October 2004 Archives

Im tirzu


Herzl famously said "If you will it, it is no dream." That's a nice sentiment but, unfortunately, it takes more than the force of will or the power of belief to change reality.

Omri asks for a compelling answer to this "point," made in an op-ed by Uri Dan in Wednesday's Jerusalem Post.

Sharon believes disengagement is the only way Israel can retain some 50 percent of Judea and Samaria. If his opponents somehow succeed in derailing his plan, he told me recently, Israel will wind up with only about 4 percent of Judea and Samaria.

In other words, having won the Knesset vote on Tuesday night, Sharon is warning his opponents not to bring him down. If they do, disengagement from Gaza will be replaced by the kind of massive withdrawals championed in the plans sponsored by president Bill Clinton and prime minister Ehud Barak.

Bring down Sharon, and you in effect get Yossi Beilin's Geneva Accord.

And then this:

Clearly, retreat from one part of the Land is being made to guarantee control over other parts.

Guarantee? What guarantee?

The compelling answer to the point, I think, is that it isn't a "point" at all. At best this is Uri Dan parroting Sharon's "I have secret information you don't on why you have to adopt my plan, so you just have to trust me" shtick. At worst, he's just making all this up out of whole cloth.

Here's Bush's "promise." At least the only one anyone can arguably hold him to (but see below) because he made it publicly. It's ambiguous to say the least.

Realities on the ground have changed over decades. In the light of those changes, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the 1949 armistice lines.

How does that translate to "Israel can retain some 50 percent of Judea and Samaria?" How does that translate to a "guarantee" of control of anything? And from where does Sharon (or Uri Dan) get substantiation for the absurd claim that if his plan isn't accepted, Israel "will wind up" with only 4%? Says who?

Even if you take Bush's comments at face value and interpret them as some sort of "promise," it didn't go beyond "no return to '49 borders." That could just as easily mean 4% as 50%. And he quickly backtracked a bit on that "promise" a few days later when he started making noises about "a 'corrective' move toward [our] European allies and the Arabs".

And do I need to mention that Bush's "promises" are in no way binding? Even if we accept that the President will honor such promises as a matter of good faith, they're certainly not binding on his successor. And sooner or later (hopefully later, but no later than a little over 4 years from now), Bush will be leaving the White House. So absent some sort of binding resolution from Congress, these are all just words.

Even so, the Americans and the Israelis don't have the final say in this matter. I didn't hear the palestinians and the Arab states signing on to this "deal." I didn't even notice the EU climb aboard. To the contrary.

Meanwhile, speculation is running rampant that with Arafat's expected permanent departure from the scene, the U.S. will be taking a more "active role" in the "peace process," regardless of who sits in the White House. We all know what that means.

And, finally, I was just reading somewhere this morning that Europe intends to ramp up the pressure on Israel for compliance with the roadmap, i.e., all the roadmap, as per their interpretation. Which I don't think allows for Israel to retain even 4% of Judea and Samaria. And that's with or without disengagement from Gaza.

Sharon may very well "believe," as Uri Dan says, that "disengagement is the only way Israel can retain some 50 percent of Judea and Samaria and that the failure to implement it will bring down all of his dire predictions. But just because Sharon believes it doesn't make it so.

Good news dept.


If you have elderly friends or relatives or if you're getting on in years yourself, please take note.

PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 28 /PRNewswire/ -- Attorney General Jerry Pappert today filed a civil lawsuit in Commonwealth Court accusing 16 defendants of engaging in an elaborate statewide living trust sales scheme, that deceived older Pennsylvanians into purchasing Revocable Living Trusts, long-term annuities or charitable gift annuities that were costly, not in their best interest and/or unnecessary. The alleged victims documented approximate losses that range between $1,800 and $80,000.

[ . . . ]

"This alleged scheme was heavily promoted and potentially hurt hundreds of senior citizens across the Commonwealth who may be unaware that they were cheated," Pappert said. "Today, I'm asking the court to ban the defendants from engaging in the illegal advertising, promotion and sale of estate planning products or services in Pennsylvania."

[ . . . ]

According to investigators, defendants Bohmueller and Weinstein between 2001 and 2004 promoted their estate planning services using telemarketing, newspaper ads, mass mailings, senior expos and local seminars held in restaurants, country clubs, synagogues or other facilities throughout the state. The attorneys used sales agents from the marketing, insurance or brokerage firms to sell the estate planning products. The sales efforts were primarily focused on consumers located in Central, Northeastern and Southeastern Pennsylvania. Those responding to the ads or promotions were typically senior citizens often 70 to 80 years old.

One of the defendants is New Life Corporation of America, d/b/a National Community Foundation. It seems New Life has had some previous problems abiding by the law in Maine, for example, and in Washington, among other places. But you wouldn't know this from visiting their very slick website (targeting seniors) or even from checking with Charity Navigator (although their very low rating may give pause).

We can rest easier in Pennsylvania tonight. But a word to the wise: these predators are out there. They often mix legitimate business practices with illegal and deceptive schemes. They're very aggressive and very glib and very shrewd and they want to take your hard-earned life savings away from you. There are many law-abiding, highly qualified estate planners who truly do have your best interests at heart. But be careful. Be very careful.

Shabbat Shalom.

Thoughts on Arafat


Reuven Koret has some in today's Israel Insider newsletter. I can't find a link at the moment, but I'll post one when I do. In the meantime,

In Israel, yesterday, the local television stations screened a video of Arafat in powder blue pajamas and a little black cap, one of the rare views of the Palestinian father of terrorism ever screened without his trademark kaffiyeh and olive-drab military coat.

He was there holding hands with various aides and bodyguards, every one of them smiling like, well, idiots. Why, I wondered, are these people smiling? Suddenly, Arafat leaned over to the right as if to kiss the hands that were holding his. The video clip abruptly broke off.

Then it occurred to me: Arafat had completely lost his mind. He had become a blithering idiot, dribbling and drooling and kissing any available hand indiscriminately. That interpretation was confirmed the next day: Haaretz quoted unnamed Palestinian sources as saying Arafat was rambling and incoherent, unable even to recognize Abu Ala and Abu Mazen, the current and former Palestinian PM. He has completely lost his mind.

Whether his feeble-mindedness was the result of a stroke, or just the accumulation of other problems, I don't know. But there are all kinds of clues to suggest that Arafat's physical problems are not the worst thing: he is now irretrievably incompetent mentally.

That would explain the veil of secrecy and the various conflicting explanations offered by Arafat's aides and defenders. The issue isn't whether he has gallstones or leukemia. He now has the mind of a three year old, and a developmentally challenged three year old at that.

Ah, how much better for Arafat if the Israelis had knocked him off guns blazing or in a well-placed missile strike through his Mukata window! Instead, Arafat is destined to spend the rest of his days not leading a million man march to the Temple Mount but stewing in his steamy adult diapers. He will not be waving his hands in a V for victory but flailing them helplessly looking for something to kiss with his slobbering lips.

There will be no sympathy from these quarters for this man, who has more murdered Jews to his credit than anyone since Hitler and Stalin. He was a killer and a thief, a corruption and an abomination. He is reaping what he sowed, after a life of perverse attachments to young boys and jars of honey. Now he will be locked away where the sun doesn't shine, confined to his debilitated mind, compulsively licking the lips of his idiot grin.

It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

Arafat in his jammies

| | TrackBacks (1)

arafata in pjs.jpg

Palestinian President Yasser Arafat (C) is surrounded by his doctors from Tunis, Egypt and Jordan in his office in the West Bank City of Ramallah, October 28, 2004. Arafat, the icon of the struggle for a Palestinian state, has agreed to be flown to France on Oct. 29 for medical treatment, Palestinian officials said. Photo by Reuters (Handout)


Israel won't allow Arafat burial on [Temple] Mount

I sure hope not.

Something for nothing


I suddenly seem to have developed an annoying habit of compulsively dropping sarcastic comments on various blogs discussing the disengagement referendum. I have my own blog, after all, so why not just post my thoughts here?

Well, I've done that. I've posted some facts and figures, too. I hate to repeat myself. And I confess to being fairly bewildered by having to make these points in the first place. I can understand how die-hard Oslophiles and road map advocates are salivating at yet one more opportunity to prove how disasterous these appeasement plans can be. It's gotten to be a habit. But coming from those who claim to have learned a thing or two from past mistakes, it's a puzzle.

Let's see. Israel offered land for peace, but got no peace. Then Israel offered more land for peace and got war. Then Israel offered land and a state for an end to terror and incitement (peace obviously being too much to ask for) and got more terror and more incitement. So now, Israel is offering freshly Judenrein land and (de facto) a state for . . . nothing.

But Israel has no choice, I'm told. Israel can't continue to rule over palestinians. It's immoral and unjust and it erodes the moral fiber of the Jewish State and saps its energy, its resources and the lives of its citizens.

Of course it is. Of course it does. But what, at the moment, is the alternative? Is there any basis whatsoever upon which to expect, or even to hope for, any positive result from this move? It's all fine and good to say there is no choice and it has to be done, but where will Israel be once it's done? What will Israel be facing? Who, if anyone, will be at her back who isn't there now? And why is it that these questions are considered off limits in this debate?

When all else fails, when diplomacy, more diplomacy, self-defense and targeted assasinations don't deter them, give the terrorists what they want? Is that the solution? Is that the way to deter and defeat terrorism? Not in my book.

Still, as I've said before, it's not for me to decide. I'm told the Israeli people are overwhelmingly in favor of disengagement. So let them say so. Give them a voice. A real voice, unlike Sharon's cabinet ministers who, it appears, have the right to disagree with him only in theory and in private if they want to keep their jobs. A referendum would go a long way toward silencing the extreme voices on both sides or, if not, toward building a consensus for shutting them out. A referendum would transform the disengagement process from one man's ego trip into a national project. And that (pardon the expression) would be a good thing.

Yesterday marked the ninth anniversary (on the Hebrew calendar) of the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin. It was a monumentally black day for Israel. And it's been shamlessly exploited over the years by various parties with various interests and with various axes to grind. But Rabin understood the necessity of national input into decisions such as disengagement, withdrawal and evacuation. So did Prime Minister Barak. In this respect, Prime Minister Sharon should follow their lead.



There's a lot of hype floating around about the "historic" nature of today's utterly predictable Knesset vote in favor of disengagement. But Ariel Sharon's loyal mouthpiece was most anxious to play down its significance and, in the aftermath, some (not so) new challenges have arisen. Sharon has, of course, elected to fire yet two more members of his cabinet for exercising their own judgment.

David Horovitz, the new editor of the Jerusalem Post, has published a very thoughtful analysis of the significance of today's events. I'm pleasantly surprised.

Look who's back!!


After a painfully (for me) long absence, Omri Ceren (formerly of Dejafoo) is back, and with his own brand new blog, Mere Rhetoric.

Omri's one of the few people anywhere who makes sense on Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan (among other things). I don't necessarily reach the same conclusions he does, but he manages to cut through the hysterics and hyperbole on both sides, and that's rare and refreshing.

Welcome back, dude!

Hardly shocking


But I really don't know from where he gets the nerve.

At the second presidential debate earlier this month, Mr. Kerry said he was more attuned to international concerns on Iraq than President Bush, citing his meeting with the entire Security Council.

"This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," Mr. Kerry said . . ..

No, he didn't.

But never mind. Who ever said honesty and integrity matter in a Presidential campaign?


AJCommitee support


For the record -

As the Knesset vote on disengagement from the Gaza Strip approaches, the American Jewish Committee sent a letter of support on Sunday to Ariel Sharon to express support for the prime minister's plan.

"We wish you to know of our respect and appreciation for your steadfast leadership in advocating the disengagement plan, including withdrawal from Gaza," the letter read.

Not that this is a surprise. But perhaps Mr. Sharon would also be interested in the opinions of the ZOA, AFSI and the ACLU, for that matter. That way, he could get a broad spectrum of advice from whole hoardes of people who also have no stake whatsoever in this decision.




I don't have a lot to say right now, but Meryl seems to have the situation in Israel's corner of the Middle East nicely summed up in a collection of informative headlines from yesterday. And, for today, some much welcome good news. Check it out.

Shabbat Shalom.

UN stands firm (?)


The UN Security Council has issued a presidential statement urging Syria to honor the Council's binding resolution calling for an end to the occupation of Lebanon. (I meant to post this Tuesday but I apparently got distracted)

The Council notes with concern that the requirements set out in resolution 1559 (2004) have not been met, as reported by the Secretary-General. The Council urges relevant parties to implement fully all provisions of this resolution, and welcomes the Secretary-General’s readiness to assist the parties in this regard.

The Council was apparently unmoved by a recent letter from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the Secretary-General, which attempts to blame Israel for the continuing presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon ("in light of the implications of Israel’s continued occupation and spoiling of opportunities for peaceful political solutions" as well as "Israel’s behaviour aimed at blowing up the region"). Uh huh.

The report finds that the most significant remaining armed group in Lebanon is Hezbollah, which the Government refers to, not as a Lebanese militia, but as a “national resistance group”, with the goal of defending Lebanon from Israel and the removal of Israeli forces from Lebanese soil, namely, the Shab’a farms. Lebanon maintains that the Shab’a farms are Lebanese territory, not Syrian. In the Secretary-General’s report of 16 June 2000, however, he confirmed that Israel has fulfilled the requirements of Security Council resolutions 425 and 426 to “withdraw its forces from all Lebanese territory”. The Council endorsed that conclusion on 18 June 2000 in a presidential statement. Notwithstanding the Lebanese Government’s position that the Shab’a farms area lies within Lebanon, the Government has confirmed that it would respect the Blue Line as identified by the United Nations. The Council has called on Lebanon to respect fully its line.

Voter registration fraud


Oh, yes. It's happening already. But read carefully.

DENVER [10-11-04] - With just 21 days left until an election in which every vote will count, the 9News I-Team has uncovered voter registration fraud that could cause chaos on Election Day for hundreds, possibly thousands of Colorado voters.

[ . . . ]

Most of the fraud has come from registration drives, where people at grocery stores or on the streets ask you to sign up. 9News has learned many workers have re-registered voters multiple times by changing or making up information about them. 9News has documented 719 cases of potentially fraudulent forms at county election offices show fraudulent names, addresses, social security numbers or dates of birth in Denver, Douglas, Adams, Boulder and Lake counties. Information from other counties is still coming in.

[ . . . ]

Some of the registration drive workers earn $2 per application or about $10 an hour. One woman admitted to forging three people's names on about 40 voter registration applications. Kym Cason says she was helping her boyfriend earn more money from a get-out-the-vote organization called ACORN or Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. ACORN works with low or moderate-income families on housing issues. Cason said her extra registrations earned her boyfriend $50.

Gerald Obi says workers pressured him to keep registering to vote so they too could earn extra cash. When asked how many times he had registered this year, Obi said, "about 35 times."

ACORN's state director said they are victims of the fraud as well and told 9News the group is cooperating with local investigators. Ross Fitzgerald says the group has fired workers for the fraud. "Our goal is to register as many people as we can," said Fitzgerald. "If they're fraudulent, that hurts our numbers."

ACORN, by the way, is not trying to get the vote out for President Bush. They're for the other candidate. Either way, though, the stage is already set for havoc on election day and challenges thereafter.

There's a video version of the story here as well. Neither Ms. Cason nor Mr. Obi appear to be particularly contrite about their activities.

Update: Bill Hobbs, I now see, has been all over the voter fraud story for weeks, including the item above and several others involving ACORN. Check out his blog for continuing updates.

I'm done

| | TrackBacks (1)

Did anyone catch Fox News Sunday yesterday? This exchange blew me away. It's between Chris Wallace and Eric Holder, former deputy attorney general under President Clinton and now a member of the DNC Election Protection Advisory Task Force.

WALLACE: And, Mr. Holder, do you have any concerns about holding up the election, delaying it for days or weeks or months, if that's what's necessary to solve some problems?

HOLDER: We are prepared to do that which we have to do to ensure that everybody who wants to cast a vote gets that opportunity and that everybody who casts a vote has their vote counted.

If that happens, I'm quite confident that we won't be talking about two days and three days. By election night...

WALLACE: But you're going to have teams of lawyers to make sure it does happen. And if it doesn't, you're ready to spring into action?

HOLDER: If that is necessary.

But, as I said, if every vote is allowed to be cast, and if every vote is counted, John Kerry will be president within a day of that election.


WALLACE: Well, I don't know how you can guarantee that.

HOLDER: You heard it right here. If every vote is allowed to be cast and every vote is counted, John Kerry will be president.

In other words, no other election outcome will be deemed acceptable, no matter what. Either Kerry wins, or the teams of lawyers go into action. For as long as it takes.

You know what? Just as soon as this election is over, I'm changing my party registration. A Democrat since 1972 . . . well, I'm done.

In memory of Navah

| | TrackBacks (3)

A friend of my mother's in Jerusalem has helped to organize a very special project to honor the memory of Navah Applebaum. Navah and her father were murdered last year on the night before her wedding when a terrorist detonated himself at the Hillel Cafe on Emek Refaim Street in Jerusalem.

I've copied the following description of the project because the direct link to it is currently not working.
[Update: the Mikvah Project page is here]

Mikvah Project in Memory of Navah Applebaum, z'l

“Our sister, may you come to be thousands of myriads.”

(Genesis 24:60)

Jerusalem Av 5764 / August 2004

Dear Friends,

The mitzvah of Mikveh [the ritual bath] has been guarded with mesirut nefesh [self-sacrifice] by Jewish women throughout the centuries.

On the eve of her wedding, Navah Applebaum, of blessed memory, went in joy to perform this special mitzvah. A short time after her tvilah [purifying immersion], Navah and her father Dr. David Applebaum, z’l, were brutally murdered by an Arab terrorist.

In Navah’s memory, we would like to dedicate the Kabbalat Kallah [bridal reception] room in the mikveh of Har Homa. This is a special room in the mikveh where family members and friends gather with the bride on the eve of her immersion. The new neighborhood of Har Homa is in southern Jerusalem, overlooking Kever Rachel [Rachel's Tomb]. The parochet [ark curtain] in Kever Rachel was interwoven with Navah’s wedding gown. We remember Navah, an eternal kallah [bride], and through the Kabbalat Kallah room, link her memory to this source of Jewish life.

In order to make this a reality, we are asking for your generous donation.

Thank you and Ketivah Vechatimah Tovah.

Committee for the Kabbalat Kallah Room:

Debra Applebaum, Chantal Belzberg, Shoshi Bier, Evelyne Birenbaum-Kandel, Felicia Goldszal, Felice Kahn Zisken


To contribute to this unique project in memory of Navah Applebaum, click here.

Donations are US tax deductible. Checks can be made out to OneFamily and sent to any of our offices worldwide. Please mark the check for the "Mikveh Fund".

Contributions are being accepted through The One Family Fund, at their donation page and may be made by check, credit card or through PayPal. If you wish to make a donation, please include a note or comment specifying that it's to go to the Mikveh Project.

Thank you.

She speaks for me


Over at The Command Post, Judith Weiss has put up a remarkable essay by a friend of hers who chooses to remain anonymous. I hope she can be encouraged to start her own blog, because this is a superb piece of writing that cuts straight to the heart of the matter with eloquence and style.

Why This Lifelong Jewish Liberal is Voting Republican

When I pull the lever on November 2nd for George Bush, I will be voting with more passionate conviction than I have ever mustered in a lifetime of voting Democratic.

My motive is simple: I believe the moral imperative of our time is to fully prosecute the War on Terror. As a Jew, I believe this sacred fight embodies the deepest Jewish values, so eloquently expressed by the ancient sage Hillel: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”

Let me explain.

Fellow travelers


He met with embraced Yasser Arafat in Beirut in July of 1979, when the PLO was still recognized by most of the world as a terrorist organization and a stooge of the Soviet Union. Several days later in Jerusalem, he visited Yad Vashem, Israel's Holocaust Memorial, which inspired his remarks about a Jewish "persecution complex," his public admonishment that "Jews should learn to see that their 'holocaust' was but one among many in history" and his private complaint that he was "sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust." He actively (and successfully) sought to sow dissension between the black and Jewish communities in America and he's always been in the forefront of the campaign to equate Zionism with racism. Then there was "Hymietown." That's just the tip of the iceberg.

And now suddenly Jesse's a senior aide to his brand new best friend John Kerry, along with Al Sharpton, about whom no commentary is necessary. Perhaps this poll has something to do with it. More illumination here.

I'm hoping that those who are the targets of this charade will see through it clearly. And that those to whom Kerry is basically flipping the bird will notice.

Dazed and confused


The Western media doesn't seem to know quite what to do with the Sinai terrorist attacks. Israeli citizens were targeted, but so was Egyptian property. What a puzzle.

Fortunately, the blogosphere can sort it all out for us. Clarifying posts by, among others, Imshin (and scroll up and down for more) and Shai, of course, and at Ariga, as well.

Earlier today, the Jerusalem Post had an article about the Sharon administration's admonition to refrain from criticizing the Egyptian handling of the disaster. Now it seems to be gone. The Post, of course, is now under new (less right-leaning) management, so to speak.

There's actually an oblique reference to the same thing here, though. And if you click on the links above, you'll find some discussion of the Egyptian way of doing things. But some of what's been going on in the past few days seems to go beyond that.

This is one of those stories where a little digging can reveal a lot more than you're likely to get on your nightly news broadcast.

2 4


So Diana Kerry's candidate -- lost in Australia.

Let's make it a two-fer.



I made the mistake of stumbling over this utterly hateful spew by Leon Wieseltier at TNR today. Some people just seem to start frothing at the mouth whenever they hear the word "settler." It's odd. Essays like this help to perpetuate the myth of the Israeli settler community as a monolithic bunch of wild-eyed fanatical and violent religious zealots. Whose agenda does that serve?

Anyway, nothing could be further from the truth, though there certainly are some settlers who fit that description. It never ceases to amaze me how desparate some Jews are to employ every device in their repetoire, including but certainly not limited to hyperbole and falsehood, to distance themselves from what is, by and large, a group of people like many others, but who live under constant threat, not only from Israel's enemies, but from their own government. Ah, well. One of life's mysteries.

Shabbat Shalom.

Shame on them


The UN has published the full text of the one-sided resolution, vetoed by the United States, demanding an end to the Israeli military offensive in Gaza, along with the pathetic rationalizations given by the elevn other Security Council members for their votes (and some whining by the palestinian observer). It's very interesting reading.

U.S. Ambassador John Danforth made a most eloquent case for our veto. Too bad it fell on deaf ears.

Speaking before the vote on the draft resolution on the Middle East, JOHN DANFORTH (United States) said that, once again, the draft was “lopsided and unbalanced”. It was “dangerously disingenuous” because of its many material omissions. Because of that lack of balance, because of those omissions, the text lacked credibility and deserved a “no” vote, both for what it said and then for what it failed to say. The text condemned Israel’s military actions in Gaza; it criticized what it called “incursions” into the Jabaliya refugee camp; it condemned Israeli acts of “destruction”, and it lamented “extensive human casualties” among Palestinians. It demanded that Israel, as the “occupying Power”, withdraw its forces immediately. Those were tough words.

He said the United States had no problem with “tough words”, but only when those were accurate and there was balance. The draft did not mention even one of the 450 Qassam rocket attacks launched against Israel over the past two years. It did not mention 200 rockets launched this year alone. It did not mention the two Israeli children who were outside playing last week when a rocket suddenly crashed into their young bodies. It did not mention the undisputed fact that Qassam rockets had no military purpose –- that those were crude, imprecise devices of terror designed to kill civilians. It did not mention that Hamas took “credit” for killing those Israeli children and maiming many other Israeli civilians –- calling those deaths and woundings a “victory”. It did not mention that the terrorists hid among Palestinian civilians, provoking their deaths, and then used those deaths as fodder for their hatred, lawlessness, and efforts to derail the peace process.

In addition, he went on, the draft did not mention the complete failure of the Palestinian Authority to meet its commitments to establish security among its people. The text did not acknowledge the legitimate need for Israel to defend itself; it was totally lacking in balance. When the rest of the world “ganged up” on Israel with insidious silence about terrorism, it did not advance the cause of peace. It encouraged both sides to dig in; it made Israel feel isolated and backed into a corner, and it discouraged dialogue.

Both sides needed to renounce violence, recommit to the Road Map, and move quickly to establish a PalestinianState. But, until the Palestinians and those claiming to act in their name stopped their use of indiscriminate acts of terror, Israel would likely continue to track down the terrorists wherever those might hide, often with the tragic but unintended result of civilian casualties.

The Security Council should “reverse the incessant stream” of one anti-Israel resolutions after the other, and apply pressure even-handedly, on both sides, to return to the road to peace. The United States would vote “no” on that text.

Shame on Brazil, France, Pakistan, the Philippines, Chile, the Russian Federation, Romania, Spain, China, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Shame.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from October 2004 listed from newest to oldest.

September 2004 is the previous archive.

November 2004 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.


email: lynn-b at this domain name

Monthly Archives


Powered by Movable Type 4.31-en