About Me

Name: Yehoshua
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Sarah And The Wolves

                                             Sarah And The Wolves-- From One Fellow Fisherperson To Another…

                                                                                                                   by Gerald A. Honigman



     Governor Palin, there’s much about you that I find refreshing.

     No, I don’t agree with you on every issue (so, you’re no different than any other candidate), but my heart tells me that your heart is basically in the right place--and I’m often accused of being too often cranially guided.

     Having said this, please permit me to offer some advice to you in what will probably be a close election this November…and, right now, you guys are behind.

     I am a former Democrat, now Independent, swaying heavily towards Senator McCain. There are many others out there like me--and we may very well determine the outcome of this election.

     Let me begin by telling you a little story that you, as a fellow fisherperson, should be able to appreciate.

     About ten years ago, my son Jonathan and myself were coming back from a fishing trip here in Florida.

     As we were unloading our small boat, along came a commercial crabber with his crates loaded to their tops, crab legs hanging out of the slots. He then struck up a conversation with me.

     A number of years earlier, I was part of a movement here to have red drum (“redfish”) declared a sports rather than a commercial species. Ever since New Orleans’ blackened redfish phenomenon, reds had been drastically plummeting in numbers--breeders disappearing before new generations could be produced.

     The new law that was passed permitted the rebound of the redfish population, ensuring stocks into the future.

     Now back to the crabber…

     He proceeded to complain to me about how difficult it was to catch all the crabs he wanted to now--he with his many crates filled to the top and so forth.

     The problem: Those damned environmentalists! Those reds were now eating too many of “his” crabs!!!!

     I was proud of myself that day…I kept my cool.

     I explained to him that long before man lived in Florida, reds and blue claw crabs lived in happy abundance…G_d working through nature creating predator-prey relationships to strike just the right balance.

     I asked Mr. Crabber if he thought that maybe thousands of folks filling crates just like him might have something to do with the crab shortage.

     Daggers came out of his eyes…

     So Madam Governor, what does this have to do with you?

     Many folks--Independents like myself certainly included--are sickened by the wholesale slaughter of wolves going on right now in your state--being shot from helicopters, etc. and so forth. Your opponents are making plenty of capital on this--sending out your record here in letters and postcards to millions of voters.

     Yours is the one state in America where this noble predator--in balance with various prey populations far longer than man’s presence--is not endangered.

     Like the crabber blaming redfish, Alaskan hunters blame everything but man’s own various adverse activities for their own declining prey populations. I remember a similar picture in National Geographic showing Japanese fishermen herding dolphins into the shallows so that they could beat them to death for allegedly eating too much fish…while Japan has huge nets killing anything and everything in their paths.

     As a person who prides herself in bucking special interests and such, please understand that millions of Americans have become more ecologically tuned in--and not just from your opponents’ camp. Republican President Theodore Roosevelt, in many ways, can be seen as one of the fathers of the modern conservation movement. As many other hunters and fishermen have done, he too became tuned in to nature’s essential balance.

     Governor, from one religious person to another, please rethink your support of such things as the wolf slaughter in your state. It goes against what I believe is the good heart and sensible mind that you indeed possess.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Elections--In Israel And America

                                                                                     Go With The Gut...

                                                                                                 by  Gerald A. Honigman

 

     Israel’s tragic—and dangerous—Prime Minister  Ehud Olmert is finally stepping down.

     Not the only leader, by far, to prove the Hebrew Prophet Samuel correct about the pitfalls of worldly leaders, he nonetheless excelled in putting his own interests above those of the long-awaited resurrected state of his people.

     Not that it was all his fault, mind you.

     When the most powerful nation on Earth—and Israel’s best friend-- tightens the screws, it’s hard to say no. But keep in mind Lord Palmerston’s advice regarding states, friends, and interests…

     Once upon a time, Israel did have leaders who knew how to draw the lines beyond which further arm-twisting would not be tolerated. Menachem Begin, for one—of blessed memory—comes to mind.

     That brings me to an AP article in my local paper on September 18th by Steven Gutkin.

     The article focused on Olmert’s Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, set to take over leadership of the Kadima Party.

     That one of Arafat’s pathetic Jew stooges, Yossi Beilin, loves her should send out an important message to all who have their heads out of the sand. He thinks the latter day Arafatians in suits and ties are just swell too.

     Gutkin then compared Livni to her main rival, Iranian-born Shaul Mofaz:

     A victory by Mofaz would have raised serious questions about Israel’s involvement in peace talks with both the Palestinians and Syrians. His approach is seen as far less conciliatory than hers…

    Two short sentences that say much indeed.

     Tsipi, you see, is good friends with Condi …

     Now, to any who have eyes and see, who have ears and hear, who have brains with functioning neurons, etc. and so forth, that “friendship” spells trouble big time.

     Livni and Olmert simply caved repeatedly to virtually all that Secretary of State Rice and her Foggy Folks asked of them—be it supplying weapons to Abbas’s latter-day Arafatian Fatah “good cops” (later used to massacre Jews), forsaking Israel’s right, a la UNSC Resolution 242, to “secure and recognized” boundaries instead of the currently imposed ’49 armistice lines which make it practically invisible on a map of the world, and so forth.

     Gutkin’s article also contrasted Livni with Benjamin Netanyahu’s “hardline” Likud Party.

     I’m always amazed by those who write in such terms regarding Israel. When Jews do it—like Gutkin, I assume—nauseated is the better word.

     A three-thousand mile wide America can fight wars, bomb targets, topple unfriendly governments, acquire territory, and so forth thousands of miles away, but Jews who want their sole state to have secure and defensible borders instead of a 9-mile wide rump state existence are “extremists.”

     Such unreasonable Jewish hardliners ask what the lessons of Israel’s retreat from Gaza years ago--with thousands of rockets and mortars fired at Israel proper from Gaza ever since—are regarding further retreat in Judea and Samaria, aka the “West Bank.”

     Those “extremists” fear Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, the Knesset, Ben Gurion Airport, and so forth will get the same treatment Sderot has gotten non-stop.

     How paranoid of them!

