JINSA Report #551 Port Insecurity

JINSA
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Suite 515
Washington, DC 20036

202-667-3900
202-667-0601 Fax

February 22, 2006

JINSA Report #551

Port Insecurity

Grant the President this: There is more than a little anti-Arab
sentiment in the uproar over a Dubai firm purchasing the British
operating company running terminals at six major American seaports.
Otherwise, how do you explain the LACK of concern over Chinese companies
running terminals at two major West Coast ports and New Orleans, the
locus of much of our energy imports? Or about the original British
company when there are probably as many jihadists in Britain today as
there are in Dubai? Yesterday, the Department of Homeland Security was
still trying to figure out the ownership of terminal management in all
361 U.S. ports.

The Coast Guard does, and will continue to do, port security and the
tracking of ships, crews and cargo. The Customs Service does, and will
continue to do, screening in the ports. The real problem is twofold -
and applies to ALL foreign terminal ownership: first, that a management
company could facilitate infiltration of people or weapons into the
U.S.; and second that company officials would be briefed on American
security procedures which, if given to terrorists, would make security
much easier to breech.

There are two ancillary, but also real problems. The Dubai company is
government-owned. The current government of the UAE is pro-American, but
change in the Middle East is nerve-wracking at best. Second, the company
runs terminals in places including Venezuela - having a Middle Eastern
company control both ends where one end is increasingly close to Iran is
even more problematic.

We are indebted to Advisory Board Member Stephen Bryen, a former
Pentagon official, for pointing out that American defense companies with
partial foreign ownership are required to have an American Security
Board responsible for issues which, if controlled by foreign interests -
even allied interests - would make Americans nervous. Accepting the
rules and the authority of the Security Board is part of the deal. No
Board, no deal. More than one sale fell through on that point, which is
just fine with us.

Ports are not military installations, but they are considered "critical
infrastructure" under an Executive Order signed by President George H.W.
Bush. So why not have American Security Boards for all of America's
ports? Why not prevent Chinese, Danish, Singaporean, South Korean and
British as well as Dubai owners from getting an inside look at American
security practices?

The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) points out that not
only do American ports handle 95 percent of America's overseas commerce
and 10 million cruise passengers annually, "They also enable deployment
of U.S. military vessels, personnel and cargo to support our troops in
Iraq and Afghanistan, while ensuring the ability of relief organizations
to ship critical supplies to areas of the world hard hit by man-made and
natural disasters, such as the tsunami catastrophe… 16 million jobs...
$2 trillion worth of international trade annually... 27 percent of the
nation's GDP."

You'd think we'd want to protect all that and not only from Dubai. It's
time to have a real policy to protect the management of our ports from
all foreign ownership.

To view this JINSA Report online click on the link below.
http://www.jinsa.org/JINSAReports/3344

___________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from JINSA Reports, visit:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/unsubscribe.html

And to subscribe to any JINSA mailing-list:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/subscribe.html

