Mavi Marmara Will Not Sail in Second Gaza Flotilla

At Haaretz, "Gaza flotilla organizers disappointed by Turkish group's decision to cancel ship" (via Blazing Cat Fur).

Organizers of the flotilla that is set to sail for the Gaza Strip later this month expressed disappointment over the weekend that the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH) will not take an active role in the convoy.

The IHH announced on Friday that the Mavi Marmara ship, on which nine Turkish activists were killed last May when it was intercepted by Israeli commandos on its way to Gaza, will not take part in the upcoming convoy.

RELATED: At Jerusalem Post, "US man seeks to seize flotilla ships using anti-piracy law":

Dr. Alan Bauer, an American- Israeli victim of a Palestinian terrorist attack, on Thursday filed a first of its kind lawsuit in an effort to seize ships to be used by Islamic and anti-Israel organizations to try to breach the blockade of the Gaza Strip later this month.

The suit, Bauer v. The Mavi Marmara, was filed in Manhattan federal court, seeking to confiscate 14 ships, which are scheduled to participate in the upcoming flotilla and which were outfitted with funds Bauer says were unlawfully raised in the United States by anti-Israel groups, including The Free Gaza Movement. Over the weekend, however, the Turkish IHH organization said the Mavi Marmara was still too damaged to sail for Gaza.

The plaintiff, a biologist from the Chicago area, and his son Jonathan, then aged seven, were seriously wounded when Palestinian suicide bomber detonated a bomb, packed with metal spikes and nails, in the center of a crowd of shoppers on King George Street in Jerusalem on March 21, 2002.

Three people were killed and 85 other people were also wounded.

Bauer alleges that The Free Gaza Movement and other American-based anti-Israel organizations have raised funds in the United States to outfit the Gaza flotilla ships. The lawsuit contends that furnishing and outfitting the ships, which are being used for hostilities against a US ally, violates American law.

The plaintiff rests his claim upon the rarely used 18th-century “informant” statute (18 USC Section 962) that allows a plaintiff (called an “informer”) to privately seize ships outfitted in the United States for use against a US ally.

The stature states: “Whoever, within the United States, furnishes, fits out, arms, or attempts to furnish, fit out or arm, any vessel, with intent that such vessel shall be employed in the service of any foreign prince, or state, or of any colony, district, or people, to cruise, or commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens, or property of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people with whom the United States is at peace; or Whoever issues or delivers a commission within the United State for any vessel, to the intent that she may be so employed – Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

“Every such vessel, her tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with all materials, arms, ammunition, and stores which may have been procured for the building and equipment thereof, shall be forfeited, one half to the use of the informer and the other half to the use of the United States.”

Still more at the link above.

Nitsana Darshan-Leitner Interview with James Poulos at PJTV

Background at Jerusalem Post, "Lawyers, not IDF, at forefront of battle against flotilla."

The Jewish Enemies of Israel

From David Solway, at FrontPage Magazine:

Everywhere we look we see these broken Jews who have embraced left-wing causes, or assimilationist fatuities, or the temptations of social prestige, or the fashionable bromides of the zeitgeist that promise peace and understanding with anti-Semitic killers and despots in a pluralistic New World Order that exists only in their own febrile and disarrayed minds.

Canada's Hamas Flotilla

Called the Tahrir, the Canadian Boat to Gaza, of the Freedom Flotilla II.

Also known as the "Sea Hitler" by another name.

Background from Matt Gurney, at National Post, "The return of the NDP's anti-Israel fringe":

It was just over a year ago that Israeli forces went aboard the Mavi Marmara and six other ships that had set sail from Turkey. The vessels were filled with anti-Israel activists and aimed to deliver supplies to Gaza in defiance of Israel's arms blockade of the Hamas-controlled territory. Those aboard the ships were hoping to provoke an Israeli response and, unfortunately, they succeeded. While most of the ships were boarded peacefully, Israeli troops -armed only with light weapons, as they expected no resistance -were attacked when they boarded the Mavi Marmara. The situation escalated rapidly and, having failed to use the appropriate degree of force at the outset, Israeli troops had to use too much at the end. Nine activists were killed and Israel and its blockade were roundly criticized.

A year later, Canadian anti-Israel activists are hoping lightning strikes twice and are planning to sail a vessel from our shores to the Gaza Strip, despite the continuing Israeli military embargo. By forcing a confrontation with the Israelis, they hope to bring yet more international scorn down upon the Jewish state. They have a long list of supporters, including the usual suspects -but also one name that is a bit surprising: Alex Atamanenko, the freshly re-elected NDP MP for B.C. Southern Interior.

Mr. Atamanenko, first elected in 2006, has been quite public with his support of the Gazan cause before. He was quick to condemn Israel for the original flotilla incident. He also criticized its military operations against Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip in 2008 and 2009. His endorsement of the Canadian Boat to Gaza is therefore logically consistent, if nothing else.

More at that link above. The NDP is the New Democratic Party, a national socialist party that is currently the official opposition party in the Canadian House of Commnons.

See also Gurney at FrontPage Magazine, "The Canadian Left Backs Upcoming Gaza Flotilla."

Stand Up for Israel

I get e-mails from the folks at San Diego Israel Coalition. In turn they send me information available from StandWithUs.

Protesters Killed at Israeli Border

At New York Times, "Israeli Soldiers Shoot at Protesters on Syrian Border":

JERUSALEM — Israeli forces fired at pro-Palestinian protesters on the Syrian frontier on Sunday as they tried to breach the border for the second time in three weeks, reflecting a new mode of popular struggle and deadly confrontation fueled by turmoil in the Arab world and the vacuum of stalled peace talks.

Wave after wave of protesters, mainly Palestinians from refugee camps in Syria, approached the frontier with the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. Israeli soldiers opened fire on those who crossed a new trench and tried to attack the border fence near the towns of Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights and Quneitra in Syria.

By nightfall, the Syrian news agency SANA reported that 22 protesters had been killed and more than 350 had been wounded. Israeli officials said that they had no information on casualties but suggested that the Syrian figures were exaggerated.

Even so, it was the worst bloodshed in the Golan Heights since Israel and Syria fought a war there in 1973.

RTWT.

This is a Damascus production. See, Ynet, "Syrian opposition: Anti-Israel rioters paid $1,000." And Gateway Pundit, "Anti-Israel Protesters Reportedly Paid $1000 to Storm Across Israel Border."

Also, from Rick Moran, at FrontPage Magazine, "Besieging the Israeli Border: A Syrian Production."

Yigal Allon — 'Israel: The Case for Defensible Borders'

The Los Angeles Times has a new essay from Dore Gold, "The long view in Israel against the 1967 line." Recall that Gold is a former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations. I cited his recent commentary piece at Wall Street Journal, "Israel's 1967 Borders Aren't Defensible." At the Times he discusses Yigal Allon's 1976 essay at Foreign Affairs, "Israel: The Case for Defensible Borders." I'm reading it. Here's this from the introduction:

It is impossible to plumb the depths of the Arab-Israeli conflict, not to speak of formulating proposals for its solution, if no true understanding exists of the full significance of its cardinal characteristic-the extreme asymmetry of its two sides. This asymmetry is manifest not merely in one or two, but in all, of its aspects. It is obvious in such objective data as the comparison between Arab and Israeli territories (of the Arab League states 8,500,000 square miles; of Israel, including presently administered areas, about 28,500); or of the relative population statistics (of the Arab League states 134,000,000; of Israel 3,500,000 citizens); not to mention their contrasting actual and potential wealth.

But of primary importance are the subjective asymmetric factors affecting relations between the two sides. In this respect, there is absolute polarization. Whereas the Arab states seek to isolate, strangle and erase Israel from the world's map, Israel's aim is simply to live in peace and good relations with all its neighbors.

These diverse objectives have determined the war aims of both sides. It is within this context that we should mention the chain of terrorist acts that was designed not merely to sow death and destruction in Israel but also to extend the conflict, and thus embroil the Arab states in full-scale wars. It is almost superfluous, and certainly tiresome, to quote the legion of statements of Arab leaders that represent this aim, ranging from the "Palestine Covenant" to current governmental declarations.

As opposed to this total Arab goal, Israel's war aims have been confined to repelling the offensives of the Arab armies as determined by strategic and political circumstances, whether by reactive counter-offensives such as those of 1948 and 1973 or by preemptive counter-offensives as those of 1956 and 1967. Military defeats, indeed, cost the Arab states losses in lives, destruction of equipment, political setbacks, and damage to national prestige-and perhaps even danger to their regimes. However, such defeats have never been, nor ever will be, a threat to their very existence as sovereign states or to the lives of their civilian populations. In contrast, a military defeat of Israel would mean the physical extinction of a large part of its population and the political elimination of the Jewish state. In highly realistic and clear terms, therefore, the Arab states can permit themselves a series of military defeats while Israel cannot afford to lose a single war. Nor does this reflect a historical trauma in any sense. To lose a single war is to lose everything, and this is a most real and stark fact.

And about the 1967 borders:

One does not have to be a military expert to easily identify the critical defects of the armistice lines that existed until June 4, 1967. A considerable part of these lines is without any topographical security value; and, of no less importance, the lines fail to provide Israel with the essential minimum of strategic depth. The gravest problem is on the eastern boundary, where the entire width of the coastal plain varies between 10 and 15 miles, where the main centers of Israel's population, including Tel Aviv and its suburbs, are situated, and where the situation of Jerusalem is especially perilous. Within these lines a single successful first strike by the Arab armies would be sufficient to dissect Israel at more than one point, to sever its essential living arteries, and to confront it with dangers that no other state would be prepared to face. The purpose of defensible borders is thus to correct this weakness, to provide Israel with the requisite minimal strategic depth, as well as lines which have topographical strategic significance.

And not quoted is the key issue raised by Dore Gold at the Los Angeles Times: There's never been a final recognition of boundaries. Israel is not now nor has it ever been required to withdraw behind the 1967 armistice lines.

Anyway, check the discussion at LAT. It's perfectly sound, but detailed arguments like this have little effect on those determined to drive the Jews to the sea.

Israel Opens Fire on Naksa Day Protesters

At Washington Post, "Palestinian protesters attempt to cross Israeli border from Syria, troops open fire."

Israeli army spokesman Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai accused Syria of creating “a provocation” at the border to divert attention from the Syrian government’s deadly crackdown on the uprising in that country.

In a sign of official backing for the protests, the border clashes were broadcast live on Syrian television, with comments from participants, and reporters were permitted direct access to the normally closed frontier zones.

Near the village of Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights, scores of Palestinians and Syrian supporters who arrived in buses from Damascus streamed down a hillside and marched toward the frontier, carrying Palestinian and Syrian flags and chanting “Palestine is Arab!” and “the Golan is Syrian!”

When the protesters tried to cross a trench and earth berms topped with razor wire, which had been put up by the Israeli military to block their approach, army sharpshooters opened fire at the marchers from a border fence nearly 150 yards away.

The army spokesman said that troops had fired warning shots before shooting at the legs of the demonstrators. The gunfire was accompanied by loudspeaker warnings in Arabic that those who approached the border fence were endangering their lives.

Also at Los Angeles Times, "Israel fires on pro-Palestinian protesters at Syrian border."

Added: At Legal Insurrection, "Assad Sends More Palestinian Cannon Fodder Over Israel Border." (via Memeorandum).

'Naksa Day'

Okay, should be a big news day, for example, at Jerusalem Post, "IDF on high alert for 'Naksa Day' border unrest," and "30 protesters gathering on Syrian side of border."

And at Ynet, "Security forces on high alert for 'Naksa Day'." Also, at New York Times, "Israel Braces for Clashes During Border Protests":

JERUSALEM — Israel on Saturday was bracing for possible clashes along its borders after Palestinian activists in the region called for protest marches on Sunday, three weeks after a similar wave of coordinated protests led to deadly clashes with Israeli troops.

Protests on Sunday to mark the anniversary of the Palestinian “naksa,” or setback, in the June 1967 Middle East war were being planned in the West Bank and Gaza, territories that were conquered by Israel then. There have also been calls on social networking Internet sites for Palestinians in Lebanon and Syria to march at the Israeli border.

That echoed the conditions that led to the violence on May 15, the day Palestinians mark as the “nakba,” or catastrophe, of Israel’s establishment in 1948. Taking a cue from the so-called Arab Spring movement, organizers in multiple countries and territories called for a coordinated action against Israel, and huge crowds of Palestinians responded.

They clashed with Israeli troops on four fronts, and breached the border between Syria and the Golan Heights for the first time in more than 30 years. At least 14 protesters from Lebanon and Syria were killed, stoking outrage in Palestinian camps across the region and intensifying pressure on Israel to create the conditions for a return to peace talks.

The Israeli military was not giving out details of its preparations, but television reports showed soldiers repairing fences and bulldozers digging trenches along the borders in the north. On Thursday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had instructed Israeli forces to act with restraint, but also with determination, to protect Israel’s sovereignty and borders. According to reports from Lebanon, activists there canceled plans to march to the Israeli border after the Lebanese authorities declared the border area a closed military zone.

Plus, at Haaretz, "Thousands march in Tel Aviv in support of Palestinian state based on 1967 borders."

RELATED: Leo Rennert, at American Thinker, "Joel Greenberg, the Washington Post's Palestinian Propagandist."

Added: At Jihad Watch, "Palestinian Authority presidential adviser: 'refugee' assaults on Israel's borders are the 'new Palestinian nuclear weapon'."

Palestinians Ready Major Action Against Israel

Big news from the Middle East.

At Haaretz, "Dress rehearsal: The Palestinians are gearing up for more protests in the wake of their Nakba Day successes."

June is shaping up to be one big dress rehearsal for the tsunami in September. On Sunday, Palestinians will mark the anniversary of the 1967 Six-Day War with processions and demonstrations in the territories and along Israel's borders. Toward the end of the month, a new flotilla to Gaza is planned, with the declared aim of breaching the blockade - which in practice has long since been lifted. In the meantime, the Palestinians will continue pressing their initiative for a unilateral declaration of a state come September.

From the Golan Heights to the West Bank, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman's suggestion to the Palestinians will continue to resonate: to march en masse to Jerusalem. The idea is to create a popular, nonviolent demonstration along the lines of Tahrir Square, which would leave Israel unable to mount an effective response.

More details, and then:

Without ignoring the plans for Naksa Day, the country's leaders are now primarily concerned with blocking the Gaza flotilla, which is scheduled to depart on June 20. Currently, the plan is to have 15 boats carry about 1,500 Islamic and European left-wing activists who are seeking a bloody clash with the IDF. So far, only four boats have been recruited. Gantz promised the MKs that the IDF would block all attempts to breach the maritime blockade of Gaza, and added the self-evident: that the flotilla is a provocation, not an actual attempt to assist Gaza's residents.

Maj. Gen. (res. ) Giora Eiland, who headed the internal IDF inquiry into last year's flotilla episode, offered an interesting hypothetical proposition this week. If it were possible to get the Turkish government (as opposed to the organizers, who are from the extremist Islamic organization IHH ) to promise to examine the boats in advance, and ensure that they are not carrying weapons, he said, then Israel should consider letting the vessels into Gaza.

Yeah. Weapons.

See Ynet, "IDF has photos of armed flotilla activists" (via Memeorandum) Also at Israel Matzav, "IDF has photos of armed Mavi Marmara terrorists... but won't release them?!?"

RELATED: At CSM, "Israel's navy trains for second major Gaza flotilla."

Coldplay: 'Every Teardrop is a Waterfall'

The new single.

And the band's endorsing the movement of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions against Israel? That's lame. See Uncoverage, "Rock Group “ColdPlay” Endorses Jihad Against Israel."

New Ad from Emergency Committee for Israel Slams Obama on Israel Peace Proposal

Thanks both Democrats and Republicans alike, for standing with Israel. Puts Debbie Wasserman Schultz on the outs as well:

Voiceover: When President Obama sided with the Palestinians, members of both parties stood with Israel.

Harry Reid: Nobody should set premature perimeters about borders.

Steny Hoyer: Israel’s borders must be defensible.

Bob Casey: Jerusalem is the undivided and eternal capitol of Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu: And I see a lot of new friends of Israel here…. Democrats and Republicans alike.

Voiceover: The Emergency Committee for Israel thanks Israel’s true friends, Democrats and Republicans alike.

ADDED: Alana Goodman has more: "Here’s to Bipartisan Support for Israel."

Toronto's Globe and Mail Goes Inside Hamas

Literally.

See, "Inside Hamas: An Inside Look at What Drives Palestinian Militants" (via Blazing Cat Fur).

This is another one of those resources where you'll want to sit back with a cup of coffee. There's both articles and video reports. The Globe's Patrick Martin really did get inside Hamas. Militarized squalor. Amazing reporting.

Start here: "Hamas: Agents of terror, partners in peace, or both?"

Martin is sympathetic but un-appeasing. I keep thinking what it would be like to have essentially a terrorist state in your backyard, recruiting and training a whole generation of young Palestinians that want to kill my family. Partners for peace? Well, folks know where I stand on that?

New York's LGBT Community Center Caves to 'Queers Against Israeli Apartheid'

Update from my report in March: "Queers for Palestine Party to End Apartheid!"

From the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center, "STATEMENT ON DECISION TO ALLOW SPACE USE BY OUTSIDE QUEER IDENTIFIED GROUP."

And from the anti-Israel side, Queers for an Open LGBT Center, "QUEER VICTORY! Today's action is still on!" And The Cahokian, "Rightwinger now calls NYC Gay Center 'an anti-Israeli nest'."

But see Phyllis Chesler, at FrontPage Mag, "NYC Queers for Jihad":

Last Friday, May 26, 2011, “Queers Against Israeli Apartheid” exercised their hard-won right to hold their meetings at New York City’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Center. Their right to hate and to be grossly misinformed was, as usual, presented as a free speech right and as yet another victim-driven Intifada (uprising).

This meeting followed the long campaign to vilify City University Trustee Jeffrey Wiesenfeld for daring to dissent from Tony Kushner’s anti-Israel views; Kushner, who happens to be both gay and Jewish, is nevertheless being given an honorary doctorate this week. These two events are intimately connected to each other and have been further empowered by President Obama’s shameful and dangerous actions towards the Jewish State.

We have all seen black and white footage of people dancing the night away, even as the crematoria or the machetes did their deadly work somewhere off camera. We understand that people elsewhere continue eating, having babies, buying first homes, going on vacations, even as genocidal wars rage on camera, even as tornadoes, nuclear plant meltdowns, and savage flash floods destroy whole communities elsewhere, also on camera.

Right now, in my little neck of the planet, Manhattan, the weather has turned gloriously sunny and summery; people are enjoying this respite from the unending rains and freezing winter weather. As people amble through leafy city streets, the world is preparing to slaughter the Jews again. As if the Muslim Brotherhood and the Gama’a al-Islamiyya in Egypt were not enough, a new swastika-flying Nazi party has emerged in Egypt—Egypt, Israel’s friendly neighbor; Egypt, which on Saturday opened the Rafah crossing to admit even more weapons and terrorist fighters into Gaza in the unending Arab war against the Jews; Egypt, where many are demanding an end to the cold peace treaty with Israel.

Some say that President Obama might be touring Europe in order to gain European allies to help him pressure Israel into accepting the “pre-1967” Auschwitz borders.

Here at home in America, we continue to enjoy Gazan Intifadas on our campuses. For example, the people are getting ready to party in the streets when, on June 3, 2011, City University of New York gives playwright Tony Kushner his honorary doctorate. In my view, they are feting Kushner, not so much for his art but rather for his celebrity and for his obsessively harsh views of Israel. The playwright has not led any campaigns against genocide in Sudan or against real gender and religious apartheid in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Like the “Queers Against Apartheid,” Kushner also scapegoats Israel for the crimes of the Arab and Muslim worlds.

The LGBT “queers” had threatened to storm or “surge” into the Center if they did not receive official approval for their group meeting.

“Surging” and “storming,” Arab street mob behavior, is a vision and a tactic that has been recommended by none other than journalist Tom Friedman, long adopted by international “Free Gaza” activists; it reminds me of Nazi Brownshirt behavior. Think Kristallnacht. Civilians and men in uniform breaking Jewish shop windows, breaking Jewish bones, burning Jewish books, eventually burning millions of living Jews.

But, you must understand: The German Nazis felt “victimized.” They had lost World War I and were humiliated because they should have been triumphant; they had also been unfairly economically penalized. Kushner and his supporters claim that the genuine dissent of one CUNY trustee, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, somehow “victimized” their views because their views are supposed to triumph, not Wiesenfeld’s. His pro-Israel view is not supposed to exist and, in their view, is not protected by academic or free speech rights. Only the anti-Israel views deserve such protection.

One thousand six hundred and eighty people signed a petition to the Center on behalf of “Queers for Palestine.” Like Tony Kushner and his CUNY supporters, the aggressors first claim victimhood and protest the denial of their free speech rights; then, they “surge” forward as a mob (on petitions, on the Internet, on the streets, on other battlefields), to either murder Jews or to honor those Jews who hate Israel, and to silence gay Jews who are pro-Israel ...

More at the post, and then:

Now, in the light of what has happened, Lucas, a major financial supporter of the center, has withdrawn from it. His letter is brief, dignified, and to the point. I will give him the closing words. He writes:

Dear supporters of the state of Israel-

I just learned that tonight the Gay Center of NYC will be hosting the first meeting of the group Queers Against Israeli Apartheid. This organization stands for boycotts, divestments and sanctions of the Jewish state. In other words, it stands for boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Jewish men, women, children, and Holocaust survivors living in Israel.

I am a proud gay man and a proud Jewish man, but I have made my choice. I ask you to boycott, divest and sanction the LGBT Center of NYC. Today Jewish people in Israel are in incomparably greater danger than the gay people in America will ever be. This is a difficult choice and I am asking you to make the same choice.

Alienate yourself from NYC LGBT Center. Stand with Israel, stand with Israeli Jews, and defend their right to exist, their right to defend themselves, not to let the world exterminate them again.

And even if all the gay groups will condemn this letter, I will not change my mind.

Michael Lucas

Bill Whittle's Firewall: 'Turncoat Nation'

Via Right Klik:

RELATED: Victor Davis Hanson, How The Obama Administration Threatens Our National Security.

FLASHBACK: Whittle's original series, "What We Believe."

Caroline Glick: 'American Jewish Organizations and Obama'

At Big Peace:

President Obama’s speech on the Middle East at the State Department last week, his icy glares at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office last Friday, his address before the AIPAC conference on Sunday, and his subsequent press briefings have all made clear that he is not sympathetically inclined toward Israel, nor does he consider Israel an ally worth defending.

Obama’s advocacy of the 1949 armistice lines as a starting point for negotiations demonstrate his lack of support for Israel’s right to defensible borders. His non-response to the Hamas-Fatah unity deal demonstrates that there is nothing the Palestinians can do that will make him accept the reality that their commitment to Israel’s destruction, rather than Israel’s continued control over Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, is the reason there is no peace between them and Israel.

Word.

The full essay at the link.

IMAGE CREDIT: Israel Matzav, "Why American Jewish Organizations are Defending Obama."

Robert Stacy McCain: 'Pacifism and Historical Ignorance'

An excellent post.

I promised McCain I'd throw him some traffic this weekend. He links to a Victor Davis Hanson essay, on which I'll have more later. Meanwhile, I'm snagging this video, a Legal Insurrection upload:

RELATED: From Evan Sayet, at FrontPage Mag, "Why Jews Support the Democratic Party."

More on all of this tonight ...

Henry Kissinger Interview at Time

An extremely interesting discussion. Kissinger's in the news for his new book on China, but the interview is wide ranging. And there's video. Time's Belinda Luscombe asks Kissinger, "Is the U.S. not a member of the International Criminal Court because former Secretaries of State like yourself might face prosecution?", and the transcript is strangely truncated:

The reason we are not a member of the international court is that the work is left to prosecutors who are drawn from a variety of countries who very often cannot understand what the issues are. I do not favor the International Criminal Court, but not even remotely out of fear for myself.

At the video clip, Kissinger indicates that the ICC has "started a process where some American officials are reluctant to travel abroad for fear that somebody will launch some sort of indictment against them ..." Yeah, and Israeli officials as well. In 2009 a British court issued an arrest warrant for Tzipi Livni, former Israeli foreign minister, to stand trial on war crimes charges. It's "lawfare" against the international systems' great power and their allies.

Student Activism at AIPAC

The video is especially interesting after 6:00 minutes.

And Barbara Efraim touched base with me yesterday, the first chance she's had since getting back from AIPAC in D.C. I already posted Barbara's recent commentary piece at The Daily Bruin, but she wanted to give me a heads up on this comment at the article:

Equating Noam Chomsky – a world-renowned public intellectual, linguist, writer, and emeritus professor at one of the most prestigious academic institutions in the world – to some marginal, goblin-like hate-monger as Horowitz is just plain foolish.

What “threat” of Sharia Law do you speak of? What Israeli “democracy” do you speak of? Your rhetoric is tired and ineffective.

Appeasement of Ratko Mladic Was Dress Rehearsal for Left's Antiwar Politics Since 9/11

An outstanding piece, from Ben Cohen, at Pajamas Media, "The Appeasers of Ratko Mladic: The UN appeasers of butchers Mladic and Slobodan Milosevic today demonize Jews, the West, and support Muslim dictatorships."