07/26 Links Pt1: Trump exposes UN hypocrisy on PLO, Hamas and Israel; Under the cover of a children's protest: Sniper injures IDF officer; Obama Admin Knowingly Funded an al-Qaeda Affiliate

From Ian:

---

David Horovitz: Hamas, the murderous neighbor that demands Israel give it the gun

A few years ago, an awful new neighbor moved in next door. An ex-murderer, unreformed.

Life became a nightmare. He claimed we were on his land. We weren’t. There’d been a dispute before he arrived, but we’d actually conceded.

He vowed alternately to force us out of the neighborhood and to kill us. He told anyone who’d listen that we had no right to be here and that he hated us. Unbelievably, some of the other neighbors supported him.

There were fights at the fence. We were scared to go outside. Life became a nightmare.

He tried to get a gun. He had friends who we knew would give him one. He said that if we didn’t let him get the gun, he’d keep on harassing and attacking us.

So we said okay. We let him get the gun. He killed us.

That ridiculous story is essentially the tale of what’s going on between Hamas and Israel. Except for the last part. That’s not going to happen.

David Singer: David Singer: Trump exposes UN hypocrisy on PLO, Hamas and Israel

President Trump has challenged United Nations (UN) member States to put their money where their mouths are in a hard-hitting speech delivered by US Permanent Representative to the UN – Ambassador Nikki Haley – at a UN Security Council Open Debate on the Middle East on 24 July.

Following Trump’s dressing down of NATO – Haley attacked UN member States who are full of words but short on money when it comes to supporting the Palestinian Arabs.

Haley did not mince her words:
Here at the UN, thousands of miles away from Palestinians who do have real needs, there is no end to the speeches on their behalf. Country after country claims solidarity with the Palestinian people. If those words were useful in the schools, the hospitals, and the streets of their communities, the Palestinian people would not be facing the desperate conditions we are discussing here today. Talk is cheap.

No group of countries is more generous with their words than the Palestinians’ Arab neighbors, and other OIC [Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – ed.]member states. But all of the words spoken here in New York do not feed, clothe, or educate a single Palestinian child. All they do is get the international community riled up.

Haley used members’ contributions to UNRWA to prove her case:
Last year, Iran’s contribution to UNRWA was zero. Algeria’s contribution to UNRWA was zero. Tunisia’s contribution to UNRWA was zero.

Other countries did provide some funding. Pakistan gave $20,000. Egypt gave $20,000. Oman gave $668,000.

Haley did not spare non-Arab and non-Islamic countries from similar naming and shaming:
Other countries talk a big game about the Palestinian cause. In 2017, China provided $350,000 to UNRWA. Russia provided two million dollars to UNWRA.

Haley contrasted America’s generosity:
Last year … the United States gave 364 million dollars… And that’s on top of what the American people give annually to the Palestinians in bilateral assistance. That is another 300 million dollars just last year, and it averages to more than a quarter of a billion dollars every year since 1993.

Israel Should Seek More from Hamas Than a Return to the Status Quo Ante

The fighting between Israel and Hamas has not yet abated, but it’s possible that this round of conflict is coming to an end. Yet even if Israel succeeds in deterring Hamas from further attacks, writes Amos Yadlin, the result will be what he calls an “asymmetric strategic tie.”

Hamas has been able to erode the Israeli deterrence that was established since Operation Protective Edge in the summer of 2014, to breach the calm that prevailed in [Israel’s] south, and to try to define new “equations” and rules of engagement. To be sure, Hamas did not plan the March of Return or the kite- and balloon-based arson attacks, but it found in them attractive tactics and turned them into two central operational efforts. . . .

Israel has undoubtedly scored impressive achievements: its borders were not breached and its citizens were not harmed. Hamas weapons factories, training camps, and storage facilities were wiped out by the air force. Yet Hamas still has a sense of achievement. It has once again put the Gaza issue—both its humanitarian and political aspects—on the international agenda, damaged Israel’s image, undermined the sense of security among the Israeli population in the communities near the Gaza border, and challenged Israeli sovereignty in the Gaza environs.

In order to break this ongoing tie, Israel must adopt a proactive rather than a reactive strategy. It must take an approach designed to change the reality and not sanctify the status quo. . . . [First], efforts can and must be made to promote more modest understandings, namely, a limited hudna [Arabic for a temporary truce]. A fundamental condition for such an arrangement is a total halt of terror from Gaza and the return of Israeli civilians and bodies of the fallen soldiers held by Hamas. . . .

Read More

07/25 Links Pt2: The Media Is Not ‘Pro-Palestinian,’ Just Anti-Israel; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Neturei Karta, and the Corbynization of the Democratic Party; Facebook Must Get Rid of Holocaust Denial

From Ian:

---

CAMERA OP-ED: The Media Is Not ‘Pro-Palestinian,’ Just Anti-Israel

Many major Western news outlets are accused—often correctly—of bias against Israel. Yet, this does not mean that their coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict can be described as “pro-Palestinian.” In fact, many in the media—and the policymakers and pundits that they influence—tend to ignore internal Palestinian issues when Israel can’t be blamed. And recent events prove it.

Since the beginning of June 2018, hundreds of Palestinians in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) have taken to the streets in protest of their government’s policies toward the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority, dominated by the Fatah movement, rules the West Bank. Under PA President and Fatah head Mahmoud Abbas, the authority has enacted punitive measures towards Gaza in an attempt to apply pressure on Hamas, Fatah’s rival that rules the Strip. Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group with a fiercely antisemitic ideology, has controlled Gaza since besting Fatah in a short but bloody civil war in 2007.

Abbas has attempted to regain control of the coastal enclave ever since.

Among other actions, the PA has cut salaries to its employees living in Gaza, suspended social assistance to hundreds of families residing there, forced the retirement of thousands of civil servants, and reinstated the collection of taxes from previously exempt Gazans. The PA also quit paying Israel for the electricity and fuel that it provides to the Strip—resulting in severe power shortages for Gazans.

For its part, the misery endured by the average Gazan—misery that is not shared by their leaders, many of who live in luxury in Qatar —is a frequent media topic. Many journalists, however, blame Israel’s security blockade for Gaza’s troubles, often failing to note that it exists only because Hamas expends international aid and resources on rockets and terror tunnels to attack the Jewish state.

SPLC Ignores Muslim Anti-Semitism, Warns About Danger to Muslims From Holocaust Denial

On Saturday, the left-wing smear organization the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) attacked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg for suggesting that some forms of Holocaust denial could be acceptable on Facebook. Tragically, the left-wing group did not mention a key source of Holocaust denial: anti-Israel sentiment, and anti-Semitism among Muslims. Instead, the SPLC expressed fear that Holocaust denial might hurt American Muslims.

While Nazis were the first to start crafting lies rejecting the reality of the Holocaust, Holocaust denial is most mainstream among Muslims in the Middle East. A 2014 survey by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) found that 63 percent of people in the Middle East and North Africa said the Holocaust was "a myth or an exaggeration. A full 65 percent said "Jews are responsible for most of the world's wars." A whopping 74 percent of those in the Middle East and North Africa harbored anti-Semitic views.

When asked directly about the Holocaust, 61 percent of Muslims under age 65 said it was a myth or an exaggeration, while Christians were consistently the least likely to deny the Holocaust (followed by Buddhists and non-religious people). Hindus also proved surprisingly likely to deny the Holocaust.

After preliminary notes about Nazis founding the practice — pushing "the deeply offensive lie that the Holocaust was a fraud concocted by Jews" — the SPLC noted that it monitors 10 active Holocaust denial groups in the U.S., four of which have a minor presence on Facebook. To its credit, the SPLC does have two pro-Palestinian groups on that list: two chapters of Der Yassin Remembered.

At the same time, after a brief mention of "the resurgence in antisemitism online," the SPLC went on to lament the plight of American Muslims — some of whom are spreading Holocaust denial in an effort to slander the State of Israel.

