And the World is Lying - The Plight of the Refugees
Ben-Dror Yemini,
Ma'ariv 1 Oct. 2006 (in Hebrew)

This is the second article in a series of investigations of the unique standards applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by the international community and world media. Part I of the series ("And the World is Silent" - 22 Sept. 2006) dealt with the world's silence in response to mass murders by Arabs of their fellow Arabs and Moslems. That silence is of particular significance in light of the constantly reiterated charge that Israel is implementing genocidal policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians - yet this particular genocide is purely fictional. As shown previously, the number of Palestinian casualties inflicted by Israel is trivial compared to the magnitude of casualties inflicted in other ethnic or religious conflicts around the globe. Part II focuses on the unique treatment of Palestinian refugees, by the UN and the international community, compared with the refugees generated by other ethnic and religious conflicts over the course of the last century.
Let us begin with a well-known story. In a country that formerly belonged to the Ottoman Empire, a large Moslem minority continues to reside. There is no love lost between the majority and minority populations, rather a long history of conflict, ripe with mutual hostility . Eventually the majority population forces a large contingent of the minority Moslem population to relocate to a neighboring country with a majority ethnically identical Moslem population.
No, this story is not about Israel and the Palestinians. It is the story of the Moslem Turks in Bulgaria. Nor is it a story from 200 years ago. It took place at the end of the 1980's. Three hundred thousand Moslems were pressured into fleeing Bulgaria. Not forced, just pressured.
If the reader has never heard of the "right of return" of ethnic Turks to Bulgaria, or of any international organizations devoted to their plight, to their suffering in refugee camps, nor read thousands of articles on the subject, the explanation is simple: they are not Palestinians. Nor is the case of ethnic Turks in Bulgaria an isolated one. In the course of the last century, tens of millions of people fled their native lands in the wake of religious or ethnic conflict and redrawal of international borders.

A world full of refugees
Population exchanges have been considered throughout history down to the present as the optimal solution to religious and/or ethnic conflicts. Less than one century ago, Norwegian geographer and statesman Fridtjof Nansen was awarded the 1922 Nobel Peace Prize, in international recognition for designing, initiating and implementing the population transfer between Greece and Turkey.
This does not mean that we are in favor of transfer. Times have changed. Even international moral standards and circumstances have changed. Not every biblical solution is applicable in this day and age. Supporting transfer will no longer win the Nobel Peace Prize.
Entire communities have had no choice but to leave their home country or hometown and relocate. Were the world to impose a "right of return" similar to that advocated for the Palestinians to other instances of population transfer, millions of Moslems would have to move back to India, and millions of Hindus to Pakistan. Entire populations of the Balkan states would have to be reshuffled. Old conflicts that had been laid to rest would be rekindled.That is why no international body advocates the return of Moslems to Greece or Bulgaria, ethnic Greeks to Turkey or Germans to the Sudetenland, etc. And for a very good reason: implementing the right of return to these millions or people would result in the collapse and breaking up of several European states, and the entire continent would be subjected to an endless bloodbath.

The right of return is our winning ticket for the destruction of Israel
Luckily, the world is sane – it does not impose the bloodbath and destruction of Europe and Asia Minor. But there it ends. When it comes to the Palestinians, the world flips. New sets of rules are in order. Whatever holds true for any other conflict in the world cannot apply to God's little acre, which just happens to be the tiny acre of the Jews.
Rules developed for other nations that have been the subject of mass population transfers - India, Pakistan, Turkey, Greece, Czechoslovakia, and dozens of others - suddenly no longer apply when it comes to Israel. Then the world calls for new criteria, which are quite the opposite of what has been accepted thus far. And even then the efforts of entire international organizations focus on one issue alone: the worldwide propaganda campaign devoted not to alleviating the plight of Palestinian refugees but to perpetuating it. Some support the Palestinian "right of return" out of good-hearted naiveté. But many others have a different agenda. Their purpose is not the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the destruction of Israel. As one of Yasser Arafat's closest advisors, Sahar Habash, once commented, "The right of return is our winning lottery ticket for the destruction of Israel." We shall not dwell on the great migration of peoples recorded by history. Nor are we going to demand that the Arabs who invaded Asia, Africa and Europe return to their homelands. Nor, for that matter, are we going to ask the white conquerors of Africa to move back to Europe and America, in spite of their having raped and plundered those lands foreign to them, not to mention the crimes against humanity committed in so doing.
We are only going to examine some of the population exchanges during the last hundred years, due to their similarity to the vast numbers of displaced people in Israel and the neighboring Arab countries: expulsions, fleeing and willing relocation on both sides.

UNRWA's objective: to perpetuate the Palestinian refugee status
Between 600,000 and 800,000 Arabs left Israel and headed for the neighboring Arab countries, while a similar number of Jews fled their Arab homelands and moved mostly to Israel. This was part of a global population shift not unlike that seen in other parts of the world when new states were created on the basis of ethnicity or religion. Millions of people were sometimes involved in such transfers. Not one person out of these millions is still a refugee. Not even those who made it to Israel. This title is reserved for a single category: the Palestinian refugees.
And this is where the application of the double standard comes into action: the existence of two U.N. bodies for dealing with refugees. The United Nations decreed that the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) deals exclusively with Palestinians, while the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) is charged with responsibility for all other refugees around the globe. The mission of the UNHCR is to help refugees begin a new life. As a consequence of its activities tens of millions of former refugees do no longer qualify as "refugees" when they gain citizenship in their new host countries. Thanks to UNRWA, the number of Palestinian refugees continues to expand rapidly, as its one and only purpose is to perpetuate the refugee status of the Palestinians.
There are two official definitions for the term refugee. According to UNRWA's definition, any Egyptian, Jordanian, Lebanese, or Syrian citizen whose primary place of residence between June 1946 and May 1948 was within Israel's 1949 armistice lines is classified as a refugee, even if he was only temporarily in the country in search of work. Thus, a mere two-year stay in mandate Palestine ensures anyone an eternal place on UNRWA's refugee list.
An ordinary refugee has to meet a number of criteria in order to qualify for UNCHR assistance. According to the all-encompassing UN definition, those integrated in a new country, where they become active members of society, are no longer refugees. By contrast, not a single Palestinian has ever lost his refugee status. There are hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees or their descendants who are citizens of Jordan. Yet as far as UNRWA is concerned they are still refugees. So are several Lebanese government ministers. Why? Because a unique and far more expansive definition of refugee is applied to Palestinians. Palestinian refugees are treated differently than other war refugees.
And there is more. Everywhere else in the world only those who fled their previous place of residence are classified as refugees, but not their descendants or other relatives. With respect to Palestinians, however, refugee status is transmitted from generation to generation - it is hereditary. Indeed. Even if one's children never set foot within Israel's 1949 armistice lines and are as wealthy as Bill Gates, they are still classified as refugees.
The special treatment of Palestinian refugees by the U.N. is not meant to solve the plight of Palestinian refugees but to perpetuate it. As the number of those classified as refugees grows year by year, the only consequence is making any solution of the underlying Palestinian-Israeli conflict practically impossible.

Population Exchanges
The Palestinians were not the only ones to be uprooted by the fighting between Israel and the invading Arab armies in 1948-49. As a result of anti-Jewish rioting in Arab countries in the wake of the war, between 600,000 and 800,000 Jews fled the Arab lands where they had lived for centuries and even millennia. Most of those refugees came to Israel, where they were absorbed without assistance from the international community. Such population exchanges are common following major religious or ethnic strife all around the world. Any place else in the world, the exchange of populations between Arabs fleeing Israel - i.e., the area within the 1949 armistice lines - and Jews fleeing Arab lands would have been the end of story.

Population Shifts in the Balkans
With the exception of the Indian subcontinent, no area of the world has experienced more widespread population shifts over the last century than the Balkan states. From the beginning of the first Balkan War in 1912 to the wars following the dissolution of Yugoslavia, between seven and ten million people were uprooted from their homes on the basis of ethnic identity. It is estimated that in the two Balkan Wars between 1912 and 1915, 250,000 Bulgarians, 150,000 Greeks and 200,000 ethnic Turks were expelled to their ancestral homelands. World War II brought about even more significant population shifts. Three-quarters of a million Serbs fled their homes in the course of the war, and another quarter million were forced into labor brigades in Bulgaria and Hungary. After the conclusion of the war, 300,000 Bulgarian nationals returned to Bulgaria from areas which had been under Bulgarian rule prior to the war. At the same time, 200,000 Hungarians emigrated from Transylvania to Hungary. A similar number of Hungarian nationals were forced to leave their homes in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. The 1920's brought another significant wave of population transfers between Turkey, Greece and Bulgaria, pursuant to the signing of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne between Turkey and the Entente Powers. The major transfer was that of 1.5 million ethnic Greeks from Turkey to Greece, and 500,000 ethnic Turks from Greece to Turkey. In addition, 80,000 Bulgarians were transferred to Greece. Not all ethnic Greeks (who were Christians) left Turkey for Greece, and not all ethnic Turks (who were Moslems) left Greece for Turkey. But the stated purpose of the population exchange was the creation of religious and ethnic homogeneity. It was Fridtjof Nansen, who won the Nobel Peace Prize, for initiating, planning and implementing the transfer. Events connected to World War II brought further population transfers to the Balkans. After a pro-Nazi government took power in Croatia, thousands of Serbs fled the country. In addition, after Hungary took control of Transylvania, 200,000 Romanians fled Transylvania for Romania.

The world media favored turning Serbs into refugees
The next major wave of population shifts in the Balkans came about as a result of the ten year long warfare that followed the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, after Tito's death in 1991. Following fighting between Croatia and Serbia, 250,000 Serbs were expelled from regions that remained in Croatian hands. According to the peace treaty signed between Croatia and Serbia, a procedure was established for Serbs to reclaim their former homes. In practice, however, few Serbs succeeded in exercising their right to reclaim their former homes. Serbs returning to Croatia encountered job discrimination and various forms of harassment. Most found their homes occupied, and even when they successfully asserted their rights in Croat courts, the courts' orders were rarely executed. In short, whatever sort of "right of return" exists for Serbs, it has proven largely ineffectual. And that is so, even though historic tensions between Serbians and Croats are far lower than those between Palestinians and Israelis. Moreover, 200,000 ethnic Serbs pose no demographic threat to Croatia, with a population of 4.4 million people. Nor have Serbs been subjected to a massive propaganda campaign since 1995 calling for the elimination of Croatia, as Palestinians have been vis-à-vis Israel almost since the outset of the Oslo process.

No right of return in the Balkans
A survey of Western newspapers at the conclusion of the fighting between Serbia and Croatia reveals a general acceptance of the need to create ethnically homogeneous states by means of an exchange of Serbs and Croats. That was more or less the leading position of the New York Times on the issue. In renewed fighting in 1999, 800,000 ethnic Albanians were expelled from the Serbian province of Kosovo. Most of those were subsequently returned to their homes after NATO's military intervention. In the meantime, 150,000 Serbs, fearing Albanian retribution, fled Albania. An equal number of Serbs fled Kosovo, after NATO's intervention, for the same reason. Hundreds of thousands more people became refugees over the course of a decade of fighting in the former Yugoslavia, including an estimated 170,000 Croats who fled Serbia. Some of those refugees fled from one newly created country to another; others fled from one region to another within a single country like Bosnia-Herzegovina. Of the 7-10 million Balkan refugees over the course of less than a century, some became refugees as a result of deliberate efforts at ethnic cleansing, some as a consequence of military action, and others pursuant to treaty. The common denominator of these population shifts, however, is that they all led to increased religious and ethnic homogeneity. And that process was accepted by the international community as necessary in order to prevent far greater bloodshed Only in the case of the Serbs, who were allowed to return to Croatia, was there any recognition of a right of return. And even in that case, that recognition remained almost purely theoretical.

12 million German refugees absorbed in just a few years

Poland - Ukraine
After World War II, Poland's eastern border was set at the so-called Curzon Line, which had first been proposed as the border between Poland and the USSR in 1919 by British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon. At that time, however, Poland, succeeded in pressing further demands, and under the Treaty of Riga signed in 1921, its eastern border was set on average 200 kilometers to the east of the Curzon Line. The movement of Poland's border westward after World War II led to a total of 1.4 million Poles and Ukrainians crossing the border in opposite directions: ethnic Poles returning westward to Poland and ethnic Ukrainians moving eastward to the Ukraine. Just as in the Balkans, the basis of that transfer was the preservation of ethnic and religious homogeneity.

Germany - Eastern Europe
At the Potsdam Conference after World War II, the Allies met to discuss the post-War administration of Germany, including the fate of ethnic Germans who had settled throughout Eastern Europe and southern Russia over several centuries. The German majority in the Sudetenland had been the pretext for Hitler's demand, at the Munich Conference, for German annexation of the Sudetenland at the expense of Czechoslovakia. After World War II, the Allies were eager to remove any future pretexts for further German expansionism. As a consequence, it was decided that millions of ethnic Germans in the Sudetenland, Romania, Hungary and Poland - many of whom had never been Nazi supporters - be repatriated to Germany "in an orderly fashion." Between 12-16 million ethnic Germans were moved against their will. Some of the ferries carrying the refugees back to Germany were torpedoed. According to some German sources, many Germans were killed in the process of transfer to Germany. Yet just a few years after this mass exodus, there was not one German refugee still in a refugee camp or with refugee status. The fate of those repatriated is nowhere to be found on the public agenda today in Germany, with the exception of one fringe group BdV (Federation of Expellees) that deals with the issue. The consensus in Germany today is that the refugees have no rights - not to restitution and not to return to those areas in which their ancestors lived for centuries.

India-Pakistan
14 million refugees settled successfully
Though Moslems and Hindus joined together to secure India's independence from Great Britain, as independence drew near religious tensions between Moslems and Hindus flared, though religion was only one of the many dividing lines between different sectors of the population. Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of the struggle for Indian independence, envisioned a single state composed of Hindus, Moslems and Sikhs. The British, however, opted for the creation of two states - one majority Hindu and the other overwhelmingly Moslem - to avoid a bloody war between Hindus and Moslems. As a result, British sovereignty over the Indian subcontinent ended in August 1947 with the creation of two states: India and Pakistan. The creation of two states - one overwhelmingly Moslem and the other predominantly Hindu - resulted in a massive population transfer. More than seven million Hindus and Sikhs transferred from Pakistan to India and a similar number of Moslems left India for Pakistan. Many massacres were perpetrated in the process of these population exchanges. Estimates of the number of those killed range from 200,000 to 1,000,000. Today Pakistan is almost entirely Moslem, while India, with almost a billion people, is home to roughly 160,000,000 Moslems. The two countries have lived in a constant state of tension almost since their creation. Much of that tension is focused today on the Kashmir region of India, which abuts Pakistan, and which has a majority Moslem population. Though the creation of India and Pakistan resulted in over 14 million refugees, the absorption of whom placed enormous burdens of the fledgling states that took them in, today not one person still classified as a refugee as a result of that massive population transfer.

Armenia- Azerbaijan
UNHCR helps Armenian refugees, but refuses to touch Palestinians
The break-up of the Soviet Union brought about the formation of new countries and rekindled old ethnic and religious tensions. Chechnya Moslems, who were exiled to other regions of the former Soviet Union during the Stalin era, suddenly returned to Chechnya, and ignited a movement seeking independence from Russia. More closely related to our topic is the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. The majority of Azerbaijan is Moslem, but within Nagorno-Karabakh, the majority of the people are Armenian Christians. In 1988, this semi-autonomous region sought to be joined to Armenia. That request triggered widespread killings of Moslems in Armenia and Armenians in Azerbaijan. The fighting ended with a ceasefire in 1994, but the conflict gave rise to one million new refugees: 740,000 Moslems fled Armenia for Azerbaijan, and 360,000 Armenian Christians fled Azerbaijan for Armenia. One other interesting detail: Armenia made an effort, in conjunction with UNHCR to absorb its Christian brethren seeking refuge in Armenia. By contrast, the Moslem refugees to Azerbaijan still languish in refugee camps, unabsorbed and unintegrated into Azerbaijan. In that way, the Moslem refugees resemble the Palestinian refugees, many of whom still live in fetid refugee camps nearly sixty years after they became refugees.

The refugee tragedy of Sudan
Sudan has been plagued in recent years by a series of vicious ethnic conflicts: between Moslem Arabs and black animists in the South, and between Moslem Arabs and black Moslems in the Darfur Province, respectively. As a consequence of the warfare between non-Moslem blacks and Arab Moslems, 75,000 blacks were expelled to the neighboring states of Senegal and Mali, and an equal number of Arabs sought refuge in Mauritania in the late '80s and early '90s. Arab militias, known as the Janjaweed are making a concerted effort to rid Darfur of its black population and impose an Arab majority. This is not your run of the mill population exchange. The ethnic and religious cleansing and genocidal policies have resulted in the killing of 200,000 – 400,000 blacks in Darfur. The atrocities committed in the name of the Arab-dominated government in Darfur are creating huge numbers of IDP (internal displaced persons), while three to four more millions have been forced to flee their homes, some into neighboring Chad.
Though both victims and perpetrators in Darfur are Moslems, to date there have been no protests in the Arab world against the ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies being pursued by the Janjaweed against black Darfurians. The Arab-dominated government in Khartoum continues to resist intervention by the U.N. and African peacekeepers, and to do everything possible to prevent them from putting and end to the ongoing atrocities in Darfur. Sudan holds the infamous record of producing the highest numbers of refugees in the world these days.

