I never get tired of posting this:

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I will not be going to Fort Lee this year. I’ll be celebrating at Chesterfield County Fairgrounds with Sarah and family. (My big job of the day: Going to Chesterfield Berry Farm, an awesome produce place, and getting the corn.)

I have checked my email for the day, and will be filling out my electronic timesheet as soon as this post is done. For the rest of the day, well, it’s a holiday. I’ll be back after the fireworks. I hope my cobloggers are taking a break as well.

Griff Witte’s report, Motives in Earthmover Rampage Debated in Jerusalem is striking for two things one that it says and one that it omits.

Israeli officials and media described Edwyat as a terrorist who had targeted Jews. But friends and relatives in East Jerusalem on Thursday described a man with no political affiliations or particular grievances against his Jewish neighbors. Instead, they said Edwyat had suddenly snapped for reasons they did not understand.

There is New York and there’s West New York, however there’s east Jerusalem and west Jerusalem. They are not separate municipalities.

The second is the way he frames the story between the perceptions of the Jews and the perception of the Arabs. He leaves out an important detail though:

“He shouted ‘Allah Akbar.’ At that moment I pulled the pistol that Oron carried and shot the terrorist three times in the head. After I verified that he was dead, I raised the pistol to make sure that passersby were not hurt,” he recounted.

Shouting “Allah Akbar” is a signature of a terror attack. It might be that Edwyat wasn’t handled by any terror organization and previously was on good terms with Jewish Israelis, but on Wednesday he, for some reason, chose the path of terror.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad

Time to forget about our problems and think about the simpler things in life. Like, cats. And umbrellas. And cats and umbrellas.

Oh. No wonder my umbrella started leaking the last time I used it.

“Oh, were you looking for this?”

I’ve been saying for months: “Je suis un cat toy.” (Yeah, I know, my French is a little off, but then, the French are a little off, so we’re even.) Well, everything in my house is a cat toy. Tig was actually chewing on the wooden rods holding my bookshelves together. They’re an inch in diameter. I assume he was teething.

He is growing very quickly. I tried to measure him the other day, but he wouldn’t hold still for it. He wanted to play with the tape measure. But I think his tail is about eleven inches long right now. And it’s very fluffy. His ruff (the Maine Coon cat mane) is starting to come in, and he’s beginning to look very dignified.

Tig has also discovered Kitty Nirvana: Sleeping in my bed. I finally opened up the bedroom to him this week. He got thrown out two nights in a row until he finally figured out that if he stops attacking me every time I breathe, he can stay. Unfortunately, I’m still getting woken up at odd hours, but at least now he’s not yowling at the door. (He’s climbing on me and licking my nose instead.) During the daytime, he takes turns sleeping downstairs and upstairs. Since Gracie no longer sleeps upstairs (she gave it up completely to Tig), I’m getting to hear the big thunk of a cat jumping off my bed after a nap again. I’m looking forward to hearing the Tig-sized thunk I used to hear from Tig the Second. I could always tell which of my two cats was waking up. The difference was very noticeable. Tig3 makes a little thunk. He’s only five pounds, yet. But he’s showing promise to grow up bigger than his predecessor. And that tail… wow, that is one long, fuzzy tail. And he holds it upright most of the time.

I just counted eight weeks backwards from April 18th, when I got Tig. That would put his birthday at February 29th. I’ll call it March 1st. I hadn’t realized that until now. (Tig and Gracie were born on March 15th, 1997.) That makes Tig about a week past four months old. And he’s already hit the five-pound mark.

Yep. He’s gonna be big.

Yesterday, Boker Tov Boulder aptly observed that following a terror attack:

… there’s the attack by the media that inevitably follows. Then there’s the aftermath, in which we can see the results of the first two, usually along the lines of Israel being weakened and our enemies further emboldened.

The attack she referred to was by the BBC.

It didn’t take long elsewhere.

via memeorandum

The New York Time reported on yesterday’s terror attack. There’s nothing remarkable about the headline:

Palestinian Kills 3 With Construction Vehicle.

However that wasn’t the original headline, that read:

Construction Vehicle Kills 3 in Israel Attack

However as we all know construction vehicles don’t kill people, people kill people.

(h/t LGF’s link viewer)

Similarly Meryl observed that the AP headline used words as if:

… it was an accident, instead of a deliberate, murderous attack.

McClatchy’s Jerusalem correspondent showed his true colors with:

The video also shows a policeman shooting the lifeless man at point-blank range, a move that could spark questions from Israeli human rights groups about whether the officer’s shot was necessary and if he might have unnecessarily killed the man.

(Though, from the footage, it looks as if the first shots probably killed him.)

My first thoughts on observing this action would have been amazement at the heroism of the shooters; his first thought was of the possible human rights violation. The truth is that Israeli security forces follow a protocol of “confirming the kill.” This is especially important when terrorists may have explosives strapped to their bodies.

The Israelis intervening yesterday had no idea, of course, if the terrorist was indeed wearing explosives but it wasn’t a chance they could take. And given that he was at the controls of a construction vehicle, if he were still capable of controlling it he presented a danger.

Just for a reminder here’s what happened in Dimona a few months ago:

Shalom Bar Avi, a journalist speaking to Channel 10, said “I am here no longer as a journalist but as a simple citizen … I pray and hope my wife is okay.”

Bar Avi praised the police’s quick response to the attack, and said Mor, the officer who identified the second attacker shot “four or five times … he took no chances.”

Later Mor’s heroism was revealed in detail: He shot the terrorist in the head, and when the latter in his last breath still tried to press the detonator button, shot him four more times and killed him. Mor managed to kill the terrorist before he could explode and without hitting his explosive belt, thus preventing a much more devastating attack.

You don’t take chances. And while this isn’t the reason the terrorist was killed, Seraphic Secret notes:

Here’s the good news: this is one Muslim terrorist who will not be used in a disgraceful and damaging prisoner swap.

The reaction to terror against Israel is telling of the mindset of those reporting the news. Though it was reported that the terrorist yelled “Allahu Akbar” most press accounts still try to raise doubts that this was a terrorist attack rather than an accident or criminal act.

(There are those who complained that Al Jazeera’s coverage of the attack was too pro-Israel!)

Ha’aretz reports on the Israelis who stopped the attack.

“I approached the bus on my bicycle, and then began to run to the site, looking for a weapon to use against the terrorist,” he told reporters yesterday. The military censor imposed a gag order on his identity.

Near the bulldozer the young soldier found a civilian, Oron Ben-Shimon, 28, a regional manager of a security firm in Jerusalem, who was armed. “Together we tried to neutralize the terrorist, at least to lift his feet off the pedals.

“He shouted ‘Allah Akbar.’ At that moment I pulled the pistol that Oron carried and shot the terrorist three times in the head. After I verified that he was dead, I raised the pistol to make sure that passersby were not hurt,” he recounted.

“I went out on Jaffa Road,” says Oron, “and as I was driving I saw a crowd of people shouting ‘terrorist’ and ‘mad man.’ I put on a police hat, and took my pistol and ran toward the bulldozer.”

“I saw a policeman on the bulldozer with a drawn gun. I holstered my weapon and the policeman told me there was no need to shoot him because he passed out and we need to pull him out of the bulldozer.

“And then the terrorist woke up and grabbed the wheel and tried to run over more people. I was already on the bulldozer and I hit him with my fists in the face in an effort to take over the wheel. I shouted to the young man near me to shoot him. He drew my pistol from the holster and shot him three times in the head.”

Oron confirms that the terrorist was dead when shot by the policeman. Still even here, the terrorist apparently out of commission started his attack again.

Then there’s the heroism of a mother who saved her baby:

Seconds before being crushed to death by a bulldozer, 33-year-old Batsheva Unterman succeeded in unbuckling her 5-month-old baby from the car-seat and passing her out through the window to safety.

“Just as I took the baby out, he reversed on top of the car. The baby is okay, but not the mother,” Jeremy Aronson, the man who helped save the baby, told The Jerusalem Post quietly as he sat alone in the waiting room of Hadassah-University Hospital in Mount Scopus.

I am amazed by those who can act quickly at times of crisis. Unfortunately Mrs. Unterman didn’t survive.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Unbelievable. First, the lawyer says that the Israeli Arab who murdered three and wounded at least 66 should not have been shot. Then the family says it wasn’t a deliberate attack. It was a “road accident.”

The lawyer representing the family of bulldozer driver Hossam Dawyyat of east Jerusalem, who murdered three people and injured dozens during a killing spree in Jerusalem on Wednesday, said Thursday that had the police cuffed the terrorist’s hands and legs and removed him from the vehicle, the incident would have ended at once and “life would have been spared.”

[...] According to the brother, the incident may have been a road accident which had gone wrong. “Any person responsible for a road accident is alarmed and afraid. This can happen to anyone, and this could have been a road accident. It’s possible that my brother was scared when people started chasing him and shooting,” he told Ynet.

However, Issam did not rule out the possibility that his brother had lost control and gone on a rampage under the influence of drugs. “It was easy to irritate him. He had a criminal record for violence offenses and he was punished for this.”

Yeah. A “road accident.” Like this:

“I was trying to enter a parking lot when the bulldozer’s driver signaled me to move back. I moved my car, and then he began ramming into it over and over,” one of the women injured in Wednesday’s terror attack in Jerusalem recounted.

Or this:

“Then I saw the bulldozer heading in my direction; it gave me a little nudge. I opened the window to yell at the driver, but then he turned the bulldozer in its place, lifted the bus up and flipped it over.

“He slammed into the bus a few more times then continued on his way. I was knocked back to other side of the bus and then climbed out the window. A female officer then shattered another window and began pulling the passengers out of the bus,” he said.

Accidents. Things like that just happen when you’re scared, or irritated. You do this, too:

“At one point he yelled out, ‘Allahu Akbar,’ and stepped on the gas pedal,” M recalled. “I drew the weapon of the civilian who was with me and shot the driver three times in the head. I think I did what is expected from every soldier and citizen.”

The amount of denial in terrorist acts is pretty astonishing. I think this one falls into Robert Spencer’s Daniel Pipes’ “Sudden Jihadi Syndrome” category—one in which everyone seems surprised that the terror attack occurred, and yet, as always, it is Jews who wind up being the target.

But a “road accident”? That’s just beyond stupid. The rampage lasted for 500 meters, killed 3, and wounded 66. Try again. “Road accident” just doesn’t cut it.

Stop the presses. The AP has identified two of the three victims of the Palestinian terrorist attack. Of course, their identities are buried deep within the story, instead of in the lead, as they would be if they were Arab victims of an errant IDF shell, but hey—at least they’re finally named.

Three people were killed and 45 were injured, including two babies.

The mother of one of the babies hurled the child out of the car window to save her as the attacker bore down on their vehicle, and the mother was also injured. The mother of the other baby, Batsheva Unterman, 33, was killed in the assault. Social workers appeared on TV frantically trying to locate the child’s father.

A second dead woman was identified as Elizabeth Goren-Friedman, 54, a dual Austrian-Israeli citizen who had lived in Israel for several years, the Austrian Foreign Ministry said. The third victim was a man.

What next? Putting the names of the killed in the lead?

Naaah. Too much to ask, humanizing Israelis like that.

I rarely read Maureen Dowd anymore. I idolized her columns when I was in college.

Times change.

But she ends a column—ironically titled “The Wrong Stuff—about the current sniping about the candidates’ military experience, with this:

Maybe instead of refighting the Vietnam War while we’re still fighting the Iraq war, the candidates can figure out how to feed the world, find enough fuel for everyone, and, oh, yeah, catch that bin Laden fiend who’s running around free.

Funny, but I thought the primary duty of the president of the United States of America was running the United States, not feeding and fueling the world.

And let me tell you, even in my most liberal leftist college days, I didn’t think it was America’s responsibility to feed the world. I thought it was our responsibility to help the poorer nations figure out how to feed themselves. Or send famine-stricken nations food. But no, it’s not my president’s responsibility to figure out how to feed the world.

The world needs to learn how to pull on its big-boy pants and feed itself.

The original AP headline for the Palestinian terror attack in Jerusalem?

Driver rams vehicle into Jerusalem bus, killing 3

Like it was an accident, instead of a deliberate, murderous attack.

Palestinian terrorists are now resorting to using heavy machinery to kill Israelis. Three dead, and 45 wounded*, when an Arab Israeli drove his bulldozer into cars, buses, and crowds.

Three women were killed and at least 30 more people were injured when a bulldozer driven by a Palestinian resident of east Jerusalem trampled over pedestrians and vehicles and plowed into two buses in downtown Jerusalem at around noon Wednesday.

[...] The driver, who reportedly had a criminal record and was the holder of an Israeli (blue) identification card, was shot dead by a SWAT officer near the old Shaare Zedek Medical Center. The terrorist was identified as 31-year-old Hossam Dawiath, a father of two from the village of Tzur Baher.

The terrorist continued on his killing spree, but a short while later a soldier and a SWAT officer jumped on top of the vehicle. The officer then shot the terrorist in the chest and leg and killed him.

Jerusalem Police Chief Aharon Franco told Channel 2 “a tractor driven by a terrorist began hitting vehicles and flipped over two buses. Apparently there are casualties at the scene; we don’t have an exact number as of yet. We received no prior warning of a possible attack.”

Hamas is praising the attack.

However, a Hamas spokesman said Wednesday that the Jerusalem attack was “a natural reaction to Israel’s aggression,” adding the group did not know who was behind the attack.

Authorities think it was the act of a lone terrorist.

According to an assessment by the Gaza Strip organizations, as well as by sources in the Palestinian Authority, the Jerusalem attack was an independent act carried out by the driver alone.

But they’re beefing up security in crowded areas.

Regarding the headline to this post: The Palestinians found yet another way to define deviancy. If they can’t use nail bombs to murder innocents, apparently, they’ll grab the nearest bulldozer. There is nothing they will not stoop to.

There’s also almost nothing Israel’s “anti-Zionist” enemies won’t stoop to. Counting down to the anti-Israel crowd cheering the use of a bulldozer to kill Israelis. I’m quite sure they won’t object to this use of Caterpillar equipment (if it was Caterpillar), just as I’m sure some disgusting POS on Indymedia will be crowing over it.

*Toll is up to 66 wounded now.

According to a report issued by the White House, the Iraqi government is showing satisfactory progress on most of the political benchmarks it needs to.

Iraq’s political and military success is considered vital to U.S. interests, whether troops stay or go. And while the Iraqi government has made measurable progress in recent months, the pace at which it’s done so has been achingly slow.

The White House sees the progress in a particularly positive light, declaring in a new assessment to Congress that Iraq’s efforts on 15 of 18 benchmarks are “satisfactory”–almost twice of what it determined to be the case a year ago. The May 2008 report card, obtained by the Associated Press, determines that only two of the benchmarks–enacting and implementing laws to disarm militias and distribute oil revenues–are unsatisfactory.

In the past 12 months, since the White House released its first formal assessment of Iraq’s military and political progress, Baghdad politicians have reached several new agreements seen as critical to easing sectarian tensions.

(via memeorandum)

I’m not sure if liquor sales are one of the benchmarks.

Saif, who asked that his last name not be used to protect his safety, represents an unusual resurgence. Iraq is a deeply Muslim nation that allows its citizens the right to consume alcohol. During the era of the late dictator Saddam Hussein, drinking was common. After the U.S.-led invasion, however, violence and Islamic extremists forced most liquor shops to close for a while.

Today, Saif’s family stores are running full tilt after years of off and on business. Self-service, it isn’t. To buy a bottle of Scotch, a customer confronts an iron gate that keeps him 3 feet away from Saif. By vaulting two steps back, Saif can hide behind the wall where he displays bottles of liquor.

(h/t Instapundit)

And at the Socialist International meeting in Greece (is that a sign of Iraqi progress?) Iraqi President Jalal Talabani met with Israeli Defense MInister Ehud Barak.
(h/t Daled Amos)

I’m still waiting for a formal declaration from the Iraqi government that it will establish a diplomatic mission in Israel. That’s a way off still from Caroline Glick’s hopeful diagnosis.

But what is clear enough is that today Iraq shares vital interests with Israel. It has common enemies. It has common challenges as a democracy. And it doesn’t hurt that Palestinians are nearly universally reviled by Iraqis who view them as Saddam Hussein’s most stalwart henchmen.

An Israeli-Iraqi alliance would help secure Jordan. It would frighten Syria and perhaps force Damascus to reconsider its alliance with Teheran. It would provide Israel with a new source of natural gas and so end its dependence on fickle Egypt. It would mitigate Israel’s political isolation in the region. It would provide Iraq with a safe port in the Mediterranean for its oil exports in the event that the Shaat al-Arab is closed by Iran in a future war. Iraqi Shi’ite leaders could help draw Lebanese Shi’ites away from Iran’s Lebanese proxy Hizbullah. Indeed, the potential of an Israeli-Iraqi alliance is seemingly endless.

A basic political fact of life stands at the heart of this theoretical Iraqi-Israeli alliance. Peace is possible for the first time between Israel and Iraq because, for the first time, Iraq perceives its interests as aligned with Israel. That is, peace is possible because at a very basic level, Iraqis today - whether they admit or not - are Israel’s friends. And they know it.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

I’m sure you’ve seen those motivational posters around.

(This parody was created by Despair, Inc.’s Parody Motivator Generator.)

I saw this picture and thought it must be the world’s least appropriate motivational poster.

Israelly Cool! thinks it’s part of a subliminal effort to affect people’s perceptions.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Never forget that in order to piss on someone (or someone’s parade) you have to be a person of some, how to say it gently, stature. Otherwise the only thing you produce is a small puddle.

Yeah, and calling British bobbies “fascists” is soooo sixties…

Via David T.

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

According to Ha’aretz a law that just past its first reading stipulates Territorial withdrawal only by referendum:

An existing law already mandates a referendum before ceding any territory under Israeli sovereignty, but it also states that this requirement will not apply until a Basic Law detailing the procedures for holding a referendum is passed. The current law eliminated the need to enact a Basic Law. Instead, it requires that territorial concessions be approved by a national referendum or general elections or a majority of 80 Knesset members.

Golan Lobby Chairman MK Yisrael Katz said that it was extremely important that the law was approved, in order to make it clear that attempts to hand over the Golan will be followed by the tedious procedure of a referendum. “There is an important message here, especially while negotiations are underway,” Katz said.

Opposition Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu said the “in Western countries, giving up land is impossibly difficult, and in tiny little Israel, governments can relinquish land with unbearable ease. This is something that must be rectified, and the law can do that.”

My guess is that if Netanyahu ever becomes Prime Minister again, he may regret supporting such a bill. Still the record since 1992 has been that governments promoting peace have ceded land to enemies with unfortunate results.

In 1995, the late PM Rabin didn’t have the votes in Knesset to win passage of Oslo II. So he enticed members of the opposition to join his coalition with ministerial positions in order to secure the necessary votes. In 2005 PM Sharon ignored the results of referendum in the LIkud and went ahead with the withdrawal from Gaza.

In the first case Yasser Arafat benefited and received more territory from which he proceeded to encourage terrorism against Israel. In the more recent case after Israel evacuated all Jews from Gaza, Hamas strengthened its hold there and has been free to launch rockets against Israel with near impunity.

I’m not arguing that the public is necessarily better equipped to make such decisions, though in these two cases the public’s skepticism was clearly justified.

This referendum law is a reaction to the way Israeli governments have handled peace negotiations until now. Whether it was PM Rabin’s machinations over Oslo II, PM Sharon’s ignoring his own party’s referendum or PM Barak negotiating with Arafat even after his government fell, there’s been a tendency of Israeli governments to “sneak” peace deals.

Given that any deal requires the relinquishing of territory to enemies, concessions are bound to be unpopular. But instead of trying to convince the electorate of the benefits of such deals or insisting that the enemy actually change and convince the Israeli public of new circumstances, the governments have taken an attitude that we know what’s best and we’ll get it done any way possible. They’ll achieve the peace deal with the enemy - who more often than not commits to taking the benefits but not the responsibilities inherent in the deal - but without the popular support of their constituents.

This law, if passed would change that. The Israeli public would have to be convinced that the price paid for peace would be worth it.

The behavior of Fatah and Hamas since they gained territory showed that the governments’ faith in them was misplaced. Now, if this law passes, future Israeli governments will have to gain the faith of the electorate before trusting Israel’s enemies.

Netanyahu has a point too. In the United States treaties require a super majority of Congress. And those treaties are usually with friendly nations. When dealing with hostile nations shouldn’t Israel require a similar mandate?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Amos Harel wrote Prisoner swap is capitulation to blackmail by terrorists. Judging by the title alone it would seem that it’s a critique of the government’s decision to trade Samir Kuntar and other terrorists for Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser. It starts:

At bottom, it was another painful lesson in the limits of power. The same government that on July 12, 2006 embarked, without fully thinking it through, on a war in which it vowed to bring back the hostages (three ministers have since quit; five joined) on Sunday voted with a heavy heart for the deal that will finally put the war Second Lebanon War to rest. We cannot overlook the gap between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s declaration, a few hours after the abduction (”We will not give in to blackmail and will not negotiate with terrorists when it comes to the lives of Israel Defense Forces soldiers”) and the deal with Hezbollah approved on Sunday. Much ground has been covered from the early arrogant pronouncements to the current hard reality.

The truth needs to be said: Israel did indeed capitulate to blackmail by a terror organization, after conducting lengthy negotiations with it. It is releasing five live prisoners, in return for (almost certainly) the bodies of the soldiers Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser.

But Harel isn’t criticizing the deal:

But we should also admit that this is what Israel has always done, under similar circumstances. When hostages could not be freed by force, negotiations were held and concessions made, in many previous deals. Moreover, the price this time is lower than we paid in the past.

The price is perhaps lower in that Israel isn’t releasing as many terrorists as in the past, but there’s this:

The deal secured by the government’s coordinator of hostage talks, Ofer Dekel, appears to be the most reasonable deal one could be obtained under the present circumstances. Hezbollah would not sign a deal that did not include murderer Samir Kuntar’s release. Despite last week’s embarrassing events, a deal was finally approved.

This is what’s troubling. Hezbollah had a red line. Kuntar or not deal. Israel had no such principles. For Israel getting the deal done was essential regardless of the cost. Elder of Ziyon writes why this is problematic:

I cannot imagine the pain that the Regev and Goldwasser families have been going through, but giving Hezbollah their stated prize - in which they give up nothing that is of any value to themselves - is doing nothing less than giving them total retroactive victory in the Lebanon war,
by their own stated goals. We know by now that the UN forces in Lebanon are not enforcing their own mandate and that Hezbollah has more than recouped their losses from 2006, and now Israel is doing nothing less than conceding defeat.

The sickening piece of filth called Samir Kuntar was the only thing that stopped Hezbollah from being able to declare total victory. Now, victory is theirs.

Given that Hezbollah is a proxy of Iran, currently the main menace in the region Israel’s handing both a political and propaganda to Hezbollah makes the swap an even worse deal earlier ones.

UPDATE: JudeoPundit notes that Iran is crowing too. And Noah Pollak adds that this hurts Lebanon:

The prisoner deal is terrible for the Lebanese government. In the years since the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, and accelerating in the wake of the events in Lebanon of May 2008, Hezbollah has experienced a significant weakening of its popularity in Lebanon, especially among non-Shia. Having waged a short-duration war against Lebanon — something Nasrallah promised the “resistance” would never, ever do — Hezbollah is increasingly being viewed not just as an Iranian militia antagonistic to Lebanon’s interests, but one which threatens to drag the country back to civil war. The recent talk of handing the Shaba Farms to the Lebanese government was met with hysterics by Hezbollah, which feared that its last remaining excuse for keeping its arms was being removed (which was exactly the point).

By making a deal with Nasrallah, Israel threw a lifeline to Hezbollah; allowed Nasrallah to claim once again the salience of his militia; and, in agreeing to the inclusion of Palestinians, allowed Nasrallah to once again position Hezbollah across the Shia-Sunni divide, which, of course, is a primary Iranian objective (the Iranians do this on their own, for example, by sponsoring Hamas and Islamic Jihad).

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

I have been slammed with work today. I was slammed with work for the past few days, actually, and will be again tomorrow. There was even some Sunday work to be had.

I’ll be up for air soon.

The Israeli government has decided to swap a live terrorist for two dead soldiers.

Former Chief of Staff Dan Halutz is in favor of the deal.

And isn’t the price too high? According to Halutz, “Our nation is not like all other nations. Let’s face it, we have different sets of values, which I believe are the right values. In returning the soldiers we must act from the same place we acted at the time - from the Jewish place. Redemption of prisoners, mutual guarantee.

“Sometimes the sentiment must dictate a decision… And the main thing is that the soldier and his family should know that we will do everything for them - because we have been sentenced to many more years of hostility.”

For Halutz this deal ought to pre-sage a deal with Hamas to get Gilad Shalit back. Halutz’s predecessor Moshe Yaalon disagrees:

Former IDF Chief of Staff Yaalon sparked a row Monday when he said that security prisoners should not be released as part of prisoner exchange deals in which the demanded “price” is too high.

“When it comes to the question of a deal, I am one of those who call for the minimum, and in some cases we must even say we are ready to sacrifice in the face of what we are required to pay, because the payment price is much heavier than the price of losing the hostage,” he said.

Not surprisingly Yaalon was criticized by the Shalit and Goldwasser families.

Emanuele Ottolenghi has a question about how Israel handled the situation:

When did the government know that the two soldiers were in all likelihood dead? Was it immediately after Hezbollah’s incursion into Israeli territory, on July 12, 2006? If so, the government launched a military campaign of 33 days, that cost the lives of over 130 Israelis, in order to rescue the dead bodies of two. Some explaining is in order, if that is the case.

We’ve been down this road before. In 2004 Israel released hundreds of prisoners to get the bodies of 3 soldiers who had been killed in a crossborder raid by Hezbollah, violating the international border behind which Israel had retreated month earlier.

Israel released more than 400 prisoners Thursday in a long-awaited swap with the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah in exchange for the return of an Israeli businessman and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers.

The German-brokered exchange was completed despite a suicide bombing earlier on a bus in Jerusalem that killed at least 10 bystanders and wounded about 50 in the deadliest attack on Israel in four months. The blast occurred near Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s official residence, but he was not in the area at the time.

“We are releasing another 400 Palestinians with a very heavy heart, because we know that these 400 will return very quickly to the cycle of violence,” Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Jonathan Peled said in Jerusalem.

This time again it was the Germans who helped facilitate the return of dead Jews. And the Washington Post adds, it was under the auspices of the UN.

The deal, which followed months of negotiation mediated by Germans under U.N. auspices, marked the first such swap between Israel and Hezbollah since 2004.

That’s the UN whose troops aided the 2000 cross border raid, protected Hezbollah and did nothing to enforce its own resolutions when violated by Hezbollah. It’s kind of like paying to getting your property back from the very thieves who stole it.

The New York Times reminds us that this was purportedly one of the reasons that Hezbollah carried out the raid two years ago.

Indeed, within minutes of the decision, Al Manar, the Hezbollah television station, hailed it as evidence of the group’s power. “What happened in the prisoner issue is proof that the word of the resistance is the most faithful, strongest and supreme,” Hezbollah’s executive council chief, Hashem Safieddine, was quoted as saying.

The July 12, 2006, raid by Hezbollah into Israel that captured the two soldiers was aimed at seizing bargaining chips for the group’s effort to free Mr. Kuntar and several other Lebanese.

So Israel has effectively handed a Hezbollah a victory with this trade.

And of course there’s the question of who will be next.

Three government ministers voted against the prisoner swap deal Sunday-Finance Minister Roni Bar-On, Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann and Housing Minister Zeev Boim.

The three said that the deal constitutes a victory for the Hezbollah. “After the release of Kuntar, who will be able to stop the release of [Tanzim head] Marwan Barghouti?” Bar-On said Sunday.

The families of Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser will get much needed closure. The question will be at what cost.

Meryl wonders if there might be some advantage to Israel that may occur on account of the release of Kuntar for the bodies of Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser:

There’s one tiny point of light at the end of this dark tunnel. I think that Israel may be clearing up all the details of her prisoners and KIA hostages as a way to clear the decks for action in Gaza. In other words: If Israel has her captives back, whether they are alive or dead, she can then start clearing out the terrorist rat’s nests with a clear conscience, and without fear that it is causing their deaths.

The only problem with that idea is that Israel just agreed to a one-sided ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza. Daled Amos asks if there’s a different consideration in play

Is it a coincidence that this exchange is taking place now, at the same time that Olmert is attempting peace negotiations with Lebanon?:

For those of you who are concerned about Samir Kuntar’s suffering in jail, Israelly Cool has some details:

Did I mention that Kuntar got married, received conjugal visits from his wife, and earned a college degree all while in prison?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Choose an event in the past. The event should be famous enough for any news related to it to reverberate far and wide. The event should be remote enough to make checking the “news” difficult to impossible. Now start manufacturing the news. And voila:

Professor Arnd Krüger claims Israeli athletes murdered in 1972 knew their lives were in danger because of ‘Olympic village’s poor security,’ but decided to stay, sacrifice themselves for Israel’s interests.

This method of getting famous is becoming a routine act for some historians, it seems. Especially when their prospects of getting famous are quite low, like in case of Professor Arnd Krüger, whose area of expertise is “sport history; sport management; sport media; training theory; coaching science; track & field“. Hard to become a TV star upon issuing a monograph on a revolutionary jockstrap for a baseball player.

So what does one do? Revises a bit of history, not necessarily related to his field of expertise, but one that allows him to claim some personal knowledge. Hitherto undisclosed for some reason. Hitherto undisclosed for some reason.

In a recent lecture, Prof. Arnd Krüger of the University of Göttingen, who covered the Munich Olympics as a journalist and claimed to have known some of the murdered Israeli athletes, compared the decision made by the sportsmen to stay in the Olympic village despite the known threat to their safety to the decision made by the Jews to stay in Hebron during the 1929 Palestine riots.

Yes. Letting themselves get killed in order to promote their far-reaching interests is a well known Jooish trick, from times immemorial. Like luring all these Babylonians, Greeks, Romans and Germans to kill the Jooz to promote… whatever. Good theory.

Of course, the learned professor is now backpedaling.

Speaking to Yedioth Ahronoth on Saturday, Krüger denied ever saying he believed the Israeli mission to the Munich Olympics knew that it would be targeted, but added that “one has to assume that the sportsmen who stayed in the village knew it had poor security.

But the bird has already escaped, and professor is feverishly covering his arse:

I’m not a racist or an anti-Semite, I’m just trying to understand what really happened.

Yep. Thirty six years of trying to understand and this is what we have: a wannabe celebrity crawling to fame over people’s graves. With the “what really happened” battle cry of freaks and morons all over the world.

And you know what? I really believe he is neither a racist nor an anti-Semite.

Just dreck.

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

I went for my second shooting lesson today, which I think you could call my second Second Amendment lesson. The teacher this time was Joe, a friend of my last teacher’s, who also happens to be an ex-police officer. Joe brought the guns, and I discovered that I’d better start doing this on a more regular basis. It took a while to get back into the swing of loading and unloading a weapon. But I got the hang of putting ammunition in the clip fairly quickly. The two guns were a .38 Smith and Wesson revolver and a .22 pistol (whose origin, I’m sure, Joe will alert me in the comments or email). I can shoot the .22 all day long. (The target pictured below is one of my best groupings with it.) It’s fun and easy.

The Smith & Wesson made my hand tired after a few uses. It also rather surprised me the first time I fired it. Oops. Bit more of a kick than the .22. I need to build up my hand and arm muscles. I should go back to to the rock climbing gym. You use many of the same muscles to climb as you do to hold a gun and fire it.

There were an awful lot of young men at the range today, and one of them rented what looked like a military semi-automatic rifle. I have absolutely no desire to try a weapon like that, but I was curious enough to stay until I saw him fire it. I think I may head back on my own and rent one of the rifles. Now that I no longer teach on Sundays, I finally have the time to hit the ranges and see what I like. Although it’s a rather expensive habit, but I was warned about that.

My new teacher declared himself very satisfied with my shooting skills today. I was thinking I really need to renew my prescription. It was getting tough to sight the target clearly. But overall, I did well enough to stop an attacker. Most of my shots were within a five-inch range, Joe said.

I think two or three more trips to the range will be enough for me to make up my mind about which guns to buy. The crime rate in my neighborhood is sure convincing me I need one. The range holds classes every other weekend. I’m busy this weekend, but two weeks after the Fourth, I think I’ll take that all-day class and learn about the gun laws in Virginia, shooting and cleaning a weapon, and protecting yourself with your Second Amendment right.

Overall, I think my second Second Amendment lesson went really well.

Add the Guardian to the list of Sunday papers that are featuring heavily the Israel/Iran issue. It apparently took four authors to slam Israel with the typical canards.

And while some of the messages amount to signalling, to warn Iran as well as the EU and the US that Israel does not intend its nuclear monopoly in the Middle East to be challenged, it is clear that Israel has launched an aggressive information campaign apparently designed to soften up public opinion for the case for war, reminiscent of the run-up to the war against Iraq. Indeed, some of the same cast are back on stage, not least the former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, who has loudly been making the case for an Israeli strike.

Interesting how they put the cause for war. Israel doesn’t want it’s “nuclear monopoly” to be challenged. It doesn’t happen to be that Israel is at risk of being destroyed by Iran, no. The article discounts utterly the proxy war that Iran has been waging for years via Hamas, PIJ and other terrorist groups, and Hezbullah.

Academics and journalists who have recently visited Israel have come back from meetings convinced the country is getting ready for war. The campaign has been assisted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) in the US and the Britain-Israel Communications and Research Centre in the UK, two influential Jewish lobby groups who have brought over experts to brief the media.

And thus we see the true subtext of this story. Those crafty Jews are at it again: Doing what they have done for millennia, tricked the world into going to war. You think I’m reading into things? Read on.

Last week, Bicom invited journalists to meet Shmuel Bar, a former military intelligence officer and civil servant in the Prime Minister’s Office. Now an academic, Bar writes on Iranian defence doctrine. On Monday the same organisation will be hosting a member of Israel’s security cabinet, Isaac ‘Bouji’ Herzog, who once again will answer questions, among other issues, on the threat posed by Iran.

The Israel lobby is trying to convince the media that the war is right. But there’s even more blame for AIPAC to go around, and of course, the article is filled with references to “neocons.”

Bush, vice-president Dick Cheney and the remnants of the neoconservative lobby in Washington are believed to be sympathetic to the idea. However, there are also those in strong positions, such as Defence Secretary Robert Gates and some senior military chiefs, who are thought to be privately opposed to such a move. ‘If it were up to Bush and Cheney they would want to see this thing done,’ said Larry Johnson, a former top CIA analyst. ‘But they are now up against a lot of fundamental military realities that make it hard. The military has been pushing back against this.’

Larry Johnson is now a Democrat (he once even gave the Democratic response to Bush’s radio address) with, shall we say, an agenda. You may remember that the Air Force is currently restructuring its top brass due to some really awful mistakes made with the transportation of nuclear-armed missiles (among other things).

The Air Force continued handing out disciplinary actions in response to the six nuclear warheads mistakenly flown on a B-52 bomber from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30. The squadron commander in charge of Minot’s munitions crews was relieved of all duties pending the investigation.

[...] The original plan was to transport non-nuclear Advanced Cruise Missiles, mounted on the wings of a B-52, to Barksdale as part of a Defense Department effort to decommission 400 of the ACMs. It was not discovered that the six missiles had nuclear warheads until the plane landed at Barksdale, leaving the warheads unaccounted for during the approximately 3 and one-half hour flight between the two bases, the officers said.

Here’s Johnson’s analysis of what happened—before the Air Force investigation came out.

So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

Then he told me something I had not heard before.

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

That’s some awesome analysis, Johnson. Why, it’s only 100% wrong regarding the nukes. No wonder the Guardian is quoting him. He says all the things they want to have “confirmed” by “experts” for their “readers.” (Sorry, got carried away with the scare quotes there.)

Right-wing think-tanks, however, such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, have been vocal in their advocation of confronting Iran. Indeed, the institute recently produced a report on a theoretical military attack on Iran authored by Patrick Clawson and Michael Eisenstadt, entitled ‘The Last Resort: Consquences of Preventive Military Action Against Iran’.

The study fell short of recommending such an attack but it did provide an exhaustive argument on why and how such an attack would work. That led critics to dub it a blueprint for war with Iran. It suggested that the possible best line of attack would in fact not be against Tehran’s nuclear programme but against its oil industry, thus cutting off the source of Iran’s current wealth. ‘The political shock of losing the oil income would cause Iran to rethink its stance,’ the report suggested.

Shyeah, because that’s exactly how stupid they think we are: Performing actions guaranteed to double (yet again) the price of oil.

It comes at a time when a resolution has been put forward in Congress calling for a naval blockade of Iran led by US warships. The proposal calls for the United States to lead an international effort to cut off the country by sea, something that would almost certainly by seen as an act of war by Iran. The resolution has got huge support from Israeli politicians and the country’s highly effective lobbying industry in Washington, led perhaps inevitably by Aipac, which has made the issue its legislative priority. ‘The war drums are beating. There is no doubt about that,’ said Johnson.

A naval blockade? Oh, they must be referring to this:

(2) urges the President, in the strongest of terms, to immediately use his existing authority to impose sanctions on–

(A) the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian bank engaged in proliferation activities or the support of terrorist groups;

(B) international banks which continue to conduct financial transactions with proscribed Iranian banks;

(C) energy companies that have invested $20,000,000 or more in the Iranian petroleum or natural gas sector in any given year since the enactment of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996; and

(D) all companies which continue to do business with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps;

(3) demands that the President initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by, inter alia, prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran’s nuclear program; and

That’s a bill in committee at the moment calling for tougher sanctions on Iran. So does this make the EU complicit in the war as well? They’re also calling for tougher sanctions on Iran.

Read the whole article. It’s Israel Wants A War Day in the British press. Know your enemy, as Frank J likes to say.

Looks like Israel is creating more reasons for Hezbullah, Hamas, and other terrorists to kidnap more Israelis. They’re freeing Samir Kuntar and other Lebanese prisoners for what is now declared the corposes of Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser.

The cabinet approved Sunday the prisoner exchange deal with Hizbullah, which will facilitate the return of IDF captives Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser. The motion was carried with a majority of 22 ministers.

Earlier, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert urged his ministers to vote in favor of the deal. “At the end of a long process, I have reached the conclusion that as the Israeli prime minister I must recommend that you approve the proposal which will bring this painful affair to an end – even at the painful price it requires us to pay,” Olmert said during Sunday’s cabinet meeting.

I’m not an Israeli. I don’t understand why the nation will allow terrorists to hold it hostage this way. But I do understand cause and effect, and incentives. Israel has just guaranteed that Hezbullah will try to kidnap more soldiers. Next up: the Hamas swap for Gilad Shalit.

There’s one tiny point of light at the end of this dark tunnel. I think that Israel may be clearing up all the details of her prisoners and KIA hostages as a way to clear the decks for action in Gaza. In other words: If Israel has her captives back, whether they are alive or dead, she can then start clearing out the terrorist rat’s nests with a clear conscience, and without fear that it is causing their deaths.

Mind you, I have a tendency to see the glass half-full, so this may be entirely wishful thinking. But maybe it isn’t.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. It’s yet another article from Uzi Mahnaimi, proven liar about all things Israel and Iran, with yet more unnamed sources (in this case, “defence sources”) claiming that the Israel-Iran war is imminent.

Iran has moved ballistic missiles into launch positions, with Israel’s Dimona nuclear plant among the possible targets, defence sources said last week.

The movement of Shahab-3B missiles, which have an estimated range of more than 1,250 miles, followed a large-scale exercise earlier this month in which the Israeli air force flew en masse over the Mediterranean in an apparent rehearsal for a threatened attack on Iran’s nuclear installations. Israel believes Iran’s nuclear programme is aimed at acquiring nuclear weapons.

The sources said Iran was preparing to retaliate for any onslaught by firing missiles at Dimona, where Israel’s own nuclear weapons are believed to be made.

The Times keeps publishing this liar, and every time they do, they lose yet more credibility. You’d think the editors would catch on by now. You’d think Israel would protest every time they publish this buffoon’s lies about Israel, especially with those liberal U.K. libel laws. Because I would think that the man who created the blood libel of the “genetic bomb” (that is now used on anti-Semitic conspiracy websites as truth, and by anti-Israel lefties the world over as “proof” that those Israelis are just plain EVIL) wouldn’t be able to keep being published by a paper that used to have a record of credibility and real reporting.

The fact that they keep publishing this man makes me disbelieve most of what I read in the Times. The fact that Ynet publishes this drek as if it’s real news surprises me even more.

Pass the word, please. Liar on Aisle 2.

From Tig to you: Don’t harsh my mellow, dude.

He hit the five-pound mark. I weighed him this morning. Yep, he’s going to be a big boy.

Israel will send goods through the crossings, in spite of mortars fired at Karni crossing today.

An explosion was heard near the western Negev community of Gabim, but a search for a rocket or mortar landing site came up empty.

The Karni crossing is expected to be reopened by Israel on Sunday for the transfer of goods to the Strip within the framework of the agreed upon ceasefire between Israel and the armed Palestinian organizations in the coastal enclave.

The AP isn’t even reporting the mortar fire. Apparently, only kassams count. They still haven’t acknowledged the mortar that first broke the truce.

And I’m tired of writing about it.

In celebration of the Heller decision, I will be going to my second shooting lesson tomorrow. Or, as my friend Sarah puts it, I’m going to go shooty-bang-bang.

Report, and maybe pictures, tomorrow evening.

Mortars fired from Gaza are yet another “test” of the ceasefire, according to AP, while somehow, the closing of the border crossings—which were contingent on the ceasefire working—are labeled as the cause of the mortar fire by the AP. Note the headline: It’s a cause-and-effect summation.

Israel closes Gaza, Palestinians fire mortars

You see? As a result of closing the border crossings, the Palestinians fired mortars at Israel. Not as a matter of habit, this being the third day in a row that the Palestinians have violated the truce by firing rockets and mortars. But that’s not the worst of it. The AP is outright blaming Israel for the rocket fire. Look at the lead:

Israel refused on Friday to fully open crossings with the Gaza Strip and Palestinian militants attacked Israel with mortars, further testing an already fragile truce.

For the third day in a row, Israel prevented food trucks from entering Gaza by closing crossings in retaliation for repeated Palestinian rocket attacks, Israeli army spokesman Peter Lerner said. Later in the day, Palestinian militants fired two mortar shells toward Israel, Israeli police said, but no injuries or damage were reported. It was not immediately clear which militant faction fired the shells.

Notice the order of the events in the paragraphs. Israel closed the crossings, and THEN the Palestinians fired rockets. The AP is framing the situation as an Israeli cause—”refusing” to open the crossings—and a Palestinian effect—firing rockets and mortars. As if those are the natural progression. What the AP is no longer doing is calling the rocket fire a violation of the truce. The Israeli refusal to open the crossings is following the terms of the truce, which the AP knows full well, having published many articles detailing the truce. First, the attacks were supposed to stop. Then Israel would send more goods into Gaza. If three days went by without an attack, more goods would go in. Since the Palestinians are violating the truce, Israel is doing exactly as was agreed, and not sending in more goods or opening the crossings. But the AP is not reporting this honestly. The news service is trying to make its readers think that Israel is violating the truce by “refusing” to open the crossings. You have to dig down ten paragraphs to find the word “violation” anywhere in this article. And it’s used in the context of a revenge attack.

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni called for retaliation for the attacks.

“I am not interested who fired and who didn’t fire at Israel,” she told reporters Thursday. “It is a violation, and Israel needs to respond immediately, militarily, for every violation.”

Notice that the only Israeli quoted is made to look like a bloodthirsty, well, “militant.” Strangely for the AP, which manages to find a quote for every single Palestinian casualty of Israeli fire, there are no quotes at all from Hamas or terrorist groups in this article. And in this short piece from early this morning, the AP outright calls Israel’s closure of the crossings a violation of the truce, thus following the Hamas line.

Israel has refused for the third day in a row to fully open crossings with the Gaza Strip in retaliation for rocket attacks. The rockets and closure both constitute violations of a cease-fire that began June 19.

Truly, is there anyone out there anymore who thinks the AP is an objective news source? Because if so, I have this bridge that’s been in my family for generations, for sale, cheap.

J-Street has a wonderful new feature that allows you to send a letter to the editor of a local paper to support J-Street’s views. I decided to take advantage.

Amy Teibel’s report on the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas has a very important sentence in the middel, “Hamas, which has ruled Gaza for the past year, has said it will enforce the truce, but not confront militants from other groups who violate the deal.”

In other words Israel made a deal with a partner unwilling to live up to its side of the bargain. Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh said last week that his organization would not stop the smuggling of weapons into Israel.

In word and deed Hamas is showing itself to be just as committed to peace as Fatah was:not at all.

.

You’ll note that my text doesn’t match the default message that J-Street recommended.

Why’d I go to J-Street. Well you see they’re very proud of an ad (pdf) they just sponsored in the NY Times. The ad reads in part:

If Israel had gone to war this week, established pro-Israel organizations would have rallied to its side. There would have been ads, press releases, fundraising appeals and political speeches. Let’s have the courage to support Israel loudly and clearly when it pursues security through diplomacy.

If Israel had reacted to the repeated provocations by going to war against Hamas this week, much of the world would have ignored the reasons went to war and reflexively condemned Israel for protecting its citizens. Pro-Israel organizations would have rallied to support Israel in the face of the concerted efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state. It isn’t a matter of supporting war, it’s a matter of trusting Israel’s government to defend the lives of its citizens.

When J-Street asks pro-Israel groups to show courage, it’s a shame that it lacks the courage to criticize Israel’s enemies who show contempt for diplomacy and care nothing for the lives of Jews in Israel.

They cannot even bring themselves to criticize Hamas for working against peace.

And yet they call themselves pro-Israel and pro-peace. I wonder what color the sky is in that world the denizens of J-street inhabit.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Taking its cue from the NY Times that recently introduced “Op-classics,” the Washington Post is inaugurating a feature called “Re-posted.” (I like the name Op-Classics better, but the idea is still a good one.)

Here’s the deal:
This RePosted article comes at the suggestion of a reader, Howard Schmitt of Pittsburgh,
who recently came across a 1999 Post essay about the perils of cheap gas and praised it for its prescience. That essay, originally published in The Post’s Outlook section, is “reposted” below, along with the article that originally accompanied it.

We’re grateful for Mr. Schmitt’s generosity. He also got us thinking: What other columns or editorials from The Post’s archives would you like to read again? Are there past opinion pieces that you think are newly relevant? Do you remember editorials or columns that were spot-on — or dead wrong? Do you wonder what the Post had to say about a particular historical event that might shed light on what’s happening now?

Send your suggestions to reposted@washingtonpost.com.

We don’t expect you to recall headline, byline and date. And we can’t promise that we’ll get to every request. But give us as much guidance as you can — and explain why you think it would be helpful or interesting to read again now. Then we can start digging through the archives.

Here’s my suggestion: Charles Krauthammer wrote a column “The end of the illusion” on March 7, 1996. The column started:

This is peace? “Israelis Unnerved by Peace That Kills ,” says a Washington Post headline, March 5. Peace that kills ? This is an absurd oxymoron. If peace means anything, it means at its very minimum an absence of violence. After all, “armistice” and “truce” — lesser forms of peace — mean cease-fire. Peace must mean at least that .

This Orwellian conjunction of peace and violence demonstrates the state of hypnosis that Americans and Israelis have placed themselves under since the September 1993 Handshake on the White House lawn. What followed has been called a peace process. It has been nothing of the kind. The Palestinian war on Israel has been unrelenting. More Israeli civilians have been massacred since the handshake than at any time in the entire history of the country.

The ” peace process” is in fact nothing more than a unilateral Israeli withdrawal. The Palestinians have gotten Gaza, West Bank autonomy, huge influxes of foreign aid, international recognition, their own police force, their first free elections ever (something their Turkish, British, Egyptian and Jordanian rulers never granted them).

In return Israel has gotten what? Pats on the head from the United States. The occasional trade mission from Tunisia. And, from the Palestinians, death. This is peace?

I already criticized the Post’s coverage of Hamas’s breach of the ceasefire it concluded with Israel last week. In short, the Post’s correspondent Griff Witte departed from straight reporting in his portrayal of Hamas’s bad faith.
1) He termed the firing of rockets at Israel as “rattling” neither “breaching” nor “violating” the ceasefire, and thus downgraded the seriousness of the action.
2) He failed to report (unlike the New York Times) that a leader of Hamas claimed that the organization had no obligation to stop the firing on Israel.
3) He reported Hamas’s claim that Israel’s renewed closure of Gaza was a violation of the truce, effectively declaring Hamas the good guys.
4) He termed those who criticized the truce as “hard-liners,” and then quoted an Israeli critic. The critic, Gen. Moshe Yaalon was correct when he called the truce unstable, largely because Hamas will not stop the smuggling of weapons as it committed to and, as mentioned, won’t stop the firing on Israel.

Just as the Post’s correspondent (I think Barton Gellman) 12 years ago declared “peace” where an extremist group was violating its terms, (then it was Fatah,) now Witte pretends there is a ceasefire or truce when an extremist group (now Hamas) was violating every one of its terms.

I don’t expect that the Post will follow my advice; it seems averse to self criticism. But what the heck, I’ll give it a shot.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Don’t forget to check in with Michelle Malkin at 4 p.m. Eastern today. She’s running a live, streaming video telethon to raise money for From the Frontlines. Or you can go here to sponsor a care package in your price range. If you do send a package, email Michelle. She’s keeping a tally. And tell her I sent you. She’s been a good blog buddy to me. I’d like to repay the favor.

This is a case of my not agreeing with everything she writes, and vice-versa, and yet, we don’t hate each other. Go figure.

Update 11:15 p.m.: They’re closing in on one million dollars. THere’s still time to donate.

A group of Israeli teenagers pwned a few terrorist websites.

Izzadin Kassam’s site displayed a blank white screen and Hebrew text notifying of a technical error.

The websites of Arab Israeli political party Balad, and left-wing activist groups ‘Hagada Hasmolanit’ and ‘Occupation’ featured a black background with an Israeli flag, and the emblem of the ‘Extremist Zealots’ group, similar to that of Meir Kahane’s Kach movement.

The lyrics from the Israeli national anthem ‘Hatikva’ were also posted on the sites in Hebrew, as well as pictures of Palestinian babies dressed as suicide bombers with the caption, ‘Murderers from Birth.’

Pictures at the link.

Ynet doesn’t label the kids right-wing, and talked to some of the hackers, who don’t sound nearly as scary as the JPost is making them out. (The JPost is going Ha’aretz on us? WTF?)

“The criteria are defined as anti-Zion