Poll: Israel not an important partner for US Democrats

A recent Pew Research poll indicates an overwhelming divide between American Republicans and Democrats over perceptions of the importance of the US-Israel relationship.

The poll primarily dealt with comparing American and German perceptions of one another, but also touched tangentially on American perceptions of other countries.

According to the poll, 12% of Americans said that Israel was the “first or second most important partner for American foreign policy.” Israel tied in third place with Germany, also at 12%, coming behind China at 24% and chart topper Great Britain at 33%.

Dividing responses to the same question along party lines, the poll found that 24% of Republicans found Israel to be a top foreign policy partner out of eight countries listed, in second place behind Great Britain at 42% and ahead of China at 18%. Russia closed the list for Republicans, at 5%.

On the other hand, Israel did not make the eight-country list for Democrats, for whom Great Britain topped the list at 32%, China came in second at 26%, and Canada closed the list at 6%.

Read More

07/17 Links Pt2: What Ireland's Boycott Bill Means For Israel; UK Chief Rabbi: Labour guidelines show 'unprecedented contempt' for Jews; Anti-Facebook Group Takes Anti-Semitic Signs to Congress

From Ian:

---

What Ireland's Boycott Bill Means For Israel

Fiamma Nirenstein, a former member of the Italian parliament and currently a Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, considers the boycott movement more of a threat due to what she defines as troublesome constituent elements. "On the one hand, BDS is viewed as a way of attacking Israel without being accused of extremism, so in this sense it is a great invention by the Palestinians. On the other hand," she expounded to The Media Line, "the program is connected to the worst anti-Semitic organizations, including terrorist ones."

Nirenstein further highlighted the danger associated with the potential blurring of boundaries. "Boycotting commerce outside of the [1967 borders] interferes with business conducted inside of them, including banking, insurance, etc... So there is a fine line between calling for a boycott of products in [the territories] and advocating for a [blanket] ban of the Jewish state."

As regards the EU, specifically, she considers the body the "mother of the BDS, as it is globalist, anti-religious and totally devoted to the idea of peace whatever the cost may be. By contrast, Israel is a nation-state with religions undertones that must constantly defend itself and Europe cannot forgive that. I do not think that Israel can do anything to change this attitude."

Somewhat paradoxically, though, the law itself is a critical barrier to the implementation of European boycotts on Israeli goods. As noted by numerous economists, should the Irish bill be passed, U.S. companies, for example, might be forced to end their operations in Ireland as American firms are legally prohibited from participating in foreign economic bans not sanctioned by Washington. Such an eventuality would, in turn, render an estimated 150,000 people in Ireland jobless. And the same holds true across the continent, the potential negative ramifications of which have been made evident by ongoing European efforts to negotiate around renewed U.S. sanctions on Iran.

Aside from the legal, economic and moral implications, there is also the long-touted political norm against taking action that could "pre-judge" the outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Increasingly, European countries seem to comprehend that applying uni-directional pressure on Israel is not a recipe for peace, but, rather, serves to push both sides further away from the negotiating table.

Indeed, critics of BDS the movement note its overall limited realization of its raison d'etre to damage the Jewish state diplomatically and financially. Nevertheless, most analysts agree that cases such as the Irish Senate legislation require a fervent Israeli defense, if not measured offensive. Such instances are, in the eyes of Jerusalem and its proponents, more than much ado about nothing, even if the economic sky is not liable to fall.

Ireland, Boycotts, and Israeli ‘Settlement’ Products

Ireland did not extend recognition to Israel until 1963 and did not establish an embassy in Tel Aviv until 1996. Furthermore, Ireland was one of the first European countries to call for a Palestinian state in 1980 and has persistently focused on the Palestinian refugee issue.

Today, despite its subordinate position within the European Union to such larger powers as France and Germany, Ireland has played an outsized role as a voice on matters concerning Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Last year, the Irish parliament passed a symbolic resolution calling on the EU government to recognize Palestinian statehood. Ireland was also the first European country to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization. At the same time, the BDS movement in Ireland is viewed by many as extremely powerful.

The Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which has been at the forefront of anti-Israel sentiment in Ireland, led to Israel banning some 20 activists associated with the Dublin-based group from entering the Jewish state as part of a “blacklist” targeting anti-Israel BDS groups.

As such, Kittrie believes that Israel needs to do a better job improving the country’s image in Ireland.

“Israel has a good story to tell. It needs to do a far better job of telling it to the Irish people,” he said.

“Watching the debate in the Irish Senate, one would think that the lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians is entirely the fault of Israel. That is just not correct. I think education has a big role to play in improving relations between Ireland and Israel.”

EU: Israel spreads ‘disinformation’ by alleging we fund terror-tied BDS efforts

The European Union is pushing back after an Israeli minister accused Brussels of funding boycotts and even terrorism against Israel.

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini recently complained to Strategic Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan, saying a report from his ministry was spreading disinformation in a report accusing the EU of funding anti-Israel groups with ties to terrorists.

EU Ambassador to Israel Emanuele Giaufret also rebuffed the suggestion Tuesday.

“The idea that the EU could support terrorism is entirely unfounded,” he told The Times of Israel on Tuesday. “We’re very determined in our fight against terrorism and remain opposed to the isolation of Israel or the questioning of its legitimacy. That’s why we don’t fund any BDS activity.”

He added that the EU was open to hearing “issues of concern” from Israel.

Mogherini sent a letter on July 5 to Erdan responding to a May report from his ministry that alleged that the EU funds nonprofit groups that campaign for boycotts of Israel or have ties to terror groups.

Knesset passes law barring 'anti-IDF' groups from schools

Education Minister Bennett: If Breaking the Silence wants to change things, it should act at home, not abroad • Breaking the Silence: The law proves how much Bennett fears his own ideology • Delegitimizing groups should be outlawed, right-wing forum says.

The Knesset on Monday passed a legislative proposal designed to keep out of schools nongovernmental organizations that advocate against the Israeli military. The bill passed its second and third readings with a vote of 43 in favor to 23 against.

The law, sponsored by Habayit Hayehudi MK Shuli Mualem-Rafaeli, was dubbed the "Breaking the Silence bill" for a controversial advocacy group dedicated to exposing alleged wrongdoings by the IDF. The group has been excoriated numerous times for encouraging legal action against Israeli soldiers, an allegation its leaders deny.

The legislation expands Section 2 of the Public Education Law and states that public education will teach Israeli youth about performing a meaningful role in the IDF or in national service.

The bill also grants the education minister the power to establish guidelines that will prevent organizations from outside the school system from activity in public schools if their work contradicts the goals and values of the public education system.

Read More

07/05 Links Pt2: Claude Lanzmann, acclaimed director of documentary 'Shoah,' dies at 92; I’m Jewish and Pakistani… let me go to Israel; Debunking claims about Israel’s “apartheid” wall

From Ian:

---

Claude Lanzmann, acclaimed director of documentary 'Shoah,' dies at 92

French Director Claude Lanzmann, whose 9½-hour masterpiece “Shoah” bore unflinching witness to the Holocaust through the testimonies of Jewish victims, German executioners and Polish bystanders, has died at the age of 92.

Gallimard, the publishing house for Lanzmann’s autobiography, said he died Thursday morning at a hospital in Paris. It gave no further details.

The power of “Shoah,” filmed in the 1970s during Lanzmann’s trips to the barren Polish landscapes where the slaughter of Jews was planned and executed, was in viewing the Holocaust as an event in the present, rather than as history. It contained no archival footage, no musical score — just the landscape, trains and recounted memories.

Lanzmann was 59 when the movie, his second, came out in 1985. It defined the Holocaust for those who saw it, and defined him as a filmmaker.

“I knew that the subject of the film would be death itself. Death rather than survival,” Lanzmann wrote in his autobiography. “For 12 years I tried to stare relentlessly into the black sun of the Shoah.”

