Jewish Russian Telegraph

Allahu Akbar, Airline!

Washington Times:

Air marshals, pilots and security officials yesterday expressed concern that airline passengers and crews will be reluctant to report suspicious behavior aboard for fear of being called "racists," after several Muslim imams made that charge in a press conference Monday at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
    Six imams, or Muslim holy men, accused a US Airways flight crew of inappropriately evicting them from a flight last week in Minneapolis after several passengers said the imams tried to intimidate them by loudly praying and moving around the airplane. The imams urged Congress to enact laws to prohibit ethnic and religious "profiling."
    Federal air marshals and others yesterday urged passengers to remain vigilant to threats.
    "The crew and passengers act as our additional eyes and ears on every flight," said a federal air marshal in Las Vegas, who asked that his name not be used. "If [crew and passengers] are afraid of reporting suspicious individuals out of fear of being labeled a racist or bigot, then terrorists will certainly use those fears to their advantage in future aviation attacks."
    But Rabiah Ahmed, spokeswoman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said Muslims "have to walk around on eggshells in public just because we don't want to be misconstrued as suspicious. You have to strike a balance between legitimate fears which people may have, but not allow passengers to have so much discretion that they can trigger a process that would violate a traveler's basic civil rights."
    "Because one person misunderstood the actions of other law-abiding citizens, they were able to trigger a very long and daunting process for other travelers that were pulled off the plane in handcuffs and detained for many hours before they were cleared."
    The imams say they were removed from the Phoenix-bound flight because they were praying quietly in the concourse. They had been in Minnesota for a conference sponsored by the North American Imams Federation.
    But other passengers told police and aviation security officials a different version of the incident. They said suspicious behavior of the imams led to their eviction from the flight. The imams, they said, tested the forbearance of the passengers and flight crew in what the air marshal called a "[political correctness] probe."
    "The political correctness needs to be left at the boarding gate," the marshal said. "Instilling politically correct fears into the minds of airline passengers is nothing less than psychological terrorism."
    The passengers and flight crew said the imams prayed loudly before boarding; switched seating assignments to a configuration used by terrorists in previous incidents; asked for seat-belt extensions, which could be used as weapons; and shouted hostile slogans about al Qaeda and the war in Iraq. [link]

Imams playing Mohammed Atta on the plane. What could be wrong with this? Plenty! Political correctness kills. Remember how Mohammed Atta was NOT stopped?

posted by: jrtelegraph

Boris Gorbis: Would American Jews Abandon Israel?

Boris Gorbis:

“The question is a silly provocation,” said my American Jewish acquaintance. “Of course American Jewry will never abandon Israel.” Then he thought for a moment and added: “unless, Israel falls under the sway of irresponsible politicians, like your Lieberman but even then…” He hesitated, lost in a number of imponderables and then asked me: “Well, what do you mean abandon Israel?”

I was ready: “This means being unwilling or unable to prevent the destruction of the State of Israel. And you just identified the first component of this doomsday scenario by suggesting that someone like Lieberman might be so frightening to American Jews that they would consider giving up on the country altogether.”

Indeed, thinking that Israel might cease to exist is a mental taboo for most people, even those who daily swear to support and protect it. But there has been no guarantee of any state’s survival. At one time or another in this past century of uneasy memory, the world allowed for the disappearance of Ethiopia, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Tibet, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia. Why not Israel?

And so I proceeded to lay out reasons ‘why’ when’ and ‘how’ this may happen. My first argument was easy to state:

“You are a life-long Democrat” I told my vis-à-vis. “Like your family, the majority of American Jews are embedded in the Democratic Party. While they pride themselves on making major financial contributions, the actual number of Jews is not enough to affect the party run today by many of the 60’s radicals. The party is quickly growing to the left because its ranks are swelled by anti-war and anti-globalization crowds, by the young and the disenfranchised.”

He interrupted: “There are many factions in the party and at it always returns to the center”

I asked: “Would you agree that the ‘Scoop’ Jackson-style Democrats are marginalized and have little power. Soon they will be gone and when that happens, American Jews will discover that they cannot move the party back. They will have no choice but to move with the party in all matters including Israeli-Arab or Israeli-Iranian conflict. Rest assured that this movement would involve a significant bent towards acceptance of anti-Israeli planks in your party platform.”

“Look at the signs,” I continued. “The creation of a lobbying group by George Soros in counterbalance to AIPAC is a case in point. If before, the Jewish community spoke with one powerful voice when it came to Israel, the likes of George Soros and Chaim Saban are likely to advance a different set of arguments to whoever will be running the United States, come 2008.”

This angered my acquaintance who met Mr. Soros personally. “What is wrong with that?” he bellowed. “We are a free society and anyone can express their views. We are the world’s best know marketplace of ideas.”

“Well,” I retorted, “all it takes is one anti-Israel resolution in the UN which the US fails to prevent or, even worse, votes for it and the end is near.”

“Nonsense!” interrupted my opponent. “Sheer nonsense!” he repeated for emphasis and said: “First, no UN resolution critical of Israel is going to put an end to Israel. Second, why would you think that the US might support it?”

Now came the time for my second and third arguments. “American society is divided on Bush presidency and the war in Iraq. But the majority of American Jews vehemently and unswervingly dislikes George W. Bush.”.

“The man is a moron and a liar.” responded my acquaintance.

“And you probably can’t even force yourself to listen to him,” I ventured.

“Right on, pal” he said, betraying his college vernacular.

“Well, this President happens to be the greatest and the strongest supporter of Israel”

“So what! This imbecile is destroying the country. Just look what he does to our civil liberties!”

To my pride I maintained a long pause and then said slowly: “I cannot argue with you about what you think of the President. My liberties are in good shape, no worse than under Kennedy or Johnson,”

“Worse than under Nixon!” he said.

“I doubt it, but the point we just made is that in the eyes of anyone claiming Presidency after George W, support for Israel no longer translates into support by American Jews. The lesson we taught all political contenders is that it is not essential to back Israel to be liked by Jews and vice-versa.”

This my opponent could not concede easily: “Not true and Nixon is a case in point. If Israel seeks peace with its neighbors and continues to live up to its international obligations anyone who hates or even dislikes it would not be tolerated in our society. His chances of election would be ‘nil’”.

“I am sure you are aware that you have just made a conditional statement.” I said in a tone of voice my father employs when he wants to annoy me. “What if Israel cannot make peace with its neighbors? What if it becomes aware of an imminent attack and launches a pre-emptive strike as it did in 1967? What if it cannot put its international obligations above its duty to survive, then what?”

