The Editor,
The Jerusalem Post.

Sir,

In a recent New York Times column, long time contributor Thomas Friedman alleged that the ovation given to Bibi Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, during and following his recent speech to both houses of Congress . . . was “bought and paid for by the Israel lobby”.

No facts were adduced to support this monstrous accusation though Friedman and the NYT have no doubt been roundly criticized.

What’s strangely missing however, are vigorous denials by individual Congressmen that they are corrupt, or have been corrupted by the Jewish or any other lobby. Why have they not personally defended themselves against this personal attack on their character and morals?

Sincerely,
Jock L. Falkson

The Letters Editor,
The Jerusalem Post.

Sir,

Re: Issamar Ginzberg’s Tips for Entrepreneurs column (December 19, 2011).

As a retired copywriter (35 years in South Africa) I was intrigued and delighted to read Issamar Ginzberg’s Tips for Entrepreneurs column (December 19), mischiefly titled “Graphic designers, please ignore this column”. Ha!

Ginzberg’s tips are all spot on. Israeli advertisers could do themselves a lot of good by cutting out this fine essay and making sure their design studios read his excellent advice before preparing their next ad.

Allow me however, to add something from a copywriter’s point of view.

Why do advertisers hire design studios instead of ad agencies? Design Studios generally produce good artwork but copy is mostly poor and ineffective.

Ad agencies have an innate understanding of marketing. They know that while good artwork is essential to draw attention to ads, persuasive benefit copy does the selling.

Many English ads seem to suffer from the fact that they are translated from Hebrew. There is far too much reliance on information – far too little on user benefits and sales persuasion. Such ads make me cringe.

The best solution is to have an English copywriter edit the translation. Better still perhaps, to write the ad anew.

Sincerely yours,

Jock L. Falkson

By Robert D. Blackwill, deputy national security advisor for strategic planning in the George W. Bush administration, and Walter B. Slocombe, undersecretary of defense for policy in the Clinton administration.

The writers are authors of the new report “Israel: A Strategic Asset for the United States” (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy).

Israeli contributions to U.S. national interests, underappreciated by many, include enhanced counter-terrorism, intelligence and technology useful in urban warfare.

American leaders have traditionally explained the foundations of the U.S.-Israel relationship by citing shared democratic values and the moral responsibility America bears to protect the small nation-state of the Jewish people. Although accurate and essential, this characterization is incomplete because it fails to capture a third, crucial aspect: the many ways in which Israel advances U.S. national interests.

Today, Israeli contributions to U.S. national interests cover a broad spectrum. Through joint training, exercises and exchanges on military doctrine, the United States has benefited in the areas of counter-terrorism, intelligence and experience in urban warfare. Increasingly, U.S. homeland security and military agencies are turning to Israeli technology to solve some of their most vexing technical and strategic problems.

This support includes advice and expertise on behavioral screening techniques for airport security and acquisition of an Israeli-produced tactical radar system to enhance force protection. Israel has been a world leader in the development of unmanned aerial systems, both for intelligence collection and combat, and it has shared with the U.S. military the technology, the doctrine and its experience regarding these systems. Israel is also a global pacesetter in armored vehicle protection, defense against short-range rockets, and the techniques and procedures of robotics, all of which it has shared with the United States.

In missile defense, the United States has a broad and multifaceted partnership with Israel. Israel’s national missile defenses — which include the U.S. deployment in Israel of an advanced X-band radar system and the more than 100 American military personnel who man it — will be an integral part of a larger missile defense spanning Europe, the eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf to help protect U.S. forces and allies.

Israeli-developed defense equipment, some of which benefited from generous U.S. aid, now used by the U.S. military include short-range unmanned aircraft systems that have seen service in Iraq and Afghanistan; targeting pods on hundreds of Air Force, Navy and Marine strike aircraft; a revolutionary helmet-mounted sight that is standard in nearly all frontline Air Force and Navy fighter aircraft; lifesaving armor installed in thousands of MRAP armored vehicles used in Iraq and Afghanistan; and a gun system for close-in defense of naval vessels against terrorist dinghies and small-boat swarms. Moreover, U.S. and Israeli companies are working together to produce Israel’s Iron Dome — the world’s first combat-proven counter-rocket system.

Counter-terrorism and intelligence cooperation is deep and extensive, with the United States and Israel working to advance their common interest in defeating the terrorism of Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda and its affiliate groups, and preventing nuclear proliferation in the region. There are joint Special Forces training and exercises and collaboration on shared targets.

This intimate relationship reinforces overall U.S. intelligence efforts by providing Washington with access to Israel’s unique set of capabilities for information collection and assessments on key countries and issues in the region. Such was the case, for example, when Israel passed to the United States conclusive photographic evidence in 2007 that Syria, with North Korean assistance, had made enormous strides toward “going hot” with a plutonium-producing reactor.

