Ethan Bronner of the New York Times has an excellent piece today on Hamas’s arms buildup in Gaza, based on a report by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center.
AJC’s Terrorism Expert Yehudit Barsky examines Hamas’s quest for legitimacy, and its quest for arms, in this AJC briefing:
The repercussions of Hamas’s border breach into
The New York Times published today a devastating report on Hamas’s increased incitement against Jews in Gaza:
“Jews are a people who cannot be trusted,” Imam Yousif al-Zahar of Hamas told the faithful. “They have been traitors to all agreements — go back to history. Their fate is their vanishing. Look what they are doing to us.” …
Such incitement against Israel and Jews was supposed to be banned under the 1993 Oslo accords and the 2003 “road map” peace plan. While the Palestinian Authority under Fatah has made significant, if imperfect efforts to end incitement, Hamas, no party to those agreements, feels no such restraint.
Since Hamas took over Gaza last June, routing Fatah, Hamas sermons and media reports preaching violence and hatred have become more pervasive, extreme and sophisticated, on the model of Hezbollah and its television station Al Manar, in Lebanon.
A new AJC-Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education study, Palestinian Textbooks: From Arafat to Abbas and Hamas, focuses on hate in Palestinian texbooks used in school is Gaza and the West Bank.
Sderot, an Israeli town under daily rocket attack from Hamas-controlled Gaza, is the focus of efforts by AJC for international attention.
The New York Times published over the weekend a letter from AJC’s Director of Communications Kenneth Bandler:
More than 7,000 Qassam rockets have landed in Sderot since 2001. Residents have barely 15 seconds to get to the safety of an air raid shelter after the “red alarm” sounds. That can happen 20 or more times in a single day, Mayor Eli Moyal told me on a recent visit.
Infolive.tv, Israel’s first web-based television news site, featured the recent visit to Sderot by AJC’s Board of Governors. AJC President Richard J. Sideman was extensively interviewed.
Eight years ago, Mauritania became the third Arab country to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel. This momentous action occurred without fanfare, and even today is not as widely known as it ought to be.
The other two, Egypt and Jordan, signed peace treaties with Israel in 1979 and 1994, respectively, and shortly thereafter opened embassies and exchanged ambassadors. These challenged the longstanding conviction among Arab leaders that diplomatic ties with Israel would be established only in the context of a full Israeli-Palestinian peace. But, bordering Israel, and having engaged in costly warfare, Egypt and Jordan proceeded without waiting for a resolution of the Palestinian situation, which has held Arab-Israeli relations virtually hostage for 60 years.
David Bernstein, Guest Writer
Israel’s upcoming 60th birthday provides a great opportunity to take a step back from the day to day and assess the bigger picture.
It’s easy to be drawn into a pessimistic outlook about Israel’s future. There’s plenty of evidence to support such gloominess: much of the Arab world’s continuing rejection of the Jewish State’s right to exist; the rising tide of Muslim extremism; the menacing threat of Iran; the growing social, economic and religious cracks within Israeli society.
These problems are all very real and must be taken seriously. But they only tell part of the story, and can dangerously obscure our view of the larger, more positive portrait of Israel’s remarkable achievements. Such “we’re doomed” pessimism is dangerous, for it can skew our vision, sap our resolve, and wind up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
drugs penis enlargement
prices medication penis enlargement pills
generic viagra now
quality buy propecia
buy viagra prices now
store buy phentermine
top buy viagra
tabs medication buy cialis
pharmacy cheap viagra
buy meridia top treatment
cheap viagra site
online viagra medication top
shipping online viagra
generic cialis prices
generic viagra prices
reduceri pe net parfumuri
gaseste sentimente
incaltaminte numai acum reduceri
cleaner test
purchase snow
pocket pc shop home
At first glance, the two books inhabit different worlds. One, carrying the imprint of a prestigious publisher, is riding high in the Amazon bestseller chart. The other, from a tiny publisher in Atlanta, would not make a bestseller list on Amazon or anywhere else. The first book is splendidly printed and bound, reflecting the gravitas of the authors. The second looks and feels cheap, like a trinket from a murky political gathering.
And yet this is one instance where packaging tells us very little. What counts is that the two books – Mearsheimer and Walt’s The Israel Lobby, which everyone is talking about, and James Petras’s The Power of Israel in the United States, an unabashedly conspiratorial tome unnoticed by the reviewers – focus upon the same subject. What counts even more – lest readers should think that my purpose is to damn by association – are the arresting similarities between the two books in terms of argument.
Several months ago I was on Capitol Hill meeting a prominent Congresswoman in the Rayburn Room. We met in a corner of the large room, while at its center a technical crew was preparing for a press conference. The banner behind the podium read “Energy Independence.” The House energy bill was going to be presented under that banner later in the day.
She asked, half jokingly, if we had come to talk with her about energy, it being the subject du jour.
Yes, I responded. She was somewhat surprised, as were some of the other Representatives and Senators I had approached. After all, what do Jews have to do with energy policy?
Already in its death throes after seven years of futile struggle against Israel, the Palestinian national movement suffered a fatal blow last week, when Gaza fell in the hands of Hamas. Now, instead of a state-in-the waiting, Palestine is two failed states, under two governments at war with one another.
Hamas in Gaza might still pursue its fight against Israel; and Fatah in the West Bank might still voice the rhetoric of grievance against Israel as the occupier. But the two are now locked in a deadly struggle. Anti-Zionist rhetoric has been waving the ghost of a one-state solution - implying that Israel might disappear, replaced by a united binational state comprising the West Bank and Gaza as well as present Israel. It now looks as though there will be a one-state solution after all - Israel, alongside two failed states, both Palestinian, and fighting each other.
Tashbih Sayyed was a very special human being, a friend of the Jewish people, and my friend. I first met him seven years ago when my organization, the American Jewish Committee, was launching an interfaith effort to initiate dialogue with Muslims. In our conversations, Tashbih exuded a quiet intensity, and a determination to make the world a better place. Little by little, I began to learn more about his personal experiences in Pakistan and how those experiences had shaped him into a defender of human rights in the Muslim world.
Tashbih was not only dedicated to discussing his vision of how the Muslim world could change. He was a passionate believer in the power of the press to educate the public in order to make those changes happen. He lived and breathed journalism, and more than once described his newspapers as “my life.” For him, immigrating to the United States was the opening of a new door of opportunity to express himself through his journalism, and freedom of speech was a precious gift that should not be squandered.
A few years ago an American Indian friend phoned me, absolutely perplexed. He could not reconcile two stories in his morning paper – one in the news section, the other in sports. Both were about major Florida universities.
The first story reported universal outrage at and severe sanctions on a fraternity which had hosted an event where participants dressed in blackface. The leadership of the university spoke in strong language about not tolerating racism, the hurt of stereotypes, the psychological impact of dehumanization, and the incompatibility of such offensive behavior with the standards of a university.
The second noted, without comment, that the leadership of another Florida university (which had an Indian mascot) was encouraging students to show up at a major sporting event in red face.