Tobin - Even the Most Moderate Palestinian Won’t Accept a Jewish State

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
04 October '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/04/nusseibeh-jewish-state/


Anyone looking for reasons to despair about the prospects of peace in the Middle East need only listen to the endless stream of incitement and denial of Jewish history and rights that comes from the Palestinian Authority’s leadership and official media. But genuine perspective about the political culture of the Palestinians can also come from paying attention to what their moderates are saying. Unfortunately, that gives us just as little comfort.

Thus, Sari Nusseibeh’s polemic against the idea of a Jewish state ought to provide sobering reading for hawks and doves alike. Nusseibeh is a philosopher and peace activist who is well-respected internationally as well as by Israelis. Yet in his essay published last week on the Al Jazeera website, even he seems willing to indulge in rhetoric that not only disparages Jewish rights to share the land but also Jewish history. If the phrase “Jewish state” sticks in the craw of such a worldly intellectual, there seems little hope ordinary Palestinians will be able to accept it.

First, Nusseibeh’s claim Israel is “moving the goalposts” by demanding the Palestinians accept a Jewish state is absurd. Though he cites the decision of an Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry about the future of Palestine that wrongly claimed the British Mandate need not create a Jewish state as part of its obligations to fulfill the Balfour Declaration, he fails to note the following year, the United Nations General Assembly overrode that decision. Despite their obsession with the world body, Palestinians tend to forget the 1947 partition resolution explicitly demanded the creation of a Jewish state alongside an Arab one.

The reason for Israel’s demand is simple. Unless and until the Palestinians specifically accept that the part of the country they do not control is forever Jewish, the conflict will not be over. Nusseibeh and other Palestinians are right when they say it is not for them to determine the nature of the Jewish state. But no one is asking them to do that. Jewish identity is complex, and Israelis may well spend the rest of eternity trying to define themselves. But, whatever their ultimate answer, the fact that Israel will be the state of the Jewish people cannot be questioned without unleashing the dogs of war that have doomed the Palestinians to tragedy during the last century.

(Video) Rav Hanan Porat Z”L

Love of the Land
04 October '11


Rav Chanan Porat Z"L, passed away today (6 Tishre) at age 67. An exceptional individual, who this year was one of three recipients awarded the 2011/5771 Moskowitz Prize for Zionism. Below, a brief biography, and the video which accompanied the presentation of this award.

Rav Chanan Porat
2011/5771 Moskowitz Prize for Zionism

Chanan Porat has been an inspiration to both young and old throughout his career – as an IDF paratrooper in the 1967 Six Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War, founder and leader of the Gush Emunim movement to resettle Yehuda, Shomron and Aza, a political figure, educator and chessed (charity) activist. His parents moved to the new Kibbutz of Kfar Etzion when Porat was six months old. During the 1948 War of Independence he was among the children of Kfar Etzion evacuated from the Kibbutz before it was subsequently destroyed by Arab attackers.



Porat grew up to be one of the leaders of the surviving children, leading them back 19 years later to reestablish the Jewish presence in Gush Etzion. Porat has been a model of taking an unfaltering ideological stand in order to affect the national agenda, from founding the first communities of Gush Etzion, to Sebastia with Prime Minister Menachem Begin, and throughout historic Eretz Yisrael.

Porat served as member of the Israeli Knesset for many years, as a member of the Techiya party, the NRP and a founder of the National Union. After leaving the Knesset, Porat was among the founders and leaders of the “Orot” chessed network, and he continues his Torah based teaching to many.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Fresnozionism - Obama Administration joins the bullies

Schoolyard bullies (from
 the film "Back to the Future").
Why is the Obama
Administration joining them?

Fresnozionism.org
03 October '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/10/obama-administration-joins-the-bullies/








The Obama Administration has joined the schoolyard bullies:

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Sunday that Israel is becoming increasingly isolated in the Middle East, The Associated Press reported.

Panetta added Israel must restart negotiations with the Palestinian Authority and work to restore relations with Egypt and Turkey.

Panetta made the comments as he was traveling to Israel, saying the ongoing upheaval in the Middle East makes it critical for the Israelis to find ways to communicate with other nations in the region in order to have stability.

“There’s not much question in my mind that they maintain that (military) edge,” AP quoted Panetta as having told reporters traveling with him. “But the question you have to ask: Is it enough to maintain a military edge if you’re isolating yourself in the diplomatic arena? Real security can only be achieved by both a strong diplomatic effort as well as a strong effort to project your military strength.” – (my emphasis)

Let’s compare the implications of Panetta’s remarks to reality:

“Israel must restart negotiations.” Why is the onus on Israel? It was the Palestinian Authority (PA) that broke off negotiations and then violated the agreements it had signed by seeking UN sanction for a unilateral declaration of statehood. It was the PA that insisted on one precondition after another, and Israel that agreed to talk without preconditions.

Making Israel give in to PA demands on the grounds that then there will be productive negotiations has exactly the opposite effect. The Arabs pocket the latest concession and demand more. Negotiations are never ‘productive’ because the PA will never agree to end the conflict.

“Israel must work to restore relations with Egypt and Turkey.” This is Kafkaesque. A terrorist attack which killed 7 Israelis was launched from Egyptian territory, Egyptian soldiers or police murdered at least one of the victims and were themselves killed when the Israelis returned fire. Israel apologized — for self-defense — and had its embassy destroyed, and barely avoided having security officers who were trapped inside ripped to bloody bits. Now Israel needs to “work” to restore relations? With a country that while allegedly ‘at peace’ with it, continues its vicious incitement against Jews and Israel?

MK Uri Ariel - 'Price-tag' terror is not the Jewish way

MK Uri Ariel
Israel Hayom
04 October '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=591

From time to time, history presents us with events requiring a clear-cut response that, sadly, we can't presume will happen automatically. That response is simple: There is no forgiveness for those who committed the horrific crime of destroying the mosque in Tuba-Zangarriye on Monday.

