- Might the Turkish Military Intervene in Syria?
Dr. Can Kasapoglu
- Two States With a River Between Them: Mudar Zahran
David Haivri
- The Poor Palestinians
Ted Belman
- Jewish Liberals Denigrate Christians, Enable Islamists
Matthew M. Hausman, Att'y
|
Free Daily Israel Report
Arutz 7 Most Read Stories
- Is Israel Conceding Rachel's Tomb as PA Heritage Site?
Jewish World 10:27 AM 2/14/2012
- Gaza Goes Dark – Is Egypt to Blame?
Middle East 9:05 PM 2/14/2012
- Chabad Tells Men: Marry at 20
Jewish World 1:19 PM 2/14/2012
Op-Eds
Judaism
- Rabbi MelamedMan is Like a Tree
- HaRav KookBlessings for Miracles
- Rav A. MillerThe Torah Was a New Beginning
- Rabbi ShafierThe Astonishing Potential of Man
- Rabbi J. SacksThe Custom that Would Not Die: 10 Commandment Reading
- Rabbi Dr. Yakov NagenYitro: Family First
- Rabbi Ilan GoldmanJust a Just Society
- Rabbi RichmanAmazing Lecture on Yitro
Radio
- How Attacks are Being Portrayed via the Social Media Network
Reality Bytes
- Social and Market Norms Applied to Our Day to Day Relationships
The Jewish Home & Family
Back to Sanity
by Arutz 7 Analysts
Insightful and analytical, passionate and authentic, with biting wit and masterful writing - our bloggers are a source of crystal clarity in this time of confusion.
|
Tammuz 1, 5768, 7/4/2008
Quotes and Notes Corner: Poisoning the Wellsby Nissan Ratzlav-KatzHere's some more from history's grab-bag and how it plays out in current events. In January of 2003, the news agency of the United Arab Emirates, WAM, reported that the Emirates-based Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-Up published a book titled Israel's Water Security, "dealing with the conflict After noting that the water security policy of Israel is merely a cover for "expansionist designs," the United Arab Emirates news agency presents the Zayed Centre's conclusion: "Israel does not suffer from any shortage of water, as do other countries in its neighborhood. It only hopes to escalate the problem in order to gain benefits and to justify its hegemony and control over the natural resources, including water, in the region." The only answer, WAM concludes the issue, is "a collective Arab action to challenge these designs." What has this to do with 2008? It makes me wonder if B'tselem is taking part in that "collective Arab action" consciously or just by coincidence. BTselem claimed that "the chronic water shortage results in large part from Israel's discriminatory policy in distributing the joint water resources in the West Bank and the limits it places on the Palestinian Authority's ability to drill new wells." Once upon a time, the libel was that Jews poison the wells; now it's that Jews block the wells. Did I say "libel"? As reported here on Israel National News: "Mekorot, the national water company, denied allegations made by the B’Tselem group that Israel has discriminatory water policies in Arab villages in Judea and Samaria. The company reported that it provided more water in these areas than was required under the Oslo agreements. "...Mekorot said it provided 500 million cubic meters per year to Arab controlled areas of Judea and Samaria which was 30 percent more than required under current arrangements. This means that Israel supplies 80 percent of the Arab-controlled areas' water needs. The National Water Authority responded that shortages in these areas were caused by the poor infrastructure built by the PA and local water thieves." And this during the week of parshat Chukat, which emphasizes the role of water for the Jews during their passage through the Sinai desert. Researched, compiled and presented by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz |
|
Sivan 29, 5768, 7/2/2008
Rachel Corrie Lobby Silent?by Steven Plaut
Of all those groups and people who were "outraged" when Rachel Corrie from the International Solidarity with Terror Movement (ISM) threw herself under an Israeli bulldozer in Gaza to defend terrorists and later died in a Palestinian Authority medical facility, how many of those have expressed outrage and anguish at the bulldozer mass murder in Jerusalem today? The dozer driver who hit Corrie did not see her at all. Today's bulldozer murderer intentionally murdered four people and tried to murder dozens more. Where are the Corrie apologists today? Will Corrie's parents take time off from their campaign of vilification against Israel to speak out?
Meanwhile, send out a fax at once demanding that Caterpiller stop all sales of equipment to the Palestinian Authority! UPDATE: James Taranto from the Wall Street Journal claims today that the terrorist got the idea of using the bulldozer for murder from the years of false claims by the Corrie Lobby that Israel "murdered" Rachel Corrie with a bulldozer. |
|
Sivan 24, 5768, 6/27/2008
Quotes and Notes Corner I: A Palestinian Stateby Nissan Ratzlav-KatzWelcome, blogospheroids, to the Quotes and Notes Corner. I will be using this space to present interesting For the first Quotes and Notes Corner in history, I'd like to quote from the official Fatah website - yes, nowadays, all the best terrorist groups have to have a website, too. If Arafat were still alive, he'd have a Facebook entry and a MySpace video ("Shout out to all the jihadeeeeeeeez! Whassup?") In any case, in December of 2001, Fatah published an editorial marking the 37th anniversary of its first terrorist act (on January 1, the group claimed credit for a December attack). Fatah was founded, according to the editorial, "in 1957 when it issued its first statement calling for military struggle. In the period 1959 to 1964, Fateh published a magazine called Our Palestine. Eight years of organizing, recruiting, and raising awareness preceded the first military operation. The military wing of Fateh issued its first statement on January 1st, 1965." Of course, that historic first attack in 1964 and most (but far from all) subsequent attacks by Fatah and the PLO According to their celebratory 2001 editorial, Fatah "believes that a legitimate Palestinian entity forms the most important weapon that Arabs have against Israel, the outpost of the imperialist powers." Aha! Now THAT explains a lot..... Sources: "The 37th Anniversary of Launching Fateh": http://www.fateh.net/e_editor/01/311201.htm (last viewed June 26, 2008) Researched, compiled and presented by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz |
|
Sivan 21, 5768, 6/24/2008
Sarkozy and Land for Peaceby Steven Plaut Sarkozy to Wife, fully clothed: Let's Move the Louvre Here!  Perhaps the true French capital is not Paris at all, but Vichy  Well, Sarkozy was in Jerusalem this week, and standing before the Knesset he called for Israel to agree to have Jerusalem divided, with half turned over to the savages. He also called for ethnic cleansing of the Jews living in the West Bank.These French politicians have long believed that peace could be created by turning Israel into a sort of Vichy appeasement regime. But now that they want to purchase peace with land, they may be on to something important. Never one to back down from a challenge, I have prepared a set of proposals for consideration by the French people, so they too can achieve a full, lasting, and just peace with their historic opponents. First, we all agree that territory must not be annexed by force. Therefore, we can also agree that Germany has a moral right to demand the return of Alsace-Lorraine, for the French aggression in 1945 and its consequent occupation must not be rewarded. "A full withdrawal for full peace" should operate here. Further, France must agree to the return and rehabilitation of all ethnic Germans expelled from Alsace-Lorraine after World Wars I and II, as well as all those they define as their descendents. But this, of course, is just the first step toward a solution, as no aggression can be rewarded—and France has much other stolen territory to return. It took Corsica from Genoa, Nice and Savoy from Piedmont; as the successor state, Italy must get back all these lands. By similar token, territories grabbed from the Habsburgs go back to Austria, including Franche-Comté, Artois, and historic Burgundy. The Roussillon area (along the Pyrenées) must be returned to Spain, its rightful owner. And Normandy, Anjou, Aquitaine, and Gascony must be returned to their rightful owners, the British royal family. Not even this not enough for the sake of peace. Brittany and Languedoc must be granted autonomy at once, recognizing the Breton and Occitan Liberation organizations as their legal rulers. This leaves the French government in control over the Île de France (the area around Paris). That, however, still does not solve the problem of the Holy City of Paris, sacred to artists, gourmets, and adulterers. The Corsicans obviously have a historic claim to the Tomb of the Emperor Napoleon, their famed son, as well as the Invalides complex and beyond. For the sake of peace, is it not too much to ask that Paris be the capital for two peoples? The French authorities must agree to prevent French Parisians from even entering the sacred tomb area, lest this upset the Corsicans. The Saint Chapelle and the Church of Notre Dame of course will be internationalized, under joint Vatican-art historical auspices. Indeed, the French should consider it a compliment of the highest order that so many people see Paris as an international city. The French have nothing to complain of. They will enjoy the benefits of peace and retain control of the Champs Elysées. Actually, come to think of it, even the Champs Elysées may be too much. Recalling the French position that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel, perhaps the true French capital is not Paris at all, but Vichy. |