On important issues, the two nations do sometimes differ, a phenomenon not unique to the U.S.-Israel relationship. Over the decades, there have been periodic policy flare-ups, some even bitter, on topics ranging from Israel’s preventive action against Iraq’s nuclear reactor to Israeli sales of weaponry and military technology to China. Some of the most contentious disputes have been about actions affecting the Middle East peace process. But more often have been instances of U.S.-Israel collaboration — most important, the Arab-Israel peace treaties that are the anchor of American national interests in the Middle East.

We do not deny that there are costs to the United States, in the Arab world and elsewhere, for its support of Israel, as there are costs to U.S. support of other beleaguered — and sometime imperfect — friends, including West Berlin in the Cold War, Kuwait in 1990-91 and Taiwan today.

But the long-standing U.S. commitment to Israel has not prevented development of close ties with Arab nations, which understand — however much they disagree with U.S. support for Israel — that they benefit from a good relationship with the United States on other issues. Nor has it made the Arab oil-exporting states any less conscious of their own economic and strategic interest in a reasonably stable flow of oil to world markets, or their eagerness to buy first-class military equipment from the United States or to enjoy the benefits of U.S. protection against Iranian or other aggression.

Would Saudi Arabia’s policies toward the United States, for example, be markedly different if Washington entered into a sustained crisis with Israel over the Palestine issue? Would Riyadh lower the price of oil? Would it stop hedging its regional bets concerning U.S. attempts to coerce Iran into freezing its nuclear weapons programs? Would it regard current U.S. policy toward Afghanistan more positively? Would it view American democracy promotion in the Middle East more favorably? Would it be more inclined to reform its internal governmental processes to be more in line with U.S. preferences? No.

In sum, we believe that Israel’s substantial contributions to U.S. interests are an underappreciated aspect of this relationship and deserve equal billing to shared values and historical responsibility as rationales for American support of Israel.

By EFRAIM KARSH

Finland’s FM can’t be bothered with facts as far as the Jewish state is concerned; he allows his anti-Israel animosity to get the better of him.

Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja has done it again. No sooner did this 1960s radical ease himself back into the foreign minister’s seat after four years in the opposition than he unveiled again his anti- Israel prejudice.

“No apartheid state is justified or sustainable,” he told a panel discussion in Helsinki last week. “If you are occupying areas inhabited by Palestinians who do not have the same rights as the Israelis in Israel, that is apartheid…. I think that the majority in Israel has also realized this, but they have been unable to provide a leadership that [can] move forward on the two-state solution, on the Palestinian problem.”

As the longest-serving foreign minister in Finland’s history (2000-2007, 2011-present) one would have expected Tuomioja to show greater familiarity with the facts. For one thing, all Israeli prime ministers over the past two decades – from Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres to Ariel Sharon and Binyamin Netanyahu – have unequivocally endorsed the two-state solution, whereas all Palestinian leaders have rejected this solution, refusing to allow a single Jew to live in a prospective Palestinian state. For another, Israel’s “occupation” of the populated areas in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip ended in the mid-1990s.

THE DECLARATION of principles signed on the White House lawn in 1993 by the PLO and the Israeli government provided for Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip for a transitional period, during which Israel and the Palestinians would negotiate a permanent peace settlement. By May 1994, Israel had completed its withdrawal from Gaza (apart from a small stretch of territory containing settlements in the south of the Strip, which was vacated in 2005) and the Jericho area of the West Bank. On July 1, PLO chairman Yasser Arafat made his triumphant entry into Gaza.

On September 28, 1995, despite Arafat’s abysmal failure to clamp down on terrorist activities in the territories now under his control, the two parties signed an interim agreement, and by the end of the year Israeli forces had been withdrawn from the West Bank’s populated areas, with the exception of Hebron (where redeployment was completed in early 1997). On January 20, 1996, elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council were held, and shortly afterward, both the Israeli civil administration and the military government were dissolved.

The geographical scope of these withdrawals was relatively limited; the surrendered land amounted to some 30 percent of the West Bank’s overall territory. But its impact on the Palestinian population was nothing short of revolutionary.

In one fell swoop, Israel relinquished control over virtually all of the West Bank’s 1.4 million residents. Since that time, nearly 60% of them – in the Jericho area and in the seven main cities of Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm, Kalkilya, Ramallah, Bethlehem and Hebron – have lived entirely under Palestinian jurisdiction. Another 40% live in towns, villages, refugee camps and hamlets where the Palestinian Authority exercises civil authority but where, in line with the Oslo accords, Israel has maintained “overriding responsibility for security.”

In short, since the beginning of 1996, and certainly following the completion of the Hebron redeployment in January 1997, 99% of the Palestinian residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have not lived under Israeli occupation; rather, they have been under the jurisdiction of the Arafat-led PA.

BUT A person like Tuomioja wouldn’t be bothered with such facts as far as the Jewish state is concerned. Time and again, he has allowed his anti-Israel animosity to get the better of him. In an infamous 2001interview, he compared Israel’s attempts to protect its citizens from the savage terror war launched by Arafat’s PA in September 2000 to the Nazi persecution of European Jewry: “It is quite shocking that some implement the same kind of policy toward the Palestinians which they themselves were victims of in the 1930s.”

