Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
[Jerusalem Post] Gerald Steinberg - Faced with a growing number of countries declaring they would not participate in another anti-Semitic conference, the organizers of the UN's controversial Durban Review Conference scheduled for April 21 in Geneva suddenly changed the text. The hate language, attacks on Israel, and attempts to restrict free speech and give Islam a preferred status were removed. Should governments now agree to participate on the basis of the revised document? Or is this a diplomatic sleight of hand - a temporary change in language used to bring an end to the revolt of the democratic delegations? When the conference begins, Libya and Iran, with the support of Egypt, Syria, Cuba, and the rest, are expected to use their majority to restore terms like "apartheid" and Israeli "genocide." Western leaders who are inclined to declare victory and participate in the conference must first insure that, at the first sign of restoring the hate-filled language, they will all walk out together, including every member of the European Union. The writer is the executive director of NGO Monitor and chairs the political science department at Bar-Ilan University. 2009-03-23 06:00:00Full Article
Durban II: New Strategy Needed
[Jerusalem Post] Gerald Steinberg - Faced with a growing number of countries declaring they would not participate in another anti-Semitic conference, the organizers of the UN's controversial Durban Review Conference scheduled for April 21 in Geneva suddenly changed the text. The hate language, attacks on Israel, and attempts to restrict free speech and give Islam a preferred status were removed. Should governments now agree to participate on the basis of the revised document? Or is this a diplomatic sleight of hand - a temporary change in language used to bring an end to the revolt of the democratic delegations? When the conference begins, Libya and Iran, with the support of Egypt, Syria, Cuba, and the rest, are expected to use their majority to restore terms like "apartheid" and Israeli "genocide." Western leaders who are inclined to declare victory and participate in the conference must first insure that, at the first sign of restoring the hate-filled language, they will all walk out together, including every member of the European Union. The writer is the executive director of NGO Monitor and chairs the political science department at Bar-Ilan University. 2009-03-23 06:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|