Many of those who condemned the act demanded a full investigation before casting blame on the entire national-religious sector. I too, of course, expect the police to investigate, and it is good that there are already some suspects in custody. In any case, I'm not worried. The perpetrator, whatever his or her motives, is not part of our community, even if he or she thinks so.

I do not fear incitement against the Right or settlers following this incident. Even if some officials try to leverage this affair against us, any Israeli with common sense knows that we advance our goals through building, not destruction.

Incitement and hatred are not, for the most part, the way we operate. Rather, they are part of the broken vision of our antagonists.

True, there is tension and anger between the various sectors of Israeli society. There are legitimate differences between us, Israelis, and Arabs living in Judea and Samaria and other parts of Israel. Harsh statements are fine, strong reactions are acceptable, but villainous acts by “price-tag” activists are absolutely beyond the pale.

The blind choice of a random mosque in a random village is reminiscent of the behavior of the ugliest and worst of our foes throughout history. These are pogrom tactics. Such burning hatred toward all non-Jews is unacceptable in our community.

I condemn this act and not just on my own behalf. The entire national-religious sector stands behind me.

Glick - Turkey's house of cards

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
04 October '11

http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/10/turkeys-house-of-cards.php


To the naked eye, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems to be moving from strength to strength. Erdogan was welcomed as a hero on his recent trip to Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. The Arabs embraced him as the new face of the war against Israel.

The Obama administration celebrates Turkey as a paragon of Islamic democracy. The Obama administration cannot thank Erdogan enough for his recent decision to permit NATO to station the US X-Band missile shield on its territory. The US is following Turkey's lead in contending with Syrian President Bashar Assad's massacre of his people.

And according to Erdogan, the Obama administration is looking into ways to leave its Predator and Reaper UAVs with the Turkish military when US forces depart Iraq in the coming months. Turkey requires the drones to facilitate its war against the Kurds in Iraq and eastern Anatolia. The Obama administration also just agreed to provide Turkey with three Super Cobra attack helicopters.

Despite its apparent abandonment of Iran's Syrian client Assad, Turkey's onslaught against the Kurds has enabled it to maintain its strategic alliance with Iran. Last month Erdogan announced that the Turkish and Iranian militaries are cooperating in intelligence sharing and gearing up to escalate their joint operations against the Kurds in Iraq.

Goldflam - Akiva Eldar, Who Is Lying?

Yishai Goldflam
CAMERA Media Analysis
02 October '11

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=55&x_article=2122

Following last month's anti-climactic events in the United Nations, Ha'aretz journalist Akiva Eldar took it upon himself to serve as defense attorney for Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority. While Eldar, like all opinion writers, has the right to voice his views on any subject, he does not have a license to misrepresent facts. Yet, last week (Sept. 26), in an Op-Ed bombastically titled "Netanyahu's speech of lies," Eldar charges the prime minister of lying, an accusation that rests in the realm of facts, not opinion. Either Netanyahu was lying or he was not. Either way, Eldar's allegations warrant a fact-check.

1. The Camp David Summit

In his column, Eldar sarcastically responds to the prime minister's statement in his speech that he intends to speak the truth. Eldar selects some of these "truths" and attempts to expose them as lies. The first example concerns the Camp David summit in 2000. Eldar is a big proponent of the theory that Camp David failed not because of Palestinian rejectionism, but rather due to some other amorphous reason. Thus he writes:

As a sage providing support for his own truth, Netanyahu claimed that in 2000 Israel "made a sweeping peace offer that met virtually all of the Palestinian demands." It would be interesting to hear the opinion of then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak on this "truth," for example on the Palestinian demands regarding the Temple Mount and the Palestinian refugee issue.

Elar's point is not entirely clear. Barak's offer was unprecedented in its willingness to meet Palestinian demands. Barak accepted the Clinton Parameters as a basis for negotiation in which the Muslim and Christian quarters would be entirely under Palestinian rule and accepted the division of Jerusalem including the transfer of sovereignty of Arab neighborhoods to the Palestinians. Regarding refugees, Barak proposed to permit some of them to come to Israel under the "family reunification" framework. Barak was also the first prime minister to agree to the exchange of territories and to withdrawal from parts of the Jordan Valley. As for the Temple Mount, Barak demanded maintaining Israeli sovereignty, but was was willing to consider Palestinian "custodianship," which the Palestinians understood to mean Palestinian sovereignty above ground, and Israeli sovereignty below ground (Al Quds, Aug. 18, 2000, translated by MEMRI).

Was this a "sweeping" offer? It appears to be. Does it meet all of the Palestinian demands? Apparently not. Does it meet almost all of their demands, as Netanyahu said? Definitely yes. Then how did Netanyahu lie? It seems he didn't.

Meltzer - The End of Kadima

Yoel Meltzer
Towards A New Jewish Mindset
03 October '11


http://yoelmeltzer.com/the-end-of-kadima/

Following the election of Shelly Yachimovich as the new head of the Labor Party most polls show Kadima dropping significantly in the next elections. If so, one can only hope that this spells the beginning of the end for Kadima, a party that epitomizes many of the things that are wrong in Israel.

For starters its current leader Tzipi Livni has spent most of the last two and a half years doing nothing other than attacking Prime Minister Netanyahu. It doesn’t matter what the subject is or what the stakes are for Israel, Livni simply cannot show any public support for Netanyahu. However, for someone who aspires to be the head of the country, her unrelenting attacks, even during times when it is clear that her temporary backing would be for the good of the country, clearly demonstrates the irresponsible behavior of this party and its leader.

Even a few days ago when Netanyahu went to the UN to fight a diplomatic battle for Israel, Livni, rather than showing responsibility and closing ranks for the good of the country, couldn’t resist another opportunity to publicly flail Netanyahu and thus penned an article in which she blamed Netanyahu for Israel’s diplomatic isolation. She even contrasted Kadima’s “path of hope” to Netanyahu’s “path of despair…..that weakens and isolates Israel”. Never mind the usual inflexible position of Abbas and the Palestinians, the increasingly aggressive behavior of Turkey, the ongoing threat of extinction from Iran, the growing instability in Egypt, Syria and Jordan and the occasional terrorist or missile attack; in Livni’s dream world, if only Netanyahu was serious about peace everything would be fine.

Kushner - From Israel: That Corner

Arlene Kushner
Arlene from Israel
03 October '11

It's the corner that Prime Minister Netanyahu hopes to see the PA backed into. Today I write with the sense that they are headed towards it, but not because they are being backed into it by forces around them. Rather, they are backing into it of their own volition.

You know what is said about the Arabs: They never miss a chance to miss a chance. And they are doing a splendid job here. Baruch Hashem.

~~~~~~~~~~

Yesterday, Nabil Abu Rudaineh, speaking for PA President Abbas, declared once again that they would not return to the negotiating table until Israel froze all construction in Judea and Samaria (by which is meant also eastern Jerusalem), and accepted the 1967 lines as the basis for negotiations for a two-state solution.

Said Abu Rudaineh, "If Israel is serious, it must abide, without reservations, by international legitimacy as mentioned in the road map, UN resolutions, and the Arab peace initiative."

Interesting. Now it's "international legitimacy," rather than "international law." Abu Rudaineh knows full well that the road map and the Arab peace initiative have absolutely no standing in international law, and that only some (SC) UN resolutions do. Resolution 194, which the Arabs use as the basis for claims to a "right of return," for example, has no standing in law.

So now they're charging that if the international community thinks something is a good idea, we must abide by it. Israel accepted the road map only with reservations (which were blithely ignored) and never signed on to the Arab "peace" initiative at all.

~~~~~~~~~~

A word about the thoroughly defunct road map for peace -- which called for a final resolution of the conflict by 2005, by the way. The Palestinian Arabs refer to it often because it called for a settlement freeze.

But why should we focus on just one element of the document? It also says:

"A two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will only be achieved through an end to violence and terrorism, when the Palestinian people have a leadership acting decisively against terror and willing and able to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty."

And:

"All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel."

Is it necessary to say more?

~~~~~~~~~~

Keyes - Saudi Arabia in Jerusalem?

David Keyes
Israel Hayom
02 October '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=578

There is much to critique about former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s New York Times op-ed “Peace Now, or Never” on the eve of the Palestinians’ request for statehood at the U.N. One seemingly minor point that highlights the absurdity of the article is his proposal regarding Jerusalem. “Neither side [Israeli or Palestinian] would declare sovereignty over the city’s holy places; they would be administered jointly with the assistance of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United States,” Olmert writes.

The idea of custody shared between Israel, Jordan, America and Saudi Arabia sounds appealing to the internationally minded, but upon closer examination, a more absurd idea could scarcely be found.

Imagine telling a child that Saudi Arabia should take part in administering holy sites in Jerusalem. This child might ask how Saudi Arabia administers its own holy sites. Does it, for example, allow people of all faiths equal rights?

The Saudi government, in fact, bans all non-Muslims from entering Mecca and Medina. It prohibits the importing of Bibles and the building of non-Muslim houses of worship. It imprisons men like Hadi al Mutif for nearly two decades for making a joke about religion. Days ago it beheaded Abdul Hamid Al Fakki for the crime of “sorcery.”

A 2010 U.S. State Department report on Saudi Arabia notes: “Freedom of religion is neither recognized nor protected under the law and is severely restricted in practice ...The government continued to commit abuses of religious freedom. Non-Muslim groups in different parts of the country were detained and harassed for worshipping privately ... The government continued to prohibit public, non-Muslim religious activities ...”

Should a government which systematically denies freedom of religion to its own citizens be invited into Jerusalem to uphold freedom of religion for others? Can one think of a more obscene proposal?

Ehud Olmert would be prohibited by the Saudi government from building a synagogue, importing a Torah and stepping foot in entire cities. And yet, he grovels for a Saudi role over overseeing Israel’s holiest sites.

Saudi Arabia is quite literally the last country on Earth that should be invited anywhere at any time to uphold and protect religious freedom.

David Keyes is the executive director of Advancing Human Rights and co-founder of CyberDissidents.org. He can be reached at david.keyes@advancinghumanrights.org.


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

(Video) Douglas Murray on the Durban Conference

HenryJacksonSoc
Sep 30, 2011

While the UN Durban III Conference was as expected, a very sad and pathetic spectacle, it did have a silver lining. It brought Douglas Murray to NYC, to speak at the counter-conference, hosted by The Hudson Institute and Touro College, titled "The Perils of Global Intolerance: The United Nations and Durban III". Douglas Murray, is as sharp as they come, incisive, witty, and very to the point. Enjoy!

Douglas Murray on the Durban Conference (Part One)


Douglas Murray on the Durban Conference (Part Two)


Douglas Murray is a British writer and commentator who was the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion from 2007 until 2011 and is currently an associate director of the Henry Jackson Society. Murray appears regularly in the British broadcast media, commentating on issues from a conservative standpoint, and he is often critical of Islamic fundamentalism. He writes for a number of publications including Standpoint and The Spectator. In 2009, he was awarded the Charles Douglas-Home memorial prize for journalism. Murray has authored a number of books, including in 2005 Neoconservatism: Why We Need it. (Wikipedia)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Tobin - Panetta’s Pointless Warning to Israel

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
03 October '11


http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/03/panetta-israel-risks-for-peace/#more-769790

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Israel yesterday that its increasing isolation in the region means it must take “risks for peace.” This shot fired over the bow of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was made in comments to reporters traveling with Panetta, who is on his first trip to the Jewish state since assuming the leadership of the Pentagon.

But it is not likely to make much of an impression with the Israeli people for the simple reason that, unlike either the Obama administration and the international press corps, they understand Israel has been taking risks for peace for 18 years. Panetta’s statement, like so much of the rhetoric that has come out of the administration, seems to reflect a mindset that treats the events of the last 18 years as meaningless. After the Oslo Accords, the peace offers that both Yasir Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas rejected and the withdrawal from Gaza that turned that area into a terrorist state, how can any American speak as if Israel has stood pat all this time rather than, as the historical record proves, taken terrible risks for which it has gotten little reward?

The Panetta visit is meant to reassure the Israelis who are understandably worried about the way in which the Arab Spring has led to more hate for the Jewish state rather than democracy for the Arabs. It is an unfortunate fact that there is nothing Israel can do to repair relations with countries like Turkey and Egypt, whose governments are whipping up antagonism for reasons that have little to do with the policies of the Netanyahu government. As dangerous as this is, it is the helplessness of the United States in the face of these trends that is most troubling.

(Video) Fatah Central Committee Member Abbas Zaki "... keep it to your self "

MEMRI TV
www.memri.org
Clip #3130
Broadcast: September 23, 2011

“If we say that we want to wipe Israel out….C’mon, it’s too difficult. It’s not [acceptable] policy to say so. Don’t say these things to the world. Keep it to yourself.”

Fatah Central Committee Member Abbas Zaki, spoke on the Al-Jazeera Network (Qatar) on September 23, 2011.



If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Caspit - Comment: Over our dead bodies

Ben Caspit
JPost.com
03 October '11

http://www.jpost.com/Features/InThespotlight/Article.aspx?id=240316


Israelis are wondering what went through your mind, Mr. Biden, when you said Jonathan Pollard would be given clemency over your "dead body."

Honorable Vice President of the United States of America, Mr. Joseph Biden:

Shalom and a happy Jewish New Year!

Up until several days ago, you, Mr. Biden, were considered "Israel's closest and truest friend in the White House." As such, we here in Israel are wondering what exactly was going through your mind when you declared that Jonathan Pollard would be given clemency over your "dead body." It's important to us, here in Israel, to understand. To all of us: to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's supporters and detractors, to the far right and the far left, to the rich and the poor, the Ashkenazi and the Sephardic.

Anyone with eyes in their head and hearts thumping in their chests would like to know what led you to issue that unhinged statement. Are there things that you know that the rest of the world does not? What has changed since 2007, when you declared, in your own voice, that Jonathan Pollard's bid for clemency was justified? I'll tell you what has changed: Pollard has spent five more years in prison, in solitary confinement; his health has worsened (I recommend you use your influence to verify to what extent); his chances of starting a family have been decimated; his father died and he was barred from accompanying him on his final journey; and more and more respectable people have stepped forward and declared that the time has come for his release.

That's what has changed.

Is it possible, Mr. Biden, that you know something that James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, and Dennis DeConcini, former chairman of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, do not? Because the two of them are both in favor of releasing him. Do you know something that Henry Kissinger, George Shultz or John McCain does not?

Goldstein - New York Times Israel Op-ed Index for September 2011

Daniel Goldstein
GLORIA Center
02 October '11

(Daniel Goldstein examines the 15 NYT op-eds of September '11, and keeps a running tally. Like to guess the results? Y.)

1) Turkey, Israel and the Flotilla - Editorial – September 2, 2011

Israel accepted the findings by the United Nations and said that it hoped to mend ties with Turkey, but it reiterated that it would not apologize. Two weeks ago, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel to apologize to Turkey. American officials are going to have to keep trying with both sides. We don’t blame Israel for wondering if Turkey is keeping this conflict going to burnish its standing in the Arab world. Turkey is risking a lot, including billions in trade with Israel and its reputation as a responsible international player. Israel certainly doesn’t need to be any more isolated than it is. Israel should apologize for the deaths. And Turkey should stop upping the ante.

I’m surprised here. Yes I’m a little put off by the need to tweak Israel on the apology. But overall I’d have to say that this editorial substantially takes the Israeli side. Running Total: Anti-Israel 0 / Pro-Israel 1

2) Israel Isolates Itself - Roger Cohen – September 6, 2011

Senior Turkish officials told me Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had raised Dogan’s fate with President Obama. But of course no U.S. president, and certainly no first-term U.S. president, would say what Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain said: “The Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable.” Even if there’s an American citizen killed, raising such questions about Israel is a political no-no. So it goes in the taboo-littered cul-de-sac of U.S. foreign policy toward Israel, a foreign policy that is in large measure a domestic policy. The Palmer report, leaked to The New York Times last week, is a split-the-difference document, with the Israeli and Turkish members of the panel including notes of dissent. My rough translation of its conclusion would be this message to Israel: You had the right to do it but what you did was way over the top and just plain dumb.

Cohen doesn’t note the way Turkey “raised the ante” and makes a not so subtle suggestion of inordinate Jewish influence in the political process. Running total: Anti-Israel 1 / Pro-Israel 1

(Read full "New York Times Israel Op-ed Index for September 2011")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Rennert - Wash. Post's silly semantics against Israel's rightful claims to Jerusalem

Leo Rennert
American Thinker
02 October '11

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/10/wash_posts_silly_semantics_against_israels_rightful_claims_to_jerusalem.html

Just when readers of the Washington Post might think that its reporters have exhausted all available semantic distortions to blacken Israel, here comes a new contorted Israel-bashing label that descends into the far reaches of utter silliness.

It's served up by Joel Greenberg, the Post's Jerusalem correspondent, in an Oct.2 article about a senior Palestinian official complaining that the Quartet of international mediators -- the U.S., the EU, the UN and Russia -- are too easy on Israel in pushing for resumption of negotiations ("Abbas aide presses for strong action by Quartet -- He portrays mediators' response to settlement plans as slap on wrist" page A14).

While the Quartet is pushing for a new round of talks without pre-conditions, the Abbas aide first wants an Israeli settlement freeze and Greenberg clearly sympathizes with him. Greenberg also writes that the dispute about how to proceed to negotiations was aggravated when Israel advanced building plans on West Bank land annexed to Jerusalem," -- as he puts it in his lead paragraph.

Farther down in his piece, Greenberg more specifically reiterates that Israel has complicated matters with plans to build "1,100 homes in Gilo, a Jewish neighborhood built on West Bank land annexed to Jerusalem." It takes Greenberg a while to recognize the Jewish character of Gilo.

However, in Greenberg's view, it is not enough to simply label Gilo a Jewish neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem. No, as far as he's concerned, Gilo doesn't belong to Israel and to these Jewish residents because it sits on "West Bank land annexed to Jerusalem." Such annexation, in his view, is Israel's original sin.
Consequently, Greenberg rejects any permissibility for Jerusalem, like many cities and capitals around the world, to grow by bursting its geographic boundaries -- a natural phenomenon elsewhere around the globe.

Which is utterly silly, when you think of it.

Roman - Storm Clouds Over Eastern Mediterranean

Gregg Roman
GLORIA Center
02 October '11



http://www.gloria-center.org/2011/10/storm-clouds-over-eastern-mediterranean/

Early this week, the US-based Noble Energy Company began exploratory drilling for offshore gas deposits off the coast of Cyprus. They did so with the agreement of the Nicosia authorities, in an area indisputably located within Cypriot territorial waters. Despite this, there was real concern that the drilling could face interference from Turkish navy ships on maneuvers in the area.

The explorations proceeded undisturbed. The Turkish ships observed procedures from a discreet distance. But Cyprus’s defiance of recent Turkish warnings against beginning the search for natural gas in this area is unlikely to be the last word on the matter.

Muscle-flexing in the eastern Mediterranean forms part of Ankara’s broader combined strategic and economic ambitions. Israel is part of the picture and is drawing closer to the Cypriots.

Turkey challenges the right of the Republic of Cyprus to drill for gas for as long as the island of Cyprus remains divided. Ankara argues that the breakaway Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus should also benefit from natural gas discoveries. The northern Cyprus state was established unilaterally following a Turkish invasion in 1974. It is recognized only by Turkey.

Since the division of Cyprus is nowhere near resolution, compliance with the Turkish demand would prevent Nicosia from seeking to benefit from the potentially huge revenues that could derive from natural gas deposits in its territorial waters. Cypriot President Demetris Christofias has declared that gas revenues will be shared with the Turkish Cypriots, even in the absence of unification. This is unlikely to prove sufficient for Ankara.

Many observers believe that there is more to the Turkish stance than a mere brotherly concern for the north Cyprus enclave. Turkey is itself a major “energy bridge” for oil and gas transportation from the Middle East and Caspian Sea area to the lucrative markets of Europe. Unsurprisingly, it has no particular desire to see the emergence of competitors in the region.

To prevent the emergence of rivals, Turkey has been prepared so far to use verbal threats and dispatch ships to monitor drilling.

Their efforts at intimidation do not apply only to Cyprus. Israel is also currently engaged in drilling for gas in the Tamar field within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) agreed upon with Cyprus. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyep Erdogan was quoted last week as saying that “the Greek Cypriot administration and Israel are engaging in oil exploration madness in the Mediterranean.”

(Video) Eye on Zion - One State or Two?

Middle East Panel - One State or Two? Host Leland Vittert - Fox News Live




EyeOnZionTV
Uploaded on
Sep 28, 2011

This was a very lively panel discussion with Yishai Fleisher (radio host and director of Eye On Zion Media), Dimitri Diliani (Fatah Revolutionary Council), and Alan Baker (retired Israeli Ambassador to Canada). It took place 22 September '11, and was moderated by Leland Vittert, who is based in Jerusalem for Fox News

The 18 minute edited version of this program presented here was prepared by Eye On Zion Media which is an education and outreach project of the non-profit organization Kumah. www.kumah.org



Leland Vittert is based in Jerusalem for Fox News.
foxnewsinsider.com/​author/​leland-vittert/​
Fox News is the owner of the original content.

A 34 minute version of this program is available on request. Please email shalom@kumah.org to request the long version.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Richman - What Happened Before Nothing Happened?

Rick Richman
Commentary/Contentions
02 October '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/02/palestinian-state-israel/

In an interview Friday with Al-Hayat TV, Hillary Clinton said she and Barack Obama “very much want to see a Palestinian state” – noting she first endorsed one in 1998 – but said she knows “it’s hard for [the Palestinians to return to the negotiating table] because they feel like they’ve been at this for a while and nothing has happened.” Actually quite a lot happened in the decade after Hillary first endorsed a Palestinian state:

(1) In 2000, the Palestinians were offered a state by Israel, and turned it down; (2) in 2001, the Palestinians rejected the Clinton Parameters; (3) in 2002, the U.S. endorsed a Palestinian state if the Palestinians built a practicing democracy (today the putative state is ruled half by a terrorist group and half by a party that hasn’t held an election in nearly six years); (4) in 2003, the Palestinians accepted the Roadmap but have yet to complete any of its three phases; (5) in 2004, Israel adopted a plan to hand over Gaza to the Palestinians; (6) in 2005, Israel removed every settler and soldier from Gaza, which the Palestinians turned into Hamastan in one week; (7) in 2006, the Palestinians elected a terrorist group to control their legislature; (8) in 2007, the U.S. convened the Annapolis conference to “accelerate” the Roadmap; (9) in 2008, after a year of final status negotiations, the Palestinians rejected still another Israeli offer of a state; and (10) in 2009, Israel offered the Palestinians negotiations again, which they refused, and initiated an unprecedented construction moratorium, which they ignored.

But Hillary is correct: nothing has happened since then.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Fresnozionism - Stop indulging Arab fantasies

Fresnozionism.org
28 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/stop-indulging-arab-fantasies/


Everyone is disappointed with Israel again:

[EU Foreign Affairs chief Catherine] Ashton urged Israel to “reverse” its decision to build 1,100 new housing units in Gilo, saying that “settlement activity” threatens the viability of a two-state solution.

Both Ashton and UK Foreign Secretary William Hague slammed Israel for seemingly ignoring the Quartet of Middle East mediators, which called last week for a resumption of peace talks and for both Israelis and Palestinians to resist “provocative actions” …

This new housing plan, Hague said, was just the kind of “provocative” move to be avoided. “Settlement expansion is illegal under international law [false -- ed.], corrodes trust and undermines the basic principle of land for peace,” Hague said, calling on Israel to “revoke this decision.”

Earlier, the United States said that Gilo plan was “counterproductive” and urged both Israel and the Palestinians not to take steps which could complicate resumption of direct peace talks. “We are deeply disappointed by this morning’s announcement by the government of Israel,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.

And Mahmoud Abbas said this in his UN speech last week:

The occupation is racing against time to redraw the borders on our land according to what it wants and to impose a fait accompli on the ground that changes the realities and that is undermining the realistic potential for the existence of the State of Palestine.

So where is Gilo? Let’s see exactly how it is “provocative” and “redraws the borders”?

Bernstein - Why do human rights groups ignore Palestinians’ war of words?

Robert L. Bernstein
Washington Post
Opinion
28 September '11

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-do-human-rights-groups-ignore-palestinians-war-of-words/2011/09/26/gIQAWU5y2K_story.html?wprss=rss_opinions

Two dominant forces have defined Arab nations in modern times: autocratic leadership that has denied basic freedoms to its own people, and a deeply ingrained and institutionalized anti-Semitism, centered on a hatred of Israel. Freedom is a growing possibility in light of the Arab Spring, but for this freedom to lead to peace, progress must be made in ending hate speech and incitement to genocide. This is particularly true in Gaza, the West Bank, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran. Yet at this moment of possibility, the United Nations is fueling discord and anti-Semitism.

The United Nations is doing this by granting legitimacy to Hamas, a terrorist Islamic group, and the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas. A vote to add to the United Nations a new member state that calls for the elimination of its neighbor and glorifies terrorism will make peace harder — not easier — to achieve. While Hamas’s calls for genocide most certainly should be condemned, those who would accept the position Abbas has taken, even as recently as Friday, when he submitted to the United Nations an application for statehood, should be aware of the work of Palestinian Media Watch. The group, an Israeli research institute focused on monitoring the messages of all aspects of Palestinian media, has detailed some of the deception of the Palestinian Authority, even during moments of peace talks. For example, while portraying himself to the West as a man of compromise, Abbas said flatly last October that “we refuse to recognize a Jewish state.”

Most shockingly, human rights groups have become the unwitting accomplices of the United Nations as almost every mainstream human rights group has ignored hate speech and incitement to genocide, not only against Israel but against all Jews. The call to genocide has been accompanied by a sophisticated arms buildup along Israel’s Lebanon border over the past five years, defying Security Council Resolution 1701, which called in 2006 for an end to hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. Even after the 2009 war in Gaza, particularly since the Arab Spring has opened up the Sinai, thousands more rockets continue to pour into Gaza, circumventing the Israeli blockade.

Human Rights Watch, which I founded 33 years ago, continues to attack many of Israel’s defensive measures during war, yet it says nothing about hate speech and incitement to genocide. To cite just one example, the speaker of the Hamas parliament, Ahmad Bahr, called in April 2007 for the murder of Jews, “down to the very last one.” Imagine what leading human rights groups would say if this same speech and incitement were coming from Israel, aimed at the Palestinians.

Roth - Signs that our neighbours know we're in the middle of High Holyday season

Israeli servicemen on duty during the High
Holyday season enjoy a platter of apples
dipped in honey, a traditional symbol
of the Jewish people's constant hopes
for a better, sweeter, more
peaceful year. [Source]

Frimet/Arnold Roth
This Ongoing War
02 October '11

http://thisongoingwar.blogspot.com/2011/10/2-oct-11-signs-that-our-neighbours-know.html

Israel almost entirely shut down over the past three days. Wednesday night through Friday night were Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year and a time devoted to family, prayers and introspection. And the Sabbath followed immediately on Friday night, making for a three-day interlude of holiness or vacation, depending on your outlook.

Our Palestinian Arab neighbours along with the Arab states surrounding Israel have never shown any inclination for respecting the Jewish people's religious sensitivities (remember the co-ordinated massive attacks by multiple Arab armies on Israel on Yom Kippur 1973?). Hardly a surprise then that the past several days have seen several civilian-focused rocket attacks by the terrorist gangs of the Gaza Strip.

Tuesday, two rockets fired from Gaza exploded in the Sha'ar Hanegev region of southern Israel. One exploded next to an electricity line, causing damage to property. The second landed in an open field. [Source] Both were intended to kill civilian Israeli and cause maximum damage to non-military targets.

Thursday evening, yet another Qassam rocket fired by the jihadist terrorists of the Gaza Strip landed in an unspecified open area inside Israel. No injuries or damages are reported. [Source]

Saturday: In Beit Hanun, in the northern Gaza Strip, a gang of Palestinian Gazan Arab terrorist jihadists was spotted by Israeli intelligence in the act of preparing to launch multiple long-rage rockets into Israel. The Israeli forces called in Israel Air Force fire of the pinpoint variety for which Israel is famous. Though the potential for collateral damage in the heavily populated area from which the terrorists like to fire is great, the IAF achieved direct hit on the gang members who Ynet says are connected with Hamas. There are three of them, and all are injured, one critically. The IDF says the same three were behind the Thursday rocket firing and previous such terror attacks. The official Chinese newsagency rather ingenuously says the three (it calls them "a group of people") were attacked by "an Israeli reconnaissance drone [that] fired at least one missile". Reconnaissance drones carry sensors but no weapons, but if the terrorist thugs were stopped, we're more than happy to accept the Chinese distortions.

Daily rocket fire directed at Israeli civilians is not exactly what we have been praying for these past three days. But if an alert, rapid, accurate and effective defence force is part of the divine plan for protecting our land and our people from the barbarian practitioners of terror in the coming year, we'll accept that as a blessing too.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Ettinger - Demographic optimism in the new year

Yoram Ettinger
Israel Hayom
28 September '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=569


(While not relevant to the discussion of Eretz Yisrael as the eternal home of the Jewish people, the fear engendered by the demographics discussion should be addressed)

On the eve of the Jewish New Year 5772, the Jewish fertility rate of 2.97 births per woman exceeds the fertility rates in most Arab countries.

In defiance of conventional wisdom, Israeli Jewish fertility has been robust -- primarily due to a surge in secular Jewish birth rate -- while in the Muslim world rapid modernization has led to a sharp decline, down to 1.7 births per woman in Iran, 2.8 in Jordan, 2.5 in Egypt, 2.5 in most Persian Gulf states (except for Saudi Arabia, with 4 births per woman), and 1.9 in North Africa.

Since the 1940s, Israel's demographers have maintained that Jews are doomed to become a minority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and that it is incumbent on the Jewish state to concede Jewish geography (Judea and Samaria) in order to secure Jewish demography.

In fact, Professor Roberto Bacchi, the founder of the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics and the mentor of contemporary Israeli statisticians and demographers, projected in 1948 that by 2001 there would be no more than 2.3 million Jews in Israel -- a 33% minority west of the Jordan River.

However, all demographic prophecies of doom have crashed on the rocks of reality. West of the Jordan River (in the combined area of Judea and Samaria and pre-1967 Israel), Jews have gone from a minority of 8 percent in 1900 and 33% in 1947 to a solid majority of 66% in 2011, comprising almost six million people. The current demographic tailwind should further expand the Jewish majority.

Rubin - Western Policy on Israel-Palestinian Peacemaking is Ludicrously, Totally Wrong and Will Produce Only Humiliating Failure

Barry Rubin
Rubin Reports
pajamasmedia.com
29 September '11

http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/09/29/western-policy-on-israel-palestinian-peacemaking-is-ludicrously-totally-wrong-and-will-produce-only-humiliating-failure/

It’s truly remarkable about how international diplomacy on the Middle East, especially Israel-Palestinian issues, is so out of touch with reality. Consider the Quartet’s response to the mess at the UN. The proposal is for Israel-PA talks to start within a month, both sides to present proposals on borders and security within three months, and to reach a final agreement by the end of 2012.

This is insane. The premise here is that the PA is really eager to negotiate a compromise agreement with Israel. Everything that’s happened in the past three years—indeed the last 18 years since the Oslo agreement was signed—shows the exact opposite. The PA spent a year building its campaign for unilateral independence at the UN precisely to avoid negotiating with Israel at all.

Why then create a Western policy that is not only doomed to fail but certain to fail in the most obvious and humiliating way? The Palestinians won’t negotiate in a month, they won’t rush to present any proposals in three, and they certainly won’t reach a peace treaty in a year. It looks like the PA will reject the whole proposal—a step for which they will pay no penalty but in fact will get more rewards and concessions, and thus will be encouraged to ignore the West even more.

The dumbest possible thing to do is to put a strict time limit on talks when your spoiled and rejectionist “client” doesn’t want to cooperate. The outcome will make the PA look very bad but “fortunately” the media and Western governments won’t point that out. Instead, the PA will run out the one-year deadline, then complain that Israel is at fault and doesn’t really want peace. and then urge speedy Western concessions to the PA and pressures on Israel.

Could anything possibly be more predictable? Perhaps the only possible explanation is that the U.S. government, UN, and EU (I doubt the Russians do so) believe their own propaganda. They really think the PA can’t wait to make a deal if only Israel is forced to negotiate and some more concessions are offer. Haven’t they learned anything?

Rennert - Wash. Post whacks Israel during High Holidays -- On the religion page no less

Leo Rennert
American Thinker
01 October '11

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/10/wash_post_whacks_israel_during_high_holidays_--_on_the_religion_page_no_less.html

Lisa Miller, a Wash. Post religion writer and columnist, is a self-avowed Jew, who in her own words in the Oct. 1 edition confesses that "these days I'm not so crazy about Israel." Born into a Jewish family but "without any formal religious education," she recently joined a Reform synagogue. During High Holy Day services, when it comes to petitioning God to protect Israel, "I hesitate before I voice this plea." ("In a season of introspection, coming to terms with Israel" page B2)

So why is she put off by Israel? Well, she doesn't like that "on the eve of these holidays an at the moment when Mahmoud Abbas was making his bid at the United Nations for Palestinian statehood, Israel announced the approval of 1,300 new housing units in East Jerusalem."

"I'm ashamed that Israel continues to draw criticism from human rights groups for the demolition of homes in the West Bank and, sharing the blame with the Palestinians, for waging a conflict over land with the lives of innocent people," she writes.

Which makes one wonder how much she really knows about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and where she gets her information. At one point, she references leftist intellectuals "such as Peter Beinart and the late Tony Judt," who have said that "Jews like me will abandon Judaism because of the dissonance" between today's Israel and the historical-theological Israel.

In other words, Israel is no longer true to its biblical past. It has lost its way.

So, to relieve her angst, Miller consults several liberal rabbis who advise her to love all Jews, including even "Benjamin Netanyahu as well as Judt, who in 2005 called the state of Israel an 'anachronism."

Miller is clearly lost in a leftist fog. One can only wonder, how much -- or how little -- she really knows about Israel. In criticizing new housing units for Gilo, for example, she obviously hasn't got a clue that this is a Jewish neighborhoods of 40,000 people with three dozen synagogues that, under any imaginable peace agreement, will remain on the Israeli side. She also seems to lack any real sense of Jerusalem demographics. Or else, she would know that Arab housing construction and population growth have far outpaced Jewish housing construction and population growth since 1967 in Israel's capital.

Gold - Israel's bitter lessons

Dore Gold
Israel Hayom
28 September '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=575

It has become almost axiomatic for Western leaders who are aware of Israel's acute military vulnerability to suggest that international forces be deployed to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It has even been suggested that the IDF withdraw from strategically vital parts of the West Bank, like the Jordan Valley, and instead let international forces take their place. This was in fact proposed in the past by General Jim Jones, President Barack Obama's first national security adviser.

Some Israelis have also proposed this idea; former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told The New York Times earlier this year that he wanted to deploy international forces in the West Bank, though he suggested they be led by the U.S. The last major experiment with international forces was actually attempted under the Olmert government at the end of the 2006 Second Lebanon War, with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701. It is worthwhile to look back five years to see how that international force actually functioned before more proposals of this kind are put on the table in the future by the international community.

At the time, Israeli diplomacy was focused on instituting security arrangements that were intended to prevent the return of the military conditions along Israel's northern border that had contributed to the outbreak of hostilities to begin with. Thus Resolution 1701 called for the creation of a larger UNIFIL force with a much more more robust mandate than before. It was not supposed to be just another U.N. force with underpaid third world soldiers, but rather European forces from France Spain, and Italy, like those who make up NATO, were deployed instead.

The resolution also reiterated the importance of UNIFIL actually disarming Lebanese militias, like Hezbollah, in accordance with past U.N. resolutions. Resolution 1701 sought to prohibit the transfer of arms into Lebanon that were not authorized by the Lebanese Government, thereby making any further Iranian arms transfers to Hezbollah a violation of a U.N. Security Council Resolution. In order to implement this arms embargo, German naval ships were deployed to monitor the Lebanese coastline in September 2006.

Honig - Optimism was compulsory

Sarah Honig
Another Tack
28 September '11

http://sarahhonig.com/2011/09/28/another-tack-optimism-was-compulsory/

Israeli babies born this month 18 years ago are now old enough for the draft. Some are already in uniform while others soon will be. They were born under the Oslo sign. It seemed a great time to come into the world.

They took their first breaths as the Oslo accords were inaugurated with whoops of rapture. Niggling doubt was politically incorrect and accordingly drowned out with heaps of scorn and wrath in the name of goodwill and broad-minded tolerance. Optimism was compulsory.

But, looking back, was optimism vindicated? Had the Oslo dreams panned out and even partially justified the hype, there would be no more need to train any more 18-year-olds in the arts of war – especially this very symbolic batch of 1993-vintage recruits.

But alas, OC Home Front Command has just imparted to us the glad tidings that “the possibility for a multi-front war has increased including the potential use of weapons of mass destruction.” As to Maj.-Gen. Eyal Eisenberg assesses our situation, our perils are acute, if not unprecedented.

Among the dangers, he noted that during recent confrontations on the Gaza front, “we discovered a new weapon. We therefore instructed the public to take extra precautions and seek cover under two roofs and not just one.”

Whoa, hold on! What’s that?

Fresnozionism - Zionism — a short note

May 1948: the Jewish
 state is declared

Fresnozionism.org
28 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/zionism-a-short-note/

Someone recently quoted an official of the New Israel Fund (NIF) as saying “NIF is not a Zionist organization.” One might respond “so what else is new?” Although the NIF’s statement of principles begins

The New Israel Fund is dedicated to the vision of the State of Israel as the sovereign expression of the right of self-determination of the Jewish people…

clearly it does not support the idea of Jewish sovereignty — rather, as we can see by examining the causes it supports, it views sovereignty as residing in the will of all of Israel’s citizens. This is a time-honored position, if not appropriate for a Zionist group. I think the official quoted was being honest and I don’t think there would be much disagreement among them, if NIF leadership would speak openly.

I’m not attacking the NIF today, which I’ve done numerous times in the past. I just want to use this to illustrate a fundamental divide among Jews centering on Israel and Zionism.

Zionism asserts that there is a Jewish people — a nation — and that it ought to have a ‘sovereign expression’, that is, its own country, in its historical homeland.

Nationalism of any kind isn’t popular among those who identify as liberal or progressive. It’s a fundamental part of their official worldview that differences between national groups are inessential, ‘mere’ matters of culture, language, religion, ancestry, etc. As a result, they believe that it is immoral to base political structures on them. So much for any form of nationalism — including Zionism.

That is not to say that they don’t take note of cultural differences. These are the people who like to ‘celebrate diversity’. And they advocate corrective political action when they believe a group has been discriminated against, like affirmative action. But they would justify this only in order to redress an existing imbalance.

The logical extension of this is to post-colonialism, which asserts that existing worldwide political structures are massively unbalanced against ‘people of color’ (which doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with race), and that massive corrective political action, sometimes in the form of violent ‘resistance’ is justified.

This leads to absurd positions, such as the toleration of nationalism and even vicious racism, misogyny, homophobia, etc. on the part of ‘oppressed’ peoples. These behaviors are considered a result of their oppression — post-colonialists blame the ‘oppressor’, never the ‘oppressed’ — and are presumably expected to go away when the oppression is eliminated. Nationalistic aspirations by non-favored groups, like the Jewish people, are rejected. In the event that they conflict with the aspirations of an ‘oppressed’ group — well, I don’t have to draw you the picture.

This explains why the far Left is prepared to tolerate racism, terrorism and the rest when it is directed at Jews by Palestinian Arabs: a supposedly immoral nationalism is being challenged by an ‘oppressed’ group, with all of the special dispensations from normal moral rules that such groups are given.

In an imaginary ‘ideal’ world — one that is impossible given the basic drives of territoriality, tribalism, greed, etc. that characterize the human animal — it would perhaps be possible to give up nations, borders, conscription, security barriers, and many other things that apparently so irk the NIF leadership. But in the real world, the assumption of these ‘ideal’ values — even if they were not accompanied by the pernicious, deliberate tolerance of evil that is post-colonialism — is a form of unilateral disarmament.

Zionism, therefore, is not only an expression of the idea that Jewish culture is best preserved in a Jewish state and an effective response to antisemitism, it is also a response to the incoherent, fundamentally self-contradictory philosophy of post-colonialism.

Happy new year — לשנה טובה תכתבו — to all.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.