APRPEH - Feed

Jewish Federations Tell Israel to Bug Off

2011-12-02T07:25:00.000-08:00

Can thin skinned be excused for ahavas Yisroel? Can the national interests of the State of Israel be confused with causing hatred amongst Jews? Is the accusation itself a form of anti-Jewism? INN ran THIS STORY: American Jews Take Issue with 'Come Home' Campaign describing the angst of the The Jewish Federations of North America; unhappy that the State of Israel is trying to bring home ex-patriots - those who have descended from Israel (yireda) back to Israel. I thought that we, as Jews - lovers of Israel, supporters of Jewish ownership of the land and concerned for its well-being - were supposed to be upset when Israel's national interests were struck from the outside?

That is only true, of course when the issue is secular. Jewish Federations (sounds like an organized labor movement, no?) are held hostage to Identity Jews, those lacking in yiras Shomayim, married to the culture of Edom - and well off. The money flowing in to and its counter threat to be withheld (even a perceived and not real threat) determine the positions taken by The Jewish Federations of North America not what is in the interests of Torah or Israel.

Even worse is the contradictory nature of the culture of The Jewish Federations of North America. Millions of dollars are contributed every year to the Jewish Federations for the purpose of advocating for and educating about the importance of Israel. Teens and others are sent on free exploration style trips or junkets to learn about the land and build attachments. Yet for Israelis living abroad - living in North America, its different. One the one hand, organized efforts are made to advocate for building connections to Israel, on the other hand and to the contrary - opposing the efforts of that very same nation to reach out to its home born overseas.

This quote tells the story
"We fear this campaign will only backfire, and rather than simply bringing Israelis back, will alienate and divide Diaspora Jews from Israel. Rather than playing Israeli Jews against American Jews, we should be seeking to reinforce our shared love of Zion and to build the bonds of Jewish people hood worldwide."
What they are saying is that we don't want our donors to see the truth of living in exile. We are concerned that upon realizing that Chanukah Bushes and children knowing more about the other cultures in which they inter-mingle than their own - one in their eyes which is backward, repressive, anti-woman, racist and overall inferior to the wonders provided by the "modern" world will be offensive and result in a loss of donations (HaShem yirachem). After all Jewish Federations represent all Jews - even those who need the most Jewish - (read Torah) influence, education and enlightenment. We don't want to offend anyone - even at the risk of mis-representing what our our holy Torah teaches us and what our tradition demonstrates for us. The children of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov have a unique culture and law. It is not to be held hostage to The Jewish Federations of North America and their kowtow to its donor base.

In this weeks parashah Vayeitzei, Yaakov is sent away by his parents - away from the hatred of his "brother" Eisav and to find a wife. As he lay down to sleep, he protects his head with a set of stones. In one of my favorite Torah commentaries Vedibarta Bam, Rabbi Bogomilsky quotes Rashi explaining the rocks are to protect Yaakov from "wild animals". He then brings this gem "Yaakov knew that in the world at large there are many forces that are alien to Torah and mitzvot and hostile to the religious Jew. These forces influence the mind of the Jew and try to persuade him to leave the path of Torah. Therefore, Yaakov made a great effort to protect his "head," to prevent negative influences from interfering with his yiddishkeit." Further Rabbi Bogomilsky brings another explanation:
"He took of the stones of the place, and he placed them around (under) his head, and lay down in that place to sleep." (28:11)

QUESTION: Why did Yaakov rest his head on a stone?

ANSWER: The Gemara (Bava Kamma 30a) says: "He who wants to be a chassid should observe the laws of nezikin — damages" (being careful not to hurt anyone or damage property). Rava says that he should follow the teachings of Avot (Book of Ethics), and others say that he should be observant in the laws of berachot (recognizing the supremacy of Hashem and thanking Him for everything). The word "even" — "stone" — is an acronym for "avot, berachot, nezikin."

As Yaakov was preparing to enter the "outside world," his first resolution was to be a chassid. The placing of the placing of these three stones as the guidepost for his "head," was, as though to say, that his thoughts would always be directed to exceling in these three matters.

The three stones united to emphasize that each approach is equally important and that through these three things one can make the world a "beit Elokim" — a "house of G-d."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It may also be said that "berachot" — recognizing the supremacy of Hashem and thanking Him for everything — is an allusion to the relationship between man and Hashem. Being careful not to hurt or injure a fellow man, "nezikin," represents inter-human relationships. To be exemplary, one must conduct himself within these two realms, in accordance with the guidelines and teachings conveyed by "avot" — our ancestors.

To answer the criticism that my opinion is too negative, note the above paragraph. We must balance our approach to our relationships with fellow Jews (and all mankind) with recognition of Hashem's supremacy and the lessons of our Avos - whose actions lead us still. And to fend off "wild animals", one needs to live within fences.

In other words, the actions to oppose Israel's interests in bringing back Israelis to Eretz HaKodesh by the Jewish Federations is contrary to the needs and interests of the Jewish people and is being espoused for the wrong reasons.

Israel Matzav posts the videos of the advertising campaign

And here is the contrary view: Israeli ad campaign suggests Israelis shouldn’t date Americans (VIDEO). What this article sarcastically points out is an all true phenomenon that many an observer of the Jewish world can point towards as the best reason why the Israeli absorption effort is needed. I have known far more Israelis than I care to remember - who came here for "a short time" to "make some money" or "learn a professional" with the goal of returning to Israel later. Most of them become very comfortable in America and decide "for their family's ie. children" to stay in America. Really? For the children? They have learned from the politics of America how any policy choice can be advocated - its for the children. The same justification of the Jewish Federations to fund Israel programs... I'm confused.

Obama's Israel Policy Goes Native

2011-05-20T07:26:00.001-07:00

To my most holy Jewish brethren - those who still worship at the feet of the idol O'Ba'alma and who drink from the bitter waters flowing from Jstreet, the time has come for you to do teshuva, if you still can.

Yesterday, in what must have a been like removing a load of bricks off his back, (not to be confused with the fallen ruins of the Twin Towers), the president of the United States of America shrugged off national interest and the hard and painful lessons learned from history in favor of his latent anti-Jewism, born of his early-years Medrassa education. How much of a relief it must have been for him to express his real inner feelings of despise for the lives of the Jewish people in the land of Israel?

Perhaps due to the frustration of having wasted two full years of solitary liberal rule in DC, the emir in chief has finally decided to "be himself" and express his true intentions. Israel, he told us must be reduced to the size it once was when former Ambassador Abba Eban coined the phrase, "the Auschwitz lines".

Since yesterday afternoon's Obamaism, many pundits have made reference to the 1967 "lines" where both friend and foe of the Jewish people have not justly explained what this means. On the surface, it merely means the pre-Six Day war line separating arabians and Jews. What it really means is the 1949 armistice line - the line separating between the Jewish army and the retreating arabian armies who attacked Israel immediately following Israel's declaration of Independence in 1948. The "green-line" as it was known became the Berlin wall of the middle east - demarcating not between freedom and tyranny as in Europe but between civilization and barbarism. So in reality Obama the terrible is calling for re-do, back to 1949, back to the Auschwitz line, back to the time before the humiliating defeat of the arabian armies at the hands of the descendants of monkeys and pigs. Sultan Hussein Obama's inner muslim is on display.

The next few days should be interesting to say the least. This Shmuly Boteach story kinda says it all. Obama will arrogantly speak at AIPAC and tell the Jews and supporters of Israel, that his recommendations are in Israel's best interests and that America's support for Israel is unshakable - just like he said in his Middle East speech on Thursday.

So let's backtrack a little to yesterday and look at just one paragraph of Obama's speech:

For decades, the conflict between Israelis and Arabs has cast a shadow over the region. For Israelis, it has meant living with the fear that their children could get blown up on a bus or by rockets fired at their homes, as well as the pain of knowing that other children in the region are taught to hate them. For Palestinians, it has meant suffering the humiliation of occupation, and never living in a nation of their own. Moreover, this conflict has come with a larger cost the Middle East, as it impedes partnerships that could bring greater security, prosperity, and empowerment to ordinary people.

We could really hours on every word, every innuendo, every inflection, etc. But with better things to do, lets be brief. In the eye's of the president, the conflict is about death to the Jews vs. humiliation. Plain and simple it is what Obama said. I don't know that many Israelis that are constantly worried about buses blowing up or a rocket falling on their home - not to belittle these things are say they are not serious. But they are not worries. What does worry Israelis is having the carpet, (a prayer carpet, perhaps) pulled out from underneath them the way Obama did yesterday. What worries Israelis is the possibility of a major regional war with missiles flying in from Iran along with a newly muslimized Egyptian army attacking from, not in, the Sinai joined with a Syrian-Hizbollah offensive in the north. That is a worry. The pali-terrorists are a thorn in the side in comparison.

To equate the two ideas of death to the Jews and humiliation is of course, a demonstration of how little Jewish blood must be valued by the president. And as to the idea that the poor palis have never had a nation of their own, well who is to blame here? I wonder if Obama expressed this same concern to the little King Abdullah II who rules as a minority tribal sultan over millions of "palis" living on the east bank of the Jordan river? I wonder if Abdullah, in the midst of protests in Jordan, feels any safer today? One could argue of course that no arab living in an arabian land today has a country of his own unless he is prince or of royal ancestry. In those lands where an Emir or King or Prince or even Colonel or someone acting like one without the title rules, is the country really theirs? Where tyranny rules, one cannot be free. And where arabians rule, freedom is stifled and only those in power or support those in power can claim any form of ownership.

What is the nature of this statement by Prince Hussein Obama: "Moreover, this conflict has come with a larger cost the Middle East, as it impedes partnerships that could bring greater security, prosperity, and empowerment to ordinary people". Is he saying that the US and arabians are suffering diplomatically and strategically because of "the conflict"? Really? Is peace in the middle east contingent upon the palis building a thug-terror state in Judea and Samaria? He could mean something else but knowing the president and his historically cold view of Israel which is well-documented on this blog and other places, it is a fair assumption to read between the lines and expect the least from Obama's intentions.

When PM Netanyahu speaks to the Obama today, what will he say? More importantly, when Bibi speaks to the joint session of Congress on Monday, what will he say. If I were Obama, I would be very careful how I treat Netanyahu today and with what I say at AIPAC. Netanyahu may not be the perfect Israeli Prime Minister but I would not want anyone else speaking at AIPAC and more importantly before the Congress of the United States of America. My hope is that Bibi will clearly state before Congress that Israel is under no more moral or legal compulsion to negotiate with the terrorist thugs of a party which honors and trusts Hamas as an equal party than the US has a moral need to negotiate with al-Qaeda. Any party which routinely calls for the destruction of Israel and cannot even draw a map where Israel can be found is no partner for peace - only a partner for war. My hope is that strongly and unequivocally states "Jerusalem is not for sale" while calling upon the US to once and for all move the embassy to Jerusalem, not because it is Israel's capital but because it is Hakadosh Baruch Hu's capital.

See Ketzaleh's speech he wishes PM Netanyahu would deliver.

Privacy and Technology

2010-09-02T20:15:00.000-07:00

Thoughts about changing technology and how it affects the public need for and access of public records and the relationship to identity theft.

Does new technology which enhances access to information pose an inherent danger to the privacy rights of individuals? Does ease of access to information increase the number of identity theft victims? Are more people likely to fall victim to information based frauds because of the World Wide Web?

These questions on the surface require an analysis between two ideas which have been in conflict since mankind has sought to build a better mouse trap. The essence of the dispute can be explained with the following debate question: do new technologies which change an existing process so much that even though all agree the process is vital, the new process brings with it costs that were not conceived of when the previous process existed. At such time, should the process be banned or changed into something else?

In English, what do I mean? Virginia, resident, Betty "B.J." Ostergren , runs a website named The Virginia Watchdog whose mission is to expose public records of public officials found online in order to bring attention to her supposition that the availability of electronic public records is a cause of identity theft. Ms. Ostergren contends that public records should only be available at a clerk’s office. So the question becomes, is there a fundamental difference in the nature of safety for consumers between access of public records which might contain personal identifying information electronically, online vs. electronically or by hand in a clerk’s office? With no dis-respect to Ms. Ostergren, I want to look at the question from a different perspective. Can’t identity theft occur under either scenario? (Note that data shows that most identity theft results in old fashioned theft of information by hand not by computer)

New technologies or new ways to do things have always come with new or shifting perceived costs and benefits. It is safe to say that before the introduction of automobiles, the frequency of significant traffic accidents where people were left with life-long injuries often resulting in costly court trials to determine who is liable for the costs of the disability was insignificant compared to today. Okay, horses occasionally threw riders and could damage someone else’s property or even another horse. But when automobiles came along, land speed increased and new dangers quickly became apparent. What did we, as a society gain with automobiles? For a start, quicker access to emergency medical care, ability to be mobile to visit family, to move out of crowded living environments, to travel to places we would never have scene otherwise and plenty more. Both new benefits and costs followed the mass introduction of the automobile. New businesses creating good wage jobs supporting the automobile also arose. And, along with the automobile came the shift from urban horse by-products to urban air and noise pollution.

Which was worse? It depends. Streets perceived as already crowded, and designed for slow horse traffic quickly became insufficient. Imagine driving in the middle of a city without traffic control. But it wasn’t necessarily the automobile itself which resulted in the negatives or the positives but how it came to be used and how society learned to manage the new challenges posed by automobiles. Yes, criminals too learned how to use a getaway car. But, police also learned how to use sirens and lights. So did ambulances and fire trucks. Did people learn to drive recklessly? You bet. Was law written to address reckless driving? Yes. Does the law deter reckless driving? Sometimes it does, and sometimes it does not.

Let us apply the lesson to identity theft. What causes identity theft? Is it easy access to personal information or a realization that most identity thieves are never caught or prosecuted? Maybe it’s some of both. But if identity theft were not so easy to commit and the perceived cost of perpetrating it so low, no matter how much personal information were to be accessible, the crime would not be amongst the biggest of consumer fears and result in losses to the US economy of $50 billion annually.

Is it a moral crisis that leads perpetrators to steal identities from other consumers or is the business of identity theft just too profitable to resist? Is the threat posed by possible prosecution for the commission of the crime too unconvincing? Does the perceived benefit or profit of committing identity based crimes exceed the perceived costs of apprehension and prosecution? These are questions which merely reflect upon the debate question above, a question which has arisen in every generation and with every new idea or new technology which opens the door for those who wish to exploit it for bad instead of good. Those who defend society from those whose intent is to exploit the situation for criminal means must decide between spending limited resources on either or both deterrence and remediation. Is the situation different with technology and identity based crimes than any other societal challenge previously faced?

interesting related read

Chief Rabbi Amar Speaks on the Conversion Bill

2010-08-10T20:59:00.000-07:00

Chief Sephardic Rabbi Shlomo Amar has spoken and written in strong support of the proposed Rotem law (AKA Conversion bill). His support for the bill is based upon the idea that Olim with questionable Jewish status (or no Jewish status) will be able to work with local Rabbis under Rabbinate supervision to officiate at conversions, thus insuring that halachic standards are met for conversion in Israel. Rabbi Amar also expressed great concern that foreign intervention in Israel's internal affairs could jeopardize the effort to keep Israel a Jewish state. As posted previously on
APRPEH, American non-Orthodox interests feel threatened by Chief Rabbinate conversion supervision in Israel.

The Conversion bill has an interesting coalition of supporters in Israel. Missing in the minds of the American non-Orthodox who preach regularly on their pulpits and at their conventions (unfairly) that Orthodox (ie. Jews committed to halacha) are divisive is the fact that this bill is supported by the Orthodox political parties and secular nationalist parties in Israel. As Rabbi Amar implies, significant numbers of Russian Olim are not halachically Jewish and would be more inclined to become Jewish if the path to conversion were not stifled by red tape. Interestingly, even in the US where strong voices within liberal Orthodoxy have sought to garner publicity by advocating local rabbinical autonomy, by opposing the Rotem bill they are arguing for exactly the opposite in Israel.

Critics of the bill in the US and other diaspora communities seem to have a point that Israel is a place for all Jews and therefore they command a right to intervene in Israel's internal affairs for reasons of personal interest. However, the quote from Rabbi Amar below strongly rebuts that idea. Israel is indeed a land for all Jews. It is the Jewish homeland and as such, all Jews much seek to protect and support the land even when its government might not be all that we would like it to be. What should be consistent in the approach of diaspora Jews concerning issues in Israel is a rule that criticism is okay but pressure beyond argumentation should not be utilized.

In recent years, perhaps since the late 1980s, we saw liberalism's infectious breaking down of conventional wisdom expressed within the context of breaking Jewish consensus on Israel. This pervasive and dangerous threat of backing off of support for Israel in general, if this law were passed or that law were passed is becoming the strategy of first not last resort. It should never be an option.

The observation that consensus on Israel was breaking was made by Rabbi Zalman I. Posner in a radio interview conducted by Rabbi Jacob J. Hecht (date uncertain)
(real player format) see "Who is a Jew" Tape 4 side B (at time of posting, this audio is not working). Rabbi Posner pointed out that for the first time, during one of the previous "who is a Jew" debates, threats to cease supporting Israel or not going out of the way to support Israel within the American political context were first heard. Rabbi Posner went on to say that US pressure on Israel vis a vis the arab conflict became stronger as a result of a perception that American Jews were divided.

I find it ironic that the same Jews who loudly protest the anti-Zionism crowd amongst the charedim, are themselves, with righteous indignation claiming the possibility of deep divisions resulting from a conversion bill affecting Israelis only. "Look at what the Israeli government is doing? How could we support them?" From which camp do you expect to hear such words, Neturei Karta or the Rabbinical Assembly of Conservative Judaism? What about JFNA?

The true Jewish heart needs to stop for a moment of reflection, especially in this month of Elul to consider what sort of interests should prevail - the political and financial vested interests, positions taken that are framed within a context of egotistical minded fear of irrelevancy or true unification the Jewish people? Should there be more than one definition of Jew? Should there be people with the status of Jew in some congregations of America but not others, all the more so not in Israel? These questions require deep soul searching within. Conservativists and Reformists have built a career writing their own rules all the while claiming that ancient halachic rules cannot stand in the place of their own new and improved versions. The time has come to base decisions of status not rooted in what is seen as easy for the masses of people and convenient for their leaders but what is right for the future of Judaism and Torah.

'Diaspora Jews 'coercing the Israeli government'' - JPOST

“Israeli laws should be determined by residents of Israel who defend its security and bear its burdens,” he said. “If our Jewish brethren immigrate to Israel, we will welcome them with great joy, and then they would be entitled, as citizens, to struggle for the adoption of their perspective. Diaspora Jews who are coercing the Israeli government to drop the proposed legislation are causing great damage. The bill, within the framework of Jewish law, would expand the ambit of conversion, prevent the application of unjustified stringencies, and provide more leniency and flexibility in administration. Many Russian Israelis would benefit substantially. In fact, this legislation was proposed by Israel Beiteinu – a secular party – representing more than a million Russian Israelis,” Amar’s letter read.

NYT Letter to the editor by Rabbi Amar

Conversion in Eretz HaKodesh: JFNA Seeks to Undermine Halacha

2010-07-14T17:54:00.000-07:00

In my email today, I along with probably many readers received the communication below from Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA). The email addresses the conversion bill now in consideration in Knesset which would place all conversions in Israel officially in the hands of the Chief Rabbinate. The Jewish people will only be blessed when the State of Israel advocates the keeping of Halacha and doing mitzvos. What Jew could possibly disagree with this idea? Halacha and mitzvos are the core of Judaism.

I fundamentally oppose the position taken by JFNA and encourage readers to submit the APRPEH suggested letter at the bottom of this post which can be found after the JFNA communique and the letter JFNA suggests be sent to the PMO.

JFNA URGES PM NETANYAHU AND OTHERS TO HALT CONVERSION BILL

July 14, 2010

The Jewish Federations of North America, with the Jewish Agency and other partners, are leading a concerted and high-profile advocacy campaign to stop a bill in the Knesset that could prevent some Diaspora Jews from gaining automatic Israeli citizenship as immigrants.

These efforts are the latest phase of an initiative that began this winter, when a Knesset member proposed revising the Law of Return. Though the change was initially aimed at giving local Israeli rabbis greater authority, it carried the potential effect of threatening to delegitimize those who converted to Judaism through the Conservative and Reform movements and preclude conferring citizenship under the Law of Return to those who did not qualify for such status on prior visits.

This Sunday, the Knesset member, David Rotem of the Yisrael Beitenu Party, advanced a newer version with stronger language giving the Orthodox-run Chief Rabbinate full control over conversions in Israel and urging that any convert "accepts the yoke of mitzvot according to halacha."

The Knesset Law Committee on Sunday approved the bill on first reading, sending it to the full Knesset plenum, where it would require three readings and approval before becoming law.

On Sunday, The Jewish Federations of North America's President and CEO Jerry Silverman, Senior Vice President Rebecca Caspi, and JAFI Chair Natan Sharansky, along with representatives of the liberal religious streams, began a major advocacy campaign to prevent the measure from advancing. JFNA is also urging Federations to appeal to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the issue (see below).

This advocacy involves daily strategy meetings, attending the Knesset committee session, meeting with Knesset members including Rotem and speaking out publicly through Israeli and international media.

In addition, Silverman and JFNA Chair Kathy Manning, along with the JFNA Coordinating Council of professional and lay leaders, have sent Prime Minister Netanyahu two strongly worded letters urging him and members of his Likud Party to speak out publicly against the proposal.

Until now the prime minister has not done so, though he did reportedly tell The Jerusalem Post he thought the bill would not pass.

On Tuesday, Silverman, Caspi and the 125 members of the JFNA Campaign Chairs & Directors Mission now visiting Israel also met with Israel's President, Shimon Peres, about this important issue. Peres called for greater dialogue on the proposed bill so that discussions embrace both Diaspora and Israeli Jews (click here for JFNA's briefing with his remarks).

JFNA is also leading an e-mail effort among Federations and their partners urging Prime Minister Netanyahu to oppose the bill. To read more background on the conversion bill and to send Netanyahu a prepared letter (or edit the letter before sending), click here.

JFNA will continue to keep Federations informed about the conversion proposal as developments occur.

The letter JFNA suggested that should be sent to PM Binyamin Netanyahu follows:

To: Prime Minister Netanyahu
Re: Conversion Bill

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

I am writing to you regarding the controversial conversion bill currently before the Knesset.

The language used in this bill is highly problematic. This bill raises issues about the chief rabbinate having full authority over conversions and includes new language about the stringent commitment to halacha. Finally, it changes the 62-year agreement over the Law of Return, which could in turn drive a deep wedge between the Jewish State and Diaspora Jews. This could significantly affect our ability to connect and inspire varying parts of our community around Clal Yisrael.

I know you are aware of the deep sense of concern this proposal has stirred among Diaspora Jews. If successful, this bill will damage the Diaspora-Israel relationship and create significant long-term impacts. We urge you and members of your Likud party to speak out against this legislation now, before it proceeds further.

I hope you will show your concern for the unity of the Jewish People and work with the Knesset and the leadership of the Jewish Diaspora to amend the bill in a way that is acceptable to Jews across the world.

With respect,

The APRPEH suggested letter:

B"H

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

I am writing to you regarding the courageous effort underway in Knesset to maintain a universal standard in Jewish conversion. The bill before the Knesset is being viewed by many non-Orthodox in the United States as divisive and controversial. Some say it has the potential for alienating American Jews who have not yet realized that Halacha already prescribes only one way for someone to join the Jewish people. I appeal to you as a fellow Jew to be strong and to support the conversion bill in its current form. To not maintain the Halachic standard of conversion would be to undermine the consistency and simplicity of the only standard for conversion accepted universally by all Jews for most of our modern and ancient history. The variations that exist today in the United States for conversion, if forced upon Israel would cause severe damage to the state and to the Jewish people. These variations have contributed to a negative Jewish population shift in North America, a resistance to Jewish culture and a distancing of many Jews from the interests of Medinat Yisrael. These phenomenon have occurred in correlation with the non-Orthodox structure being the dominant Jewish force in the United States. Interestingly, those arguing against the Conversion bill are saying that its passage into law would result in those very same phenomenon. This is the best evidence as to why passage of the Conversion bill is necessary. These backwards trends must be reversed. They will only be reversed when the standards of who is a Jew are strengthened, not weakened. We Jews are rational, yet spiritual. Rationality born by convenience and access to non-Jewish culture conceived in non-Jewish religions has been winning the day in North America for far too long. As the Jewish spiritual homeland, Israel must lead the way to spiritual revival of Jewry world-wide. That effort will be enhanced, not weakened by reinforcing in law the Halachic standard for conversion. World-wide, Jews look to Israel for spiritual leadership. Failing to provide it will sanction their looking elsewhere. This is the true struggle beneath the surface of this discussion. The halachic standard for conversion is an eye-opening moment for Jews world-wide, especially for many of those in North America who have grown accustomed to creating their own standards and rules - kashering them within the structure of "movements". Israel will only garner increased respect and support, not less for telling the truth and doing what is right by the vision of our sages and prophets and in the eyes of Heaven.

With wishes of comfort in this season of national mourning,

Blockade Running for Hamas

2010-06-02T08:04:00.001-07:00

The Israeli Navy interception of the flotilla of islamo and islamo sympathizing blockade runners resulted in casualties to both Jews and terrorists. It didn't have to be that way. In the eyes of the world media, governments around the world, the UN and almost everywhere except for in Israel and in pockets of conservative commentators, Israel is being vilified. For the record, there are wronged parties and aggressors in this story. As to be expected in this period in birth pangs of moshiach, far too many people continue to confuse the aggressor with the party being aggressed against.

Additionally it must be noted that blockade running is an inherently dangerous occupation, tantamount to reverse piracy, even when the runners are carrying politicians and media representatives. The logic and facts supports Israel's claims that this was a pre-meditated provocation on behalf of the cause of the 'Free Gaza' movement. inciting, preparing to engage Israel

'Activists threw stun grenades'

What is it about Gaza which so moves anti-Jews? Gaza is the armed gang headquarters of Hamas. Hamas is an elected by the arabians terrorist organization from its inception. Hamas fires rockets and mortars into Israel from Gaza, has been responsible for numerous terrorist actions and seeks "liberation" of the lands arabians wish to steal from Jews. {pardon the simplicity of this writing but it has to be said}. Hamas is solely responsible for Operation Cast Lead in 2008 and solely responsible for the current blockade of all but humanitarian aid being delivered through official channels. In short, the "misery", if there is any in Gaza is solely the fault and responsibility of the Gazans who elected Hamas and Hamas itself.
Fancy restaurants and Olympic-size pools: What the media won’t report about Gaza

"Blockaded" Gaza is Awash in Goods

Behind the Headlines: The seizure of the Gaza flotilla

The Mavi Marmara ship on which the assault, described by those watching as an attempted lynching of the Israeli Navy commandos, was staffed and sponsored by the IHH, "affiliated with Hamas and the Union of the Good, an Islamic umbrella affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood."

French, Danish Intelligence Say The IHH Backs Terror [05.31.2010] This was no ship of peace activists.

All of this detail supports the idea that the delivery of relief aid was never the purpose of this blockade run. Essentially the goal was to render the blockade obsolete opening the door to out right weapons delivery to the Jew killers of Gaza to support their stated goal to destroy Israel. Israel had no choice but stop these ships. The best evidence of the intent of the mission is that the request to sail to Ashdod, to unload the goods and permit Israel to deliver them along with the usual convoy of aid trucks was declined. To this end, those accusing Israel of piracy and defending the blockade runners are accomplices of Hamas's mission to kill al Yahud and remove Israel from Dar al-Islam.

The Myth of the Gaza Blockade

Behind the Headlines: The Israeli humanitarian lifeline to Gaza

'Equipment not in shortage in Gaza'

Link to pictures of weapons on the Mavi Marmara

Notice the comments on this Flickr page. The supplies on this ship have been laid out and organized for the photographs. The arabian and islamo-fascists commenting on this page are ridiculing that knives, bats, and slingshots are weapons compared to firearms. But how was the scene described? A lynching? These are the implements of arabian style lynching, the kind in which arabians thrive - spilling blood by hand in public shows of machismo. Remember Ramallah? Blood spilling is a common custom in arabic and islamo culture.

Photos of Bullet Proof Vests, Sawn-Off Rods, Night Vision Goggles and Rifle Scope Found on Mavi Marmara, 2 June 2010

An interesting wrinkle in this story is the revealed linkage between Barack Obama's friends and the Free Gaza movement. This was mentioned today on both the G. Gordon Liddy show and on Glenn Beck (not sure of others).

GGLiddy interview, Aaron Klein
AUDIO: Aaron Klein discusses Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Jodie Evans, and Code Pink associations with the flotilla organizers. One can only hope this effort to blacken Israel's eye was not perpetrated with covert consent. How is it these people keep popping up? Klein who covers the Middle East for World Net Daily comments on this interview that based upon his knowledge and contacts with Hamas, an operation of this nature is too creative and organized to have been home grown in Gaza throwing a little speculative fuel on the fire. also on Glenn Beck

In the United States where support for Israel's right of self-defense, (facing the same islamo-fascist terrorism that America is fighting) is still high everywhere but in the White House and at Foggy Bottom, INN reports this story "Lone Jewish High School Student Faces Down Arab Mob in LA". I doubt you will see too many of these pro terrorist rallies outside of California and Dearborn, MI, home of Ms. Shaheda USA, Rima Fakih.

additional sources below:

IDF: Global Jihad on flotilla

PA and Hamas Boats Also Planning to 'Greet' Anti-Israel Flotilla

Foreign Ministry: Flotilla Organizers Promote Agenda, Not Aid

The Left's De-Construction

2010-05-27T05:53:00.000-07:00

The coalition of the establishment left and far left is fracturing. Watch James Carville and Matthew Dowd with George Stephanopoulos on GMA below from 26 May. Carville lays into Sheikh Barak Obama on both the BP oil spill and the Arizona immigration law. In both cases, Carville claims Obama is failing to act and thereby failing to garner any political advantage. To Carville, it's all about politics. To Obama, it's all about arrogance. In any event, Carville's sharp reactions to Obama not responding to either issue with clarity and an eye to politics are entertaining. What could be read into this interview is that an establishment democrat is saying that you,(Obama) just aren't up to the job. You mean, inexperienced? unprepared? indecisive? arrogant? demagogic? If only Carville would have added that Obama treats America's enemies like friends, and her friends like enemies... Is it a sign of things to come?

A Boy and the Power of Tefillin

2010-01-21T20:38:00.000-08:00

By this time, the entire world has been exposed to the story of the poor 17 year old bachur who's act of davening Shachris, the morning prayer service of the Jewish people, resulted in the diverting of a small commuter aircraft from its route. On the surface, it is an "oy vey" moment. How could the aircrew be so uninformed? How, after questioning the passenger and observing his behavior could they still "error on the side of caution"? Never mind that tefillin are described in the Torah and have been worn since the time of Moshe. On the one hand, the most knee jerk reaction is to deem the flight crew ignorant and ill-trained. Surely, they must have heard of tefillin? Certainly, in training, they are taught about unusual religious practices they could see during a flight?

These doubting questions are natural, which is a good indicator that a sensitive Jew should not judge these goyim so harshly. Instead, think of the wonderful opportunity afforded to share with the world the practice of wearing tefillin. Every major news service, print, audio, television and Internet have discussed tefillin today. Amazing!!!! Gentiles world over have learned that Jewish men wear tefillin in the morning. And this is true even as we read in this week's parasha, Bo the first command to wear tefillin (Ex 13:9 - And it will be for you a sign on your hand and for a remembrance between your eyes...)

It is an unnatural thing to do, to see the positive in the strange. But indeed this situation can be a turned into light, a kiddush HaShem, for such is the way of a Jew. The message that HaShem runs the world can be taught even at the cost of flight delay. Even in a cramped commuter plane, a Jew can still be a Jew - tefillin and all. Now, all those who are lax in their observance of tefillin have no excuse. If only their non-Jewish colleagues, friends, co-workers and acquaintances would ask every day, "did you wear tefillin this morning?"

Having experienced putting on tefillin during a flight (albeit pre-9/11), I think the following advice might be useful to Jewish men who will be flying during morning davening time. First, tell a member of the flight crew before you start to daven what you are about to do, that you will be wearing particular religious garments and most importantly, that what you are about to engage in is a daily routine, not just today, on this aircraft. If possible, take some literature with you that will support your position. Be humble, not pushy - poised, not erratic. Explain to the other passengers seated next to you and explain to them what is happening in the event they are questioned. "During part of my prayer service I am unable to speak unless it is an emergency. If someone asks me what I am doing, please relate to them what I related to you". Incorporating is a very powerful tool.

The potential impact of the story will be determined by the decision making process which some Jews, who may not yet be so secure in their yiddishkeit will go through when deciding to publically wear tefillin or not. A Jew might think, do I really want to put on tefillin with all these other people around? Non-Jews might laugh or stare or G-d forbid think me crazy. Maybe that Jew believes it to be dangerous?

These are fears which are caused by a galus inspired weakness. Maybe that same Jew could or should think instead, "these people looking at me are astounded that my faith is so strong; that I am oblivious to my surroundings". The fear is shifted to its proper place. It is the goy or not yet strong Jew who then thinks, "I could never do that". The answer to that theorized inquiry is, "I am a servant of HaShem and he commanded me to put on tefillin". Such faith is not scorned or ridiculed but admired, maybe quietly, maybe enviously, but admired.

This bachur and his tefillin were very powerful, enough to divert a flight in progress. That's some davening!!! What power a single Jew possesses! The non-Jewish world should see Jews davening in tefillin more often. Tefillin is a sign, a segula, a branding of the wearer as in service to G-d. The Jew wearing the uniform of HaShem's service, testifying to all who see him that HaShem is the boss, not just the captain, but the air traffic controller as well.

Below, Rabbi Posner writes about the various meanings of a "sign".

Bindings - Rabbi Zalman Posner, Chabad.org - an excerpt from Think Jewish

A nice tefillin story:

Tefillin on the Train

J-Street Mythology and Deception

2010-01-17T17:07:00.001-08:00

On Saturday, 16 January, the "Tennessean" ran "Group backs 2-state solution", a story sub-titled "Jews in J-Street want to put political pressure on Israel". The report on the visit by Hadar Susskind, directory of policy and strategy for J-Street, focuses on the idea that J-Street offers American Jews an alternative to the mainstream Israel advocacy organization AIPAC. J-Street, however is a contradiction not just of logic but of religious values. Logically, since J-Street advocates the mythical "two-state solution" where Israel being one of the two with the other being not a country, not a country in waiting, not even a nationality but a gang masquerading as a government in waiting, J-street clearly is not a pro-Israel advocacy group.

J-street, as with many of the leftist organizations which wish to create a "Palestinian" state composed of arabs living in the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, are driven not by a grand desire to make peace so much as motivated by a leftist, theological view that all 3rd world revolutionary movements which challenge the establishment possess inherent virtue. It doesn't matter what tactics or beliefs the 3rd world movement uses because the virtuous goals of the revolution permit excesses. So thus, we find that Israel's system of checkpoints and the construction of the partition wall in Judea and Samaria, proven effective anti-terror tactics are considered evil and repressive, while the excesses of the Palestinian revolutionary movement, primarily the wink and nod to terrorism (provided it is the PA gang and not the Hamas gang perpetrating the attacks), and arabic press messages espousing the pose of the old-fashioned PLO propaganda (conveniently not translated into English) are excusable.

Since J-street advocates policies which, if enacted would endanger the lives of millions of Jews in Israel, their positions are in direct contradiction to Torah values. One need not be a biblical scholar to know that siding with those who seek to harm their fellow Jews are not held guiltless or blameless. The actions of those Jews who support the enemies of the Jewish people will delay the final redemption and will result in their own extinction. This is not my opinion but supported theologically and historically. It is a most perplexing and bitter moment in time, the result of a long and seemingly unending exile, which finds Jewish advocates for "peace" hosting common ground with terrorists and enemies of "peace". A better day will come when honesty of thought will permit clearer vision. Palestine, does not and has never existed. There is no legal requirement for Israel to withdraw from any additional territory. An honest reading of UN Res 242, instead of the arabian propaganda version will lead a reader to understand that Israel's secure borders were the primary goal. Palestinians? The name "Palestinian" is not found in the text of the agreement, meaning the "Palestinian" national myth had not yet been created. Instead, "refugees" are discussed. Refugees from where? Not Israel, but disputed territory, administered by Jordan between 1948 and 1967 and unowned. In any event, Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai in 1982 exceeds any obligation of withdrawal from " from territories occupied in the recent conflict " as stated in Res 242.

All of this returns us to our discussion of J-street and its Jewish proponents. After reviewing the historical and religious views of Israel's security, one will then understand it is not Israel's security which drives J-street proponents but another belief. A belief that "peace" does not come through historical right or even strength, but through weaknesses, pacifism and "Chamberlainian" appeasement. Ultimately, such beliefs bring war, bloodshed and eternal conflict.

J-street background

Res 242 background

The New Iraq is the Old Iraq

2010-01-06T21:31:00.000-08:00

Back in the day, when the Iraq post-war outcome was in question, one of the favorite claims made by my politically conservative brethren, (those who were the most invested in success of the post-war) was that a Iraqi democracy would bring a change to the political structure of the Middle East. A successful Iraqi democracy would put pressure on the other arabian countries to leave behind primitive beliefs and modernize - voila - end of conflicts in the Middle East. Never mind that somewhat real elections have been held for years in arabian countries, this rising tide lifts all boats argument was strongly advanced by President Bush as a way to end terrorism and conflict. This argument seemed reasonable, after all we went to war against Saddam basically because he was a squeaky cog in the islamo-fascist terrorist infrastructure.

Other great hopes of modernization included the now distant expectation that a democratic Iraq would normalize relations with Israel. It is well beyond any shadow of a doubt that this was all fantasy. Iraq is not becoming the great arabian democracy any more than it is becoming a friend of Israel. While the voices pontificating the fall of Iraq after US troops withdraw may be premature, what will certainly not change is the fact that Yishmael is still Yishmael.

Take for example two recent stories. Both represent a different focus, or pose of the "new" Iraq. One example is representative of the fact that Iraq is still a very islamic land. In the INN story below, we find that the Tomb of Yechezkel is slated to become a mosque. Democratic Iraq seems to have no tolerance of religious expression or history. Islam has no need to turn a Jewish shrine into a muslim one if it is recognized as a place of holiness already with the exception of wanting to erase all vestiges of the once large and proud Iraqi Jewry. How irrational this is? One day, the Iraqi government mouth piece may even deny Jews ever lived in Iraq.

The second story from Jpost is also outrageous. US ally PM al-Maliki has approved a plan to ask the UN to demand Israel pay for damages (financially) caused by the 1981 bombing of the Osirak nuclear reactor under construction at that time for Saddam Hussein (YmShm) by French nuclear engineers. At the time of the first Gulf War, then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney pointed out that the bombing by Israel made the US attack much simpler. Conceivably, a Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons would have changed the balance of power in the region and possibly the world in very bad ways. (this is the best lesson in thinking about Iran with nuclear weapons). At the time of the bombing though, Israel was treated as a villain. The UN resolution al-Maliki is basing his claim on Security Council Resolution 487 according to the story below gives Iraq the opportunity to demand compensation. Of course, al-Maliki would not have been PM nor been involved in the government of Iraq had Saddam lived and had still been running the show there. What a strange way to say thanks for helping to bring democracy to Iraq. But this brings us back to the theme of the story - Irrational arabians doing irrational things. This is the new Iraq. This is the new and improved Iraq. This is the Iraq which carries the hope of arabian social revolution and modernization with it. This is the new Iraq which, if it holds together, could become a democratic and powerful force opposing Israel in the future.

Iraq De-Judaizing Ezekiel's Tomb - by Hillel Fendel

(IsraelNN.com) Early reports that Iraq plans to retain the Jewish nature of the Tomb of the Prophet Ezekiel are apparently false. Sources in Baghdad say that the government plans to turn it into a mosque and erase all Jewish markings.

Iraq announced earlier this year that it would revamp the ancient burial site, which is located in Al-Kifl, a small town south of Baghdad. The U.S.-backed government announcement implied that its Jewish nature would continue to be emphasized.

Since then, however, reports have surfaced that the government is actually planning to build a mosque there, including removing the ancient Hebrew inscriptions that adorn the site. Some reports say that all or some of the lines of Hebrew script have already been erased.

Ezekiel (Yechezkel, in Hebrew), lived in the sixth century BCE, having accompanied the exiled Judeans to Babylon. His prophecies include the Vision of the Dry Bones, as well as the future return of Jewish People to the Land of Israel even if they are not deserving (Chapter 36: 22-25). Thousands of Jews often visited the site of his tomb annually before Iraqi Jewry came to an abrupt end in the middle of the 20th century, and Moslems and Christians continue to visit it even today.

Shelomo Alfassa, Director of Justice for Jews from Arab Countries, reports that Islamic political parties have pressured the government to remove the Jewish inscriptions. He quotes the Iraqi news agency Ur News as reporting that the writing and ornamentations “are being (or have been) removed… under the pretext of restoring the site.”

Alfassa quotes sources to the effect that Iraq’s Antiquities and Heritage Authority “has been pressured by Islamists to historically cleanse all evidence of a Jewish connection to Iraq - a land where Jews had lived for over a thousand years before the advent of Islam.”

Professor Investigates
Four months ago, a German-based Iraqi journalist tipped off the Association of Jewish Academics from Iraq in Israel (AJAII) that plans were afoot to build a mosque on the site of Ezekiel’s Tomb. AJAII asked Dr. Jabbar Jamal al-Din, a lecturer in Jewish Thought at Kufa University in Iraq, to investigate these reports – and he said that he believes them to be untrue.

Baghdad Sources: Room for Concern
Sources in Baghdad, however, feel otherwise. Prof. Shmuel Moreh - Israel Prize Laureate in Arabic Literature and Professor Emeritus at Hebrew University of Jerusalem - told Israel National News that he had received worrisome phone calls from non-Jewish friends in Baghdad. Prof. Moreh, who serves as the Chairman of the Association of Jewish Academics from Iraq, said that the plans are to turn the holy site into a mosque, and “some told me that they are taking off the Hebrew inscriptions.”

Alfassa provides the following translation of the relevant report in Ur News: “The officials of the Department of Antiquities and Heritage say that their restoration programme will continue until 2011 and is designed to carry out essential maintenance and prevent the dome and roof from collapsing. But their hidden purpose, sources say, is the removal of features that emphasize a historical connection with the Jews who built the shrine and lived in the city for hundreds of years after the Babylonian exile.”

Though well over 100,000 Jews lived in Iraq a few decades ago, this number has now been decimated to no more than eight, Prof. Moreh said. “There are others,” he added, “but they barely know that they are Jews; in many cases, their parents did not tell them.”

Alfassa concludes: “Iraq - the Biblical Mesopotamia -is almost as rich in Jewish history as the Land of Israel. The tomb of the prophet Ezekiel dates back to the Babylonian exile in the sixth century BCE. It was there in Iraq that Abraham discovered monotheism, and it is where the prophets Ezra, Nehemiah, Nahum, Jonah and Daniel are all buried.”

'Israel must compensate Iraq for Osirak'- Jan. 5, 2010 JPost.com Staff - THE JERUSALEM POST

Iraq will demand that Israel pay compensation for bombing the unfinished nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981, an Iraqi member of parliament told the Iraqi al-Sabah newspaper in an article published on Tuesday.

Muhammad Naji Muhammad claimed that his government was planning to enlist the United Nation's help to pressure Israel into compensating Baghdad, according to a DPA report cited by Channel 10.

"Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the Foreign Ministry turned to the UN and the Security Council demanding that Israel pay us reparations for damage caused to the reactor in 1981," Muhammad was quoted as telling the newspaper.

Baghdad is demanding that the UN establish a committee to assess the scope of the damage caused by the Israeli strike in order to calculate the appropriate compensation.

The Iraqi demand is based on UN Security Council Resolution 487, which was drafted following the bombing of the reactor in June 1981. The resolution harshly condemned Israel's aerial attack and determined that Iraq had a right to demand compensation over the damages.

Pharoah, Taxation, and Population Control

2010-01-05T20:58:00.000-08:00

(Ex 1:8-11)

A new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. He said to his people, "Behold! the people, the Children of Israel are more numerous and stronger than we. Come, let us act wisely to it lest it become numerous and it may be that if war will occur, it, too may join our enemies, and wage war against us and go up from the land." So they appointed tax collectors over it in order to afflict it with their burdens; it built storage cities for Pharoah, Pithom and Raamses. (translation from Artscroll, The Saperstein Edition Rashi.)

When Pharoah, king of Egypt wished to oppress Bnei Yisroel, he first chose heavy taxation as a method. It is clear from the text that the priority of Pharoah was not a national building campaign, but to reign in what was perceived as a foreign population for which Egypt felt both compelled to control but afraid to allow to leave. The Egyptian reasoning is bizarre. Logically, if Bnei Yisroel were a threat to the land, they should have been thrown out. If they were essential to the country, Pharoah should have engaged in efforts to incorporate the people. Whatever the Egyptians thought about Israel, what was not in the calculation was the conclusion that Bnei Yisroel was loyal to Egypt. To Pharoah, Israel was a necessary evil. So, how did Pharoah choose to handle the necessary evil? Tax them. Increase the burden on them. Show them who is boss. How do you control populations in order to repress them and enslave them? Taxation. How do put people in their place? Taxation.

Manipulating populations through social and economic means is not a phenomenon of the 20th century. The dictators and villains of history can count Pharoah of Egypt as one of their role models.

20 Teves/6 January - I realized later that I forgot to cite the source for the Torah graphics. This came from ORT - Navigating the Bible.

The Conservative Movement Searches For Its Soul

2010-01-01T09:21:00.000-08:00

Conservatives to tackle intermarriage,'homo-lesbian' ordinations. Dec. 28, 2009
Matthew Wagner, THE JERUSALEM POST

Burning issues threatening to split the Conservative Movement, such as the ordination of homosexual and lesbian rabbis, the sharp drop in the number of young members and the challenge of intermarriage will be raised this week during a two-day conference in Jerusalem's Van Leer Institute entitled "Conservative Judaism: Halacha, Culture and Sociology."

"This will be the first time that an institution not associated with the Conservative Movement will devote a scholarly conference to Conservative Judaism," said Professor Naftali Rothenberg, Jewish Culture and Identity Chair at Van Leer. "And this is happening on the backdrop of a major crisis that the Conservative Movement is undergoing, in which members of the religious Right and Left in the movement are headed in opposite directions."

To be truthful, there has not been a real "Conservativist movement" in many years. What exists now is another version of "Reformism" albeit with different managers and owners. Conservativism ceased to exist after the driving on shabbos decision. Going forward, the impetus to figure out new ways to break away from halachic Judaism disguising rulings as formulated from halacha has set a tone which is leading to an inevitable split up of "Conservatism" in favor of Reformist and Traditionalist "movements".

Having learned that all Jews in their heart's really want to follow Torah and do mitzvos in a proper way but are knocked off course do to outside influences, one must look at "conservativism" and "reformism" for that matter, with pity. These holy Jews, congregants of Conservativists synagogues (those who actually are halachically Jewish that is) have been convinced by the credibility of multi-generational participation and the goodwill presumed by the religious experience that the evolution of their religious experience is supported by Torah. A slow, but certain evolution it is. There was never a drive to do away with halacha (like in Reformism), but to make halacha bend to the will of simple people who merely wanted their religious experience to be consistent with their secular experience or that of their children.

There is plenty of room for understanding Torah in a modern context. Torah must make sense at all times and in every place. There is no room, however to re-define Torah to permit the forbidden and kasher the treif. Conservativism sought to do this and fell into a trap of its own making. And thereby set its own course to obsolescence.

For each generation to make its own mark and find its own way there must be a structure upon which to build. Generationally speaking, there is no “Conservative” movement to build upon. It has come to its logical conclusion.

The conference in Jerusalem has scheduled as one of its topics the decline in young membership, a problem not faced by Orthodoxy. The reason is that there is no room to continue moving Conservativism towards Reformism without fully becoming Reformism and it cannot go backwards. Those youth who want to be fully connected to the Jewish world find their way to Orthodoxy, possibly in college, through Chabad or other outreach programs. Those who do not find it necessary yet to connect to the Jewish world may, on occasion check in at a Reformist Temple or blend into the woodwork, vulnerable to the delights of Edom and “marriage” to non-Jews or worse. Thus, one can see the reason why Conservativism at the grassroots is so interested in kashering the relationship between Jews and non-Jews and male to male and female to female. These reflections of the world of Edom, now fully part of life in Reformism, will soon be the norm in Conservativism. What is Conservativism other than a Reformism with different owners?

But sigh, more perversion awaits in the world of Edom. For today, marriage to non-Jews and homosexual professional staff is the trend. What comes next? When does Torah-true Judaism stand up and say enough. Be our brothers or be something else – but please stop the attempt to drag the holy Torah and halachic credibility into your world, the reflection of Edom.

On Bringing Redemption

2009-12-31T18:34:00.000-08:00

Rabbis: Abortion will delay the redemption - Jpost, Dec. 29, 2009, Matthew Wagner

Rabbi Metzger and Rabbi Amar (JewishPress)

Declaring that abortions "delay the redemption," Israel's chief rabbis have pledged to "strengthen" the work of an anti-abortion council in the rabbinate and urged state-employed rabbis to take other steps to reduce abortions.

In a letter sent out on Monday, Chief Rabbis Shlomo Amar and Yona Metzger encourage local rabbis to devote their Shabbat sermons to speaking against abortions, distribute anti-abortion literature to couples registering for marriage at religious councils, and work in coordination with the pro-life organization Efrat to encourage grassroots opposition to abortions.

It is indeed gratifying to find those all too few occasions where Jewish leadership draws a clearly demarcated line of separation where virtue of Torah supersedes political expediency. Cast within the announcement by the Chief Rabbinate that aborting the unborn will “delay the redemption” Chief Rabbis Amar and Metzger have revealed yet another disconnect between the Jewish liberalism espoused by mainstream non-Orthodox organizations at the will of their constituent’s and Torah values. It is cliché to point out that the desires and values reflected in the non-Jewish world of Edom are given favor by our non-Orthodox brothers and sisters at the expense of a Jewish world view.

The Rabbinate’s ruling is focused upon the misogynistic procedure known as abortion, {short for the aborting of a pregnancy, IE withdrawing through barbaric means, “potential” life called a fetus, from the womb of a female, (in the Jewish sense we must hold by halachic interpretation not conventional wisdom) and preventing it from attaining a full gestation at which time the fetus would leave the womb of the female carrying her, and attain rights under both halacha and US law as a live human.}

The act of destroying potential life is antithetical to Torah values. While our non-Orthodox brethren emphasize and focus upon the Torah’s imposition of financial remuneration for the miscarriage caused unintentionally by another Jew as the pivotal point in understanding what is perceived to be permission to destroy a fetus, those same Jews fail to continue the logic which follows when learning the din of the intentional act of causing an abortion, (see pg 2 Daf Digest) which reviews the Gemara in question and the response of R. Moshe Feinstein, (ZTL) to the idea that a Jew intentionally causing an abortion is viewed as a murderer.)

Having determined that the performance of an abortion by a Jew is murder, one must look with curiosity at the non-Orthodox heterim for abortion. All opinions that I could find in my review express a value statement upholding the sanctity of life within all of the opinions. However, strangely, this expression of sanctity gives way to what appears to be an equal or greater “right” of giving a woman “the choice” of withdrawing the potential life, IE the fetus from her womb with varying degrees of permissibility. The woman's right is usually based on an undefined “psychological” condition.

This wording of choice has always baffled me. What choice? The natural order of pregnancy is concluded by the female giving birth. This is how Hashem determined procreation should occur and gave a positive mitzvah to the Jewish male to have offspring. Mitzvah of procreation.

Tragically, miscarriages occur. Both the conception, pregnancy, delivery and even miscarriage when it occurs (it should be His will that they never occur) are acts of G-d. How does someone choose a different path? How can destruction of the fetus be considered a choice when it is the Aibishter that made the pregnancy possible?
We learn that jealousy is a great sin, less because the negativity it portrays but the fact that jealousy represents a denial of the existence of G-d's will. Who determines what should happen and how? Who is the rich man? (hint: look for the answer in Pirke Avos). The same goes with pregnancy. It is Hashem's will that pregnancy exists and his will who will become pregnant and who will not. We merely need to look no further than the early chapters of Sefer Bereshis and learn this from the matriarchs. So choice, does not represent what the modern American feminist says, a woman's control over her body but a denial of the G-d's order in the world. Only intentional disinformation bred of Edomite culture can interpret a blessing as a curse. Our poor brothers and sisters in the non-Orthodox world have adopted this twisted non-Jewish inspired kefira.

Now, there is a danger here of going too far. We must recognize that there are clear halachic grounds where destruction of the fetus is not only permissible but required most notably when the continuation of the pregnancy would be the direct cause of death to the mother – a rare occasion these days. In all of these situations, a competent halachic expert must be consulted. One Orthodox Rabbi once told me in fact that since the Pro-life movement could restrict halachic abortion as well as impermissible abortion that he was leery of the movement. However, given a choice between the two movements, one would have to conclude that Torah has more in common with the Pro-life movement than the alternative. If Jews were put in this world to bring the light of Torah to this dark place than we must emphasize the position which most reflects the Torah's perspective. Indeed, not only must we bring the light here but we must turn the darkness into light. One step in that process is for pulpit Rabbis to speak passionately on the theme suggested by the Chief Rabbinate and not shy away for political reasons from the truth. For bringing light into the darkness must start in the Jewish congregations.

Supporting articles

USCJ
Jewish Virtual Library Article on Reform Practices
Hadassah
Women's League of Conservative Judaism
Ask Moses Article on Abortion
JLaw Article on stem cell research which discusses life issues

Abbas's Newest Jew Murdering Martyrs

2009-12-31T10:29:00.000-08:00

PA, Abbas Bless Rabbi’s Murderers as ‘Martyrs’

Abu Mazen gives thinking people another reason to pause and contemplate what futility it would be to engage in final status negotiations with the arabians known as "palestinians". Abu Mazen is no different than Arafat,YmSh except for the expensive suits he wears. The formula of duality-politics, giving red meat to arabians in their native language and for the English speaking, non-arabic speaking audiences - peace drivel has not changed an iota in decades. We have come to expect such arabian non-sense. Things that become a 'matter of course' also fall victim to the adage 'familiarity breeds contempt'. Except as it applies to Israel. It is Israel and the Jews to whom the contempt is focused and not the arabian antagonists.

It is most discouraging that in this day and age that the antiJews around the globe choose to encourage arabian foreign policy by deceptive behavior. Jews, on the other hand have no halachic or moral reason to give fatah or the PA any benefit of the doubt. To the extent that Bibi believes that it is a time to negotiate, one can only hope that he intends this call to be a ploy - giving the arabians another noose to hang themselves. With hamas re-gaining nerve and weapons, a new show down between fatah and hamas cannot be too far away.

Perhaps Bibi would be strengthened by reading the opinion piece which ran in the WSJ earlier this week Israel's Right in the 'Disputed' Territories written by Danny Ayalon, Deputy FM.

Rabbi Meir Avshalom Chai (H'Y'D), the father of 7 - murdered in a car for the "crime" of being a Jew by arabians on the payroll of fatah, was remembered by his 17 year old son, Eliyahu with these words, “The difference between us and them is that we are human beings. We won’t shoot them in the head for no reason. We are Jews, holy people, human beings.” Matzav.com story. This is as good a summary as any of the truth for why the world hates the Jews.

Palestinian Myth on Video

2009-11-27T08:14:00.001-08:00

Appearing earlier this past summer, the video below of Azmi Bishara is being re-cycled by Israel National News in an attempt to publicize the fallacy and deception of the palestinian myth. The myth remains in the concealed cranial crevices of arabian leadership except during those moments of candor when the truth slips out exposed by ego trips in front of cameras and microphones.

Azmi Bishara: There is No "Palestinian" Nation. Never Was! - INN

Translation: “Well, I dont think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so and I did not change my mind. I do not think there is a Palestinian nation, I think its a colonialist invention - Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from? I think there is an Arab nation. I never turned to be a Palestinian nationalist, despite of my decisive struggle against the occupation. I think that until the end of the 19th century, Palestine was the south of Greater Syria.”

WeJew link

some backgrounders:
The No-State Solution

Palestinian problem: anti-Jewish racism

Rep. Ellison's "CAIR"ing for Congress

2009-10-30T06:48:00.000-07:00

David Horowitz's excellent news blog, NewsReal blog posted an article today, Congressional Group Comes to CAIR’s Defense which sheds light into the dishonesty and purpose of Congressional leftists to sell out America through subterfuge.

The short version is that some Republican Congressmen are concerned that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), with its history of supporting an agenda to Islamify America along with its agenda to support terrorists in their war against the west and Israel, (see more here) is advancing its cause in Congress through the auspices of Congressional interns and want an investigation into their activities. Well as the old saying goes, if you ain't done it you have nothing to worry about. In fact, if the parties under investigation are innocent, inviting a review of their activities would bring them additional credibility would it not?

Now for the subterfuge; Congressman Keith Ellison, (D,MN) America's Congressional voice for Islam is all in a huff over the idea along with allies from the Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus, and Asian Caucus. In a fashion typical of Islam, which takes the truths of Torah and flips them on their head adding a uniquely Arabian twist to them (such as replacing Avraham and Yitzchak in the akeida narrative going to Har haMoriah, it is Ishmael going with Ibrahim to be bound and for which the Muslim holiday of Eid ul-Adha commemorates. The Torah of course, appeared well over one thousand years before the Koran, so go figure) Ellison uses an argument form which utilizes what is to be interpreted as value statements and positions them in support of his deceptive effort to defend what is indefensible. In contrast to Ellison's position, the logic pointed out above is a balanced approach to determine if the interests of CAIR's alleged and verified illegal activities are being represented in Congress.

Here is an example of Ellison's end run from the story:

If anything, we should be encouraging all Americans to engage in the U.S. political process; to take part in, and to contribute to, the great democratic experiment that is America.

Of course. Who would argue with this? Who would discourage participation in the political process in America? Now, this quote was the end of the statement. It was proceeded by:

The idea that we should investigate Muslim interns as spies is a blow to the very principle of religious freedom that our founding fathers cherished so dearly.”

Hm - I don't get it. Has someone suggested that Muslim interns are not allowed to practice their Islam? Has someone suggested that Muslims cannot be interns? Is anyone insinuating that all Muslims are spies? Would the Founding Fathers have ignored a threat of spying because the accusation of such would anger the accused or the coreligionists of the accused? Is CAIR so firmly and fully ingrained into Muslim America that suspecting CAIR of illegal activity is off-limits?

The other quotes can be found in the original article. Ellison is clearly mis-leading the listener/reader to defend against even a fair investigative review of certain individuals actions. There is no Constitutional right to be a Congressional intern nor is there a right to represent the interests of organizations which are supporting terrorism and advocating policies which are detrimental to the interests of the United States.

Real Jewish Activism

2009-10-27T10:15:00.000-07:00

The term "Jewish activism" can pass as many things. The nature of English as a language permits a deceptively common string of otherwise disparate entities or events to define the core nature of both entities. Jewish activism is a good case study of this trick. One might assume that Jewish activism must be both Jewish and be activist to warrant this description. As most readers already know, most Jewish activism has little to do with Judaism and is usually only called such merely by virtue of the fact that it is activism of Jews or by Jews but without a Jewish soul.

Two recent articles however define in my opinion what real Jewish activism is. The first found at Shmais.com comes from the United Kingdom where chairman of the Rabbinical Council of United Synagogue(RCUS), Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet is going the distance in the UK court system to defend the halachic definition of "Who is a Jew". The court case involves a child of a non-Jewish mother and Jewish father who sought to enroll their son into a school in London which requires it's students to be Jewish. Where the common "Jewish activist" sentimentalism and raw emotionalism would call for a decision to be made in a non-traditional way, over-ruling halacha for the family's sake (in the mode of the US Federations who adopt non-traditional Jewish break-away definitions to keep the money pie as big as possible), the RCUS and Rabbi Schochet are standing firm. Bravo, kol hakavod. This is real Jewish activism.

The second story comes from Jpost in the form of an editorial by David Weinberg calling out JStreet for what I would refer to it as (although I doubt this is original), the Yevsektsiya of American leftist politics, serving its masters at the DNC and the White House.

JStreet is holding its first ever "hug-in" as Weinberg calls it this week to discuss how to better re-define support for Israel by opposing Israel and to justify this opposition by calling it a Jewish thing to do. Weinberg says:

J Street is a new form of Jewish apostasy. Its adherents hasten to embrace their Jewishness (even if they don't really know much about authentic Jewish tradition and morality) in order to besmirch Israel and the mainstream Jewish community. They earnestly declare how "profoundly" Jewish they are, in order to engender a distancing in US-Israel relations.

Indeed, David Weinberg scores a full body blow in this editorial. And again, this is real Jewish activism, no apologies, no ill-will, just telling the truth, doing the right thing for the right reason, not looking back.

Both Rabbi Schochet and David Weinberg should be an example for American Jewry. We will never overcome the problems that endanger the survival of our community until we are willing to tell the truth about what ails us and speak up to defend our Torah, tradition and our Holy Land. Our common destiny awaits.

PSA - Lulav Ring Tying

2009-10-02T05:27:00.000-07:00

ALSO:
A nice story and photo exhibit to bring you into the Sukkos mood, see A Growing Enterprise on Kingston, Lulav Rings!

PREVIEW:

Chag Sameach

Privacy Vs. Privacy

2009-09-24T08:05:00.000-07:00

Below is an article printed in a recent "InformationWeek.com" reporting on a federal civil case involving a Wyoming bank and Google Inc. The core issue running underneath the case is the definition of a data breach and when it should be disclosed. The plaintiff, (Rocky Mountain Bank) wished to seal the court documents to prevent the publicizing of the breach.

A Rocky Mountain Bank employee inadvertently emailed a list of bank customers along with account information to a Gmail account belonging to an unknown party. The error was discovered the next day and the bank employee attempted to re-mediate the problem by recalling the email and then sending a follow up email informing the unknown recipient to delete the email and file immediately.

Question: Do the account holders of the 1,325 individual and business accounts that were breached in error, have an established right to notification before the bank can determine whether or not any illegality on the part of the recipient has occurred? The bank argued that there is no reason to panic. The court ordered otherwise. (a footnote to the denied order establishes that a breach occurred whether or not the data will be used for fraudulent purposes or with or without a determination on the active or inactive status of the account).

Question: Does Google have a mandate to inform the bank about the status of the email account and possibly additional contact information on file for the email account holder? What if that action could prevent the illegal use of the mistakenly sent data or does the privacy of the email account user force Google to maintain a policy of requiring a court order to take such action which would result in a significant delay by the custodian of the information in possibly seeking the assistance of law enforcement?

The court's denial of the request by the bank to seal the docket was made in deference to established precedent that court documents are public record and should be sealed only when absolutely necessary. Breaches, the court found - do not qualify as absolutely necessary. Google, for its part merely requested its procedures for release of information be followed. Wouldn't Google's pre-mature release upon request of an email holders name, while not qualifying as a "breach" of personally identifying information constitute a breach of trust? Email accounts are provided, as most software, with a fine print user's agreement.

However Google's privacy policy reads as follows:

Information sharing

Google only shares personal information with other companies or individuals outside of Google in the following limited circumstances:

· We have your consent. We require opt-in consent for the sharing of any sensitive personal information.

· We provide such information to our subsidiaries, affiliated companies or other trusted businesses or persons for the purpose of processing personal information on our behalf. We require that these parties agree to process such information based on our instructions and in compliance with this Privacy Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.

· We have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request, (b) enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations thereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, or (d) protect against harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public as required or permitted by law. Google Privacy Policy

It seems from their stated privacy policies that the request for a court order goes above and beyond what they state in their published privacy policy. Nowhere does it say "must" have a court order to release information. Therefore, if fraudulent activity does occur as a result of this breach, it is possible to hold Google, Inc. somewhat liable for delaying action which could have (possibly) prevented or limited the resultant fraud.

The trade-offs in this case are not pleasant. The email account that received that transmission may not have been logged into in many months and could have been a "throw away" email. Which group of people has the greater claim to privacy - the bank account holders or the Google email user?

Lawsuit Tied To Bank Gmail Error Can't Be Secret, Judge Says

A lawsuit seeking to identify a Gmail user who accidentally received confidential bank information must proceed in public.

By Thomas Claburn, InformationWeek
Sept. 21, 2009
URL: article link

A bank's effort to prevent the disclosure of information about a data breach arising from an errant Gmail message has been rejected by a federal judge in San Jose, California.

On Friday, Judge Ronald M. Whyte of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, acting on behalf of another judge, denied a motion by the Wyoming-based Rocky Mountain Bank to seal its lawsuit against Google.

An attempt by a bank to shield information about an unauthorized disclosure of confidential customer information until it can determine whether or not that information has been further disclosed and/or misused does not constitute a compelling reason that overrides the public's common law right of access to court filings, the judge said in his ruling.

The lawsuit seeks to force Google to reveal information about a Gmail account holder who received a misdirected e-mail sent by a bank employee.

The message, intended for a bank customer, included an attachment that should not have been sent containing confidential customer information for 1,325 individual and business accounts, according to the court's summary of the case. The data is question is said to include names, addresses, tax identification numbers, and loan information.

According to the facts summarized in the judge's order -- the actual complaint has not yet been made available in response to the judge's ruling -- the bank employee attempted to e-mail loan statements to one of the bank's customers who had requested them. But the message went to the wrong person, with a confidential file.

After learning of its inadvertent disclosure of confidential customer information, Plaintiff tried to recall the e-mail without success, the court's summary states. It then sent another e-mail to the Gmail address, instructing the recipient to immediately delete the prior e-mail and the attached file in its entirety without opening or reviewing it. Plaintiff also requested that the recipient contact Plaintiff to discuss his or her actions. The recipient has not responded to Plaintiff's e-mail.

Representatives of Rocky Mountain Bank, based in Wilson, Wyoming, did not return repeated calls seeking either confirmation or denial of the bank's involvement in the lawsuit.

Neil Arney, an attorney for the plaintiff with the Denver, Colorado branch of law firm Kutak Rock, declined to provide any information about the case. Separately, a spokesperson for the firm said he had been instructed by attorneys working on the Rocky Mountain Bank case not to respond to media inquiries.

A clerk for the court said that the case was still sealed until the parties responded to the judge's order and declined to provide further information. The judge has allowed the Gmail address of the accidental recipient of the bank's data to be redacted in court documents.

Rocky Mountain Bank filed its lawsuit because it asked Google to provide information about the account holder who received the errant message and Google declined to provide any information without a court order.

Google said that it is waiting for the bank to comply with the judge's order that it resubmit its filing before deciding on a response.

When Google receives legal process, such as court orders and subpoenas, where possible we promptly provide notice to users to allow them to object to those requests for information, a company spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. In this case, RMB must comply with proper court process, and the court has required it to resubmit its papers. Once we have a chance to review these papers, we will determine our response.

The judge's ruling sets Monday, September 21, as the deadline for the plaintiff to resubmit the filing.

CARD Act of 2009 and Credit Fraud Risk

2009-07-21T12:29:00.000-07:00

The Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009 became law in May. The provisions of the law address consumer protections, improved disclosures of credit contracts, gift cards, and of particular interest - regulations concerning the younger consumers and credit issuance.

The new law prevents consumers under the age of 21 from opening a new credit account

unless the consumer has submitted a written application to the card issuer that the meets the requirements of....the signature of a co-signer, including the parent, legal guardian, spouse, or any other individual who has attained the age of 21 having means to repay debts incurred by the consumer in connection with the account, indicating joint liability for debts incurred by the consumer in connection with the account before the consumer has attained the age of 21; or submission by the consumer of financial information, including through an application, indicating an independent means of repaying any obligation arising from the proposed extension of credit in connection with the account.

Also in the act is a provision which requires someone from the same list of parties above to increase an open credit line for an under 21 consumer. Other provisions include protecting young consumers from pre-screened offers of credit and for regulating, tracking, and reporting the activities of credit issuers involvement on campuses which includes prohibiting the offering of tangible gifts as an inducement to open a new credit account. The law also requires "credit card and debt education and counseling sessions" be provided to all new students of any institution.

While in particular the inducement restriction is a welcome regulation, there is reason to be concerned that a piece of this new law may increase identity frauds and scams. It will not take too long for 18 or 19 year olds who will not have co-signers to find co-signers when this law goes into affect, supposedly this upcoming winter.

The possibility for fraud is wide open. Some scam possibilities include offering to co-sign for a credit card in exchange for cash either as a residual or one-time fee without taking actual responsibility for the account. The "co-signer" may also be using stolen personal identifying information. What about the under 21 year old obtaining without authorization or buying an identity in order to create a co-signer? In the same way that 21 year olds and older buy alcohol for other students, it is a fair guess to say that irresponsible "adults" will co-sign for under 21 year olds. Just wait until we see fraternities and sororities offering credit backing as a fringe benefit of pledging or using it as an inducement for some other activity. This is merely the beginning. While this law is well-intended, I do not believe it was well thought out.

Israel's Greatest Adversary

2009-07-16T12:19:00.001-07:00

"Right now, the Obama Administration is the strongest, if you will, and the greatest adversary that Israel has." Jay Shapiro Show - 12 July 09 'The Real US-Israel Relationship' - Israel National Radio

Increasingly, it is becoming apparent that the US President, Barack Hussein Obama no longer has any apprehension in hiding the fact that he is not a friend of Israel.

Monday's meeting with "Top Jewish Organizational Leaders" hand-picked for passivity, (as pointed out in the Leibler article below) further supports the notion that Obama is unashamedly and openly anti-Israel. Obama wants no opposition to his opinion that Yosh is the biggest obstacle to peace and wants support for that position by the lefties who voted for him. The idea that "settlements" are the biggest obstacle to peace also is a surrender to the false notion that Israel was required to withdraw from all of Yosh in any of the previous "negotiations" or treaties.

I am drawn to the words of Moshe Rabbenu in the first of this week's two parashios (Matos) after the leaders of the tribes of Reuven and Gad approach him to request that their inheritance be granted to them on the other side of the Jordan, in the lands of Sichon and Og. Moshe asks these leaders

32:6. [Thereupon,] Moses said to the descendants of Gad and the descendants of Reuben, "Shall your brethren go to war while you stay here? 7. Why do you discourage the children of Israel from crossing over to the land which the Lord has given them?

Moshe then goes on to remind these leaders why they were sentenced to die in and wonder in the wilderness - because the people angered G-d doing evil in His eyes. Then Moshe adds

14. And behold, you have now risen in place of your fathers as a society of sinful people, to add to the wrathful anger of the Lord against Israel. 15. If you turn away from following Him, He will leave you in the desert again, and you will destroy this entire people."

These lefties who nod in self-righteous approval of this administration are letting their brethren go to war for them and discourage the weak and dis-heartened of our people from "crossing over to the land" publically standing up to support their brethern in the land of Israel. Their actions are evil and contrary to the safety of the Jews in the land of Israel and places into jeopardy, all Jews collective inheritance of the land. These leftie Jews have "risen in place of their fathers" - (those who compensate them and pay their salaries and wish for these wayward Jews to nod on their behalf.)

Today's story in Ha'aretz suggests that the Obama team may make a superficial concession to allow construction projects underway in the "territories" to be completed, but nothing else. In return for this "favor", Obama will be calling for a "binding time-table" for completion of negotiations between the democratically elected government of Israel and the terrorists who stole the PA from other terrorists who actually were elected.

Below, Isi Leibler lays out a compeling case as to why Obama is causing significant damage not only to the US-Israel relationship but to Israel's security. By accepting arabian propaganda as truth, Obama has turned the tables on America's role in the world as the bearer of truth. Shameful.

Candidly Speaking: The case against Obama

Jul. 15, 2009
Isi Leibler , THE JERUSALEM POST
Prior to the election, many traditional Jewish supporters of the Democratic Party were apprehensive of Barack Obama's initially negative attitude to Israel and his troubling association with people like PLO ideologue Rashid Khalidi and the anti-Semitic Rev. Jeremiah Wright. However after aggressively repudiating his earlier policies, Obama convinced most Jews that he would never abandon the Jewish state. Alas, recent developments suggest otherwise.

President Obama is adept at warming the cockles of the hearts of his Jewish constituents, many of whom seem as mesmerized by him as their forebears were by Franklin D Roosevelt. He repeatedly articulates his commitment to the welfare of Israel and admiration for American Jewry.

Yet if one probes beneath the veneer of bonhomie and analyzes the substance of his policies, they reflect an unprecedented downturn in relations towards Israel with hints of worse to come. This was reaffirmed by Obama in the course of his recent meeting with Jewish leaders (which included representatives of extremist fringe groups like Peace Now and J Street but excluded those likely to be critical of his approach). In an extraordinary patronizing manner with his Jewish aides beaming at him he told Israelis to "engage in self reflection" and made it clear that he believed he had a better understanding of what is best for them than their democratically elected government. Alas, with the exception of Malcolm Hoenlein and Abe Foxman, it appears that the majority of the others endorsed his position or remained silent. Yet only a few days earlier even a passionate Democrat like Alan Dershowitz had expressed concern "that the coming changes in the Obama administration's policies could weaken the security of the Jewish state".

THIS COLUMN is a response to American Jews devoted to Israel who remain under the charismatic spell of their president and challenged me to demonstrate how his policies are harming Israel.

President Obama's keynote Cairo address included effusive praise for Islam, highlighted Western shortcomings but omitted mention of global jihad and Islamic fundamentalism. It also legitimized the Arab narrative including its malicious and false historical analogies. By alleging that the State of Israel was a by-product of the Holocaust, the president of the United States denied 3,500 years of Jewish history and the central role of Jerusalem in Judaism. He endorsed the Arafat mantra that Israel had been inflicted upon the Arabs by the Europeans to compensate for the Holocaust, even hinting at equivalence between Jewish and Arab suffering. Obama ignored the rejectionism, ongoing wars and waves of Arab terror directed against the Jewish state since the day of its creation. He also compared the Palestinians to the US civil rights movement. When the president of the world's greatest superpower provides an imprimatur for such a false narrative it represents a major breakthrough for those seeking to delegitimize Israel.

Obama's Cairo address should be viewed as an extension of a calculated policy designed to appease the Arab world by playing hardball with Israel. Obama's response to the brutal Iranian regime's thuggish clampdown on its own people was inordinately restrained. He bowed and scraped to the Saudis, unconditionally renewed diplomatic relations with the Syrians and failed to respond to the latest brazen North Korean missile launches. His "engagement" and benign relationship with corrupt and despotic Arab regimes contrast starkly with the tough diktats conveyed to Israel.

The confrontation with Israel goes far beyond the vexed settlement issue which was wrongly linked with curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions and has been exaggerated totally out of proportion.

Israel endorsed the road map and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu unequivocally undertook to freeze settlement expansion in areas other than within the settlement blocs which the Bush Administration had implicitly agreed should remain under Israeli sovereignty. Even in these areas Netanyahu undertook to limit growth to "enabling normal life." But either disregarding or cynically abrogating understandings by the former administration, Obama's demands exceeded even those of Arafat's when the 1993 Oslo Accords were negotiated.

Today, no city outside the Islamic world denies Jews the right of residence. Yet Obama is demanding that for the first time since 1967 Jews will no longer be entitled to build a single home beyond the old armistice lines, including Jewish sections of Jerusalem and adjacent areas like Ma'aleh Adumim. No Israeli government of any political composition could conceivably accept such a demand which even opposition Kadima spokesmen condemned as outright "extortion."

NOT SURPRISINGLY, the Palestinians and Arabs are delighted with Obama's humiliation of Israel. Saeb Erakat, the chief PA negotiator, proclaimed that the Palestinians need make no concessions because the longer the process extended, the more they would benefit from further unilateral Israeli concessions. Washington Post journalist Jackson Diehl, not renowned as a pro-Israel supporter, observed, "[Obama] revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively watch and applaud."

The reality is that Arab concerns are not related to settlements or boundaries. Both Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas rejected offers to return virtually all territories Israel gained in the 1967 war - a war initiated by the Arabs to destroy the Jewish state. "The gaps were too wide" said Abbas, after Olmert offered him the equivalent of all territories beyond the Green Line, including joint control of the Temple Mount. They adamantly demand the right of return for Arab refugees, which would effectively bring an end to the Jewish state. Clearly, the overriding objective for the PA, no less than Hamas, remains, not two states but two stages leading to the demise of the Jewish state. In recent weeks there was a spate of Fatah statements on official PA-controlled media brazenly describing the negotiations as a vehicle to destroy Israel. "Peace is a means not a goal. Our goal is all Palestine," said Fatah activist Kifah Radaydeh on PA TV and also affirmed that "armed struggle" is still on the cards.

If Obama was genuinely even-handed, he would urge the "moderate" Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. He would make it clear that the US would never support the repatriation of the descendents of the Arab refugees to Israel. Obama would call on Abbas to stop sanctifying martyrs and naming streets, sports teams and other projects (some of which are sponsored by the US) after Palestinian suicide killers and murderers and would monitor anti-Semitic incitement in PA media, mosques, schools and kindergartens. And most importantly, before demanding that Israel remove barriers and downgrade security in Judea and Samaria, the US would insist that the PA curb its military wings and cease all acts of terror.

But as of now, Obama's policy can be summarized as "Israelis should give and Palestinians should take." It amounts to appeasing the Arabs, humiliating Israel and in the process, undermining the security of the Jewish state.

ISRAEL IS not a superpower and needs to retain the support of the United States, in the absence of which the United Nations, Europeans and the entire international community would gang up against the Jewish state. It is no coincidence that Javier Solana, the retiring EU foreign policy chief, has urged the UN to determine the final borders, the status of Jerusalem and resolution of the refugee problem and impose their solution. That the British government has just announced what amounts to a partial arms boycott against Israel is another example.

Netanyahu is doing his utmost to achieve a compromise and has already offered to totally freeze all settlement activity beyond Jerusalem and the major settlement blocs, which the vast majority of Israelis agree must be retained. But if the Americans remain bloody-minded and refuse to compromise, Netanyahu will stand firm on this issue and will be overwhelmingly supported by the people who are outraged by the double standards applied against them.

In the meanwhile, the public reprimands and humiliations already underway are eroding the US-Israel relationship and impacting on American public support for Israel, which polls indicate is plummeting.
American Jews who voted overwhelmingly to elect Obama should not remain silent. They are entitled to press him to adhere to his commitment and treat the Jewish state in an even-handed manner. Together with other friends of Israel they should discourage their president from offering Israel as a sacrificial lamb on the altar of Arab appeasement. In urging Obama not to abandon Israel, they would also be promoting the US national interest. History cannot point to a single instance in which appeasement of jihadists or tyrants has ever borne fruit.

Comments to Isi Leibler

Dangers of Social Networking - Real Dangers

2009-07-08T12:55:00.001-07:00

If there ever was an object lesson in the dangers posed by wreckless social networking, just ask incoming MI6 head Sir John Sawers. Sawers wife Shelley, a Facebook user missed the tutorial about securing the access to her account and keeping her private information, private. In the process, she has put the lives of her husband, family and friends into jeopardy.

previous Social Networking safety posts by APRPEH:
Dangers of Social Networking Sites

More Dangers of Social Networking

Social Networking III - Lives of the Happy Holiday Hackers

At this time, her actions could be forcing many people to change domiciles, mailing addresses, schools, and plenty of other everyday routine schedules. For instance imagine how useful it would be to know where the head of MI6 has tea and where he meets his friends, where his children live or go to school, when they are dropped off and picked up, at which home he may be attending a party, etc? One can only imagine the potential damage which could have been done to British national security had this story not broken.

Everyone needs to use the security settings on whatever site they are using. They should not reveal information that could be personally or professionally damaging. And that includes pictures of middle aged men in bathing suits in the way Ms. Sawers has done.

It is very hard to think of someone as SIR John Sawers after seeing him playing on the beach.

coverage from TimesOnline

Phillips vs. Dershowitz

2009-07-07T08:46:00.001-07:00

Melanie Phillips highlights troubling contradictions contained within Alan Dershowitz's Wall Street Journal editorial. To use the proverbial "canary in the mine shaft" description of Dershowitz would be generous. Coming from a professor of law (wasn't Obama supposedly a professor too or so he told us?) of his stature one would hope for more than a wishful thinking op/ed on his part.

Dershowitz has for the record though, pinned himself into red-lines which he says should be watched for intrusion by Obama. Should one of those red-lines be breached however, we can be certain that Dershowitz will explain in the most elegant terms why what we see isn't really what we see. Ah, the benefits of a good legal education.

Melanie Phillips below explains the contradictory nature of Dershowitz's positions although she seems uncertain whether wishful thinking on his part or a pre-meditated attempt to create history the way he thinks it should be written is his goal.

Briefly, one of her points is that Dershowitz sails into the waters of moral equivalency (between Israel and the arabians), something that lefties cannot avoid without betraying their most core belief. Another point is how Dershowitz explains away the evidence of Obama's dislike of Israel by setting up the above mentioned red-lines as distant excuses permitting observers to ignore the strain in the relations between the US administration and Israel.

The honest approach here (based on Dersh logic) followed to its logical conclusion is "wait until things really get bad". Dersh starts with how some Jews saw clearly (those who could see beyond the DNC's talking points) that Obama during his life has run with the anti-Jew crowd - but still dismisses those observations as less relevant than campaign rhetoric - (rhetoric for which he should claim conflict of interest). Like a trial attorney is apt to do, Dersh brushes these justified fears under the carpet. History shall play no part in his equation of Obama and his Israel policy, only the future. We could have avoided this problem of course if Jews like Dersh would have used their superior intellects to make reasoned analyses of why NOT to vote for Obama - (my attempt - APRPEH: Barack Obama - Myths, Facts, and Obfuscating (Bloggers Beware)) but that is after all water under the bridge. Dershowitz is the friend who supports you provided you agree to his terms. And those terms are written by the White House.

July 6, 2009 / 14 Tamuz 5769

Dershowitz doesn't get it/By Melanie Phillips

A sobering view by one of Britain's most respected columnists

Jewish World Review | Alan Dershowitz is one of the most prolific, high-profile and indefatiguable defenders of Israel and the Jewish people against the tidal wave of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish feeling currently coursing through the west. So a piece by him in the Wall Street Journal giving expression to the rising anxiety being felt about Obama by American Jews naturally arouses great interest.

But just like the majority of American Jews, getting on for 80 per cent of whom voted for Obama, he is a Democrat supporter who is incapable of acknowledging the truth about this President. For most American Jews, the horror of even entertaining the hypothetical possibility that they might ever in a million years have to vote for a Republican is so great they simply cannot see what is staring them in the face — that this Democratic President is lethal for both Israel and the free world. And in this article Dershowitz shows that he too is just as blind.

Acknowledging the anxiety among some American Jews about Obama's attitude to Israel, Dershowitz concludes uneasily that there isn't really a problem here because all Obama is doing is putting pressure on Israel over the settlements, which most American Jews don't support anyway. But this is totally to miss the point. The pressure over the settlements per se is not the reason for the intense concern.

It is instead, first and foremost, the fact that Obama is treating Israel as if it is the obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Obama thus inverts aggressor and victim, denying Israel's six-decade long victimisation and airbrushing out Arab aggression. The question remains: why has Obama chosen to pick a fight with Israel while soft-soaping Iran which is threatening it with genocide? The answer is obvious: Israel is to be used to buy off Iran just as Czechoslovakia was used at Munich. Indeed, I would say this is worse even than that, since I suspect that Obama — coming as he does from a radical leftist milieu, with vicious Israel-haters amongst his closest friends — would be doing this to Israel even if Iran was not the problem that it is.

In any event, the double standard is egregious. Obama has torn up his previous understandings with Israel over the settlements while putting no pressure at all on the Palestinians, even though since they are the regional aggressor there can be no peace unless they end their aggression and certainly not until they accept Israel as a Jewish state, which they have said explicitly they will never do. On this, Obama is totally silent. So too is Dershowitz. That's some omission.

Next, Obama is pressuring Israel to set up a Palestine state — within two years this will exist, swaggers Rahm Emanuel. But everyone knows that as soon as Israel leaves the West Bank, Hamas — or even worse — will take over. The only reason the (also appalling) Abbas is still in Ramallah, enabling Obama to pretend there is a Palestinian interlocutor for peace, is because the Israelis are keeping Hamas at bay. Yet Dershowitz writes:

There is no evidence of any weakening of American support for Israel's right to defend its children from the kind of rocket attacks candidate Obama commented on during his visit to Sderot.

So what exactly does he think would happen if Israel came out of the West Bank and the Hamas rockets were down the road from Jerusalem and Tel Aviv (literally: many in the west have absolutely no idea how tiny Israel is). It's not a question of Israel's 'right to defend its children'. If Obama has his way, Israel would not be able to defend its children or anyone else, because Obama would have removed its defences by putting its enemies in charge of them. It is astounding that Dershowitz can't see this.

Then there was Obama's appalling Cairo speech in which he conspicuously refrained from committing himself to defending Zionism and the Jewish people from the attacks and incitement to genocide against them, but committed himself instead to defending their attackers against 'negative stereotyping'. On this, Dershowitz has nothing to say.

Worse still, by falsely asserting that the Jewish aspiration for Israel derived from the Holocaust, Obama effectively denied that the Jewish people were in Israel as of right and thus endorsed the core element of the Arab and Muslim propaganda of war and extermination. On this, Dershowitz has nothing to say.

Obama drew a vile — and telling — equivalence between the Nazi extermination camps and the Palestinian 'refugee' camps. On this, Dershowitz has nothing to say. Obama's statement that the Palestinians 'have suffered in pursuit of a homeland' was grossly and historically untrue, and again denied Arab aggression. On this, Dershowitz has nothing to say. Equally vilely, Obama equated genocidal terrorism by the Palestinians with the civil rights movement in America and the resistance against apartheid in South Africa. On all of this, Dershowitz has nothing to say.

Dershowitz also grossly underplays the terrible harm Obama is doing to the security not just of Israel but the world through his reckless appeasement of Iran. In the last few weeks, this has actively undercut the Iranian democrats trying to oust their tyrannical regime, and has actually strengthened that regime. All the evidence suggests ever more strongly that Obama has decided America will 'live with' a nuclear Iran, whatever it does to its own people. Which leaves Israel hung out to dry.

But even here, where he is clearly most concerned, Dershowitz scuttles under his comfort blanket — Dennis Ross, who was originally supposed to have been the US special envoy to Iran but was recently announced senior director of the National Security Council and special assistant to the President for the region. It is not at all clear whether this ambiguous development represents a promotion or demotion for Ross. Either way, for Dershowitz to rest his optimism that Obama's Iran policy will be all right on the night entirely upon the figure of Dennis Ross is pathetic. Ross, a Jew who played Mr Nice to Robert Malley's Mr Nasty towards Israel in the Camp David debacle under President Clinton, is clearly being used by Obama as a human shield behind which he can bully Israel with impunity. American Jews assume that his proximity to Obama means the President's intentions towards Israel are benign. Dazzled by this vision of Ross as the guarantor of Obama's good faith, they thus ignore altogether the terrible import of the actual words coming out of the President's mouth.

The fact is that many American Jews are so ignorant of the history of the Jewish people, the centrality of Israel in its history and the legality and justice of its position that they probably saw nothing wrong in Obama saying that the Jewish aspiration for Israel came out of the Holocaust because they think this too. Nor do they see the appalling double standard in the bullying of Israel over the settlements and what that tells us about Obama's attitude towards Israel, because — as Dershowitz himself makes all too plain — they too think in much the same way, that the settlements are the principal obstacle to peace.

Many if not most American Jews have a highly sentimentalized view of Israel. They never go there, are deeply ignorant of its history and current realities, and are infinitely more concerned with their own view of themselves as social liberals, a view reflected back at themselves through voting for a Democrat President.

Whatever else he is, however, Dershowitz is certainly not ignorant. Which makes this lamentable article all the more revealing, and depressing.

another related commentary at American Thinker

Fred Thompson Explains the Truth About the Palis

2009-06-23T11:10:00.001-07:00

Hear Fred Thompson in his "Winners and Losers" segment cheerleading for Bibi Netanyahu. Fred understands Israel's situation better than most Israelis and explains it in a way in which only, well Fred could. FRED THOMPSON SHOW

Show date 22 June 2009

Will The Jews Choose Obama Over Israel?

2009-06-18T13:33:00.000-07:00

Many readers will not like this post. I am not sure I like this post. Yet, it has to be written. Riding the coattails of APRPEH's last post American Jews: Obama or Torah, today Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic has made his prediction as to which choice will be prevail. It is not a satisfying answer. American Jews and Settlements: A Divorce in Progress - Jeffrey Goldberg - The Atlantic - 18 Jun 2009 01:28 pm

Goldberg's article based mostly on an earlier article by Samuel Freedman claims that American Jews will pick Obama. Both writers believe that American Jews see Yehuda and Shomron, (aka "The West Bank" or more accurately the "West Bank of the Jordan River") as not only an obstacle to peace but an obstacle to a belief in the "rightness" of Israel on moral and democratic grounds.

Goldberg goes further and warns the mainstream Jewish organizations (specifically pointing at Malcolm Hoenlein of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations) that they are out of touch with the Jewish voters of America who in overwhelming numbers voted for B. Hussein Obama.

The rationale is that American liberals view the territories in the biblical heartland of Israel the same way as the Arabians who have been calling them 'obstacles to peace' for years. By implication, he asserts that Al-Baraq Hussein Obama has given the Jewish left the confidence to boldly step forward and oppose Jewish land rights in Yehuda and Shomron (a Jstreet fantasy), a position which they should know in their heart is truthfully a great aveira/sin. What is even more ridiculous is that to even hold the "obstacle to peace" position, one must not give much weight to the more historically factual argument that the conflict has never been about land at all but the failure of the Jews to simply go away. The arabians simply do not want us around. To arabs and muslims, we Jews are the obstacle to their religious credibility. Islam cannot be a replacement of that which came before it when the holy Torah of Israel stands in its way, countering its would-be desert modification replete with stolen and maligned stories from the Torah, known as the Koran.

The very idea of supporting a policy which feeds upon Jews as pawns to justify denial of Jewish property rights in the biblical heartland of Eretz HaKodesh must be strongly opposed with all available resources by all Jews who still hold that the Torah is true and HaShem is the G-d of Israel. Now, if that means finally coming out to further distance Torah Judaism from the apostasy and antiJew non-Torah yet still Jewish (for now) cults which are lead more by political allegiances than Torah allegiances, than it is time to begin this process.

I say this with the deepest regret and fear. We must NEVER have any negative and hateful feelings towards fellow Jews. We must, however consider them as desperately in need of teshuva. Sometimes, distance can be a positive force for change.

Political arguments amongst Jews over common preferences of one philosophy or another as it relates to the economy, health care and many other domestic and foreign policy issues as within the context of America's role and direction in the world, although at times heated, are normal and represent no intrinsic threat. They should never, chas v'sholom, serve as a foot in the door for manipulation by the goyim to divide the people of Israel into camps supporting the belief's of one group of goyim vis a vis another group of goyim. All the more so, in terms of the land of Israel there should never be two camps, one of which supports Jewish inheritance rights in the land of Israel and one which follows a non-Jewish, non-Torah outlook seeking to strip the holy land from its rightful owners.

I pointed out in my previous post (see above) that based upon the Torah and Rashi's explanation, supporting non-Jewish rights to the land of Israel is an aveira (IMO).

One could easily conclude from these comments that any Jew who supports the idea of any other nation having any property rights in Eretz Hakodesh is in simple and plain violation of the Torah and thus the will of the Holy One, Blessed be He.

Jews who wish to strengthen their commitment to the wishes of this one-term president and his antiJew friends over the objections of their eternal divine Torah, do so not only at their own peril, but the peril of all Jews. Not only does this policy cause greater conflict amongst the not yet fully Torah observant Jews and Torah observant Jews on the one hand, but it will underpin actual conflict amongst Jews in a physical sense as the Israeli security forces will eventually be called upon to uproot more of their brethren from land they are rightly living upon. In a greater sense, since all Jews share One unique source which binds each soul together, collectively the Jewish people will suffer from such misguided beliefs. A foot cannot be removed without the rest of the body suffering.

As for Goldberg and Freedman, Jews who wish to bring Moshiach will ignore them in deference to that small voice inside, reminding them who they are and why were put on this planet.

For clarification as to the religious aspects of the land of Israel and the Jew's obligation to it see here.

American Jews: Obama or Torah?

2009-06-16T10:47:00.000-07:00

I am not one to quote Shmuley Boteach. I am less than enamored with his interest in becoming the Jewish icon to the goyim. But he is dead on the money in his Jpost column The coming storm: Obama and American Jewry.

APRPEH's last post concerning Jeremiah Wright and his message to B. Hussein Obama and subsequently to anyone else who was paying attention, drew a conclusion that Wright (who knows Obama as well, if not better than most people) seemed to be surprised and disappointed that Barry was concealing his true self. This conclusion should be in mind to read the remainder in context.

Boteach seems to expect that the organized Jewish community will have to make a choice between its insatiable appetite for supporting democrats and liberals and its Torah based commitment to defend the very soil of Eretz HaKodesh and the blood of Israel as this administration and its policies of foisting an a non-peace agreement on Israel are played out.

Many Jewish liberals are liberal on everything but Israel's security. This group is further broken down into full fledged Israel hawks to those who mistakenly believe that a 2 state solution will bring peace in our time but have little to no understanding that the 2 state solution has become the coat-rack to hang hopes of an eventual 1 state solution where arabians come to the land in mass numbers and overwhelm the rightful Jewish settlers, (yes all Jews are "evil" settlers in the land of Israel since it was none other than G-d, 'May His Name be Blessed' who settled Jews in this land) and set the world back further from the time of Moshiach. In a more physical sense, the emergence of a unified state arising from what was Israel sets back the path to a just world birthing yet another backwards arabian country.

The knowledge that B. Hussein and his antiJew friends cannot be successful in dragging Israel into the sewer of perpetual strife brought own by indefensible borders and hordes of barbarians flooding through the gates of civilized and modern Israel is brought down in the first Rashi of Chumash, go and learn it. This same theme is relevant to this week's parasha (chutz l'aretz) Shlach.

This is the first commentary in my weekly study of the parashah in Vedibarta Bam - Rabbi Moshe Bogomilsky

"Send forth men, if you please, and let them spy out the Land of Canaan that I am giving to the Children of Israel." (13:2)

QUESTION: Why is it necessary to mention the name of the land and the fact that Hashem is giving it to the Jewish people?

ANSWER: The Gemara (Sanhedrin 91a) relates that the people of Canaan once took the Jewish people to court before Alexander the Great. They demanded that Eretz Yisrael be returned to them because it was originally owned by their ancestor Canaan. Gevihah ben Pesisa argued that Canaan was the son of Cham and was cursed by Noach to be a servant to his brothers, Shem and Yafet. According to halachah (Pesachim 88b), whatever a slave acquires belongs to his master. Thus, the Canaanites had absolutely no claim to the land, and through their ancestor Shem, the Jews were the rightful owners. The plaintiffs were dumbfounded and ran away leaving their fields and vineyards to the Jewish people.

In the beginning of Bereishit, Rashi explains that Torah starts with the narrative of creation because if the world accuses the Jews of illegally taking away Eretz Yisrael, they can respond, "Hashem created the entire world and it belongs to Him. With His will He took it away from them and gave it to us."

In preparation for the Jewish people's first encounter with Eretz Yisrael, Hashem emphasized: "This is the land of Canaan, which according to halachah belongs to the Jewish people since its original owner Cham became a slave to your ancestor Shem. Moreover, it is the land that 'I am giving to the Children of Israel' and as Master of the world I have the right to take it from whomever I want and give it to whomever I wish."

One could easily conclude from these comments that any Jew who supports the idea of any other nation having any property rights in Eretz Hakodesh is in simple and plain violation of the Torah and thus the will of the Holy One, Blessed be He. Would it be too much to ask Rahm Emanuel to learn this Torah with Barry on Shabbos?

This brings us to Bibi Netanyahu and his Bar-Ilan speech. I have much sympathy for Bibi and do not envy the difficulty of the task before him. Many of the most faithful to the land of Israel have been critical of Bibi (seemingly justifiable) for words which "superficially" call for a Pali state. One must always point a wary eye at Bibi. He can be unpredictable at times and all too predictable other times. After all, this is the same Bibi who would not meet with Arafat either. Don't judge him by what he says.

But this time Bibi is the best equipped to walk the tightrope of Israel's security interests on one side and meeting US benchmarks without actually following through on any of them on the other.

I see it like this. Bibi basically needs to successfully manage this non-process-process for 2 years until the mid-term elections. By that time, either enough pro-Israel, Republican Congressmen will be elected that Obama will have too much on his plate to worry any further about peace-legacy building or his own pre-election campaign will advise him to lay off this issue for a variety of policy and political purposes.

Bibi has laid the ground work quite nicely for arabian non-compliance with his pre-requisites. On this point, I refer the reader to the second half of the second hour of the Fred Thompson show of 15 June (download). Fred lays out the Bibi case better than I. While I continue to hope that the land of Israel loyalists keep up the pressure on the PM to keep him sort of honest, I also am somewhat confident knowing that Bibi is doing what PM's of Israel always do intentionally or unintentionally which is to give the arabians enough rope to hang themselves.

The hollering from the arabian world is a collective cry of foul. Bibi told the truth about Jewish heritage and cast dispersion on the arabian myth of victim hood at the hands of the evil Zionists. Bibi challenged the phony conventional wisdom which the arabians have been spreading for decades, calling Jews land grabbers and thieves (when in reality it is Ishmael who is the thief) and burst the Obama balloon (see Two Campaigns, Two Candidates, One Israel)of Israel existing merely as a refuge foist into the heart of arabia after World War II because the arabians were powerless victims of colonialism and could not prevent her establishment. For these achievements, Bibi deserves praise. American liberal-loving Jewry would do well to read Bibi's remarks. American Jews should use this opportunity to tell the truth about Israel even if it means not hiding behind DNC membership cards, and even if it means no longer nodding their heads approvingly to the rhythm of the false messiah at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The coming storm: Obama and American Jewry - Shmuley Boteach, THE JERUSALEM POST, Jun. 15, 2009

There's a storm coming. It will pit a well-organized community of substantial resources but also substantial insecurity - particularly when it comes to charges of dual loyalty - against a popular president of considerable eloquence but misguided policies that identify Israeli settlements as the main obstacle to Middle East peace. The inevitable clash will separate sunshine Jewish patriots who back Israel when convenient against those who stand with Israel even when it means losing their invitation to the White House Hanukka party.

The bogus issue of settlements is already being swallowed whole by many well-meaning Jews. Last week Dan Fleshler, a leader of Americans for Peace Now, wrote in the New Jersey Jewish Standard that Obama has no choice but to pressure Israel because "it is fruitless for a well-armed, occupying power to negotiate the terms of a viable settlement with an almost defenseless occupied people unless a third party mediates and presses both sides."

In reading Fleshler one wonders whether he has been himself occupied with building a settlement on the moon with no knowledge of events on Earth. Is he seriously suggesting that the thousands of Katyusha rockets and nonstop suicide bombers that have killed more than a thousand Israelis (the equivalent of 30,000 dead Americans) have come from a "defenseless" foe? Would Fleshler likewise argue that the US ought to have pressure from, say, Russia or China to make peace with the terrorists in Afghanistan, seeing that America now represents a "well-armed, occupying power" against the comparatively defenseless Taliban? Or is it only Israel that is forbidden from defending itself.

Sorry Mr. Fleshler, but Jewish values do not dictate that the only moral Jew is a dead one who refuses to fight in the face of a 60-year terror onslaught.

Any return to the 1967 borders, which is what Obama's attack on the settlements represents, is simply suicide for Israel. The borders are utterly indefensible. The Arabs know it, which is why they press for it. Had Israel not dismantled its settlements in Gush Katif, Gaza would not have become a terrorist state ruled by Hamas, an organization that kills even more Palestinians than it does Israelis.

BUT MISGUIDED Jewish apologists aside, are the rest of us prepared to speak up against the policies of the administration? By this I do not mean the drunken racist rants of the American Jewish hooligans who got attention disgracing themselves on YouTube last week; their bigoted drivel against our democratically elected president represents an abomination to Judaism. I have already written several columns lamenting how a small minority of the large and praiseworthy contingent of Jewish youth who go to Israel from the US after high school ostensibly to study in yeshivot end up instead hanging out on Rehov Ben Yehuda making asses of themselves. That they have no proper supervision and that they are allowed to go through their year in a drunken stupor is an outrage that must be finally addressed by the institutions which host them.

Rather, I mean courageous and intelligent criticism that accepts the president's praiseworthy efforts in making peace but decries his soft posture on tyranny when he bows to an Arab potentate who oppresses women and warmly embraces the dictator of Venezuela.

Asher Lopatin was one of the first students I met at Oxford and the university's first Orthodox Rhodes scholar. Today he is the successful rabbi of one of Chicago's most youthful congregations. He is also Rahm Emanuel's rabbi. But that did not stop him from criticizing the White House chief of staff in Newsweek for his unfair pressure on Israel. Lopatin could easily have basked in the aura of being rabbi to one of the most influential men in the world. Instead, he spoke truth to power.

In promoting the new translation of his Hebrew prayer book, British Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks constantly reminds us that he studies Bible with the prime minister of the United Kingdom. That's nice. But a few years ago Sacks spoke out publicly against Israel, telling London's Guardian newspaper, "There are things that happen on a daily basis which make me feel very uncomfortable as a Jew."

Sacks is a brilliant man but with a long history of pandering to whatever audience he happens to be addressing. He would do well to remember the admonishment of Mordechai to Esther on the responsibility of being close to political power: "If you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place."

But while Europe and the UK are significant, the main battle lines will be here in the US and now is the time for American Jewry to organize. From schools to universities to synagogues and JCCs, we must make it clear that when 78 percent of Jews voted for Obama and filled his campaign coffers with cash it was not in the expectation of biased policies against Israel. We're upset, disappointed and we won't take it. We'll march in the streets, write op-eds and blogs, and publish ads making it clear that America should be standing with the Middle East's only democracy and America's most reliable ally.

As Charles Krauthammer pointed out, our president undermines his moral authority when he pledges that henceforth America will "forge partnerships as opposed to simply dictating solutions," but then only applies that pledge to Iran, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela, but not to Israel.

Last year, right after Obama captured the democratic nomination, I received a phone call from his campaign asking if I would serve as one of the national chairs of "Rabbis for Obama." It was a tempting offer. I was moved by the candidate's remarkable personal story, his iron discipline, his soaring oratory and, most of all, the fact that his victory would be the culmination of my hero Martin Luther King's dream of a man being judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin. In the end I declined because I feared that Obama would draw a moral equivalence between Israel and the Palestinians and pressure the former to appease the latter. But even I never suspected that it would happen so quickly and so lopsidedly.

The writer is the founder of This World: The Values Network. His upcoming book is The Blessing of Enough: Rejecting Material Greed, Embracing Spiritual Hunger

Wright Warns Obama to be Himself

2009-06-11T09:39:00.000-07:00

By now everyone has heard the comments from Obama's (former) Reverend, Jeremiah Wright blaming the Jews for his own isolation from his student (Obama) whom he married and who's children he baptised. So far, most of the reporting on this story is merely focused upon Wright and his blatant anti-Semitic ranting and antiJewism. The comments were played out in the context of his ridiculous accusations against the "Zionist's" and make believe ethnic cleansing of Gaza, an area ruled by Hamas and from where Israel withdrew in 2005.

What has not received as much attention is what is running between the lines of the Wright rant.

The reporter, David Squires of the Daily Press speaking to Wright after the 95th annual Hampton University Ministers' Conference asked Wright what he would tell Obama, if his access were not cut off. Wright said he would tell him what he has told him all along (paraphrasing) that Obama should not let politics change who he is as a person. He counseled Obama to not let "policies and the people around him" change what he believes with the core and "fiber of your being". Wright concluded that if Obama compromised his beliefs he would turn into a puppet of a political machine and would no longer be himself. Incidentally, when Wright made his 'Jews around him' comment, Squires, the reporter, snickered. Whether that was an approving snicker or an embarrassed one is a question for Squires. Interestingly, the audio found at the Daily Press (Squire's newspaper) website cuts out the snicker. But the audio at Real Clear Politics does not cut out the snicker. David any comment?

When all of this is taken in context, Wright, arguably someone who knows B. Hussein Obama better than most, is describing him as a comrade who is in danger of losing touch. The question which should be asked is, what is Wright worried that Obama will forget? Dare we pose the question?

Today, no one doubts that Wright believes in layer upon layer of Jewish conspiracy theories of Jews running the government, controlling the Presidency, Zionists ethnically cleansing arabians from Gaza and all and all making life difficult for honest folk like himself. But what does he expect Obama to say? More importantly, what does Wright mean when he talks about Obama forgetting what he believes?

The hardest pill to swallow is when a close, personal, confident and protege, someone you placed great faith and, well, hope in, turns his back on you - shuns you. Wright is clearly bitter in a personal way. But he also expresses anxiety that his cause has been denied one of it's budding stars; at least for the time being. After all, Wright believes Obama will come back to the fold when he is a lame duck.

What beliefs, theories and conspiracies does/did Obama buy into during the height of his activity at Trinity? The vast overwhelming body of evidence would be convincing to anyone when not obscured by a political campaign and the mark of Democrat next to his name on the ballot intervening between common sense and hysteria. As APRPEH pointed out in the past, one must work very hard indeed to assemble as many antiJews as friends, advisers and colleagues as Obama assembled over the previous decades. That so many Jews not just fail, but refuse to look objectively at this fact is a sure sign of the weariness of exile, a luxury not afforded to Bibi Netanyahu and Israel who are beginning to understand with whom they now must deal.

Lifelock's Lost Combination

2009-05-27T09:29:00.000-07:00

Court: Lifelock Using 'Unfair Business Practice' -The Red Tape Chronicles

Back in April 2008, APRPEH posted: Lifelock Getting Picked. At that time, Lifelock and its over-exposed CEO Todd Davis was at the beginning of a slew of legal issues. Well finally, the Experian case may have hammered the first nail into the coffin of Lifelock. According to the above story, Lifelock's procedure of proactively placing fraud alerts is an "unfair business practice". U.S. District Judge Andrew Guilford of the Central District of California ruled that

"Experian clearly incurs costs each time it must process a fraud alert made by LifeLock. These costs include the costs of allocating Experian’s electronic resources and employee time, plus the maintenance costs of Experian’s toll-free telephone number and Web page used to accept fraud alert requests," he said. "Experian also incurs postage and printing costs in mailing disclosure letters to each consumer on whose behalf a fraud alert is requested."

As was pointed out in the article, Lifelock will continue to place 90 day security alerts either with Trans Union or Equifax which pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, will also be automatically activated with Experian too. The big question is whether or not Trans Union and/or Equifax will press the issue and request Lifelock to stop automatically placing and renewing security alerts as well. Or, will either Trans Union or Equifax cut a deal with Lifelock? If I were forced to guess on this, I would expect both Equifax and Trans Union (which has worked with Lifelock in the past) to cut a deal provided there is adequate financial reason for the bureaus to do so. Lifelock claims that if they are prevented from performing their primary offering of automatically renewing security alerts they will continue to provide other services.

Lifelock's other services, besides the security alert include an internet privacy scan service and "Wallet Lock" which amounts to someone asking you, with apologies to Capital One, "Whats in your Wallet?" in the event you lose it and "help you contact each credit card, bank or document issuing company, cancel your affected accounts and complete the paperwork and steps necessary to replace your lost documents, including your credit/debit cards, driver's license, social security card, insurance cards, checkbook - even travelers checks...". Plenty of other companies offer internet scans and I suppose if you are not near a computer it is helpful to have someone look up telephone numbers and possibly conference call you in to the customer service of your credit card issuer.

Despite Lifelock's tremendous advertising effort, the product has always been lacking substance. As a result of this, Lifelock entered the business world with a guarantee and promise which they could never keep. While the product expectations, after much criticism were finally revised to more realistic levels, the question of why purchasing the coverage remained. The question now is still pressing. While the bureaus may force Lifelock from performing automatic security alert renewals, the bureaus would most certainly fail in an attempt to prevent consumers from doing the same proactively. Why continue to pay $10 a month for internet scanning and "Wallet lock"?

What is true is that other companies in the business of providing security services to consumers, those who provide honest and useful services to consumers, will read this story with a smirk. Lifelock's history of high-flying promises and service guarantee, both of which have been, in my opinion a stain on the industry coupled with the high profile advertising, - are not enviable but embarrassing. The most important question is what will all of our favorite radio talk shows do if Lifelock stops its radio advertising campaign?

Obama Pal Ayers Defends Ward Churchill

2009-03-06T10:35:00.001-08:00

Terrorists and terrorist sympathizers always stick together. Unfortunately for America, at least one William Ayers and by extension, his friends are stuck to the President. The views of Bill Ayers have been well vetted and shown to be as radical today as when he was building bombs as a Weather Underground terrorist. Ayers, as all now know, shared an office with the President and as the USA Today article reminds us served alongside the President on the board of the Woods foundation funnelling money into community enterprises intent on building up future socialist activists disguised as supporting public education. None of this means Obama is tied to Churchill directly, but by extension are removed by barely a separation. Obama tied to both to Ayers and Rashid Khalidi, pali activist, complete a triangle of friendship and radicalism.

Certainly, Ayers must know that Churchill's views peg him as a Holocaust questioner if not denier, and most certainly antiJew. (this is of course sarcasm. Ayers views on Israel are harder to deduce but the fact he sympathizes with Israel's enemies is pretty straightforward).

Ayers: Colo. professor was fired in 'witch hunt' - USA Today

(excerpt)In an essay and a follow-up book, Churchill argued that the attacks {9-11}were a response to a history of U.S. abuses. He said the victims of the World Trade Center collapse were "little Eichmanns," referring to Holocaust organizer Adolf Eichmann.

Why does Churchill single out Eichmann from a long list of potential Nazi "bureaucrats"? Because Eichmann was caught and executed by Israel, by those Jews. That, of course is merely my opinion. Churchill, of course in the view of academics is the lowest of scum, stealing the work of others to claim it for himself. The "witchhunt", however convenient doesn't cover up for the fact that plagiarism likely runs rampant, intended or accidental in "academia" but that is a story for another day. The fact of the matter is that the entire process of tenure in academia is arcane. Churchill was a detriment to the university and was fired as a result. Employees who disgrace a company lose their jobs.

The leftist-socialist agenda needs the protected status of holier than thou university tenure. The same protected, can't be assailed self-righteousness is not however extended to those opposing the leftists academicians. Conservative opinion and pro-Israel opinion is constantly under attack in American universities as not being 3rd world enough, not underdog enough, too main stream to be acceptable. Israel after all, is now the aggressor and conservative Americans, lap puppies of the Israel lobby. The leftists have convinced themselves and seek to convince others that justice requires always taking the side of those who do not fit into the main stream, the oppressed, the threatened.

Who the threatened party is, remains in the eye of the beholder. Whoever is not "mainstream" becomes the threatened party. Despite the fact that the well-being of Israel and worldwide Jewry teeter-toter's on the ever present but mostly below the surface yet nonetheless explosive anti-Jewism, any party on the opposite side of the now "mainstream" Israel wins the leftists affection and support being the non-conventional party. It's Israel's fault that all those arabians wish her dead.
Blaming the Jew for the hate of the Jew becomes a simple matter of political theory.

JCPA Against Liberty for DC

2009-02-27T10:15:00.000-08:00

Maybe we need a regular column to examine the leftie Jewish organizations fulfilling the will of their leftie masters at the DNC. On the heels of the APRPEH post, Cashing in on Obama which discussed the immigration reform advocacy of the JCPA, today we look at the JCPA's intervention in the District of Columbia's firearms policy.

Below, the JTA reported that the JCPA opposed a Senate amendment offered by Sen. John Ensign to comply with the new legal realities in the US post District of Columbia v. Heller.

The JCPA opposed Any attempt to "undermine" Washington's ability to regulate firearms reasoning that the District's right to regulate firearms would be impacted. Well, it occurs to me that the Supreme Court took care of the impeding of the District's firearms laws in Heller.

The Supremes in a 5-4 vote upheld a Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit finding that the 2nd Amendment actually means what it says and that the District needs to pay attention.

My question to the JCPA would be, "To what regulations are you referring? Those that were struck down by the courts?". The lefties in control in the District do have the right to regulate firearms, but within reason. They cannot prevent firearm ownership or make it close to impossible for legal firearm ownership and commerce. The JCPA seems to be opposed to legal firearm ownership and trade of firearms. Once again, we see the left campaigning against laws and court findings which uphold Liberty and law against the tyranny of the left. Be on guard, freedom loving Americans, more of this is coming during the Obama years.

Interfaith letter opposes effort to ‘undermine’ D.C. gun laws - JTA

February 26, 2009

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- Any attempt to "undermine" Washington's ability to regulate firearms should not be included in the District of Columbia's voting rights legislation, an interfaith coalition said.

In a letter to the U.S. Senate, the 31-member group, organized by the Jewish Coalition for Public Affairs and including more than a dozen Jewish organizations, said that "though proponents of such legislation claim it would restore Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia, in actuality it prevents the 600,000 District of Columbia residents from enacting comprehensive, constitutional, common-sense regulations to reduce gun violence and ensure their community's safety."

On Wednesday, Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) introduced an amendment that would repeal all of the district's gun laws enacted since the Supreme Court overturned Washington's law banning handguns last year.

The Senate could vote on a final version of the voting rights bill this week after a cloture vote limiting debate on the bill succeeded Tuesday. The legislation would permanently add two seats to the U.S. House of Representatives, one to the heavily Democratic District of Columbia and the other to Republican-leaning Utah until reapportionment in 2012. Utah had narrowly missed acquiring an additional seat after the last reapportionment in 2002.

In addition to JCPA, Jewish signatories include the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, Hadassah, the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, Jewish Women's International, Jews United for Justice, the National Council of Jewish Women, Na'amat USA, the Union of Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, Women of Reform Judaism, Women's League of Conservative Judaism and Workmen's Circle/Arbeter Ring.

WTOP coverage (less bias)

Avigdor Lieberman - From Kingmaker to Deal Breaker

2009-02-27T05:50:00.000-08:00

No I am not surprised. Avigdor Lieberman saying I also advocate the creation of a viable Palestinian state is proof he was infected some time ago with the disease of conventionalism. When politicians are on the cusp of power but not sensing victory they grasp for support. Lieberman needed to reach a wider audience to win. The path was to secure the land of Israel loyalists yet also win over those sort of pragmatic folks who don't yet see or understand the nature of the divine in the land of Israel. Lieberman went wobbly - his biography title: From Bar Bouncing to Policy Bouncing.

Lieberman's move was predictable. As a leader of a non-religious party, (also calling for civil marriages) Lieberman is not held to the standard of consistency (to be fair much of the Israeli political world can not be measured by this indicator either- contradiction is the life force that makes Israeli governments). The YNET article below characterizes Lieberman's opinion of the peace process, negotiations and Pali Independence as based upon false assumptions. Then, he was not a kingmaker. Now, he can own the peace process, the prestiege, the White House visits, the constant attention - so it makes sense to him. Today, Lieberman has revised his assumptions. No doubt many of his voters from a mere few weeks ago are revising their own assumptions, wishing they had voted for National Union. And as measured by the world media's own conventional wisdom, I bet many are scratching their heads this morning. (see below)

I could be cynical and conspiracy minded enough to say that Lieberman stands accused with Sharon, Olmert, and Livni of sacrificing the policies of the country and the trust of the voters as leverage for political gains and/or posturing in light of pending criminal investigations. But that maybe going to far. Maybe.

While many in Israel and around the world are questioning Lieberman's inconsistency, Aryeh Eldad, speaking for the frustrated around the world summed it up “Only ostriches and illiterates should be surprised. Throughout the campaign we said that Lieberman is not the true Right.

Nationalists Blast Lieberman’s ‘Palestinian State’
Adar 3, 5769, 27 February 09 12:08by Gil Ronen(IsraelNN.com) Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman’s article supporting the creation of a ‘Palestinian state’ was ill-received in the nationalist camp, with some accusing Lieberman of deserting his former positions on the subject and carrying out an about-face.

The ‘Mattot Arim’ action committee reacted by saying that had Lieberman made the statements in support of a ‘Palestinian’ state before the elections, “the Yisrael Beiteinu party would have gone down from 15 mandates to 9.” [Yisrael Beiteinu went up to 15 mandates from 12 in the last Knesset. -ed.]

Mattot Arim clainmed that before elections were held, Yisrael Beiteinu gave them a written, clear-cut statement that opposes the establishment of a ‘Palestinian’ state.

The group noted that Lieberman made that commitment public in several ways, including a full-page advertisement in the Jerusalem Post. “In addition, at least three party candidates confirmed before the election that the party opposes a Palestinian state: Danny Ayalon, Uzi Landau and David Rotem,” according to Mattot Arim, which also cited similar statements on the Yisrael Beiteinu website and in the media.

Terror Victims’ group Almagor said that “nothing has improved since Lieberman cooperated with the terror victims on explaining the dangers” of such a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

MK Aryeh Eldad (NU) said, however, that “Only ostriches and illiterates should be surprised. Throughout the campaign we said that Lieberman is not the true Right. His diplomatic plan includes transferring sovereign parts of the State of Israel to the Palestinian.

Hardline populist Lieberman could be surprise kingmaker in Israeli election - hit piece from Guardian

Israel election: profile of 'kingmaker' Avigdor Lieberman - Telegraph

Mr Lieberman thinks that what we call the "peace process" has been a mistake from the start. Put simply, Mr Lieberman rejects every facet of President Barack Obama's thinking on the Middle East. When the nationalist leader has real power in Israel, the country could find itself on a collision course with America's new administration.

The Palestinians and their Arab brethren are determined to destroy Israel, he believes. Giving them a state along the 1967 borders that used to contain Israel would only whet their appetite for more.

Instead of leading to a settlement, the peace agreement that America and Europe would foist on Israel would only weaken the Jewish state and embolden its Arab neighbours to fulfil their destiny and eradicate the "Zionist Entity".

"The peace process is based on three false basic assumptions," Mr Lieberman has explained. "That the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main fact of instability in the Middle East, that the conflict is territorial and not ideological, and that the establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders will end the conflict."

Lieberman: Territorial concession concept failed - YNET

"Israel needs to explain that the demand for an independent Palestinian state and the refugees' right of return is a cover for radical Islam's attempt to destroy the State of Israel," he stated in the document.

Lieberman OpEd - IMRA

Cashing in on Obama

2009-02-23T11:23:00.000-08:00

What bigger issue is there than immigration reform? It is on the minds of everyone, in constant debate in Congress and the subject of radio talk shows and newspaper editorials daily. Huh?

America is walking down a path to economic disaster, flushing billions of dollars down the drain in bailouts, and planning to spend dollars in amounts that most people only relate to in theory yet, in the minds of the leftie, Jewish mainstream organizations, immigration reform is THE key issue. During the past presidential election, the conservatives wanted to make immigration reform, a different immigration reform than that advocated below, an issue in the campaign however the presidential candidate was not on-board.

The leftist initiative seeks to re-design immigration enforcement policy to meet the standards of the false morality of leftism. At the heart of the effort is "to get Obama to issue an executive order or other directive to Immigration and Customs Enforcement curtailing the use of raids as a primary tool of immigration enforcement". ICE raids, far from being immoral have been highly effective in upholding the law of the land and represent an effort to at the very least establish a deterant factor against hiring illegal workers.

The first step to understanding this problem is to employ proper terminology. In the eyes of the lefties, illegal workers are "undocumented immigrants". (see Enforcement Gone Bad - NYT where the unnamed editorial decries the effort to catch "undocumented immigrants". The editorial claims that illegally entering the US and over-staying visas is not a criminal offense). Immigrants, by definition are legally in the US. Those who are not legally in the US are not "immigrants". People who have not legally entered the US or are working illegally in the US are not "immigrants" but fugitives. Given that many or most of those working illegally in the US are using phony or stolen identities of American citizens are (or should be) felons (see article at bottom).

Not only leftist non-orthodox believe that fugitives have rights. I have even heard from leftie orthodox such as Saul Berman, that fugitives should actually be considered "gerim toshvim" and should be treated with the same rights as a resident alien. As stated above, if you are working in the US illegally, (like those employees of Agriprocessors whom Berman was discussing) you are violating multiple US laws in the process. So much for Dina D'Malchusa Dina. If so, what is the value of coming to the US legally especially when you can always find a leftie orthodox Rabbi to grant you the status of ger toshav despite the fact that you may be an identity thief.

APRPEH has discussed employment/SSN identity theft before. The bottom line is that American citizens who become a victim of this sort of fraud have to deal with not only the IRS, but the SSA, as well. The consumer must pay the SSA for what is known as a detailed wage earning statement which reports which companies and businesses reported income associated with their SSN. Standard operating procedure of these federal agencies is to have the consumer contact these employers. All this means possibly weeks of contacting companies and businesses, sending documentation back and forth and months more working with the federal agencies to correct records. Often a cost of this process is a delay in income tax refunds and extended time needed for proper tax filing.

Contrast the views of the Jewish main stream leftie groups with the case headed to the US Supreme Court in the second article below. The fugitive named in this case had been using phony identification to work and then purchased the identity of an American citizen. He was turned in to authorities under suspicion by his employer when he changed his personal identifying information that was on file with his HR department. The case hinges on whether the fugitive should have been charged with a higher crime of identity theft which carries a two year incarceration sentence or lesser charges. The fugitive claims he didn't know that the ID belonged to someone.

The other side of the argument is claiming it does not matter what the fugitive knew. The truth of course is that the fugitive knew he was illegally residing in and illegally working in the US. Indeed he was charged correctly as were the Agriprocessor employees referred to in the article. America must uphold the right to work for American citizen laws that are on the books. No intervening false sense of morality that blames ICE raids, labels as immoral the ID theft laws used as leverage for convictions should be granted legitimacy. American citizens, taxpayers, have rights too, to not be victimized - which might come as a shock to those advocating making it easier for more fugitive entry and illegals to work in the US. A little sympathy to the victims of crime would be nice from the lefties. What did we used to call it? Soft on crime? What the lefties call immoral is called by right thinking people - effective law enforcement.

Jews stepping up efforts for immigration reform - JTA, Friday February 20, 2009
by Eric Fingerhut - JTA

Washington | It was the forgotten issue of the general election campaign, with the two U.S. presidential candidates barely mentioning it last fall. And with so much focus on the economy, it seems to have receded even more into the background.

But Jewish groups aren’t letting that stop them from making a big push for comprehensive immigration reform.

Several major Jewish organizations recently signed on to two new initiatives: a Jewish campaign aiming for “Progress by Pesach” on the immigration issue and the larger Interfaith Immigration Coalition working for the enactment of “humane and equitable” reform by the end of this year.

While Jewish groups are urging President Barack Obama and Congress to take action, they are focusing much of their attention on education and advocacy efforts in local communities, hoping to see pressure bubble up to Washington.

Melanie Nezer, senior director for U.S. programs and advocacy at the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, said the key to success in immigration reform is for local activists to let their representatives know how important it is — and that’s already starting.

“In the last year we’ve really started hearing from local communities that this is something that needed to be done,” Nezer said. “We really have the grass roots pushing a lot of this.”

In particular, she said, the impact of immigration raids on local communities — such as the one last year on the Agriprocessors kosher meat plant in Postville, Iowa, which resulted in hundreds of arrests — have demonstrated the “fallout” from problematic immigration policies “in a very direct way.”

Postville-like raids are a prime motivator of the Progress by Pesach initiative, in which groups including HIAS, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Reform and Reconstructionist movements and the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly have joined with a multitude of local organizations. Among their goals is to get Obama to issue an executive order or other directive to Immigration and Customs Enforcement curtailing the use of raids as a primary tool of immigration enforcement.

The organizations are aiming to collect 10,000 signatures by April 8, the first night of Passover, for a petition encouraging “humanitarian immigration reform” and decrying the “policy of relying on raids and enforcement tactics as the sole means of controlling immigration.” Visitors to the group’s Web site (www.hias.org/progress) also can send a letter to the president and members of Congress that contains similar language.

Coalition members argue that in addition to denying equal protection to those detained and splitting up families through jailing and deportations, the immigration raids also are expensive for the government and seriously impede businesses in a poor economy.

Many of the same national organizations, along with others, including United Jewish Communities and B’nai B’rith International, are part of the Interfaith Immigration Coalition.

The coalition’s platform in favor of “humane and equitable” immigration reform by the end of 2009 includes upholding family unity as a priority, creating a process for undocumented immigrants to earn legal status and eventual citizenship, restoring due process protections, reforming detention policies, and aligning the enforcement of immigration laws with humanitarian values.

“Throughout history, the Jewish community has been the quintessential immigrant community, often forced to flee from land to land to land,” said the director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Rabbi David Saperstein. “Having struggled to adjust to societies that did not welcome our arrival, we understand many of the challenges faced by today’s immigrants.”

Supreme Court hears immigrant's ID theft case 2/22/2009, 8:19 a.m. EST By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa, an undocumented worker from Mexico, made a curious and undeniably bad decision. After working under an assumed name for six years, he decided to use his real name and exchanged one set of phony identification numbers for another.

The change made his employer suspicious and the authorities were called in. The old numbers were made up, but the new ones he bought happened to belong to real people. Federal prosecutors said that was enough to label Flores-Figueroa an identity thief.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday on prosecutors' aggressive use of a new law that was intended to strengthen efforts to combat identity theft. In at least hundreds of cases last year, workers accused of immigration violations found themselves facing the more serious identity theft charge as well, without any indication they knew their counterfeit Social Security and other identification numbers belonged to actual people and were not made up.

The government has used the charge, which carries a mandatory two-year minimum prison term, to persuade people to plead guilty to the lesser immigration charges and accept prompt deportation. Many of those undocumented workers had been arrested in immigration raids.

The case hinges on how the justices resolve this question: Does it matter whether someone using a phony ID knows that it belongs to someone else?

The government, backed by victims' rights groups, says no. The "havoc wrecked on the victim's life is the same either way," said Stephen Masterson, a Los Angeles-based lawyer, in his brief for the victims' rights groups.

On the other side, Flores-Figueroa and more than 20 immigrants' rights groups, defense lawyers and privacy experts say that the law Congress passed in 2004 was aimed at the identity thief who gains access to people's private information to drain their accounts and run up bills in their name. Surveys estimate that more than 8 million people in the United States are victims of identity theft each year.

Flores-Figueroa acknowledges he used fraudulent documents to get and keep his job at a steel plant in East Moline, Ill. But he "had no intention of stealing anyone's identity," his lawyers said in their brief to the court. He traveled to Chicago and bought numbers from someone who trades in counterfeit IDs.

Had he been caught while using the fictitious name and numbers that went with it, he could not have been charged with the more serious offense.

Federal appeals courts in St. Louis, which ruled against Flores-Figueroa, Atlanta and Richmond, Va., have come down on the government's side. Appeals courts based in Boston, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., have ruled for defendants.

The government's use of identity theft charges in immigration cases was on full display in last year's raid on a kosher slaughterhouse in Postville, Iowa. Authorities charged 270 undocumented workers with identity theft, including its threat of two years in prison.

Chuck Roth, litigation director for the National Immigrant Justice Center in Chicago, called the charge "a bludgeon" that was intended to elicit guilty pleas to lesser charges. Roth's group joined one of the briefs supporting Flores-Figueroa.

All 270 workers accepted plea deals in which they also agreed not to contest deportation.

An additional 100 workers arrested in the same raid were using unassigned numbers and faced charges with little prospect of prison time.

The case is Flores-Figueroa v. U.S., 08-108.

Moonbats Say: Our Children Will Make Peace

2009-02-17T14:43:00.000-08:00

Kumbaya. Let peace begin with me. Give peace a chance.

Child sacrifice is strictly forbidden by Torah. Isaac, after all was brought upon the altar and taken down. Do not harm the boy. Do not do anything to him. For now I know that you fear G-d. You have not withheld your only son from Him - Bereshis 22:12. The Jewish child is a precious, holy gift from HaShem. A parent is given a child with a holy neshama to nurture into a spiritually holy life. However, far too often, Torah truths and the political "beliefs" of the parents come into conflict, especially amongst the moonbat-left crowd. In such occasions, logic dictates that the Jew set aside "beliefs" and seek Torah guidance.

The story below is a testimony to the sickness of liberalism in the Jewish world which demands moral equivalency even to the point of denying the truth and the strengthening of the undoing of Israel's most basic right to exist. My comments to the article follow the story. For those who want to stop now before reading the account of moonbat madness, the bottom line is that Jews need to stand up and say Israel is for the Jews and that there is no such thing as palis.

Young Muslims, Jews work toward peace
February 17, 2009

Groups try to bridge gap between religions

By Bob Smietana
THE TENNESSEAN

Shoshana Jaffa sums up the conflict in the Middle East like this: "Everybody wants to meet halfway, but no one knows where halfway is."

Jaffa was one of about 45 Jewish and Muslim teens and young adults who met Sunday at Congregation Micah in Brentwood (TN) to discuss the recent fighting in Gaza.

It's part of a dialogue between local Jews and Muslims aimed at building understanding between young people of different faiths. Organizers hope that if young people can learn to discuss the Middle East civilly, perhaps their parents can, as well.

In fact, there was just one rule in place at Sunday morning's meeting — no parents allowed.

"Adults can't have this conversation," Michael Pote, a Sunday School teacher at Congregation Micah, said to the interfaith group meeting in a classroom at the Brentwood synagogue. "Things like this don't happen, and it's a shame."

Pote says that Jewish and Muslim adults rarely discuss the Middle East conflict without ending in a shouting match. He and other organizers hope that young people can show their parents and faith communities a better way.

Sunday's meeting was part of an ongoing dialogue between youth groups at the Islamic Center of Nashville and two local synagogues, Congregation Micah and West End Synagogue in Nashville.

In December, a group of Jewish high school juniors visited the Islamic center for a lesson on the basics of Islam taught by the Muslim youth group. On Sunday, the Jewish teens returned the favor, leading a class on the basics of Judaism.

After the class, Pote, along with Rabbi Flip Rice of Congregation Micah, and Rashed Fakhruddin of the Islamic Center, led an hour-long discussion of the Middle East conflict. The students quizzed one another on everything from the history of Zionism to whether a two-state solution would solve the current conflict.

Several of the Muslim students wanted to know how much Israel's claim to Palestine was religious, and how much was political.

"Most of the people in this room do not believe that Israel is mine because it says so in our sacred texts," Rice said. "That doesn't mean that we don't want Israel to be there, but it's not a deed to the land."

When Rice asked the Jewish youth if any believe that Israel belonged to the Jewish people because the Bible says so, only one student raised her hand. On the other hand, several students said that while Jews had a right to their own homeland, the country should not exclude people of other faiths.

That idea is actually found in the Israeli Declaration of Independence, says S. Ilan Troen, director of the Schusterman Center for Israel Studies at Brandeis University in Waltham, Mass.

Still, Troen says that the religious connection of Jews to Palestine remains strong.

Students discuss history

During Sunday's conversation, the students also discussed the history of Zionism, which dates back to the 1890s. Inspired by the writings of Theodor Herzl, Jews began to move back to Palestine and buy land.

At the time, Pote said, Palestine wasn't viewed as a paradise on Earth.

"At that time, it was either desert or swampland," Pote said. "This was not ground where you'd say, 'Oh I have to live there.' "

Complicating matters, both the Jewish and Muslim students admitted, is the fact that Palestine has been ruled by outside powers for more than 2,000 years. Jews were forced from the land by the Romans beginning in 70 A.D., after a failed uprising. When large groups began to return around 1900, Palestine was ruled by the Turks, and then the British after World War II, until Israel's independence in 1948.

Sabina Mohyuddin, who helps lead the Muslim youth group, said it was important for the students to get a bigger picture on the conflict on Middle East.

"In the nightly news, it's two minutes. It won't do any justice to the whole issue," she said. Mohyuddin said that she encourages her students to read news accounts and history from different perspectives.

After the meeting ended, the Muslim students took a tour of the synagogue.

Amar Razali, a 22-year-old Muslim student who spent the discussion seated in front of a stained-glass window of the Ten Commandments in Hebrew,
said that he was surprised by how much Jews and Muslims have in common.

"We should focus on our similarities, and less on our differences."

Back in December during Israel's Operation Cast Lead attack on the terrorist gang Hamas the Tennessean reported on simultaneous rallies in downtown Nashville Local Rallies Mirror Israel-Palestine Splitwhere Jews and Christians came together to support Israel's right of self-defense against random rocket fire into cities in Israel from Gaza. Local Arabs came together to complain that Israel was fighting back. Today, the Tennessean reports that children "can show their parents and faith communities a better way." Children can be taught to ignore the facts when their parents aren't around. For the Muslim side that might not be so bad. But for the Jewish side.....

This story is interesting in that we find local Jews, tied to the land of Israel by religion, by history and by law not knowing that fact. It is curious that a "dialogue between local Jews and Muslims aimed at building understanding between young people of different faiths " has any mention of international politics at all. Muslim youth, unless specifically connected to the land of Israel by all rights should merely be as connected to Israel as any youth anywhere, which should be scant to little.

Like all people, they, their families, their friends can travel to Israel as tourists and visit wherever they please. The Jewish youth on the other hand, contrary to the article's quotes are indeed, by religious obligation connected to the land of Israel and should not be afraid of saying so. Unlike the quote in the article,

"Most of the people in this room do not believe that Israel is mine because it says so in our sacred texts," Rice said. "That doesn't mean that we don't want Israel to be there, but it's not a deed to the land."

even the atheist David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel testifying before the Peel Commission in 1937 said: "I say on behalf of the Jews that the Bible is our Mandate, the Bible which was written by us, in our own language, in Hebrew, in this very country. That is our Mandate. It was only recognition of this right which was expressed in the Balfour Declaration."

Ben-Gurion was only wrong in his citation of authorship but was quite correct in his logic. It is confusion over Jewish rights to the land and the pervasive liberal attitude to not say without hesitation that there is no such thing in history as an Arab Palestine which perpetuates the Arab Israel conflict. Let the youth meet, let them discuss common themes but let us not forget the truth, that Israel is the Jewish home land. Bring the kids together to feed the hungry and clean up the trash in the parks. Leave the political discussions out.

for review:
Daniel Pipes - Reader comment on article: The Forcible Removal of Israelis from Gaza

JCPA - AN ANSWER TO THE NEW ANTI-ZIONISTS:
THE RIGHTS OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO A
SOVEREIGN STATE IN THEIR HISTORIC HOMELAND

Front Page Magazine - How 'Nakba' Proves There's No Palestinian Nation

What Is Identity? Who Am I?

2009-01-28T12:00:00.000-08:00

In honor of Data Privacy Day 2009, APRPEH presents the article from 2006 "It’s Me, and Here’s My Proof: Why Identity and Authentication Must Remain Distinct - Technet Microsoft - Steve Riley" mentioned last week by Bruce Schneier on Schneier on Security. Schneier's blog is a great place online to go for security information.

When discussing identity we must first determine the audience to whom we are speaking. To some people identity is who they are. "My name is Ploni". To others identity might be a reflection of some important fact to which they identify answering the questions what they are, what they do. "I am a doctor", "I am a Republican", "I am a Jew". But is this really identity or something else?

Identity is defined in the information management and protection world as a way that an individual can be universally distinguished from another person and the access rights set for that person are enabled. Failure to authenticate identity results in denial of access.

For databases which the consumer visits, identity also means proof of identity and access level (authorization). In the article linked above, the reader will learn that identity is provided initially by the individual. Authentication is defined as proving who you are. Access is defined as setting user limitations. But of these three, identity and authentication can be faked by a perpetrator of identity theft. When the perpetrator acquires enough knowledge about the consumer to enter a less secure database - user name and password, we end up with hacked Paypal accounts and hijacked Facebook sites.

Truly secure databases will utilize two or multi factor authentication. This is how your ATM card operates. One factor is something you have (the card). One factor is something you know (PIN). Other factors could include some biometric or challenge question in addition to the PIN. Combining these authentications along with requiring them to change on a regular basis will provide the greatest level of security. None of this however will prevent a data breach. Only proper encryption of data can reduce the likelihood of stolen data being utilized by a perpetrator. Think of it this way. You cannot always prevent a traffic accident. But when you wear your seat belt and have an air bag, you can reduce the chances of serious injury to the driver and passenger when you do have an auto accident. Same with encryption. Not all encryption is equal and not all encryption is unbreakable. However, in the world of data theft when data is stolen, bought and sold daily - why bother wasting the time finding someone who can break the encryption (or steal the key).

However, in at least one high profile breach, the consumer information - encrypted and encryption key were stored on the same network.

{Avivah}Litan's sources in the financial industry have told her that thieves hacked into a as-yet-unknown system, and made off with data stored on debit cards' magnetic stripes, the associated "PIN blocks," or encrypted PIN data, and the key for that encrypted data.

The recommended multi-factor authentication will also not protect a consumer who's computer is vulnerable to key logger programs and malware. When your computer is transmitting all your user names, passwords, PINs, etc. to a fraud perpetrator along with what websites you visit, falling victim to at the very least account takeover is a sure bet. Real identity theft could be the result of your Social Security Number and Date of Birth being accessed from your computer. Computer security must be kept up to date. Again, this is the best protection possible but not fool proof.

In any event, data system designers need to think through these questions and try to solve the equation of security vs. user experience. While most people will say they want businesses they do electronic commerce with to be good stewards of their personal identifying information, the reality is that if the experience on that website is disappointing, the consumer will not come back again. Efficient access to identity and authentication on demand, along with storage or custodianship of information, information about us which we trust the custodian to protect, and policies which limit access to that information to an "as needed" basis is not the future of IT. It is the present. The future may look very different. The answer to the future of identity and authentication may be "you". I do not endorse stand alone biometrics mind you. But along with other authentications, maybe randomly applied authenticators along with private, trusted 3rd party identification warehousers, bio is coming.

It’s Me, and Here’s My Proof: Why Identity and Authentication Must Remain Distinct - Technet Microsoft - Steve Riley Published: February 14, 2006

The Gaza Cease Fire - Merely a "Lull"

2009-01-27T08:08:00.001-08:00

Hamas: Member wounded in Israeli air strike - USA Today

The MSM, reporting from Gaza City is once again showing its bias against Israel. By reporting an Israeli reaction to an act of violence at the beginning of an article, the intent is to cast the IDF and Israel in the worst possible light. The roadside bomb which killed an Israeli soldier and wounded three others, mentioned initially in the second paragraph without explanation and then in the third paragraph where you finally see for the first time that the air strike, the lead idea in the report, was in response to an attack on an Israeli patrol.

The writer of the article then attempts to place a few doubts in the reader's mind as to the true nature of the exchange. First, the reader is told that Israel threatened responses to violations of the cease fire. This is written specifically to label one party "Israel" and not label the other party so that the accountability falls on Israel. Since withdrawing its troops, Israel has threatened to retaliate hard for any violations of the truce. Notice the way that a fact {Israel withdrew her military and will try to enforce the cease fire} is mangled into a statement breeding mistrust - a play on the sneaky Jew mythology. It seems to say, "those Israelis are just looking for an excuse to attack".

The reader then moves on to ...Gazans struggle to resume normal.... The reader is supposed to think, if only the Israelis would leave alone the peace loving arabians in Gaza, they would be able to re-build their homes and cities that were shattered by Israeli bombardment. No mention is made of Israeli cities trying to recover from bombings and shellings. Renewed warfare would return a wave of rockets into Israel.

After an attempt to rehabilitate Hamas as a reputable organization that would never think of confiscating money sent by donors to relieve the non-combatant population {never mind this was going on during the conflict} a minuscule attempt to remind the reader that Hamas is a terrorist organization with a wanted leader (Ismail Haniyeh) is easily overlooked given the drama of the article itself.

The writer's bias is on display as an attempt to sub-consciously remind the reader of the slant that Israel used "dis-proportionate" force is found in the next part of the report

After Tuesday's bomb blast, heavy gunfire was heard along the border in central Gaza and Israeli helicopters hovered in the air firing machine gun bursts, Palestinian witnesses said. An Israeli jet set off a loud sonic boom over Gaza City not long afterward, possibly as a warning.

For one measly little road side bomb, an IED after all, the IDF responds with overwhelming force and executes collective punishment. Oh, those evil Jews.

Its one thing to write the normally biased report and to write badly. Its another to report half facts and to ignore facts.

In the days immediately following the cease-fire there was shelling by Israeli gunboats and some gunfire along the border — including the killing of two men Palestinian officials identified as farmers — but there were no serious clashes until Tuesday.

Somehow forgotten was Hamas rocket attacks against Israel after the cease fire. See also Israel Matzav report and video.

Moving right along the reporter makes no effort to tell the reader that he is about to quote a major arabian death cultist. We are just supposed to assume he is another member of the respected and beloved religion of peace:

Although there was no claim of responsibility, Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas leader, said Israel was to blame for continuing to fire into Gaza. Al-Masri said his group had not agreed to a full cease-fire but only to a "lull" in fighting.
"The Zionists are responsible for any aggression," he said.

Masri believes the cease-fire is a hudna. Hamas just needs some time to catch its breath, reload, rearm and rest a little while the international world gleefully rests on it laurels of once again interfering with the Israeli right of self-defense.

Masri is merely labeled "a Hamas leader" in the McPaper article. In a December 2007 article he is quoted as reported by JihadWatch as speaking to a Hamas rally,

In another speech to the rally, senior Hamas official Mushir al-Masri warned Israel to expect many casualties if troops invade the coastal territory in an attempt to stop almost daily rocket firing by militants into Israel.

"Jews, go back, because we have already dug graves for you," Masri said. Israel carries out regular raids on Gaza and has killed dozens of militants in the past month.

Finally, we have the summary paragraph:

Israel wants an end to Hamas rocket attacks and guarantees that Hamas will be prevented from smuggling weapons into Gaza from Egypt. Hamas has demanded that Israel and Egypt reopen Gaza's border crossings, which have been largely closed since Hamas took power. The crossings are Gaza's economic lifeline.

See the problem? Hamas, the terrorist organization with stated goals to kill Jews and destroy Israel has had it's border crossings legitimately shut off by Israel(not necessarily so successfully). The crossings are Gaza's economic lifeline. Since when has Hamas attempted to build any economic system? The first thing that happened when Israel withdrew from Gaza was the destruction of the business infrastructure that existed. Yet, this "factoid" in the article remains unquestioned. Worse, this false statement is meant to be the fulcrum's center point against Israel's demand that cities inside Israel should be free of random rocket and mortar fire. The writer is attempting to equate denial of weapons to terrorists with the use of those same weapons against civilian populations. In the mind of the antiJew, the Jews are just as guilty as their harassers - moral equivalency must reign. Both sides must come to terms.

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) — The Islamic Hamas movement says one of its members has been wounded in an Israeli airstrike in the southern Gaza Strip.
Tuesday's violence is the worst since the sides declared a cease-fire last week.

Hamas says the militant was struck as he was riding a motorcycle in the southern Gaza town of Khan Younis. Residents say Israeli tanks and bulldozers have also entered the area where the roadside bombing took place and are leveling some farmland.

The airstrike comes hours after a roadside bomb along Israel's border with Gaza killed an Israeli soldier and wounded three others.

Palestinian militants detonated a bomb next to an Israeli army patrol along the border with Gaza on Tuesday, killing one soldier and wounding three in the first serious clash since a cease-fire went into effect more than a week ago.

Israeli soldiers briefly crossed the border in search of the attackers, and Israel's defense minister, Ehud Barak, called an urgent meeting of Israel's top defense officers, saying Israel "cannot accept" the attack.

"We will respond, but there is no point in elaborating," Barak said in comments released by his office.

The explosion jolted the calm that has largely prevailed since Israel ended a devastating three-week offensive on Jan. 17. Since withdrawing its troops, Israel has threatened to retaliate hard for any violations of the truce.

The flare-up came as Gazans struggle to resume normal life after the fighting, and as international donors discuss how best to help the territory rebuild. Gaza's Hamas leader said Tuesday the group — which is boycotted as a terrorist organization by the U.S. and European Union — would not try to claim any of the reconstruction funds, an announcement that appeared aimed at clearing the way for money to start flowing.

The announcement from Ismail Haniyeh, who remains in hiding because of fears he could be assassinated by Israel, appeared directed at donors who concerned their funds could end up in Hamas' hands.

"Our aim now is to ease the suffering of our people and to remove the aftermath of the aggression in Gaza," the statement said. "Therefore we emphasize that we are not concerned to receive the money for rebuilding Gaza and we are not seeking that."

After Tuesday's bomb blast, heavy gunfire was heard along the border in central Gaza and Israeli helicopters hovered in the air firing machine gun bursts, Palestinian witnesses said. An Israeli jet set off a loud sonic boom over Gaza City not long afterward, possibly as a warning.

The Israeli military said the bomb targeted an Israeli patrol near the border community of Kissufim. It was not clear if it was planted after the cease-fire, or whether it was an older device. There was no claim of responsibility.

Not long after the bombing, a 27-year-old Gaza farmer was killed by Israeli gunfire along the border several miles away, according to Dr. Moaiya Hassanain of Gaza's Health Ministry. Two other Palestinians were wounded. The military had no immediate comment, and it was unclear if the two incidents were related.

Israel closed its crossings into Gaza to humanitarian aid traffic after briefly opening them Tuesday morning. Gaza border official Raed Fattouh said Israeli officials informed him the closure was due to the attack.

Israel and Gaza militants have been holding their fire since Israel ended its offensive, which was aimed at halting rocket fire from the territory. Israel announced a unilateral cease-fire on Jan. 17, and that was followed by a similar announcement from Gaza militants.

In the days immediately following the cease-fire there was shelling by Israeli gunboats and some gunfire along the border — including the killing of two men Palestinian officials identified as farmers — but there were no serious clashes until Tuesday.

Although there was no claim of responsibility, Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas leader, said Israel was to blame for continuing to fire into Gaza. Al-Masri said his group had not agreed to a full cease-fire but only to a "lull" in fighting.

"The Zionists are responsible for any aggression," he said.

Egypt is currently trying to negotiate a longer-term arrangement to allow quiet in the coastal territory of 1.4 million people, which has been ruled by the Islamic militants of Hamas since June 2007. Local experts believe the fighting caused some $2billion in damage.

Israel wants an end to Hamas rocket attacks and guarantees that Hamas will be prevented from smuggling weapons into Gaza from Egypt. Hamas has demanded that Israel and Egypt reopen Gaza's border crossings, which have been largely closed since Hamas took power. The crossings are Gaza's economic lifeline.

The Israeli offensive killed 1,285 Palestinians, more than half of them civilians, according to records kept by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians, were also killed during the fighting.

The Vatican and Holocaust Denial

2009-01-26T08:39:00.000-08:00

On the heels of Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino using Holocaust references to criticize Operation Cast Lead, a de facto admission that the Shoah did indeed occur, the Vatican strikes again with dishonoring and disgracing the memory of Jewish Martyrdom in Europe. Relations between the Vatican and world Jewry seem to be heading into a period of uncertainty after what seemed to be a time period of relatively decent relations fostered by the previous pontiff. It is noted in the story below the irony of a German born Pope seemingly insensitive to Holocaust revisionism and false application of imagery. The claim by the Bishop is

"people who are against uh -what is widely believed today as "quote unquote the Holocaust", I think those people conclude, the revisionists as they're called, uh I think the most serious conclude that between 200,000 and 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps but not one of them by gassing in gas chambers"

One could easily believe from the video, especially in terms of the Bishop being unable to define anti-semitism, that he might also conclude that those numbers 200,000 - 300,000 were far too few.

The Jewish world needs to get over dealing with the Vatican for now and just recognize that the children of the Nazis both in body and spirit are now in charge.

German Jews condemn pope move over Holocaust denier - Reuters
BERLIN (Reuters) - Pope Benedict's rehabilitation of a bishop who has denied the full extent of the Holocaust is a slap in the face for the Jewish community, especially coming from a German pope, Germany's Central Council of Jews said on Monday.

"It's a deep shock," Dieter Graumann, the Council's vice-president, told Reuters. "I'm not imputing bad intentions to the Vatican or the pope, but in fact this is a slap in the face for the Jewish community."

"It's a provocation and I'm worried that dialogue between Jews and Catholics will now be frozen to some extent, that the process of reconciliation that has advanced so much over the past 50 years will be interrupted, if not aborted."

Pope Benedict on Saturday rehabilitated four traditionalist bishops who lead the far-right Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), which has about 600,000 members and rejects modernizations of Roman Catholic worship and doctrine.

One of the four, British-born Richard Williamson, has made statements denying the full extent of the Nazi Holocaust of European Jews, as accepted by mainstream historians.

"Especially from a German pope, I would have expected more understanding and sensitivity," Graumann said. "The fact that this comes from a German pope leaves a certain taste and provokes certain feelings."

In comments to Swedish television broadcast and widely available on the Internet, Williamson has said: "I believe there were no gas chambers." He said up to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi camps, rather than the 6 million widely accepted.

Graumann said it had taken a long time and much effort to strengthen dialogue between Jewish and Catholic communities over the past decades, adding Pope Benedict's predecessor John Paul II had moved the process forward significantly.

"This dialogue is being overshadowed by what has happened," he said. "Those who rehabilitate anti-Semites are ... bringing anti-Semitism back into the church to some extent."

"It's without bad intentions but that's the actual effect," he said.

The four traditionalist bishops were thrown out of the Roman Catholic Church in 1988 for being ordained without Vatican permission. The Vatican said the excommunications were lifted after the bishops affirmed their willingness to accept Church teachings and papal authority.

(Reporting by Kerstin Gehmlich; editing by Ralph Boulton)

Forecasting Obama's Budget and Economic Mistakes

2009-01-25T19:37:00.000-08:00

Here is a good read making the free market case in opposition to the Obama economic plan. The article written by John Tamny of H.C. Wainwright Economics provides an important lesson in economics and the damage caused by ineffective and damaging government intervention. Government moving wealth around, the essence of the Obama tax plan disguised as tax credits will stifle demand and not serve as a vehicle of economic growth. Tamny points out that since no change in wealth will result from the Obama tax policy (unlike what would be the result of an across the board real tax rate reduction) it merely is a punitive measure aimed at the producers and achievers in favor of the non-producers and non-achievers in the economy. John Tamny's supporting argument as to why he believes that the Obama plan will result in slowing economic recovery is based in part upon the crowding out theory. Since government debt is now at historic levels both in real dollars and in percentage of the GDP less money can be made available for the sort of entrepreneurial activity which drives economic growth.

The Obama plan at every turn takes decision making away from the private sector and replaces it with government redistribution and allocation of hard earned dollars. The American people still have the ingenuity, creativity, and innovative spirit needed to lead the world economy if only the government will not stand in the way and not interfere with the free market's invisible hand.

However, this time unlike in other recession and recovery cycles, the US government is now part owner of some of the biggest names in the financial sector and the auto sector due to billions of dollars in debt buyouts meaning, Uncle Sam sits on the boards of these companies that were bailed out. That debt belongs to all of us yet we have little to no say in demanding that those companies now partly owned by the taxpayers shape up. Tamny points out the truth proven time after time that left alone, companies or industries are reorganized and that the bailouts are "... delaying the process whereby people and capital are managed productively. "

hat tip to Ralph Bristol's Nashville's Morning News, WTN 99.7
Ralph interviews John Tamny on Friday mornings.

John Tamny is editor of RealClearMarkets, a senior economist with H.C. Wainwright Economics, and a senior economic advisor to Toreador Research and Trading (www.trtadvisors.com). He can be reached at jtamny@realclearmarkets.com.

Obama's Economic Solutions Are Contractionary
By John Tamny
"The man, that lives upon the production of other people, originates no demand for those productions; he merely puts himself in the place of the producer, to the great injury of production.” - Jean-Baptiste Say, A Treatise On Political Economy

With President Barack Obama now in control in Washington, it’s time to ask how his economic plan might affect the real economy.

Obama has stated that “We are in one of those periods in American history where we don’t have Republican or Democratic problems, we have American problems.” Obama and his economic team have released a broad outline of the way they intend to fix an economy that some say is on the verge of falling into a second Great Depression. But Obama’s solutions meant to aid the economy—at least on paper—won’t fix anything. Indeed, if implemented it’s easy to see how they might actually cause the economy harm.

Eager to attract support from the Republican side of the aisle, Obama has expressed a high degree of willingness to include tax cuts in his post-inauguration legislation. At first blush, tax cuts sound appealing and speak positively about a politician who’s been up front with his belief that a “monopoly on good ideas does not belong to a single party.”

Good political theater for sure, but we might add that neither party has a monopoly on bad ideas either. Reading the fine print, we see that the definition of a tax cut in Washington is far more nuanced than what we might be used to. The tax cuts Obama has in mind might attract votes, but they have very little to do with economic growth.

First up are income credits described as tax cuts. The latter are meant for low-income families, and as the Wall Street Journal described them, they will allow “more families that earn too little to pay income taxes to claim at least some of the $1,000-per-child tax credit.” At present, a household must have income of $12,500 per year to be eligible for tax credits, but under the Obama plan, the cutoff will be reduced to $3,000.

So what Obama and his advisors call a tax cut is really only a transfer payment from one set of hands to another. Such redistribution fosters no new production, and with that, no subsequent demand.

For at least two reasons, the credit will be an economic retardant. Productive workers will see more of their earnings taxed or borrowed in order to stimulate immediate consumption. When we consider that all profits in society result from past parsimony, we can see that the productive economy will be weakened if this form of alleged stimulus is put in place.

Most important, Obama should not run from the basic truth that economic growth is always and everywhere the result of productive work effort. To the extent that low-income families are plied with yet another form of welfare, this will reduce the individual incentives within impoverished households to engage in more work.

Put simply, the tax credits masked as cuts will reduce the work incentives for those redistributed from, all the while making real work less necessary for the alleged beneficiaries of the credit.

On the taxation front for top earners, the story gets worse. The late Warren Brookes once wrote that “We are all blessed by the genius of the relatively few.” What Brookes meant was that thanks to the frequently innovative and entrepreneurial efforts of a vital few in this country, all Americans are able to enjoy better jobs and better products.

That is far from Obama’s mind. He has made plain that he intends to return the tax rate on top earners to the Clinton-era level of 39.6 percent, and the capital gains rate on investment success will move from 15 to 20 percent. Higher tax rates in the Obama model are meant to pay for the aforementioned credits, along with yet another stimulus package.

Assuming Obama’s plan to soak the rich works, it has to be said that increased revenues for the federal government will reduce the amount of capital available for the business sector to fund the wages of the poor. Whether the government is borrowing or taxing in order to redistribute, capital is being removed from the private pool of available funds meant to create new industries, new companies, and new jobs.

And when it comes to Brookes’s vital few, the poor and the middle class alike will be made worse off if the successful among us choose to remove their skills from the productive economy due to higher penalties on work.

Jean-Baptiste Say once noted that the heavily taxed “are seldom regular in their payments,” but it seems he actually downplayed the negatives that come with penalizing the successful. If they were merely irregular in their payments to the tax man the economy would be fine, but the real threat is perhaps the unseen. Indeed, it’s tax distortions which cause the rich to be irregular in their work and investment habits that lead to economic degradation.

With regard to corporate taxation, according to another Wall Street Journal account, a key provision of Obama’s plan is to “allow companies to write off huge losses incurred last year, as well as any losses from 2009, to retroactively reduce tax bills dating back five years.” Translated, failing companies will write their losses off on the backs of successful individuals and companies alike.

When we consider what actually causes economies to grow, the corporate tax provision is creating incentives for something quite the opposite. In his Theory of Economic Development, Joseph Schumpeter wrote that “development consists primarily in employing existing resources in a different way.” But if failing companies are kept alive not by a simple reduction in the tax rate on their profits, but rather thanks to a bailout of the non-financial variety, entrepreneurs waiting in the wings to redeploy mismanaged physical and human capital will be hampered in their efforts to bring the economy out of its slump.

In the end, entrepreneurs can only innovate to the extent that they’re able to purchase the assets of failed business combinations with visions of more profitable future combinations. So when governments prop up failed or dying businesses, far from saving the economy, they only hurt it by delaying the process whereby people and capital are managed productively.

All of which brings us to the jobs portion of the Obama corporate tax plan. For the companies that make new hires or forgo layoffs, the Obama administration is set to offer a one-year tax credit in return. Once again, the incentives here are backwards, and if heeded, will surely stimulate the opposite of growth. Indeed, if there’s one certain rule when it comes to business success, it has to do with producing as much as possible with as little labor as possible. Far from a job killer, when companies do more with less they free up the very capital that allows them to expand into other potentially profitable areas previously out of reach due to a lack of funds.

To the extent that businesses keep workers employed for non-productive reasons, the economy will surely be rendered poorer in time. Workers are like capital. When either labor or capital is wasted, the end result is less growth.

The tax portion of the Obama package includes write-offs for business expenditures, and it’s safe to assume here that companies producing business equipment will be the beneficiaries of this new rule. Equipment write-offs recall a frequent Wainwright theme over the years that when the Federal Reserve moves around its target interest rate, it merely reschedules economic growth, as opposed to fostering new economic activity. Write-offs should be viewed in much the same way. Businesses will simply move up equipment purchases in the near-term; those purchases will detract from capital spending over the long-term.

It’s also important to remember that as a mature economy, U.S. economic growth has very little to do with spending on capital equipment, but quite a lot to do with spending on human capital. Using Google as an example, its growth over the years has been the result of heavy investment in the best minds, as opposed to the best equipment. Equipment write-offs at best address a past version of the U.S. economy that most Americans would no longer recognize.

Sadly, the tax portion of Obama’s recovery plan was only put in place to give Republicans the political cover necessary to vote for the various spending initiatives that the new administration envisions. This is the alleged “stimulus” part of Obama’s economic package, and as Wainwright publications have emphasized over the years, government spending can in no way stimulate economic growth.

Beyond the negative work incentives created by wealth redistribution, the basic reality is that no one—least of all government—can profit from the same transaction twice. That’s the assumption the government is making when it claims it can grow the economy through the transfer of wealth already created. In a sense, the very notion of stimulus turns routine economics on its head.

But to address arguably the worst aspect of Obama’s proposed $775 billion spending package, we must once again bring in the notion of the entrepreneur waiting in the wings. It’s tautological to say that entrepreneurs cannot innovate without capital. When the federal government is borrowing at relatively low rates from the private sector, there’s necessarily less capital at higher rates for entrepreneurs to access in order to utilize human and physical capital more effectively.

At its core, Barack Obama’s economic recovery plan is anti-entrepreneur, and as such, anti-growth. So while we should expect to read quite a lot about how “change” in Washington will enhance our economic wellbeing, we shouldn’t be fooled. The new administration plans to engage in feverish activity. It may be meant to make us better off, but it would be charitably naïve to mistake it for any real prescription for economic recovery.

2009 Data Breach Season Begins Strong

2009-01-25T05:41:00.000-08:00

2009 is not even a full month old and already we have learned of two significant data breaches. Both breaches 5 Million Checkfree Consumers Warned involve account information, not personal identifying information (PII). Both, however could leave actual bank accounts of millions of consumers vulnerable to unauthorized access. The latter breach, if it proves to be as big as the initial indicators reveal, may result in the selling or closing of the business. Too extreme? The Heartland breach is being compared in scope to TJX (TJ Max) who was unable to handle the attorney general investigation, publicity and fines changed hands or even a better example,CardSystems Solutions which ended up sold and doing business as a different entity after the FTC had its way.

At some level, there is always a negligence story buried in these breaches. While even the most secure company could fall victim to a breach due to intentional attack, the least secure companies will almost certainly become breach victims and some many times. Breaches can be the result of company data retention policies, keeping more PII or account information than needed for far too long, providing more access than needed to that data to too many employees, or basically not doing enough to block electronic access to their data or not encrypting data transmissions. Having said all that, a data breach does not need to put at risk thousands of consumers at one time to be a data breach. One employee with access to consumer information as part of normal job duties carefully targeting a few of those consumer records and selling them to some one on the outside infrequently also amounts to a breach of data.

Given the fact that Heartland was unaware their responsibility as a trusted data custodian had been compromised until notified by Visa and MasterCard leads an unbiased observer to believe that Heartland's security was indeed lacking. The company is now claiming that malware infected their database, a conclusion that Heartland's own IS department should have discovered without having to be told by a third party. All this points to rogue/insider cooperation or even an insider planning the entire attack. That a global crime organization had access to Heartland's data does not mean that the same organization stole the data. PII or in this case credit and debit card numbers are easy to transmit back and forth (there would not be a credit industry otherwise) and can change hands many times before ending up in the hands of an end user perpetrator.

The scenario of greatest concern is whether or not debit card numbers along with PINs were compromised. The PIN system was once thought of as the solution to electronic credit and ATM fraud. That idea has gone by the wayside. From intentional malware type hacks like at Heartland or intercepted, non-encrypted transmissions (or weak encryption) debit and PIN while still a little safer for the credit issuers than standard credit card transactions is not the saviour it was once thought to be. From the consumer's perspective, the dispute of un-authorized credit transactions is pretty simple. Disputes where money comes directly from your checking account, money which may well have been set aside for rent, car payment, or mortgage payments, is another matter. And while disputes involving Heartland will probably be fairly easy, a consumer may still find themselves out the funds for a short period of time, (up to 10 days in some cases). Don't be surprised if Heartland is forced to sell due to fines and credit issuers billing them for each account that had to be closed and re-opened, a cost which the unsteady banking industry will do everything possible to pass along to someone.

Heartland: How This Disaster Exploded - Bank Info Security
January 22 - Tom Field
Let's talk about how a big disaster becomes an even bigger one.
On Tues., Jan. 20 - Inauguration Day - Heartland Payment Systems (HPY) President/CFO Robert Baldwin announced the company had been breached sometime in 2008. Heartland, which processes roughly 100 million transactions per month for 250,000 different businesses, says it discovered malware attached to its processing platform, and an undetermined number of consumers had their names and card numbers exposed to hackers. The breach has subsequently been contained, Baldwin says, and he believes the incident to be part of a broader cyber fraud operation.

Heartland did what we wish all such companies would do. They stood up and said "We've been breached."

Mind you, no enterprising journalist uncovered and exposed this breach, nor was it revealed by any external investigators or law enforcement agencies. It became news when Baldwin made it news, announcing the breach and a website, www.2008breach.com, set up for consumers who fear they may have been victimized. Rather than try to sweep the incident under the rug or hope not to be exposed, Heartland did what we wish all such companies would do. They stood up and said "We've been breached."
But, boy, talk about "No good deed will go unpunished..."

Within hours of the Heartland news going public, our office was besieged by queries from eager PR reps whose clients wanted to jump on this story as a platform to discuss security strategies and solutions.

And you could see right away that many of these correspondents hadn't quite read the story's fine print. Because suddenly a breach of undetermined magnitude had become:

"... a data breach that could be potentially larger than TJX."

"...tens of millions of credit and debit transactions may have been compromised..."

"...a data breach of 100 million credit cards."

"...the biggest breach ever reported."

By late Weds afternoon, I was contacted by KPCC, Southern California Public Radio, whose talk show host Patt Morrison wanted to include me in a panel discussion of the Heartland breach. The storyline here:

"Credit card processor Heartland Payment Systems suffered a huge security breach in 2008, allowing hackers to steal credit card information on more than 100 million accounts. What damage has been done and how worried should consumers be?"

By Weds night, CNBC's On the Money hosted a short exchange on Heartland, punctuated by a bunch of airbags talking over one another and attributing this breach "to a bunch of kids in an Internet café in Amsterdam."

It's like an Internet-age game of telephone. Person A says one thing to person B, and by the time it gets down the line to person Z, the story is unrecognizable.

So, the question for Heartland today is: "What damage has been done and how worried should Heartland be?"

I don't even know how to begin to answer that. Until Tuesday, it's safe to say that the average citizen didn't even know who or what Heartland was. Now, having been publicized everywhere from The New York Times and USA Today to NPR and CNBC, the company is suddenly the poster child for what the public is going to perceive as "the biggest breach ever reported."

But while Heartland struggles with its breach and the popular media struggle with getting the story straight, there are serious issues here for all of us to deal with:

Yes, Virginia, there are global fraud schemes - It's foolish for anyone who calls himself an expert to attribute a sophisticated data breach to "a bunch of kids in an Internet café in Amsterdam." We're so past that stereotype now, and it's time to acknowledge that the biggest external threats are organized, professional, expert criminals who are focused 110% on finding new ways to crack secure systems. That said...

Locking the outside door is only half the job - Think about it: Two of the biggest breaches of 2008 - Bank of New York Mellon and Countrywide Financial - were the result of data loss and a rogue insider. These are two of the biggest threats any of us face today. How much critical data walks out of your institution daily in a laptop, PDA or portable media (thumb drives, etc), and what happens if those devices get left on a train? How many critical employees have walked out of your company's employ recently - their choice or yours - and what sensitive information might have walked out with them? How will your trusted employees behave if they fear losing their jobs or their homes? Remember, bad times don't build character; they reveal it. We're going to see a lot of scary revelations in 2009.

Heartland is just the beginning - Right now, Heartland's greater issue isn't that it's "the biggest breach ever reported," but rather that it's the first one of 2009, and it fell on a day when the only other news was the Inauguration. It became the big story by default. Safe to say, though, we'll see many similar headlines as the year unfolds. Times are tough, the threats are real, and before this year gets much older we'll all be hearing about new hacks, lost data, malicious or inattentive insiders and The Next Big Story.
It's funny. On Tuesday morning, I'm sure Heartland President Robert Baldwin felt he'd done the right thing by standing up and saying "We've been breached." I wonder how he feels about that decision today?

different opinion:
Report Credit:Heartland Payment Systems - Breach Blog

Response:
From the online sources cited above:

NOTE: This breach is very significant and potentially affects millions of credit and debot card holders from multiple credit and debit card companys, regardless of bank or card issuer. In this section, we will first explore the press release before moving on to additional facts found discovered by others.

HEARTLAND PAYMENT SYSTEMS PRESS RELEASE:
[Evan] I have to say that this is one of the worst press releases I have ever read announcing a breach. I'll comment below.

Princeton, NJ — January 20, 2009 — Payments processor Heartland Payment Systems has learned it was the victim of a security breach within its processing system in 2008. Heartland believes the intrusion is contained.
[Evan] The very first sentence in the press release states that Heartland is the victim. In my opinion, it is rarely a good idea to announce yourself as a victim when you are the custodian of confidential information. The owners are truly the victims.

"We found evidence of an intrusion last week and immediately notified federal law enforcement officials as well as the card brands," said Robert H.B. Baldwin, Jr., Heartland's president and chief financial officer.
[Evan] Heartland was actually alerted by Visa and MasterCard.

"We understand that this incident may be the result of a widespread global cyber fraud operation, and we are cooperating closely with the United States Secret Service and Department of Justice."

No merchant data or cardholder Social Security numbers, unencrypted personal identification numbers (PIN), addresses or telephone numbers were involved in the breach.
[Evan] So what? I want to know what information WAS involved.

Nor were any of Heartland's check management systems; Canadian, payroll, campus solutions or micropayments operations; Give Something Back Network; or the recently acquired Network Services and Chockstone processing platforms.
[Evan] Again, I don't care about what Heartland systems were safe. I want to know what information wasn't safe. There is no mention of the specific data that was actually compromised anywhere in the press release.

After being alerted by Visa® and MasterCard® of suspicious activity surrounding processed card transactions, Heartland enlisted the help of several forensic auditors to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter.

Last week, the investigation uncovered malicious software that compromised data that crossed Heartland's network.

Heartland immediately took a number of steps to further secure its systems.

In addition, Heartland will implement a next-generation program designed to flag network anomalies in real-time and enable law enforcement to expeditiously apprehend cyber criminals.
[Evan] This sounds like network intrusion detection/prevention, which has been around for quite some time. Network intrusion detection/prevention employing anomaly detection is used by many organizations processing much less sensitive information.

Heartland has created a website — www.2008breach.com — to provide information about this incident and advises cardholders to examine their monthly statements closely and report any suspicious activity to their card issuers.
[Evan] This web site is nothing more than the press release and Q&A with regurgitated press release information.

Cardholders are not responsible for unauthorized fraudulent charges made by third parties.
[Evan] Not directly anyway. The money comes from somewhere (banks) and the costs will be passed on.

"Heartland apologizes for any inconvenience this situation has caused," continued Baldwin.

"Heartland is deeply committed to maintaining the security of cardholder data, and we will continue doing everything reasonably possible to achieve this objective."

FROM OTHER SOURCES:

A data breach last year at Princeton, N.J., payment processor Heartland Payment Systems may have compromised tens of millions credit and debit card transactions

If accurate, such figures may make the Heartland incident one of the largest data breaches ever reported.

The data breach could turn out to rival the massive breach reported by TJX in 2007, which affected as many as 94 million credit card accounts.

Robert Baldwin, Heartland's president and chief financial officer, said the company, which processes payments for more than 250,000 businesses, began receiving fraudulent activity reports late last year from MasterCard and Visa on cards that had all been used at merchants which rely on Heartland to process payments.
[Evan] According to this statement, it appears as though fraud has already occurred. This is important information to keep in mind as you read more below.

Baldwin said 40 percent of transactions the company processes are from small to mid-sized restaurants across the country.

He declined to name any well-known establishments or retail clients that may have been affected by the breach.

Baldwin said it would be unfair to mention any one of his company's customers.

"No merchant of ours represents even [one-tenth of one percent] of our volume, and to put out any name associated with what is obviously an unfortunate incident is not fair," he said.
[Evan] This is an indication of how widespread this could get.

"Their customers might end up having their cards used fraudulently, but that fraud might turn out to have come from their store, or it might be from another Heartland store and no one will ever really know."
[Evan] Exactly, and this makes this a very scary breach.

Baldwin said it wasn't until last week that investigators uncovered the source of the breach: A piece of malicious software planted on the company's payment processing network that recorded payment card data as it was being sent for processing to Heartland by thousands of the company's retail clients.

Baldwin said that the breach was the result of keylogging malware, which covertly captures anything typed on an infected computer, such as user names and passwords.
[Evan] How could a computer connected to a network that carries extremely sensitive information become infected with malware? There are many ways in which malware can find it's way into an organization, but on a network like this?

"There were two elements to it, one of which was a keylogger that got through our firewall," he said. "Then subsequently it was able to propagate a sniffer onto some of the machines in our network. And those are what was actually grabbing the transactions as they floated over our network."

Baldwin said Heartland does not know how long the malicious software was in place, how it got there or how many accounts may have been compromised.

The stolen data includes names, credit and debit card numbers and expiration dates.
[Evan] Finally, we get an indication of what data was compromised.

"The transactional data crossing our platform, in terms of magnitude... is about 100 million transactions a month," Baldwin said. "At this point, though, we don't know the magnitude of what was grabbed."

The company stressed that no merchant data or cardholder Social Security numbers, unencrypted personal identification numbers (PIN), addresses or telephone numbers were jeopardized as a result of the breach.

The data stolen includes the digital information encoded onto the magnetic stripe built into the backs of credit and debit cards.

Armed with this data, thieves can fashion counterfeit credit cards by imprinting the same stolen information onto fabricated cards.

"The nature of the [breach] is such that card-not-present transactions are actually quite difficult for the bad guys to do because one piece of information we know they did not get was an address," Baldwin said.
[Evan] This maybe true in some card-not-present transactions, but means nothing for data written to physical cards. People can make credit cards out of any card with a magnetic strip; gift cards that you can pick up at the Target checkout, blank cards bought online, etc. For people who want to go the card-not-present route, it may not be difficult to find an address if given a name. Mr. Baldwin's statement here means little.

As a result, he said, the prospect of thieves using the stolen data to rack up massive amounts of fraud at online merchants "is not impossible, but much less likely."
[Evan] Again maybe this holds true for ONLINE merchants, but means nothing for PHYSICAL merchants.

In many cases where a processor experiences a breach, the affected banks may simply re-issue new cards to some customers.
[Evan] Which costs the bank $10-12 per card by some estimates. The bank pays for the fraudulent charges by not holding legitimate cardholders responsible AND/OR reissues cards at 10-12 bucks per card. The costs add up quick and will likely be passed on to all customers. We all end up paying eventually.

It is unclear whether consumers who receive new account numbers from their bank will ever be able to definitively tie the re-issuance to the Heartland breach.

Baldwin said it was not appropriate for Heartland to offer affected consumers credit protection or other identity theft protection services.

"Identity theft protection is appropriate when there is enough personal information lost that identity theft is possible," he said.
[Evan] Not identity theft, just credit/debit card fraud.

"At the same time, we recognize and feel badly about the inconvenience this is going to cause consumers."

Avivah Litan, a fraud analyst with Gartner Inc., questioned the timing of Heartland's disclosure -- a day in which many Americans and news outlets are glued to coverage of Barack Obama's inauguration as the nation's 44th president.

"This looks like the biggest breach ever disclosed, and they're doing it on inauguration day?" Litan said. "I can't believe they waited until today to disclose. That seems very deceptive."
[Evan] After reading the horrible press release and supporting information, I tend to agree with Avivah Litan.

Baldwin said Heartland worked to disclose the breach last week.

"Due to legal reviews, discussions with some of the players involved, we couldn't get it together and signed off on until today," Baldwin said.

"We considered holding back another day, but felt in the interests of transparency we wanted to get this information out to cardholders as soon as possible, recognizing of course that this is not an ideal day from the perspective of visibility."
[Evan] Transparency? Please.

"There are a host of things we didn't go into that we're implementing, some larger, some smaller, all of which are designed to say, 'Okay, we had a commitment to high security. We were PCI compliant -- that was certified in April of last year. Yet we had this problem. Clearly we need to do more.' So our IT team is implementing as many additional precautions as it can as quickly as possible."
[Evan] Wait?! PCI compliance doesn't equal "high security"? The answer is NO. It's a start.

If this data breach represents heartache for Heartland, security vendors see it as an opportunity to play doctor.

"As the Heartland breach illustrates, you can be PCI compliant and still be breached," said Phil Neray, VP of security strategy at database security company Guardium, in an e-mailed statement. "Good compliance does not mean good security."
[Evan] Exactly.

Commentary:
There is still too much information missing. Personally, I am very displeased with Heartland's response and spin. It's disappointing. Effective communication is a critical piece of a good incident response plan. Poor communication can be more destructive to a company than the breach itself.

There are many missing facts. If fraud has already taken place AND it can be tied to this breach, then I think we have a very big problem on our hands. If not, we still know that the potential is there. Who would think that a little piece of code (the malware) could cause so much trouble? What can you learn from this and put into practice in your organization?

I am always interested in your thoughts…

more:
Heartland Payment Systems' Big Breach & Lame PR Tactic - The Information Week - George Hulme

Reform Guilt - All Halacha Must be Stowed in Luggage

2009-01-23T07:19:00.000-08:00

The Reformists are fighting El Al's decision to have seperate seating flights for religious Jews. Liberal Judaism can justify and tolerate every yetzer hara but has no tolerance for traditional Jewish observance. No - You may not ask for services which accommodate the most observant of Jews, even or maybe especially in Israel. The guilt of the non-religious Jew is brought to the surface upon seeing an observant yid talking Torah, doing mitzvas, dressing in "funny" clothes and embarrassingly un-modern. In a time when Jewish unity is so necessary, divisiveness such as this anti-charedim action is disheartening.

The Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism (IMPJ)decision to question the legality of special flights is an antiJew position taken by Reformists and a cynical attempt to play socially divisive politics so close to the Knesset elections. With the polls showing electoral power shifting away from the left, Reformists pull out the social warfare card to help stir things up. Bashing the observant is typical leftist politics and their friends in the IMPJ will carry the water. After all, in their minds, we have to stop these favors for the charedim who take and don't give back.

El Al needs to stick to its plans and ignore those who meddle in the airlines business.

Reform movement challenges legality of kosher flights.
Movement's legal branch asks transportation minister, El Al CEO to clarify plans to launch special flights for haredi public that would include separation between men and women - YNet
Kobi Nahshoni

The Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism (IMPJ), which represents the Reform stream of Judaism in the country, has asked the Transportation Ministry and El Al Airlines to look into the legality of the airline's intention to launch exclusive flights for the haredi public.

According to the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC), IMPJ's legal branch, the move represents "an illegitimate policy that violates Israeli law."

In a letter to Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz and El Al CEO Haim Romano, IRAC Attorney Orly Erez-Likhovski wrote that "flights that institute separation between men and women should not be approved offhandedly."

According to Erez-Likhovski, the law in Israel prohibits any form of segregation based on gender, and therefore any agreement that infringes on this principle should be grounded on a solid rationale and adhere to the law.

A copy of the letter was sent to Attorney General Menachem Mazuz.

The Reform movement believes that these special flights are wholly unnecessary. "It's clear that if a haredi passenger asks not to be seated next to a woman, he can ask to switch seats," the letter stated.

"The fact that these arrangements often happen on flights illustrates that there is no need for such a compulsory gender-based segregation."

IRAC also noted that the kosher bus lines that are operated by the public bus companies are currently being reviewed by an inter-ministerial committee appointed by Mofaz, and that the a petition on the issue has also been filed with the High Court, with a ruling still pending.

The movement asked Mofaz and Romano to clarify how the separation on flights would be enforced, how many special flights would be introduced, are the fares expected to be lower and whether flight attendants would have to adhere to specific restricting dress codes.

Israel Rally in Nashville - Event Coverage

2009-01-13T16:21:00.000-08:00

APRPEH reporting from Legislative Plaza - from Sunday 11 January 2009

On a blustery Sunday, January 11 with temperatures falling through the 30s, the Christian and Jewish communities of middle Tennessee came together to support Israel in her war with the Hamas Islamic terrorists. Proclaiming Justice to the Nations (PJTN) and the local Jewish community organized the rally held at Legislative Plaza adjacent to Capitol Hill which overlooks the plaza. With no barriers to prevent the wind from whipping through, a bone chilled but warm hearted crowd, most of which stayed for the entire program listened to speaker after speaker explain why Americans should support Israel and her Cast Lead operation to inflict maximum damage on Hamas and stop the rocket fire into Israel from Gaza.

The attendance, before the cold weather reduced the numbers is estimated (by me) to have been between 250 - 300 people (75% not Jewish). Supportive signs and waved Israeli flags were only eclipsed by an over sized flag of Israel draped over the steps to Legislative Plaza held by some of the children in attendance. Although invited and on the schedule to speak, none of the cities non-Orthodox Rabbis attended the second of the day’s pro-Israel gatherings. An earlier gathering at one of Nashville’s Reform congregations included the Conservative and Reform Rabbis both as speakers and attendees.

more pictures here
The rally began with an invocation and inspiring talk by PJTN President
Laurie Cardoza Moore
Laurie Cardoza Moore laid the groundwork for one of the main themes echoed throughout the day, challenging the institutionalized double standard and disproportional force arguments regularly targeted against Israel and the Jewish people (vis a vis the barbarians who try to harm them) and assumed by world leaders. This bias is strengthened by the international pro-Arabian media and serves to complicate understanding Israel's true situation.

“It is acceptable after all, because it is just the Jewish people” Ms. Moore stated as a hypothetical answer to the world’s lack of concern over “Hamas’s disproportionate response to Israel over the last three years as thousands of rockets rained down on innocent civilians daily including men, women and children”, “where were the protesters?” “where was the outcry for the Jewish people?”

Laurie Cardoza Moore's Remarks:

After Ms. Moore completed her remarks, and following remarks by Steven Edelstein (see Newschannel 5 coverage at the bottom), Executive Director of the Jewish Federation of Nashville and Middle Tennessee, Rabbi Saul Strosberg of Congregation Sherith Israel spoke.

Comparing the Jewish people to Judah Ben Yaakov Avinu (the Biblical patriarch), Rabbi Strosberg said

“Judah stood up when he sensed injustice, Judah stood up for his family, Judah stood up and so do we stand up for Israel. As Jewish people each day we wake up with a mission. Our mission is to follow the ways of G-d and to do justice and mercy. And this is not an easy mission. Sometimes, we have to go against the stream. Sometimes we’re criticized. Sometimes, we realize that we will never be accepted. That certain people in the world don’t want us to be alive. And I know this is hard to accept, but that is the truth. So together with Laurie and Proclaiming Justice to the Nations, we gather to stand up for our brothers and sisters in Israel. Yes, we must stand up. And if we don’t stand up for Israel who will? Who stood up for us 60 years ago in Europe? Who stood up for us then? And as recently as this past Thursday night, who stood up for us and stood against the United Nations resolution calling on Israel to cease its operation of breaking down the terrorist infrastructure in Gaza? No one. No one stood up. Not even our own United States. And throughout history we have stood alone. And if we do not stand up for ourselves who else will? If we don’t stand up what will our children think?

Rabbi Saul Strosberg

Rabbi Strosberg charged the Jewish and Christian communities to counter the inaccuracies about Israel’s offensive and not to accept the “moral equivalency” arguments which claim Israel and Hamas are equal. Such beliefs, Rabbi Strosberg went on to say will not lead to peace.

Rabbi Strosberg's Remarks:

Additional speakers from the pro-Israel Christian community spoke in addition to other members of the Jewish community with ties to Israel see video from ICEJ

Also speaking were Rabbi Yitzchak Tiechtel and Rabbi Shlomo Rothstein, Chabad Rabbis in Nashville.

Rabbi Tiechtel after wishing the blessings promised to Avraham (that those who bless you shall be blessed) be fulfilled in all those non-Jews who came out to support Israel, Rabbi Tiechtel focused upon the crime of using civilian locations for military purposes putting non-combatants intentionally in harm’s way. Implied in his remarks, but not stated is the fact that most militaries purportedly representing a contingent of non-combatants goes out of its way to protect civilians while Hamas sends them to the slaughter.

Rabbi Yitzchak Tiechtel - The Chabad Center For Jewish Awareness

“When is a school not a school? And the answer is when it is turned into launch pad for missiles and hideouts for terrorists. We stare in horror at images of innocent men, women, and children who were slain because they were forced into a situation not of their making. Innocent lives are being lost daily in the Gaza Strip and unfortunately this is a prime tactic of the terrorists Israel is trying to defeat.”

Rabbi Tiechtel went on to question the morality of people (Hamas) to use the deaths of their own constituency as a weapon for propaganda.

Rabbi Tiechtel's Remarks:

The rally closed with a message of chizuk from Rabbi Shlomo Rothstein. Rabbi Rothstein’s charge was to change the world.

“There was a great sage many, many years ago who was asked about his view on the world. He said – ‘The world it’s upside down. They’ve changed sweetness for bitter and bitter for sweet.’ Isn’t it ironic that underneath large peace signs flourishes hate? Isn’t it ironic that people that support terrorists that want such acts of violence to continue cry out for justice? Isn’t it ironic that with so much evil and corruption, pain and suffering in the world, it’s the tiny little country in the Middle East, Israel that gets the wrath and ire in the world? Isn’t it ironic that that one nation that cares so much for peace, that will give anything for peace that prays three times a day - morning, noon and night for peace gets all the war?....”Such evil, such corruption will continue as long as this world is an upside down place. Our job is to right side up this upside down world. We all have the power with our own two feet and our own two hands to engage in acts of goodness and kindness, and acts of rightside up – true justice and peace.”

Rabbi Shlomo Rothstein - Chabad at Vanderbilt
Rabbi Rothstein's Remarks:

The local and regional media was sparsely seen in the crowd. To the best of my knowledge, the major local Nashville newspaper The Tennessean, did not cover the event. Unfortunately, only one television station in Nashville News Channel 5 reported on the rally. An earlier PJTN rally on December 31 received more media attention.

Vatican Cardinal Invokes Holocaust Imagery to Criticize Israel

2009-01-08T15:46:00.000-08:00

The Jew or Israeli being described in imagery designed to stir up visions of Nazi Germany or Gestapo soldiers is usually confined to the channels of antiJew publications or websites. The first time I recall seeing a Jew as Nazi image was in an editorial cartoon accompanying a Pat Buchanan column in 1988 which ran in a local newspaper. Arabian newspapers are filled with this antiJew propaganda. The pictures below are of arabian origin and are found on the Fraud Factor website.

Certainly, Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino knows that this new mythology exists? He must be aware that these false comparisons have been around for many years?

For the record Cardinal, the 'concentration camp' of Gaza is made that way by the arabians who have complete control of it. It is they who force civilian women and children to stay in the line of fire and use buildings in which those women and children reside as locations to launch rockets and shoot at soldiers.

If conditions were bad in Gaza before, it is because the ruling Hamas thugs did nothing to improve those conditions. Jews in Europe, by comparison had everything taken away from them, were forced into their living quarters by the Nazis not because other Jews thought they would make good pawns and provide good photo ops. Real concentration camps are run by ruthless single minded barbarians. Wait, that's Gaza too! But it is the arabians, not the Jews who are the barbarians who have brought Gaza to warfare.

Additional coverage of this story is below. Note the lame, not very informative version presented by the New York Times in comparison to the UPI, JPOST and Reuters coverage. The NYT doesn't seem to want anything but the mildest criticism of the Cardinal.

Vatican official: Gaza resembles ‘concentration camp’ - JTA
January 7, 2009

ROME (JTA) -- A senior Vatican official said the conditions in Gaza "resembled ever more a big concentration camp."

Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, the president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, called for dialogue to end the conflict between Israel and Hamas in an interview with an online Italian daily. Martino said "violence does not resolve problems, and history is full of confirmations of this."

At the root of the conflict, he said, is the fact that "no one sees the interests of the other but only its own." The consequences of such egoism, the cardinal said, were "hatred for the other, poverty and injustice. The ones who pay the price are always innocent populations."

ADL blasts Holocaust imagery in anti-Israel protests - JPOST
Jan. 6, 2009
Etgar Lefkovits , THE JERUSALEM POST
The comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany being made at protests worldwide against the IDF's Gaza operation are a "cynical perversion" of history that has no place in civil societies, the New York-based Anti Defamation League said Tuesday.

"Comparisons of Israel to the Nazis are a deeply cynical perversion of history, an attempt to turn the tragedy that befell the Jewish people into a bludgeon against Israel," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL national director and a Holocaust survivor.

Foxman particularly deplored the fact that this comparison was being heard at demonstrations in the United States.

"While we have come to expect to see such and hear this type of inflammatory rhetoric in Arab and Muslim capitals overseas, it is deeply disturbing that it is appearing in anti-Israel demonstrations at home," Foxman said.

"Offensive Holocaust comparisons and the use of Nazi imagery are deeply offensive and have no place in a civil society such as ours."

The anti-Israel demonstrations in major American cities have included expressions of support for Hamas, which is designated by the State Department as a foreign terror organization, as well as inflammatory anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric, the ADL said.

A January 3 mass rally in New York's Times Square, which was endorsed by Al-Awda, the Muslim American Society, and the Islamic Circle of North America, included signs that read "Israel: The Fourth Reich;" "Holocaust by Holocaust Survivors;" "Stop Israel's Holocaust;" "Holocaust in Gaza;" and "Stop the Zionist Genocide in Gaza.

One sign juxtaposed gruesome images of Holocaust victims and Gazans and read, "Nazi Genocide, Israeli Genocide."

Similar anti-Israel protests using Nazi imagery were held in Chicago, Los Angeles, Tampa and San Diego.

Israel Condemns Vatican’s ‘Concentration Camp’ Remarks - NYT
January 9, 2009

By RACHEL DONADIO
ROME — Tensions rose between the Vatican and Israel on Thursday after Israel condemned a high-ranking Vatican official for comparing the Gaza Strip to “a concentration camp.”

"Look at the conditions in Gaza: more and more, it resembles a big concentration camp,” Cardinal Renato Martino, the president of the Council for Justice and Peace, said in an interview published Wednesday in an online publication.

He defended his comments in the center-left daily newspaper La Repubblica on Thursday. While noting that Hamas rockets into Israel were “certainly not sugared almonds,” he called the situation in Gaza “horrific” and said conditions there went “against human dignity.”

Israel on Thursday harshly condemned the cardinal’s use of World War Two imagery. “We are astounded that a spiritual dignitary would have such words, that are so far removed from truth and dignity,” said Yigal Palmor, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

He added that it was “shocking to hear the vocabulary of Hamas propaganda coming from a member of the church.” But he denied that it would cause a diplomatic crisis. It “doesn’t change the nature of relations between Israel and the Holy See,” Mr. Palmor said.

The Vatican sought to downplay the cardinal’s remarks. The Vatican spokesman, Rev. Federico Lombardi, called Cardinal Martino’s choice of words “inopportune,” and said they created “irritation and confusion” more than illumination.

While calling the cardinal “an authoritative person,” Rev. Lombardi added that “The more authoritative voice and line would be that of the pope.”

Indeed, the cardinal’s remarks overshadowed an important discourse that Pope Benedict XVI delivered on Thursday, in which he called for a ceasefire in Gaza and decried “a renewed outbreak of violence provoking immense damage and suffering for the civilian population.”

“Once again I would repeat that military options are no solution and that violence, wherever it comes from and whatever form it takes, must be firmly condemned,” he told diplomats accredited to the Vatican.

In unusually direct remarks, the pope looked ahead to “crucial elections” coming up in the Middle East and called for dialogue between Israel and Syria, the “strengthening of institutions” in Lebanon and a “negotiated solution” to “the controversy surrounding” Iran’s nuclear program.

Israel’s ambassador to the Vatican, Mordechay Lewy, said events Gaza had “no connection” to plans underway for Benedict to visit Israel, the West Bank and Jordan this spring. The Vatican has not yet officially announced the trip.

In the past, some Jews have seen the Vatican’s approach as more sympathetic to Palestinian suffering than Israeli security. Mr. Lewy called the pope’s speech “equivocal.”

“The language and the expectations of the Holy Father and the scope of his interests are different from those of a politician,” Mr. Lewy said. “In practical politics, I’m sure Israel wouldn’t have existed if we would have acted without any force.”

Vatican-Israel ties tense over cardinal's camps comment - Reuters
Thu Jan 8, 2009 7:11pm GMT
By Philip Pullella

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Relations between the Vatican and Israel grew tense on Thursday when the Jewish state condemned an aide to Pope Benedict for calling Gaza "a big concentration camp."

Israel criticised Cardinal Renato Martino as the pope delivered a speech to diplomats in which he spoke out against the use of violence by both Israel and Hamas Islamists in Gaza.

On Wednesday, Martino, president of the Vatican's Council for Justice and Peace, delivered the Vatican's toughest criticism of Israel since its offensive in the Palestinian-ruled enclave, calling Gaza a "big concentration camp."

"We are astounded to hear from a spiritual dignitary words that are so far removed from truth and dignity," Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor told Reuters.

"The vocabulary of Hamas propaganda, coming from a member of the College of Cardinals, is a shocking and disappointing phenomenon," he said.

Jewish leaders around the world also condemned Martino.

"His comments are offensive and an insult to the memory of the Holocaust and survivors worldwide," said Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants.

"He is either trying to nefariously disseminate anti-Israeli propaganda or he doesn't have the faintest clue about the murderous conditions inside a concentration camp," Stephan Kramer, general secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, told Handelsblatt newspaper.

"These remarks are untrue, distort the memory of the Holocaust and are only used against Israel by terrorist organisations and Holocaust deniers," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.

SHADOW OVER POPE'S HOLY LAND TRIP

The row over Martino's remark as well as Israel's bombing of Gaza have cast a shadow over negotiations for the pope to visit the Holy Land in May, a trip some diplomats say is now in doubt.

The exchange of accusations heated up as the pope delivered his yearly "state of the world" speech to diplomats in which he seemed at pains to be even-handed following the furore over Martino's remarks.

The pontiff lamented "a renewed outbreak of violence provoking immense damage and suffering for the civilian population" in Gaza and Israel and urged "the rejection of hatred, acts of provocation and the use of arms."

"Violence, wherever it comes from and whatever form it takes, must be firmly condemned."

More than 750 Palestinians have been killed since Israel started bombarding Gaza on December 27 with the aim of halting Hamas rocket attacks. At least eleven Israelis have been killed, eight of them soldiers, since the offensive began.

In a follow-up interview in Italy's La Repubblica newspaper on Thursday, Martino defended his comments, saying the people of Gaza "are surrounded by a wall that is difficult to breach, in conditions that go against human dignity."

Martino said "certainly, the rockets of Hamas are not confetti. I condemn them" but forcefully criticised Israel for an attack on a U.N. school.

(Additional reporting by Erik Kirschbaum in Berlin)

ADL: Nazi imagery abound at anti-Israel rallies - YNET

Comparisons of Israel’s actions to those of Hitler, signs altering Jewish Star of David into swastika a recurring feature at many rallies across US
Ynetnews

Of all of the recriminations aimed at Israel at scores of demonstrations held across the country in response to its military operation against Hamas, none has been more consistently or emphatically employed than comparisons of Israel to the Nazis, or the situation in Gaza to a “Holocaust", the Anti-Defamation League said Tuesday.

According to a statement issued by ADL, in-your-face comparisons of Israel’s actions to those of Hitler, or signs altering the Jewish Star of David into a swastika, have been a recurring feature at many rallies across the country, including protests held over the past weekend in several major US cities.

Some demonstrations have included expressions of support for Hamas, a US-designated terrorist organization, or for terrorism against Israel in general, ADL said. And some protesters at rallies have spewed inflammatory anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric.

In New York City’s Times Square, six city blocks were filled Saturday with anti-Israel demonstrators holding signs that read “Israel: The Fourth Reich;” “Holocaust by Holocaust Survivors;” “Stop Israel’s Holocaust;” “Holocaust in Gaza;” and “Stop the Zionist Genocide in Gaza.”

One sign juxtaposed gruesome images of Holocaust victims and Gazans and read, “Nazi Genocide, Israeli Genocide.”

'A deeply cynical perversion of history'

On December 30, demonstrators gathered at the Israeli Consulate in Los Angeles waving Palestinian flags and holding signs, including ones that read, “Every Israeli committing the genocide in Gaza is a 'Hitler'.”

One sign depicted an image of the Israeli flag with the Star of David replaced by a swastika and above the flag, the words, “Upgrade to Holocaust Version 2.0.”

The same day, hundreds of demonstrators gathered in Tampa, Florida carrying signs that compared Israel to Nazi Germany and calling for the dissolution of Israel. One sign declared, “Zionism is Cancer; Radiate it,” and other signs featured the word “Nazi” written over an Israeli flag with a swastika.

“Freedom of speech is not just a right, it is also a responsibility,” said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL national director and a Holocaust survivor. “Comparisons of Israel to the Nazis are a deeply cynical perversion of history, an attempt to turn the tragedy that befell the Jewish people into a bludgeon against Israel.

“While we have come to expect to see such and hear this type of inflammatory rhetoric in Arab and Muslim capitals overseas, it is deeply disturbing that it is appearing in anti-Israel demonstrations at home,” said Foxman. “Offensive Holocaust comparisons and the use of Nazi imagery are deeply offensive and have no place in a civil society such as ours.”

Nazi Imagery, Anti-Semitism Rampant In Arab Media As Gaza Crisis Unfolds - ADL Press Release

Roseanne Barr: Israel is a 'Nazi state' - JPOST

Urban Dictionary definition of "Jewish Nazi"

UK Lib-Dems Offensive Against Israel

2009-01-07T11:41:00.001-08:00

Lib Dems call for British arms embargo on Israel - Guardian
Once again, the most extreme left politicians in the UK have sided with the enemies of the Jews. Having read this Guardian article, I thought it would be constructive to take a look at the three leading political parties in the UK and the positions they are taking vis a vis Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. The Guardian article is a backgrounder covering the political dog fighting between the Liberal Democrats and majority Labour parties. Left out of the Guardian article is any opinion from the opposition Conservatives.

I have assembled annotated statements and links to the most recent statements made by each of the three leading parties in the UK, although I am hesitant to refer to the Liberal Democrats as leading - in seats, ideas or morals. The current breakdown of the UK House of Commons is:

Member Constituency
Conservative (193)
Democratic Unionist (9)
Independent (5)
Independent Conservative (1)
Independent Labour (1)
Labour (350)
Liberal Democrat (63)
Plaid Cymru (3)
Respect (1)
Scottish National (7)
Sinn Fein (5)
Social Democratic & Labour Party (3)
Ulster Unionist (1)
Speaker and Deputies (4)
Parliament.uk

Based upon the statements below, it appears to be necessary in the UK to throw a bone to the antiJews. Even the favorable, er..make that favourable statements from the Conservative party include flashes of 'both sides' faux fairness. It is also telling that the Conservatives statement does not come from the party leader Mr. Cameron but from an MP, who based upon his bio online does not have any foreign affairs assignments or responsibilities. Maybe, Mr. Cameron wants deniability? Maybe it is the political reality in the UK given the level of anti-semitism and growing radical arabian population? This is troubling to me. I suppose friends are always welcome, even ones who are embarrassed of being friends.

PM Brown's statements seem to be right in line with US Secretary of State Condi Rice echoing the obvious, that Israel has a security interest in stopping rocket fire. This is in contrast to the Liberal-Democrat pressure tactics of ending arms sales to Israel and blocking Israeli trade with the EU, actions which are nothing short of taking the side of Hamas. I find it interesting how the most liberal party with any standing in the UK is in favor of the right to free fire rockets into democratic and liberal Israel.

For readers from the UK, please feel free to correct, amend, reprove, etc. the details of this post.

Labour Party - Majority

PM Gordon Brown (Labour)
Gaza is a humanitarian crisis - PM
Speaking to journalists in 10 Downing Street, Mr Brown said he was hopeful that the basis for a ceasefire, providing assurances to Israel over security and securing an open border under international supervision for Palestinians in Gaza, could be found.

Gaza needs “immediate ceasefire” - PM
“We need an immediate ceasefire, and that includes a stopping of the rockets into Israel. Secondly, we need some resolution of the problem over arms trafficking into Gaza and, thirdly, we need the borders and the crossings open and that will need some international solution.”

PM “deeply concerned” by Gaza violence
In a Downing Street statement, the PM said that only “peaceful means” could secure a lasting solution to the dispute between Israel and Palestine. He called upon Gazan militants to end their rocket attacks and asked Israel to “meet its humanitarian obligations”.

Conservative Party Opposition

Opposition Leader MP David Cameron

MP Stephen Crabb

The conflict in Gaza has caused yet more distress and suffering
Stephen Crabb MP, Wednesday, January 7 2009
There is nothing about the current military conflict in Gaza which is not tragic and disturbing. The immediate consequences for the people of Gaza of the fighting between Hamas and Israel are yet more distress and suffering, compounding the humanitarian disaster in which they have been living for years.

But this is not a conflict made in Israel. We may criticise Israel for settlements on the West Bank; for the ugly and imposing security barrier which it has constructed; for the roadblocks and checkpoints which cause so much disruption to the economy and daily lives of Palestinians on the West Bank. But the blame for the current misery of Gaza lies squarely with its own leaders.

Just as NATO would not allow Afghanistan, under the Taliban, to provide a platform for international terrorists like Al Quadea, so Israel cannot be expected to allow Hamas to construct a terrorist statelet in Gaza and use it as a base for continous attacks on its people. No government which takes seriously its responsibility to protect its citizens would do otherwise.

Liberal-Democrats

Nick Clegg
Leader of the Liberal Democrats

Clegg: We must stop arming Israel

Of course, Israel has every right to defend itself. It is difficult to imagine what it must be like to live with the constant threat of rocket attacks from a movement which espouses terrorist violence and denies Israel's right to exist. But Israel's approach is self-defeating: the overwhelming use of force, the unacceptable loss of civilian lives, is radicalising moderate opinion among Palestinians and throughout the Arab world. Anger in the West Bank will make it virtually impossible for Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president, to continue to talk to Israeli ministers.

Brown must stop sitting on his hands. He must condemn unambiguously Israel's tactics, just as he has rightly condemned Hamas's rocket attacks. Then he must lead the EU into using its economic and diplomatic leverage in the region to broker peace. The EU is by far Israel's biggest export market, and by far the biggest donor to the Palestinians. It must immediately suspend the proposed new cooperation agreement with Israel until things change in Gaza, and apply tough conditions on any long-term assistance to the Palestinian community.

Brown must also halt Britain's arms exports to Israel, and persuade our EU counterparts to do the same. The government's own figures show Britain is selling more and more weapons to Israel, despite the questions about the country's use of force. In 2007, our government approved £6m of arms exports. In 2008, it licensed sales 12 times as fast: £20m in the first three months alone.

What Should Be Israel's Goal in Gaza?

2009-01-04T10:32:00.000-08:00

The best evidence that a very quick final status treaty may well follow an Israeli victory over Hamas is the attempt by Hamas to move against the internal opposition. Fatah, which ironically can condemn the attack (a false show of solidarity) on one hand and be a significant beneficiary on the other will be enhanced both politically and strategically in Gaza even if Hamas is not destroyed. From a pure tactical perspective, destroying Hamas is not in Israel's interest. Balancing out the facts on the ground between Hamas and Fatah is. Hamas's does not count in its goals a political victory against Israel, only one soaked in Jewish blood chas v'shalom.

Fatah's support amongst Gazan arabians will increase as Hamas will be seen as bringing the wrath of the IDF upon Gaza. In the end, a scenario where Fatah and Hamas are engaged in an internal conflict benefits Israel provided that the unspoken goal of population reduction through masses of arabians fleeing Gaza (presumably into Egypt) due to the violence and human rights abuses by Hamas (which will try to force the civilian population to stay in place) does not occur.

What Israel has to do is destroy the ability of Hamas to produce or procure long range rockets and prevent additional terror rocket attacks at shorter range while all the while damaging Hamas's legitimacy. Not doing so will be seen as a dramatic failure to meet the stated objectives of the conflict. The goal of destroying Hamas is misinformation by Israel. I just do not see the current government believing this is possible even though by doing so, the left's goal of a final settlement would be possible.

Going public with this understanding would damage the credibility of the war effort in the eye's of the few friends Israel has. One justification from the ruling Israeli government for building up Fatah and damaging Hamas (since the government of Israel lacks the will to destroy Hamas) will be that only Fatah {in their mind} can prevent rocket fire on Israel originating from Gaza. This is of course, the same failed logic of Oslo.

The only way to successfully meet the war objectives is to capture and hold territory in Gaza where immediate response to rocket launches can be dealt out. This is a daunting task given the current rocket ranges and past Lebanon experience.

Therefore, in theory rolling back the rocket ranges to June 2008 should be a primary goal of the conflict and holding a zone of territory in Gaza which would make launching rockets into Israel not very easy and thereby not feasible. Longer range rocket launches will have to be dealt with severely.

In truth, there is fundamentally no difference between Hamas and Fatah in their goals of eventual victory over Israel, only style. Having said that, there should be no change in the nationalist goal of eventual Jewish control over all territory held at this time by arabians which is within the borders of Israel. The above outcome is a considerably better one than a rushed treaty with Fatah for a split Gaza-Yosh state, two state disaster legitimizing a pali state for the time being, until Fatah loses control to Hamas's successor.

Hamas moves on Fatah 'collaborators'

Is the real target Hamas rule?

Shin Bet Says Hamas Feeling the Pain, Looking for Way Out

Gaza Bombing Proves Israel is Right

2009-01-02T06:23:00.000-08:00

Ha'aretz's Amira Hass pulls out the stiletto to take up the case of a poor, innocent Gaza resident, Ahmed Samur, who lost his son and business due to what Hass wants the reader to think is questionable targeting or error. Hass's information comes from 'B'tselem and the Mazan center for human rights'. There is a video of this strike which has been seen by many on YouTube (linked below and in the Ha'aretz article) which according to the IDF shows Gazans loading Grad rockets into a truck. Hass, citing the "human rights" organizations say Samur, his son and other workers were loading welding equipment into trucks to remove it from his shop which was next door to a building that had been bombed. {Why YouTube didn't pull this video unlike other IAF bombing videos remains a mystery).

The article details the account as recalled by Samur. What is the reader supposed to think? Poor fellow. Bad Jew. Evil Israeli. Incompetent military. Cowboy pilot. Lost his son for nothing. Gaza operation out of control. Is it worth the price?

It isn't until the very end of the article, the third to last and second to last paragraphs where someone wanting to accuse the IDF of foul play or turn others sour on the operation - a part of the article which might be missed we find this printed:

Haaretz asked the IDF spokesperson if the video depicts the truck in question, and was told "the truck's contents were taken from a building that was housing ammunition and rockets."

No one in Gaza has denied that the building is used for the construction and firing of Qassam rockets, but there are many targets hit by the IAF whose military importance is unclear at best. For instance, a small, empty building in the middle of a playground in the Shabura refugee camp in Rafah which was blown up by the IAF two days ago, in an attack that left two dead.

Uhm, what was that? You mean the building next to the workshop was a Qassam factory and launching base? You mean Hamas placed a Qassam factory and fired rockets next door to a non-combatant's workshop (provided he, Samur, is really non-combatant)? I would think that next door to a pipe welding shop would be a very convenient location for a Qassam factory.

Be that as it may, it seems, Ha'aretz missed the story (surprise). Here we have a first hand account of Israel's accusation that the Hamas barbarians are committing a crime against humanity and intentionally trying to cause "civilian" casualties. The use of civilians as human shields is an act of barbarism. The Hass story inadvertently is the best evidence as to why Israel must not only destroy Hamas from the air but root it out, in a massive door to door ground offensive. The Hass story should be heralded all over the world as a pro-war article. Hamas is abusing its own people and we have 'B'tselem and the Mazan center for human rights' to thank for the just cause argument.
See Charles Krauthammer - The Necessity of Israel for more background.

Amira Hass / Did the IAF bomb a Gazan welding truck or a Hamas Grad transport?
By Amir Hass, Haaretz Correspondent

Just before midnight, on December 29, the Israel Defense Forces Spokesman's Office posted an urgent headline on its Web site: Truck packed with weapons attacked near Jabalya.

The subheadline went on to read: "At around 6 P.M., the Israel Air Force attacked a Hamas truck carrying dozens of Grad rockets."

According to the article, the rockets in the truck caused a secondary explosion, shooting pieces of weaponry in all directions. The rockets were being transferred, said the article, due to militants' fear that their present storehouse would be attacked by the IAF, as well as to be put to use for launching at Israel.

The article was accompanied by a video just over 2 minutes showing the IAF's perspective from the sky, until just a moment before the explosion. The video shows 15 white figures casually milling between two vehicles. Three long black objects appear between their hands and the white figures lay these objects down on what seems to be a truck. The second vehicle takes off at a certain point and suddenly an explosion sounds and flames cover the screen. An eyewitness said the explosion was caused by an overhead drone.

Human rights groups' investigations, however, present a different testimony altogether.

According to B'tselem and the Mazan center for human rights, the truck belongs to Ahmed Samur, 55, and is still standing, burnt, beside his workshop in the Jabaliya refugee camp. Next to it hang scorched oxygen balloons, a blade and cables. Nobody dares move the truck or the accompanying accoutrements for fear that the UAVs filming every detail from above will bomb whoever approaches.

"Everything is still there on the ground," said Samur on Thursday. "We only moved the dead."

Just three hours before the attack, Samur's daughter told him that she had heard on the local radio that a house next to his workship had been bombed.

He immediately got into his Mercedes truck, along with his son and a few neighbors and relatives, and went to the workshop to see the damage.

They were shocked to discover that the neighboring house had collapsed onto his workshop and decided to pack up the expensive tools and take them home before they could be looted.

On the first round, they brought home a drill, a welding torch, a scale, other tools and a gas balloon for cooking. Then they went back to the workshop to pack up the rest: three of six oxygen balloons used for welding, two jerrycans filled with benzene and two filled with diesel.

As Samir's son Imad organized the tools in the truck, his brother-in-law packed his own smaller car with 50 packages of welding electrodes, 4 kilograms each, and drove off.

Samur himself stood on the other side of the street to keep the dust particles from the burning nearby house from flying into his lungs. He looked at the youths packing the truck and was reminded of working bees in a honeycomb - this was just before 5 P.M., he estimates.

"Suddenly I saw a flash of light next to my truck and then it caught fire and I heard the sound of an explosion. I started to run toward the blast, and when I got close and the smoke cleared, I saw bodies, one of them belonging to my son Imad. I fainted. When I woke up they told me that Imad and the seven other young people who were helping him had been killed," he recounted.

Speaking to Haaretz by phone, Samur said: "These were not Hamas, they were our children, and I will tell you their names. Imad Samur, 32; Ashraf al-Dabar, 30; Mahmoud Rabayan, 15; Rami Rabayan, 23; Ahmed Hila, 19; Mohammed Mahdi, 17; Wissam Eid, 14; Mohammed Haber, 20. Four others were hurt, two of them seriously: Bilal Rabayan, 19 and his brother Baha, 16.

"You have experts and smart people in Israel," he said. "They should come and check my truck and the oxygen balloons. They should see that they were not Grad missiles and they were not anything else. You people are saying they burnt a big truck filled with Grads. Well come and see for yourself."

Haaretz asked the IDF spokesperson if the video depicts the truck in question, and was told "the truck's contents were taken from a building that was housing ammunition and rockets."

No one in Gaza has denied that the building is used for the construction and firing of Qassam rockets, but there are many targets hit by the IAF whose military importance is unclear at best. For instance, a small, empty building in the middle of a playground in the Shabura refugee camp in Rafah which was blown up by the IAF two days ago, in an attack that left two dead.

Mazan said the unending IAF attacks have made it very difficult to determine how many of the targets hit were military and which were civilian.

Jews Chill Out - Zbigniew Brzezinski : Rockets Were "Provocative, Harrasing, Annoying But Not Lethal"

2008-12-30T16:18:00.001-08:00

There are few antiJews in the world such as Zbigniew Brzezinski who can speak from one side of their mouth, stating the obvious that Hamas "provoked" Israel into the current offensive and has "harassed" Israel with rockets and then almost immediately thereafter do a logical flip - toss in the proportional force argument along with a moral equivalence claim. ZB thinks that because Israel has done significant damage to Hamas "does that mean punishment has to be on that scale? 400 killed 1,400 wounded? (Scarborough asks: What would you recommend) I would recommend a process by which you limit such casualties and limit them very significantly." In other words, you Jews must not seek to deter those who want to kill you. Extend your necks like your ancestors did in the old days.

Zbig went on to engage in historical revisionism to defend Arafat at Camp David, glorify Clinton and blame Bush for failure to "exert" US diplomatic strength in the conflict. Zbig believes Condi Rice did too little to engage in the peace process. I wonder where all those photos with Abu Mazen came from?

Zbig thinks that the US should be at the forefront in forcing a peace process and states in the interview that the middle east "political consequences and moral consequences" are impacted by Israel's response. (I guess that means that Hamas and Hezbollah do not need to worry about political and moral consequences. Maybe ZB is correct here. Barbarians aren't held accountable to political and moral consequences).

But alas, its Israel's fault for defending herself. Zbig recalls that the 2,000 missile, rocket, and mortar attacks have been "provocative, harassing, annoying but not lethal". Not lethal, and therefore presumably not intended to be in his antiJew mind. It was of course game playing really. We send a rocket and you send a jet fighter while CNN keeps score.

While the entire interview is breathtakingly absurd, at 6:02 Joe Scarborough asks "What do we do the next time Israel is attacked from an outside force? What do we do at that point?"

ZB: That's the wrong question.
JS: No ,that's not the wrong question because... because...
ZB: That's not the question I am trying to answer(mumbles....)
JS: We never get the condemnation of Hamas or Hezbollah its always after Israel responds to defending itself .....
ZB: No its not... The problem is that this conflict has lasted for years and the US has been largely passive. The right question is not what do we do when things breakdown. the right question is what do we do to avoid a breakdown by being engaged seriously in the peace process. And for the last eight years we haven't been, and that's why we have the mess like we have right now on our hands.

Here is classical antiJew speak. The problem, the conflict, needs to be addressed by the US with the prestige of the president since both sides are guilty. Zbig began the interview by pointing out that both sides are suffering by making reference to the front page of the Washington Post, (grieving arab woman - lost 5 daughters: grieving Israeli woman because Hamas rocket hit town where she lives _ZB interpretation).

Zbig is calling for Obama to inject himself directly and with all his might into the conflict. Remember that Zbig was/is an advisor to Obama. Is this why the president-elect has been silent during the conflict, not to play his hand so soon?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Israel Attacks Hamas: Euphoria Matured - Reality Settling In

2008-12-30T08:17:00.000-08:00

Of course the attack on Gaza was the proper course of action. It is the moral thing to do when you are being fired upon indiscriminately to stop the ability of the one firing on you to continue doing so. The situation had become untenable. It is too much to ask border towns to “just deal with it”. Too much to ask school children, easily frightened into inaction and elderly unable to react with vigor to take cover in 15 seconds for mortars (up to 90 seconds for rockets) after the tseva adom siren.(Color Red/Red Dawn). Find shelter the alarm says, anywhere – incoming. More importantly it is a mitzvah to preserve innocent life even by taking the life of the rodef. Is anything more important? It does not matter that most of the rockets and mortars failed to kill or maim. They were supposed to. Most military objectives are multi-faceted. If you don’t kill anyone, that’s okay the launcher thinks. Terrorize them, make us look important. Make them fear us. Challenge them to find us, come and get us.

All but the most steadfast antiJew would have to sympathize with the plight of innocents under fire, even president-elect Obama as Bibi Netanyahu has explained now to the American media would not tolerate such a life for his girls – or so he said during his visit to S’derot.

Transitioning from desire and righteousness of acting to goals of acting is not quite so easy. It now is becoming quite clear that the year plus build up of anticipating an attack on Iran’s nuclear program was merely a diversion to shield spying eyes from the true target of the Israeli security apparatus – Hamas in Gaza. I suppose in terms of immediate threats, it was a good call. No one could have any doubt after the destruction of Israeli Gaza – Gush Katif- and villages of chalutzim in Yosh that Israel rarely considers morality in policy making. Otherwise one would have to ask “why did it take so long to act?” Taking years under fire to react in a legitimate way, one that could be interpreted by an observer to proclaim 'Jewish life has value'is a little extreme in the wrong direction. Was it really necessary to prove beyond that much shadow of a doubt that continued bombardment of innocents would not be tolerated?

Well, at least one benefit can be discerned from the inaction, a negative turned into a positive to Israel’s advantage. How many “toothless tiger” allegations have been made in recent years? How many Israeli warnings of a pending assault have been filed under “lost credibility” or more precisely “lost balance of power deterrent”? What causes armed conflict – on paper that is? It is a perception that the opponent will not or cannot fight back. This classically is understood as a failure of deterrence.

Israel was clearly guilty of the offense of failing in deterrence – for failing to utilize the powerful assets at its disposal in a meaningful way and thus create either balance of power or a perception that attacking Israel will result in an overwhelmingly strong response. How many times did you read stories within the last year that Israeli military officials were hinting or pointing toward a Gaza operation? How many times did Ehud Barak make threats to that effect? Yet, none were believable. Too many “toothless tiger” times in the past the threats were merely words not followed up with a significant action. One could claim that the 2006 Lebanon war was a result of “toothless tiger syndrome”. Yet this time, the presumption of Israeli inaction worked in Israel’s favor. Hamas seems to have been caught off guard. The best evidence is the large number of bombings and casualties on the first day of Operation Cast Lead.

But what now? Back to our earlier idea – what is victory and what does it look like? Both Samson Blinded and Sultan Knish have written about possible results of the war where Israel is clearly not benefited. The negative results include legitimizing Hamas and strengthening the terror organization both politically, strategically and tragically militarily and deeply impacting the Israeli political elections.

Failure to eliminate Hamas results in one not very favorable outcome (see the blogs above) and complete victory a different sort of not favorable result. As of now, I cannot find any Israeli leader in a position of power who asserts Israeli hegemony in Gaza. There appears at this time no interest in planning for a re-conquering of Gaza or of driving the barbarians into the Egyptian Sinai – most likely a discussion point between Israel and Egypt prior to the attack. Victory in the war as translated by complete elimination of Hamas foretells a future where the PA will be invited back to Gaza, given the pieces that are left, promised hundreds of billions in aid, and rushed to make a treaty with Israel while the power vacuum is still being filled with the exit of Hamas and before the the nationalist opposition can make the argument that 'Gaza is Israel' can occur. Essentially, complete military victory means a defeat for Zionism and international Jewry. A PA state will come into being rather quickly and who knows what will be the cost in Yosh for the treaty.

In the end, we can usually count on the arabians making decisions which prolong the conflict. What if some surviving Hamas official, who claims to be speaking for the organization makes a plea to through the international media and claims that “yes of course we will stop shooting at Israel, stop supporting the shooting at Israel and facilitating the shooting at Israel”. What then? Where does Israel’s international support go, what there is of it? What if it is Hamas that asks for UN observers or peace keepers? What if Hamas pulls a Hezbollah, never agrees to stop arming itself, only to stop shooting at Israel (for now)? Within a couple of days if not hours you can count on the offensive to stop and Israel’s chance to defeat Hamas will go by the wayside. This outcome leaves everything at a standstill. (see the Sultan Knish article above).

Yes, perhaps the rocket and mortar attacks will end under that scenario (for a while). But yes, Hamas will still be there and Israel has possibly contributed to re-building deterrent credibility. What doesn’t happen is an instant treaty with the PA and the idea of Israeli Gaza is still on the table. On the other hand it is likely that Hamas will return to firing rockets into Israel eventually or use the time honored defense that the attacks are coming from “rogue” elements or some other group. But this time, international observers will be in a better position to block Israeli self-defense tactics - perhaps. What is the better outcome for Israel in this conflict? It is a tough call. But what is also true is that the Torah demands we defend our lives at least as I read it. And even more so, we must defend Jewish sovereignty in Eretz Yisroel, again at least as I understand the Jewish role. If I am correct, the outcome then is not one in which we should be too concerned. We must do our part and the Aibishter will does His. Maybe, just maybe the political winds will shift and complete victory can be obtained.

Gaza War Message Confusion (what is the Goal?)

2008-12-29T14:09:00.000-08:00

What is the message coming out of Israel? I am getting the feeling that the Government of Israel has not exactly decided what the goals are or how victory will be defined. A quick glance at some of the English speaking reports leads me to ask this question.

Barak: This is 'all-out war' on Hamas is an example. Maybe it is a badly worded title by JPOST but maybe not. In this article we find the unfortunate typical Israeli voice of indecisiveness.

"This operation will be extended and deepened as we find necessary. Our goal is to strike Hamas and stop the attacks on Israel. Hamas controls Gaza and is responsible for everything happening there and for all attacks carried out from within the Strip. The goals of this operation are to stop Hamas from attacking our citizens and soldiers," said Barak.

. This is a far cry from:

UN ambassador: Israel seeks to 'destroy' Hamas

NEW YORK (AP) — Israel's ambassador to the United Nations says the goal of the current offensive in the Gaza Strip is much broader than ending Palestinian rocket attacks. She says Israel wants to destroy Gaza's ruling Hamas movement.

In an interview Tuesday, Ambassador Gabriela Shalev said Israel's main goal is to "destroy completely" what she called a "terrorist gang."

She would not explicitly say that Israel wants to topple the Hamas government. But she said a return to the terms of a recent six-month truce would not be enough.

Shalev says Israel wants stronger assurances that the rocket fire will stop. Israeli leaders have said they do not want to reoccupy Gaza.

More than 300 Palestinians have died in the three-day air offensive.

Here, I was all ready to post about how Israel seems to have a strong public message about the war, specifically the remarks of Tzipi Livni Israel Slams Media Bias, Netanyahu Joins PR Efforts, Netanyahu joins Gaza op PR effort and this contradiction hit me. How on one hand does the Israeli Ambassador to the UN talk about destroying Hamas and the PM, DM and opposition leader speak as if the mission is merely to hold Hamas responsible for rocketing sovereign Israel until they either promise to stop their bad behavior or have been temporarily separated from the ability to do so.

I can only hope that the words from the Knesset are merely for consumption by the world press while the Amb. are closer to the truth. That would seem to be the reverse however of what a hasbara campaign would call for. One can only hope that the message disconnect is planned for some reason. I fear that it isn't. See The Gaza Picture Show - Sultan Knish for more. Israel should not accept anything less than destruction of Hamas's ability to govern if not exist. To return to some form of manageable cease fire is ludicrous.

Update The Jpost article referenced above "Barak: This is 'all-out war' on Hamas" has been changed by Jpost to "MKs trade volleys over Gaza op". The same quote I inserted above from Barak is still in the article.
new article.
CNN has picked up the same quote from Barak which is all over the web now. This quote seems to be political grandstanding by Barak.

Gaza War in the Eyes of the BBC and Me

2008-12-29T08:42:00.000-08:00

The BBC selected to publish the following annotations from commentaries around the middle east. In general, the media coverage from the non-arabian world has been honest. It will take a few days for the MSM to find a reason to turn on Israel. Maybe it will be the disproportionate force case Yid With Lid has written about. Maybe it will be something else.

My guess is that playing along hand in hand with the "disproportionate force" argument we will soon hear and read the argument that the continued assault on hamas will work to damage peace efforts instead of improving them. In theory, if you are a real peacenik, dismantling hamas should cause you to rejoice. Israel would, after all, this demented logic dictates, make peace with the PA/Fatah, but hamas is in the way.

At some point we will hear the "extreme" argument. That one goes something like, Israel's credibility is so low now amongst the arabians that the PA cannot make peace without jeopardizing it's ability to lead. blah blah blah. In the minds of the antiJew, Israel has no right of self-defense and any action taken to defend herself is either "disproportionate" or damages the "peace process". The immorality of this illogical position should be apparent to everyone. It promotes continual, long-term low-scale attack and reprisal conflict. This sort of conflict fits the arabian mentality nicely but not the Jewish one. War should be conducted to win, win decisively and win quickly. The IDF can do this if the government of Israel lets the generals run the war.

A few APRPEH comments follow the newspaper editorials (as usual, APRPEH comments are in the dark blue). Unfortunately, I can understand what the arabians are saying more so than the Israelis. I do not sympathize with them but they more clearly play the part of outside sympathetic observer than the Israeli lack of will portrayed below.

Mideast papers on Gaza - BBC

Commentators in the West Bank-based Palestinian press are united in dismay at the Israeli operation in Gaza, condemning it as an "ugly massacre".

Some also voice their fury at what they see as the inaction of the region's Arab states and the West's support for Israel, while one commentator fears the operation will only drive more of Gaza's young men into the arms of radical Islamists.

In Israel, press commentators are broadly supportive of the army operation, and insist that it is up to Hamas to stop the violence, by ending firing of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel. One writer, however, disagrees, terming the operation a "crime against humanity".

EDITORIAL IN PALESTINIAN AL-QUDS

As the Arab and international silence continues, the credibility of Europe, the United States and the Arab regimes is collapsing. It is becoming very clear that the Palestinians are required to be a broken people... However, they forget that the many massacres to which our people in the Gaza Strip have been exposed will only increase their steadfastness.

The West's credibility increases by not siding with terrorists. Maybe there is a message here for the so-called 'palis'. You are the ones with no credibility.

BASIM ABU-SAMMIYA IN AL-HAYAT AL-JADIDAH

The Israeli aggression against the Gaza Strip is an ugly massacre. However, the public protests by the Arab countries are not enough on their own. We have become used to being massacred and to dying under the rubble while hearing statements of condemnation and the commotion of demonstrations. However, after a day or two they disappear only to leave the sounds of shells and missiles.

If the arabian countries had spoken up earlier and condemned the daily rocket and mortar fire at civilians within Israel, Gaza would not have faced the brunt of the IDF. As it is, collateral damage has been minimal. The reporters must be embedded with hamas.

KHALID AL-HARRUB IN AL-AYYAM

What is happening now is the ideal situation for the recruitment of the angry young men who feel collectively insulted. The picture that the Islamists on the streets are painting is that Israel, supported by the West, is waging a war of extermination against the Palestinian people as powerless Arab regimes watch idly.

Yep, blame the victim. It is Israel's fault that Islamists exist. That picture may well be educational. Angry, young Islamists are the problem not the cure.

SAMIH SHBEIB IN AL-AYYAM

The main objective of the Israeli operation is not to destroy Hamas's rule [in Gaza], because this would entail a land invasion and lengthy occupation of the Gaza Strip. What it wants is to deal Hamas and the resistance a painful and effective blow in the Gaza Strip, in order to weaken the resistance and force it to accept a truce according to Israel's conditions.

Sounds like this reporter has a direct line to Olmert. Olmert may well be thinking this. Barak may also be thinking this even thought he is saying otherwise. I don't trust either of them. Let's hope Israel shows the fortitude for the full scale ground offensive.

EITAN HABER IN YEDIOT AHARONOT

This is a strange, unique war. It has no defined borders. There is no occupation and no victory. It could end in an hour or in a year. The way in which it develops will be dictated to a large extent by the Palestinians: They stop firing, we will also stop firing. They'll continue? Their end will be bitter.

They will stop firing hopefully because the offensive has been successful in destroying the enemy ability to fire. Please think before you print. (no offense intended)

BEN KASPIT IN CENTRE-RIGHT MA'ARIV

The ground operations are due at some point. At some point it will be possible to take control of territory in Gaza and effect great damage. Hamas can halt the whole affair at any given moment if it agrees to renew the truce on acceptable terms. Meanwhile, Hamas is conveying stubbornness.

Stubborness? You must be kidding? These are blood thirsty hamites. They are not stubborn. They are at war as we, the Jews must understand. Any renewal of the truce is an acceptance of defeat at this point. Hamas must be rooted out or at the very least left with a few underlings and some broken PCs.

JONATHAN GEFFEN IN CENTRE-RIGHT MA'ARIV

Just like in the first days of the Second Lebanon War, we are again in euphoria. The media, like then, is full of prattle about the morality of the war. Have we not learned that every war, no matter how justified, is a crime against humanity? Most of the public is united around the only consensus we have ever had: war and bereavement, Holocaust and disasters.

This is so sick. All war is a crime against humanity? And when you must fight to defend yourself, your rights, your home and your children and refuse to do so, is this not also a crime against humanity?

EDITORIAL IN LEFT-OF-CENTRE HA'ARETZ

Re-establishing the ceasefire on better terms and with better supervision is a reasonable goal. Toppling the Hamas regime, or eradicating the last rocket factory where the last Hamas member is making the last Qassam rocket, are not reasonable goals, in part because they are unachievable without a prolonged presence on the ground in Gaza.

Not attempting to destroy Hamas is not a reasonable use of force. Even if the goal is not achieveable it must be a goal and it must be attempted. There will be no balance of power otherwise. I don't recall daily rocket fire and mortar fire falling into Israel when there was a "prolonged presence on the ground in Gaza.

ALEX FISHMAN IN CENTRIST YEDIOT AHARONOT

In order to stop the firing [of rockets] there is a need to reach a settlement, and in order to convince Hamas to reach a settlement we are now breaking its bones - in part to ensure that the price it demands is not high. However, we have not yet decided what price we are ready to pay. It is worth our while to decide quickly so that others may not decide for us.

These are the terms: no rockets ever, no mortars ever, no missiles ever, no kidnapping of Israelis ever, no importation of weapons ever, no Al-qaeda presence ever, no Iranian training or weapons ever, no leaving Gaza or entering Gaza ever without full security check ever, no tunneling to Egypt ever, etc. These are the terms take it or leave it. If you take it, maybe we will tolerate your presence. Maybe.

BBC Monitoring selects and translates news from radio, television, press, news agencies and the internet from 150 countries in more than 70 languages. It is based in Caversham, UK, and has several bureaux abroad.

Bah - Enough 'Interfaith' December Dilemma Stories

2008-12-24T10:09:00.000-08:00

{this post is dedicated to the thousands of Jewish children (many of whom both you and I know personally), holy and pure Jewish neshamas, who have been placed into the world in the custody of parents who know not what they do and will be tested both this year as in previous years and future years to overcome the environments in which they live. HaShem should have rachmonus on them and put into the hearts of their Jewish parents wisdom and knowledge but mostly the ability to do teshuva}

The first lesson that a Jew really should learn about Chanukah is that the "holiday" exists because Jews were willing to fight for Torah at all costs. That is the revealed understanding of the holiday. At a deeper level, the more important understanding is that Jewish commitment to Torah drew down divine intervention in the war against the Assyrian Greek occupiers and sanctioned the war as holy. HaShem gave the oil miracle to the Jewish people when the Temple was re-dedicated to Jewish rites and thus presented an enduring symbol of Jewish redemption to the world. After having been used by the Helenists for pagan worship, true and authentic Jewish worship returned to Jerusalem.

In America today, Chanukah has become a holiday to celebrate religious freedom. This idea fits very nicely with American culture. Our Jewish ancestors, the Maccabees however did not really care whether or not Taoists could be Taoists. They only cared that the most holy place on earth, the Temple's sanctuary - had been defiled, that the holy Torah was being re-interpreted to fit within a Helenistic framework and the socially popular thing to do was to act like the goyim who were occupying Judea.

In December, it is very common to see articles in print and to see and hear stories in the electronic media with titles such as:

Interfaith families find ways to celebrate season

Dreidels and Santa Claus: The Interfaith Holiday Juggle

Hanukkah and Christmas: A happy pairing?

Holidays times two

Interfaith Couples Face December Dilemma

Interfaith couples face 'December dilemma' for holiday celebrations

Interfaith families find ways to honor, celebrate Jewish, Christian holidays.

All of these were uncovered merely by searching on Google News "interfaith families". If you do a Google News search on "December Dilemma", the list is too long to reproduce.

Quite honestly, I really would like these stories to go away. Trying to make interfaith couples (which means out of faith thanks to the wonders of the English language) comfortable with the life choices they have made is not really on my agenda. I have no intent while writing this to offend anyone mind you. If you are Jewish and living with or without a legal arrangement to a person of a religious tradition different than your own and feel offended thus far, please choose a different article or blog to read.

Some people are concerned that one religion or another loses out in out of faith relationships. But, its not the religions that lose. Religions are religions - larger entities made up of believers. Its the children who lose. If you try to have everything you end up with nothing. Whether you are "more Jewish" or "more Christian" (whatever that means), it is not possible in a meaningful way to mix holiday observances. The children grow up with a minimal understanding of either religion because in their minds, the religious aspects are merged. To find a universal message consistent with both Jewish and Christian teachings and then make it the focal point of the season is doing justice to neither religious tradition, certainly not to the Torah or yiddishkeit.

Respecting others rights to observe what they want to does not mean assembling a family tradition of selected observances, sort of a 'best of' collection from various cultures or religions. Observance without the underlying meaning is game playing and a symptom of a society of takers - a society which demands acceptance not just the right to do as you please or believe what you wish, but a demand for acceptance -just because. The message is I will make my observance the way I want it to be and it is every bit as legitimate as any other. The one creating the observance will become it's adherent; religious creativity/creating religion. One could easily envision ornaments for idol trees in the shape of a chanukiah and dreidels or sufganiyot served as a dessert option at a big family Christmas dinner, freshly cooked latkes in the morning to accompany present opening before church. How could this empty symbolism be meaningful? After all, every Chanukah symbol has to do with Torah and Judaism overcoming the enemy, an enemy which sought to strip faith in the Giver of the Torah away from the Torah itself.

What was forbidden by the Helenists? To the extent that certain Jewish practices could be removed from the 'religion' such as bris milah, Shabbos, and Rosh Chodesh, Judaism would be allowed to co-exist with the Greek culture - be a working sub-set even. Essentially, the belief that Torah was given by HaShem and that man must be subservient to his Creator (note here the illogical premise that Creator and created could be the same being) was the problem. These rites all testify to the fact that HaShem is in charge, not Greek logic. Greek gods would not equate to HaKadosh Baruch Hu for the heroes of the story.

Now, let's take a look again at how Chanukah and Christmas are being merged. Chanukah, as anyone reading the above undoubtedly understands is about upholding the Jewish way of life even against the odds, even if it means heading for hills as the Maccabees did. That way of life is defined by and interpreted through Torah lenses.

Adding Christian observances and recognition of non-Jewish rites runs 100% contrary to the message of the Maccabees and Chazal. To the extent that Chanukah can be understood solely as a holiday of religious freedom and Christmas about presents, idol trees and fat guys in red suits there is no problem merging the two except that the season is as empty as the red suit without the extra padding. The real Chanukah cannot co-exist with Christmas and still carry with it the light of Torah. Chanukah must be about bringing the light of Torah into the world even to a world which resists its message. The Chanukah lights must carry the message as portrayed in what is now a Chabad classic the Fifth Candle story as having the ability to illuminate even the deepest darkness. Christmas observers may try to make the same claim as to their holiday. But for Jews, as it is attributed to the Rebbe in the Fifth Candle story - 'every Jew is like an only child of G-d'. Torah observance, Judaism cannot be compartmentalized. The Maccabee's war was to rid compartmentalizing from Judea and the Jewish future. A Jew must illuminate the world with the radiance of Torah, not put out its flame. Chanukah and Christmas cannot co-exist in one home. Christmas is for Christians. Chanukah is for Jews.

FTC Report: Social Security Numbers and Identity Theft

2008-12-23T13:59:00.000-08:00

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a report which doesn't break much new ground on protecting American citizen's Social Security Numbers. It does make official the call for new regulations intended to end unnecessary use of the Social Security Number (SSN) and provide for the privacy concerns of consumers when it is used. As the report makes clear, the genie cannot be stuffed back into the bottle. The SSNs of Americans are used, filed, stored, and accessed everywhere for business and identification purposes. That's pretty amazing for a number which is not officially an identification number.

Think about this. SSNs are assigned almost immediately after the birth of a baby. A basic paper card with few security provisions is given to the parents of the baby. The Social Security Administration will be happy to re-issue a card to a consumer as many as 10 times over a life time, not including legal name changes. If the card is lost or stolen, that is too bad. Apply for a new card - same number. No changes to your number will occur. Small wonder why identity theft is so easy to perpetrate. One of the basic pieces of information needed to commit identity frauds of all sorts is unprotected and is rarely changed even after it is exploited for criminal purposes.

Because so many functions of business though rely on the SSN for day to day operations, it will not go away anytime soon. Especially now as we boldly head into uncertain economic times, businesses cannot afford the cost of re-tooling from an obsolete identification system to a technologically safer credentialing system which matches stored card data to knowledge based authentication (KBA), PIN and/or biometrics. Many people are rightfully very concerned about these technologies and the implications they pose for consumer privacy. What cannot continue however is the current unabated abuse of the SSN which results in costly and time consuming identity restoration for consumers and billions of dollars in costs due to fraud; all facilitated by the SSNs inherent lack of safety. I am certainly not a proponent for national identity cards but the current system of using SSNs as a primary ID has to be put out to pasture. This is a subject we will need to visit again in the future.

FTC Issues Report on Social Security Numbers and Identity Theft
excerpts
The Commission believes that the most effective course of action is to strengthen the methods by which businesses authenticate new and existing customers. Stronger authentication would make it more difficult for criminals to use stolen information, including SSNs, to impersonate consumers, thus devaluing the SSN to identity thieves and reducing the demand for it.

Limiting the supply of SSNs that are available to criminals, as a complement to improved authentication, although important, is more complex. SSNs already are available from many sources, including public records, and it may be impossible to “put the genie back in the bottle.” Moreover, there is a danger that reducing the availability of SSNs would have unintended, adverse consequences. A number of important functions in our economy depend on access to SSNs. Businesses routinely rely on SSNs to ensure that the information they use or share with other organizations is matched to the right individual. Still, we believe it is feasible to reduce the availability of SSNs to identity thieves, such as by eliminating unnecessary public display, while preserving the legitimate and beneficial uses and transfers of SSNs. The Commission’s five recommendations, detailed below in Section III, are:

Improve consumer authentication;

Restrict the public display and the transmission of SSNs;

Establish national standards for data protection and breach notification;

Conduct outreach to businesses and consumers; and

Promote coordination and information sharing on use of SSNs.

This dual use of the SSN as identifier and authenticator has created significant identity theft concerns. SSNs often are described as the “keys to the kingdom,” because an identity thief with a consumer’s SSN (and perhaps other identifying information) may be able to use that information to convince a business that he is who he purports to be, allowing him to open new accounts, access existing accounts, or obtain other benefits in the consumer’s name. Unfortunately, SSNs have become
increasingly available to identity thieves, at least in part because they are so widely used as identifiers.

“Authentication” is the process of verifying that someone is who he or she claims to be. It is distinguished from “identification,” which simply matches an individual with his or her records, but does not prove that the individual is who he or she purports to be.

{Recommendations}

Given that the widespread use and availability of SSNs cannot be completely reversed,33 the Commission believes that the central component of the solution is to reduce the demand for SSNs by minimizing their value to identity thieves. This could be achieved by encouraging or requiring entities that have consumer accounts that can be targeted by identity thieves to adopt more effective authentication procedures, thereby making it more difficult for wrongdoers to use SSNs to open new accounts,
access existing accounts, or otherwise impersonate a consumer.

1. Improve Consumer Authentication
The Commission recommends that Congress consider establishing national consumer authentication standards covering all private sector entities that maintain consumer accounts other than financial institutions subject to the jurisdiction of the bank regulatory agencies, which already are subject to such requirements. These standards, which should be consistent with those covering financial institutions, should require private sector entities to create a written program that establishes
reasonable procedures to authenticate new or existing customers. This “reasonable procedures” approach, which should be fleshed out through agency rulemaking, should be technology-neutral and provide flexibility to private sector entities to implement a program that is compatible with their size, the nature of their business, and the specific authentication risks they face.

In developing authentication standards, Congress should consider several factors. First, the cost of implementing new authentication procedures should be evaluated in determining what is “reasonable.” Second, consumer convenience is a critical concern and also should be weighed in the reasonableness determination. Consumers are likely to resist authentication requirements that are too time-consuming or difficult, or that require the memorization or retention of too much information. Third, more robust authentication procedures that require consumers to provide additional information about themselves raise potential privacy concerns. For instance, some
businesses have developed authentication methods that require consumers to provide additional personal information either at the time the account is established or when the consumer later attempts to access the account. Many businesses use knowledge-based authentication in which they ask challenge questions, the answers to which are likely to be known only by the true individual. Although this method of authentication can overcome concerns about the unreliability of documentary evidence of identity45 and the lack of personal interaction in telephone or online transactions, challenge questions may require consumers to provide increasing amounts of information to businesses that are linked together in ways that may be unsettling to some.

2. Restrict the Public Display and the Transmission of SSNs
Although SSNs are valuable as a means of linking consumers with their information, much can be done to reduce the availability of SSNs to identity thieves by eliminating the unnecessary display and transmission of SSNs by the private sector. Restricting the display of SSNs on publicly-available documents and identification cards, and limiting the circumstances and means by which they can be transmitted, would make it more difficult for thieves to obtain SSNs, without hindering their use for legitimate identification and data matching purposes.

The Commission recommends that Congress consider creating national standards for the public display and the transmission of SSNs.64 Federal legislation would establish a nationwide approach to Federal Trade Commission reducing unnecessary display and transmission of SSNs, while addressing concerns about a patchwork of state laws with varying requirements. National standards should prohibit private sector entities
from unnecessarily exposing SSNs. The precise standards should be developed in rulemaking by appropriate federal agencies (i.e., agencies that oversee organizations that routinely transmit or display SSNs), and should include, for example, prohibitions against:

publicly posting or displaying SSNs;

placing SSNs on cards or documents required for an individual to access products or services provided by a covered entity, including student ID cards, employee ID cards, and insurance cards;

transmitting (or requiring an individual to transmit) an SSN over the Internet, unless the connection is secure from unauthorized access, e.g., by encryption or other technologies that render the data generally unreadable;

printing an individual’s SSN in materials mailed to the individual; and

printing an individual’s SSN on the outside of an envelope or other mailer, or in a location that is visible without opening the envelope or mailer.

3. Establish National Standards for Data Protection and Breach
Notification
The Commission has previously expressed support for national data security standards that would cover SSNs in the possession of any private sector entity, and numerous commenters and workshop participants voiced similar support. Such standards, which would be implemented in rulemaking by federal agencies that oversee entities that routinely use and transfer sensitive consumer information, could be modeled after the Safeguards Rules and cover all entities that maintain sensitive consumer information.

The Commission also reiterates its support of its prior recommendation that Congress consider establishing national data breach notification standards requiring private sector entities to provide public notice when the entity suffers a breach of consumers’ personal information and the breach creates a significant risk of identity theft or other harms. These standards would also be implemented in rulemaking by appropriate federal agencies. Most states now have breach notification laws, but currently there is no across-the-board federal requirement. Commenters and workshop participants noted that, in addition to alerting affected consumers to protect themselves, these laws have had the indirect benefit of motivating companies to weigh their need to collect SSNs against the potential cost and liability that may ensue if the SSNs are compromised. Participants also noted that many businesses
have strengthened their safeguards practices to avoid data breaches, at least in part as a result of breach notification requirements. The state laws differ in various respects, however, complicating compliance.

4. Conduct Outreach to Businesses and Consumers
The Commission recommends increasing education and guidance efforts as additional steps to help reduce the role of SSNs in facilitating identity theft.

This type of guidance would be especially useful to small businesses and could include the following messages:

the importance of collecting SSNs only when necessary and storing them only as long as necessary;

steps businesses can take to reduce the use of SSNs as internal identifiers;

proper disposal of SSNs;

the importance of securing SSNs (such as by encrypting them) during their transmission; and

limiting employee access to SSNs and conducting employee screening and training.

5. Promote Coordination and Information Sharing on Use of SSNs
Many private sector entities, from large multi-nationals and universities to small businesses and health care systems, have described the difficulties and expense of removing SSNs from computer systems and files, as well as the challenges of keeping up with the sophisticated and changing methods of identity thieves.

The Commission recommends that appropriate governmental entities explore helping private sector organizations establish a clearinghouse of best practices, enabling those organizations to share approaches and technologies on SSN usage and protection, fraud prevention, and consumer authentication.

Text of the Commission Report

Looking Back - 2008 Data Breaches

2008-12-22T13:04:00.000-08:00

Hurray, another end of the year list. This one though (from Bank Info Security) is not reviewing the top movies, songs, celebrities but, the miserable failures in data security of 2008. With nine more days until the end of 2008, this post could be pre-mature. Data breach threats show no regard for end of the year holiday parties and frivolities.

The data breach incidents of 2008 include the old stand-bys of lost tapes and data due to mistake and theft but also reveals an increased use of break in technologies to steal information from data bases. Numerous "hacking" incidences and infected computer systems not only resulted in millions of dollars in cost to businesses but exposed large numbers of consumers to fraud. Stolen data has to go some where and can be held in reserve for use at a later time, possibly changing hands often before reaching a perpetrator. Data is a commodity. After all, identity theft is a business - suppliers, middle men and end users are the norm, just like in any business.

At least one of these breaches began in 2007 and continued into 2008 due to law enforcement action. Last year's breaches while not lacking of hacking incidents, were focused more on missing data. For comparison purposes, below the top 10 list find links to stories looking back on 2007 and a link to a comprehensive multi-year listing. APRPEH is currently taking predictions of data loss stories for the end of 2009.

For accuracy purposes, it is important to recognize the difference between lost back up tapes or disks and stolen computers, hard drives or data devices and must be further differentiated from data lost due to hacking, viruses, malware - any active invasion of data storage systems for the purpose of stealing information. It is this last category with its obviously pernicious intent to steal data (vis a vis hardware) which represents a greater threat equation for consumers. The 'how was it stolen' question makes a huge difference in predicting whether or not consumers are likely or unlikely to become victims of identity theft.

Top 10 Security Breaches of 2008 - Bank Info Security
Ghost of Christmas Past (TJX) Still Casts Specter on Present and Future
Linda McGlasson, Managing Editor
December 22, 2008

From Hannaford to Countrywide to the Bank of New York Mellon, 2008 has been a year of high-profile security breaches in or impacting the financial services industry. Here's our list of the top 10 - and lessons that should be learned, so we aren't back revisiting these issues in '09.

1. TJX Case Winds Up, Arrests Made

Earlier this year, The TJX Companies (parent of retailer TJ Maxx) settled in federal court and paid out millions to its federal regulator, the Federal Trade Commission, banking institutions, credit card companies and consumers to bring to a close the court cases that had threatened to overwhelm the company.

The August arrest of 11 alleged hackers accused of stealing more than 40 million credit and debit cards brings law enforcement closer to closing what is still the largest hack ever. The U.S. Department of Justice brought charges against 11 alleged hackers from around the globe. Some of the hacking gang were nabbed and brought to the U.S. to face trial alongside three U.S.-based defendants. Two of the defendants, Christopher Scott and Damon Patrick Toey, have already pled guilty in the case. Others including the ringleader, Alberto Gonzalez, await trial.

Lesson Learned: The wide-range of the perpetrators brings to light something that those in the cyber intelligence realm have known for some time: Criminal hackers are part of a very mature and multi-billion dollar industry that reaches around the world. No organization is immune to the threat.

2. Bank of New York Mellon

An unencrypted backup tape with 4.5 million customers of the Bank of New York Mellon went missing on Feb. 27, after it was sent to a storage facility. The missing tape contains social security numbers and bank account information on 4.5 million customers - including several hundred thousand depositors and investors of People's United Bank of Connecticut, which had given Bank of New York Mellon the information so it could offer those consumers an investment opportunity.

Lesson Learned: For Bank of New York Mellon, know that when data is released to a third-party that their security is as good or better than yours. Encryption isn't just something that is good for the data held at an institution; it's also something to consider for data that leaves the institution.

3. Hannaford Data Breach

In March, the Maine-based Hannaford Brothers grocery store chain announced that 4.2 million customer card transactions had been compromised by the hackers. More than 1800 credit card numbers were immediately used for fraudulent transactions.

The affected banks and credit unions were forced to reissue the credit and debit cards. Within two days of the breach announcement, two class action suits had been filed on behalf of customers against the retailer. The retailer claims its systems were PCI-compliant and had passed a PCI assessment shortly before the hack was discovered.

Lesson Learned: The case is still open, and forensic reports by security investigators brought in by Hannaford have not been made public. The PCI Security Council has pledged that if the PCI requirements are found to be wanting in light of the report, they will make changes to tighten the requirements. Cases such as Hannaford may be the impetus behind legislation to require prompt notification of a data security breach.

4. Countrywide Insider Theft

In August, a former Countrywide Financial Corp. senior financial analyst, Rene Rebollo, was arrested and charged by the FBI for stealing and selling sensitive personal information of an estimated 2 million mortgage loan applicants. How he did it over a two-year period was to download about 20,000 customer profiles each week onto flash drives, working on Sunday nights, when no one else was in the office. Rebollo then took the excel spreadsheets to business center stores to email to buyers.

Countrywide, now owned by Bank of America, was already facing money and reputation issues because of the subprime loan meltdown before it faced the insider threat of Rebollo.

Lesson Learned: While Countrywide and Bank of America now know firsthand what a rogue insider can do, other institutions need to do a better job of monitoring their employees and creating asset controls. As the economy continues to produce layoffs, this threat may become even more so, as fearful employees look to cash in on their trusted status and take data just in case they face unemployment.

5. GE Money Backup Tape Goes AWOL

Early in January, Iron Mountain said it could not find a backup tape that belonged to GE Money, containing information on J.C. Penney customers and 100 other retailers.

The tape was stored in an Iron Mountain vault, says an Iron Mountain statement issued about the loss, and had been requested by GE Money in October 2007. The tape contained the personal information of about 650,000 J.C. Penney customers and the other 100 retailers. GE Money processes credit cards for those retailers. As a records and archive company that specializes in records management, Iron Mountain was at a loss to explain the tape's whereabouts.

Iron Mountain said it was an unfortunate case of a misplaced tape, but asserts that there was no evidence that the information was obtained and used by unauthorized persons. The missing tape also included about 150,000 social security numbers.

Lesson Learned: While GE Money paid for credit monitoring for the 650,000 credit card holders, Iron Mountain may have learned to better monitor where media is located. For the rest of companies that hold information of a personally identifiable nature, there is another reason to keep it safe from prying eyes. The cost of an average data breach can hit a company's bottom line. According to a study conducted by the Ponemon Institute, an independent information security and privacy research group, data breaches are costing businesses an average of $197 per customer record, up from $182 in 2006.

6. RSA Report: Half-Million Banking ID's Stolen

In November, security vendor RSA said it found a single Trojan that had taken more than 500,000 online banking accounts credentials, credit cards and other resources. The company's Fraud Action Research Team added that the hacking gang behind the Trojan may have been operating for as long as three years. The compromised data came from hundreds of financial institutions around the world.

Lesson Learned: The Trojan Sinowal is so tricky that the average institution or customer would not even know that they are infected with it. Taking a professional, defense-in-depth approach to protecting a network and customers is the best remedy.

7. Compass Bank Hard Drive Stolen, 1 Million Accounts Taken

At the sentencing of a former bank programmer at Compass Bank in Birmingham, AL. in March, it was revealed that the accused had stolen a hard drive with 1 million customer records and used it to commit debit-card fraud. James Kevin Real is now serving a 42-month sentence and was ordered to pay back the more than $32,000 that he and an accomplice withdrew from Compass Bank customer accounts. The bank claimed that the customer records contained limited information, but Real was able to create 250 counterfeit debit cards. He used 45 of them to access and withdraw cash before being arrested.

At the time of Real's sentencing, Alabama was one of 11 states that didn't require companies to automatically notify customers of data breaches.

Lesson Learned: Compass Bank dodged a bullet in terms of cost on this breach. It would have had to notify all 1 million customers of the compromise of their data had the hard drive theft been in a state that requires notification. Other than the 250 customers that Real took money from, no other customers were notified of the data loss. That means that 999,750 of the other 1 million customers weren't notified of the potential risk.

8. Ski Resort Okemo Suffers Hannaford-Like Data Breach

In an attack similar to what hit Hannaford Brothers in March, the Okemo Ski Resort in Vermont said in April it had been hit by hackers that installed malicious software to capture credit card data as it was being processed at the resort. Law enforcement officials at the time said they were investigating as many as 50 other similar incidents in the Northeast.

Lesson Learned: PCI compliance is like a driver's license -- it may mean that a retailer has passed the test for compliance, but doesn't necessarily mean it is in compliance.

9. Retailer Montgomery Ward

Six months after a breach happened at the parent company of the Montgomery Ward website, the company Direct Marketing Services finally began notifying customers that their credit card information was stolen in the hack. At least 51,000 records were stolen out of a database in December, 2007.

Direct Marketing said it had promptly contacted its payment processor and Visa and MasterCard, and it also notified the U.S. Secret Service.

Lesson Learned: Direct Marketing Services was forced into contacting the customers after the company CardCops, an investigative firm that tracks credit card thefts for the financial services industry, found more than 200,000 payment cards being offered for sale on an Internet chat room often visited by card thieves. Better to take the public relations role and confess the breach than possibly face data breach notification lawsuits by consumers and state attorney generals.

10. More Than $5 Million Taken By ATM Capers

The Automatic Teller Machine capers are hitting everywhere. In June, two men were charged with making hundreds of withdrawals from New York City ATMs, grabbing $750,000 in the process, using stolen information from a previous computer intrusion into a Citibank server that processes ATM withdrawals. One of the same accused also allegedly took $5 million in withdrawals from iWire prepaid MasterCard accounts.

Lesson Learned: While Citibank denied the indictment's charge that their server had been breached and blames a third-party transaction processor for the compromise, it still meant it had to notify and reissue new debit cards to those customers that the bank believed were exposed to increased risk.

The Top 10 Data Breaches of 2007 - CSO Online

2007 Data Breaches Not As Bad As We Think - Baseline Mag

Data breaches: 2007 IT failure superstar - ZDnet

Chronology of Data Breaches from Privacy Rights Clearing House

Social Networking Safety III - Lives of the Happy Holiday Hackers

2008-12-16T14:15:00.000-08:00

Social networking is highly valued by many people including regular users who update their "personal" sites with all the details of their comings and goings. Growing accustomed to such World Wide Webizing of their lives brings some of these people great fulfillment. It's true - social networking can be highly addictive. Why? Often, it's for good reasons. Users find it a convenient way to stay in touch with their family and friends. Little thought is given to the consequences of regular use or what could happen if someone fraudulently acquires your log in information.

The value of the service, in the eyes of the user is based upon what the service can do for me. For hackers, scammers, fraudsters and internet thieves, the value is measured by it's resale price. According to the article below based upon research by Trend Micro, the value of the login information for criminal purposes is nothing, maybe not even enough for your favorite Starbucks. Now, that can mean two things (supply and demand). One, the market for login information is slow. OR, two -the information is SO easy to come by EVERYONE can steal it and does steal it.

APRPEH's previous posts Dangers of Social Networking Sites and More Dangers of Social Networking on this subject documented the criminal aspects, what users of login information actually do with it.

Below is a little different angle: the free market for stolen logins.

Facebook hacking increases as logins sold cheaply - SC Magazinee UK
Dan Raywood, December 16, 2008

Hackers are stealing Facebook login details and selling them on for just 89p each.

According to research by Trend Micro, logins for MySpace, Skype and online computer games are also sold on to gangs for £1 a time, a set of credit card details is sold for £25 while internet banking logons cost £35 each.

Rik Ferguson, senior security advisor at Trend Micro, told The Sun: “We give away a huge amount of personal information on social networking sites. Hordes of cyber criminals are drawn to them. Whether you're going online to use Facebook, or for banking or Christmas shopping, you should be aware that hacking and identity theft tends to increase at certain times of the year.”

Gary Clark, VP EMEA at SafeNet, said: “Organisations need to take responsibility for their customers, and protect them from anyone looking to exploit a weakness in the system. This could be account details on Facebook, personal financial data used in internet banking, or credit card details disclosed when shopping online. Website owners should be able to guarantee security, or expect people to go elsewhere.

“At the very least, all data must be encrypted. Plus, any sites dealing with financial details need to comply with the appropriate regulations, such as the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS). There's is nothing we can do to stop the scammers trying their scams, aside from educating users not to fall for them. But when it comes to data, websites owners need to up their game and provide the appropriate safety measures.”

another look from the Daily mail

Data Breaches and Customer Loyalty

2008-12-12T09:33:00.001-08:00

Below is a discussion concerning whether or not businesses or organizations suffer any consumer based ramifications from a data breach. Here is my two cents. As the Stillsecure blog alludes to, breaches need to be defined based upon what was lost. There is a huge difference between losing sales based information ie. credit card or debit card account information (further sub-divided by adding checking account routing and account numbers) and actual personal identifying information (PII). One way to think about the loyalty question is to frame it within an understanding of the consequences to the consumer. When credit card or debit card numbers are lost in a breach what typically happens? Either the consumer or pro-actively the credit card issuer will cancel the card and mail the consumer a new one. Big deal. This is a minor cost to the consumer and while it may be an inconvenience, it will hardly affect the behavior of too many consumers.

Let's face it. Financial data is free flowing and many hands touch it. A consumer should expect that his/her credit and debit information will be stolen a few times during their adult life. If the credit or debit information were actually used, that is a slightly greater inconvenience. The consumer calls the issuer, denies knowing about the transaction and in 95% of the cases the charge to the consumer is written off as fraud. This still doesn't affect the loyalty too much. Throw in some credit monitoring and most consumers have very little reason to be concerned.

Now, what if what was lost was PII or medical records or tax/employment earnings records? That is a totally different matter, one which generates anger and fear in the minds of customers and yes brings to question loyalty. Is there another vendor I could patronize instead of the one who didn't take proper pre-cautions to guard my information? I have a cartoon on my desk which reads "I didn't say it was your fault. I said I'm going to blame it on you". Whether or not the data management of the organization was well crafted or not, the impression is that 'you lost it, its your fault' despite what could have been the best efforts of the organization to protect their records. And if the breach results in identity theft victims, the affected company had better prepare itself to cover the expense of identity restoration. While it does indeed matter what the relationship between the consumer and organization was before the breach, chances are the affected consumer is still going to re-think his/her relationship with the company after becoming a victim of fraud which is tied back to the organization's breach.

But this is business. An organization which experiences a data breach of PII MUST REACT PROPERLY, QUICKLY AND EFFECTIVELY by notifying the affected consumers and offering them some sort of compensation. This action is only partly to reduce the liability which could result in class action suits, but also Attorney General investigations. Call me cynical, but reacting properly to the breach is more important for the customers that you do not as of yet have than for the customers that the business currently has. Re-building reputation is potentially far more expensive than the costs of a proper response to data breach.

Do data breaches really cost companies customers? - Still Secure After All These Years Blog

Adam Dodge writing on the Security Catalyst blog (another great SBN member site) writes about how data breaches have a substantial impact on companies losing customers. Adam points out that nothing will make a company take security more seriously than hits to the bottom line. Adam cites two recent studies to prove how data breaches make customers lose faith in the breached companies and how a substantial amount (30% or more) terminate their relationship.

I don't buy this for a second. In fact I think for many kinds of breaches, it doesn't effect bottom line or customer loyalty at all. DSW Shoes,TJX, Best Buy - none of these retailers had any lingering effect to the bottom line or their stock prices as a result of data breaches. Adam's evidence from two studies are both sponsored by companies that make their living in id management and identity protection. These are hardly neutral parties.

I can understand if the data breach was your banking institution, but when it comes to retail at least, I don't think people stop shopping there. That is not to say that they don't get upset and on a short term basis bitch and moan about it. But long term the next time DSW has shoes on sale or Best Buy is running a great deal on HD TV, consumers will be lining up to buy. Also the fact that stock prices are not effected is not lost on executive management of these companies.

The fact is until there are real hits to the bottom line from these high profile breaches, as a business plan it may be cheaper to absorb the cost of a breach than to try to lock it down and prevent them.

* The two studies Adam mentions are here:

Javelin Research

Ponemon Study

More - Dangers of Social Networking

2008-12-12T07:11:00.000-08:00

Back on December 1 APRPEH posted The Dangers of Social Networking Sites. Since then, I have become aware of other articles besides the one included in my post which assert that 2009 may be the year of the attack on social networking.

As I stated in the December 1 post, I don't believe people will flee from social networking, and if so, expect an increase in infected computers, networks and friends lists. The malware and spyware installations in American computers will continue to contribute to identity theft, increasing the percentage of people who may fall victim to fraud due to computers and internet. People have long been concerned about becoming a victim of identity theft due to their computer usage but this has not been, at least until now, one of the primary reasons consumers fall victim. Granted, technology makes the commission of consumer type fraud easier but is usually not the initial source for personal identifying information (PII) being stolen.

What makes infecting computers and for that matter identity theft easier on social networking sites is the fact that "networking" inherently is a low-threat, high-trust environment. And even someone inclined to be more security minded will lower their defenses when they perceive that the environment is safe. Such presumptions are the foundation upon which fraud is built. This very same idea is what makes a reasonably well educated adult respond to an email asking for highly personal or sensitive information.

Information you should know

In order to be a successful at spreading malware through disguised links or stealing PII through email phishing two things must be present:
1) the consumer believes that failure to act will result in a loss which causes
2) the consumer to lower their defenses or skepticism (or over rule it) and act imprudently. In the case of malware and what should be suspicious links in a different environment the 'failure to act will result in a loss' equation is replaced by an equally strong impulse that 'failure to act will result in not acquiring the perceived benefit'.

Best advice

Watch what you click.
Never reply to an email asking for PII.
Verify with the "friend" any suspicious email asking you to follow a link into their site before clicking.
The email may not have originated from your friend but by malware forwarding messages from an infected friends list.

Too Late to Save Facebook?
A slew of security vendor reports on risks to expect in 2009 point to Facebook, Myspace and other such sites as increasingly tempting targets among hackers looking to dupe people out of their sensitive information. PDF and Flash files, once considered safe, are now a threat as well.

Danger lurks behind social networking
What's the top threat to data security going to be in 2009? According to the GTISC Emerging Cyber Threats Report for 2009 out of Georgia Tech's Information Security Center, the answer is malware specifically disguised as "benign social networking links."

Young workers' use of social networking sites concerns IT staffs
By Steve Johnson

Mercury News.com

Posted: 12/04/2008 12:03:58 PM PST
Social-networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace are being targeted so often by cybercrooks and other mischief-makers that half of the information-technology specialists surveyed recently by Intel expressed concern about workers under 30, who disproportionately use such sites.

Of the 200 corporate and government IT professionals in the United States and Canada who were surveyed, 13 percent said they regard so-called Generation Y employees as "a major security concern," and 37 percent tagged them as "somewhat of a security concern." The biggest worry they mentioned was the tendency of many Gen Yers to frequent social-networking sites like Facebook and MySpace.

Among other problems, the IT executives said employees using such sites may download viruses that wind up on their employer's computers or reveal information about themselves on the networking sites that compromises their employer's business secrets. To prevent such problems, some companies, including Intel, ban their workers' access to social networking sites.

"Their wide-ranging use of the Internet can expose the company to malicious software attacks," said Mike Ferron-Jones, who directs an Intel program that monitors new computing trends. "This is a big deal now, and it's going to get bigger as more Gen Yers come into the workforce."

On the positive side, the IT executives noted that Gen Yers tend to be computer savvy and are brimming with new ideas, which are highly desirable corporate qualities.

MySpace executives didn't respond to a Mercury News request for comment on the report. But Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt acknowledged that his site has seen increasing cyberassaults.

"The more a site grows, the more it becomes a target of bad guys," he said. Nonetheless, he stressed that Facebook "acts aggressively and proactively to protect our users."

Among other things, Facebook does statistical analysis of how often people send messages to identify scammers targeting large numbers of its users. And while he declined to provide data on how many scams are launched against the site each year, he said "only a very small percentage of users have been impacted by security issues."

Even so, the threat posed by identity thieves, con artists and malevolent hackers is considerable and growing, other experts have concluded.

On Tuesday, cybercrime specialists at the security software company McAfee in Santa Clara said they had discovered a link for a movie posted on Facebook. After the link is clicked, a so-called worm detours the user's Internet searches to certain Web-based ads, according to McAfee threat researcher Craig Shmugar.

McAfee's list of top 12 Christmas scams also warns that people on some social-networking sites have been receiving messages that say "You've got a new friend." When clicked, the messages downloads software that steals their financial information.

Increasing numbers of employees access social-networking sites at their job or while using a personal computer linked to work. And the problems they encounter on those sites can turn into big headaches for their employers, according to experts.

In a study earlier this year, security firm Sophos said, "Organizations are facing the dual concerns of social-networking Web sites causing productivity issues by distracting employees from their work" as well as viruses or other malicious computer code "being introduced to the workplace."

Sophos warned employers to be particularly wary of the common tendency of people to use the same password for every site they access. If a crook successfully guesses the person's social-network password, the study said, "They may well be guessing it for the company network, too."

Users of social-networking sites tend to be unusually trusting and willing to share information, said Scott Mitic, chief executive of TrustedID in Redwood City, which offers identity-theft protection services. While they would never dream of leaving their trash cans out when going on vacation, they often seem unconcerned about revealing details of planned trips on social-networking sites.

"I can tell you right now of my friends on Facebook whose house I should be breaking into," he said. "I know who's in Russia now. I know who's on a business trip to L.A."

Because some of Intel's computer chips can block viruses and other security threats, the company may be able to use the research to promote its technology, said Ferron-Jones. But he added that Intel — like other companies — also benefits from its employees using sites like Facebook to confer with customers or business associates.

That poses a big dilemma for businesses grappling with the social-networking phenomenon, he said, adding, "how do you harness all of the good, but avoid the bad?"

Chevron - Home of the Patriarchs but not Their Children

2008-12-11T10:47:00.000-08:00

Isn't it funny how so much of the world cries when they hear the proverbial Arabian story that "my grandmother" or "my grandfather" still has the key to this home or that building in Jerusalem or Haifa or Beer Sheva if only the Zionists didn't throw them out of this house they would still live there to this day. Even though it is pretty worn out and dollars to donuts a lie much of the time, it still provokes anger and creates tears from the gullible anti-Jew. How easy it is to create animosity towards Jews. What happens when it is the Jew who claims ownership of a building or home taken over by others in Israel? And what if that Jew uses legal means to re-claim his family property? All the more so, what if that property is in the politically charged environment of Chevron, home of the patriarchs - the Jewish patriarchs and matriarchs who indeed might cringe at the thought of Arabian-Muslims claiming them as their own?

But what can you say to the argument that, "this is merely a law enforcement matter"? The court ordered the building emptied until the conclusion of a legal process to determine ownership of the property is taken up in court? Send in the army. How many courts of law in the civilized world can have the authority and access to military special forces in order to carry an expulsion order? A simple hearing to view the video tape or audio tape would resolve the legal matter quickly. There was no need for the blood and guts drama of the building invasion. A better country and government would have already conducted hearings into the governments actions in this case.

The use of brutal force to evict what arguably, (if his story is accurate and there is no reason to believe it is not) those residing in the property with the permission of the rightful owner of the property merely because the politics dictates it, is a huge violation of civil rights and possibly falls under the definition of Crimes Against Humanity as my meager understanding of the term permits.

It is no secret that the Olmert/Livni/Barak regieme has systematically thwarted and at the very least made difficult Jewish residence and life in Yosh. The legal rights of individuals has been shoved to the back of the bus in favor of politically contrived definitions of national interest which are agreed to by few and certainly are not universal. Majority agreement and general approval are guide posts directing strategic necessity and generate what is called "national interest". There is no such mandate within Israel or Jewry that Chevron should be left in a vacuum.

Peace House Purchaser Feels Connected to Hevron

Kislev 14, 5769, 11 December 08 12:19by IsraelNN Staff(IsraelNN.com) What motivated philanthropist and New York businessman Morris Abraham to buy Hevron’s Peace House? In an interview with the weekly Jewish periodical, Mishpacha Magazine, Abraham explains, “It was very simple. I had a bar mitzvah there almost thirty years ago. We’re very connected through the Torah.”

However, Abraham’s Hevron connection goes back to the 1920’s, when his Iraqi-born great-grandfather, Yechezkel Abraham, settled the town of the Jewish Patriarchs. He was one of the eight hundred Jewish survivors expelled in the 1929 Arab pogrom. Yechezkel Abraham subsequently resettled in Jerusalem, learning in the Porat Yosef Yeshivah. “He was lucky to be alive,” Abraham adds, “I feel very connected. We were driven out once before. Maybe that’s why I’m still connected.”

The Abraham family connection to the Land of the Biblical Abraham is even more recent, with nearly tragic consequences. Morris Abraham’s father is a major benefactor to the Navat Yisrael schools run by Rabbi Nissim Zeev, a Knesset Member (Shas) since 1999. In 1989, Morris Abraham’s parents and two sisters were being driven by Nissim Zeev to pray at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. While driving through Hevron’s narrow streets, they were boxed in by two Arab cars. A few Hamas terrorists with black masks surrounded the car and started stoning it. Zeev tried driving away, but hit a dead end. Jumping out of the car, Zeev begged an Arab taxi driver to drive the group to IDF troops. Although Zeev’s car was torched, their lives were spared.

MK Nissim Zeev moved into Peace House about a month ago. Rabbi Zeev was encouraged by his rabbinic mentor, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef to remain. “Continue fighting for the house and continue living in the house,” Rabbi Yosef told his disciple.

Peace House residents cannot go to their neighbors to borrow milk, since their next-door-neighbors are Arab. “No one ever thought to move far from existing Jewish homes in Hevron. Five years ago, someone mentioned to me that houses were available,” Abraham explains, “But I wanted something that could make a difference.” Abraham rejected property offers until he came across the present Beit HaShalom. “It was risky without knowing the outcome,” he states, explaining that he was concerned with the risk of pioneering in a new area. “There were the issues of security, but NOT legal issues,” Abraham reiterates, “It was just as much of a legal issue to move next to an existing Jewish property as this property.”

“I gave the go-ahead. The property is actually in quite a strategic area as the home gives more protection to the area,” Abraham clarifies.

“We knew what we’d be facing - that whichever Arab would sell it would subsequently deny it, because, as you know, there’s a death penalty to an Arab who sells property to a Jew. So, we made sure that the sale was well-documented, with video and cassettes, and we made sure that every ‘i’ was dotted in the contract.” Abraham states.

Although Abraham’s legal team documented the sale, Rajbi, the Arab seller actually changed his story three times. He first claimed that he didn’t sell the property. He later claimed that he sold the home but didn’t receive money for it. His last claim was that he sold the Peace House and received payment, but he wants to retroactively cancel the sale.

In the tape documenting the sale, Rajbi admits that he sold the building to Abraham’s agents. Abraham feels that his fight is not for the building, itself. “It’s about a Jew’s right to live in the Land of Israel,” he added, “The government isn’t interested in legalities. They are interested in agendas, being it’s so close to elections.”

Abraham was disheartened to hear of the eviction the very day that ongoing negotiations between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and pro-Land of Israel representatives were taking place.

However, Abraham will not give up his fight. On Sunday, the Hevron Jewish Community filed preliminary proceedings against the IDF for damages. “With all the legalities, I’m confident that we’ll succeed. Although it’s a corrupt system – a very socialistic society – I’m confident that we’ll win,” Abraham stated, mentioning his intention to continue to purchase more homes in the Land of his Forefathers.