Synagogues Targeted in Possible Terror Plot

US president says suspicious packages from Yemen found in UK, Dubai apparently contained explosives, adds US views case as 'credible terrorist threat' and security to be increased for as long as necessary.

US President Barack Obama said Friday that suspicious packages sent from Yemen to the US apparently contained explosives, and that they were intended for Jewish institutions in Chicago.

Obama said investigators had discovered a "credible terrorist threat" against the United States and that security would be increased in response to the incident for as long as it takes. He said the parcels were bound for "two places of Jewish worship in Chicago."

Speaking at the White House, Obama said Yemen's president had pledged to cooperate in the investigation. Obama expressed suspicions that a militant group called al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is behind the incident, saying the group continues to plot attacks against the United States.

The packages were found in Dubai and the United Kingdom. Obama said an initial examination has determined that "they do apparently contain explosive material."

Obama pledged US officials will spare no effort to find the source of the packages and any additional plots.

Jewish groups warned ahead of time
Michael Kotzin, vice president of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, told Ynet Friday that synagogues and other locations associated with Judaism were asked to check their mail with additional care even before the bomb threat surfaced.

Kotzin said the first warning came regarding packages originating in Yemen, and later came warnings regarding Saudi Arabia and additional countries.

"We need to be careful on all days of the year, not just today," he said. "We remind synagogues and Jewish institutions every once in a while to be alert and aware of the dangers, and provide lectures on this issue – how to act when such information is received."

The Anti-Defamation League also stated Friday that it had been notified by law enforcement officials that Jewish institutions may be targeted soon. The league also reported mention of warnings against packages arriving from Britain, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia. In response, the organization ordered Jewish facilities to remain alert.

'Terrorists were performing trial run'
One of the suspicious packages was found on a United Parcel Service cargo plane at East Midlands Airport, about 260 km north of London. The other was discovered at a FedEx Corp facility in Dubai.

British police said an item found on the UPS plane was sent for further testing. CNN said it was an ink toner cartridge converted into a bomb.

Before Obama spoke, an FBI source had told Reuters that initial tests in Britain revealed no explosives.

In the United States, UPS planes were checked in New Jersey and Philadelphia. The Transportation Security Administration said they were searched "out of an abundance of caution."

US officials and some analysts speculated that the suspicious parcels may have been a test of cargo screening procedures and the reaction of security officials.

"One possibility, if this is terrorism related, is that this may be a trial run," one US official said.

Intelligence about the possible plot had come from an ally abroad, the official said, without elaborating.

The US Department of Homeland Security said it was stepping up aviation security measures as a result of the scare. The British government said it was "too soon to say" whether it would follow suit but was "urgently considering" what steps to take about freight coming from Yemen.

White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan later told reporters that the explosives "were in a form that was designed to try to carry out some type of attack," but he provided no further details.

"The forensic analysis is under way," he said, adding, "Clearly from the initial observation, the initial analysis that was done, the materials that were found in the device that was uncovered was intended to do harm."





by Reuter

Iran, Hezbollah Trained Iraqi Militants

Documents made public by WikiLeaks recount Tehran's role in providing Iraqi militia fighters with rockets, magnetic bombs, rifles, surface-to-air missiles used against American helicopters; according to documents, militants

Ynet

Tens of thousands of classified US military documents, which were made public by WikiLeaks on Friday, shed light on the strong ties between the armed militias in Iraq and the Iranian regime, news agencies reported.

According to the documents, the Iraqi militants, who were backed by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and trained by Hezbollah, used Iranian weapons to carry out suicide attacks and target US troops.

Media outlets that gained access to some 400,000 classified documents reported that they shed light on Iran's secret war in Iraq. The New York Times said the reports recount Iran's role in providing Iraqi militia fighters with rockets, magnetic bombs that can be attached to cars, "explosively formed penetrators," or EFPs, which are the most lethal type of roadside bomb in Iraq, and other weapons. Those include .50-caliber rifles and the Misagh-1, an Iranian replica of a Chinese surface-to-air missile, which, the reports say, was fired at American helicopters and downed one in Baghdad in July 2007.

The American daily said the reports assert that Iraqi militants went to Iran to be trained as snipers and in the use of explosives by the Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah operatives.

'Iran looking to weaken government in Iraq'
The reports indicated that the training of Iraqi militants was also conducted in Iraq itself.

According to the New York Times, American military officials based in Baghdad had issued a secret warning in December 2006 that a Shiite militia commander was hatching plans to take American soldiers hostage after undergoing training by Middle East masters.

They claimed that Iraqi militant Azhar al-Dulaimi was trained in dark arts of paramilitary operations near Qum, Iran.

Five months later, Dulaimi was tracked down and killed in an American raid in the sprawling Shiite enclave of Sadr City in Baghdad - but not before four American soldiers had been abducted from an Iraqi headquarters in Karbala and executed in an operation that American military officials say literally bore his fingerprints.

The secret US field reports from the battlegrounds of Iraq also indicate that Iran encouraged Iraqi militants to carry out as many suicide attacks as possible and that Tehran was behind the murder of senior Iraqi government officials by Iraqi militants.

According to the secret reports, Iran is looking to weaken the current US-backed government in Iraq and reduce America's influence in the country.

The US reports say Iran’s role has been political as well as military. A Nov. 27, 2005, report, issued before Iraq’s December 2005 parliamentary elections, cautioned that Iranian-backed militia members in the Iraqi government were gaining power and giving Iran influence over Iraqi politics, the New York Times reported.

“Iran is gaining control of Iraq at many levels of the Iraqi government,” the report warned.

Trained militants. Iran's Revolutionary Guards

3 Jihad Members Killed in Gaza Strike

Palestinian sources say Israel Air Force strike in central Gaza leaves three al-Quds Brigades operatives dead. IDF confirms attack, says cell was preparing to fire at Israel

Gaza sources reported Monday that three Palestinians were killed in an IDF strike on a militant cell.

According to the sources, the cell, which was spotted moving at the Noserat refugee camp in central Gaza, suffered a direct hit.

The three have been identified as Muhammad Abu Id, Awani Abdel-Khadi and Ala Abu Zbeida – all confirmed members of the Islamic Jihad's al-Quds Brigades.

The sources added that shortly after the first strike, the IDF struck central Gaza a second time. No injuries were reported.

The IDF Spokesman's Unit confirmed the strike, saying that "the Israel Air Force, in a joint military-Shin Bet operation, attacked a terror cell preparing to fire at Israel."

Several rockets have been fired at Israel over the past week. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the Gaza vicinity communities last week and warned the Gaza groups against any escalation.

"Our first commitment is to security, and I suggest Hamas and the other organization not test us on that."

Ynet News

Suspends Trial of Cole Terrorist

By: Arthur Herman

Americans are learning there's one minority group President Obama is never afraid to offend: families of victims of Islamist terror.

First, Attorney General Eric Holder wanted to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attack, in lower Manhattan -- which nearly everyone, even Mayor Bloomberg (eventually), realized would be a standing insult to the memory of KSM's victims.

Then came Obama's "I was for it before I was against it" stance on the Ground Zero mosque -- another slap at 9/11 victims' families.

Now, last Friday, we learned that "no charges are either pending or contemplated" against one of the deadliest and most dangerous al Qaeda operatives, Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, mastermind of the October 12, 2000, bombing of USS Cole that killed 17 sailors and officers and wounded dozens more.

The hope of families that lost loved ones on that terrible day, that after a decade justice would finally be done, has faded to zero.

It's worth remembering how this outrage -- which I predicted in a column back in February 2009 -- came about.

In the wake of the Twin Towers attack and despite howls of protest from the civil liberties left, the Bush administration rounded up leading Islamist terrorists around the world and put them to CIA interrogation. One of them was al Nashiri, a Saudi national who set off the attack on the USS Cole in 2000 as the destroyer was moored peacefully in Aden harbor.

Under President George W. Bush's executive order establishing trials of terrorists by military commission, authorities painstakingly gathered evidence against al Nashiri -- even as groups like ACLU howled that such commissions would violate terrorists' rights and should be shut down.

The gathering of evidence dragged on for nearly six years, until in January 2009 Obama ordered Defense Secretary Gates to suspend all military commission proceedings, including against al Nashiri.

