Showing posts sorted by date for query egypt explosives. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query egypt explosives. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Thursday, December 25, 2014

From Ian:

Tzipi Livni: Abbas Sabotaged Peace Process
In an interview with Roger Cohen of the NY Times, Tzipi Livni, Israel's chief negotiator with the Palestinians, detailed the events which led to the failure of the most recent talks. Despite the fact that Livni is not a supporter of Prime Minister Netanyahu and felt he was difficult to deal with during the negotiations, she placed the failure of the talks firmly at the feed of Palestinian President Abbas.
According to Livni, the U.S. presented its own framework for a peace plan, Netanyahu agreed to work with it despite his objections but Abbas never gave the U.S. an answer. Things went downhill from there.
On March 17, in a meeting in Washington, President Obama presented Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, with a long-awaited American framework for an agreement that set out the administration’s views on major issues, including borders, security, settlements, Palestinian refugees and Jerusalem.
Livni considered it a fair framework, and Netanyahu had indicated willingness to proceed on the basis of it while saying he had reservations. But Abbas declined to give an answer in what his senior negotiator, Saeb Erekat, later described as a “difficult” meeting with Obama. Abbas remained evasive on the framework, which was never made public.
This, in Livni’s view, amounted to an important opportunity missed by the Palestinians, not least because to get Netanyahu’s acceptance of a negotiation on the basis of the 1967 borders with agreed-upon swaps — an idea Obama embraced in 2011 — would have indicated a major shift.
Elliott Abrams: US aid to PA should not reward terrorists
The omnibus appropriations bill recently passed by Congress contains an interesting ‎provision regarding the support for terrorists and their families by the Palestinian Authority:‎
"The Secretary of State shall reduce the amount of assistance made available by this Act ‎under the heading 'Economic Support Fund' for the West Bank and Gaza by an amount the ‎Secretary determines is equivalent to that expended by the Palestinian Authority in ‎payments to individuals and the families of such individuals that are imprisoned for acts of ‎terrorism or who died committing such acts during the previous calendar year.‎"
The intent is clear: Congress was aware of the PA's practice of rewarding individuals who ‎had committed acts of terrorism with direct financial support or financial support for their ‎families while they remain in prison. And Congress wants to be sure that aid from the ‎United States isn't paying for this, so for every dollar the PA spends we will reduce aid to the ‎PA by the same amount.‎
Good idea, long overdue -- but the language quoted above won't achieve that goal. First of ‎all, why only acts committed "during the previous calendar year?" Does that mean that ‎payments to someone who committed an act of terrorism two or five or 10 years ago is ‎exempt? Does that clause about "the previous calendar year" modify "imprisoned for acts of ‎terrorism," or "who died committing such acts," or both? Or does it modify all "payments," ‎which would be the logical meaning: The amount of U.S. aid is to be reduced by the amount ‎of all payments made in the prior year? Sloppy, last minute drafting of this provision is the ‎culprit.‎
The UNRWA Shill Game and State Department Compliance
“The goal of U.S. support to UNRWA,” according to the State Department Report, “is to ensure that Palestinian refugees live in dignity with an enhanced human development potential until a comprehensive and just solution is secured.” In reality, however, UNRWA has assured that the children, grandchildren and all future descendants of Palestinian refugees will remain degraded and humiliated victims of its policy, which has no equivalent for any other refugees in the world – including more than three million Syrians from President Assad’s current reign of terror.
The stated goal of State Department largesse toward UNRWA is to “promote the human development of Palestinian refugees by improving living conditions, economic potential, livelihoods, access, and human rights.” It pledges to do so “until a just solution is achieved and UNRWA’s mandate ends.” American taxpayers should not hold their breath. A sixty-five year-old policy of unmonitored generosity to a certified rip-off organization that invents and inflates refugee numbers to justify its shnorring is unlikely to abate in the foreseeable future.
Indeed, as Romirowsky and Joffe indicate, UNRWA in Gaza has become little more than a surrogate for Hamas. During its summer rocket assault against Israel UNRWA schools were storehouses for Hamas rockets while UNRWA employees cheered the murder of Israelis. Belatedly mindful of this travesty, the new State Department Framework states, rather preposterously in light of recent events, that “the United States and UNRWA share concerns about the threat of terrorism.” Tunnels beneath and rockets above Israel’s borders are not mentioned.
On paper at least, according to impressionable State Department drafters, UNRWA is “committed to taking all possible measures to ensure that funding provided by the United States to support UNRWA is not used to provide assistance to, or otherwise support, terrorists or terrorist organizations.” The State Department notes “with appreciation efforts taken by UNRWA during the course of 2014 to strengthen the Agency’s neutrality compliance.” Gaza is ignored. Romirowsky and Joffe wonder, as anyone might, how the Facebook celebration by UNRWA teachers following the recent murder of four Jerusalem rabbis at prayer in their synagogue meets the standard of “neutrality compliance.”

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

From Ian:

The 2014 Dishonest Reporting Awards
Scarlett Johansson’s brave stand against Israel-bashers seems so long ago. With three teenagers kidnapped and murdered, a Gaza war, violence in Jerusalem, an escalating tug of war over the Temple Mount, and unilateral PA efforts in the UN, Israelis will be glad 2014 is over.
Don’t forget the rise of ISIS, Iranian tensions, and frayed ties with the US.
For the first time, we decided to set aside the readers’ choice for the 2014 Dishonest Reporter. We believe readers will agree. More on that below.
We thank everyone for sharing their thoughts on the roller coaster that was 2014. And so, without further ado . . .
The 2014 Dishonest Reporting Awards
1. The 2014 Dishonest Reporting Award Winner: Gaza War Correspondents
2. Dishonest Reporting Award (People’s Choice): New York Times
3. Most Infected Medical Journal: The Lancet
4. Worst Video: Channel 4, Jon Snow
5. Biggest Op-Ed Train Wreck: Sydney Morning Herald
6. Most Dishonest Photo: Jim Hollander, European Pressphoto Agency
7. Worst Blurring of Journalism and Advocacy: Haaretz
8. Most Insensitive Cartoon: The Guardian
9. Most Memorable Gaffe: CNN

The 2014 Dishonest Reporting Awards: Why the Gaza War Correspondents Won
What It All Means
Media coverage of Operation Protective Edge contributed to dramatic spikes in anti-Semitism in Europe, Australia, US campuses, South Africa, and South America. Britain alone saw a 500 percent increase.
The anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement has been making a comeback as well.
And Israel refuses to cooperate with a UN inquiry led by William Schabas, a Canadian professor of human rights and international law who has his own axe to grind with Israel.
As 2014 draws to a close, all the players are drawing conclusions and moving forward. Hamas is already reconstructing terror tunnels, holding military exercises, and re-arming. The top US military leader, Gen. Martin Dempsey said the Pentagon was learning from the IDF how to minimize civilian casualties and deal with terror tunnels. And among other things, the IDF concluded that Hezbollah has probably dug cross-border tunnels.
Only time will tell what, if anything, Big Media has learned.
BBC chief: Anti-Semitism makes me question Jews’ future in UK
The director of BBC Television said rising anti-Semitism has made him question the long-term future for Jews in the UK.
Speaking at a conference in Jerusalem on Sunday, Danny Cohen said the past year had been the most difficult for him as a Jew living in the United Kingdom.
“I’ve never felt so uncomfortable being a Jew in the UK as I’ve felt in the last 12 months. And it’s made me think about, you know, is it our long-term home, actually. Because you feel it. I’ve felt it in a way I’ve never felt before actually,” he said in a conversation with Channel 2’s anchor Yonit Levi.
Cohen went on: “And you’ve seen the number of attacks rise. You’ve seen murders in France. You’ve seen murders in Belgium. It’s been pretty grim actually. And having lived all my life in the UK, I’ve never felt as I do now about anti-Semitism in Europe.”
Cohen, who grew up and went to school in London — including to a Jewish elementary school — is a TV whiz kid. Still only 40, he was previously the controller of BBC1 TV, the youngest appointee to that post, before taking over a director of BBC Television last year. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

From Ian:

