Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed: A Political Fatwa against Nuclear Weapons

by Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed


Sometimes there isn’t much difference between politicians and clergymen. The art of speech is their profession. They can justify or evade issues with their eloquence. The Iranian regime is currently saying that it does not intend to build military nuclear capabilities because the supreme guide issued a fatwa prohibiting nuclear weapons. You must be a pious Shi’ite Iranian to believe this pledge. The region’s governments cannot possibly believe such statements.

I will use the phrase my colleague Eyad Abu Shakra used in his article on Wednesday: “Cynicism may be a sign of wisdom.” The supreme guide’s fatwa increases our suspicions. The issue doesn’t require a fatwa. It requires that facilities and reactors be open to international inspectors, and it requires that we accept their judgment and guarantees. As neighbors of Iran, we will not demand Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditions, announced during his UN General Assembly speech: “First, cease all uranium enrichment. . . . Second, remove from Iran’s territory the stockpiles of enriched uranium. Third, dismantle the infrastructure for nuclear breakout capability, including the underground facility at Qom and the advanced centrifuges in Natanz. And, four, stop all work at the heavy water reactor in Arak aimed at the production of plutonium.”

The supreme leader’s fatwa prohibiting nuclear weapons was motivated by religion and politics. Islam teachs that “whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he has slain all men.” One nuclear warhead is enough to annihilate thousands of innocent people. But the supreme leader’s fatwa is not that different from the pope’s edict prohibiting contraceptives. Iran is about to give birth to its prohibited weapon. Iran spent a lot of money and sacrificed a lot over the last decade and a half for the sake of its nuclear program. It is therefore not possible to believe that all of this was geared towards lighting Tehran’s streets using nuclear energy. The West has offered rewards, alternatives and incentives to consecutive Iranian governments in order to allow Iran to attain the energy it needs. But Iran refused them and resumed implementing a project which cannot be considered anything but a military one.

Avoiding war

The Middle East, which has become accustomed to war, is capable of engaging in other wars. But after eliminating tyrants like Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi and fighting even against Bashar Al-Assad, hope increased that the day the region rids itself of war is nearing. Hope increased that regimes like the one in Iran will give up their expansionist schemes and dreams of establishing regional empires, and thus free themselves to build their countries from within. The threat against Iran comes from within, and not from Arabs or Israelis—that is what the Islamic Republic’s lecturers say in order to justify the misery the Iranian people are put through for the sake of attaining the holy bomb.

The irony is that the Americans, who spent a lot of time and effort to build an expanded alliance which succeeded in restraining Iran’s regime politically and economically, are currently destroying this alliance. The US aimed to achieve its goal peacefully by forcing Tehran to give up its military dreams. It used banks and petroleum, travel and technology companies, in addition to its security and military means, for that purpose. Banks were shut down, economic interests were obstructed, airline companies were banned, and various products were prohibited from being exported to Iran. This is what pushed the Iranian leadership to choose Hassan Rouhani, the man with the smiling face, to replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the man with the frowning face, to act as president and peace activist.

We—the ones who live within a stone’s throw of Iran—will be happier than the Americans or the Israelis if the Iranian regime really wants peace and has really reached the conviction that it should give up its nuclear weapons. Attaining them will cost Iran much more than it would benefit Iran. Unfortunately, we do not sense any of this humbleness. Instead, it appears to us that the current gestures on the part of Iran are simply part of a PR project aiming to appeal to the sentiment of the White House.


Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed is the general manager of Al-Arabiya television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine Al-Majalla. He is also a senior columnist in the daily newspapers Al-Madina and Al-Bilad.

Source: http://www.aawsat.net/2013/10/article55318416

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Huda Al Husseini: The Return of Terrorism

by Huda Al Husseini


A Kenyan victim says: “This is not Islam. Islam is a religion of mercy and charity.” 

Kenyan Islamic scholar Abubakr Sharif Ahmed, better known as Makaburi, says: “I’m not a moderate. . . . Moderate Islam is that of Obama and Tony Blair. The Al-Shaba’ab operation is justifiable. I’m not affiliated to the group, but do support its ideology.” 

These two comments came following the terrorist attack on Westgate Mall in Nairobi in which 67 people were killed. 

But just who are Al-Shaba’ab? 

Ali and Khalid, two people who were held captives in the mall and managed to escape with their lives, related what happened during the Al-Shaba’ab siege to BBC’s Panorama. Ali said: “They forced me to ‘watch’ another captive who tried to escape. They shackled his feet and hands and blindfolded him, and then they stabbed him to death while he screamed in pain.” 

Khaled said: “They brought two kids in front of me and put explosive belts on them, and sent them in a suicide operation, and we never saw them again. They were only six and seven years old.” 

Among the documents discovered in Osama Bin Laden’s lair in Abbottabad, Pakistan, was a document that called for the ties between his organization and Al-Shaba’ab to be kept a secret. Bin Laden was conscious that publicly acknowledging this link would draw the West’s attention to the Somalia-based organization. As a result, Al-Shaba’ab remained relatively free in terms of their orchestration and implementation of terrorist operations in eastern Africa. 

The claims that the threat represented by Al-Qaeda is waning are simply not true. Al-Qaeda’s decentralization and fragmentation in no way means that the terrorist group no longer represents a threat. Its mere ideology is a threat. 

Al-Qaeda wants Muslims to feel separate and distinct from non-Muslims, namely in that they should not feel like they are potential targets of terrorist attacks. Al-Qaeda also wants non-Muslims to be suspicious and hostile towards Muslims, which further alienates and isolates the Muslim community. Most terrorist operations are carefully organized and orchestrated, with the people carrying them out having a distinct plan of action and specific grievances.

In Nairobi, the plan was: “If you are a Muslim, you are safe,” meaning that non-Muslims were the target of the operation, although many Muslims were killed. What Al-Qaeda and its affiliates are trying to do is divide people and society, creating splits within states and communities in order to accomplish their ultimate objective of creating a world of division and strife. 

Will they succeed? 

The problem is that the areas where groups like Al-Shaba’ab and others are situated also attract foreign youths who are neither deprived nor poor, but who have fallen prey to this terrifying ideology. These angry young men, often called “intellectuals,” believe that through such violent actions they can avenge themselves on the world, and that their actions will have long-term consequences. 

The Westgate Mall terrorist attack is painful not only due to the number of people killed, but also who were killed and how, including the brutal butchering of young children. This was a terrorist operation and so its aim was to terrify the watching world. 

Some international economies are harmed by what is happening in neighboring states. For example, Lebanon shares a border with Syria, while Pakistan is adversely affected by the close proximity of Afghanistan. As for Kenya, it unfortunately finds itself sharing a border with Somalia. 

These states are harmed by their proximity to an unruly neighbor, in addition to their own failure to implement national security.

Today, this state of instability is able to traverse broad geographic regions, starting from eastern Africa to Sudan, Somalia and then to Kenya. The question that must be asked here is: Why didn’t Al-Shaba’ab carry out a single terrorist operation against Ethiopia, despite the historic hostility between the two countries?

This could be due to the tight security situation in Ethiopia and the weakening security in Kenya. Al-Shaba’ab announced their arrival on the international scene in 2006, initially seeking to take control of Somalia and turn it into an Islamic emirate before African troops were deployed, dashing these Islamist dreams. 

During internal clashes last month, Al-Shaba’ab leaders who wanted to keep the group’s activities domestic were killed, including Omar Hamami, a US citizen of Syrian parentage. Those who wanted to expand the terrorist group’s operations have since taken over. 

Following the Westgate terrorist operation, Al-Shaba’ab movement issued a statement signed by its emir, Sheikh Mokhtar Abu Zubair. The statement read: “On Saturday, September 21, 2013, which was just 10 days after the anniversary date of the blessed 9/11 operations, a battle which is among the epic battles in the history of Islam began in Nairobi, and in which some of the Mujaheddin Martyrdom-Seekers have written with their blood. Allah has honored the Mujaheddin fighters to write this epic battle—the Badr of Nairobi [a reference to the Islamic Battle of Badr]—with their blood and to change the course of history and avenge the deaths of the weak, oppressed Muslims.”

On July 12, two months before the Westgate operation, a report by the UN in Kenya warned that Al-Shaba’ab’s major ally, Al-Hijra, was orchestrating new and more complex operations. 

Among the rumors that spread following Westgate was that one of the group’s leaders was a Kenyan national who embraced Islam and who had been a former soldier in the Special Forces. According to the same report, while Al-Hijra and Al-Shaba’ab were strengthening their ties, the Kenyan group had also suffered a number of setbacks, with many of its senior leaders being killed in counter-terrorist operations, including Sheikh Abboud Roghou Mohamed. However, the report also highlighted the continuing threat posed by Al-Hijra, in addition to that of Al-Shaba’ab. 

Al-Hijra did not hide its loyalty to Al-Qaeda. In February 2012, only one day after Al-Qaeda and Al-Shaba’ab announced their merger, Al-Hijra announced that it was part of Al-Qaeda in East Africa. 

The report also mentioned two names of Al-Qaeda loyalists who were being consulted by Al-Hijra, including Abubakr Sharif Ahmed, who was placed on the UN and US terrorist watch list. He is believed to be very close to the Al-Shaba’ab leadership, with the report also saying that Makaburi exerted a “growing influence over Al-Hijra,” adding he was “determined to redirect the group’s resources and manpower from hitting ‘soft targets’ to conducting complex, large-scale attacks in Kenya on behalf and in support of Al-Shaba’ab.” 

The second name mentioned in the UN report is that of British national Jermaine John Grant, who was reportedly planning to attack a tourist resort in Mombasa in 2011. According to the report, Grant admitted being a member of Al-Qaeda, not Al-Shaba’ab, to Kenyan authorities. 

In his book, The World’s Most Dangerous Place: Inside the Outlaw State of Somalia, James Ferguson tells an anecdote about Somali youth being lured into joining the terrorist Al-Shaba’ab organization in return for a single piece of fruit per day. 

There are those who say that Somalia is hungry and poor and that as long as there is poverty and starvation, Al-Shaba’ab will have no shortage of recruits. But where does their money come from? 

Today, a hardline movement is rising in Kenya. A state of inequality is prevailing across the world; distrust in government and unemployment are rife. This state of division and fragmentation, if it remains unaddressed, will only serve to strengthen Al-Qaeda and its affiliates. Indeed, Al-Qaeda draws strength from such circumstances in order to create more division and strife in a vicious circle. 