    After all, those Arabs—who still show no Israel in school textbooks, maps, etc.—are such trustworthy peace (of the grave) partners.

     Gutkin mentioned the Syrian card as well.

     Nations who repeatedly attack neighbors over decades from territory often end up losing such territory. Wake up and smell history…

     Israel has already--long ago--offered to return to Syria far more than it deserves on the Golan Heights.

     As in Judea and Samaria with Abbas and his Fatah Arafatians, a real territorial compromise must be the answer with Damascus as well…not what an Arab petrodollar-greased American State Department dictates. Syria must never again be able to shell Israeli farms and such from the Heights,  nor control Israel’s key water sources. What would America do with such an enemy? Need I ask?

     Back home in the States, we’re about to choose a new leader as well.

     That Arabs and jihadists all over the world love Barack Obama, and that the latter has too many key advisors and buddies who are anti-Semites and/or anti-Zionists (not that there’s really a difference) says something loud and clear…and I’m a former Democrat myself, now an Independent.

     In November, I’ll go with my gut instincts.

     I suggest that those in Israel who truly care about the long term future of the Jewish State do likewise when they have to choose between Bibi and Tsipi.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Lesson From Kosovars And Palestinians For Atlasians


                               A Lesson From Kosovars And Palestinians For Atlasians...
 
                                                                                              by Gerald A. Honigman
 
 
 

     Now tell me…What would you do in the age of nationalism--which came relatively late to the Middle East--if your national group already had almost two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory (conquered mostly from other national groups), wanted to create at least one more, but another people’s sole, tiny, resurrected nation state stood in the way?
 
     Well, please take a look--like many of us have over the decades--at the answer through the oft-quoted words of a spokesman for that above national group itself, PLO executive committee member Zuheir Mohsen, on March 31, 1977, in the Dutch newspaper Trouw.
 
     The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese... Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism…
 
     Before having to deal with the politics and sensitivities of at least some in the West, Arabs simply gave no thought to Mohsen’s tactics.
 
     As I deliberately like to reemphasize time and again (for those who like to place Israel under the high power lens of moral scrutiny while playing deaf, dumb, and blind to what surrounds it), millions of native peoples were simply conquered and forcibly Arabized in the name of the Arab Nation and the spread of its Dar ul-Islam--imperialism and colonialism, pure and simple--and millions of native Egyptian Copts, black Africans, Kurds, Imazighen (Berbers), Jews, and others are still suffering the consequences of this murderous subjugation.
 
     In a post-Holocaust age, however, in the struggle to win over hearts and minds from abroad, how could Arabs demand twenty-two states while denying Jews their one?
 
    The answer--as Mohsen so correctly stated above: Reinvent yourselves.
 
     From now on, you’re “Palestinians.” And then depend on the ignorance of most of the rest of the world to back your claim, “If Jews can have a state, why not Palestinians?” And, don’t you know, “Palestinians” are the new formerly stateless Jews.
 
     Forget the facts…
 
     Like most Arabs never saw the land of the Jews--Judaea--until their own murderous imperial conquests brought them out of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century C.E. when they spread out in all directions.
 
     Or that the very name “Palestine” was dubbed upon Judaea by the Roman Emperor Hadrian after the Jews’ costly second revolt for freedom. To pour salt onto their wound, he renamed the Jews’ land after their historic enemies, the Philistines--a non-Semitic sea people (i.e. not Arab) from the area around Crete. Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and other contemporary Roman historians wrote all about Judaea and Judaeans--not “Palestine” or  “Palestinians.” Listen to one of my favorite telling quotes about the Jews' first revolt in Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus:
 

     Vespasian... succeeded to the command.... it inflamed his resentment that the Jews were the only nation that had not yet submitted…Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea... he commanded three legions in Judaea itself... To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria... amongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations.

 

     Or that, not having endured the forced exile and diaspora of many (but not all--many still remained in the hill country and elsewhere clear up to the Arab conquest) of the Jews, still...so many Arabs were newcomers themselves to the Mandate of Palestine after World War I and the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire which had controlled the land for over four centuries, that when the United Nations Relief Works Agency--UNRWA--was set up to assist Arab refugees (after a half dozen Arab states invaded a nascent Israel in 1948 to nip it in the bud and their attempt backfired), the very word "refugee" had to be redefined from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948 to assist these people. Hamas's own patron saint, for whom its terror brigade and rockets are named for, Sheikh Izzadin-al-Qassam, was born in Latakia, Syria. Arafat was from Egypt. And both "native Palestinians" had plenty of company, pouring into the Mandate because of the economic development going on due to the Jews.

 

     And so forth.

 
     Now, using this same tactic, Serbs have been similarly shafted .
 
     Albania is an independent nation southwest of the former Yugoslavia. The Serbs fought their first major battle for Kosovo against the spread of the Dar ul-Islam (this time led by Turkish imperialism) in 1389--over six centuries ago.
 
     Albania had become at least nominally converted to Islam via the Ottoman conquest. Over the centuries, ethnic Albanians encroached upon traditionally Serbian lands.
 
     Enter the late 20th century…
 
     Everyone knew that with the death of Tito, Iraq’s twin, artificially glued together state of Yugoslavia would fall apart.
 
     Now, if you’re an Albanian in Serbia and you already have an ethnic Albanian state in existence (so you can't claim "statelessness"), how do you stake your claim for additional territory--at another people's (Serbs’) expense?
 
     Hitler played a somewhat similar game with the large population of ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland. World War II soon followed, as his sights were set far beyond the Czechs’ and Slovaks’ domain.
 
     According to this reasoning, America also better watch its own southwest very carefully--especially since it really was once part of Mexico anyway. And what’s Russia up to these days, since we’re on this subject? Think non-Russian peoples’ lands, with Russian ethnic minorities, and how this game could be played out.
 
      The answer, however, regarding Albanians in Serbia is…You follow Zuheir Mohsen's advice.
 
     But instead of renaming yourselves “Palestinians,” you, of course, call yourselves Kosovars instead. And then get assorted Jihadis from the rest of the Arab/Muslim World to assist you--along with America and NATO.
 
     There is no doubt that too much of the conflict regarding the breakup of Yugoslavia was deliberately biased against the Serbs.
 