Ignoring criticism of this comparison, which subsequently became an integral component of the EU’s working definition of anti-Semitism, he told the same Finnish magazine four years later that he “could have avoided many unnecessary reactions with a different wording, but the matter itself has not changed in any way.”

Nor, for that matter, does Tuomioja seem to believe that the Jewish state has any right to self-defense. In 2003, he used the apartheid metaphor to denounce the erection of the security fence, which has done more than any other single factor to slash the tidal wave of Palestinian terrorism, though Finland has long had a similar fence along its border with the Soviet Union/Russia. When Israel responded to years of Gaza rocket attacks on its towns and villages by unleashing Operation Cast Lead in December 2008, Tuomioja, now chairman of the Parliament Grand Committee, condemned this supposed disproportionate use of force. When IDF commandos killed eight Islamist militants in violent clashes on board a Turkish ship trying to break the naval blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza in June 2009, he demanded that “trade and other ties with Israel should be linked to Israel’s regard for international law and commitment to the peace process.”

One could have dismissed Tuomioja’s musings as a desperate ploy by an aging politician to regain his luster after the highly successful term of his predecessor – the charismatic Alexander Stubb, 22 years his junior – had Finland not been aggressively campaigning for the rotating Security Council seat for the 2013-2014 term. Next time Abbas touts his Jew-free revanchist state to the council, he is likely to find an eager collaborator.

Copyright by the author.

The writer is research professor of Middle East and Mediterranean studies at King’s College London, director of the Middle East Forum (Philadelphia) and author, most recently, of Palestine Betrayed.

The Editor
Jerusalem Post

Dear Sir

Clearly, the stringent admonishments which Israel publishes after each day’s rocket firing into our country have no deterrent effect on Hamas.

Their rockets keep coming and we keep wagging the big finger. Hamas would appear to have the upper hand in the present confrontation. We behave as though we’re quite helpless.

Here’s a deterrent that should change the situation within days – a week or two at utmost:

In retaliation for each day’s rocket fire from Hamas our air force should bomb a high school in Gaza to the ground – late at night when it is completely unoccupied!

Why should our kids be the only ones forced to stop learning?

Sincerely,

Jock L. Falkson

Jock L. Falkson

Nakba Day was inaugurated by Yasser Arafat in 1998 and has since become an annual event. It gives the Palestinians a great opportunity to beat the big bass drum of their so called victimization – the result of two failed wars intended to complete Hitler’s genocide.

Unfortunately Nakba Day spurs the always present anti-Semitism in much of the non-Jewish world. It generates ardent sympathy for the Palestinian cause. For days before and for days after, the world media is immersed in the Palestinian narrative. From a PR point of view Nakba Day gives Israel a bloody running nose and two black eyes – year after year.

Israel’s PR response if any is muted, disorganized and clearly ineffective. To counter the Palestinians’ effective PR we need to promote an event of our own that can meet fire with fire; because Palestinian PR can only be beaten by equally good, or preferably better, Israeli PR.

My suggestion is that we institute Salvation Day to celebrate our salvation from the murderous catastrophe the Arabs intended to bring about on us.

Salvation Day will give us the opportunity to remind the world media how we were victorious in two righteous wars when we prevented the Arab armies from perpetrating the genocide they enthusiastically promised and carefully planned.

We need to remind world media of the annihilative threats the Arabs promised us so soon after Hitler. While we can’t entirely rely on world media to relate Israel’s narrative in a balanced manner, many outlets which never exposed our side will be more likely to do so when the actual Arab threats of those days are publicized. The media will find it necessary to give Israel’s narrative some time, some space, however little. Year after year Salvation Day will also reduce the force of Nakba’s PR. Over time it is quite likely to dissipate.

Here are some of the barbaric threats which Arab leaders issued and which the Israel military fortunately denied to the savages who unashamedly thirsted for our annihilation:

The Mufti of Jerusalem, one of the worst Nazi collaborators, called for Jihad against Jews in a 1943 broadcast from Radio Berlin during the height of the German Holocaust:

“I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!”

And “Kill the Jews wherever you find them, this is pleasing to Allah.”

The Iraqi Prime Minister said all the Arabs would need would be “a few brooms” to drive the Jews into the sea.” Quoted by Sir Geoffrey Furlonge in “Palestine Is My Country: The Story of Musa Alami”

Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, on the day Israel its independence (May 15, 1948), declared a “jihad” (a holy war) at a Cairo press conference.

“This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades”.

Egypt 1967

“Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel.” – Nasser, May 27, 1967.

“The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.” – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan’s King Hussein.

Cairo Radio Statements, 1967:

May 19: “This is our chance Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation, to blot out its entire presence in our holy land”.

May 22: “The Arab people is firmly resolved to wipe Israel off the map”.

May 27: “We challenge you, Eshkol, to try all your weapons. Put them to the test; they will spell Israel’s death and annihilation.”