Cole's former skipper, Capt. Kirk Lippold, and the Cole victims' families fought hard to reopen the case against their sons' and daughters' killers -- who in the meantime had been found guilty of terrorism and sentenced to death in a court in Yemen. They even met with President Obama, who promised them he was only waiting for the "right judge" before reopening the case under new rules.

Now, on Friday, we learned the "right judge" meant no judge at all. A Defense Department spokesman insisted that the fact that no charges will be brought before a military commission doesn't mean the case is over. But it will be a long time before this mess is finally sorted out. Yet it's a mess of Obama's own making.

After 9/11 Bush and other Americans understood that we were in a war, not a "Law and Order" episode. They understood that such a war required more effective instruments than our civilian courts and the normal legal process. The time-tested, Supreme Court-approved system of military tribunals for trying enemy combatants was one such instrument.

Obama told his political allies on the left that as president he'd turn Bush's War on Terror upside down. The terrorists would now get constitutional protections; and those who fought against them would go to jail as "war criminals."

Now, Obama's popularity is in a tailspin. Late night comics joke about his being a one-term president. The civil liberties left is furious with him for failing to close Gitmo and to prosecute a single former Bush official -- not to mention for keeping US troops in Afghanistan. If he starts even one military trial of an alleged terrorist, even one who attacked a mili tary installation, he loses whatever shred of credibility he still has with his political base. (The two commissions under way both began under Bush.)

"It seems like nobody really cares," says Gloria Clodfelter, whose 21-year-old son died in the Cole bombing. Like the KSM trial and Obama's stance on the Ground Zero mosque, the decision to suspend the al Nashiri proceedings has nothing to do with justice and a lot to do with politics. The shame is that, once again, those who suffer are the families of those killed by terror, not the terrorists themselves.


NY Post

The Spirit of the IDF - Pt. 2/2

Standing in an Israeli Soldier's Shoes
Now that you have some background on what Israel is up against, it is time to take your place on the front lines and make decisions about what you would do if faced with the type of dilemmas Israeli soldiers face every day....

1) At a checkpoint in the West Bank. Your job is to check people and vehicles that are requesting entrance into Israel. On a typical day many Palestinian Arabs cross over from the West Bank into Israel proper, mainly for work and often for medical reasons (many Palestinians use hospitals in Israel). They line up at checkpoints so the Israeli Army can search each person and vehicle to make sure they are not carrying weapons.

According to intelligence information you’ve received, an ambulance is expected to arrive with a wanted terrorist in it carrying an explosive belt for a suicide attack against innocent Israeli civilians.

Suddenly an ambulance arrives, and inside is a woman who is seemingly pregnant. It has happened at checkpoints that not everybody who appears to be pregnant is truly pregnant. The woman appears to be in pain and her husband is also highly anxious. The ambulance driver says the woman is about to give birth and without the proper medical attention at the hospital, the newborn baby will struggle to survive.

It is a hot day and there is a long line of cars. Your commander is yelling at you on the two-way radio, “Do not let ambulances go through because there is a terrorist in an ambulance!”

To complicate the picture, a news video crew is present. To further complicate the situation, the pregnant woman is a religious Muslim and it is considered disrespectful to touch a religious woman. You are not a doctor, but you have to make a decision. If you let the ambulance go through and it contains a terrorist, then innocent people will die. If there is not a terrorist in this particular ambulance, you may cause the woman to lose her child.

What Actually Happened?
The vehicle was stopped and searched and another ambulance was called.

2) You are serving within a commando unit in the southern West Bank, south of Hebron. Your current mission is to infiltrate a small village of about 30 people. There is a suspected terrorist living within this small village who is known to have created explosives for suicide bombings.

There is a lot of information and research on this particular terrorist, and his arrest is important for the safety and security of Israeli citizens. Your unit is heading by foot to this hilltop village starting at 5 a.m. On your trek up to the top of the hill, your leader notices an older shepherd from the village on a nearby hill. The shepherd, with his flock of sheep, sees you and your unit approaching the village.
What Would Do?

What Actually Happened
The Shepard ends up inflicting some harm though. He warns the village and the operation is compromised.

3) Your unit is called in to respond to a sniper who is shooting from inside a hospital. What do you do?

What Actually Happened?
Warn the hospital of your intention to enter and then move in carefully to take out the sniper.

4) You are part of a patrol unit near the Palestinian city of Jenin. Over the past few weeks a thorough investigative research has found a terrorist aide to be living in a small house on the outskirts of Jenin.

He is thought to have assisted a few suicide bombers in the making and preparing of their suicide-bomb belts. Your mission is to go to his house, arrest him, and search his home for additional weapons and bomb-making materials. Your unit’s truck approaches his house, enters his home through a side window, and arrests him, avoiding gunfire and confrontation. You order his family to take a few belongings with them for a few hours as the unit has to search the house.

The man’s wife and kids reluctantly agree, grab a few items, and slowly exit their home. The wife and kids all leave the home carrying a bag or backpack with a few home items inside. The man’s older son, who is about 4 years old, is crying and requests repeatedly to go over and say goodbye to his father. What do you do?

What Actually Happened
The boy ran away. He was chased and caught. He was carrying dynamite sticks in his backpack.

5) Palestinians terrorists shoot at an Israeli civilian car and you are engaged in a chase. The terrorists flee into a mosque where a prayer service is being held. What do you do?

What Actually Happened?
A group of terrorists in Gaza holed up in a mosque and a group of women came and put themselves between the soldiers and the terrorists. The Israelis retreated and the terrorists were allowed to escape.

6) You are driving in a jeep in the West Bank with another soldier and see a Palestinian placing a pile of rocks in the road that you suspect may be booby-trapped.
What do you do?

What Actually Happened?
If the soldiers see the Palestinian place the rocks in the road, it is permissible to order the person to remove them. However, if no one is seen placing the rocks, it is forbidden to force a local resident to help move them because civilians cannot be used as human shields.



You Also might Like to Read:

The Spirit of the IDF - Part 1
http://israelpalestine-speedy.blogspot.com/2010/04/spirit-of-idf.html

The Long Bloody History of Islamic Terrorism

By: BARBARA J. STOCK

The Sunday morning pundits preach that the terrorist attacks around the world continue because American troops remain in Iraq. These so-called experts claim that Iraq is a training ground for attacks in Europe and America. Have these armchair-terror-experts forgotten the 50-year Islamic training ground called Israel?

These 'experts' also seem to believe that this split between so-called 'moderate' Muslims and the Islamic terrorists is something new. These 'experts' have missed the mark by about 1300 hundred years. The present Islamic terrorists are a result of the split within Islam between Muslims who wish to live in the 21st century, secular Muslims, and the followers of 'True Islam' who want the world to be ruled by Islamic Sharia law with the Quran as the new world constitution.

The recent attack in London proves the line between a 'moderate' Muslim and a terrorist is very, very thin. It seems with only a small dose of 'True Islam; a peaceful Muslim can become a mass murderer.

Islamic terrorism started long before there was an Israel. Sunni and Shia Muslims have been killing each other since the death of Mohammed.

Centuries ago, Islam ruled a large part of the world and Muslims had spread out of the Middle East and moved across Europe, conquering all in their path. At Islamís pinnacle, the Ottoman Empire stretched from Egypt to the Black Sea and from the Persian Gulf to Hungary.

So what happened to the glorious Islamic empire?
Today, Islam blames the Crusades, the Jews, Western culture, and Christians for its fall from power. In truth, the most destructive enemy that Islam has ever had was Islam itself.

As the world modernized around them, the Islamic leaders refused to move forward with the rest of the world. Firmly believing in Islamic superiority, the pompous ruling class of religious leaders planted the seeds of hatred towards the West as far back as the 1700s. The ruling Islamic religious leaders believed western inventions were evil things created by evil and inferior people.

Any attempt to modernize the empire was put down by the ruling Islamic body called the ulema which wanted to hold onto its power and maintain Islam in its pure state. This meant no non-Muslim influence of any kind.

It should be no surprise that the western advancements in warfare eventually overwhelmed the archaic ways of Islam. The Islamic dream of ruling the world, was over.

At the end of World War I, France and England carved up what was left of the once great Islamic Empire. All that remained was Turkey. It was the Islamic Turks who slaughtered over 1.5 million Armenian Christians. The Turks blamed the Armenian Christians for assisting in Islamís fall from power. Islam has a long history of blaming others for its failures.

The new leader of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal, wanted Turkey to join the modern world and insisted on a separation of mosque and state, something that infuriated the Islamic leaders. Kemal declared Islam the national religion but did not allow the controlling and backward ways of Islam to destroy the new country. The battle rages today in Turkey between the Islamic leaders and the secular government. Slowly, the Islamic leaders are winning.

By 1924, the glory days of Islam were over.

This inner battle for Islam stewed after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and Middle East came under the influence of western culture. Secular Arab governments, which accepted western modernization, drove the followers of True Islam into a murderous rage.

Todayís terrorist movement started in 1928 with the founding of Ikhwan al-Muslimun, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, to oppose the Arab secular governments that stripped the Islamic elite of its power. This group, led by Hassan al-Banna, felt no Islamic country should tolerate a secular government. Islam had always been the judge, jury, and executioner over the people.

This militant group armed and trained itself and became such a problem for the Egyptian government that the terrorist leader, al-Banna, was executed but this only elevated him to martyrdom. The movement grew in power and status.

In the 1950s, a new and extremely radical leader, Sayyid Qutb, convinced his followers that the Quran justified the killing of fellow Muslims. In his book, 'Milestones', he encouraged a jihad to remove secular Muslim leaders and claimed it was the duty of all Muslims to return Islam to its former power and glory. Following strict Islamic law could only do this. Secular Muslims were put in a category with Christians and
Jewsóthey were infidels.

Sayyid Qutb was also executed by the Egyptians in 1966, but the Islamic terrorist movement grew and expanded and now has branches of loyal followers in over 70 countries around the globe and these Islamic terrorists are more than willing to kill for their cause.

The embarrassing defeat of Islamic/Arab countries by the lowly ìmonkey-Jewî in the 1967 Six Day War gave fuel to the Islamic terrorist movement. This humiliating loss to the tiny Jewish state was proof for Islamic terrorists that secular Islamic states were against all that was Islamic. Islamic countries were defeated by a people that True Islam does not even consider human.

Mu'ammar Qaddaffi seized power in Libya in 1969 and he used Libyaís vast oil wealth to fund Islamic terror around the world. A decade later, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini overthrew the secular government in Iran by taking the American embassy personnel hostage and keeping them as prisoners for over a year.

The 1980s saw the Iranian-backed terror group, Hezbollah strike American troops on a peacekeeping mission in Lebanon and the American embassy was bombed. The United States made the tragic mistake of leaving Lebanon, and the Islamists saw this as a sign of weakness, and a rash of attacks on Americans continued unpunished around the world for the next two decades.

True Islam had its golden moment on 9/11 when it succeeded in attacking the ìgreat Satanî on its own soil. Their bragging and celebration was brief. The American response to that attack took the terrorists by surprise. Believing America was a weak paper-tiger, I believe the invasion of Afghanistan surprised bin Laden. The loss of Afghanistan enraged the Islamists. Afghanistan was True Islamís model for the world. Even more insulting was that the majority of Afghani people seemed to welcome the overthrow of the Taliban.

True Islam couldnít care less about the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. The fact Saddam is Muslim means nothing to them. He was a secular infidel. Iraqi Muslims who wish to remain under a secular government are slaughtered like sheep because they too are considered un-Islamic infidels. Radical Islam knows this may well be its only chance to subjugate the Iraqi people under strict Islamic rule and take possession of an oil-rich terrorist training base. If True Islam were to gain control in Iraq, it would immediately join forces with Iran to wreck havoc on the world.

Once a great power, Islam has now been reduced to training the gullible to strap bombs on themselves and blow up a bus or train full of civilians. Radical Islamic leaders have only one goal: To make Islam the only religion, and to put Islamic leaders in command over the entire population of the world. To accomplish this, western civilization, Christianity, Judaism, secular Muslims, and all other non-Muslim forms of religious beliefs, must be exterminated.

There has been one important adjustment in True Islamís plan. It no longer shuns modern weapons and technology. Indeed, Islamics believe that the detonation of nuclear weapons on American soil will bring them a quick victory. This is a serious miscalculation on True Islamís part. A very deadly miscalculation.

If one studies the history of Islam and its violent roots, it is not difficult to understand it. Islamists have killed millions of people over the centuries and killing millions more to accomplish the goal of total Islamic rule does not disturb them.

The number of moderate-secular Muslims is declining as true Islam spreads its rage and hatred to every corner of the world. Time is short. Iran may be only months away from obtaining nuclear weapons. There are reports that several nuclear weapons are already here and in place in America. There can be no signs of weakness from the western world. There can be no negotiations or deals made with True Islam. There can be no quarter given.

History has taught us one thing: It is us, or them. There is no middle ground with terrorists. True Islam has not changed in 1400 years. It is not going to change now.

,b>About the Writer: Barbara J. Stock is a registered nurse who enjoys writing about politics and current events. She has a website at http://www.republicanandproud.com/.

Barbara J. receives e-mail at dickens502003@yahoo.com.

Facing Unpleasant Facts in the Middle East

By Steven Plaut

The world is now well into the Post-Oslo era, in which the delusions and denials of reality that were the foundations of the "Oslo peace process" are at last being acknowledged for what they were. For those returning to the planet Earth from Fantasyland in the "Oslo" parallel universe, it behooves them and us all to bear in mind some of the unpleasant facts of life about the Middle East.

1. The Arab world has never come to terms with Israel's existence within ANY set of borders whatsoever and is still seeking the destruction of Israel and its population.
2. ANY Palestinian state, regardless of who rules it, will produce escalated violence, terror and warfare in the Middle East, and not stability nor peaceful relations. It will seek warfare with Israel and not solutions to the economic and social problems of its citizens.
3. The only reason Arafat and the PLO ever wanted control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip was to use them as bases for attacks on Israel. This is the only real use to which they will be put by any future Palestinian state.
4. There is no alternative that will stop the bloodshed and war in the Middle East other than the adoption by Israel of an unambiguous policy of R&D, that is, of Re-Occupation and Denazification of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Every other alternative proposal for stabilization and pacification is delusional.
5. Denazification of the West Bank and Gaza Strip must be based partly on the programs of Denazification imposed on Germany and Japan by the Allies after World War II, but in part must be different. Such Denazification policies will have to stay in place for decades. There is no other way in which Israel can prevent the daily massacre of its civilians by the Palestinian terrorists.
6. The bulk of Palestinians have lived outside Israeli "occupation" for years, and their "liberation" from Israeli "occupation" only produced Nazification, terrorism, mass murders, and radicalization. Their pacification requires reimposing of martial rule by Israel.
7. The instability of the Middle East is not caused by Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands but by PLO occupation of Israeli lands.
8. There was never in history an Arab Palestinian state.
9. The Palestinians have no legitimate claim to the right to set up their own state. It is doubtful whether they ever did have such a right, but even if they did - they forfeited it thanks to decades of terrorism, savagery, mass murders and barbarism.
10. Palestinians are Arabs. The Arabs already rule 22 states. There is no reason why they should be entitled to a 23rd, and creation of such a 23rd Arab state in the West Bank and Gaza will escalate Middle East violence and world terrorism.
11. The Palestinians are not and never were a "nation". They are not even a tribe. They are a branch of Arabs with only minor secondary cultural differences that distinguish them from Syrians, Lebanese or Jordanians.
12. The Middle East conflict cannot be resolved through endless exhibitions of niceness and restraint by Israel. Israeli niceness, restraint, and goodwill gestures are interpreted by the Arab world as weakness and as signs that the Jews, like Paul McCartney's Band, are on the run.
13. The Palestinians are not "mistreated" by Israel, but ARE poorly treated by the PLO.
14. The only Arabs in the Middle East with any semblance of civil rights are those who live under Israeli rule.
15. Israeli Arabs are the best-treated minority in the Middle East and are treated far better than are Arabs living in Arab states. If the intifada "uprising" were in fact a product of oppression and mistreatment of Arabs by a government, then Israel should be the only country in the Middle East that does NOT have an intifada.
16. Oslo has radicalized and Nazified most Israeli Arabs, who now identify with and openly support Arab parties and politicians who call openly for violence against Jews and the destruction of Israel.
17. There exists no set of concessions by Israel that would result in the Arab states coming to terms with Israel's existence.
18. There are no Arab democracies and no support for democracy among significant minorities within the Arab world.
19. Israeli assassination of Palestinian terrorists is in fact a substitute for retaliation in kind against the Palestinians for bombings of Israeli children and other civilians. The alternative to such assassinations is bombings of Palestinian civilians.
20. Israeli settlements are the "mine canaries" of the Arab world. There is no reason why Jewish civilians should not be free to live in peace within Arab countries truly seeking peace with Israel, just as Arabs live at peace within Israel and within the United States. The attitude of the Arab world in general and of the PLO in particular towards such "settlements" is indicative of their attitudes towards Israel and Jews in general. If the Palestinians are NOT seeking peace with the Jews, and they are not, then the real problem is that Israel has built too few settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
21. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that does NOT deal with Islamist terror through wholesale massacres of the people in whose midst the terrorists operate.
22. There is an inverse relationship between the material comfort of Arabs living under Israeli rule and political moderation. The better off they are in a material sense, the more violent and radical they are. More generally, Arab radicalism and terror are positively correlated with comfort and education and wealth. Bin Laden and his people are filthy rich. There have been no undernourished Palestinian suicide bombers.
23. Palestinians endorse terrorism and violence against Jews by near-universal majorities.
24. Israeli Arabs endorse terror and violence against Jews by large majorities. They also support bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
25. There are no visible Palestinian public figures who oppose violence, terror and Islamist fascism.
26. There is not and never has been a Palestinian "peace movement".
27. The Hamas and Jihad are for all intents and purposes wings of the PLO, regardless of who actually serve as their day-to-day commanders.
28. The PLO is itself very much a manifestation of Islamist fascism and was founded by Islamist fundamentalists.
29. Asking Arafat to arrest the terrorists is a bit like asking Osama bin Laden to arrest those responsible for September 11 or asking Libya's Khaddafi to arrest those responsible for the Lockerbie downing of the Pan Am flight or asking Hitler to take steps against those who invaded Poland. It is all part of the Oslo era of delusion.
30. Peace cannot be achieved through pretending that war does not exist.
31. The Israeli Left is responsible for the bloodshed in Israel. The
Israeli Left rescued the PLO from oblivion in the early 1990s, armed it, and allowed it to become entrenched in the suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The Israeli Left is as wacky as is the pro-Taliban campus Left in the United States.
32. Ariel Sharon has yet to detach himself fully, at least in public, from the pipe dreams and denials of reality imposed on the country by the Israeli Left, those that produced the Oslo debacle.
33. The only peaceful terrorist is a dead terrorist.
34. Israel cannot restore the credibility of its military prowess through "signaling," but rather only through using that prowess and putting its military might to actual use.

"Occupation" as an Excuse for Terrorism

By Carlos

No reasonable person can doubt that Palestinian extremists have been committing terrorist acts against the Israeli civilian population on a very wide scale. Call it what you will, under the banners of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades and others, these terrorists have intentionally targeted the most defenseless Israelis, including infants, children, and the elderly. They say they must do it to fight the "Israeli occupation." They say they have no alternative.

The word "occupation" is indeed the most powerful weapon in the Palestinians' propaganda arsenal. It is a serious charge. Therefore we must examine the questions: Just what is this "occupation," and is it a legitimate excuse for violence against innocent people?

The claim that "occupation" excuses terrorism has made Palestinian extremists seem credible and has made gratuitous violence look legitimate. Aside from the very obvious moral weakness of any attempt to excuse intentional violence against civilians, the claim is false for at least two basic reasons:

1. Arabs committed terrorist atrocities against Jewish civilians years before the existence of what is now called the "occupation."

2. The Palestinians refused even to negotiate a genuine peace offer that could soon have ended the so-called "occupation." There was never any need to resort to violence.

These two facts are enough to invalidate any attempt to use "occupation" to justify terrorism. The "occupation" excuse for terrorism has persisted nevertheless, and so deserves a full examination.

The word "occupation" in this discussion refers to the presence of Israelis in the West Bank and in Gaza. What is its origin?

Before 1967, the West Bank was part of Jordan and Gaza was part of Egypt, and Israel had nothing to do with them. Then came the Six Day War.

In the spring of 1967 the Arab states were preparing for war. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser ordered the UN Emergency Force to leave the Sinai. Egyptian and Syrian troops massed along the Israeli border. Egypt closed the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping and blockaded the port of Eilat. This itself was an act of war. Cutting off a major supply route placed Israel in a stranglehold.

The Arabs made their intentions clear. An official radio broadcast proclaimed:

As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain any more to the UN about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence.

Israel, knowing its existence was threatened, launched a preemptive strike against the Egyptian air force. The result was an Israeli victory in a surprisingly short period of time. Afterwards Israel found itself in control of pieces of Arab territory in the front-line states that had attacked it: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.

On June 19, 1967 the Israeli Unity Government announced that it was willing to give back these territories in return for peace treaties and normalization of relations. The Arabs responded with resolutions passed at the Khartoum Conference held at the end of that summer. Then as now, the Arab response to an offer of peace was belligerence. Article 3 of the Khartoum Resolutions states:

The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country. [Emphasis added]

Over time the situation with Egypt did improve. Largely due to Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's bold gesture for peace, for which he paid with his life, Israel was able to negotiate a treaty with Egypt, which included return of the Sinai. The negotiations were hard and took years, but they have proven that Israel values peace more than the land it captured in 1967 and is ready to negotiate the return of the land as part of any serious peace offer.

In contrast, the situation in the West Bank steadily deteriorated. Any hope of reaching an accord with Jordan ended in 1988 when King Hussein relinquished all claims to the West Bank, severed all administrative ties, and canceled his investments there. Israel was left with the Palestine Liberation Organization as the only possible partner to any negotiations.

In 1992 disillusion with the policies of Yitzhak Shamir and the desire to try new approaches to peace led to the election of his Labor Party rival Yitzhak Rabin. While Shamir did not truly believe in the negotiation process, Rabin had faith that it could lead to results. The history of the Oslo agreement is complicated and beyond the scope of this essay, but we do need to consider its basic provisions.

The agreement of September 1993 consisted of mutual letters of recognition, plus a "Declaration of Principles" (DOP). In these letters Yasser Arafat affirmed the right of Israel to exist, and Yitzhak Rabin formally recognized the PLO as the official representative of the Palestinian people. Arafat also promised to renounce terrorism and to control those factions that would still engage in it.

The intention of the DOP was to provide for a gradual process of Palestinian autonomy over the West Bank and Gaza, beginning with Gaza and Jericho. To that end a "Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority" was to govern the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank for a transitional period of at most five years, during which time permanent status negotiations would take place. The parties were to negotiate an "interim agreement" specifying the structure of this Self-Government Authority or "Council" and the transfer of power from the Israeli military government to this Council.

There were delays in the implementation of the DOP. Palestinian self-rule in Gaza and Jericho was achieved in May 1994, five months behind schedule. And in September 1995, two years after the initial accords, Rabin and Arafat signed the "interim agreement." Known popularly as "Oslo II," it was a detailed prescription for Palestinian autonomy.

Oslo II was far more comprehensive than Oslo I, comprising over 300 pages. It provided for the election of the Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority, more commonly known as the Palestinian Authority, and specified its powers. It also provided for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, the establishment of a Palestinian police force, and the creation of a safe passageway between Gaza and the West Bank. But the heart of the agreement was a prescription for gradual Israeli withdrawal from the territories. The West Bank was divided into three zones:

Zone A consisted of the major Palestinian cities: Jenin, Nablus, Qalqilya, Tulkarem, Ramallah, Bethlehem, and Hebron. In these areas, to be evacuated by Israel, the Palestinian Authority would have full jurisdiction over both civil affairs and security.

Zone B consisted of the more rural areas, including hundreds of small towns and villages. In this zone the Palestinian Authority would have full jurisdiction over civil affairs and internal security, while Israel retained authority over external security.

Zone C consisted of areas that were largely unpopulated, as well as Israeli settlements and military camps. Here the Palestinian Authority would have control over civil affairs, while Israel remained responsible for both internal and external security.

Israel was gradually to transfer Zone B areas to Zone A status, and Zone C areas to Zone B. This would prepare the way for the final stage of this peace process, the permanent status negotiations.

To summarize, Zone A consisted of areas under Palestinian control, Zone B of areas under joint control, and Zone C of areas under Israeli control, with a process in motion to achieve steadily increasing Palestinian autonomy in all areas.

The plan should have worked. Both parties agreed to it. It was based on the same land-for-peace principle that had worked with Egypt. So what happened after Oslo?

Arab violence against Israelis not only continued, it intensified. After Israel withdrew from Jericho and the Gaza Strip, those places became safe bases of operation for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. By the end of 1995 Israel had withdrawn from all Zone A cities save Hebron. A rash of terrorism including suicide bomb attacks in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv in early 1996 caused a delay of Israel's departure from Hebron. Arafat proved either unwilling or unable to control the terrorists responsible for these attacks, and indeed members of his own Fatah group perpetrated much of the violence. Israel finally withdrew from most of Hebron immediately after ratifying the Hebron Accord in January 1997.

And so since 1997 the Palestinian Authority had total jurisdiction over all Palestinians living in the seven Zone A cities plus Jericho. These areas comprised about 60% of the Palestinian population. Almost all of the rest lived in the smaller towns of Zone B, over which the Palestinian Authority had civil jurisdiction with Israel responsible only for security. The Palestinians had achieved self-rule. There was no longer any occupation in any real sense of the word.

But instead of getting better, things got worse.

After Oslo a new form of terrorism became increasingly common: bus bombings. These attacks were especially deadly, the fatality rate much higher with the explosion confined to a small enclosed space. Suicide bombing and other violence spread rapidly to all areas where civilians congregate: dance halls, shopping malls, birthday parties, holiday celebrations, even children's bedrooms. No one was safe.

Yasser Arafat, signer of the Oslo Agreement, was complicit in this terrorism. He signed the checks that financed many of the terrorist operations.(6) He was the Commander of Fatah and the Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades. The areas that Israel turned over to Palestinian control under the Oslo Accords became terrorist strongholds. Jenin became the capital of the suicide bombers. Nablus became the terrorist leaders' headquarters as well as their major bomb factory. Hamas developed Qassam 2 rockets in Gaza, built them in Nablus, and shipped them to Tulkarem for use against cities in central Israel. This was the Palestinian response to the concessions Israel made at Oslo.

The great irony here is that it is not Israeli "occupation" that provokes escalations of Palestinian terrorism but rather steps taken to diminish the Israeli presence in the territories. Palestinian terrorism has only increased since Oslo. And the greatest escalation of terrorism in history came after the historic peace offer of Camp David 2000, when Israel signed on to an American plan that would have ceded to the Palestinians virtually the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip plus shared control over Jerusalem. The Palestinian response to this peace offer was the Second Intifada, which grew so bloody, to the point of suicide bombing attacks almost every day, that Israel had to take drastic measures during Operation Defensive Shield and reenter the Palestinian cities that had been granted autonomy under Oslo. This Palestinian answer to the peace process has so far claimed 500 Israeli dead and 4,000 wounded.

The big lie behind Palestinian terrorism is that it is a response to Israeli occupation. Palestinian terrorism began long before Israel gained control of the territories in 1967, and the more autonomy (that is, the less "occupation") the Palestinians gained, the worse the terrorism became. The Palestinians have shown the world conclusively what they would do with their autonomy and with their own state if they ever acquire one: turn it into one big suicide bomb aimed at the heart of Israel, taking Israel down and themselves with it.

What can possibly account for such irrationality?

If the Palestinian agenda were really to acquire a state of their own, they would have achieved it by now. If we understand the Palestinian goal to be an end of Israeli "occupation" in the West Bank and Gaza so that they can establish their own state there, then their strategy makes no sense. They could have done so much more quickly and without all this bloodshed. The Palestinian strategy makes sense only if we understand what their goal really is.

The Palestinians are smart, much smarter than the Israelis when it comes to public relations. The word "occupation" has a double meaning, and they use it knowing that Western people understand it one way while they themselves understand it in another. To the West, "occupation" means Israeli presence in territories captured in the 1967 war. To the Palestinians, "occupation" means the existence of Israel itself. Their own maps have no "Israel" at all but show the entire area, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, as "Palestine."

Occasionally in news interviews given in English one can hear a Palestinian spokesperson slip and talk about "fifty years of occupation," going all the way back to the creation of the State of Israel. Often when speaking to friendly audiences they do not even try to hide it. In an article entitled "Mother's Day Rally: Over 50 Years of Occupation" a staff writer for the Ottawa Muslim Network writes:

End The Occupation! No Land No Peace! These are the slogans shouted by thousands who gathered on Mother's day on Parliament Hill to voice their support for Palestinians and to oppose the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands. May 15, 2002 marks the 54th anniversary of the occupation of Palestine and the crowd in front of the Peace Tower were reminded of the unrelenting struggle of generations of Palestinians.

And in her address to the 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa no less a figure than Hanan Ashrawi spoke of "occupation" pre-1967:

In 1948, we became subject to a grave historical injustice manifested in a dual victimization: on the one hand, the injustice of dispossession, dispersion, and exile forcibly enacted on the population that has come to be known as the refugee question that currently encompasses more than 5 million Palestinians. On the other hand, those that remained were subject to the systematic oppression and brutality of an inhuman occupation that robbed them of all their rights and liberties including their national identity on their own land.

This paragraph is full of distortions and lies, only one of them being that an "occupation" started in 1948. To the Palestinians, "occupation" means the existence of Israel itself; yet by clever use of language they have turned the word into a potent propaganda tool justifying the worst kind of brutality. They have gotten the world to sympathize with them while their nail-packed bombs tear apart the bodies of innocent people.

What then can we say about Oslo from Israel's perspective? Was it a mistake?

Oslo was a tragic mistake in that by granting the Palestinians autonomy without insisting that they live up to their promises, Israel has compromised its security more than ever. But Oslo was a necessary mistake. Israel had to participate, to do what it could to give peace a chance. The Oslo process began at a more optimistic time, when there seemed to be real hope for peace, when people believed that if only the Palestinians would remove from their charter the clauses urging Israel's destruction that their hearts would change and they would become real partners for peace. It took Oslo, plus the rejected peace offer of Camp David 2000, to reveal to the world, once and for all, beyond the shadow of a doubt, the Palestinians' true intentions. And still the world refuses to listen.

And yet from the beginning there were signs of what was to come. On the very same day that he signed the Oslo Accord, Arafat gave a speech on Jordanian television indicating he had no intention whatsoever of abiding by it:

O, my beloved ones, do not forget that our Palestine National Council adopted the resolution in l974. It called for the establishment of a national authority on any part of Palestinian soil that is liberated or from which the Israelis withdraw. This is the fruit of your struggle, sacrifice and Jihad....

Long live Palestine, free and Arab!

The "resolution in 1974" to which Arafat refers is the infamous "Phased Plan" for Israel's destruction, a reference well known to his television audience. Many times when speaking to his own people Arafat referred to Oslo as a step in this Phased Plan. And both Arafat and Feisal Husseini, another Palestinian negotiator, have compared Oslo to a "Trojan Horse," a weapon poised to penetrate Israel's defenses and destroy it from within.

"Occupation" is not only the lie that fuels the Intifada, it is the Palestinians' most potent excuse for Israel's destruction. A knowledge of history exposes the lie. But one important question still remains: Why has this lie so easily taken root?

It is difficult to respond to the word "occupation" because the word itself has become a powerful slogan whose purpose is to turn off thought and elicit sympathy for terrorism. Such manipulations of people's emotions are always hard to counter. Reason and reflection are often no match for prejudice and hatred - but only in the short term. Prejudice and hatred abound not only in the front-line Muslim states but also in those countries that accept the "occupation" excuse reflexively, without considering the other side. Nevertheless, the truth must continue to be told. Like water dripping on a rock, after time its effect on people of good will can overcome even the hardness of a heart calcified by prejudice.

