews.  He said that “Palestine [sic] in its entirety is a revolution,” that “continues today,” and then quoted from what he decreed is an authoritative statement of the Islamic prophet Mohammed, that while Jews “will hide behind stones or trees,” those objects will say to  Muslims:  “there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.”  The Mufti stated that the trees invoked in the statement are like the modern day trees surrounding current Israeli towns and colonies.  He explained that fighting and killing Jews will usher in the Muslim "Hour of Resurrection."

“When an Arab Palestinian leader calls upon his people to kill Jews in order to fulfill  Islam’s religious destiny, all people of good will must stand up and denounce the incitement,” said Lori Lowenthal Marcus, NCJA executive committee chair.


NCJA calls on President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Leadership of the House and Senate and the Chairmen and Ranking Chairmen of the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committee to also condemn this explicit call to murder Jews.


Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israeli President Shimon Peres both called for a criminal investigation into the incident, which was initiated on January 24th. The  British Foreign Officer for the Middle East Alistair Burt has joined them in condemning the Grand Mufti’s incitement.

The Mufti gave the speech on January 7, 2012, to supporters of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas who were celebrating the Fatah political movement's 47th anniversary.  Abbas appointed Hussein as the Mufti in 2006. The speech was carried on official Palestinian Authority television, and was translated and aired by Palestinian Media Watch.

In response to charges that he was advocating a Jewish genocide, the Mufti and the PA Minister of Religious Affairs, Mahmoud al-Habbash, claimed the Mufti was not engaging in current incitement, but merely repeating theological dictates.  “But the Mufti’s invocation of these 'dictates' as the source of a Muslim religious duty to kill Jews is the dictionary definition of incitement,” said Marcus, "he clearly was talking about now, not the past, and not the future, by referring to the trees from the hadith as being the same as those surrounding current Israeli cities and villages," she added.


NCJA also exhorts the Secretary General of the United Nations as well as leaders of all human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International to join in this condemnation.  Organizations which profess to care deeply about the rights of people in Israel, such as the World Council of Churches, must not miss this opportunity to demonstrate their concern.  All peace-loving and all pro-Israel groups must also make public statements strongly denouncing the Mufti's hateful and irresponsible statement.

US leads Security Council charge against Israel

US leads Security Council charge against Israel

Justice Ministry opens investigation against Jerusalem grand mufti

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=2827

President Peres: These are dangerous words that could lead to an escalation between Jews and Arabs • Sheik Muhammad Ahmad Hussein caught on tape saying killing Jews is justified by Islamic text.

Yori Yalon, Mati Tuchfeld and Edna Adato

Sheik Muhammad Ahmad Hussein denies calling for the murder of Jews, but says Islamic text sanctions it. | Photo credit: Dudi Vaaknin

The Justice Ministry on Monday launched an initial investigation into the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Palestinian Authority representative Sheik Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, who came under fire recently for publicly calling for the killing of the Jews. The mufti said such murders were justified by Islamic text.

President Shimon Peres met with Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman on Monday and said the mufti's words were extreme and that law enforcement officials must use every means at their disposal to prevent similar public statements from being made. "The mufti's words are dangerous and could lead to an escalation in the relations between Jews and Arabs, including bloodshed," Peres said.

Neeman responded by telling Peres that he would instruct the Justice Ministry to thoroughly investigate the laws at its disposal for handling the case.

Earlier this month, Palestinian Media Watch reported that Hussein, on Palestinian television, had been filmed saying that according to the Hadith, an Islamic book believed to be a record of the words and actions of the Prophet Muhammad, the Islamic Resurrection would not come until the Muslims fought the Jews.

In the video, the mufti says: “Forty-seven years ago the revolution started. Which revolution? The modern revolution of the Palestinian people’s history. In fact, Palestine in its entirety is a revolution, since [Caliph] Umar came [to conquer Jerusalem in 637 C.E.], and continuing today, and until the End of Days. The reliable Hadith, in the two reliable collections, Bukhari and Muslim, says: 'The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: ‘O Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’ Except the Gharqad tree [which will keep silent].' Therefore it is no wonder that you see Gharqad [trees] surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies."

In 2006, Hussein said suicide bombings were a "legitimate weapon" in the Palestinian struggle for independence.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- who asked Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein to oversee an investigation of the mufti -- denounced Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Monday over the mufti's outburst. "Someone who seeks peace should not permit this type of incitement and should not allow someone to call for the killing of Jews,” Netanyahu said. “These words were exceptionally severe, because they remind us of the words of another mufti who called for the destruction of the Jews -- Haj Amin al-Husseini -- who was one of the architects of the Final Solution, and also because they are being said by people who are supposed to be supporting peace between us and our Palestinian neighbors. What is most severe in my eyes is the fact that the Palestinian Authority not only did not condemn his words, but allowed them to be broadcast on official Palestinian TV. I expect senior PA members to condemn that act."

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman instructed Israel's ambassadors around the world to condemn the anti-Semitic tirade. Lieberman encouraged the ambassadors to publicly denounce the mufti's remarks, and to approach the governments of their host countries on the issue.

Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz said he was horrifed by the mufti's call. "He who wants to turn Jerusalem into a city of conflict has no place in this city and we should never forgive him. I call upon all religious leaders to condemn his words," Rabinowitz said.

The PLO Phased Plan

Mainstreaming anti-Semitism

Mainstreaming anti-Semitism

Islam's OIC: The World's Thought Police

READ MORE


On December 19, 2011, the U.N. General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning the negative stereotyping and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urged member states to take effective measures towards addressing and combating "such incidents." This resolution, based on an initiative from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), was supported by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who hosted a closed-door three-day meeting – apparently one of many in a series called the "Istanbul Process"-- in Washington D.C. with OIC representatives to discuss ways to implement the resolution.
What might sound like a step toward "tolerance," however, is in reality an assault on freedom of speech: a UN-endorsed violation of human rights, co-sponsored by the US, and prompted by the OIC, an organization of 57 Muslim nations, most of which hold the world's worst records on freedom of speech.

Israeli Arab MP Tibi praises Martyrs as "height of glory," their "blood opens path to liberty"

Last we checked Avigdor Lieberman doesn't support overthrowing the US government...

from Lori Lowenthal Marcus at Z-Street 

  Sunday, 22 January 2012 13:21

01/22/12 There have been recent reports that US officals do not want to meet with Israel's Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, and are especially loathe to be photographed with him. Presumably the US officials do not want to have pictures show up anywhere that might suggest they agree with, endorse, or have anything to do with Lieberman.  Well, given how photos can be manipulated, and the need for representatives of the US government not to look as if they cavort with "nutjobs" or, heaven forbid, "racists" (as they apparently are convinced by the msm that Lieberman is), can you really blame those officials?  Heck yes! Lookie here:
at a January 18, 2012 picture of the US Ambassador to Egypt, Anne Patterson, looking all happy and gushy over the appropriately named Mohammed Badie, the supreme leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Is Badie as bad as Lieberman?  Well, yes.  He not only wants to rid the world of Israel and the Jews, he also hates America and wants Arabs to stand together and rise up against "Zio-American arrogance and tyranny,"  and predicts the fall of the United States because it is "a nation that does not champion moral and human values."  Challah gives all the details here.

Flock Builder exposes Jewish terror and anti Arab discrimination strikes again

Netanyahu"s Post-Zionist Education Ministry

Netanyahu"s Post-Zionist Education Ministry

So what exactly did Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. have to say about Israel?

There is a reason Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, Al Sharpton, Cynthia McKinney, etc. would be likely to want to avoid the subject of the views of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. regarding the State of Israel.

Read More

Palestinian Authority Mufti calls for genocide of Jews quoting Islamic Hadith

What Does it Mean to be Pro-Israel?

