On Hizbullah's deaf ears

President-elect Barack Obama's desire to engage some of America's political adversaries, such as Iran, in direct dialogue has been a source of acclaim and criticism. Those opposed to such talks charge that Obama's stance is detrimental to plans that seek to undermine the Iranian regime and inhibit its acquisition of nuclear weapons. Supporters of Obama's plan to have "tough, direct diplomacy without preconditions" believe that this is a chance to for America to persuade Iran to change its current course while avoiding further escalation.

Former President Jimmy Carter has been the focus of much criticism after he met with Hamas' leader Khaled Mashaal in Damascus in April. After meeting with one group that his own government designates as a terrorist organization, this week Carter planned on meeting with another; Hizbullah. However, on December 10th a Carter spokesman reported that Hizbullah rejected the proposed meeting.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (1)

Biden's worrying gaffe

The purpose of this entry is purely to reiterate what was pointed out by journalist Michael Totten after the Vice Presidential debate on Thursday. What he wrote in Commentary's blog should have made more headlines and caught the collective attention of the American audience.

Both Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama claim to be allies of Israel, and I don't doubt either of their intentions on the matter. However, the Israeli government should probably be extremely worried if Sen. Joe Biden is to be the next American vice president after his fairly confident gaffe on Thursday. Many people lack a deep understanding of the Middle East. However, Sen. Biden's understanding of Lebanon, now one of the key players in the volatile region, is no where near realistic. In the debate he said "we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hizbullah out of Lebanon," and that [he] "said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hizbullah will control it.""

Anti-semitism goes to college

I try to not overreact at isolated anti-Semitic incidents, but enough "isolated" occurrences have taken place at Rutgers University in the past year that warrants a strong public reaction. Despite the large Jewish population at Rutgers, - approximately 3,000 - this year Jewish students have had to deal with several anti-Semitic attacks, ranging from verbal challenges to vandalism. It has reached the point where even the most skeptical and naïve guardian against the classic knee-jerk reaction, like myself, has to realize and speak out against a continuing trend of anti-Jewish sentiment that is apparent at Rutgers.

Rutgers sophomore Molly Salovitz a few months ago said that she was horrified in her off-campus house one night when she heard several drunk students outside her porch saying "this is where the Jews live" late one evening. Upon later inspection she found that her porch had been damaged.

That same night, a Jewish house down the street had a window damaged. These two seemingly unrelated events could easily be explained by juvenile and/or drunken behavior that is common for college students, yet this seems too coincidental.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (21)

Annapolis - two little, too early

When I saw the article in the Jewish Week about the Annapolis peace conference this week titled "Too Little, Too Late" I thought that they slightly missed the point as to why those who desire peace should be pessimistic about the outcome of this conference. The attempts at peace - through the agreement on a final status deal between the Israeli and Palestinian governments by the end of next year - were valiant and in the eyes of many exactly what was needed to make a lasting peace. Unfortunately, the timing of such drastic measures is completely off and will only result in more setbacks.

It saddens me as a proud American to say that the blame for what will become known as the failure of Annapolis 2007 rests on my president, George W. Bush. Many can say that he was brave and took a big and dangerous step in the right direction in the name of peace in a region which does not offer much hope for security or democracy. Yet, the most courageous thing President Bush could, and should have done was to not do anything. He should have had the foresight, and the courage, to take a step back from the so-called peace process, and realize that now is not the time for either the Palestinian Arabs or the Israelis to be able to handle the responsibility of reaching such agreements.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (3)