The Opportunity To Support 'Disengagement'

Finally, I can now support a 'disengagement' policy, as Jennifer Rubin describes Obama's predicament:

It was always going to be a challenge for the Obama administration to maintain a policy of engagement with regimes and actors who so obviously have no interest in being engaged...there has been precious little evidence that these players [N. Korea & the PA] are interested in adopting fundamental changes (e.g. giving up nuclear capability, recognizing a Jewish state, etc.) — which is the desired end result of engagement. But in the last few weeks the veneer of plausibility has been chipped away, country by country.

North Korea was the first to go...

Then we had Israel and the Palestinians. Happy talk toward the “Muslim World” and harsh words for Israel. The Palestinians balk when the Israeli Prime Minister reminds them this is all about recognizing a Jewish state. What’s changed? Who is to be engaged? Well there’s a head-scratcher. In the meantime, Obama can pester Israel about settlements.

Then comes Iran...

...One senses the Obama team is longing to hold on to the shreds of their tattered engagement vision...[but]...It is time for a new approach that does not entail self-delusion and doesn’t require historical distortion.

Moreover, the pipe dream that engagement could keep the world at bay and conflicts quiet...is proving unrealistic...

What Exists, Destroy; What Doesn't Exist, Who Needs?

From Barry Rubin's thinking:

...What did Obama say in Cairo? First, he said that the Palestinians, have “suffered in pursuit of a homeland” for more than 60 years. Second, he insisted that “the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable.”

As I pointed out at the time, the first statement was a misrepresentation of history, the second a false picture of the present.

Now if Obama was right, the Palestinians should be eager for a state. So if Netanyahu calls on them to recognize Israel as a Jewish state — what do they care if they are accepting to live alongside it permanently? — and have their own state. Yes, that state would be “demilitarized,” I prefer the word “unmilitarized,”...

...But how does the PA’s leader—who is always referred to as “moderate” in the Western media and is more moderate than any other Palestinian leader (it’s all relative) — react?

...Yasser Abed Rabbo, said that recognizing Israel's Jewish character would force Palestinians "to become part of the global Zionist movement".

Think carefully about what Rabbo said. Very carefully. The Zionist movement advocates a Jewish state, Israel, exists. But the PA leadership — the top “official” leadership, the most moderate people in the Palestinian movement — are still not reconciled to Israel’s existence.

Sure, there might be a country there but not a Jewish state, in their thinking. But if it isn’t a Jewish state, why call it Israel? They have another name for the future state they have in mind for Israel to become: Palestine.

...The Palestinian movement as presently constituted is irreconcilable. It wants to destroy Israel, not live alongside it. The movement prefers to sustain the conflict for decades rather than make a stable peace.

It's Business As Usual In the Arab Middle East

...anti-Semitism is now a part of Middle Eastern culture. It has infiltrated textbooks; it is recited in mosques. It is aired on television -- for instance, the broadcast of a play produced at Gaza's Islamic University in which Jews were portrayed as drinking Muslim blood. "You must drink from the blood of Muslims," a father tells his son, according to a transcript provided by MEMRI. "Okay," the son says, "but just one cup, because I'm full."

Such views are routinely espoused by religious figures. MEMRI quotes an official of the Egyptian Ministry of Religious Endowment as saying that all Jews are descended from pigs and can therefore be slaughtered. This particular statement was rebutted by other religious officials -- such sentiments do not always go unchallenged -- but it remains remarkable and scary that they are aired in the first place.

...the toleration of the vilest kind of anti-Semitism is not a precondition for peace, only a warning to Israelis that the past can be prologue. If Arab leaders do not attempt to rebut and eliminate the hatred of Jews that is poisoning their societies, they will find that the peace that most of them undoubtedly want will not be possible.

Source

Will We See A Nude Protest?

Fur can elicit amazing responses.

Coats.

Hats.




The above are activists of international animal rights organisation PETA wearing mock fur hats, protest in front of the British embassy in Sarajevo, on Friday, Aug. 1, 2008 - Source

One near-naked protest we probably won't see in connection with this:-

Knesset Member Menachem Eliezer Moses, chairman of the Haredi-religious United Torah Judaism party, has found that an animal welfare bill supported by the government could make his shtreimel an endangered species. The shtreimel is a unique fur hat traditionally worn by members of Hassidic sects on special occasions.

...The amendment to the Animal Welfare Law would outlaw the import of products made from the fur of dogs, cats or rabbits. Specifically noted are furs imported from east Asia...

MK Moses wants fur imported for use in making shtreimels be exempted from the general prohibition. "It is inconceivable," he said, "to support a bill that outlaws imports for such a clear and important religious need."

Moses, who is a Belzer Hassid and also a rabbi, explained to the coalition representatives the meaning and importance of the shtreimel to the sector his party represents.

Religious need?




But wait, is that a shtreimel or a spodik?

What?

A spodik is a tall fur hat worn by some Haredi Hasidic Jews, particularly members of sects originating in Congress Poland. Spodiks should not be confused with shtreimels, which are a similar type of hat also worn by Hasidim. Shtreimels are shorter, wider, and circular shaped. Spodiks on the other hand are long, tall, thin, and cylindrical. There are many types of spodiks, some quite similar to the shtreimel.

Ger Hasidim are the most famous for wearing spodiks. Gerrer Hasidim have the custom of allowing all married men to wear a spodik. A Spodik generally costs between $800 to $1000 and is made out of fur. Due to an edict by the Grand Rabbi of Ger designed to stop the extravagance of the hats, Gerrer Hasidim are only allowed to purchase fake fur spodiks that must cost less than $600.

Other groups that wear Spodiks include Alexander, Amshinov, Ashlag, Kotzk, Lublin, Modzitz, Ozrov-Henzin, and Radzin.

Confused?

Try this:

Hasidim wear a variety of fur headdresses on the Sabbath:

* Shtreimel is worn by most Hasidim today, including those from Galicia and Hungary such as Satmar, Munkacs, Bobov, Breslov and Belz, and some non-Galician Polish Hasidim, such as Biala, as well as some non-Hasidic Haredim in Jerusalem.