Jordan 1967

May 30, 1967: “All of the Arab armies now surround Israel. The UAR, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Lebanon, Algeria, Sudan, and Kuwait. … There is no difference between one Arab people and another, no difference between one Arab army and another.” – King Hussein of Jordan, after signing a military pact with Egypt.

Iraq 1967

May 31, 1967: “The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear – to wipe Israel off the map. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa.” – President Abdel Rahman Aref of Iraq.

Syria 1967

May 20, 1967: The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united…. I as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation.” – Syrian Defense Minister Hafez Assad.

Palestinians 1967

June 1, 1967: “We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants and as for the survivors – if there are any – the boats are ready to deport them.” – Shukeiry, at a Friday sermon in Jerusalem.

The full list of the barbaric Arab threats should be publicized on the eve of every Salvation Day.

July 5, 2011

The Editor
The Jerusalem Post

Dear Sir

All this kerfuffle by the Swedes who want to ban circumcision (as recently reported in your paper) leads me to remind these Christians that Jesus, his apostles, and all his early Jewish followers were circumcised Jews.

God it was who had commanded his people to circumcise their newborn sons, thus: “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; every man child among you shall be circumcised.” In keeping with God’s commandment Abraham circumcised Isaac when he was 8 days old.

Not long ago I witnessed an amusing documentary on YES TV, where several anonymous males displayed their penises to a group of fearless females who had been invited to vote for the best looking ones.

Would you believe that 8 out of 10 voted for the circumcised genitalia?

Surely the Swedes should rethink their position? Do they want to earn the displeasure of God – and their women folk too?

For those who agitate about ‘shechitah’, the Jewish method of annimal slaughter, allow me to remind you that Jesus and his Apostles only ate meat slaughtered this way. Surely what was good for them should be good for today’s Christians?

Yours etc.,
Jock L. Falkson

By Jock L. Falkson

After a lifetime in South Africa I retired in 1993 to live in Israel – among my people – at long last. Without exaggeration, this was a happy decision.

In my 73 years in S. Africa I never once came face to face with anti-Semitism. Yet I was certainly aware of its existence. I would avidly read up on the subject. Before too long it became clear to me that the origin of anti-Semitism had nothing to do with the accusations levelled against Jews. It had everything to do with our accusers.

It was the Christian finger of guilt which pointed to the Jewish people throughout the generations for their so called “killing of Christ”. An untruth which denied the fact that this observant, temple-going Jew was tried and crucified by the Romans for attempted sedition. Pontius Pilate called Jesus “King of the Jews” and a crown of thorns was placed on his head to mock him. Responding to Jews who criticized his verdict Pilate brusquely brushed them aside, saying “What I have written, I have written”.

Jewish religious practices like circumcision and the kosher way of slaughtering animals led to the uncontrolled hatred of a great many European Jews. Completely disregarding the fact that Jesus and his apostles were themselves circumcised. In addition to observing kosher food requirements they all observed the 613 commandments to be found in our bible.

Throughout the generations Christians were unfortunately taught to see Jews as their enemy for whom, torture, limb smashing, lashing, bashing, forceful conversion, raping, gassing and genociding were all deserved punishments. And, except for the infamous Inquisition, unworthy of any legal process. Not that the Inquisition rendered true justice.

One of the most common anti-Semitic accusations levelled against Jews during the last 100 years, is that in contrast to upstanding non-Jews, Jews were money mad. It became a given that money was our God – for which we would do anything. Non-Jews were of course naturally profligate in their disdain for the filthy lucre, preferring the low paid jobs so they could not be accused of Jewish money-loving. Such absolute nonsense nevertheless led to much Jewish suffering.

Jews were likewise accused of poisoning wells – as if they had secret wells they alone could drink from. And of spreading the plague – as if they were magically protected from their contact with the said diseases.

Jews were also accused of killing Christian children in order to drink their blood. Exactly how Jews would benefit from this remains a mystery, never mind God’s prescription that His people were prohibited from drinking even a single drop of blood! (Hence the kosher method of killing animals – which ensures that all blood is drained before the meat is sold or eaten.)

Such anti-Semitic nonsense was trotted out as justification to hate and attack Jews, and to frequently rob them of their money and possessions. Also to mercilessly rob them of their lives – no doubt to teach other money mad, blood sucking Jews a lesson. Nor were poor Jews spared – they too were robbed, tortured, maimed and murdered for no rhyme or reason other than that they were Jews.

Anti-Semitism continues to be alive and well in these times in many countries, with notable exceptions of the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Have I erred by not including Britain? No I have not.

The Asian countries such as India and China were never anti-Semitic.

The rise of the Jewish State of Israel has unfortunately served as the focus for the current wave of anti-Semitism. The reasons are couched in political terms but the motivation is the same. It is none other than hatred of Israel because it is a Jewish state.

