FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

The Union for Reform Judaism (URJ) has announced that it supports the Cordoba Initiative — the Ground Zero mosque:

We welcome the planned construction of the Cordoba House mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan. Although we fully recognize the strong sentiments that have characterized the debate over the center, we strongly believe that Cordoba House’s presence will reflect our nation’s historic commitment to religious liberty. After consulting with rabbinic and lay leaders of our New York area synagogues we express our belief that the decision to allow the Cordoba House to move forward best embodies our values and the interests of the New York community. We affirm our abiding commitment to the principle of religious freedom that ensures that houses of worship not be subject to discrimination and to the principle of religious equality that ensures the right of the Muslim community to locate and build its houses of worship like Jewish, Christian or other houses of worship…

We commend Mayor Bloomberg, who has always supported the rights of the Jewish community as he has those of all religious communities, for advocating the position that the New York community will be enriched by this Center and for his view that New York should not embody in its actions any form of religious intolerance or discrimination.

Their statement, like so many similar ones, appeals to the principle of ‘religious liberty’. It does not even obliquely mention the fact that a large group of 9/11 families have expressed their sincere desire to have the mosque built somewhere — anywhere — else.

Rabbi Meir said that a person who speaks excessive words of comfort to a mourner more than a year after his loss is like a doctor who breaks a patient’s leg again so he can reset it (Mo’ed Katan 21b, quoted in Telushkin, A Code of Jewish Ethics, Vol. II, p.134). So how much worse is it to tear open someone’s wounds over and over by building what he will perceive as a permanent monument to the murderers of his loved one?

The callous approach to the survivors — whose pain is simply ignored — is only part of the problem. By emphasizing the concepts of ‘religious freedom’ and ‘religious equality’ and contrasting them to “religious intolerance and discrimination” the URJ suggests that those of us who oppose it are bigots who deny religious freedom. One wants to say — “please, drop the straw men and ad hominem arguments and respond to our real concerns!”

If ‘intolerance’ and ‘discrimination’ were the motivation, then why would the critics of the project almost all say “build another mosque in New York if you wish — but in a different place?”

In addition to the question of respect for the mourners of 9/11, here are some other issues:

There is a Muslim tradition of building a mosque on holy or important sites of vanquished peoples. This mosque will clearly be perceived throughout the Islamic world as a sign of Muslim victory over America. If this were not the case, then why do they insist on this site? Why is moving it a mile or two unthinkable?

There are questions about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. He’s connected with the Perdana Global Peace Organization, the largest single contributor to the Free Gaza Movement, which in fact supports Hamas. He has refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization. Although he denies that he is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, he is close to several American groups which represent it in the US.

There are questions about the funding for the Cordoba Institute. The building will cost $100 million. Some of the $5 million price of the Burlington Coat Factory building may have come from Qatar, although Rauf says that it was all put up by NY Muslims.

I’ve come to think that this issue is really a litmus test which can tell us which of our ‘leaders’ truly get it, and which do not.

The URJ just flunked.

Technorati Tags: URJ, Ground Zero mosque, Cordoba initiative, Feisal Abdul Rauf

On Tuesday I wrote about “Murder on the northern Border“. Since then, several things have become clear. UNIFIL has confirmed that the Israeli soldiers were on their side of the border. Lebanese army sources have admitted (proudly) that they fired first. There’s no doubt that the ambush was carefully planned, and Hizballah-connected journalists and photographers were on hand to report it.

What still isn’t clear, as I said on Tuesday, was from how far up the chain of command the orders came. For what it’s worth, there are Lebanese sources that say it came from the top.

Israel’s reaction was muted. The decision was apparently made that this incident didn’t need to trigger a full-scale war, with rockets flying and bombers destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure. There are contingency plans which weren’t activated.

But this can’t be allowed to just fade away. A man was murdered, a Jew was murdered because he was a Jew — yes, that is the motivation here.

This isn’t Hitler-era Germany. It’s not acceptable to murder Jews to create diversions, or because you have an ideological commitment to a Jew-free dar al Islam, or just for the hell of it. That’s why there is a Jewish state.

Someone bears the overall responsibility for this murder, and it’s probably not the Lebanese soldiers who were killed when the IDF returned fire.

Perhaps some of the investigative resources being employed to track down the ‘guilty’ parties who executed Mahmoud Mabhouh in Dubai, a multiple murderer who was arranging for Iranian weapons to be shipped to Hamas when he was killed, could better be spent solving this crime? Possibly some of the indignation about the death of nine Turkish thugs who were trying (again) to murder Jews could better be applied here?

Capt. (res.) Ezra Lakia, who was seriously wounded in Tuesday's ambush.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Lebanon, border ambush, Dov Harari, Ezra Lakia

Recent events make it clear that a war on Israel’s northern border could break out at any time. Hizballah’s capabilities are far ahead of what they were in 2006, and while the IDF has worked assiduously to develop answers to its threats, nobody thinks that the inevitable war will be cheap, either for the IDF or for Israeli civilians who will be the target of Hizballah’s rockets.

In 2006, the Bush Administration saw the destruction of Hizballah — an Iranian proxy, destabilizing force in the Mideast and nexus of international terrorism — as in the interest of the US. So, at least for the first few weeks, it did not intervene to rein in Israel. After that, US officials either realized that the Olmert government was incompetent and the IDF unready, or they were influenced by Hizballah propaganda about civilian casualties in Lebanon, or both. At this point the war was brought to a close by the toothless UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which Hizballah has openly flouted ever since.

The US response to the next round, therefore, will be supremely important. If Israel suffers a large amount of damage and/or casualties in a war which is again forced to an inconclusive end, Israel’s deterrence posture will be severely weakened, not to mention her economy, morale, etc.

Hizballah knows this and we can expect that the propaganda techniques that were used in 2006, refined by Hamas in 2008-9 and deployed yet again in the Flotilla affair, will make their appearance again.

But a great deal depends on how the US perceives its interests. And given the powers in ascendancy in the Obama administration, it doesn’t look good. Dan Kurtzer is a former ambassador to Egypt and Israel, and a close adviser to the president on Middle East issues. Here is how he evaluates American interests:

Hezbollah is near the top of America’s list of most dangerous terrorist organizations. If the next Israeli-Hezbollah confrontation were to result in a sharp decline in Hezbollah’s military capabilities and was not accompanied by substantial civilian casualties or destruction of Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure, the result would be beneficial for U.S. interests.

However, such an outcome is slim [sic]. The more likely unfolding of an Israeli-Hezbollah war would hold almost no positive consequences for the United States, which is focused on three Middle East priorities: trying to slow or stop Iran’s nuclear program, withdrawing combat troops from Iraq, and helping Middle East peace talks succeed. Although the United States has essentially backed Israeli claims of Scud deliveries to Hezbollah, an Israeli attack, however efficient or successful, would arouse the Arab “street” and complicate the efforts of moderate Arab governments to support U.S. objectives in the region.

While Syria is unlikely to respond militarily to an Israeli attack against Hezbollah, it could resume its support for Iraqi insurgents to attack U.S. forces in Iraq. Syria would likely calculate that the United States would not retaliate against its support of Iraqi insurgents, but rather blame Israel for the increased danger to U.S. forces in the region.

The Middle East peace negotiations likely would enter another deep freeze. As in past military confrontations in Lebanon, Palestinians would find it impossible to keep negotiating as Arabs are fighting Israel in Lebanon.

Kurtzer’s arguments are almost entirely wrong.

• Hizballah, the “Foreign Legion of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard” is an integral part of Iran’s deterrent to action against its nuclear project, not just by Israel, but by the US as well. The removal of Hizballah from the equation would make it much easier to force Iran to give up its plan to deploy nuclear weapons.
• Hasn’t he learned yet that the “Arab street” is used by ‘moderate’ Arab governments to avoid supporting US objectives? And that radical Islamists will always oppose the US, regardless of what it does?
• Syria’s support for Iraqi insurgents has little to do with anything that Israel does and everything to do with the US policy of rewarding Syria in advance for actions that it then fails to take. ‘Engagement’ with Syria has been a huge failure. It’s particularly cynical to say that Syria would expect the US to blame Israel — all the US has to do to counter that is to put the blame where it belongs.
• The Middle East ‘peace’ negotiations? Please. This isn’t the place for another discussion of why the PA is not interested in or capable of agreeing to a  peaceful two-state solution, but let me add that it would be a lot more likely that the Palestinians would make peace if they weren’t hoping that Israel can be worn down by multiple inconclusive wars.

But wrong or not, Kurtzer probably reflects the thinking of the administration.

Israel should make the point to the US that the primary American interest in the Middle East is to prevent the establishment of an Iranian hegemony, because of economic considerations (oil prices), the desire to see an independent Iraq, and the need to curb the radically anti-Western forces of Islamic fundamentalism. It really is a turning point for the West and the US must be made to realize that.

Israel should explain that the so-called ‘peace process’ will not go anywhere until the Arabs can no longer hope for a military victory. This means that the dealing with Hamas and Hizballah are higher priority than forcing negotiations that are in any case pointless.

It’s also important to convince the US that the IDF has the power — and the Israeli government the will — to finally end the threats from the Iranian proxies, if given the chance.

Of course, all of this assumes that administration policy really is guided by American interests. I honestly wonder about that.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Hizballah, Dan Kurtzer

Lt. Col. Dov Harari, z"l, holding a Sefer Torah written for Ilan Ramon. I believe the setting is Yad Vashem in 2003, when the Torah was dedicated (IDF Spokesperson blog).

I’m sure that the family of Lt. Col. (res.) Dov Harari didn’t expect that he would not return from his annual stint of reserve duty.

Harari, 45 years old and from Netanya, was a battalion commander in the IDF Engineering Corps. Early this afternoon, he was supervising soldiers who were clearing brush next to the security fence near the Israel-Lebanon border along with Capt. Ezra Lakia, 30, from Kfar Harif. This is a routine activity, carried out entirely on the Israeli side of the border, and coordinated with  UNIFIL peacekeepers.

Suddenly a Lebanese Army armored vehicle appeared on a nearby rise. Two snipers got out and opened fire directly at the officers. Lt. Col. Harari was hit in the head and killed, and Capt. Lakia was critically wounded in the chest (he was airlifted to Rambam Hospital in Haifa where he underwent surgery, in part to remove fragments from his heart; he has been reported in stable condition).

The Lebanese soldiers did not call out to the Israelis or fire warning shots. They shot to kill, in what can only be called an act of cold-blooded murder.

Israeli soldiers returned fire.  Several Lebanese soldiers and a journalist were killed (we’ll get to the journalist later).

Here is an IDF map, showing the location of the incident. Note that there is an area (an ‘enclave’) between the security fence and the international border.

IDF map showing the area between the security fence and the international border where the incident took place (IDF Spokesperson blog).

The rise just north of the border is a perfect spot to shoot down at anyone on the Israeli side. This, plus the way the officers were singled out, makes it clear that this was no accidental clash. IDF officials called  the attack a “deliberate ambush”:

The IDF has noticed an increase lately in anti-Israel rhetoric among senior LAF commanders. The LAF company commander responsible for the area where the attack took place recently took up his post and, the IDF believes, might have interpreted the recent rise in rhetoric to mean that he could take matters into his own hands.

Israel is concerned with the radicalization that the LAF has undergone over the past year, including the assistance it provides Hizbullah in hiding its arms caches and operations throughout southern Lebanon…

OC Northern Command Maj.-Gen. Gadi Eizenkot said the Lebanese soldiers had planned to attack the troops and used the crossing of the fence as an excuse. “This was a deliberate ambush,” Eizenkot said. “This was a provocation by the LAF, and we view the shooting severely.”

The Lebanese Army’s officer corps is 30% Shiite, as are most of the rank and file. Many of them are very sympathetic to Hizballah. So the possibility that this was a Hizballah provocation is real. Lebanese President Michael Suleiman, Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad all denounced Israel, claiming that Israeli soldiers had crossed the border into Lebanon. But even UNIFIL representatives said that the attack was unprovoked.

What about the journalist who was killed? According to the Lebanese Daily Star, he was Assaf Abu Rahhal, a Lebanese who worked for the Hizballah-aligned daily al Akhbar. The Star also reports that Ali Shaib, a correspondent for the Hizballah TV channel al-Manar was wounded in the fighting. One wonders why they were with this particular group of LAF soldiers. Were they expecting something to happen?

What we don’t know is how high this goes. Are we dealing with a jihadi LAF officer who saw an opportunity to kill a few Jews, or was there a high-level plan to create an incident, and if so, to what purpose? Many commentators have said that Hizballah doesn’t want a war today, but perhaps they’re wrong? Others have said that the incident is intended to divert attention from the forthcoming release of the report of the UN Special Tribunal on Lebanon which is expected to name a senior Hizballah member as responsible for the murder of former Lebanese PM Rafiq Hariri.

We’ll have to wait and see. In the meantime, we express our condolences to the family of Lt. Col. Harari and wish for the speedy recovery of Capt. Lakia.

Update [4 Aug 0839 PDT]: See this article for complete details on the incident. Clearly it was much more serious than early IDF reports (on which I based my post) had indicated, especially in connection to the role of Hizballah.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Lebanese Army, Hizballah, border clash, Dov Harari, Ezra Lakia

There has been an incident on the Lebanese border, in which Lebanese Army troops fired on Israeli soldiers who were cutting trees near the border fence. The soldiers were on the Lebanese side of the fence, but on the Israeli side of the border.

More precisely, the Lebanese targeted the Israeli commanders who were supervising the operation, and at least one, Lt. Col. Dov Harari, was killed. Another officer, Capt. Ezra Lakia, was critically wounded.

This is the worst such incident since 2006.

Here is a link to an Israeli blog where news is being presented live as events unfold.

Update [0930 PDT]: The IDF says it was Hizballah fighters in LAF (Lebanese Army) uniforms “some LAF units are strongly influenced by Hizballah”.

They are calling it an ‘ambush’. It looks like cold-blooded murder to me.