Breaking News: Ahmadinejad says no more talks about Nuclear Issue
April 16, 2009 by Barry Rubin

Meir Javedanfar, a reliable analyst who follows Iran closely and is fluent in Farsi, says that Iran's president is now saying Iran's nuclear program is non-negotiable. The tone of the statement is similar to his Der Spiegel interview which I reported here earlier.

The implication is that President Obama's approach and the weakness of other Western governments has emboldened Ahmadinejad, who is also showing off for his election supporters. Now he says he's going on the offensive, saying in effect: let's not talk about Iran's nuclear program, let's talk about how we are going to change the structure of international affairs to eliminate Western hegemony and redistribute power.

Meir writes:

"On the 15th of April, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in a speech in the city Kerman stated that “the time for discussions over the nuclear program has come to an end, and the clock will not go back”.

He continued to say “today, we have to discuss and collectively think about other issues such as reform of international structures, reform of the UN Security Council, and execution of justice and real peace. Iran is ready in all such areas”.

Meir adds: "It is very unlikely that Ahmadinejad would make such a statement without the consent of the Supreme Leader. Therefore, judging by his statement, the nuclear program is unlikely to be part of the negotiations with Obama."

source: http://middleeastanalyst.com/2009/04/17/ahmadinejad-iran-wont-negotiate

Presidential appointee Mogahed doesn’t recognize 1.9 million South Sudanese deaths as inflicted by Radical Islam.  Certainly won’t call it ‘jihad.’

 

By Mark S. Finkelstein     April 14, 2009   

  A commentary on Dalia Mogahed’s appointment  by President Obama  to the Presidential Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.  (1)     

 

Before the crisis in Darfur, Sudan, there was one in South Sudan.   As far back as 1998, Researchers called it genocide and tallied “ an astounding 1.9 million deaths [in the South] since the current phase of Sudan's civil war began in 1983.” ( 2 )

 

What was Sudan’s civil war all about?  “Since [Sudan’s] independence on January 1, 1956 successive Arab and Muslim dominated governments in Khartoum have strived to forcefully bring the South under Arab and Islamic fold.  ...   The National Islamic government [in Khartoum] has even gone as far as to declare "Jihad", an Islamic Holy war against the people of the South and the Nuba Mountains, who it considers as infidels and who must be totally eradicated or brought under the banner of Arabism and Islamism.”  ( 3 ) 

 

 And so the Nationalist Islamic government “forced Islamization and Arabization” ( 4 ) on the Christian Sudanese.  They used a number of means including the imposition of strict Islamic religious law (including amputation for proscribed crimes)( 5 )  on Christians as well as on Muslims and by the “[d]enial of basic human needs and use of food as a weapon for conversion into [the] Islamic religion.” ( 6 )  Slavery has been documented first-hand as well. ( 7A )   Slavery?  Read Simon Deng's testimony (7B ) yourself.

 

 There were 1.9 million Christian and animist victims of supremacist Islamism in Sudan.   But Dalia Mogahed would not acknowledge this.  At a public program in Des Moines, Iowa on May 27,  2008 , I personally asked her to acknowledge these facts, and I expected her to do so, because the case is incontrovertible.  But she refused.

Why did she refuse?  Perhaps acknowledging Sudanese jihadism goes against her apparent need to present  radical Islamic extremism as a reaction to political grievances with the world.  For in the book she co-authored with John Esposito   ( 8 ) – the book she came to talk about – she concludes :  the “data indicate that faith [i.e., religion, i.e., adherence to the tenets of a jihadi interpretation of Islam] is not the distinguishing factor primarily responsible for extremism…” (p. 163) ;  That “ the real difference between those who condone terrorist acts [including, jihad – my addition]  and all others is about politics, not piety.” ( p. 74)  Fortunately there are some pretty  solid critiques of the Esposito- Mogahed book  available, one of them being Robert Satloff’s article entitled: “Just like us? Really?” ( 9 ) 

The fact that Ms. Mogahed is either unable or unwilling to identify the Sudanese jihad for what it is and for what it has done, should make one pause.   Think for a moment about the things she is conveniently able to overlook. 

Mark S. Finkelstein serves as Director of Community Relations for the Jewish Federation of Greater Des Moines, Iowa.  He may be contacted at jcrc@dmjfed.org

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 References 

1.    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-Announces-Additional-Members-of-Advisory-Council-on-Faith-Based-and-Neighborhood-Partnerships/

 

 2 .  Testimony of J. Millard Burr, to Congress, 1999.   Burr is the author of “Quantifying Genocide in Southern Sudan.  http://home.planet.nl/~ende0098/content/documents/Burr.htm

 3 . Sabit A. Alley from the iAbolish, the Anti-Slavery Portal, 2005. http://web.archive.org/web/20051221045218/http://www.iabolish.com/today/features/sudan/overview1.htm  

  See also: de Chand, "The Sources of Conflict between the North and the South in Sudan"  http://www.dur.ac.uk/justin.willis/chand.htm who identifies many of the residents of South Sudan as Christians.  “ The 13-year old Jihad (Holy war) being waged by the extremist Islamic regime in Khartoum against Christians in the South has given slavery a come back.”

 4 . and  6 .  Riek Machar Terry-Dhurgon.  “South Sudan: A History of Political Domination” http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Hornet/sd_machar.html

 

 5 .  "In September 1983, as part of an Islamicization campaign, President Nimeiri announced that traditional Islamic punishments drawn from Shari’a (Islamic Law) would be incorporated into the penal code. This was controversial even among Muslim groups. Amputations for theft and public lashings for alcohol possession became common. Southerners and other non-Muslims living in the north were also subjected to these punishments."   U.S. Department of State    http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5424.htm

 

 7A "Slavery Widespread in Sudan, Bishop charges." 1998   http://www.domini.org/openbook/sud80713.htm

  . 

7B   Simon Deng’s personal account of slavery under the Khartoum regime.  "I was abducted into slavery at the age of nine, in which I spent three and half years of my life as a slave."   http://www.satyamag.com/mar06/deng.html

 

 8.  John L. Esposito and Dalia Mogahed  ,  Who Speaks for Islam . What a Billion Muslims Really Think.  Gallup Press, 2007. 

 

 9.  Robert Satloff .  “ Just Like Us. Really?”   A critique of Esposito & Mogahed's Who Speaks for Islam

 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/066chpzg.asp?pg=1

 

 

Rubin: read article on why Israel might have to attack Iran someday

An extremely interesting article about why Israel might--and might have to--attack Iran some day
-commentary by Barry Rubin


link to article recommended by Barry Rubin: http://www.slate.com/id/2215820/

Read it as so far superior to what is usually written on such matters. The critique below is about secondary points which do not detract from the article's value but express some of my personal reactions.

Samuels is sympathetic to Israel and there are good--even very clever--aspects to the argument. But he has to earn his right to make an essentially pro-Israel argument by:

1. bashing Israel a bit, sometimes in rather silly ways.

2. says all sorts of inaccurate things about Israel.

3. understandably put everything in terms of US interests. This is reasonable for a U.S. audience of course but still it is an article about why Israel might have to take great risks.

4. miss the reality of the Arab world making it seem like a sort of black box rather than a place with serious malfunctions that messes things up on its own.

And finally, and most importantly, he omits the rather main reason why Israel has launched attackes on Hamas and Hizballah--self-defense, not restoring credibility as the main goal--and on Iran--belief that Iran might use nuclear weapons against it.

Again, though, an important article well-worth reading, making insightful points. Samuels has been writing good things and shown some real courage in doing so.

The President holds a seder in the WH

Why was last night different?
Apr. 8, 2009 HILARY LEILA KRIEGER, The Jerusalem Post, Washington

WASHINGTON - US President Barack Obama was scheduled to celebrate Pessah on Thursday night with staff and friends in what is believed to be the first White House Seder attended by an American president.

The event was slipped onto the president's public schedule Tuesday night with little fanfare, following a letter signed by Obama earlier in the day wishing Americans who mark the day a "peaceful and relaxing holiday."

While presidential proclamations in honor of Pessah were common throughout the administrations of George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, this year's Seder is believed to be the first of its kind.

"I'm really happy to hear about it," said Steve Rabinowitz, who once led a staff Seder in the Clinton White House but was unaware of a White House Seder in which the president had personally taken part. "It's been an extremely open White House to all faith communities, certainly including ours."

William Daroff, who runs the United Jewish Communities' Washington office, recalled that Franklin D. Roosevelt had snuck out the back door of the White House in 1943 to avoid seeing rabbis marching out front to demand US action to save European Jews from the Nazis.

"Sixty-six years later the president of the United States is spending Thursday evening with his friends and family celebrating the liberation and survival of the Jewish people," Daroff noted. It was "a testament to how far we have come as a Jewish people in America," he said.

"Jews are a vital component in the mosaic that is American culture and society," Daroff continued. "Our welcome through the front door, and the dining room door, of the White House speaks to the inclusiveness of today's America and of President Obama. This night is indeed different from all other nights."

In his letter, Obama described the story of Jews' ascent from slavery to freedom in the Land of Israel as being "among the most powerful stories of suffering and redemption in human history," accompanied by rituals and symbols that indicate "the beauty of freedom and the responsibility it entails."

He also said the holiday presented a message for all humankind. "As part of a larger global community, we all must work to ensure that our brothers and sisters of every race, religion, culture and nationality are free from bondage and repression, and are able to live in peace."

He concluded his letter with the traditional Hebrew greeting chag sameach, or happy holiday.

Though Pessah started on Wednesday evening, Obama was hosting the second Seder, on Thursday night, apparently so that those in attendance could celebrate with their families on the first night.

The guest list included the president, First Lady Michelle Obama and their daughters, Malia and Sasha, as well as a dozen staff members and friends along with their families.

Last year, most had been on a campaign stop in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with then-senator Obama when the first night of Pessah fell.

According to the White House, Obama insisted on holding an impromptu Seder, and this year invited those who were with him to celebrate together again.

This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1238562942442&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

A member of the Chicago Board of Rabbis, Rabbi Capers Funnye [ pron. Foo-Nay'] is spiritual leader of Beth Shalom B'nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation in Chicago. Let's go to the videotape....

The Palestinians' Obligations

Monday, April 6, 2009; A14  Letter to the Washington Post

Your March 31 editorial "Israel's New Government" talked a lot about what the Israelis must do to continue to have support from the United States. What I found lacking was a discussion of what the Palestinians must do to have acceptance by Israel and the United States for a two-state solution. If peace is to come in that troubled region, both the Palestinians and the Israelis have to make concessions and bear responsibilities. Pressure should not be put just on Israel alone, as the editorial attempted to do.

For a two-state solution to become a reality, Palestinians in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip must recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. They must also renounce terrorism and understand that they cannot use terrorism as a negotiating tool to achieve their state. The Palestinians must also agree to abide by all previous agreements signed by their leadership. These are simple things and prerequisites for Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank to accept for there to be a peaceful, two-state solution. Since the war in Gaza has ended, Palestinians continue to bombard Israel with missiles threatening Israeli civilians. This must stop if the conflict is going to be resolved.

Peace will come to that region of the world when both sides recognize each other's right to exist in peace and security. It will not come from pressuring Israel to make unilateral concessions in return for worthless promises or worthless pieces of paper.

ELIOT L. ENGEL

U.S. Representative (D-N.Y.)

Washington

The writer is a member of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia.

Most Palestinians appear to hope for something other than a two-state solution.

 

As reported elsewhere on the internet, a Norwegian organization, the Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies conducted an opinion poll in the West Bank and Gaza in late February and early March 2009.  The poll is online at http://www.fafo.no/indexenglish.htm

 

Among the findings:  ( parenthetical comments are mine. -- Mark)

 

35% of respondents [ Total n= 3,232] "hope"  for a Two-state solution. (Advocated by 47% of Fatah respondents; 21% of Hamas respondents.)    (no information available from respondents about whether Israel, as part of a 2-state settlement, would be expected to absorb Palestinian 'refugees' or whether Palestine would permit Jewish residents.)

 

33% hope for the establishment of One Islamic state  (i.e., governed by Islamic law.   Advocated by 58% of Hamas respondents; 17% of Fatah respondents.)

 

20% hope for the establishment of One state with equal rights for all   (In other words, the absorption of Israel into a Greater Palestine and the nullification of Israel as a Jewish state.  Advocated by 22% of Fatah respondents; 12% of Hamas respondents, a majority of whom would prefer a Islamic state. )

 

  3%  hope for a Three-state solution

 

  9%  "Don't know"  what to hope for.  ( A response by 14% of the 35-44 age bracket) 

 

[Table 1.23  Hopes for a future political solution of the conflict with Israel. p. 25]