* Spodik is the name given by others to the shtreimel worn by Polish Hasidim such as Ger, Amshinov, Ozharov, Aleksander and it is more narrow, and taller then the shtreimel, and are generally black.

* The choibl or soyvl was worn in Poland prior to the Holocaust, and has fallen into disuse.

* kolpik (Polish: calpac) is a traditional Slavic headdress, worn by unmarried sons and grandsons of many Rebbes on the Sabbath. The kolpik is worn by some Rebbes on special occasions other than the Sabbath and major Biblical Holidays, such as Hanukah, Tu B'Shvat, and Rosh Chodesh.

* The kashket or dashikl was a peaked cap worn during the week, prior to the Holocaust. It was worn in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine, and was worn by poorer Hasidim on Shabbat. Its use began as a result of the Tsarist decrees banning other traditional Jewish headdress. In these geographic areas, generally only rabbis wore black hats. Today, some Hasidic children, under the age of 13, wear a kashket on the Sabbath. Amongst Belz, the kashket has been reintroduced for boys under the age of 15 to wear on weekdays.

* The black fedora, and less so the trilby, is worn by Lubavitch Hasidim. This hat is of the style of the 1940s and 50s. They are the same as the hats worn by many non-Hasidic Haredim, as well as by some more "modern" Hasidim who are followers of a particular Rebbe without being part of a Hasidic community. Habad Hasidim often pinch their hats to form a triangle on the top, following the style of the Chabad - Lubavitcher Rebbe. They wear their fedoras even on the Sabbath and Holidays. However, some Lubavitch Hasidim in Jerusalem wear a shtreimel on the Sabbath, if that was their family's custom for generations in Jerusalem.

* Various forms of felt open-crown (a type of hat with a rounded top) are worn by many Hasidim. Affiliation can sometimes be identified by whether there is a pinch in the middle of the top or not, as well as the type of brim. This is called a shtofener hat in Yiddish. Ger and Slonimer Hasidim wear a round hat, while Stolin and Emunas Yisrael wear a pinched hat. Many Satmar laymen wear a type of open crown hat that resembles a bowler hat with rounded edges on the brim.

* Samet (velvet) or biber (beaver) hats are worn by Galician and Hungarian Hasidim during the week and by unmarried men on Shabbat as well. They are usually only worn in the winter. Some unmarried men wear a samet hat on the Sabbath and a felt hat during the week. There are many types of Samet hats, most notably the "high" ("hoicher") and "flat" ("platsher") varieties. The "flat" type is worn by Satmar Hasidim, and some others as well. Some Rabbis wear a "round" samet hat in a similar style to the shtofener hats, however made from the Samet material. They are called beaver hats even though today they are made from rabbit.

* A small fur hat called a kutchma (Ukrainian: kučma or кучма) is worn by many Hasidic laymen during weekdays in the winter. Today this hat is sometimes made from cheaper materials, such as polyester. This hat is referred to as a shlyapka (шляпка), by Russian Jews.

Help:



And let's keep within the tribe:

An Iranian Observation - by a Nut

Jeffrey Goldberg notes that:

Flynt Leverett, formerly of the National Security Council, compares the "election" in Iran to the 2000 recount in Florida:

Look at the irregularities Mousavi is citing now: that they ran out of ballot paper in some polling precincts, that they did not keep some polls open long enough. There is no way such things could change the overall outcome which is clearly in favor of Ahmadinejad. If you compare this to the flaws of the presidential election in Florida in 2000, it seems very insignificant.

So, this is the type of 'wise men of Washington' that rule our destiny?

Gee, I would have compared it to Germany:

The election campaigns was held under violent circumstances, as Papen lifted the ban on the SA, the Nazi paramilitary, which Brüning had banned during the last days of his administration. This inevitably led to clashes with the equally violent Communist paramilitary.

The elections resulted in great gains by the Nazi party, who with 230 seats for the first time became the largest party in parliament. Combined with the Communists, the enemies of democracy now commanded a firm majority in parliament, making any parliamentary government impossible. However, the Nazi Party had no governing majority either and both President Hindenburg and the other parties refused cooperation. Hence, Papen's minority government continued, leading to another election in November.

Remember My Warnings About Dayton?

If the Palestinians follow through with their threat to renew their terror war against Israel it will be quite bad. This is so not because Israel will be unable to defend itself. Israel has the means to defend itself. It will be quite bad because, in light of the hostile treatment Israel is suffering at the hands of the Obama administration, and given the central role the U.S. under Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton is playing in arming and training the Palestinian army that will likely be attacking Israeli targets in Judea and Samaria, the U.S. may well side with the Arabs against Israel. The administration is already placing limitations on arms sales to Israel.

Caroline Glick via Atlas Shrugs

This Better Not Be Wishful Thinking

This:-

The U.S. administration is prepared to show flexibility on construction in West Bank settlements, a government source in Jerusalem says. The Americans will apparently not demand a full freeze on construction, but will agree that projects now underway can be completed, Israeli officials say.

Latest Joke

Q.

Ever heard of a demilitarized "Palestinian State"?

A.

What's a "Palestinian State"?


And, seriously, read this.



(Kippah tip: LK)

Jabotinsky Recalled

Likud members explain their objection to a Palestinian state with the claim that Ze'ev Jabotinsky's idea of an "iron wall" has not yet taken hold of Palestinian public opinion and that an agreement should be avoided until they have relinquished their desire to destroy Israel.

Source

Netanyahu's Next Task - And That of the Yesha Council

Consider this:-

Public support for Netanyahu's speech is sky-high, even though Israelis do not have illusions about the prime minister's motives, which they generally attribute to American pressure. But it turns out that Israelis prefer a prime minister who does the right thing even if he does it for the wrong reasons.

And most of the public thinks the right thing is the combination found in Netanyahu's address: right-wing rhetoric mixed with the desire for peace, an undivided Jerusalem, opposition to the return of Palestinian refugees, a demand for defensible borders, and the words that made the big headline - a demilitarized Palestinian state

and it continues:

The numbers show that when Netanyahu deals with leadership on defense and policy matters without scare tactics, the public supports him...Netanyahu needs to operate less and lead more. Another conclusion is that maybe he should speak to the public more often, on condition that he says what the public wants to hear.

