Category Archives: Israel

Arabs Trashed Israel: What's New?

Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Middle East, Propaganda

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel is alleged to have presented Obama with Mark Twain’s Innocents Abroad, which documents the American satirist’s “post Civil War tour” to Palestine.

The New York Times disagrees with Bibi’s deductions, drawn from Twain’s impressions. Nevertheless, it reports the following:

“Nine years ago, in a book of his own, A Durable Peace: Israel and Its Place Among the Nations, Mr. Netanyahu cited some of the observations in Innocents Abroad, about how sparsely populated certain parts of the land were at the time of Twain’s visit, as proof of ‘what every civilized and educated person knew at the close of the nineteenth century: that the land was indeed largely empty.’ Mr. Netanyahu quoted several passages from Twain’s book to support his argument that, even decades after the American writer visited the Holy Land, ‘this wasteland of Palestine,’ with ‘its miniscule Arab presence, making use of virtually none of the available land for the people’s own meager needs, could hardly be considered a serious counter to the claim of millions of Jews the world over to a state of their own.'”

“Twain’s description of Jerusalem under Muslim rule” … was far from flattering:

Rags, wretchedness, poverty and dirt, those signs and symbols that indicate the presence of Moslem rule more surely than the crescent-flag itself, abound. Lepers, cripples, the blind, and the idiotic, assail you on every hand, and they know but one word of but one language apparently—the eternal “bucksheesh.” To see the numbers of maimed, malformed and diseased humanity that throng the holy places and obstruct the gates, one might suppose that the ancient days had come again, and that the angel of the Lord was expected to descend at any moment to stir the waters of Bethesda. Jerusalem is mournful, and dreary, and lifeless. I would not desire to live here.

[SNIP]

Arabs trashed Palestine and never dried one swamp. Jews dried the swamps—died in droves of malaria doing so—planted orchards, started industries, and generally built the place into what it is today.

Past is prologue: Palestinians continue to punish the land.

So, what’s new under the sun?

Big Man Barack

Africa, Barack Obama, Constitution, Democrats, Economy, Ethics, IMMIGRATION, Intellectualism, Israel, Journalism, Law

To go by the dictionary, and “within the context of political science, big man, big man syndrome, or bigmanism refers to corrupt and autocratic rule of countries by a single person.”

Back in February, Democratic Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), “a stern constitutional scholar who has always stood up for the legislative branch in its role in checking the power of the White House,” warned about Obama’s executive-branch power grab.

According to Politico, “Byrd complained about Obama’s decision to create White House offices on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Byrd said such positions ‘can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.'”

Byrd is an old Southern gentleman after whom Republicans are always chasing for his past indiscretions. George Will follows in Byrd’s footsteps in making a similar point, only later in the game, and leveled at a president he did not support.

“The Obama administration is … careless regarding constitutional values and is acquiring a tincture of lawlessness,” writes Will. After detailing the flouting of contracts, the use of TARP as a slush fund, and the bullying of business, Will concludes:

“The Obama administration’s agenda of maximizing dependency involves political favoritism cloaked in the raiment of ‘economic planning’ and ‘social justice’ that somehow produce results superior to what markets produce when freedom allows merit to manifest itself, and incompetence to fail. The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.”

Updated: Israelis To Sue NATO For 1999 Air Strikes On Serbia

Europe, Foreign Policy, Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Justice, Political Philosophy, War

What a great move, from the only people to have stood by my homeland, South Africa. The tactic taken by the Israelis is aggressive. It accomplishes two things: It makes it a little harder for the hypocrites who monopolize the discourse on justice to get away with murder. It achieves a measure of justice by calling a crime a crime. An added bonus it that an Israeli outfit here is actually bucking American foreign policy.

I can almost sense the bitterness in this BBC News report (sent by john peter maher):

“The Israeli Almagor Terrorist Victims’ Association is about to file a lawsuit against NATO officials who gave the green light for the bombing of Serbia in 1999.

The association elected to take the move in response to the decision by Judge Fernando Andreu of the Spanish Audencia Nacional (National Court) to launch an investigation into Israel’s bombing of Gaza in 2002, when one Hamas leader was killed and 14 people were wounded.

In the suit, Almagor cites the names of a number of high-profile Spaniards, including EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana, who was NATO secretary general from 1995 to 1999, as well as the names of certain officials from other European countries and the United States.

Almagor Director Meir Indor told the media in Israel that the lawsuit would be completed shortly.

He confirmed that the Serbian case might open a Pandora’s Box, which could make certain individuals think twice before deciding to accept any lawsuits that the Palestinians filed against Israel.

‘We see this as a case highlighting the double standards of Europeans who are accusing Israel of war crimes, while at the same time, those very same countries, as part of NATO, committed crimes that were a lot worse,’ Indor said.

He stressed that every European NATO member-state would be mentioned and that the suit would be filed in every country that decided to file similar actions against Israel for war crimes recently committed either in the aforesaid case, or, more recently, during the Israeli offensive in Gaza at the turn of the year.

‘Even now Israeli Army generals cannot travel to the UK for fear of being arrested the moment they set foot in the airport,’ said the Almagor president.

The organization’s delegate in Serbia was, he said, a certain Mr. D., an Israeli businessman who was caught in the crossfire when the air strikes began, and who works in Serbia to this day.

Serbian citizens have welcomed the news that Almagor has launched their case, says Mr. D.

Almagor purports to being a humanitarian organization that represents the victims of global terror, not only in Israel, and is endeavoring to obtain authorization from Serbian victims of the bombing to present their case.”

Update: In response to the comment: Sure, this is a self-serving action on the part of the Israelis. Altruism is overrated–and, at times, wrong-headed. You serve others best by serving yourself first and foremost. Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand and all that stuff. Good stuff.

This is why I love this feisty move.

‘Avigdor Lieberman’s Brilliant Debut’

Islam, Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Middle East

Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s new foreign minister, has given his maiden speech, which has left Daniel Pipes elated. It’s hard to disagree, given that it was through strength that Menachem Begin, a hardliner Likudnik, made peace with Egypt. “Here are some of the topics Lieberman covered in his 1,100-word stem-winder”:

Egypt: Lieberman praises Cairo as “a stabilizing factor in the regional system and perhaps even beyond that” but puts the Mubarak government on notice that he will only go there if his counterpart comes to Jerusalem.

Repeating the word “peace”: Lieberman poured scorn on prior Israeli governments: “The fact that we say the word ‘peace’ twenty times a day will not bring peace any closer.”

The burden of peace: “I have seen all the proposals made so generously by Ehud Olmert, but I have not seen any result.” Now, things have changed: “the other side also bears responsibility” for peace and must ante up.

The Road Map: The speech’s most surprising piece of news is Lieberman’s focus on and endorsement of the Road Map, a 2003 diplomatic initiative he voted against at the time but which is, as he puts it, “the only document approved by the cabinet and by the Security Council.” He calls it “a binding resolution” that the new government must implement. In contrast, he specifically notes that the government is not bound by the Annapolis accord of 2007 (“Neither the cabinet nor the Knesset ever ratified it”).

Implementing the Road Map: Lieberman intends to “act exactly” according to the letter of the Road Map, including its Tenet and Zinni sub-documents. Then comes one of his two central statements of the speech:

Read the rest here.