Mallory Danaher is the Director of the David Horowitz Freedom Center
Archive for April, 2010
Narain Kataria’s Speech:
Brothers and Sisters: Shalom:
I feel privileged and honored for your giving me an opportunity to speak before you. I am really thankful to the organizers of this Rally. I am living in this country for the last 40 years. America has given me freedom of religion and liberty of expression. Unlike Islamic nations, the American government does not force its citizen to accept Islam or say they would be killed or driven out of that country if they do not.
Dear friends like many Jewish people I am also the victim of Islamic Jihad. I am the survivor of the Partition of India that took place in 1947. I was 17 years old when Islamists forced Hindus to divide British India into two parts in 1947 – Hindu India and Islamic Pakistan.
I was living in that part of India which is now called Pakistan . Since I was a Hindu, my life was made miserable by Islamic police and Islamic militia. I was hounded out by Radical Islamists. Many of my friends and colleagues were singled out, chased and brutally killed. Thousands of Hindu and Sikh girls were gang raped by fanatic Islamists. More than 10 million Hindus and Sikhs were driven out of the region that is now called Pakistan .
In 1947, there were 23% Hindus living there in Pakistan . Today the Hindu population in Pakistan has been reduced to 1% in just 60 years. All the others have been ethnically cleansed.
The same thing happened in Bangladesh . The Hindu population has been reduced from 35% in 1947 to 9% in 2010. More than 400,000 Hindus were driven out in 1989 from Indian ruled Kashmir . These Hindus are living as refugees in their own country.
Today we Hindus are here to express our sympathy and support to Israelis who are surrounded by militant and fanatic Islamic nations armed with deadly weapons. Islamic nations want to wipe out Israel from the world map. Let me tell you, Israel is the frontier of the free World. Once we lose Israel , we lose the free world. I repeat, once we lose Israel , we lose the free world.
The cowardly and politically correct media and its apologists have no idea as to what they are dealing with. It is not just Jerusalem the Islamists are claiming; they are claiming Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Sudan, Nigeria, Londonistan, Parts of France, Spain, Belgium, Holland and several other countries – and eventually the whole world. They want all of us to surrender. They want to subjugate all of us. They want to plant the Islamic flag in London , They want to plant the Islamic flag at in Washington . They have openly stated that they want to establish the supremacy of Allah all over the USA , in India , in Israel and everywhere else. Dear Brothers and Sisters, we have to resolutely and unitedly face this menace of terrorism.
We both – Hindus and Israelis – are the oldest surviving civilizations. We both have been the victims of Islamic terrorism for more than a thousand year. Hence, we both are the natural allies.
At the moment Israeli is under attack by radical Islamists. Israel is the only democratic country in the Middle East . It has every right to exist. We fully support Israel ’s right to exist as a free nation within its rightful borders.
GOD BLESS AMERICA###Narain Kataris is president of Indian American Intellectuals Forum
April 29, 2010
[DP note: The title is slightly changed]
This month, Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak declared that Israel must withdraw from Palestinian territories. “The world isn’t willing to accept — and we won’t change that in 2010 — the expectation that Israel will rule another people for decades more,” he said. “It’s something that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world.”
Is he right? Is peace even possible? And if so, what form should a final agreement take? Those are the questions we asked National Post writers in our series “What’s Your Peace Plan?”
Ehud Barak, Israel’s defence minister.
My peace plan is simple: Israel defeats its enemies.
Victory uniquely creates circumstances conducive to peace. Wars end, the historical record confirms, when one side concedes defeat and the other wins. This makes intuitive sense, for so long as both sides aspire to achieve their ambitions, fighting continues or it potentially can resume.
The goal of victory is not exactly something novel. Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese strategist, advised that in war, “Let your great object be victory.” Raimondo Montecuccoli, a seventeenth- century Austrian, said that “The objective in war is victory.” Carl von Clausewitz, a nineteenth-century Prussian, added that “War is an act of violence to compel the enemy to fulfill our will.” Winston Churchill told the British people: “You ask: what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory – victory – at all costs, victory, in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be.” Dwight D. Eisenhower observed that “In war, there is no substitute for victory.” These insights from prior eras still hold, for however much weaponry changes, human nature remains the same.
Victory means imposing one’s will on the enemy, compelling him to abandon his war goals. Germans, forced to surrender in World War I, retained the goal of dominating Europe and a few years later looked to Hitler to achieve this goal. Signed pieces of paper matter only if one side has cried “Uncle”: The Vietnam War ostensibly concluded through diplomacy in 1973 but both sides continued to seek their war aims until the North won ultimate victory in 1975.
Willpower is the key: shooting down planes, destroying tanks, exhausting munitions, making soldiers flee, and seizing land are not decisive in themselves but must be accompanied by a psychological collapse. North Korea’s loss in 1953, Saddam Hussein’s in 1991, and the Iraqi Sunni loss in 2003 did not translate into despair. Conversely, the French gave up in Algeria in 1962, despite out-manning and out-gunning their foes, as did the Americans in Vietnam in 1975 and the Soviets in Afghanistan in 1989. The Cold War ended without a fatality. In all these cases, the losers maintained large arsenals, armies, and functioning economies. But they ran out of will.
Likewise, the Arab-Israeli conflict will be resolved only when one side gives up.
Until now, through round after round of war, both sides have retained their goals. Israel fights to win acceptance by its enemies, while those enemies fight to eliminate Israel. Those goals are raw, unchanging, and mutually contradictory. Israel’s acceptance or elimination are the only states of peace. Each observer must opt for one solution or the other. A civilized person will want Israel to win, for its goal is defensive, to protect an existing and flourishing country. Its enemies’ goal of destruction amounts to pure barbarism.
For nearly 60 years, Arab rejectionists, now joined by Iranian and leftist counterparts, have tried to eliminate Israel through multiple strategies: they work to undermine its legitimacy intellectually, overwhelm it demographically, isolate it economically, restrain its defenses diplomatically, fight it conventionally, demoralize it with terror, and threaten to destroy it with WMDs. While the enemies of Israel have pursued their goals with energy and will, they have met few successes.
Ironically, Israelis over time responded to the incessant assault on their country by losing sight of the need to win. The right developed schemes to finesse victory, the center experimented with appeasement and unilateralism, and the left wallowed in guilt and self-recrimination. Exceedingly few Israelis understand the unfinished business of victory, of crushing the enemy’s will and getting him to accept the permanence of the Jewish state.
Fortunately for Israel, it need only defeat the Palestinians, and not the entire Arab or Muslim population, which eventually will follow the Palestinian lead in accepting Israel. Fortunately too, although the Palestinians have built an awesome reputation for endurance, they can be beaten. If the Germans and Japanese could be forced to give up in 1945 and the Americans in 1975, how can Palestinians be exempt from defeat?
The United Nations Security Council, one factor extending the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Of course, Israel faces obstacles in achieving victory. The country is hemmed in generally by international expectations (from the United Nations Security Council, for example) and specifically by the policies of its main ally, the U.S. government. Therefore, if Jerusalem is to win, that starts with a change in policy in the United States and in other Western countries. Those governments should urge Israel to seek victory by convincing the Palestinians that they have lost.
This means undoing the perceptions of Israel’s weakness that grew during the Oslo process (1993-2000) and then the twin withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza (2000-05). Jerusalem appeared back on track during Ariel Sharon’s first three years as prime minister, 2001-03 and his tough stance then marked real progress in Israel’s war effort. Only when it became clear in late 2004 that Sharon really did plan to withdraw unilaterally from Gaza did the Palestinian mood revive and Israel stopped winning. Ehud Olmert’s debilitating prime ministry has been only partially remedied by Binyamin Netanyahu over the past year.
Ironically, an Israeli victory would bring yet greater benefits to the Palestinians than to Israel. Israelis would benefit by being rid of an atavistic war, to be sure, but their country is a functioning, modern society. For Palestinians, in contrast, abandoning the fetid irredentist dream of eliminating their neighbor would finally offer them a chance to tend their own misbegotten garden, to develop their deeply deficient polity, economy, society, and culture.
Thus does my peace plan both end the war and bring unique benefits to all directly involved.
Mr. Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.
by Nagendra Rao
More than 2500 people, braving inclement weather and driving rain assembled in front of the Israeli Consulate in the heart of the city of New York on Sunday, April 25th and whole-heartedly supported Israel ’s right to exist and to determine its own fate.
More than 50 organizations representing Jewish, Christian, Hindu and Sikh faiths took part in the Rally. A formidable contingent of Hindus and Sikhs led by Narain Kataria and Arish Sahani, President and Vice President of Indian American Intellectuals Forum, Satya Dosapati and Nand Lal Ramsinghani of the Hindu Human Rights Watch and Bhupinder Singh Bhurji, Chairman, Namdhari Sikh Foundation, USA, participated in the Rally. The chief organizer of the event was Beth Gilinsky, Political Strategist, Action Alliance .
The supporters carried playcards saying that since 9/11/2001 attack on the World Trade Center , the followers of ISLAM the so called “religion of peace” have carried out 15,101 deadly terrorist attacks and killed more than 75,000 people.
In his brief speech, which he delivered with electric effect, Mr. Kataria touched the deepest cord in the psyche of the audience. Mr. Kataria was widely cheered five times by the strong crowd. First when Kataria greeted the energetic audience with “Brothers and Sisters Shalom”; second when he said we Hindus understand and appreciate your persecution and pain because we Hindus have suffered unprecedented brutalities and savageries at the hands of Radical Islam for the last 1400 years hence we both are natural allies; third when he said that Israel is the frontier of the free world – if we lose Israel we lose the free world; fourth when he poignantly described the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir; and fifth when he said that Islamists are not just claiming Jerusalem but they are also claiming Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Sudan, Nigeria, Londonistan, Parts of France, Spain, Belgium, Holland and several other countries.
This young soldier, Gilad Shalit, was captured by the Hamas terror organization
and has been held in solitary captivity for four years.
At a Hamas rally, a Hamas representative, posing as Shalit, pretended to beg for his life for the
“amusement” of the terror organization’s rally participants.
Shalit’s father has released this video on the occasion of Yom Ha’atzmaut. Please view and share with
April 15th, 2010 10:34 am
The Palestinians Already Have Two States: The Truth According to Khaled Abu Toameh
The Real War is Palestinian vs. Palestinian
The world has gone mad—or at least, the American leadership has now formally joined the Islamist and international madness about “peace in the Middle East.”
President Obama has just claimed that American “vital national security” is linked to finding—or even imposing—peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. South Africa’s revered Archbishop Emeritus, Desmond Tutu, has just praised the recent Berkeley student vote (which the university’s president later vetoed) to divest university money from companies that “profit from the injustice of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land in violation of Palestinian human rights.” Tutu writes that what he witnessed in occupied Palestinian territory reminds him of the conditions he “experienced in South Africa under the racist system of apartheid.”
Tutu—this is really too much! Who exactly gave you a tour of the territories? The usual diabolically skilled propagandists? Did you, perchance, bother to visit Israel? If not, why not?
I strongly recommend that both President Obama and Archbishop Tutu consult with Khaled Abu Toameh, an Israeli Arab Muslim/Palestinian journalist whom I was privileged to hear speak the other night in Manhattan. Abu Toameh lives in Jerusalem and he really “gets it.” He is a charming, urbane man, who speaks English perfectly; I assume he speaks Arabic and Hebrew just as well.
Abu Toameh used to work for the PLO newspaper as a translator and fledgling journalist, then attended Hebrew University, and decided that he wanted to be a real journalist, not a mere propagandist. That meant working for an Israeli newspaper where “freedom of the press” is respected. Abu Toameh confirmed that journalists and distinguished visitors to the “territories” cannot just go anywhere on their own; they risk being barred from future visits or even death if they report something that the various Palestinian militias do not want the world to know. “All the news is controlled in Gaza and on the West Bank.”
Archbishop, President, are you listening?
Abu Toameh began working for the Jerusalem Post in 1988. He is not seen as a “traitor” for working for the free Israeli press in Jerusalem—but he has been attacked for doing so on campuses in California! He understands how fundamentalist and dangerous Hamas really is, and yet he reads that Hamas is becoming moderate—where? In Toronto’s Globe and Mail!
I urge—nay, I implore, I demand, that all those who keep talking about a “peace process” listen to what Abu Toameh has to say. I feel so strongly about this that I am presenting what he said, almost verbatim.
He spoke on the Upper West Side, at Aish HaTorah. Yes, an Orthodox Jewish religious center graciously gave Abu Toameh his platform and were very grateful to have him. Thus, the room usually reserved for religious services and study was precisely where the wry, ironic, witty Abu Toameh spoke. He is very much an Israeli–although not as hot-tempered as some, or as some Arabs.
First, Abu Toameh confirms that the worst possible thing for the Palestinian people were the various peace processes which were highly misguided, insincere, and unworkable. “Before the Oslo Accords, Palestinians had high hopes that we would have a democratic Parliament just as the Israelis do and a free media. Since Oslo, things have gone in the wrong direction.”
In Abu Toameh’s view, “Oslo was based on the assumption that Arafat and Fatah were reliable peace partners.” That was far from the case. Once Arafat was returned in triumph—“the show began, a one man show. Thirteen to fifteen militias roamed the streets. Most of the money given to Arafat for Palestine went down the drain, into secret Swiss bank accounts, and to his wife, Suha, in France. He built a casino—right across from a refugee camp.”
According to Abu Toameh, all those who were giving money to Arafat “simply refused to believe that he was corrupt.” Because Abu Toameh reported this, he was repeatedly asked if he was “on the payroll of the Jewish Lobby.” But, he said, it became more and more difficult to file stories abroad because “newspaper editors all wanted stories against the Occupation. They did not want to confuse their readers with facts.”
In his view, everyone was afraid to report the truth because Arafat and his goon squads would kill the truth tellers. Thus, Arafat and the mythic peace process embittered and “radicalized” the Palestinian people and they turned to Hamas, an Islamist organization funded by Iran. “People lost faith in the peace process.” Abu Toameh also confirmed that Arafat kept saying one thing in English about peace and in Arabic, kept inciting people against Israel.
Israeli President Shimon Peres defended Arafat. Peres refused to factor in what Arafat was saying in Arabic. Abu Toameh thought to himself: “How stupid can this man be? Doesn’t he know that Arafat is describing the Jews as the descendants of pigs and monkeys. Why make peace with the Jews if they are this terrible?”
And so, in 2006, Hamas won a democratic election—an election which was held under American supervision and which was strongly supported by both President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Rice did not expect Hamas to win. Abu Toameh knew they would win; the people were angry at their hopeless situation at the hands of their own leaders. According to Abu Toameh, “Israel also facilitated the election of Hamas by allowing Arabs in Jerusalem to vote in that election. Israel did not know what every Palestinian child knew: That Hamas would win.”
And so now, Fatah has lost, Mahmoud Abbas cannot deliver peace nor can he make peace with Hamas. In turn, Hamas is not stepping down. Thus far, “this civil war among the Palestinians has so far claimed 2000 lives.”
Ironically, those who once clamored for a free and open election are now trying to bring down the duly elected with guns and bombs. Hamas kicked Fatah out of Gaza. Abu Toameh reports that he personally “saw Palestinians running away from Hamas towards Egypt, saw Egypt close the border to those in flight. Only Israel helped Muslims who were about to be slaughtered by Muslims.”
And so, wryly, ironically, Abu Toameh concludes: “We got our two-state solution. The Palestinians got two states. Hamas is funded by the Muslim Brotherhood, Syria, and Iran and I would not want to live there. The West Bank is being run by Arafat’s former cronies. But Mahmoud Abbas is afraid of his own people. I have not once seen him in a village. He has no credibility. He cannot deliver peace.
“If Israel withdraws from the West Bank, Hamas will take over. The IDF is keeping Abbas from being hung. Israel is also keeping Fatah and Hamas from killing each other. They hate each other more than they hate Israel.”
In his view, “we cannot move forward with a peace process. There is no Palestinian partner…Did you know? Mahmoud Abbas’s office expired in 2009 but Secretary of State Rice told him to simply stay on. Look: Abbas has lost control of 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza. Abbas is also seen as corrupt and ineffective. To whom will Abbas sell his peace agreement? Hamas will hang him at the entrance to Gaza, they will not wait.”
What does Abu Toameh suggest is the way forward?
“Dismantle all the Palestinian militias, start building Palestinian infra-structures, solve the Palestinian-Palestinian problems—and only then, sit down with the Jews. Obama thinks the ball is in the Israeli court. That is not true.”
Abu Toameh pauses, then says: “If I were Netanyahu, I would offer Palestinians ten states. Bring Obama over, ask him: To whom do I give the Palestinian states? To Hamas? Abbas? Islamic Jihad? He cautions Israel to be “careful about unilateral measures. Any land you give back, any land you give to Abbas, will end up in Iran’s hand. See how Gaza ended up. The same thing will repeat itself. The majority of Jews support the Palestinian state not because they love Palestinians but because they want to get rid of them.”
And then he issued a warning—to Israel which had nothing to do with two state solutions or with a peace process. “Israeli Arabs have been loyal to Israel. They are still discriminated against. No, Israel is not an apartheid state, but discrimination exists against 1.4 million of its own citizens. If Israel does not implement an emergency plan to solve this then the radicalization of the Israeli Arabs will explode. The next Intifada will be in Haifa, Umm al-Fahm, Nazareth, Rahat, Yaffo.”
President Obama: Please do not keep making the same mistakes that both your Republican and Democratic predecessors have made.