The Israeli public overwhelmingly supports Netanyahu's speech - 71 percent...Israelis...do not believe there will be any real change in the region as a result of the speech. A large majority of Israelis surveyed say the peace process will not see any breakthrough in the wake of the address, and an even larger majority says a demilitarized Palestinian state will not be established in the next few years, as Netanyahu himself now supports.

...The survey shows that 90 percent of Likud voters, an incredible figure, agreed with what Netanyahu said in his speech. Maybe they are aware that a Palestinian state will not emerge as a result, so they are not worried.

So, how does the revenant community, the official Yesha Council, as well as other bodies and groups, solidify public support based on Netanyahu's consolidation of a fundamental positive and pro-Eretz Yisrael attitude?



Not that hard:


Don't speak shrilly. Smile in interviews.

Always justify disagreement in moderate terminology but based on a fact the public is familiar with and agrees with.

Don't act violently or seem to appear violent.

Don't attack police or soldiers.

Highlight big minuses of proposed Pal. state based on past performance.

In addition to Bible and history, use legal rights, human rights and security needs.

Bring people out to Yesha.

Reach out to supporters from wherever.

Launch diplomatic and media campaigns.


Any other ideas?

Misleading Headline

I read this:

Woman accused of assaulting bus driver with change

and thought, maybe she changed physically into something else (you never know with transgenders) or she changed her wardrobe or she changed her direction or whatever.

Nope.

A Boston woman accused of throwing a handful of change in the face of a Boston bus driver faces an assault charge. According to a police report, 23-year-old Chantal Williams boarded an MBTA bus Sunday and told the driver, "I only have this change and you're gonna let me ride this bus."

Non-Lethal?

A Zionist summer camp promises:

Kitat Konenut New York
New York's only Jewish Emergency Readiness Squad is having it's fourth anual 10-day
Israeli Military Training Camp this summer (2009).

Training will include:

*Krav maga
*Kung fu
*Edged weapons training
*Rifle training
*Pistol training
*Scoped Rifle, long range shooting
*Non-Lethal weapons training
*Endurence marches
*Overnight wilderness hikes
*Masa alunkot, 10-25 Kilometers
*Histaarut, prat, kita and chulia
*Identification of suspicious objects and how to deal with them

Hey, guys, if it doesn't have any lethal potentiality, it isn't worth it.

New Graphic for Media Critique Comments

G-o-o-d M-o-r-n-i-n-n-n-n-g, America

Carlos Bledsoe's transformation from Tennessee youth to an American-born Islamic extremist charged in a bloody rampage outside an Arkansas military recruiting station may signal an ominous new wave of violent homegrown jihadists, counterterror officials say.

National security officials have long feared the emergence of a new breed of American militants who would raise little suspicion as they move in and out of the country carrying out the aims of terrorist groups like al-Qaida.

"It's the manifestation of a problem that the counterterrorism community has been worried about all along," said Juan Zarate, a top counterterrorism official in the Bush administration. Their worries center on "a radicalized individual who decides to take matters into his own hands."

Source

I Had My Say

Note the BBC Arab Affairs analyst below in this "Have Your Say"::

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak says an Israeli demand that Palestinians accept Israel as a Jewish state ruins the chances for a peace deal.

The demand was one of the conditions set by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he backed the creation of a Palestinian state for the first time.

He also asked that a Palestinian state be demilitarised. Palestinians have rejected the conditions...

...A Palestinian official has said the Israeli prime minister's conditions for a two-state solution "paralysed" the peace process, while a Hamas spokesman in Gaza called on Arab nations to "form stronger opposition" towards Israel.

BBC Arab Affairs analyst Magdi Abdelhadi says Palestinians suspect that Mr Netanyahu has moved the goal posts.

Recognising the Jewish nature of the Israel state would in effect mean that they will have to forgo one of their key demands: a negotiated settlement for the problem of the Palestinian refugees - those who either fled or were forced to leave their homes when Israel was established in 1948.

I left this comment there:

Well, there's goes another chances Arabs had to try to undermine the existence of the state of Israel. Netanyahu should, a la Obama, give them two weeks to recant and if not, he makes another speech, this time a "bye-bye" speech on "Palestine".

Was two weeks too long a period?

An Integral Part

...we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements.

But there is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.

Benjamin Netanyahu

An Appreciation of Bibi's Speech

One can’t but admit what a vast gulf there is between Obama’s distorted history and Netanyahu’s accurate one, and between Obama’s formulation that Israel’s territorial concessions must precede unconditional recongition and Netanyahu’s diametrically opposite view.

Jennifer Rubin

Pics of Obama's Reaction to the Mention of Netanyahu's Name

New Temple Mount Novel

I have noted close to ten novels dealing with the Temple Mount over the years at my blog. (Here together with here, and here and also here, for example)

Frank Shapiro, a former high school history teacher and assistant researcher at the Museum of the Diaspora, has written God's Elect, his first novel.



From its blurb:

On Jerusalem's Temple Mount, masses demonstrate for the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple, fired by rumours that the Temple Treasures, taken to Rome two thousand years previously by Titus, are making their way to Israel. But what is behind this newly elected Pope's statesmanlike gesture of releasing these holy vessels? Is this the trigger ushering in the triumph of Christianity over Islam and the hastening of the End of Days - the war of Gog and Magog?

Nothing is at is seems - not even the Pope. A fanatical sect has embedded itself in the heart of Christendom, and is determined to change the fate of the world. This is the backdrop for a clash of civilizations, led by the rise of religious fanaticism - both Christian and Muslim!

The book's site.

One More And It's 100

100?

Elder is counting.

Netanyahu: "Yes to a Palestinian state means no to a Jewish one"

Really:

...ultimately, the historical accounts are clear: Yes to a Palestinian state means no to a Jewish one. And yes to a Jewish state means no to a Palestinian one.

Ah, but that was in 2002.

Here are additional excerpts:

Today, most of the Israeli nation understands that it is impossible to reach any kind of solution with the Palestinians before the terrorist forces are completely routed, before they lose all hope of ever achieving their goal – which is the destruction of the State of Israel.

But in order to decisively prevail over terror, we must do three things, about which I have been talking for these many months.

The first thing we must do is to complete the removal of all Palestinian fighters, weapons and ammunition from the area.

...The second step is to establish security buffer zones opposite the main Palestinian population centers in order to seal off the free passage of Palestinians into our cities and towns.

Let me emphasize – I am not talking about a fence along the 1967 lines...I am talking about is a physical buffer opposite the Palestinians’ main population centers, the source of most of the terror...

...there is a third step, and it is the most important one of all. We must completely and totally eradicate Arafat’s regime and remove him from the vicinity!

...From all this, it is clear that not only must we not hold negotiations with Arafat, but we must not participate in a regional conference that includes him or anyone representing him.

...not everyone in the world is against us! The great American nation is not only not against us – it supports us, and by a huge majority!

And that is important, because in the final analysis, what determines the position of the administration in the United States is public opinion...We have the ability to sway this public opinion. Because the American people is in general a decent nation that cannot stomach a double standard. The citizens of the United States understand very well that terror is the absolute evil that must be eradicated.

...we are doing something even more serious and dangerous:

We are promising Palestinian terror the greatest prize of all – the establishment of a Palestinian state.

...The question is whether we can agree that they have sovereign authority, power that goes beyond self-rule, which every country has. This power would include:

the right to have full control over borders, through which they could import unlimited arms and solders. States control their own air space – a Palestinian state would have the right to shoot down any Israeli plane overflying it without permission. States have the right to make military alliances with other countries – a Palestinian state would have the right to make such alliances with Syria, Iraq, Libya, ets. States control the water sources underground – a Palestinian state would have the right to control the mountain aquifer which supplies about 30 percent of Israel’s water and most of our drinking water. Even those who support the establishment of a Palestinian state are unwilling under any circumstances to give this power to the Palestinians. But the moment we agree to give them a state, that is exactly what we would be giving them!

It must be understood that sovereignty has its own power. Even if an agreement limiting certain sovereign rights were signed, within a short time, this Palestinian state would demand to have all these rights and would realize them, whether we agreed or not.

The world would not stand in the way of allowing the Palestinian state to appropriate all this authority, which would give it the power to destroy the State of Israel, but it would stand in our way if we tried to prevent it from realizing these rights.

...We must not be frightened if the international community does not see eye to eye with us on these matters. Did the international community foresee the danger of the Holocaust? And when it finally opened its eyes, did it do anything to stop it? Did it as much as lift a finger?

Did it see the danger posed to our survival from the atomic reactor in Iraq? And when it did, did it not condemn us when Menachem Begin’s Likud government bombed that destructive facility from the air?

On matters vital to our survival, we have always taken resolute steps, and we have always spoken clearly, even when many others in the world did not agree with us.

Because, ultimately, the historical accounts are clear: Yes to a Palestinian state means no to a Jewish one. And yes to a Jewish state means no to a Palestinian one.

Clinton Clamps Down

Here's the lead-in:

In a recent interview, [which I already noted here] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated:

"We do have a view about Israel's security. We see historical, demographic, political, technological trends that are very troubling as to Israel's future."

This was a most peculiar thing for a secretary of state to say. In effect, she claims that the United States knows best for Israel. I cannot imagine an American secretary of state saying such a thing about any other country in the world in this manner.

But the truth is that this administration doesn't know best for Israel.

Read it all.

Islamic Non-Feminism

Three German women who were among a group of nine foreigners kidnapped in Yemen last Friday are reported to have been killed, in what seems like a violent conclusion to another hostage drama in the poor and unstable Arab country.

That's all? Poor and unstable? Or Muslim?

Nope.

More:

A high-ranking official in the Yemeni Interior Ministry told Germany's DPA news agency that the bodies were found in the Saada province and that the women had been shot. A local security official, meanwhile, told the Associated Press that the bodies had been mutilated.

Meanwhile, AP reported on Monday that a Yemeni security official had said that the other six hostages, including three children, had now also been found dead.

More Yesha Feminism

Following on this neat weapon-in-a-handbag, we have the:

Tactical Corsets

Tactical Corsets bring female operators MILSPEC features like MOLLE modular pouch attachment webbing and self-adjustable quick-release buckles...Tactical corsets: a corset that's bulletproof, comes with pistol holster, pepper spray holster, and an "interrogation pouch."

Demonstration video here.

The Facism of the Left

My mentor, Dr. Israel Eldad, once told me on one of those Fridays we spent together for an hour or two, "The left considers me a fascist for my staunch positions of the Land of Israel and the need to be strong in face of Arab hostility. I admit that my orientation outwards is harsh but towards all my fellow Jews I am soft. The Left, on the other hand, is the opposite. They are weak and soft towards the external enemy and harsh towards their fellow Jews."

I recalled those words when reading Bernard Avishai, here, who wrote:

But insisting on a total freeze today, when settlements have turned into substantial towns full of mobilized youth--towns whose residents should be understood as on a scale somewhere between Pat Robertson and David Koresh--seems false.

This is ridiculous, false, malicious and hatefully spiteful.

It is the type of metaphoric imagery one uses when one has no real argument.

What Avishai does desire is American interventionism (only in Israel, God forbid anywhere else in the world):

Obama should use the dispute over a settlements freeze as an occasion to rally the world community to drawing up a permanent border, something along the lines of the one offered in the Geneva Initiative...Obama should make clear that a border is not Israel's internal affair. That, for example, the world will never recognize the town of Ariel as part of a future Israel...A strong sense of where America wants the border would be an early win for the peace process, which could unlock many other possibilities.

And here's the fascism:

...to get these people [the revenants] out eventually, you have to 1) politically marginalize them, that is, create a conflict of interest between settlers who fall within an agreed border and those more fanatic types falling outside it; 2) induce them to return to agreed settlements or to within the Green Line with time-limited financial compensation; 3) threaten them with power and water cuts on this or that date; and, these measures failing, 4) remove them by siege and, if necessary, force.

Egypt Not Playing Nice

Fark's comment:

Egyptian president blasts Bebe's proposal for a two state solution, after he outrageously demands that one of the two states should recognized as "Israel."

on this:

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak blasted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's speech on Sunday saying "Netanyahu's demand that Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state is ruining the chance for peace," Egyptian news agencies reported on Monday.