Of course, the nations offer political justification for being anti-Israel. Like human rights violations, racism, apartheid, oppression, occupation – all of them apparently fitting reasons for hatred, boycotts, flotillas and high minded anti-Israel votes at the United Nations’. Nevertheless, as I shall demonstrate, all the so called justifications fit the definition of anti-Semitism: hatred of Israel because it is a Jewish state.

Take the accusation of racism and apartheid. How come Israel is excoriated, yet India is not condemned for its vicious racism and apartheid against its estimated 150 million Dalits – ‘untouchables’ – who have lived in virtual slavery for centuries? Think of it – 150 million Dalits with no human rights whatever!! (Imagine the unceasing political hysteria if Israel treated its Arabs as India treats its Dalits.)

Nor do the anti-Semitic nations protest China’s continued occupation of Tibet. Nor Russia’s occupation of Chechnya, Dagistan, North Ossetia, Tatarstan and the Japanese islands of Kuril. Nor the Turkish occupation of half of Cyprus since 1974. And other occupations.

Should we be amazed that the anti-Israel nations do not have the honesty, the decency, nor the fortitude to give Israel credit where and when it is due? Surely it’s due to Israel in spades for its countless inventions and innovations which have been so beneficial to mankind? Many more continue in the pipeline. Here are some which I have copied from 21c’s blog from April to date:

1. June 12, 2011 – Israel is the only country that permanently opens its arms to children sick from radiation caused by the Ukrainian nuclear disaster 25 years ago.

2. June 5, 2011 – Hebrew University researchers have discovered how a single gene can keep malignant cancer cells from spreading to healthy tissue.

3. May 29, 2011 – An Israeli medical consortium was called in to set up adult male circumcision clinics in an effort to halt the HIV-AIDS epidemic among the Zulu in South Africa.

4. May 22, 2011 – Israeli researchers have discovered a way to reverse the aging process and rejuvenate the immune system in mice.

5. May 15, 2011 – Israel’s Vacciguard introduces a unique biotech system to develop immunizations against some of the world’s deadliest maladies, from cancer to CMV and West Nile virus.

6. May 8, 2011 – Under a $250 million agreement, Israel’s Evida will supply the batteries, cooling systems and software tools for Mia Electric’s vehicles in Europe.

7. May 1, 2011 – Israel’s AnyClip has cut a dream deal with Universal Studios to bring favorite clips from the production house’s enormous library to the Internet.

8. April 24, 2011 – Israel was among the first countries to send medical aid and crucial supplies to Japan following the devastating March 11 earthquake and tsunami.

9. April 17, 2011 – Researchers from Tel Aviv University are working on a nasal two-in-one vaccine that could protect against both Alzheimer’s disease and stroke. The proposed vaccine appears to repair vascular damage in the brain by marshaling forces from the immune system.

10. April 10, 2011 – Israeli startup Bioexplorers has developed a foolproof, non-invasive and easy method to sniff out contraband, drugs and terrorists — using mice.

11. April 3, 2011 – Israel Aircraft Industries has developed an airplane “tugboat,” Taxibot Dispatch Towing System, in partnership with Airbus. Taxibot will allow pilots to cut the engine to and from gate and runway, potentially saving billions in fuel.

12. March 27, 2011 – New York-based ICare4autism plans to build the first global research and education center for autism on Jerusalem’s Mt. Scopus. The campus will house the world’s first university-level school of autism studies, with the aim of raising therapeutic standards worldwide.

13. March 20, 2011 – Intel is investing $2.7 billion in its Israeli plant in southern Israel, which will produce next-generation 22-nanometer chips to make computers faster, smaller and lighter.

14. March 13, 2011 – Only about 1.2 million of the world’s 400 million ethnic Arabs live in Israel, yet the sole registry for Arab bone marrow donors is located in Jerusalem’s Hadassah Medical Center.

15. March 6, 2011 – Israeli scientists at IBM Haifa joined colleagues from the United States, China and Japan to put the brains in Watson, an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered supercomputer.

The full list of Israeli achievements over the last 25 years is breathtaking. Regrettably these are not listed anywhere as far as I know. However, the 244 which are published in 21c’s blog since July 2005 –though clearly incomplete – is concrete evidence of a small nation beavering away at projects for its own good and the benefit of mankind. Certainly worthy of admiration and approbation in the councils and universities of the world. Instead of which Israel is mostly lashed by the cruel whips of mindless anti-Semitism.

For shame.

For more: http://israel21c.org/didyouknow/didyouknow

By Jock L. Falkson

There is something inhuman about the continued solitary confinement of Jonathan Pollard in jail for spying. He has been serving a life sentence in solitary confinement these past 25 years.

Pollard has suffered longer than any other US convicted spy even though his 25 year old sin did not hurt America in any serious way – despite Secretary of State Weinberger’s dire warning to the judge that it could and would. It was his personal letter to the judge which resulted in Pollard being sentenced to life. It was a punishment never before inflicted on any spy – even those who caused the death of American spies.

In fact the US has never produced a single instance of the dire circumstances which Weinberger so angrily threatened would happen, during these 25 years!

