Israel on The Huffington Post

Who Is Jewish? British Court Weighs In

2009-12-22T20:51:50Z

This week, I'd like to ask whether our identity is determined fundamentally by what we do or by our blood.

Yeah, I know. That's heady, metaphysical stuff for snowy days late in December. But it's a question directly raised in a landmark decision by Britain's Supreme Court, which ruled last Wednesday that it was illegal for a state-funded Jewish school to base its admissions policy on whether or not the applicant's mother was Jewish.

Medea Benjamin: Gaza Freedom March Blocked by Egypt

2009-12-22T16:39:30Z

Citing escalating tensions on the Gaza-Egypt border, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry informed us on December 20 that the Rafah border will be closed over the coming weeks, into January. We responded that there is always tension at the border because of the siege and that if there are any risks, they are risks we are willing to take. We also said that it was too late for over 1,360 delegates coming from over 42 countries to change their plans now.

Although we consider this as a setback, it is something we've encountered -- and overcome -- before. No delegation, large or small, that has entered Gaza over the past 12 months has received a final OK before arriving at the Rafah border. Most delegations were discouraged from even heading out of Cairo to Rafah. Some had their buses stopped on the way. Some have been told outright that they could not go into Gaza. But after public and political pressure, the Egyptian government changed its position and let them pass.

Our efforts and plans will not be altered at this point. We have set out to break the siege of Gaza and to march in Gaza on December 31 against the international blockade. We are continuing the journey.

Egyptian embassies and missions all over the world will be hearing by phone, fax and email from delegates and the supporters of the Gaza Freedom March over the coming crucial days, with the clear message: Let the international delegation enter Gaza and let the Gaza Freedom March proceed.

Many delegates are already in Cairo and more are arriving daily. Delegates cancelled holiday plans months ago to come on the Gaza Freedom march and air tickets were purchased. We anticipate that virtually all of the 1,360 delegates will come to Cairo.

Because of the incredible humanitarian crisis in Gaza caused by the Israeli attack on Gaza a year ago and by the international siege on Gaza, we feel morally obligated to continue our mission to bring more international attention to the plight of the 1.5 million people imprisoned there.

Bruce Feiler: Christmas Decoded? What New Discoveries in Nazareth Tell Us About Jesus

2009-12-22T12:27:11Z

Just in time for holiday deadlines, Israeli archaeologists announced Monday they had uncovered remains of the first dwelling in the city of Nazareth that can be dated back to the time of Jesus.

Digging not far from Basilica of the Annunciation, where tradition says the angel Gabriel visited Mary, archaeologists found remains of a wall, a hideout, and a water system that appeared to collect water from the roof.

Researcher Yardena Alexandre also found clay and chalk vessels used by Galilean Jews of the time -- an indication the home belonged to a simple Jewish family.

The findings suggest Nazareth was probably a small hamlet with about 50 houses populated by poor Jews.

"From the little written evidence available we know that first century Nazareth AD was a small Jewish village located in a valley," Alexandre said, adding that "until now a few Jesus-era graves were revealed, but never have we unearthed the remains of contemporary residences."

So what does this new discovery tell us about Jesus?

The answer is not very much. We still have no evidence that Jesus was ever in Nazareth or in Bethlehem, the two towns featured in the Christmas story. In fact, one of Alexandre's statements is classic archaeological hyperbole fed to a gullible press: "It was likely Jesus and his childhood friends would have known the house." Oh, really? Based on what?

If anything, this new discovery shows how minor a place Nazareth was and draws new light to a central paradox of the Christmas narrative: Why would a pregnant mother from the Galilee travel as far south as Bethlehem to have a child? The given reason of a census is hardly persuasive. (The most logical answer is that King David is from Bethlehem and since the Hebrew Bible states the messiah should come from the line of David, a Bethlehem birth would bring the new baby into David's home region.)

While this week's findings tell us little about Jesus, they do highlight a number of often overlooked features of Jesus' world.

1. Jesus was a Jew, and his life story makes sense only when understood in the context of Jewish ritual. Two of the more striking finds in Nazareth this week were clay and chalk vessels, which were used by Jews at the time to ensure the purity of the food and water kept inside the vessels.

2. The Jesus story was deeply political. The hideout at the Nazareth house, for example, is likely related to the growing tension between Jews and Romans in the late first century B.C.E., a showdown that colors Jesus' birth story -- and especially his death narrative.

3. The Bible is grounded in the history and landscape of the Ancient Near East. The Bible is full of details of time and place that would have resonated deeply to people at the time, but are often lost on us today.

Discoveries like the one in Nazareth titillate the press because they promise something they can't deliver: If one feature of the Bible is true, the entire thing must be true. The real truth is that even if we found a house in Nazareth with the names Mary and Joseph on the mailbox and a birth announcement of a baby Jesus carved into a wall, we'd still never find proof that God spoke to Mary, conceived a child, and sent forth a messiah into the world.

That's not a subject for science. That's a matter of faith.

And that's exactly as it should be.

Khulood Ghanem: Living Under the Bombing of Gaza

2009-12-22T09:53:32Z

On December 27, 2008, 27-year old Khulood Ghanem was in Gaza City when Israel launched its massive three-week military assault on the captive population of Gaza. 1400 Palestinians were killed, a majority of them non-combatants and 400 of them children. Much of Gaza's infrastructure was destroyed.

Khulood kept a diary every day of the Israeli assault. In March 2009, Khulood volunteered to help with translation for a CodePink Women for Peace delegation that managed to get into Gaza for International Women's Day. Two of the delegates -- Tacoma WA resident Linda Frank and Canadian-Israeli Sandra Ruch -- learned of the existence of Khulood's diary and asked Khulood for permission to read and make public this rare personal account of living under the bombing. Khulood translated the first seven days of the diary from Arabic into rough but clear English. Linda Frank brought playwright Edward Mast into the process to adapt the text into a performance piece which has been performed several times in the Seattle area. Plans to perform the piece in other cities include solidarity events with the Gaza Freedom March on December 31, when 1300 people from 42 countries will attempt to break the siege.

A full year after the assault ended, Gaza is still in ruins. Israel has maintained sporadic attacks as well as a siege and blockade which prevent food, medical supplies, building equipment and other necessities from entering Gaza. Israel's blockade has made reconstruction impossible, and this human-created catastrophe continues. What follows is an adapted excerpt from Seven Days From A Gaza Diary, a performance for three voices adapted by Edward mast from the diary of Khulood Ghanem, Gaza, 2008-2009
-- Linda Frank and Edward Mast]

****

At 11:45 I was on my way walking in the street. I heard the first rocket, the second and the third, many quick attacks, one after one, at this moment I could see nothing, all I remember was the biggest explosion I have ever seen. I started to run away, but to where? I saw the military planes in the sky at a very low level. I was scared and started to lose consciousness. All I was thinking was how to reach a safe place. The sound of bombs and explosions was horrible, the ground was moving up and down, I said, it is not a joke, it is a real, the war has started.

I stopped beside a building looking at the sky, watching the military planes. At that moment I lost my ability to move or even to think. People, girls and children, all were shouting, running every where, it was the time for students to leave their school, I thought that if they started to attack haphazardly they will make a catastrophe. I walked a lot till I felt sick, the attacks increased and all streets started to be empty from people except the emergency and ambulance cars. I was worried about my family, sisters, brothers, friends, I tried to phone every one I knew to assure that all are safe but the attacks destroyed the telecommunication net.

My journey to Khan Younis took 3 hours. It was more safe to avoid the main street because most of the police stations that have been attacked were located at the main street. Finally I reached home. All my family were sitting glaring at the screen of the TV, shocked, pale, yellow and horrible faces, sitting like idols. I took a place beside them. The first scene was the police academy. The number of martyrs was big, about 180 in one place, the scene was horrible, really can't be described, blood in every place, severed parts, heads, hands, legs and arms, couldn't be described. I spent my whole day sitting on a chair in front of the TV. I did not expect one day that I will face such catastrophe, hour after hour, number of martyrs increased and increased.

At 8:30 this night I had a call from my sister who lived in Gaza city. She was walking beside the fence of that school, she saw the heads of young children, bags colored with their blood. One child with his blue shirt, she taught him once before, he was thrown on the ground, bleeding from all parts with no legs, he was shouting and raising his hands, but no one could help. She started to scream, what should we do? I kept silence and started to cry loudly, the vision was so hard to imagine. She started to lose her breath. I told her that is enough, please stop talking, I can't tolerate. I closed my mobile and took my diary and sat in the living room . . . .

Full text of Seven Days From A Gaza Diary at www.palestineinformation.org/GazaDiary

For more about the Gaza Freedom March: www.gazafreedommarch.org

To listen to a studio recording of Seven Days From a Gaza Diary, go here.

James S. Gordon: Open Minds, And Warm But Troubled Hearts In Closed Gaza (Pt. 1)

2009-12-21T19:13:29Z

Gaza City, December 16, 2009

Day 5 of the December 2009 Mind-Body Skills Training in Gaza

Read more entries and view video here

As the days pass, our participants discover and discuss new possibilities of psychophysiological self-regulation - breathing deeply to relax in spite of the anxious anticipation of leading a group for the first time, or to find a calm place from which to encounter memories of family members "martyred" by violence. They find in the creative imagination of guided imagery unexpected ease: "When I go to my imaginary 'safe place' I discover it is my home - I would not have believed it because we are close to the border and have often been shelled - and I thank God for my family and for seeing the green of the trees every day."

Sitting in the circles of our small groups we move more deeply into each others' minds and hearts. Experiences and feelings that are rarely if ever publicly revealed in tradition-saturated Gaza are shared; long suppressed emotions and conflicts emerge.

We hear about the ways that the frustrations of men, deprived in the Nakba - the "catastrophic" loss of homes and villages of 1948 - of their patrimony, unable to maintain their self-respect without jobs or freedom, have manifested in the self-righteous abuse of women and children. Her late arrival after difficulty navigating the streets during a Hamas demonstration reminds one young psychologist - gentle, always smiling, pale in her long black coat - of her father's fury at an elder brother when one evening years ago he came home late: The old man burned the boy's arm with a stick glowing with red heat, and turned the instrument on his wife when she pleaded for mercy. The girl watched. A university professor cries with shock and pain for her young colleague, and recalls her own father's contrasting kindness. Then it is the turn of a large young man, a gentle giant I think, who is also a psychologist. "I have not spoken of this before," he begins. When he and his brother were six and five, their father forced them - out of, the psychologist now believes - some warped idea of discipline and manliness, to walk 10 kilometers to school each morning before dawn; the young man remembers, his face softening in hurt, his hands opening in incomprehension, how furious his father became when one day, attacked by dogs, the boys ran home. The participant who is leading the group today suggests we stand and hold hands. He asks us, so wisely I think, to "Feel the support of the group." The pale young woman, quietly tearful, nods with relief and release; the young man thanks us - "Shukran" - and tells us he has vowed always to understand and be kind to his own children.

The ways of Gaza are ancient, sometimes painfully problematic, but also rich and in many ways still sustaining. The closeness to families that can under pressure constrict can also hold up people who should by all ordinary reckoning have collapsed. Mothers, fathers and especially grandparents appear in another imagery exercise - the summoning of a "wise" or "inner guide" with a frequency I have seen nowhere in the Western world. "My grandmother was strong and kind" one young woman announces, emphasizing the conjunction. "she was always there for me." Another says his long dead, imagined grandfather counseled him not to throw stones at Israeli tanks; "It is a waste, he says to me. True courage will be in caring for your children and your wife." When a young psychologist - unusually lithe and natty, a "dead ringer" I am told for a Turkish movie star - tells me I remind him of his grandfather. I'm at first taken aback, ready to protest - "I'm much too young," I think. When I look again and see the sweetness of his face, the tears in his eyes, I am aware of the foolishness of my reaction, and accept the honor he is giving me.

Each day the nature that remains free from overcrowding, the destruction of artillery shells and fear of Israeli patrols appears, vital and hopeful, in mental imagery, check-ins and reminiscences. In the drawings participants make of "how I want to be" and "how I will achieve it," there are palm trees with ladders- steps to a more hopeful future- leading upward; small patches of green issue gracious invitations; many colored flowers represent "all the brightness of experience;" birds of free thought and feeling fly at the top of pages; the sun warms tired heads and softens hunched, burdened shoulders. Often the sea that borders Gaza appears, deep and ever present, calming troubled minds.

This post is continued in Pt. 2.

Robert Naiman: Egypt: Country will Block International Gaza Freedom Marchers

2009-12-21T15:47:08Z

On December 31, together with more than 1000 peace advocates from around the world, I plan to join with tens of thousands of Palestinians in a march in Gaza to the Erez border crossing to protest the Israeli blockade of Gaza, and to demand international action to relieve Gaza's humanitarian crisis.

Unfortunately, it appears that the Egyptian government has announced that it will not allow the internationals to enter Gaza as planned. If would be a shame if that were the case.

This apparent decision though, could be reversed with sufficient public pressure in Egypt and around the world. Concerned individuals can write to the Egyptian Embassy in Washington and to the Foreign Ministry in Cairo. There is also contact information for the Egyptian consulates in Chicago, Houston, New York, and San Francisco here.

The aim of the march is to call on Israel and the international community to lift the siege, and to respond to Gaza's humanitarian crisis. The international participants will also take in badly needed medical aid, as well as school supplies and winter jackets for the children of Gaza. Dec. 27 will mark the first anniversary of the Israeli invasion, from which Gaza has not recovered, in large measure because of the ongoing Israeli blockade, which has prevented Gaza from rebuilding.

Of course, if the Egyptian government decision stands, and the international participants are not allowed to enter Gaza, then much less international attention will be drawn to the ongoing blockade, and that would be an unfortunate setback for peace efforts, because the need for international attention is great.

In the Guardian yesterday, former President Jimmy Carter wrote:

... those under siege in Gaza face another winter of intense personal suffering. I visited Gaza after the devastating January war and observed homeless people huddling in makeshift tents, under plastic sheets, or in caves dug into the debris of their former homes. Despite offers by Palestinian leaders and international agencies to guarantee no use of imported materials for even defensive military purposes, cement, lumber, and panes of glass are not being permitted to pass entry points into Gaza. The US and other nations have accepted this abhorrent situation without forceful corrective action.

I have discussed ways to assist the citizens of Gaza with a number of Arab and European leaders and their common response is that the Israeli blockade makes any assistance impossible.

Carter argued that with the "peace process" at an apparent impasse - and with Egyptian efforts to resolve differences between Hamas and Fatah impeded by "US objections" - addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza can't wait on broad diplomatic progress. There should be an intense diplomatic effort by the international community - and the United States in particular, which obviously has strong influence on Israel and Egypt - to ensure that humanitarian supplies can get into Gaza and rebuilding can begin.

Indeed, some Members of Congress, led by Reps. Jim McDermott (D-Wa.) and Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), are urging the Obama Administration to press for an easing of the blockade. If the Gaza Freedom Marchers are allowed to go forward, it will add to this pressure. In support of peace, the Egyptian government should allow the marchers to go through.

Israel Admits Harvesting Organs From Dead Bodies Without Permission

2009-12-21T14:43:17Z

(AP) JERUSALEM - Israel has admitted that in the 1990s, its forensic pathologists harvested organs from dead bodies, including Palestinians, without permission of their families.

The issue emerged with publication of an interview with the then-head of Israel's Abu Kabir forensic institute, Dr. Jehuda Hiss. The interview was conducted in 2000 by an American academic, who released it because of a huge controversy last summer over an allegation by a Swedish newspaper that Israel was killing Palestinians in order to harvest their organs. Israel hotly denied the charge.

Parts of the interview were broadcast on Israel's Channel 2 TV over the weekend. In it, Hiss said, "We started to harvest corneas ... Whatever was done was highly informal. No permission was asked from the family."

The Channel 2 report said that in the 1990s, forensic specialists at Abu Kabir harvested skin, corneas, heart valves and bones from the bodies of Israeli soldiers, Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers, often without permission from relatives.

In a response to the TV report, the Israeli military confirmed that the practice took place. "This activity ended a decade ago and does not happen any longer," the military said in a statement quoted by Channel 2.

In the interview, Hiss described how his doctors would mask the removal of corneas from bodies. "We'd glue the eyelid shut," he said. "We wouldn't take corneas from families we knew would open the eyelids."

Many of the details in the interview first came to light in 2004, when Hiss was dismissed as head of the forensic institute because of irregularities over use of organs there. Israel's attorney general dropped criminal charges against him, and Hiss still works as chief pathologist at the institute. He had no comment on the TV report.

Hiss became director of the institute in 1988. He said in the interview that the practice of harvesting organs without permission began in the "early 1990s." However, he also said that military surgeons removed a thin layer of skin from bodies as early as 1987 to treat burn victims. Hiss said he believed that was done with family consent. The harvesting ended in 2000, he said.

Complaints against the institute, where autopsies of dead bodies are performed, at the time of Hiss' dismissal came from relatives of Israeli soldiers and civilians as well as Palestinians. The bodies belonged to people who died from various causes, including diseases, accidents and Israeli-Palestinian violence, but there has been no evidence to back up the claim in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that Israeli soldiers killed Palestinians for their organs. Angry Israeli officials called the report "anti-Semitic."

The academic, Nancy Sheppard-Hughes, a professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley, said she decided to make the interview public in the wake of the Aftonbladet controversy, which raised diplomatic tensions between Israel and Sweden and prompted Sweden's foreign minister to call off a visit to the Jewish state.

Sheppard-Hughes said that while Palestinians were "by a long shot" not the only ones affected by the practice in the 1990s, she felt the interview must be made public now because "the symbolism, you know, of taking skin of the population considered to be the enemy, (is) something, just in terms of its symbolic weight, that has to be reconsidered."

While insisting that all organ harvesting was done with permission, Israel's Health Ministry told Channel 2, "The guidelines at that time were not clear." It added, "For the last 10 years, Abu Kabir has been working according to ethics and Jewish law."

Rabbi Abraham Cooper: Pre-Genocidal Hate: How the Internet Supersized a Medieval Big Lie

2009-12-21T12:05:25Z

Whenever Simon Wiesenthal, the late great Nazi hunter and iconic human rights advocate, would speak to college students, inevitably this question would be posed: Could the Holocaust happen again? His answer: "The history of humankind is the history of crime. The only difference between the Nazi Genocide and the Inquisition was technology. Had modern technology been available, no Jew had survived in Spain; no Catholic in England, no Protestant in France." He would add this warning: "Hate+Crisis+Technology can set the stage for a new genocide."

Mr. Wiesenthal knew first-hand of what he spoke. He lost 89 members of his family among the 6 million Jews mass murdered by the ultra-efficient Nazi death machine that recast old hatreds in modern outlets of the 1930s-- utilizing radio, posters, children's games, and colorful books to dehumanize "the enemy" and setting the stage for bureaucratized 'extermination' in the 1940s.

Mr. Wiesenthal outlived most of his tormentors, passing at the age of 96, at the dawn of the Internet Era.

Were he alive today, he would be worried, very worried. For today, old hatreds are being repackaged and supersized in a way that would have made Josef Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Hate, drool with envy. In our time, the drumbeat of hatred -- like yesterday's precursors to genocide--is fueled by the 'Big Lies' that--that a generation ago served as the ignition key for the ultimate "weapon of mass destruction." The only difference between past and present is the speed of transmission. It used to be said that that lies, by means of newspaper or radio, could travel halfway round the world before truth has time to put on its trousers. Now, digital data and satellite dishes can bounce the lie to Mars and back almost before you can blink an eye.

Just look at the global transmission belt that has transformed the libel that Jews drink the blood of their Passover victims from a medieval libel to a post-modern Cyberspace "truth":

The updated libel started small in the 1990s with ludicrous reports from the Palestinian territories, that Israeli soldiers were harvesting t organs of Palestinian civilians.

It next was given currency in the Muslim world in 2004 by Iranian Sahar 1 TV which serialized in both Persian and Arabic "Zara Blue Eyes"--the tale of how a Jewish doctor, modeled on Auschwitz's Dr. Mengele, poses as a UN official to target a particularly pretty young Palestinian, saying: " [Take] this one! Her eyes remind me of my wife."

Next it achieved orbital velocity over Scandinavia in the form of a story in Sweden's leading newspaper, Aftonbladet, under a headline in which grieving Palestinian parents scream: "They Plunder the Organs of Our Sons!" No matter that the reporter, Donald Bostrom, admitted that "whether it's true or not--I have no idea, I have no clue," while one Palestinian family quoted denied subsequently ever having made the accusation.

Now it's metastasized to Eastern Europe, where in Kiev a panel of intellectuals supported an anti-Semitic presidential candidate who accuses Israeli families who adopted Ukrainian orphans of being part of an international black market ring to harvest their organs for sale. Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported that Professor Vyacheslav Gudin told the 300 attendees a detailed story about a Ukrainian man's fruitless search for 15 children who had been adopted in Israel. The children, Gudin charged, had clearly been taken by Israeli medical centers, where they were used for "spare parts."

Horrible enough that anti-Semitism has emerged as a factor in Ukraine's democratic elections--but this pig has wings. Iran's PressTV headline touts: "Ukrainian kids, new victims of Israeli 'organ theft'". "Alternative" media and a few other Middle Eastern sites quickly picked up the PressTV report as a real news--more than 300 outlets in 24 hours! There's small comfort that one online "white Nationalist" actually did the math, adding up the number of alleged Arab kids to the 25 thousand supposed victimized Ukrainian children. "I guess every person in Israel has had multiple organ transplants by now" -- was his comment.

Why care if the lunatic fringe picks up on such garbage? Think again. There's this development from Israel's senior peace partner in the Middle East. Dr. Hamdi Al-Sayed, chief of Egypt's Medical Syndicate has banned Israeli doctors from attending a medical conference in Cairo, declaring, "We have no regard or respect for the Israeli doctors . . . due to their participation in the torture of Palestinian prisoners", adding, "Israeli doctors are also guilty of stealing the organs of Palestinian prisoners."

What's been done to combat the Big Lie? So far, nothing! Sweden, currently rotating president of the European Union has ignored its moral obligation to condemn its country's leading newspaper for reviving the medieval blood libel by hiding behind a flimsy press freedom defense. The Jewish Forum of Ukraine is urging that the bigoted presidential candidate Ratushnyak be indicted under Ukraine's Criminal Code for inciting ethnic hatred. But the nation's paralyzed political and judicial systems seem incapable of preventing the January elections from being hijacked by a hatemonger.

U.S. Supreme Court Louis D. Brandies once said, "Truth is the best disinfectant." Given the cynicism and apathy in face of the re-birthed and digitized blood libel, don't expect the stench of this Internet-validated Big Lie to disappear anytime soon. Failure to act does guarantee that more pre-genocidal and terror-spawning "Big Lies" are on the way.

Think it can't bite us? Think again. Reacting to the arrest of 5 young American Jihadi-terrorist wannabees arrested in Pakistan, President Obama declared: "We have to constantly be mindful that some of these twisted ideologies are available over the Internet."

Dr. Harold Brackman, a historian who is a consultant to the Simon Wiesenthal Center contributed to this essay.

Miss Fat And Beautiful Israel Brings Babes To Beersheba (VIDEO)

2009-12-21T11:49:25Z

Beersheba, Israel recently held its annual "Fat and Beautiful" beauty pageant with plus-size contestants coming from all over the country to compete in casual wear and evening gowns...but there was no swimsuit competition. Ladies had to be at least 176 lbs to enter.

Twenty-two-year old Moran Baranes, weighing in at 205 pounds, was crowned the winner. She works as a security guard and enjoys painting and dancing.

WATCH the ladies strut their stuff:

Get HuffPost Style on Twitter and Facebook!

Bethlehem Faces A Bleak Christmas

2009-12-21T11:25:10Z

BETHLEHEM, West Bank -- Bethlehem's traders face a bleak Christmas this year as they compete for a dwindling share of much-needed tourism revenues.

First Jesus-era House Found In Nazareth, Archeologists Say

2009-12-21T09:24:36Z

NAZARETH, Israel — Just in time for Christmas, archaeologists on Monday unveiled what may have been the home of one of Jesus' childhood neighbors. The humble dwelling is the first dating to the era of Jesus to be discovered in Nazareth, then a hamlet of around 50 impoverished Jewish families where Jesus spent his boyhood.

Archaeologists and present-day residents of Nazareth imagined Jesus as a youngster, playing with other children in the isolated village, not far from the spot where the Archangel Gabriel revealed to Mary that she would give birth to the boy.

Read more: Nazareth Jesus, Israel, Nazareth, Jesus, World News

David Harris: Iran: The Truth Hurts

2009-12-20T19:00:46Z

It's as predictable as day follows night.

Raise the issue of Iran's nuclear program, as I have more than once, and all Tehran's flacks and flunkies, including Israel-bashers galore, come out of the woodwork.

They rush to Iran's defense, portraying it as a peace-loving, law-abiding, misunderstood nation.

There is no evidence whatsoever, they allege, that Iran is hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons capability.

Oh, and by the way, on the off chance it is, they add, it's strictly for defensive purposes. Iran has never hurt a soul in its history, so why the concern?

They accuse all kinds of alleged miscreants - warmongers, neoconservatives, Zionists, you name it - of besmirching Iran's good name in pursuit of nefarious aims. The label is meant to say it all.

If heaven forbid, you're a Zionist, as I am, then it's abundantly clear what you must be up to. Nothing more need be said. Were it not for you, Iran would enjoy the reputation for democracy and decency it so richly deserves.

And they seek to divert the discussion to Israel's nuclear program and a whole host of other misdeeds, falling just short of holding Jerusalem responsible for the melting of the ice caps.

You see, they contend, the problem in the Middle East is Israel, not Iran. Anything that focuses on Iran is off-limits, as it's only a ploy to divert the world's attention from the root cause of all evil and instability, Israel, in an otherwise serene and sedate region.

Gee, if only Israel would go away - hmm, come to think of it, that Iranian nuclear bomb just might help - the region would overnight resemble Europe or North America in its commitment to peace, development, and human rights.

All these spin doctors, whether they comment in the Huffington Post or Bahrain's Gulf Daily News, offer a variant of these themes.

Frankly, they do themselves a disservice. Strip away the huffing and puffing and their arguments don't amount to a hill of beans.

Iran's stock has been dropping like a rock, and the responsibility lies solely and exclusively with Iran. Trying to blame this state of affairs on others may play to the bleachers, but won't wash on the street.

First, consider what's been going on.

The UN Security Council has adopted three sanctions resolutions against Iran because of its nuclear program, each with the support of the five permanent members - China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and United States. And a fourth resolution appears to be just around the corner.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has censured Iran as recently as last month for developing in secret a uranium enrichment site near Qom. The vote was 25 to 3. Those voting against were Cuba, Malaysia, and Venezuela. Right afterwards, Malaysia indicated that its vote was in error, leaving just Cuba and Venezuela, quite a support group for Iran. As the saying goes, "Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are."

Interpol has issued "red notices" for five Iranians, including Iran's current defense minister. These red notices indicate that Argentina seeks the arrest and extradition of the five in connection with a terror attack against the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994 that killed 85 people.

In February, Bahrain suspended talks with Iran on a gas deal after Iranian officials referred to the country as "the 14th province of Iran," evoking memories of Saddam Hussein's claim that Kuwait was an integral part of Iraq - and all that followed.

In March, Morocco broke diplomatic ties with Iran. Rabat accused Tehran of "intolerable interference in the internal affairs of the kingdom."

In April, Egypt lodged an official protest with Iran over Tehran's "blatant interference in internal Egyptian affairs."

In June, President Barack Obama visited Saudi Arabia. The Saudi king pressed for tougher U.S. action against Iran, fearing the geostrategic implications for his country and all the Arab Gulf states of a nuclear Iran.

That's just a small taste of Iran's dealings with the larger world. What about inside the country?

Each day brings new reports about human rights abuses, as the current regime, besieged since the rigged June elections, tightens the noose - literally and figuratively.

Literally, as public hangings have been among the favored methods of capital punishment practiced by the Iranian government. Figuratively, as nervous leaders attempt to quash the demonstrations that keep popping up, despite efforts to intimidate and cow the protesters.

Will the whitewashers of the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad regime defend the government's repressive practices against students, reform politicians, independent journalists, women activists, gays, or religious minorities?

And then there's the Israel argument. But that doesn't hold any more water than the others.

If Israel has a nuclear arsenal, it is for one purpose - and one purpose only. It serves as the ultimate guarantor of the security of a state that has been the target of its enemies since its very establishment in 1948.

Last time I checked, Israel, unlike Iran, had never called for the destruction of any country in the region. Israel has never questioned Iran's right to exist. It is Iran that questions Israel's right to exist.

And last time I checked, Israel had never resorted to the use of nuclear weapons, though faced with devastating wars since the 1950s, when reports suggest it first developed those weapons. If that doesn't indicate rational, responsible behavior, what does?

I understand that being Iran's lawyers in the court of public opinion these days can be rather tough. It's not easy to find salient arguments to make. Iran has become its own worst enemy - practicing deceit and deception abroad, repression and brute force at home.

Sorry, but no smokescreens, straw men, name-calling, or truth-twisting can deny the stark, unassailable facts about Iran today.

CIA Working With Palestinian Security Agents Known For Torturing Hamas Supporters

2009-12-18T09:22:15Z

Palestinian security agents who have been detaining and allegedly torturing supporters of the Islamist organisation Hamas in the West Bank have been working closely with the CIA, the Guardian has learned.

Olmert's Plan For Peace With The Palestinians

2009-12-18T08:20:40Z

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert proposed giving the Palestinians land from communities bordering the Gaza Strip and from the Judean Desert nature reserve in exchange for settlement blocs in the West Bank.

Eric C. Anderson: Learn to Live with the Iranian Nuclear Program

2009-12-16T11:29:54Z

Paramedics learn two lessons early in their careers: never panic and never rush. Panic typically results in foolish and/or dangerous behavior. Rushing about can cause accidents, lost equipment, and senseless mistakes. The denizens of Washington's chattering class would be well-served to remember these lessons in light of the latest revelations concerning Iran's nuclear weapons program. Endlessly waving about the latest bit of incriminating evidence will not significantly alter Tehran's behavior nor will it generate international support for an exercise of the Bush doctrine. Rather, I would suggest it is time Washington learn to live with Iran's nuclear ambitions in much the same way we have with China, India, Pakistan...and Israel.

Despite occasional ostrich-like protests to the contrary, U.S. policy makers have been aware of Iran's potential nuclear weapons program since at least 2002. Data provided by the National Council of Resistance of Iran -- Tehran's very own parliament in exile -- in 2002 revealed Iran's efforts to enrich uranium and produce heavy water. While these efforts were not ipso facto proof of intent to manufacture munitions, they were (and are) cause for concern...and drew significant attention from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Three years of subsequent IAEA inspections found Iran to be engaged in a number of activities that all suggested electric power generation was probably not the primary driver behind these efforts. In addition to delaying inspections, Tehran developed cover stories, cleaned up suspect facilities, and even went so far as to destroy a site before the IAEA could put eyes, and Geiger counters, on the target.

These are not the actions of an innocent party. But like any child caught with a hand in the cookie jar, Tehran opened the conversation with denials and cover stories. In May 2004, the Iranian foreign ministry vehemently rejected claims Tehran was running a secret nuclear weapons program. In October 2005, Tehran declared U.S. charges concerning Tehran's nuclear weapons program were a lie...that the country's nuclear program was solely aimed at generating electricity. In September 2006, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told NBC reporters, "We don't need weapons at all. We're strong enough to defend ourselves. And we support peace." In September 2007, Ahmadinejad told an audience at Columbia University Iran had no nuclear weapons program. And in June 2008, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei publicly decreed, "No wise nation is interested in making a nuclear weapon, since it is not logical and can not be used."

As Shakespeare so aptly observed, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." The latest development in this long-running saga all but proves Tehran is very much interested in constructing a functioning nuclear weapon. On 14 December, the Times of London published a story highlighting "notes, from Iran's most sensitive military nuclear project," that purportedly outline a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator--the trigger for an atomic weapon. According to nuclear experts I've spoken with, this device has no civilian application--it will not generate electricity, its only function is to make things go boom. Bad karma, bad, bad karma.

Tehran's response to this latest disclosure: the report is "baseless." "Such statements are not worthy of attention. These reports... are intended to put political and psychological pressure on Iran." In fact, Tehran's foreign ministry would have us believe the Times story is simply a "scenario" crafted by "some countries [that] are angry that our people defend their nuclear rights."

I don't know about you, but I find this denial strangely reassuring. It reaffirms what we have suspected for a long time; Iran is operating a less-than covert nuclear weapons program. Which causes me to wonder about the response from Washington. In a 15 December interview with the Times, an unnamed "senior U.S. official," declared, "Now that work may have been done on a trigger mechanism, this certainly gives urgency, in the absence of any meaningful response from Tehran...in terms of additional pressure on sanctions." I'm betting the most recent denial is not going to constitute a "meaningful response from Tehran."

All of which leaves Washington in a bit of a quandary. Sanctions--as the Cubans, North Koreans, and former Soviet Union can attest--are rarely worth the paper they are printed on. This is particularly the case when one is providing a commodity--oil and natural gas--the rest of the planet finds critical for continuing economic productivity. What are we going to do? Advocate a full boycott of Iranian petroleum products and thereby drive up world oil prices? Given the current global economic woes that course of action seems foolish, at best. At worst it could threaten the Obama administration's political longevity. Oh, I suppose we could continue denying Tehran access to foreign technologies, but that ploy certainly seems to have been less than successful...with both Iran and North Korea.

So how about learning to live with the Iranian nuclear program just as we have the Indian and Pakistani atomic developments? Seems reasonable to me. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be prone to making outlandish statements--but he is not insane, he is a politician...an elected politician who will say anything necessary to secure votes. Hugo Chavez does this, Nicolas Sarkozy has come up with some real eye openers...and lord knows more than one Republican or Democrat president has issued statements that caused an uproar outside our borders.

Instead of turning the Iranian nuclear weapons program into yet another excuse for a crisis in the Middle East we need step back and take a deep breath. Think, for a minute, about how Tehran likely sees the world. As the only functioning Gulf state with a predominately Shiite population, Iran is not exactly surrounded by friends. Add to that a nuclear armed Israel and the endless American military presence...and you have reason for concern--particularly when some in Jerusalem and Washington have been very adamant about suggesting the possibility of preemptive strikes on Iran's newest national pride and joy.

That said, we can put this fear to our advantage. The concept of Mutually Assured Destruction may seem passe and out of favor in academia, but the truth is such a defense strategy works. In this case, it will require Washington and Israel to open nuclear umbrellas over a whole new set of erstwhile allies. A public declaration that a nuclear strike originating from Iran will result in Tehran's annihilation is going to significantly curtail Ahmadinejad--and his successor's--policy options.

And spare me a lecture about the dangers of a nuclear weapon in Muslim hands. Frankly, I am more worried about Pakistan's nukes than I am any Iranian program. Tehran appears capable of keeping the wacky fundamentalists in line or at bay. I am significantly less certain of Islamabad's ability to do the same. In a similar vein, it would behoove us to remember that the only nation to ever employ one of these devices in anger proudly proclaims its Christian orientation.

Rather than pandering to fear mongers, Neocons, and modern crusaders, Washington needs to come to grips with this emerging reality. Iran is going to have a nuclear weapon, and there is little, to nothing, we can do to stop Tehran from realizing this ambition. The great quandary is not in how the United States should deal with a nuclear Iran, but how Washington is going to explain this latest development to an American population prone to visceral responses to anything Iranian. I'd start by ceasing the demonization of Iran. At the same time I would demand Tehran reiterate her adherence to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Finally, I would require the Iranian leadership make the same pledge we have chosen to accept from Israel: Tehran, "would not be the first country in the Middle East to formally introduce nuclear weapons into the region."

I understand none of this is acceptable to the John Boltons of American politics, but demanding a world of black and white is impossible when reality is nothing more than shades of gray. The Obama administration has demonstrated it understands this lack of perfection in dealings with China and the war in Afghanistan...let us apply the same pragmatism to engaging with Iran.

Sharmine Narwani: Being Anti-Israel and Anti-Zionist Is the "New Anti-Semitism"

2009-12-16T09:37:52Z

A Jewish woman, deriding protesters at a UK rally on Sunday in support of charging former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni with war crimes, declared loudly into a TV camera that being anti-Israel and anti-Zionist is the "new anti-Semitism."

Such licentious language. Meant primarily, I might add, to inflame passions and mislead public opinion by invoking a word - anti-Semitism - that we have been well-conditioned to condemn above all other forms of racism or prejudice.

I am sorry the woman fears anti-Semitism, pogroms and hatred around every corner. It's not my problem, frankly. Let her get therapy. Does that sound harsh? Sorry, again. But I for one get pretty irritated hearing false cries of anti-Semitism against anyone who criticizes Israel, its human rights crimes, its crazy settler movement, its unique brand of crypto-racism against non-Jews living within the state and its occupied territories.

These targets include Jews as well. Like Richard Goldstone - a man who served the international community honestly and fairly by rooting out the perpetrators of real evil and putting them on trial for the most despicable of human rights violations in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. A Jewish man, a Zionist too. "Anti-Semite," they roared when he charged Israel with war crimes in his UN report on the 2009 Gaza War.

Or Harvard scholar Stephen Walt and the University of Chicago's John Mearsheimer, whose paper The Israel Lobby And US Foreign Policy was skewered in a Washington Post column as anti-Semitic. Writer Eliot Cohen says:

If by anti-Semitism one means obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews; if one accuses them of disloyalty, subversion or treachery, of having occult powers and of participating in secret combinations that manipulate institutions and governments; if one systematically selects everything unfair, ugly or wrong about Jews as individuals or a group and equally systematically suppresses any exculpatory information -- why, yes, this paper is anti-Semitic.

I read this paper, and it is well researched, fair and thought-provoking. Cohen's claim is far and away the most emotionally muddled interpretation by an academic I have yet to encounter.

Yet other targets of this convoluted connection between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism are - well - entire countries. Like Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark, for instance. Yup, anti-Semites, one and all. "Norway is the most anti-Semitic country in Scandinavia," said Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, a scholar of Western European anti-Semitism from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, who spoke last year at a gathering of Israeli scholars highlighting anti-Semitism in Scandanavia.

Oops. Might want to check in on Sweden. An article in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet alleged a few months ago that IDF soldiers harvested the organs of Palestinians they killed, before returning the stitched up bodies to families for burial, igniting a crisis between Israel and Sweden. When the Swedish government refused to condemn the newspaper article, citing "freedom of the press," accusations of anti-Semitism went flying.

That was just the maelstrom we heard in our media. In June, a pro-Israel group that monitors NGOs for bias in the Mideast conflict, issued a report identifying Sweden as a major source of funding for NGOs that routinely use anti-Semitic language - which in this case meant language primarily viewed as unfavorable to Israel.

What were some of these inflammatory, potentially anti-Semitic terms? "Nakba" - the Arabic word meaning "catastrophe" that Palestinians use to describe the events of 1948. Also "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide," in reference to Israeli policies against Palestinians. Only Jews, it seems, can use the lessons of the holocaust for political impact.

But most of the report targets Swedish-supported NGOs for any direct or implied criticism of Israel - one example: The Palme Center, established by the Swedish Social Democratic Party and trade unions, "promotes an overwhelmingly Palestinian narrative of the conflict. The Palme Center makes the absurd statement accusing Israel of 'provoking' the al-Aqsa rising and the 'Second Intifada,' 'contributing to a chaotic security situation' in Gaza following the Disengagement, and 'disproportionate violence against civilians, unlawful executions and torture.'"

Such overt displays of anti-Semitism, indeed.

Ex Norwegian Prime Minister Kåre Willoch has said the kinds of anti-Semitism allegations leveled at some Scandanavian nations is "a traditional deflection tactic aimed at diverting attention from the real problem, which is Israel's well-documented and incontestable abuse of Palestinians."

The Israeli paper Haaretz quotes Danish daily Berlingske Tidende's Mideast Bureau Chief Louise Stigsgaard Nissen as saying: "Why is criticism of Israel automatically considered anti-Semitism? Why can't one criticize Israel as one criticizes the U.S. without being called an anti-Semite?"

Some anti-Semitic allegations border on the absurd. As far back as the 1960s, survivors of the USS Liberty - the US Navy technical research ship that some say was deliberately bombed, napalmed and shot at by Israeli fighters as it sat in international waters on June 8, 1967 - were systematically accused of anti-Semitism when they gave their accounts of the events that day. Accounts that suggest the Israeli attack was a deliberate one on an American military vessel.

It is worthwhile to note that both Secretary of State Dean Rusk and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs Thomas Moorer believed the attack to be premeditated.

As to the present: President Obama has been called an anti-Semite by right-wing Israelis and politicians, who have invoked his middle name, "Hussein" as proof enough. Others cite his association with an array of individuals and policies considered to be anti-Israel as further damning evidence. Former President Jimmy Carter has been called one for years, even though he brokered Israel's very first peace agreement with an Arab state.

Ironically, Obama's has just hired Hannah Rosenthal, the former head of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, as the State Department's Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism. Rosenthal, the daughter of a Rabbi and Holocaust survivor has this to say:

"Criticizing a certain policy in Israel or a certain policy in the United States regarding Israel does not make someone an anti-Semite. It makes them, perhaps, a thoughtful analyst of what's going on, recognizing we can't keep doing things the way we've been doing them."

And of course, the ever-vigilant Anti-Defamation League, which has criticized Rosenthal publically, spent the early part of this year churning out press releases during Israel's 2009 military onslaught on Gaza's civilians, claiming that the throngs of protestors hitting the streets in capitals around the world were fueling "the explosion of anti-Semitic rhetoric." This is the same ADL that two years ago opposed congressional legislation recognizing the Armenian Genocide.

I hate being treated like an idiot. We can see for ourselves the carnage caused by Israeli troops in Gaza and Lebanon, the daily acts of collective punishment and brutality against Palestinians in the territories. So when supporters of Israel pull out the anti-Semitism card no matter how ridiculous the claim, it does Jews everywhere a disservice by severely diluting the impact of the word, and therefore lessening the gravity of real and harmful prejudice against Jews.

Like the boy who cried wolf, the cries become meaningless when invoked for political gain - or simply when all other arguments fail to convince a weary world that yet another Israeli atrocity was justified to protect Jews.

To the woman accusing pro-Palestinian protestors on TV of anti-Semitism, I too wearily say, frankly my dear, I just don't give a damn.

David Saranga: Social Media as a Platform for Dialogue in the Middle East

2009-12-16T08:38:02Z

How can a conflict to which writers have devoted entire books, and which journalists attempt to explain in a few thousand words of copy be encapsulated in a mere 140 characters? This was the central question posed by the New York Times reporter who interviewed me for an article he was preparing about the initiative to hold a press conference on Twitter during the war in Gaza a year ago. This question was essentially a paraphrase on a comment by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, who, in a tone that was part query and part criticism, voiced the same concern live, regarding the first press conference in history ever held by any governmental body on Twitter.

Last week the President of the State of Israel, Shimon Peres, inaugurated a new YouTube channel, where he calls citizens from all over the world to share their thoughts with him, emphasizing his desire to "hear" what they have to say - to "hear" their words and not to "sound" his own. For the first time an Israeli leader is prepared and willing to engage in a non-hierarchical dialogue with world public opinion through a direct and unmediated channel. Coming from an Israeli leader, this development is unusual, unique, and extremely unexpected. With the initiative to create a YouTube channel, Peres has joined rank with a select number of world leaders who have embraced technological progress, among them President Obama, Pope Benedict XVI, and Queen Rania of Jordan.

For some time now I have been following with interest the dialogue that Queen Rania has been holding over the social network sites with citizens from around the world. The goal of this dialogue is to improve the image of the Arab world in Western eyes and to try and explain that Islam is not synonymous with terror, and that not every Arab citizen is a potential terrorist. This welcome initiative by Queen Rania, which has been harshly criticized in Jordan, is held only in English, and is oriented to the Western public. Yet since it is held in English it cannot be viewed as an internal Arab dialogue, in which citizens of the Arab world might also share their views with their leaders. Nonetheless, the initiative is important - a significant, if small step, indicating openness to dialogue.

Unlike Queen Rania, President Peres was chosen by the Israeli parliament; unlike the Queen, Peres has inaugurated the YouTube channel in Hebrew and in English, in order to engage in conversation with the citizens of his country aswell; and, unlike Queen Rania's, his YouTube channel will eventually be translated into other languages, Arabic among them. Despite the differences between the approaches of these two leaders, this is an important development, in which key statesmen and public figures are engaging in dialogue with citizens of the world and not only with the citizens of their own country. As such, it represents a new phase in the evolution of public diplomacy. Unlike the past, when transparency and accountability were demanded of democratic leaders vis-à-vis their voters, today these leaders are also involved in dialogue with international public opinion and with a global citizenry. This is a revolution that could only have taken place thanks to the existence of internet-based social networks.

The answer I gave to the New York Times correspondent one year ago is still valid today:

Since the definition of war has changed, the definition of public diplomacy has to change as well.

I was referring to the need of governments to adapt to progress. This answer is also true in times of peace: as the definition of the media has changed, now that social networks have emerged as a central source for information, governments and state leaders must embrace social networks and use them as a platform for conveying their messages in a direct and unmediated fashion. It is time for direct and frank dialogue between governments and global public opinion. Today this is a real possibility for leaders, and it lies directly at their fingertips, within reach of the keyboard.

Israeli Police Officer Beaten, Seriously Injured By Settlers

2009-12-15T19:12:52Z

JERUSALEM — Angry settlers beat and seriously injured a female Israeli police officer Tuesday, police said, as she tried to enforce a government ban on new housing construction in Jewish West Bank settlements.

It was the most serious clash between settlers and authorities since the building restrictions were imposed last month. Settlers have vowed to defy the orders and have confronted government inspectors, scuffling with them.

Hani Almadhoun: Israel Traps Itself: How Netanyahu's Israel is Less Safe

2009-12-15T17:00:22Z

The right wing Israeli government is in bad shape right now. At least that's what a close look at the political arena reveals.

At this moment, most countries in the European Union are not too fond of Israel's policies nor the country's leadership, for that matter. The United States is not happy either: the Obama administration does not want another distraction right now and the State Department has had harsh words for Israel's wild settlement policies. The UK just issued an arrest warrant Tzipi Livni, Israel's former foreign minister. And Arab states that signed peace treaties with Israel constantly criticize their lack of commitment to peace and their open appetite for grabbing yet more land from the Palestinians, endangering the very essence of the two-state solution. The Palestinian leadership, on the other hand, isn't looking too great right now, either, even though it seems to be empowered by support from the international community. But back to Israel, here is what Netanyahu's genius brought upon Israel:

1. He has publicly supported Israeli settlers and invited the military establishment to back their confiscation of more land from Palestinian farmers in the West Bank, uprooting trees to build residential homes for a segment society that not many Israelis would like to have as neighbors. Because of the free hand given to the settlers, Israeli society is for the first time worried about civil war if the heavily-armed settlers were ordered to evacuate the illegal settlements. You see, the more land settlers confiscate from Palestinians, the farther we are from a two-state solution and the closer we are to a one-state solution. A Palestinian friend who believes in a one-state solution once told me, "Let the Israelis build settlements. At the end of the day, it is infrastructure that the Palestinians do not have to pay for"

2. The Israeli government has systematically ignored President Mahmood Abbas' calls for resuming negotiation for years now. Fed up with empty promises and aggressive settlement building, President Abbas declared he will not seek office again. It is Israel's negligence and humiliation that lead the Palestinian president to that conclusion. Thanks to Israel's lack of action in negotiating, Hamas is once more politically viable. Obviously, the absence tangible outcome from 16 years of negotiation gives Hamas ammunition.

3. The Israeli government refuses to talk to the Palestinians and rejects calls to negotiate final status issues. Israel not being interested in resuming negotiation, President Abbas, an ally of the US and a friend of the EU as well as "moderate" Arab states demanded from the UN and the international community that they meet their obligation and give him a state. Realizing the significance of Abbas' political maneuvering, suddenly Netanyahu wants to talk. But because of his continuous quest to build new settlements, Abbas has turned to fixing his own party instead.

4. In addition to demolishing Palestinian homes in Jerusalem, Israel is now meddling in religious sites in the holy city; century-old Christian and Muslim sites have both suffered equally. These unilateral policies have prompted King Abdullah of Jordan--a genuine friend of Israel -to recall his ambassador in protest. Even the Vatican has expressed concerns about Catholic sites in Jerusalem and Israeli policies.

5. Israel's calls to world powers to strike Iran, have been largely dismissed. While most nations fear a nuclear Iran, those "moderate" Arab states especially do. But countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia who fear a nuclear Iran just as much have also asked Israel to disarm as well. Turkey, another state that has traditionally had good ties with Tel-Aviv warned Israel to not violate its airspace in the event of a strike on Iran. But Israel's credibility on this issue is about as good as Tiger Woods' on fidelity.

6. Israel is making noise about how much they resent Hamas in Gaza. The facts on the ground, though, are quite different. Israel quietly communicates with Hamas and establishes rules of engagement of a sort. Since the the Israeli assault on Gaza a year ago, not a single Hamas member has been targeted by Israel. Israel kills fishermen, farmers and civilians in Gaza, while the Hamas leaders enjoy a peace of mind courtesy of Israel. But militants of the Islamic Jihad are constantly targeted by Israeli airstrikes. In return Hamas patrols the borders and detain those attempting to launch homemade rockets--I have personally seen Hamas police detain individuals attempting to launch rockets

7. Israeli extremists' assaults are reaching beyond Palestinians to hit closer home. Israel's Justice Minister stated, "step by step, Torah law will become binding in Israel." This is not what democracies do; but I have not heard anyone reject his desire to implement Jewish Law, where at least 25% of the population is not Jewish and the greater majority of the populace is secular. Such practices are more proper for dictatorships, not states boasting their respect for religious freedom

8. The number of Israeli extremists has increased as they become more vocal about their desire to build additional settlements. Such frightening scenarios have lead the Israel security forces to increase security on both Prime Minster Netanyahu and the Minister of Defense; this due to threats against their lives by Israeli extremists unhappy with the two figures. Ironically, these are the same people who helped Netanyahu get into office.

In other words, the practices and policies of the extremists in Israeli society (the settlers) are making many Palestinians' dream come true - one state for both people. I am not being naive about this, but the reality on the ground makes having a viable independent Palestinian state living next to Israel ludicrous in light of the changes on the ground. In order to work toward viable peace the international community has to do away with its own double standards when dealing with Israel -- and we Arabs have a gift for detecting double standards. Here is the reality: since the Israeli assault on Gaza a year ago, not a single Israeli has been killed as a result of violence coming from Gaza. While Israel continues to assassinate farmers on their land in Northern Gaza, Fishermen on their fishing boats, as well as militants. Thanks to the Extremists in the Israeli government, all the Palestinians have to do now is watch the most radical segment of the Israeli society bring about an outcome that the Israel as a whole won't be too fond of.

Bradley Burston: I Refuse to be your Enemy: Human Rights in the Holy Land

2009-12-15T12:46:16Z

This is where the war ends.
It begins here.
It begins in a city which practices what Jerusalem preaches
And what Jerusalem, with its vicious holy men, betrays:
God's work.

I have seen the future. It was last Friday,
in the faces of thousands of people marching in the street
in Tel Aviv-Jaffa.
in the face of a little girl dancing on the shoulders of her father
to music played on a pensive oud and a goblet drum
and to music played on a jacked electric guitar and a trombone

"It's true," says my wife, looking at the crowd, straight and gay and Jew and Arab and citizen and foreign worker and refugee, devout and atheist, care giver and victim of domestic violence:
"God doesn't make mistakes.

There was every reason to skip this march for human rights.
It was supposed to rain.
No one was likely to show up.
My foot was broken.

But when the crowd began to move
From the square where Yitzhak Rabin sang publicly for the first time, and was then killed,
What they began to chant
Changed everything:

"Yehudim, Aravim - M'sarvim L'hiyot Oyavim"
Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies

This was a march about what is wrong with Israeli society
But it was an expression of what is right with it.

A woman, elderly, religious, watches the mysterious, uncategorizable mingling of tribes straggle past her down the street. The signs speak of the rights of lovers to marry, of Africans who have cheated genocide to make a new home, of Gilad Shalit to return to his. Of the right to share the Holy Land between two peoples, for the sake of, and despite, the two peoples' many quarrelsome sub-tribes, camps and splinters.

As we pass, the woman on the sidewalk asks "Are you people trying to kill my country?"
My 15-year old daughter answers without hesitation. "Has v'shalom." Heaven Forbid.

I want a word with the people - my people and theirs -
Who treat land as sacred, and people not theirs, as dirt:
My war with you is over.
My enemy today is the word Never.

This is where it begins.
Not the Jerusalem of murderous faith and a vengeful God
But in a city which faces God because it faces the world.
"This is a taste of the World to Come," my wife says, the crowd swaying to music, other peoples and their own.

A year from now, at the second annual Israeli march for human rights, there will be still more people. More people who, in their songs and their movement and in their self-respect, will be saying,
"This country is too young to die.
I declare the war is over."
Next year in Tel Aviv-Jaffa.

This post first appeared on haaretz.com: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1134720.html