“What do you think will happen?” he asked in response. I had no problem to shift gears:

“Well, I do not think necessarily that an Israel-hater would come to power. The next President of the United States is likely to be swept into office on the wave of anti-war sentiments.”

“So you agree that the Iraq war was a huge blunder, that Bush opened a Pandora box and cannot even close it?” rejoiced my acquaintance.

“Actually, I hate metaphors,” I said “but I think he opened up a big bag of puss and it will take time before it drains and heals, but my view is not widely accepted. Anyways, the point is that in the eyes of many, Israel was either a reason for the war or a beneficiary of this war. Viscerally, these people connect Israel with an increasingly unpopular military action and are ready to blame it for anything that goes slowly or goes wrong in Iraq.”

“That it just too tenuous” he said.

“I am not saying that the connection exists for all. But many, including Jewish anti-war establishment figures, would not hesitate to condemn Israel if a new conflict flares up in the Middle East.”

“Israel is not a sacred cow to be above criticism” declared my opponent.

“Right you are, but a cow that is not sacred can be slaughtered.” I took a cheap shot and decided to draw back a bit:

“Remember, we are discussing a juxtaposition of events that would produce this unthinkable result. It does not have to happen. The very purpose of our dialogue is to see what ‘may’ take place. Just bear with me for a moment. Here are the ten components that might; I repeat might result in Israel being wiped out:

1. Israel elects a strong leader, like Lieberman, who is      maligned and marginalized in the US media and whom the left loves to hate.      American Jews voice their disagreement with tactics and policies of the      new Israeli government.
2. US elects as President a popular anti-war crusader      whose position of pulling out of Iraq and the Middle East is      overwhelmingly supported by the ruling Democratic party.
3. Sensing this growing weakness and dissatisfaction and      mindful of the ever strong US reliance on foreign oil, one of the actors      in the Middle East, say Iran, or Syria, directly or by proxy begins to      prepare for a decisive victory over the “Zionist entity” and its      “occupation army.”
4. Any debate on the future of the Middle East is in the      context of the best national interests of the US which, as before, require      an uninterrupted supply of Mid-East oil. Israel receives no support from      the majority of American Jews,
5. In spite of this, Israel reacts decisively to the      threat of war. UN condemns any preemptive strikes with US voting in favor.      Economic or arms embargo is imposed on Israel immediately.
6. It is clear that there shall be no re-supply of      Israel.
7. Whether Israel does anything or not, one of the      parties, say Iran, launches a massive rocket attack on Israel using its      offensive conventional weapons. The nuclear shield, if it exists, merely      serves as a deterrent to prevent retaliatory strike.
8. The UN deliberates with little or no real input from      the US delegation. Anti-war demonstrations roll through the US in response      to some group calling for US military involvement to save the Jewish      State.
9. Israeli major industrial and military centers are      destroyed. Cities lie in ruins.
10. Israel capitulates.

“These are just vectors of possibilities,” I said, seeing that my opponent’s patience was running thin.

He admonished me: “Every American President since Truman had to deal with the threat of the Arab oil embargo because of Israel. Every American President resisted this pressure and protected Israel’s right to exist” he said.” There is nothing that the Arabs could do.”

“I wish you were right in the future tense” I responded. “In the past there always was a strong American-Jewish diaspora in America with access to the centers of power which clearly saw centrality of Israel as an important part of its identity. Not so now.”

“What kind of BS is that?” he said in a hurt tone of voice. “Look at our system of self governance. Look at our network of federations. In less than a week I shall be leading a panel at the General Assembly. Hundreds of delegates from all over are going to come. Our community is strong as is our support for Israel.”

“Strong we are, but the disconnect between American Jews and Israeli Jews is greater than ever before and growing wider. First, there is no reluctance to demonize Israeli politics on the part of the left-leaning Jewry and second, the young generation of Jewish kids couldn’t care less. ” I replied.

“Wait a minute!” protested my acquaintance. “The kids are all pro-Israel. Look at the rallies we had when Israeli soldiers were captured by Hamas and Hezbollah. Most of the faces were under 25.”

“How many young Jews in America would you say consider Israel an important part of their identity?” I asked.

“I think a lot, maybe 70, maybe even 80 percent” he ventured a guess.

“That is not true. A recent analysis by American Jewish Committee summarized findings of surveys of 1, 5 million young Americans (20’s to 30s) and it found that Israel was not a central component in their identity, placing 11^th out of 15 components. The upshot is that the younger the people, the less sympathy they feel for Israel.”

“I have not heard of this study,” said my acquaintance shaking his head.

“Well, just check with the AJC and while you are at it, look into the study by the Institute for Jewish and Community Research that found that for American college and university faculty members US is the second most dangerous country in the world (North Korea is the first).

“I can’t blame them, to be quite honest”: my opponent smiled, possible indicating that he was not prepared to defend this point.

I charged: “Really! Do you also see US as more dangerous to world stability than Iran (Iran comes close third)?”

“No, of course not,” admitted my opponent. I was right – he thought it was a hyperbole.

“This is not a rhetorical exaggeration,” I said, “the study showed that nearly half of those teaching humanities (46%) and more than a third teaching social sciences believe that US is a greater threat to world peace than any other country (again trailing North Korea). About 12 % of faculty perceives Israel as a great threat to international stability – more than Syria (7%) or Russia (4%).

“That’s not good.” commented my acquaintance.

“It is rather bad.” I agreed. “Add the two and two together and you get a startling figure of American students being educated by 41 percent of teachers who believe that the United States and Israel combined are the most dangerous countries in the world. Would you support such an alliance if that was what you were taught?”

My opponent hesitated then said:” Figures lie and besides, this is no proof of how students would vote or what they would do in the event tensions escalate in the Middle East?” He looked at me with obvious distaste and continued: “I see that what you are trying to convince me of is an immediate disaster but I see none of this happening to the extent that you do. Worst case scenario – Israel gets bloodied a bit but the country will survive. You are just an alarmist.”

“Again,” I repeated, thinking how Kissinger waited to warn arrogant Israelis about the impending attack on Yom Kippur until it was almost too late, – and said: “all we are talking is trends. The process is glacial until it shapes up. Besides, you are not responding to the specifics, and platitudes do not help one who wants to see the shape of things to come. Let us take a look at yet another dimension.”

“Which is what?” he asked, possibly losing interest.