Mubarak further added that "not Egypt, nor any other Arab country would support Netanyahu's approach."

Follow-up on "West Bank"

I received this in response to a letter of protest (below):

Dear Mr. Medad,

Thank you for your note.

Please be advised that is a long-standing U.S. government policy, and does not represent a recent change. We will certainly be happy to pass along your views to Washington regarding this issue.

Sincerely,

Luke Zahner

U.S. Consulate General Jerusalem

--------------------------------

Letter of Protest

Dear ,

Thank you for the update on the regulations.

On behalf of myself and additional American citziens, I kindly request that you convey the following protest to the highest officials both in the Consulate as well as the State Department in Washington, including Madam Secretary of State.

The custom adopted by the United States bureaucracy to note "West Bank" for babies born to American citizens in the regulation 7 FAM 1360 APPENDIX D BIRTH IN ISRAEL, JERUSALEM, AND ISRAELI-OCCUPIED AREAS whereby

"If a child is born in the West Bank, whether they are Israelis or Palestinians, place of birth on the U.S. passport is either the city (Efrat, Ramallah, etc.) or the area – the West Bank in that case."

And that furthermore,

"In addition, since the couple’s previous children were born in ________ (and not, say, in Beit Shemesh, etc.), their passports would have to be amended the next time they are renewed. American Citizen Services, Special Consular Services"

is illogical.

As State Dept. officialdom should know, the "West Bank" does not exist as a geo-political entity and never did. In fact, the 1947 UN Resolution referred to Judea and Samaria. So, even if there are some who perceive a logic in the regulation, and I do not recognize such, nevertheless its internal reasoning is based on May 15, 1948 as a cut-off date. However, the "West Bank" did not exist prior to that time. Actually, it only evolved in 1950 when the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, a state, incidentally, that launched a war of aggression against the nascent state of Israel on May 15, 1948, one-sidely declared an administrative entity they called the "West Bank".

If the State Dept. cannot bring itself to note "Israel" as the state in which "Jerusalem" is located, and furthermore, seeks to create a new political entity, the "West Bank", which never existed previously, I and many others protest this attitude.

The UN Partition Resoltuion 181, partitioning the Mandate territory, was quite explicit about boundaries and place names. "West Bank" does not appear whereas "Judea" and "Samaria" do. Those were the official British Mandate names.

So, until a future alteration in policy, I must insist that the State Dept. adopt those names. An American child born in Efrat or Hebron should be registered as "_______, Judea" and for a child born in Bethel, Ofra or Shiloh, registration should read "______, Samaria".

Moreover, any retroactive actions in previous instances where registration was not done in accordance with the above noted regulation, any amendments should be discounted.

Sincerely,

Yisrael Medad

Hebrew Book Week at Liberty Bell Park

Views From A Roof

From the roof of a centrally located Jerusalem hotel:

the swimming pool
Old City walls
Jaffa Gate (center-left); Kishleh (center-right); Augusta Victoria and Tur Malka on ridge
Lutheran Church, Old City center
YMCA

David's Crown Residential Project behind YMCA
Independence Park surrounded by Plaza left
Machaneh Yisrael neighborhood founded in 1864

Washington Post Is Hostile to Zionism

As the American Thinker beat me, I'll note:

Even before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began his long-awaited June 14 policy speech on Mideast peace, [Howard Schneider of the Foreign Service (he's a diplomat?) of] the Washington Post rushed out to warn readers that it wouldn't pass the paper's kosher test. "Netanyahu's Speech to Inject Zionist Perspective," the headline blared.

Simply frightening to the Washington Post that an Israeli leader would go so far as to tilt a major foreign-policy address in a Zionist direction.

What next? An American president injecting Americanism in his speeches? What is the world coming to?

...Only when an Israeli leader chooses a venue that epitomizes the historic essence of the Jewish state does the Post raise a red flag.

Talk about a double standard!

But Schneider's text read:

Advisers to Netanyahu and Israeli political analysts say the speech will be a
response to President Obama's address to Muslims this month at Cairo University.
Netanyahu, they say, wants to inject a Zionist "narrative" into a discussion
that he believes was tilted in Obama's speech toward the Arab version of events.

So, actually, he was just quoting, I trust, others about that "Zionist injection". Rennert of The American Thinker need not have gone that overboard, methinks.

Like to let Howard what you think? Go here.

So, is Zionism is a dirty word?

The Netanyahu Speech - First Reactions

As I was not able to hear his speech live, and then got involved in other matters, only now can I react very concisely.

The speech is here and a few items:

Peace has always been our people’s most ardent desire.

Jewish survival is our most ardent desire.

...An economic peace is not a substitute for a political peace, but an important element to achieving it.

Correct. First, economy, then democratic society, then full human rights. If the societies are not relatively equal, there will be no peace.

There is an enormous potential for archeological tourism, if we can only learn to cooperate and to develop it.

This will be a great boon for ancient Jewish historical presence in the country.

Israel is obligated by its international commitments and expects all parties to keep their commitments.

Missed a chance to announce the Road Map needed a new compass.

In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?...And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland.

Excellent.

The Arabs rejected any Jewish state, in any borders.

Those who think that the continued enmity toward Israel is a product of our presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is confusing cause and consequence.

The attacks against us began in the 1920s, escalated into a comprehensive attack in 1948 with the declaration of Israel’s independence, continued with the fedayeen attacks in the 1950s, and climaxed in 1967, on the eve of the six-day war, in an attempt to tighten a noose around the neck of the State of Israel.

Superb.

Many good people have told us that withdrawal from territories is the key to peace with the Palestinians. Well, we withdrew. But the fact is that every withdrawal was met with massive waves of terror, by suicide bombers and thousands of missiles.

Great.

The claim that territorial withdrawals will bring peace with the Palestinians, or at least advance peace, has up till now not stood the test of reality.

Stupendous.

...there must also be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel’s borders. For it is clear that any demand for resettling Palestinian refugees within Israel undermines Israel’s continued existence as the state of the Jewish people.

Very good.

...let me first say that the connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel has lasted for more than 3500 years. Judea and Samaria, the places where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Isaiah and Jeremiah lived, are not alien to us. This is the land of our forefathers.

The right of the Jewish people to a state in the land of Israel does not derive from the catastrophes that have plagued our people...But our right to build our sovereign state here, in the land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: this is the homeland of the Jewish people, this is where our identity was forged.

Take that Obama.

But now he fumbles it.

In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect. Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.

These two realities – our connection to the land of Israel, and the Palestinian population living within it – have created deep divisions in Israeli society...Palestinians must clearly and unambiguously recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The second principle is: demilitarization. The territory under Palestinian control must be demilitarized with ironclad security provisions for Israel...It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarized.

A Catch-22 situation: conditions that probably cannot be fulfilled.

I told President Obama when I was in Washington that if we could agree on the substance, then the terminology would not pose a problem. And here is the substance that I now state clearly:

If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitirization and Israel’s security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state...Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel with continued religious freedom for all faiths.

State is a no-no word.

...In the meantime, we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements. But there is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.

Even the Prime Minister's translation team uses "settlers". Dummies.

Shaul Goldstein Did It

AFP:-

Former US president Jimmy Carter on Sunday made a rare visit to a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank which he said "will be here for ever," despite Palestinian claims to the territory.

Carter, a staunch opponent of the settlements, travelled to Neve Daniel in Gush Etzion, a large settlement bloc south of Jerusalem which Israel hopes to keep in any future Middle East peace deal.

He said he came "to make sure they (the settlers) understand my own attitude towards Israel, the Jewish population across the world and the Jewish settlements."

Speaking at the end of a meeting with Shaul Goldstein, the head of the Gush Etzion regional council, Carter said that the settlement bloc would remain under Israeli control.

"This particular settlement area is not one that I can envision ever being abandoned or changed over into Palestinian territory. This is part of settlements close to the 1967 (border) line that I think will be here for ever," he said in the garden of Goldstein's house.

Media Line:-

“I have been very fortunate this afternoon in learning a perspective that I didn’t have,” said Carter.

And they downloaded an audio, if you don't believe the media.

More background here.

Refrraining From A Civil War Is The Responsibility of Both Sides

In the weekly Shabbat bulletin "Me'at Min Ha'Or" (internet site), published by Tnuat Orot, the editor, Chanan Porat writes, following MK Tzipi Livni's appearance at the launch for Haggai Segal's book, on "what Tzipi Livni hasn't begun to comprehend":



He discusses that there is a limit to the willingness of one side to refrain from engaging in civil war even after the "Saison" and the "Altalena" and the subject of Segels' book, the kidnapping and apparent torture and murder of his uncle by the Hagana. There is a red line which both sides need learn for the historical events of those days in the 1940s. This part of the article is important:

and the highlighted portion translates:

Let the words be said without any attempt to deceive, he who is planning to repeat in a large-scale fashion the precedent of the the Gush Qatif evacuation and to uproot tens of thousands of Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria, should know that he is liable to ignite the flame of fratricidal war that no one can foretell its conclusion. And even the members of the Yesha Council will shout - and I among them - from today until tomorrow: "just not a civil war", it is doubtful if we will succeed in dousing the burning fire, on the backdrop of the wounds dripping of blood of Gush Qatif.

I am not saying this with a wink of the eye in order to create a "balance of fear" but as a considered reading of the bitter reality, and all those you ignore the situation is either blind or evil, as one who is knowingly pushing for a war among brothers.

Nonsense from Saudi Arabia

The New York Times inadvertently highlights how much more intransigent than Israel most Arab states are. President Barack Obama is soon heading to Saudi Arabia, where he will present wish-lists from the U.S. government, from the Israeli government, and from the Palestinian Authority. Israel isn’t asking for much – just a few symbolic tourist visas, meetings between Saudi officials and their Israeli counterparts, and the opening of a Saudi interests office in Tel Aviv. “These would be a tall order for the Arab kingdom,” the Times says.

Good grief. The Obama Administration expects Israelis to stop building houses in Jewish neighborhoods in suburban Jerusalem that they never intend to abandon, yet the Saudis won’t even talk to Israelis or let a few Jews visit the beach.
Once in a while, it’s wise to refuse meetings with enemies. President Franklin Roosevelt didn’t negotiate with Adolf Hitler or Emperor Hirohito during World War II. President Obama won’t hold a summit with the Taliban’s Mullah Omar or with Al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden. Israel, though, isn’t a threat to Saudi Arabia. Israel has never attacked Saudi Arabia. Israel almost certainly never will attack Saudi Arabia. The overwhelming majority of Israelis want peace and normal relations with Saudi Arabia now. Saudi Arabia’s refusal to even speak to Israelis under these circumstances makes its government more reactionary than Israel’s would have been had then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin refused to meet with then-Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1979.

The idea that Saudi Arabia “can’t” have diplomatic relations with Israel until the Palestinian question is resolved has become mainstream, even axiomatic, but it’s nonsense.

Source

I Empathize

Out here in Yesha, we can't get the local Arabs to at least cooperate on environmental issues like water and sewerage and waste disposal.

So, I felt sympathy here:

In 29 years of enforcing sewage laws in Pennsylvania, Jack E. Crislip has never faced violators more adamant, or more pleasant to deal with, than members of the ultraconservative Swartzentruber Amish sect.

For the last two and a half years, Mr. Crislip, a planning supervisor for the state’s Environmental Protection Department, and local sewage authorities have had more than 30 meetings in a futile effort to persuade members of the sect here in Cambria County, about 80 miles east of Pittsburgh, to upgrade outhouses next to a schoolhouse so they comply with state sanitation codes.

The schoolhouse is on land belonging to Andy Swartzentruber, 53, one of five elders who guide the 20-family Amish community spread out on farms near Nicktown.

Mr. Swartzentruber was scheduled to be released from county prison on Sunday after serving 90 days for failing to correct the violations at the outhouses. Other members of the Amish community could also end up behind bars if the impasse is not resolved.

Haveil Havalim #221

Here.

Another Poll

The May Peace Index:

On the eve of President Obama’s address in Cairo, only about one-third (31%) of the Israeli Jewish public saw his position on solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as neutral. A majority of 55% think he leans more to the Palestinian side, and only 5% say he favors the Israeli side. Moreover, 60% do not trust the president to take into account and uphold Israel’s interests in his efforts to improve America’s relations with the Arab world...52%, opposes a two-state solution if it requires substantial concessions by Israel, compared to 41% who are prepared for an agreement entailing such concessions.

As for the settlements, the Jewish public appears to be divided on whether they contribute to or weaken the Israeli national interest, with a small majority (48%) saying they weaken it and 43% that they contribute to it. At the same time, the majority — 53% — think Israel should not agree to an inclusive settlement evacuation even if reaching an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement were to hinge on this alone, while 41% would support such an evacuation...Among those who think the settlements contribute to the national interest, 74% oppose evacuating them and 23% favor it; among those who think they harm the national interest, 57% support an evacuation and 37% oppose it.

Continuing Construction at Shiloh

We're adding on to our crowded synagogue:


and the expansion of our primary school keeps apace, with a new internal driveway almost finished:

What To Wear To A Wedding Reception

I saw a shirt at a recent wedding:

and this caught my eye:

Anti-Parking Lot Open on Shabbat Posters

A Strawberry in Our Garden

It's tough being a agriculturalist.

Yaakov Ahimeir and Geula Cohen

June 5, 2009

The Al-Islah School in Blackburn

Really, Blackburn, UK

Hollywood Jewish Talk

"Yeah, right, I forgot about that," Larissa interjected, hoping to head off yet another one of June's newspapery blah, blah, blahs with a quick toss to the safe world of their children's preschool. "June, will you be on the coloring committee at Tot Shabbat this winter?"

June was amused by how Larissa and Willie, who were not Jewish, had thrown themselves into the world of Temple Beth Israel, joining the synagogue in order to get their daughter, Chloe, a spot at the coveted preschool. They had no intention of converting, but they had learned to pray phonetically so as to participate in the random bread blessing and Passover seder, even as they continued to attend the Church of the Good Shepherd in Beverly Hills every Sunday. "Um, I'm a little busy this semester," June said.

Source in the new novel
BEVERLY HILLS ADJACENT by Jennifer Steinhauer and Jessica Hendra

A Bit Old "Hat"

This poster, of a politician wearing the Arab kaffiyeh, is a bit boring.

It's been used so many times.

Now, it's Obama:



In the past it was Rabin, Peres, Netanyahu, et al.

Hey there, right-wing extremists. Can we have a bit more graphic and artistic creativity?

These Are The Guilty

The Washington Post points the finger:

President Obama's close friends and key advisers have helped him shape the toughest line against the continued expansion of Israeli settlements since the administration of President Jimmy Carter...

...supporters of Israel whose tough views on the need to stop settlements mirror his current public position. Abner Mikva, an Obama mentor and former law professor, was one of them. "There has to be realistic talks about how the two states will get along together," Mikva said, describing Obama's thinking on the subject of Middle East peace before being elected to the U.S. Senate. "You can't do that if one state, as you're talking, is picking up more land."

...One of the president's close friends in Chicago, the late Rabbi Arnold Wolf, wrote last year of his disappointment that Obama had often publicly softened his private positions. "For my part, I've sometimes found Obama too cautious on Israel," said Wolf, who in 1973 co-founded an organization that advocated creating a Palestinian state [Breira and this: In the 1940s, Rabbi Wolf served as the American representative to Brit Shalom, joining other renowned Jewish leaders including Judah Magnes, Martin Buber, and Henrietta Szold in calling for "Jewish-Arab cooperation, as both necessary and possible." In 1949, he was instrumental in founding Israel's Givat Haviva Educational Institute, created to educate for peace, democracy, coexistence and social solidarity.].

...White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel worked in the Clinton White House when Netanyahu reneged on an understanding to stop the growth of settlements. As a member of Congress, Emanuel was one of only two Jewish lawmakers to co-sponsor a resolution supporting a peace plan that would have abandoned to the Palestinians one of the West Bank's largest settlements -- Ariel, with about 40,000 settlers.

...in 2008, James L. Jones -- now Obama's national security adviser -- examined the security issues involved in creating a Palestinian state. The Israeli media reported that he drafted a report, never released by the Bush administration, that was highly critical of Israel's policies in the West Bank.

Politically, there is little danger for the president in confronting Israel, especially if it leads to a peace deal. Polls suggest that settlements hold little appeal to many American Jews and have rapidly decreasing support in Congress.

"They made a political calculation that this is something they could sell on Capitol Hill," said Samuel Lewis, former U.S. ambassador to Israel. "It will divide the Israelis and put Netanyahu on the defensive."...

Archeology Solves A Biblical Textual Difficulty

In this Shabbat's Haftara reading, Joshua 2, we read:

15 Then she let them down by a cord through the window; for her house was upon the side of the wall, and she dwelt upon the wall.

What does that mean? That Rahab actually lived in the wall or nearby?

Well, this picture I took at Tel Shiloh seems to provide an answer:

The wall, here 5 meters broad, was at some time emptied out of its fill and rooms were built into it. The same was probably done at Jericho.

Quite simple, actually.

Poll Supports Jewish Revenants!!!

Poll: 56% of Israelis back settlement construction

Nearly six of every 10 Israelis think Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should resist U.S. demands to completely freeze construction in Jewish West Bank settlements, according to a new poll released Friday.

The poll by the Maagar Mohot Polling Institute comes just ahead of Netanyahu's major policy speech on Sunday that is expected to address a growing divide with Washington.

...Fifty-six percent of those surveyed said Netanyahu should not consent to the American demand to halt all settlement construction, as opposed to 37 percent who said he should. Fifty percent said failure to comply would not provoke a crisis with the U.S., while 32 percent said they thought the settlement freeze was a make or break issue for Washington.

Maagar Mohot also found in a separate poll that two-thirds of Israelis have little appetite for dismantling West Bank settlements. Thirty-six percent oppose any evacuation as part of a final peace deal and 30 percent said only a small number should be dismantled.

Aw, we always knew that. But that Haaretz would print it.

Probably think it damages Netanyahu.

