More Proof That The Palestinian Don't Want Peace

You can tell alot about a people by who they support. For example when Ehud Barak was Prime Minister of Israel the people grew tired of the constant terror attacks so public support moved to Ariel Sharon who was perceived as stronger on defense.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was originally elected because he was the hand picked successor of the terrorist Arafat. He talked a good game of peace but so did the pedophile he replaced.

The truth is the Palestinian people do not want peace--that's why ever since he was elected Abbas support has waned and moved to Hamas. Not that Fatah is any less radical than Hamas--Hamas is just more open about it.

Poll: Hamas Popularity On Rise Since Gaza Border Breach - AFP

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AFP)--The popularity of Hamas has risen in recent months since the Gaza Strip's border breach with Egypt, deadly Israeli strikes and the lack of progress in renewed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, according to an opinion poll released Monday.

"A major shift in Hamas's favor occurred during the last three months with about 10% of the population shifting their attitudes and perceptions," said the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research in a statement accompanying the results.

The same number of people would vote for moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as for senior Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in any presidential election and the Islamists would get more votes than Fatah in legislative polls, it said.

Abbas, who succeeded legendary leader Yasser Arafat at the head of the Palestinian Authority in January 2005, would receive 46% of votes, compared with 47% for Haniya.

It is the first poll in which an Islamist candidate has garnered more support than the secular leader.

Haniya served as prime minister in the Hamas-led unity government that Abbas fired in June 2007 after the Islamists routed his forces in the Gaza Strip following a week of deadly clashes.

The Hamas leader would not fare as well against Marwan Barghouti, the popular West Bank leader of Abbas's Fatah party and architect of the 2000 uprising who is imprisoned by Israel for his involvement in suicide attacks.

Barghuti would receive 57% of the vote, while Haniya would get 38%, the poll said.

In legislative elections, Hamas would receive 42% of the vote, compared with 35% for Fatah - a near mirror reversal of the figures from a December poll, in which 31% would have voted for Hamas and 49% for Fatah.

The rise in Hamas's popularity is partly due to the recent breach of Gaza's border with Egypt and the high number of Palestinian casualties in Israeli strikes on the coastal strip, the poll said.

Abbas meanwhile has been hurt by the lack of an improvement in Palestinians' daily lives amid the renewed peace talks with Israelis, it said.

"These developments managed to present Hamas as successful in breaking the siege (on Gaza) and as a victim of Israeli attacks," it said.

"These also presented Palestinian president Abbas and his Fatah faction as impotent, unable to change the bitter reality in the West Bank or ending Israeli occupation through diplomacy," it said.

Fifty-six per cent of those questioned said they were "unsatisfied" with Abbas, compared with 41% who said they were satisfied.

The survey questioned 1,270 people in the West Bank and Gaza between March 13 and 15 and had a three-percent margin of error.

Senator Obama- Its Not About Race, ITS ABOUT TRUTH

Senator Barack Obama will have to make the "speech of his life" tomorrow in Philadelphia. And if advanced information is correct, his speech may satisfy Democrats but it will do nothing for independents or Republicans.

Obama is going to address the issue of his relationship with preacher Jeremiah Wright by addressing race relations. He is going to talk about how Wright's statements were totally inexcusable, that isn't what the guy is about and they can't really be understood without the context of having lived through the African American experience in the 1960s. He will go on to talk about how he transcends race and that the purpose of his candidacy is to bring America together. He will use beautiful words and present them with oratory worthy of Cicero.

His speech might have worked if he gave it last Friday but now its too late, the issue has changed, it is no longer about race or religion, now the issue is honesty and truthfulness. I want to know why he lied to the American public about never hearing one of Wright's hateful sermons.

Are we to really believe that Barack Obama is the ONLY person in American that didn't know that his preacher was making hate speeches in Church? Are we to understand that neither Barack Obama nor anyone in his campaign has internet access, or that they never investigated what was being said that could hurt him? They knew about the whole Muslim thing, how the hell are we to believe that he never heard one of his speeches especially when he wrote about them in his 1995 book, Dreams of My Father?

Is he telling America that he didn't know that NINE MONTHS ago, Jim Davis of Newsmax about hearing one of Wrights hateful speeches, in Obama's Church with Obama in Attendance?

His friend Oprah was a member of Obama's church, she quit because she didn't like Wright's hate talk. Does he really think the American public is so gullible that we believe that Oprah never said to him something like, why are you still listening to that crazy SOB every Sunday? Or that he was the only regular Church-goer in America that didn't go to Church the Sunday after 9/11 (when Wright made his God Damn America speech)?

This is only a partial list, but these are the types of questions that Barack Obama needs to address tomorrow. Anything less would be as Judge Judy might say, "peeing on my leg and telling me its raining."

Israel Must Get Over Its Fear of being Disliked

Its that time again. Everytime Israel tries to protect herself against the terrorist and the Arab world gets real upset the diplomatic parade comes through Jerusalem, admonishing Israel to "be gentle. For example this was one of the headlines on YNet today:

Foreign envoys to press Israel on peace process

German chancellor, US vice president, Republican presidential candidate, Russia's foreign minister and Britain's foreign secretary expected to visit Jerusalem this week. Diplomatic tsunami reflects international community's concern over escalation in region

This isn't about making friends, this is about protecting your country. Its time for Israel to stop being afraid about what everyone else thinks. History has shown that the other countries are going to criticize Israel whatever they do. Time for them to get over their fear and get on with the buisness of ridding the region of terrorism.

Israel's fear of world opinion

March 15, 2008

By Edward Bernard Glick - As Israel's enemies see the Palestine problem, the Jewish state, with the weakest and most unpopular prime minister in its history and an army that failed in the second Lebanon war, is in political, military and public-relations free fall. Its military neither intimidates nor defeats its enemies. In spite of repeated assassinations, barrages and incursions, the terrorists continue to lob rockets and missiles into Israel at will. The principal reason, in their view and in mine, is Israel's paralytic fear of negative world opinion and of inflicting enemy civilian casualties. As Fouad Ajami of The Johns Hopkins University has observed, the terrorist "always works with the winks and nods of the society that gives him cover."

So, if the Jewish state does not conquer its fears and inflict more, not less, collateral damage in the places from which the terror emanates, it will surely die.

Those who wish and work for Israel's destruction do not shrink from killing innocent civilians. So they are unimpressed by Israel's failed policy of limiting and apologizing for such casualties, and then begging for forgiveness from a world that masks its politically incorect anti-Semitism with politically correct anti-Zionism.

Israel's foes would be more impressed if it followed the dictum of its late chief of staff, Lt. Gen. David Elazar. After a commando raid in Beirut in 1973, during which a 70-year-old Italian woman was killed, Lt. Gen. Elazar expressed his regret but added: "Israel won't play by the rules of partial war; wars are not won with a strong defense."

Israel's enemies remember, even if Israel's leaders do not, that Germany, Italy and Japan surrendered in 1945 only because Allied might overwhelmed them and made them lose their will to fight and to be led by political and military losers. Israel's enemies remember, even if Israel's political and military leaders do not, that the Axis Powers were defeated only because the Allied Powers applied slow, sustained and superior force over a number of very bloody years. And Israel's enemies remember, even if Israel's political and military leaders do not, that avoiding enemy civilian casualties was never a serious issue for America's Franklin Roosevelt, Russia's Joseph Stalin or Britain's Winston Churchill.

Israel must also stop going berserk whenever one of its soldiers or civilians is captured. This happens in war. It must cease releasing hundreds or thousands of enemy combatants in exchange for one or two of its citizens.

By any calculation, it is proper to sacrifice one soldier in order to save 10, 10 to save hundreds, hundreds to save thousands, and thousands to save millions. Because of the symbiosis between victory and casualties, Israel must also apply this principle to its civilian casualties. In their 1948 war of independence, in order to establish their state, at least one percent of Israel's population of 650,000 gave their lives. But, now, when Israel's population is 10 times larger, its leaders erroneously believe that Israelis will not endure a far lower percentage of fatalities in order to preserve their state.

The Israelis must stop fretting about world opinion. The only opinion that matters, and only to the point where it does not threaten Israel's existence, is that of diaspora Jewry and American opinion. During the 2006 Lebanon war, Americans from President Bush down to the proverbial man and woman in the street hoped and prayed that the Israelis would be much more audacious and victorious than they were. To survive, Israel will have to fight by the rules of its neighborhood. The first rule is "Never let the fear of casualties trump your military judgment." The second rule is "If you don't win in this neighborhood, you lose, and you deserve to."

YOU DON'T Have to Be Jewish - To Fear Obama's Advisers

(H/T Ed Lasky-The American Thinker)

The Mets always make this mistake, they sign the hotshot prospect, play them out of position and then don't understand why they aren't playing well. The last time they did that was with all-star shortstop Jose Reyes, they had him at second base one year and it almost ruined his career.

Some of Barack Obama's foreign Policy team, Samantha Power and Robert Malley have a nasty habit of saying the most stupid things about the middle east at the worst time. Eric Trager of Commentary has a theory maybe they are like Jose Reyes the year he played second base, maybe its that Senator Obama does not have the judgment to play people in their natural position:

More on “Experts” Power and Malley

Posted By Eric Trager

This weekend, the New York Times covered the trials and tribulations of [1] Samantha Power and [2] Robert Malley–[3] former and current Obama advisers, respectively, whose remarks on the Middle East have drawn fire. Unsurprisingly, much of this coverage trivialized their critics: a Daily News headline deriding Power as “Pretty Dumb!” was portrayed as representative, while Malley’s detractors were dismissed as “a handful of Jewish bloggers.” As I [4] wrote last week, one need not be Jewish to observe that Malley has frequently called events in the Palestinian political sphere blatantly wrong, while [5] Noah Pollak and [6] Martin Kramer’s dissections of Power’s statements demonstrate that the attacks on Power have been substantive, rather than ad hominem.

Yet the real story behind Power and Malley’s poor public receptions should have little to do with their critics. After all, we were merely responding to their previous statements. Rather, the scrutiny that Power and Malley have faced should provide a cautionary tale regarding the limits that aspiring experts must obey if they value their credibility.

Let’s start with Power. Prior to achieving [7] “top adviser” status on Barack Obama’s foreign policy staff, Power had established herself as a certifiable expert on genocide: from 1993 to 1995, she covered the Yugoslav wars as a correspondent in Bosnia, and she later traveled to Rwanda. Her first book, which won the Pulitzer Prize, drew on these experiences, exploring American responses to the genocides of the 20th century. Yet as her star kept rising, Power seemed to forget the limits of her true expertise, acting as if her study of genocide had imbued her with expertise in just about anything foreign policy-related. Downright ignorant statements on [8] Iran, [9] Iraq, and the [10] Israeli-Palestinian conflict followed, with critics rightfully questioning her depth as a consequence.

Malley’s story is different: although he has limited his statements to his area of expertise-the Israeli-Palestinian conflict-his writings frequently reflect the triumph of ideology over analysis. In this vein, Malley has continually furthered the [11] myth that Palestinian national unity is an attainable prerequisite for Israeli-Palestinian peace, thereby advocating policies that have ultimately strengthened Hamas and undermined U.S. interests. For example, as I [12] noted last month, Malley supported the inclusion of Hamas in the 2006 parliamentary elections, and later predicted that the 2007 Hamas-Fatah Mecca Accord-which ended with Hamas seizing Gaza barely four months after its signing-would likely hold. Indeed, the scrutiny that Malley has faced is not a matter of pro-Israel bloggers vocally disagreeing with a [13] pro-[14] Palestinian expert on key assumptions. Rather, at issue is how Malley’s [15] gushing over Yasser Arafat has motivated bad policy analysis.

In short, two lessons can be drawn from Power and Malley’s poor public receptions. First, aspiring “experts” should stick to their areas of expertise. Second, they should avoid the interference of political sympathies with policy analysis. Sadly, neither Power-who [16] argued that her critics were really just attacking Obama-nor Malley-who thought that revealing his Jewish identity would allay his detractors’ concerns-seems to understand this.

Dershowitz Urges Fix Laws to Easier Fight Terrorism

The Law Should not be blind, says Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz, it should adapt to the realities of the world. The Professor and Israel advocate says that right now with the use of homicide bombers and human shields the laws favor the terrorists and take advantage of Israel's higher sense of morality, the terrorists exploit that legal advantage as much as they can.

That's because our culture is one of ubacharta bachaim [the Biblical prescription to 'choose life'], while the Imams encourage them to look at their children as martyrs. This is what makes it so difficult for the democracies, because the terrorists are trying to get us to kill their children.

Dershowitz urges an adaptation of law to return the advantage to the anti-terrorism side and a closer connection between Israeli Jews and and those in the Galut:

Dershowitz: 'Rule of Law Must Adapt to Terrorism'
by Hillel Fendel

(IsraelNN.com) Prof. Alan Dershowitz, visiting in Israel, says 'rule of law' must adapt itself to fight the terror threat. He bemoans American Jewry's lack of connection with Israel, and calls on U.S. Jews to visit Israel.

Dershowitz, the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard University and an outspoken advocate for Israel in books, articles, lectures and debates, has set two goals for his current visit to Israel: He's here to show support for the residents of Sderot and Ashkelon, and to teach classes and give lectures on how to fight the war against terrorism within a revamped rule of law.

Speaking with IsraelNationalRadio's Yishai Fleisher, Dershowitz said, "I will be teaching how the rule of law has to change, to adapt to the new realities of suicide terrorists who use human shields and thus place democracies in a difficult situation. They take advantage of our higher morality, forcing democracies to choose between doing nothing or inevitably killing civilians. The rules currently favor the terrorists over the democracies, and the rules have to change."

On-Line Rally for Sderot
Dershowitz said he will be participating in a large American Jewish Congress conference this week at which these issues will be discussed. "Some of the world's most important and influential jurists will be there, such as Irwin Kotler, who was Attorney General and Minister of Justice in Canada, former Israeli Supreme Court justices, and Americans as well. It will be an interesting attempt to redefine jurisprudence."

Prof. Dershowitz will also be visiting Sderot later this week, taking part in what organizers expect will be the largest-ever on-line rally. The rally will begin at 5 PM New York time (11 PM in Israel) this Thursday night, at www.togetherforisrael.org, and will switch back and forth between Israel, New York, Los Angeles and other sites around the world. Those involved, including Dershowitz, are hoping to have a million people click and sign on during the rally.

A Target on His Back
"I'll be under the rockets in Sderot myself, with a big target on my back," Dershowitz said, "just like all the other citizens of Sderot. I want to feel what it's like to be in Sderot and Ashkelon at these times, with the terrorists playing Russian rocket roulette with the lives of Israeli citizens. Israel should adopt a zero tolerance policy for rockets. I have written that every rocket that flies from Gaza into Israel is a violation of UN Charter Article 51 - an armed attack giving Israel the full and complete right to proportional self-defense."

"Why must it be proportional?" Fleisher interjected, to which Dershowitz responded, "Proportional doesn't mean equating lives; it just means that if they fire a rifle at you, you can't nuke them. It also doesn't mean that for every life taken, you can take one life, as the international community absurdly believes. It simply means that you don't react totally out of proportion, and neither do you look at the actual damage caused, but rather, you look at the risks of an attack. If each rocket can potentially kill 100 people, then just because they missed, it doesn't remove the risk that had been there. Israel doesn't have to wait until inevitably a rocket hits a school bus or a kindergarten or an ambulance; it can look at the risks, not just the actual consequences."

Though he supports a strong Israeli response against terrorism, he is not politically right-wing. Dershowitz has stated that his book The Case for Israel "is a pro-Palestinian as well as pro-Israel book, because it favors an economically viable Palestinian democratic state, with good health care, education, opportunity, and freedom for the Palestinian people.”

Hizbullah Wants More Civilian Deaths
Dershowitz noted that while Israel has built a shelter system in Sderot in order to protect lives, "Hizbullah did exactly the opposite in Lebanon in 2006 - because Hizbullah wanted to increase the amount of its civilian deaths. That's because our culture is one of ubacharta bachaim [the Biblical prescription to 'choose life'], while the Imams encourage them to look at their children as martyrs. This is what makes it so difficult for the democracies, because the terrorists are trying to get us to kill their children.

US Jewry Growing More Disconnected with Israel
Fleisher asked Prof. Dershowitz about the lack of connection of American Jews with Israel, noting that 70% of them have never been to Israel. "It's getting much worse," Dershowitz agreed. "My generation had a high level of connection to Israel, but my children and grandchildren's generations are much less so. Jews in their 20's are sometimes embarrassed by Israel; they're fair-weather friends. They're happy when Israel succeeds, but they ignore Israel when international support goes down. But core support for Israel is still pretty strong."

"I think we have to increase the case for Israel, that's why I write so much - I've written The Case for Israel, and now I'm writing The Case Against Israel's Enemies, where I take on people like Jimmy Carter, and Ahmedinajad, and Mearsheimer and Walt and other professors who devote their lives to their hatred of Israel. They have to know that they will be answered..."

"And in order to increase a sense of passion for Israel," Dershowitz concluded, "we have to bring more Jews to Israel; there's no better way to get a passion for Israel than to be here."