Lies have power only when people are willing to believe them. Most of the nations of the world, not only the Arab states but the countries of Europe as well, have shown themselves only too willing to embrace this lie. When terrorists receive not condemnation but sympathy for committing terrorist acts, then those who give their sympathy become accomplices. Let those nations of the world who give tacit approval to the deaths of innocent children and grandparents deal not only with their consciences but with the results of their own policies when they in turn become the victims of terrorism.

Israel Is Fighting Islamic Terror

For over 50 years, beginning on January 1, 1952 when seven armed terrorists attacked and a nineteen year-old girl in her home, in the neighborhood of Beit Yisrael, in Jerusalem, Israel has fought against terrorism. The terrorists of Israel, the enemy of Israel is also America’s enemy ! My prayer is that ALL the world will realize this soon!

The Disengagement is WRONG!

Terrorists see concessions as a victory and proof that their violence works, as the Oslo process and the withdrawal from south Lebanon have shown. That’s why everyone accepts that you don’t negotiate with terrorists. It is therefore only logical to conclude that further concessions will result in more terror when future demands are not met, as the PA leadership continues to proclaim.......

So before you attacking us with words, claim that we are brutal, talking about how emotionless we are, before you sending another e-mail or chat to the world that claims that the Israelis are the problematic, before you determine that we are the bad guys and the rest are week and miserable, I wonder if you know this things

Obama's Treatment of Israel is Shocking

By Ed Koch

President Obama's abysmal attitude toward the State of Israel and his humiliating treatment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is shocking. In the Washington Post on March 24th, Jackson Diehl wrote, "Obama has added more poison to a U.S.-Israeli relationship that already was at its lowest point in two decades. Tuesday night the White House refused to allow non-official photographers record the president's meeting with Netanyahu; no statement was issued afterward. Netanyahu is being treated as if he were an unsavory Third World dictator, needed for strategic reasons but conspicuously held at arms length. That is something the rest of the world will be quick to notice and respond to."

I have not heard or read statements criticizing the president by New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand or many other supporters of Israel for his blatantly hostile attitude toward Israel and his discourtesy displayed at the White House. President Obama orchestrated the hostile statements of Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, voiced by Biden in Israel and by Clinton in a 43-minute telephone call to Bibi Netanyahu, and then invited the latter to the White House to further berate him. He then left Prime Minister Netanyahu to have dinner at the White House with his family, conveying he would only be available to meet again if Netanyahu had further information - read concessions - to impart.

It is unimaginable that the President would treat any of our NATO allies, large or small, in such a degrading fashion. That there are policy differences between the U.S. and the Netanyahu government is no excuse. Allies often disagree, but remain respectful.

In portraying Israel as the cause of the lack of progress in the peace process, President Obama ignores the numerous offers and concessions that Israel has made over the years for the sake of peace, and the Palestinians' repeated rejections of those offers. Not only have Israel's peace proposals, which include ceding virtually the entire West Bank and parts of Jerusalem to the Palestinians, been rejected, but each Israeli concession has been met with even greater demands, no reciprocity, and frequently horrific violence directed at Israeli civilians. Thus, Prime Minister Netanyahu's agreement to suspend construction on the West Bank - a move heralded by Secretary of State Clinton as unprecedented by an Israeli government - has now led to a demand that Israel also halt all construction in East Jerusalem, which is part of Israel's capital. Meanwhile, Palestinians are upping the ante, with violent protests in Jerusalem and elsewhere. And the Obama administration's request that our Arab allies make some conciliatory gesture towards Israel has fallen on deaf ears.

Prior American presidents, beginning with Truman who recognized the State of Israel in 1948, have valued Israel as a close ally and have often come to its rescue. For example, it was Richard Nixon during the 1973 war, who resupplied Israel with arms, making it possible for it to snatch victory from a potentially devastating defeat at the hands of a coalition of Arab countries including Egypt and Syria.

President George W. Bush made it a point of protecting Israel at the United Nations and the Security Council wielding the U.S. veto against the unfair actions and sanctions that Arab countries sought to impose to cripple and, if possible, destroy, the one Jewish nation in the world. Now, in my opinion, based on the actions and statements by President Obama and members of his administration, there is grave doubt among supporters of Israel that President Obama can be counted on to do what presidents before him did - protect our ally, Israel. The Arabs can lose countless wars and still come back because of their numbers. If Israel were to lose one, it would cease to exist.

To its credit, Congress, according to the Daily News, has acted differently towards Prime Minister Netanyahu than President Obama. Reporter Richard Sisk wrote on March 24th, "Congress put on a rare show of bipartisanship for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday - a sharp contrast to his chilly reception at the White House. ‘We in Congress stand by Israel,' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told a beaming Netanyahu, who has refused to budge on White House and State Department demands to freeze settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank."

But Congress does not make foreign policy. It can prevent military arms from going to Israel, but cannot send them. Congress has no role in determining U.S. policy at the U.N. Security Council. The President of the United States determines our foreign policy - nearly unilaterally - under our Constitution. So those Congressional bipartisan wishes of support, while welcome, will not protect Israel in these areas, only the President can do that. Based on his actions to date, I have serious doubts.

In the 1930s, the Jewish community and its leadership, with few exceptions, were silent when their coreligionists were being attacked, hunted down, incarcerated and slaughtered. Ultimately 6 million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust. The feeling in the U.S. apparently was that Jews who criticized our country's actions and inactions that endangered the lives of other Jews would be considered disloyal, unpatriotic and displaying dual loyalty, so many Jews stayed mute. Never again should we allow that to occur. We have every right to be concerned about the fate of the only Jewish nation in the world, which if it had existed during the 1930s and thereafter, would have given sanctuary to any Jew escaping the Nazi holocaust and taken whatever military action it could to save Jews not yet in the clutches of the Nazis. We who have learned the lessons of silence, Jews and Christians alike, must speak up now before it is too late.

So I ask again, where are our Senators, Schumer and Gillibrand? And, where are the voices, not only of the 31 members of the House and 14 Senators who are Jewish, but the Christian members of the House and Senate who support the State of Israel? Where are the peoples' voices? Remember the words of Pastor Niemoller, so familiar that I will not recite them, except for the last line, "Then they came for me, and by that time, there was no one left to speak up."

Supporters of Israel who gave their votes to candidate Obama - 78 percent of the Jewish community did - believing he would provide the same support as John McCain, this is the time to speak out and tell the President of your disappointment in him. It seems to me particularly appropriate to do so on the eve of the Passover. It is one thing to disagree with certain policies of the Israeli government. It is quite another to treat Israel and its prime minister as pariahs, which only emboldens Israel's enemies and makes the prospect of peace even more remote. ~Ed Koch is the former Mayor of New York City.~

Terrorism - Cause And Effect

We often hear about Israel’s checkpoints making the lives of Palestinians so unbearable.

We often hear complaints that the Israel Defence Forces check Palestinian children, pregnant women, handicapped people and even ambulances.

Recently, we hear daily protest against Israel’s “Apartheid Wall.”

Why?
Why does Israel spend so much money and use such manpower?

Is it all really in order to humiliate the Palestinian people, or is it a justified and legitimate security measure

Let’s look at what other democracies did to prevent terror attacks.

If you flew around the world before September 11, 2001, you know the difference yourself.

What used to be a fairly fast and painless security check (a security check which didn’t exist at all until Palestinian groups started to hijack airplanes in the late 1960’s) is now hours of security procedures. Passengers today are required to be at the airport hours before their flight, wait in lines, have their belongings checked and many times confiscated if they have items as “dangerous” as a nail-clipper in their baggage.

But it’s not only the airport’s checkpoints…

All of a sudden we see more and more armed soldiers in international airports -- something we didn’t see before 9/11.

In addition, airlines around the world are now placing armed marshals on board their planes.

The security measures are not restricted to air travel. . .

Cars and people are being checked today at the entrances to public and private places, crowded events and even on the roads.

Crossing international borders after 9/11 takes much more time than before.

Nobody likes all these security measures. Nobody likes to wait in line for hours, to be late for an engagement, to be scrutinized.