Oh, and thanks to Obama for aiding us in closing ranks.

An 'On Obama Observation'

...on freedom of religion, Obama could not resist the compulsion to find fault with his own country: "For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation" -- disgracefully giving the impression to a foreign audience not versed in our laws that there is active discrimination against Muslims, when the only restriction, applied to all donors regardless of religion, is on funding charities that serve as fronts for terror.

For all of his philosophy, the philosopher-king protests too much. Obama undoubtedly thinks he is demonstrating historical magnanimity with all these moral equivalencies and self-flagellating apologetics. On the contrary. He's showing cheap condescension, an unseemly hunger for applause and a willingness to distort history for political effect.

Distorting history is not truth-telling but the telling of soft lies. Creating false equivalencies is not moral leadership but moral abdication. And hovering above it all, above country and history, is a sign not of transcendence but of a disturbing ambivalence toward one's own country.

Source


And one more:

In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere. And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people.

Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience — more than 100 million people — that the killing of six million Jews during the Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel’s actions in dealing with the Palestinians. This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million Jews who died as a result of Hitler’s genocide — and it is a form of revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come.
While Obama acknowledged that “six million Jews were killed — more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today” — his discussion about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: “On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people — Muslims and Christians — have suffered in pursuit of a homeland.”

Obama’s clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 million Muslims who tuned into to hear him.

Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are guilty of.

At first blush Mr. Obama’s speech seemed rosy, optimistic — one that espoused tolerance and understanding. If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history will view as a turning point for America and Israel — one that will lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians.

The immediate danger posed by Obama’s speech is in its incredible re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from Medieval times to the present.

Source

Appalling Obama Is

George F. Will at the Fairmont Miramar Hotel in Santa Monica, in celebration of the Claremont Review of Books. He took a few questions, including one that led him to reflect on President Obama’s apparent belief that disharmony among nations results from misunderstandings that can be cured by dialogue and communication.

And he said (clip here)

We’ve seen this in his treatment of Israel in that remarkable speech, the atmospherics of which were fine, the specifics appalling...How many Americans understand that when Israel was founded in 1948, no Palestinian state was invaded, no Palestinian state was destroyed? There had not been a Palestinian geographic entity since between the departure of the Romans and the arrival of British rule.

How many know that the West Bank, referred to by the President as “occupied territory,” inferentially as occupied Palestinian territory, is under international law unallocated portion of the Palestine Mandate rightfully occupied by Israel, because it occupied it in repelling aggression that came from that territory in 1967...

How the President believes that if we return to the 1967 borders, the antipathy to Israel, which predated the 1967 borders, will disappear, I do not know.

...It is unworthy of the United States to aspire to be even-handed between those who would destroy and those who would preserve the only democracy in that region...

Wrong Number

UPI reports:

A religious ruling permits ultra-orthodox Jews [who are workers at Israel's Magen David Adom emergency services] to operate their mobile phones on the Sabbath and religious holidays with their teeth...Recently, the agency began replacing workers' paging systems with modern mobile phones equipped with GPS technology that locates workers and volunteers closest to the scene of an accident, shortening the response time, the report said...a specially designed case...prevents phones from being shut down accidentally. To confirm response to dispatch, workers are permitted to hold a small metal pin between their teeth and press the necessary buttons on the phones, the Web site said...

In my humble opinion, as I have myself experienced - having been a volunteer at Shaare Zedek Hospital which is administered according to Halacha - in life-threatening situations, one uses all necessary medical aid and medical support in a regular fashion.

Rubin Resounds: Rubbish!

From Barry Rubin's

Israel and America: Neither Surrender nor Confrontation:

The United States demands that Israel stop construction on settlements. If this doesn’t happen, it hints at dire retaliation. If Israel agrees to this step, President Barack Obama promises great things. First, he claims this will bring dramatic progress toward Israel-Palestinian peace.

That’s rubbish. We know that yielding would be followed by Palestinian Authority (PA) demands for more unilateral Israeli concessions. PA leaders openly say their strategy is to let the West force Israel to give them everything they want without any change by them...In addition, the U.S. initiative is absurdly one-sided, without hint of reciprocity by the other side...

...Second, we are promised that if Israel gives in, Arab states will change their policies, becoming more conciliatory toward Israel and more helpful on pressing Iran.

This, too, is rubbish. Arab regimes have their own interests. They need the conflict; they view its solution to be an American problem...

...Third, we’re promised that if if Israel stops construction on settlements, the West can act more effectively on Iran...this, equally, is rubbish. Iran will make no deal, is stall for time, and correctly assess Western willpower as low. Of course, Iran wants to be regional hegemon.

Bent Beckham

David Beckham - a model for fascist art?



Unfortunately, I can't say he's "over-the-top":



Leni Riefenstahl would have been so proud and probably all aglow.


And I thought his Mom was Jewish but "non-practicing:





Source

Are You Funemployed?

Funemployed = Those enjoying unemployment.

Actually, you can be employed and enjoying fun, too.

I do.

The Low Ten

Jonathan S. Tobin, executive editor of Commentary magazine, an old acquaintance, published a list of what he calls "the top ten myths about Israel and the Middle East conflict". By me, they're the "low ten". It is a very good start to get one started on understanding the heart of the problem.

Myth #1: Jews have no historic connection to Israel/Palestine.

Myth #2: Jews have no unique claim to the ancient and holy city of Jerusalem.

Myth #3: The Zionist movement was never prepared to share the land.

Myth #4: The lack of an independent Palestinian Arab state is the fault of the Zionists.

Myth #5: The plight of Palestinian refugees is a special case of dispossession that must be redressed by international action.

Myth #6: The occupation of eastern Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights in 1967 was the result of an Israeli war of aggression.

Myth #7: Jewish settlements are the main, if not the sole, obstacle to peace in the Middle East.

Myth #8: The failure of the Oslo peace process was the result of actions by hard-line Israeli governments.

Myth #9: The Arab-Israeli conflict is the key to all of America’s political, diplomatic and military problems in the Middle East.

Myth #10: American support for Israel is the result of the manipulations of the U.S. government by Jews.

Now, why they aren't myths, you'll have to read the article here.