“We must look at the fundamental belief system of those who confront Israel and the US”

“I am not sure I understand what you are talking about. Are you saying that we would abandon Israel over Arab oil?”

“Oh no, that is an issue of national priorities and not an individual one. Our individual system of values has at its core two beliefs: One - every life is sacred and two – subject to the rule of law, each person has autonomy over his or her actions. The Muslim world’s system of values is different – it rests on two symmetrically opposite propositions. First, infidels spread spiritual and physical uncleanliness and second Koran obligates every faithful Muslim to stop the infidel’s sacral uncleanliness by conversion or annihilation.”

My interlocutor regained his interest: “I understand, but this applies to only a radical fringe of Muslims -- the bulk of Muslim population consists of decent and normal people. They want peace for themselves and their children no less than we do. We should be orienting ourselves towards them – not towards the fanatics. Calling these people Islamo-fascists as your beloved President did recently did not help”

I felt that we are moving away from the main theme but I started this. I had to get us back but I said: “The bulk of ‘decent’ Muslims voted for Ahmadinejad

in Iran and Hamas in Palestinian State. Look at the European Muslims. Your position is at odds with evidence. As far as children are concerned, do you remember Golda Meir’s famous statement that peace would come to the Middle East only when Arabs would love their children more than they hated the Jews?”

“Yes, of course, I know the aphorism, but the Israelis should be more responsible contributors to the peace process. Diplomacy is a much better alternative than air raids and cluster bombs that are still maiming kids in Lebanon.” he retorted.

I was getting angry with my inability to bring up what seemed to be the core issue. “And you believe that there is symmetry between our values and the Islamic moral universe?”

“Of course, I do. What is more, I believe that fundamentally it is the right wing in Israeli politics, like this Lieberman fellow, who wishes to show that it is not so.”

I took the bait: “So, it is Lieberman who invented intifada and it is he and those like him who brought upon Israel a barrage of suicide bombers and it is he who insists that Middle East would be free of Jews…”

He waived his hands at me. “Stop, stop! I never said such outrageous things and you know it. What I am saying is that the peace process is preferable to war. Israel is on the war path and there is a better way.”

“So the old Latin maxim: ‘Para pacem para bellum’ no longer applies?

“Please remind me what it says?”

“It says that if you wish for peace, you prepare for war, and we, American Jews, are not prepared to go to war for what we would consider is a war for Israel, especially in support of a right-wing Israeli government. The question will not be put before us in black and white but we shall continuously signal our unwillingness to do so.”

There was silence and so I continued: “In any event, your belief that the entire world accepts the notions of sanctity of life and freedom of person and conscience is just plain wrong. The Muslim world as we know it rejects these notions. Most importantly, my point is this: any confrontation puts these conflicting values to test.”

My opponent waived me away: “I cannot agree with your pessimism. Democratic values are strong, much stronger than you concede. The notions of freedom, of tolerance, of human dignity – these are powerful weapons in our arsenal. Please do not underestimate them.”

I paused to make my point: “Our humanistic values will prevail: Americans, Jews and non-Jews, shall act strategically to avoid or limit a possibility of bloodshed and casualties. Given other factors we spoke about, we shall support every non-violent strategy. The Muslims shall act to prevail and thus inflict the greatest human loss without fear, restraint or hesitation. Just look at the deadly score between Sunnis and Shiites. ”

“This does not mean ‘abandoning Israel’ he reacted. “This means promoting peace. Why are you bringing this up?” asked my opponent getting up.

“Because this is exactly what it will be. You just cannot accept the fact that there are no benefits of peace for the other side.” I stayed put. And then continued watching him pace.

“Don’t you think that everyone knows this and plans accordingly? Don’t you realize that when strategic planners in Lebanon, Syria or Iran analyze our responses they know the limits of what we shall do if they take up on Israel? They will know that American Jews will go with the mainstream and that mainstream America will not dare to suffer or to inflict casualties on them in order to protect Israel.”

“We have no fear of inflicting harm on those who threaten us directly but are you saying that we shall hesitate to do so if Israel is attacked?” said my acquaintance.

“Now you got it! But it would be the Russian Jews in America who will come forward and ,,,” My voice trailed and we looked at each other as if this were a joke and laughed.

"He was still chuckling but I wanted to drive the point home:
"It's not just us, the Russian-speaking Jews, its everyone who is not the mainstream: the Persian Jews, the Orthodox, the Chabadniks, even the Evangelical Christians who will do the impossible...

"And what is that?" he asked as we both rose to leave.

"I don't know for sure." I confessed, "but I think it will involve God. Even in the Egypt of Pharaoh not everyone cried out to Him for help."

posted by: jrtelegraph

Advantage Hamas

CNSnews:

Gaza Ceasefire Hands Terrorists Strategic Advantage, Lawmaker Says
By Julie Stahl
CNSNews.com Jerusalem Bureau Chief
November 28, 2006

Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) - By agreeing to stop military operations against Palestinian terrorists in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was repeating the mistakes made in Lebanon last summer, and Hamas would gain a strategic advantage as a result, a senior Israeli lawmaker has warned.

Israel Saturday halted a military offensive in Gaza after Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas called Olmert to tell him he had succeeded in getting all Palestinian factions to agree to a cessation of terrorism.

Many Israelis were further stunned when Olmert in a speech Monday offered Palestinians terms for a peace agreement. The offer delighted some in the left-wing - who would like to see negotiations with the Palestinians renewed - but angered other Israelis who want the security forces to deal with the Palestinian terrorist threat first.

Testifying before the Knesset's powerful foreign affairs and defense committee Tuesday, Army chief Dan Halutz hinted at unhappiness over the ceasefire. He told the lawmakers the army had only been partially consulted about it.

Halutz also warned that Palestinians terrorists may respond to future Israeli military operations in the West Bank - where the ceasefire does not apply - by firing rockets at Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip.

Defense Minister Amir Peretz said breaches in the ceasefire would be dealt with severely. Palestinians fired at least one rocket at Israel on Tuesday.

Yuval Steinitz, a senior opposition Likud Party lawmaker and former head of the foreign affairs and defense committee, voiced serious concerns about Olmert's shift.

Steinitz told Cybercast News Service that by pulling back from Gaza when Israel had every reason to carry out a massive military campaign to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure there, the prime minister was repeating the summer's mistakes in Lebanon.

Following a 34-day war against Hizballah in Lebanon, Israel in August acquiesced under international pressure to a ceasefire that left the terrorist group intact and - in the view of many critics of the ceasefire - in a stronger position than before.

Steinitz said a large counter-terror ground operation in Gaza now would have been to the advantage of "everyone," except Hamas and its Iranian sponsors.

The United States would have understood the need for such an operation, and beneficiaries would have included "moderate" Arab regimes and Abbas, he said.

Israel had had an opportunity to bring about a strategic change that would affected Gaza for years, Steinitz said. Instead, it had handed the strategic advantage to Hamas. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Olmert unleashes his new secret weapon

JTA:

Leaders cleave to Gaza cease-fire,
despite violations by rocket crews
By Dan Baron
JERUSALEM, Nov. 26 (JTA) — The guns have gone silent, more or less. Are negotiations next?

Israel and the Palestinian Authority declared a surprise cease-fire in the Gaza Strip over the weekend, and, even more surprisingly, managed to keep it together despite violations by terrorist rocket crews.

That, twinned with the confident rhetoric from both sides, stirred speculation a peace summit could be in the works.

It began with a telephone call between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Saturday night. Abbas offered to secure a halt to cross-border Palestinian rocket fire from the Gaza Strip. Olmert pledged in return to withdraw Israeli troops from the territory and put the military on a defensive footing only.

The deal went into effect early Sunday morning. Within two hours, at least five rockets from Gaza fell in the vicinity of Sderot, causing no casualties but raising hackles among Israelis who have learned to distrust Palestinian truces.

But the Palestinian Authority was quick to condemn the salvo as the work of renegade rocket crews and, in a more concrete show of good will, posted 13,000 policemen along the northern Gaza frontier with orders to stop the launches.

Olmert counseled his countrymen to give the calm a chance.  [link]

JTA's coverage is very upbeat and optimistic. Finally peace is on the horizon. We, Jews, showed to the world that we are committed to peace by spanking ourselves badly in Gush Katif. Now, terrorists are shooting missiles at us daily. But we will be stronger than provocations! We will ignore them, and show restraint. After all, one makes peace with enemies, not friends. As far as Olmert's new secret weapon is concerned -- it is patience.
Stop, make it cowardice. Yes, cowardice! Now Olmert says to the world it takes a mature man to show that you are a coward. Some stupid cowboy might think about self-defense -- that would be so simplistic.

Are you proud? Are you happy? Are we there yet?

posted by: jrtelegraph

Urgent Action: Support for Immigration Officials in the Masood and Hannan Case

Solomonia:

Petition: Support for Immigration Officials in the Masood and Hannan Case

Here is the text of the petition:

To: Immigration officials involved in the case of Imams Hafiz Masood and Abdul Hannan, and other interested public officials

We, the undersigned, would like to thank you for your efforts in enforcing our nation's immigration laws. We would like to assure you of our continuing support in the face of what must be extreme pressure to drop this matter.

We encourage you to continue to pursue this matter in a fair manner consistent with the vigorous application of the rule of law and without regard to pressure group tactics which will attempt to stifle your efforts.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Here's a brief explanation by way of a recap of the events:

A week ago Wednesday, immigration officials arrested 33 people on immigration fraud charges, including 4 from Massachusetts. Among those four were two prominent Imams, Hafiz Masood of the Islamic Center of New England (ICNE), based in Sharon, MA and Abdul Hannan from the Islamic Society of Greater Lowell in Chelmsford who also serves as chaplain for the Middlesex House of Correction in Billerica and the Cambridge Jail.

The gist of the allegation is that the two were acquiring bogus religious worker visas for people who weren't really religious workers.

The case is similar to one from a couple years back when a guy named Muhammad Khalil was running a "Mosque" out of a Brooklyn basement, vouching for bogus religious worker visas and pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars cash. Oddly enough, one of the allegations against Chelmsford's Hannan is that he fraudulently obtained his visa from this very same Brooklyn Khalill in 1997.

The Imams are now out on bail, but not before much agitation on the part of the Muslim American Society, the ACLU and others, who were encouraging the signing of petitions, the packing of courtrooms, calls to government officials and cries of harassment.

Previous posts on this issue on this blog are here, here and here.

Miss Kelly, who has been watching this issue very closely and will likely be the blog to watch for breaking coverage, has a post decrying the weak news coverage of the event (of course), with links to her previous posts that will catch you up to date very well, here.  Her post on the petition is here.

Now you've got the background.  Given the pressure that our public officials must be under in this case, Miss Kelly and I are sponsoring a petition to support them -- it is something of a counter to the petition that the MAS put up earlier. You can see the text quoted above, and can sign on to it by clicking here.

I would like to emphasize that we are neither judge, jury nor investigators. We do not know the people involved, all of whom may be fine people and pillars of their communities. The fact is, however, that many of us have called for serious immigration enforcement, and have been disappointed with the repeated flouting of those laws, yet when the authorities take action, there are dozens of groups who step forward to make life as difficult as possible for them. We believe that it’s entirely appropriate that citizens also step forward to support the authorities operating on our behalf when the situation calls for it.

I think you will find the text of the petition measured. We are calling for support, while not attempting to dictate any particular outcome.

Again, the petition may be found here. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Alexander Litvinenko to Putin: "You may succeed in silencing one man..."

Jerusalem Post:

Poisoned Russian implicates Putin in pre-death statement
Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM POST     Nov. 23, 2006

A former Russian spy who died in an apparent poisoning signed a statement on his deathbed blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for his death, friends said Friday. The government said Alexander Litvinenko's death was linked to a radioactive substance in his body.

Home Secretary John Reid, the country's top law-and-order official, said experts had been called in to search for "residual radioactive material" at a number of locations as police investigate the cause of Litvinenko's death.

Reid said in a statement that Litvinenko's death Thursday night was "linked to the presence of a radioactive substance in his body."

Litvinenko's statement, read to reporters outside the hospital where the ex-spy died late Thursday, accused the Russian leader of having "no respect for life, liberty or any civilized value."

"You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women," Litvinenko said in a statement read by his friend Alex Goldfarb.

"You may succeed in silencing one man but the howl of protest from around the world will reverberate, Mr. Putin, in your ears for the rest of your life."

Goldfarb said Litvinenko had dictated the statement before he lost consciousness on Tuesday, and signed it in the presence of his wife, Marina.

Putin's government has strongly denied involvement.

"The allegations against Russia in this respect are nothing but nonsense," said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov before Litvinenko's statement was made public.

"It's so silly and unbelievable that it's not worth comment," Peskov said in Helsinki, Finland, where Putin is attending a summit with European Union leaders.