Not many know that Pollard was offered a special deal after his arrest for consenting to assist the US government in its damage assessment. Pollard agreed to the deal and cooperated with the Government’s investigation in every way over a period of several months. He submitted to all the required polygraph examinations in interviews with FBI agents and Department of Justice attorneys.

Pollard’s statement that he never spied against the US and only gave Israel documents which exposed the machinations of the surrounding Arab countries, proved to be true. He had only given Israel documents which the US had not shared – contrary to an understanding between the two nations.

Yet, in a bare faced turnaround worthy of the worst lying conman, the US shamefully, and without compunction, reneged on its sacred word.

Moreover, Israel was compelled to issue a statement that it would never again spy in the US. The US never offered to reciprocate this undertaking. Only the naïve will believe that the US, with the hundreds of employees in its huge office building in Tel Aviv – does not employ a large cadre of intelligence officers to spy on Israel.

Haifa University’s Prof. Steven Plaut has just released an article drawing attention to the anomaly that WIkileaks’ Julian Assuage, has released hundreds of thousands of classified US intelligence documents. All are available to the worst enemies of the United States and the West yet Assuage enjoys unfettered freedom, while Pollard who only released hundreds, continues to be incarcerated in solitary, without mercy or justice.

Shame on the US.

By Warren Goldstein
Chief Rabbi of South Africa

Published in The Jerusalem Post

November 3, 2010

Dear Archbishop Desmond Tutu,

I write to you with a heavy heart.

You are a revered leader in South Africa, but have recently added your iconic voice to the campaign for sanctions against Israel.

Archbishop, I believe you are making a terrible mistake. Without truth there can be no justice, and without justice there can be no peace. The Talmud says: “The world stands on three things: justice, truth and peace.” These three values are inseparable. Archbishop, I am convinced that the sanctions campaign against Israel is morally repugnant because it is based on horrific and grotesquely false accusations against the Jewish people.

The truth, archbishop, is that Israel is simply not an apartheid state. In the State of Israel all citizens – Jew and Arab – are equal before the law. Israel has no Population Registration Act, no Group Areas Act, no Mixed Marriages and Immorality Act, no Separate Representation of Voters Act, no Separate Amenities Act, no pass laws or any of the myriad apartheid laws.

Israel is a vibrant liberal democracy with a free press and independent judiciary, and accords full political, religious and other human rights to all its people, including its more than 1 million Arab citizens, many of whom hold positions of authority including that of cabinet minister, member of parliament and judge at every level, including that of the Supreme Court. All citizens vote on the same roll in regular, multiparty elections; there are Arab parties and Arab members of other parties in Israel’s parliament. Arabs and Jews share all public facilities, including hospitals and malls, buses, cinemas and parks. And, archbishop, that includes universities and opera houses.

The other untruth is the accusation of illegal occupation of Arab land. Like the apartheid libel, this is outrageously false. There is no nation that has a longer, deeper or more profound connection to its country than the Jewish people have to the land of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.

Archbishop, you and I as religious leaders always turn to the Bible as a source of truth. What does it mean that Israel is the “promised land”? It means, as we both know, that it was promised by God to the Jews – the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This promise was first fulfilled by God more than 3,300 years ago, when Joshua led the Jewish people into the land of Israel. Since then there has been an unbroken Jewish presence in the land, albeit small during the Roman exile.

All the books of the Old Testament – Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc. – describe the deep connection between the Jews and the land of Israel, including the West Bank, known in the Bible as Judea and Samaria – the area that contained the great cities of the two previous Jewish commonwealths, such as Jericho, Shiloh (where the Tabernacle stood for hundreds of years), Beit El (where Jacob had his vision of the ladder) and Hebron (where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are buried with their wives Sarah, Rebecca and Leah).

Three thousand years ago, there was no London or Paris, no Washington or Moscow, no Pretoria or Cape Town, but there was a Jerusalem, capital of a Jewish state.

“If I forget thee O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning… if I fail to elevate Jerusalem above my foremost joy.” Those words from Psalms are recited by Jews at every wedding. At every funeral, the statement of comfort given to the mourners refers to Zion and Jerusalem. Jews pray for Jerusalem three times a day, and also after every meal.

Archbishop, the Arab/Israeli conflict is not a struggle against apartheid or occupation. It is a century- long war against the very existence of Jews and a Jewish state in the Middle East. There have already been seven major Arab/Israeli wars since the birth of modern Israel.

Today the front includes an alliance between Iran, Syria and Hizbullah, the latter now with 40,000 rockets aimed at Israeli cities. Iranian officers train Hizbullah forces, while Iran pursues nuclear weapons and openly declares its intention to wipe out Israel. Hamas, the terrorist Palestinian government in Gaza, sides with Iran and Hizbullah in rearming with the declared aim of destroying Israel.

Since 1967, one aspect of this century- long conflict has been the demand for a Palestinian state. In spite of the deep historical and religious roots of Jews in all of Israel, generations of Jewish leaders have been prepared, for the sake of peace, to give up ancestral and covenantal land to establish a Palestinian state.

SO WHY has there not been peace? The ANC taught us you can’t make peace on your own. No matter how deeply the ANC was committed to a peaceful resolution of the South African conflict, until the National Party was prepared to accept that black South Africans had a place in their own country, there could be no peace. And so too, until the Arab/Muslim world accepts that Jews have a right to a state of their own on their ancestral land, there will be no peace.

In 1948, the Jews accepted the UN resolution establishing a Jewish state and a Palestinian state, but the Arab world rejected it and five Arab countries invaded Israel to destroy it.

After that, the West Bank and Gaza were in Arab hands until 1967.

There was an opportunity then – every day for almost 20 years – to establish a Palestinian state. It never happened. And since then there have been numerous opportunities – each rejected by Arab leaders.

Why? Because this war has been more about the destruction of the Jewish state than about the establishment of a Palestinian state. Even today, so-called moderate Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas denies Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.

In 2000, the Palestinian leadership launched a massive wave of suicide bombers into Israel, leading to more than 1,300 civilian deaths and 10,000 injuries. Proportionately, such carnage in South Africa would mean more than 10,000 killed and over 80,000 injured! Israel erected a security fence with checkpoints to shield it from such attacks launched from the disputed territories.

Archbishop, you compare these checkpoints to apartheid South Africa. But they are not about pass laws, which don’t exist in Israel. The checkpoints are on the border between sovereign Israeli territory and the disputed territories of the West Bank and Gaza in order to keep civilians from being murdered, and have been very successful in doing so. These checkpoints – like those found in all airports – are there to prevent suicide bombers from blowing up innocent people.

Archbishop, do not bestow respectability on an immoral sanctions campaign that is an affront to truth and justice, which prevents peace and prolongs the terrible suffering of people on both sides of this painful conflict. Archbishop, let us pray for an end to all this agony, and for the fulfillment of the verse in Isaiah: “And the Lord God will wipe away the tears from all faces.”

{} {} {}

By Prof. Yisrael Aumann
Nobel Prize Laureate

Two men—let us call them Rick and Steve— are put in a small room containing a suitcase filled with bills totaling $100,000. The owner of the suitcase announces the following:

“I will give you the money in the suitcase under one condition…you have to negotiate an agreement on how to divide it. That is the only way I will agree to give you the money.”

Rick is a rational person and realizes the golden opportunity that has fallen his way. He turns to Steve with the obvious suggestion: “You take half and I’ll take half, that way each of us will have $50,000.”

To his surprise, Steve frowns at him and says, in a tone that leaves no room for doubt: “Look here, I don’t know what your plans are for the money, but I don’t intend to leave this room with less than $90,000. If you accept that, fine. If not, we can both go home without any of the money.”

Rick can hardly believe his ears. “What has happened to Steve” he asks himself. “Why should he get 90% of the money and I just 10%?” He decides to try to convince Steve to accept his view. “Let’s be logical,” he urges him, “We are in the same situation, we both want the money. Let’s divide the money equally and both of us will profit.”

Steve, however, doesn’t seem perturbed by his friend’s logic. He listens attentively, but when Rick is finished he says, even more emphatically than before: “90-10 or nothing. That is my last offer.”

Rick’s face turns red with anger. He is about to punch Steve in the nose, but he steps back. He realizes that Steve is not going to relent, and that the only way he can leave the room with any money is to give in to him. He straightens his clothes, takes $10,000 from the suitcase, shakes Steve’s hand and leaves the room humiliated.

This case is called ‘The Blackmailer’s Paradox” in game theory. The paradox is that Rick the rational is forced to behave irrationally by definition, in order to achieve maximum results in the face of the situation that has evolved. What brings about this bizarre outcome is the fact Steve is sure of himself and doesn’t flinch when making his exorbitant demand. This convinces Rick that he must give in so as to make the best of the situation.

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

The relationship between Israel and the Arab countries is conducted along the lines of this paradox. At each stage of negotiation, the Arabs present impossible, unacceptable starting positions. They act sure of themselves and as if they totally believe in what they are asking for, and make it clear to Israel that there is no chance of their backing down.

Invariably, Israel agrees to their blackmailing demands because otherwise she will leave the room empty handed. The most blatant example of this is the negotiations with Syria that have been taking place with different levels of negotiators for years. The Syrians made sure that it was clear from the beginning that they would not compromise on one millimeter of the Golan Heights.

The Israeli side, eager to have a peace agreement with Syria, internalized the Syrian position so well, that the Israeli public is sure that the starting point for future negotiations with Syria has to include complete withdrawal from the Golan Heights, this despite its critical strategic importance in ensuring secure borders for Israel.