     Atrocities occurred (as they had for centuries)--but on both sides, with Serbs often the victims…victims the American State Department ignored as it sought Muslims it could point to as championing while America was fighting others in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. American bombers led the final dismemberment.
 
     There’s a lesson here…and Jews, Kurds, Imazighen, and others need to pay close attention.
 
     Instead of demanding just the rebirth of their one state, Jews need to demand others as well.
 
     Jews have a long history in Morocco, as just one example--long before Arabs conquered both Jews and Imazighen alike there.
 
     Over 600,000 Moroccan Jews now live in Israel--part of the other side of the Middle East refugee problem few ever talk about...more Moroccan Jews than Arabs who got their own nation states in Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, etc. when they were created. Additionally, many more Moroccan Jews live in America, France, and elsewhere today, including Morocco.
 
     Why multiple states for Arabs and not Jews?
 
     As early as Roman times, Jews fleeing the Roman wars in Judaea began to travel inland in North Africa and forged both economic and cultural ties with the Imazighen--especially in the Atlas Mountains. Some of the latter folks even adopted the faith of their Jewish neighbors.
 
     When Arab Muslims invaded, Jews and Imazighen fought them together. Across the Atlas Mountains, Queen Dahlia al Kahina (whom the famed Muslim scholar, Ibn Khaldun, called “the Jewess” ) led both Jews and Imazighen in battle against invading Arabs, who would later massacre and subjugate both peoples.
 
     Why not states for the Atlasians--at least one for Jews and one for the Imazighen--in North Africa?
 
     Why “Palestinians” and “Kosovars,” but not “Atlasians?”
 
     While we’re at it, some thirty-five million stateless Kurds need to jump aboard as well.
 
     Kurds predate Arabs in “Arab” Syria as well as in “Arab” Iraq…and in “Turkish” Turkey. But we all know what happened/happens when Kurds try to assert their rights there. Their best hope right now is in the place where they were indeed promised independence after World War I--in northern Mesopotamia, part of today’s renamed Iraq.
 
     While I don’t really expect that much of the above will happen, it’s worth asking those academics, State Department folks, left-wing knownothings, and other hypocritical practitioners of the double standard… Why not?
 
     If Kurds played the Arab game regarding trading “Arab” for “Palestinian,” how many Kurdish states might they be entitled to?
 
     The reality, of course, is that all of these peoples are still struggling to maintain or obtain basic political and human rights in what Arabs call “purely Arab patrimony.”
 
     That others buy into their subjugating mindset is the real travesty.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Of Kurds And Arabs...Beyond Ignorance

                                                           Of Kurds And Arabs: Beyond Ignorance…The Allegedly Free Press
                                                                                                                 by Gerald A. Honigman



     Now, where's the Presidential candidate who will not act deaf, dumb, and blind on this timely issue...the candidate who will demand for Kurds in one, sole state what they support for Arabs in almost two dozen others?

 

     If it was just another State Department travesty, I could accept it.

    After all, I’m used to the Foggy Folks doing such things as fighting President Truman over his supporting Israel’s very rebirth; concocting latter day Arafatian Fatah “good cops” to force down Israel’s throat (knowing that on the issue of a permanent Jewish Israel, Abbas’s boys totally agree with the Hamas “bad cops”); demanding that Israel itself supply weapons to Fatah--which has as much, if not more, Jewish blood on its hands than Hamas--only to see such things as yeshiva students later massacred as a result; setting up equivalency standards whereby murderer and those in pursuit are placed on the same moral plane; and so forth.

     The Arabists who wield too much say at Foggy Bottom have played such games for well over a half century now.

     Demanding a second, not first, state for Arabs within the original 1920 borders of the Mandate of Palestine (Jordan, sitting on the lion’s share of the land, carved out in 1922), the State Department has no problem pressuring Israel to make one suicidal concession after another so that Arab state # 22 may arise.

     One of the latest issues involved Arab students (“Gaza Fulbright Scholars”) Secretary Rice wanted Israel to allow to come to America to study. Reports stated she was fuming over Israel’s reluctance to grant this request for these particular students.

     Guess what…? Turns out State has now also “seen the light” on this matter (connections to terror groups, etc.). Don’t expect any apologies, however.

     What’s worse, in all the decades I’ve closely followed the Middle East, I can’t recall any Foggy Folk “fuming” over anything Arabs did--be it blowing up Jewish teens in nightclubs, students on buses, mothers and babies in pizzerias, gassing and massacring Kurds, Assyrians, Copts, black Africans in the Sudan, or Berbers in the rest of North Africa, and so forth. Nonetheless, Baker, Rice, Dulles, etc. fume/fumed a lot over Jews, however.

     No doubt, America needed oil, and--like many other nations--did what it could to make nice to those who would one day be controlling the spigots. Many of the latter are Arabs. Not to mention that long before former Secretaries of State James Baker made $$$ millions and Condoleezza Rice had a Chevron oil tanker named for her, other Foggy Folks, under cover of the flag, also prospered via that oil spigot.

     So, that brings me to the real problem of this current article…the press.

     As with the Foggy Folks, I’m sure there are bright people in the print and other media. So, the problem cannot simply be due to ignorance…which makes it much worse.

     Furthermore, far too few of us have written of this problem--as glaring as it is--and far too many  academics have shamed themselves by indulging in such hypocrisy as well.

     The problem I’m speaking of is the double standards the press constantly uses when covering the Arabs’ quest for state # 22 versus the plight of some thirty-five million stateless Kurds.

     A free press is one of the cornerstones of a true democracy…yet ours routinely acts like it takes its cue from the State Department when it comes to the Middle East. State has the same animus and set of Arab-colored glasses when it comes to Kurds as it has with Hebrews. As just one of numerous examples, when--as National Security Advisor--Dr. Rice spoke at the U.S. Institute of Peace on August 19, 2004, here's some of what she said about the birth of Arab state # 22:

     The President believes that the Palestinian people (Arabs) deserve not merely their own state, but a just and democratic state that serves their interests and fulfills their decent aspiration.