But who is to blame for all these measures?

Is it the fault of the country that takes these security measures in order to protect her citizens, or maybe it’s the fault of the terrorists -- the ones who killed innocent people and by doing so, forced the country to take the measures to protect her citizens?

When you stand on line, who do you blame? Which airline would you prefer, one that checks passengers or not?

September 11, 2001
Attack on America

In a horrific suicide attack against the United States, terrorists crash commercial passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands of innocent people.

One horrific terror attack changed the world as we know it.

Unfortunately, security measures are usually put into place only in retrospect. Terrorists exploit “holes” in the system in order to kill as many innocent civilians as they can.

Responsible governments must cover these “holes” in order to prevent such future attacks and protect their civilians.

It’s all a matter of
Cause and Effect

Israel has faced over 20,900 terror attacks since September 2000, when a wave of terror started against Israeli citizens right after Arafat was offered an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital by then-President Clinton. Arafat never even made a counter-offer. Instead he started a terrorist war.

916 Israelis died in these attacks -- a per capita toll equivalent to 14 September 11ths.

To protect her citizens, Israel started to use security measures never used before in the country.

Not only Palestinian lives are influenced by these security measures.

Since Palestinian terrorists attacked innocent Israelis in almost every public place possible -- restaurants, cafés, shopping malls, hotels, buses, etc. -- Israelis are now facing security checks everywhere. You can’t get into a restaurant, a mall, a movie theater, a school, a bus station, in Israel without being checked and having your belongings checked.

The Cause
Suicide bombing in buses

The Effect
A checkpoint for Israeli citizens when they get on a bus.

“Dozens of city buses have been targeted by Palestinian suicide bombers over the last 40 months of violence…As the primary method of transportation in the country, buses have proven to be a traditional target for the bombers. Attempts to employ security guards on the buses to thwart such bombings have proved largely unsuccessful, due to the large number of buses operating through Israeli cities at any given time, and a paucity of guards.”

The Cause
Suicide bombing in restaurants

The Effect
A checkpoint for Israeli citizens when they get into every restaurant, café, school, movie theater. You can’t enter a shopping mall in Israel without having your car and your bags checked.

The Cause
Ambushes on Israeli cars

The Effect
Israel’s anti-terrorist fence and checkpoints for Palestinians

What some “Human Rights” groups call the “Apartheid Wall” will actually consist over 97% of chain-link fence system. Less than 3% of the fence will be constructed of concrete, strictly for security need. The fence will not annex Palestinian lands, nor change the legal status of the Palestinians. It will not establish a border, which is to be determined by

Yes, innocent Palestinian lives are influenced by the checkpoints and anti-terrorist fence, just like any civilian’s life is influenced by security measures. Nobody likes to wait in line and to be checked, but human lives must come first.

The Cause
The Palestinian use of ambulances and medical materials for terror

Since September 2000, Israel’s security forces have witnessed the terror organizations cynically using Palestinian medical resources, including ambulances, to smuggle both arms and terrorists throughout the territories. They do so, assuming medical vehicles are 'immune' to security checks at checkpoints; this cynical use of ambulances emphasizes the need for a security check of medical vehicles. In a document seized during Operation Defensive Shield, it was noted that weapons were concealed in the floor of an ambulance. In another document, it is noted that the Palestinian general intelligence service used an ambulance to transfer a

The Effect
Israel is forced to check Palestinians ambulances

Such searches are conducted in order to ensure that ambulances are not used by terrorists in an attempt to transport terrorists, weaponry and explosive devices. These searches

The Cause
A would-be female suicide bomber intended to hide explosive charges under a maternity dress

In April 2002, Israeli soldiers discovered that 26-year-old Shifa Adnan Kodsi intended to carry an explosive charge camouflaged under a maternity dress. The terrorist organizations behind such attacks want to

primarily within the Green Line. This is under the assumption that a female is thought of as gentle, tender and innocent and therefore will arouse less suspicion than a man. In the cases in which females were involved, the terrorists were aware of their need for camouflage that would help them blend in on the Israeli street. The female terrorists attempted to Westernize their appearance, among other things wearing clothing that was not conservative, such as short skirts, or maternity clothes, and having modern haircuts.

The Effect
Israel is forced to check pregnant Palestinian women

Again, the cynical use by Palestinian terrorist organizations of such tactics affects the lives of innocent Palestinians. Unfortunately, Israel can’t not check…

The Cause
A Palestinian female suicide bomber pretended to be handicapped

(Jan. 14, 2004) The suicide bomber entered the security (checking) area and passed through a metal detector which was set off. The suicide bomber informed security officials that she suffered from medical problems and had a metal plate in her leg. Due to the above-mentioned medical problems, and in order to preserve her dignity, IDF soldiers asked the suicide bomber to enter the terminal area to undergo a private security check by a female IDF soldier. However, upon entering the terminal area, the suicide bomber blew

The Effect
Israel is forced to examine handicapped people more carefully and to close factories

Since the year 2000, terrorist organizations have taken advantage of humanitarian aid granted to the Palestinian population by carrying out terrorist attacks that exploit such assistance. This cost many Israeli civilians lives. It also made Palestinian lives harder. "It's simply stupid," spat 40-year-old Ashur Salha. "Of course I'm angry at her [the bomber]. This is not only the place where we work, but our home."… "Whoever ordered the bombing," said Salha, who is among about 150 Palestinian factory owners at Erez, "must have known that 30,000 mouths depend on our employment here."… Before the first intifada, recalls Malik, there were no checkpoints, and Palestinians could travel anywhere in Israel. "Not anymore, and today pretty much shows why." - By Matthew Gutman, The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 15, 2004

“The Erez checkpoint suicide bombing on Wednesday, carried out in the name of Hamas and Fatah by Reem Salah Riashi, ended the lives of security personnel at the Gaza Strip-Israel crossing point. They were three soldiers and a civilian - Tzur Or, Vladimir Trostinsky, Andrei Kegeles, and Gal Shapira. The attack also foiled efforts Israeli security forces make to reduce suspicions in their encounters with Palestinian civilians. From this point, it's likely that Palestinians most in need of relief and help - women, the sick and disabled - will also come under suspicion at crossing points…

The Erez checkpoint chosen by the terror organizations for the attack is the sole crossing point for masses of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip who want to enter Israel to work. The checkpoint represents the front line of Israel's effort to draw a distinction between military activities against terrorists, and a readiness to allow innocent people to earn their daily bread.

These [terrorist] groups, particularly Hamas and Islamic Jihad, operate on the basis of a permanent agenda of opposing any diplomatic solution with Israel. With this doctrine, they not only kill Israelis but also harm their own people and destroy any chance of an agreement materializing for a diplomatic solution with the blessing of the Israeli public.

The terror strike at the Erez checkpoint will probably oblige the security forces to develop more stringent inspections that will further burden entry procedures to Israel. It will certainly aggravate the suspicions of security personnel toward Palestinians, whether they are dealing with an ambulance carrying pregnant women, or sick or injured people seeking medical treatment. This is what happens when terror organizations strike at sites that have tried to make life easier for the innocent civilian population.” ~ Editorial, Haaretz, Jan. 16, 2004 ~

The female terrorist who blew up at the Erez Crossing, killing four Israelis along with herself, was forced to carry out the suicide attack as punishment for cheating on her husband.

“On Wednesday, 21-year-old Reem Salah al-Rayashi left her 18-month-old daughter, Doha, and her 3-year-old son, Obedia. According to a Sunday Times report, her husband drove her to Erez Crossing. IDF sources said that the investigation has already revealed that her husband, an activist in the Hamas organization, not only knew about his wife's plans in advance, but even encouraged her to carry out the suicide attack. Moreover, the person who recruited al-Rayashi to carry out the suicide attack and equipped her with the explosive belt was none other than the lover with whom she cheated on her husband…

Al-Rayashi was the daughter of an established family in Gaza. Her father was the owner of a large battery factory selling mainly to Israel. Both her family and her husband's denied rumours of an illicit love affair…

"If society does not have the courage to speak out on this issue, we could soon see 10-year-olds and pregnant women blowing themselves up," Palestinian commentator Hasan Badtil wrote in the Palestinian daily Al-Ayyam.” ~ The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 18, 2004 ~

Hasan Badtil was right, as it quickly became apparent…

The Cause
Palestinian terrorist groups are exploiting children

The use of children and youth by terrorist organizations to carry out attacks, including suicide bombings, is well known. As part of the practice of including them in violent activities and in terror-supporting operations, children and youth are sent to participate in

with the army (at times they are taken out of school for this purpose). Terrorist groups also use them for smuggling, digging tunnels, spying and intelligence-gathering. The terrorists exploit their innocent appearance, which allows them to pass more easily through IDF roadblocks and to approach soldiers and Israeli settlements, the fact that they are easy to influence and recruit because of their tender age and the intensive incitement to which they have been exposed, and the tendency of Israeli soldiers to refrain from harming children and youth.

The Effect
Israel is forced to check Palestinian children
On March 15, 2004, IDF soldiers detained a 12 year-old Palestinian boy, Abdallah Quran, while he was attempting to smuggle a powerful bomb through the Hawara checkpoint, south of Nablus. Two Nablus based Fatah-Tanzim terrorists had exploited the boy's innocent appearance, and used him to carry a fully armed explosive device through the checkpoint. The boy, who works as a porter in the area, told the soldiers that he was unaware that he was even carrying the bomb. The terrorists, members of Arafat's own Fatah faction, had planned to use the boy as an unwitting suicide bomber, intending to detonate the explosives with a mobile phone as the boy passed near the

“We condemn those who sent the boy to blow himself up. He was an innocent and quiet boy. He was a short, naive boy who had been struck in the head when he was a child and has been suffering from an illness since then. We always kept an eye on him because we knew he was a small child. Although he's 16, he thinks like a 10-year-old.” - Abdu's uncle, Abu Muhammad

“People do not like me. My friends at school make fun of me. They call me 'Brains ' but they also make fun of me because I'm small and ugly. They call me 'The Ugly Dwarf.' It hurt so much I wanted to kill myself… The people who gave me the suicide belt told me this was my only chance to have sex… We don't have any problems. I have a computer, and I like playing 'Terrorist and the Policeman.' I've heard a lot of music on the Internet” - Hussam Abdo

It can be concluded that Israel’s actions are indeed motivated by security needs.

Israel wouldn’t be checking her own citizens every time they enter a public place if it wasn’t for TERROR.

Israel wouldn’t be checking innocent Palestinians at checkpoints if it wasn’t for TERROR.

Israel wouldn’t be checking Palestinian ambulances, handicapped individuals, pregnant women and schoolchildren, if they weren’t used by TERROR.

Israel wouldn’t have build the anti-terrorist fence if it wasn’t for TERROR.

The facts are on the ground.

None of these security measures existed prior to TERROR.

It’s all a matter of
Cause and Effect

The Cause
3/11

After the March 11, 2004 terror attack on a train in Madrid, in which 202 people lost their lives, countries with no security measures in train stations must rethink their policies.

Not doing so will endanger many innocent lives.

The Effect
Shortly after the 3/11 bombing in Madrid, upgrading of the security in train stations around the world can be clearly seen.

Islamist fundamentalist terrorism cannot be negotiated with, or appeased. The time has come for the West to understand that for terrorist organizations, this is a zero-sum game.

As Hussein Massawi, former head of the Hezbollah, said about the Western world:

“We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you.”

Or, as Sheikh Ahmed Yassine, the arch-terrorist head of Hamas, said of Israel:

“Make no mistake, there will be no peace as long as there is a Zionist-Jewish state. Our holy goal is to liberate all of Palestine, and if the Jews do not go, they will die. All of Palestine is Islamic land - every inch.”

We have two choices before us:
1) To give in to Islamist terrorism and fulfill their demands, including those articulated by Osama Bin Laden and the head of Jemaah Islamiah, Abu Bakar Bashir, such as returning the extreme form of Islamic rule to Afghanistan, Southern Spain, southern Philippines, southern Thailand, Malaysia, significant parts of China, many of the republics created from the former Soviet Union and, of course, all of North Africa and the Middle East; driving the Jews of Israel into the sea; persecuting homosexuals; banning alcohol; preventing women working or being educated, or appearing in public without full covering dress; requiring women to obey men. Or…

2) To fight to uphold those values which are dear to us, in Western civilization, including freedom, democracy, human rights, women's rights, tolerance, pluralism, and rule of civil law.

The choice is ours.

From the heart of a Muslim

By: Tawfik Hamid

"I am a Muslim by faith....
a Christian by spirit....
a Jew by heart....
and above all I am a human being."

From the heart of a Muslim -
I was born a Muslim and lived all my life as a follower of Islam.
After the barbaric terrorist attacks done by the hands of my fellow Muslims everywhere on this globe, and after the too many violent acts by Islamists in many parts of the world, I feel responsible as a Muslim and as a human being, to speak out and tell the truth to protect the world and Muslims as well from a coming catastrophe and war of civilizations.

I have to admit that our current Islamic teaching creates violence and hatred toward Non-Muslims. We Muslims are the ones who need to change. Until now we have accepted polygamy, the beating of women by men, and killing those who convert from Islam to other religions.

We have never had a clear and strong stand against the concept of slavery or wars, to spread our religion and to subjugate others to Islam and force them to pay a humiliating tax called Jizia. We ask others to respect our religion while all the time we curse non-Muslims loudly (in Arabic) in our Friday prayers in the Mosques.
What message do we convey to our children when we call the Jews "Descendants of the pigs and monkeys".. Is this a message of love and peace, or a message of hate?

I have been into churches and synagogues where they were praying for Muslims. While all the time we curse them, and teach our generations to call them infidels, and to hate them.

We immediately jump in a 'knee jerk reflex' to defend Prophet Mohammed when someone accuses him of being a paedophile while, at the same time, we are proud with the story in our Islamic books, that he married a young girl seven years old (Aisha) when he was above 50 years old.

I am sad to say that many, if not most of us, rejoiced in happiness after September 11th and after many other terror attacks.
Muslims denounce these attacks to look good in front of the media, but we condone the Islamic terrorists and sympathise with their cause. Till now our 'reputable' top religious authorities have never issued a Fatwa or religious statement to proclaim Bin Laden as an apostate, while an author, like Rushdie, was declared an apostate who should be killed according to Islamic Shania law just for writing a book criticizing Islam.

Muslims demonstrated to get more religious rights as we did in France to stop the ban on the Hejab (Head Scarf), while we did not demonstrate with such passion and in such numbers against the terrorist murders.

It is our absolute silence against the terrorists that gives the energy to these terrorists to continue doing their evil acts. We Muslims need to stop blaming our problems on others or on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. As a matter of honesty, Israel is the only light of democracy, civilization, and human rights in the whole Middle East .

We kicked out the Jews with no compensation or mercy from most of the Arab countries to make them "Jews-Free countries" while Israel accepted more than a million Arabs to live there, have its nationality, and enjoy their rights as human beings. In Israel , women can not be beaten legally by men, and any person can change his/her belief system with no fear of being killed by the Islamic law of 'Apostasy,' while in our Islamic world people do not enjoy any of these rights. I agree that the 'Palestinians' suffer, but they suffer because of their corrupt leaders and not because of Israel .

It is not common to see Arabs who live in Israel leaving to live in the Arab world. On the other hand, we used to see thousands of Palestinians going to work with happiness in Israel , its 'enemy'. If Israel treats Arabs badly as some people claim, surely we would have seen the opposite happening.

We Muslims need to admit our problems and face them. Only then we can treat them and start a new era to live in harmony with human mankind. Our religious leaders have to show a clear and very strong stand against polygamy, paedophilia, slavery, killing those who convert from Islam to other religions, beating of women by men, and declaring wars on non-Muslims to spread Islam.

Then, and only then, do we have the right to ask others to respect our religion. The time has come to stop our hypocrisy and say it openly: 'We Muslims have to Change'.

Happy moments, PRAISE GOD.
Difficult moments, SEEK GOD.
Quiet moments, WORSHIP GOD.
Painful moments, TRUST GOD.
Every moment, THANK GOD!

Dr. Hamid is an Egyptian scholar and author
opposed to Islam fundamentalism.