SAIGONBOB

"Why Israel Had No Choice."

     

David Harris, Executive Director of the American Jewish Committee, wrote an article in the Jerusalem
Post (Dec. 30,2008) about the latest conflict between the Jewish state and Hamas.
       It is very thorough and leads the reader to an understandable conclusion.
       Here is the piece by David Harris:
  

        

In the Trenches: Why Israel had no choice

Posted by David Harris
Comments: 5

Israel's military operation against Hamas targets in Gaza should have come as no surprise. The handwriting was on the wall. No more than any other country, Israel could not tolerate a terrorist regime on its border that was launching repeated rocket and mortar attacks - 200 in the last week alone - against Israeli towns and villages.

Some context is needed. Israel, which entered Gaza in 1967 after a successful war of self-defense, left the region unilaterally in 2005. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon faced down strong domestic opposition, indeed active resistance, to remove Israeli troops and civilians. He announced that Israel had no claims on Gaza and wished to see it become part of a peaceful Palestinian state living side by side with Israel.

This was the first chance in Gaza's history for its residents to govern their own affairs - something too many of Israel's detractors conveniently forget. Immediately prior to Israel's presence, Gaza had been under Egyptian military rule for two decades, during which there was never, not for a moment, discussion of independence.

But things rapidly spiraled downward after Israel left. Local elections in 2006 led to a coalition of Palestinian Authority and Hamas leaders, followed by a bloody Hamas coup d'état the following year. The PA was ignominiously expelled from Gaza, seeking refuge in the West Bank.

The choice of Hamas to govern led to international isolation. Hamas is defined as a terrorist group by both the United States and European Union. The international community set forth three basic conditions to engage Hamas - recognition of Israel's right to exist, an end to violence, and willingness to abide by previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements

To date, predictably, Hamas has not fulfilled any of the conditions. After all, its charter calls repeatedly for the elimination of Israel and, citing the infamous Protocols of the Elders of the Zion, spews hatred of Jews wherever they might live.

Thus, since gaining control of Gaza, Hamas has focused not on building Palestinian society, but rather on seeking to destroy Israeli society. With substantial help from Iran and a labyrinthine smuggling network across the Gaza-Egypt border, Hamas has turned Gaza into a veritable armed camp and munitions factory.

The result has been that Israeli towns near the border have been targeted, in recent years, by literally thousands of rocket and mortar attacks. As the range of the rockets has grown, so, too, has the arc of vulnerable Israeli population centers.

In truth, Israel's policy options have been limited. Negotiating with Hamas is impossible, unless Israel is prepared to discuss the terms of its own capitulation. Seeking a ceasefire or lull, as occurred earlier this year, buys quiet, yes, but isn't cost-free. Hamas used the break to enhance its weapons capabilities, train its fighters, and reinforce its command-and-control infrastructure, modeled on Hizbullah's example in Lebanon.

Hamas has counted on its ability to attack Israel at will, while relying on Israeli restraint. The terrorist group calculated that Israel no longer had the will to fight and risk military casualties in teeming Gaza. It also doubtless assumed that Israel would be held back by fear of negative publicity, since Hamas has, as standard operating procedure, skillfully exploited the media to focus on Palestinian civilian casualties, real or contrived, that inevitably lead to diplomatic and editorial condemnation.

This time, Hamas erred. It misread Israel. It opted to believe its own propaganda about an Israel fearful of striking, trembling at the prospect of a sustained barrage of Hamas missiles aimed at southern Israel, or worried about an exit strategy once it entered Gaza.

Until Saturday, Israel showed remarkable restraint, which Hamas read as weakness. But Israel has an obligation to defend its borders and its citizens. Clearly, as has been on display, it has the military and intelligence capability to do so. And, no less, despite upcoming elections, it has the collective political will. All these elements have been impressively demonstrated in the current military operation.

As soon as Israel struck, some in the international community predictably returned to formulaic stances.

Most Arab leaders, not to mention the "Arab street," condemned Israel, but what else is new?

Egyptian and Palestinian Authority leaders, the exceptions, noted that Hamas brought this upon itself. In truth, there are others as well who couldn't be more pleased that Israel is dealing a blow to Hamas and its Iranian paymaster.

The European Union referred to Israel's "disproportionate" use of force, but what exactly is "proportionate" in a situation where Hamas-led Gaza, part of the jihadist network, seeks a permanent state of conflict with democratic Israel?

The UN leadership called for an immediate end to the violence, as if that will in and of itself magically persuade Hamas to rethink its reason for being.

And that rather bizarre coalition of extreme left-wingers and radical Islamists - who, at the end of the day, have about as much in common as North Korea and North Dakota - resurfaced on the streets of London and other cities to burn American and Israeli flags.

Let's be clear. It is in Israel's vital interests to have a peaceful and prosperous Gaza on its border. This point needs to be hammered home again and again. Instead, it is faced with Hamastan, a terrorist enclave. What Israel is doing now is exactly what any other nation would do under similar circumstances. In fact, Israel has probably held back longer than many other nations, including the United States, would have done, and, judging from modern history, is exercising more care to avoid civilian casualties than many other armies, though that's particularly tough when the enemy callously uses civilians as human shields.

Some argue that there is no military solution to Gaza. Quite true. In the long term, Gaza's residents need to decide if they want a potentially bright future without Hamas or an assuredly bleak future with it. But in the short term, Israel must convey the clear and unmistakable message that it will defend itself. And that, to its credit, is exactly what it is doing right now.

THANKS FOR READING:   BOB KHOLOS

A Case for Caroline Kennedy

 

Politically, the State of New York, is a bizarre place.
  First, they accept the First Lady of Arkansas as a United States Senator from their northern confines.        Then the New York Times tries to tear apart, long time New York resident, Caroline Kennedy, in her quest to be appointed as the current US Senator, in an 8-thousand word interview.
 But, in that interview, the quaint toughness of President Kennedy's daughter comes through.
 When asked about what her husband thinks about her running for the spot, she retorts, "Why don't you write for womens' Magazines?"
 Ms. Kennedy was more than willing, as she said, to answer questions on the economy or other issues.
 The theme going through the critics, however, is that she is not tough enough, and too vague, to hold the senate seat.
 What a bunch of BS.
 She has been a philanthropic activist for many years.  President-elect Obama chose her for his transition team, and reportedly she did a great job.
 If Caroline Kennedy is appointed to the US Senate, she will vote, along with the new Democratic majority in that branch of government. Any deal making on the Senate floor, will be handled diplomatically, as she is used to dealing with various interest groups.
If anyone or anything comes off weak---it is the New York Times and her jealous critics.
Here is a partial digest of her NY Times interview, as posted by Politico.com:

    

Kennedy to NYT reporters: 'You should write for women's mags'

In addition to today's front page story on Caroline Kennedy -- "As Candidate, Kennedy is Forceful but Elusive" -- the NY Times published the 8,500-plus word, at times contentious, transcript online.

Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and David Halbfinger described Kennedy in the piece as "forceful but vague, largely undefined and seemingly determined to stay that way." Judging from the transcript, it doesn't seem like Kennedy was too pleased with the interview either, including her annoyance at being asked (several ways) about why she threw her hat in the ring.

"You know, this is all for the governor," Kennedy said at one point. "And you guys are really focused on, kind of, the ins and outs and the comparisons of this process, and so, that’s really something that you should be asking him. Really. Um, you know, if you want to talk about, sort of, the economy or the issues, or me, that’s, you know — I’d be happy to do that."

And later, the reporters ask Kennedy whether her husband, Edwin Schlossberg, will be with her on stump and for his reaction to her decision.

NC: Could you, for the sake of storytelling, could you tell us a little bit about that moment, like, where you were, what you said to him about your decision, how that played out?

CK: Have you guys ever thought about writing for, like, a woman’s magazine or something? (Laughter)

DH: What do you have against women’s magazines?

CK: Nothing at all, but I thought you were the crack political team here. As I said, it was kind of over a period of time, you know, obviously we talked about politics, we talked about what’s going on, we’ve been watching the team that the president-elect is putting together — Hillary Clinton is going to be a spectacular part of that team, you know, then there was a vacancy here, you know, just like everybody else, you know: who’s going to fill it, isn’t that interesting, there’s a lot of great candidates, you know, obviously I have become much more politically involved than I have in the past, so you know, I figure, why not try, I really think I have something to offer.

Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos

 

Another Israeli-Hamas/Palestinian War?

    

Israel is under the gun again---over 6,000 rocket rounds, from Iran supported Hamas, have hit the ground in Israel.   Just a couple of days ago, some Palestinian gangsters launched a rocket which wound up being a "short-round" and killing two little girls.
    Perhaps the madness will never stop as long as Iran receives millions of petrol dollars and then distribute such funds to hate filled mad men, who do not believe in negotiation for peace in the Middle East.
    War, is again, on the horizon, in this area of the world.
     Here are some thoughts from the Israeli Project.org: (www.israeliproject.org)

    

On Christmas Eve, Iran-backed Palestinians Launch 60 Strikes on

Israel

In 5 Days Following End of Ceasefire, Hamas Steps Up Attacks on Civilians

Photos: Israel Under Fire
Iran Press Kit

Children in Ashkelon crying from shock after Qassam rocket hits near their home (Yehuda Peretz for The Israel Project)

In the five days since

Israel

’s ceasefire with Iran-backed Hamas formally ended Friday (Dec. 19) Palestinian terrorists have fired more than 100 rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians, wounding a foreign worker who was hit by shrapnel. Hamas and other Iran-backed terrorist groups claimed responsibility for the attacks, which also hit a home and struck near an elementary school.[1]

On Tuesday night and Wednesday - the day before Christmas - Hamas launched more than 60 rockets and mortars at

Israel

, the largest round of strikes since before the ceasefire began. Among the artillery were Grad-type missiles that hit the cities of

Ashkelon

and Netivot, where a missile exploded outside a community center as children celebrated Chanukah. During the past year, Iran-backed terrorist groups in

Gaza

have fired more than 3,000 rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians in the

southern

Negev

region, killing four people and wounding more than 270.[2]

 

Since Israel gave up all of Gaza in 2005 – relinquishing homes, farms, places of business and worship –  terrorists have launched more than 6,300 rockets and mortars into Israel from Gaza. The attacks have killed 10 civilians, wounded more than 780 and traumatized thousands of others. [3] The only remaining Israeli in Gaza is Staff Sgt. Gilad Shalit who was abducted from Israel on June 25, 2006 by Hamas in a bloody cross-border raid in which the terrorists killed two IDF soldiers and wounded four others. [4]

More...

Iran Press Kit Iran’s regime is a growing threat to the world, as it supports terrorism and develops nuclear weapons.

Israel’s Commitment to Peace Israel wants peace and security for all sides. Israel has peace with Egypt and Jordan and longs for peace with all its neighbors.

Israel at 60 Israel is a multicultural society and a true democracy. It respects the rights and freedoms of all its citizens.

Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos

Gene Autry Wishes Everyone a "Merry Christmas"----Enjoy!

Download AutryXmas

Obama Picks Science Advisors, while LA Times Columnist Joel Stein, Counts Jews in Hollywood

While we enter the holiday season, with many religious overtones----which is appropriate---I thought it was a class act for President Elect Barack Obama to name his science team on the radio today, Dec. 20, 2008.
A day before the first night of Hanukkah, and five days prior to Christmas, it is important for our government to be focused, not on religion, but rather, the tough issues ahead of us.
Here is the science team announced by Obama today, and run on Politico.com:
    From the transition: 'In this week's Democratic Radio Address, President-elect Barack Obama announced key members of his Science and Technology team, including: Dr. John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST); Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Nominee for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator; Dr. Eric Lander, Co-Chair, President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST); and Dr. Harold Varmus, Co-Chair, President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).'

-----Joel Stein---
I've had problems with Los Angeles Times columnist, Joel Stein, in the past----particularly when he called our American troops, "Immoral."
I'm happy that Mr. Stein is both smart and moral---something US soldiers can not be---in his estimation.
As a columnist, I understand his need to make groups out of individuals and scapegoat others, as he has the high ground of a Buddhist monument on his front lawn.
During this time of year, many people are very sensitive about their religion. It's best to stay away from such discussions as to "who follows the right God."  Wait until May..not December, to have such a discussion.
One  of the top emailed stories from the Los Angeles Times, today, is Joel Stein's column on the number of Jews in Hollywood and whether the old anti-Semitic saying that "they" (Jews) control Hollywood is true.
Jews are very involved in the Art's and Sciences----and the creative business of the media.
For example, Irving Berlin, a Jew, wrote "White Christmas."
Whether the Jews control the media, banks, and have a 'secret" Kosher tax---as the Aryan Nation likes to spit out....is not relevant.
Neither is the number of Jews (what kind of Jews...are some married to a "schiksa"---do they do Shabbos--or are they eating "white meat,")---when we discuss "Hollywood."
Were these the same "Jews," who promoted a television show by Nat King Cole....which could not get sponsors to keep the show on the air---or the "Jews" who brought us movies such as "Chain-Gang" which showed the inhumane treatment of prisoners.
Mr. Stein tries to be cute....but the timing of his article, and the way he goes about it is purely amateur hour.
Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos

Obama: Fund Raising Overload--and--A Pastor Rick Warren Overload?

    

For the first time this week, Barack Obama was not asked about the sleazy Governor of Illinois.
     There are other controversial issues to take the place----something President Obama will find part of his job, every time he holds a news conference.
     Although the election has been over for some time now, I, along with millions of others are getting fund raising emails every day.
     Just recently, one email touted the problems of Hillary Clinton's campaign deficit, and would I contribute?
     Thinking that Bill Clinton could give a couple of speeches and pay off her deficit, I didn't respond.
     Then, today (Dec. 18, 2008) I receive an email about helping the "Transition" team, with a contribution.  I declined on that one, also.  The powerful get these great jobs..and won't be homeless after Barack Obama takes office.
     The inaugural is something special.  Some of the famous and elite of America, will be paying $50,000 dollars for a couple of good seats at the event, as well as their choice of Inaugural balls to dance at.
      Thinking that I have to re-finance my house next month, I passed on a donation to this over-the-top event.
      Now, I have been an Obama supporter for almost two years, and I can't wait until he takes office, just after noon, on January 20th, 2009.
      President-elect Obama has announced some brilliant cabinet positions, but he is not mistake-proof.
      They should lighten-up on their fund raising appeals, now that they are so close to taking office.
     -----Rick Warren---
      There should always be a healthy separation between Church and State.....but someone has to give the Invocation at the Inaugural.
      Although, I would probably disagree on almost everything Pastor Rick Warren believes in politics---he did invite then Senator Obama to appear along side Senator John McCain at his Saddelback, Orange County, California mega church.
     There is something to be said for a more civil discourse in American society.  Just because one disagrees with another politician, for example, is no reason not to have a polite discussion.
     Although, there are plenty of other clergymen and women, who could also fill.  But, I assume Mr. Obama wants to deliver his own message:   Its OK to agree to disagree, and still be apart of the American social fabric.
     I don't underestimate the anger of the Gay community about Mr. Warren.....but I am sure, once Barack Obama starts governing, minority communities all through the nation will celebrate his election, again.

     Thanks for reading:
     Bob Kholos

    
    
     

Why Chris Matthews, MSNBC, Should Not Run for US Senate

Many years ago, the federal government put in guidelines for current employees, who wanted to leave and join the private sector.
It made a lot of sense for a rule which disallowed a member from lobbying the government for at least two years after they left their government job----the conflict of interest was just too great.
In Chris Matthews case--there are some, albeit, esoteric comparisons:
The people own the airwaves, and although MSNBC is a cable company, not under the jurisdiction of the FCC, Mathews jumps from NBC, which is under the public domain, to MSNBC.
Because he has millions of viewers on his "Hardball" segment, weeknights on MSNBC, and has the gift of gab, he has built up his credibility in ways an average "Joe" or "Joan" could not.
This gives him a huge break in name recognition, which is the basic "caffeine" in running for office.
There is a lot of talk, on his station, about Caroline Kennedy, and her lack of experience in possibly being appointed to the vacant US Senate seat from New York.
Yet, Matthews, who has less experience......I think he worked for Jimmy Carter, which is definitely not an asset, even among Democrats---he has spent years as a talking head.
Don't get me wrong----I'm an avid viewer of MSNBC and of Hardball---but I think, in this case, NBC should have an agreement with its various anchors, that they will not run for office, or take a job lobbying the Federal Government, for two years after leaving their jobs.
I also realize that there is a "First Amendment" issue here, however it should be debated because of the Elmer Gantry effect on the public at large.
Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos

GOP to Detroit Automakers: "Screw You."

     The Republican Senator's, who have many foreign auto makers in their states, and taxpayer subsidized, are now on their high horse, denying a partial bailout of GM, Ford and Chrysler.
      "Breaking up is hard to do," but the GOP senator's seem anxious to send about 3 million workers to the unemployment line, while they get 100% health care, a great pension, and someone to get them coffee, when needed.
     In an interesting turn, the Bush White House may come to the rescue.
     For once in eight years, our executive branch may get it right, by taking the "Tarp" funds and giving the Big 3 a life for a few months, until the Obama administration takes over on January 20th, 2009.
     During the Reagan era, much of labor voted for the conservative leader....even though he laid off many Air Traffic Controllers.
    But, now, the GOP is trying to make the UAW the bad guy.  Under the guise of "better competition," the self righteous Republican politicians are trying to destroy one of the last and strongest Union's in the country....ala China.
  Dictatorships and Authoritarian governments, like the People's Republic of China, don't like Union's, because they represent the working people who may want a bigger raise, or have a say in working conditions.
 How are they going to have 9 year old girls on the assembly line, when some "horrible" union try to get better labor conditions?
 If it wasn't for Union's, we would still have Children working, and no Child labor laws.
 The misguided Republican party wants to "save" our country, by destroying it.
 Welcome to the Vietnam of Domestic policy.
 Thanks for reading:
 Bob Kholos

 

Getting Cancer Again....Still Blogging Away!

 

I'm going in for my radiation treatments, after they discovered my third episode of non-Hodgkins Lymphoma Cancer.
  The Doctor's want to blame it on Agent Orange...but nobody knows for sure.   I was at the wrong place at the wrong time, serving as a soldier with the 4th Infantry Division, next to the Cambodian border, in the Central Highlands of Vietnam.   It was the heaviest spraying of the war, called Operation Ranch Hand.
But, it really doesn't matter how I got it....I got it.
I went through a Stem Cell transplant, with an 85% cure rate....but it didn't work.
So, now, I'm taking it a tumor at a time.
I've got 15 treatments of radiation, which is really a no-brainer after ton's of Chemotherapy.
Still listening to Ella Fitzgerald, and blogging away....keeps my mind off things.
I haven't written about the Gov. of Illinois, or other stupid distractions, because I am still waiting for Barack Obama to be sworn in on Jan. 20th, 2009.
Obama has put together a great transition team, with fabulous appointments for his Administration.
To me, the economy, health care, and our deteriorating environment, is a lot more important, than the stupidity of an elected official, who makes Al Capone look like the head of "Common Cause."
My suggestion:  Stay focused on what will help you and your neighbor, not the distraction of dirty politicians.
Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos

Los Angeles Times (Tribune Co.) files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection

In a turnaround---instead of reporters asking for protection from the readers, Sam Zell, the CEO of the Tribune Company, has decided to ask for protection from its creditors.
While the successful and credible Los Angeles Times has been making a profit......the unsuccessful Chicago Cubs, are not part of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Perhaps, Mr. Zell, could have kept on a hundred or so editors and reporters and other staff---who he let go before bankruptcy.
After all a billion here and a billion there.....is loose change to a guy like Zell.
Honestly, I hope Mr. Zell will allow the Times to exist as the excellent paper it is.
I have never met so many real professional journalists and editors, as I have, over the years, with the Los Angeles Times.
For those of us who desire "real" news and legitimate stories, I hope that Mr. Zell will keep the Times as a strong force in America.

Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos