by Yoram Ettinger Straight from the Jerusalem Boardroom #161, May 11, 2012
1. The $58BN MA-based EMC acquired Israel’s XtremIO for $430MN, in addition to its existing Israeli R&D center, which employs 750 persons. EMC intends to expand its Israeli presence, as has been done by Intel (Globes business daily, May 11, 2012). The Mansfield, MA-based $26BN healthcare giant, Covidien acquired Oridion, an Israeli developer of devices for patients’ breathing safety from $346MN, following its March 19 acquisition of Israel’s SuperDimension for $300MN (Globes, April 6). J.P. Morgan acquired 7% of Israel’s Conduit for $100MN (Globes, Apri 10). ProSeibenSat, the German communications giant acquired Israel’s July-August Productions for 10MN Euros (Globes, May 11).
A very gallant Dr. Charles Asher Small just delivered an important lecture at the 92nd St Y. in New York.
Yes, this is the same Dr. Small who, in 2004, founded the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), which he housed at Yale University from 2006-2011–until the Yale Corporation decided that the Center’s work on Islamic Judeophobia and specifically on Iranian genocidal Judeophobia threatened Yale’s “scholarly commitments” in the region.
Who could make this up?
This was the first time that Dr. Small spoke about this publicly.
By Yoram Ettinger Israel Hayom Newsletter, April 06, 2012
Israeli leaders are able to repel President Obama’s relentless pressure to refrain from pre-empting Iran, Hizballah and Hamas; to freeze Jewish construction in eastern Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria; to retreat to the 1949 cease fire lines, including the repartitioning of Jerusalem; and to placate Mahmoud Abbas, while ignoring the PA hate-education, non-compliance and terrorism.
In contrast to the ironclad US public and congressional support of Israel, presidential pressure has always been part of US-Israel relations.
Therefore, contemporary Israeli leaders should emulate Israeli prime ministers who served from 1948 (Ben Gurion) to 1992 (Shamir). While they rejected — in most cases — presidential prescriptions for Israel’s national security, bilateral strategic cooperation surged unprecedentedly in spite off, and probably due to, their steadfastness.
Is there going to be a “third intifada?” I have no idea. That is a question most likely to be determined by those who set Palestinian strategy and they will surely differ among themselves. What interests me is the question of what factors would determine their choice.
When this issue is discussed publicly it is attributed almost entirely to the idea that frustration will motivate revolt. This is certainly the point made by Palestinian Authority (PA) leaders. The argument is that unless they get their way diplomatically violence will be the logical outcome.
Hitler’s Nazi Germany signed a “non-aggression” agreement with Stalin’s USSR in 1939 (the “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact”). It meant nothing. It was a worthless peace of paper designed to ease the Nazi’s eventual conquest and extermination of all peoples in the Soviet sphere of influence: “Of the Soviet Union’s 190 million people, Hitler intended to kill 150 million and the rest would be made slaves for the invaders.” The Nazis did kill millions of Russians and Eastern Europeans. In the same way, Nazi Germany’s “alliance” with segments of the Arab/Muslim world was a short-term lie: The Germans considered North African Arab Semites to be sub-human inferiors whom I’m sure they would’ve eventually exterminated. As is so common in the current Arab/Muslim world, ignorance reigns, and Libyans don’t even know that Allied soldiers actually saved them from eventual extermination by defeating the Nazis in WWII’s north African theater. Libyan Islamists have ignorantly desecrated Allied soldiers’ tombs because of the silly, accidental Koran-burning incident in Afghanistan:
A furious mob has desecrated dozens of Commonwealth War Graves in a Libyan cemetery amid continuing fury in the Middle East over the burning of the Koran by U.S. soldiers.
Headstones commemorating British and Allied servicemen, killed during World War II campaigns in the Western Desert, lay smashed and strewn across Benghazi Military Cemetery. …
There is no “Arab Spring.” It is indeed an Arab winter in which hateful, violent Islamo-fascists are trying to take over the Middle East.
Want to know how to talk to an Islamo-fascist and expose his soft-spoken but dangerous agenda to spread Sharia’s barbarity (Islamic “law”)? Just watch this excellent exchange. The Islamo-fascist publicly admits he wants Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist — non-Muslim “infidel” — Americans to live as third-class citizens (dhimmis) under Sharia. He admits he wants to destroy democracy. He gets told to shove off, as it should be:
… Evidence so far indicates that no malice was intended in the Koran-burning at the [Afghan] air base, Doug Wilson, the Pentagon’s assistant secretary for public affairs, said today.
“We do not believe that this was something where those involved intended to burn the Koran as a religious document,["] Wilson said. …
“After 10 years, incidents such as this have been extremely rare,” he said. “No matter how serious this was, no one should necessarily extrapolate a broader trend about how our armed forces in Afghanistan are poised to treat religious and cultural materials.” …
President Obama has completely lost it. His “perspective” is reversed — upside down. Intolerant Muslim savages are again on a murderous rampage simply because some American kid accidentally burned a book. Remember Muslim madness over the silly Mohammed cartoons? A crazed Afghan killed two American soldiers today because of this non-”incident,” and all’s Barack Obama can do is apologize to whom; the Taliban? 1,883 American soldiers have been killed trying to bring civilization to Afghanistan. It is the Afghan president and civic groups who should be apologizing to the U.S. for their own barbarism and bigotry. The book which was burned was the Koran, but nonetheless, just a collection of paper pages. President Obama should be ashamed of his “apology.”
Oh, ye of little (nonexistent) faith. Are your “Islamic” beliefs so shallow that you would once again commit murder because some icon or object is accidentally destroyed? People of true faith have the strength and courage to remain civilized in the face of any tribulation — because their beliefs are rooted in their hearts, minds, and souls, and not dependent on mere objects. True believers are also unshaken by the acts of hooligans. Do these barbaric Afghans even know what they are rampaging about? Do they have any feelings of conscientiousness, forgiveness, and/or compassion? Do they only understand violence and hatred? You can’t shake my faith by burning my flag or my Bible or my Constitution — I’ll only dig my heals in because my faith tells me that civilization and the pen are mightier than any sword.
In 2001, the Taliban terrorist group so popular among Afghans, destroyed, “all ancient sculptures [in their country]. Explosives, tanks, and anti-aircraft weapons blew apart two colossal images of the Buddha in Bamiyan Province, 230 kilometers (150 miles) from the capital of Kabul.” Buddha was the Prince of Peace. Just read his words. He never condoned violence or intolerance.
To heck with Afghanistan and President Obama. If the Taliban hurt us or our friends, we can carpet bomb them from the air. President Obama should be voted out of office for his misjudgement and cowardice. Oh, by the way Mr. Obama, your “apology” — your weakness — will only encourage more violence: “Taliban leaders called on Afghans to ignore the apologies and step up attacks against Americans.”
Resistance to a new bill aimed at limiting foreign law in Pennsylvania courts serves as a case study of how Islamists and their allies operate: peddling falsehoods about Shari’a, painting Muslims as victims, and denying that anyone seeks to institutionalize aspects of Islamic law — even as they vigorously promote that very agenda. With similar legislationbeingdebated across the U.S., understanding their tactics is critical.
Are sanctions capable of derailing Tehran’s nuclear drive? Some skeptics reject such measures altogether, preferring to deal with Tehran by either accommodation or containment.[1] Others point to the spotty historical record of sanctions in altering state behavior in arguing that they will similarly fall short of forcing the ayatollahs to rethink their long-standing nuclear ambitions.[2] For example, sanctions were found to be successful in only a third of the 105 instances in which they were applied between World War I and the end of the Cold War.[3] As the past year has shown, however, Tehran may well turn out to be the exception to the rule — but only if the Obama administration (and Western governments more generally) make swift and skillful use of the economic and strategic means at their disposal.
The Middle East political storm of early 2011 has had an interesting impact on Iraq. Though the government was confronted with almost daily demonstrations, which led to a number of high profile resignations and the use of force to suppress political dissent, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki felt sufficiently confident to boast that “Iraq has become the most stable country in the region.”[1] While this may seem a bold claim given the recent past, Maliki is not alone in showing confidence in Iraq’s prospects. The Sadrists, Kurds, and leaders of the primarily Sunni Iraqiya bloc have been equally upbeat about the country’s prospects while many Iraqi insiders believe that their battle-torn country will not only weather the instability but will also serve as a model for democracy.
The gap between dominant Western perceptions of the Middle East and the region’s reality is dangerously wide. While the “Arab Spring” is celebrated as an advance for moderation and democracy, in fact the advance is going to revolutionary Islamists. Developments in Turkey and Egypt especially threaten to plunge the Middle East back into an era of conflict, instability, and the worst threats to Western interests in decades.
There are several things very much predictable about the future of the Middle East area during the next year. First, on June 12, 2011, Turkey will have an election. That election will probably be won by the government, whether or not it gets a two-thirds majority. The current rulers will interpret this as a signal to take a much tougher line toward Israel and the United States. It is possible that the extent of the increase of Turkey’s enmity toward Israel after that election will astonish the world.
On this and every day, let us remember, honor, and thank those brave Americans who gave life and/or limb to preserve freedom for America and many other nations.
Amr Moussa, probably Egypt’s next president, has given a comprehensive picture of his views, a foretaste of the likely policies of someone about to become the Arab world’s most powerful person. One thing he said is particularly important and shocking. Read on.
Moussa, former Egyptian foreign minister (1991-2001) and head of the Arab League until his resignation takes effect on May 15, is a figure from the Egyptian establishment and the old regime. But which aspect of the old regime: that of the centrist Husni Mubarak, the moderate Anwar al-Sadat, or the radical Arab nationalist Gamal Abd al Nasser?
Now that the hoopla over the successful United States “hit” on arch terrorist Osama bin Laden has begun to fade into the annals of history, the stark realization that the US and the free world are still bereft of a concrete plan of action to stem the tide of al-Qaeda terrorism is beginning to set in. Having spent close to 10 years assiduously tracking down the elusive 9/11 mastermind, we hasten to remind the CIA, along with the various and sundry intelligence networks, that the task of eradicating Islamic radicals bent on global domination demands replication of the kind of “muscle” that bagged bin Laden.
Articles/Entries