Cyprus refugees forget about hatred in refugee camps
The population of Cyprus is 80% Greek and 20% Turkish – a remnant of the Ottoman Empire. In response to a threat by the majority Greek population to unite the island with Greece in 1974, Turkish forces invaded the island. As a result of the invasion, Cyprus was divided into two halves: one Greek and the other Turkish. Two hundred thousand ethnic Greeks moved to the Greek-controlled half of the island, and 50,000 Turkish Moslems moved to the Turkish part of the island.
This is not the time and place to draw a comparison between the Cypriot Greeks and the Palestinians: the Greeks did not start the war, did not threaten to drive the Turks into the sea or wipe Turkey off the map. They were victims of the Turkish aggression and violence. Moreover, a Turkish statal entity has been created, unrecognized yet by the world community.
From the time of the partition of the island, the Greek half has flourished - there are no refugee camps, no terror, and no incitement of terror against the Turks, despite the fact that Turkey settled 100,000 more Turks on the Turkish-controlled half of the island (in violation of international law) and brought in tens of thousands of soldiers to maintain its military regime. In contrast to the Greek half of the island, the Turkish half has experienced severe unemployment and a stagnant economy. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan devised a far-reaching proposal to reunite the island in 2004, but in a national referendum, the Greek half of the island rejected the plan. Nevertheless, the U.N. plan does provide an interesting insight into the international community's view of the "right of return" in general. The plan did not hint at a general right of return of those who had fled their homes upon partition of the island. Only Greeks over 65 years old were granted anything like a right of return, and even then, only on condition that they do not exceed 10% of the total Turkish population, and no more than 20% in any particular area. Had Israel accepted such a proposal, it would have had to export Palestinians rather than bring them back for the simple reason that Palestinians already constitute over 10% of Israel's population.

The world turns turns their back on refugees – unless they are Palestinians
The number of refugees (except the Sudanese) during the last century totals approximately 38 million people. International organizations estimate the number of people displaced by the communist regime in the USSR alone to 65 million. The unending civil warfare in Congo and Somalia generate unknown numbers of refugees who remain mostly uncared for. There is no special UN agency to address their needs. They would certainly benefit from the attention the Palestinians garner, but except for a few low-budget relief agencies, the world looks away. They simply fall under different categories and are left to fend for themselves, as the international mass media takes little interest in their suffering. Unlike the Palestinians, they simply do not make the headlines. The Palestinian refugee numbers are growing larger every year thanks to clever manipulation.
Of all the tens of millions of refugees generated by religious and ethnic strife, however, only the 700,000 Palestinians who fled their homes in Israel in 1948 - most of them at the urging of their leaders - remain a "problem" for the UN-led international community nearly sixty years later. All over the world, the same pattern prevails. Those who have been expelled or forced to flee from areas in which they were part of a religious or ethnic minority to areas or countries where
their religious or ethnic group is the majority have been absorbed by their co-religionists or those of the same ethnicity.
That is what happened when Israel absorbed 600,000-800,000 Jews from Arab lands after the creation of the state. And this is what has happened everywhere else in the world. The two Germanys absorbed ethnic Germans after World War II; India took in Hindus fleeing Pakistan, and Pakistan received Moslems fleeing India. That too should be the fate of the Palestinians. They should be absorbed in an independent Arab state of Palestine to be established one day alongside Israel, not instead of Israel. Only the Palestinians (and Moslem refugees to Azerbaijan) depart from the general pattern of absorption by those who share their religion and ethnic identity. The Palestinians were never absorbed by their Arab co-religionists in the countries bordering Israel. They faced both de facto and de jure discrimination in many of those countries. Today hundreds of thousands of those who left Israel in 1948 and their descendants still languish in refugee camps nursing their bitter historical grievances and constituting a permanent attack force to be unleashed against Israel. The Arab states deliberately maintain the Palestinians in their pitiable state. The international community is also complicit in the process. Rather than helping the Palestinians out of their refugee status, UNRWA and international donors have frozen the Palestinians in that status. That holds true not only for those who fled Israel in 1948, but for all their descendants in perpetuity. In lieu of applying medicine, the Palestinians' "benefactors" have only rubbed salt on their wounds - sometimes for their own purposes and sometimes with good intentions. The day that the international community desists from applying a double standard to the Palestinians will be a day of rejoicing for them. On that day, they will stop being political pawns and be on the way to gaining their independence. Of the tens of millions of refugees created by World War II and the grant of independence to India and Pakistan in 1947, all lost their refugee status, as far as the international community is concerned, decades ago. And the possibility of those former refugees returning to the lands of their birth would strike the international community with horror, for an attempt to do so would only unleash old ethnic and religious conflicts. We might as well discuss the return of North America to its original native inhabitants. Only with respect to the Palestinians does the "right of return" continue to be discussed. Not just discussed, but to be the subject of thousands of books, articles, and documentaries. That "right" is never placed in the context of comparable cases of other refugees around the world. Sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians dwarfs that for other peoples who have suffered far worse fates, and who are far less complicit in their fate. The exodus of Palestinians from what is today Israel took place only because five Arab armies invaded Israel immediately after its declaration of independence. And the Palestinians could have had their own independent state a long time ago. Instead, they have chosen to focus their energies on the destruction of Israel. The black farmers of the Darfur province of Sudan constitute just the most blatant current example of the disproportionate sympathy for the Palestinians. The U.N. estimates the number of those killed by Arab Moslem militias at 400,000, while another two to three million people have fled their homes, as a consequence of a concerted effort at ethnic cleansing. And yet it is the plight of the Palestinians that continues to be portrayed as the greatest injustice perpetrated by man against his fellow man in the world today. International humanitarian aid to the Palestinians is by far of the greatest magnitude than that directed towards any other people. (That will be the subject of our third investigation.) Meanwhile the black farmers of Darfur are left to cope as best they can.
The international community has long acknowledged the rule that religious and ethnic homogeneity serves as a deterrent to the most vicious of conflicts. For that reason, Turkish Moslems will not return to Greece nor Greeks to their former homes in Turkey. Sometimes history must be forgotten if peace is to be maintained. Judea and Samaria is the historical homeland of the Jewish people. Yet we do not advocate Jewish rule of that area today, for it is home to another people. But just as Arabs dwelling today in Judea and Samaria have a right to national self-determination, so do Jews. And Israel is the only place in the world where Jews can exercise that right today. Those who call for the "right of return" for Palestinians would deny Jews their right to self-determination. Let us be clear. When we argue that Cyprus is the model for the solution of religious and ethnic conflicts, we do not mean that ethnic and religious homogeneity need not be absolute. There is room for an Arab minority in Israel, just as there is a Jewish minority in Morocco. We oppose with every fiber of our being the idea of transfer - either of Arabs from what is today Israel proper or from Judea and Samaria. Though ethnic cleansing has taken place many times in the past, and even though the results of such a policy have subsequently become part of the accepted status quo, we reject ethnic cleansing. Jews in Israel will not do to Arabs in Judea and Samaria what government-supported Arab militias are doing to their black co-religionists in the Darfur province of Sudan.
Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's paper "The Israel Lobby" has received deservedly warm approbation from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and has been featured prominently on neo-Nazi and anti-Israel sites. The main thesis of the paper is that a nefarious pro-Israel lobby has subverted American foreign policy in favor of Israel, and at great cost to American interests. The paper is a virtual compendium of the most malicious charges against Israel. Opposing facts and views are not even cited much less refuted. (For a detailed point-by-point refutation of the Mearsheimer/Walt thesis, the reader is invited to consult the posting by Professor Alan Dershowitz.) No accusation is too wild to lay at Israel's doorstep. For instance, the authors claim that Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in order to bring about Hamas' ascendance to power, and thereby end the peace process. Among the claims made by Mearsheimer/Walt is that there is strong support for transfer in Israel. Nowhere do the authors mention that no party advocating transfer has ever wielded any significant political power in Israel. It is interesting, however, that the same Mearsheimer who fumes against Israel for the popular support for transfer, wrote in a New York Times op-ed in 1993 that the only solution to the chaos in the Balkans was the creation of "ethnically homogeneous states." Needless to say, as Mearsheimer wrote, "Creating homogeneous states would require transferring populations and drawing new borders". We mention this little bit of hypocrisy only because it typifies the world's hypocrisy with respect to discussion of all aspects of the Palestinian refugee question. Had the world treated Palestinian refugees as it once treated German, Hindu, and Moslem refugees, the refugee problem would no longer exist. By treating Palestinians as a uniquely privileged class of refugees instead, through dozens of organizations supporting the Palestinian "right of return" and maintaining them as wards of the international community, they have only succeeded in perpetuating their plight. The determination that every country has the right to maintain ethnic or religious homogeneity and that refugees who are already located in places in which they belong to the religious or ethnic majority have no right of return, applies to Israel as well. That means that even though Judea and Samaria are part of the historical homeland of the Jewish people, the Jews have no right of return there just as the Palestinians have no right of return to Israel, even though that is their historical homeland. There must be one rule for the Germans absorbed in Germany, for the Hindus absorbed in India, for the Moslems who moved to Pakistan and, by virtue of this rule, the Jews have the right of return to Israel but not to Palestine, and the Palestinians have the right of return to Palestine but not to Israel. The absolute rejection of the right of return is a corollary of not only the international situation but also the right to self-determination. The Palestinians have such a right and the Jews have such a right. Anyone who demands the right of return for the Palestinians, and only for them is, in effect, rejecting the Jewish right to self-determination.
The international community, rather than Israel, is responsible for perpetuating the problem of the Palestinian refugees. Instead of dressing their wounds, it poked and probed. It utilized manipulation. The irony - and it is a very bitter irony - is that the double standard has only increased the suffering of the Palestinians. It has eternalized them in their suffering. It has prevented the resolution of their problem. The day the world abandons this double standard will be a good day for the Palestinians. It will be the first day on which the level of their suffering begins to recede. It will be the day on which they cease to be political pawns. For the sake of the Palestinians, for the sake of peace, that day should come.

December 11, 1947. This is a refugee camp set up to absorb Jewish refugees. They lived in tents. Cooking, washing, laundry were done outdoors. Location: Tel-Aviv's most fashionable location, nowadays that is.

November 5, 1950. Yigal Yadin (second left) , IDF Chief-of-Staff at the time , visiting a transition camp for Yemenite Jews airlifted to Israel in what is known as the audacious Magic Carpet Operation. Location Kessalon, close to Beit-Shemesh. Same as in the above picture, these people had to live in tents. They would have qualified as refugees. International aid offered to them amounted to zilch. Needlesss to say that they have all of them live in proper houses. You don't live in a tent, you're not a refugee. No Palestinian to-date lives in a tent. Most have running water and electricity, schools, businesses, etc. They study in universities (mostly the art of terrorism).

An amount of weapons is seen on display at an undisclosed location in Gaza, in this frame made from Palestinian Television, Friday, Feb. 2, 2007. Palestinian TV aired footage of dozens of rocket-propelled grenade launchers, rockets and assault rifles, as well as thousands of bullets that Abbas' presidential guard claimed was confiscated at the Islamic University, Thursday night. Fatah and Hamas gunmen attacked two universities and a radio station on Friday in the deadliest single day of their violent struggle to chart the course of the Palestinian people. (AP Photo / Palestinian TV). Ynet also has an interesting piece on Fatah's raid of this school of horrors, claiming that IDF corporal Gilad Shalit was held there for a while folloowing his abduction on June 26, 2006.

What kind of refugees are they, really? This kind?

Or this kind?

This little girl is re-enacting the Ramallah lynch of two Israeli soldiers in a Gaza kindergaten, while the little boys seen below are being indoctrinated into killing Jews and becoming terrorists, no, strike that, resistance fighters.

It really pains me to say this, but is the life of one Palestinian child killed accidentally by the IDF (accidentally is circumstantial, since they are cynically being used as human shields, or worse, KILLED by the grown-up terrorists) more valuable than the lives of thousands of African children dying of starvation, disease, neglect? It appears so. Why? you might ask. Well, because the media hates Jews and hates Israel. Pallywood can make the whole world point the accusing finger at Israel for such gross fakeries as the Dura child shooting, the Gaza beach incident, and so many more. But the world not only lets the Palestinians get away with such blatant child abuse, it is quick to accuse Israel of dire living conditions in Gaza and the West Bank that leave the Palestinians no choice but to fight back. By means of terror. Two things I can tell you: - malnourished they are not, armed to the teeth they are.

Those Who Are About to Pay the Price
Nadav Ha'etzni
Ma'ariv (Saturday supplement) 05.01.2007

In 1988 the Israeli government released Yiad Sawalha from Israeli prison as a good will gesture for Arafat's government despite his having been sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering alleged collaborators with Israel. Between his release and his target-killing by the IDF in 2002, he participated in killing and wounding several people, such as Zion Agmon, Adi Dahan, Elico Timsit, and 14 more Israelis injured in the Megiddo Junction bus bombing and here.

He was also responsible for murdering 14 other Israelis in the Karkur junction bus bombing.

Nasser Abu-Hamiyad, a Fatah member, was released as part of the Oslo agreement, despite having been sentenced to several life terms in prison. I met with Abu-Hamiyad in the mid '90's, following his release. I found a totally remorseless cold blooded murderer. To say nothing of a message of peace or hope. Indeed, shortly after his release, he was back in the business of butchering Israelis: shooting at Israeli cars, participation in the Ramallah lynch, responsible for killing a policewoman and wounding ten people in the Neveh-Yaakov (a Jerusalem suburb) bombing. In March 2002, together with Marwan Barghouti, the lefties' darling, he masterminded the Sea Food Market restaurant carnage in Tel Aviv. Among the victims - two dead: Eliahu Dahan and Yossi Havi - and 31 wounded. Barghouti was convicted for nine counts of murder, Abu-Hamiyad for seven life terms plus 50 years. Both of them are up for release under the prisoner exchange deal concocted by Ehud Olmert.

Similar to Sawalha and Abu-Hamiyad, thousands of convicted terrorists and murderers have been released under different deals since 1985. They were set free without the benefit of any kind of reasonable legal procedure. Their release was part of "good will gestures" extended by the Israeli leadership to the Palestinian terrorist organization, or part of sloppy exchange deals for the return of kidnapped Israelis or dead soldiers. We were told that releasing terrorists would bring about peace and security, strengthen our peace partners, and mainly save lives. Except that following their release, most terrorists resumed their criminal activities and went back to killing and wounding Israelis. At least half of those released under the Jibril deal returned to the killing fields".
According to the Jibril deal, 1,150 of the most dangerous murderers were released from Israeli jails in exchange for three Israeli soldiers captured during the (first) Lebanon war. The Israeli government was duly warned about the unbearable blood price about to be paid, but the pressure was overwhelming. Indeed, without delay, those who had just regained their freedom proceeded to establish the new terror infrastructure that brought about the second intifadah.
Indirectly, this exchange deal cost us dearly – the Palestinian uprising. But the really unbearable price was paid by the victims and their families: all the terrorists released under this agreement were directly responsible for murdering and maiming hundreds, perhaps thousands of Israelis.
One of those terrorists, Jihad Alamrin of Gaza, was serving a life sentence when he was deported to Jordan, as part of the exchange deal. There, instead of rotting away in a jail cell, he founded the Islamic Jihad gangs which he dispatched to perform endless terror attacks. He returned to Gaza in 1996 only to be appointed senior officer in Arafat's own army. His task was to organize terrorist groups – thus he founded the Al-Aksa martyrs brigades. Among his victims – first sergeant Asher Zaguri and first sergeant Moshe Peled. The trail of murders he was responsible for since 1985 came to an end in 2002, when the IDF target killed him. Meantime, Alamrin alone was responsible for the deaths of many more soldiers than the three released under the Jibril deal.
Therefore, I find it very hard to understand the terminology favored by the government officials and senior journalists at the present time. More obscure dealings meant to bring about more dangerous actions are presented as "optimistic". Details concerning such wheelings and dealings are called "progress". Optimism and progress for whom? Certainly not for those who are about to pay the price – those who already count as dead men walking in our midst thanks to the intended deal. Certainly not for the rule of the law, which is just about to be wiped out.
Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levi once wrote: "This is not the first time that certain signed agreements force State of Israel to release terrorists responsible for sowing death and destruction in our midst. In the wake of each and every release of this kind, the hearts of many tremble with anticipation that, at long last, one may see the desired change and those pardoned would not resume their terrorist ways, and that perhaps they might even serve as good will ambassadors who might spread the idea of peaceful co-existence. Yet I believe there is no need to define this hope, or better said delusion, as totally unfounded."
Except that the Supreme Court as well as the Israeli public are jointly responsible for the victims to come. So far, the Supreme Court has not blocked such release deals, while the Israeli public turns a blind eye to the criminal activities planned by the government. The reports about the monster about to be released have not caused even the tiniest protest, to say nothing of a hunger strike. This silence will exact a heavy personal price from thousands of people, while all of us will lose more and more of our ability to carry on and preserve our society and our country.

This is 19-year-old David Biri. He was the first victim of the second intifadah. I work with one of his aunts, I know his parents and some of his cousins and uncles. My spouse works with his father and one of his uncles and knows most of his family. In this country, surrounded by genocidal maniacs, what happened is that he stepped out of his vehicle to help a family wounded in a terrorist attack, and was killed by the second charge, denotated on purpose by the rabid terrorists who were lying low and waiting for their next victim. He was just another IDF soldier who did not live to celebrate his 20th birthday.

Chin up! We beat London, Paris and New York! and Amsterdam and Rome!

Way to go, Ben-Gurion! Israel detractors, EAT YOUR HEART OUT! And this is no mean feat in this day and age when the world is against us and our very existence is being threatened by the forces of evil!

Our two year-old International Airport (Terminal 3 to be more specific) ranks first in Europe and fifth (or eighth, depending on category) in the world:

So I suppose we can bask in the limelight for at least one night. We can forget about politics, corruption, poverty, Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, the civil war in Gaza, the drought, James Fuck the Jews Baker, and the rest of our troubles, at least for tonight! Tomorrow we can face the music again, but here's an example to follow. Way to Go, Ben-Gurion staff!

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1164881920231&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

How James Fuck the Jews Baker Lined His Pockets
By Ben Caspit,
Maariv (Saturday supplement) December 15, 2006

He meddled in the Iraq quagmire (also here, here and even here) and made tens of millions of dollars, and then came up with the famous report on how the US should handle the Middle East situation. Nir Gouaz, an Israeli who spent years in the US, reveals how former Secretary of State James Baker employed his services in order to collect Iraq's debts to a major Korean conglomerate firm using a Jordanian bank and a Chinese middleman. All of this occurred despite UN-imposed sanctions on the Saddam Hussein administration. Baker's office: "The description of our role in this affair is not accurate."

James Baker himself is the reason why Nir Gouaz decided to break the silence: "Having read all the articles concerning Baker's ME vision, including the report itself, I realized there was no limit to the nerve (hutzpa) of the man chosen by the US to decide on the fate of this region."
The story itself is wonderful. Gouaz recalls how the main American media enticed him for years in order to expand on the bits and pieces of information they had managed to gather. At the time Gouaz, who was living in America, had no desire to get into trouble. Now that he is back in Cesarea, he feels the time is right to talk. His story has all the potential for a spy thriller movie script with all the required economical political and security elements: international relations, a tyrannical dictator, an angry superpower, businessmen at work in grey areas, a former high-ranking influential politician, oil and money. Lots of money.
Nir Gouaz returned to Israel two years ago, after a 15-year spell in the US. At 48 years-old, he has a wife and four children, the oldest serving as a paratrooper. Gouaz lives in a spacious villa and drives a tank-size American luxury car with all the extras. He's living the good life. Although he was occasionally associated with diamonds and arms deals in Sierra Leone, his name has been cleared both in America and Israel. He remains calm, relaxed and self-confident while recounting his story.
He had the time of his life in America. He lived in a huge estate on Fisher Island, the kind only the richest Miami crowd can afford. He made his money from important international business deals, mainly rescue and debt-collecting operations. He was asked to intervene when huge business operations were being blocked by problem states and he always succeeded in closing the deal - for a fee, of course – sort of a "persuader". He started out in the Israeli Secret Service Security Division, then he was involved in security issues. His personal charisma earned him important contacts.
In August 1998, he received a phone call from Jeffrey Stonerock, senior partner of the Baker Botts law firm, the American legal empire headed by former Secretary of State James Baker. This international business law firm employs hundreds of lawyers in offices all over the world.
"We have a big business deal for you", said Stonerock to Gouaz, "it's a very delicate matter only you can handle. Get on the first plane, please".

A private meeting with Baker
Gouaz was living in Miami at the time. The private jet that took him to Washington, DC landed at an executive only airport. The limo waiting for him drove him straight to Baker's office - 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue. Stonerock greeted him:"Come, the boss wants to talk to you". A few minutes later he was seated in James Baker's private office for a tête à tête meeting with James Baker.
"The deal in question is highly confidential", said Baker, "and we know you are a very discreet. I would like to introduce you to someone who will explain the whole thing to you." A Chinese gentleman stepped into the room and introduced himself as Do Sen Shey, a representative of CPC, an international business firm (Fortune-affiliated, apparently).
Shey told Gouaz he was well-connected in Korea and proceeded to show Gouaz a thick-bellied manila file: Hyundai's large civil engineering division had been working on vast infrastructure projects in Iraq for the past ten years. The Iraqi government had agreed on payment of over $ 800 million for the projects, in the form of government bonds, to be cashed at later dates. However, as soon as the First Gulf War broke out in 1991, the Iraqis had suspended all payments to suppliers, and Hyundai was stuck with worthless IOU's that the Iraqis refused to redeem.
Shay went on to tell Gouaz that due to interest rates and delayed payments, the outstanding debt was in excess of $ 1 billion. Which meant the collapse of the entire Hyundai Concern unless the debt was settled. Baker and Shey explained to Gouaz that unless a solution was found quickly, Hyundai was doomed. Shey revealed that Hyundai was willing to conduct indirect negotiations with the Iraqis in order to collect at least part of the debt. However, there was a catch: the world had imposed sanctions on Iraq, and the Security Council allowed trade with Iraq only under the famous oil-for-food program, which allowed for limited Iraqi oil exports (US-supervised) in exchange for food and medicine. No cash transactions were allowed.
What to do? Shey then told Gouaz that Baker's law office was the only law firm empowerment by Hyundai to conduct negotiations on its behalf. "Find us a buyer for the Iraqi bonds", was the Koreans' demand. Why Gouaz? "Firstly", he says, "because they were aware of my discreet and professional record. Secondly, I was not an American national. An American national cannot engage in bypassing a Security Council sanctions resolution. James Baker's involvement has very significant implications."
Gouaz went on to stress that the aforementioned meeting took place in Baker's private office and that he was present during the initial stages. Even after Baker had left the room, Shey and Gouaz remained seated in the sumptuous office. Gouaz wanted time to think things over. He also wanted photocopies of all the uncashed bonds, which were mailed to his home in Miami: the outstanding debt was indeed $ 830 million. Then he came up with a simple solution: only Jordan, Iraq's neighbor could provide the necessary services.
Then he phoned Jeffrey Stonerock to enquire whether Baker's office had any contacts in Jordan. "I need meetings at the highest levels", demanded Gouaz. "I need someone to open doors for me. Once they are open, I can go in and deliver the goods". "You got it", replied Stonerock. It turned out that the self-confidence of Baker's men was justified. Some time later, Gouaz was invited to meet Shakir Taufik Fakouri, president of The Bank of Jordan.
The meeting took place at the Hyatt Hotel in Jerusalem, in early 1999. Fakouri, who had no clue as to the subject of the meeting, was very courteous. Gouaz offered him the deal of a lifetime: buy Iraqi government IOU's at a great discount (around 30% of their actual value), and sell them back to the Iraqi government for oil, at great profit. All parties win: Hyundai escapes bankruptcy, the Jordanians make about 20% of the sum assuming that the Iraqis agree to provide oil in exchange for half the bonds, the Iraqi government settles a heavy debt that will allow Hyundai to continue work on Iraqi infrastructure projects. In addition, seizure will be lifted off Iraqi assets around the world.

Money flowed and so did oil
From there on in things cascaded rapidly. A meeting was scheduled with Hyundai Civil Engineering representatives in Hong-Kong (that's where their home office was located). The meeting was attended by Gouaz, Do Sen Shey, and a Bank of Jordan team. At the same time, Fakouri was meeting Tareq Aziz, the Iraqi Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time, who held the price for which the Iraqis would redeem the government bonds.
Gaps were being bridged, but Aziz still had one condition: the oil-for-food was a good option, the deal, but the amount of oil for export would have to be increased. Fakouri went back with the news about the increased oil quota. Gouaz briefed Baker and his people about the Iraqi demands. Then, in August 1999, the Iraqi oil export quota was indeed increased. Tarek Aziz contacted with Fakouri to give him the go ahead for the deal.
Thus, with the assistance of Baker's law firm, the Jordanians bought the Iraqi government bonds off Hyundai for $ 272 million, while Gouaz and Do Sen Shey served as mediators. The bonds were then sold to the Iraqis for $ 450 million worth of oil. The Bank of Jordan netted a handsome net profit, while Baker and Botts' fee was no less than $33 million, in Gouaz's estimate. Gouaz himself admits that he also earned a nice commission.
The deal was completed in July 2000. Everyone flew to Hong-Kong to meet at the Peninsula Hotel where they signed the agreement. Hyundai Vice-President, Su-Kuang Min, who made an appearance at the final meeting, wrote Gouaz a very emotional letter of appreciation. Gouaz knows for a fact that Baker flew to Korea a few weeks later to collect his fee.
At the time, Gouaz recalls, the entire affair began to surface and the American media was showing increased interest, so Stonerock was forced to admit to a certain involvement in the negotiations.
In November 2001, two months after the WTC attack, Stonerock called Gouaz again. "Listen", he said, "you've got to destroy all documents pertaining to that deal. And we'd like you to sign our confidentiality agreement forms again."
Gouaz was cautious: "Some of the documents have been destroyed, while others are being kept in a safe location." He never signed the confidentiality forms. "I destroyed whatever needed to be destroyed", he reassured Stonerock. "But I'm keeping whatever does not need to be destroyed".
He never heard from Baker's people again. But he began to get into trouble: IRS investigations and all kinds of uncomfortable strange little things. The Hyundai deal or the Iraqi bonds were never mentioned, but Gouaz felt that his troubles were somehow connected to that deal.
In 2004 Gouaz decided to return to Israel. He has stayed silent since then. But now he needs to break the silence. This is obviously his side of the story. It is straightforward and detailed. It is also supported by documents, photographs and tapes.
As to Baker's law firm, here's Jeffrey Stonerock's statement: "Our professional ethics and client confidentiality policy prevent us from discussing our clients' affairs, yet we can confirm that Baker-Botts has never served as a mediator or provided significant legal counsel in the transaction mentioned in your letter. Your description of the role played by our firm and our connection with Mr. Nir Gouaz in 2001 is not accurate. If you have any documents that might indicate otherwise, please forward us relevant photocopies so that we can reply accordingly." (this is the general idea, since I am translating from Hebrew). James Baker has not provided a direct response so far.
What can we learn from this affair? In Gouaz' words: "When the US was spearheading the international sanctions on Iraq, the law firm of a former Secretary of State closed a super deal involving a billion dollar's worth of Iraqi government bonds at a great discount. I was personally chosen to act as mediator between buyer and seller and my commission was paid by Baker's Washington DC law office. I was designated for the job because I was not a US national, and because I was personally acquainted with highest level ME officials. I am willing to lay the cards on the table at this time, in order to reveal what hides behind Mr. Baker's vision and plans. Bottom line? It's all about the money."

(I translated this article from Hebrew, sorry for the incongruences).

Viagra in the Service of the Hezbollah

By Amit Cohen
Maariv, December 8, 2006


Ten facts on the green fuel that sets the wheels of terror in motion. Millions of dollars' worth of stolen medicine and contraband cigarettes sold in America. A lucrative industry of abducting people for ransom. Banks that can do nothing about it.

1. This scenario has become almost routine in Gaza: gunmen or unmarked vehicles ambush passing cars, preferably with foreign nationals inside. The unsuspecting passengers are then dragged out of their car at gunpoint and driven to secret locations. The abduction is carried out in a couple of minutes and is over in several days. So far no Gaza abduction has resulted in bloodshed, for one reason only: it is business. The rationale behind snatching foreign nationals is purely financial: ransom, extortion or employment opportunities. It is very difficult to try and estimate how much money found its way into the Palestinian terror business coffers thanks to the practice of abduction, since all the abductees deny having ever paid for their freedom - e.g., Spanish Foreign Secretary Miguel Moratinos denies having paid any kind of ransom for the release of abducted Spanish AP photographer Emilio Morenatti.
2. We got some kind of clue as to the sums paid for the release of foreign nationals this last August, when Fox journalists Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig were detained by a group calling itself "Holy Jihad Group" that threatened to execute the two hostages and even forced them to convert to Islam in front of the cameras. When they were freed 13 days later, there were allegations that Fox News had paid $2 million for their release. But not according to Gaza officials, who claim that $200,000 had been the price of their freedom, and that the tab was picked up by Hamas. According to Palestinian sources, the man behind the abduction was
Muataz Durmush and here, head of National Resistance Front branch. The Durmush clan is considered one of the most dangerous in Gaza and is in fact closely connected to Hamas. Mumtaz Durmush, Muataz' brother, is the one who snatched IDF corporal Gilad Shalit and here together with Hamas. Muataz Durmush's branch, as well as other branches, receives monthly funding from Hamas for their supporting the organization or for carrying out attacks on its behalf. However, at some stage, Hamas decided to cut Muataz' funding. This angered Muataz, who abducted the two Fox journalists and threatened to kill them in order to "embarrass" and compromise Hamas in the eyes of public opinion. Following lengthy negotiations, Hamas gave in and paid Durmush the requested ransom, as per the monthly budget received until the abduction.
3. Taking hostages for ransom has also become the favorite source of funding for terrorist organizations operating in Iraq. This article published by the New York Times reveals that foreign governments, such as France and Italy, paid Iraqi terrorists over $ 30 million for the release of their abducted nationals during the last year alone. The document also reveals that last year terrorist operations succeeded in raising $ 70-200 million dollars. The money was made by means of extensive criminal operations such as smuggling oil, counterfeiting money and fund-raising through fictitious charities. But even these sums appear somewhat conservative versus the estimations of the Iraqi Oil Ministry. According to figures released by the Iraqi government, the local terror groups managed to raise $ 200 million by oil-smuggling alone.



4. Terror-funding in Iraq has changed significantly since the beginning of the Second Gulf War. During the first year of the hostilities terror was funded by Saddam loyalists. But in 2004 foreign couriers began bringing suitcases full of cash into Iraq. Currently, Iraqi terrorists can sustain themselves without any kind of foreign assistance. This financial independence makes it very difficult to put and end to terrorism or to attempt to cut its financial lifeline. These huge cash stashes go to show how extremely difficult it is for the US administration to deal with terror in Iraq, and they also explain the current Iraqi government failure to freeze the money flow into the insurgents' coffers. Estimates go so far as to suggest that if nothing changes, the insurgents will not only be able to fund their own operations in Iraq, but also to extend financial support to terrorist organizations worldwide.
5. Despite Iranian funding, Hezbollah also resorts to criminal activities to increase its budget – 19 people were brought to trial in the US this year for fundraising on behalf of the Hezbollah by means of illegal activities such as selling stolen Viagra pills and smuggled cigarettes, extortion, theft and money laundering to the tune of over $ 20 million.
6. Following 9/11 the White House decided that terrorist organizations, mainly Al-Qaeda, should be separated from their cash sources, assuming that if there is no money, there will be no terror. But reality backfired. Blocking money channels proved impossible, while the destruction of several financial routes brought about a change in the modus operandi. True, the annual Al-Qaeda budget was cut down from $ 30 million to a mere couple million, but at the same time the cost of terror activities also went down significantly. The 9/11 attack cost half a million dollars, while the Madrid and London cost a mere few thousand dollars. This forced the US intelligence services to re-evaluate their priorities. US officials are now admitting that the main goal is not to divert the terror funds, but rather to follow the money trail in order to identify and locate terror infrastructures. A US official report maintains that freezing assets is not the only or most important objective of monitoring the money trail; it is a means of identifying terrorists or their supporters, and has become instrumental in the war against terror groups.
7. "This is a cat and mouse game", says Yair Dagan, a specialist in the prevention of money laundering and terror sponsoring. "We are always one step behind the terrorists. Attempts to thwart terrorist funding are bound to fail, much like the battle against crime. Terror organizations are beginning to employ financing patterns similar to those used by organized crime." Dagan also maintains that the banking system is unable to cope with this trend. However, he claims, the intelligence community is more apt do deal with it if they turn to non-banking areas." He is worried that Israel cannot keep up with what is going on in the world at large. "The Israeli law prohibiting terror funding compels financial organizations to check all transactions with the Ministry of Defense black list, which is incomplete, to say the least, and full of typos, and this makes it very difficult for the checkers to pinpoint suspects. For instance, the Al-Aksa fund set up by the Hamas appears only once on the Israeli blacklist, while on the US list it is mentioned over 180 times."
8. The US administration has recently admitted that the special powers it enjoyed in the first stages of the war waged against terror are beginning to wear out. The war on terror was authorized mainly by a special executive order issued a few days after 9/11, which placed the crackdown on terror funds at the top of the priority list. At the time, President Bush promised to "starve the terrorists of funding, turn them against each other, rout them out of their safe hiding places and bring them to justice." But last month, for the first time since the order was issued, a federal judge ruled to limit the President's authority. Judge Audrey Collins overruled the President's decision to freeze the assets of two organizations defined as "terrorist" – the Tamil Tigers and the PKK. The judge cancelled the executive order allowing the US Treasury the privilege to blacklist suspected terror sponsors.
9. Banks are most likely the ones to suffer because of terror funding. The Royal Bank of Scotland was sued recently for managing a Hamas-linked charity. Previously, American terror attack victims sued French Credit Lyonnais for Hamas funds funneling. A huge $ 875 million dollar suit was filed against the Arab Bank by families of suicide bombings victims. Such suits are a serious threat to banks. Since these are civil suits, the prosecution does not need to prove that the bank actually knew about the terror connection, all it needs is to make the jury think so. In fact, this suspicion acts as indirect aid to terror sponsors. Banks unwilling to risk being associated with terrorist assets flood the system with tens of millions of reports, which make it very difficult to pinpoint the real blood money.
10. Attempt by banks to freeze automatically charity funds suspected of being connected to terrorist organizations are facing judiciary difficulties. A Michigan-based Moslem charity an American bank for violation of its civic rights, because the bank was planning to shut down the accounts of the organization in the wake of an FBI raid of its premises and haul of documents and computers form its offices (and here).

The Supreme Court Rules Supreme

A very heated debate is going on these days in Israel - I mean besides whether to allow Haniyeh back into Gaza or not (he's been let in as we speak), with or without the blood money donated by the ex-executioner turned president in Iran (apparently the 35 USD million in cash will be deposited into Arab League accounts with Egypt promising not to funnel it into for weapons and ammo deals), besides who's responsible for the defeat/victory in Lebanon (depending on how you look at it), whether we do or do not have nuclear weapons, and all the other life-and-death issues - and this debate concerns the Supreme Court rulings and their implications.
I have translated the article below for my English-speaking visitors, as it has only appeared in the Hebrew newspaper Maariv. It was published in response to the Supreme Court ruling to allow Palestinians to claim compensation for intifada-related damages. That is they can kill and blow us up at will, but if a soldier so much as fires a rubber bullet into the air and the Palestinian's donkey shies, well then you better come up with the money, you damn bastard mother-f***ing genocidal child murdering oppressive occupier!
You can also follow the links to the ruling and several other opinions (yes, I am also including the pro's, if only to show
how idiotically, insanely suicidal we have become, as the same "enlightened" Supreme Court judges rejected a petition to deal with Israel's own poor !!!)

Democracy is dying
By Ben Dror Yemini,
Maariv, December 13, 2006

The question is not whether the bill cancelled yesterday is right or wrong. This has already been debated and settled. And I may well have opposed this bill. The Knesset knew that this bill was not in line with the Basic Laws. Except that being out of line on this issue is the norm in civilized, democratic Canada, where the bill concerning this same issue is even more encompassing, as it grants the state full immunity even when peace time non-combat military operations are concerned.
Not that the Supreme Court judges are unaware of the Canadian counterpart. No, they are quite familiar with it, as they quote it in their ruling. But what holds true in Canada during peace time, even though nothing threatens Canada's very existence, where no terrorist actions are being launched from hostile civilian centers, does not hold true in Israel. Or at least that's what our Supreme Court judges believe.
Therefore, the real question is – what else must happen for the Knesset to restore its sovereignty? The Knesset makes our laws and one may and should argue about them. But then along comes the Supreme Court and says screw the Knesset. During the first class I attended in Law School, the lecturer explained that we need judges so that "the arbitrary majority of the law-makers does not infringe on the redheads' rights." Good! Except that no legislative body has adopted such idiotic bills so far. If they ever do, no court will ever be able to stop them, as US Justice Learned Hand put it. And anyway, the accumulating experience shows that there are more dubious, erroneous and stupid court rulings than wrong parliamentary decisions. Therefore the advantage of the judiciary over the legislature is pure legend.
One of the most idiotic American Court rulings dating from the mid 18th century, stated that a negro is an object with no rights. Thus the judges overruled the much more enlightened lawmakers' decision. In the wake of this court ruling, the American Civil War broke out. Slavery was eventually abolished, despite the Court's ruling, but the price was rivers of human blood. So please, no more brainwashing us on the issue of the judges' superiority!
Yesterday's Supreme Court ruling is not nearly as idiotic as the American one. If Barak (Aharon Barak, President of the Israeli Supreme Court) were a politician, who knows, I might have voted for him. But with all due respect, we are not being ruled by philosophers in Plato's republic. We are living in a democratic state. The bill preventing compensation payments for those who sustained damages in intifada operations, as much as I might disagree with it, should not be cancelled. When a nine judge panel unanimously recite Meretz texts we are in deep trouble. Because when they start canceling one law after another, we no longer need a democratic regime, we no longer need a Knesset and we no longer need elections. The Supreme Court will rule instead.
The Knesset must make a stand. There is no such thing as "a bill bypassing the Supreme Court." Instead, we have a Supreme Court bypassing bill after bill. Not because the law denies the redheads their right to vote, but because of the judiciary principles at work in democratic societies. Therefore, in order to put an end to this kind of trampling on the law, there is no choice but to cancel the Supreme Court authority. If the Knesset fails to make a stand on this issue, we can forget about our democracy. Democracy will become the Supreme Court's private dominion.

High Court: PA residents eligible for compensation
MK Elon: High Court one of Israel's existential problems
Bereaved father: Now we can sue IDF murderers
MK: High Court criminal, must be constrained
Time to pay for mistakes
Intifada law controversy
High Court shuns Knesset

And, boy, do I love this one - I didn't realize Indians and Israelis had so much in common - mea culpa! Except the medical profession in Israel is still mostly uncorrupted.

"Is justice blind or blindfolded?
The icon of justice can be seen in all the courts from the High Court to the Supreme Court. It is blindfolded. This means that equal justice should be given to everybody irrespective of caste, creed or colour. But now, the judges, government doctors and even the police are corrupt. We became free from the British, but now we have to become free from our own politicians. It is in our hands to make justice work. (In our case it's the Supreme Court judges we have to free ourselves from).
Saishyam M, X Hosur: Sishya School"

A Palestinian synagogue?

Synagogue of ancient Jewish town uncovered

Nadav Man, Bitmuna
Published: 09.30.06

Work to build army post uncovers impressive tile floor, leading to a discovery of a third-century synagogue and town near Maoz Haim (below, in 1943. The kibbutz was founded in 1937, in the Beit-Shean Valley close to the Jordanian border. Huh? Prior to the creation of the State of Israel - apparently, contrary to popular belief, Jews had established a presence prior to 1948. Good grief! Where is the public outcry? Where are the protesting dispossessed Arabs?)

As a matter of fact, these emerging settlements were coming under constant attack from marauding Arab gangs, that is why the inhabitants were to keep watch at all times. Thus the watch towers of Maoz Haim (to the right) and Hanita (below, 1938). These kibbutzim were founded during the British Mandate, by "sabras" Israeli-born Jews (Good grief, once again, wot? not all Jewish residents got here AFTER 1948? Well, apparently NOT). Anyways, this campaign took place between 1936-1939 and was known under the name of Stockade and Tower, and it was carried out by the Hamahanot Haolim movement, a youth movement founded in 1926 - a bit of a headache there for anti-Zionists claiming there was no significant Jewish activity prior to the Declaration of Independence.

The secrets of an ancient synagogue, dating from around the 3rd to 6th century CE, were discovered completely by accident near Kibbutz Maoz Haim. In 1974, during construction work on an army post west of the kibbutz, Avshalom Yaakovi (right, undated picture), a founder of the kibbutz and specialist on the Land of Israel, discerned a mosaic floor, partly buried under the dirt, depicting what looked to him like a menora (traditional Jewish candelabra).

Such as the one appearing on the Arch of Titus, in Rome, Italy. Was this Roman Emperor a Zionist conspirator as well?
The seven-branched candelabra was but a fraction of the exquisite mosaic floor exposed by Avshalom who used his hands literally to remove the soil and dirt covering the find. Construction work was stopped, and the Antiquities Authority arrived at the kibbutz. Excavations uncoverd an ancient synagogue.
Underneath a the remains of a Bedouin cemetery, built on the ruins of an old Arab village, a Jewish town from the third century was found. The synagogue, constructed during the latter part of the century, served the Jewish community there for over 300 years, and was destroyed, along with the rest of the the town, in a large fire which broke out during the Arab occupation of the land. According to signs found in the area, the Jewish town was called Bala, and the Bedouins too kept that name.

The synagogue was constructed during three periods. It was first built as a simple structure, and as circumstances improved in the Jewish community, the synagogue was renovated in the basilica style. It faced Jerusalem, and a wonderful mosaic floor including images of a bird, grapes, and a yellow fruit (apparently a citron) are displayed:

Credit should also be given to this 19th century New York Apollo watering can (detail, below) presented to Asvhalom by a worker of the Yaffo Stein Company that operated in Eretz Israel prior to World War One. It was one of the tools used by Avshalom to hand-dig the site.


Also found at the dig: part of the tiled roof

and this elaborately crafted object:

Beit-Hanoun

("rocket science" has become THE "cottage industry" of Gaza)

(Hamas terrorists use UN vehicles to ferry rockets from the factories to the launching sites. There they kneel and pray to their murderous deity that the rockets might kill innocent Israelis. These cowardly brutes never reveal their ugly unshaven faces - always hiding behind ski-masks. The UN must be in bed with them, because you never hear Kofi condemning the use of these vehicles in terrorist operations. But did he ever condemn the use of UN vehicles when our three soldiers were kidnapped and murdered in Lebanon back in the year 2000?)

The price of the Qassams
By Ben Caspit, Maariv, November 11, 2006

Someone must tell the truth. Someone must tell it like it is to the inhabitants of Beit-Hanoun, to the civilians of the Gaza Strip, to the Israeli Arabs, to the entire world. The one simple, punching truth: whoever fires thousands of Qassam rockets into civilian centers for years, whoever stocks up on tons of explosives, weapons and katyusha rockets for months, whoever rains terror and horror over an entire country without any apparent reason, must get it through their heads that they cannot simply hide behind women and children. This kind of behavior carries a price tag.

Every state on this planet has the obligation to protect its citizens. Israel's actions in Gaza are moderate, humane, and moral, much more so than the actions of the US, UK or Russian troops would be in case terrorists were lobbing rockets into Texas, Coventry or Moscow. This is not a theoretical assumption. This is an historical fact, whose consequences are buried in the remains of Grozny, in the ruins of Afghan villages, Iraqi cities and towns, or Dresden during WWII. If we were to examine less enlightened regimes, such as those in the Arab world, the results would be a lot worse.

But guess what, Israel is the only one getting grilled. We are the ones hollered at. Being Jewish is difficult. Living itself is difficult, not to mention self-defense. We have to justify our actions more than anyone else in the world. It shouldn't bother us, though. That is why, although deeply sorry, as any human being should be at the sight of the Beit-Hanoun victims, we must not refrain from telling the truth. And the truth is that as long as Qassams are being launched into Israel, Israel must return fire.

They shoot to kill women and children. We do not. Ever. But when residential neighborhoods become launching pads, it is very difficult to avoid mishaps or technical errors. Which is why, in view of what happened in Beit-Hanoun last night, I would like to reiterate, out loud for the whole world to hear, looking into everyone's eyes, that it's like this: as long as Sderot cannot live in peace, Gaza will not live in peace. You shoot rockets, we fire shells. Shame when one of them goes astray, it's bad, it is a catastrophe, but that's the way it is. Every other option has been tried and failed. When in Rome do as the Romans do: when facing murderous terror perpetrated by a bloodthirsty enemy who wishes to wipe you off the Earth, you have no option but to eliminate him.

Last night, while Col. Yossi Galant, the Southern Command Chief, was being interviewed on Channel 2, a Qassam rocket landed next to the children's quarters in Kibbutz Kfar Gaza (South of Ashkelon). Yesterday morning, Rubhi Rantisi, a Hamas representative, was fuming in an interview on Army Radio: "Do you expect the Arabs to sit idly by?" No, dear Rubhi, we do not expect the Arabs to sit idly by now. We expected the Arabs to sit idly by in the wake of the Gaza pullout. When Israel displaced thousands of its citizens and turned them into refugees, having spent billions and hanging on the brink of civil war in order to perform a complete disengagement from Gaza, behind the international border, and abandoning even the Philadelphi Route. Yes, we were stupid enough to believe that at least now, at least in Gaza, you might sit idly for a while. Instead, we were rewarded with intensified barrages of "improved" Qassams, tons of explosives and Hamas takeover. While another Hamas top man, Ghazi Hamad, was bragging on the radio "Now we have to wipe Israel off the map".

Lovely, good morning, everyone. This was declared in the Hamas charter long before the Beit-Hanoun incident, Mr. Hamid. That is your Bible, that is your belief, that is what you have been trying to do ever since we left Gaza, ever since Ariel Sharon's "pilot", reciprocated by tens of tunnels packed with ammunition and IED (improvised explosive devices). Ghazi Hamad was followed by an Israeli commentator who announced that "Now, following this tragic event, the Israeli-hatred in Gaza is sky-rocketing." Oh, dear!" What exactly was there in Gaza BEFORE this tragic event? Was Gaza overflowing with burning love for Zionists and Jews? These are the people whom we left alone over a year ago, we "got out of their hair", set them free. They could have created a model of rehabilitation, co-existence, peace. If only they had invested one hundredth of their murderous energy into giving the refugee camps a facelift. A tenth of the money they invest in terror could have gone into setting up new residential neighborhoods. They could have shown the whole world – look, Israel is out, has retreated beyond its international border, we have reached a solution and we can live in peace. They could have justifeid our retreat from the West Bank as well.

(rockets found in a private residence in Nablus, West Bank)

Instead, they charged us with rabid terror. They are not attacking the 1967 borders, they want the 1948 borders. They do not challenge the occupation; they do not struggle against the oppression. They want to completely uproot us from here; they want to wipe us off the face of the earth. But guess what, we are not that eager to let that happen.

On the eve of the Beit-Hanoun incident I saw Slieman Al-Shafee (the energetic channel 2 correspondent) interviewing an Islamic Jihad activist who was bragging in front of the cameras that they had developed a new rocket, one that was presently going to land in Sderot's commercial center or next to the children's dorm in Kfar Gaza (if not on top of it actually). I hear someone say – "let's talk to them, let's resume negotiations". But then one grasps the horror, the madness, the hatred, and one asks oneself – what is there to talk about? Ending the occupation in Gaza, perhaps? Shall we offer to retreat and allow them to rebuild their lives, let the spirits chill, separate the demons? But then we remember that we've done that already.

(These are rocket-launching sites targeted by the IDF: Beit-Hanoun, Beit-Lahiya, Sheich-Ziyad, Al-Atatrah, Shuhada Cemetery, Giv'at Oranim, Officers Quarters - this last location was built to provide lodgings for Palestinian security officers).

(Here are rocket attacks recorded in just one week prior to Gaza disengagement: Sha'ar ha-Negev Industrial Park - 1 Qassam, Sderot - 13 Qassams, Netiv ha-Assarah - 1 Qassam, Elei-Sinai - 1 Qassam, 1 mortar, Nissanit - 3 mortars, Gadid - 4 mortars.)

We're out of Gaza. We've retreated. We've negotiated. But it didn't do any good. They are still firing rockets, they are still snatching soldiers in cross-border (international border) attacks. And they are still hiding behind their women and children. But this equation has to be broken. Just as everybody over in Lebanon knows that whoever piles up rockets in their homes might actually get hit by a missile or a shell, so must every Arab mom in Gaza face the reality that she cannot sleep safely at night anywhere in Gaza if the Sderot children cannot sleep safely at night. Whence rockets are launched, shells will fall. Following the disengagement about one thousand Qassam rockets have been fired at us. Which is why we must brace ourselves and carry on. All they have to do, if they want their peace and quiet, is to stop the rockets. Until then there will be no peace and quiet for them, and such mishaps are bound to recur. Yesterday, someone by the name of Rafi Eitan managed to squeeze in among the radio updates pouring in from Beit-Hanoun, and recounted the story of how he captured Eichmann 46 years ago. It appears that Eichmanns don’t die, they reincarnate and need to be recaptured.

I translated this article from Hebrew for the benefit of my non-Hebrew speaking friends who pop in every now and then, because I think it illustrates perfectly what most Israelis feel and think nowadays. However sorry we may be for the loss of life in Beit-Hanoun (which was accidental, although there are serious allegations of foul-play, no wonder the Arabs themselves call it Qana, and therefore I shall address it separately), we must never forget our own victims, who were targeted on purpose:

This is where little Afik Zahavi-Ohaion (below, with his mother, Ruthie) was killed on his way to his kindergarten.

This beautiful 17-year-old girl, Ella (Ayala Abouksiss), sustained fatal head injuries when she shielded her younger brother, Tamir, featured here below.

According to Palestinian (and their blind supporters') logic, all of these heinous crimes are perpetrated (and largely applauded by the international community free-falling for the Palestinian lies and distortion of the English language and international laws- where is the UN condemning violence against defenseless Israeli civilians; where is the UNICEF when Jewish/Israeli children, toddlers, babies, are shamelessly and ruthlessly slain?) under the pretext that they are "war criminals" and "occupiers". Except these children are not targeted because they are war criminals, they are targeted and killed only because they are Jewish and living in Israel.

And the latest Palestinian craze is that the Jews have no legal claim to Jerusalem or to the Land of Israel. I wonder where they (and also their supporters in Europe, America and Canada) learnt their history and why they think the Romans, having taken Jerusalem and ransacked Herod's Temple (in the year 70 AD), first called the province Judea Capta and even minted coins with that inscription. The term Palestina was given 65 years later, as token of ultimate humiliation and insult to the Jews who were constantly challenging Roman authority. It couldn't be that the Arabs were calling themselves Israelites, Jews or anything like that back then, and then suddenly, such as e.g. when Islam was invented in the 7th century AD, decided to call themselves something else, such as Arabs, and Palestinians even later, perhaps in the 1960's. And how the world cheers for them...

It has just struck me that the Palestinians claim to be descendants of those ancient Philistines. Perhaps. Interesting to note, though, that those ancient Philistines were not semitic, whereas Jews and Arabs are very much descendants of Noah's sons...