In an email I got today -
I heard a BBC interview yesterday in which a
member of Hamas, a PhD, was comparing what is going
on in Gaza to having two children locked in a room
with nothing but a small piece of bread - what else
could they do but begin to fight over the bread?
This is obvious. Eventually they will figure out
that they can share. Like the two children in the
story, we must give residents of Gaza time to sort
things out.
My parents, both Holocaust survivors, were
locked in bunkers with five people per sleeping
board and not even a crust to share among them.
They never did what those two fictional children
locked in a room see as the only thing to do.
Throughout the millennia, Jews have been locked in
ghettos and oppressed with hardly a slice of bread
between them, and they too used sticks and stones.
They used them to scratch letters on the floor to
teach their children to read. They took that crust
and found a seed on top that they could plant to
grow more wheat. Did you ever hear the old Jewish
tale, "Something From Nothing"?
To the Hamas PhD it is obvious that when two
children with nothing but a small piece of bread are
locked in a room, they will fight. And so the
population in Hamastan fights. And when they run
out of enemies to fight, they fight each other.
To Jews it is obvious that when two children
with nothing but a piece of bread are locked in a
room, they will ration the bread until they figure
out how to get more bread or get out of the locked
room.
To the members of Hamastan, it is obvious that
when you are left with the hothouses abandoned by
your enemies, you break it apart and loot and
destroy it to show your frustration with your
situation and erase anything that reminds you of
your enemies.
To the Jews it is obvious that when you find
parts and broken pieces, you try to fix them or use
them to build something useful.
To the members of Hamastan, it is obvious that
when you have a small, crowded, barren piece of land
with nothing to recommend it, you fight until the
world recognizes your plight. You bravely sacrifice
lives to destroy the neighboring enemies to make
room to expand into their land and their homes.
To Jews it is obvious that if all you have is
a small, crowded, barren piece of land, you drain
the swamps and make the desert bloom, sometimes
sacrificing lives to help build a future.
To the members of Hamstan it is obvious that
if you manage to get hold of resources or money, you
use them to bolster your leaders and buy weapons to
fight your enemies.
To Jews, it is obvious that if you manage to
get hold of resources or money, you feed your
children, build hospitals and schools, then
businesses that can generate more resources and
money.
One of us ended up with a country that in 60
years' time rivals countries many-fold its size and
many times its age.
One of us ended up with nothing but fear and
destruction, and blaming everyone else but
themselves for their situation.
Which type of people would you rather have as
a neighbor and a partner in this world?
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Amnesty, at the height of hypocrisy
A few months ago, Amnesty International declared that "Last summer's war criminals must be punished". When you read that article a little more deeply, you see that they feel Israel, Lebanon and the international community haven't done enough to prosecute those responsible for war crimes and other grave violations.
Absurdly enough, in the same document, AI calls for Hezbollah to give more information about the abducted soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Absurd, because AI, who generally fights for the unconditional release of illegally abducted prisoners, does not ask Hezbollah for the release of our soldiers in this document, only for Hezbollah to give information about them. Bunch of hypocrites.
But in any case, the whole concept of addressing any parts of this document to Hezbollah or Lebanon is a moot point. Do they even care what pseudo-do-good-organizations like Amnesty International think?
Israel is capable of judging its own military activities, without the need of an external 'international community' who wouldn't know the first thing about the situation in the Middle East. Lebanon is not capable of that (reminder: Rafik Hariri). Hezbollah doesn't care to be capable of that.
In fact, Israel will do just that, following this absurd AI document.
Winograd Commission to address 'war crimes'
Does anyone think Hezbollah will do the same?
Does anyone think Lebanon will do the same?
Back to Amnesty's document, the double standards it employs are completely ridiculous.
It laments the 'indiscriminate killing of civilians' and wants to hold those responsible accountable.
Let's compare the Israeli side to the 'other' side.
Hezbollah abducted two and killed three soldiers on our side of a UN recognized border. This was followed by Katyusha rockets fired randomly (and not especially towards military targets) into Israel. All this was an unprovoked attack.
Israel responded by sending helicopters over southern Lebanon.
Here already started the world's echoing call for Israel to stop using this disproportionate force. This would mean that they expected Israel to randomly fire Katyusha rockets back towards Hezbollah.
Who thinks that by doing this Israel would have avoided the world's wrath about 'indiscriminate killing of civilians'?
No one?
Didn't think so.
As the war drew on, we saw a regular pattern of events. Katyushas being fired into northern Israel, at one point getting as far as Hadera. Hezbollah would fire these rockets indiscriminately into Israel, with the hope of creating as many casualties as possible. Hezbollah would listen to Israeli news reports about recent Katyusha landings in order to better orient the next rockets and to create more casualties. It was impossible to know where the next Katyusha would be aimed at. I doubt anyone thinks they were the least worried about their human rights record.
In contrast, Israel preceded every one of the IAF's attacks by distributing thousands of pamphlets asking the civilian population to leave the area. Israel addressed every accidental civilian casualty with deep regret, and reiterated their call for the civilians to leave the areas that were being attacked. Does this sound like a country whose aim is to 'indiscriminately kill the civilian population'?
In some places the Lebanese civilian population was blocked from leaving these places where they knew Israel would attack. Hezbollah had placed launching pads for the Katyusha rockets near civilians' homes, sometimes inside them. Hezbollah counted on the civilian population in order to hide among them. This, for the terrorists was a win-win situation. Either the Israelis would avoid attacking them because of the high civilian population, and thus have the terrorists free to do as they wish, or Israel would attack them and then obviously harm the civilian population meant to 'protect' them, making Israel seem as a vicious killer to the world and ultimately have Israel retreat in order to retain a certain level of conscience. They therefore needed the civilians to stay there as their shield. This is forbidden according to the Geneva Convention (Article 37 outlaws the use of civilian populations as a shield for military actions. It explicitly prohibits "the feigning of civilian, noncombatant status; and the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of neutral or other States not Parties to the conflict."), and in the even that it does happen, it is solely the responsibility of the side who hid among the civilian population. But again, I doubt anyone thinks Hezbollah were the least bit worried about their human rights record.
In contrast, Israeli civilians hid in underground shelters built years ago for their security by the Israel government. Some Israeli civilians from the north left the north in order to find shelter with family living in the center or the south, and were free to do so without having Israeli soldiers block their way, in order to make sure that Israel was correctly portrayed as the victim on CNN when the number of casualties would be compared.
It is absurd that Amnesty International should treat Israel in the way it does, given the obvious respect Israel has for human rights.
It is even more absurd when compared to the way Hezbollah is being treated with silk gloves, given its obvious disregard for anything remotely attached to human rights.
Absurdly enough, in the same document, AI calls for Hezbollah to give more information about the abducted soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Absurd, because AI, who generally fights for the unconditional release of illegally abducted prisoners, does not ask Hezbollah for the release of our soldiers in this document, only for Hezbollah to give information about them. Bunch of hypocrites.
But in any case, the whole concept of addressing any parts of this document to Hezbollah or Lebanon is a moot point. Do they even care what pseudo-do-good-organizations like Amnesty International think?
Israel is capable of judging its own military activities, without the need of an external 'international community' who wouldn't know the first thing about the situation in the Middle East. Lebanon is not capable of that (reminder: Rafik Hariri). Hezbollah doesn't care to be capable of that.
In fact, Israel will do just that, following this absurd AI document.
Winograd Commission to address 'war crimes'
Chairman of commission probing Second Lebanon War tells MKJust like in the past, where Israel judged whether Ariel Sharon was a war criminal (he was not), whether there was a massacre in Jenin (there was no massacre in Jenin), whether the Anti-Terrorist fence was illegal (is was not, however parts of its path were revised in order to better accommodate 'Palestinians'), Israel will judge its own military of whether any war crimes were committed.
Gal-On committee will examine Israel's actions in context of
international law, following allegations of war crimes.
Does anyone think Hezbollah will do the same?
Does anyone think Lebanon will do the same?
Back to Amnesty's document, the double standards it employs are completely ridiculous.
It laments the 'indiscriminate killing of civilians' and wants to hold those responsible accountable.
Let's compare the Israeli side to the 'other' side.
Hezbollah abducted two and killed three soldiers on our side of a UN recognized border. This was followed by Katyusha rockets fired randomly (and not especially towards military targets) into Israel. All this was an unprovoked attack.
Israel responded by sending helicopters over southern Lebanon.
Here already started the world's echoing call for Israel to stop using this disproportionate force. This would mean that they expected Israel to randomly fire Katyusha rockets back towards Hezbollah.
Who thinks that by doing this Israel would have avoided the world's wrath about 'indiscriminate killing of civilians'?
No one?
Didn't think so.
As the war drew on, we saw a regular pattern of events. Katyushas being fired into northern Israel, at one point getting as far as Hadera. Hezbollah would fire these rockets indiscriminately into Israel, with the hope of creating as many casualties as possible. Hezbollah would listen to Israeli news reports about recent Katyusha landings in order to better orient the next rockets and to create more casualties. It was impossible to know where the next Katyusha would be aimed at. I doubt anyone thinks they were the least worried about their human rights record.
In contrast, Israel preceded every one of the IAF's attacks by distributing thousands of pamphlets asking the civilian population to leave the area. Israel addressed every accidental civilian casualty with deep regret, and reiterated their call for the civilians to leave the areas that were being attacked. Does this sound like a country whose aim is to 'indiscriminately kill the civilian population'?
In some places the Lebanese civilian population was blocked from leaving these places where they knew Israel would attack. Hezbollah had placed launching pads for the Katyusha rockets near civilians' homes, sometimes inside them. Hezbollah counted on the civilian population in order to hide among them. This, for the terrorists was a win-win situation. Either the Israelis would avoid attacking them because of the high civilian population, and thus have the terrorists free to do as they wish, or Israel would attack them and then obviously harm the civilian population meant to 'protect' them, making Israel seem as a vicious killer to the world and ultimately have Israel retreat in order to retain a certain level of conscience. They therefore needed the civilians to stay there as their shield. This is forbidden according to the Geneva Convention (Article 37 outlaws the use of civilian populations as a shield for military actions. It explicitly prohibits "the feigning of civilian, noncombatant status; and the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of neutral or other States not Parties to the conflict."), and in the even that it does happen, it is solely the responsibility of the side who hid among the civilian population. But again, I doubt anyone thinks Hezbollah were the least bit worried about their human rights record.
In contrast, Israeli civilians hid in underground shelters built years ago for their security by the Israel government. Some Israeli civilians from the north left the north in order to find shelter with family living in the center or the south, and were free to do so without having Israeli soldiers block their way, in order to make sure that Israel was correctly portrayed as the victim on CNN when the number of casualties would be compared.
It is absurd that Amnesty International should treat Israel in the way it does, given the obvious respect Israel has for human rights.
It is even more absurd when compared to the way Hezbollah is being treated with silk gloves, given its obvious disregard for anything remotely attached to human rights.
600 French Jews to Arrive on Mass Aliyah Wednesday
From Arutz Sheva:
Yeah, this isn't news. Jews don't feel too loved in France. Remember Ilan Halimi?
His kidnappers, torturers and killers said they didn't do it for anti-semitic motives. They said they did it because Jews are rich, and Ilan Halimi was Jewish.