|
Sivan 17, 5768, 6/20/2008
Good Lynch, Bad Lynch - Haaretz Displays its Integrityby Steven PlautSuddenly, this week the "T" word appears on Haaretz' front page AH, Haaretz, the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew, the daily whose idea of journalistic "pluralism" is based on Brezhnev's Pravda, the newspaper in which Israel (and America) are always wrong and the Islamofascists are always right, the newspaper of Post-Zionism and Post-Judaism, where Israeli survival is an archaic idea whose time has past.Haaretz, or Al-Ard in Arabic, has for many years adopted the quaint custom of anti-Semitic newspapers elsewhere in referring to suicide bombers and mass murderers of Jews as "activists" and "militants." You know, like the people who march to defend the self-esteem of dolphins. Yet suddenly, this week the "T" word appears on Haaretz' front page. "T" as in terrorist. How come? Well, the news story concerns Eden Natan-Zada, a mentally ill Israeli soldier (actually a deserter) who shot up Shfaram in October 2005 and killed several Druse and Arabs. Shfaram is about 40 minutes outside Haifa. He was then attacked by locals in the crowd who lynched him, killing him. Ever since, the Israeli Attorney General's office has been mulling over whether to prosecute the members of the mob who killed the by-then-disarmed Natan-Zada. This week, the prosecution decided not to prosecute. Every second word referring to Natan-Zada in the Haaretz articles about the decision refers to him as a "terrorist." He of course was not, although he was a killer, and probably was not legally sane. This is newsworthy because there have been cases in which Arab terrorists were apprehended live after they murdered Jews and who were then summarily executed by those who captured them. In every one of these cases, those who dispatched the terrorhoids were prosecuted. The most famous incident being the Bus 300 affair. Now after the Natan-Zada incident, I called for the prosecution NOT to indict those who killed the perp. I also insisted that killing terrorists should never be considered a crime, even when Jews kill captured Arab terrorists, and that the decision not to prosecute Natan-Zada should be regarded as case precedent for ALL who kill terrorists, even when the lynchers are Jews. I thought that those who executed the terrorists in the Bus 300 affair should have been given medals. I am all in favor of lynching terrorists captured immediately after they commit mass murder. Now Haaretz is also in favor of such lynching, but only when the perp is a Jew and the victims Arabs. Haaretz is NEVER in favor of punishing Arab terrorists who murder Jews, and of course opposes the death penalty for Arab terrorists. Which brings us to the Haaretz editorial in the very same issue (June 16) in which it cheers the decision by the AG not to indict the killers of Natan-Zada. In the very same issue, it runs an editorial demanding that a Jewish farmer in the Negev who shot Arab burglars who had broken into his small ranch be indicted! In January 2007 one Shai Dromi shot two Arabs who had broken into his homestead, trying to steal his sheep, and he killed one and injured the other. The Attorney General prosecuted him. The Knesset decided to take an uncharacteristic stand against this case of prosecutorial politization and judicial tyranny by starting to pass (it already passed its "first reading") a special law, known in the media as the Shai Dromi Law, declaring that people who kill or injure burglars and intruders into their homes will not be prosecuted. The farm lobby took time off from lobbying for cheap water and subsidies to back the bill. Haaretz of course is outraged! This law would be nothing less than a "license to kill." What about their Miranda rights? I cite the editorial: 'The new law will lead to killing to no avail, and could include people accidentally harming members of their own family. True, a man's home is his castle, and he has to be granted the right of self-defense therein, but it is not permissible to shed the blood of someone who enters the house, even if he is a burglar. The place of thieves is in prison, but they must not be turned into the victims of executions. Nor is it reasonable to extend the rights granted to a person in his home to his yard, store or flock as well.' So when is it okay in Haaretz' opinion to kill intruders? When they are Jewish "intruders" in "Palestinian lands," of course! |