If this state of affairs continues, then Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al-Shaba’ab in Somalia, Al-Hijra in Kenya, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula will see a new era of interaction and collaboration.


Huda Al Husseini

Source: http://www.aawsat.net/2013/10/article55318339

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

For Our Arab Allies, It’s “East of Suez” All Over Again

by Michael Rubin


Evelyn Gordon is absolutely correct when she writes that the U.S. romance with Iran “terrifies” our Arab allies, but she hits only the tip of the iceberg. Obama’s “bromance” with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is only the latest in a long line of presidential statements, decisions, and actions which have antagonized America’s Arab allies.

Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman have quietly but steadily supported the United States for years. Bahrain and Kuwait host important U.S. military contingents (I write this from the Louisville, Kentucky airport where I am returning from a brief with a Fort Knox-based U.S. Army unit heading to Kuwait in a few months). The Sultanate of Oman has been a force for moderation and quiet backchannel diplomacy for years, and played a crucial role in the months after 9/11 as action neared in Afghanistan. The United Arab Emirates has been at the forefront of the fight against the Muslim Brotherhood, the most dangerous group to both democracy and stability in the Arab Middle East.

Imagine how the “Pivot to Asia” sounded to Gulf Arab leaders who, in their childhoods, heard British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan’s “East of Suez” speech and then saw the British military promptly abandon their Arab allies. It was against the backdrop of the British withdrawal that the United Arab Emirates, for example, experienced Iranian aggression firsthand when the Iranian military (with President Richard Nixon’s tacit approval) seized the disputed Tonb islands and Abu Musa.

Then, early in Obama’s first term, Hillary Clinton floated a trial balloon to extend a nuclear umbrella over the Gulf states should Iran ever go nuclear. Privately, our Gulf partners asked how they could ever trust such a guarantee since Obama and Clinton had been so willing to abandon the previous rock-solid guarantee that Iran would never go nuclear.

The Obama doctrine is a doctrine of betrayal. Just ask Georgia, Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, Honduras, Poland, and every Gulf Arab ally. Maybe pundits can spin, but there is no denying it in the perception of our Gulf allies. Alas, the reverberations of so quickly dispensing with commitments to allies will last long after Obama retires, and will be an insurmountable burden for U.S. diplomacy for decades to come.


Michael Rubin

Source: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/10/03/for-our-arab-allies-its-east-of-suez-all-over-again/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

America Facilitated Yom Kippur War by Reneging on Promise to Enforce of Missile Restrictions

by Aaron Lerner


As Egypt prepares to celebrate the 40th anniversary of their successful October 6, 1973 crossing of the Suez Canal (that this move that started the Yom Kippur War concluded with the IDF 101 kilometers from Cairo and a starving surrounded Egyptian 3rd Army will not, of course be mentioned in the festivities) it is appropriate to take a moment to consider what made this Egyptian operation possible.

We Israelis focus on whether or not the war could have been avoided if Israel was more forthcoming in diplomatic activities before the war (often these discussions ignore Israeli willingness to negotiate and an Israeli initiative rebuffed by Egypt) but perhaps more important for future policymaking is why Egypt was able to carry out the operation in the first place.

Which brings us to probably the most profound and least discussed episodes in the Jewish State's short history: America's refusal to honor its commitment to enforce the 1970 Egypt-Israel ceasefire.

A refusal that was ultimately responsible for the Yom Kippur War.

The last time I can recall that a national leader saw fit to allude to this terrible series of events was then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s 30 September 2001 address at the main memorial service for those who died in the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

Sharon noted that Israel was surprised in that war by Egypt because the Egyptians did not honor the 1970 cease-fire agreement and thus the lesson of the Yom Kippur War is that one must always pay attention when agreements are not honored.

For reference below is the 13 August 1970 statement by the Defense Minister Dayan on the immediate Egyptian violation of the 7 August cease-fire agreement.

Now we know the following:

#1 The Egyptians moved anti-aircraft missiles close to the Suez Canal the very moment that the cease-fire went into effect.

#2 The US had a spy plane that flew over the area that first day and photographed the violations. They were aware that first day that the Egyptians had violated the agreement. It should be noted that at the time the US asked Israel to provide evidence and for several days said it was waiting for evidence of violation.

#3 While BEFORE the agreement was signed, the US promised Israel that if the Egyptians moved up their missiles that the US would press the Egyptians to pull them back, when they finally had to face up to the violation, the US explained that they could not pressure Egypt.

#4 The US ultimately compensated Israel with "black boxes" for Israeli aircraft that were meant to offset the damage to Israel's security caused by the Egyptian violation.

#5 Those same anti-aircraft missiles ultimately provided invading Egyptian forces protection from the Israeli Air Force at the opening of the Yom Kippur War in 1973.

#6. Without the anti-aircraft cover, the invasion would have been quickly repulsed.

#7. In point of fact, in all likelihood, Egypt would have never tried to cross the Suez Canal if the anti-aircraft missiles hadn’t been deployed in the Canal area.

Simply put, if the United States had honored it’s word in 1970 and insisted that Egypt pull back the anti-aircraft missiles to their pre-truce positions the Yom Kippur War would never have taken place.

There is certainly much to be learned from the events of 1970 and the nightmare that followed in 1973.

Much that is extremely relevant to our own times.

Israel paid dearly in 1973 for accepting the Egyptian violation of the 1970 agreement.

So we have a double warning for Israeli policymakers:

#1. Ignoring the violations of agreements can have deadly consequences.

#2. It is irresponsible to rely on third parties to honor their commitments to guarantee the compliance of the other side.

================= 

Statement to the Knesset by Defence Minister Dayan, 13 August 1970: [From the Foreign Ministry of Israel Website]

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relations/Israels+Foreign+Relations+since+1947/1947-1974/22+Statement+to+the+Knesset+by+Defence+Minister+Da.htm

On the night when the cease-fire between Israel and Egypt came into effect, the Egyptians, with Soviet help, began to move SA-2 and SA-3 missiles into the standstill zone, embarked on the construction of new missile sites, and moved missile deployments closer to the Canal in flagrant violation of the cease-fire. On 13 August, the Minister of Defence made a statement to the Knesset:

The Minister began by citing the full text of the agreement as follows:

A. Israel and the UAR will observe a cease-fire effective at 2200 hours GMT Friday 7 August.

B. Both sides will stop all incursions and all firing, on the ground and in the air, across the cease-fire lines.

C. Both sides will refrain from changing the military status quo within zones extending 50 kilometres to the east and the west of the cease-fire line. Neither side will introduce or construct any new military installations in these zones. Activities within the zones will be limited to the maintenance of existing installations at their present sites and positions and to the rotation and supply of forces presently within the zones.

D. For the purposes of verifying observance of the cease-fire, each side will rely on its own national means, including reconnaissance aircraft, which will be free to operate without interference up to 10 kilometres from the cease-fire line on its own side of the line.

E. Each side may avail itself as appropriate of all United Nations machinery in reporting alleged violations by each other of the cease-fire and of the military standstill.

F. Both sides will abide by the Geneva Convention of 1949 relative to the treatment of prisoners of war and will accept the assistance of the International Committee of the Red Cross in carrying out their obligations under that Convention.

The Minister then explained how the agreement was drafted and accepted by the parties:

This agreement was reached on the initiative and through the mediation of the United States Government. We were first shown a draft. We made our comments, and we later received this text, which was handed to us by US representatives and which was agreed to by Egypt. That was the US representatives' share in drafting this agreement. We did not talk with the Egyptian representatives directly, but, as I have just said, representatives of the US Government brought us the proposed agreement, we made our comments, and we were afterwards told by them -and I have no doubt accurately so - that the matter had been brought before the Egyptian Government for final drafting, and that this text that we have here was agreed upon by both sides.

In this text, the third paragraph covers what is called in the Hebrew version a "freeze" and in the English original a "standstill". This is a central provision of the very first importance.

On the first night of the cease-fire, and after that, the agreement was violated in its standstill provision by the bringing forward of missile sites - sites for Soviet-Egyptian ground-to-air missiles - on the Egyptian side of the Canal, a move of very considerable military significance. It is not something marginal, not an odd burst of firing.

Moreover, we ought not to, and cannot, allow ourselves to ignore the fact that not only is this moving forward of these sites of considerable military significance and not only is this standstill provision a central provision of the agreement, but the entire agreement is a very important part of the American peace initiative, of the "talking" that comes within the compass of this initiative.

There are three things that I wish to stress in the name of the Government: that the violation is of importance; that the provision violated is of importance; and that the agreement is of importance in the context of the "talking" under the American peace initiative known by that name.

When we learnt of this infringement, we turned to the United States, and use was also made of the fifth provision about reporting violations to the UN apparatus. But first of all we turned to the US Government and faced it with the facts, with the violation that had taken place, and we asked that the US representatives have things put back correctly the way they were, have those launching sites that were brought up after zero hour put back where they were before. That is how things stand at the moment. The matter is being discussed between us and the US Government on the basis of our insistence on the return of the launching sites to their previous positions because their being brought forward was and is a violation of the agreement.


Aaron Lerner

Source: http://imra.org.il/story.php3?id=62020

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran says Four Arrested in Nuclear Site Sabotage Attempt

by Reuters, Israel Hayom Staff and News Agencies

Saboteurs caught "red-handed" and are now being interrogated by Iranian authorities • Meanwhile, alleged Iranian spy Ali Mansouri indicted in Israel • Mansouri's indictment accuses him of espionage and assisting the enemy in wartime.

Four saboteurs arrested in an attempt to attack Iranian nuclear site [illustrative] | Photo credit: Reuters

At least four people have been arrested in Iran for trying to sabotage a nuclear site, an Iranian official was quoted by Iranian media as saying on Sunday.

The head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Ali Akbar Salehi, said officials had monitored and then arrested a "number of saboteurs" before they could carry out their plan.

"Four of these individuals were caught red-handed and their interrogations are ongoing," he said, according to the Mehr News Agency on Sunday. He did not identify which nuclear site they were planning to damage or when those detained were arrested.

Israel, widely believed to be the region's only nuclear-armed state, sees Iran's atomic work as a military threat and has said it will attack Iran's nuclear sites if it does not end its programme. Iran says its nuclear work is purely peaceful.

Iran accuses Israel and the West of being behind the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists and of trying to damage its programme in other ways, such as by cyberattacks. 

Meanwhile, alleged Iranian spy Ali Mansouri was indicted Sunday morning at the Lod District Court for spying and assisting the enemy in wartime. 

According to Israeli media reports, the indictment stated that Mansouri, 58, was recruited by Iran to carry out terror operations in Israel. He has dual Iranian and Belgian citizenship, and arrived in Israel to set up a business network that would act as a cover for terrorist activity. 

He had entered Israel three times to carry out this objective, and was arrested on September 11 while attempting to leave the country, the Shin Bet security agency revealed last month.

According to the Shin Bet and the indictment, Mansouri said he had several meetings with Iran’s Quds Force, the unit responsible for extraterritorial special operations, terrorism and subversion. The unit is run by the Islamist Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. 

In his interrogation Mansouri said that he had returned to Iran in 2007 after having left the country in 1980 with his family. He lived in Turkey until 1997, when he became a businessman and moved to Belgium. He received his Belgian citizenship in 2006, and subsequently changed his name to Alex Mans.

Mansouri was found with photographs of the U.S. Embassy and Ben-Gurion International Airport, having reportedly collected information on security procedures at the latter. 

According to the indictment, Mansouri was preparing to be joined by a second agent in the future. His espionage activities were carefully hidden from the Israeli government and his activities were reported to his Iranian handlers following each trip to Israel.

Iran reportedly offered him $1 million for his espionage work.

The prosecution requested to return Mansouri to police custody until the proceedings are over.

Reuters, Israel Hayom Staff and News Agencies

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=12393

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Report: Syria Transferred Chemical Weapons to Hezbollah

by Israel Hayom Staff

Saudi paper Al Watan quotes Lebanese parliament member as saying that despite agreement to surrender chemical weapons, Syria has given Hezbollah long-range missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads, under Iranian Revolutionary Guards' supervision.

According to the report, Hezbollah now has long-range missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads [Illustrative picture] | Photo credit: AFP

As Syria prepared to surrender its chemical weapons in compliance with international efforts, the Saudi newspaper Al Watan quoted a Lebanese parliamentarian on Sunday as saying that Syrian President Bashar Assad has already transferred large stores of chemical weapons to his ally, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah. 

According to the report, Hezbollah now has long-range missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads. 

Quoting Khaled Zaher from the anti-Hezbollah al-Mustaqbal party, the paper reported that the transfer of weapons was overseen by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Zaher reportedly added that these missiles were spread out in various locations, some of them underground. 

Zaher linked his report to recent remarks by Nasrallah, who warned that Israel would soon face things it has never faced before. He specifically noted that Hezbollah's missiles could strike the central Israeli city of Tel Aviv. 

"These missile bases pose a threat to the stability of the entire Middle East," Zaher told Al Watan. He explained that this serves Iran's nuclear efforts, even though "the international community has been asked repeatedly to monitor Hezbollah's military sites." 

Israeli officials, however, cast doubt on the report. Last week, a senior official in Jerusalem said that Hezbollah was wary of accepting chemical weapons from Syria. "Nasrallah knows that Israel would see it as a red line, and that the IDF would respond," Israeli media sources quoted the official as saying. 

"Hezbollah knows that the moment it gets its hands on unconventional weapons, it will draw fire onto itself, and not just from Israel," the official said. "Hezbollah is facing a lot of challenges, not just with unending attacks on its forces in Lebanon but also with attempts to infiltrate its defenses in the Dahieh in Beirut."

Israel Hayom Staff

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=12397

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Netanyahu: Palestinian Incitement to Blame for Psagot Attack

by Mati Tuchfeld, Gideon Allon and Israel Hayom Staff

Likud, Habayit Hayehudi MKs demand Prime Minister Netanyahu halt peace talks with the Palestinians, planned prisoners' release over attack of 9-year-old • MK Chetboun demands military operation in Judea and Samaria • MK Elkin: It is time we face reality.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu commented Sunday on the terror attack that took place at the Ramallah-adjacent Judea and Samaria community of Psagot on Saturday night, in which a terrorist wounded 9-year-old Noam Glick, saying, "The Israeli government takes this incident, in which a 9-year-old girl was the victim of a heinous attack, very seriously."

Speaking ahead of the weekly cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said that "as long as the Palestinian media continues to promote incitement the Palestinian Authority cannot wash its hands of it." According to Israel Radio, the prime minister told the cabinet that while 2013 has, so far, been the quietest of the decade, there has been a recent rise in terror attacks. "The inciters and murderers won't win. We are here, and here we will stay," Netanyahu went on to say. He added that the government's thoughts and prayers were with the Glick family. 

Noam was rushed to the Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem apparently suffering from a gunshot wound to the chest. Dr. Dan Fink, head of the Pediatric Cardiology Unit at Shaare Zedek, told Channel 2 her condition was stable.

In the wake of the terror attack, Knesset members from the political Right demanded that Netanyahu suspend the peace talks with the Palestinians. 

Housing Minister Uri Ariel (Habayit Hayehudi) called on Netanyahu to halt the planned release of Palestinian prisoners, which Israel had committed to as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinian Authority, ahead of the resumption of the peace talks. 

Speaking to Army Radio on Saturday night, Ariel urged Netanyahu to allow Israeli security forces to act firmly against terrorism, saying, "murderous terrorism is rearing its head once again and we cannot allow that to happen."

Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon (Likud) said that, "Anyone who backs terrorists is not worthy of being called a peace partner. We have to put an end to the Palestinian leadership's hypocrisy. … Those who target a 9-year-old girl -- their blood is on their own head." 

Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin (Likud) added that, "Once more we see how the Arabs interpret the fact that we reach out to them in peace as a sign of weakness and react by increasing terror [attacks]. It is time we face reality and remember what those sitting across from us in the negotiation room really want." 

Deputy Transportation Minister Tzipi Hotovely (Likud) urged the prime minister to suspend the peace talks. In a post on her Facebook page, she wrote: "The increase in terror activity by the Arabs in Judea and Samaria mandates that Israel cease the negotiations. Just like in other terror attacks, the incident in Psagot is a product of PA's incitement and of its two-faced policy. On the one hand, they say they want peace, and on the other hand they incite against Israel."

Hotovely stated that "nothing has changed since the days of [PA Chairman Yasser] Arafat. There is no partner for peace and there will never be one."

Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee member MK Yoni Chetboun (Habayit Hayehudi) said, "The events of the past month lead to only one conclusion -- terror is rearing its head again. Yesterday it was IDF soldiers, today it's a little girl. I demand the defense minister orders a military operation in the area to restore deterrence."

Knesset Finance Committee Chairman Nissan Slomiansky (Habayit Hayehudi) called the terrorist attack "further proof that pursuing negotiations with the PA from a position of weakness only results in more terror."

Transportation, National Infrastructure and Road Safety Minister Yisrael Katz (Likud) told Israel Radio Sunday that the Psagot attack proved that the release of Palestinian prisoners was a mistake, adding that the government must find a different avenue for negotiations. He accused Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas of "not lifting a finger" to stop the incitement against Israel. 

"We must all pray for this little girl's recovery," Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett wrote in a Facebook post Saturday night. "This is a very serious event and another incident in a series of painful terror attacks."

Habayit Hayehudi MK Ayelet Shaked issued a statement saying: "While the negotiation teams share a glass of wine and discuss the next step in the peace process, reality is proving to be different. Up in the ivory tower there are wet dreams about peace while a 9-year-old girl is shot in her own backyard. 

"The dream our neighbors foster is obviously different than the one promoted by the Obama administration," Shaked said. "It is time that we stop wasting time and come up with sensible plans, the first of which should be to stop releasing terrorists who have blood on their hands."

Binyamin Regional Council head Avi Roeh, who also serves as head of the Yesha Council -- the umbrella organization of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria -- urged Netanyahu to suspend the planned release of Palestinian prisoners.

"After a long period of quiet, terror is yet again rearing its head under the guise of diplomatic negotiations and the release of terrorists. Abu Mazen [Abbas] sends envoys to meet with [Justice] Minister Tzipi Linvi while the PA's incitement against Israel rages on and terrorists are dispatched from Ramallah to target a 9-year-old girl," he said.

"I call on the prime minister and the cabinet ministers to immediately halt the prisoners' release, to order the IDF to eradicate terror, and to pursue the appropriate response in the form of building [projects] across Israel."

A statement issued by the Almagor Terror Victims Association on Saturday night said: "Following the terror attack in Psagot, Almagor and the bereaved families demand that the prime minister and the cabinet immediately suspend the release of any more murderers as part of the negotiations [with the Palestinians] and that they reconsider the negotiations as a whole." 

MK Orit Struck (Habayit Hayehudi) also commented on the attack, saying, "The Israeli public have been reminded that releasing terrorists only adds fuel to the terrorists' fire. I urge the government to make the responsible decision of suspending the release of any more terrorists."

Struck said that if the government does not do so, she will present the Knesset with a bill forcing the cabinet's hand on the matter, as soon as the legislature's winter session begins.

 

Mati Tuchfeld, Gideon Allon and Israel Hayom Staff Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=12387  

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

IDF troops at the entrance to Psagot Saturday night |Photo credit: Lior Mizrahi

Bangladesh: Christians Threatened with Beatings, House Burnings unless they Closed their Church and Converted to Islam

by Robert Spencer


"Islamophobia is the biggest threat to peace in the world today." -- U.S. "academic" Kevin Barrett in Iran's state-run PressTV

"Bangladeshi Christians Told to Close Church, Convert to Islam," from World Watch Monitor, October 4 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A local government official in central Bangladesh has halted the construction of a church, forced Christians to worship at a mosque and threatened them with eviction from their village unless they renounce their faith. The Tangail Evangelical Holiness Church in Bilbathuagani village, Tangail district, about 100 kilometers north of Dhaka, was created Sept. 8 by a group of about 25 Christians who had been meeting secretly for three years.
However, local council chairman Rafiqul Islam Faruk joined around 200 demonstrators Sept. 13 to protest against the start of the building of the church.
The following day, the Christians were summoned to his office. More than 1,000 Muslims waited outside, following an announcement at all local mosques to gather at the chairman’s office.
Ordered to Embrace Islam
Mokrom Ali, 32, told World Watch Monitor he was forced to accept Islam.
“The chairman and the imams of the mosques interrogated me for accepting Christianity. They asked me why I had become a Christian. It is a great sin to become a Christian from Islam,” Asli said. “If I did not accept Islam, they would beat me, burn my house, and evict me from the society.
“Their threats chilled me to the bone. That is why I pretended to accept Islam, but faith in Christ is the wellspring of my life. Now I am no longer a Muslim; I am a Christian.”
Mojnu Mia, 31, told World Watch Monitor he was also forced to accept Islam against his will.
“The chairman and the imams asked me what my religion is. I said I was a Christian. Then they threatened to beat me and evict me from the village unless I recanted my faith in Christianity,” Mia said.
“They had browbeaten me into accepting Islam. I accepted it only to get out from that predicament. But later, I embraced Christianity by swearing a confession in the court.
“The chairman came to know that I became a Christian again, by affidavit. He threatened that it would not be possible to practice Christianity in that area. If I stick to this religion, I must leave this place.
“The chairman is clipping the wings of our faith. I do not know how long we can grin and bear it. We want religious freedom. We want to practice our religion freely.”
Eight Christians agreed to return to Islam since Sept. 14, under the chairman’s orders. The chairman and his associates had already beaten some of those Christians three years ago for accepting Christianity.
‘They Were Derailed’
Local chairman Faruk told World Watch Monitor that some Christians had been acting against Islam, due to their incorrect interpretation of the Quran.
“The imams and other elders of the society called them for rectification because of their aberrant behavior. They were derailed, so we tried to put them on the right track,” he said.
“Eight people who had deviated came back to Islam. We are trying to bring back others. To change a religion, a person needs to swear his or her name, and should inform a local magistrate. If the magistrate permits, then he or she can change religion. But what they are doing is completely wrong.”
World Watch Monitor asked Faruk if he would protest if any of those people filed an affidavit with the court re-affirming their Christianity.
Faruk said there would be “huge pressure from the society against it. As a representative of the local people, I cannot go against the public sentiment.”
The chairman warned the Christians not to resume the construction of the church, saying it was anti-Islamic.
The Bangladesh constitution grants every citizen the right to profess, practice or propagate any religion. Every religious community or denomination has the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions.
Rev. Mrinal Kanti Baroi, the group’s leader, told World Watch Monitor they had tried to show the constitution’s clause on religious freedom to the chairman, to no avail.
“We took one copy of the constitution to the chairman and other elders of the society, but they did not listen to us and did not want to see it,” Baroi said.
On Sept. 15, members of the congregation wrote a letter to the district administrative chief, requesting safety and protection.
Deputy commissioner Anisur Rahman of Tangail district told World Watch Monitor that necessary steps had been taken to ensure their safety and security....

Robert Spencer

Source: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/bangladesh-christians-threatened-with-beatings-unless-they-closed-their-church-and-converted-to-isla.html

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran: World Powers must Present new Approach before Nuclear Talks

by Reuters, JPost.com Staff

Iranian FM says previous P5+1 plan - to stop enrichment of uranium to 20 percent - "belongs to history"; Zarif: West should deal seriously with Iran's nuclear issue by changing its views.

P5+1 participants prepare to start talks with Iranian negotiators 

in Almaty April 5, 2013. Photo: REUTERS/Ilyas Omarov/Pool 

 

DUBAI - World powers negotiating with Tehran over its disputed nuclear program must come up with new proposals before talks in Geneva on October 15-16, Iran's foreign minister said.

"The previous P5+1 plan given to Iran belongs to history and they must enter talks with a new point of view," Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said in an interview with Iranian state television late on Saturday.

"The players must put away this illusion that they can impose anything on the Iranian people."

The United States wants Iran to respond to proposals by world powers in February as a starting point for talks. If the parties cannot agree on how to start the negotiations, it casts doubt on whether a resolution can be agreed within the six months in which Iranian President Hassan Rouhani says he wants a deal.

Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council - plus Germany, the so-called P5+1, said in February they want Iran to stop enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, ship out some stockpiles and shutter a facility where such enrichment is done.

In return, they offered relaxation of international sanctions on Iran's petrochemicals and trade in gold and other precious metals.

US officials said last week Secretary of State John Kerry had secured agreement from his Chinese counterpart calling for Iran to respond positively to existing nuclear proposals by the six powers.

According to Zarif, "Iranian people have completely lost their confidence in the West," he added that the coming nuclear talks "could be a good start" for reversing that sentiment, ISNA cited the minister as saying. 

"The West should deal seriously with the Iranian nuclear issue and that requires it to change its views," Zarif added. 

The election of Rouhani in June and his appointment of US-educated Zarif as foreign minister and chief nuclear negotiator have raised hopes for a solution to the decade-old dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

Western powers believe Iranian enrichment activities are aimed at achieving nuclear weapons capability, whereas Iran insists its program is purely for civilian purposes - generating electricity and for a medical research reactor.

"RACE AGAINST TIME"

Each side wants the other to make the first move.

"There is a new tone (in Iran), we want it to be sincere but we need to see deeds," French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told Europe 1 radio on Sunday.

But, he said, there was limited time to resolve the dispute while maintaining the Western goal of ensuring Iran is not able to make nuclear arms. That was because the heavy water reactor in Arak, in western Iran would be able to produce plutonium.

"If it were completed we wouldn't be able to destroy it because if you bomb plutonium it will leak. This means it's a race against time," he said.

Asked how much time he thought there was, Fabius said; "People say roughly a year ... We hope there will be a negotiation, but we must act quickly."

Rouhani and Zarif tried to dispel mistrust with meetings, speeches and interviews at the UN General Assembly in New York last month, was capped with a phone call between the Iranian president and US President Barack Obama.

Both presidents face opposition at home from conservatives who fear they may be too willing to grant concessions before the other side takes tangible steps.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on the nuclear issue, said on Saturday he supported Rouhani's diplomatic opening with the United States.

But he said some aspects of it were "not proper". Khamenei did not elaborate on his objections, but it was a possible reference to the phone conversation between Rouhani and Obama.

The supreme leader also said he did not trust the United States as a negotiating partner, a sentiment echoed by Zarif.

"Just as the supreme leader said, we do not trust them, and they must build the trust of the Iranian people towards them in public and private discussions," Zarif said.

Reuters, JPost.com Staff

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Iranian-Threat/News/Iran-calls-for-new-approach-from-world-powers-before-October-nuke-talks-328000

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Legacy of 9/11 Hero Danny Lewin

by Steven Plaut

 

At the center of the 9/11 attacks against the United States by Islamofascist terror, an unlikely hero played a largely unknown role. He sacrificed his life in an attempt to stop the hijacking of one of the planes that later crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. He was an Israeli-American and his role has remained largely ignored and unacknowledged.

Danny Lewin was an American-Israeli, a world-class Internet entrepreneur, and the very first person to be murdered by the Al-Qaeda barbarians on September 11, 2001.  He was aboard the American Airlines Flight 11 plane out of Boston headed for Los Angeles when it was hijacked by the terrorists.  A veteran of the special forces in the Israeli army, Lewin quickly understood what was going down.  He spoke fluent Arabic and knew what the terrorists were saying.  He single-handedly attempted to attack and subdue the terrorists.  He was stabbed to death on the plane by terrorist Satam al-Suqami, a Saudi law student.  Lewin was 31-years-old when he was murdered.

A new biography of the hero of 9/11 is now in book stores entitled, “No Better Time: The Brief, Remarkable Life of Danny Lewin, the Genius Who Transformed the Internet.”  It is written by Molly Knight Raskin.  She describes Lewin thus:

In some ways, Lewin’s appearance belied his intelligence. Lacking the physical traits of the stereotypical mathematician, he could have easily been mistaken for a high school athlete. Although he stood just five feet ten inches tall, Lewin was built like a bull—burly and broad-shouldered, sheer muscle from head to toe.  He was boyishly handsome, with a soft, round face, blue eyes and brown hair that was prematurely receding, giving way to a long, smooth forehead.  His smile was unyielding and almost impish, creating in those around him the urge to smile, too.”

Lewin grew up in Denver and immigrated to Israel with his family in 1984, three years after I did the same.   His parents were devoted Zionists and passionate about their Jewishness.  While exempt from military service in Israel on grounds that he had recently immigrated, Danny insisted on serving anyhow, and in the country’s most challenging military unit at that.  He served in the ultra-elite special forces combat unit called “Sayeret Matkal,” perhaps best known for its operation in Entebbe to release the kidnapped Jews held by Palestinian and Ugandan terrorists.  The brother of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu died in that operation, which safely rescued nearly all of the hostages.  (One hostage woman had been moved out of the airport to a hospital and she was then murdered by Idi Amin’s stormtroopers.)  In Raskin’s words, “Until the 1990s, Sayeret Matkal was so important to Israel’s security that the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) would not officially acknowledge its existence. Those who knew anything about its inner workings were sworn to a code of silence, and its soldiers are still forbidden to wear its insignia in public.”

Lewin attended the Technion in Haifa, where in 1995 he was named the year’s Outstanding Student in Computer Engineering.  He then worked for IBM in developing high-tech products, later doing graduate work at MIT.  There he became the protégé of the legendary MIT professor F. Thomson Leighton.  According to Raskin, “The more Lewin got to know Leighton, the more professionally enamored he became, routinely telling friends he’d met the ‘smartest man in the world.’”   The two developed mathematical algorithms for optimizing internet traffic.   These became the basis for Akamai Technologies, which the two founded in 1998.  Lewin served as the company’s chief technology officer and a board member.  The company went public in 1999 and its stock market valuation rose rapidly to 345 billion dollars.  Lewin was posthumously named one of the most influential high-tech figures in the world.   Much of the book by Raskin details his career in advanced high technology.   He was not only the first victim of the terror on September 11, 2001, he was also its wealthiest and most successful victim.

Here is Raskin:

An executive summary mistakenly leaked by the Federal Aviation Administration to the press stated that terrorist Satam al-Suqami shot and killed Lewin with a single bullet around 9:20 a.m. (obviously a typo, as the plane crashed at 8:46 a.m.). But almost as soon as the memo was leaked, FAA officials claimed it was written in error, and that Lewin was more than likely stabbed, not shot. The 9/11 Commission concurred, offering a more detailed summary: based on dozens of interviews with those who spoke with flight attendants Sweeney and Ong, the commission determined that al-Suqami most likely killed Lewin by slashing him in the throat from behind as he attempted to stop the hijacking.  The time of his death was reported to be somewhere between 8:15 and 8:20 a.m., which—if fact—would make Lewin the first victim of the 9/11 attacks.”

After his death, the intersection of Main and Vassar Streets in Cambridge, Massachusetts, was renamed Danny Lewin Square in his honor. He left behind a widow and two sons.

Lewin’s life captures everything positive about the American-Israeli collaboration in education, high-technology, and military strategy.  He also epitomizes the world struggle against barbarism.

Steven Plaut

Source: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/steven-plaut/the-legacy-of-911-hero-danny-lewin/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.