Anglicans for Israel

A group called “Dayenu!” will be demonstrating in London in support of Israel on June 9. This is in response to a planned anti-Israeli march by ‘Enough’.

The Dayenu demonstration is organised by Jonathan Hoffman of Totteridge (Sarelnik and veteran campaigner). Mr Hoffman said “Our group includes Jews, Christians, people of other faiths and indeed of no faith. The one thing we have in common is that we cannot bear the thought of thousands of misinformed and misled marchers on the streets of our capital city with free rein to attack Israel . Our name - ‘Dayenu’ - is in response to ‘Enough’.

We also say ‘Enough’ - enough lies, enough Kassams, enough anti-Zionism, enough anti-Semitism, enough boycotts, enough blinkered attacks on Israel regardless of what is happening elsewhere in the world. We are expecting 50 or more and we will be telling the “Enough!” marchers the truth - how Israel is prepared to exchange land for a secure peace but also how Israel gave back Gaza, only to be rewarded with Kassam rockets raining down on Sderot.

“Our demonstration is supported by StandWithUs and the Centre for Vigilant Freedom. Due to the timing, the communal organisations have been limited in the support they feel able to give but we are grateful to them too.

The demonstration will be from 2.30pm at the junction of Arundel Street and The Strand. Police permission has been granted and the police will ensure that public order is maintained.

StandWithUs Condemns Ahmadinejad’s Anti-Israel Rhetoric at Khomeni Service

(Los Angeles) — StandWithUs condemns in the strongest possible terms, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his poisonous, inflammatory rhetoric against Israel.

At a memorial service for the Ayatollah Khomeini on Sunday June 3, Ahmadinejad said yet again that Israel will soon be wiped off the world map, a goal that seems to be Iran’s official policy. He claimed that Israel would be destroyed by Hezbollah and Hamas, Iran’s proxies. Ahmadinejad revels in Hamas’ attacks from the south and in Hezbollah’s drumbeats of war from the north because he apparently wants to see Israeli civilians murdered.

Ahmadinejad calls for genocide of Jews.

Ahmadinejad has been declaring war against Israel since he took office. Defying UN resolutions, Iran is fast developing nuclear weaponry. Its openly stated target is Israel.

Ahmadinejad clearly is trying to bait Israel into a confrontation. Israel has demonstrated remarkable restraint. It knows that an open confrontation can and would reach far beyond the Middle East.

In the 1930’s, Hitler’s demonizing rhetoric and Jew-hatred preceded his brutal murder of six million. The world simply stood by. Ahmadinejdad has joined the most violent, racist murderers in history by giving us a prelude to his dreams–the destruction of a group of people.

The silence of the world’s leaders is deafening.

The world must take this man at his word and act.

We ask the United Nations to condemn Ahmadinejdad’s hateful rhetoric and meet its responsibility to act as a peace-keeping body. We call on the Lebanese government to fulfill its pledge to contain Hezbollah. We call on the European Union and responsible Arab nations to speak out boldly against warmongering and racism. We call on U.S. leaders and other nations to force Ahmadeinejad to stop threatening civilians and destabilizing the region.

Ahmadinejdad has warned us all about his intentions. It would be irresponsible, morally reprehensible and dangerous for world leaders to simply stand by passively at this outrage to decency and to hopes for a more peaceful world.

StandWithUs, an international, non-profit Israel education organization hosts speakers and conferences, offers website resources and creates brochures and materials widely distributed in universities, libraries, high schools, churches and communities. Based in Los Angeles, the organization has offices and chapters in New York, Michigan, San Francisco, Chicago, Buffalo, Orange County (CA) and Israel. SWU was founded in 2001 in response to the second Intifada and the misunderstandings about the challenges that Israel faces. StandWithUs Campus helps college students fight anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias on campuses.

by Gerald A. Honigman

I’m a reasonable sort of guy… really.

I’m all for logic, exchange of ideas, and so forth. In fact, I’m often accused of being too loquacious…if you know what I mean (my publishers certainly do).

Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza Rice was at Sharm el-Sheikh on May 3rd attending an international what-to-do-about-Iraq conference. The Syrians have been pressing for better ties with the United States–ties soured due to their murderous shenanigans in Lebanon and Iraq contrary to Washington’s desires.

Notice I left out their actions involving Israel. Not an accident…

Secretary Rice met with her Syrian counterpart, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem, the first high-level contact in a few years. This marked a turnaround from the previous approach which required a change in Syrian behavior first.

While this was recommended earlier by the Baker-Hamilton Commission, it had largely been placed by the Bush administration onto the backburner until a marked change in Syrian behavior was forthcoming.

The Syrians or their local stooges have been eliminating one Lebanese leader and patriot after another who dared oppose Damascus’s vision of Lebanon as being merely its western province. Additionally, good evidence points to Syria as being the haven for both Saddam’s missing WMDs and “militants” crossing the border into Iraq.

So, Washington has good reason to be miffed.

But, as I said above, what’s wrong with a chat?

In theory, perhaps nothing…

But in this case the logical outcome of such dialogue is indeed a problem.

The mid-19th century British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, once said something to the effect that nations don’t have permanent friends…just interests. Keep this in mind.

The New York Times report about Rice’s meeting quoted American officials as stating that they do not plan to trade away Lebanon for Syria’s help in Iraq. As State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, put it, “The Lebanese people have no better friend than the United States.”

Now, who could find fault with that statement? Certainly not me.

But here’s the problem…

The State Department has long known what carrot of choice would be used at the proper moment–and it ain’t Lebanon.

As I had written much earlier, despite Syria’s deadly hegemonic attitudes and actions towards what it sees as its Lebanese “province;” despite its appalling treatment of Kurds, native Jews, and others; despite its support for terrorists undermining Iraq’s attempt at democracy; despite the great likelihood that many of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction found their way to Syria; despite Damascus’ support of major terrorist organizations whose aim is the destruction of the Israel and giving safe haven to those organizations within its own borders; despite its record as mass slaughterer of any and all who decent, author of the infamous “Hama Solution;” etc., etc., and so forth…America would be squeezing the Jews right now–not the Syrians– if circumstances were just a bit different.

You see, it’s Israel–not Lebanon–who the Foggy Folks have in mind as the main sacrificial offering.

Keep in mind that not long ago Israel had suggested, itself, that it wanted to resume negotiations with Syria–the nation which, along with Iran, used Hizbullah last summer in a proxy war against Jerusalem.

The Foggy Folks demanded that the Jews not do this.

The time was not yet ripe as far as America–or least the State Department–was concerned.

To hell with what the Jews felt their own, on the scene and in the bull’s eye interests required.

But now, things have taken continuous turns for the worse in Iraq–despite Washington’s honorable efforts. Any “progress” will most likely not survive an American withdrawal.

So now, it’s time to bring out the icing on the cake as far as Syria is concerned…

Former Secretary of State James Baker III pledged to Assad I, butcher of Damascus, during George I’s administration, a total Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights.

George II made Baker, Bush close family friend and quail hunting partner (whose law firm represents the Saudis and other Arabs as well), his Special Middle East Envoy. Baker has worked behind the scenes for decades–among other things, taking good care of all of his and his buddies’ lucrative Arab petrodollar connections (Condi even has an oil tanker named for her in the Chevron fleet). Additionaly, Baker has a most definite Jew problem as well (not that he’s unique–especially in the circles he hangs out in). See http://www.paktoday.com/honig9.htm for a bit more about this.

Note that upon the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire after World War I, the Golan was part of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine until Britain and France did some imperial trading. The territory had changed hands often throughout the centuries. Jews also had a long history here.

Recall how Syria used the Heights to rain death and terror on Israelis below prior to the 1967 War–which it also largely instigated. And, in 1973, Israel was attacked on its holiest day,Yom Kippur, from the Syrian side of the Heights as well. This time, the combined Arab assault almost succeeded in Israel’s destruction. Today, the Syrians have even better weaponry and the same murderous intentions as far as Jews are concerned.