“Shoah” was nearly universally praised. Roger Ebert called it “one of the noblest films ever made” and Time Out and The Guardian were among those ranking it the greatest documentary of all time. The Polish government was a notable dissenter, which dismissed the film as “anti-Polish propaganda” (but later allowed “Shoah” to be aired in Poland).

Long before Israel, Claude Lanzmann stirred Poland’s wrath

Claude Lanzmann was mostly amused by the “truckloads of calumny” unloaded across the front pages of the livid Polish press after the 1985 release of his nine-and-a-half hour landmark “Shoah” documentary.

Preoccupied with raising money for further copies of his pioneering cinematic masterpiece on the genocide of six million Jews during the Holocaust — and pressed with a sense of urgency to disseminate the accounts of the survivors — the French Jewish journalist and filmmaker had casually shrugged off the torrential, raging criticism emerging from then-Communist Warsaw.

“And yet, while I may have been amused, I did not realize that the Polish lobby disposed of some heavy artillery. Compared to their firepower, the Jewish lobby was barely capable of a skirmish,” Lanzmann wrote in his 2012 memoir, “The Patagonian Hare.”

Lanzmann died on Thursday at the age of 92, some 33 years after he first cast his lens on many ordinary Poles, offering up some piercing accounts of horrific wartime actions and deeply rooted anti-Semitism, and violently upending narratives of untarnished Polish victimhood.

Yad Vashem slams ‘highly problematic’ Israeli-Polish Holocaust statement

The Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial center on Thursday slammed an agreement between the governments of Israel and Poland regarding the latter’s record during the Holocaust, saying it would stifle free research on the subject.

A joint declaration issued by Warsaw and Jerusalem “contains highly problematic wording that contradicts existing and accepted historical knowledge in this field,” the institution said in a press release.

The statement is an embarrassing blow to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who last week hailed the agreement and the joint statement that was issued on the occasion as safeguarding “the historic truth about the Holocaust.”
.....
On Thursday, Yad Vashem released a long press release in which its historians detail why they not only contest the joint statement’s historical veracity, but are also dissatisfied with the Polish amendment to the controversial law.

“A thorough review by Yad Vashem historians shows that the historical assertions, presented as unchallenged facts, in the joint statement contain grave errors and deceptions, and that the essence of the statute remains unchanged even after the repeal of the aforementioned sections, including the possibility of real harm to researchers, unimpeded research, and the historical memory of the Holocaust,” the statement read.

Indeed, the statement “contains highly problematic wording that contradicts existing and accepted historical knowledge in this field,” the statement continued.

The joint Israeli-Polish declaration “effectively supports a narrative that research has long since disproved, namely, that the Polish Government-in-Exile and its underground arms strove indefatigably — in occupied Poland and elsewhere — to thwart the extermination of Polish Jewry.”

Bennett: Israel-Poland Holocaust declaration ‘a disgrace, saturated with lies’

Education Minister Naftali Bennett on Thursday led a chorus of widespread condemnation for a joint Israeli-Polish declaration signed by the two nations’ prime ministers that appears to accept Poland’s official position that it is not responsible for the crimes of the Holocaust.

The outrage from across the political spectrum came following a statement from the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial center saying it would stifle free research on the subject.

“The joint declaration of Israel and the government of Poland is a disgrace, saturated with lies, that betrays the memory of those who perished in the Holocaust,” Bennett said in statement put out on Twitter. “As minister of education, entrusted with passing on the memory of the Holocaust, I reject it completely. It has no factual basis and won’t be studied in the education system,”

The Jewish Home leader added that he would be demanding”the prime minister cancel the declaration or bring it to the government for approval.”

Read More

06/18 Links Pt2: The Many Ways the Palestinians Violate International Law; SPLC pays Maajid Nawaz $3.5Mil for false extremist accusation; Prince William an FCO hostage in a minefield

From Ian:

---

Amb. Alan Baker: The Many Ways the Palestinians Violate International Law

After the UN General Assembly on June 14, 2018, voted to condemn Israel for its handling of the Gaza border fence violence, It is all the more curious to observe the deliberate disregard of the serious and flagrant international humanitarian, environmental, and ecological crimes committed by Hamas and the Palestinians.
Since the Palestinian Authority is utilizing the events in Gaza to conduct its own political and legal campaign against Israel in international bodies, this renders the Palestinian leadership an accessory to Hamas in the commission of these crimes.

By initiating, encouraging, and supporting mass pollution of the border area through the organized stockpiling and burning of tires, the Palestinian leadership is responsible for repeatedly creating caustic clouds of carbon pollution. This act is damaging to the health of the Palestinian civilian demonstrators themselves, as well as the residents of Israeli communities in the vicinity of the border.

Incendiary kites and balloons have ignited vast swathes of agricultural land in Israel, destroyed crops, and endangered Israeli residents. The International Criminal Court Statute defines as a war crime "extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly."

Weaponizing kites and balloons by attaching explosive devices with the intention that they will explode upon landing or when found by Israeli civilians is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, notably the 1997 Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings. Moreover, the 2001 Conventional Weapons Convention prohibits the use of incendiary weapons.

From the viewpoint of international humanitarian law and accepted norms of humanity, placing Palestinian civilians, and especially women and children, at the forefront of violent demonstrations and attacks on the border fence as human shields to conceal the presence of Hamas terrorists is a violation of several international treaties protecting children and prohibiting their involvement in warfare.

The Palestinian leadership must be made to understand that its fixation with joining international treaties is not unidirectional. It involves solemn responsibilities to abide by the obligations included in such treaties. The international community must hold the Palestinian leadership to their commitments and not ignore their violations of the most fundamental norms and principles of international law.

Radical-Left SPLC Pays Anti-Islamist Think Tank $3.37 Million After Calling It 'Extremist'

On Monday, Quilliam, a London-based counter-extremism think-tank that battles against Islamic extremism, announced the hard-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) would pay Quilliam almost $4 million after SPLC had included Quilliam in its “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists.”

SPLC released a statement, which read:
Today, we entered into a settlement with and offered our sincerest apology to Mr. Maajid Nawaz and his organization, the Quilliam Foundation, for including them in our publication A Journalist’s Manual: Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists. Given our understanding of the views of Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam, it was our opinion at the time that the Field Guide was published that their inclusion was warranted. But after getting a deeper understanding of their views and after hearing from others for whom we have great respect, we realize that we were simply wrong to have included Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam in the Field Guide in the first place.

Then, the acknowledgment of the payment: “As part of our settlement, we have paid $3.375 million to Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam to fund their work to fight anti-Muslim bigotry and extremism.”

And this conclusion: “As we move forward, we are committed to redoubling our efforts to ensure that our work is always carried out with the utmost care and integrity. The stakes in the battle against hate and extremism are simply too great to be satisfied with anything less.”

The SPLC has defended anti-Semite and radical leftist Linda Sarsour; called the late Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum a hate group; named the Family Research Council a hate group, and written that Prager University videos are “indispensable propaganda device for the right.” (h/t jzaik)

Antisemitism at the United Nations Cannot Be Ignored

Yet even most of us who care about these issues tend to treat the UN’s actions as mere rhetoric. While this is true, we’re wrong to treat days like June 12 as deplorable but not worth getting all that upset about. While what goes on in the United Nations is, in a sense, just talk, it’s far more dangerous than that.

What we forget about these exercises in hypocrisy is that they give official imprimatur to antisemitism. As Obama’s State Department certified, a “rising tide of anti-Semitism” is sweeping across Europe and Southeast Asia. Arab and Islamic hatred for Israel, as well as some Western elites’ belief that the Jews are the one people on the planet who aren’t entitled to a homeland, drive this trend.

If other countries are willing to give Hamas a pass for terror and bash Israel for defending its border in a way no different (if not far more humane) than almost all of the nations condemning it, then this is an act of prejudice against the one Jewish state on the planet.

To note this fact is not to assert that Israel is perfect or above criticism. But when a world body attacks Israel alone and vilifies it for doing what any other nation would do, that is called hate.

The Obama administration treated the United Nations like a sacred multilateral cow. But it’s time for the Trump administration to put even more pressure on the United Nations that it already has done, cutting the US allocations that keep it going.

By regarding everyday hate as ordinary, we are, even if only because of exhaustion and a sense of futility, enabling it. That has to stop. We must never allow ourselves to get used to UN-certified Jew-hatred. The United Nations must be made to understand that decent persons won’t tolerate this practice indefinitely without consequences.

Read More

06/16 Links: When Does Pro-Palestinian End … and When Does Anti-Israel Begin?; The UN's Automatic Majority Against Israel is Fraying; 20 Fires Sparked by Incendiary Kites From Gaza

From Ian:

---

When Does Pro-Palestinian End … and When Does Anti-Israel Begin?

In a 2013 news item on Iran’s annual Quds Day march, the Associated Press reported that newly elected President Hassan Rouhani said at the event that Israel was an “old wound” that needed to be removed.

The AP later provided some context for those remarks, “Rouhani spoke at an annual pro-Palestinian rally marking ‘Al-Quds Day’ — the Arabic word for Jerusalem — and although his remarks appear contrary to his outreach efforts to the West, they should also be seen in the context of internal Iranian politics where softening the establishment’s anti-Israeli stand is not an option.”

Despite the AP’s efforts to downplay the extremism of Rouhani’s comments – that he had no choice but to express his opposition to the Jewish state – it also reported, “In the capital, Tehran, tens of thousands took to the streets, chanting ‘Down with America’ and ‘Death to Israel.'”

In a report about last week’s cancelled soccer match between Israel and Argentina, The Washington Post reported, “The BDS movement aims to pressure Israel into complying with international law vis-a-vis its policies toward the Palestinians by discouraging the purchase of Israeli goods, pressuring international companies not to conduct business in Israel and urging celebrities not to visit or perform in the country.”

Omar Barghouti, one of the founders of the Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment (BDS) campaign, has been clear about the goal of his movement. He has said, “A Jewish state in Palestine in any shape or form cannot but contravene the basic rights of the indigenous Palestinian population and perpetuate a system of racial discrimination that ought to be opposed categorically….Definitely, most definitely we oppose a Jewish state in any part of Palestine. No Palestinian, rational Palestinian, not a sell-out Palestinian, will ever accept a Jewish state in Palestine.”

Nor is Barghouti alone among proponents of BDS in calling for an end to the modern state of Israel.

Elliott Abrams: The UN's Automatic Majority Against Israel is Fraying

On June 13, the United Nations General Assembly voted once again to condemn Israel, this time for its actions against Hamas in Gaza when tens of thousands of Hamas supporters and terrorists stormed the Israeli border. The condemnation is not news, but the voting patterns are worth a look.

The final resolution passed 120 (yes) to 8 (no) with 45 abstentions. Who were the eight countries voting no? The United States and Israel, several Pacific island states (Marshall Islands, Nauru, Micronesia, Solomon Islands), Togo—and Australia.

Last year Australia’s government announced that it was through with unfair and unbalanced UN treatment of Israel and would henceforth vote against such resolutions in all parts of the UN system. And so it has. For example, on May 18 of this year, the UN Human Rights Council adopted yet another worthless resolution condemning Israel. The vote was 29 to 2, and the two countries voting no were the United States and Australia. So the first thing to note about the recent General Assembly voting was the Australian vote: a rare show of principle and determination on the international diplomatic scene, and a model for other democracies who all ought to be following Australia’s path.

In Israel, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Calls to Turn the Tide Against Terrorists

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told the International Homeland Security Forum in Israel on Tuesday:

Our alliance has been fortified through crises and strengthened by collaboration. Following the 9/11 attacks - the deadliest terror assault in modern world history - you were right there by our side. We knew we could not win the coming fight alone. And we turned to you for guidance because the State of Israel has withstood decades of violence at the hands of fanatics - and has proudly defended freedom against relentless terrorist enemies.

From Ottawa to Berlin, our communities are now on the frontlines. All countries represented here have experienced this evil in one form or another, whether your nationals have been victims or your homelands have been hit directly. We are at war. And we must respond accordingly.

Victory in this struggle begins with moral clarity. We are engaged in a generational struggle against Islamist militants, the preeminent terror threat to our lives, our livelihoods, and our way of life.

Whether it is global jihadist groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda and their legions of digital followers, or the proxies of rogue nation states such as Iran, our enemies have perverted a major religion to justify horrific violence and lust for power. Their goal is to establish a totalitarian empire governed under a backwards and repressive worldview. And the danger they pose is at its highest point in decades.

There have been more than 100 terrorist attacks in Western countries since the rise of ISIS in 2013, resulting in thousands of casualties. The U.S. has been the victim of around 25 of those incidents. Most were carried out by homegrown violent extremists inspired by the group's heinous propaganda.

The good news is that we have put clear-eyed, focused pressure on terrorist groups around the world. We have obliterated the core safe havens of groups such as ISIS and taken tens of thousands of them off the battlefield. The U.S. is standing up to rogue regimes that bankroll terror and use proxies to advance their malign goals.

Read More

05/18 Links Pt2: Foundations of a New Middle East; Erdogan: Anti-Semite and regional threat; A Great Historian of Russia on the Soviet Jewish Plight

From Ian:

---

Op-Ed: Left and right wing Anti-Semitism/Zionism

The left has accepted the outright lies told by the Islamists as a means of undermining political opponents. This is the old tactic of scapegoating/blaming the Jews/Israel for the ills of the world, again failing to take responsibility for their own behavior.

The postmodern Marxists have successfully inverted the meaning of anti-Semitism. It is no longer hatred of Jews. It is acceptable (normative) to attack pro-Israel Jews for their Jewish identity (part of their program of identity politics and intersectionality.)

Linda Sarsour, women’s movement activist and representative of the terrorist organization Hamas in America, recently redefined anti-Semitism at the New School in N.Y. She reformulated the age-old hatred of Jews so that progressive left activists could continue to be anti-Zionist or anti-Israel.

Hating Jews is not the definition of anti-Semitism under this new language formulation.

Criticizing progressive left activists for being anti-Israel is the new definition of anti-Semitism. Thus, this is a corruption of language and evidence of compelled speech, the very kind that Dr. Jordan Peterson of the University of Toronto refused to use in Canada.

This redefinition by a Muslim who represents a terrorist organization in America is a ploy and a shield to protect its own anti-Israel activities. It is benefiting the leftists to the detriment of the Jews and of Israel.

The American Jewish community needs to have the necessary discussion about its safety and security. The time to educate is now so that the community has the tools to take collective action on its behalf.

A Great Historian of Russia on the Soviet Jewish Plight

Richard Pipes, one of America’s foremost historians of Russia and the Soviet Union, died yesterday at the age of ninety-four. In a book review he contributed to Commentary in 1989, when glasnost and the release of substantial numbers of Soviet Jews had made possible new and better-informed histories of Soviet Jewry, he presented a characteristically incisive summation of the situation of Jews under the Communist regime:

[A]lthough they protected Jews from violence and declared overt anti-Semitism a crime, the Communists espoused a program that promised slow death for Jews as a religious community and a nation. Measures outlawing private trade and manufacture, passed in the early years of the Soviet regime, undercut the economic base of Jewish life, creating millions of unemployed. The regime’s anti-religious policies affected Jews no less than Christians: as early as 1919, synagogues and other religious buildings were made liable to confiscation. Hebrew was declared a foreign language and Zionism a subversive doctrine.

In the 1920’s, especially during the relatively benign period of the New Economic Policy, Jews managed to circumvent many of the prohibitions on their economic and cultural activities. But all this came to an end in 1929 when Stalin undertook in earnest to realize Lenin’s revolutionary agenda. . . . By the time he entered into his alliance with Hitler in 1939, Stalin had restored many of the tsarist discriminatory laws, setting quotas on access to educational and bureaucratic opportunities and closing altogether the more sensitive positions. He meant to go farther. In 1942, as Germany’s armies were deep on their murderous mission in the Soviet Union, Hitler confided to his associates that Stalin had promised Ribbentrop “he would oust the Jews from leading positions the moment he had sufficient qualified Gentiles with whom to replace them.” . . .

In the decades since Stalin’s death his successors have done away with the most egregious manifestations of persecution, but discrimination against Jews remains in place. There are no Jews in the Politburo and hardly any in the upper echelons of the military. Strict quotas are imposed on admissions to institutions of higher learning. [Mikhail] Gorbachev’s reforms, which have eased Soviet discriminatory policies, have also allowed the emergence of overtly anti-Semitic movements, of which Pamyat [“memory”] is the most notorious. . . .

Hence very many Russian Jews see no future for themselves and their children, and if given a chance would emigrate. Recent Israeli estimates are that a continuation of Gorbachev’s liberalized emigration policy might lead to the exodus of at least 500,000 Jews. A community that a century ago was not only the largest in the world but also culturally the most vibrant has been destroyed by a regime that many Jews in and out of Russia once regarded as a beacon of hope.

Guatemala becomes 2nd country to open embassy in Jerusalem

In anticipation of the inauguration of the Guatemalan Embassy in Jerusalem’s Malcha Technology Park on May 16, the city illuminated the Old City walls with flags of Guatemala, Israel and the United States along with a message thanking President Jimmy Morales Cabrera of Guatemala.

Morales and the Guatemalan ministers of foreign affairs, defense and economy arrived in Israel earlier in the week to prepare for the event, which closely followed the official opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem.

Guatemala’s embassy was originally in Jerusalem and had moved to Tel Aviv in 1980.

“Guatemalan Embassy, welcome home!” said Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat. “I thank President Jimmy Morales Cabrera of Guatemala for his courageous decision and am honored that we will be opening the embassy in the capital of Israel.”

Before the ceremony inaugurating the new embassy, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Guatemalan President Morales held a private meeting as did their wives, Sara Netanyahu and Patricia Morales. President Reuven Rivlin also met with Morales.

Where were the Democrats?

This should be clear enough, even for clueless Conor Powell, that If you don’t show up for Israel it means you’re showing up for Hamas.

That’s the tribe of terrorists who rule Gaza with love and tolerance for nobody, including their own children.

Why, for Fox News, is Powell dishing this Hamas propaganda about right of return to “ancestral homes” that can only fool a reporter who knows nothing.

Well, what can you expect from today’s journalists except zilch city. On the political front, however, Democrats occasionally know right from wrong. I said occasionally.

So in or out, as we’ve been saying. You can’t be half for Israel, where every child is precious, and half for Moloch who practice child incineration.

Was this a boycott? Either way, mark them as absent without an excuse. The Democrats were not there in Jerusalem when it counted, so count them as sharing the values of Radical Islam.

Include them with Hamas, ISIS, al Qaeda and Hezbollah. Nothing wrong with beheadings, wife beating, gay bashing, honor killings, and capricious mass executions.

It’s a sale, according to this new wave of Bernie Sanders Liberalism and… we should try it at home.

Read More

05/09 Links Pt1: Donald Trump Ends the Obama Mirage; Sohrab Amari: Obama Killed His Own Iran Deal; Palestinians announce embassy move date to be ‘day of rage’

From Ian:

---

Bret Stephens: A Courageous Trump Call on a Lousy Iran Deal

Apologists also claim that, with Trump’s decision, Tehran will simply restart its enrichment activities on an industrial scale. Maybe it will, forcing a crisis that could end with U.S. or Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. But that would be stupid, something the regime emphatically isn’t. More likely, it will take symbolic steps to restart enrichment, thereby implying a threat without making good on it. What the regime wants is a renegotiation, not a reckoning.

Why? Even with the sanctions relief, the Iranian economy hangs by a thread: The Wall Street Journal on Sunday reported “hundreds of recent outbreaks of labor unrest in Iran, an indication of deepening discord over the nation’s economic troubles.” This week, the rial hit a record low of 67,800 to the dollar; one member of the Iranian Parliament estimated $30 billion of capital outflows in recent months. That’s real money for a country whose gross domestic product barely matches that of Boston.

The regime might calculate that a strategy of confrontation with the West could whip up useful nationalist fervors. But it would have to tread carefully: Ordinary Iranians are already furious that their government has squandered the proceeds of the nuclear deal on propping up the Assad regime. The conditions that led to the so-called Green movement of 2009 are there once again. Nor will it help Iran if it tries to start a war with Israel and comes out badly bloodied.

All this means the administration is in a strong position to negotiate a viable deal. But it missed an opportunity last month when it failed to deliver a crippling blow to Bashar al-Assad, Iran’s puppet in Syria, for his use of chemical weapons. Trump’s appeals in his speech to the Iranian people also sounded hollow from a president who isn’t exactly a tribune of liberalism and has disdained human rights as a tool of U.S. diplomacy. And the U.S. will need to mend fences with its European partners to pursue a coordinated diplomatic approach.

The goal is to put Iran’s rulers to a fundamental choice. They can opt to have a functioning economy, free of sanctions and open to investment, at the price of permanently, verifiably and irreversibly forgoing a nuclear option and abandoning their support for terrorists. Or they can pursue their nuclear ambitions at the cost of economic ruin and possible war. But they are no longer entitled to Barack Obama’s sweetheart deal of getting sanctions lifted first, retaining their nuclear options for later, and sponsoring terrorism throughout.

Trump’s courageous decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal will clarify the stakes for Tehran. Now we’ll see whether the administration is capable of following through.

John Podhoretz: Trump and America’s Centripetal Foreign Policy

With some exceptions (like the elder Bush’s administration in relation to Israel), every element on this list (if in some cases you substitute the Soviet Union for Russia pre-1991 and Libya for Islamist terror) was to some degree at play in American foreign policy from 1981 until 2008. Such has been the powerful logical flow of American foreign policy since the election of Ronald Reagan. This consensus ebbed and flowed depending on the circumstance, of course, and the parallels are not perfect. What Trump has done, and I don’t think strategically or with any grand design, is to place far greater stock in both the unilateralist and the realpolitik aspects of American foreign policy than his predecessors in the Reagan and post-Reagan era. He views enduring alliances more as constraints than grand benefits, which is perhaps the primary way in which he differs from the consensus. But his attacks on those alliances have basically ceased, which is itself a striking change from candidate Trump’s approach.

And what of 2008 to 2016? Barack Obama, schooled in 1970s liberal foreign-policy shibboleths, came at this consensus and flipped it—not entirely on its head, more like about 140 degrees. We went at Israel, we went light on Russia, we sought a concord with Iran, and Obama was celebrated for his acceptance of the monsters of Havana. Most notably, he accepted the left-liberal critique of postwar American foreign policy’s supposedly bad actions in the world and sought to apologize or make implicit amends for them. Viewed in this light, it’s the Obama years that represent the jarring discontinuity from the consensus path and not the election of the X-factor Trump.

We’ll have to see how this North Korea business goes to better understand Trump. (And certainly Trump’s trade practices mark him as very different, though there’s an argument that’s more an economic than a foreign policy.) There’s no reason to believe any of this is conscious or deliberate or designed. There is no Trump Doctrine. But there might be one yet, and it might be more familiar than we had any right to expect.

Sohrab Amari: Obama Killed His Own Iran Deal

He tried to circumvent the Israelis by keeping them in the dark about secret negotiations with the Islamic Republic. For Obama, Arab fears of Iranian expansionism were a tertiary concern, and he was surprised when the most important Sunni powers didn’t show up for a 2015 summit that was supposed to sell them on the deal. He likewise pooh-poohed Iran’s eliminationist anti-Israel rhetoric (“at the margins, where the costs are low, they may pursue policies based on [Jew] hatred as opposed to self-interest,” he told The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg). His aides described a sitting Israeli prime minister as a “chickens—t” (on background, naturally).

He lectured and condescended, and then lectured some more.

On the home front, meanwhile, Obama relied on his signature “pen and phone” methods to ram the deal through. Rather than welcome GOP hawks as good-faith actors seeking to strengthen his hand against an adversary, he treated Republicans as the adversary. He thought his diplomacy pitted him and reasonable Iranians like Javad Zarif against “hard-liners” in Washington and Tehran.

Meanwhile, Obama’s Ben Rhodes-operated media echo chamber swarmed and shouted down journalists and experts who raised concerns about the terms of the accord, not least the fact that it permitted the Iranians to inspect their own military sites and left unaddressed the question of ballistic missiles. The Obama administration never satisfactorily answered critics’ questions about Iran’s refusal to come clean about its prior weaponization activity—the glaring flaw in the deal’s architecture that contributed the most to its undoing this week.

And here we are. The deal’s demise, then, was written into it by its primary author.

Read More

The Truth About Hans Asperger, Nazi (Judean Rose)

Hans Asperger, after whom Asperger’s Syndrome (AS) is named, is oft been depicted as a grandfatherly figure. The kindly white-haired Austrian pediatrician, it is thought, is the reason we’re as far as we are today in our understanding of AS. And there is immense gratitude for that.

The only problem with this fairytale is that it is a lie.

Here is the truth:

·         Hans Asperger rose to prominence by default after his more accomplished Jewish colleagues were expelled from the University of Vienna

·         Hans Asperger was not first to note the syndrome that bears his name

·         Hans Asperger likely lifted his early work on AS from two Jewish colleagues who were booted from the university and expelled from Austria, Georg Frankl and Anni Weiss

·         Hans Asperger actively participated in Hitler’s eugenics program, referring children with Asperger’s Syndrome to the Am Spiegelgrund clinic in Vienna for euthanasia

Hans Asperger, in other words, sent children with Asperger’s Syndrome to die. The children he referred for euthanasia were murdered by starvation or lethal injection. The cause of death was listed as “pneumonia.”

Contrary to the benign figure he cut in circles affected by the subset of autism known as AS, Hans Asperger was a Nazi. Did he go along to get along? Did he find the work repugnant?

Edith Sheffer, author of a new book, Asperger’s Children: The origins of autism in Nazi Vienna, argues that Asperger was a willing participant in the murder of “defectives.” According to Sheffer, Asperger may have been attracted to the idea of a fascist collective as embodied by the Nazi concept of Volk: that of an Aryan people unsullied by those with “defects,” be they physical, psychological, or social.

There's also the fact that in 1938, these two things happened:

1. · The Dean of the University of Vienna Medical School removed over half of its faculty, mostly Jewish doctors
2. · Hans Asperger was promoted to become director of the Curative Education Clinic at the (very) young age of 28

What happened here? Was Asperger promoted because the Jews were gone? Or was he chosen for his ardent embrace of Nazi ideology?

Did Asperger, drunk with newfound power, simply fall in line with the Nazi killing machine, helping to eliminate all those who could not conform to the image of perfect Aryan? Or did he go along to get along: go along with murdering helpless children because he was afraid he’d otherwise be killed?

Did Hans Asperger experience a twinge of guilt as he sent children with AS to their deaths?

Does it matter?

An editorial in Molecular Autism argues that it matters a great deal. It matters that the story comes to our attention. And it matters that we know the truth.

This is about bioethics and accurate medical history, they say. The editors are unequivocal in stating their belief that Hans Asperger was a willing volunteer, “complicit with his Nazi superiors in targeting society’s most vulnerable people,” based on their review of an article by medical historian Herwig Czech, appearing in the same journal.[1] 

Simon Baron-Cohen*, Ami Klin, Steve Silberman, and Joseph D. Buxbaum, authors of this important editorial, write: “We take the unusual step of publishing this Editorial so as to explain our reasons for publishing this article. Two of us are Editors-in-Chief of Molecular Autism (SBC and JDB), one of us served as Action Editor during the long review process of this article (SBC), and two of us served as anonymous reviewers for this article, but have decided to forgo their anonymity (SS and AK).”

Hitler's letter authorizing the murder of the "incurably sick"

The four writers, all Jewish, take the bold step of owning history and making you own history, even when it is unpleasant, even when they might be accused of prejudicial treatment of the facts by dint of their religion.

They don’t CARE what you think. They will do what is right.

Respect!

In contrast, there is Sahil Singh Gujral, “the first openly autistic postgraduate in the UK to win the Wellcome Trust’s PhD studentship.” Speaking to the Guardian, Gujral compares these revelations regarding Asperger complicity in the Nazi eugenics program to Leo Kanner's views on the sterilization of the mentally disabled. But Gujral woefully misrepresents Kanner’s views.

Leo Kanner

Kanner advocated sterilization only for those who were incapable of caring for children. He didn’t for a moment believe that included all people with intellectual disabilities. “In my 20 years of psychiatric work with thousands of children and their parents,” said Kanner, “I have seen percentually at least as many 'intelligent’ adults unfit to rear their offspring as I have seen such 'feeble-minded' adults. I have--and many other have--come to the conclusion that, to a large extent independent of the I.Q., fitness for parenthood is determined by emotional involvements and relationships."

Jay Joseph[2] detailed an important debate between Kanner, a Jew, and Robert Foster Kennedy, chairman of the American Psychiatric Association. Foster Kennedy, advocated a U.S. euthanasia program patterned on the Nazi model that Hans Asperger served to implement. Kanner argued against such a program.

As they lined up for and against the murder of those with disabilities, these two men betrayed their ideological underpinnings. Foster Kennedy's views were likely informed by his academic milieu: he received an honorary degree in 1936 at the University of Heidelberg’s Nazi-sponsored 550-year jubilee celebration. Kanner's views were likely influenced by the fact that he was a Jew, part of a nation that values life.

It is worth reading in full, Joseph’s lengthy recounting of Kanner’s argument against euthanasia for the disabled. Kanner's Jewish humanity is on full display. A taste:

Kanner spoke of ‘the garbage collector’s assistant who has served our neighborhood for many years’. This was a ‘sober, conscientious, and industrious fellow, . . . deservedly respected by his employer, his co-workers and his spare time companions.’ Still, ‘with an I.Q. of 65, he is rated by us psychiatrists as feebleminded or mentally deficient' . . . 

Kanner discussed ways in which the ‘mentally deficient’ contribute to society:

“Sewage disposal, ditch digging, potato peeling, scrubbing of floors and other such occupations are as indispensable and essential to our way of living as science, literature and art. Cotton picking is an integral part of our textile industries. Oyster shucking is an important part of our seafood supply. Garbage collection is an essential part of our public hygiene measures. For all practical purposes, the garbage collector is as much of a public hygienist as is the laboratory bacteriologist. All such performances, often referred to snobbishly as ‘the dirty work’, are indeed real and necessary contributions to our culture, without which our culture would collapse within less than a month.”

Although Kanner agreed with Kennedy that ‘idiots and imbeciles cannot be trained in any kind of social usefulness’, he disagreed with Kennedy’s conclusion that, in Kanner’s words, ‘we are justified in passing the black bottle among them’ through the procedure some ‘dignify with the term euthanasia’. Kanner linked such ideas to reports of Nazi atrocities, and asked, ‘Shall we psychiatrists take our cue from the Nazi Gestapo?’

 . . . Kanner agreed with Kennedy and others that ‘sterilization is often a desirable procedure’ for ‘persons intellectually or emotionally unfit to rear children’. However, he objected to sterilization performed ‘solely on the basis of the I.Q.’

Kanner objected to sterilizing people on their basis of their IQ. And he certainly never advocated murdering people with Asperger’s Syndrome. Unlike Hans Asperger.

Propaganda poster for the Nazi eugenics program

Here’s an interesting factoid: some believe that Hans Asperger had Asperger’s Syndrome himself. He spoke of himself in the third person. He quoted himself. He was cold and distant, an introvert. 

And yet he was sending people just like himself to die of starvation or lethal injection.

No. There is no comparison between Hans Asperger, who sent children to starve to death, and Leo Kanner, who looked at people’s worth rather than at their ability to conform.

Propaganda for Nazi Germany's T-4 Euthanasia Program: "This person suffering from hereditary defects costs the community 60,000 Reichsmark during his lifetime. Fellow German, that is your money, too." from the Office of Racial Policy's Neues Volk.

Consumed by this story for several days, I cannot help but enumerate, in my mind, the wonderful people I know who have Asperger’s Syndrome. My brilliant cardiologist, for instance, or a certain young man who leads a local congregation with a voice like an angel.

What would have happened had these two been under Hans Asperger’s care in Vienna?

I think about this until my brain aches then think about it some more: the unfeeling banality of the particular evil of Hans Asperger, who marked for elimination the children he "championed."

I can see the children being marched into the bus that would take them to a place where they would be starved to death, or given a shot of something to steal the breath from their lungs, the sight from their eyes, the world around them.

Collection bus for killing patients. Hartheim Nazi killing center, bus with driver

The true story of Hans Asperger, Nazi, is an important story that must be told far and wide.

For if we do not, who will?

*Simon Baron-Cohen is a renowned autism researcher and expert, a cousin of Comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, who played, among other roles, Borat.

---

[1] Simon Baron-Cohen, Ami Klin, Steve Silberman, and Joseph D. Buxbaum, Did Hans Asperger actively assist the Nazi euthanasia program?, (Molecular Autism, 2018), https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-018-0209-5

[2] Jay Joseph, The 1942 ‘euthanasia’ debate in the American

Journal of Psychiatry,(Sage Publications, 2005), https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c10d/3408c200077d9123f802a92408859c37d90c.pdf

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

04/17 Links Pt2: Israel prepares to remember 23,646 fallen soldiers and 3,134 terror victims; Pro-Palestinian Students Protest During Holocaust Remembrance; 1,400-year-old menorah lamp, rare coin found Israel’s 70th trail

From Ian:

---

IDF Blog: What is Yom HaZikaron and how does Israel observe it?

Yom HaZikaron is the day of national remembrance in Israel to commemorate all the soldiers and people who lost their lives during the struggle to defend the State of Israel. On this day we mourn and remember our fallen soldiers and all lives lost by terror. Yom HaZikaron, which goes by the Jewish calendar, begins with a siren at 8:00 in the evening. As soon as the siren is heard, Israeli citizens stop whatever they’re doing, wherever they are, and stand firm to honor those they’ve lost. People driving on highways stop their cars in the middle of the road to get out and stand in remembrance. A whole office will stop working and a family having dinner will stop eating in order to spend a minute in respectful silence.

After the first siren, the State Memorial Ceremony begins at the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem. The Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff of the IDF, and the President take part in this ceremony. The next day, there’s another two-minute siren at 11:00 in the morning. This siren marks the beginning of private memorial ceremonies that take place in cemeteries or schools.

At night, the final ceremony is held at Mount Herzl National Cemetery. This ceremony ends Yom HaZikaron and marks the beginning of Israel's Independence Day.

Generally, in other countries, the Remembrance Day (Yom HaZikaron) of fallen soldiers and the Independence Day occur in two separate days of the year. In Israel, it was decided in accordance with the law that the Independence Day needs to begin the moment that Remembrance Day ends. This is because the State of Israel wouldn’t be able to celebrate its existence if it weren’t for those who gave their lives for it. We wouldn’t be able to have one of those days without the other one. We honor their memory and everything they fought for, so that today, we can celebrate our independence.

Israel prepares to remember 23,646 fallen soldiers and 3,134 terror victims

Israelis will bow their heads at 8 p.m. Tuesday for a minute of silence as sirens sound in remembrance the country’s fallen soldiers and terror victims.

In all, 71 new names were added over the past year to the roster of 23,646 who died defending the country. Thirty of those were disabled veterans who passed away due to complications from injuries sustained during their service.

Twelve names were also added to the list of terror victims who perished in attacks, bringing the total to 3,134.

The nationwide ceremonies for Israel’s Memorial Day, which begins at sundown, started in the afternoon with a commemoration event at the Yad Lebanim memorial for fallen soldiers in Jerusalem.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein took part in the ceremony, as well as top army brass and families of fallen soldiers.

“We bow our heads in memory of our loved ones whose blood has been spilled in our homeland,” Netanyahu, who lost his brother Yoni during the 1976 Entebbe Operation, said at the ceremony. “There is never a true remedy to that — to every family its own grief and its own courage.”

The prime minister mentioned the two Israeli soldiers who were declared dead after the 2014 Gaza war and whose bodies are held by the Hamas terror group, as well as an Israeli civilian who went missing after entering the Strip of his own accord.

“We don’t forget our missing [soldiers], Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul, even for a single moment, and are committed to returning the boys home as well as Avera Mengistu.

“We don’t forget our wounded even for a moment and lovingly send them wishes for recovery,” he added. “The message left by the fallen is sharp and clear: Our lives may be too short, but we have guaranteed the life of the nation forever,” Netanyahu said. “And they have indeed given us the ability to live. It is thanks to them and their successors that we are here.”

Memorial for Fallen Israeli Soldiers Opened to the Public

From its unimposing exterior, one might be surprised to learn that what lies underground at the site of the new Memorial Hall of Israel’s Fallen is an architectural masterpiece. The emotionally impactful memorial, set atop the historic Mount Herzl in Jerusalem, was designed and constructed by Kimmel Eshkolot Architects to commemorate members of Israel’s security services killed in the line of duty.

The hall, commissioned by Israel’s Department of Families, Commemoration and Heritage, was inaugurated in late 2017 upon completion but it wasn’t open to the public until recently. Now, visitors can experience the memorial with public tours and follow along with a video app that takes them through the stories of the fallen and the uniquely designed site.

At the center of the memorial, intended to be both a collective and personal experience, is a 250-meter “Wall of Names” composed of 23,000 commemorative bricks, each individually engraved with the name of a fallen soldier and date of death.

A computerized system, custom built for the memorial in collaboration with ETH’s ROB Technologies, illuminates each engraved brick on the anniversary of the person’s death.

The continuous, spiraling wall wraps around a central commemoration hall, where an undulating funnel-shaped formation of bricks opens to the sky.

“The special shape of the funnel is like a vortex – a natural phenomenon – playing with the daylight falling into the hall, making the daylight a ‘building material,’” Etan Kimmel, cofounder of Kimmel Eshkolot Architects, told Dezeen.

Read More

03/06 Links Pt1: Netanyahu at AIPAC: We must stop Iran. We will stop Iran; Palestinians increase payments to terrorists to $403 million

From Ian:

---

Netanyahu at AIPAC: We must stop Iran. We will stop Iran.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was welcomed with a resounding ovation Tuesday morning at AIPAC, where he gave a 30 minute speech on the “good, bad and beautiful” in Israel and the region.

Netanyahu steered completely clear of his legal woes piling up at home.

The prime minister, showing no outward signs of the impact of his domestic situation, strolled away from the podium and used slides broadcast on large screens to talk about Israel’s contributions in the spheres of agriculture, water preservation and security, as well as its growing diplomatic standing in the world.

Pointing to the slide which was painted in blue representing all the countries with whom Israel has diplomatic ties, Netanyahu said to a resounding ovation, “There are those who talk about boycotting Israel, we will boycott them.”

While the good news coming out of Israel – regarding its technology and security expertise – is very good and getting better, the bad news, he said, “is that bad things are getting worse and are very bad.”

The overwhelmingly bad thing, he said, is Iran. “We have to deal with this challenge,” he said. “If I have a message today it is simple: We must stop Iran.”

Netanyahu in the Oval Office: U.S.-Israel Alliance Has Never Been Stronger

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday during an Oval Office meeting with President Donald Trump that the U.S.-Israeli relationship has never been stronger.

"Mr. President, I've been here for nearly four decades seeking to build the American-Israel alliance. Under your leadership, it's never been stronger," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

"It's always a pleasure to see you both, but this is the first time we meet in Washington, America's capital, after you declared, Mr. President, Jerusalem as Israel's capital. And this was a historic proclamation followed by your bold decision to move the embassy by our upcoming national independence day," Netanyahu said.

He continued his praise of Trump by saying the Jewish people have long memories and they won't forget Trump's decision.

"We remember the proclamation of the great King, Cyrus the Great, 2,500 years ago. He proclaimed that the Jewish exiles in Babylon can come back and rebuild our temple in Jerusalem. We remember 100 years ago Lord Balfour, who issued the Balfour proclamation that recognized the rights of the Jewish people in our an ancestral homeland," he said.

"We remember 70 years ago, President Harry S. Truman was the first leader to recognize the Jewish state. And we remember how a few weeks ago that President Donald J. Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Mr. President, this will be remembered by our people throughout ages. Others talked about it. You did it. I want to thank you on behalf of the people of Israel," Netanyahu said.

US Ambassador to Israel Friedman decries J Street’s motto as ‘blasphemous’

The U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, decried the phrase “pro-Israel, pro-peace” — a motto closely associated with J Street — as “blasphemous.”

“Pro-Israel and pro-peace sounds like a completely reasonable position,” Friedman said Tuesday addressing the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. “My friends, it is not. Using that praise plainly implies that there are people who are pro-Israel and anti-peace.”

Friedman, formerly a lawyer for President Donald Trump, came under fire during his nomination process for having attacked liberal Jews, including his claim that J Street, the liberal Jewish Middle East lobby, was “worse than kapos.” He apologized during his testimony, although he ignored J Street requests for a personal apology.

“If you support Israel, then you must by definition support peace with its neighbors,” Friedman said. “It is no less than blasphemous to suggest that any Jew or any Christian is against peace.”

If a state of war persists, Friedman said, “I strongly suggest that we blame someone other than Israel for this predicament.”

J Street’s president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said in response that commitments to peace involved taking action.

“Contra David Friedman, it’s not blasphemous to suggest that the settlement movement and its allies in the Netanyahu and Trump governments are not committed to peace. They have spent years helping to expand and entrench the occupation — undermining the two-state solution and endangering Israel’s future,” Ben-Ami said.

“If Ambassador Friedman wants to defend settlements, demonize Palestinians, oppose the two state-solution and still claim to support peace, that’s his right,” he said. “Meanwhile, the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement will oppose his policies and continue to work to actually promote peace and secure Israel’s future.”

The bulk of Friedman’s speech was devoted to attacking those who use the phrase, which was notable considering how substantially Trump has moved U.S. policy to be more aligned with the policies of the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Read More

03/02 Links Pt1: Royal visit to Israel breaks a long-standing taboo; PA News Agency Ma’an Marks Purim Holiday With ‘Blood Libel’ Accusation

From Ian:

---

Melanie Phillips: ABOUT TIME!

Whether this momentous change is permanent, or merely a tactical alliance with Israel which won’t make even a dent in the profound Jew-hatred which is the default position in the Muslim world and which will in due course revert once again to hate-mongering rejection of Israel, remains to be seen.

For now, though, this geopolitical landscape has been altered in a way that was unthinkable until very recently. And that will undoubtedly have eased the way for a royal visit which Theresa May, as a genuinely warm Israel supporter, will have wanted to happen.

Prince William’s visit will be, however, extremely sensitive. Already the Palestinian Arabs and their cheerleaders in NGO-land are stirring the pot to make trouble.

The British are stressing that Prince William’s visit will be apolitical. The ambassador to Israel, David Quarrey, says : “It would be a visit about the strength of the contemporary partnership and relationship between the UK and Israel. It won’t be a visit about the peace process or issues like that”. He hoped that the prince would get “to see a bit of Israel and to meet as many Israelis as possible,” adding he wanted the prince to get “a flavour of this country, because I think that’s really important when visitors come that there are very special things about Israel, including the people.”

This royal visit to Israel, the west’s sole genuine ally in the Middle East, is not just long overdue. Prince William doesn’t have to say a word about the politics of the place. By bestowing upon Israel such a seal of approval, the visit will in itself send a message to the Arab and Muslim world that the the decades-long attempt by the Palestinian Arabs and their odious British and European supporters to delegitimise Israel has failed.

Israel is not a pariah state, it is not shunned and it is not alone. On the contrary, it is an important and valued ally of one of the most powerful countries in the west – which is now making plain its support, friendship and powerful ties to Israel by sending the Queen’s grandson to advertise this to the world.

About time.

Royal visit to Israel breaks a long-standing taboo

The news that HRH Prince William is going to visit Israel is to be wholeheartedly welcomed. A long-standing Foreign Office taboo has been broken, only four months after Theresa May’s extremely warm words about Israel at Lancaster House during the celebration of the centenary of the Balfour Declaration.

Royal visits have always been a central plank of Britain’s diplomacy over the centuries, and this one is a statement that Israel is no longer going to be treated like the pariah nation it so long has been by the Foreign Office. It is no therefore coincidence that although Her Majesty the Queen has made over 250 official overseas visits to 129 different countries during her reign, neither she nor one single member of the British royal family has ever yet been to Israel on an official visit.

Even though Prince Philip’s mother, Princess Alice of Greece, who was recognised as “Righteous Among the Nations” for sheltering a Jewish family in her Athens home during the Holocaust, was buried on the Mount of Olives, the Duke of Edinburgh was not allowed by the Foreign Office to visit her grave until 1994, and then only on a private visit. The Duke of Cambridge’s visit – which will be official – is therefore a splendid opportunity to right decades of wrong done to Israel in this regard.

“Official visits are organised and taken on the advice of the Foreign and Commonwealth office,” a press officer for the Royal Family explained when Prince Edward visited Israel privately – and a spokesman for the Foreign Office replied that ‘Israel is not unique” in not having received an official royal visit, because ‘Many countries have not had an official visit.’ That might be true for Burkino Faso and Chad, but the Foreign Office has somehow managed to find the time over the years to send the Queen on State visits to Libya, Iran, Sudan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan and Turkey. So it can’t have been that she wasn’t in the area.
Finally, the royal boycott of Israel ends. Tom Gross comments

The queen was happy to warmly embrace President Assad but not to visit the Jewish state.


Mark Regev: Prince William's visit - a testament to good ties

As early as several months ago, we received hints from the British that a historic visit from Prince William was possibly in the works. We were asked to be discreet about it. We are thrilled this visit has now been made public and official.

This visit is not materializing in a vacuum. It comes amid the backdrop of intensive talks at the highest levels between the two countries and their respective governments on sensitive matters pertaining to national security and Israel's role in matters of defense and the war on terror, in the private sector as well.

Relations between the two countries are exceedingly positive and healthy, as illustrated by the prince's upcoming visit. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has visited Great Britain twice in the past year, in February and November. At the same time, London officially commemorated the centennial anniversary of the Balfour Declaration.

Additionally, bilateral trade between the countries stood at a sum of $10 billion in 2017. This marked a 25% increase in one year. Great Britain is the second largest destination of Israeli exports after the United States and there many more examples of the countries' strong commercial ties.

For instance, one in every six medications sold within the framework of the British public healthcare system is Israeli-made. There are 300 Israeli companies with offices in Great Britain, 29 of which are publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange.

We will soon sit down with representatives of the British royal family and together build the prince's Israel itinerary, in a fashion befitting the lofty occasion. I will tell those representatives that when the red carpet is laid out, it will be more than just the Israeli government doing so. Indeed, a large number of Israelis have great interest in and affection for the British royal family.

Read More