What Does it Mean to be Pro-Israel?:

Moment magazine’s latest issue has an interesting symposium on what it means to be pro-Israel today. Though some of the choices are bizarre (the contributors include two Palestinians, one of whom formerly advised the Palestinian Authority, and John Mearsheimer, author of the notorious “Jews-control-Washington” screed The Israel Lobby), other pieces are illuminating. I found Hillel Halkin’s.....

Congregation Beth El Synagogue In New Jersey Firebombed With Molotov Cocktails

Read More


RUTHERFORD, N.J. — Several Molotov cocktails and other incendiary devices were thrown at a northern New Jersey synagogue early Wednesday, igniting a fire in the second-floor bedroom of the rabbi's residence in an attack that is being treated as both a bias crime and attempted murder, police said.
Wednesday's attack on Congregation Beth El in Rutherford was the fourth bias incident within a month against a Jewish religious institution or center in northern New Jersey, police said. Within the last three weeks, a fire was intentionally set at a synagogue in Paramus and anti-Semitic graffiti was discovered at synagogues in Hackensack and Maywood.

Report: Israeli experts predict Iran nuke test in January 2013

Read more

Times of London: Institute for National Security Studies says Iran could conduct first nuclear weapons test next January • Ross: If Iran blocks Strait of Hormuz "they will be the ones who suffer the most" • U.S. warns Iran on uranium enrichment at Fordo.

Muslim Brotherhood says will not honor peace treaty with Israel

Deputy head of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party denies comments by U.S. State Department that Brotherhood made guarantees to honor peace deal with Israel, says, "treaty is not sacred and can and should be changed."

Read more

The land-for-peace hoax

The land-for-peace hoax

by Caroline Glick

".....Since the inauguration of the land-for-peace process between Israel and the PLO 19 years ago, the Palestinians have repeatedly demonstrated their bad faith. Israeli land giveaways have consistently been met with increased Palestinian terrorism. Since 1996, US- and European- trained Palestinian security forces have repeatedly used their guns to kill Israelis. Since 1994, the PA has made it standard practice to enlist terrorists in its US- and European-funded and trained security forces.

The US and Europe have continued to train and arm them despite their bad faith. Despite their continued commitment to Israel's destruction and involvement in terrorism, the US and the EU have continued to demand that Israel fork over more territory. At no point have either the US or the EU seriously considered ending their support for the Palestinians or the demonstrably fictitious land-for-peace formula.

As Israel bows now to still more US and EU pressure and conducts land-for-peace talks with Fatah, our leadership may be seduced by the faint praise they receive from the likes of The Washington Post or even from the Obama administration. But this praise should not turn their heads.

To understand its feckless emptiness, all they need to do is direct their attention to what happened this week in Cairo, as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists secured their absolute control over Egypt's parliament. Specifically, our leaders should note the absence of any voices demanding that Egypt respect the peace treaty with Israel or return Sinai.

The time has come for Israel to admit the truth. Land-for-peace is a confidence game and we are the mark."

Intro To The Middle East by Yoram Ettinger

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=1136


Intro to the Middle East

In the pursuit of peace, alliances and interests, Western policy-makers have tended to sacrifice the perplexing realities of the Middle East on the altar of oversimplification and wishful-thinking. Yet their attempts to implement unsubstantiated policies often have served to inflame rather than extinguish regional fires.

Lebanese-born professor Fouad Ajami, the distinguished historian and former director of Middle East Studies at John Hopkins University, asserted that realities in the region constitute “a chronicle of illusions and despair and of politics repeatedly degenerating into bloodletting (The Arab Predicament, Cambridge University Press, 1990).”

Western policy-makers and shapers of public-opinion would benefit from studying writings by some key historians and scientists, whose research reaffirms that fundamentals in the Middle East have remained largely intact for the last 14 centuries.

Get the Israel Hayom newsletter sent to your mailbox!

For example, the late Iraqi-born professor and leading historian of the Middle East Eli Kedourie, from the London School of Economics, wrote in Islam in the Modern World (Mansell publishing, 1980): “The fact that political terrorism originating in the Muslim and Arab world is constantly in the headlines must not obscure the more significant fact that this terrorism has a somewhat old history…which would not be easy to eradicate from the world of Islam.”

Meanwhile, the late Egyptian-born professor P. J. Vatikiotis, from the London University School of Oriental and African Studies, another preeminent Middle East historian, wrote in Arab and Regional Politics in the Middle East (Croom and Helm, 1984): “The use of terrorism by [Arab] states or rulers…has been for domestic, regional and international political purposes.… Rulers of this provenance and background are hegemonists of power.… If Islam and those who claim to represent it and wish to implement its law and rule over man, society and the polity reject all other human forms of law and rule…then clearly there is an unbridgeable gap between them and all other social and political arrangements.… The dichotomy between the Islamic and all other systems of earthy government and order is clear, sharp and permanent; it is also hostile.”

The assumption that the stormy Arab winter of 2011 is a temporary glitch that can be cured by a constitutional panacea is detached from long-standing realities in the region. Moreover, most Arab rage has been directed toward Arabs, and was expressed long before the 2011 turmoil and butchery gripped the Arab street. In the 1970s and '80s, some 200,000 Lebanese were killed in internal violence; in 1982, Hafez Assad slaughtered tens of thousands Syrians; Saddam Hussein murdered some 200,000 Iraqis while an additional 300,000 Iraqis were killed during the 1980-1986 war against Iran; about 2 million Sudanese were killed, and 4 million were displaced, during the 1983-2011 civil war; public executions and decapitations are regularly held in Saudi Arabia, and those are just several examples.

The deep roots of contemporary Islamic violence are highlighted by professor Efraim Karsh, head of Middle East and Mediterranean studies at London’s King's College, editor of the Middle East Quarterly and author of Islamic Imperialism: A History (Yale University Press, 2006): “In the long history of the Islamic empire, the wide gap between delusions of grandeur and the forces of localism would be bridged time and again by force of arms, making violence a key element of Islamic political culture.... Arab rulers systematically convinced their peoples to think that the independent existence of their respective states was a temporary aberration. The result was a legacy of oppressive violence that has haunted the Middle East [from the seventh century] into the 21st century.… It is doubtful whether Middle East societies will be able…to transcend their imperial legacy and embrace the Western-type liberal democracy that has taken European nations centuries to achieve…”

The aforementioned Professor Vatikiotis delivered a key lesson to U.S. policy-makers: “Inter-Arab relations cannot be placed on a spectrum of linear development, moving from hell to paradise or vice versa. Rather, their course is partly cyclical, partly jerkily spiral, and always resting occasionally at some ‘grey’ area. Secondly, American choices must be made on the assumption that what the Arabs want or desire is not always – if ever – what Americans desire; in fact, the two desires may be diametrically opposed and radically different.”

Western interests and the pursuit of peace would be dramatically enhanced if Western policy-making were based on the knowledge of these deans of Middle East history. Learning from history means avoiding – rather than constantly repeating – costly errors.

The Danger of the Civility Clause in Detroit's Jewish Community

original Link

 The Birth of Civility?

There is a debate going on in the pages of the Detroit Jewish News on "civility in our Jewish dialogue". OK, I can be civil. But if you don't like what I have to say, don't accuse me of being "divisive". Rather, offer a substantive argument showing me the error of my ways. There always has been and always will be a diversity of opinion in the Jewish community, civil or otherwise. So, Sharon Lipton and the JCRC will have to excuse me if don't attend their civility seminars. (I'd have to attend in my Purim costume anyway to maintain my anonymity.) Here at Talking Tachlis, we offer a fine platform for community members to air their grievances and engage in spirited debate. We are adults. We don't need to be told how to debate. If you don't like our position on the issues, don't avoid answering our charges by hiding behind "civility".

Civility, believe it or not, can be taken too far. Take for example, this letter by Robert Cohen, JCRC president, in January second's Detroit Free Press:

Although Terry Ahwal's guest commentary of Dec. 27 conveyed a one-sided picture of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it was encouraging to see it conclude with support for a two-state solution ("Gingrich's claim that Palestinians are 'invented' displays a pandering style of foreign policy").

Jews and Arabs often strongly disagree about where to lay blame for their conflict, but we can agree that both Israelis and Palestinians have suffered greatly. We cannot forget past events that brought Israelis and Palestinians to where they are today. But peace can only be realized if both peoples move forward toward a settlement they negotiate directly with each other based on a shared vision of a better future.

Lovely, isn't it? The very model of civility. It is even-handed, forgiving, non-confrontational, walking on the sunny side of the street with both hands outstretched in friendship.

The problem is that Terry Ahwal took the opposite stance. Read his column here.

Pretty nasty, isn't it? It's not only divisive (to the Metropolitan Detroit community) and confrontational, but it's a pack of lies, which anyone who knows anything about the history of the Middle East can easily expose. Unfortunately, as we know, when it comes to slandering Israel in the mainstream press, the slanderers are allowed to create their own facts; fact-checking be damned. The ultimate lie, sitting atop a stinking pile of defamation and dishonesty, is the final paragraph:

Gingrich should know that we Palestinian people live and exist and are the indigenous population of Palestine. For the interest of peace, Palestinians are willing to live side by side by Israel as equal and no amount of denial will eradicate us.

Do I really have to explain the unabashed mendacity of those fallacious claims? I don't think I do, but I think Mr. Cohen should have shown some support for the Jewish community and exposed Ahwal's lies in the Free Press. I'm sorry Mr. Cohen, but "one-sided" is quite a limp-wristed attack on a piece that demanded a strong response. But what's worse is the morally equivalent tone of what follows.

You credit Ahwal for his support of the "two state solution"? Palestinian leadership is interested in a one state solution, and guess which state that solution doesn't include.

Yes, Palestinians and Israelis have both suffered . . . at the hands of the Palestinians.

Anyone who has been paying attention knows that Palestinians and Israelis don't share the same vision. The Palestinian vision is a land without Israel and without Jews. That's more than strong disagreement. That has to be acknowledged when answering libels against Israel and against Jews. You want to compromise with evil? Move over, and let those of us who are willing to raise our voices speak.

Recall what Golda Meir had to say about compromising with our enemies:

I guess we have no choice. Either we do everything that is possible, and may seem to others as impossible, and just give up. Or we do everything that is really impossible and we remain alive. There’s one more basic thing that I think that people outside of Israel must realize, and if they understand and accept that, maybe other things will fall into place.

For instance, we’re not the only people in the world who’ve had difficulties with neighbors; that has happened to many. We are the only country in the world whose neighbors do not say, “We are going to war because we want a certain piece of land from Israel,” or waterways or anything of that kind. We’re the only people in the world where our neighbors openly announce they just won’t have us here. And they will not give up fighting and they will not give up war as long as we remain alive. Here.

So this is the crux of the problem: it isn’t anything concrete that they want from us. That’s why it doesn’t make sense when people say, “Give up this and give up the other place. Give up the Golan Heights,” for instance. What happened when we were not on the Golan Heights? We were not on the Golan Heights before ’67, and for 19 years, Syria had guns up there and shot at our agricultural settlements below. We were not on the Golan Heights! So what, if we give up the Golan Heights, they will stop shooting? We were not in the Suez Canal when the war started.

It’s because Egypt and Syria and the other Arab countries refuse to acquiesce to our existence. Therefore there can be no compromise. They say we must be dead. And we say we want to be alive. Between life and death, I don’t know of a compromise. And that’s why we have no choice.

I await a response. But please be civil. I'm very sensitive.
Cowznofski 

Terrorist released in Schalit deal named PA adviser

Murderer of Americans Named PA Adviser by Abbas

Read About It at Z-Street

Read About It In The Jerusalem Post