Editor: Rael Jean Isaac
Editorial Board: Ruth King, Rita Kramer

Outpost is distributed free to Members of Americans for a Safe Israel

Annual membership: $100.

Americans for a Safe Israel
1751 Second Ave. (at 91st Street)
New York, NY 10128
Tel (212) 828-2424 / fax (212) 828-1717
Email: judy@afsi.org


Gilding the Weed By William Mehlman

The media-abetted elation that attended Iran’s release of five American hostages guilty of no discernible violation of its laws in exchange for seven Iranians nailed by U.S. authorities for attempting to smuggle banned missile components into the Islamic Republic redefines celebration as a reasoned response to the pickpocket’s return of your emptied wallet. One would have thought the White House in full self-congratulatory armor and John Kerry cast as Talleyrand had just pulled off the diplomatic coup of the 21st Century.

In fact, this “hostages-for-spies” swap could serve as a model for emulation, a “get out of jail” card for any rogue regime whose operatives get caught in the act. It should be noted that in addition to clemency for the seven violators of the U.S. Sanctions Law–three of whom hold dual American citizenship–the White House rushed to cancel Interpol “Red Notice” arrest warrants for 14 other Iranian nationals “for whom,” according to a State Department spokesman, “it was assumed that extradition requests were unlikely to be successful.” Translation: they were part of the package.

If all this were not sufficient to warrant the administration’s immediate election to the diplomatic Hall of Fame, the U.S., without batting an eye, agreed to reimburse Ayatollah Khamenei’s government to the tune of $1.7 billion ($400 million in principal, $1.3 billion in interest) for its 37-year suspension of a prepaid delivery of military hardware to Tehran in the wake of the fall of the Shah’s government to the “Islamic Revolution” and the subsequent 444-day incarceration of American diplomatic personnel following the 1979 storming of their embassy.

While we can’t be other than comforted by the separation of five innocent Americans from their Republican Guard captors, it serves as little more than glorified window dressing for Iran’s reentry, under the cloak of an American-led “nuclear containment” agreement, into a global marketplace from which it has been largely barred for more than a decade. Embracing the five Permanent Members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5+1), the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the agreement signed in July is formally known, cancels virtually all economic and financial sanctions imposed on Iran in return for a commitment to cease its quest for an atomic bomb and its suspension of all efforts related to that quest.


From the Editor: Rael Isaac

Taking on NGOs

In Catch the Jew Tuvia Tenenbom, in his travels through Israel and the Palestinian occupied territories as “Tubi the German”, focuses on the role of anti-Israel NGOs (some of them Jewish-led), chiefly funded by European countries, in stoking hatred of Israel. Now, finally, Israel proposes to take a minor measure in self-defense. Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked has sponsored a bill to require political NGOs principally funded by foreign governments to identify as foreign agents in their official communications.
The U.S. State Department is in high dudgeon, this despite the fact that the Shaked bill is less restrictive than the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act. The reason for the U.S. opposition to the bill is not hard to understand. As Caroline Glick points out, the U.S. has seen radical NGOs operating in Israel as a potential tool to carry out anti-Israel policies. Thanks to disclosures from Hillary’s email server we know, for example, that former ambassador to Israel Thomas Pickering recommended using NGOs, including Peace Now, which he mentioned by name, to destabilize Israel. The U.S. has funded B’Tselem’s video project which seeks to show IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians in a bad light so as to call their morality and legitimacy into question. (Two can play at the same game and Uvda, Israel Channel 2’s investigative news magazine, recently broadcast video shot by Ad Kan, a three year old pro-Israel NGO that shows operatives for B’Tselem and the so-called “grassroots” Ta-ayush plotting to bring about the arrest, torture and murder of a Palestinian—who wanted to sell his land to Jews–by the Palestinian Authority’s U.S. trained and funded security services.)
Channel 2 also broadcast Ad Kan footage showing another NGO employee paying Ta-ayush for organizing a demonstration against IDF soldiers and Ta-ayush in turn paying Palestinians in cash for throwing stones at IDF soldiers. Passing the Shaked bill would only be a first step in the necessary measures to bring to heel the NGOs which now run amok and, as Glick writes “will stop at nothing to achieve their goal of demonizing Israel and destroying its good name in the Western world.”

The Green Climate Fund

It is most unlikely that climate change conferences will do anything to change the temperature, but they have already contributed significantly to the world’s store of gobbledygook. In Paris in December the developing nations who are to be recipients of the developed world’s largesse promised in return to recognize “the importance of promoting, protecting and respecting all human rights, including the right to development, and the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, climate induced migrants, refugees and internally displaced peoples, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations with due respect to sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, as well as promoting health, gender equality and the empowerment of women, while taking into account the needs of local communities, intergenerational equity concerns and the integrity of ecosystems and Mother Earth, when taking action to address climate change.”
Patrick Heren, who quoted this literary gem in “The Great Climate Change Boondoggle”, notes that Christiana Figueres, the Costa Rican Marxist academic nominally in charge of the Paris conference, argues the developed world should contribute a trillion a year (not the mere $100 billion currently on offer) to developing nations. Writes Heren, adapting the late Senator Everett Dirksen: “A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.”


High Noon to Midnight: Why Current Immigration Policy Dooms American Jewry By Stephen M. Steinlight

Editor’s note: This prescient article was written in 2004, long before the current Muslim invasion which is overwhelming Europe and, thanks to Obama’s policies, will have a major impact here. While Steinlight believed American Jewish organizations were waking up to the dangers of Muslim immigration, this has turned out to be wildly over-optimistic. This is an edited version of a much longer essay—well worth reading in its entirely—at www.cis.org/articles/2004/steinlight2.html

Among the articles of faith in the waning culture of secular liberalism that has served as an ersatz religion for many mainstream American Jews, the most vulnerable tenet is belief in “generous legal immigration,” the euphemism for open-borders immigration in the lexicon of American-Jewish public affairs agencies. This is not to accuse them of crude hypocrisy and double-talk so much as engaging in intellectual and moral trimming, self-deception, and denial.

Promulgating self-deception isn’t merely bad ethics; it’s untenable as a matter of policy: it conflicts with the interests, security and values of American Jewry. Survey research, plus mountains of anecdotal evidence, reveals a profound change in attitude among American Jews. Opinion polls in the three years following the attacks of September 11, 2001 show a plurality favoring lowered immigration, 70 percent the introduction of a secure national identity card, and 55 percent believing Muslims are the most anti-Semitic group in the United States. It may not require another domestic terrorist enormity for respondents to discern simple cause-and-effect relationships; more ambitious efforts to persuade might suffice.

My experience at the grassroots suggests Jews know little about the history of their own immigration, immigration policy, the scale of immigration, or the engines that drive it. Frequently, all that’s required to effect attitudinal change is apprising them. When I began my efforts, the Jewish media spoke of Jewish attitudes in favor of open-borders immigration as “monolithic;” now it’s commonplace to speak of “a raging debate.” If this could be accomplished essentially by one person, what might a concerted, well-funded effort achieve? Among the community’s organizational leadership, enthusiasm for this dangerous anachronism is a mile wide and an inch deep.


No More Martyrs Funerals: A Plan to Stop Arab Terrorism By Moshe Dann

According to a survey conducted for Walla by Prof. Camil Fuchs of “Panel Project Hamidgam” and the statistician Yosef Miklada of the Statnet research institute, released on Friday, 71% of Israelis believe the government has failed in its efforts to stop Arab terrorism; add the 9% who weren’t sure and it rises to 80%. That is a clear vote of no-confidence.
Moreover, Israeli government officials agree; they announced that they cannot stop Arab terrorism. We can expect, therefore, that more Jews will be murdered and maimed.
Excuses from politicians, police and IDF commanders are pathetic. Waiting for the next tragedy to happen is unacceptable. Neutralizing a terrorist after an attack is not sufficient. Putting barriers at bus stops offers barely minimal protection. Cameras on the street only help to identify terrorists after an attack. More police on the street is reassuring but doesn’t work.

The only way to stop homicidal jihadists is to create disincentives, making the price that they will pay – in their minds – unacceptable. If they are intent on becoming “holy martyrs,” dying in their attack will not deter them.

The only thing that could dissuade them is the knowledge that their path to martyrdom would be blocked. The simplest and most effective obstacle is to bury Islamic terrorists at sea or cremate their bodies, both of which are forbidden according to Islamic law.

Some have suggested burying terrorists with pig entrails since, according to Islam, contact with a pig defiles Muslims to such an extent that it prevents them from the rewards of an afterlife. This may seem extreme to some, but if it works and saves lives, it’s worth trying. And, according to legend, it was used effectively by U.S. General “Black Jack” Pershing to stop Muslim terrorists in the Philippines a century ago.

Under no circumstances should bodies of terrorists be returned to families where they will receive glorious funerals and be used in parades to promote violence. This shames the memory of their victims, our country and our civilization.

Anyone who is found to be an accomplice should be deported; their property should be confiscated and turned over to the family of the victim.
Islamic hate-preachers should be banned and, if necessary, deported. Although incitement is a criminal offense, the law is rarely enforced and in the case of the PA, Israel not only allows incitement but indirectly funds it. This policy needs to change.


Abba Eban on BDS

Editor’s note: Outpost readers are likely to be familiar with one or more of the lists of products using Israeli technology drawn up by supporters of Israel that would-be boycotters would have to give up if they abided by their own boycott calls. These range from Iphones to IPads to Macs to any machine with an Intel chip to life-saving drugs to (heaven forfend!) Volvos. But very few will be aware that the first such mocking lists going back seventy years. It was put together by Abba Eban, Israel’s first–and by far the most eloquent–ambassador to the UN. In Eban’s day of course the movement wasn’t called BDS and lacked the current boycott’s high moral pretensions. Back in 1947 it was the plain old Arab boycott. Eban’s list, in which he facetiously offers his help to those Arabs wishing to enforce the boycott of Jewish goods, is printed in the recent biography of Eban by Asaf Siniver.

In my past articles, I feel I may have been a bit hard on the Arabs. So . . . in apology, I have compiled a list to help them with their boycott. Since it is imperative that all loyal Arabs avoid any and all contact with Jewish influences, the following must be adhered to religiously:

An Arab who has syphilis must not be cured by salvarsan, because it was discovered by a Jew, Ehrlich. If an Arab suspects that he has gonorrhea, he must not seek diagnosis, because he will be using the method of a Jew, Neissner. An Arab who has heart disease must not use digitalis, which comes from the Jew, Ludwig Traube.

If he has diabetes, he must not use insulin, because of the research work of a Jew, Monkowsky. If he has a headache he must shun pyrqmidon and antipyrin because of the Jews, Spiro and Ellege.
Arabs with convulsions must put up with them because it was a Jew, Oscar Leibereich, who thought of chloral hydrate.
Arabs should be ready to die in greater number and not permit treatment by the method of Nobel Prize winner, Robert Baram, whose method of treatment of ear and brain damage has saved millions.

Arabs of all ages must forgo the use of vitamins, because the discoverer of their special nutritional value was a Jew, Kasimir Funk. They should continue to die or be crippled by infantile paralysis because the discoverer of the anti-polio vaccine was a Jew, Jonas Salk. They must refuse to use streptomycin and continue to die of tuberculosis, because a Jew, Zalman Waxman, invented the wonder drug against this killing disease.


Efraim Karsh: The Tail Wags the Dog Reviewed by David Isaac

If there is one proposition on which there is a consensus among Middle East experts—from academia to the media, and to politicians who echo them both—it is that the “root cause” of present problems in the region are the Western imperialists who imposed their will on its hapless indigenous peoples. According to this narrative, Western powers had been nibbling at the margins of the Ottoman Empire and seized on the opportunity offered by its siding with Germany in World War I. Secret agreements between imperialist powers determined new political boundaries without regard to the needs or interests of those who lived in the region, or to any promises made in the past.

As he did in his 1999 Empires of the Sand: The Struggle for Mastery in the Middle East (written with his wife Inari), Efraim Karsh, professor emeritus of Middle East Studies at Kings College, London and currently professor at Bar Ilan University, again turns the conventional wisdom on its head. He writes that Britain, France, and Russia begged the Ottoman Empire to stay out of World War I, promising to ensure the Empire’s survival if it did. Moreover, Karsh insists “the depiction of Muslims as hapless victims of the aggressive encroachments of others, too dim to be accountable for their own fate, is not only completely unfounded but the inverse of the truth.”

The Western powers did play an important role, but the process “was nothing like the caricature portrayed by the standard historiography,” where Europeans and Americans sat at a table creating states. Rather, as the book’s title indicates, the tail often wagged the dog, with the resultant map and rulers, “the aggregate outcome of intense pushing and shoving … in which the local actors, despite their marked inferiority to the great powers, often had the upper hand.”

Karsh argues that every part of the accepted foundational narrative is wrong. Take the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement between Britain and France stipulating their future areas of influence in the region, which is typically treated as “the source of all evil” and prima facie evidence of western duplicity. A mark of the potency of this claim of devilry is that even ISIS has invoked it, saying its June 2014 conquest of Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, was the first step towards “smashing the Sykes-Picot border.”


The Wrong Hasbara By Ruth King

Israel’s supporters in America from the top to the lower community organizers and from left to right agree on one subject, namely that Israel needs better hasbara.

Hasbara refers to public relations efforts to disseminate positive information to portray Israel and its policies in a glowing light.
Unfortunately most “hasbara” has the opposite effect. Even Israel’s staunchest protagonists fall into the trap of thinking that listing Israel’s numerous concessions to its enemies will soften or convince hardened anti-Semites.

As a matter of fact, enumerating Israel’s serial appeasements and the catastrophic results only show a weak, forlorn, and desperate nation begging to be liked by the wrong people at the wrong time. It also displays a nation unable to learn from history which has lost the will to assert its historic and legitimate rights. And, worst of all, it shows political leadership which cravenly puts the escalating demands of its adversaries before defense of its citizens.

Furthermore, too much of this propaganda hints that “recognition of its right to exist as a Jewish state” is what is to be negotiated. A disproportionate number of post-colonial era nations have disintegrated into swamps of famine, chaos, genocide, jihad and tyranny, and only Israel has to plead for “recognition of its right to exist?” That is both idiotic and morally depraved.
A good public relations policy starts with the declaration that Israel will not reward enemies with jihad as their agenda. The nation’s priority is to defend its citizens and the state’s remarkable accomplishments.

Israel has much to be proud of and to defend.


Editor: Rael Jean Isaac
Editorial Board: Herbert Zweibon, Ruth King

Outpost is distributed free to
Members of Americans For a Safe Israel
Annual membership: $50.

Americans For a Safe Israel
1751 Second Ave. (at 91st St.)
New York, NY 10128
tel (212) 828-2424 / fax (212) 828-1717
E-mail: afsi @rcn.com web site: http://www.afsi.org

January 2016
« Dec   Feb »