Posted 12/24/2002 06:08:00 PM by Ocean Guy
Here's another perspective on the Temple Mount:

Just the other day, an Israeli archaeologist took me through a 3,800-year-old passageway where old Jerusalem's early inhabitants, the Jebusites, and later King David collected water for what became the old city of Jerusalem. Then he showed me a relatively new dig in the passageway, whose characteristics perplexed archaeologists until someone remembered a passage in the Book of Kings.

I was standing precisely where King David had Solomon anointed 3,000 years ago. I am by nature a skeptic, but cross-referencing the hard evidence of archaeology with Biblical passages makes a strong case. The archaeological site is called Ir David. It constitutes a massive endorsement of Biblical authenticity and is eminently deserving of book-length treatment.

There are other digs in the Old City that are not so encouraging. Whereas the Israelis respect sacred places, the Palestinian Authority does not. Their police have taken over the Temple Mount with the sufferance of the Israeli government that controls it. Against the will of Jews and Christians, who judge it sacred, and of archaeologists, who consider it worthy of careful study, these religious bigots are carting away tons of ancient earth to build a huge mosque for political purposes. They are defiling a sacred and archaeologically invaluable location on a 3,000-year-old site to establish a political claim to the site, and no one is stopping them. read more...

Posted 12/23/2002 09:05:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Hanoi Jane visits Jerusalem. I have to admit, I am glad to see that her traitorous past is not forgotten... even in Israel.

Posted 12/20/2002 09:27:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Occupation:

It is a cruel and ruthless military occupation, one which has persisted for decades and been declared illegal by international organizations. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs have been turned into refugees, as settlers sent by the occupying power slowly but steadily alter the tenuous demographic balance.

Human rights abuses are rampant, and although the government signed a peace treaty years ago, intended to grant the residents a voice in determining their own future, it has done everything in its power to prevent the deal from being realized.

Guess what, it is NOT in Israel.... read the rest here.

Posted 12/20/2002 09:25:00 AM by Ocean Guy
It seems that much of the world needs a reminder of some of the history of the Palestinian Mandate. Gerald Honigman at Jewish Express sheds some light on the facts that most of the world ignores.

In 1922 Colonial Secretary Churchill, to reward Arab allies in World War I, chopped off 80% of the original Palestinian Mandate issued to Great Britain on April 25, 1920 --all theÊ land east of the Jordan River-- and created the purely Arab Emirate of Transjordan, today's Jordan. Emir Abdullah, who received this gift on behalf of the Hashemites of Arabia, attributed the separation of this land from the area promised to the Jews to an 'act of Allah' in his memoirs. Sir Alec Kirkbride, Britain's East Bank representative, had much to say about this as well. The Jordan-Palestine connection is just one of many well-documented facts (not 'Zionist propaganda') completely ignored or distorted by Arab spokesmen and, unfortunately, little known by the rest of the world. In a Washington Post piece by the P.L.O.'s Marwan Barghouti, for example, he claimed Jews got 78% of all of the land, the standard Arab line. Leading newspapers typically prepare segments on the Middle East ignoring this Jordan-Palestine connection as well. In reality, not only do Arabs today have twenty-two states, but they've had one in most of 'Palestine' for well over half a century. What's now being debated is the creation of a 23rd Arab state, their second one in 'Palestine'. And for this to occur, they expect Israel to consent to national suicide.

you can also read it here...

Posted 12/18/2002 02:19:00 PM by Ocean Guy
And from Carl Hiaasen writing for Trent Lott:

Upon reflection, I realize that there's no good explanation and that many people could reasonably assume from my remarks that I'm a hapless peckerwood who has no business running the U.S. Senate.

Hapless peckerwood... fitting.

Posted 12/17/2002 10:39:00 AM by Ocean Guy
The idiocy of Trent Lott's comments while celebrating the hundredth birthday of a colleague is apparent to everyone. The only question is whether the Republican Party will allow him to remain as Senate Majority Leader. They should not, unless they are interested in making the new poster child for Racism the spokesman for the majority party.

Whether or not you believe Lott is a Racist, the fact remains he has a history of making insensitive remarks and of voting on the "racist" side of controversial issues. It is much too late for his backstroke to save him. His appearance on BET, both to apologize and to promise to change, seemed both insincere and even dishonest. Maybe he can redeem himself in the eyes of his doubters, but he should not maintain the leadership of the Senate Republicans while we wait to see if he's successful.

Lott's credibility has been seriously challenged. He does not have the backing of the White house, he does not have the backing of most Americans. The fact is, many people were hurt by his words, and he should not go unchallenged. He should be removed from any position of leadership within Congress and even censured for his statements. The Republican Party has to LEAD by taking a stand for what is moral an ethical. This is much more than a question of Political Correctness.

If Lott is allowed to keep his position, Republicans will be making the statement that minorities are not welcome in their party. They cannot afford to sweep the incident under the rug and deny the problem exists. Ignoring the furor that Lott's words have caused is to ignore all those minorities the Party hopes to attract to its message. Part of that message must be that racism, racial bias and bigotry will not be tolerated.

Lott must go.

Posted 12/13/2002 11:10:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Here's a weekly journal that everyone interested in Israeli/Arab relations ought to read. You can subscribe to bitterlemons.org or just go read it. It consists of two articles from a Palestinian perspective and two articles from the Israeli perspective each week. It's also a good source for reading documents applicable to the conflict. Can't believe I've missed this until now.

Posted 12/12/2002 10:50:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Twelve bad arguments for a State of Palestine
from Israeli Insider:

1] It will rectify an historic injustice to the Arabs.
2] It will end Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory.
3] Israel must comply with United Nations resolutions.
4] It will bring peace and stability to the Middle East.
5] It will satisfy the demands of the Palestinian Arabs, who will give up terrorism and war and settle down to building a society.
6] A State of Palestine will honor a pledge to respect Israel's right to exist.
7] A State of Palestine will be demilitarized and thus no danger to Israel.
8] It will secure the human rights of the Palestinian Arabs.
9] It will solve the Arab refugee problem.
10] It will encourage civic and economic development, raise the standard of living and bring contentment to the people.
11] It will win the respect of world opinion for Israel.
12] If a State of Palestine commits aggression against Israel, then Israel can fight its military forces and win back what it gave away.

Read the entire article.

Posted 12/12/2002 09:17:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Israeli residential development in the Territories, is undeniably a controversial issue. Many, if not most, who sympathize with the settlers also believe that peace is unlikely without giving up some of the settlements. Ha'aretz surprised me today with an article arguing that withdrawal will only lead to more violence. I'm afraid they're right.

I wonder, though, why there is no Arab "settlement" activity. Do the palestinians prefer living in 50 year old refugee camps? Certainly there is no lack of funds in the Arab world to pay for building decent housing and pleasant neighborhoods for the "refugees." They lay claim to the land, yet, do nothing to develop it. I fear the answer is that their real claim is to the whole of Israel, and that they are more interested in driving the Jews from the region than creating a separate State. Actions DO speak louder than words. Their actions tell us that Arabs don't want peace. Their promises, whether to the Israelis, the Americans or their own people, have meant nothing. Until that changes there will not be peace.

Posted 12/10/2002 02:57:00 PM by Ocean Guy
Moderate Islam Watch: From MEMRI

The Extremists have Corrupted the Minds of Our Youth

"The extremist groups have stuffed their minds with a fanatic ideology and a faulty interpretation of Jihad and Da'wa in Islam, whereas, Jihad in reality means self-defense. They have been taught that it is a tool to oppress and dominate others."

"These misguided youth were made to believe in the ideology of dividing society into believers and non-believers, and hold that every other idea amounted to apostasy. They were taught not to accept any other viewpoint other than [the one] held by their own group, and that the whole world is full of infidels and heretics."

"The extremists have inculcated brutality, violence, and killing in the minds of their followers who blindly and thoughtlessly go on fighting without assessing the real power of their enemy."

"Religious Literature Introduced a Culture of Violence to Saudi Arabia"

"When the Afghan war against the Communists began, the extremists wore a religious mask to win over Saudi society's participation in the war, firstly through donations and voluntary humanitarian services, and later on through volunteer military operations. Al-Rashed said that, 'The Afghan War became a popular struggle fed by religious literature that introduced a culture of violence for the first time in the Saudi society. The call for Jihad became the order of the day and the society was politicized through preachers in mosques and universities, something unknown before. The golden rule was further broken when young men were allowed to go abroad to fight against the Soviets.'"

"Our Youths Must be Re-educated"

"This is the most apt diagnosis of the problem of our society. To regain its peace and innocence and reconciliation with the world, our youths must be reeducated and violence – a concept alien to our society – must be discarded."

Posted 12/09/2002 09:04:00 AM by Ocean Guy
Here's a column by one of my favorite writers, Carl Hiaasen. Because the Miami Herald's links have been short lived in the past, I am pasting the entire column here.

Why no Muslim outrage about Nigeria?

As we in the Western world struggle to comprehend Islamic fanaticism, along comes a boob named Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi.

He is deputy governor of Kamfara, a largely Muslim state in northern Nigeria. Last Monday he decreed that true Islamic believers should rush out and kill a writer named Isioma Daniel. She writes about fashion, which is usually not the most dangerous job in journalism. Her death-deserving offense was to pen a column suggesting that the Prophet Mohammed would approve of the Miss World Pageant, which at the time was being staged in Nigeria.

She wrote: ``The Muslims thought it was immoral to bring 92 women to Nigeria to ask them to revel in vanity. What would Mohammed think? In all honesty, he would probably have chosen a wife from one of them.''

That passage offended many hard-line Muslims, who thought it insulting to the prophet.

Mohammed himself is long gone and thus unable to offer his wisdom on the topic of beauty pageants, but those professing to worship him demonstrated their piety by going on a murderous spree of looting and arson. By the time it was over, 215 persons were dead -- because of a magazine column about a beauty contest. The absurdity is staggering.

Americans are no strangers to moronic mob behavior -- witness last week's football rioting at Ohio State -- but even for us, it's difficult to grasp how something as inane as the Miss World Pageant could provoke slaughter as a form of protest.

The same religious zealots who complained about the immorality of a bathing-suit competition expressed no qualms about the bloodbath. In Zamfara, Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi publicly declared that the fashion columnist should die for what she'd written.

Said he: ``Like the blasphemous Indian writer Salman Rushdie, the blood of Isioma Daniel can be shed. It is binding on all Muslims wherever they are to consider the killing of the writer as a religious duty.''

Several prominent Muslims in Nigeria refused to support the impromptu fatwa, and a Nigerian government spokesman said the death order was unconstitutional and should not be carried out. Nonetheless, Daniel has gone into hiding.

In most of Western society it would be hard to imagine a circumstance that would drive a fashion writer, or any writer, underground.

If I wrote a column saying that Jesus Christ would have been a cool casting choice for The Bachelor, the worst I could anticipate would be a stack of angry mail, or getting trashed by Pat Robertson on his TV show. Some jerkwater politician might urge readers to cancel their newspaper subscriptions, but that's not nearly as severe as a public beheading.

Nigeria is, of course, a world away. Zamfara and 11 other states are reintroducing Islamic law and administering the harshest possible interpretations.

Several of the Miss World contestants had threatened to boycott the event because a woman convicted of adultery was sentenced to death by stoning, a dirty little ceremony abandoned long ago in most cultures. To quell the controversy, Nigerian officials spared the defendant from her court-ordered pummeling. However, when the riots erupted following the publication of Daniel's column, pageant organizers rounded up the Miss World beauties and fled to London.

For Nigeria's radical Muslims, it was a proud victory over Western decadence. For everybody else in the country, it was a tragedy and a humiliation.

Salman Rushdie, whose name was contemptuously invoked by Shinkafi, remains the most famous survivor of a fatwa. Marked for death in 1989 by Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini, Rushdie today is writing as brilliantly and bravely as ever. Of the carnage in Nigeria and other recent inhumanities by hard-line Islamists, he asked in The New York Times:

``Where, after all, is the Muslim outrage at these events? As their ancient, deeply civilized culture of love, art and philosophical reflection is hijacked by paranoiacs, racists, liars, male supremacists, tyrants, fanatics and violence junkies, why are they not screaming?''

Perhaps the question is simplistic, but what deep and mystical explanation can there possibly be for maiming and murdering innocent people in response to a fashion column? Or a swimsuit contest?

To those on the outside looking in, the only logical conclusion is that some of these fundamentalist loons will jump at any excuse, no matter how lame, to kill in the name of Allah.

Until strong Islamic voices of peace and tolerance are heard, the gap of understanding between that world and ours will remain as vast a black hole in space.

Posted 12/03/2002 04:17:00 PM by Ocean Guy
The cover of The Economist this week is a chilling skull on a black background. The skull is a modified globe with the Earth's land mass pictured in Blood Red. The world is threatened everywhere by terrorism..... Islamic Extremist Terrorism.

Yoel Marcus in Haaretz gives us his take on the article and the general situation. He notes that nowhere in the Economist do they mention Israel as a cause of the terrorism. The Bloody Borders of Islam have nothing to do with Israel.

The world is not lacking places where religion and nationalism have yielded terror and flames - the Philippines, Indonesia, Kashmir, Sudan, Algeria, Egypt, Chechnya and a long list of African countries. None has anything to do with Israel. Khomeini and Khomeinism were not born because of Israel.

Iraq and Iran did not fight for eight years because of Israel. Iraq did not conquer Kuwait because of Israel. Al Qaeda's target is America, and now all of Western Europe...

...Even if bin Laden is no longer alive, someone has taken command. The organization is alive and well and its purpose is to draw the Arab countries into a war against the world. For that purpose, fanning the hatred of Israel is good bait. It doesn't matter if Israel concedes or doesn't concede the settlements, if it leaves or stays in the territories. As long as it is in the Islamic sphere, al Qaeda has another flag. For Islamic fundamentalists, Zionism and imperialism justify the mega-attacks against the Western world. This sophisticated gang isn't fighting over borders. The border is their ability to expand and cause damage. To Israel's credit, it must be said that ever since the phenomenon of the suicide bomb for Allah was born, when killing civilians, women and children turned into a commandment that leads to heaven, Israel was the first to point out that it was a worldwide danger.