Not long ago, an Israeli Prime Minister offered, as was done after 1967, an almost complete return of the Heights in exchange for true peace. The exception would cover a tiny stretch of land protecting Israel’s water sources.

Think about what usually happens to such land when others are attacked from it. Are the victims that generous and understanding in the aftermath of wars launched from those territories aimed at their very destruction?

Think about how much territory–including land acquired by the United States far away from home–has changed hands this way…

Israel currently controls the passes Syrian tanks would use to roll down hill to kill Jews. From the Heights, Israeli artillery can send Assad II and friends a calling card if need be. Right now Syrian artillery and gunners can’t do this anymore to Jews. And right now Israel is assured that an enemy sworn to its death will not be in control of its water supply.

That’s what’s at stake with America’s forthcoming new approach with Syria.

What would America do with such an enemy (need I ask)?

A key element in Baker’s recent Commission’s plan involved the resurrection of his old idea to appease Arab dictators–in this case Syrian ones–at the Jews’ expense.

Numerous politicians and military experts who have visited the Golan and have seen what Israel is up against have said that a complete Israeli withdawal from an area so vital to its security–given the nature of the enemy it faces, in particular–is both unreasonable and suicidal.

Those who hold that a return of the Golan to Syria will bring peace are the fools’ fools.

But, in the State Departments’s case, foolishness has nothing to do with it.

The Foggy Folks know the Syrians very well. So, it’s even worse.

No friends…just interests.

The ball is now in Israel’s court.

Olmert and his suicidal gang must go.

New elections are a must, and Israel must, unfortunately, once again learn how to say “no” when its own vital interests are at stake…even if it must say it to its best friend.

Too bad another American President has allowed it to come to this point.

Others, like Ronald Reagan, understood that U. N. Security Council Resolution 242 did not expect Israel to withdraw to its 1949 Auschwitz/armistice lines and was entitled to secure and defensible borders. Reasonable compromise was the ticket.

Unfortunately, George II, by apparently allowing the State Department (which opposed Israel’s rebirth in the first place) to once again have its way with the Jew of the Nations–is proving Lord Palmerston right once again.

He had many of us fooled.

Michael Gove, British Member of Parliament and former Associate Editor of The Times, announced yesterday that he was leaving the National Union of Journalists over its call for a boycott of Israel. From The Times:

I have been a member of a trade union for nearly 20 years now. The union to which I belong, the National Union of Journalists, kept me fed and watered when I was a young trainee and out on strike. I was grateful for the support and camaraderie of its members and appreciated the virtues of solidarity. As time has worn on I’ve kept faith with the union because it kept me going at a difficult time.

With the benefit of hindsight I realise that the strike for which I came out in support was mishandled. Better men and women than I, with much more to lose, lost it in a vain struggle. Yet they made those sacrifices in defence of a principle in which they believed, and they thought that their actions would protect younger journalists like me most. So it would have been more than churlish to fail to respect their sacrifice.

But now, reluctantly, I fear that I will have to part company with the union, even as I continue to respect the men and women who went out on strike, in its name, in Aberdeen nearly two decades ago. Because the NUJ recently passed a motion at its conference calling for a boycott.

This boycott is not of a repressive state that outlaws free expression (of which, sadly, there are still too many) but of one of the few states in the Middle East with a proper free press: Israel.

The NUJ exists to defend, among other virtues, freedom of speech. That virtue is better defended in Israel than in any other nation of the Middle East and it comes under assault daily from forces driven by fanaticism.

Now is a time, for all sorts of reasons, for showing solidarity with those defending democracy in that region, not for passing on the other side of the road. So, with no little sadness, I feel that I have to leave.

We have been asked to circulate details of the following event:

Foreign Policy Evening

organized by the Selsdon Group

‘Islamic Fundamentalism - the challenge to Western democracy’

Speakers:
Dr Julian Lewis MP, Shadow Defence Minister
Roey Gilad, Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of Israel

Date and Time:
Thursday, 12th April 2007 - 7:30pm.

Venue:
St Stephens Tavern
10 Bridge Street
London SW1A 2JR
(next to Westminster underground station)

For more details visit the Selsdon Group website.

by Gerald A. Honigman

“It pays to be the king.”