"Now the case will be investigated by relevant British services and we hope that those who are standing behind this case will be brought to justice," he added.

Litvinenko, a vociferous critic of the Russian government, suffered heart failure late Thursday after days in intensive care, London's University College Hospital said. Doctors said the cause of his illness remained a mystery, discounting an earlier theory that the 43-year-old father of three had been poisoned with the toxic metal thallium or a radioactive substance.

British health authorities were to hold a news conference later Friday.

"As part of this investigation, the police have called in expert assistance to search for any residual radioactive material at a number of locations," Reid said.

Friend Andrei Nekrasov, who spoke to Litvinenko just before he lost consciousness, said the former KGB agent had accused Russian intelligence services of poisoning him. Friends said Litvinenko had been on a quest to uncover corruption in Russia's Federal Security Service, or FSB, and unmask the killers of another trenchant critic of the Putin's government, investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

 

Time to Wag the Dog: How Mainstream Jewish Organizations Are Failing Us

Naomi Federlander, special to JRT:

How Mainstream Jewish Organizations Are Failing Us

Several recent examples of deplorable conduct by the mainstream Jewish organizations should give us all pause to examine how they are spending our funds and demand accountability for their actions, or lack thereof.  A quick preview is enough to showcase a consistent pattern of poor judgment in gauging emerging threats, failing to respond in a timely manner, or all too often failing to act at all.  What’s even more disturbing is complicity by Jewish organizations in spreading the welcome mat to those bent on Israel’s destruction by providing them with a venue and a forum to vent their hatred and spread their lies.

Jewish organizations like to hide behind the rhetoric of “dialogue,” “open discussion,” “freedom of speech,” to compel us all to believe in the utility of their dangerous endeavors.  But their argument is disingenuous.  If it were true, they would invite members of the KKK or the Skin Heads to air their “opposing” viewpoints and hold “discussions” on the topics of their differences and try to “understand” their point of view.    They would create summer camps for their children and ours to learn about and teach “respect” for each other’s differences.  The fact is they don’t.  The compelling question is why?  What is different about Islamic fascism and extremism that warrants their sympathies and desire to connect and understand and change hearts and minds? 

Larry Lowenthal of AJC is again advocating the “need to dialogue” with the Muslim community.  Larry claims he personally knows entire communities of Muslim moderates who eschew violence and discrimination.  If so, why haven’t the rest of us been privy to these deafening voices?  Why don’t they ever speak out, speak up, and speak often?  Do they just exist inside Larry’s head?   The excuse that Muslims are AFRAID to speak out is just that, a thin, tired and worn out excuse.  If this group of Moderates is afraid to speak up in America where political dissent is not only permissible but encouraged, I dare say this rationalization falls flat.  The alternative explanation compels me to believe that while these moderates hate violence, they nonetheless, belong to the very institutions that preach it, send their children to learn it, and fear doing anything to change it.  This, my friends, is called living a lie.  So either they are living a lie or telling you a lie, which form of Takiya is it Larry????

Larry also claims that absent this “dialogue structure,” it would be impossible to learn about Jews and dispel the negative stereotypes that exist about them.  I’d suggest, before trying to reinvent the wheel why not dialogue with Jews who harbor extreme negative stereotypes of other Jews and of Israel and as a result do everything in their power to speak out against us and publicly and privately work to harm, humiliate and sabotage our efforts especially when we dare to defend Israel and her right to exist?.  Shouldn’t we attempt this  "Abrahamic reconciliation" in our own backyard first where it at least stands a chance of success once Jews learn the truth from their leaders, that is a truth based on facts not relativistic, humanistic, jingoistic, garbage we have been fed by you and yours for years?  Perhaps it’s time Jewish organizations cease and desist from the “politically correct” double speak they have been preaching and subjecting us to for years. 

The Abrahamic reconciliation Larry proposes requires of Jews to accept the Palestinian narrative, with all its outrageous distortion, disinformation and outright lies because only in this way will he and other Jewish organizations ever be able to claim “success” and realize the fruits of their fruitless labor; years of dialogue with nothing to show.  This, Larry, necessitates not a paradigm shift but a frontal lobotomy! 

This summer ADL was asked to intervene in Andover high school, which has become a hot bed for anti Israel and anti Jewish indoctrination of students.  ADL’s response; they’ll have their lawyers “look into it,” and when hard pressed they reluctantly acquiesced to providing a speaker, if asked.  This tepid reaction was inspite of ADL’s keen awareness of the numerous complaints filed against anti-Israel activist physics teacher Ron Francis. A teacher who recruited students to canvass for him in Somerville where he spearheads the Somerville Divestment Project, and where he served as co-chair of the MA Green Rainbow Party, a party with a rabidly anti Israel platform.  In October, ADL was finally forced to intercede at Andover high, when parents voiced concerns about the impending visit of the Wheels of Justice [WOJ]. A speaking engagement arranged underhandedly by Francis and the social studies chair where they planned to sneak the speakers into the classrooms, unbeknownst to the school administration.  Only when ADL’s hand was forced did they provide some literature ADL published about this specific nefarious organization. 

The pivotal question is why didn’t’ ADL take a pro-active stance in this matter when they had months of prior forewarnings.  Why did they have to wait for an incident to unfold before getting involved?   Of course, this story is not yet over and already it appears that parties are caving in to the demands of Francis and his thugs because they contacted the ACLU claiming abridgement of their first amendment rights! Since when is incitement to hatred protected speech? Stay tuned to see whether the ADL will stand up to the ACLU, or cave in allowing this dangerous group to indoctrinate innocent students yet again.  Since Andover involves Israel bashing and because Ron Francis is black political correctness kicks in and our Jewish organizations begin treading on eggshells.  If this story involved the KKK and black students at Andover high, ADL would be holding the torch and leading the effort to expose and discredit them, as well they should.

Why is ADL so timid, passive, complacent and silent about Israel bashing and student indoctrination?  Why is anti Israel, anti Jewish activity not equally deplorable and equally actionable?  Part of the answer lies in a tour through ADL’s website that tracks “extremist groups.”  Most astounding is that not one single Arab, Palestinian or Muslim group hostile to Israel and to Jews appears on ADL’s Website.   Can they be so out of touch with the real dangers lurking in their own backyard?  At a recent meeting with Christians and Jews, it was reported that Tarsy unleashed an anti Christian tirade backed up by an insulting article blaming Christians for today’s antiSemitism.   I don’t recall a single instance of Christians strapping themselves with suicide belts threatening to blow up Israelis, Jews or anyone sympathetic to them, do you?   