The Losing Solution

According to game theory, Israel has to change certain basic perceptions in order to improve her chances in the negotiations game with the Arabs and win the long term political struggle:

a. Willingness to forego agreements

Israel’s political stand is based on the principle that agreements must be reached with the Arabs at any price, that the lack of agreements is untenable. In the Blackmailer’s Paradox, Rick’s behavior is the result of his feeling that he must leave the room with some money, no matter how little. Because Rick cannot imagine himself leaving the room with empty hands, he is easy prey for Steve, and ends up leaving with a certain amount of money, but in the role of the humiliated loser. This is similar to the way Israel handles negotiations, her mental state making her unable to reject suggestions that do not advance her interests.

b. Taking repetition into account

Game theory relates to onetime situations differently than to situations that repeat themselves. A situation that repeats itself over any length of time, creates, paradoxically, strategic parity that leads to cooperation between the opposing sides. This cooperation occurs when both sides realize that the game is going to repeat itself, and that since they must weigh the influence present moves will have on future games, there is a balancing factor at play.

Rick saw his problem as a onetime event, and behaved accordingly. Had he told Steve instead that he would not forego the amount he deserves even if he sustains a total loss, he would have changed the game results for an indefinite period. It is probably true that he would still have left the game empty handed, but at the next meeting with Steve, the latter would remember Rick’s original suggestion and would try to reach a compromise.

That is how Israel has to behave, looking at the long term in order to improve her position in future negotiations, even if it means continuing a state of war and fore going an agreement.

c. Faith in your opinions

Another element that crates the “Blackmailer’s Paradox” is the unwavering belief of one side in its opinion. Steve exemplifies that. This faith gives a contender inner confidence in his cause at the start and eventually convinces his rival as well. The result is that the opposing side wants to reach an agreement, even at the expense of irrational surrender that is considerably distanced from his opening position.

Several years ago, I spoke to a senior officer who claimed that Israel must withdraw from the Golan Heights in the framework of a peace treaty, because the Golan is holy land to the Syrians and they will never give it up. I explained to him that first the Syrians convinced themselves that the Golan is holy land to them, and then proceeded to convince you as well. The Syrians’ unflinching belief that they are in the right convinces us to give in to their dictates. The only solution to that is for us to believe unwaveringly in the righteousness of our cause. Only complete faith in our demands can succeed in convincing our Syrian opponent to take our opinion into account.

As in all of science, game theory does not take sides in moral and value judgments. It analyzes strategically the behavior of opposing sides in a game they play against one another. The State of Israel is in the midst of one such game opposite its enemies. As in every game, the Arab-Israeli game involves interests that create the framework of the game and its rules.

Sadly, Israel ignores the basic principles of game theory. If Israel would be wise enough to behave according to those principles, her political status and de facto, her security status, would improve substantially.

{} {} {}

Copyright Yisrael Aumann

By Peter Hichens
Daily Mail UK
October 11, 2010

British Prime Minister David Cameron recently fawned on his Islamist hosts in Turkey by stating Gaza was a “prison camp.” This phrase is the official line of the well-funded Arab and Muslim lobby, who want to make sure Israel is seen by the world as a villainous oppressor.

But if you think Israel is the only problem, think again. Realize, for a start, that Israel no longer rules Gaza. Its settlements are ruins. No Israelis can be found inside its borders. And, before you say “but Israel controls the Gaza border,” look at a map. The strip’s southern frontier – almost as hard to cross as the Israeli boundary – is with Egypt. And Cairo is as anxious as Israel to seal in the Muslim militants of Hamas.

Gaza was bombed on the day I arrived in retaliation for a series of rocket strikes on Israel, made by Arab militants. Those militants knew this would happen, but they launched their rockets anyway. Many Gazans hate them for this. The Islamist rocket-firers are also the government here, supported by Iran and others who care more for an abstract cause than they do for real people.

I won’t give the name of the rather pleasant establishment where young women with bright make-up and colorful silken hijabs inhaled apple-scented smoke from their water-pipes. Their menfolk, nearby, watched football on huge, flat-screen televisions. Nor will I say where I saw the Gazan young gathering for beach barbecues beneath palm-leaf umbrellas. Of course this way of life isn’t typical. But it exists, and it shows the “prison camp” designation is a brain-dead over-simplification.

Can anyone think of a siege in human history where the shops of the besieged city have been full of Snickers bars and Chinese motorbikes, and where EU and other foreign aid projects pour streams of cash (often yours) into the pockets of thousands?

What about Gaza’s “refugee camps.” Most of those who live in them are not refugees, but the children and grandchildren of those who fled Israel in the war of 1948. All the other refugees from that era were long ago resettled. These places are not much different from the poorer urban districts of Cairo, about which nobody, in the Arab world or the West, has much to say.

One of the distressing things which I feel all of us should be aware of is the plight of Christian Arabs under the rule of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. More than once I heard them say: “Life was better for us under Israeli rule.” One young man, lamenting the refusal of the Muslim-dominated courts to help him in a property dispute with squatters, burst out: “We are so alone! All of us Christians feel so lonely in this country.”

What is most infuriating is that many Christians in Britain are fed propaganda blaming this on the Israelis. Arabs can oppress each other, without any help from outside. Because the Palestinian cause is a favorite, some prefer not to notice that it is largely an aggressive Islamic cause.

{} {} {}