So who are these monsters we have to release?

Make no mistake about my feelings in regard to the Gilad Shalit prisoner swap. I am very happy that he will come home and while the price to pay for his release is very high, I applaud my government for being able to make this very difficult choice, and support this decision.

But it is an incredibly high price to pay and one can only wonder about the society which welcomes monsters such as the terrorists we are forced to release.

Here's a little glimpse of a handful of the people beasts the peace-loving and state-deserving Palestinians wish to see free:

• Walid Abd al-Aziz Abd al-Hadi Anajas, born in 1980, currently serving 36 life sentences for his role in the terror attack at Moment Caffé in Jerusalem on March 9, 2002, where 11 civilians were immediately killed and 54 more were injured.
  
• Nasir Sami Abd al-Razzaq Ali al-Nasser - Yataima, born in 1977, currently serving 29 life sentences for his role in helping bomb the Park Hotel in Netanya when it was full of guests for the Passover Seder on March 22, 2002, where 30 civilians were killed and 140 injured.
  
  
• Maedh  Waal Taleb Abu Sharakh, born in 1980, currently serving 19 life sentences for his role in the bombing of bus 37 in Haifa on March 5, 2003, in which there were 17 fatalities and 53 wounded.
• Fadi Muhammad Ibrahim al-Jaaba, born in 1982, currently serving 18 life sentences, also for his role in the bombing of bus 37 in Haifa.
  
• Mus’ab Ismail aI-Hashlimun, born 1982, currently serving 17 life sentences for dispatching the two suicide bombers who realized the twin bus bombing in Beer Sheva on August 31, 2004, where 16 civilians were killed and 100 wounded.
  
• Tamimi Aref Ahmad Ahlam, born in 1980, the female terrorist currently serving 16 life sentences for driving the suicide bomber to his destination, the Sbarro pizza restaurant terror attack on August 9, 2001, where 15 people (including 5 members of the same family) were killed, and 130 people wounded.
  
• Abd al-Aziz Yussuf Mustafa Salehi, born in 1981, the man who proudly waved his blood stained hands to a cheering crowd after the brutal lynch of two Israeli non-combatant reservists, before their bodies were thrown from the window and trampled on, on October 12, 2000.
  
  ;
• Muna Jawad Ali Amna , born in 1976, serving 1 life sentence, was present at the Ramallah lynching and was excited by what she saw, and decided to get active online. She lured 16-year-old Ofir Rahum to Jerusalem then Ramallah, after telling him on the Internet that she was a new immigrant from Morocco. She drove him to his killers who fired several shots at him.
  While in prison, she adopted a young baby born there, does not regret what she did and says that people shouldn't look at her only as a murderer, she also has a deep personality.
  

These are not people who deserve to be free. They deserve to rot in hell for a few eternities, not to be hailed as heroes in their home villages.The only thing I can console myself with is the fact that they had very good living conditions in Israeli prisons, and will now go back to their previous, crummy living standards. In fact, they will all probably have to go into hiding because Israel has made it clear that just because they are being returned does not mean they are no longer targets.

Remember, it's easier to kill them outside of prison rather than inside.


You can see the full list of the terrorists about to be freed here.
For detailed accounts of the lives cut short because of these terrorists, One Family Fund has it all. Read their stories and remember their lives.

Analysis of Abbas's UN speech

For a while now, I hear people around me ask innocently "why shouldn't the Palestinians be recognized as a full member-state by the UN?" as if that's the solution to the whole Middle East Peace Process.

These people can go to lengths dissecting Netanyahu's speech, casting doubt on his willingness to go to negotiations, taking offense at his slightest criticism of the Palestinian Authority for the current status quo, and generally feeling that his concerns regarding terrorism and security are bordering on paranoia.

But place these people in front of Abbas's speech, and they can't find a thing to criticize. Oh yeah sure, he hasn't been the perfect negotiator, but he's the most secular leader the Palestinians are likely to get, or something just as apologetic.

You expect so little of me that I can get a standing ovation just by waving this wad of papers

Why is it that people have such low expectations of the Palestinian leadership? Raise the bar a bit, you're not doing them any favors by treating them like incompetent kindergartners.

Abbas whines at the UN

Some people really have no shame.

Abbas could have had a great moment at the UN. Imagine coming in, and declaring "As a result of successful negotiations, and a strong infrastructure in cooperation with the Jewish State of Israel, I am proud to declare the establishment of the State of Palestine" or something just as kumbaya-ish.

Instead, we got this (PDF text in link).

Notice how there is no mention of Hamas or terrorism. No mention of Jews.
Just perpetual whining.

He even talks about Arafat's 1974 UN appearance with his famous ""Do not let the  olive branch  fall
from my hand", failing to mention that the other hand held the proverbial "freedom fighter's gun".
Just as all of his narrative, he glosses over anything the Palestinians may have done wrong, because they are just perfect citizens, aren't they?

The more things change the more they stay the same

Who actually has legal rights to Palestine? Part 2

Now that we've established the legal framework in place before the creation of the State of Israel, we can discuss the agreements, rights and obligations which followed it, particularly UN Security Council Resolution 242.
(If you haven't read Part 1 yet, I highly recommend it, it's good for your health)

Is Israel always in the UN's cross hairs?