Access past JINSA Reports at: http://www.jinsa.org/

Comments? Send e-mail to info@jinsa.org

FIRE News: Mohammed Cartoon Controversy Sweeps the Academy

Dear Mr. Levy: For weeks now, controversy and unrest over cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed have swept the world. Not surprisingly, this global dispute has reached college campuses, resulting in heated debate and, unfortunately, some censorship when the cartoons have been published or posted. In response, FIRE issued a statement on the controversy today and is bringing to light details on several universities’ responses, both good and bad.   FIRE’s full press release on this case appears below, but if your e-mail client does not support HTML, you can view a link-rich version at www.thefire.org/index.php/article/6818.html. Sincerely,   Greg Lukianoff, Interim President Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) 601 Walnut Street, Suite 510 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Phone: 215-717-3473; Fax: 215-717-3440 ------------------------   Mohammed Cartoon Controversy Sweeps the Academy; FIRE Responds to Intimidation, Newspaper Disputes   PHILADELPHIA, February 22, 2006—The global controversy over cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed has now struck American college campuses. In response, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) issued a statement today reminding colleges and universities that free speech needs protection now—in the face of ongoing controversy—more than ever.   “It is when expression is most hotly contested and the calls for suppression are the loudest that we must defend liberty the most fervently,” said FIRE Interim President Greg Lukianoff. “I am reminded of the infinitely wise words of Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson: ‘Freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.’”   FIRE’s statement stresses that the First Amendment unquestionably protects printing and posting the infamous cartoons. It also points out that while fear of violent reprisal could be an impetus for censoring the cartoons, “fear must not lead universities to forget that their primary duty is to defend the rights of students and faculty to hold and express their opinions, not placate those who would silence them.” The statement goes on to explain that universities have both a “negative” duty not to censor the cartoons as well as a “positive” duty to protect speakers from being censored by others.   Although censorship in response to displays of the cartoons has been rare, it has indeed occurred. At Century College in Minnesota, adjunct professor of geography Karen Murdock posted the 12 original cartoons, articles about the resultant international controversy, and comment sheets on a bulletin board near her office. After the cartoons were anonymously torn down several times, Murdock reported that her division head removed the cartoons and a university administrator requested that she not repost them.   Some Muslim students also wrote a letter saying they were “heartbroken” to see that Murdock had posted the cartoons, claiming that “[d]uring the last week, this incident had a very negative impact on our ability to concentrate on our studies.” While no disciplinary action was taken against Murdock, she has not reposted the cartoons out of fear of possible fallout. She told FIRE, “When a division chairman and a college vice president both tell an untenured adjunct professor that something should not be posted on a bulletin board, this is a suggestion that has the force of a direct order. The cartoons would still be posted if I felt that I had a say in the matter.”   At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, student editors Acton Gorton and Chuck Prochaska printed six of the original 12 cartoons in the independent student paper The Daily Illini. The Chicago Tribune reported on February 14 that the Illini’s board of directors, composed of staff and students, dismissed Gorton and Prochaska for failing to consult with “other student editors and staff members” in making the decision to print the cartoons. The paper then ran an editorial apologizing for printing the cartoons and calling Gorton “a renegade editor who firmly believes that his will is also the will of the paper.”   The Chicago Maroon reported on February 17 that an anonymous University of Chicago student hung a homemade sketch of Mohammed with a caption reading “Mo’ Mohammed, Mo’ Problems” outside his dorm room. After receiving a complaint about the sketch, Resident Head Andrea Gates ordered it removed and reported the student who had posted it to the Housing Office for a possible investigation. The student removed the sketch and issued a written apology. The university has taken no further action, and FIRE continues to investigate the situation.   Similarly, at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), student Mitchell Foley reported to FIRE that he had posted the 12 cartoons on his dorm room door until his resident assistant told him to remove them. He removed the cartoons and has not reposted them; RPI has not commented on the situation.   There have also been various instances of student papers running the cartoons with little to no reaction from administrators. Student papers at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Purdue University, the University of Arizona, Northern Illinois University, and Harvard University have all printed the original cartoons, or their own versions depicting the prophet, without official consequence.   “No one should deny the student press’ freedom to publish these cartoons,” Lukianoff concluded. “Administrators have the right to criticize newspaper decisions—as does every American—but this criticism cannot and must not be parlayed into censorship.”   FIRE works on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities, and urges people to report any instances of censorship of these cartoons on college campuses at thefire.org/submit. FIRE’s efforts to preserve freedom of expression on college campuses across the country during the cartoon controversy can be viewed at thefire.org/cartoons.   CONTACT: Greg Lukianoff, Interim President, FIRE: 215-717-3473; greg_lukianoff@thefire.org       FIRE's work is made possible by the generosity of our individual supporters. Please click here to make your tax-deductible contribution.

Click here if you do not want to receive further emails.

AJC OPED: Cartoon Controversy

Controversy missing honest discussion, sensitivity By David A. Harris February 22, 2006 Had it been our call, we would not have published the cartoons. As an organization actively involved in efforts to strengthen mutual respect and mutual understanding among the world's faith communities, the American Jewish Committee does not engage in religious satire. Disregard for the core tenets and sensibilities of particular religious groups -- such as the graphic portrayal of the prophet Muhammad in an editorial cartoon -- runs counter to our principles, and by giving offense to others, offends us as well. At the same time, as citizens of open and democratic societies, we recognize that the bedrock principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press can, at times, produce things that are not to our liking or taste. We have witnessed, in recent years, articles, cartoons, films and art that have been deemed anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-Muslim. But when we find something objectionable, even offensive, we respond within the norms of democratic societies, which invite peaceful protest and public debate. Three things in particular disturb us about the response of some in the Islamic world to the cartoons, first published in a newspaper in Denmark last year. First, peaceful protest and public debate have been replaced by angry mob scenes, violence, intimidation and destruction of property. This is totally unacceptable. Second, while editorial cartoons may not be the most refined forum to examine social and political ills, and these cartoons clearly gave offense, the broad message they sought to convey -- that Islam and the name of the prophet Muhammad are invoked frequently by fanatical murderers whose horrific crimes have touched every continent -- is a serious one, which cannot be ignored either in the West or in the Muslim world itself. And third, the story drips with hypocrisy. Saudi Arabia, which withdrew its ambassador to Denmark, removed Danish products from supermarkets and lodged a formal protest with Norway, is among the world's most intolerant nations. As the U.S. State Department International Religious Freedom Report of 2005 declared regarding Saudi Arabia, "The law requires that all citizens be Muslim … and the public practice of non-Muslim religions is prohibited." Moreover, as an American Jewish Committee co-sponsored study in 2003 documented clearly, Saudi government-sponsored schools teach children contempt and distrust of Christians and Jews (the study is available at www.ajc.org). Some of the other countries protesting the loudest are also purveyors of unadulterated religious hatred and bigotry. When Syrian television recently carried a multi-part series depicting Jews in the most venal manner, inspired by a notorious anti-Semitic forgery, there wasn't a peep of protest from within Syria; to the contrary, the series was wildly popular among viewers. In stark contrast, the Syrian regime was complicit in the attacks on European embassies in Damascus. And when the former Malaysian prime minister, Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad, stood before heads of government of the Organization of the Islamic Conference on Oct. 23, 2003, and expressed unambiguous anti-Semitic views, what was the audience reaction? A standing ovation. We hope that the outcome of the events instigated by the cartoons could be general agreement around the world to promote interfaith harmony and heightened sensitivity. That might prove a silver lining. But if the result is only to prove that violence achieves its intended effect, and that honest discussion of the most difficult religious and political issues is impermissible, then that would be a tragic day for all who cherish the values of a free society. David A. Harris is national executive director of the American Jewish Committee.

To remove yourself from all mailings from American Jewish Committee, please click here.

To modify your profile, please click here.

Turn Friday March 3rd into something Extraordinary

Israel Insider thanks you for accepting and checking out this sponsored mailing, which enables our publication to remain free for all. We carefully select our partners in these special promotions. You are currently subscribed to this list as: davidlevy68.home@blogger.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-41920-1139345Q@list.israelinsider.com

AJC Mideast Briefing

A Narrow Passage: A Policy-Design Challenge for Israel and the West: Demonstrating the Cost of the Hamas Vote while Avoiding a Humanitarian Crisis A Weekly Briefing on Israeli and Middle Eastern Affairs February 20, 2006 Dr. Eran Lerman Director Israel/Middle East Office A narrow mountain path winds its way between dangerous cliffs; a step too long, a step too short, and a sharp slide awaits the careless wayfarer, with potentially disastrous consequences. This has been, in symbolic terms, the challenge of policy design as seen by the Israeli military planners during the long twilight period of warfare against terror, imposed on us since the autumn of 2000: Do too little, and terror might reign on Israeli streets. Do too much, in terms of the use of force against terror bases hidden amidst a civilian population, and the elaborate trap laid by Yasir Arafat-the escalation of Palestinian suffering so as to bring on massive external intervention, and the imposition of a solution based on the Arab interpretation of "international legitimacy"-would have been sprung. Not to mention our own moral anguish and internal divisions in the face of this dilemma! Despite occasional failures of judgment and errors, missteps on either side of the path, the IDF and the defense establishment can be said to have kept their balance-and to have found an effective way to walk the path and avoid both pitfalls. The pinpoint accuracy of recent strikes on terror operators in Gaza, in response to the Qassam rockets-all those killed in these air strikes were definitely identified as being directly involved in acts of war against Israeli civilians-testifies to the effort that goes into keeping this balance, based on highly accurate intelligence.            A similar challenge-but this time transferred from the relatively precise military domain, where it will continue to be relevant, to the much murkier realm of economic and aid policy-now faces Israel as well as members of the international donor community. The latter has given, in recent years, more economic assistance per capita to the Palestinians than to any other people on earth. This has, in fact, evolved into a sense of entitlement. A Hamas spokesman, speaking to CNN-brazenly standing right in front of a poster glorifying bus bombings, a point that the network reporter elegantly avoided any reference to-claimed that the world should "respect the democratic outcome" by continuing to fund the PA as if nothing had happened. But something did happen: Instead of looking for a peaceful, liberal alternative to Fatah, the Palestinian people empowered a murderous terror organization. Despite the normal generous instinct to "give them the benefit of the doubt," the painful memories of recent years, the silent murmuring voices in the background of all of those children, women, and men who have been murdered under orders of Hamas leaders, as well as the virulent nature of Hamas's positions on the Jews (a recent quotation from the Hamas Web site-"we shall drink your blood"-can serve as a reminder) are there to warn us against any appeasement.            Once the active control of PA institutions has passed to Hamas functionaries, many of the complex cooperative arrangements which until now have governed the Israeli-PA relationship (and the parallel system of aid management by the U.S. and Europe) simply will cease to be. No money can flow to the PA coffers (tax and custom receipts will probably be held in escrow, for legal reasons); no security coordination (often based on sensitive intelligence) would be possible with people who owe their living to Hamas; no elaborate procedures to allow Palestinian workers to come daily to earn a living in Israel could be safe enough for the time being. The new government is bound to depend on a functional interaction with Israel and the West, if it is to succeed in delivering on its promises to the Palestinian public. But it must not be allowed to succeed; indeed, it must be shown to fail, unless and until it proves, in very concrete ways and by restating its identity in a dramatic fashion, that it has changed entirely and left behind, in perpetuity, its exterminatory ideology and terrorist practice. If softer standards are applied, the Israeli defense establishment feels, we shall soon face loopholes and "gray areas" leading to an unbowed Hamas, in power and in close coordination with Hizballah, Syria, and Iran. If Hamas decides to break the "hudna" ("calm") and resume large-scale violence (which it is not inclined to do, at this stage-the deterrent  message seems to be working), the Israeli "menu" of responses would prove to be much harsher. The IDF is certainly not in favor of doing "too little" against Hamas, and at the political level, this line enjoys the cautious but firm support of Ehud Olmert, the acting prime minister.            At the same time, the strictures against doing "too much" are equally in force. The Palestinian people will not be starved. There is an acute awareness among Israeli decision-makers, from within the IDF all the way to the highest national level, that for legal, moral, and strategic reasons, this would be a harmful and potentially disastrous outcome: Hamas would use it to radicalize popular opinion and blame Fatah as collaborators. Arab reactions might escalate and play into the hands of radical elements in the region, led by Iran. Internationally, a strangulation strategy would quickly erode the unprecedented backing Israel now enjoys and could lead to significant intervention in terms highly harmful to our interests.             Can this circle be squared? Is there a foothold on the narrow path? At least in theory, the answer is yes: A careful use of existing connections and contacts could give Israeli planners an opportunity to "peel" the Hamas government off the people who may have voted for it-but still need to be offered an alternative way to keep their families alive. With a measure of creativity and good will, and based upon existing structures (much of the aid is already funneled through NGOs and aid agencies directly to recipients, often in kind and not in cash), the essential supplies could be kept flowing, while the huge governmental payroll is replaced by other sources of income, including new investments in industrial parks on the Palestinian side of the border and other private sector initiatives. After all, Hamas previously did the same to Fatah, by maintaining a parallel structure (da'awa, a "call to the faith," in effect, a separate social service and educational system). We are now called upon to help beat them at their own game.

To remove yourself from all mailings from American Jewish Committee, please click here.

To modify your profile, please click here.

David Harris on the Radio

We Stand with Denmark David A. Harris Executive Director, American Jewish Committee Week of February 21, 2006 David Harris delivers regular radio commentaries on the CBS radio network, which can be heard nationally just before the Osgood File on more than 400 stations. All of the commentaries are available at www.ajc.org. Click here to listen to this week's message. The following is the full text of this week's broadcast: By now, the story is well known. A Danish newspaper prints controversial cartoons. It triggers angry mob scenes in many Muslim countries. Danes are targeted. Danish goods are boycotted. Danish embassies are attacked. The goal is to bring Denmark to its knees. Whether or not you agree with the newspaper's decision, this response is outrageous. As the Danish prime minister said, he regrets any hurt to Muslim sensibilities, but he can't apologize for freedom of speech. In democratic societies, we don't always like what we see and hear, but it's a small price to pay for the blessings we enjoy. Denmark is a model democracy. In fact, it has lots to teach other nations, including those protesting the loudest, about freedom, religious liberty, women's rights, and human development. An American Jewish Committee delegation is in Denmark this week. It's our way of saying that at times like this we're all Danes. This is David Harris of the American Jewish Committee.

To remove yourself from all mailings from American Jewish Committee, please click here.

To modify your profile, please click here.

FIRE News: Partial Victory for Free Speech at DePaul

Dear Mr. Levy: DePaul University has acquitted a conservative student group that was charged with harassment for holding an event that satirized affirmative action. DePaul administrators shut the bake sale down, and until FIRE intervened, the DePaul Conservative Alliance was charged with violating that anti-discrimination policy for holding an “affirmative action bake sale” protest. This incident marks the third time in one year that FIRE has had to intercede at DePaul.    FIRE’s full press release on this case appears below, but if your e-mail client does not support HTML, you can view a link-rich version at www.thefire.org/index.php/article/6802.html. Sincerely,   Greg Lukianoff, Interim President Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) 601 Walnut Street, Suite 510 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Phone: 215-717-3473; Fax: 215-717-3440 ------------------------   Partial Victory for Free Speech at DePaul: Student Protestors Acquitted of Trumped-Up Harassment Charges   CHICAGO, February 20, 2006—DePaul University has acquitted a conservative student group that was charged with harassment for holding an event that satirized affirmative action. Until the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) intervened, DePaul administrators had been investigating the DePaul Conservative Alliance (DCA) for holding an “affirmative action bake sale” protest.   “It’s about time DePaul realized that dissenting opinions are not the same thing as harassment,” stated FIRE Interim President Greg Lukianoff. “FIRE has had to intervene in case after case of viewpoint discrimination at DePaul. The university’s record of repression is shameful.”   On January 17, the DCA held an “affirmative action bake sale” protest in DePaul’s student center. Students across the country have held affirmative action bake sales to satirize what they see as injustice in affirmative action policies. In this case, the DCA advertised that African American and Hispanic students would be charged lower prices than white and Asian students for the same items. The primary goal of these “bake sales” is to spark debate, not to raise revenue.   After shutting the bake sale down, DePaul administrators charged the DCA with violating the Anti-Discriminatory Harassment Policy. FIRE sent DePaul President Dennis Holtschneider a letter on January 23 but Holtschneider failed to respond. FIRE brought the case to public attention on January 30, resulting in an outpouring of criticism of DePaul’s actions. Then, on February 15, the DCA members were found not guilty of violating the harassment policy, but were found guilty of failing to disclose in advance that the bake sale would be used to protest affirmative action.   “DePaul was wise to take FIRE’s words to heart in deciding to acquit the students of any harassment charges,” stated Lukianoff. “It is hard to believe that the remaining sanctions are a result of how the DCA registered the protest and not its controversial content. Furthermore, should students really be expected to register their political protests in advance? That is a truly stifling interpretation of ‘free’ speech.”   Last November, the DePaul College Republicans (CRs) were banned from posting flyers protesting a visit by University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. DePaul not only prevented the students from voicing dissenting opinions but even surreptitiously altered its policies to prohibit the CRs’ actions, and then misled FIRE about having done so.   As a result of the controversy that has ensued since the bake sale, the DCA is planning an event to clarify the role of open debate and dissenting opinions on campus. The DCA is considering inviting as a speaker Thomas Klocek, the DePaul professor whom FIRE defended last spring after he was suspended without due process for engaging in a heated out-of-class argument with students.   “DePaul has a terrible habit of praising free speech with one side of its mouth and denying it with the other. This is getting truly tiresome,” Lukianoff concluded. “FIRE is relieved that the DCA was not found guilty of harassment, but we expect that this is not the end of the suppression of dissent at DePaul.”   FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at DePaul University can be viewed at thefire.org/depaul.   CONTACT: Greg Lukianoff, Interim President, FIRE: 215-717-3473; greg_lukianoff@thefire.org Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, President, DePaul University: 312-362-8000; dholtsch@depaul.edu       FIRE's work is made possible by the generosity of our individual supporters. Please click here to make your tax-deductible contribution.

Click here if you do not want to receive further emails.

Israel Campus Beat - February 19, 2006

Dateline: February 19, 2006Subscribe | My Subscription | Search | Archives | About ICB | Contact Us

Top Stories Analysis & Commentary Campus News Campus Analysis & Commentary Point-Counterpoint

Science & Technology Arts and Entertainment Sports Domestic Israel News Suggest a Story Educational Resources Israel Study & Travel Additional News Sources Research Institutes NGOs Israeli Universities Israeli Government & IDF Featured this week Amherst Arizona Ben-Gurion Berkeley Columbia Connecticut Florida Georgetown Harvard Hebrew Illinois - Urbana Indiana Oregon Oxford San Diego State Stanford Toronto Virginia Wake Forest Washington U., St. Louis Wesleyan	Hamas Takes Over Palestinian Parliament Hamas has taken over as the dominant party in the Palestinian parliament and swiftly rejected President Mahmoud Abbas' call to pursue his peacemaking efforts with Israel.  The swearing-in of the parliament  paves the way for Hamas to form a government that will be on a potential collision course with Mr Abbas and faces a boycott by major powers unless it renounces violence and its vow to destroy Israel. Israel is considering tougher restrictions on Palestinians as a way to pressure the government. (Telegraph-UK) Additional Headlines Gallup Poll: Support for Israel among Americans Highest since Gulf War U.S. House of Representatives Urges Halt to PA Aid Hamas Video: We Will Drink the Blood of the Jews Secretary Rice Meets Arab Journalists, Discusses Hamas "The only path to a good and peaceful life [for Palestinians] is to have a government that is prepared to seek a two-state solution, that is prepared to recognize the other party to that two-state solution. You can't say you want the destruction of Israel and be committed to a two-state solution. Hamas needs to do that. They also need to renounce violence, because you can't have one foot in violence and terrorism and another foot in the political process. So, the international community is making, I think, what is just a very practical case. You can not be a responsible government and - govern responsibly and call for the destruction of the Israeli state and resort to violence." (State Department) Sharon's Legacy and Hamas by Henry Kissinger The emergence of Hamas as the dominant faction in Palestine should not be treated as a radical new departure. Hamas represents the mind-set that prevented the full recognition of Israel's legitimacy by the PLO for all these decades; kept Arafat from accepting partition of Palestine at Camp David in 2000; produced two intifadas and consistently supported terrorism, on occasion explicitly, always tacitly. (International Herald Tribune) Amherst: In a Land of Unrest, Jewish Students Rediscover Heritage by Virginia Lora A group of 11 Amherst College students traveled to Israel thanks to Taglit-birthright israel. They went in three different groups, along with other college-aged men and women. From day one, the jet-lagged students traveled up-and-down the country. The best part of the trip, several students seemed to agree, was the visit to the Western Wall. "They had us close our eyes, hold hands and led us into a balcony that overlooked the Wall. They organized us so that we would all have a view," said Daniel Lees '08. "That was probably the best moment in Israel." (Amherst Student) Berkeley: Jewish, Arab Students Work Toward a Better, Greener Israel by Bryan Thomas Israeli graduate student Maya Negev described the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies with Rabbi Michael Cohen, one of the center's founders. Rabbi Cohen and Negev, who is Jewish, joined Israeli Arab Mazin Zoabi in speaking to about 15 students and Berkeley community members about the multi-ethnic institute, which seeks to educate future environmental leaders of the Middle East. (Daily Californian) Ben-Gurion: Ya'acov Blidstein Wins Israel Prize in Jewish Thought Prof. Ya'acov (Gerald) Blidstein of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev has been awarded this year's Israel Prize in Jewish Thought for the year 5766. The prize, Israel's highest honor, was announced by Minister of Education, Culture and Sport Meir Shitreet last week. (Jerusalem Post) Columbia: Israeli and Arab Mothers Tour U.S. for Peace by Adam Phillips The classroom at New York's Columbia University was packed earlier this month with students for the Mothers for Peace event. The two mothers on tour are Nonie Darwish (pictured right), an Egyptian who grew up in Gaza and moved to the U.S. over 25 years ago, and Miri Eisen (left), a recently retired colonel in the Israeli Defense Forces, where she worked for 20 years in Army Intelligence. Each woman is the mother of three.  (Voice of America)     Click for audio broadcast. Point-Counterpoint - What Is Behind the Cartoon Wars? Enough Political Correctness by Adi Schwartz The feeling that the large and established parties in Europe were not doing enough to deal with the problem also contributed to the strengthening of the far right. The clear lesson is that ignoring the problem - the rising feeling of discomfort among many Europeans over the amount of Muslims on the continent - is liable to lead to the growth of weeds whose strengthening is dangerous to the Europeans themselves, to European democracy and to Muslim citizens. After all, what does the average European think when he sees the pictures of the Danish and Norwegian embassies being set on fire in Beirut and Damascus? The question of whether it was appropriate to publish the cartoons is secondary. In Europe, Israel, and the Muslim world, much harsher cartoons have been displayed in the last few years.  The primary question is whether Europe is capable of recognizing the problem that has been placed on its doorstep. Mainstream politics and media must set aside political correctness and say in a clear manner what kind of continent they want and why they have been fighting for it for so long. (Ha'aretz) Governments Playing with Fire by Anders Jerichow In European countries, minorities - Muslim as well as Jewish - have been subject to demonization and immigrants have been targets of discriminatory practices and exclusivist policies. In the great cartoon affair, governments have been playing with fire. In Denmark, the government tried to reduce the affair to a question of freedom of speech. In the Middle East, governments insisted on seeing the affair as a question of religious respect and made the most of the issue. In Europe traditions do call for sensitivity to religious feeling, just as hate speech generally - and wisely - is banned. In Europe, marginalized immigrant societies have found a cultural symbol in the cartoon affair of their sense that they are being denied opportunities, equality and respect. In the Middle East, populations who would otherwise find plenty of reason for local frustration - the continued political oppression in their own countries, the Iraq war, the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, the Darfour genocide, lack of freedom of speech - were allowed to let off plenty of steam. But when the dust has settled, European exclusion of immigrant minorities will continue to nurture growing frustration. (Bitterlemons) The Relevance for Jews and Israelis by Dina Porat Many commentators now consider the Danish caricatures as a mere excuse seized upon by Muslim radicals to start a wave of violent reaction against the West and one of its most sacred values, freedom of speech. The most logical reaction to this proposal among Jews is, first, how come we never launched a loud campaign to protest against thousands of far more abusive caricatures, published worldwide for hundreds of years, which have defamed everything dear to us? Why did Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinezhad announce a "scholars" conference and a caricatures contest on the Holocaust, and not, say, on Theodor Herzl? Let me suggest a less well-known reason for the Iranian anti-Holocaust crusade: that same legislation against Holocaust denial, especially in western and central European countries, has put in jail a number of its central figures. I would suggest, though I naturally cannot prove it, that the Swiss Jurgen Graf, the Austrian Wolfgang Froelich and the German Horst Mahler, who are either residing in Tehran or visit there frequently, are the moving spirits behind the Iranian campaign. My pessimism notwithstanding, let us call upon the UN Third Committee on Discrimination to ask the representatives of each religion to define precisely what are its most sacred values, and then to reach an agreement signed by all nations not to abuse freedom of speech in order to defame them. (Bitterlemons) To unsubscribe from Israel Campus Beat, click here
Israel on Campus Coalition | Conference of Presidents | Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs | Daily Alert | Israel HighWay
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyrights

JINSA Report #550 Consequences of the Palestinian Vote

JINSA
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Suite 515
Washington, DC 20036

202-667-3900
202-667-0601 Fax

February 17, 2006

JINSA Report #550

Consequences of the Palestinian Vote

Khalid Abu Toameh, a Palestinian journalist, recently described American
policy toward the Palestinian elections: "If you don't vote for the same
thieves who have been stealing your money for ten years, we are going to
punish you." Fair point. And because we can't deny the legitimacy of the
election or the result, American and EU diplomacy since Hamas won a
legislative majority has taken on an element of the parent-child
relationship - a demand that Hamas behave and a threat to cut off its
allowance.

Readers with children know that "demanding" is doomed, right? If you do
it, you had better be prepared to exercise leverage if the demand isn't
met. Ditto governments demanding that others do something without the
necessary leverage for enforcement. Here's an idea. What if we just
allow the natural consequences to flow?

President Bush in his landmark June 24, 2002 speech told the Palestinian
people to "elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror" in
order for the U.S. to "support the creation of a Palestinian state." The
Road Map calls for Palestinian leadership to issue an "unequivocal
statement reiterating Israel's right to exist in peace and security and
calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed
activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere."

Neither the speech nor the Road Map indicate what would happen if the
conditions are not met, but it seems reasonable that the U.S. and the
Quartet would cease to support the establishment of an independent
Palestine. That means:

· No Roadmap
· No more Quartet if Vladimir Putin follows through on his invitation
for Hamas to visit Moscow - a natural consequence that accrues both to
the Palestinians and the Russians.
· No treating Palestinian representatives as if they are diplomats of a
sovereign state
· No support for committees of the UN dedicated to Palestinian
independence - of which there are at least five, including "The Special
Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of
the Palestinian People & Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories."

This is NOT punishment of the Palestinian people, just the natural
consequences of making American and EU policy internally and externally
consistent.

The underlying assumption here about Palestinian "democracy" is that
this will not be the last legislative election they have. [If it is, we
have other problems.] If, in some future election, the people choose
"leadership not compromised by terror" we can reinstate our support for
Palestinian independence. If they don"t, OK.

One of the lessons of democracy is that ideas, words and votes have
consequences. The Palestinians have made their choice but nothing
requires the rest of us to ignore the political ramifications of what
they've chosen.

To view this JINSA Report online click on the link below.
http://www.jinsa.org/JINSAReports/3315

___________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from JINSA Reports, visit:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/unsubscribe.html

And to subscribe to any JINSA mailing-list:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/subscribe.html

Access past JINSA Reports at: http://www.jinsa.org/

Comments? Send e-mail to info@jinsa.org

JINSA Article Digest for February, 17th

Articles added to JINSA Online from February, 10th to February, 17th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

#548 Mohammed Cartoons, Google and Yahoo

(2006-02-10) Second to the freedom of speech, the American position on the
Mohammed cartoon controversy has been the need for cultural sensitivity and
respect for religion and culture, which leaves enormous wiggle room in the
concept. Google and Yahoo, two of Americas biggest icons of the free exchange
of speech and information, wiggled right through. Read the analysis in JINSA
Report #548.

Read more @ http://www.jinsa.org/articles/view.html?documentid=3311
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

#549 Standing With Your Friends

(2006-02-14) Americans are feeling the international political heat of
policies that deal with the fact that the over-armed, repressive
dictatorships of the Middle East were already a swamp that harbored and
supported anti-American terrorists responsible for massive attacks on
Americans both home and abroad. Read the analysis in JINSA report #549.

Read more @ http://www.jinsa.org/articles/view.html?documentid=3313
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

#550 Consequences of the Palestinian Vote

(2006-02-16) One of the lessons of democracy is that ideas, words and votes
have consequences. The Palestinians have made their choice but nothing
requires the rest of us to ignore the political ramifications of what theyve
chosen. Read the analysis in JINSA Report #550.

Read more @ http://www.jinsa.org/articles/view.html?documentid=3315

_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe from this Digest, visit:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/unsubscribe.html

And to subscribe to any JINSA mailing-list:
http://www.jinsa.org/lists/subscribe.html

ADL Headlines: A Weekly Update from the Anti-Defamation League

     

Iran Provides Megaphone To Holocaust Deniers World Leaders Urged to Reject Hamas Resurgence of Racist Skinheads in U.S. Air Force Guidelines on Accommodation “A Step Backwards” Dover Judge Makes Case for Judicial Independence Anglican Church Votes to Divest from Israel Voices of Conscience for Darfur Alabama Church Burnings Condemned Chicago: Campus Newspaper Defends Column Denying Holocaust Seattle: ADL Testifies on Religious Inclusion New York: Experts Discuss Future of Supreme Court “Myths and Facts” Updated Media Watch February 16, 2006      Cartoon Controversy Rages On As violence raged across the Muslim world in the aftermath of the publication of images of the Prophet Mohammed, some Muslim and Arab media outlets used the controversy as an excuse to print ugly anti-Semitic caricatures and images denigrating the Holocaust, injecting Jews into the maelstrom over religious imagery. Meanwhile, one of Iran’s largest daily newspapers announced a contest for cartoons lampooning the Holocaust, deepening that country’s descent into ugly Jew-baiting and ravenous anti-Semitism.   More>> Lessons from the Cartoon Jihad Op-ed By Abraham H. Foxman (NJ Jewish Standard) End the Hypocrisy: ADL Ad in the International Herald Tribune In the News: Newsday     Anti-Semitism In The Arab World Cartoon of the Week  Al-Watan, February 11, 2006 (Saudi Arabia) The cartoon's headline: "The Western Media." Click to Enlarge Iran Provides Megaphone To Holocaust Deniers Iran is taking its promotion of Holocaust denial to dangerous new levels. In the last few months as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stepped up his hateful rhetoric against Jews and the Foreign Ministry announced plans for a revisionist conference, an Iranian news agency has handed a megaphone to some of the West’s most active and notorious Holocaust deniers.   More>> World Leaders Urged to Reject Hamas In the wake of the Palestinian elections, ADL urged four South American governments not to legitimize the Hamas terrorist organization by meeting with its leaders visiting their countries and seeking support in the wake of their victory.  More>> The League also urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to refuse to meet with Hamas.  More>> Resurgence of Racist Skinheads in U.S. The U.S. has seen a "significant and troubling" resurgence of racist skinhead activity, with a rise in the number of organized racist skinhead groups as well as a rise in the number of unaffiliated racist skinheads. A new ADL report says groups or individuals identifying themselves as racist skinheads are active in nearly all states in the country.  More>> Air Force Guidelines on Accommodation “A Step Backwards” While maintaining substantial religious accommodation protections, the new Air Force guidelines on religious accommodation are a significant step backwards with respect to religious coercion, proselytizing and harassment.   More>> Dover Judge Makes Case for Judicial Independence The judge who presided over last year’s landmark case involving the teaching of “Intelligent Design” in the Dover, PA, schools told ADL leaders meeting in Florida that his verdict was grounded in constitutional law and court precedents that found that the government, in providing education, must not endorse any religious view. This, and other highlights from the meeting.  More>> Anglican Church Votes to Divest from Israel The Church of England’s decision to disinvest in certain companies doing business with Israel is a moral outrage, especially in light of the recent election victory of Hamas.  More>> Voices of Conscience for Darfur The Save Darfur Coalition launched a special campaign, “Million Voices for Darfur,” to urge President Bush to support a stronger multinational force to protect the civilians of Darfur, Sudan, against the ongoing ethnic atrocities there. The centerpiece of the campaign is to have one million people send postcards to the White House. As a coalition member, ADL provided 10,000 postcards to its 30 regional offices for nationwide distribution.  More>> Alabama Church Burnings Condemned Calling the rash of church burnings in Alabama “heinous crimes,” ADL’s Southeast Regional Office called on law enforcement to vigorously investigate the incidents and bring the perpetrators to justice.  More>> Chicago: Campus Newspaper Defends Column Denying Holocaust ADL called the Daily Northwestern’s decision to run a column by a Holocaust denier “irresponsible journalism.” In an editorial, the student newspaper defended its decision to print a column by Arthur Butz, a well-known Holocaust denier and professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University, on the basis of seeking a “balanced perspective” and “fairness.”   More>> Seattle: ADL Testifies on Religious Inclusion In testimony to the U.S. Secretary of Education’s Commission on Higher Education, Amy Stein, a member of ADL’s Pacific Northwest Region Advisory Board, said that colleges and universities needed to provide safe environments where students do not feel marginalized because of their ethnicity or religion, and where respect for differences and inclusion are valued. Stein cited several recent incidents of anti-Jewish activity on campus. New York: Experts Discuss Future of Supreme Court A panel of distinguished professors and experts on constitutional law discussed the future direction of the U.S. Supreme Court at the annual ADL Brodsky Legal Conference at New York University. More than 300 people attended the panel discussion on “The Supreme Court at a Crossroads: American Constitutional Law in the Next Decade,” organized under the auspices of ADL’s New York Lawyers’ Division. “Myths and Facts” Updated ADL’s popular Confronting Anti-Semitism Myths and Facts guide has been completely revised and reissued. The guide emphasizes practical suggestions on how to confront anti-Semitic remarks. It discloses the origins of popular misconceptions, contrasts these with factual evidence, and describes recommended responses and actions.   More>> Media Watch Op-Eds: The Future of the Mideast is at Stake The Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections on Jan. 25 raises a number of important propositions regarding the region, Israeli-Palestinian relations and U.S. foreign policy. Diversity of Beliefs is American Way We must continue to defend and protect the separation of church and state. The wisdom of those who founded this nation has enabled diverse faiths to flourish and allowed a marvelous diversity to enrich our society. Letters: Mohammed Cartoon Furor (NY Times)  2/04/06 The widespread anger over the depiction of Muhammad is ironic considering that newspapers in the Arab world have no scruples when it comes to demonizing Jews. Arab Media's Anti-Semitism (Boston Globe) 2/06/06 A Boston Globe editorial missed the elephant in the room: Virulent, graphic anti-Semitic cartoons appear daily in the Arab and Muslim media. Writer Blames Israel for Violence 2/14/06 In an op-ed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Salim Lone absurdly blamed the U.S. and Israel for the rioting and destruction. Philadelphia Writer Goes Overboard on PC 2/09/06 In his Daily News column, Michael Smerconish went overboard in his attempt to express his frustration with political correctness in the name of racial sensitivity. Editor's Note: The next edition of ADL Headlines will appear on March 2, 2006. ©2006 Anti-Defamation League. All rights reserved. The Anti-Defamation League is a not-for-profit organization recognized as tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). Our mission is to stop, by appeals to reason and conscience and, if necessary, by appeals to law, the defamation of the Jewish people. Our ultimate purpose is to secure justice and fair treatment for all people. ADL Homepage | Donate Change Your E-mail Address | Update your E-mail Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy