FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

From an email:

Marcy Winograd is the co-founder of the LA Jews for Peace collective and a long-time anti-war activist in Los Angeles. Inspired by author Joel Kovel’s book Overcoming Zionism, she is interested in assembling and publishing an anthology entitled: From Zionism to Humanism: Personal Stories of Jews Who Dare to Speak Out…

We were brainwashed, indoctrinated, fooled. Zionism is not the way. You can’t steal people’s land, erect a country on the basis of religious or cultural superiority and ever think you will be at peace. It is wrong. Zionism hijacked us, robbed us of our humanity, and conned us into thinking Israel equaled Judaism. — Marcy Winograd

Humanism, not Zionism, is the path to peace.

There’s plenty more like this. The usual propaganda — she accuses Israel of “indiscriminate bombing of civilians” — mixed with first person self-hatred.

I know, it’s a trite thing to say, I should answer her arguments instead of slamming her ad hominem. But my answers are all over this blog, and — trite or not — how else can you characterize this:

Though I identify with persecuted Jews, I grow up longing to be part of the dominant culture. I hang little red and green lights on plastic Christmas trees and rarely visit temple except to hava nagila at the boys’ bar mitzvahs or to pray on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, when we never atone for the sin of theft, slaughter, or occupation.

Winograd’s parents considered themselves “world citizens”, she says, and I presume that she would describe herself similarly (perhaps with a more up-to-date phrase). She feels deeply for the victims of Sabra and Shatila, for the “Lebanese children”, etc.

But somehow the fact that almost the entire Arab world, comprising 23 nations with about 350 million people (and that doesn’t include non-Arab Iran), is dedicated to the violent replacement of a small democratic state containing 5.5 million Jews (and 1.5 million Arabs) with yet another Arab dictatorship simply doesn’t strike a chord in her.

Why should it? She has no Jewish connection. If the temple where she goes to “hava nagila” and all the rest of them were to disappear tomorrow it wouldn’t matter at all. The fact that there is only one Jewish homeland is not important either, to a world citizen like Ms. Winograd. It, too, could disappear. A world citizen is at home anyplace.

Nevertheless, she makes a big deal about her Jewishness — in the context of her anti-Zionism.

Insofar as it gives her an audience for her recitation of lies and distortions about history and current fact, insofar as it perversely lends credence to her false accusations, she is happy to be Jewish.

She mentions persecuted Jews and the Holocaust. Although she can put herself in the place of Palestinian refugees, can she imagine being a Jew with nowhere in the world to go? It may come to pass again, if humanists like Marcy Winograd have their way.

Do us (the Jews) a favor, Ms. Winograd. Say the Shehada. Learn some Arabic, put on the hijab. Spend a few years in an Arab country. Then as a Muslim Arab anti-Zionist, you will be entirely normal.

And we won’t have to listen to your crap about being Jewish.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Marcy Winograd, LA Jews for Peace

The publication of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), and — more importantly — the spin placed on the statement therein that “in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program”, has encouraged Iran to continue its enrichment of uranium and has reduced the possibility of effective international sanctions.

In the international scene, Russia’s decision to renew fuel shipments to Iran main nuclear facility at Bushehr was interpreted by many anlysts as stemming directly from the NIE’s publication; another development possibly stemming from the report is Russia and China’s hardened position on further sanctions against Teheran.

In Teheran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quick to capitalize on the NIE, calling it an “Iranian victory” and demanding that the United States publicly apologize for its previous bellicose stance. — Jerusalem Post

As I have written, reading past the first sentence in the NIE makes it clear that the intelligence community’s estimation of the Iranian potential to make nuclear weapons has not changed much, if at all.

However, politically — in both the international and domestic arenas — the statement is highly significant. Unless it’s a trick to distract the Iranians while we plan to bomb them (doubtful), it sends the message that the US does not plan to interfere militarily in the Iranian program. And this message has obviously been received loud and clear in Moscow, Beijing, and Teheran.

Today, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said

On Iran, I continue to say that if Iran will just do the one thing that is required of it by the Security Council resolutions that have been passed — and that is suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities — then I’m prepared to meet my counterpart any place and anytime and anywhere and we can talk about anything… — AP

Of course Iran does not need to worry about resolutions which are not likely to be enforced, but note also that she did not even mention nuclear weapons.

One can speculate about why the US has taken the military option off the table. Some possibilities are

• we have been deterred by the probable Iranian response, both against our troops, ships, and installations in the region and in the form of terrorism against Americans in the US and elsewhere; and

• we have been encouraged by secret Iranian promises to take the heat off in Iraq.

Probably, the answer is a bit of both. I also think our policymakers think that a direct nuclear threat from Iran against the US is far in the future, and can be deterred by a promise of massive retaliation.

For Israel the question is much sharper. Israeli planners see a world with Iranian nuclear weapons as a world without Israel.

The consequence of the NIE is that both US pressure and international sanctions are less likely to prevent Iran from achieving its goal. Therefore, the possibility that Israel will at some point find her red line crossed and wil attack Iran is much greater.

Some argue that this can’t happen because Israel doesn’t have the capability, because Israel can’t risk the Iranian (and Syrian) response, because the US is unlikely to give the ‘green light’, etc.

But in a life or death situation, even the most dangerous course of action is better than doing nothing.

Technorati Tags: Iran, Israel, NIE

From the people who gave us the Danish Cartoon Riots and the Teddy Bear Affair:

(IsraelNN.com) Jewish worshippers Tuesday were stunned to find Arabs had desecrated the graves of the Biblical Joshua, Caleb and Nun (Joshua’s father).

Joshua served as the Jewish Nation’s Prime Minister from the year 2488 until 2516 on the Hebrew calendar (1272 BCE – 1300 BCE).

Members of the One Shechem organization that organizes visits to the graves arrived in the village of Timnat (Kifl) Haress, near Ariel in Samaria, to prepare for a special prayer gathering, discovered that Arab vandals had desecrated the village’s Jewish tombs. The tombs of Yehoshua (Joshua) ben Nun, Nun, and Calev (Caleb) ben Yefuneh were covered with garbage and feces – both human and animal, and anti-Semitic and Nazi slogans and symbols had been painted in the area.

Israel of course has gone out of her way to protect Muslim holy sites. How do you think the Arabs would treat ours if they had control of East Jerusalem?

That’s right. Like they did in 1948-67, like Joseph’s tomb in 2000, and like the graves of Joshua, Nun, and Caleb this week.

Technorati Tags: Arabs, Joshua, Caleb, Nun

Another idea that misses the point:

The mechanism for an international security presence in the Gaza Strip “could be devised quickly” if Israel and the Palestinians reach an agreement on the matter, EU Middle East envoy Marc Otte told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

Otte said there is “definitely more interest than in the past” for the idea from both the Israeli and Palestinian sides…

Hamas spokesmen, however, have said consistently they would oppose any international force and view it as an occupier no different than Israel. — Jerusalem Post

A UN or NATO force in Gaza would be a decidedly mixed blessing — or worse. For one thing, Israel would be severely limited in her ability to strike at terrorists who launch rockets into Israel. And even if the force were highly motivated to do so, stopping the terrorists from launching would be very, very difficult.

It would certainly put an end to the possibility of a massive Israeli invasion. It might reduce the tunneling and explosive-planting activities of Hamas near the border fence with Israel, but on the other hand would give Hamas a respite from Israeli attacks in which they could continue to build up their forces, manufacture rockets, smuggle supplies, etc.

Since the force would have to communicate with Hamas, this would provide Hamas some degree of legitimacy.

Hamas is an outlaw organization, using terrorism as policy and making war on a legitimate UN member state, Israel. I suppose that in an ideal world with a real UN, the international policemen would simply step in and arrest the leaders of a criminal, murderous, genocidal gang like Hamas. But that isn’t the world we live in.

Meanwhile, Gaza terrorists are hurting from recent Israeli air strikes that have killed 13 Islamic Jihad and Hamas guerrillas in the past few days. Gaza Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh has suggested that Hamas and Israel should negotiate a hudna, a temporary truce, in which Hamas would stop the rocket fire and Israel the air attacks.

Israeli President Shimon Peres, not usually my favorite guy, made eminent sense when he pointed out in response that all Hamas has to do is stop the rockets and Israel will stop the air attacks — no negotiation required or desired.

Since the IAF is so much more accurate than Palestinian rockets, perhaps the best outcome would be for the present situation to continue unchanged for a while, until the terrorist factions in Gaza are decimated.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Hamas, Gaza

Foreign donors have just pledged $7.4 billion in aid to the Palestinian Authority. This is intended to ameliorate poverty, build infrastructure, and ultimately reduce violence.

How has this strategy worked in the past? Steven Stotsky, writing for CAMERA, presents a picture that is not terribly encouraging. It seems that homicides by Palestinians, both in terrorism against Israelis and in factional fighting are closely correlated to aid given to the Palestinian Authority.

The following graph plots the number of Israelis and Palestinians killed by Palestinian terrorists and the amount of aid received by the PA from 2000 – 2007. The murder data is shown for the year after the aid was received, in which the correlation is almost perfect.

The going rate seems to be about one murder for every $1.2 million. At this rate, we can expect nearly 6200 murders for our $7.4 billion.

Does this prove anything? Of course not. There are lots of reasons for the ups and downs in Palestinian productivity, and foreign aid is only one of them.

As is often said, “Past performance is no guarantee of future results”, but it certainly helps to evaluate an investment.

Technorati Tags: terrorism, Palestinians