Jailed Palestinian leader blasts UN statehood bid
Jailed Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti sharply criticized the Palestinian Authority on Monday and called to reword the bid submitted to the UN requesting recognition of a state and an Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by 2017.
In a letter sent from Israeli prison, Barghouti said he supported the unilateral move to go to the UN but slammed the current bid as an “unjustified fallback which will have a very negative impact on the Palestinian position,” Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported.
The senior Fatah leader said any mention of land swaps with Israel must be removed and that the bid should focus on the major issues of settlement expansion, Jerusalem, and the blockade on Gaza.
“We must stop negotiating with ourselves uselessly,” he added.
Barghouti also said the Palestinian prisoners issue should take central place in the document. (h/t Elder of Lobby )
Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinian voices show dissent over statehood resolution at UN
The Palestinian National Initiative, an independent political movement led by Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, said the draft resolution includes “dangerous lapses” that compromise Palestinian demands.
The movement claimed that the PA leadership presented the draft resolution so as to have an excuse to avoid joining the International Criminal Court.
The movement criticized the resolution for “equating between Palestinians and Israel, ignoring the fact that one part has been occupying and repressing the other for the past 66 years.”
It also rejected the reference to Jerusalem as the capital of two states. This would pave the way for Israel to take most parts of the city and turn the Palestinian presence into a symbolic one, the movement said.
PA and Fatah: “Jaffa, Acre, Haifa, and Nazareth are ours”‎
The Palestinian Authority and Fatah continue to deny Israel's right to exist and present Israeli cities as "Palestinian." Recently, Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi emphasized on Lebanese TV that "Haifa, Jaffa, Acre and Nazareth are Palestinian," and this "despite" the opinions of "the Americans and the Israelis":
Fatah Central Committee member, Tawfiq Tirawi: "Don't you dare think there is even a single Palestinian, whether he supports the two-state solution or another path, who would agree to these settlements being part of Israel, and that Haifa, Jaffa and Acre are not Palestinian. No. Haifa, Jaffa, Acre and Nazareth are Palestinian, despite the Americans and the Israelis."
[Al-Mayadeen TV (Lebanon), Dec. 14, 2014; posted on Tirawi's Facebook page]
Fatah official: Israeli cities "Haifa, Jaffa, Acre and Nazareth are Palestinian"


Friday, December 12, 2014

From Ian:

Danish ambassador, JPost's Caroline Glick exchange verbal blows over EU attitude toward Israel
Glick was particularly struck by Vahr’s reference to a common culture between Israel and Europe.
“We have this whole common culture, I mean really? We respect international law. You guys make it up,” she said.
In 2001, the United Nations Security Council approved a binding resolution that bars UN member states from funding or supporting terrorist organizations, Glick said.
That resolution, she said, has not stopped Europe from “funneling billions of euros into rebuilding terrorist-controlled Gaza.
“This is in contravention of binding international law that you signed onto,” she charged.
But when it comes to Israel, Europe simply invents international law, Glick said. Europe acts as if it is required by law to sanction Israel for activity over the pre-1967 lines in West Bank settlements and Jerusalem, even though there is no such binding international legislation, she said.
“There is no such binding law. You guys are funding settlements in Western Sahara. (h/t Bob Knot)
Caroline Glick tells off Danish ambassador


Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians Flee Hamas, Ask Israel to Imprison Them
Hamas claims that there is no phenomenon of Palestinians fleeing to Israel. A spokesman for the Hamas-controlled Interior Ministry said that security forces in the Gaza Strip were working to prevent Palestinians from crossing into Israel.
But what Hamas is not prepared to admit is that it is responsible for the misery of the Palestinians living under its rule in the Gaza Strip. More than three months after the military confrontation with Israel, Hamas has failed to offer the Palestinians any hope.
"Hamas has destroyed the dreams of young Palestinians," remarked a veteran Palestinian journalist in the Gaza Strip. "Hamas has destroyed the future of young people here."
Not only is Hamas unwilling to accept any kind of responsibility, but it continues to hold everyone else but itself responsible for the tragic situation in the Gaza Strip. Hamas continues to hold Israel, the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA responsible for the grievances of the Palestinians.
Instead of working to improve the living conditions of its people, Hamas is continuing to prepare its next war against Israel. In recent weeks, Hamas increased its rocket and mortar firing tests out to sea, according to an Israeli military source.
The tragic case of the two Palestinian youths who said they prefer Israeli jail to life in the Gaza Strip shows that some Palestinians are no longer willing to tolerate Hamas's deadly adventures and oppression. That is why the coming weeks and months could see a rise in the number of Palestinians knocking on Israel's door and asking to be imprisoned rather than return to the Gaza Strip.
Palestinian attacks family of five with acid in Gush Etzion
A family of five, including young children, were lightly wounded in the West Bank Friday afternoon when a Palestinian man hurled acid into their car, before being shot and seriously wounded.
The attack occurred near a checkpoint between the Gush Etzion settlement of Beitar Illit, where the family is from, and the Palestinian village of Husan, southwest of Jerusalem.
Palestinian news agency Ma’an identified the man as Jamal Abd al-Majid Ghayatha, 45, from the West Bank village of Nahalin. Media networks affiliated with Hamas said the man was a former Palestinian prisoner in Israel jail, Israel Radio reported.
The father of the family, in his 50s, was said to have been hit in the face with the liquid, causing burns to his eyes. He was evacuated to Hadassah Hospital Ein Kerem in Jerusalem for treatment. The mother and three girls aged 8 to 10 were taken to Shaare Zedek Medical Center in the capital with light injuries.
Ghayatha was being treated at Hadassah Hospital Ein Kerem as well.
Police said the Ghayata approached the family’s car, posing as a hitchhiker, and hurled the chemical substance inside. He reportedly held a screwdriver in his hand, and there were conflicting reports as to whether he attempted to attack people with it or tried to flee the scene. An armed civilian shot Ghayata, seriously injuring him. He was then apprehended by Border Police.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

From Ian:

Israeli home demolitions deter Palestinian terrorism, study finds
Israeli house demolitions effectively decrease terrorist attacks, according to a new study.
The study, “Counter-Suicide-Terrorism: Evidence from House Demolitions,” to be published in the January issue of the Journal of Politics, found that Israel’s policy of demolishing the homes of Palestinian terrorists causes “an immediate, significant decrease in the number of suicide attacks.”
The study examines data on punitive house demolitions between 2000 and 2005, and precautionary demolitions — those based on the location of a house but unrelated to the identity of the house’s owner — from 2004 to 2005. The authors found that punitive house demolitions during that time led to “fewer suicide attacks in the month following,” while precautionary demolitions caused “a significant increase in the number of suicide attacks.”
Co-authored by researchers at Northwestern University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the study runs contrary to the widely held belief that punitive house demolitions do not dissuade would-be terrorists.
Eugene Kontorovich: Resolution 242 Revisited: New Evidence on the Required Scope of Israeli Withdrawal
United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, passed in November 1967, in the wake of the Six Day War, is widely regarded as among the most important ever. But it’s meaning is also the most debated. The resolution famously called for “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.” The meaning of this provision – in particular, the extent of the required withdrawal - has been contested ever since.
This article presents new evidence on the resolution’s meaning – an issue that has gained new relevance amidst current diplomatic efforts for a Security Council resolution that could effectively supersede 242. The article does not engage all the myriad disputes and questions about the resolution, nor aim at a comprehensive evaluation of it. Rather, it adds two important but previously unappreciated dimensions that bear on how 242 should be read.
First, the article examines the meaning of 242’s withdrawal provision by comparing it to all other such territorial withdrawal demands issued by the Security Council. It finds that the language of 242 differs notably from the other 18 distinct territorial withdrawal demands, all of which explicitly require a complete withdraw from the territory in question. An examination of these resolutions supports the view that 242’s unusual wording was a meaningful and substantive drafting choice.
Second, the article examines contemporaneous understandings in the United Nations about the rules concerning territorial. Discussions in the International Law Commission, involving the leading international law jurists of the post-WWII era, demonstrates that it was generally agreed that the U.N. Charter introduced a new prohibition on territorial changes as a result of war, a principle referred to in the preamble of 242. Yet the same discussions also make clear that this rule was understood to have significant limitations and exceptions. (h/t billposer)
Eugene Kontorovich: The legitimacy of Israel’s nation-state bill (I): comparative constitutionalism
These objections do not hold water. For one, ensuring Israel’s status as a Jewish nation state is a goal expressly endorsed by the same critics, when it comes to pressuring Israel into diplomatic concessions. Second, the law is far from unusual by Western standards: it actually does far less to recognize Jewish nationhood or religion than provisions common in other democratic constitutions. This post will consider the general parameters of the legislation in comparison to constitutional provisions of other Western democracies. Tomorrow, a second post will relate the law to the “two state solution.”
The nation state bills mostly constitutionalize the national anthem, symbols, holidays, and so forth. There is nothing racist, or even unusual, about having national or religious character reflected in constitutional commitments, as research by my colleagues at the Kohelet Policy Forum demonstrates. Seven EU states have constitutional “nationhood” provisions, which typically speak of the state as being the national home and locus of self-determination for the country’s majority ethnic group. This is even the case in places like the Baltics, with large and alienated minority populations.