Or, at least a prince.

No, this observation didn’t come from Isaiah, Amos, Micah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Samuel, or any of those other famous ancient Jews. In fact, Samuel didn’t even want the latter to have a mortal king. He feared the corrupting influence of power. Truer fears never existed, as our current case in point testifies to.

Our Hebrew sage of the day is Mel Brooks, and I quoted him as he lusted after a young French woman in the days prior to the French Revolution in his movie, History of the World: Part I.

On March 28th the Arab League held its latest summit in Saudi Arabia, and, among other things, London’s Daily Telegraph quoted Prince Saud al-Faisal as stating:

It has never been proven that reaching out to Israel achieves anything…Other Arab countries have recognized Israel and what has that achieved? The largest Arab country, Egypt, recognized Israel and what was the result? Not one iota of change happened in the attitude of Israel towards peace.

Saud was commenting on the Arabs’ offer to Israel to accept the Saudi Peace (of the grave) Plan–or else !

How’s that for negotiations?

This followed in the wake of the recent Saudi brokered good cop/bad cop deal between Hamas and Fatah’s Abbas to form a new Palestinian Arab Unity Government.

As discussed in greater detail in my last analysis, Hugo’s Peace Plan, among other things, that Arab “peace” demands that a nine-mile wide Israel accept millions of allegedly “returning” jihadi refugees. The Jews must replace blown buses, teen night clubs, pizzerias, and restaurants with their own suicide…or return to the blown buses and worse again.

Such a bargain!

Power indeed corrupts–in all kinds of ways.

And in this case, it exacerbates an already present Arab predilection to dismiss anyone else’s justice but their own as illegitimate.

Think also about those blatant, outright royal lies above.

Reaching out to Israel achieves nothing?

How about this, for starters…

Historically, empires, kingdoms, and nations have lost territory repeatedly when they used–or let others use–such territory to attack neighbors or threatened others’ “national interests.”

For the sake of a very cold peace, Israel returned the biggest protective buffer zone and tank trap it ever had, the Sinai Peninsula, to an Egypt which had repeatedly invaded, blockaded, and terrorized it from that territory and the adjacent Gaza Strip. Indeed, Egypt had used the latter as its key invasion route to attack Jews since the days of the Pharaohs.

But, after the late Egyptian President, Anwar al-Sadat, flew directly to Jerusalem for the sake of peace, Israel responded with relinquishing the oil fields that it largely developed at Abu Rudeis (its chance at energy self-sufficiency), key air fields and other military bases, and the only semblance of somewhat meaningful strategic depth that it ever possessed in modern times.

How’s that for Arabs getting something for their “overtures?”

Keep in mind that repeated Egyptian blockades of Israel, not to mention its outright military aggression, were recognized casus belli.

No doubt, others have permanently lost (and America and others gained) territory for far less…not to mention how Arabs acquired most of “their” territory in the first place–by conquering and forcibly Arabizing it from others, like those native Copts and Nubians in Egypt (since the Prince brought that nation up as an example) who predated the Arab conquest by millennia.

Want more Hebrew overtures?

How about Gaza?

After handing it over to Hamas, Fatah, and other jihadis–knowing full well that it would only bring the latter’s rockets, mortars, etc., that much closer to Israel proper, what did Israel get in return? Just what those of us with functioning neurons expected…hundreds of additional rockets and such launched at Israeli towns and cities in Israel proper.

Next… that famous Oslo Peace…

With the forced Rabin-Arafat handshake at President Clinton’s Whitehouse, Israel withdrew from disputed–not purely Arab–lands and got the highest casualties due to Arab terror in return for that overture.

Several decades ago, Israel was forced to go after the PLO in southern Lebanon because of the unceasing terror it launched from that territory and the Lebanese refusal or impotence to do anything about it. When Israel, despite continuing problems, gave up that land as well and the United Nations confirmed that Israel had indeed withdrawn from all Lebanese territory, Israel got renewed attacks from Hizbullah anyway in return–leading to last summer’s war.

In a move towards Syria–which had bombarded Israel for almost two decades from the Golan Heights–Prime Minister Barak offered to give virtually the entire Golan back. Syria lost this strategic territory in the Six Day War in ‘67, which it was also key in instigating.

Note that the Golan was originally slated to be part of the Mandate of Palestine, from which only a small part (one fifth) was resurrected as Israel. This came after Arab (Trans-)Jordan was carved out of the lion‘s share of the territory in 1922. The Arabs subsequently refused the ’47 partition plan which would have divided the 20% of the land left after the creation of Jordan roughly in half…so Arabs would have wound up with about 90% of the entire pie. The Brits and the French did some imperial trading upon the breakup of the Turks’ earlier four centuries old empire, and so the Heights became part of modern Syria.

The deal Barak offered fell through because the Syrians insisted on controlling several hundred yards Israel needed to insure that its water sources wouldn’t fall under Syrian control. And, after all, Secretary of State James Baker III had promised Saddam’s twin butcher in Damascus, Hafez al-Assad, a total Israeli withdrawal. Note that this is the same Baker–Bush family best friend–whose law firm represents the Saudis today…including against fellow Americans currently suing them over 9/11. And Baker’s law partner is the American Ambassador to Riyadh.

This story could go on and on, but I think you get the picture.

As revealed, once again, in the Hamas-Fatah Mecca Accord and more recently in the Arab League Summit in Saudi Arabia, Israel wasn’t given that supposed offer that it simply couldn’t refuse.

The Arabs are simply up to their same old rejectionist games, but this time they are emboldened even more by Israel’s worst performance ever last year–for whatever reasons–in a war against Hizbullah and its Syrian and Iranian sponsors; billions of dollars in petrobucks at their disposal and the assorted international sycophant supporters such money can buy; huge quantities of state-of-the-art armaments supplied by America and others as well; and knowing that Israel is outnumbered some 60 to 1 by them–and that figure doesn’t include hostile non-Arab Iranians and others as well.

The Arabs also think that Israel will have to fight with one hand tied behind its back, not striking out, for example, at Saudi strategic assets–i.e. oil–for fear of provoking the wrath of other nations, including the United States.

America, with the State Department in the lead, has pressured Israel repeatedly over the decades into going along with such one-sided deals that were contrary to its own national interests and very survival.

The time for this American behavior must now come to an end. That others so indulge is no excuse.

Despite America’s best efforts to coax some virtually meaningless words out of Israel’s alleged Arab “peace” partners, it should be obvious by now, with Abbas and the Saudi prince’s recent remarks, that even that is too much to ask. And for this, those who care about Israel should in fact be grateful.

Honesty is indeed better than lies. And the State Department–with the President’s continued backing–will be totally exposed as being hostile to Israel’s very existence if it pressures Israel further at this point.

There are scores of millions of Americans who indeed care and can see through what’s gong on. And many of them do indeed vote.

Despite the above Saudi accusations about Israel, nothing but an Arab takeover of Israel–peaceful or otherwise–is still all that is being offered by those alleged “moderate” Arab peacemakers.

And the State Department’s darling, Mahmoud Abbas, has been saying the same things all along. He has always insisted–long before the Saudi plan–that Israel would have to consent to being overwhelmed by “returning” jihadis, and this after Israel is forced to return to its pre-’67, 9-mile wide armistice line existence. He ran on a platform proclaiming this, and has always insisted that he won’t budge on this issue. The State Department and at least two American Presidents have known about this all along–even while they continuously tried to sell Arafat, Abbas and their muderous Fatah as Israel’s “peace partner,” the alleged good cop as opposed to the Hamas bad cop.

In light of Prince Saud’s comments, the question that now really needs to be asked, considering the Mecca Accord and the current Saudi peace of the grave initiative, is how Arabs, not Jews, have responded to real peace overtures–not counterfeit ones like the Arabs themselves have made.

Yet, again, the Arabs should be commended for their honesty.

And Israel must, unfortunately, plan for a war that will make us recall the early days of June ‘67 once more.

Many wish there was a better alternative. But the Arabs need to wish that too.