Soccer Dad

College aid

After we had three children my wife went back to school. Her degree wasn't very marketable and she wanted to work. So she went back to school; we got government loans to pay for it. She thus was able to get her degree and gain marketable skills.
What would have happened if there weren't government loans available? We would have taken out market rate loans and have owed more. But my wife was determined to get that degree. Sure the student loans made my wife's second degree easier, but they didn't make it possible; that was her own drive. Student loans, though, come at a high price as Brendan Mininter recently wrote in "Uncle Sam's Tuition Bill":

Nonetheless, based on its original miscalculation, the federal government has now become the co-signer on nearly every student loan, even paying the loan's interest while the student is in school, and guaranteeing to lenders at least 98% of their principal should the student default. The government also guarantees private banks that they will turn a profit on student loans no matter how low interest rates fall. Under President Clinton, Uncle Sam even started lending to students directly.

This year the federal government will make more than $70 billion in financial aid available by guaranteeing loans, lending money directly to students, or handing out grants. Pell Grants alone will cost more than $13.4 billion next year as 5.4 million students will receive direct government funding (a million more than when President Bush took office in 2000). Moreover, the pressure to keep upping the ante is unrelenting from Democrats and Republicans alike, who never tire as posing as the protectors of children against the scourge of rapacious tuition increases.

Miniter writes further:

Unfortunately, by footing these bills and turning higher education into an entitlement, Congress itself is primarily responsible for isolating academia from normal consumer pressure by shielding most students (and their parents) from the true cost of higher education. That's why schools can keep ratcheting up tuitions beyond what any middle class family can reasonably afford to pay--because they know taxpayers stand ready to take up the slack.

It's not just the insulation at work here. It's inflation. By making more money available for college education - it will induce some who wouldn't or shouldn't otherwise go to college to give it the old college try, student loans exert an inflationary pressure on tuitions. So if student loans were not so readily available my wife might have been able to borrow less from a regular lender because tuition wouldn't have been as high.
I suppose that there's also another problem with all this extra money going to academic institutions. That's the creation of gender, ethnic and all sort of other pseudo academic disciplines. After all if you have all that money, how else to use it?
It's good that Miniter reports that some Congressmen are attempting to curb the excesses of federal help to colleges and universities. I'd say that's a good thing.

Haveil Havalim #31

British Terror
Knockin' on the Golden Door asks us to have Rachmones when considering the Brazillian who was killed by the British police last week.

Crossing the Rubicon2 doesn't deny that you have to have Rachmonos but points to a NY Times op-ed that says sometimes doing something terrible prevents something even more terrible from happening.

Men's News Daily asks about the media's using a terrorist as a source. The terrorist's name remains blocked pending review. (But maybe you can figure out her name from context.) Alas the conclusion is missing an element of Rachmonos.

Outside the Blogway and Backspin both consider the double standard in the world's reaction to the subway shooting. Backspin also notes that Israel got blamed for the shooting!

Pictures from Israel

As Mirty's Place head off to Israel. Pillage Idiot returns. Looks like he's seen the country from Dan to Be'er Sheva. His travelogue is in three parts with pictures (including an awesome sunrise near Massada). (1, 2, 3)

Chayyei Sarah has a picture from the train in Israel.

Disengagement
Fundamentally Freund takes a lesson from the terror attacks in Sharm El Sheikh to make another anti-disengagement argument.

CosmicX points to another security problem that is linked to disengagement.

In Crosscurrents, Jonathan Rosenblum clarifies an earlier article (and post) in Misunderstood. Truth is I had misunderstood him too. (See Adderabbi's post later.)

Mental Blog posts links to articles that deal with issues similar to that which Rabbi Rosenblum discussed in "Where is Zionism going?"

Dov Bear apparently neither sleeps nor slumbers but he does go on vacation. In the meantime he's enlisted a number of bloggers to fill in, including Shanna of Devarim who argues that Israel's orange protesters are divisive..

Biur Chametz sees the divisiveness coming from the government.

Jewish Education
Biur Chametz suggests that one way out of high tuition costs is to make Aliyah. OK, I know that's not the whole thing, but he does say that too.

Presence discusses the day school problem from the Galus perspective.

Media Outrages and Biases
Elder of Ziyon directs his righteous rage at the AP for glorifying murderers. (with credit to Boker Tov Boulder.) And in his Palestine Postings blog notes again that terror against Jews precedes "occupation."

Me-Ander points to an article about an interesting media conference.

Mediacrity defines the Sulzberger Indifference Template. Armed with an excellent analytical tool Media Backspin takes no time in applying it.

Mourning
Last week Elie's Expositions remembered his son, Aaron.
This week Moving On remembered his daughter, Nechama.

May they both only know Simchas from now on.

Treppenwitz comforts friends and discovers an incongruity.

Interviews
Jewish Current Issues interviews Dr. Kennet Levin, author of "The Oslo Syndrome." (What is it about Scandinavian cities and syndromes?)

Hear Oh Israel interviews himself.

Protests
Only in Israel tells of how the protesters heckled the Israeli security forces. The ISM type protesters that is.

Tisha B'Av
Kesher Talk is looking for contributions for a blog burst commemorating Tisha B'Av. The theme should have something to do with the Jewish connection to Israel or denial of that part of our history.

Yeranen Yaakov announces the topic of this year's Tisha B'Av video. Last year I found Rabbi Krohn's segment particularly inspiring. As was the interview with David Hatuel who came across as extremely gracious. Not a trace of bitterness that I could see. Check out the listings in your city.

Mystical Paths reports that there will be Meteors before Tisha B'Av. Though I'm not sure what that means. The Kinos (sad liturgical poems) refer to certain astronomical phemonena, I don't remember if Perseids is one of them.

Shiloh Musings, as she prepares to leave the US and return on a Nefesh b'Nefesh flight contemplates "Olim" and other aspects of American Jewish life and attitudes.

Rabbis, Rabbis, Rabbis
Adderabbi writes a long thoughtful post on "The Tuition Crisis and Disengagement. I would have never thought of a way to tie them together, but he did it, very well!

NY's Funniest Rabbi (though he may not be the only one, given the google results on "New York's Funniest Rabbi") contemplates Rabbis in "On Rabbis."

Velveteen Rabbi contemplates "All the Vows."

Misc

RACHAK gives more details of his decision to shut down his blog.

Ha-kayitz shel Ahava? Life-of-Rubin has the info!

Biur Chametz looks at the data and concludes that road safety in Israel is, actually, much improved!

UPDATE: Bloghead has graciously agreed to host next week's Haveil Havalim (#32 that is) again. (She hosted #7, check it out below.) Send her your (self) nominations at miriam at miriamshaviv dot com. Or e-mail me at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com with your (self) nominations and I will forward them accordingly.

Or use Conservative Cat's handy dandy carnival submission page.

If you'd like to host Haveil Havalim - Vanity of Vanities - The Jewish/Israel blogging carnival - send me an e-mail at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com and I'll pencil, er electron you in.

Continue reading to see past editions

#30 Jack's Shack
#29 Crossing the Rubicon2
#28 Soccer Dad
#27 Mirty's Place
#26 Shiloh Musings
#25 Soccer Dad
#24 Mirty's Place
#23 Soccer Dad
#22 Mystical Paths
#21 Rabbinical Authority Consortium of HACKers
#20 Shiloh Musings
#19 Devarim
#18 Soccer Dad
#17 Mystical Paths
#16 Critical Mastiff
#15 Soccer Dad
#14 Multiple Mentality
#13 IsraPundit
#12 DovBear
#11 Kesher Talk
#10 Biur Chametz
#9 Soccer Dad
#8 It's Almost Supernatural
#7 Bloghead
#6 Willow Tree.
#5 Crossing the Rubicon2
#4 Dov Bear
#3 Biur Chametz

A mistake on the cover of the half blood prince

I already put this question to Elie of Elie's Expositions in an e-mail. And he hasn't answered it correctly yet. What mistake is there on the front cover of "Harry Potter and Half Blood Prince?" Though I've pointed out another mistake in a different Harry Potter book, I'm really not nitpicking. I'm really surprised that JK Rowling let the picture get by.

Zocher Ha-bris

When the sun is setting and a rainstorm is moving east; the sun's rays are diffracted by the water droplets. It's time for a rainbow.

Idiots

I don't agree with disengagement. But I also don't agree with this. Pray, if you will, that the PM will change his mind, but praying or holding a ceremony for his death is beyond the pale. It's not that I believe that these ceremonies work; as Sha! points out:

What I want to know is: if this kind of crap actually worked, why wasn't it cast years ago on Arafat, Yassin, Bin Laden and others who have it coming? Just curious.

Of course there's no reason to assume that it's any more than a handful of kooks who are doing this. This is the responsible approach.

Abbas's job

A few months ago an editorial "A boost for Mr. Abbas" in the Washington Post stated:

U.S. Lt. Gen. William E. Ward, who has been monitoring the Palestinian security efforts, delivered a mostly positive assessment to the White House, countering an Israeli campaign to portray Mr. Abbas as having failed to act.

At the time, I could find no news reports that backed up the claim of the Post's editors. Though Gen. Ward had been reported to make comments of qualified support for Abbas's progress on the security front, no newspaper had reported on that "mostly positive assessment" the Post's editors claimed. That, of course, raised the question why such an assessment wasn't newsworthy assuming that it had really been delivered. And alas a number of news reports suggested that Abbas hadn't accomplished much regardless of what Gen Ward may have reported.
But regardless of the praise or accuracy of Gen Ward's previous reporting we learned yesterday that "Palestinian Security Forces Are Found Unfit."

The security forces of the Palestinian Authority are divided, weak, overstaffed, badly motivated and underarmed, and more attention must be paid to building up institutions rather than personalities, says the first independent survey of the complicated Palestinian security environment since the death of Yasir Arafat.

The survey, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times by the authors a day before publication, was prepared in close coordination with Lt. Gen. William E. Ward, the American-appointed coordinator of the effort to overhaul the chaotic Palestinian security apparatus, and the Palestinian Authority. It has been reviewed by senior American and Palestinian officials, including those in the office of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas.

Most of the rest of the article is providing excuses for Abbas's failure:

The essential problem for the Palestinian Authority, the report says, is that its security forces were established on "an ad hoc basis without statutory support and in isolation of wider reforms," a lasting legacy of Mr. Arafat's policy of duplication and promoting rivalry within his organization.

The security forces in Gaza are somewhat stronger than those in the West Bank, but suffer from a continuing lack of coordination, the report says. "The critical gap is in command and control," Mr. Chopra said. "There's a blurring between state actors and non-state actors, and that's very difficult from the military point of view."

Despite recent changes by Mr. Abbas, centralizing most forces under Mr. Youssef, that formal structure does not reflect the realities of power, the report indicates.

For example, former chiefs of preventive security like Jibril Rajoub and Mahmoud Dahlan, who have no line authority over the security forces now, have powerful influence over them and play an important security coordination role with Israel. The current chief of preventive security, Gen. Rashid Abu Shabak, is considered a Dahlan loyalist with weak ties to Mr. Youssef, and divisions between the West Bank and Gaza are deep.

Yesterday, Ynet reported that Shabak head Yuval Diskin testified that Dahlan is hampering Israel anti-terror efforts. Dahlan denies the charges.
(The NY Times article cites the efforts of an organization called Strategic Assessments Initiative in preparing the report. Here's a previous assessment from the group on the implications of the Gaza withdrawal.)
Of course, fitting the Sulzberger Indifference Template the Times reports on those aspects of the problem that are Israel's fault:

The report's picture of the state of the Palestinian security forces is sobering, even as senior Israeli military officials, as well as Israeli politicians, insist that Mr. Abbas has sufficient manpower and arms to dismantle the militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad if only he would decide to do so. Israel has refused requests by General Ward to allow the Palestinians to import new armored vehicles and fresh supplies of arms.

After Israel went to war against the Palestinian security forces in the spring of 2002 - a year and a half into the current Palestinian intifada, or uprising - destroying much of their infrastructure, the current quality of arms and ammunition is low and deteriorating.

"The current ratio of personnel to weapons is 4 to 1," the report says. "Meanwhile, non-state factions" like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the various fighters of Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades and local groups like the Tanzim and the Popular Resistance Committee "are, by contrast, relatively well armed."

