Israel Agrees to Release Samir Kuntar

I am sick to my stomach. Israel's cabinet today agreed to a "prisoner exchange" involving the release by Israel of Hizballah terrorist Samir Kuntar in exchange for the "release" of Israeli soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, who were abducted by Hizballah in 2006, setting off the most recent Israel/Lebanon war. Amazingly, Israel made this "deal" despite clear assessments from both the Mossad and Shin Bet that its two captured soldiers were no longer alive. Again, just sickening.

But even if they were alive, this is no "prisoner exchange" by any stretch, or at least one that involves the exchange of legitimate combatants. Kuntar, unlike Goldwasser and Regev, is no soldier or any other type of legitimate combatant. He is a murderer, who should have been executed shortly after he was captured and tried (Israel, for some inexplicable reason, has no death penalty, even for the worst of terrorists). This man brutally murdered a four year-old girl and her father in 1979. You can learn all about it here. And Israel is trading him (and the bodies of numerous other terrorists) for what will likely be the remains of two soldiers and "intelligence" related to the fate of soldier Ron Arad, who disappeared in 1986 (and is likely dead). Add to this the fact that Kuntar has said openly that he will join up and fight with Hizballah against Israel once he is set free.* How can any country make such a deal and claim to be either sane or moral?

Yes, the soldiers' families are grief-stricken and want their sons and husbands to come home (or to at least know their fate). Who wouldn't? Nobody can blame these people for favoring such a deal. But the job of politicians and leaders is to look beyond that and see the forest for the trees. The families' grief and desire to know the fate of their loved ones cannot be allowed to trump the national interests of the country. And it certainly cannot be allowed to interfere with the just punishment of a remorseless murderer for the brutal crimes he committed (and has said outright that he will murder again). Unfortunately, the family of Kuntar's victims just doesn't have the same political pull as the soldiers' families do.

Don't fret though. Kuntar's brother said that Kuntar was a fighter and that all of Lebanon would celebrate his return. And Hizballah stated that Kuntar's release proves the organization's strength. What an awful, awful day.


*Hat tip: Solomonia

Why Gentile Americans Overwhelmingly Support Israel

In the July/August 2008 issue of Foreign Affairs, Walter Russell Meade writes an immensely thoughtful essay about what drives the foreign policy of the United States with respect to Israel. Unlike certain other people, Meade does not believe that U.S./Israel policy results from the insidious machinations of some well-funded "Lobby" representing a minority of the population that is acting against the interests of the United States.

Rather, says Meade, U.S. foreign is and has always been driven by the will of the majority of the American people. That logically leads to the question of why the majority of Americans tend to support Israel while the majority of the rest of our beloved planet clearly does not (and is so receptive to the message of Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer, linked to above).

Well, I'm not going to spoil it. Read the essay. It's THAT freaking good. I swear, I didn't chuckle at all until the last page, when Meade hilariously suggests that the Arab leadership might one day end terrorist attacks and embrace non-violent civil disobedience (Michael Moore made the same suggestion in one of his books). Suffice it to say that if such a mentality was even possible, we probably wouldn't be in this pickle. But other than that this essay is great. If nothing else, you'll learn that Adam Clayton Powell raised money for the Irgun, which might be the single biggest badass fact I've learned about Israel in like five years.

So stop reading this blog, and read the essay!

Hat tip: DeProgram Program

Inside the Brain of Mu'ammar Al-Qaddafi

Mu'ammar Al-Qaddafi has been laying pretty low for the last twenty years, and I can only guess that Libya's "Brother Leader and Guide of the Revolution" grew tired of allowing his fellow dictators to corner the market on craziness. Well, not to worry because on June 11, 2008, Qaddafi decided to share his thoughts with the world. Buckle up, everyone, because this one is going to be a bumpy ride!

"It has been proven that there is no democracy in [the U.S.]. Rather, it is a dictatorship no different than the dictatorships of Hitler, Napoleon, Mussolini, Genghis Khan, Alexander the Great, and the rest of the tyrants."

A wobbly start. Invoking Hitler is not exactly the most creative approach, though you have to respect the Genghis Khan name-drop. You don't hear many folks comparing the U.S. to Genghis Khan. The Mongols were pretty bad-ass so that can't be all negative, right? Okay, let's hear the reasoning as to why there is no democracy in this lovely country of ours.

"In the days of crazy Reagan, the American president issued a presidential order to launch a war against Libya, for example, a presidential order to besiege Libya, a presidential order to boycott Libya, and so on. Is this a democracy or a dictatorship?"

