Planning for Mumbai-style Attack - a follow-up

We previously wrote about NYPD Trains for Mumbai-style Attack. John Yoo, writing in the Wall Street Journal, "Yes, We Did Plan for Mumbai-Style Attacks in the U.S. Why the latest assault on Bush anti-terror strategy could make us less safe," compares the Bush administration's response to al-Qaeda's attacks and the threat of a Mumbai-style attack happening here with new policies of the Obama administration.

Suppose al Qaeda branched out from crashing airliners into American cities. Using small arms, explosives, or biological, chemical or nuclear weapons they could seize control of apartment buildings, stadiums, ships, trains or buses. As in the November 2008 Mumbai attacks, texting and mobile email would make it easy to coordinate simultaneous assaults in a single city.

After 9/11, we had a responsibility to consider all possible threats.In the weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, strikes on New York City and Washington, D.C., these were hypotheticals no more. They became real scenarios for which responsible civilian and military leaders had to plan. The possibility of such attacks raised difficult, fundamental questions of constitutional law, because they might require domestic military operations against an enemy for the first time since the Civil War. Could our armed forces monitor traffic in a city where terrorists were preparing to strike, search for cells using surveillance technology, or use force against a hijacked vessel or building?

According to Yoo, while the military did its job, "it was the duty of the government to plan for worst-case scenarios -- even if, thankfully, those circumstances never materialized." Such efforts raised "unprecedented questions under the most severe time pressures."

Judging from the media coverage of Justice Department memos from those days --released this week by the Obama administration -- this careful contingency planning amounted to a secret plot to overthrow the Constitution and strip Americans of their rights. As the New York Times has it, Bush lawyers "rush into sweeping away this country's most cherished rights." "Irresponsible," harrumphed former Clinton administration Justice Department officials.

Yoo's article does not descend into an apologia for Bush administration tactics. It is a look at the Constitutional underpinnings of the post-9/11 actions of the government going as far back as Alexander Hamilton's opinions on the use of Federal force.

To blame Yoo and others for abuse of Constitutional powers is just silly and that's what is "irresponsible."

There's a good history lesson here, one that folks on the left and right should read. Read the full article.

Lifeline cut as Palestinians vacate Israeli hospitals - Update from JTA

Terror Victims' Voice previously commented on the Palestinian Authority's decision to curtail and then eliminate the treatment of Palestinians in Israeli hospitals. Dina Kraft reporting through the Jewish Telegraphic Agency updates the story.

Pediatric oncologist Michael Weintraub of Hadassah Hospital recently found himself in the unenviable position of turning away ailing Palestinian children after the Palestinian Authority decided to halt payment for their treatment.

“People could die in the next few weeks” if they do not receive proper treatment, said Weintraub, director of pediatric hematology, oncology and bone marrow transplantation at Hadassah. “Patients were denied coverage from one day to the next. If you stop cancer therapy for a month or two, the risk of relapse and death increases every day.”

Palestinian leadership is throwing away years of relationship building through health care between Israelis and their Palestinian neighbors. Playing with the health and welfare of your fellows is a terrible game with the potential for disastrous results.

Read the full article here.

India's Partition of 1947 - Is the world still paying a price?

Anyone familiar with the motion picture Gandhi will recall the plea made by Hindu leaders to their Muslim counterparts for the latter to drop their demand that India be partitioned and thereby create the Muslim state of Pakistan.

The Mumbai attacks, organized from outside India, and a list of many more, are symptomatic of Muslim "disaffection." Identifying that disaffection is easy according to some. Norman Berdichevsky, writing in New English Review, takes a different approach.

A few academics and editorial writers claiming to be scholars and quite a few liberal pundits/observers, have argued that some blame for the recent atrocious acts of terror in Mumbai should be put on India’s Hindus by stressing that the terrorist group of “disaffected Muslims” carrying out the outrage of random murder of civilians was “probably funded from outside India." They believe as Fareed Zakaria stated in Newsweek, that Indian Hindus “had it coming” because "One of the untold stories of India is that the Muslim population has not shared in the boom the country has enjoyed over the last 10 years. There is still a lot of institutional discrimination, and many remain persecuted."

He continues,

This view is not just wrong and short-sighted, it is symptomatic of why India has become a major target for terrorism that enjoys widespread support not only in Pakistan but in the wider Muslim world. Hatred of India stems from a psychological need to link India and Israel as guilty in the “injustice” Muslims believe they have suffered and to deflect blame and muddy the waters by shifting responsibility for the Partition of India in 1947 to the Hindus and conjuring up the vision that the Jews and Zionism did precisely this in Palestine in 1948. Nothing is further from the truth.

Berdichevsky explores the similarities and dissimilarities between India and Israel and the partitions that created the modern states. But he does not brook the argument that the creation of modern Israel was foisted on a Muslim population.

The truth of the 1948 partition in Palestine is that the Muslims rejected it totally and any possibility of living in peace alongside a tiny Jewish state. Instead they aided in the invasion of the country by the regular armies of six Arab states plunging their homeland into war and ending as defeated refugees. Had they accepted it, the great majority of Palestinian Arabs would today be enjoying the rights of their own independent homeland without the bloodshed of the last sixty years and a minority of them would be citizens of a much more secure, serene and tolerant Israel, untroubled by the threat of constant renewed warfare and terrorism.

Read the full article A Tale of Two Partitions: India 1947 and Palestine 1948 here.

Gilad Schalit - A Letter Home? Hamas plays games

No one in their right mind would claim that Hamas's so-called social services network makes these killers and thugs nice people. Hamas's callousness and disregard for the lives of Gazans by using them as human shields is well documented. Its unabated firing of rockets and mortars into Israel lead to immeasurable damage to peoples' lives on their side of the border—the same people they claim to represent. Yet the world is now rallying to alleviate the "humanitarian" crisis in Gaza by providing money to Hamas through the Palestinian Authority.

Now comes another Hamas ploy to show its humanitarian side—the delivery of a letter from Gilad Schalit to his parents through the efforts of Hamas no. 2, Moussa Abu Marzouk.

According to the Jerusalem Post,

"Damascus-based Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk received a letter written by captive IDF soldier Gilad Schalit during his short visit to the Gaza Strip last week, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida reported on Tuesday."

"Marzouk, exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal's deputy, met with Gaza leaders from his organization's military wing "including officials responsible for the captivity of Schalit" such as Izzadin al-Kassam Brigades' top commander Ahmed Jabari, the article stated.

"Marzouk will deliver the letter to the Syrian Foreign Ministry but it is not known where it will go from there, the article stated.

"The Kuwaiti report, which cited anonymous "Palestinian sources close to Hamas," could not be verified by The Jerusalem Post. A Hamas official in Gaza would not confirm the report, Israel Radio reported on Tuesday."

According to the website China View, "the armed wing of Islamic Hamas movement on Tuesday refused to comment on reports that a letter from captive Israeli soldier was handed out to Hamas' leadership in order to be sent for his family."

So, here we are again, Hamas playing the downtrodden social network pleading with the world to alleviate a crisis brought to Gaza by its own callousness and demonstrating just how callous they are by playing with the emotions of a family who misses their son. Wake up world.

Gaza Rebuilding is Center Stage at Sharm e-Sheikh

U.S. Secretary of State joined other representatives in the opening day of discussions at Sharm e-Sheikh designed to bring aid and comfort to Gazans. According to the AP, Clinton declared ‘the Obama administration committed to pushing intensively to find a way for Israelis and Palestinians to exist peacefully in separate states.

The conference came about to halt, in the words of others, the “cycle of violence” between Israel and Hamas beginning with Hamas launching rockets and mortars into Israel.

"We cannot afford more setbacks or delays — or regrets about what might have been, had different decisions been made," she said in apparent reference to the failure of previous peace initiatives, including those pushed vigorously by her husband's administration.”

With almost $900 million US dollars on the table for Palestinians, the AP reports that Clinton said, "We have worked with the Palestinian Authority to install safeguards that will ensure our funding is only used where and for whom it is intended and does not end up in the wrong hands," Clinton told the conference. She did not explicitly mention Hamas but alluded to extremist elements.”

“Before Clinton spoke, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told the conference he was encouraged by the Obama administration's approach to the Mideast. He singled out Obama's decision to appoint Mitchell a special Mideast peace envoy.” Unfortunately, Mr. Ban’s remarks as reported by the United Nations are less than satisfactory.

A UN press release dated March 2, 2009 reporting on Mr. Ban’s attendance at the conference states,

"When building a house, we begin with the foundation," he noted. "So too with our work today. When it comes to rebuilding Gaza, this foundation must be a durable ceasefire.

"And that, in turn, requires us to face a number of political realities -- and to deal with them squarely," he stated.

“The Secretary-General stressed that the first priority must be to ensure open crossings, which are vital for aid delivery and to implement social and economic programme -- the starting point of reconstruction.”

Unfortunately, nowhere in his remarks does Mr. Ban make mention of the reason for Israel’s launching of Operation Cast Lead, rockets and mortars fired by Hamas into Israel, nor does he mention Hamas’s captivity of Israeli soldier Galid Schalit.Israel, once again, is given the blame for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Shame on you Mr. Ban for not recognizing that humanitarian gestures run both ways.

What do you think?

Read the full reports: Clinton Calls for Action; United Nations Press Release