Of course the problem was that during the "Aqsa intifada" the security forces were not taking action against the "non-state factions" but were acting in concert with them, which is why Israel targeted them. But I wouldn't expect that the NY Times or Strategic Assessment Initiative would acknowledge that.
Now would it be unreasonable to assume that the Washington Post will editorialize on Abbas's failure? Especially when they asserted two months ago that all was great according to General Ward. The point isn't that the Post's editors can't opine what they want. The point is that if they're going to praise Abbas and knock Israel there better be a good reason for it, else their editorials on the subject will have no credibility. (The Post, by the way, carried a Reuters story on the SAI report, but did no reporting of its own.)
UPDATE: Media Backspin noticed how the Times article conformed to the Sulzberger Indifference Template.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Pop music trivia answers

Gut Music in Elie's Expositions had me recall my favorite songs. So I referred back to a post I had written in his comment section. In that post I asked three questions about pop music.
1) What future #1 hit did Brandy have an effect on?
Answer: Barry Manilow's "Mandy." The song, written by Scott English and Richard Kerr, was originally "Brandy," but after the Looking Glass hit, the name wa changed to avoid confusion.
2) What did Meat Loaf and Harry Anderson have in common? Ellen Barkin was the "Meat Loaf girl" on the "Bat out of Hell" album. (Though not in concert.) She also was the PD on "Night Court" for a few episodes until the role went to Markie Post.
3) What hit did Jr. Walker appear on in 1981? Foreigner's "Urgent."

An unexpected mention

Recently I sent a link to an old post of mine to Secular Blasphemy as a counterpoint to the idea that the police over-reacted when they shot and killed Jean Charles de Menezes. Graciously he posted a link to the story.

Well today I discovered that the BBC "Web Blog Watch" linked to me too, so I got 2 - 3 times the traffic I normally get. Thank SB!

Speaking of attention in unexpected places, Biur Chametz's disengagement post got mentioned in Slate!

And as is only right, I should mention that I have an entry in this week's Carnival of the Vanities (#149), hosted at Pratie Place.

This just in

The new head of the Shin Bet gives an assessment that suits his boss:

Shin Bet chief: After pullout Hamas will ease tensions in Gaza

Actually that's not what the article says. The paragraph cites Diskin claiming that he:

estimates that following the scheduled pullout Hamas would have an interest in easing tensions in Gaza and escalating violence in the West Bank.

"[W]ould have an interest?" What exactly does that mean? And is it good that even if Hamas would behave in Gaza that it would open up a new front in Judea and Samaria?
UPDATE: Ynet has more here on Diskin's testimony, including:

Palestinian Authority Minister of Civil Affairs Muhammad Dahlan is preventing Chairman Mahmoud Abbas from taking significant action against Hamas, Shin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin said Tuesday.

“The man (Dahlan) is like a weight on the chairman’s feet,” he said. “He is a disruptive force, and he is taking advantage of the fact that Israeli politicians and senior members of the upper echelon of Israel’s leadership want to remain in close contact with him.”

The remarks are surprising in light of the fact that Dahlan is hailed as Israel’s “Great Hope” regarding pullout-related cooperation with the PA, and the fight against Palestinian terror.

Gosh, I'm surprised.

Counterproductive

Israel long has had a problem with the Palestinians. Israel cannot absorb the Palestinians. But neither can it deny them rights. In order to solve that problem, in 1993 the PLO was imported from Tunis so that it (or its successor organization) would be a government for the lands that Israel would withdraw from. In the past twelve years Israel has seen peace slip further and further away. That's because every step of the way, Israel or the world community or both made mistakes that rewarded terror. These mistakes continue until this day, but it's interesting to review this march of folly. I don't presume to include every mistake; I don't remember every one. This is meant as an overview but not a comprehensive one. In "Yasser Arafat and the Myth of Legitimacy", (free registration required) Daniel Polisar describes, in detail, how Arafat installed his dictatorship over the areas Israel handed to him subverting the numerous democratic institutions that had existed in the Palesitnian areas under Israeli rule. For example:

What made the PA security forces particularly effective in stifling dissent was their wide range of political activities. The intelligence units, especially the PSS, sought to identify opponents of Arafat and the PA, and to win their cooperation or their silence. Their officers engaged in numerous tactics that are off-limits to police in democratic states: Threatening political opponents, censoring the media, intimidating NGO leaders and human rights activists, and enforcing business monopolies given to Arafat’s allies.

But it wasn't enough that Arafat subverted freedom, the West quite happily funded Arafat's efforts. Daniel Pipes has noted that the Palestinians are one of the greatest recipients of foreign aid:

Aid-wise, residents of the West Bank and Gaza have hardly been neglected until now. They receive about $300 per person, making them, per capita, the world's greatest beneficiaries of foreign aid. Strangely, their efforts to destroy Israel have not inspired efforts to crush this hideous ambition but rather to subsidize it. Money being fungible, foreign aid effectively funds the Palestinian Arabs' bellicose propaganda machine, their arsenal, their army, and their suicide bombers.

Even forgetting about the corruption, Patrick Clawson recently wrote how poorly conceived aid hurts rather than helps the Palestinians:

Consider that after Oslo, USAID tackled the housing problem in Gaza by building 192 apartments at a cost of $35,000-$42,000 each, in a place where per capita income was around $1,200 a year. Guess who got the apartments: politically well-connected families, some of whom occupied multiple units without paying. What's more, wasted money can often beget additional wasted money. For instance, after the EU built a beautiful hospital in Gaza, the EU auditor's report noted, "The cost of maintaining and using this hospital will be well over the financial means of this country." So the hospital stayed shut. But meanwhile, the P.A. had to pay to truck in sewage to the empty facility to prevent a breakdown of its otherwise idle waste-processing equipment.

But recently we've seen mistakes multiply.
With the upcoming withdrawal from Gaza we see Israel potentially making the same mistake as it did when it withdrew from Lebanon. Jewish Current Issues examines one aspect of this:

Haaertz reports on Condoleezza Rice’s talks with Israeli officials over the weekend:

Rice said that she is very worried that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas will be weakened and collapse, and that Hamas will take over the Gaza Strip after the Israeli disengagement.

Perhaps Rice and Israeli officials should consider whether it is the disengagement itself that will lead to Abbas’ collapse, because it will be a victory claimed by Hamas.

Jewish Current Issues backs up this belief by quoting Dennis Ross:

Suddenly, there was a new model for dealing with Israel: the Hizbollah model. Don’t make concessions. Don’t negotiate. Use violence. And the Israelis will grow weary and withdraw.

And then of course Jewish Current Issue notes that "Hizbollah now has 12,000 rockets capable of hitting northern Israel" that points to another consequence of the withdrawal from Lebanon. Now that Hezbollah is no longer forced to defend itself on its own territory, it has been able to expand its operations and stockpile arms. And it seems to be reported regularly that Hezbollah has increased its operations into Judea, Samaria and Gaza. There's no reason to assume that Hamas won't become more active in Judea and Samaria once it no longer has to defend itself in Gaza.
And of course, Hamas is not the only terrorist group in Gaza. Why Fatah exists there too. And the United States wants to make sure that Fatah gets more weapons. Mere Rhetoric, wonders what it is that Foggy Bottom does to smart people:

What is it about being a member of the State Department that absolutely disables a person from fairly evaluating the Israeli-Arab situation? Secretary Rice was all smiles about the fantastic job that Abbas is doing fighting terror:

After meeting with Palestinian Authority leaders in Ramallah on Saturday, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's efforts to clamp down on terrorism.

Seriously, he's doing a fantastic job:

Gunmen of the Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades of Fatah killed Dov, 58, and Rachel Kol, 53, while they were driving on a road that links the Kissufim crossing to the settlement bloc in the southern Gaza Strip. Dov and Rachel Kol were laid to rest in Jerusalem on Sunday afternoon.

That's Fatah - that's a member of his own party. Those are his people doing the murdering. So you can understand why Israel would be loath to, for instance, transfer arms to Fatah the way that Secretary Rice wants them to.

There you have it. Invite a terrorist organization to your territory. Say it's legitimate. Give it money. Give it guns. Praise it even if it does nothing or even continues its evil ways. And it will get the message. As Elder of Ziyon notes:

In short, lying works for Palestinians. It is rewarded with news stories that either never get retracted or get corrected so silently that the damage can never be undone. When a behavior is rewarded, it gets repeated; this is simple behavioral psychology.

and

But now, Israel has turned a punishment into a reward. The retreat from Gaza is the biggest reward that Palestinians could have asked for - it directly gives them a piece of what they always wanted, control over land that Jews had control over. No amount of doubletalk can deny that the Palestinian terrorists perceive that they are now being rewarded for terror. And as in countless other situations, the reward ensures that the behavior that caused the reward will continue.

If terrorism isn't made too expensive it will continue. Now with Israel hellbent on withdrawal from Gaza and the United States practicing "Clintonism without Clinton" the Palestinians have once again learned that terrorism pays. And it pays mighty handsomely.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

The half blood prince

After the oppressive melancholy of "Harry Potter and Order of the Phoenix," "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince" was a breath of fresh air.
To look at the series now, it's useful to break them down into the first three books and the remainder of the series. While there were threats in the earlier books the sense of exactly what the stakes were wasn't so clear. Since "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" how high the stakes are has become clearer and clearer. In each of the later books a character is killed. After the "HPatHBP" it's clear that the final book in the series will likely be the most tragic of all.
But even in a book with a tragic ending, J. K. Rowling has brought back the playfulness that has made the series such a pleasure. (I'm sure there was some of that playfulness in "HPatOotP" but Harry's negative attitude in the book overwhelmed any sense of fun in the book.) I particularly enjoyed the chapter in Fred and George's store. Yes it was a lot of fun. But it also wasn't without consequences. And one incident later in the book caught my eye:

"... for the vampire had been edging toward the nearby group of girls, rather hungry look in his eye. "Have a pasty," said Worple, seizing one from a passing elf and stuffing it into Sanguini's hand..."

Rowling's eye for detail provides with more than one of these slightly absurd moments. While the Harry Potter series has characters and a plot, it's these seemingly minor moments that make them so much fun.
One interesting change from previous books is that it is more often Harry than Hermione who notes the incongruities. True Hermione offers Harry some useful warnings that Harry ignores - much to his regret; but most of the plot is discovered by Harry, though he can't quite figure everything out.
It's a testament to Rowling's writing that though a friend accidentally let slip the biggest surprise, I still found myself disbelieving it until it happened.
Other reviewers I agree with: Penny Stock (though hopefully she'll write a fuller review soon) and Elder of Ziyon.
UPDATE: A couple more reviews/comments worth mentioning. Elie's Expositions notes some real life parallels between the HP world and ours. Jack's Shack also liked it. Life of Rubin has an odd review (or at least one odd idea) and major spoilers. Don't check him out unless you've already finished the book

Haveil Havalim #30 is up

Jack's Shack has nimbly assembled a collection of the best of the Jewish and Israel related post of the past week in Haveil Havalim #30. Thanks so much!
Next week's host is .... me! e-mail me at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com with your (self) nominations.

Or use Conservative Cat's handy dandy carnival submission page.

If you'd like to host Haveil Havalim - Vanity of Vanities - The Jewish/Israel blogging carnival - send me an e-mail at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com and I'll pencil, er electron you in.

Continue reading to see past editions

#29 Crossing the Rubicon2
#28 Soccer Dad
#27 Mirty's Place
#26 Shiloh Musings
#25 Soccer Dad
#24 Mirty's Place
#23 Soccer Dad
#22 Mystical Paths
#21 Rabbinical Authority Consortium of HACKers
#20 Shiloh Musings
#19 Devarim
#18 Soccer Dad
#17 Mystical Paths
#16 Critical Mastiff
#15 Soccer Dad
#14 Multiple Mentality
#13 IsraPundit
#12 DovBear
#11 Kesher Talk
#10 Biur Chametz
#9 Soccer Dad
#8 It's Almost Supernatural
#7 Bloghead
#6 Willow Tree.
#5 Crossing the Rubicon2
#4 Dov Bear
#3 Biur Chametz

Perceptions of Israel

A few months ago, Gallup released a poll showing that Americans support Israel more than they support the Palestinians:

Fifty-two percent of Americans said their sympathies were with Israel in the dispute with the Palestinians, while 18% said they were more sympathetic to the Palestinians.

Truthfully, results like these from Gallup are not at all unusual. A 3 or 4 to 1 ratio of those who favor Israel over the Palestinians has been pretty consistent over the past fifteen years.
At the time, Michael Freund wrote:

What is truly extraordinary about the results is the fact that despite the widespread bias of the mainstream media, the overwhelming majority of Americans still side with Israel. It is almost as if the steady diet of anti-Israel propaganda being fed to the American public by various media outlets has little, if any, real impact on their world-view.

(both links via Backspin)
I have to disagree for a few reasons. Even if the 52% supporting Israel is high, 52 - 18 still only accounts for 70% of those surveyed. What about the other 30%? The fact that only 70% have opinions is pretty amazing.
Another thing is that as nice as 3 - 1 margin is, it is not that impressive. If Americans had a true view of the nature of the conflict, I have no doubt that the advantage to Israel would be at least 5 - 1 with many fewer undecideds. Instead that media has successfully introduced the idea of moral equivalency. Does it make a difference that one society produces Nobel winning scientist and the other suicide bombers? No. To the media one must understand what drives the terrorists. And it's impossible to believe that this attitude does not rub off on those who read, listen to or view the news.
This brings up the next question: What is the best Israel can do to fight this perception problem?
This is a question that Jonathan Tobin deals with in "The Selling of Israel." Tobin presents two competing views. One:

To that end, a group calling itself ISRAEL21c: A Focus Beyond the Conflict has set itself the commendable task of giving greater context to the hyperviolent portrayal of Israeli society that those who have never been to Israel, believe to be the country's whole truth.

The other:

Others disagree. They contend that for all of the great things to be said about Israel, the reality remains that as long as its right to exist is called into question, an infinite number of pleasant stories about life there will not convince anyone it deserves to survive.

As pollster and Republican Party political consultant Frank Luntz writes in a booklet about his research on the question, "You can't get beyond the conflict until you get beyond the conflict. A strategy of focusing on all the contributions to 21st-century life... will go unheard unless and until your audience hears and believes that Israel is a proponent of peace, and advocate for justice, and a force for compromise."

My preference is for the Israel21c approach. If people know more about Israeli contributions to science and its missions to assist countries after disasters then they will start questioning those who doubt its legitimacy. Instead by focusing on the conflict, Israel can't win.
A few weeks ago Israel caught a woman who had hoped to blow herself up inside a hospital exploiting a humanitarian pass Israel had given here to seek treatement inside Israel. Did a single news account describe the pass as a "confidence building measure?" Why is it that only releasing terrorists is considered a "confidence building measure" but not the treatment of Palestinians in Israeli hospitals. Because for a variety of reasons the Palestinians (and Arabs generally) own the terms of the conflict. Israel's only hope is to show as many people as possible that it benefits the rest of the world. Only then will people start questioning the unbalanced information that they are fed by the media.
When people read that five Iraqi children were treated at Israeli hospitalswouldn't they find news that the Iraqi constitution doesn't allow Jews to reclaim their property to be outrageous. If each of these stories were emphasized - and similar ones were emphasized - people would stop buying the moral equivalency.
UPDATE: Atlas Shrugs shows these contrasts effectively.
Crossposted at Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

A long awaited mention

I'd been waiting for this article for some time. A friend of mine, Glenn Jasper, and his family made Aliyah. As I understood, the Baltimore Sun was to publish the article shortly after the Jaspers made Aliyah, in January. For whatever reason the article was delayed until now. Despite the too many references to "settlements," "A leap of faith" is a reasonably sympathetic article. (Not perfect. Too much dubious politics mars the article.) There also some nice photographs.
At least in the case of the Jaspers, if you use the term "settlements," they are settlers. The San Franciso Chronicle recently profiled some Olim, who live in West Jerusalem, yet referred to them as "settlers". (via Backspin)
UPDATE: Glenn (now Go-el) Jasper has written a number of articles for Arutz-7. Check them out. Philip Wilcox has argued that Israel's separation fence is a violation of international law. I'm sure a less biased individual could have been used as a source.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Judicial headlines

From the Washington Post
About Ruth Bader Ginsburg:
A MENTOR, ROLE MODEL AND HEROINE OF FEMINIST LAWYERS (June 15, 1993)
QUICK CONFIRMATION OF GINSBURG SOUGHT - CLINTON, SENATORS OPTIMISTIC ON COURT NOMINEE (June 16, 1993)

About Stephen Breyer:
A MODERATE PRAGMATIST - NOMINEE WIDELY ADMIRED IN LEGAL CIRCLES (May 14, 1994)
BREYER: PRAGMATIC LAWYER AND JUDGE - SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IS KNOWN AS IMPARTIAL CONSENSUS-BUILDER (June 27, 1994)

About John Roberts:
Democrats Say Nominee Will Be Hard to Defeat (July 21, 2005)

While I don't presume to have found every single headline regarding Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, I think it's safe to say that the Post would have never allowed the opposition party's talking points to dictate its coverage of Clinton's nominees. However, yesterday, that's exactly what the paper did for Presdent Bush's nominee.
Remember, when you look at that Post's masthead that it's an "independent" newspaper. Yeah, right.

Around the web

Biur Chametz considers the divisiveness that PM Sharon has inspired in the disengagement process. Like me this bothers him a lot as it seems out of character for Sharon. I think he gives the only answer possible in "Tearing for purpose of mending?". Though his solution seems plausible - I think even more so than the popular but dubious allegations that Sharon pursued disengagement as a way out of his legal troubles - it still is unsatisfying (because it's only speculation) and ultimately frightening (because, as Biur Chametz points out, it won't likely work.)

Elie's Expositions fingers a lack of basic negotiation skills involved from Israel's side of the peace process. (Though his criticisms are directed towards the Sharon government, they could be applied to any of the post-Oslo governments of Israel, except perhaps Netanyahu's. Of course, Netanyahu's time in office was an object lesson in the problems with negotiating. Every effort by Netanyahu to require something of the Palestinians, was portrayed as an effort to get out of Israeli obligations; not an attempt - as it should have been understood - to introduce Palestinian obligations.) And yes he cites Biur Chametz.

Mirty's Place has a couple of interesting pictures. In particular the second one stands out. It shows a group of protesters and a group of soldiers; separated by a fence. But they're not separated in a more fundamental way; they are praying together. Despite the divisiveness encouraged by the Sharon government, there are many people - though they may be working against one another - who see themselves as members of a single nation. This is encouraging.

I've been chiding the Sharon government for being unnecessarily divisive. Early on in the disengagement process, Sharon told Lally Weymouth of the Washington Post that he was threatened by Jews:

By doing this, you have opponents threatening not only your political career but your life.
I don't worry about my life. Arabs always wanted to act [against me] but now the Jews are doing this. So for me, it is a strange situation. As one who defended Jews all his life, I now have to be secured against Jews. But I am fully committed to the plan.

Even if true, the way he said it was a pre-emptive strike to delegitimize his opponents. He will carry through despite the threats to his life. His approach should have been to deflect the question.
Yes recently an Israeli government minister was assaulted. But it wasn't one who was for disengagement. It was Natan Sharansky; because he wasn't sufficiently committed to peace in the eyes of one Abe Greenhouse.
I don't recall if PM Sharon deplored the incident when it occurred. But I do know that recently added insult to the injury by undermining Sharansky's candidacy to run the Jewish Agency.

President Bush recently disappointed those of us who thought he was serious abou his war on terror. I'm not happy that he wants a Palestinian state. But I though he differed from Democrats because he would, at least, demand some level of compliance. Jewish Current Issues lets us know that, alas, he's following in his predecessor's footsteps. I've been remiss in not bringing it up sooner; this is a disappointing retreat from the President's position of June 2003.

Cox and Forkum illustrate this appeasement this quite well.

On another matter, Brain Terminal has a nice comparison of how Americans treat their enemies in war; and the way our enemies treat us. It's a good exercise in moral equivalence.

One of the more popular entries that people still look up here is one of a soldier, Pfc. Oscar Buonafina, sharing his Game Boy with an Iraqi boy.

Here's another great picture showing the humanitarian nature of the American army. Our soldiers are people to be proud of.

Capt. Jacqueline Naylor, a family practice physician from the 173rd Support Battalion, successfully delivers a premature baby in a hospital at Lashkar Gah, Afghanistan. This photo appeared on www.army.mil. (Picture by Sgt. Erin Maynard)

Finally, how about Not Quite Perfect's fractal art?

I had wanted to cover more ground but just don't have the time.

Name that shrub

We have this bush in our front lawn that I love. And my wife hates. For a few weeks in the summer it has the most beautiful magenta flowers. The problem is that it wasn't maintained before we bought the house and it has become a host for all sorts of opportunistic weeds.
I remember seeing somewhere that this bush is a member of the myrtle family, but I don't know anything else about it.

Tonight I noticed that the flowers that I love so much had started to bloom.

Last year because it had become too wild, my neighbor offered to cut it down. (He was really anxious to give his new chainsaw a workout.) My wife agreed and I was very upset. However, by cutting it down he really got rid of most of the branches that had been strangled by the weeds and we were left with a smaller healthier plant. Still I have to be vigilant with the weed killers, else it will get consumed by weeds again.

He's dead Jim

My wife told me this afternoon that Scotty, James Doohan passed away.
Elie's Expositions and Crossing the Rubicon2 (and, I'm sure, many others) beat me to the punch.
Elie's Expositions focuses on the fact that no one in Star Trek actually said, "Beam me up, Scotty." So I chose for my ghoulish title a cliche that was actually used. But he missed another famous mis-quote. Sherlock Holmes never actually said "Elementary, my dear Watson" in any of Doyle's writings. I guess that Basil Rathbone or other Holmes portrayers may have used the phrase. But that's not canon!
Here are a couple of quotes from the highly skilled, workaholic Chief Engineer Scott that I've found (here and here):

"How long to re-fit?" -- Kirk, "Eight weeks. But you don't have eight weeks, so I'll do it for you in two." -- Scotty, "Do you always multiply your repair estimates by a factor of four?" -- Kirk, "How else to maintain my reputation as a miracle worker?" -- Scotty, "Your reputation is safe with me." -- Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search For Spock

"I had a wee bout sir but Dr. McCoy pulled me through" "A wee bout of what?" "Shore leave Admiral" (Scotty And Kirk in STII)

(The two above were the ones I was looking for.)

In The Undiscovered Country, with the cloaked Klingon ship blasting away at them, Scotty says, "Then we're dead." and Spock, not ready to give up, says, "I've been dead before!"

"The best diplomat that I know is a fully-loaded phaser bank." -- Lt. Cdr. Montgomery Scott ("A Taste of Armageddon")

Sinking lower

Earlier I had expressed some reservations (and linked to others) about Steven Spielberg's planned movie of the Black September atrocity committed against Israel's Olympic team in Munich, 1972. As Backspin had noted the source for the movie is a discredited book. (More on this from Yossi Melman in Ha'aretz.)
Spielberg's compounded his irresponsibility by hiring Tony Kushner as his screenwriter. Crossing the Rubicon2 has gotten some disturbing sources on the ideology that Kushner is likely to write into the film.
So the movie will the result of lies colored by an extreme leftwing ideology. Not promising at all.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Raffy at 3000/500

Last year when he re-signed with the Orioles, Rafael Palmeiro boldly expressed his wish to wear the black and orange when he entered the Hall of Fame. At the time it seemed a bit premature. Certainly at the end of last year that was a bit of a disappointment, whether his relationship with the Orioles would continue (he didn't play enough for his option to kick in). But the Orioles were able to convince him to return.
Except for April the return has been productive for Raffy and the team. And this past weekend, Raffy joined an elite club - 3000 hits and 500 HR. It appears that despite spending more time with Texas, Raffy's home is Baltimore.
Though there seem to be some doubters, most agree that Raffy is a Hall of Famer. ESPN''s Jim Caple gets strong endorsements from the players.
At Minor League Ball, Jim Sickels gives a Raffy retrospective and then concludes:

It is true that Palmeiro benefited from hitting during the 1990s, but c'mon guys, 3,000 hits, 500+ homers, superb durability. Palmeiro is a Hall of Famer. A pitching parallel would be someone like Early Wynn or Fergie Jenkins or Don Sutton, guys who were consistently strong pitchers for a long time. They deserve to be in the Hall, just as Sandy Koufax-like "spectacular peak performers in shorter careers" do.

Palmeiro is a Hall of Famer and it is not a borderline case.

Baseball Prospectus dismisses the naysayer too.

At The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman considers "Raffy and the Hall" puts up several metrics and shows that Raffy measures up to other Hall of Famers. He may be at the lower end, but he's still got the credentials.

On the other end of the baseball spectrum there's Jason Maxey and Joe Michalski, neither of whom is even likely to play in the big leagues. Still they're enjoying their cup of coffee with the short season A-ball Aberdeen Ironbirds.

Finally a friend has a baseball question. How is it possible ... ? I haven't figured it out. And my searches haven't yielded the answer either.

The brink of credibility

In "Back to the Mideast Brink" the editors of the Washington Post assert:

Mr. Sharon can hardly be faulted for responding to the Palestinian attacks, which killed a half-dozen Israeli civilians. But the Israeli military response risks playing into the hands of the Palestinian extremists. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose own security forces fought gun battles with Hamas on Friday in an attempt to stop the attacks, could be critically undermined by continued Israeli intervention.

This is incredible. Essentially the editorial is saying we understand that Israel must defend itself, but it shouldn't try too hard. Then it throws in a sentence that PA police fought Hamas on Friday as if it shows that Abbas is making an effort.
Abbas was elected six months ago. His forces have confronted Hamas far too few times. To promote one such instance is dishonest.

But if the moderate Palestinian president is shoved to the sidelines by Israeli military intervention, the result could be a post-withdrawal Gaza effectively ruled by Hamas and its allies.

Such an outcome might suit Israeli hard-liners determined to stop further territorial concessions or peace talks, but it would be a disaster for the Bush administration and U.S. interests across the Middle East.

Only Israeli hardliners would want to stop further terrirtorial concessions? Why are territorial concession treated here as the holy grail of peace? If territory meant anything, Hezbollah would have taken up knitting in 2000. If territory meant anything terror would have been reduced after Israel withdrew from Tulkarem, Jenin, Ramallah, Qalqilyeh, Bethlehem and Shechem (Nablus) but instead it got out of control.
There are two elements driving the terror war against Israel. 1) A hatred of Israel. 2) A failure of the PA to do anything about it. (Often the PA is working to encourage the hatred and the violence, but I'm trying not to be too ambitious here.)
Giving the PA authority that it hasn't earned will not help American interests in the Middle East. Creating a terrorist state will not help American interests. Less than two weeks ago London was attacked by Islamist terror. A Gaza preacher praised the terror attacks; in a way reminiscent of the way Palstinians greeted 9/11:

The preacher welcomed the “blessed acts” that took place recently in Iraq and Britain, and highlighted their proximity to the selection of an Olympic host for the 2012 games.

“The sounds of happiness were heard in London, and Osama Bin Laden came and redrew the map. He made sure that the voice of the surrendered will be heard in every place,” the mosque's preacher said.

The sermon was translated by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center , which emphasized that mosques under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority routinely incited for murder, and were being used by a variety of organizations with no effective supervision by the Authority.

No, a change of attitudes is the minimum of what's necessary. But the Washington Post doesn't worry about that.
Another annoyance is the way the editorial lauds the ceasefire:

At stake is more than the tenuous truce that prevailed from February until last week and that gave Israelis and Palestinians the most sustained respite from terrorism and bloodshed in five years.

But the ceasefire succeeded in its limited fashion not because of Palestinian efforts, but because of Israel's defense. The Post reported this week:

The military wing of Hamas, known formally as the Islamic Resistance Movement, has fired more than 100 mortar shells and rockets into Israel and Jewish settlements in Gaza in recent days, one of which killed a 22-year-old Israeli woman Thursday.

"More than 100 mortar shells and rockets" don't suddenly appear. They need to be imported or manufactured. Yet Hamas was able to summon up that number effortlessly; unmolested by PA security.
It's instructive to compare the Washington Post's editorial to one in the Jerusalem Post and one in the Washington Times.
A few weeks ago "Moderate" Mohammed Dahlan claimed that Israel needed to withdraw from Gaza, northward virtually until Ashkelon. An editorial in the Jerusalem Post makes the connection between Dahlan's claim and last week's terror:

The fact that the rocket attack on Netiv Ha'asara last week came a short time after PA minister Muhammad Dahlan took Israeli disengagement coordinators by surprise when he seemingly casually raised demands for that village's land cannot be written off as a mere unfortunate coincidence.

Some seemed to dismiss the attack, which killed 22-year-old Dana Galkovitch, and to take Dahlan's retractions at face value. But the fact that Netiv Ha'asara was subsequently targeted with such deadly precision leaves too little room for comfort.

We may be witnessing nothing less than the germination of the next set of demands to fuel further conflict following the projected completion of the disengagement from Gaza. Netiv Ha'asara's shelling speaks louder than Dahlan's wan backtracking. It and neighboring kibbutzim, all essentially Ashkelon suburbs situated inside the Green Line, have much to fear from the approaching border if that means mortar fire from closer range.

An editorial in The Washington Times noted:

Last week, Hamas, embroiled in an internal political dispute with the PA, fired approximately 80 rockets and mortars at Jewish towns in Gaza and Israel. Thus far, Israel has refrained from taking action to root out this terrorist threat. We expect that Mr. Bush will remind Mr. Abbas that this situation is intolerable, and that he would be making a grave mistake if he emulates Mr. Arafat.

That was written nearly two months ago.
It's hard to take the Washington Post's plea for Israeli restraint seriously. The breakdown didn't just occur. Israel has been restrained in the face of continuous provocations. That Israel hasn't suffered more losses in the past five months cannot is extremely fortunate.
The end of the Washington Post's editorial states:

It also means urging Israel to show restraint unless and until it becomes clear that Mr. Abbas cannot succeed. That would be a fateful and costly judgment -- and it is too soon to make it.

It would be a lot more convincing if over the past five months the Post's editors had not been ignoring Abbas's serial failures. Their failure to demand any accountability of Abbas gives them precious little credibility on this issue.
UPDATE: My outrage at the editorial was based on an impression. Jewish Current Issues, though, links to a recent Barry Rubin column, "What Ceasefire?" (The column is also available here.) Dr. Rubin gives the proof that my feelings were correct:

Given all these factors it is not surprising that Palestinians, including members of Fatah and the PA security services, continue to plan and carry out terrorist attacks on Israel. During the five months between the February 8 cease-fire decision by the Palestinians and July 8, Palestinians carried out 812 attacks on Israeli targets. In thousands more cases attacks were disrupted by Israeli arrests, security efforts or defensive operations.

Some attacks take place in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Others are aimed at Israel itself, though a higher proportion of these are blocked. The type of attacks include shootings at Israeli civilians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, the firing of mortars and rockets, assaults on homes and economic targets, as well as against Israeli forces organizing the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

What makes the situation even more ironic is that the main factor reducing the number and effectiveness of attacks inside Israel has been the security fence so strongly opposed by the PA. If the fence did not exist, given the PA's own lassitude in blocking terrorism Israeli casualties would be much higher.

In other words, the ceasefire that the Washington Post so fondly recalls is more the result of Israeli forebearance than it is of Palestinian effort. So for the editors to call for more Israeli restraint is simply cynical. They are admitting, in essence, that peace will only come as long as Israel doesn't hit back too hard.
Of course the Post's editorial was good, if it was compared to a New York Times editorial from last week, "Aimless in Gaza:"

Mr. Sharon appears to have become so fixated on making the withdrawal appear palatable to the Israeli right that he has lost sight of the larger strategic calculus of building peace. He wants to advertise the pullback as a unilateral Israeli measure, undertaken for Israel's own reasons, and not as part of any larger negotiated deal with the Palestinians, or still worse, as a response to Palestinian terrorism.

He has become so determined to show that the Palestinians will not be reaping any rewards from Israel's withdrawal that he has shunned taking simple steps that could significantly improve the quality of Palestinian life in Gaza, like paying to clean up the rubble of the settler homes Israel intends to destroy, facilitating the reopening of Gaza's airport and finding ways to make border security less humiliating and time-consuming for Palestinians.

So the failure of disengagement to bring peace will be Israel's fault. All those terror attacks during the so-called cease-fire don't point to a deeper problem than whether or not Israel has sufficiently boosted the standing of Mahmoud Abbas. For sheer chutzpah the Times outdoes the Post.
Mediacrity shows how "Aimless in Gaza" fits the Sulzberger Indifference Template.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Targeting professionals

Back in June the Washington Post featured an article "Immigration Law as Anti-Terrorism Tool". The article tells of how American officials have used immigration law as a tool for fighting the war on terror. The article makes a point of saying the high level of education or professionalism attained by those who have been arrested using these laws.
The problem is, as we see again and again that having an advanced education doesn't make one less likely to be involved in terror:

In Cairo, Egyptian officials said they arrested Magdy Nashar, a biochemist at Leeds University wanted by British authorities for questioning in the attacks. Residents in Leeds said Nashar had helped in the rental of a Leeds townhouse near the university where police found explosives after a raid Tuesday. Officials said they suspect the townhouse was used to assemble the bombs used in London, although investigators said they are unsure whether Nashar knew of the plot.

Harry Potter and Israel

With the appearance this past weekend of the new Harry Potter novel I'd like to once again review Harry Potter's connection to Israel.
Harry Potter was a great defender of Israel. For this he was hated by Professor Snape. Not to mention, attacked by Peter/Pierre Pettigrew.

A friend in the business

No blogging isn't a business. (Well I haven't made anything off of it yet!) But I've now got a friend in the blogging business.
Though I've made some friends through blogging (and even met a couple) I haven't till now, had a friend who started blogging. That changed Friday when Elie's Expositions debuted. I expect Eli's Exposition to be at turns funny and poignant. Read it.

Haveil Havalim #29 is up!

Crossing the Rubicon2 was very busy last week putting up an excellent Haveil Haveilim, Haveil Havalim #29 to be exact. (Who'd have believed she'd have time to go to the bakery and get treats for her guests!) Please check it out.

Next Week's host is Jack's Shack, e-mail him with your (self-)nominations at talktojacknow at sbcglobal dot net or send them here to dhgerstman at hotmail dot com. Or use Conservative Cat's handy dandy carnival submission page.

If you'd like to host Haveil Havalim - Vanity of Vanities - The Jewish/Israel blogging carnival - send me an e-mail at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com and I'll pencil, er electron you in.

Continue reading to see past editions

#28 Soccer Dad
#27 Mirty's Place
#26 Shiloh Musings
#25 Soccer Dad
#24 Mirty's Place
#23 Soccer Dad
#22 Mystical Paths
#21 Rabbinical Authority Consortium of HACKers
#20 Shiloh Musings
#19 Devarim
#18 Soccer Dad
#17 Mystical Paths
#16 Critical Mastiff
#15 Soccer Dad
#14 Multiple Mentality
#13 IsraPundit
#12 DovBear
#11 Kesher Talk
#10 Biur Chametz
#9 Soccer Dad
#8 It's Almost Supernatural
#7 Bloghead
#6 Willow Tree.
#5 Crossing the Rubicon2
#4 Dov Bear
#3 Biur Chametz

Another great moment in art history

Earlier, Secular Blasphemy and I picked up on a couple of great moments of art history. (Warning, Secular Blasphemy's is rather gross.)
Now comes another:

Never mind pickling animals and slicing them up to be your next work of modern art, why not let the put-upon animals slice something up and then use it as art instead?
One industrious gerbil is busily doing just that for the Waygood Gallery in Newcastle after the artist Sally Madge used a pet to create "A gerbil's guide to the galaxy".

The gerbil is contributing to her artwork by gnawing through deliberately chosen pages of The New Illustrated Universal Reference Book from 1933.

When Ms Madge cleans up the cage, she takes out the ripped paper to use in her work. It is thought that her furry friend will be the first animal editor in the world.
The 72-year-old book's original editor boasts that the book enables the reader to have "a mine of information at their fingertips". The gerbil is mining sections from the encyclopedia to make its nest.

I'm not upset that people consider this art. I'm upset that I haven't come up with anything suitably stupid to pass off as art myself!
(Thanks to Bill Venko of WBAL news for alerting me to this!)

Standing in the shadows

If the Washington Post's editors were honest this is the editorial they would have written today:

Leaking is a time honored tradition in Washington. Usually though, people think of leakers as being anonymous sources who dispense unauthorized information in dark garages and hide their identities for thirty years. This element of mystery rewards the reporters who cover the stories disclosed by leaks with hefty book and movie contracts - sometimes even thirty years apart - and confers celebrity status upon the reporters. Similar benefits accrue to the news organizations that employ these reporters. It adds an aura of uncorruptability to them and reinforces the view that these organizations will bravely stand up against abuses even in the highest level of government.

The case of Valerie Plame has none of these elements. Karl Rove didn't meet with reporters in a dark garage. He didn't insist on anonymity. Consequently there's no mystery here and it inhibits our reporters' ability to market themselves more effectively. In short: there's nothing in it for us or ours.

But perhaps more unforgiveable than Mr. Rove's failure to add an aura of mystery to the proceedings is the fact that he was, in fact, not exposing the administration, but one of the administration's critics. Joseph Wilson, who made a name for himself two years ago by writing an op-ed in the New York Times implying that the Bush administration tailored data to fit its pre-conceived notions about Iraq and the need to go war, was discredited by Mr. Rove's leaks. Given the number of charges that Mr. Wilson made in his now famous op-ed that have turned out to be mistaken, his credibility was already in tatters; he needed a whistleblower to buttress his claims not question them further.

It is for these reasons that we condemn Karl Rove's answer to reporter Matt Cooper of Time Magazine. We hope that in the future, Mr. Rove, will realize that leaks are supposed to take place in dark garages and will not, in the future, give a bad name to other leakers.

Alas the editors of the Post wrote this. (One more thing has been cleared up about Karl Rove's leak: apparently Rove found out that Valerie Plame worked for the Agency courtesy of Bob Novak.)

Phil Wood's back

Twenty years ago my favorite sports talk show host was Phil Wood. He was both extremely nice and extremely knowledgeable. Somehow he knew that (at the time I visited Israel in 1989) there was a display in the Diaspora Museum about Lipman Pike!
He's back, hosting a talkshow on XM radio. I don't expect that I'll hear him.
He's also a sports columnist for the Washington Examiner. Good stuff, even if he defends Syd Thrift. (Or one aspect of Syd Thrift's disasterous tenure in Baltimore.)
In a totally unrelated development, Boston pitcher Bronson Arroyo just released his debut album. (But it's something that Phil Wood might appreciate!) The first item here must be the highlight:

Teammates Johnny Damon, Kevin Youkilis and Lenny DiNardo help out on Arroyo's version of The Standells' "Dirty Water," the song that blasts from the Fenway Park speakers after every Sox victory. And general manager Theo Epstein, a fellow guitarist, plays on Toad the Wet Sprocket's "Something's Always Wrong."

That inaccurate op-ed

Joseph Wilson IV is getting quite a bit of attention these days. Jim Lindgren of the Volokh Conspiracy criticizes the softball treatment he got on the Today Show. PostWatch asks a question that I wondered about. Does Howard Kurtz read his own newspaper?

In his online Media Notes column, Howard Kurtz repeats something he's said one or two times recently:

...So the response is that 1) the Dems are playing politics (and Rove wasn't, in dragging in Mrs. Joe Wilson?). And 2) Rove was just performing a public service by steering a reporter away from a false story (actually, Wilson was right about the bogus Niger uranium tale, and the White House was wrong).

Actually, the Senate Intelligence Committee's 8-gazillion page report issued a year ago this month concluded that Wilson lied about the information he found, what the Bush Administration did with it and who sent him to Africa in the first place.

I have more to write, but have to run right now.
UPDATE: Though I haven't read the whole thing I find the following from last year's Senate report (pdf) to be interesting:

Throughout the time the Niger reports were being disseminated,the CIA Iraq nuclear analyst said he had discussed the issue with his INR colleague and was aware that INR disagreed with the CIA’s position. He said they discussed Niger’s uranium production rates and whether Niger could have been diverting any yellowcake. He said that he and his INR counterpart essentially “agreed to disagree” about whether Niger could supply uranium to Iraq.
The CIA analyst said he assessed at the time that the intelligence showed both that Iraq may have been trying to procure uranium in Africa and that it was possible Niger could supply it. He said his assessment was bolstered by several other intelligence reports on Iraqi interest in uranium from other countries in Africa.

Clearly there was a quite a few reports - albeit not conclusive - that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from at least one African country. Wilson's trip to Niger was only part of the effort involved in trying to ascertain the truth of those reports. Wilson acts as if he were the sole arbiter of the question.
A question he asked at the end of his infamous op-ed betrayed his self importance and has simeltaneously guided the news coverage:

The question now is how that answer was or was not used by our political leadership. If my information was deemed inaccurate, I understand (though I would be very interested to know why). If, however, the information was ignored because it did not fit certain preconceptions about Iraq, then a legitimate argument can be made that we went to war under false pretenses.

Of course there are many inaccuracies and omissions in his op-ed. (He doesn't mention his wife's role in getting him the job to go to Niger; he mentions a memorandum that was not yet in American hands at the time he wrote his op-ed.) Despite these inaccuracies the MSM has been treating Wilson as the last honest man in Washington.
Of course since Wilson is curious as to why his findings weren't use to answer the vice president's question, that's in the Senate report. Though his report was judged "good" (the middle level):

Because CIA analysts did not believe that the report added any new information to clarify the issue, they did not use the report to produce any further analytical products or highlight the report for policymakers. For the same reason, CIA’s briefer did not brief the Vice President on the report, despite the Vice President’s previous questions about the issue.

His report wasn't deemed inaccurate; it was deemed not useful. In other words Katie Couric finds Joseph Wilson a lot more informative than the CIA did. No wonder he's showing up on the networks now. It makes him feel important.

(Jewish) Music and Art

via JewishBlogging.com. I found a website Metal Jew. Though he has little information other than the group's name, he just bought a CD by White Shabbos. He also discusses an album by David Lazzar called "Shtark." Lazzar's comments are a riot (though he may mean one of them seriously):

What really intrigues me is the line on the inlay sleeve 'after listening to this CD one must go to the Mikveh immediately' and on the back the line 'Warning: not for Chassidish buchrim'.

In an area of music that I'm more familiar with, Crossing the Rubicon2 points to a survey from USA Today of the greatest American Rock Band. I have several quibbles with the results. But, of course, it's just a matter of tasted. Truth is, I haven't been current with rock music for about 20 years. So I don't know if I've ever heard Pearl Jam. But I can't believe that Creedence Clearwater Revival ranked lower than the likes of Journey, the Doors (whose music I don't think has aged well at all), or Kiss. (Is Kiss an American rock band, or an Israeli one anyway?) I'd even pick them above perennial favorites of mine like the Eagles or Fleetwood Mac. I have Chronicle, CCR's 20 greatest hits and no matter how similar much of the stuff sounds it still sounds fresh. I've recently notices that the feedback and decay of some of their songs would possibly make them psychadelic.

Not Quite Perfect has had some absolutely awesome posts recently. "Barnacle" is great. But then so are "Digital Dawn," "Ice Blue," and "Nocturnal Violet!" I hope she never gets tired of making these things!

Midweek Haveil Havalim reminder

This week's hostess (July 17) of Haveil Havalim (#29) is Crossing the Rubicon2. Please e-mail her with your suggestions at enbeea at aol dot com until Saturday night. Or use Conservative Cat's submission form. Or e-mail me at dhgerstman at hotmail dot com.
The following week (July 24) Jack's Shack has agreed to host.

2 + 1 from Boswell

At the end of an earlier post I wrote:

BTW, if there's a Baltimore Washington World Series (or even if both teams make the playoffs) I'm sure that Peter Angelos will regret fighting the appearance of a team in Washington.

If I wasn't clear, I meant that I thought with heightened interest in baseball in the Baltimore/Washington region this year, there would be a greater interest in the Orioles.
At the end of a recent column, "For O's, a swing set," Thomas Boswell bring the numbers to support that contention:

Those big crowds pulled the two franchises so close in attendance -- the Nats average 33,328 to the Orioles' 33,198 -- that the remarkable feature was not their similarity but the raw total of both cities combined: 66,526 fans. The Orioles are now 3,000 a game above their '03 pace and only 1,000 a game below '04. In fact, we've reached the point where the only two cities in all of baseball that draw more fans than the combination of Baltimore and Washington are Los Angeles and New York.

I realize that's likely a temporary state of affairs. If one or both teams fade, interest in them will fade too. But I suspect that there's a bit of a multiplier effect here. In other words if the O's were doing better but no other team was in the area I think (I have no proof) that the increased attendance would not be as great. By fighting the return of baseball to DC, Angelos was cutting off his nose to spite his face.
Boswell's other recent Oriole related colum was about team (super)star, Miguel Tejada, "Best in the All-Star Game, Perhaps Best in the Game." Here, Boswell gets a little carried away. Yes, Tejada is about the best player in the AL right now. I don't know if he's better than A-Rod, but probably better than everyone else. But in his career, he won't be better than A-Rod. A-Rod was a productive major leaguer at the age of 19. Barring injuries A-Rod will undoubtedly be the premier player of this era.
I'm not comfortable with Boswell's comarisons between Tejada and Ripken. Not because I believe that Ripken is some sort of deity. It's just that there's more to a player's offensive ability than his home runs and RBI. If he's going to make the comparison, he needs to do a little more work.
But I agree that Tejada if the face of the team. And it's a pretty nice face right now. (Until this year, I was still thinking that this might be Melvin Mora's team. Still it's nice that two of the Orioles' stars come accross as such nice guys.
Finally, I'd just like to point out that Boswell had a really nice profile of the Nationals closer, Chad Cordero. I guess what really sticks out is that he was very happy with his signing bonus and didn't even have an agent when he originally signed with the team. It's a nice story. Still, I hope he has an agent by now. As he improves he will need a professional looking out for his interests.
One of the reasons I didn't want the Nationals, is that I realized that Boswell would primarily write about them instead of the Orioles. It was nice to read a couple of Oriole related articles, even if his first love now is the Nationals.

Perspectives on Israel from around the web

Ocean Guy has an apt quote from Cal Thomas.

Crossing the Rubicon2 reproduced a headline "22% of Israelis are in Mourning For a Relative or Friend Lost in a Terrorist Attack" from the Jerusalem Post.
As it relates to my brother's family:
My brother was a friend of Rabbi Shimon Biran from Yeshivat Sha'alvim.
My sister-in-law worked with the brother's of Dr. Shmuel Gilles.
My oldest nephew learned in Yeshiva with the son of Col. Dror Weinberg.
My next nephew was in the same class as one of the surviving Dickstein children.
In America we don't usually know so many people who died unnaturally. But that is the nature of this war against the Jews of Israel.

She also links to an essay by Alan Dershowitz showing how successful terror has been. It also makes me question the conclusion Daniel Pipes on the subject of "Does Terrorism in the West Help the Islamist Cause?" Pipes argues that anti-Western terror is counter-productive to Islamist goals. But I think that Dershowitz is right here. Terror put the Palesitinian cause on the map and still is justified by many among the elites of the West. The more terror against the West, the more those same people ask "Why do they hate us?" and "What can we do to make amends?" Those questions affect much of our (the Western) policy to those who would kill us and work to undermine the effectiveness of force to be used against those enemies.

Were the Palestinians expelled? Palestine Postings answers ( or Elder of Ziyon does ) with headlines. Ephraim Karsh answers with scholarship.

The fake bomb in the bus station. Jewish terror? Or a smear? Willow Tree argues that it was obviously a government plant. (Read the comments too, for a further clarification of her view.) CosmicX is suspicious too but not necessarily as certain as Willow Tree.

Normally, like Olah Chadashah in CosmicX's comments, I am suspicious of conspiracy theories. However there is precedent. I've posted on this before. In a nutshell, in September 1995 an Arab man in Halhul (near Chevron) was killed by a group of men in Israeli army uniforms who spoke some Hebrew. After the murder a representative of the extreme Israeli group Eyal called to take "credit" for the murder. For the next few days government ministers were threatening to get rid of Hevron's Jewish community and generally condemning Jews living in Yesha.
About a week later three Arabs were arrested for the murder. (A fourth apparently escaped capture.) There were, of course, no apologies from the government.
What's more disturbing is that we now know that Eyal wasn't a group. It was Avishai Raviv, a Shabak agent who was charged with spying on (and, apparently delegitmizing) Israel's nationalist camp. Some number of government ministers had to have known from the start that Eyal was Raviv and said nothing. The silence of any minister at that point was interfering with the investigation of a felony. Needless to say since Raviv got off - though he surely was more culpable than Margalit Har Shefi of not preventing PM Rabin's murder - no one else has been made to account for this dirty trick. So yes, ten years ago the government was willing to smear its opponents. It makes it easier to believe that it's happening again.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad

New doubting thomas up

I just posted a new Doubting Thomas, "The missing middle."

Kind to the cruel is not the right measure

A collection of quotes and attitudes from a group of Israel haters.
Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah:This is why I do not think that this divergence of opinions has led to any tension. In fact, I support many of Iran’s political stances against the US and Israel and its support for the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine.

Saeb Erekat:"That´s absolutely unacceptable," Erekat told the Associated Press. "Our children should have hope and a future and should not be suicide bombers. We want them to be doctors and engineers."

The great hypocrisy of Erekat's statement is that he and the PA leadership have been the driving force indoctrinating PA children to aspire to Shahada - Death for Allah. As PMW has reported, it was only a few months ago that Erekat and other top PA leaders, including Yasser Arafat, sponsored a soccer tournament honoring 24 Shahids ("Islamic Martyrs"), including such arch-terrorists as Yechya Ayash, the first Hamas suicide-bomb maker, who masterminded the Palestinian suicide bombings; Adin Al Kassam, the name of the suicide terrorist wing of the Hamas; Raid Carmi, a regional head of a suicide terrorist unit; Jamal Mansour of Hamas; and Salah Drowza of Hamas.

As a sponsor, Saeb Erekat was present at the tournament honoring the terrorists, and personally distributed the trophies. [Al Ayyam, Sept. 21, 2003, Al Quds, Sept. 29, 2003]

Al-Azhar Grand Imam Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi, Sunni cleric: However, an Egyptian law professor, Tawfiq Al-Shawi, recalled that Tantawi had issued in the past an opposite religious ruling, namely, that the suicide attacks are acceptable in the Shari'a: "On August 4, 1998, in an interview in the Al-Hayat daily, Sheik Tantawi described suicide operations as a legitimate defense against the enemy who attacks the Palestinian people, and who has no mercy on the elderly, women or children... On a previous occasion, on May 27, 1998, Sheik Tantawi stated: 'It is every Muslim, Palestinian and Arab's right to blow himself up in the heart of Israel, an honorable death is better than a life of humiliation. All religious laws have demanded the use of force against the enemy and fighting against those who stand by Israel; there is no escape from fighting, from Jihad, and from [self-]defense, and whoever refrains from such things is not a believer.'"

These guys might be capable of making moderate comments when called upon to do so. And they're smart enough to know that no one's going to spend a lot of time seeking out how they really feel.

To present the rehearsed but insincere concilliatory comments of these guys is to make a statement. That statement is that you're willing to whitewash the evil of their views. When you usually construe (or more likely misconstrue) the statements of people you disagree with to show that they are extreme beyond redemption; to promote the few non-offensive words of people who hate you is to give them cover.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

A real medical outrage

A little while ago I posted about "The washington post's medical ethics." I complained that the Post made a debate whether it was good to have developed a treatment that was only going to help black people. There's no debate, if the treatment leads people to live healthier and longer lives that's a good thing. If genetics made it so that this treatment only helps a segment of the population, I hardly see what is wrong with that.
On the other hand Parshablog links to this article from New Scientist that says:

WOMEN in Europe who happen to be of Ashkenazi Jewish descent may want to keep that fact from their doctor when being tested for breast cancer genes.

Myriad Genetics of Salt Lake City won a European patent on 1 July covering a specific mutation in the BRCA2 gene, which increases the risk of breast cancer. The mutation is found in 1 in 100 women of Ashkenazi Jewish descent. The ruling means that doctors offering tests for BRCA2 mutations are now legally obliged to ask women if they are Ashkenazi Jews. If they say they are, doctors must pay a licence fee to Myriad. No fee is due if a patient says she does not know.

The differences are these:
1) In the case of the heart treatment, a treatment has been developed. This treatment only helps a certain ethnic group.
2) In the case of the breast cancer screening, this isn't about a treatment. It's about a test that's available for everyone. But only one group has to pay an extra fee for it.
Clearly the second case is objectionable.

Antelopes are missionary

But turtles apparently aren't.
The turtles we saw were, um, "exercising" as our 6 year old helpfully explained at the Plumpton Park Zoo this past Sunday. The zoo was OK, worth about an hour and a half. But the Baltimore Zoo (or now the Maryland Zoo in Baltimore) is too pricey for too little, so we decided to try the Plumpton Park Zoo about an hour north of Baltimore.
There were peacocks all over the place. (Actually that's peafowl. Peacocks are the male of the species; peahens are the females.) Somehow, though I don't think they fly, they were on roofs and in trees.

And no matter how beautiful peacocks are, they are loud and obnoxious.

When I was younger we lived in Springfield Massachusetts. On our walks to synagogue we'd pass through this zoo. The two animals (or species) I remember were the peacocks and the polar bears. In the summer, my father would usually comment how unhappy the bears looked, so hot in their fur coats.

The Springfield Zoo in Forest Park is sort of famous. Not for itself. But at one point it was run by T.R. Geisel, the father of Theodore Geisel, otherwise known as Dr. Seuss.

Some of their animals were named. There was Freddy the Donkey.

Jimmy and Jeremy were the giraffes. (But not Geoffrey.) And there was a Python named Monty.

As far as exotic animals go there were Zebus, that simply look like white cows. There were also Watusi, which is another kind of cattle, not just a dance.

On the way out I decided to take pictures of some of the flora too.

I thought that this one was particularly nice; though I have no idea what kind of flower it is.

One problem I've noticed with private zoos is that they are generally smellier than the public ones. Still for our two children (who are currently home) it kept them interested. Though the three year old didn't like the "smelly house." That was the reptile her house. Her six year old brother liked it quite a bit though. Especially the bespectacled caiman.

Jihad in Thailand

If you're coming here because of the link from NRO's Media blog, here's a link to recent mentions of Jihad in Thailand by the excellent Clarity and Resolve blog. Thanks Steve.

Haveil Havalim #28

Jews in odd places:
Critical Mastiff offers his Thoughts on Batman Begins. If you're planning to see the movie, though, beware there are spoilers.

In honor of the anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg, Pillage Idiot presents the Gettysburg Address in Hebrew. Rishon Rishon gives a preferred Hebrew translation. By the way, who was the main speaker at the dedication of the Gettysburg cemetery?

Eytan Kobre at Cross-Currents thinks that Daf Yomi played a role in the decision to deny New York the 2012 Olympics. Need i say this is tongue in cheek?

My Urban Kvetch found Israeli tea on Will and Grace. (I guess that's not so unusual given that the character Grace is Jewish.

Jewish Music Blog gives the secular sources of some popular Jewish tunes. (via Life of Rubin)

Yourish has a seemingly all-encompassing Israel News Roundup.

Views on Disengagement
House of Joy is a house of doubts. She expresses her views very well and includes an exhortation to people like me who still live in the States. Commenter Ze'ev agrees and seconds the point with his own observation.

Israel Perspectives (Ze'ev the commenter above) wonders what fateful decisions he will make to show his objection.

Chayyei Sarah who mentioned House of Joy has her own thoughts. She askswhat color is my bracelet but sees value in unity above all else.

Not a Fish is leaning toward the blue in Too Late.

Medical Madhouse (in a slightly older post) recounts his feelings on returning to his homeland for vacation that include, not surprisingly, his thoughts on politics and disengagement, in Israeli Departed.

The Chainik Hocker focuses on the likelihood of many soldiers refusing to follow orders to remove Jews from their homes in Gaza.

Alas, Shiloh Musings gives advice what to do if someone protesting is a victim of "Police Brutality."

Mystical Paths provides a map showing the schedule of disenagement.

CosmicX has More Exclusive Cosmic X Protest Pics.

My Right Word wonders if the proper questions from a pollster might change peoples' minds about disengagement.

via An Unsealed Room, On the Face writes of the upcoming disengagement from the view of reporters and reservists in Coming Closer to Home.

Israelly Cool! tells us the problems the Color Orange is causing.

Down then Up
All of this disengagement blogging has gotten me down. Fortunately Me-Ander has a pick-me-up. Specifically she reports that Machanei Yehuda is going upscale!

Divesting
Rabbi Jeremy Rosen has an extended post about Anglican Divestment. In short: not all Anglicans are culpable. He also briefly discusses issues of interfaith dialogue.

Atlas Shrugs writes of the Euphemism of the Day: Economic Leverage.

Looks at Books
Modern Orthodox Woman writes about the mussar (ethical teachings) that can be gleaned from different children's books.

Though it's actually a little older than one week old, Hirhurim wrote a heartfelt review of sefer (religious book) written by someone who influenced him, Rabbi Baruch Simon.

Around Israel
Willow Tree had a wonderful vacation around Israel.

For Shiloh Musings and husband, they've been in Israel 35 years now. She recalls their aliyah and the changes they've seen over the years.

Super Blogs
There've been a couple of new Super Blogs - group blogs made up of bloggers already on the map - joining the JBlogosphere.

There's the Jewish Connection, apparently focusing on the personal, featuring, Jack's Shack, PsychoToddler, Yetta, Renegade Rebbetzin, A Simple Jew, dilbert, torontopearl, Mirty, LIFE-of-RUBIN, Z and treppenwitz.

There's the Jewish View that seems more politcal featuring Laurence Simon, Judith Weiss, Flig, Knockin' On The Golden Door, Meryl Yourish, Elms in the Yard and In Context.

Then there's the venerable Israpundit with too many contibutors to mention them all (including this blogger) but with a couple of (relatively) recent contributors, Mere Rhetoric and Mediacrity. At Israpundit, Israpundit's driving force, Joseph Alexander Norland observes "Shoot Israelis, Collect $3 Billion."

The Jerusalem Post has started a blogging section called Cafe Oleh.

Seraphic Secret has put together a tour of his most visited blogs, "Seraphic Blogosphere."

Two last quick hits
Elder of Ziyon questions Reuters' definition of terrorism.

Finally Crossing the Rubicon runs an item from the Jerusalem Post, 22% of Israelis are in Mourning For a Relative or Friend Lost in a Terrorist Attack. And that brings us to ...

Next Week
Next week's hostess, for Haveil Havalim #29 is the just mentionedCrossing the Rubincon2. As always your submissions may be directed to her at enbeea at aol dot com here to dhgerstman at hotmail dot com. Alternatively use Conservative Cat's handy dandy submission form! Requests to host future editions of Haveil Havalim are of course also welcomed!

Continue reading to see past editions

#27 Mirty's Place
#26 Shiloh Musings
#25 Soccer Dad
#24 Mirty's Place
#23 Soccer Dad
#22 Mystical Paths
#21 Rabbinical Authority Consortium of HACKers
#20 Shiloh Musings
#19 Devarim
#18 Soccer Dad
#17 Mystical Paths
#16 Critical Mastiff
#15 Soccer Dad
#14 Multiple Mentality
#13 IsraPundit
#12 DovBear
#11 Kesher Talk
#10 Biur Chametz
#9 Soccer Dad
#8 It's Almost Supernatural
#7 Bloghead
#6 Willow Tree.
#5 Crossing the Rubicon2
#4 Dov Bear
#3 Biur Chametz

Michael and the chocolate factory

When I started seeing the billboards for "Charlie and Chocolate Factory" with Johnny Depp as the the Willy Wonka I found myself somewhat unsettled. Subsequently the ads I've seen haven't made me any more favorably disposed to this new Willy Wonka. I think I've figured out why.
The character has an androgynous look. He wears gloves. I think he reminds me a bit too much of Michael Jackson. This is a big mistake.
(US News reprinted a cartoon after the Jackson acquittal. Michael is asked what's he going to do. Surrounded by a bunch of little children Michael says "I'm going to Disneyworld." Michael may not have been guilty of what he was accused of, but he also doesn't seem to get that what he did is not normal. I don't see how reminding people of that is a winning marketing strategy.)
UPDATE: I'm not the only one who finds the resemblance unsettling.)

Why was Moshe denied?

Last year's Parshablog discusses why Moshe (Moses) was punished by not being allowed into the land of Canaan (Israel). He has some doubts as to whether hitting the rock was indeed the sin.
Rashi (Bamidbar/Number 20:12) wrote that had Moshe spoken to the rock Hashem's name would have been sanctified. That His name was not sanctified meant that Moshe would be punished. Hashem "swore" (with the word lachen) that Moshe would not enter the land. (In the Artscroll note it points to Rashin on Shmos/Exodus 6:1 that interprets Hashem's words to Moshe meaning that he would see how Hashem would fight Egypt but not the Canaanite kings because of Moshe's expressed doubts. Hashem made a decree against Moshe then; it became an immutable "oath" when he didn't sanctify Hashem's name at Mei Merivah.)
Similarly the Malbim (on Devarim/Deuteronomy 1:37: "Also against me Hashem was angered and said, 'You too shall not go there.'") contends that Hashem decreed against Moshe at an earlier time - in this case at the sin of the spies, - but at Mei Merivah the decree was converted to an irrevocable oath.
The Malbim argues that a proper sanctification of Hashem's name would have erased the decree; instead it was transformed to an oath.
But there's another consideration too. At the time of mei merivah Hashem says "Lachen lo tavi'oo ..." Well that means, "therefore you shall not bring ..." It doesn't say that Moshe (and Aharon) won't enter with the Jews into the land of Canaan, but that they won't bring them in, presumably lead them.
This squares nicely with the Medrash that Moshe was initially given the opportunity to cross the Jordan if he'd go in as a common man. In the end he couldn't stand the indignity. It's possible that the Midrash is working off of the text here.

A hit job?

It started last week with Backspin carrying an item from Reuters that Steven Spielberg is preparing to make a movie of Israel's effort to track down and kill the perpetrators of the 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre. Backspin notes that the book on which the movie is to be based has been "discredited" but offers no details.
Devarim follows up with the story from the NY Times on "Spielberg's Next Gamble." In particular Devarim is worried:

I can't decide what will be worse: humanizing the Mossad agents too much (leading audiences to wonder what kind of sick people could have so many doubts and still go through with the assassinations) or not making them human enough (leading audiences to believe that the IDF is made up of a bunch of heartless killing machines).

Sha! comes to the rescue and explains how the Jonas book has been discredited.

July 06, 2005
Playing With Fire
Therefore, Spielberg's alleged reliance on one Yuval Aviv, an Israeli living in New York who contributed significantly to the 1984 book Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team by Canadian journalist George Jonas, is likely to worsen the situation. According to one of today's Haaretz articles , Yuval is something of a con man who spins fabulous yarns about espionage to eager reporters and anyone else who will pay him for information.

As far as Devarim's concerns, I cannot address them. However about 30 years ago, I read a book, 'The Hit Team" by David B. Tinnin. As I recall it made the agents look human and not without remorse or too emotional.
The success of the movie from my standpoint will be based on how much background Spielberg uses. He should use the hardhitting journalism of Sports Illustrated:

Though he didn't know what the money was being spent for, longtime Fatah official Mahmoud Abbas, a.k.a. Abu Mazen, was responsible for the financing of the Munich attack. Abu Mazen could not be reached for comment regarding Abu Daoud's allegation. After Oslo in 1993, Abu Mazen went to the White House Rose Garden for a photo op with Arafat, President Bill Clinton and Israel's Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres. "Do you think that ... would have been possible if the Israelis had known that Abu Mazen was the financier of our operation?" Abu Daoud writes. "I doubt it." Today the Bush Administration seeks a Palestinian negotiating partner "uncompromised by terror," yet last year Abu Mazen met in Washington with Secretary of State Colin Powell.

If Spielberg is unwilling to shine a light on Abu Mazen's role the movie will be a waste.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

First new one in awhile

A new Doubting Thomas is up. With help from my friends Boker Tov Boulder and Mediacrity.

Still dividing

Chayyei Sarah in her post about disengagement makes a plea for unity above all else.
Alas, from my perspective, it is the government that is promoting much of this divisiveness. I've mentioned before that what bothers me more than the withdrawal is how PM Sharon has gone about it in a way that seems designed to increase divisions in Israeli society. And it's not just me, a right winger who feels this way. Former Shabak head, Adm. Ami Ayalon, someone with whom I rarely agree politically, feels the same way:

Ayalon is, unsurprisingly, a firm supporter of disengagement – as a first step toward a pullout from most of the West Bank. But he is withering in his criticisms of the prime minister's presentation of it, especially to the settler public. Instead of holding "humiliating" discussions with them over the process of their evacuation and financial compensation, Ariel Sharon should be highlighting the imperative – to ensure a democratic, Jewish Israel – that is impelling the pullout.

"The settlers are not merely our brothers," Ayalon says. "They are the pioneers of the past 35 years. We owe them an explanation."

And the New York Jewish Week underscored this with an editorial (July 1, 2005) criticizing how PM Sharon does business with his political opponents:

Sharansky has his critics among American Jewish leaders, primarily for what they perceive to be his lack of support for religious pluralism. But even detractors would admit that his life story personifies the goals and work of the Jewish Agency. So for the Advise and Consent committee of American Jewish leaders to conclude last week that Bielski was the only qualified candidate for the Jewish Agency chairmanship, suggesting that Sharansky was unfit to run for the post, was unfortunate and unnecessary.

Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Luke Potter?

I've joked to a few people that when Obi Wan brought the baby Luke to his uncle at the end of "Revenge of the Sith" that I almost expected a giant on a motorcycle to come out of the sky. A friend pointed out that I wasn't alone. (As my friend advised, "...23rd bullet (or just search for the word "Potter" on that page)."

Holy happy birthday President Bush

Not only is today, July 6, 2005 President Bush's 59th Birthday.
It's also Bert Gervis's 60th. Who? Make that Burt Ward.
And yo, Mr. President, it's also Sylvester Stallone's birthday. He's also 59.

Don't give the accuser an opening

One year after assuring PM Sharon that he expected that Israel's boundaries would not be the same as they were in 1967:

As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.

President Bush qualified his statement:

It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.

Actually that qualification was from a year ago. However, he repeated this again in April this year:

It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will be achieved only on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.

By talking of "mutually agreed changes" the President, like his predecessor, is strengthening the Palestinian Peace Veto. The Palesitnian Peace Veto is the way that peace has been thwarted time and again since 1993. Regardless of what Israel does for peace it is not enough, it is not fast enough or it's simply not worth any gratitude because it was the least Israel could do. Meanwhile it encourages Israel's enemies to make greater claims against Israel and complain that they still have the right to violence if those terms aren't met. Two recent stories confirm this dangerous trend.
The "moderate" Mohammed Dahlan is now saying that Gaza isn't enough:

The Palestinian Authority is demanding that Israel extend its withdrawal from the Gaza Strip two kilometers northward, the National Security Council chairman said yesterday.

Conceding to this demand would mean the evacuation of Nativ Ha'asara, a community within Israel, Major General (Res.) Giora Eiland told the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. Eiland emphasized that Israel completely rejects such a demand.

According to Eiland, PA Civil Affairs Minister Mohammed Dahlan presented Israeli representatives with the demand for the additional territory. Eiland said it was based on an agreement signed between Israel and Egypt in 1949, in which a protocol is included stating that the border runs two kilometers north of Gaza, but for which there are no maps. However, he added, the Palestinians are ignoring the later agreement, signed in 1950, which includes maps along with the protocol, and which is recognized by international law.

And Hezbollah is now demanding territory inside of (northern) Israel:

Like many residents of villages in the Upper Galilee, the Tarbikha community was cast far and wide in 1948. Community elders have relied on two facts in their effort to rebuild the village. One is that they are Shi'ites, thanks to which they benefit from political support in Beirut. The second is that they consider themselves Lebanese, because early in the 20th century their entire village was part of Lebanese territory. Like other villages in the region, between 1920 and 1923, Tarbikha was considered part of Lebanon under the French mandate, and not as part of Palestine under the British Mandate. In 1923, the border was redrawn further to the north, an action that placed about 20 settlements under British Mandatory rule.

Hezbollah is demanding that the territory between the two borderlines be returned to Lebanon. "Greater Lebanon" is one the epithets being voiced by the organization. Although it is not a regular theme in speeches of Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, it has been brought up periodically ever since the 1990s. During last month's election campaign in Lebanon, Hezbollah raised the issue again, declaring that Lebanese territory includes not only the Shaba Farms area, which it claims is Lebanese but is now held by Israel, but also the region formerly occupied by "the seven villages" - the region that was transferred to the British mandate in the 1920s. Seven Shi'ite villages had existed in the area, along with several Sunni and Christian villages. When asked by members of the press for clarification, Mohammed Raad, who chairs the Hezbollah parliamentary faction, said, "It's a simple matter of geography."

President Bush, I know you say that you are a friend of Israel. And from what I've seen in the past you've shown that you are. But if you continue along the path you've recently started, you will be no better than President Clinton was. It's up to you to remind the Arab world that its demands on Israel must be limited and realistic. And you must remind them that if the Palestinian don't get all they think they deserve it's because of the repeated Arab refusal to make peace with Israel. It's time for you to state explicitly: The Arab demands for greater Palestine will only extend the conflict and are wholly unrealistic. Israel must not return to what Abba Eban called its "Auschwitz borders."
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Think she saw this coming?

I loved this headline, "Russian Astrologer Sues NASA Over Comet":

NASA's mission that sent a space probe smashing into a comet raised more than cosmic dust — it also brought a lawsuit from a Russian astrologer.

Marina Bai has sued the U.S. space agency, claiming the Deep Impact probe that punched a crater into the comet Tempel 1 late Sunday "ruins the natural balance of forces in the universe," the newspaper Izvestia reported Tuesday.
...
NASA representatives in Russia could not immediately be reached for comment.

No word either as to whether Marina Bai predicted that NASA would launch a probe to explore the comet.

Apparently Marina Bai isn't the only one suing. :-)

Ab-normalization

From "Signs of the Times" by David Horovitz:

At a dinner at the home of Dr. Marouf Bakhit, Jordan's newish ambassador here, we're talking student statistics. There are, it turns out, in excess of 1,000 Israelis studying at Jordanian universities this year, their tuition subsidized by a variety of scholarship programs.

Israelis?

Well, to be more specific, Israeli Arabs.

What about Israeli Jews, I ask? Any of them at university in the Hashemite kingdom?

Not one, I'm told.

How about Jordanians studying in Israel? I venture again, remembering the trickle of Jordanians a few years back to overseas programs at our major universities, and to less mainstream initiatives like an environmental study program at Kibbutz Ketura, north of Eilat. Are any of them left these days?

A pause. There is one Jordanian student, I'm told, studying for his doctorate at an Israeli university. But please, I'm urged, don't go seeking him out and writing about him. He's desperate to avoid publicity. You've no idea what kind of trouble it would make for him when he gets home.

Later on in the article:

THE GROWING consensus, ever more openly expressed by Israelis, and Americans, who participated in the former prime minister's unsuccessful peacemaking initiative with the late Hafez Assad, was that Ehud Barak blew it with the Syrians. The deal was there to be done, one of those participants told me recently, but Barak feared the Israeli public was not ready to swallow it.

The outstanding feature of the negotiations, this Israeli official added, was that on the security issues – demilitarized zones, early warning stations et. al. – the Syrians were strikingly ready to accommodate Israel's demands.

Where they dug in their heels was on normalization: open borders, trade, free-flowing tourism. For Assad, desperately trying to maintain his closed regime, the threat of an Israeli tank, this official said, paled in comparison to the prospect of an Israeli tour bus bringing vibrant, colorful, free-speaking visitors into his constrained land.

From Caroline Glick's "Irrelevant Visions":

Thursday morning a senior diplomatic source told Israel Radio that the decision not to accede to Egypt's demands is not due to the government's objection to the cancellation of the agreement to demilitarize the Sinai, which was signed together with the peace treaty in 1979. Rather, the government wants to avoid acceding to the Knesset's demand that any substantive change to the 1979 treaty – and a cancellation of the demilitarization agreement certainly constitutes a "substantive" change – must first receive Knesset approval.

The prime minister knows that there is no way that he would receive majority support for enabling the deployment of the Egyptian military, which Yuval Steinitz, the chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, notes "has been training for war against Israel for the past 10 years" along the border. And so, in a bid to prevent Knesset oversight, Peres and Sharon have limited their agreement with Mubarak to the Gaza-Sinai border – although according to the committee's legal adviser, this too is a substantive change in the agreement.

In a nutshell then Egypt, the Arab country with the longest standing peace treaty with Israel has been showing increasing belligerance towards Israel. Jordan that might have been the most sincere in making peace with Israel doesn't much want to advertise these ties. And Syria wouldn't make peace with Israel if it included normalization. (I don't know if Horovitz is subscribing to the view that faults Barak for demanding normalization; or simply quoting those who hold that view. It hardly seems that Barak is at fault for there not being an accord between Israel and Syria. Normally peace entails normalization!)

What these cases show, is that the Arab world is keen on Israel making concessions. It's not so keen on reciprocating. This has been the problem since Camp David and continues to be the problem. The Arab world - back by many in the West - claims it has grievances against Israel. Israel tries to assuage these grievances by giving up land (and in the case of Jordan, water). But the peace never comes. Just more demands. Until which time, Israel is still illegitimate. There's no way to win this game. Israel needs to say: This and no more. (or at this point just "no more.") Support trade with us. Support academic, professional and cultural ties. Fight for the Mogen David Adom to be a recognized symbol of the International Red Cross. Stop distributing the Protocols (in any form!) Israel needs confidence building measures too.
If the Arab world cannot allow itself to accept Israel with anything more than weak statements; it is the Arab world that is not ready for peace. The more Israel gives to make peace without getting anything back the more the Arab world's intransigence is encouraged. This is just not an issue of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are the excuse the Arab world uses to justify its rejection of Israel. It's time to demand that the Arab world show concrete signs that it accepts Israel. Normalization with Israel is the first step to peace. Not Israeli concessions.

Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Not so fired up

A few weeks ago the Washington Post reported:

Ehrlich, the first Republican governor in a generation, has also expanded the reach of his patronage by bringing people in; he has made appointments to relatively low-level jobs, such as motor vehicle workers, computer specialists, a highway traffic monitor and other positions that until now were filled through civil-service hires, records and interviews show.

.
This past weekend the editors of the Post followed up with their take on the subject:

As The Post's Lena H. Sun and Matthew Mosk reported recently, some of the shifts and dismissals have not been pretty, and some have affected workers well below the policymaking levels -- career employees with outstanding performance reviews in traditionally nonpartisan civil service positions.

The next day, July 2, the Post ran a correction in a small box on their editorial page:

The workers in question were in mid-level jobs, but they were at-will employees, not civil service employees.

(Emphases mine.)
That correction isn't good enough. In uncritically accepting the Democratic talking points that Governor Ehrlich had fired civil service employees, the Post injected itself into a partisan debate and took a side in that debate. It was an important point in a front page news article. (Usually local politics are covered in the Metro section.) It gave rise to an editorial that astonishingly acknowledged:

IN MARYLAND, more than 7,000 state workers serve at the will of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R). Since he took office Jan. 15, 2003, he has fired only 284 of them, according to the governor's advisers. That's hardly a purge, especially given the years of Democratic control in Annapolis that preceded Mr. Ehrlich's election.

That's precisely correct. No big deal.
(An earlier editorial wrote:

Democrats say scores or hundreds of state employees may have lost their jobs in this manner at the hands of Mr. Steffen and other agents of the governor who infiltrated agencies of state government. Mr. Ehrlich and his aides have denied it, insisting no Maryland state workers have lost their jobs for being Democrats.

If the Democrats' assertions that workers were vetted for loyalty are true, it may or may not have been illegal -- Maryland governors are empowered to hire and fire more than 7,000 state workers who serve at the pleasure of the executive.

Now the Post's editors acknowledge:

Certainly Mr. Ehrlich is entitled to bring in his own team, and there has been no evidence that laws were broken.

Good of them to acknowledge that. But why were they suggesting that there was something wrong with Ehrlich's actions back in February when there was no evidence short of the hyperbolic claims of Democrats in Annapolis?)
Which brings us to the end of the editorial that hopes that the hearings into Governor Ehrlich's hiring and firing practices will not be politicized:

In response to a decision by Democratic lawmakers to investigate administration personnel practices, Mr. Schurick counters that any such inquiry could bring out dirt on past Democratic abuses. So be it, but the investigation should not degenerate into a partisan rumble.

That's disngenuous. The Post, an "independent" newspaper weighed in on one side of a partisan issue. Now it's hoping that the proceedings won't be partisan? Who do they think they're kidding. They just don't want too much scrutiny of Democratic shenanigans.
At the end of former Governor Glendening's term and after he had separated from his wife, he promoted one of his aides, Jennifer Crawford to a position as deputy chief of staff. Following up on rumors, the Post's reporters staked out Ms. Crawford's townhouse and discovered that the then-Governor sometimes stayed the night but didn't report it for awhile. Not until there were whispers that Ms. Crawford (now Mrs. Glendening) was having undue influence in state matters, did the Post report the relationship.
Though I could find no Post editorials on the subject of whether Governor Glendening had overstepped the bounds of propriety by promoting his girlfriend, the Post's ombudsman, Michael Getler was none too pleased:

So this was a smelly kind of scoop, one where you hold your nose and argue that the ends -- more openness in government, even on touchy subjects -- justify the journalistic means. Crawford has had big advances in position and salary. Taxpayer money is used for official trips she and the governor take together. Relationships of this type are frowned upon in management handbooks and in most organizations. Neither party will discuss it, so legitimate questions remain about whether their relationship affects state policy or funding.

In the end Getler seems more concerned that the story was reported because it may have been pushed by a vindictive Comptroller Schaeffer than he was about the Governor's possible misuse of power.
Funny when the Governor's a Republican it takes a lot less to get the Post concerned about appearances of impropriety.

What's Hamas up to?

June 29, 2005 - Ha'aretz - PA acts to prevent Hamas taking over in evacuated Gaza Strip:

The PA is worried by Hamas' recent shows of power. In addition to the "popular army" it has established, Hamas has also recently initiated armed patrols, known as murabitun, that patrol near areas where the Israel Defense Forces operate. Each patrol consists of five to 10 masked men dressed in army uniforms. However, they do not engage in attacks on IDF soldiers; rather, their goal is to demonstrate presence. Palestinian residents of Gaza view the patrols as another effort by Hamas to supplant the PA and its security services.

June 27, 2005 - Jerusalem Post - "Hamas gathers several thousand Gaza fighters and arsenal of Kassams":

Hamas is using the lull in fighting to raise an "army" of several thousand fighters in the Gaza Strip to complement its developing arsenal of Kassam rockets and mortars, an IDF source told The Jerusalem Post Sunday.

June 22, 2005 - Middle East Newsline - "JIHAD OBTAINS HAMAS MISSILES":

Islamic Jihad has obtained an arsenal of short-range missiles from Hamas.

Palestinian sources said Jihad has for the first time deployed the Kassam-class, short-range missile. They said the Iranian-sponsored Jihad paid Hamas for Kassam missiles, produced in workshops in Gaza City and Khan Yunis.

So in the past few weeks it's been reported that Hamas is strengthening itself so it can fight Israel and, if necessary, the PA. It has fueled the violence in the region by selling missiles to Islamic Jihad. Surely that would catch the attention of a prestigious American paper such as the Washington Post.
So what did Hamas do recently according to the respected Washington Post? "In Politics, Hamas Gains in the West Bank":

Bilal Swaleh's journey from prisoner to politician began years ago in an Israeli jail cell. It ended triumphantly last month at the ballot box in this city populated by citrus growers, living along a wall separating the West Bank and Israel.

A butcher by trade, Swaleh was among the candidates affiliated with the militant Islamic movement Hamas who won all 15 municipal council seats. The victory placed Qalqilyah at the leading edge of a shift in Palestinian politics that is bringing some of Israel's most ardent enemies into public office. Seven of the new council members have served time in Israeli prisons. The newly elected mayor is still behind bars.

Swaleh attributes his success primarily to the network Hamas has built through charitable work, which supports thousands of people here and in villages nearby. But he said the wall, which Israeli officials said they built around the city for security reasons, has enhanced Hamas's standing more than ever and helped the group's members get elected.

Members of Hamas are engaged in politics. I suspect that sixty and seventy years ago members of the National Socialists also engaged in politics; that doesn't automatically make the organization legitimate.

And of course there's no reason to jump to any conclusions about Hamas. The reporter takes great pains to show that the political and "military" wings are sepearate. But in any case:

This month, low-level E.U. diplomats were given permission to meet with elected officials of Hamas -- considered a terrorist organization by the European Union and the United States.

This is pure laziness. "[C]onsidered a terrorist organization?" There are definitions for what constitutes terror. And Hamas meets those criteria.
(via Instapundit via Vodkapundit ) An article in Parameters a publication of the Army War College, lays out some of the possibilities:

It’s sometimes argued that organizations like al Qaeda don’t qualify for lawful combatant status because their members don’t meet such standards. They don’t wear uniforms, carry arms openly, or follow the laws and customs of war. But these factors only determine the lawfulness of military conduct in interstate warfare. In an unlikely scenario where terrorist organizations actually followed such rules (highly unlikely, as such practice would be antithetical to their doctrine and goals), they still would be acting outside the laws of war. Again, those rules make no allowance for privately waged international warfare, no matter how or why fought. In essence, being enrolled in an organized, uniformed military force is irrelevant if there’s no lawful authority for its existence or deployment.

I realize that the author doesn't think that saying that Hamas is a terrorist organization because its members don't wear uniforms, carry arms openly or follow the rules of war is sufficient. But it is true. And by that definition Hamas, indeed, is a terrorist organization. The reporter shouldn't shrink from his duty of reporting. Instead he writes that some "consider" Hamas a terrorist group.
Compare that with this recent by article by the same reporter (and a colleague) "Israel Agrees To Demolish Its Settlers' Gaza Homes" (I preivously posted about the article here:

:Under international law, Israel is required to return the property as it had been when it seized it during the 1967 war, which would mean a costly and time-consuming cleanup and leave Israeli soldiers vulnerable to attack for months. Moreover, indiscriminate destruction of the homes could ruin water and sewer lines necessary for future development.

No source is given for this international law. Though one presumes it is based on the widely accepted (but mistaken) view that Israel is an occupying power. In the article "Occupied Territories or Disputed Territories" an unidentified writer reminds us:

Israel entered the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israeli legal experts traditionally resisted efforts to define the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "occupied" or falling under the main international treaties dealing with military occupation. Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Meir Shamgar wrote in the 1970s that there is no de jure applicability of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention regarding occupied territories to the case of the West Bank and Gaza Strip since the Convention "is based on the assumption that there had been a sovereign who was ousted and that he had been a legitimate sovereign." In fact, prior to 1967, Jordan had occupied the West Bank and Egypt had occupied the Gaza Strip; their presence in those territories was the result of their illegal invasion in 1948. Jordan's 1950 annexation of the West Bank was recognized only by Great Britain and Pakistan and rejected by the vast majority of the international community, including the Arab states.

International jurists generally draw a distinction between situations of "aggressive conquest" and territorial disputes that arise after a war of self-defense. Former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel's case: "Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title." Israel only entered the West Bank after repeated Jordanian artillery fire and ground movements across the previous armistice lines; additionally, Iraqi forces crossed Jordanian territory and were poised to enter the West Bank. Under such circumstances, even the UN rejected Soviet efforts to have Israel branded as the aggressor in the Six-Day War.

In any case, under UN Security Council Resolution 242 from November 1967, that has served as the basis of the 1991 Madrid Conference and the 1993 Declaration of Principles, Israel is only expected to withdraw "from territories" to "secure and recognized boundaries" and not from "all the territories" captured in the Six-Day War. This language resulted from months of painstaking diplomacy. Thus, the UN Security Council recognized that Israel was entitled to part of these territories for new defensible borders. Taken together with UN Security Council Resolution 338, it became clear that only negotiations would determine which portion of these territories would eventually become "Israeli territories" or territories to be retained by Israel's Arab counterpart.

The last international legal allocation of territory that includes those strategic zones of what is today the West Bank and Gaza Strip occurred with the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine which recognized Jewish national rights in the whole of the Mandated territory. Moreover, these rights were preserved under the United Nations as well, according to Article 80 of the UN Charter, despite the termination of the League of Nations in 1946. Given these fundamental sources of international legality, Israel cannot be characterized as a "foreign occupier" with respect to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

According to the Washington Post what do we have? Whether or not Hamas is a terrorist organization is a matter of perception. Whether or not Israel is an occupying power (it is) is a matter of settled law.
There is no way the Washington Post can claim to be free of bias in its Middle East reporting. Simply put, it takes the Palestinian perspective at face value but is agnostic toward Israeli claims. And when it comes to reporting on Hamas it ignores its terror activities and focuses only on its political efforts.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Haveil Havalim #27 is up

Mirty's Place has done a bang up job - but not as a result of cutting off another driver - on Haveil Havalim #27, go check it out. (BTW did you know that Mirty is sinister? I do now.)

As always your submissions may be directed here to dhgerstman at hotmail dot com. Alternatively use Conservative Cat's handy dandy submission form! Requests to host future editions of Haveil Havalim are of course also welcomed!

Continue reading to see past editions

#26 Shiloh Musings
#25 Soccer Dad
#24 Mirty's Place
#23 Soccer Dad
#22 Mystical Paths
#21 Rabbinical Authority Consortium of HACKers
#20 Shiloh Musings
#19 Devarim
#18 Soccer Dad
#17 Mystical Paths
#16 Critical Mastiff
#15 Soccer Dad
#14 Multiple Mentality
#13 IsraPundit
#12 DovBear
#11 Kesher Talk
#10 Biur Chametz
#9 Soccer Dad
#8 It's Almost Supernatural
#7 Bloghead
#6 Willow Tree.
#5 Crossing the Rubicon2
#4 Dov Bear
#3 Biur Chametz

Unsettling

Do you remember that the Hatuels were settlers? Tali Hatuel and her four daughters weren't people to much of the media, they were "settlers." A recent tour through Yahoo!'s slideshows on the Middle East conflict still shows the term thrown about indiscriminately.

Jewish settler family
a Jewish settler, carrying a boy (Shouldn't that be "settler boy?")
An Israeli settler boy cries (Now we have the correct modifier!)
Senior Islamic Jihad leader Nafez Azzam (No modifier needed here. No "militant." No "extremist." No "leader of a terrorist organization.")
female settlers
settler woman and her child (That should be "settler child.")
Israeli settlement of Metulla Glad they got that right. No they didn't.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.