     She later went on to say something to the effect that there would be no greater cause than the birth of Palestine.

     Now contrast this with how, on this same occasion, she simply brushed off a question regarding a Kurdish referendum on independence (which showed that at least 80% of Kurds wanted this) with the following disdain:

     …It's the role of leadership to convince people that they really ought to stay in the same body.

     Sucking the Arab oil teat quite well since leaving office, James Baker led the Baker-Hamilton Commission (Iraq Study Group) for President Bush not long ago and proposed similar shaft the Kurds ideas. The list, unfortunately, goes on and on.

     We’re supposed to expect better of our press, but it has mostly behaved as if the Foggy Folks are its mentors.

     Countless editorials and op-eds have been written on behalf of the birth of Arab state # 22--knowing full well that Arabs of either stripe have no intention of living peacefully with a Jewish neighbor--regardless of its size. A visit to either good or bad cops’ maps, textbooks, websites, and so forth soon reveals this.

     Yet I still have not  seen the press editorial calling for the birth of Kurdish State # 1...or even for meaningful Kurdish autonomy. The same papers who call Arabs who blow up buses “militants” have no problem calling the PKK in Turkey “terrorists.” Why the double standards? Where’s the courage of a free press to confront such injustice?

     Are there problems associated with addressing the aspirations of tens of millions of repeatedly used and abused native, stateless Kurds?

     Sure, but no more--indeed less--than with those associated with the creation of Arab state # 22.

     I have written of this many times before, such as in State Department Math...
http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?rnr=77&lngnr=12&anr=6589&smap=. Keep in mind that Kurds were indeed  promised such a state in the north of Mesopotamia after World War I but were shafted by…guess what?

     British petroleum politics and Arab nationalism.

     A united, Arab-controlled Iraq was created instead in all of the former Mandate of Mesopotamia.

     Among other places, you can find my work on this (while a doctoral student) on Paris’s acclaimed Institut d’Etudes Politique (Science Po) recommended reference list:
 
    http://bibliotheque.sciences-po.fr/produits/bibliographies/question_kurde.htm

     Keep in mind that all the Kurds are asking for is meaningful autonomy within a federated Iraq--far less than what they truly deserve. But to have the former, they must secure their finances as well. And that brings me to the press again…

     Recently, just days apart, my local paper carried photos and articles supplied by the Associated Press (July 29th and August 3rd).

     One showed a “Palestinian” (Arab) boy with “The Dome Of The Rock Mosque” in the background.

     The overwhelmingly vast majority of the time, what’s missing from such reporting to mostly unaware readers is that that mosque was deliberately built--after the Arabs’ own imperial conquest of Israel in the 7th century C.E.--on the Temple Mount of the Jews. Using this case as an example, the most you’ll read is that the place is holy to three faiths and such.

     The second piece, by the AP’s Robert Reid, was entitled, “Kurdish Demands Over Kirkuk Spur Protest.”

     The Kirkuk and Mosul region is where the second half of Iraq’s major oil deposits are located. After the Brits got a favorable decision on the Mosul Question from the League of Nations in 1925, the abortion of promises of independence to the Kurds became complete.

     Now, if Israel captured Arab oil fields, Judaized the area, and so forth, the whole world would have a hissy fit. Actually, it did develop the Abu Rodeis oil fields in the Sinai, captured as a result of the ‘67 War started when Egypt blockaded Israel at the Straits of Tiran. Subsequently, in return for a very cold peace (the arms and explosives coming into Gaza to kill Jews are entering largely via Egypt), Israel gave up its chance at energy independence by returning the whole shebang to Egypt.

     Now, apply this to Iraq.

     Why is it okay for Arabs and Iranians to control 'their' oil, but not so for Kurds?

     And please don't respond--as that second article did--that Kirkuk is composed of mixed nationalities (largely due to Saddam's forced Arabization of the area).

     Kirkuk is as Kurdish as Londonistan--er, I mean London-- is British…despite all of those other nationalities now living there. Iran's major oil fields are in its western province of Khuzestan…but that area has been known as Arabistan for centuries…Guess why?

     There is no doubt that Kurds lived in the area of the Mosul and Kirkuk oil fields for millennia before a Turk or Arab even knew it existed. As Hurrians, Kassites, Medes, Guti, and so forth, they were neighbors of the Jews. As for the presence of some Turkmen as well, recall that, besides Turkey, there are a half dozen other Asiatic Turkic states as well. It’s the Kurds who are still lacking a national liberation…

     We Americans take pride in our sense of fair play.

     We can’t do much about the State Department’s shameful shenanigans--except elect strong  Presidents (as with Truman )--while making sure that both the latter and Congress also strongly receive our messages.

     But we can demand that our press lives up to the source of pride it should be for any free nation--let alone America--which calls itself a true democracy. It should not simply become anyone’s virtual mouthpiece.

     Sadly, when it comes to the Middle East, reading the news today is like reading a State Department press release…like those we’ve seen above.

     That’s not what a free press is supposed to be about.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Annapolis and Tales of the 1002nd Arabian Night...

                       Forget About Ali Baba and Sinbad...

27 Tammuz 5768, 30 July 08 01:57
by Gerald A. Honigman
(IsraelNN.com)

                           Have you heard about the 1002nd Arabian Nights tale, "Abu Alaa and the Tightening Screws"?


Well, his story really begins, for those non-Arabians reading these tales, when Israel's Yitzchak Rabin shook hands with Yasser Arafat, at President Bill Clinton's prompting. Predictably, Israel got non-stop barbarism for each unilateral, concrete concession it was pressured to make. A similar scenario would take place bit later at Camp David and Taba when Clinton, seeking to salvage his stained reputation, made Israel's Ehud Barak an offer he couldn't refuse. And Barakoffered to give away the store.

At the time of the 1990s "Oslo Peace Accord," Ahmed Qurei' (Abu Alaa) was one of Arafat's chief marionettes. A translation by the highly respected Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) on July 3, 2003 included an interview with Abu Alaa. When asked about the Arabs' problem with having the word "Jewish" placed in front of the words "State of Israel" at the summit leading up to the evolution of the current Roadmap, here was his response: "What is the meaning of a Jewish state? Do we say... Sunni state... Shi'ite state... Christian state? These are definitions that will bring... turmoil."

It is not unusual to hear critics of Israel, even some academics, proclaim, "If Jews can have a state, then why not Catholics, or Protestants, or Hindus, and such?" a la Alaa.

Now think about this for a minute. Someone from England is English, from Poland is Polish, from Ireland is Irish, and so forth. Indeed, while there are other ways of describing nationality or ethnicity, the addition of the suffix "-ish" denotes this as well. That's how Webster's Collegiate Dictionary primarily defines it. So, what's Abu Alaa's problem here?

It's really very simple. Arafat confirmed, by refusing the Taba offer, that it makes no difference how big Israel is, but that Israel is. How dare Jews want in one tiny, resurrected state what Arabs have created almost two dozen of for themselves, mostly by conquering and forcibly Arabizing non-Arab peoples? Taba is now the Arabs' starting point for negotiations.

In the Arab vision of justice, virtually the entire region is "purely Arab patrimony." Hence, the millions of dead or subjugated Kurds, Copts, Berbers, black African Sudanese, native Jews, and so forth. To paraphrase Dr. Boutros Boutros Ghali, Egypt's Uncle Tom Coptic Foreign Minister, 'If you want to gain acceptance, you must consent to Arabization.'

If the Abu Alaas of the world admit that Jews are a nation or a people, then it makes Arab rejection of their national movement - Zionism - more difficult to defend; i.e., how could Arabs demand a twenty-second state for themselves, and a second one in "Palestine" (Jordan was carved out of the lion's share of the land), while denying Jews their one?

When the Roman historian, Tacitus, wrote the following amid the Jews' struggle for independence against their imperial Roman conquerors, ask yourselves if he was only referring to a religion or to a people who coincidentally had specific religious beliefs. Tacitus and other contemporary Roman historians, like Dio Cassius, wrote extensively on this topic, and I quote them frequently to those who babble as Abu Alaa does:

Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea... he commanded three legions in Judaea itself.... To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria.... [A]mongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations (Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus)

So, Abu Alaa's tale is the ongoing saga of Arabs denying everyone in "their" region even a minuscule portion of the very same rights they demand for themselves. That's what the Anfal Campaign was against Kurds in Iraq; what Ismet Cherif Vanly wrote about in his book, The Syrian Mein Kampf Against the Kurds, (Amsterdam, 1968); what Arab genocide in Darfur and the Sudan is about; along with murder and intimidation of Copts in Egypt, Berbers in North Africa, and what's left of native Jews in "their " lands.

On October 31, 2007, the Associated Press wrote of Abu Alaa - now Arab chief negotiator at yet anotherAmerican President's attempt to improve his legacy by consenting to traditional State Department Arabist arm-twisting of Jews - "raising the stakes" prior to the proposed gang-up-on-the-Jews "peace" summit at Annapolis.

Since Ehud Olmert and the Israeli leadership are now incapable of responding to Abbas, Querei' and all the other State Department alleged Arab good cops properly, let me propose the following Israeli response to Abu Alaa's modern Arabian tale:

No nation is obligated to take part in its own suicide, despite what Czechoslovakia was forced to do by its "friends" via Munich in 1938. Israel is not obligated to withdraw to UN-imposed 1949 armistice lines, which made it nine miles wide in parts and a constant invitation to be attacked. Those lines merely marked the point where invading Arab armies were stopped after the rebirth of Israel in 1948 on roughly 11% of the original 1920 Palestinian Mandate created after the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which ruled it for four centuries. After the Arab attempt on Israel's life in 1967, UN Resolution 242 made this quite clear. Israel was to get "secure and recognized borders" - not armistice lines - in return for any withdrawal from territories it came to occupy in a defensive war, and this was to be done in the context of real peace treaties, not hudna-type ceasefires. All of the resolution's final architects, quotes from Presidents Johnson and Reagan, Secretary of State Shultz, and others demonstrate this well.

Regardless of State Department Arabist attempts to bury the facts over the years (by some of the same folks who fought Israel's very rebirth), Israel must hold its ground and demand that Judea does not once again become Judenrein, and seek a fair territorial compromise on that "West Bank."

Arabs are already controlling most of the original territory just in Jordan alone. All of Gaza has since been handed over - with Arab mortars and rockets constantly launched from there against Israel anyway. (This occurred under Fatah's watch as well as Hamas's, for those bent on excusing the good cops.) Much of the "West Bank" is now also under Arab control , courtesy of the one-sided concessions of Oslo.

There will be no timetable for the creation of Arab state no. 22. As Arabs show themselves true partners for a true peace - not their well known hudna games - then more steps can be taken towards that Arab goal.

No nation would consent to being a partner with another whose school text books, maps, television and radio stations, children's camps, religious leaders, and so forth are unrelenting in calling for the other partner's destruction. All of this was supposed to change as of the Oslo Accords. None of it did. And Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Alaa and Co. insist that they will flood a minuscule Israel, after it withdraws to the '49 armistice lines, with millions of jihadist alleged refugees.

Recall Abu Alaa's problem with a "Jewish" Israel. The Arab leopard does not change its spot on this "purely Arab patrimony" issue. And it won't after Annapolis 2007, either.

The Jews will once again be pressured to cave in to the Arabs' post-‘67 destruction-in-stages plans, courtesy of their American friends. Munich 2007.

Hopefully, Israel will quickly snap out of its stupor and have its own say at how this latest tale of the Arabian Nights will end.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Example For Israel...

                                               Obama’s Example For Israel…Change

                                                                                                 by Gerald A. Honigman



     Israel has a very important lesson to learn from Barack Obama…and it better do so quickly.

     I checked out Obama’s official website, Obama For Change, and here’s what’s highlighted:

     With the right leadership, and a change of attitude and focus, Barack Obama brings a new viewpoint to discover solutions to the problems at hand.

     It's about time...It's about change.

     Exactly.

     Now, I’m a registered Independent voting for John McCain, but certainly my own country needs a good dose of proper change…in how we get energy, as just one example. McCain knows this as well.

     Certainly, if this idea is important for America, it is even more so for Israel.

     Jews and/or Israel have been undergoing change imposed from the outside for centuries.

     In the 19th century, the Reform movement emerged among Jews who--among other things--were determined that the days of the imposed ghetto, degradation, and such (from which Napoleon had freed them) should never return.

     Assimilation was the name of the game--to the point of recommendations to change the Sabbath to Sunday. The idea was to rid themselves of their identities as Jews. Henceforth, they would just be Frenchmen, Russians, Poles, Germans, etc. of the (much diluted) Jewish faith…not German or French Jews.

     Sounded reasonable--if not a bit pathetically nauseating--no?

     Too bad the Germans, Poles, French, and so forth didn’t see things this way.

     Modern political Zionism, leading to the resurrection of the state of the Jews, arose because--in perhaps the most enlightened of nations in the 19th century--France--the most vile anti-Semitism proved to be alive and well, targeting even the most assimilated of Jews--whom Alfred Dreyfus, of the infamous Dreyfus Affair, symbolized. And it flourished amongst the intelligentsia as well as the rabble.

     Another assimilated Jew, Theodore Herzl, was a reporter from Austria covering Captain Dreyfus’s railroaded trial. Shocked to the core at seeing mobs shouting such things as “death to the Jews,”  he later wrote, Der Judenstaat--The Jewish State.

     So much for that change…

     It was as if G_d was saying, “ Israel will be reborn--whether you Jews like it or not!”

     In the Jews’ quest for normalcy, they bent over backwards in the pursuit of modern political Zionism to create a state like all others…somewhat reminiscent of the Reform movement’s motivations, but on a national scale.

     Now, don’t get me wrong, not all saw things this way. Religious Zionists saw G_d’s hand in all of this…the Hebraic prophecies unfolding as planned. I agree. And they too had many supporters.

     But most of  the Zionist leaders who came to rule both pre-state and post-‘48 Israel also deluded themselves into believing that the rest of the world would forget that Israel was the Jew of the Nations.

    Well, since Auschwitz, it’s not proper--in at least some circles--to be “anti-Semitic.”

     No problem…

     Utilize absurd double and  moral equivalence standards, and replace anti-Zionism for anti-Semitism, and the age-old animus now remains kosher.

     All other peoples can demand national liberation except the one people who needed it the most…the condemned to wandering “G_d-killers” of the Christian West and the “slayers of Prophets and Jew Dogs” of the Arab/Muslim East.

     Being the oldest, still existing victims of imperial conquest, the Jews were expected to simply remain that way.

     Seeking to gain acceptance in an “Arab” world which sees them as sons of apes and pigs, too many Jews then continued to pursue this change even further in pursuit of a “post-Zionist” Israel.

     Again, recall one of the key motivations of the Reform movement…What can we do to change ourselves so we’ll gain acceptance from the Gentiles?

     Unfortunately, ignorance of one’s enemies has characterized too many of those who have called the political shots in Israel. The very idea that dhimmi Jews (or Kurds or Berbers or Copts or black Africans, etc.) should demand political rights in what Arabs consider to be purely Arab patrimony and the Dar ul-Islam is laughable to anyone truly familiar with this subject.

     Add to post-Zionism a continued movement away from the idea of Israel as a Jewish State, and you have the mess Israel now finds itself in.

     So, so much for those changes as well.

     Therefore, guess what?

     It’s time for Israel to try another type of change…a return to its proud roots.

     It’s time for Israel to stop trying to alter itself to be accepted by others.

     The values of Jews became the moral guidelines for much, if not most, of the modern world; and, despite its imperfections, Israel is still that light unto the nations the Bible asked it to be.

     The national liberation of the Jewish people in the land in which they have thousands of years of continuous history--Zionism--ranks as noble as any of such movements can be. If Arabs can have almost two dozen states--conquered and forcibly Arabized from mostly non-Arab peoples--then why not one resurrected state for Jews?

     No, Israel has nothing to cover up for…certainly nothing to revise its very being. If compared with the same set of lenses to the “Arab” world (rarely done), Israel should indeed be canonized. Indeed, as I write this article, black Muslim African refugees fleeing Arabs from Darfur are fleeing to Israel.

     What’s needed now is change--but done the right way…

     There are Jews in Israel who still have the sense of justice, passion, and compassion of Golda, Ben-Gurion, Jabotinsky, and Begin. Where are they?

     Where are the leaders who will insist that Israel no longer trade live, captured, rabid butchers for the bones of dead Jews--regardless of how nice they make it sound? Where are the leaders who will institute a quick death penalty for such “heroes?” Better yet, why are they taken alive?

     Where are Israeli leaders who will insist on “peace for peace” instead of “land for peace?” It’s obvious that the latter has not worked…it’s only brought closer to fruition the Arabs post-’67 “destruction in stages” plans for “their” kilab yahud--Jew dogs. Think Gaza…the same will happen after a total Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria, aka, the “West Bank.” Not to mention the Golan. Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Ben-Gurion Airport, the Knesset, and so forth will receive what Sderot gets daily now.

     Where is the change which will bring new Israeli leaders who will insist that Israel get a reasonable territorial compromise granting it real borders to replace former, UN-imposed,  suicidal Auschwitz/armistice lines a la UNSC Resolution 242? America’s United Nations’ representative in ‘49, Ralph Bunche, openly stated that those lines were never meant to be Israel’s permanent borders.

     The Arabs will never play ball, you say…

     Of course they won’t. So what?

     They don’t accept a 9-mile wide Israel either. Think about what other nations have done thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own national security and interests. 

     Israel must do what it must do to thrive--not just survive.

     Demanding reasonable territorial compromise merely undoes the injustice created by the Arab invasion of a nascent Israel in 1948 and the mostly armistice lines--not borders--which emerged as a result. Those lines simply marked the points at which a half dozen invading Arab armies were turned back. As would become all-too-common later on, the UN only got involved after the Jews turned the tide and had the Arabs on the run…not before, to stop the Arabs’ initial aggression.

     Where are the new Israeli leaders who will tell the State Department’s next James Baker or Condi Rice, when he or she insists on such things as Israel supplying its enemies with weapons (which were then used to massacre Jews in yeshivas, etc.), to go fly a kite?

     Where’s the change which will bring to the fore proud Zionist Jews who will draw the lines beyond  which no further retreat will be allowed--regardless of who is twisting the arms, turning the screws, and increasing the heat from across the sea?

     If it means losing American aid, then so be it. My prediction is that such games will backfire big time on any White House which lowers itself this way.

     Millions of fair-minded people will not expect the sole, resurrected Jewish State to sacrifice itself on the petroleum greased altar of international hypocrisy so that Arabs can get their 22nd state--and second, not first, in the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine. Jordan sits on almost 80% of that territory.

     So, as a solid McCain supporter (despite some concerns ), I’m now hoping that Israelis will do some real soul searching and take a cue from the Obama camp.

     Replacing Olmert with someone of similar ilk will accomplish nothing but a continuation of the sort of change we’ve explored earlier…the change that gave Israel its first military defeat, handed over a live Samir Kuntar, and so forth. The latter’s head needed to have been parachuted onto Hizbullah’s headquarters.

     That Condi loves Tsipi Livni should send another disturbing signal as well.

     Israel must get itself new leaders, at all levels, who will place the overall Zionist forest ahead of individual, parochial trees which hold fragile coalitions together. Olmert should have been dumped long ago.

     The change that Israelis must insist upon may very well determine if the Jews’ long-awaited, reborn state will continue to even exist.

     Hamas and Fatah’s Abbas refuse to recognize a Jewish Israel. Abbas’s “moderates” just sung praises to a returning butcher--Kuntar--who murdered a father while his 4-year old daughter watched and then beat her skull in with his rifle butt against a rock until she too was dead.

     In short, the type of change that Israel must have will bring forth leaders who will know how to better address such things. And for those who care, it’s time to do all that’s legally and humanly possible to see to it that this happens sooner rather than later.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

666, The Mark Of The Beast, And The Price Of Gasoline


 
                                666--The Mark Of The Beast...One Jew's Interpretation
                                                                                            by Gerald A.Honigman
 
 
     Over the decades, I've heard several different interpretations of my Christian friends' New Testament's 'mark of the beast,' usually associated with the number 666.
 
     Listening to various news commentators lately, I couldn't help but think of yet another twist to this.
 
     Fox News is usually the television station most balanced when it comes to dealings with Israel and the Middle East. So, if the Jews can't get a fair hearing on this channel, they're in real trouble.
 
     Regarding the world's current energy crisis (and America's in particular), the subject of continuously increasing oil prices repeatedly is being discussed in the same breath as Iran's non-stop nuclear ambitions.
 
     Whether the particular program is the business news or Bill O'Reilly, the audience hears one variation or another of the following…
 
     Israel better not dare to attack Iran's nuclear facilities because, if it does, Americans will be pointing the finger at it for six dollar a gallon gasoline.
 
     6…6…6
 
     Now, let's see…
 
     It took six million dead Jews--1/3 of all in existence at the time--to serve as a down payment for at least part of the world's fleeting sympathy for the rebirth of the Jewish State.
 
     Of Israel's roughly seven million people today, about six million are Jews.
 
     And, while Ahmadinejad and the Iranian mullahs openly call for Israel's obliteration, Israel's best friends in the media warn that it must be willing to take a nuclear first hit so that gasoline won't hit six dollars.
 
     Now, I don't want to see the price of gasoline go that high either, but understand that an Israel--over thirty of which fit into President Bush's home state of Texas--that takes a nuclear first strike virtually ceases to exist.
 
     What would America--3,000 miles wide, with two huge oceans buffering it, and a population over three hundred million--do with an enemy which promises to end its existence, and one already supporting deadly proxies as a step in that direction? America, or anyone else for that matter…
 
     I seem to remember another story from my Christian friends' New Testament…one about Jesus being sold out for thirty shekels of silver.
 
     But, along with this, I have to also share a Jewish interpretation of a famous quote that Christians like to use from the Jews' own Hebrew Bible, aka the 'Old Testament.'
 
     For us, you see, Israel--the Jewish People itself--is the Suffering Servant of G_d.
 
     Just how high does the price of gasoline have to go before that fleeting support for the Jew of the Nations vanishes completely?
 
     Do we really need a second Holocaust Remembrance Day so folks can momentarily show sympathy for more dead Jews? And have others claim that it never happened afterwards?
 
     How about empathy for live Jews instead?
 
     Alas, it seems that that's too much to ask for.
 
     So, let's see, just how many shekels does it take to equal six dollars these
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hamas's "ceasefire"...Jews cease and Arabs fire--Enough!

Gerald A. Honigman
How Did We Let It Come To This?
By Gerald A. Honigman
www.MichNews.com
Jun 17, 2008

     I received a phone call this morning from a friend. Ron wanted me to listen to Chabad’s Jewish radio program in town, where the plight of Sderot’s children would be discussed…the town in the Negev that’s under constant bombardment by Arabs years after Israel’s total withdrawal from adjacent Gaza. The plan evidently involves moving the kids elsewhere, out of harm’s way.

     Like many other Diaspora Jews, I’m also deeply concerned about the resurrected Jewish State. But
Israel
itself has been making serious blunders over the last few decades--and, especially, the past several years--which greatly exacerbates its situation.

     Something about this rubs the wrong way… big time.

     I know, it’s easy for me to be brave when it’s not my own town in
Florida
being targeted. But it goes far beyond this…

     The Arabs have always planned to make life so unbearable for Jews in
Israel
that they’d want to abandon the Zionist dream.

     When a pressured Prime Minister/General Ariel Sharon came up with his controversial unilateral withdrawal plan for
Israel from Gaza
a few years back, many of us had mixed feelings. One of our main fears was that it would just bring Arab terror that much closer to Israel proper, while caving into yet another step in the Arabs’ post-’67 War destruction-in-phases plans for Zion. We instinctively knew that Arabs would not take advantage of this to begin a state-building process for their 22nd state and second, not first, within the original 1920 borders of the Mandate of Palestine (Jordan created from almost 80%of this back in 1922).

     Yet, we hoped we would be proven wrong.

     After all, David Ben-Gurion himself looked to
Israel’s own NegevDesert as a major area for a growing Jewish population, not Gaza
--despite the latter being used as an invasion route to attack Jews from since the days of the Pharaohs.

     Sad to say, the Arab leopard does not change its spots, and the whole area--despite scores of millions of non-Arab Kurds, Berbers, Copts, Jews, black Africans, and so forth--is still regarded as “purely Arab patrimony.”
 
     Episodes such as the
Gaza withdrawal only confirm the success of the overall Arab game plan for the region. The Arabs’ ANFAL campaign against Kurds in Iraq and genocide against black Africans in the Sudan
are just a few of many other examples.

     So, back to Sderot...

     I’m all for building strong defenses and shelters to try to keep the town’s citizens as safe as possible from Arab mortars, rockets, and such. But evacuating Jews in
Israel proper because of Arab terror is a line which I believe will lead us down a very dangerous slippery slope. Today Sderot, tomorrow Ashkelon
, and so forth as Arab missiles gain in range and power.

     Jews should not be the ones having to do the evacuating…

     Imagine, as Presidential hopeful John McCain has said himself, that it was an American border town in
Arizona, Texas
, or elsewhere being subjected to this terror.

     Would the world expect an
America, which dwarfs Israel, to evacuate its own land, or would it expect the aggressors to halt their destructive, murderous behavior? Certainly Mexico has its grievances with America
…McCain and President Bush’s home states were once part of that country.

     Now, what do you think we--or any other nation--would do (have done) under such circumstances?

     Okay? So now here’s the plan…

     Since Prime Minister Olmert’s crew lacks the backbone (and a few other analogous body parts) to spell it out and carry it through (letting the Arabs’ good buddies in the American State Department dictate most of Israeli policy instead), let me propose that a major, well-advertised , televised news conference be held to which many of the world’s leading media and diplomats will be invited. It will be broadcast live, all over the world carried by radio too, in many different languages, will explain much of what I have already covered above, and will be delivered by a handsome orator with the talent of the late Abba Eban. Yep, the John F. Kennedy factor won’t be ignored either.

     After this general overview of the situation
Israel
faces, the following will next be stated…

     My friends...Please understand that
Israel would love nothing more than to be able to live in a true, mutually respectful, peace with our Arab neighbors. Unfortunately, the problem has never been how big Israel is, but that Israel is. For this problem, there is no compromise solution, and poll after poll conducted amongst Arabs has shown this to still be the case. Continuous unilateral Israeli concessions only convince Arabs of Israel’s weakness and the success of their own long term strategy for Israel
’s demise.

     In light of this, and in consideration of the current main Arab target of terror, please note the following…

     Sderot will not undergo any evacuations.

     If evacuations are called for, then they will not be those of Jews.

     We will soon be delivering to our Arab neighbors one last call for them to begin their own # 22 state-building process,  rather than continuing to persist in their quest to destroy our one, tiny, sole state.
Gaza
was a test of what the future might hold…and the Arabs have flunked it--pure and simple.

      If, as we fear, they ignore our plea and continue to wage terror, destruction , bodily harm, and murder, then we will be forced to respond to these open acts of war the way others have and would respond.

     Indeed, we have been far more patient than any other nation regarding those who openly seek our destruction. And, in this, the Hamas-led Arabs only differ in timing with those led by Abbas’s Fatah…by the latter’s own words. The quarrel between the two factions is largely about who will control the billions of dollars that will be pouring in from abroad--not over acceptance of a permanent Jewish neighbor.

     Those ruling Gaza were openly elected by that Arab population--the same population which shields them as they launch their terror. Furthermore, the same situation awaits us in Judea and Samaria, aka the “West Bank,” unless a reasonable territorial compromise is arrived there as well. Secretary of State Rice might wish us to believe otherwise, but it is our children in the line of fire--not hers.

     Let it be known that the next act of Arab terror launched against us will be met by the following sequence of events. We will not pursue tit-for-tat or targeted responses any longer, for those have proven to be virtually useless.

     When the next mortar or rocket lands, we will proceed as follows:

     We will drop by air--as we’ve done elsewhere before--numerous warnings, in Arabic,  to the Gaza population. Unlike Arab terror, we will let Arabs know where not to be in advance.

      They will be told that two days following the next terror attack will be answered by a massive artillery bombardment of the entire width of the area in Gaza from which mortars or rockets may be launched from. This is similar to what America calls its Powell Doctrine. The two-day grace period will provide time for Arab evacuation of the area. Note also that we put ourselves at risk by doing this, with the probability of being subjected to massive foreign pressure, and so forth.

     Because of the latter, it has also been discussed that we carry out our plan according to the Arabs’ own  rules, and launch our response unannounced--without telegraphing our plans or punch. Unlike our neighbors, however, we cannot get ourselves to behave as such.

     The day afterward the artillery assault  will bring a massive aerial bombardment.

     As the
Perfidy
and other clauses of the Geneva Conventions openly state, warring parties cannot use their civilian populations as human shields, and when they do so, this will not remove such locations as legitimate targets…Any civilian casualties will thus be on the Arabs’ own shoulders.

     Article #51/7:
           The presence of the civilian population shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attack...

     Article #58b:
            The parties to the conflict shall...avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas.


     There will be no massive infantry invasion, subjecting Jewish soldiers to the deadly surprises Arabs think they have in store for them.

     After the bombardment, a fifteen-mile buffer zone will be created which will be a mine field, posted for all to see and keep out of.

     If terror continues after our initial responses, we will repeat the above process, extending the mine field, and so forth.

     Next…

     We advise our Arab foes to forget about crying to their hypocritical friends in the United Nations, the American State Department, and elsewhere. We have already displayed a patience far beyond what any of those folks would display themselves given the same circumstances which we have daily faced.
     
     Finally, we are holding this news conference today because we truly hope that we will not have to put these plans into motion.

     But we refuse to put up with the murder and destruction any more.

     Now, I will open the floor to questions from this distinguished audience…

 

Copyright by Gerald A. Honigman (honigman6@msn.com)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »