Another Iranian Demonstration- this one in Paris

This past June 20th a demonstration different than the one unfolding on the streets of Tehran took place. This one, in Paris, was held by exiled Iranian opposition groups, the most organized of which is on the US Terror List, the the Mujahedeen-e Khalq or the People's Mujahedeen of Iran (MeK or PMOI).

Led by a firebrand, Maryam Rajavi, the MeK is still designated a terror organization despite its renunciation of terrorism directed against other Iranian targets.

Ms. Rajavi's remarks are on the website of the National Council of Resistance of Iran - Foreign Affairs Committee. Her speech's 4,000 words are difficult to abstract. So the speech is presented here. It's worth a read.

The Myth of Zionism as Imperialism

Delegates at the UN and professors on university campuses worldwide brand the State of Israel the creation of a racist and colonialist European imperialism. This libel of the Jewish state betrays an ignorance of the history of the Jews and the story of the Zionist movement. From the beginning, the Zionist movement has been a foe of imperialism.

So begins an op-ed appearing in today's jpost.com, "The myth of Zionist imperialism"by Eli Kavon, a member of the faculty of Nova Southeastern University's Lifelong Learning Institute in Davie, Florida.

Kavon discusses the roots of Zionist thought and, importantly, asks the question, "If the Zionist founders of the State of Israel were, indeed, imperialists, what empire did they represent?" I'm sure that Zionism's opponents that come across this post will come up with something. But the fact remains that Israel is not a colonial or racist state.

Just When You Think They Don't Care - ICRC takes Hamas to task

Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, held incommunicado for nearly three years, is the subject of the International Committee of the Red Cross as it calls on Hamas to allow visits and communication with the soldier.

According to an ICRC press release,

Since Mr Shalit's capture in June 2006, the ICRC has repeatedly asked Hamas to allow the exchange of Red Cross messages between Gilad Shalit and his family. The most recent requests were made at the highest level, but these and all others have been refused.

Repeated requests by the ICRC to visit Gilad Shalit to ascertain his conditions of detention and treatment have also been refused. Visiting people deprived of their freedom and enabling them to exchange personal news with their relatives is one of the ICRC's main humanitarian tasks. In 2008, the organization visited nearly half a million detainees in 83 countries, including nearly 36,000 who were registered and monitored individually.

You can read the full press release here.

Terror sponsor assets hidden in plain sight in NYC

More than 10 years ago our family attempted to seize assets belonging to the Alavi Foundation, a NY based "charity" that we claimed was part of the Iranian government. Although thoroughly rebuked by the US government at that time, the government is now singing a different tune.

FoxNews reporter Eric Shawn has covered the Alavi Foundation and the government's new attempt to get to the bottom of its activities.

FoxNews has the story, 5th Avenue Skyscraper Center of Iranian Mystery, accompanied by Shawn's video report.

Obviously, this is a work in progress. I hope good news will follow.

Carolyn Glick at jpost.com - Getting Obama off Israel's back

Caroline Glick's most recent column at jpost.com takes aim at Israeli prime minister Netanyahu's policy speech and President Obama's recent actions.

Netanyahu's speech was an eloquent, rational and at times impassioned defense of Israel. For Israeli ears, after years of former prime minister Ehud Olmert's and former foreign minister Tzipi Livni's continuous assaults on Israeli rights, and their strident defenses of capitulation to the Palestinians and the Syrians, Netanyahu's address was a breath of fresh air. But it is hard to see how it could have possibly had any lasting impact on Obama or his advisers.

The problem with delivering "a rational speech?" "To be moved by rational argument, a person has to be open to rational discourse." Glick then looks at some of Obama's actions.

First,

If rational thought was the basis for the administration's policymaking on foreign affairs, North Korea's decisions to test long range ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, send two US citizens to long prison terms and then threaten nuclear war should have made the administration reconsider its current policy of seeking the approval and assistance of North Korea's primary enabler - China - for any action it takes against Pyongyang.

Second,

Similar to Obama's refusal to reassess his failed policy regarding North Korea, his nonreaction to the fraudulent Iranian election shows that he will not allow facts to interfere with his slavish devotion to his ideological canon that claims that no enemy is unappeasable and no ally deserves automatic support. Far from standing with the democratic dissidents now risking their lives to oppose Iran's sham democracy, the administration has reportedly expressed concern that the current postelection protests will destabilize the regime.

At the same time, "NETANYAHU'S SPEECH was a much-needed strong defense. But it was not a perfect defense. It suffered from two flaws that may come back to haunt the premier in the years to come."

To read the full column and the risk Obama's and Netanyahu's actions pose, go to Our World: Obama's losing streak and us.

Getting Middle East Peace Process Restarted

David Makovsky, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, writes in today's Wall Street Journal that there is a way to bridge the gap between the approach to settlements as set forth by Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu.

The issue of settlements highlights broad philosophical differences about how to approach Arab-Israeli peace. Neoconservatives such as Norman Podhoretz have favored a hands-off approach. In contrast, foreign-policy "realists," including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft, favor imposing a peace plan.

So what does he suggest?

The only way to deal with the settlement issue is to render it moot by widening it to peacemaking and heading straight into the final negotiations on territory.

Read the full article here.

Riverdale Bombers, continued

Previously, I noted that the entrapment defense will be raised by the Riverdale bombing culprits and their supporters.

In a letter to the editor appearing in LoHud.Com, a Mr. Paul Brodhead did just that. "Last week's indictment of four "terrorists" in White Plains ("Accused terrorists plead not guilty" June 3) is the outcome of an FBI sting operation that is transparently fraudulent."

The men drawn into the conspiracy were obviously incapable of doing much without the help of the FBI. One is described by his lawyer as "intellectually challenged" and on medication for schizophrenia. The family of another of the accused states that he expected to use his $25,000 to pay for his brother's liver transplant. And so on. The FBI's "terrorist" scam entrapped people who needed society's help, not victimization.

I thought this kind of thinking was worth an on-line comment. Here's what I wrote:

I think it's too early to jump to Mr. Brodhead's conclusions about the nature of the FBI investigation of the Riverdale bombers. If these guys were entrapped by the FBI, the trial will bring that fact to the surface.What strikes me as important to remember is that none of the "intellectually challenged" or big-hearted plotters thought it important to go to the FBI to report the informant's overtures to turn them to a life of terror. Let's face it, these guys had a choice to make between terror and minding their own business. And they chose terror.

And I stand by that statement.