The Hamas-Russia Connection

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 10, 2006

Russia’s determination to undermine the U.S. policy in the Middle East may well weaken U.S. power. But opposing punitive sanctions for Iran at the U.N. and endorsing HAMAS is likely to cost Russia dearly.

On March 8, 2006, after discussing the Iran crisis with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov conveyed Russia’s objections to sanctioning Iran, while warning that â€œthere is no military solution to this crisis.” Instead, he welcomed the European Union proposal to continue exploring diplomatic solutions with Iran, despite years of European-led negotiations that merely allowed Tehran to continue to develop its nuclear program. And nuclear weapons in Iran, are likely to pose a grave danger to Russia; much graver than to the U.S.

In a similar move, after visiting the State Department, Lavrov said that the HAMAS government should receive international funding because HAMAS chief Khaled Mashaal had assured him that the money would â€œbe spent in a transparent manner.” And Like Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas before him, Mashaal promised Lavrov to allow international monitors to ensure this.

It is not surprising, therefore, that Khaled Mashaal noted, â€œAt the Russian Foreign Ministry we felt that we were being understood.” Continue reading “The Hamas-Russia Connection” →

All Articles, Poems & Commentaries Copyright © 1971-2021 Alyssa A. Lappen
All Rights Reserved.
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage (For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

Ports and pitchforks

By Diana West
Washington Times | March 3, 2006

One of the weirder sideshows to open alongside a main event — the proposed operational transfer of six major American ports to a firm owned by the United Arab Emirates — is the growing chorus of road-company Zolas, “J’accusing” everybody opposed to the sale of “xenophobia,” “isolationist mass hysteria,” “bigotry,” “nativism,” “panic,” and “prejudice” against innocent Araby.

Such accusations are supposed to make you hang your head in shame. They make me shake mine in consternation — wondering how in tarnation a hefty chunk of the American elite has the chutzpah to castigate the American people (64 percent of whom, says a Rasmussen poll, think the deal is a Bad Thing) for “xenophobia” and “prejudice” on behalf of a culture that is the embodiment of xenophobia and prejudice. The words precisely describe the official state of normal in the Arab-Islamic world since at least 1948, when the modern state of Israel was founded.

Nonetheless, we’re the “pitchfork-wielding xenophobes” en route to the “Dark Ages,” says the New York Times‘ Thomas Friedman. I’d say we’re heading in the other direction, trying to escape the Dark Ages — as represented by the spreading influence of sharia (Islamic law), which, in terms of the sharia-compliant port deal, would make deep inroads into global financial markets. I would add, as Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen have suggested in this newspaper, “It’s time for the United States to limit financial transactions that involve American companies” — and the U.S. government — “to governance by secular laws.” Continue reading “Ports and pitchforks” →

The Burning Issue

By Alyssa A. Lappen and Jack D. Lauber
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 1, 2006

Establishing U.S. energy independence won the attention of President George W. Bush in his January 31 2006 State of the Union Address. The President called on research scientists and the energy industry to help the U.S. replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.”

To do that, the President seeks a 22 percent increase in Department of Energy research into clean energy, and heavy investment in “zero-emission coal-fired plants, revolutionary solar and wind technologies, and clean, safe nuclear energy.” He also urges the auto industry to promote a major fuel shift, from imported oil to better hybrid and electric car batteries and hydrogen. Furthermore, within six years he seeks a switch to “cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but from wood chips and stalks, or switch grass.”

The President’s long-term goal is to “dramatically improve our environment, move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past.”

Naturally, big oil executives pronounce, with doom and gloom, that such goals are implausible and unfeasible. At a February 8 energy conference in Houston, Exxon Mobil Senior Vice President Stuart McGill stated that it is a â€œmisperception” that the U.S. can achieve energy independence any time soon. Continue reading “The Burning Issue” →

Hamas More Don’t We Know?

Andrew C. McCarthy
National Review | March 1, 2006

The $8 billion deal to turn over commercial shipping operations at major American ports to Dubai Ports World, a company owned by the United Arab Emirates, continues to stoke controversy. The Bush administration and other supporters of the deal insist that, despite a history of facilitating al Qaeda — including what the 9/11 Commission described as contacts between high-regime officials and Osama bin Laden himself — the UAE is a “good friend” and a valuable ally in the war on terror.

Nevertheless, it has become necessary to ask whether, even now, the UAE is in felony violation of the 1996 law that has become the cornerstone of U.S. counterterrorism enforcement. Is the UAE providing material support to Hamas, a specially designated terrorist organization?

Any American citizen doing such a thing would be sent to prison. Any American company doing it would surely be convicted and put out of business â€” and its principals liable for prosecution and imprisonment. Continue reading “Hamas More Don’t We Know?” →

Welcoming Terror to U.S. Ports

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 24, 2006

President George W. Bush justifies the sale of the private British company that manages six U.S. ports to the government owned Dubai Ports World, saying that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a close ally of the U.S. in the war on terror. Indeed, the Jebel Ali terminal in Dubai transports at least 40% of US supplies to the troops in Iraq. Having the deepest port in the Persian Gulf, Dubai is critical for U.S. naval operations in the region. The UAE also provides air bases to support U.S. warplanes and stores materiel for U.S. forces. Moreover, it is also a major market for U.S. arms.

Not surprisingly, the President threatens to veto any legislation to block the deal and challenges lawmakers to â€œstep up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard” than the British company that ran the ports before.

There are many important differences. To begin with, a private company based in the U.K. a Western democracy with troops fighting along with U.S. soldiers in Iraq, contrasts sharply with the UAE, which supported al-Qaeda, sent 9/11 terrorists and funding, and continues to support Palestinian suicide bombers and particularly HAMAS, which President Bush calls â€œa terrorist organization.”

On July 27, 2005, the Palestinian Information Center carried a public HAMAS statement thanking the UAE for its “unstinting support.” The statement said: “We highly appreciate his highness Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Bin Sultan Al-Nahyan (UAE president) in particular and the UAE people and government in general for their limitless support … that contributed more to consolidating our people’s resoluteness in the face of the Israeli occupation”. Continue reading “Welcoming Terror to U.S. Ports” →

Funding Hamas

By Alyssa A. Lappen
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 1, 2006

An influential foreign policy advisory group recommends that the U.S. and European Union continue to fund the Palestinian Authority despite the terrorist group’s landslide victory in the January 25 Palestinian elections.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) in a press release announcing its January 18 study entitled “Enter Hamas: The Challenges of Political Integration” bemoan the fact that both the U.S. and E.U. bar contacts with Hamas, deny funding to projects with Hamas-run municipalities, and have threatened to halt assistance to the PA if Hamas joins it. This attitude has had several, essentially negative, results: estranging Palestinians from Western donors; losing touch with an increasingly large segment of the population; jeopardising projects; and reducing accountability. Meanwhile, Hamas participates in elections without having to fulfil [sic] any prior conditions.” The ICG changed neither its report nor press release after the Wednesday poll.

Rather, the group recommends that the West adopt a policy of gradual, conditional engagement to encourage Hamas to choose politics over violence. Incorporation into local and national governance may cause it to move away from the military path by giving it a stake in stability and emphasising the political costs of a breakdown.” Of course, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar declared that the group will not change a single word of its charter,” which calls for Israel’s complete “obliteration”, using that precise term. But never mind. Continue reading “Funding Hamas” →