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) Saul Singer - By limiting Article 51 of the UN Charter to the right of self-defense against attacks "by one state against another state," the ICJ logically implies that 9/11 did not trigger America's right to self-defense. The ICJ's second major contortion is defining the West Bank as foreign land with respect to the fence, but then claiming that attacks from the same land are not "international," and therefore don't trigger Article 51. The objective of the fence has to be not just defending Israelis, but also imposing a territorial price for the almost four years of unprovoked aggression the Palestinians have unleashed against us. This is particularly true in the context of a disengagement plan which, we must admit, is susceptible to portrayal as a withdrawal under fire. The fence, and particularly where it is built, are the key antidotes to the sense that the disengagement plan is a net Palestinian victory. When the Palestinians look back at their fruitless and unnecessary war, they will see that the route of the fence imposes the only diplomatic price they had to pay for their choice of terror and rejectionism. 2004-07-16 00:00:00Full Article
ICJ to Israel: Drop Dead
(Jerusalem Post) Saul Singer - By limiting Article 51 of the UN Charter to the right of self-defense against attacks "by one state against another state," the ICJ logically implies that 9/11 did not trigger America's right to self-defense. The ICJ's second major contortion is defining the West Bank as foreign land with respect to the fence, but then claiming that attacks from the same land are not "international," and therefore don't trigger Article 51. The objective of the fence has to be not just defending Israelis, but also imposing a territorial price for the almost four years of unprovoked aggression the Palestinians have unleashed against us. This is particularly true in the context of a disengagement plan which, we must admit, is susceptible to portrayal as a withdrawal under fire. The fence, and particularly where it is built, are the key antidotes to the sense that the disengagement plan is a net Palestinian victory. When the Palestinians look back at their fruitless and unnecessary war, they will see that the route of the fence imposes the only diplomatic price they had to pay for their choice of terror and rejectionism. 2004-07-16 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|