But no, that's not anti-semitism now, is it?
A group of 600 Jews from France will be making Aliya (immigrate to Israel)
on two chartered planes Wednesday, arriving at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport.
The two planes, one El Al and one Israir, will be taking off from Paris and
Marseille. The mass Aliyah was coordinated by the French AMI organization,
modeled after the Nefesh B’Nefesh organization’s Aliyah assistance, as well as
the Jewish Agency for Israel.
This year has seen a ten percent increase in French
Aliyah.
Yeah, this isn't news. Jews don't feel too loved in France. Remember Ilan Halimi?
His kidnappers, torturers and killers said they didn't do it for anti-semitic motives. They said they did it because Jews are rich, and Ilan Halimi was Jewish.
But no, that's not anti-semitism now, is it?
Monday, July 23, 2007
Kassam rocket reminder
In case some people forgot, 'Palestinian' terrorists made sure to remind us.
Their aim is to destroy Israel completely. Men, women and children. Equal opportunity killers.
Today one of the Kassams landed in a community south of Ashkelon. That's inside Israeli borders. They want the complete destruction of Israel.
This is also a reminder that if the count of victims is low (something that terrorist apologists often claim) it is only because of luck.
The Kassam rocket hit a house and a baby girl, her mother and her grandmother were rushed to the hospital. This walla article (in Hebrew) says that mere minutes before the Rocket smashed into their house, the baby was in her bed and her mother beside her. As the baby had started to cry, the mother took her to the living room. The Kassam rocket then flew through the house, throwing the baby's bed in the air, and hit the couch opposing the one the mother was sitting on. By crying, the baby had saved both herself and her mother.
And the world yawns.
Breaking news: Israel also responsible for 'Palestinian' soccer problems
In this walla article (in Hebrew) we read that 'Palestinians' have written a letter to various associations around the world in order to condemn and boycott Israel. Because somehow they seem to think that Israeli activities are harming 'Palestinian' soccer.
"Because of Israel there's not league in Palestine" so they say. 21 'Palestinian' soccer players can't enter the territories because of the closure in Rafiah (due to the raging Hamas-Fatah violence, lest you forget), and this is not because of defensive measures taken by Israel in order to protect her citizens from violence, no of course not. According to them, it can only be because of "Israel's racist and inhuman procedures".
If only they directed their fury at the right source for their misery.
It would make a whole lot more sense if they had said:
"Palestinian terrorism doesn't only kill and maim Israeli citizens, it also hurts 'Palestinian' soccer"
"Because of Israel there's not league in Palestine" so they say. 21 'Palestinian' soccer players can't enter the territories because of the closure in Rafiah (due to the raging Hamas-Fatah violence, lest you forget), and this is not because of defensive measures taken by Israel in order to protect her citizens from violence, no of course not. According to them, it can only be because of "Israel's racist and inhuman procedures".
If only they directed their fury at the right source for their misery.
It would make a whole lot more sense if they had said:
"Palestinian terrorism doesn't only kill and maim Israeli citizens, it also hurts 'Palestinian' soccer"
Friday, July 20, 2007
Why is it always Israel who has to do an act of goodwill towards the 'Palestinians' ?
Abbas: 'This is just the first group of prisoners to be freed'
What?? It was hard enough to find 250 prisoners with no blood on their hands.
What?? It was hard enough to find 250 prisoners with no blood on their hands.
Some prisoners knelt and kissed the ground as they arrived at the checkpoint and
boarded the buses. Leaning out of bus windows, some flashed V-for-victory signs and held up Palestinian flags and posters.
I think people don't realize this enough. When 'Palestinians' make a V sign with their fingers, it's NOT a sign of "peace, dude". It's a victory sign. So these newly released prisoners are flashing victory signs. Does this make anyone else feel uncomfortable? If freed terrorists claim victory, this is not a good sign.
The protesters voiced their opposition to the gesture and called for Jewish
prisoners to be released first, Israel Radio reported.Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said the prisoner release was part of a package
of goodwill gestures that was to give new momentum to stalled peace efforts.
Why is it always Israel that has to do goodwill gestures? We're not the ones randomly firing homemade rockets into their civilian centers. We're not the ones who are holding captive one of their soldiers in a secret location, giving no one access to him, and giving him no access to anything. We're the ones who disengaged from Gaza. Wasn't that one big heck of a goodwill gesture?
I would think that what with the world always complaining that we're always abusing of our disproportionate force and that we must restrain ourselves, then just the fact that we didn't flatten Gaza completely should be considered a gesture of goodwill.
And where are our boys?
Bring our boys back home.
Harry Potter Countdown
Just this many hours until I have the last book in my hands... Well that plus the time it takes for the queue in front of me...
I met guy yesterday who claimed to have already read the book, working in a bookshop and all. I didn't quite believe him. He said he didn't have any HP theories before reading the book, but that would mean he wasn't such a huge HP fan to begin with, so why would he go to the trouble of risking the embargo?
A few hours later I also remembered that the bookshop he said he worked at doesn't sell books in English...
Pfff... What people won't say to make themselves appear interesting...
Harry Potter fans be strong! Don't spoil the surprise by finding information on the net or by reading the last chapter first! Don't go read that last word of the book!
I want to know what's happening inside Snape's head.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
The one-man foreign ministry evens out
Huh. This was unexpected. Score 1 for Peres for this:
Peres: Without the Holocaust, we could have had Jordan, too
But of course, this next part was totally expected. On the day he was sworn in, he showed everyone that he's clearly planning on ignoring the fact that the President of Israel has no political power. Shimon, it's just a ceremonial role.
That's it, continue seeing the world through your pink lensed glasses.
Peres: Without the Holocaust, we could have had Jordan, too
Newly-installed Israeli President Shimon Peres on Tuesday said that if six
million Jews had not been wiped out in the Nazi Holocaust, Israel would today
likely be in control of its biblical lands on the eastern side of the Jordan
River, in what is today the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Peres' address was surprising to many, who assumed that the left-wing, secular elder statesman did not accept Israel's biblical claims to the Land.
But of course, this next part was totally expected. On the day he was sworn in, he showed everyone that he's clearly planning on ignoring the fact that the President of Israel has no political power. Shimon, it's just a ceremonial role.
Just hours before being sworn in as Israel's ninth president on Sunday,How interesting. This is exactly what he said in the late 80's when he was Prime Minister in coalition with Shamir. Did he not notice that 20 years of terrorism have passed since?
Shimon Peres said the time had come for his nation to surrender its biblical
heartland in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) to the Palestinian
Arabs.
In his inauguration speech later in the evening, Peres expounding upon his
vision of peace for the Middle East, but Israel National News pointed out that
he did not once mention ongoing Arab terrorism against the Jewish state that has
made the conclusion of any peace deal impossible.
That's it, continue seeing the world through your pink lensed glasses.
Despite filling a largely ceremonial role, an Israeli diplomatic source told The
Jerusalem Post that Peres can be expected to continue behaving like a “one-man
foreign ministry” as he works to forward his own agenda.
Smoking up a debate
Headline on Jpost today, Stiff anti-smoking bill due to pass in Knesset next week, reminded me of a post I saw on Corporate Presenter about the smoking ban in Britain, on which I wanted to comment already some while ago.
I finally took the time to do so:
I feel mitigated about this subject.
As a libertarian, I agree with you about the fact that this obviously impedes on people's freedom to decide wether or not they want to smoke.
However, as a non-smoker, I feel that often my personal freedom isn't respected. When I am in a restaurant, I choose to have clean air around me, but the smokers' smoke doesn't seem to agree with me.
This is why I see this as very different than say, a ban on fatty foods. Fatty foods are bad for you, but you eating them has no direct impact whatsoever on me (I'll avoid the discussion about my taxes paying someone's coronary bypass even though I watched my cholesterol intake while he probably didn't). If there could be a way in which only the smoker would suffer the direct consequences of his decision, then there would be no problem. But if someone in the same room as me smokes, I still end up with my clothes smelling of smoke, needing to wash my (long) hair before I go to sleep reeking of smoke, and I get unfiltered smoke into my lungs, even though I don't smoke.
I believe that my personal freedom goes only as far as the next person's. This is a problem in this case, as my wanting clean air stamps on someone's freedom to smoke, and obviously someone's wish to smoke impedes my having clean air.
There are two ways to look at this.
I finally took the time to do so:
I feel mitigated about this subject.
As a libertarian, I agree with you about the fact that this obviously impedes on people's freedom to decide wether or not they want to smoke.
However, as a non-smoker, I feel that often my personal freedom isn't respected. When I am in a restaurant, I choose to have clean air around me, but the smokers' smoke doesn't seem to agree with me.
This is why I see this as very different than say, a ban on fatty foods. Fatty foods are bad for you, but you eating them has no direct impact whatsoever on me (I'll avoid the discussion about my taxes paying someone's coronary bypass even though I watched my cholesterol intake while he probably didn't). If there could be a way in which only the smoker would suffer the direct consequences of his decision, then there would be no problem. But if someone in the same room as me smokes, I still end up with my clothes smelling of smoke, needing to wash my (long) hair before I go to sleep reeking of smoke, and I get unfiltered smoke into my lungs, even though I don't smoke.
I believe that my personal freedom goes only as far as the next person's. This is a problem in this case, as my wanting clean air stamps on someone's freedom to smoke, and obviously someone's wish to smoke impedes my having clean air.
There are two ways to look at this.
- Was the air mine to begin with? Since it wasn't, anyone is allowed to do what they want with it. If I don't like it, I can change restaurant, go wait for the bus under the rain instead of the bus stop, not go to that bar, and quite generally stay at home where I'm sure I have every right to say what can enter "my" air and what can't. If I start blowing soap bubbles, even if this disturbs other people, it's not their air I'm filling with bubbles, so why shouldn't I?
- Is my 'not-smoking' harming anyone? Creating an inconvenience for the nicotine dependant smoker, yes, but harming? I honestly think not. Is the smoker's smoking harming anyone other than himself? Yes. If I decide to blow bubbles, and the bubbles pop on other people's shirts and make a stain, something of theirs is being harmed only because I decided to start blowing bubbles there.
Being a non-smoker, I obviously have more of a penchant for the second view. Personal freedom, yes, but only as long as it doesn't directly harm someone else's.
I don't like the fact that it is a government ban. Every restaurant, pub, etc, should decide what is best for their type of environment and clientele and business. I know restaurateurs who are slowly going out of business because of smoke regulations in their countries. This doesn't help reduce the number of smokers, (which is, I think, what the government wants to do usually), it just redirects smokers to places where they can smoke. That's government meddling in business for you.
I could go on about this issue for quite some time...
Any thoughts?
There is less anti-semitism in Auschwitz than Belgium apparently
Jewish woman takes up residence in Auschwitz
A Belgian woman moved to the town of Oswiecim, where the Auschwitz death camp is located, and as such, is the first Jew registered to be living there since WWII.
I understand the feeling.
A Belgian woman moved to the town of Oswiecim, where the Auschwitz death camp is located, and as such, is the first Jew registered to be living there since WWII.
Maas said she felt more threatened by anti-Semitism in both France and Belgium
than in Poland.
I understand the feeling.
Alan Dershowitz: End the Occupation!
On Alan Dershowitz's blog:
This is what anti-Israel terror-appeasers always say about Israel, even though it has nothing to do with reality. Why would Alan Dershowitz also say that?
read more...
Alan Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard, and wrote The Case for Israel, which attempts to refute common criticisms of Israel.
On his blog, he tackles common double standard issues, in which Israel is regularly singled out for imperfections in its system, whereas other countries' record of genocide go by unnoticed.
The indigenous population is killed or chased away. New settlers of a different
ethnic background are brought in to replace the indigenous population. They are
given financial inducements to settle the stolen land and are protected by
military forces.
This is what anti-Israel terror-appeasers always say about Israel, even though it has nothing to do with reality. Why would Alan Dershowitz also say that?
No, I’m not talking about Israel and the Palestinians. I am talking about
Darfur where a dictatorial Arab regime, supported by other Arab governments, is
committing a brutal genocide against Black African Muslims in Darfur. This
genocide includes not only mass murder and systematic rape, but also a policy of
replacing the murdered black Africans with ethnic Arabs.
read more...
Alan Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard, and wrote The Case for Israel, which attempts to refute common criticisms of Israel.
On his blog, he tackles common double standard issues, in which Israel is regularly singled out for imperfections in its system, whereas other countries' record of genocide go by unnoticed.
Harry Potter creates a row in Israel
I really love Israel, but some things in Israel really annoy me. Like this for instance:
I really like the fact that Israel has such a strong Jewish identity. But I'd like it even more if businesses weren't fined if they decide not to follow it. Especially since there are loopholes to these Jewish laws, so I don't see the need to insist on them legally.
For instance the not working on Shabbat. I'm sure the businesses can avoid "forcing their employees to work on the Sabbath" and instead encourage them to do so with a higher pay (they would be working overtime), with cool Muggle tshirts, vacation days, and numerous other benefits. Last time I looked, Israeli employees weren't slaves, and were allowed to say no. I doubt that Steimatzky (leading Israeli bookshop) will ask a kippah-wearing Haredi employee to come to work Friday evening. There are enough non-observant Jews in Israel to make sure that Friday night no-one is forced to work for this grand event.
The synchronized worldwide launch of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the
seventh and last installment in the wildly popular series, falls at 2:01 a.m.
local time this Shabbat, when the law requires most businesses to close.
With Israelis already clamoring for Deathly Hallows, many bookstores are
planning to launch the book on time anyway. That has drawn fire from haredi
lawmakers, including Industry, Trade, and Labor Minister Eli Yishai (Shas), who
threatened to fine any store that opens Saturday.
"Israeli law forbids
businesses to force their employees to work on the Sabbath, and that applies in
this case as well. The minister will fine and prosecute any businesses which
violate the law," said Roei Lachmanovich, a spokesman for Yishai.
I really like the fact that Israel has such a strong Jewish identity. But I'd like it even more if businesses weren't fined if they decide not to follow it. Especially since there are loopholes to these Jewish laws, so I don't see the need to insist on them legally.
For instance the not working on Shabbat. I'm sure the businesses can avoid "forcing their employees to work on the Sabbath" and instead encourage them to do so with a higher pay (they would be working overtime), with cool Muggle tshirts, vacation days, and numerous other benefits. Last time I looked, Israeli employees weren't slaves, and were allowed to say no. I doubt that Steimatzky (leading Israeli bookshop) will ask a kippah-wearing Haredi employee to come to work Friday evening. There are enough non-observant Jews in Israel to make sure that Friday night no-one is forced to work for this grand event.
And what a grand event it is! This is the last time that I'll have a freshly released Harry Potter book in my hands. I must must MUST be able to restrain myself, and not read it in one sitting. I want to savour the chapters this time, rather than just zooming past. The last two times, I waited so long for the books, and then the pleasure of having the new books was gone after 2 days, when I had finished them. I will not read any sites that might ruin the ending for me, I will not listen to rumors of leaked information, I will ignore other theories of who will probably die and why.
The book's author, J.K. Rowling, has indicated that two characters die in
the new book, leading to speculation that one of them might be Harry
himself.
Aaaack! No! I said I wouldn't listen! Ignore! Ignore! I can't heeeeaaar youuuuu!
I have enough Harry Potter theories of my own. And they are confirming themselves (to me) as I listen to Harry Potter - The Half Blood Prince on tape every morning and evening in my car. I live an hour away from work so I get through three-four chapters every day. The reader doesn't give quite the same intonations that I had in my head when I read the book, but it's not too badly done.
So if anyone is interested as to why I'm sure that Snape is a good person, here goes.
Hagrid tells Harry about an argument that Dumbledore had with Snape in the forest. The way it's told, that Snape tells Dumbledore he doesn't want to do something, we are inclined to think that Snape doesn't want to spy for Dumbledore anymore. I believe that what Snape doesn't want to do is actually go on with the unbreakable vow he made at the beginning of the book. That means, he doesn't want to continue "helping" Malfoy to kill Dumbledore and to eventually have to kill him himself, in order to avoid turning Malfoy into a killer.
Dumbledore accepts the fact that he will have to die, and is probably planning it very well. I think this is confirmed by the way that Snape kills Dumbledore. When Dumbledore is saying "Please, Severus", I don't think he is pleading for his life. He is asking him to kill him, as he promised, maybe before anyone else does. This secures Snape's position as a Death Eater beside Voldemort and ensures that Harry will have an ally on the other side, even though I'm sure he'll realize it too late.
After Snape killed Dumbledore (but did he really die? I might have missed something which could indicate that we have proof that he was really buried, haven't gotten to that part on tape yet...), and Harry is running after him and tries to attack him with unforgivable curses, Snape lashes out at him his usual condescending remarks about how he can't do anything right. Or does he? I feel that Snape is actually giving Harry last pieces of advice, before having to completely cut off contact with him. He is telling him what he needs to really feel when he says an unforgivable curse, so that he'll have this information when he needs it most. In front of Voldemort.
I hope Dumbledore will be able to communicate to Harry, either through his portrait which will be up in the Headmaster's office, or maybe he will have left a little bottle of memories for Harry to observe in a pensieve? Harry will discover too late that Snape isn't a bad person, and maybe as a result Snape will be killed at the hands of Harry?
Can't wait till 1am Saturday!
Thursday, July 12, 2007
We Will Not Capitulate
Last year I found this article, a proposed text for a speech by the Prime Minister that would explain to the world exactly what it is we’re fighting...
We Will Not Capitulate
Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world. I, the Prime Minister of Israel, am speaking to you from Jerusalem in the face of the terrible pictures from Kfar Kana. Any human heart, wherever it is, must sicken and recoil at the sight of such pictures. There are no words of comfort that can mitigate the enormity of this tragedy. Still, I am looking you straight in the eye and telling you that the State of Israel will continue its military campaign in Lebanon.
The Israel Defense Forces will continue to attack targets from which missiles and Katyusha rockets are fired at hospitals, old age homes and kindergartens in Israel. I have instructed the security forces and the IDF to continue to hunt for the Katyusha stockpiles and launch sites from which these savages are bombarding the State of Israel.
We will not hesitate, we will not apologize and we will not back off. If they continue to launch missiles into Israel from Kfar Kana, we will continue to bomb Kfar Kana. Today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Here, there and everywhere. The children of Kfar Kana could now be sleeping peacefully in their homes, unmolested, had the agents of the devil not taken over their land and turned the lives of our children into hell.
Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time you understood: the Jewish state will no longer be trampled upon. We will no longer allow anyone to exploit population centers in order to bomb our citizens. No one will be able to hide anymore behind women and children in order to kill our women and children. This anarchy is over. You can condemn us, you can boycott us, you can stop visiting us and, if necessary, we will stop visiting you.
A voice for six million citizens
Today I am serving as the voice of six million bombarded Israeli citizens who serve as the voice of six million murdered Jews who were melted down to dust and ashes by savages in Europe. In both cases, those responsible for these evil acts were, and are, barbarians devoid of all humanity, who set themselves one simple goal: to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth, as Adolph Hitler said, or to wipe the State of Israel off the map, as Mahmoud Ahmedinejad proclaims.
And you - just as you did not take those words seriously then, you are ignoring them again now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world, will not happen again. Never again will we wait for bombs that never came to hit the gas chambers.
Never again will we wait for salvation that never arrives. Now we have our own air force. The Jewish people are now capable of standing up to those who seek their destruction - those people will no longer be able to hide behind women and children. They will no longer be able to evade their responsibility.
Every place from which a Katyusha is fired into the State of Israel will be a legitimate target for us to attack. This must be stated clearly and publicly, once and for all. You are welcome to judge us, to ostracize us, to boycott us and to vilify us. But to kill us? Absolutely not.
Four months ago I was elected by hundreds of thousands of citizens to the office of Prime Minister of the government of Israel, on the basis of my plan for unilaterally withdrawing from 90 percent of the areas of Judea and Samaria, the birth place and cradle of the Jewish people; to end most of the occupation and to enable the Palestinian people to turn over a new leaf and to calm things down until conditions are ripe for attaining a permanent settlement between us.
The Prime Minister who preceded me, Ariel Sharon, made a full withdrawal from the Gaza Strip back to the international border, and gave the Palestinians there a chance to build a new reality for themselves. The Prime Minister who preceded him, Ehud Barak, ended the lengthy Israeli presence in Lebanon and pulled the IDF back to the international border, leaving the land of the cedars to flourish, develop and establish its democracy and its economy.
What did the State of Israel get in exchange for all of this? Did we win even one minute of quiet? Was our hand, outstretched in peace, met with a handshake of encouragement? Ehud Barak's peace initiative at Camp David let loose on us a wave of suicide bombers who smashed and blew to pieces over 1,000 citizens, men, women and children. I don't remember you being so enraged then. Maybe that happened because we did not allow TV close-ups of the dismembered body parts of the Israeli youngsters at the Dolphinarium? Or of the shattered lives of the people butchered while celebrating the Passover Seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya? What can you do - that's the way we are. We don't wave body parts at the camera. We grieve quietly.
We do not dance on the roofs at the sight of the bodies of our enemy's children - we express genuine sorrow and regret. That is the monstrous behavior of our enemies. Now they have risen up against us. Tomorrow they will rise up against you. You are already familiar with the murderous taste of this terror. And you will taste more.
In a loud and clear voice
And Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza. What did it get us? A barrage of Kassam missiles fired at peaceful settlements and the kidnapping of soldiers. Then too, I don't recall you reacting with such alarm. And for six years, the withdrawal from Lebanon has drawn the vituperation and crimes of a dangerous, extremist Iranian agent, who took over an entire country in the name of religious fanaticism and is trying to take Israel hostage on his way to Jerusalem - and from there to Paris and London.
An enormous terrorist infrastructure has been established by Iran on our border, threatening our citizens, growing stronger before our very eyes, awaiting the moment when the land of the Ayatollahs becomes a nuclear power in order to bring us to our knees. And make no mistake - we won't go down alone. You, the leaders of the free and enlightened world, will go down along with us.
So today, here and now, I am putting an end to this parade of hypocrisy. I don't recall such a wave of reaction in the face of the 100 citizens killed every single day in Iraq. Sunnis kill Shiites who kill Sunnis, and all of them kill Americans - and the world remains silent. And I am hard pressed to recall a similar reaction when the Russians destroyed entire villages and burned down large cities in order to repress the revolt in Chechnya. And when NATO bombed Kosovo for almost three months and crushed the civilian population - then you also kept silent. What is it about us, the Jews, the minority, the persecuted, that arouses this cosmic sense of justice in you? What do we have that all the others don't?
In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to live normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late.
By Ben Caspit, July 31st, 2006
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART1/457/743.html
We Will Not Capitulate
Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world. I, the Prime Minister of Israel, am speaking to you from Jerusalem in the face of the terrible pictures from Kfar Kana. Any human heart, wherever it is, must sicken and recoil at the sight of such pictures. There are no words of comfort that can mitigate the enormity of this tragedy. Still, I am looking you straight in the eye and telling you that the State of Israel will continue its military campaign in Lebanon.
The Israel Defense Forces will continue to attack targets from which missiles and Katyusha rockets are fired at hospitals, old age homes and kindergartens in Israel. I have instructed the security forces and the IDF to continue to hunt for the Katyusha stockpiles and launch sites from which these savages are bombarding the State of Israel.
We will not hesitate, we will not apologize and we will not back off. If they continue to launch missiles into Israel from Kfar Kana, we will continue to bomb Kfar Kana. Today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Here, there and everywhere. The children of Kfar Kana could now be sleeping peacefully in their homes, unmolested, had the agents of the devil not taken over their land and turned the lives of our children into hell.
Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time you understood: the Jewish state will no longer be trampled upon. We will no longer allow anyone to exploit population centers in order to bomb our citizens. No one will be able to hide anymore behind women and children in order to kill our women and children. This anarchy is over. You can condemn us, you can boycott us, you can stop visiting us and, if necessary, we will stop visiting you.
A voice for six million citizens
Today I am serving as the voice of six million bombarded Israeli citizens who serve as the voice of six million murdered Jews who were melted down to dust and ashes by savages in Europe. In both cases, those responsible for these evil acts were, and are, barbarians devoid of all humanity, who set themselves one simple goal: to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth, as Adolph Hitler said, or to wipe the State of Israel off the map, as Mahmoud Ahmedinejad proclaims.
And you - just as you did not take those words seriously then, you are ignoring them again now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world, will not happen again. Never again will we wait for bombs that never came to hit the gas chambers.
Never again will we wait for salvation that never arrives. Now we have our own air force. The Jewish people are now capable of standing up to those who seek their destruction - those people will no longer be able to hide behind women and children. They will no longer be able to evade their responsibility.
Every place from which a Katyusha is fired into the State of Israel will be a legitimate target for us to attack. This must be stated clearly and publicly, once and for all. You are welcome to judge us, to ostracize us, to boycott us and to vilify us. But to kill us? Absolutely not.
Four months ago I was elected by hundreds of thousands of citizens to the office of Prime Minister of the government of Israel, on the basis of my plan for unilaterally withdrawing from 90 percent of the areas of Judea and Samaria, the birth place and cradle of the Jewish people; to end most of the occupation and to enable the Palestinian people to turn over a new leaf and to calm things down until conditions are ripe for attaining a permanent settlement between us.
The Prime Minister who preceded me, Ariel Sharon, made a full withdrawal from the Gaza Strip back to the international border, and gave the Palestinians there a chance to build a new reality for themselves. The Prime Minister who preceded him, Ehud Barak, ended the lengthy Israeli presence in Lebanon and pulled the IDF back to the international border, leaving the land of the cedars to flourish, develop and establish its democracy and its economy.
What did the State of Israel get in exchange for all of this? Did we win even one minute of quiet? Was our hand, outstretched in peace, met with a handshake of encouragement? Ehud Barak's peace initiative at Camp David let loose on us a wave of suicide bombers who smashed and blew to pieces over 1,000 citizens, men, women and children. I don't remember you being so enraged then. Maybe that happened because we did not allow TV close-ups of the dismembered body parts of the Israeli youngsters at the Dolphinarium? Or of the shattered lives of the people butchered while celebrating the Passover Seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya? What can you do - that's the way we are. We don't wave body parts at the camera. We grieve quietly.
We do not dance on the roofs at the sight of the bodies of our enemy's children - we express genuine sorrow and regret. That is the monstrous behavior of our enemies. Now they have risen up against us. Tomorrow they will rise up against you. You are already familiar with the murderous taste of this terror. And you will taste more.
In a loud and clear voice
And Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza. What did it get us? A barrage of Kassam missiles fired at peaceful settlements and the kidnapping of soldiers. Then too, I don't recall you reacting with such alarm. And for six years, the withdrawal from Lebanon has drawn the vituperation and crimes of a dangerous, extremist Iranian agent, who took over an entire country in the name of religious fanaticism and is trying to take Israel hostage on his way to Jerusalem - and from there to Paris and London.
An enormous terrorist infrastructure has been established by Iran on our border, threatening our citizens, growing stronger before our very eyes, awaiting the moment when the land of the Ayatollahs becomes a nuclear power in order to bring us to our knees. And make no mistake - we won't go down alone. You, the leaders of the free and enlightened world, will go down along with us.
So today, here and now, I am putting an end to this parade of hypocrisy. I don't recall such a wave of reaction in the face of the 100 citizens killed every single day in Iraq. Sunnis kill Shiites who kill Sunnis, and all of them kill Americans - and the world remains silent. And I am hard pressed to recall a similar reaction when the Russians destroyed entire villages and burned down large cities in order to repress the revolt in Chechnya. And when NATO bombed Kosovo for almost three months and crushed the civilian population - then you also kept silent. What is it about us, the Jews, the minority, the persecuted, that arouses this cosmic sense of justice in you? What do we have that all the others don't?
In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to live normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late.
By Ben Caspit, July 31st, 2006
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART1/457/743.html
Links and such
I'd like to thank all the people who've recently discovered this blog and have linked to it, either in a post or permanently in their links column.
I don't update my links column as often as I blog. I have however not forgotten you. If your blog is a blog I've added to my daily "must read" list, don't worry you will be added soon.
If however you notice that I've updated my links section but have neglected to add you, drop me a line...
israeli dot grouch at gmail dot com
Cheers
I don't update my links column as often as I blog. I have however not forgotten you. If your blog is a blog I've added to my daily "must read" list, don't worry you will be added soon.
If however you notice that I've updated my links section but have neglected to add you, drop me a line...
israeli dot grouch at gmail dot com
Cheers
"FREE THEM NOW" Rally in New York
I know I have some readers from New York and its surroundings, so in case you haven't heard about this rally, here's the info:
FREE THEM NOW!
One long year has passed since IDF soldiers Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser, and Eldad Regev were kidnapped by Hamas and Hezbollah.
Show the world we have not forgotten and will not forget them.
Join us in demanding their immediate and unconditional release.
Monday, July 16th, 2007
12:00 noon / Rain or Shine
Dag Hammarskjold Plaza (1st Ave. and 47th St.)
Please urge your organization's leadership and membership to join you there.
Sponsored by the: Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and Jewish Community Relations Council of New York
In cooperation with the United Jewish Communities, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, UJA-Federation of New York, and American Zionist Movement
FREE THEM NOW!
One long year has passed since IDF soldiers Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser, and Eldad Regev were kidnapped by Hamas and Hezbollah.
Show the world we have not forgotten and will not forget them.
Join us in demanding their immediate and unconditional release.
Monday, July 16th, 2007
12:00 noon / Rain or Shine
Dag Hammarskjold Plaza (1st Ave. and 47th St.)
Please urge your organization's leadership and membership to join you there.
Sponsored by the: Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and Jewish Community Relations Council of New York
In cooperation with the United Jewish Communities, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, UJA-Federation of New York, and American Zionist Movement
A Whole Year and Still Nothing About Our Boys
Unfortunately I haven't got much time to blog these days, but I would like to mark the fact that a year ago today, Hezbollah terrorists penetrated Israel, crossed a UN approved border, killed three Israeli soldiers, abducted two Israeli soldiers, fired Katyushas into Israel, and all this in an unprovoked attack. Israel had completely withdrawn from southern Lebanon in 2000.
According to Bibi Netanyahu, not in the smartest of ways:
In the next few weeks, I'll post flashbacks to things that marked last year's war and the world reaction to it. Here's a start.
A year ago today, Dan Gillerman made some informal comments at the Security Council Media Stakeout.
To watch the video click here.
(Real Media, requires Real Player... Maybe I'll find a way to embed these type of videos into blogs one day, until then, you'll have to click... sorry.)
Two days later he made an excellent speech at the UN Security Council, during a meeting about the "Situation in the Middle East". The full video is almost two hours long. I'll spare you the suspense, it's a lot of Israel bashing and incoherence about victims and restraint and fallacies.
In the midst of this room full of darkened opinions, there is one candle of intelligence and enlightment. Dan Gillerman. You can see his contribution in the next two youtube clips.
As brilliant as his speech is, there is a drawback. His audience is the UN. His words fell on deaf ears. Just like Herzog's speech after the UN's ridiculous decision to equate Zionism with racism. In a movie, or in an Ayn Rand novel, speeches like these would wake up the dormant neurons in the audience, they would realize what the "big picture" is, they'd get up and give a standing ovation (in the movie), or nod in silent agreement and act accordingly (in the Ayn Rand novel), and the world's intelligence level would have increased a notch.
Not here.
In the days following the start of the war, Cox and Forkum had some excellent comic strips made.
This one is actually from right after Gilad Shalit was abducted, but I discovered it on July 13th. I like this image so much. For me it represents the whole situation of the Middle East.
According to Bibi Netanyahu, not in the smartest of ways:
"The Barak government's irresponsible withdrawal from Lebanon brought
Hizbullah to the fence, paved the way for Nasrallah and caused the problems
in Lebanon in 2006,"
In the next few weeks, I'll post flashbacks to things that marked last year's war and the world reaction to it. Here's a start.
A year ago today, Dan Gillerman made some informal comments at the Security Council Media Stakeout.
To watch the video click here.
(Real Media, requires Real Player... Maybe I'll find a way to embed these type of videos into blogs one day, until then, you'll have to click... sorry.)
Two days later he made an excellent speech at the UN Security Council, during a meeting about the "Situation in the Middle East". The full video is almost two hours long. I'll spare you the suspense, it's a lot of Israel bashing and incoherence about victims and restraint and fallacies.
In the midst of this room full of darkened opinions, there is one candle of intelligence and enlightment. Dan Gillerman. You can see his contribution in the next two youtube clips.
Part I of Dan Gillerman's Speech at the UN's Security Council
Part II of Dan Gillerman's Speech at the UN's Security Council
As brilliant as his speech is, there is a drawback. His audience is the UN. His words fell on deaf ears. Just like Herzog's speech after the UN's ridiculous decision to equate Zionism with racism. In a movie, or in an Ayn Rand novel, speeches like these would wake up the dormant neurons in the audience, they would realize what the "big picture" is, they'd get up and give a standing ovation (in the movie), or nod in silent agreement and act accordingly (in the Ayn Rand novel), and the world's intelligence level would have increased a notch.
Not here.
In the days following the start of the war, Cox and Forkum had some excellent comic strips made.
This one is actually from right after Gilad Shalit was abducted, but I discovered it on July 13th. I like this image so much. For me it represents the whole situation of the Middle East.
The media world exploded. Countless staged pictures of dead children on the Lebanese side, the now infamous Green Helmet Guy, incredible exaggerations in captions which have nothing to do with either the picture or reality, photoshopped pictures on Reuters exposed by LGF, objects meticulously placed in order to ignite reader disapproval against Israel, pictures showing what Hezbollah wanted the world to see, pictures wrongly identified, debris of same building shown over and over again to insinuate constant Israeli destruction and contempt for Lebanese civilians... And the list goes on...
And in all this, world condemnation of Israel, excessive force, Israel should use restraint, blahblah. And where are our boys? Geneva convention anyone? Has Amnesty done anything in order to know anything at all about them? Has the Red Cross condemned anyone because the illegally abducted Israeli soldiers haven't been given access to their services?
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Entebbe Rescue Operation: 31 years ago
I completely missed the 31st anniversary of the Entebbe Rescue Operation.
I stumbled across this post which reminded me:
HASBARA: 31rst Anniversary of The Great Entebbe Rescue!
Here's a small bit
I stumbled across this post which reminded me:
HASBARA: 31rst Anniversary of The Great Entebbe Rescue!
Here's a small bit
Back on July 4th, 1976, the Israelis struck an incredible victory against
Islamofacist terrorism by rescuing a planeload of people taken hostage by evil
people. Despite the world edging Israel to give into terrorist demands, Israel
staged a daring rescue deep into Africa and successfully rescued not only its
own but the citizens of several other nations as well, Jew and Gentile.
To read more, click away :)
Israel and Apartheid
For the sake of improving this result in Google, here's a link to the ADL's very thorough explanation of why Israel has nothing in common with Apartheid South Africa.
Israel and Apartheid: The Big Lie
The other links that appear when querying "Israel and Apartheid" are ridiculous op-eds in which the blatant anti-Israelity of the respective writers is obvious from the very first paragraph.
Israel and Apartheid: The Big Lie
The other links that appear when querying "Israel and Apartheid" are ridiculous op-eds in which the blatant anti-Israelity of the respective writers is obvious from the very first paragraph.
I like this image from the dissident frogman so much, I'll use it again
Sderot is All of Us
A great show of solidarity for Sderot, the Israeli town constantly hit by Katyusha rockets.
The economy of Sderot has been hit quite hard, as no one dares to go outside.
Just like in the second Lebanon conflict, if there are few Israeli casualties it is thanks to Israeli precaution. Palestinians are still aiming for civilians.
Yesterday, a concert was held in support of Sderot and its residents, organized by Tea-Packs' front man, Kobi Oz. He gathered together many of Israel's top performers - for free - and made this concert happen.
This is an important message. If even in Israel we belittle the importance of these daily rocket attacks, why are we surprised that the UN doesn't give a hoot? And the MSM? If we don't make noise about this, no one will do it for us.
Kol Hakavod.
The economy of Sderot has been hit quite hard, as no one dares to go outside.
Just like in the second Lebanon conflict, if there are few Israeli casualties it is thanks to Israeli precaution. Palestinians are still aiming for civilians.
Yesterday, a concert was held in support of Sderot and its residents, organized by Tea-Packs' front man, Kobi Oz. He gathered together many of Israel's top performers - for free - and made this concert happen.
For the last seven years, Sderot has been under constant attack by Kassam
rockets fired by terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
The concert's title, "Sderot is All of Us," is meant to convey the message that
the Kassam attacks are not a local problem but a national one - if Sderot is
attacked, Israel is attacked.
This is an important message. If even in Israel we belittle the importance of these daily rocket attacks, why are we surprised that the UN doesn't give a hoot? And the MSM? If we don't make noise about this, no one will do it for us.
Recently, caravans of cars have been touring the streets of Tel Aviv on Fridays,
blaring their horns and displaying signs and banners reading "Sderot is here" and
"You might be next."
A group of students from Sapir College have also set up an exhibit of 50 exploded
Kassams on Rothschild Avenue, set up to look as if they had landed in the coastal
city. "We brought the rockets in untouched so that you really get the authentic
feeling," said organizer Lavie Vanunu. "We chose Rothschild because it's the
center of the center."
"We're not trying to criticize Tel Aviv residents, we just want them to remember
that Sderot is only 50 minutes away and that we're all in this together," he
added.
Here's a little flash animation I found on cusbara.com, a cynical news report about the different Israeli reaction if the Kassam rockets would have been hitting Tel Aviv. This is not an especially recent video, cusbara.com has had it up for at least a month. (It's in hebrew).
Residents of the Center and the North arrived in Sderot Friday in a convoy ofFrom what I heard on the radio today, they are getting ready to do this again for this weekend.
some 200 cars in a display of solidarity for residents of the rocket-devastated
town and to give the town a financial boost by doing their Shabbat shopping
there.
Kol Hakavod.
Politically Incorrect: Most Suicide Bombers are Muslim
I'm interested in point number 4 of this article, Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature.
This is all very interesting. Especially the fact that for some reason it isn't politically correct to state the truth, which is MOST SUICIDE BOMBERS ARE MUSLIM. This is not racism. It's the truth. Politically incorrect as it may be.
This article isn't completely right though... We know now that there are more and more female suicide bombers, that suicide bombers are not especially poor, and we have also seen suicide bombers who were heads of families.
4. Most suicide bombers are Muslim
Suicide missions are not always religiously
motivated, but according to Oxford University sociologist Diego Gambetta, editor
of Making Sense of Suicide Missions, when religion is involved, the attackers
are always Muslim. Why? The surprising answer is that Muslim suicide bombing has
nothing to do with Islam or the Quran (except for two lines). It has a lot to do
with sex, or, in this case, the absence of sex.
What distinguishes Islam from
other major religions is that it tolerates polygyny. By allowing some men to
monopolize all women and altogether excluding many men from reproductive
opportunities, polygyny creates shortages of available women. If 50 percent of
men have two wives each, then the other 50 percent don't get any wives at
all.
So polygyny increases competitive pressure on men, especially young men
of low status. It therefore increases the likelihood that young men resort to
violent means to gain access to mates. By doing so, they have little to lose and
much to gain compared with men who already have wives. Across all societies,
polygyny makes men violent, increasing crimes such as murder and rape, even
after controlling for such obvious factors as economic development, economic
inequality, population density, the level of democracy, and political factors in
the region.
However, polygyny itself is not a sufficient cause of suicide
bombing. Societies in sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean are much more
polygynous than the Muslim nations in the Middle East and North Africa. And they
do have very high levels of violence. Sub-Saharan Africa suffers from a long
history of continuous civil wars—but not suicide bombings.
The other key
ingredient is the promise of 72 virgins waiting in heaven for any martyr in
Islam. The prospect of exclusive access to virgins may not be so appealing to
anyone who has even one mate on earth, which strict monogamy virtually
guarantees. However, the prospect is quite appealing to anyone who faces the
bleak reality on earth of being a complete reproductive loser.
It is the
combination of polygyny and the promise of a large harem of virgins in heaven
that motivates many young Muslim men to commit suicide bombings. Consistent with
this explanation, all studies of suicide bombers indicate that they are
significantly younger than not only the Muslim population in general but other
(nonsuicidal) members of their own extreme political organizations like Hamas
and Hezbollah. And nearly all suicide bombers are single.
This is all very interesting. Especially the fact that for some reason it isn't politically correct to state the truth, which is MOST SUICIDE BOMBERS ARE MUSLIM. This is not racism. It's the truth. Politically incorrect as it may be.
This article isn't completely right though... We know now that there are more and more female suicide bombers, that suicide bombers are not especially poor, and we have also seen suicide bombers who were heads of families.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Saving Lives: Israel's Anti Terrorist Fence
I am currently in the process of searching for my next apartment. Because rent here is quite expensive, I'm looking for shared apartments where the renters are looking for a flatmate. So right now I'm going off from one place to another, looking at rooms and meeting people. Obviously, you not only have to like the apartment you're going to live in, you also have to get along with the other people! And you don't have a lot of time to meet them, show them the real you, see their real them, and understand whether you'll love or hate each other in the coming months. I like to mention that I am Israeli right from the start. I'd rather know if I'm in front of an Israel-hater before I move in.
So today I visited this nice little place with three other people. I sat down to talk, and while mentioning Israel, one of them said something about the wall there and how it's horrible.
I stayed very polite and all, but still felt I had to say the following "It's not a wall like the Berlin wall or something, it's mostly a fence, and it's an anti-terrorist fence". We changed the subject after that. But I don't think I'll be getting a call from them anytime soon.
The fence is Israel's defense.
I know that in some places it can cause discomfort to Palestinians. But the fence saves lives, since Palestinians refuse to do so. People all around me seem to imply that the comfort of a Palestinian is more important than the life of an Israeli. Oh they'll never say it out loud, but when people complain about the fence, that's what they are really saying, whether they are aware of it or not.
For the people who just aren't aware of the facts, here are some. Then, you'll be able to decide for yourself if the fence is a bad or a good thing.
So today I visited this nice little place with three other people. I sat down to talk, and while mentioning Israel, one of them said something about the wall there and how it's horrible.
I stayed very polite and all, but still felt I had to say the following "It's not a wall like the Berlin wall or something, it's mostly a fence, and it's an anti-terrorist fence". We changed the subject after that. But I don't think I'll be getting a call from them anytime soon.
The fence is Israel's defense.
I know that in some places it can cause discomfort to Palestinians. But the fence saves lives, since Palestinians refuse to do so. People all around me seem to imply that the comfort of a Palestinian is more important than the life of an Israeli. Oh they'll never say it out loud, but when people complain about the fence, that's what they are really saying, whether they are aware of it or not.
For the people who just aren't aware of the facts, here are some. Then, you'll be able to decide for yourself if the fence is a bad or a good thing.
- Why did Israel build this anti-terrorist fence?
About a thousand people were murdered in attacks carried out by Palestinian terrorists, and thousands have been injured, maimed for life.
In almost all of these cases, the terrorists infiltrated Israel from the Palestinian areas in the West Bank. The Palestinian leadership has done nothing to stop them and has even encouraged them.
After other options were tried and failed, Israel decided to erect a physical barrier against terrorists.
Until then, the absence of a physical barrier made infiltration into Israeli communities very easy for terrorists. - How could this fence have been avoided?
The Palestinian Authority did not fulfill the commitments it made to fight terrorism. They have only themselves to blame for the anti-terrorist fence.
However, the Palestinians seek to blame Israel, the victim of terrorism.
Had there been no terrorism, Israel would not have been obliged to build a fence to protect its citizens. - Is it a "wall" or a "fence"?
Despite the many (many many) pictures being shown in the Main Stream Media of a tall concrete wall, more than 97% of the fence consists of a chain-link fence system, with technological advances designed to warn against infiltrations.
The part of the fence, less than 3%, that is made of concrete is there for a reason. They are intended not only to stop terrorists from infiltrating, but also to stop them from shooting at Israeli vehicles from atop hills near the highway.
Since the chain-link fence is about the same width as a four-lane highway, in some areas with a high housing density, for the comfort of the Palestinians, a concrete wall was built instead of the fence. - But, but, putting a fence is like putting a border, no? You're supposed to decide where the final borders are through negotiations. That's, like, cheating, no?
No. This fence is not a border and is not considered as such by anyone, except protesters who don't listen and like to complain.
The route of the fence has been determined on the basis of security needs and topographical considerations.
The anti-terrorist fence does not annex Palestinian lands nor change the legal status of the Palestinians. The fence can be moved or even removed, when that glorious day of everlasting peace finally comes. The fence is a temporary, defensive measure, not a border.
Israel has had other anti-terrorist fences just like this one, which were moved to comply with new borders. - Well then why isn't the fence along the 1967 line? That would show you're not trying to annex Palestinian lands.
No, that would just be useless.
The sole purpose for the fence is security and it was built wherever it was needed to prevent terrorists from infiltrating into Israeli population centers.
If the fence had been built along the 1967 lines then THAT would have been a political statement of fixing a border without negotiations, and it would have nothing to do with the security needs of Israel's citizens.
The 1967 lines are just the armistice lines between Israel and Jordan during the years 1949-1967. It was not the final border between the countries. - The anti-terrorist fence is an obstacle to peace.
Terrorism is a deadly obstacle to peace.
The fence is an obstacle to terrorism.
The fence is a defensive, temporary, passive and effective barrier to terrorism. As such, it is the one thing that has brought us closer to calm in the region, which will increase the chances of achieving peace.
Once terrorism ends and peace is achieved, the fence can be removed. Lives lost due to terrorist attacks cannot be brought back. - Is the fence taking into proper consideration the needs of the Palestinian population?
In addition to its efforts to ensure the security of its citizens, Israel attaches considerable importance to the interests of the local Palestinian residents. Israel recognizes the necessity of finding an appropriate balance between the imperative need to prevent terrorism and defend its citizens, and the humanitarian needs of local Palestinian residents.
Even so, it is important to remember this: There would have been no need for an anti-terrorist fence had there not been an orchestrated campaign of terrorism that targets Israeli men, women and children for death. Death is permanent. It is irreversible. The inconvenience caused to Palestinians by the anti-terrorist fence is temporary and reversible, once terrorism stops and peace is achieved. Freedom of movement is important. But it is not more important than the right to live.
Having said this, Israel will do all it can to reduce hardship and inconvenience for the Palestinians who are affected by the fence, and have often rerouted its path after complaints. - Is the anti-terrorist fence not intensifying hostility and hatred towards Israel?
This I often hear from my friends. "But those poor Palestinians, of course if you put a fence and a checkpoint in their way, then they'll hate you more!"
Yes, obviously if make it easier for terrorists to come kill my family, they will like me more. But it won't stop them from killing my family, will it? The fence will, it already has.
What does intensify the hostility towards Israel? Incitement within the Palestinian Authority and the Arab world.
If the Palestinian Authority isn't capable of stopping terror, they should at least be happy that Israel took care of it, and tell their population that it's a good thing that terror is decreasing. Unless, of course, they don't agree. - Does this anti-terrorist fence actually help?
In fact, yes, thank you for asking.
People have often told me very silly things like "You don't need that fence anymore, there haven't been terror attacks for like, forever."
Uh, no. There haven't been terror attacks (or significantly less) thanks to the anti-terrorist fence. Terror still hasn't stopped. Only now it is INTERCEPTED. - Isn't the anti-terrorist fence just another "Berlin Wall"?
Funny, I actually heard this one at work the other day.
The Berlin Wall was designed by the Communist regime of East Germany to keep the German citizens of "East Berlin" locked in and to prevent them from knowing the world of freedom and democracy on the West side.
Israel's anti-terrorist fence is not built to keep anyone locked in. On the contrary, it is there for one purpose only - to keep the Palestinian terrorists out. - The anti-terrorist fence is apartheid! The anti-terrorist fence is racism!
Almost every Palestinian claim attaches the term "apartheid" to the fence. But the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is nothing like the situation that existed in South Africa, and the anti-terrorist fence has nothing to with racial separation, but with the need to prevent terrorism.Apartheid: Racial separation used in South Africa against fellow citizens of the same country; black South Africans were denied all rights and mingling between the ethnic groups was forbidden.The conflict between Palestinians and Israelis is not a racial one, nor a domestic one. It is a national-territorial conflict between two distinct people. Palestinians are not citizens of Israel. But Israeli Arabs are citizens, and have equal rights under Israeli law. On the other hand, Jews cannot be citizens of the Palestinian Authority. Who's racist?The attempt to depict the building of an anti-terrorist fence by Israel as somehow related to "apartheid" is ridiculous. What Palestinian propaganda purposefully omits is that the sole reason for the fence's existence is Palestinian terrorism.
And to end this post, a great image from the dissident frogman
Apparently I'm Creative...
Hmmm...
Took the CNN test here, in order to find out what the perfect hobbies for me would be, and it seems that I'm...
I do doodle on napkins and meeting notes. Actually, during a meeting today, that's pretty much all I did...
Everyone's thrilled right?
Took the CNN test here, in order to find out what the perfect hobbies for me would be, and it seems that I'm...
CREATIVE
You have a gift for expression. Whether it's writing, drawing,
creating objets d'art or making music, you see the world in a
unique way and are able to convey that to other people. No
doubt you doodle on napkins and meeting notes, are always
humming a new tune, have already read the latest fiction
releases, and know all the local art galleries' schedules by heart.
You might like hobbies like sketching, photography, sculpting,
playing an instrument, singing, journaling, scrap-booking or
designing clothing.
I do doodle on napkins and meeting notes. Actually, during a meeting today, that's pretty much all I did...
Everyone's thrilled right?
Score 1 Point for Sarkozy
Sarkozy talks about Gilad Shalit.
Sarkozy told Noam Shalit, Gilad Shalit's father, that he considers Gilad – who has French citizenship – a
kidnapped Frenchman and that he is obligated to "care
for him as one of our own."
Now let's see if these words can turn into action.
The Flaw in the Land for Peace Concept
This headline, Arab League to visit Israel, caught my attention...
This article talks about the Arab League sending envoys to Israel to discuss an Arab "Peace initiative" which I think is flawed in its very core.
This is wrong. It is flawed to exchange something real and physical like land for something non tangible and vague like recognition. What does recognition even really mean? How can you say you don't recognize us if you're willing to talk to us about recognition?
We exist, whether they like it or not. This is not a matter of discussion. In my opinion, giving weight to their non-recognition of us gives them the power to play with us. It's a negotiation chip. They'll trade us recognition for something, but through that negotiation we will have actually gotten nothing.
The very act of party A negotiating with party B for recognition of party B implies the acknowledged existence of party B by party A, therefore the whole negotiation is futile.
The whole concept of land for peace is ridiculous. These disputed lands, we got them because THEY broke the peace. Had they not decided to wage war against us (I realize this is a very general THEY) then these lands would have never been in our hands. So we should reward both their war initiation and their losing the war by giving them land? If we had lost the Six-Day War, would we even have the option of negotiating anything? We would have been dead.
The concept of land for peace is flawed at the root. This is because in exchange of land, a physical tangible thing, we get back a concept, an idea, a warm fuzzy-wuzzy feeling which we hope is shared with our counterparts, but have no way of ever really knowing.
By this Israel pays for something which was rightfully hers from the beginning, the notion of peace.
Peace is not something which can be achieved in a day, there is no "On/Off" button for peace. It is achieved over time, with a respective cooperation of some sort (One which, I would imagine, would be ensured in a fair peace negotiation). Land can be given in one day, it does have that immediate property which can change in an instant from "ours" to "theirs".
On the other hand, if one day peace is achieved, it can disappear in a moment. The concept of peace can be erased with one movement. But the land given for this peace would then remain in their hands.
At this point, Israel will have lost everything and gained nothing.
And then the article talks of another part of the peace proposal, which in and of itself proves that this "peace proposal" is nothing more than a Trojan horse.
The refugees issue has always angered me. Not only the issue itself, but the world's blindness to what it means.
First the issue itself:
This article talks about the Arab League sending envoys to Israel to discuss an Arab "Peace initiative" which I think is flawed in its very core.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said the foreign ministers
would lead an Arab League mission to Israel to discuss the Arab peace plan,
which would trade full Arab recognition of Israel for an Israeli withdrawal from all lands captured in the 1967 Mideast war and
the creation of a Palestinian state.
This is wrong. It is flawed to exchange something real and physical like land for something non tangible and vague like recognition. What does recognition even really mean? How can you say you don't recognize us if you're willing to talk to us about recognition?
We exist, whether they like it or not. This is not a matter of discussion. In my opinion, giving weight to their non-recognition of us gives them the power to play with us. It's a negotiation chip. They'll trade us recognition for something, but through that negotiation we will have actually gotten nothing.
The very act of party A negotiating with party B for recognition of party B implies the acknowledged existence of party B by party A, therefore the whole negotiation is futile.
The whole concept of land for peace is ridiculous. These disputed lands, we got them because THEY broke the peace. Had they not decided to wage war against us (I realize this is a very general THEY) then these lands would have never been in our hands. So we should reward both their war initiation and their losing the war by giving them land? If we had lost the Six-Day War, would we even have the option of negotiating anything? We would have been dead.
The concept of land for peace is flawed at the root. This is because in exchange of land, a physical tangible thing, we get back a concept, an idea, a warm fuzzy-wuzzy feeling which we hope is shared with our counterparts, but have no way of ever really knowing.
By this Israel pays for something which was rightfully hers from the beginning, the notion of peace.
Peace is not something which can be achieved in a day, there is no "On/Off" button for peace. It is achieved over time, with a respective cooperation of some sort (One which, I would imagine, would be ensured in a fair peace negotiation). Land can be given in one day, it does have that immediate property which can change in an instant from "ours" to "theirs".
On the other hand, if one day peace is achieved, it can disappear in a moment. The concept of peace can be erased with one movement. But the land given for this peace would then remain in their hands.
At this point, Israel will have lost everything and gained nothing.
"This is the first time the Arab League is coming to Israel," Regev said.So they already won something. We're flying their flag. Are they flying ours?
"From its inception the Arab League has been hostile to Israel. It will be the
first time we'll be flying the Arab League flag."
And then the article talks of another part of the peace proposal, which in and of itself proves that this "peace proposal" is nothing more than a Trojan horse.
Israel has welcomed aspects of the plan, while rejecting its call for a
return of all of the West Bank and an implied demand to resettle within Israeli
borders the Palestinian families who became refugees from the 1948 war that
followed Israel's creation.
The refugees issue has always angered me. Not only the issue itself, but the world's blindness to what it means.
First the issue itself:
- Even though about 680,000 people of Arab descent became refugees at the time of Israel's creation, most of them did so without ever seeing an Israeli soldier. Had they decided to stay, they would have been part of today's Israeli Arab population. These people have become refugees in their respective host countries, and have remained so for almost sixty years. We are now three or four generations later.
At about the same time, about 1,5 million Jews were forced or threatened out of Arab countries throughout the Middle East. About 600,000 were resettled in the newly established Israel (the others fled to Europe or the United States). - These "Palestinian" refugees have lived in squalor ever since becoming refugees. One of the distinguishing marks of poverty is having many children per family. They excelled at that. Oddly enough descendants are also refugees, making them the only population on earth whose refugee status seems to be hereditary.
If you would compare to other situations, this would mean that I, as a descendant of four European Jews displaced during WWII, would still be qualified as a Polish refugee, just as my grandparents were for a few years after WWII.
I am sorry, but children, grandchildren, and whatever the ensuing family tree might be, they ARE NOT refugees. Of the original 680,000 refugees, how many are left? This is the only number that should be considered. - Obviously, having 8 kids per family or what not has increased their population to 3 or 4 million (I lost count). They are asking to relocate these 3-4 million refugees back in Israel. Since Israel is a democracy, a sudden increase of its Muslim population will make sure that the only Jewish country in the world will de facto no longer be Jewish. Why would they propose such a thing under the guise of a "peace proposal"? It's a sure death of Israel as we know it, and that is what they really want to achieve.
But the point that really angers me, and that no one seems to talk about, is the absurdity of this claim.
This claim, to return 4 million Palestinian "refugees" in Israel, is claimed and repeated in parallel with the claim for a Palestinian country. What do they need a Palestinian country for if the plan is for them all to be relocated in Israel? Why do they need to return to Israel if they have a Palestinian country? Isn't this an obvious attempt to erase Israel? Either from the outside, by creating a terrorist state as a neighbor, or from the inside, by eliminating the unique Jewish identity of the country through demographics.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Harry Potter Theories
Must read 6th Harry Potter book again before the last one comes out.
I have a bunch of theories, but the main one is that Snape isn't a bad wizard. Harry, however, will discover this too late or almost too late.
But I want to reread the book in order to reorganize my ideas clearly...
(Don't expect any blogging from me on July 21st...)
I have a bunch of theories, but the main one is that Snape isn't a bad wizard. Harry, however, will discover this too late or almost too late.
But I want to reread the book in order to reorganize my ideas clearly...
(Don't expect any blogging from me on July 21st...)
BBC's Alan Johnston freed after 16 weeks
I'm sure that by now you've all heard that Alan Johnston has been freed. He seems to be in fine shape and will hopefully be back home soon. I first read about it here and felt I had a few things to say.
What's a kind of civil war?
A civil war is a war in which parties within the same culture, society or nationality fight against each other for the control of political power. [wiki]
What is going on in Gaza is a civil war. They share the same culture, the same society and the same nationality. What they don't share (besides the power, obviously) are their international policy tactics.
Hamas makes it officially loud and clear that they will annihilate Israel if given half the chance.
Fatah has it a well known secret that they will annihilate Israel if given half the chance.
International credibility for what? For being able to negotiate with terrorist scum like themselves? How do we know this wasn't orchestrated by Hamas from the start, in order to later be able to show the world "Look, we freed him, we're good people".
A subliminal message to make us feel that the Hamas takeover is a good thing?
Does that mean that now Alan Johnston will be writing about the horrible situations of Tzvi Feldman, Zachary Baumel, Yehuda Katz, Ron Arad, Guy Hever, Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev? After four months of indifferent treatment, does he realize what 25 years of torture and cruel treatment means?
This coming from Hamas? They won't allow illegal activities against anyone? Kassam rockets are legal now? This doesn't make much sense at first sight.
Meryl has often said that fallacies like what we just heard often make sense if at the end of the fallacy you add "Unless it's Jews/Israel/Israeli citizens". Let's give it a try.
"We will not allow illegal activities against anyone, unless it's Israeli citizens."
Yep, perfect. Works every time.
And yet the British academic boycott is against Israel. Go figure.
Now let's see how his release was arranged
I'd like to remind readers, or maybe inform new readers, that this "resistance" is against a neighboring country who gave them full control over Gaza, removed every last Jew from the strip, and are no longer an "occupying power". What on earth are they resisting against?
Also, I'd like to point out that the only reason Hamas helped free Alan Johnston is because having him kidnapped is bad for their image, and therefore bad for their ultimate goal.
What is that ultimate goal?
Total. Destruction. Of. Israel.
And if they can get the world to close their eyes and let them do it, that's just the cherry on top.
But they can't quite do that if they're also holding a BBC reporter captive right? So free the dude, get the world to love you again and appreciate your peacefulness, continue doing everything in your power to destroy Israel.
And now to the double standards issue.
The last paragraph of the story is the following.
What has that got to do with anything?? [full story here]
First of all, how stupid do you have to be to play around with a plastic M-16 replica in a war zone with armed soldiers? Maybe Israeli soldiers should have waited to see whether the M-16 would shoot at them to determine if it's real or not.
When armed robbers who are killed by policemen are later found to have been carrying a fake arm, no one blames the police. Why should this be any different? Ah yes, because it's Israel. (When in doubt, always refer back to the Meryl concept)
But the real issue is, why on earth is this part of the article??
If it's there just to paint a general picture of the situation in the past 24 hours fine. But then why not mention this?
Just because Hamas "helped" free Alan Johnston doesn't mean they're not bloodthirsty terrorists.
Hamas routed the Fatah faction in a kind of civil war in Gaza last month
and since then has been trying to deliver on promises of security and stability.
What's a kind of civil war?
A civil war is a war in which parties within the same culture, society or nationality fight against each other for the control of political power. [wiki]
What is going on in Gaza is a civil war. They share the same culture, the same society and the same nationality. What they don't share (besides the power, obviously) are their international policy tactics.
Hamas makes it officially loud and clear that they will annihilate Israel if given half the chance.
Fatah has it a well known secret that they will annihilate Israel if given half the chance.
The release of Johnston was an important goal for Hamas, which is
classified as a terrorist group by the United States and the European Union, in
its efforts to secure international credibility.
International credibility for what? For being able to negotiate with terrorist scum like themselves? How do we know this wasn't orchestrated by Hamas from the start, in order to later be able to show the world "Look, we freed him, we're good people".
At the news conference, Johnston thanked all those who had worked for his
release, including Haniya and Hamas. He said he was only beaten in the last
half-hour before his release, and said that once Hamas took over Gaza, his
kidnappers, whom he described as "comfortable," began to get very nervous.
A subliminal message to make us feel that the Hamas takeover is a good thing?
"It was really grim," Johnston said. "It was like being buried
alive, really, removed from the world." His kidnappers were
indifferent and he became very ill twice, he said, "and I had the
feeling that they would watch television while the British guy died in the other
room."
Does that mean that now Alan Johnston will be writing about the horrible situations of Tzvi Feldman, Zachary Baumel, Yehuda Katz, Ron Arad, Guy Hever, Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev? After four months of indifferent treatment, does he realize what 25 years of torture and cruel treatment means?
Mahmoud Zahar, said Hamas would enforce the rule of law in Gaza and protect
foreigners. "It's a new era," Zahar said. "We will not allow illegal activities
against anyone."
This coming from Hamas? They won't allow illegal activities against anyone? Kassam rockets are legal now? This doesn't make much sense at first sight.
Meryl has often said that fallacies like what we just heard often make sense if at the end of the fallacy you add "Unless it's Jews/Israel/Israeli citizens". Let's give it a try.
"We will not allow illegal activities against anyone, unless it's Israeli citizens."
Yep, perfect. Works every time.
His continuing detention was considered an embarrassment by many ordinary
Palestinians, who considered him a fair and sympathetic voice, and made
it more difficult for other journalists to cover the territory.
And yet the British academic boycott is against Israel. Go figure.
Now let's see how his release was arranged
Hamas and the clan agreed that kidnappings would stop and that the
clan's extensive weaponry will be considered part of "the resistance" against
Israel and not confiscated, according to a member of the Army of Islam
interviewed this morning. But his version of the deal could not be immediately
confirmed. One member of the Hamas military wing said that the Army of Islam had "played an important role in the resistance," including in the capture a year
ago of an Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, still being held.
I'd like to remind readers, or maybe inform new readers, that this "resistance" is against a neighboring country who gave them full control over Gaza, removed every last Jew from the strip, and are no longer an "occupying power". What on earth are they resisting against?
Also, I'd like to point out that the only reason Hamas helped free Alan Johnston is because having him kidnapped is bad for their image, and therefore bad for their ultimate goal.
What is that ultimate goal?
Total. Destruction. Of. Israel.
And if they can get the world to close their eyes and let them do it, that's just the cherry on top.
But they can't quite do that if they're also holding a BBC reporter captive right? So free the dude, get the world to love you again and appreciate your peacefulness, continue doing everything in your power to destroy Israel.
And now to the double standards issue.
The last paragraph of the story is the following.
Israeli troops fatally shot a Palestinian youth in Hebron on Tuesday
evening after they mistook a toy rifle he was carrying for an M-16, an Israeli
Army spokeswoman said. Maan, the Palestinian news agency, identified him as
Ahmed Skafi, 15.
What has that got to do with anything?? [full story here]
First of all, how stupid do you have to be to play around with a plastic M-16 replica in a war zone with armed soldiers? Maybe Israeli soldiers should have waited to see whether the M-16 would shoot at them to determine if it's real or not.
When armed robbers who are killed by policemen are later found to have been carrying a fake arm, no one blames the police. Why should this be any different? Ah yes, because it's Israel. (When in doubt, always refer back to the Meryl concept)
But the real issue is, why on earth is this part of the article??
If it's there just to paint a general picture of the situation in the past 24 hours fine. But then why not mention this?
Why not add that Hamas launched a rocket into the State of Israel in the hopes of killing civilians again? Because it would defeat your point of Hamas being a nice fuzzy-wuzzy organization trying to bring peace and tranquility to the world?A Kassam rocket was fired at Israel from the northern Gaza Strip Tuesday
evening. There were no reports of casualties or damage.
Just because Hamas "helped" free Alan Johnston doesn't mean they're not bloodthirsty terrorists.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Who Will Avenge Farfur?
Of course this wasn't the end of this Palestinian Child Abuse.
Hamas television to replace 'martyred' Mickey Mouse look-alike
And what is this Islamist agenda? Repeat after me.
Total. Destruction. Of. Israel.
Just like in real life, martyrs are used to further ignite the spiteful, violent passions of the Palestinian mobs.
Mark my words, whatever new character they use will try to avenge Farfur's death in holy Jihad against the murderous, criminal Jews who killed the innocent Farfur just because he had a rusty old key.
But all this is not shocking to me. It's been years and years that we've complained that Palestinian youth is getting a violent, virulent education on television. Constantly bombarded with images of death and fabricated scenarios of Israelis destroying anything remotely Palestinian. The world is waking up only because this is Walt Disney's Mickey Mouse?
This is not new. This video right here is a compilation of things I've seen at least since 1999, some of them maybe even before.
This means that while I grew up watching fuzzy muppets singing the ABC (or rather, the Aleph-Beth), those kids grew up with visions of killing the nameless Israeli enemy. Today's generation grew up on those images. They are completely brainwashed. Will the little girl dressed in green singing about wearing a battledress ever be able to see me, an Israeli, as a human being? Now that she's a teenager, does she realize? Is it possible to ever change her mind now?
Is it possible for children who have been indoctrinated with this filth to ever lead normal lives?
"Children learn best from example; the trouble is they don't know a good example from a bad one."
Hamas television to replace 'martyred' Mickey Mouse look-alike
A Hamas television station that last week killed off a Mickey Mouse
look-alike who urged children to fight against Israel will use other famous
characters to further their Islamist agenda, station officials said on
Monday.
And what is this Islamist agenda? Repeat after me.
Total. Destruction. Of. Israel.
"Farfur was a story alive and he has turned into another story as a
[martyr]," Saeed said.
Just like in real life, martyrs are used to further ignite the spiteful, violent passions of the Palestinian mobs.
Mark my words, whatever new character they use will try to avenge Farfur's death in holy Jihad against the murderous, criminal Jews who killed the innocent Farfur just because he had a rusty old key.
But all this is not shocking to me. It's been years and years that we've complained that Palestinian youth is getting a violent, virulent education on television. Constantly bombarded with images of death and fabricated scenarios of Israelis destroying anything remotely Palestinian. The world is waking up only because this is Walt Disney's Mickey Mouse?
This is not new. This video right here is a compilation of things I've seen at least since 1999, some of them maybe even before.
This means that while I grew up watching fuzzy muppets singing the ABC (or rather, the Aleph-Beth), those kids grew up with visions of killing the nameless Israeli enemy. Today's generation grew up on those images. They are completely brainwashed. Will the little girl dressed in green singing about wearing a battledress ever be able to see me, an Israeli, as a human being? Now that she's a teenager, does she realize? Is it possible to ever change her mind now?
Is it possible for children who have been indoctrinated with this filth to ever lead normal lives?
"Children learn best from example; the trouble is they don't know a good example from a bad one."
Monday, July 2, 2007
No Mouse Trap Large Enough for this Filthy Rat
I've mentioned this creature before. Farfur is an Islamist Mickey Mouse lookalike. He preaches hate, terror, martyrdom and world domination on a children's show on Palestinian TV.
For some reason, they decided to eliminate the ugly Mickey Mouse clone. (Maybe they were about to get sued by Walt Disney for defamation of character?). Now let's see, if you'd ever want to eliminate a character from a children's program, how would you do that?
- Discreetly never use his costume again. Maybe no one will notice.
- Have a goodbye episode where you explain that he's going off to college or to Australia or to the moon or something. He'll promise to send postcards.
- Have him killed by the evil blood-sucking money-craving land-stealing neighboring Jews. While he's killed have him remind the entire generation of influential young Palestinians that they will be forever miserable unless they liberate an imaginary country which never existed, and convince them that it actually did exist and it got stolen.
Obviously, the Palestinian authority responsible of what gets shown on TV opted for number 3. Color me surprised. Let's see some Oscar-winning acting on their behalf in the following video.
If you want a brief resumé of this great movie, here it is (taken from comments from LGF):
An old Palestinian man has a grandson, named Farfur, who, for reasons entirely unclear, is a gigantic rat. Grandpa bequeaths to his rodent kin the "keys" and "documents" to "Tel Aviv". (Which city didn't exist until Jews built it). Subsequently, Farfur the talking rat gets abducted and interrogated by a brutal African who is also Israeli. (We know he's Israeli because he wears his sunglasses indoors and generally behaves like a total prick). The African Israeli demands that Farfur turn over the Tel Aviv "documents", alternating his negotiating technique, bizarrely, between vicious beatings and generous offers of financial compensation. Farfur (the rat) spurns these inducements, and is subsequently beaten to death, apparently unable to defend himself, notwithstanding the fact that he seems to outweigh his assailant by a
considerable margin.
There are about a million reasons why this video makes me want to throw up, besides the horrible acting. I'll start typing them until my fingers get tired.
- Grandpa tells Hamas Mickey "This land which was occupied in 1948, is the land which I inherited from my fathers and forefathers".
This is a phrase commonly used in order to give the impression that "Palestinians" have been there forever, whereas Jews came along recently and stole the land.
This impression is FALSE.
More information about this can be found in the book "From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters. I highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to know the origins of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In time, I'd like to discuss each chapter of her book on this blog. - He continues "It is a beautiful land, all covered in flowers and olive and palm trees." Is this to give the impression that it was already this way when it was supposedly occupied?
This impression is FALSE.
Tel Aviv (this is the city he will soon talk about) was empty dune and founded in the 1880s by Jewish immigrants as an alternative to the expensive town, Jaffa. These empty dunes were purchased from willing Arab sellers in auctions, throughout many years, piece by piece. Here is a picture from such an auction in 1909.
Anything that flourished in this arid desert is thanks to the Jews who came and built Israel out of the sand. "Flowers and olive and palm trees"? Not in Tel Aviv, not before the Jews. - Now he talks about Tel Aviv. Sort of.
"The land is called Tel Al-Rabi, but unfortunately the Jews called it Tel Aviv after they occupied it."
This statement is FALSE for two reasons.
Tel Al-Rabi never existed. It is the direct translation of Tel Aviv into Arabic. The Hebrew name was given to this city after it was given to the Hebrew translation of the book "Altneuland" by Theodor Herzl. There was no city there before Jews created it.
There is a growing use of this fabricated name for the city of Tel Aviv. This is part of the increasing efforts to erase Israeli identity. - The second reason that statement is FALSE is that Tel Aviv was never "occupied territory", or disputed territory or what have you.
Tel Aviv always belonged inside Israeli borders. In the UN's 1947 partition plan, after the end of the Independence war in 1949 and until the Six-Day War in 1967, after that war and until today.
But if Tel Aviv is "occupied", then that means they don't really want to live in peace with Israel next to them, does it? It means they want to completely get rid of Israel, coexistence be damned!
Shocker?
Not really. - Grandpa talks about the keys and documents of the property he left behind. Meaning he was forced to leave everything behind and wasn't allowed to come back.
This impression is FALSE.
If he was forced to leave, it wasn't by the Jews. It was by Arab armies who promised they would wipe out the Jews in 1948. Arabs who stayed during the formation of the State of Israel became equal Israeli citizens with the same rights as everyone else. That's why you can still get the best Hummus in the WORLD in Jaffa. Because it's made by one of the descendants of the Arabs who stayed.
On the other hand, Jews were forced to leave countless Arab countries. And they really were forced. Not make believe forced. - "Documents proving that the land is ours".
This is using what we insist on all the time, and turning it against us. We have documents proving that we bought the different pieces of land. We have proof that no lands were stolen. - "Make sure you don't give up the land Farfur"
Brainwashing the kids over and over again that they must never give up that land (which they never had). - "From the filth of the criminal, plundering Jew".
Palestinian Authority lets this pass on national television in front of thousands of kiddie eyes? Imagine the world outrage if on Israeli TV anyone said "From the filth of the criminal, plundering Muslim"? Double Standards, hellllloooooooo? - "From the filth of the criminal, plundering Jew who killed my Grandpa and everybody else."
Uh, I know children have a short attention span, but come on. Only ten seconds ago Grandpa keeled over and died from what appears to be old age and maybe overexposure to the sun (either that, or camel farts).
Children watch this and it brainwashes them into thinking that even if Grandpa died of "natural causes", it is still Israel's fault. It is still the Jews' fault. Always the Joooooooos' fault. - My four year old neighbor can draw a better Israeli flag than that. Are they so busy coming up with brilliant scenarios for the series that they don't have five minutes to draw a flag that actually represents a country? It's not the flag of Brazil or of Cyprus, which I'll admit are a bit harder to draw. It's two thin blue stripes and a star in the middle. You've burned it so often, you really ought to know it by now.
- Farfur is interrogated for unknown reasons by an Israeli agent who dislikes mice (apparently). Why are children shown this? What is the link between the two? Farfur having pseudo documents makes him an enemy of the state? There is a reason for this...
It is to give the impression that Palestinians who are held in Israeli jails or are interrogated are actually innocent. (Because obviously, if Farfur has done nothing wrong, it would be ridiculous to interrogate him just because he has an old rusty key and a yellowing piece of paper). The impression is that Palestinians are interrogated just for the fun of the Israelis, even though they have done nothing wrong.
This impression is FALSE.
Palestinians who are held in prisons in Israel are there because they have some link with a terrorist activity.
As Dan Gillerman has often said "They are not in there for some minor parking violation. They are there because of their links to terror." - Ahhh the Israeli Interrogator seems to be forcing Farfur to sell his documents to the land, or in other words, to sell his land.
This is to give the impression that previous occasions when Jews bought land from Arabs, if was forced.
This impression is FALSE.
In the 19th and early 20th century Arabs were more than willing to sell that useless desert land to foolish Jews. It seemed like easy money to them. Jews didn't force anything out of them. How could they have?
Arabs made fun of the Jews for buying arid land and swamps, thinking those Jews really don't know the first thing about cultivating land. Then they saw what the Jews did with that "useless" land. Now they regret. Sour grapes. But nothing forced.
If anything, nowadays, Arabs are forbidden to sell land to Jews. Not by Israeli law, nonono. By general Palestinian consensus. Arabs who sell land to Jews/Israelis get punished. - All of a sudden Farfur is talking about liberating Jerusalem. Wasn't it Tel Aviv 45 seconds ago? Ah yes, mush it all up so that kids just keep the general idea of "I must liberate my land", which was never theirs to begin with.
- Farfur says "No, we're not the kind of people who sell our lands to terrorists".
So Israelis are the terrorists now? - The little veiled girl watches in utter sadness. She's only what, ten years old? Why is she veiled? I understand adult women who, of their own free will, wish to hide their "sexuality" and do so with a veil. But a girl that young is considered already as sexual and therefore needs to be veiled?
That speaks miles about the morality of the producers of the show. - Farfur was martyred. This is what is shown to children. In order to become a hailed martyr you need to defend your land.
- She talks of Mohamed Al-Dura, saying he was killed by Israelis.
This is FALSE.
If you look at the events of that day, it is almost physically impossible for an Israeli bullet to have hit that boy. It is completely possible that he was hit by a Palestinian bullet. But that's a whole other subject I'll also talk about another time. - Us Infidels, we're supposed to be the descendants of monkeys and pigs (As far as the monkeys go, I don't really see the insult, but I guess they don't believe in evolution either) (maybe because they haven't?). But what are you trying to say, that Palestinians are the descendants of rats? Or that ultimately all Palestinians will have evolved into giant rodents? On Israeli Sesame Street, Kippi the hedgehog had hedgehog ancestors. No zoophilia in my childhood prime time TV.
- Look at that girl. What kind of a future will she have? Will she believe everything she repeats to the cameras? Will she also go and wear a belt bomb one day and be martyred? She seems like she could have been a smart girl. She could have been so much more than that.
The Palestinians have deliberately destroyed their own children; the destruction is thorough and complete. Is anyone surprised? Hamas swore they would annihilate Israel, and what better way to do it? Wage a multi-generational war against Israel. Indoctrinating the kids with nothing but hate and violence against Jews and Israel, giving them no hope for the present and a bleak future unless Israel is destroyed. How do you deprogram a whole generation who was brought up to think in this fashion?
And while we're on the topic, do you think Farfur is in heaven with 72 virgin Minnies?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)