United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 does not call for the return to 1967 borders

I assume most of you were already familiar with this concept. Still, it never hurts to be reminded of the context around this resolution. There are many points of discussion in regards to this resolution:

• Does every single word matter?
• Which version actually counts, the English or the French version?
• Is this resolution legally binding?

Who actually has legal rights to Palestine? Part 1

With all this media frenzy about the Palestinian unilateral state bid at the UN this coming week, does anyone ever stop to think whether this move will have any legal ramifications? What's more, does anyone even care what previous commitments state and what they oblige their parties to uphold?

Well, the Mainstream Media (MSM) sure doesn't. Furthermore, President Abbas knows very well that the MSM has a selective amnesia when it comes to these subjects, and he exploits that to the max.

Why yes, contracts are legally binding. Unless you signed a contract with Israel obviously.

Points to keep in mind which we'll be developing in this post:

• United Nations General Assembly Resolutions are not legally binding.
• Rights in regards to Jews and Arabs in Palestine were created in International law during the British Mandate of Palestine (in other words, a long time ago)
• United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 does not call for the return to 1967 borders
• Israel and the Palestinian Authority signed legal agreements, or contracts, which give both parties not only rights but also obligations.

United Nations General Assembly Resolutions are NOT legally binding.

Wait, what? No way.

What present to get for a BDS friend?

Bored kids seeking to experience self-righteous indignation and then pretending that that indignation is useful to anyone. I'm sure we all know at least one person who fits that description. I have quite a few friends who do.

Now, the problem is, what do you do when their birthdays come around?

Yesterday, we had a little get-together for a close friend's birthday. Now to be totally fair, this friend isn't really active in the Palestinian arena of her organization, she concentrates mostly on developing countries in Africa (good on her!).  However, this doesn't stop her from randomly posting her organization's messages about the Arab-Israeli conflict on facebook, and to have simplistic four-word opinions such as "Palestinians live under oppression" or "Jewish settlers prevent peace" or even "Israel is exaggerating. Again". While she doesn't actively seek to BDS (She has no idea that all of the herbs she buys at the supermarket are from Israel), she knows her organization does a lot of propaganda for it, and she agrees with their reasons to do so.

She's not a bad person, though she does have some very enlightened thoughts such as that Jews wear funny little hats and that they don't integrate well, and they're really obsessive about their kitchens. (She babysat to a religious family once, and thought it was okay to bring her frozen lasagna and heat it in their oven. Let's simply say that hilarity did not ensue, and that the oven spent a week disassembled in the garden.)

Again, to be really fair, it's understandable that with what the medias here show of the conflict, it's almost impossible to have a different opinion, and it takes a great mind to be able to question oneself and search beyond the available platitudes.

I digress.

Her organization is very active in boycotting all things Israel, including open hearings and debates if they include anyone from Israel "with an agenda". They are definitely not in the business of understanding. Few people who proselytize about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict believe there is any value in listening to the other side.

I could have given her a little set of Ahava creams, or a basket filled with bamba, bissli and other Israeli calories, or perhaps an Israeli music CD (who doesn't love Idan Raichel?). But would she have felt differently about Israel's policies after feeling her super soft hands? Doubtful. I want something that will get her thinking, something that will start a debate. I don't need to convince people and to have everyone agree with me, but I do want their horizons to spread beyond their comfort level. Progress is made when ideas clash together. Or something.

Getting her a heavy duty geo-political book about the situation, or some historical analysis wouldn't be quite right. I'd obviously pick for something "from my side", and she'd be very wary reading it (if she ever would). I decided to give her an illustrated book called "How to understand Israel in 60 days (or less)" by Sarah Glidden.

It's the story of Sarah, a young American Jew, who goes to Israel for the first time, expecting it to fit her preconceived notions of it. It didn't. The tension in the story is based on the fact that progressive Sarah, like many of her cohorts, is critical of the State of Israel, particularly its treatment of the Palestinians. But what she sees is a reality much different from what she believed. Not all of it is good, which is probably the book's strongest point. It doesn't have all the answers. Heck, it doesn't even have all the questions. But she does question herself, and in that she does a grand job. It takes a very strong personality to say "I was wrong, I learned something new."

There are a few points in the book on which I wish she would have dug deeper, but on the whole I feel it's a very nice starting point for a more civilized discussion than random shouting of slogans. I hope that after reading this book my friend will see that there are no easy answers, and that not everything can be divided into "good" and "bad". Just because the loudest voices she hears seem to be so certain doesn't mean that they're right. It just means that they're the loudest.

I hope that after reading it, we'll have some interesting conversations where she'll be more open to hear my thoughts (right now, I can't possibly be objective because I'm Israeli and therefore too involved).

Hasbara doesn't always have to be directed at the masses, this type of hasbara is one person at a time. The book is available in English, French, Spanish, German, Italian and Dutch. I'm sure you all know a person who could benefit from a book like this as a light introduction to the subject. Don't wait and make a lovely gift to your favorite BDS friend today!

Palestinians celebrated 9/11 with candy

As we near the somber anniversary of the greatest terror attack ever perpetrated on US soil, take a moment to remember how you reacted. Take a moment to remember how your fellow citizens in your respective countries reacted.

How did people in East Jerusalem react?

The Palestinians danced joyfully in the streets, distributed candy, and flashed V for victory signs.

Remember this in a couple of weeks as these same Palestinians insist to the UN on their right to a state, in the very same city whose destruction they celebrated.

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

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,
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.

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?

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.