I'm going to go with "republic" (because that's, like, what the Constitution says, and stuff), but that's a topic for another day. In any event, the "logic" employed here is just priceless (as is the irony of Qaddafi referring to "crazy" Reagan -- projection, anyone??). But let's follow the reasoning. The U.S. gave Libya its comeuppance so that makes the U.S. a dictatorship. This is ironclad. I have no response.

"There are elections in America now. Along came a black citizen of Kenyan African origins, a Muslim, who had studied in an Islamic school in Indonesia. His name is Obama.

"All the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applauded this man. They welcomed him and prayed for him and for his success, and they may have even been involved in legitimate contribution campaigns to enable him to win the American presidency."

I have no doubt that the butchers in Darfur are just jumping with joy at the thought of Barack Obama becoming President. Obama is not Muslim. And he by no means "studied" at an Islamic school (except in the sense that the student body was mostly Muslim at some schools he attended before he was ten). One would think that a powerful crazy dictator would be able to get his news from someplace more reliable than email forwards.

"But we were taken by surprise when our African Kenyan brother [Obama], who is an American national, made statements that shocked all his supporters in the Arab world, in Africa, and in the Islamic world."

"We hope that this is merely an elections 'clearance sale,' as they say in Egypt - in other words, merely an elections lie. As you know, this is the farce of elections - a person lies and lies to people, just so that they will vote for him, and afterwards, when they say to him, 'You promised this and that,' he says: 'No, this was just elections propaganda.' This is the farce of democracy for you. He says: 'This was propaganda, and you thought I was being serious. I was fooling you to get your votes.'

"Allah willing, it will turn out that this was merely elections propaganda. Obama said he would turn Jerusalem into the eternal capital of the Israelis. This indicates that our brother Obama is ignorant of international politics, and is not familiar with the Middle East conflict." [...]

Don't worry, he backtracked. Barack's no Zionist Lapdog like I am. Now we get to the real good stuff.

"We thought he would say: 'I have decided that if I win, I will monitor the Dimona nuclear plant, and the other WMDs in Israeli's possession.' We expected him to make such a decision. He undoubtedly had this in mind. When he talked about Iran and its nuclear program, he undoubtedly had Dimona in mind.

"But when he was thinking about Dimona, he undoubtedly had the fate of former president Kennedy on his mind as well. Kennedy decided to monitor the Dimona nuclear plant. He insisted on doing so, in order to determine whether or not it produces nuclear weapons. The Israelis refused, but he insisted.

"This crisis was resolved with the resignation of Ben-Gurion. He resigned so he would not have to agree to the monitoring of the Dimona plant, and he gave the green light for the killing of Kennedy.

"Kennedy was killed because he insisted on the monitoring of the Dimona plant. This image was undoubtedly on Obama's mind. He undoubtedly wanted to talk about this, but decided not to."[...]

I'm inclined just to let this sit on its own. Read it. Digest it. And reflect on just how big a secret freaking Dimona has been over the years. Lee Harvey Oswald, Zionist Lapdog?

"We expected him to say: 'If I win, I will implement the one-state solution - the "Isratine" which appears in Qaddafi's White Book.' This idea constitutes the final, deep-rooted, and historic solution. It is impossible to establish two midget-states in this area. What kind of country is only 15 km deep? The so-called Israel is only 15 km deep. What kind of a country is this?

"There are five million Palestinians there. We expected Obama to say: 'I've decided to return millions of Palestinian refugees to the land of Palestine, from which they were expelled in 1948 and 1967.' This is the 'change' that the peoples applaud, the change that the American people - and the black people in America - want.

"We expected him to say: 'I will strive for the independence and unity of the Kurdish nation. This nation must take its place under the sun in the Middle East.' The Kurdish nation is torn apart, tormented, and persecuted, and is colonized by everyone. He should have supported it, instead of supporting the collaborators, while sacrificing the future of the Kurdish nation. This is 'change.'" [...]

We expected him to say "Death to America! Death to Israel!" That's the change the American people (especially African-Americans, I guess) want. Mu'ammar Al-Qaddafi: a man with his finger on the pulse of America.

"The thing we fear most is that the black man suffers from an inferiority complex. This is dangerous. If our brother Obama feels that because he is black he doesn't have the right to rule America, this would be a disaster, because such a feeling would make him act whiter than the white, and go to an extreme in his persecution and degradation of the blacks."

My first impression after hearing Obama speak? Inferiority complex. It's possible that this is a translation issue, but you have to adore how Qaddafi believes that if he becomes President, Obama will "rule" America.

"We say to him: Brother, the whites and blacks in America are equal. They are all immigrants. America belongs neither to the whites nor to the blacks. America belongs to its original inhabitants, the Indians. Both the whites and the blacks immigrated to America, and so they are equal, and Obama has the right to hold his head high, and say: 'I am a partner in America. This is my land as much as it is yours. If it is not my land, it is not yours either. It is the land of the Indians. You are immigrants, and so are we.'"[...]

So we should all prostrate ourselves before the Indians, our rightful lords and masters?

"We are still hoping that this black man will take pride in his African and Islamic identity, and in his faith, and that [he will know] that he has rights in America, and that he will change America from evil to good, and that America will establish relations that will serve it well with other peoples, especially the Arabs."

He has no "Islamic identity." You are a crazy person. And why should he change America from evil to good? As Mel Brooks taught us over twenty years ago, evil will always triumph over good because good is dumb!

John Stewart Can Go to Hell

Update: Debbie Schlussel has provided a more detailed response to the John Stewart video (and was kind enough to link to this blog. Thanks, Debbie!)


I have disagreed with John Stewart a lot over the years, but through it all, I always saw him as intelligent, funny, and generally worthy of respect. That changed last night when a friend sent me a clip of The Daily Show (click on "Indecision 5768"). In that clip, Stewart pokes fun at the Presidential candidates during their addresses to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The first 80% of it is fine, maybe even a bit funny.

But at the end, Stewart "comically" maligns the candidates for not expresssing any criticism of Israeli policies during their speeches. He also incredibly states that one cannot "remotely criticize Israeli policies and expect to be elected President." At this point, my jaw dropped.

First, why would he expect any candidate to criticize Israel WHILE ADDRESSING AIPAC?? Seriously, when has any candidate ever criticized the NAACP (or the African-American community) WHILE ADDRESSING THE NAACP?? Or for that matter, when has any candidate ever seriously criticized the NAACP and been elected President?

But more important, Stewart is nothing short of a traitor for disseminating what amounts to enemy propaganda: that somebody cannot "remotely criticize Israel's policies" (whatever that means) and get elected President. He just provided a sound byte for the Arab world that will serve as further justification for acts of mass murder against his Jewish (and non-Jewish) brothers and sisters in Israel and throughout the world and will further the myth that the "Israel Lobby" (whatever that is) has a stranglehold over both the US media and the Middle East debate. Maybe Stewart forgot that Obama said that the so-called Palestinians were suffering more than any people on Earth. Not to mention the fact that Obama has surrounded himself and associated with numerous anti-Israel people like Robert Malley (who had to quit once his Hamas connections came to light). I guess Obama can't get elected President, right?

These blog entries usually contain a degree of humor. But there is nothing funny about this. I am really pissed off. John Stewart has criticized Israel in the past, which is fine, even though I believe he's wrong when he does it. If he wants to say he favors a "two-state solution" or that Israel should take down settlements or withdraw from Judea and Samaria, that's fine. He's expressing a respectable opinion. A wrong and uninformed opinion, but a respectable one.

But I have no tolerance for traitors who disseminate enemy propaganda tinged with anti-Jewish stereotypes that have served as the justification for killing Jews throughout the centuries. And that's exactly what Stewart did by making jokes implying that you can't criticize Israel in America.

John Stewart is an empty shell of a man, and he can go to Hell.

So About That Whole Ethnic Cleansing Thing

Commentary has a rather fine article detailing the ACTUAL history leading up to the 1947 War of Independence, and of course, the Nahkba (everybody give our oppressed refugee friends a sniffle and a tear now!). Because you can't celebrate Independence without recognizing the (Greek?) tragedy that was the Nakhba. In fact, I think you shouldn't be able to celebrate anything without reflecting on the Nahkba. Next Saturday, when you're at your great aunt's 65th birthday, you go up to each one of your family remembers and remind them just how much the Palestinians suffered in 1948 and continue to suffer today! When your five year-old cousin Timmy is about to eat some birthday cake, swat it to the floor and tell him "That's what it felt like when the Palestinians were driven from Haifa!" For the more one tells the story of the Nakhba, the more he is to be praised. And if you don't tell the story of the Nakhba every time you so much as crack a smile at the sunset, you are a soulless, Imperialist, Fascist, Zionist lackey (or lapdog).