Wednesday, December 28, 2005


Israel and the nuclear question

Former Jewish, Israeli, convert to Christianity and backstabbing antisemite Mordechai Vanunu has officialy changed his name to something more "Christian", John [Johnny] Carson[1]. The former Jew who today refuses to speak Hebrew ever again and has sought citizenship with the Palestinian Authority, was imprisoned by Israel for leaking some of her nuclear secrets to the British Tabloids.

People on the left constantly badger Israel for having a nuclear program. They believe that Israel should dismantle her arsenal. Although Israel doesnt formally acknowledge that it actually has an arsenal, it is widely believed and accepted that Israel does.

In the 1950s Israel approached the USA requesting Heavy Water[2] which is needed in order to produce a bomb. The USA refused, because Israel wouldnt guarantee it would not be used for the creation of a bomb. Eventually Israel did recieve from the USA as well as Britian.

Israel did not sign the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which would say Israel does not, and will not, own nuclear weapons [India and Pakistan never signed it either and Iran is suspected of violating it[3]]

According the NPT, only the United States, Russia, the UK, and China are permitted to have an arsenal. Why not Israel? Israel is surrouded by nations bent on her destruction. The fear of war, or something worse, hangs over Israel because her neighbors refuse to recognize her [excluding Egypt and Jordan, but Egypt is suspect]. Iran trumpets threats aganist Israel, as recently as saying "Israel should be wiped off the map."

Leftists claim, that the USA support Israels right to build weapons and yet condemn the rest of the middle east [even as far as going to war] because they want to build up a nuclear arsenal as well. Lets think of it on simplier terms, by change nuclear weapons to handguns. Using this lefty logic [or lack thereof] they are basically saying that why should we pressure criminals and gangsters to get rid of their weapons and allow NRA member to own theirs?

The other countries are in the middle east are far too unstable to have these weapons. Even in Egypt, where tomorrow somebody new could come to power and throw away the peace deal between Egypt and Israel. Libya, Iran, Iraq. These countries have no need for such weaponary. Their only real enemy in the middle east is Israel, and Israel would be the only the country they would actually attack, but nobody pressures them.

Anti-bomb groups must stop their condemnation of Israels arsenal, and instead begin to pressure her unstable neighbors to stop building their arsenals. Israel has never been, and never will be, a threat to any nation except those who decide to fight her.


Wednesday, December 21, 2005


Stop blaming Israel for 9/11!!!

For some strange reason, ultra-orthodox Liberals have a problem with the fact that Muslims/Arabs caused 9/11. Although history tells us of Muslims murdering hundreds of thousands and forcibly converting many more. As a matter of fact, Muhammad himself lined up all the men of Jewish Tribes around Mecca and murdered them. following that he and his men divided the woman and children amongst him and his men[1]. Islam went on to slaughter its way through the Middle East, and today Muslim countries are backwards, terror supporting countries where nobody but Muslim men are "free" [Israel was the first country in the middle east to give Arab woman the right to vote!]. In Europe they proved who they really are, by rioting and torturing Jews and Christians alike[2]. So why is it so for Liberals to swallow the fact that Muslims are capable of using airplanes as missiles? Why must Americans believe that Israel is responsible for such an attack? Whether they believe that 4,000 Jews [or Israelis depending on what you read] skipped work because of a early morning phone call by the Mossad warning them to stay away, or that Mossad agents were cheering on the rooftops of nearby buildings, there is no validity for anything.

Here I have an article by former Congressman Paul Findley, explaining that if America would not support Israel, 9/11 wouldnt've take place.

Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

The first line is completely wrong. The USA supports Israel's right to exist as well as Israel's right to defend herself. However, the USA is also one of the biggest supporters of a Palestinian state. The USA pressures Israel consistently to withdraw from the West Bank and [Gaza], and sincerely believes that peace will come from the withdrawal. So in truth, the USA is more pro-Palestinian, while at the same time supporting Israel's right to exist.

My question is, why don't people believe that 9/11 was caused by the American support for Russia? Think, the USA has never pressured the Russians to give back Chechneya, nor does America ever condemn Russia for how she defends herself! America send billions to
Russia as well. Chechneya has been fighting for independence from Russia for over 100 years; the "Palestinians" have only been fighting for 36! Maybe 9/11 took place because of Americas support for Chechneya? Food for thought...

Next Mr. Findley writes, that be believes that if the USA would cut off financial support to Israel 9/11 would not have taken place. Actually many presidents came close to cutting off the money flow. Israel only received money from the USA in order to ensure that there would be an arms balance in the middle east; that Israel [a Democracy] will never be without weapons to fight off the radical Muslims Dictatorships that surround her. Actually in the beginning the USA refused to supply Israel with weapons. Truth is, many of Israels earliest weapons came straight from... France. In 1973, when Israel was once again blitzed [on the holiest Jewish holiday of the year I might add] Nixon at first refused to give Israel weapons. It was only after Israel was at the brink of losing that Nixon caved in and sent arms to Israel. The Arab countries as well as Israel have received billions of dollars from the American ATM. Egypt for example has a completely American funded military and receives billions in aid[3]. Israel gets loans from the USA which must be paid back over time and much of the money sent to Israel is put back into the American economy, as Israel buy many weapons from the USA [the standard Israeli weapons is an M-16].

In addition, most, if not all presidents, including Eisenhower [in 56], Carter [in 78] , both George Bushes, as well as Clinton [and others], have all pressured Israel at one time or another to dismantle settlements and withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza. [George Bush senior actually threatened to halt sending money to Israel because of it [4]]. Even when Tel Aviv was bombed, as a result of the Gulf War, the USA pressured Israel not to retaliate. Israel cannot simply just leave the West Bank. Leaving Gaza has proven to be a mistake, and withdrawing from the West Bank would put Israel a mere 10 miles from a hostile enemy, bent on her destruction, would Findley ask America to do the same?

The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any determined president - even President Bush this very day - could prevail and win overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by laying these facts before the American people:

The US lobby for Israel maybe strong, but that doesn't seem to matter, because most world leaders and politicians and presidents have all sided with the creation of a Palestinian state.
Who should America support? Israel, a Democratic country and perennial ally, or an Arab Dictatorship? Actually America does send money to them, but that's OK according to Findleys logic.

Israel's present government, like its predecessors, is determined to annex the West Bank - biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed, aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West Bank.

Is he serious? Since before Israel was created, Israel has been trying to make peace. There was never a fight for a Palestinian state until 1967. Before that time, Jordan controlled the West Bank [illegally] and Israel didn't make a peep about trying to annex it. As a matter of fact, if Jordan would have kept her nose out of the six-day war, they would have never lost it! Nasser Lied to King Hussien and told him that his armies were reaching Tel Aviv. Israel told Jordan that if she stayed out of the war, Israel would not attack her. She entered the war, anyway; and lost the west bank. Jews had been living in the West Bank for hundreds if not thousands of years, only to be expelled by the Jordanians who would raze Jewish buildings and use ancient Jewish cemeteries as latrines[5]. Ehud Barak offered Arafat 97% of the West Bank, INCLUDING Jerusalem. Arafat turned it down[6]. in 1923, Great Britain handed the Arabs 75% of what was purposed to be the Jewish State, that became Jordan. Also, 98% of all the Palestinians already live under the rule of the P.A. [Palestinian Authority]. Israel has been trying for years to compromise with the Arabs, but to no avail[7]. From pre-state Palestine to now, Israel has been willing to hand back land in exchange for peace. Heck, Israel gave back the Sinai peninsula to Egypt [that is after two attempts by Egypt to destroy Israel, plus the war of attrition]. Thousands of square miles as well as the chance for Israel to have its own oil. Findley says: "Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics..." Actually, the third largest party in Israel is the secular one, which believes that Israel should not be a Jewish state, but simply a state with a Jewish majority. Israel does not hold onto the land for "messianic" reasons as he foolishly claims, as I stated earlier: Giving back the West Bank puts Israel dangerously close to a hostile enemy. The space alone between Tel Aviv and Palestine would be only ten miles! So actually it is security reasons, even America admitted it[7]! Israel needs boarders it can defend. That is why Israel retains the land.

In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel uses the pretext of eradicating terrorism, but its forces are actually engaged advancing the territorial expansion just cited. Under the guise of anti-terrorism, Israeli forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle. With due process nowhere to be found, hundreds are detained for long periods and most are tortured. Some are assassinated. Homes, orchards, and business places are destroyed. Entire cities are kept under intermittent curfew, some confinements lasting for weeks. Injured or ill Palestinians needing emergency medical care are routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many children are undernourished. The West Bank and Gaza have become giant concentration camps. None of this could have occurred without U.S. support. Perhaps Israeli officials believe life will become so unbearable that most Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral homes.

Israel is caught between a rock and a hard place. The Palestinians build bombs in their homes, and encourage their children to use them. How should Israel respond to that? The Palestinians do not have an army, and instead use their own people [woman and children included] to carry out attacks. An Israeli soldier will have a hard time distinguishing terrorists and civilians, and Israeli soldiers are taught never to shoot unless they are 600% positive. Palestinian children, instead of being in school, are out on the streets with adults and teenagers throwing rocks and shooting at soldiers. How should Israel respond? Palestinians are arrested by Israel for suspicion are held, but if a soldier arrests a suspect, he needs to be sure that, that man wont be a bomber.

Israel must occasionally put curfews on Palestinian towns. this however, only happens when in situation like Jenin, where there is all out war in the streets. this is to protect Palestinian civilians from getting caught in the crossfire [also anybody outside at night while there is heavy fighting during the day is most likely up to no good]. Palestinians have tried many times to cross into Israel during the night as well. many of times Israeli soldiers have fired warning shots at Palestinians cutting holes in fences, or climbing over them in order to reach Israel proper usually at night.
Homes are only destroyed if the owner carried out a terror attack or used his home [or business] to build bombs, or make a weapons tunnel. Since Palestinians usually use their own homes to build bombs, and weapons tunnels they get destroyed. This is all Israel can do as a preventive measure. Yes ambulances are held at checkpoints, because they have been used many times to carry bombs[8] and even the UN helped[9]! So if Palestinians are willing to go that low, who can Israel trust?

Sure many children are undernourished, that's not Israels fault. 98% of the Palestinians live under P.A. rule. Money is routinely sent to the Palestinians via UNWRA and other countries. Their leader steal the money and the people get nothing. Findley believes that none of this would take place without US support. Really? America sent the Palestinians weapons, and money and in return Terrorists steal all the weapons[10] and money is simply "disappears." In the end Findley believes that maybe Israel wants the Palestinians to leave their "ancestral" homes. I guess he never read the 1964 and 1967 Palestinian charters[11]. in 1964 "Palestine" was all of Israel; after Israel won the war it was changed. They don't even know where they came from...

Lets go with Findleys idea for a second, that not giving money to Israel would've prevented 9/11. Lets say the only reason 2000 people died is because the USA loans money to Israel. First off I ask: Where the hell do a bunch of Arab terrorists get the right to tell the USA how to spend its money? Its not that their countries don't get money too! According to Findleys logic, the USA should spend its money the way a bunch of religious, terrorist fanatics want them to. "We don't want you to give money to Israel, that means 2000 people must die!" Does that make sense? What kind of a weak country does Findley take the USA for? Everyone knows the USA hands out money to anybody, including Western countries. Everybody remembers the French riots? Everybody remember how the Arabs were portrayed as poor, alienated people who were not accepted in French society. Lets say the Arab people told America not to support France or else they would attack America. Should America run with its tail between its legs to convenience terrorists demand? Everybody remembers how we ridiculed Spain for pulling out its troops from Iraq, we said that they should not give in to terrorist demands so why the double standards for Israel and the USA? I thought the point was not to give into terrorism?

I will stop here because I will wish to write more on other topics. However if you read Findleys article and have a question regarding it, please feel free to write the question in my comment box. I will answer it!

Why would Israel attack her only Ally?
The USA is Israel's only real Ally in the world, what would Israel gain by attacking her? Some people say that it was to start a war in the Middle East that may benefit Israel. Lets look at that. In 1991, during the Gulf War, Israel was attacked by Iraq and forced to not respond. In the beginning of the current Iraq war Israel needed to be on high alert in case of an attack from any of the Arab nations, in order to punish America. I will admit that the war with Iraq does help Israel because it relieves her of one of her problems. But she still has 19 others to worry about.
Israel and Germany did warn the USA of a possible attack, but the USA ignored it[12] [why not blame Germany?] . Yes five Israelis were arrested video taping 9/11, but hundreds of other people video taped it as well [the Israelis were "suspicious, but were released and deported after it was concluded they did nothing wrong].

In addition Osama Bin-Laden took credit for the attacks and Arabs worldwide celebrated [13].

9/11 did not take place because of Israel. Nor did Israel attack the USA on 9/11. Arab hatred for the US for its support of Israel is only the tip of a seemingly never ending iceberg. We are hated because we are democratic, fair, and progressive. This is contrary to their backwards lifestyle. Muslims believe that their religion, culture and identity is under attack by outside agitators [E.G. the USA]. Their belief is that everybody is at war with Islam, when in reality we are only fighting Jihadists. From Europe to the USA Muslims are feeling threatened by the west, who forbid them to carry out traditions that our culture sees as primitive. Seriously, does it make sense that terrorist camps are set up, recruiting potiential terrorists and training them to kill simply to attack America simply because America supports Israel? What kind of sense does that make? Even if this were true, why would Terrorists want to attack European nations as well? Even Sweden, which supports the Palestinians and the Muslims who live there, has been threatened with Jihad over and over!

[7] [U.S. policy on defenseable boarders]
[13a] read what the Israelis write Israels response to 9/11 weapons tunnels [as stated that they are in peoples houses]

Monday, December 19, 2005


Norway boycotts Israel, what else is new?

Norway is a very anti-racist country. They banned South African products during the apartheid there, and now they have taken aim at a new country: Israel. South African products were duly boycotted as a result of their apartheid; problem is, South Africa had an apartheid; Israel just wants to defend herself. The government of Sor-Trondelag, Norways third largest city/province, and home to over 200,000 people, has taken aim to boycott Israeli goods [especially fruit] in order to show solidarity with the Palestinian people [whoever they may be...]. Their boycott is primarily aimed a Israel's apartheid wall" [sic]; the wall Israel uses to deter would-be Palestinian terrorists from entering Israel and carrying out attacks.
This is not the first time, a mass boycott has been suggested against Israel in Norway, three years ago rumor spread of an impending boycott against Israeli goods. It didn't take place, but it could have. Individuals, youth groups, and colleges [of course] have been calling for a boycott for years now, not just against Israels fine array of foods, but also of intellectuals and arms trade

the boycotts are not aimed at making peace. I came across , a website devoted to boycotting Israeli goods, not just because of the wall, as it seems that the wall is the least of their worries, because logically they would only boycott products made in the disputed territories, but thats not so. Instead they boycott all Israeli goods. hmmm. Here the boycott in England points out that Nelson Mandela, while visiting the "occupied territory", said that the Israeli treatment of the Palestinian is worse than the South African apartheid. Audacity! the truth is, if the Palestinians had never lifted a hand to Israel, they would probably have a state by now and, Israel would not need to build a wall or put up checkpoints. If Palestinians did not enter Israel with the intent to blow things up, none of these things would be necessary. South Africa on the other hand, decided to segregate blacks for their own reason; blacks were never a threat to south African statehood nor did they blow up buses and restaurants either. Palestinians do/are

Back to the topic though, I did some sleuthing and decided to see if Norway bans other countries, that not only have an apartheid, but are out right racist; specifically Arabs countries. so I looked. sure enough Norway does business with Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Norway is proud to increase trade with a country like Egypt. and Iran two extremely racist countries. Iran especially. This is what Jeff Jacoby had to say about Iran and their hate: ok, lets say anti-Semitism is ok, and they only boycott Israel because of Jews: what about Saudi Arabia? Norway does business with Saudi Arabia, why is there no boycott against them? A place where, Stan Goodenough writes*: "Not a single church or synagogue exists in the desert kingdom. Jews are not welcome there at all, and when Christians visit, woes betide them if they try to bring in their Bibles, which can and have been confiscated and even shredded at Jeddah's airport.The right of Christians to hold Bible studies and prayer meetings in the privacy of their own homes is not defined in law and is seldom respected in practice. Christians have been persecuted and executed in this land - the birthplace of Islam." so where's the boycott against them? Even as Norways Muslim community continues stirring up problems such as such as permitting wife-beating*, raping girls, and forcing their customs on the Norwegian people, Israel is still targeted as "racist".

I wouldn't mind if institutions played fair and boycotted other countries such as Russia [which is actually having problems with Norway] or Sudan [which not only does Norway trade* with them, they are involved with their crisis*, and thus know the massacres and human rights violations that take place there!]. For me they can call Israel an apartheid all they want, heck, they can say that the earth is flat, and that trees give birth to birds. I seriously would not complain. However they scrutinize Israel for defending herself, and don't make a peep when Palestinians ransack Christians towns and murder? Or any Arab country for that matter? Why must it always be Israel is condemned?
A clear cut case of antisemitism, hypocrisy and studpidity.

*Stan Goodenoughs' aricle:
* wife beating ok:
* Sudan and Norway trade:

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?