Another example of mealy mouthed apologists for Israel bashing involves the JCRC.  Not coincidentally, the same devotee to “human rights,” Ron Francis, physics teacher from Andover mentioned above, attempted to turn Somerville into a bastion of Israel hatred through the organization he founded, the Somerville Divestment Project [SDP].   Ron’s twisted notion of “human rights” somehow explicitly precludes Jews, in fact Jews according to Francis are the rightful targets of suicide bombers. Ron refers to terrorism as “legitimate resistance” and ”normal behavior,” because Ron believes Israel, which he refers to as the Zionist Project, has no right to exist. 

Fueled by his hatred, Ron succeeded in getting two anti Israel questions on the 2006 Somerville ballot, he shows monthly propaganda films slamming Israel, and has forced the Aldermen to hold a meeting on right of return.  Francis’ efforts are unrelenting; with divestiture dead he’s now lobbying hard for right of return guised as Palestinian human rights.  At this crucial juncture, where right of return is a code word for the destruction and dismemberment of the Jewish state of Israel, JCRC decided to divest itself from Somerville and work on Darfur instead.  I’m not minimizing the critical need to intercede in Darfur, but insist both efforts are not mutually exclusive.   It is to the sole credit of a committed core of volunteers that these ballot questions were defeated.  JCRC’s contribution to this effort was minimal, and involved volunteers having to lobby JCRC, repeatedly, to pay the cost for several direct mailings, which they obliged with residual funds from last year’s campaign.  However, the minute JCRC smelled success, like sharks in the water, they rushed in to congratulate themselves and take all the credit for the success in this ballot campaign.  The travesty lies less in JCRC’s hypocrisy and immodesty, but in their inability to assess danger and expend their resources to expose and defeat it.  They rationalized that since these ballot questions were non-binding they would have no impact.  That reasoning is dangerous and couldn’t be farther from the truth.  A symbolic victory, as the war in Lebanon proved, could accomplish untold harm by emboldening the enemy and providing them with a momentum they wouldn’t otherwise have.  SDP’s crusade to dismember Israel has only begun.  We’ll see what, if anything, JCRC plans on doing to “educate” the public who have been brainwashed for the past couple of years because SDP rightfully counted on one truism; they would encounter no formal opposition in their efforts to propagandize and spread their anti Israel, anti Jewish hatred throughout Somerville and beyond.   

In October, the Jewish Journal promoted an event sponsored by a rabidly anti Israel group, North Shore Coalition for Peace and Justice that drew a large crowd of close to 400 people.  It was promoted as a human story about the lives of three women: a Christian Palestinian, a Muslim Palestinian, and an Israeli Jew.  Immediately it became apparent that this forum was an unrelenting Israel bashing hate fest.  Several attendees left in anger.  They felt betrayed claiming they went to this event on the strength of the promotion, which they trusted coming from the Jewish calendar of events. Had the Journal bothered investigating the sponsors of this event, they would have uncovered that NSCPJ is part of an interrelated web of organizations: WOJ; NSCPJ, VFCN, Jerusalem Women, who share a coordinator,  Dan Pearson, and whose common denominator is their profound hatred for Israel, Zionists, and inter alia, Jews.  The focus of these organizations is on the destruction and dismemberment of the Jewish state.

The last example concerns Temple Emunah, Lexington.  They hosted a candidate’s forum inviting  gubernatorial candidates to speak. All declined the invitation but for Grace Ross.  Rather than canceling the event, despite advance notices given to the temple of the GRP’s virulent anti Israel and anti Jewish agenda, they nonetheless insisted on inviting her to speak claiming they acted on advice of JCRC’s attorneys.  Jews, protesting Ross’ appearance outside the temple, were kicked off the premises and threatened with police action.  While Grace, unabashedly stood under “We Stand With Israel” banner lying to congregants.  Several hours later, Grace was seen at a fundraiser for Palestinian terrorists!!!!

Isn’t it about time we stopped buying into the lies our Jewish organizations are peddling and realize, it’s not about Israeli policies, rather its all about the very rejection of Jews, living in a Jewish homeland in Israel.   Why are our leaders silent about Israel bashing and anti Israel and anti Jewish sentiment?  Why are these same “leaders” morally outraged at events around the world, while silent about the daily barrage of rocket attacks suffered by Israelis?  Why would they donate money to alleviate the suffering of Palestinians and help them rebuild their “shattered” lives, while sitting silently by the daily horrors of Jews being slaughtered in their homes or in the conduct of their daily lives because they happen to live in Sderot or Ashkelon????  Are they back to blaming the victims as they did with the “settlers?”  Haven’t the Gazan “settlers” dispelled that myth and paid a high enough price yet?  Why won’t the Jewish community help resettle these Jews within Israel, after all, the Jewish organizations were the biggest advocates for their uprooting?  Where is the fairness and honesty in their arguments.  Or is it just about lip service that comes so cheaply?  What have these Jewish organizations actually done beyond mere platitudes to “Standing with Israel?” 

WHEN WILL YOU START DEMANDING ACTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY?  It is clear the mainstream Jewish organizations are incapable of change; they aren’t even aware of the extant and impending dangers looming all around us!!!  Change will have to come from us, the concerned members of the Jewish community.  Perhaps then, the tail will begin to wag the dog as it did in Somerville this past November!  Start wagging…..

posted by: jrtelegraph

Charles Krauthammer: Borat is wrong about the Jews

Charles Krauthammer:

Throw the Jew Joke Down the Well
Borat gets anti-Semitism wrong.

By Charles Krauthammer

Borat is many things: a sidesplitting triumph of slapstick and scatology, a runaway moneymaker and budding franchise, the worst thing to happen to Kazakhstan since the Mongol hordes, and, as columnist David Brooks astutely points out, a supreme display of elite snobbery reveling in the humiliation of the hoaxed hillbilly.

But it is one thing more, something Brooks alluded to in passing but which requires at least one elaboration: an unintentionally revealing demonstration of the unfortunate attitude of many liberal Jews toward working-class American Christians, especially evangelicals.

You know the shtick. Borat goes around America making anti-Semitic remarks in order to elicit a nodding anti-Semitic response. And with enough liquor and cajoling, he succeeds. In the most notorious such scene (on Da Ali G Show where the character was born), Borat sings “Throw the Jew Down the Well” in an Arizona bar as the local rubes join in.

Sacha Baron Cohen, the creator of Borat, revealed his purpose for doing that in a rare out-of-character interview he granted Rolling Stone in part to counter charges that he was promoting anti-Semitism. On the face of it, this would be odd, given that Cohen is himself a Sabbath-observing Jew. His defense is that he is using Borat’s anti-Semitism as a “tool” to expose it in others. And that his Arizona bar stunt revealed, if not anti-Semitism, then “indifference” to anti-Semitism. And that, he maintains, was the path to the Holocaust.

Whoaaaa. Does he really believe such rubbish? Can a man that smart (Cambridge, investment banker and now brilliant filmmaker) really believe that indifference to anti-Semitism and the road to the Holocaust are to be found in a country and western bar in Tucson?

Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world.

With anti-Semitism re-emerging in Europe and rampant in the Islamic world; with Iran acquiring the ultimate weapon of genocide and proclaiming its intention to wipe out the world’s largest Jewish community (Israel); with America and, in particular, its Christian evangelicals the only remaining Gentile constituency anywhere willing to defend that besieged Jewish outpost — is the American heartland really the locus of anti-Semitism? Is this the one place to go to find it?

In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez says that the “descendents of the same ones that crucified Christ” have “taken possession of all the wealth in the world.” Just this month, Tehran hosted an international festival of Holocaust cartoons featuring enough hooked noses and horns to give Goebbels a posthumous smile. Throughout the Islamic world, newspapers and television, schoolbooks and sermons are filled with the most vile anti-Semitism.

Baron Cohen could easily have found what he seeks closer to home. He is, after all, from Europe where synagogues are torched and cemeteries desecrated in a revival of anti-Semitism — not “indifference” to but active — unseen since the Holocaust. Where a Jew is singled out for torture and death by French-African thugs. Where a leading Norwegian intellectual — et tu, Norway? — mocks “God’s Chosen People” (“We laugh at this people’s capriciousness and weep at its misdeeds”) and calls for the destruction of Israel, the “state founded ... on the ruins of an archaic national and warlike religion.”

Yet amid this gathering darkness, an alarming number of liberal Jews are seized with the notion that the real threat lurks deep in the hearts of American Protestants, most specifically Southern evangelicals. Some fear that their children are going to be converted; others, that below the surface lies a pogrom waiting to happen; still others, that the evangelicals will take power in Washington and enact their own sharia law.

This is all quite crazy. America is the most welcoming, religiously tolerant, philo-Semitic country in the world. No nation since Cyrus the Great’s Persia has done more for the Jews. And its reward is to be exposed as latently anti-Semitic by an itinerant Jew looking for laughs and, he solemnly assures us, for the path to the Holocaust?

Look. Harry Truman used to tell derisive Jewish jokes. Richard Nixon said nasty things about Jews in government and elsewhere. Who cares? Truman and Nixon were the two greatest friends of the Jews in the entire postwar period: Truman secured them a refuge in the state of Israel and Nixon saved it from extinction during the Yom Kippur War.

It is very hard to be a Jew today, particularly in Baron Cohen’s Europe, where Jew-baiting is once again becoming acceptable. But it is a sign of the disorientation of a distressed and confused people that we should find it so difficult to distinguish our friends from our enemies. [link]

As another good friend of ours, Rush Limbaugh noted when the New York Times got all worked up about "The Passion of the Christ" by Mel Gibson --- they are upset with the movie and Mel Gibson, but they don't mind suicide bombers in the streets of Israeli cities. Here is the bottom line -- Boston's very own Alan Solomont was proudly present at the White House lawn when Arafat and Rabin shook hands, and when the infamous Oslo process started. To this day he speaks very fondly about this experience. But the Texan cowboy W. refused to admit Arafat even once to the White House. During Clinton administration, Arafat was THE MOST FREQUENT FOREIGN VISITOR to the White House.
Clinton never made an anti-Semitic joke, he just glibly ignored victims of the "Peace", together with his left-wing supporters a la Solomont. Now, who is sick here? We -- Jews. Just as Jihadis are corrupting the soul of our Arab cousins, liberals are corrupting the soul of our community. We want our Arab brothers to be healthy, not much we can do, other than cure our own community. There won't be "moderate" Muslims, unless we can produce moderate Jews. Moderate we said -- not left-wing Marxist fanatics who are running the show in our community today. Nough said.

posted by: jrtelegraph

Daniel Pipes on "Peace" deal with Egypt

Daniel Pipes:

Rethinking the Egypt-Israel "Peace" Treaty

by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
November 21, 2006
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/4146

[NY Sun title: "Time To Recognize Failure Of Israel-Egypt Treaty"]

Ninety-two percent of respondents in a recent poll of one thousand Egyptians over 18 years of age called Israel an enemy state. In contrast, a meager 2% saw Israel as "a friend to Egypt."

These hostile sentiments express themselves in many ways, including a popular song titled "I Hate Israel," venomously antisemitic political cartoons, bizarre conspiracy theories, and terrorist attacks against visiting Israelis. Egypt's leading democracy movement, Kifaya, recently launched an initiative to collect a million signatures on a petition demanding the annulment of the March 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

Also, the Egyptian government has permitted large quantities of weapons to be smuggled into Gaza to use against Israeli border towns. Yuval Steinitz, an Israeli legislator specializing in Egypt-Israel relations, estimates that fully 90% of PLO and Hamas explosives come from Egypt.

Cairo may have no apparent enemies, but the impoverished Egyptian state sinks massive resources into a military build up. According to the Congressional Research Service, it purchased $6.5 billion worth of foreign weapons in the years 2001-04, more than any other state in the Middle East. In contrast, the Israeli government bought only $4.4 billion worth during that period and the Saudi one $3.8 billion.

Egypt ranked as the third largest purchaser of arms in the entire developing world, following only population giants China and India. It has the tenth largest standing army in the world, well over twice the size of Israel's.

 

	Egyptian president Anwar El-Sadat, U.S. president Jimmy Carter, and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin in a good mood at the Egypt-Israel treaty signing ceremony, March 26, 1979.

This long, ugly record of hostility exists despite a peace treaty with Israel, hailed at the time by both Egypt's president Anwar El-Sadat and Israel's prime minister Menachem Begin as a "historic turning point." U.S. president Jimmy Carter hoped it would begin a new era when "violence no longer dominates the Middle East." I too shared in this enthusiasm.

With the benefit of retrospect, however, we see that the treaty did palpable harm in at least two ways. First, it opened the American arsenal and provided American funding to purchase the latest in weaponry. As a result, for the first time in the Arab-Israeli conflict, an Arab armed force may have reached parity with its Israeli counterpart.

Second, it spurred anti-Zionism. I lived for nearly three years in Egypt in the 1970s, before Sadat's dramatic trip to Jerusalem in late 1977, and I recall the relatively low interest in Israel at that time. Israel was plastered all over the news but it hardly figured in conversations. Egyptians seemed happy to delegate this issue to their government. Only after the treaty, which many Egyptians saw as a betrayal, did they themselves take direct interest. The result was the emergence of a more personal, intense, and bitter form of anti-Zionism.

The same pattern was replicated in Jordan, where the 1994 treaty with Israel soured popular attitudes. To a lesser extent, the 1993 Palestinian accords and even the aborted 1983 Lebanon treaty prompted similar responses. In all four of these cases, diplomatic agreements prompted a surge in hostility toward Israel.

Defenders of the "peace process" answer that, however hostile Egyptians' attitudes and however large their arsenal, the treaty has held; Cairo has in fact not made war on Israel since 1979. However frigid the peace, peace it has been.

To which I reply: if the mere absence of active warfare counts as peace, then peace has also prevailed between Syria and Israel for decades, despite their formal state of war. Damascus lacks a treaty with Jerusalem, but it also lacks modern American weaponry. Does an antique signature on a piece of paper offset Egypt's Abrams tanks, F-16 fighter jets, and Apache attack helicopters?

I think not. In retrospect, it becomes apparent that multiple fallacies and wishful predictions fueled Arab-Israeli diplomacy:

• Once signed, agreements signed by unelected Arab leaders would convince the masses to give up their ambitions to eliminate Israel.
• These agreements would be permanent, with no backsliding, much less duplicity.
• Other Arab states would inevitably follow suit.
• War can be concluded through negotiations rather than by one side giving up.

The time has come to recognize the Egypt-Israel treaty � usually portrayed as the glory and ornament of Arab-Israel diplomacy � as the failure it has been, and to draw the appropriate lessons in order not to repeat its mistakes. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Fatima, Natasha, and doomed Mahmud Ahmadinejad

Aisia Times:

Jihadis and whores
By Spengler

Wars are won by destroying the enemy's will to fight. A nation is never really beaten until it sells its women.

The French sold their women to the German occupiers in 1940, and the Germans and Japanese sold their women to the Americans after World War II. The women of the former Soviet Union are still selling themselves in huge numbers. Hundreds of thousands of female Ukrainian "tourists" entered Germany after the then-foreign minister Joschka Fischer loosened visa standards

in 1999. That helps explain why Ukraine has the world's fastest rate of population decline. On a smaller scale, trafficking in Iranian women explains Iran's predicament.

To understand Iranian politics, cherchez les femmes: the fate of Iranian women sheds light on the eccentricity of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. By Spengler's Universal Law of Gender Parity, the men and women of every place and every time deserve each other. A corollary to this universal law states that the battered Iranian whore is the alter ego of the swaggering Iranian jihadi.

In the interest of balanced reporting, I cite the history of Jewish prostitution before delving into the Persian example. The Jews have lived long enough to be defeated more often than any other people. After Spain expelled them in 1492, the Jews sold their women so widely that the character of the Jewish prostitute figured prominently in 16th-century literature, notably in one of the earliest novels, La Lozana Andaluza (1528), a story of refugee Spanish-Jewish whores in Rome. After Russian pogroms drove Jews out of the Pale of Settlement in the late 19th century, Jewish women became the raw material of the white-slave traffic, supplying Argentina as well as Western Europe. [1] Jewish prostitutes are almost unknown today, a measure of the revival of the Jewish nation.

These distasteful facts bear directly upon Iran's national decline, and the impulses that push the Iranian leadership toward strategic flight forward. Iran's plunging birth rate, I observed in essays past, will burden the country with an elderly population proportionately as large as Western Europe's within a generation, just at the point at which this impoverished country will have ceased to export oil. By 2030, Iranian society will collapse.

One does not have to destroy an opponent's military forces to defeat him. Russia collapsed without a single shot fired when Mikhail Gorbachev and his generals understood that they could not compete with Ronald Reagan's United States. The Islamic world also has been defeated, by a globalized economy in which the US dominates the top, and China blocks entry at the bottom. As the most urbane people of Western Asia, the Persians grasped the hopelessness of circumstances quicker than their Arab neighbors. That is why they have ceased to bear children. Iran's population today is concentrated at military age; by mid-century, today's soldiers will be pensioners, and there will be no one to replace them.

That is why it is folly to approach Iran as a prospective negotiating partner, and meaningless to offer the clerical government security guarantees, for the threat to its security arises from within. Once a people has determined to extinguish itself, nothing will prevent it from doing so. There is no doubt as to the demographic data, which come from the demographers of the United Nations. But it is one thing to read the statistics, and quite another to consider the millions of intimate decisions that together sum up to national suicide.

What is it that persuades women to employ their bodies as an instrument of commerce, rather than as a way of achieving motherhood? It is not just poverty, for poor women bear children everywhere. In the case of Iran, deracination and cultural despair impel millions of individual women to eschew motherhood. Prostitution is a form of psychic suicide; writ large, it is a manifestation of the national death-wish, the hideous recognition that the world no longer requires Ukrainians or Moldovans.

Iranians already behave like a defeated people. That is why they are so unstable, and so dangerous. The new Persian Empire masquerading as an Islamic Republic is a wounded beast. The rural misery and urban squalor that drive Iranian women into the brothels of Dubai and Brussels contrasts sharply with neighboring Azerbaijan, whose economy will double in size by 2010 as new oilfields come online, according to the CIA World Factbook.

Half of Iranians do not speak Persian, and half of those speak Azeri. Azerbaijan's oil wealth is a giant magnet; it must attract either the largest national minority in Iran, or the military attentions of Iran itself. If a Kurdish state asserts itself out of the ruins of Iraq - a long-delayed justice for that ancient and resilient people - Iran's Kurds will be tempted to throw off the Persian yoke.

The proliferation of Iranian prostitutes in Western Europe as well as the Arab world helps explain the country's population trends. The European Commission's most comprehensive surveys of human trafficking found that Iranian women made up 10-15% of the prostitutes working in Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy. [2] "Fatima" from Persia has become as familiar as "Natasha" from Belarus. Iranian whores long have been a scandal in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, which periodically round up and expel them. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph