Rebel Yid on Twitter Rebel Yid on Facebook
Print This Post Print This Post

The Israelis did not Kill Massoud Mohammadi

… according to Mideast expert Micah Halpern

Excerpt

This explosion was so powerful and out of control it was designed to kill, maim and damage in a wide circumference around the bomb. This was not the work of a Western intelligence force, it was not even the work of a Western assassin. Israel has perfected the art of destroying their target and their target only - a car and the people in the car, nothing else at all. Israel goes the extra mile to make sure the damage is restricted and does not injure people or property around the explosion site.

This explosion was the work of others, it was not the work of Israel and neither was it the work of the United States.

Find out who Micah believes is responsible here.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Chinese Jews Arriving in Israel

tips once again to Letty Kaplan

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

911 Memorial Unveiled…. in Jerusalem

What does it say that this memorial was unveiled in Jerusalem while we still have a hole int he ground?  Remember which side of the ‘fence’ this was built on.

Tips to Letty Kaplan

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Peace is Not a Process

Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe

Peace vs the ‘peace process’

October 14, 2009

Excerpts:

In an important article in the current Middle East Quarterly, Daniel Pipes reviews the terrible failure of the 1993 Oslo accords, and homes in on the root fallacy of the diplomatic approach it embodied: the belief that the Arab-Israeli war can “be concluded through good will, conciliation, mediation, flexibility, restraint, generosity, and compromise, topped off with signatures on official documents.’’ For 16 years, Israeli governments, prodded by Washington, have sought to quench Palestinian hostility with concessions and gestures of good will. Yet peace today is more elusive than ever.

“Wars end not through good will but through victory,’’ Pipes writes, defining victory as one side compelling the other to give up its war goals. Since 1948, the Arabs’ goal has been the elimination of Israel; the Israelis’, to win their neighbors’ acceptance of a Jewish state in the Middle East. “If the conflict is to end, one side must lose and one side win,’’ argues Pipes.

Diplomacy cannot settle the Arab-Israeli conflict until the Palestinians abandon their anti-Israel rejectionism. US policy should therefore be focused on making them abandon it. The Palestinians must be put “on notice that benefits will flow to them only after they prove their acceptance of Israel. Until then - no diplomacy, no discussion of final status, no recognition as a state, and certainly no financial aid or weapons.’’

So long as American and Israeli leaders remain committed to a fruitless Arab-Israeli “peace process,’’ Arab-Israeli peace will remain unachievable. Let the newest Nobel peace laureate grasp and act upon that insight, and he will do more to hasten the conflict’s end than any of his well-meaning predecessors.

HKO comments: our unwillingness to tolerate short term pain has again led us to longer term pain.  Ralph Peters has noted that short term ferocity is the most humane way to fight a war.  The unwillingness to acknowledge that there can be no peace until Israel’s right to exist is both acknowledged and respected has been the common thread to many past well intentioned failures. Every day that goes by with out this acceptance should cost the Palestinians - otherwise it pays to delay peace inevitably. If Israel’s existence is not accepted there is no substitute for victory.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

A Peaceful Use of Force

“More than that, no country in the world, not even Germany, would respond “proportionately” if some nonstate militia started rocketing their towns from across some border and killing German citizens.  If a government could not get the state from whose territories the rockets were being fired to take responsibility for ending the threat, then it would have no choice but to silence the threat itself.  Why do German intellectuals, journalists, and politicians expect Israel alone to act differently?  And why do they, of all people, insist that the use of force must always be a last resort in any political confrontation among states, when that kind of thinking is exactly what allowed Hitler to cause the Second World War? Germans frequently talk like Neville Chamberlain at Munich, when they ought to realize that it was Winston Churchill who was right: the readiness to use force in an appropriate and judicious manner is not what causes wars; it is often what prevents them.”

Adam Garfinkle in “Jewcentricity”

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Goldstone Smackdown

Col. Richard Kemp on the U.N. Goldstone Report

just curious if anyone has seen this on any major network, even Fox.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Netanyahu and Churchill

As Churchill advocated taking Hitler at his written and spoken word,  Benjamin Netanyahu insists that Muslim radicals must be taken at their word.

Benjamin or ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu’s speech at the UN General Assembly contained a moral clarity that belies a depth and experience absent from other world leaders, especially our own.

Before college Netanyahu joined an elite fighting unit that was a spearhead for the IDF. He led a retaliatory raid against perpetrators of the 1972 Munich Olympics, killing three of their leaders.  Bibi tried and failed in 1968 to capture Arafat for a 1968 mine attack of a busload of young Israelis.

He was part of a raid destroying 14 unoccupied planes at the Beirut International airport in retaliation for an attack on an El Al jet in Greece which killed an Israeli and wounded a stewardess.  In 1969 Egyptian forces were laying traps for the Israelis near the Suez Canal.  His team destroyed an Egyptian truck loaded with weapons, but a few days later Egyptian troops fired on Bibi’s rubber boat. Loaded with ammo belts he nearly drowned, until rescued by a naval commando who pulled him up by his hair.

Yoni Netanyahu

But most motivating was the loss of his brother at the Raid on Entebbe in 1976.  A crack team flew from Tel Aviv 2,500 miles to Uganda where Palestinian terrorists held 103 hostages after gentile passengers were released. The operation was an incredible success; all terrorists were killed, Uganda jets (Russian Migs) were destroyed on the ground, the Ugandan military was neutralized and all but 4 hostages were safely returned. The sole IDF casualty was Bibi’s brother, Jonathan, who was shot by a Ugandan sniper in the control tower.

Netanyahu attended high school near Philadelphia, got an undergraduate degree in architecture and a graduate degree in business management from MIT,  and worked for the Boston Consulting Group for two years. He understood supply side economics and became a political attaché for Israel in Washington during the Reagan years.

His father was a prominent historian and several of his uncles were successful in the steel business. His Uncle Zachary boasted that if he had not been born in Tel Aviv he may have become the first Jewish American President.

Netanyahu has published several books and is an authority on world terrorism. I highly recommend his website, here.

This is the depth that was displayed at the UN in clear unambivalent language. Compare this to the shallow experience and moral relativism of our president.

Netanyahu is a world leader in the mold of Winston Churchill.

most info from George Gilder’s  “The Israel Test”

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

New and Old Elites

“In the modern capitalist world, in which the historical extremes of poverty have been widely overcome, the most acute moral issues relate to recognition of accomplishment and superiority- treatment not of the poor but of the excellent and gifted people whose work is indispensable to providing opportunities for the poor and everyone else.  In capitalism, as I wrote in ‘Wealth and Poverty’ some thirty years ago, the great conflict is not between rich and poor but between incumbent elites and existing forms of capital and the new elites and superior forms of capital that must necessarily displace them if economic progress is to occur.”

“Thus the paramount conflict in capitalism is between the established system-entrepreneurs, business,political movements, and bureaucracies- and the superior minds and methods, vessels of excellence and innovation, that threaten to usurp them. On one side stand the alliances of government and elites, in democracies and tyrannies alike, that distort economies around the globe by protecting the past in the name of social fashions and special interests.  On the other side are the inventors, entrepreneurs, industrial innovators, and visionary artists who challenge every establishment.”

from George Gilder’s “The Israel Test.”

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Netanyahu at UN (part 1)

Share/Save/Bookmark

Print This Post Print This Post

Netanyahu at UN (Part 2)

Share/Save/Bookmark

WELCOME

Welcome to Rebel Yid where everything is relevant. Perspectives from Henry Oliner. Frustrated by the lack of depth in most media; we aim to discover the dimension of ideas beyond the left/ right, red/blue, and liberal/conservative thinking. We write about economics, politics, power, history, religion and culture. We are enthralled with most things American but skeptical of ethnocentric biases and group think. Clarity and discovery is often found with humor.

Archives

Rebel Yid on Facebook

@rebelyid on Twitter