Tuesday, December 09, 2014

From Ian:

US calls on UNRWA to ‘uphold neutrality’ after call to boycott ‘Post’
The State Department is calling on personnel at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to “uphold its stated policy of neutrality,” after its spokesman, Chris Gunness, called for a boycott of The Jerusalem Post last week.
“Our position on UNRWA and its important humanitarian role is very clear,” State Department spokesman Edgar Vasquez told the Post. “It is imperative that all sides respect the humanitarian and development role of UNRWA. And we expect UNRWA personnel to uphold its stated policy of neutrality so that it can carry out its critical mandate.”
Gunness claimed impartiality in an article published by the Post last week, reacting with a series of tweets critical of the newspaper and its staff. The article was an op-ed, written by Palestinian human rights activist Bassam Eid.
One of those tweets called for a “boycott of JPost,” interpreted by the newspaper as a breach of its commitment to neutrality.
“We have been in touch with Chris Gunness, who has made clear that, in his tweets, he was not calling for a boycott against any media outlet but instead was making his objections to a single article that we all find problematic,” one UN spokesman said, responding to the incident.
Jennifer Rubin: What is a U.N. agency for Palestinian refu­gees doing in D.C.?
The U.N. Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act of 2011 included provisions to deal with longstanding concerns about UNRWA’s use of anti-Israel textbooks, anti-Israel rhetoric, association with Hamas members and employment of some 31,000 “refugees” (“presenting a clear conflict of interest”).
But a new issue is taking center stage. As Right Turn reported:
"Early last year it set up a D.C. “liaison” office. With whom is it liaisoning? Mostly Congress, it turns out. U.S. law forbids the United Nations from lobbying Congress, but as we learned with Newt Gingrich “lobbying” or a “lobbyist” is in the eye of the beholder. UNRWA employs two full-time staffers in D.C., both of whom have loads of experience on Capitol Hill. Chris McGrath is a former aide for Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.); his boss, Matthew Reynolds, worked in legislative affairs for the State Department. I was assured no “lobbying” goes on, but they do meet virtually nonstop with lawmakers — appropriators are key — to answer questions about how taxpayer dollars are spent, why UNRWA’s work is important and how it makes sure money isn’t going to terrorists.
It seems American tax dollars are going, in part, to fund this office that in effect makes sure Congress doesn’t get fed up and cut off the money flow."
Palestinian sought to recruit Texas man to kill Obama last year, Israel Police say
An unnamed Palestinian man sought to recruit a US citizen to assassinate Barack Obama when the US president visited Israel and the West Bank in March 2013, Israel police said on Tuesday.
The American, Adam Livix, was indicted in Tel Aviv on Tuesday on a separate matter, for charges that include an attempt to buy plastic explosives from Israeli soldiers with the apparent intention of harming Muslim holy sites.
Israel Police said that Livix, who lived in Hebron and Bethlehem in 2013, was asked at that time by a Palestinian operative if he could assassinate Obama with a sniper’s rifle during the president’s visit, but he refused to do so. No reference to this allegation was made in the charge sheet released Tuesday.
Livix, a Christian from Texas who pretended to be a Navy Seal, is wanted in the US for questioning regarding drug violations and has been in Israel Police custody since November 19, the police said.
The investigation of Livix in recent weeks was carried out in cooperation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Friday, December 05, 2014

From Ian:

JCPA: Abbas Shuts the Door to Negotiations with Israel
In his speech Abbas, who claimed there was no longer an Israeli partner for a political settlement, set forth the other components of his plan. They include: the “state of Palestine” joining international conventions and organizations, particularly the International Criminal Court in The Hague and a conference of states parties to the Geneva conventions, where one of the resolutions would be to declare the conventions applicable to the state of Palestine;” requesting the United Nations to provide protection to the Palestinian people; and a diplomatic effort to convince additional states to recognize the “state of Palestine.”
Abbas’ political plan shuts the door to any possibility of reaching a political settlement through negotiations with Israel. Whereas Abbas conveys to the world at large that he remains committed to the path of negotiations, the conditions he has presented for resuming them entail imposing terms on Israel with no reciprocity from the Palestinians in the context of a political compromise.
Abbas says Palestinian conditions for renewing the talks include: ending construction in the settlements, freeing the fourth group of Palestinian prisoners (terrorists who are Israeli citizens and are serving prison sentences), withdrawing IDF forces from parts of Area A in the West Bank that are supposed to be under the Palestinian Authority’s full security control, and Israeli agreement to negotiate with the Palestinians on making the 1967 lines the border between the state of Israel and the state of Palestine.
Khaled Abu Toameh: ISIS in Gaza
When One Radical Group Believes Another Is Not Radical Enough
Now almost everyone is talking about the Islamic State threats in Gaza against poets, writers and women. The leaflets mention the poets and writers by name — a move that has created panic. The leaflets also include an ultimatum to Palestinian women to abide by Islamic attire or face the Islamic State style of punishment — presumably being stoned to death.
Of course, all this is taking place while Hamas continues to insist that that the Islamic State is not operating in Gaza. Those who are taking the threats seriously are the writers and women whose names appeared in the leaflets.
Islamic State flags can already be seen at football stadiums, on windshields of vehicles, mosques, educational centers and wedding invitations.
It is also clear that if and when the Hamas regime collapses, the Gaza Strip will not fall into the lands of the less-radical Palestinians.
It is important to keep in mind that the counties in Europe now voting for a Palestinian state may effectively be paving the way for a takeover by Islamic State.
Richard Millett: I confronted the Palestinian “ambassador” over Har Nof killings.
On Tuesday night in Parliament I asked Manuel Hassassian, the unofficial Palestinian ambassador to the UK, why in the speech he had just delivered in which he accused Israel of “war crimes” he made no mention of Palestinian violence, specifically the recent murders by two Palestinians of four Rabbis and a Druze policeman at a west Jerusalem synagogue.
He answered me directly but when he said that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had condemned the killings I reminded him, as you can see in the clip below, that Abbas had incited the murders in the first place with his violent rhetoric including imploring Palestinians to use “all means” to stop Jews visiting the Temple Mount. Here is our confrontation:
Meanwhile, a woman had just told the room that the Palestinians were suffering a fate worse than that of Anne Frank.
What she said was bad enough but the most chilling aspect was the warm applause she received from both Hassassian and ex-Labour MP Martin Linton, now chairperson of Labour Friends of Palestine, as well as from the others present.

  • Friday, December 05, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
In 2010, I analyzed the first three UNRWA reports, documenting the history of how that organization devolved from one that genuinely tried to help genuine refugees into the bloated, self-perpetuating mess it became only a few years later.

Here's a repost of the first article, plus some additional comments:

UNRWA's first report on its progress, A/1451/Rev.1, is a fascinating document on many levels. It describes its progress in the first six months of its existence.

Here are some excerpts:
HISTORY

6. When UNRPR was set up by the General Assembly, it was presumably with the idea thatthe problem would be resolved in a matter of months. During the summer of 1949 it became obvious that some other approach was needed, and the United Nations Economic Survey Mission for the Middle East was dispatched to study and report on conditions and to make recommendations concerning future activity. After three months of exhaustive study in the field, the Mission's interim report to the General Assembly in November 1949(1) recommended the creation of a new agency, which would not only carry out relief on a diminishing scale, but would inaugurate a works programme in which able-bodied refugees could become self-supporting and at the same time create works of lasting benefit to the refugees and the countries concerned. The recommendations of the report were embodied in resolution 302 (IV) which provided for the setting up of UNRWAPRNE. The final report signed in Paris in December covered the subject comprehensively and has been accepted by the Agency as its guide.2
UNRWA did not intend at first to be a permanent agency. It really tried to provide jobs for the Palestinian Arabs and to work with Arab governments to help integrate them. The Arabs' recalcitrance is the single major reason we still have so many "refugees" today, and after a few years UNRWA gave up and turned into a giant, self-perpetuating welfare system.
NUMBERS OF REFUGEES

16. The Agency has accepted as realistic the figures set forth in appendix B of the first interim report of the United Nations Economic Survey Mission, but recognizes that the numbers have increased in conformity with the extremely high birthrate of the refugees. There is reason to believe that births are always registered for ration purposes, but deaths are often, if not usually, concealed so that the family may continue to collect rations for the deceased. 

17...The figures for Lebanon (128,000) are confused due to the fact that many Lebanese nationals along the Palestinian frontier habitually worked most of the year on the farms or in the citrus groves of Palestine. With the advent of war they came back across the border and claimed status as refugees. Only an exhaustive and expensive census, now under way although ardently opposed by those concerned, will divide worthy from false claimants.

18. The former Trans-Jordan and the portion of Palestine remaining in Arab hands and now annexed to the Hashimite Kingdom of the Jordan received the greatest influx of refugees of any of the countries adjacent to Israel -- probably more than half of all the refugees. For various reasons, the largest number of fictitious names on the ration lists pertain to refugees in this area. All earlier attempts at a close census of those entitled to relief have been frustrated, but a comprehensive survey, now under way, is achieving worthwhile results in casting up names of dead people for which rations are still drawn, fraudulent claims regarding numbers of dependents (it is alleged that it is a common practice for refugees to hire children from other families at census time), and in eliminating duplications where families have two or more ration cards. The census, though stubbornly resisted, will eliminate many thousands from the lists of refugees now in receipt of rations.

19. Unauthorized movement between camps, and sometimes across international boundaries, as well as deep-rooted reluctance of refugees to reveal personal information to census-takers, make it very difficult to obtain accurate statistics concerning them.
As far as I know, the census was never completed and the problems of exaggerated numbers of refugees remain, even today. A sense of entitlement will turn many people into lazy opportunists, and if they have no disincentive to act that way this behavior gets passed on to the next generation, and the following ones as well.


MORALE

26. Strangely enough the general morale of the refugees is higher than might be expected after spending more than two years in exile under most trying conditions. Real trouble-makers are confined to a very small proportion of the total number of refugees, and food strikes and work stoppages are generally considered to be the result of organized pressure groups.

27. During August, a campaign of bitter criticism of the Agency, its motives and personnel, was carried on in a large section of the Arab Press. The rather unvaried monotony of the charges gave indication of central inspiration. An organized series of work stoppages occurred in Lebanon in early September wherein small groups threatened the workers in such a manner that they declined to work for a time. The Syrian office of the Agency, located in Damascus, was destroyed by explosives and a bomb was thrown at a truckload of workers in Lebanon. Threats of violence have been made against individual employees of the Agency. It seems likely that the two campaigns--denunciations in certain sections of the Arab Press and violence--are closely related and spring from the same source which fostered the food strikes in the early days of the Agency.
Arab governments in general considered UNRWA the enemy, and they did everything possible to thwart any chance of solving the refugee crisis, instead wanting to use the refugees as pawns to pressure Israel. This attitude has not changed in sixty years.

REFUGEES IN ISRAEL

30. In Israel, the Agency has provided relief to two types of refugees, Jews who fled inside the borders of Israel during the fighting, and Arabs in most instances displaced from one area in Palestine to another. Jewish refugees at first numbered 17,000 but, during the current summer, all but 3,000 of these have been absorbed into the economic life of the new State. Arabs on relief were first numbered at 31,000 but many have been placed in circumstances in which they are self-supporting, so that it was possible to reduce the number to 24,000 at the end of August 1950.

31. Recent discussions with the Israel Government indicate that the idea of relief distribution is repugnant to it, and the Agency was informed that already many of the 24,000 remaining refugees were employed and that all able-bodied refugees desiring employment could be absorbed on works projects if they would register at the government registry offices for that purpose. It was stated that they all have status as citizens of Israel and are entitled to treatment as such. It was claimed that after cessation of relief, aged and infirm refugees would be cared for under the normal social welfare machinery of Israel. The Agency was requested to share financially in a programme of re-establishment of displaced Arabs now within the boundaries of Israel.
How great a contrast is there between how Israel treated its Arab refugees and how the Arab nations did! Within a short time after the war, Israel managed to fully integrate every single Arab refugee as citizens (and they eventually allowed tens of thousands more to come into Israel for family re-unification.) Not only did Israel inform the UNRWA that its services would not be needed for long, but said that the very idea of an outside agency taking responsibility for its Arab citizens is repugnant!

So while the number of Arab claimants for UNRWA services went down from 31,000 to zero in a relatively short time, in every Arab country those numbers only increased.

Fully half of the report deals with specific works projects that were attempted to allow the refugees to find jobs. As we now know, most of these projects went nowhere because of fears by Arab countries that their Palestinian Arab brethren would want to actually stay in their countries as equal citizens.

The appendix of charity organizations and NGOs that contributed to help the Palestinian Arabs does not mention a single Muslim charity.


In those days, UNRWA indeed tried hard to "reintegrate" - their word, used multiple times - Palestinian Arabs into the economic life of the countries they were in, namely Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria. The point was for them to become self-sufficient and no longer need aid, and they would then no longer be called "refugees."

That never happened. Arab governments resisted any moves to allow Palestinians to become citizens, except for Jordan. 

The use of the word "reintegration" as opposed to "integration" says volumes. It means that UNRWA knew quite well that many of the refugees were in fact citizens of Lebanon or Syria and had merely returned to their countries of origin. Moreover, UNRWA knew that the chances of "return" to Israel were close to zero and that Arabs still considered all Arab lands to be essentially one virtual nation as they were only a few decades earlier under Ottoman rule. To UNRWA officials at the time, it was self-evident that Arabs should re-integrate into Arab countries to solve the refugee issue, and they didn't count on how little Arab leaders cared about their Palestinian brethren

Back to Jordan: Jordan hosts some 41% of all "refugees" today. Nearly all of them are Jordanian citizens. One must wonder, why there are still refugee camps in Jordan 66 years after 1948?  Yet, because UNRWA is now a mere self-perpetuating technocracy, Jordan has no incentive to integrate these citizens into its population even today - 60 years after Israel did exactly that.

Thursday, December 04, 2014

From Ian:

UK: Britain's Terror Addiction
In Britain, declarations of disgust for specific acts of terrorism often seem designed merely to shroud tolerance for pro-terror views. The Guardian, for example, condemned the synagogue murders in Israel and described Hamas's celebrations of the attacks as "depressing"; but a mere four days before the terror attack, the newspaper published an opinion piece by Hamas official Ahmed Yousef, which set out to defend the Hamas charter, a document that explicitly calls for the eradication of not only Israelis but Jews.
Meanwhile, Ahmed Brahimi's PPDP has entertained members of the House of Lords; Interpal enjoys the support of parliamentary motions signed by dozens of British MPs and is painted as a victim of Islamophobia by prominent newspaper journalists; and the PFLP, addressing crowds of supporters in London, is considered a heroic bulwark against Western "imperialism."
Debates between politicians and commentators over the causes of radicalization and extremism in Britain invariably focus on how to tackle support for groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda. But why is it that Hamas and PFLP are deemed moderate, regardless of how many civilians they murder?
One enormous factor in the spread of Islamic extremism surely must be the networks of charities that seem to support Palestinian terrorist organizations – networks that include groups such as Interpal and the PPDP. Will these organizations ever be shut down?
Frenchman sentenced to 5 years for Israeli hit-and-run killing
Zeitouni’s parents flew to France to attend the trial and both burst out crying during the deliberations, Ynet reported. Friends of the young woman and supporters from the local Jewish community also went to the trial but were not let into the courtroom, according to the report.
“We have an opportunity to tell the world that justice can be served, and people cannot run away from it,” said Peled.
The victim’s family would have preferred the trial to have taken place in Israel, their lawyer said.
“But this is better than nothing and they have arrived with confidence,” added the lawyer, Gilles-William Goldnadel.
He described Robic as a “habitual road criminal” who showed “rare cowardice” in deciding to flee the scene.
Enough is enough
People died that day. They were people with families, histories and legacies. Yet for every story about their lives I have seen 20 about what someone else may think about them, about us, or whatever response we choose for the slaughter of our citizens in our streets. That is simply slave mentality.
We house our own killers, provide for our attackers, save the world, protect the weak and invent the uninventable, and we stand there begging for the world to see that hey, it's kind of hard to make peace with someone who insists on chopping us up, running us over, and bombing our citizens into permanent post-traumatic stress disorder.
Well, I'm done. Seriously. I will never again give that shpiel. I will not discuss what may or may not be necessary force or hand out cookies in the hope they may lay off. Nah.
Instead I will learn what I can about Advanced Staff Sgt. Maj. Zidan Saif and Rabbis Kalman Zeev Levine, Moshe Twersky, Aryeh Kupinsky and Avraham Goldberg, may God avenge their blood, and I will know their stories and pay respect to their lives. I will not give a pound of flesh to the wolves at our door and I will not, ever again, be a public relations machine for the deaf.
Enough.
Enough.
Enough.
We have survived too much to recommit to slavery. We have too much to lose to be locked up in this prison of our own making.
Enough.

Sunday, November 23, 2014

From Ian:

Why do we keep saying it's not anti-Semitic?
There are wars, there are terrorist attacks and there are pogroms. What occurred this week at the Har Nof Synagogue in Israel was age-old anti-Semitism. It was not political, it was not anti-Zionist, it was not an attack against Israel's military actions, it was a religious pogrom; the type of which has been seen thousands of times through the ages - the type which are occurring again.
Yes, I know. It's Israel's fault, isn't it? With their military actions and settlement building, they bring it all upon themselves. And, yes, I know that the majority of Irish people consider the charge of "anti-Semitism" to be a red herring; a convenient way of deflecting attention from Israel's military and political policies in the Middle East. During the summer, some Irish politicians and media networks aired the oft-repeated view that the terrorist group Hamas were no longer anti-Semitic, and that their pre-election manifesto indicated they would remove the call for the destruction of all Jews (and the State of Israel) from their 1988 charter. But, as one of our own politicians might put it, isn't that the sort of thing you say during an election? Hamas needed to take support from the more moderate Fatah party and had no problem misleading the people of Gaza in order to do so.
But the call to kill all Jews and destroy Israel is still there in the charter and, as recently as two months, ago Hamas spokesman Osama Hamdam refused to say that they would consider removing it.
This, to put it mildly, makes Jews living in Israel, surrounded by enemies, more than a little bit nervous. (Can you imagine what would happen if Isis got in there? And we wonder why the Israeli's need to be so militarised and hard-nosed?)
Bashing Israel as Group Therapy
Your average Israeli or Israel supporter will rightly ask themselves whether this means anything. Nu? So there are Jews who think the real Israel doesn't live up to their fantasies and are throwing a fit. We have always had people like that, on both the right and the left, religious and secular. Should I really be concerned?
My answer is no and yes. No, because contrary to Peter Beinart and co., I don't believe the support of many of them matters all that much. There's a high correlation between lack of affinity with Israel and lack of affinity with Jewish identity, and the idea of chasing after such people who don't really care at the expense of the interests of millions of Israeli Jews strikes me as more than a little pointless, if not pathetic. If they want to go that badly, let them. The shortfall in donation money can be made up by opening the local and global markets as much as possible and cultivating other groups who won't treat us like we should be involuntarily committed.
Yes, because liberal Jews in elite positions – like those who write for, edit or own publications like the New Yorker – are capable of doing Israel a great deal of harm. The New Yorker is part of a select group of publications such as Haaretz, the Atlantic, the New York Times and the Guardian, which are read by a highly influential cross-national elite of journalists, professionals and government bureaucrats. Many people of real power – ambassadors, senior officials, parliamentary advisors or foreign office clerks – often rely almost exclusively on such ostensibly 'neutral' and 'balanced' publications for their information and to inform policy decisions. What's worse, if they arrive at the anti-Israel policy recommendations endorsed by such outlets, they can convince themselves that by doing so they are really Saving Israel From Itself™.
Michael Lumish: Abbas Calls for "Bridges of Love"
In a speech Friday in Ramallah, after accusing Israel of releasing wild and vicious Zionist hogs upon the innocent indigenous "Palestinian" population the Jerusalem Post tells us:
Abbas also called for establishing “bridges of love” with Israelis “instead of the racist separation fence.” He warned once again against the eruption of a religious war and called on Israelis “not to come close to our holy sites, just as we don’t come near your synagogues.”
Abbas added: “The Jews know very well that we seek peace and not war.”
So, let me get this straight.
Mahmoud Abbas, the illegitimate dictator of the corrupt terrorist organization known as "the Palestinian Authority," claims that he and his people want "bridges of love" to Jews?
He claims that they don't come near our synagogues?
He claims that we actually know that Israeli-Arabs want peace and not war?
Ah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!

Thursday, November 13, 2014

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: Agenda of death
The violence is not driven by an attempt to improve the lives of Palestinians. The desire to revenge the deaths of Gazans killed in this summer’s Operation Protective Edge and the police’s killing of Kheir a-Din Hamdan in Kafr Kana last Friday is part of the equation. But the underlying source of the terrorism – which also precipitated this summer’s Gaza operation – is a violently reactionary Islamic triumphalism that says non-Muslims – particularly Zionists – are vile interlopers in a consecrated land.
This applies to Jerusalem and the Temple Mount – the center of the unrest – as well as to Tel Aviv, as Aloni’s brutal murder demonstrates. The Palestinian offensive should not be seen in isolation from Islamic State’s bloody jihad, as Ynet’s Ron Ben-Yishai observed.
Suicide bombings, the second intifada and the victory of Hamas in the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections soured Israelis on the prospects of negotiating peaceful cooperation with their Palestinian neighbors.
The present wave of attacks is reinforcing this pessimism.
Israelis want to believe in dialogue, but the Palestinian religious fanatics getting behind the wheel or grabbing hold of a knife have a different agenda altogether.
UN- and EU-funded Al-Quds University honors murderer
Four days after Palestinian terrorist Ibrahim Al-Akari killed two and injured more than 13 Israelis in Jerusalem, the UN- and EU-funded Al-Quds University honored him by naming a tournament after him.
Dr. Ahmad Al-Khawaja, in charge of the Physical Education Faculty of the Al-Quds University, which organized the tournament, explained that:
"The Martyr (Shahid) Ibrahim Al-Akari Tournament... it was a national activity held in honor and appreciation of the soul of the heroic Martyr Ibrahim Al-Akari." [Al-Ayyam, Nov. 11, 2014]
In July 2013, the UN announced a donation of €2.4 million (close to 3 million US dollars) from the EU and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) to Al-Quds University, the aim of which would be to "contribute to the development and protection of Palestinian cultural heritage in the old city of Jerusalem." [UNDP website, July 2, 2013 and Al-Quds University website, accessed Nov. 12, 2014]
 Mordechai Kedar: An Intifada of Arab Disappointment - with Themselves
One of the most important characteristics of a nation is a strong feeling of unity that allows its people to achieve the goals that it deems important. A people with a strong and unified national identity is able to put aside personal, political, ideological and sectorial differences so that its citizens can work together to succeed in reaching a goal that is important and significant to all of them.
Real leaders sense the people's will to unite for the sake of a national cause and can overcome the differences between them; if they do not, they will be replaced by others who are better than they, who know what the priorities are when there is a crucial national objective at stake. A people with a strong feeling of unity can handle a democratic country that does not fear differences of opinion and changes in government, because these do not degenerate into violence and therefore do not endanger its existence.
In contrast, a nation with a weak and fragile identity has chronic disputes that spill over into rhetorical violence and violent acts between its different sectors, with very little cooperation occurring between them. Different sectors feel threatened by each other leading to serious distrust. The nation's symbols are not strong enough to unite its population groups, each of which has goals differing from the other. This kind of nation will invent an external enemy in the hope that the war against it will unify the people for the sake of a higher interest, a war. This kind of nation raises the question of whether its citizens have enough of a feeling of commonality to keep them together and allow them to form a nation-state.

Tuesday, November 04, 2014

From Ian:

Alan Dershowitz: Why is the Obama Administration Provoking Israel?
Beyond the damage done with regard to Iran, is the damage done to United States-Israel relations by the insulting and demeaning words used by senior Obama administration officials to describe the Prime Minister of a close ally. Benjamin Netanyahu fought bravely for his country in one of Israel’s most elite and dangerous military units. He has rescued hostages, defended his country against terrorists and lost a brother at Entebbe. To call him a “chickenshit” or a “coward” is beneath contempt. Having seen the heavy cost of warfare, he has always been cautious and prudent about committing Israeli troops to battle. For this he should be praised rather than condemned.
Netanyahu may soon have to make an existential decision about whether to allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons that might be used against Israeli citizens or to authorize a dangerous military attack designed to destroy and delay Iran’s capacity to develop such weapons of mass destruction. This decision would be difficult for any leader, and it is even more difficult for a leader of a tiny country surrounded by enemies and isolated by much of the international community. To trivialize and reduce this decision to name-calling words like “chickenshit” and “coward” demonstrates extraordinary bad judgment on the part of those who used the words and those who may have authorized their use.
There are legitimate and important differences between the Obama and Netanyahu administrations over issues such as building in Jerusalem and the stalled peace negotiations. Each side has criticized the others position on their merits and demerits. But scatological name-calling on the record has no place in an alliance between friends. Those responsible for these provocative and dangerous ad hominems and for the unwarranted disclosure of classified intelligence assessments must be held accountable by the American public and by all those who care about peace in the Middle East.
Caroline Glick: Obama and the definition of 'Islamic'
Moreover, Obama had befriended radical Islamic leaders who openly support terrorism, including Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani.
And of course, as we see more and more clearly each day, the centerpiece of Obama’s foreign policy has been appeasing the Islamic Republic of Iran in the hope of achieving détente with the nuclear weapons pursuing state sponsor of terrorism.
The likes of IS, with its love of the video camera, discredit Obama’s narrative that radical, terror- supporting Muslims are peaceful. Since IS is openly evil, it is un-Islamic.
On the other hand, despite the fact that it is nearly as barbaric as IS, the Iranian regime is Islamic, because as far as Obama is concerned, it is good. And it is good because he wants to make a deal with the mullahs.
In other words, Obama is neither an expert on Islam, nor a man moved by moral indignation.
He opposes IS because IS makes it hard for him to defend Islam from bad public relations. And he coos about the “Islamic Republic of Iran” because he is dedicated to his mission of whitewashing and mainstreaming the regime born of an Islamic revolution.
Hamas opposes UN involvement in Gaza reconstruction
Hamas is opposed to UN involvement in the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip following Operation Protective Edge and has requested that the Palestinian unity government, rather than the international organization, carry out building projects, a Hamas official said late Sunday night.
Deputy head of Hamas’s political bureau Moussa Abu Marzouk claimed that Hamas was never shown the “Serry plan,” named for United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Robert Serry, insisting that reconstruction work estimated at billions of dollars remain in Palestinian hands.
“A number of officials have claimed that Abu Marzouk agreed to the plan, which is a bald-faced lie, so I say the following: during the indirect negotiations in Cairo we rejected the UN as a recognized party to construction,” Abu Marzouk wrote on his Facebook page, referring to the Egyptian-mediated ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas in August. “Everyone insisted that the Palestinian Authority, through the national unity government, is to be responsible for construction.”
“The international envoy’s plan was never presented to us,” he added.

Wednesday, October 08, 2014

From Ian:

Isi Leibler: The Obama administration’s unprecedented outburst against Israel
The exceptionally vicious US condemnation of Israel with regard to housing construction in the Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem is not merely misguided, but also reflects irrational bias.
Incidentally, this behavior also has many ominous parallels to the inhumane incarceration of Jonathan Pollard, despite pleas for the commutation of his sentence from all sectors of American society.
The harsh outburst relates to a 2,600-unit housing project planned as an extension of an exclusively Jewish neighborhood adjacent to the suburb of Talpiot and Kibbutz Ramat Rahel, both within the Green Line. It incorporates primarily barren land on which Ethiopian and Russian immigrants had been housed temporarily in mobile homes. Highly significant – but a fact that is ignored – is that nearly half of the construction was designated to provide housing for Arabs. Construction permits were approved two years ago, but it was the far-left group Peace Now that saw fit to highlight the issue in a press release on the eve of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with US President Barack Obama in a calculated effort to embarrass the prime minister and provoke tension.
The successive statements by both the White House and State Department spokesmen must be considered among the most bitterly prejudiced and unbalanced condemnations of Israel ever expressed by the US. They make a mockery of repeated claims by the Obama administration that it considers Israel to be a close ally.
ISIS: Can the West Win Without a Ground Game?
The United States and its allies have launched a military campaign whose stated goal is, in the words of President Barack Obama, to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State (I.S., also known as ISIS or ISIL) established by Sunni jihadis in a contiguous land area stretching from western Iraq to the Syrian-Turkish border.
As the aerial campaign begins in earnest, many observers are wondering what exactly its tactical and strategic objectives are, and how they will be achieved. A number of issues immediately arise.
Any state—even a provisional, slapdash, and fragile one like the jihadi entity now spreading across Iraq and Syria—cannot be “destroyed” from the air. At a certain point, forces on the ground will have to enter and replace the I.S. power. It is not yet clear who is to play this role—especially in the Islamic State’s heartland of Raqqa province in Syria.
In Iraq, the national military and the Kurdish Pesh Merga are now having some successes at chipping away at the Islamic State’s outer holdings. The role of U.S. air support is crucial here. But the center of the Islamic State is not Iraq, and both the Iraqi forces and the Pesh Merga have made clear that they will not cross the border into Syria. This leaves a major question as to who is to perform this task, if the objectives outlined by President Obama are to be achieved.
Who Does Turkey Support?
The Mavi Marmara incident was a wake-up call to Jerusalem, where diplomats had earlier been unrealistically optimistic about building a working relationship with Erdogan despite several other, earlier, warnings, including Erdogan's famous tirade in Davos against (then) Israeli President Shimon Peres that, "You (Jews) know well how to kill!" The Turkish government has since frozen ambassadorial-level diplomatic relations between Turkey and Israel, and Erdogan has increased his calculated explosive rhetoric against Israel.
Erdogan's principal argument was that a foreign military had killed Turkish nationals outside of Turkey; that those who were killed were martyrs; and that he would never allow a foreign military to harm one single Turkish citizen. Once again, he was wrong.
One of the lucky survivors of the Mavi Marmara was Yakup Bulent Alniak, an Islamist activist for the Turkish "humanitarian aid group" IHH which organized the Gaza-bound flotilla. IHH is listed by many Western countries as a terrorist organization; but its members, including Alniak, were simply heroes for Erdogan.
Alniak survived the IDF raid in 2010 but lost his life recently, at the end of September, when a U.S.-Arab coalition struck one of the largest ISIS camps in Syria. A coalition of foreign armies had killed a Turkish citizen whom the Turkish leader had declared a hero, but since then Erdogan has remained mute.
Will Erdogan downgrade Turkey's diplomatic ties with the U.S. and five Muslim nations because their militaries killed a Turkish citizen outside of Turkish territory? No. Probably because, in the pragmatic Islamist thinking, one does not properly qualify as a "martyr" if he gets killed by an army (or armies) other than Israel's.
As of this writing, on the Turkey-Syria border, CNN correspondent Phil Black hourly beams pictures of the Syrian Kurdish city of Kobani, with a black ISIS flag atop a building in the eastern part of the city, as Turkish soldiers in tanks lined up along the Turkish border "observe" ISIS troops close in for the approaching massacre.
Washington is expecting Ankara wholeheartedly to fight the rougher boys of the Islamist camp to which it belongs? Good luck.

Thursday, October 02, 2014

From Ian:

Jennifer Rubin: White House ‘appalled’ no more by civilian casualties
Don’t get me wrong. The current U.S. practice is entirely legitimate. It is hard to argue with the assertion that “like all U.S. military operations, [airstrikes on the Islamic State] are being conducted consistently with the laws of armed conflict, proportionality and distinction.” However, this does underscore how misguided and unfair U.S. condemnation of Israel was. Perhaps Ben Rhodes, the politically minded national security official who took it upon himself to lecture Israel, should finally apologize.
There is something else to be said here about the choice of airstrikes as the main U.S. tactic. The Obama administration has been roundly criticized for pursuing an air campaign that cannot possibly destroy the Islamic State. If that is a strategy with limited efficacy, what is the moral argument for continuing to employ it when civilian casualties result? It is one thing when a strategy is well-designed to achieve a specific military objective (e.g. destroying Gaza terrorists’ tunnels and rockets), but quite another when it is not. Imagine if Israel had conducted bombing raid after bombing raid resulting in civilian casualties rather than send in ground troops at great risk to them in order to strike with precision. I’m sure the Obama administration would have been appalled.
The irony of endorsing Palestinians while bombing ISIS
Even while bombing ISIS, aka the Islamic State, Mr. Obama continues to endorse the creation of a Palestinian state, a plainly jihadist country that would inevitably be run by some adversarial combination of Hamas and the PA. Somehow, Mr. Obama doesn’t want to acknowledge that any Palestinian Arab state would promptly exhibit the very same jihadist tendencies as our own current terrorist targets in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere. Why, it is time for him to inquire, should we be fighting Islamist terrorists in one part of the Middle East, and simultaneously supporting distinctly similar others, just a short distance away?
Where are we now heading? At some point, if they can finally reconcile, the PA and Hamas will declare the existence of a fully sovereign Palestinian state. Any such state, however, whatever its theoretical “self-determination” rationale, and whatever its finally agreed-upon administrative form, would enlarge the risks of terrorism and war.
Already, Palestinian orientations to aggression are very easy to decipher. Official PA maps identify Israel as merely a part of Palestine. In essence, both the PA and Hamas have agreed upon a cartographic destruction of Israel proper — not a “two-state solution,” but rather a conspicuously “final solution.”
Any Palestinian state could have a directly detrimental impact on American strategic interests and, of course, on Israel’s physical survival. After Palestine, Israel, facing an even more expressly formidable correlation of enemy forces, would require greater self-reliance. Any such enhanced self-reliance would then call for a more coherent and more openly disclosed nuclear strategy, one focusing comprehensively upon deterrence, pre-emption, and war-fighting capabilities; and a corollary and interpenetrating conventional war strategy.
Edelstein: While Islamic State slaughters, West is focused on building in Jerusalem
Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein blasted the West for criticizing Israel for building homes in Jerusalem when there are more pressing security issues, in a meeting with Austrian Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz in Vienna Thursday.
Edelstein slammed Western leaders' "Pavolovian reaction" to the anticipated construction of 2,700 homes in the southeastern Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Hamatos, which was planned two years ago, but Peace Now released a report on the topic Wednesday.
"It's too bad that while the Islamic State is slaughtering, murdering and threatening the West, everyone is interested in a few homes being built in Jerusalem," he stated. (h/t MtTB)

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

From Ian:

David Horovitz: Bleak Netanyahu warns of militant Islam’s global ambition
There were no gimmicks. Few excruciating one-liners. Just a single visual aid: a photograph of three children in Gaza at play right next to a rocket launcher.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a no-nonsense address to the United National General Assembly on Monday — presenting himself as the leader of a “proud and unbowed” nation, charged with the “awesome responsibility” of ensuring his much-threatened people’s future in a brutal, unstable region.
It was not a speech entirely bereft of hope. He reached out “to Cairo, to Amman, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and elsewhere” and asserted that a rapprochement with Israel by such Arab players could in turn yield a peace agreement with the Palestinians, which, he also said, “will obviously necessitate a territorial compromise.”
But the outlook he presented was immensely grim, nonetheless. His bitter overview, he said toward the end of his remarks, “may fly in the face of conventional wisdom, but it is the truth. And the truth must always be spoken, especially here in the United Nations.”
As spoken by Netanyahu, the truth is that “militant Islam is on the march,” that its ambitions are global, and that all its many, sometimes competing factions are “branches of the same poisonous tree.” Thus it is ridiculous and self-defeating for countries to support the US-led coalition fighting the Islamic State but criticize Israel for tackling Hamas. If not stopped in its tracks, he indicated, Islamic extremism would come for everyone.
Caroline Glick: Kicking the PLO habit
The signs are everywhere that the time has come for Israel to abandon the PLO.
So long as the PLO remains in power, the lives of Israelis and Palestinians will only get worse.
PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas’s speech last Friday at the UN General Assembly where he repeatedly accused Israel of committing genocide was not merely an abandonment of direct peace negotiations with Israel. Abbas abandoned the very concept of peaceful coexistence between Israel and the Palestinians.
Abbas called for the UN to pass a resolution that will require Israel to cede Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria in their entirety to the PLO within a set period of time. No Israeli consideration can be taken into account. No Israel concern can be attended to.
As he put it, “Palestine refuses to have the right to freedom of her people, who are subjected to the terrorism by the racist occupying Power and its settlers, remain hostage to Israel’s security conditions.”
As is always the case, the immediate victims of Abbas’s blood libels are the Israeli Left. The politicians and media elite that have hitched their horse to the PLO were again left stuttering by the wayside.
For some, like Meretz chair Zehava Gal-On, stuttering is a fine option. So she pushed out an endorsement of Abbas’s genocide speech.
Mahmoud Abbas’s dangerous grandstanding
For several years Mr. Abbas has oscillated between half-hearted participation in peace talks and attempts to advance the Palestinian cause through unilateral action at the United Nations. The latter initiatives have no chance of substantive success and risk being self-defeating, as the Palestinians should have learned from Mr. Abbas’s last such gambit in 2012. Then their lobbyists were unable to win enough support for a U.N. Security Council resolution even to force a U.S. veto, and a compensatory symbolic measure in the General Assembly provoked Israel to impose painful financial sanctions.
Mr. Abbas nevertheless is trying the Security Council again, after refusing to respond to a U.S. framework for peace talks painstakingly developed by Secretary of State John F. Kerry. He proposes a resolution that would mandate the creation of a Palestinian state based on Israel’s 1967 borders in a set period of time; when it is voted down or vetoed by the United States, the Palestinians hint that they will seek a war crimes investigation of Israel by the International Criminal Court. That, in turn, would almost certainly prompt retaliatory sanctions by Mr. Netanyahu’s government and possibly by Congress, which supplies the Palestinian Authority with much of its funding.
Mr. Abbas has repeatedly rejected violence, and he has convinced a series of U.S. and Israeli negotiators that he has a realistic view of the terms for a Palestinian state. Yet he has now rejected platforms for a settlement on two occasions from two U.S. presidents. He persists in grandstanding gestures that he must know will only delay the serious negotiations that must precede the creation of a Palestinian state and that undermine those in Israel who support such talks. He has spoken for years of retiring but, at 79, he clings to his post four years after his elected term expired. Hamas has done the most harm to Palestinians and their cause in recent years. But Mr. Abbas has done little good.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

From Ian:

Radical Islam, Israel and Agitprop
Many Europeans who would laugh at the idea of negotiating with ISIS or al-Qaeda say that Israel should negotiate with Hamas.
Almost nobody sees that the invention of the "Palestinian people" has transformed millions of Arabs into a genocidal weapon to be used against the Israelis, and even, as in Europe recently, the Jews. Transforming people into a genocidal weapon is a barbaric act.
Israel was urged to find ways to coexist peacefully with people who did not want to co-exist with it. Terrorism against Israel fast became acceptable: a "good" terrorism.
Hamas's stated aim is the destruction of Israel. Its stated way to achieve this aim is terror attacks, called "armed struggle" by Hamas leaders. To this day the Palestinian Authority has not ceased praising and promoting terrorism.
If hatred of Israel is increasing in the U.S., it is largely confined to academics and other extreme radical circles, many of which are funding or receiving funding from Soviet-style agitprop organizations. Journalists are recruited to disseminate descriptions of "facts" as if they were real facts. Pseudo-historians rewrote the history of the Middle East. The falsified version of history replaced history.
Netanyahu headed to NY to counter 'slander and lies' after Abbas, Rouhani UN speeches
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu heads to the United States on Sunday to battle Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and Palestinian unilateralism, when he addresses the UN General Assembly in New York and meets with US President Barack Obama in Washington.
“After the Iranian president’s deceptive speech and [PA President Mahmoud Abbas] Abu Mazen’s incitement, I will tell the truth about Israel’s citizens to the entire world,” Netanyahu said on Saturday night. “In my UN General Assembly speech and in all of my meetings I will represent the citizens of Israel and will – on their behalf – refute the slander and lies directed at our country.”
Netanyahu is to address the General Assembly on Monday and meet with Obama on Wednesday.
Sources in the Prime Minister’s Office said Abbas’s speech was not that of a man who seeks peace.
“It’s a speech that is full of incitement and lies,” the sources said.
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, who also is heading to the UN General Assembly, accused Abbas of engaging in political terrorism against the State of Israel and warned that, as long as Abbas is president, it would not be possible to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“Abbas does not want and can not be a partner to a logical diplomatic settlement,” Liberman said.
Abbas is the problem, not the solution
Netanyahu must not return to paying protection money to the enemy in Ramallah, in the form of the release of terrorists, a freeze on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria or aiding the reconstruction of Gaza. If, God forbid, Netanyahu is tempted by the reckless advice from the Left, he could lose his support from the Right. Likud ministers will refuse to publicly back him if he is suspected of marching down the foolish Oslo path, and the heads of Habayit Hayehudi and Yisraeli Beytenu will continue to bash him for not toppling Hamas.
If it becomes clear that Netanyahu's diplomatic horizon is what the Left and many media outlets hope it will be, the disappointed Right will not fall in love with Netanyahu again and he could pay a heavy political price. But if Netanyahu wants to improve the country's situation, he must mold the diplomatic horizon in line with his promises and advance Israel's interests. As I see it, he must, first and foremost, deny the theoretical connection between peace and a Palestinian state, as these are a contradiction in terms.
The Zionist vision, not "peace," must be Israel's top priority. The government should focus on gathering the Jewish people in their homeland, which would increase the chances of true peace.
Abbas has ended the peace process
There is no doubt that at this point, Abbas has abandoned the path of negotiations. He strives to impose some sort of solution on Israel, and he fails to understand that the tumultuous developments in the Arab world, including the conflict between Ramallah and the Gaza Strip, have plunged the Palestinian stock to a new low.
Many in the world still subscribe to Abbas' criticism of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, especially when it comes to settlement construction during the peace talks, but the Palestinians' demands no longer seem as poignant given Abbas' refusal to hold earnest negotiations.
The majority of Israelis who subscribe to the two-state solution would probably allege that Netanyahu's insistence to forge ahead with construction outside the main settlement blocs has made it difficult of the Palestinians. I would also hedge that Netanyahu is not keen to pursue the two-state solution, but that no longer matters, since Abbas has beat him to the punch by debunking it.

Monday, September 22, 2014

From Ian:

The West’s axis of evil friends
Over the past six decades the US and its Western allies have fallen entirely under the spell of a few sheikhs who, in other times, would have been laughed off as characters conjured up by Dante or Euripides. It is madness, like watching a world turned upside down, to see the leaders of the free world bowing to people whose main accomplishment in life is getting religious police to hold down women to be whipped in public; whose main contribution to culture, philosophy and art are the blood stains on the ground following executions and whose bravest achievement is finding a way to confiscate the passports of foreign indentured servants and working them 12-hour days.
Americans teach themselves back home about Abraham Lincoln and democracy and the Bill of Rights and then proudly eviscerate every American value the second they search out foreign allies such as these. In the old days politicians in the West were concerned about working with despots, they actively campaigned against close alliances with the Turkish Sultan, “butcher of the Armenians,” or the Russian czar. Newspapers spoke out against injustices. But the West has become entirely inured to this today. Is it too much to ask of the leader of a democracy not to shake hands with the foreign minister of a country that lashes women for appearing in a dance video? That might jeopardize our relations with them and offend them? So what. Let them be offended. We are talking about regimes run by modern-day versions of the KKK, the Inquisition and Ray Rice... all rolled into one.
Will we never be rid of the cowardly foreign policies of countries that have become helpless democratic giants with no moral compass? The least we can do is continue to be shocked by the pandering to the abusers. It is like the Dark Ages. Yes, the world has become savage and full of abuses of humanity, but some people have to preserve the memory of what it could be and the knowledge that one day the men with dark sunglasses in Riyadh will meet with the fate that they so richly deserve.
How Independent is a Think Tank Funded by Hamas-Backing Qatar?
Although Indyk resigned from his Brookings post to assume the special envoy role, he returned to the think tank following the peace talks’ collapse. Critics say Indyk’s relationship with Qatar should have prevented his appointment by the State Department in the first place. Some also say Indyk was the source of leaks on the peace talks that were anonymously cited in media reports as coming from “a senior U.S. official” who blamed Israel for scuttling the negotiations.
Mark Rom, who worked for two years as a research follow at Brookings about 25 years ago, told JNS.org that Indyk should have considered that concerns over a conflict of interest would be raised before he took the job of U.S. special envoy.
“If someone at Brookings receives a lot of money from Qatar and then the person leaves and becomes a negotiator [in the Middle East], it’s hard not to see how that wouldn’t be perceived as a conflict of interest,” said Rom, who is currently the associate dean for academic affairs, co-director of undergraduate studies, and director of the MA in American Government program at Georgetown University. “I’m not questioning the integrity of [Indyk], but people of great integrity still can be in conflict-of-interest situations.”
A May 2013 Bloomberg View column by Jeffrey Goldberg challenged Brookings on its overly gracious treatment of the Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani. Goldberg described his attendance of a private, off-the-record dinner hosted by Brookings to honor Al Thani, writing that it was a “cringe-worthy” event.
“I went to the dinner that night embarrassed on behalf of Brookings, which, like many institutions in Washington, shouldn’t be taking money from despotic Middle Eastern regimes, yet does,” wrote Goldberg.
FIFA exec: World Cup will not take place in Qatar
Qatar will not host the World Cup in 2022, according to Theo Zwanziger, the German member on the executive committee of world football’s governing body FIFA.
“I think that at the end of the day the 2022 World Cup will not take place in Qatar,” Zwanziger said in an interview with Sport Bild Plus.
The former head of the German Football Federation cited high summer temperatures as the reason Qatar would lose the right to host football’s global showpiece.
“As Mr Zwanziger himself says, it’s his personal opinion,” a FIFA spokesman responded to AFP subsidiary SID when asked about the German’s statement.
UNHRC on Qatar: “I see no objection”


Saturday, September 20, 2014

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: If the West denies what it’s up against, it will lose
Westerners cannot grasp the nature of religious fanaticism. They can’t believe that other cultures may be unlike themselves and motivated not by reason but by dogma. They cannot take seriously the notion of a holy war.
But Islamic State is the purest expression we have seen of precisely that, because all the usual alibis have been stripped away. The fundamental goal of Islamic State is not to remedy some geopolitical grievance against Israel, America, India or Saudi Arabia. It is to establish a caliphate and force the world to submit to Islam. What Islamic State openly stands for is mass murder and barbarism in the name of God.
Neither air strikes nor ground troops will defeat the religious idea for which Islamic State stands and which is inspiring thousands of Muslims to join it and other such militias. To defeat Islamic terror, that idea has to be defeated. The free world needs to help truly reformist Muslims to purge it from their religion.
We must hope Islam can be reformed. If not, the alternative is brutal: either we defeat Islamic extremism or it defeats us. But for sure, denying what it is will hand it victory.
Gaza: The Proto-Palestinian State – That Wasn’t
The Arab and Palestinian leadership, with the UN’s help, was brilliant in ensuring that the world would never forget Palestinian refugee story and, indeed, it is as fresh today as it was in 1948.
A 1959 news report, gleaned from the New York Times archive, provides a revealing illustration of this cynical public relations stunt, which was as destructive as it was effective.
That year, then UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold proposed a massive international development project to resettle Palestinian refugees. As the Times reported on August 9, 1959, Mr. Hammarskjold suggested that $1.5 – $2 billion (approximately $11-$15 billion in 2014 dollars) be spent over the next five years to “make productive jobs for the 1,000,000 refugees in Arab lands.”
It was not to be. The Arab League, supported by Palestinian refugee leaders, opposed the UN plan. They not only rejected the development concept, they demanded that UNRWA “drop all of its resettlement operations and become exclusively a relief agency.” Echoing exactly what we hear from today’s Palestinian leadership, the Arabs insisted that refugees be permitted to return to homes in Israel or receive compensation if they chose not to.
The Times story left no doubt as to what motivated the Arabs’ position:
Israeli Tactics Greatly Reduced Gaza Civilian Casualty Rates
Israel's detractors engage in moral inversion, falsely accusing Israel of crimes and sins that the enemies of the Jewish state commit. In the recently concluded summer war of 2014 between Israel and Hamas, the usual clique of UN organizations, human rights groups and media organizations accused Israel of recklessly causing disproportionate civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip, while paying less attention to Hamas crimes against both Israeli and Palestinian civilians. Groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch demanded investigations of Israel for war crimes and called for embargos against the Jewish state. But a web site that specializes in military analysis, DefenseNews, describes innovative Israeli tactics that significantly reduce civilian casualties. The article quotes Israeli Brig. Gen. Amikam Norkin, Israel Air Force chief of staff, who explained that
Protective Edge marked the first time fixed-wing fighters were used as dedicated assets to division- and brigade-level forces.
“Over the last year, we drilled in a very substantive way with the ground forces and we built a process where our fighters could attack at much closer distances … We did this hundreds of times during the operation.”
The result according to Norkin was that Israel was able to far surpass
"an international average of five innocents killed for each targeted terrorist. He said preliminary data from Protective Edge indicates “we’re slowly closing in on numbers of one to one."
Is the UN Fair to Israel?
Israel is a vibrant democracy with full rights for women and gays, a free press and independent judiciary. You would think that the United Nations would celebrate such a country. Instead, the UN condemns Israel at every turn to the point of obsession. How did this happen? Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights, explains in five eye-opening minutes.


Wednesday, August 27, 2014

From Ian:

Step Away, Do Nothing, Pat Self on Back
Obama administration officials spent much of the spring and summer trying to position themselves as grand strategists. The president's West Point speech was the test drive of their revised national security strategy. It cautioned that "our most costly mistakes came not from our restraint, but from our willingness to rush into military adventures without thinking through the consequences -- without building international support and legitimacy for our action, without leveling with the American people about the sacrifices required." The speech was panned by both the right and the left, precipitating a reconsideration of releasing the National Security Strategy on which it was based (the last was delivered in 2010); it sounds even more laughably self-satisfied in light of the costly mistakes their "restraint" has occasioned in Libya, Syria, and Iraq.
The White House likes to defend its inaction by reiterating that there are no good options. And that is true, although it is not newly true. Windows of opportunity open and close, as Helmut Kohl famously worried about German unification. Options get better and worse with time and with opportunities taken and missed. But the Obama administration's philosophizing is cold comfort to the people experiencing the consequences of our inaction. We should beware buying another whole generation of mistrust from the people of the Middle East by our callous indifference to their problems and solipsistic attempts to ennoble our inaction.
If there actually is an Obama Doctrine -- and it's a debatable point, given the contradictions in the administration's policies -- it is this: Step back, criticize others who step forward, and laud our own moral superiority for doing nothing. Meanwhile, Islamist militias have encircled Tripoli and taken control of the airport. The Western governments that signed the statement encouraging a cease-fire are setting Libya up for continued humanitarian catastrophe and themselves up for another rush-to-the-crime-scene intervention. America is not incapable of devising and executing grand strategy. But the Obama administration evidently is. (h/t Alexi)
Who Occupies Gaza?


There Is No Israeli Siege On Gaza


National Founder of SJP Calls To Silence Jewish Groups The Evening Before The Jewish New Year
University of California at Berkeley professor and founder of the national student group “Students for Justice in Palestine” (SJP) Hatem Bazian announced an “International Day of Action” to call for a complete academic and cultural boycott of Israel on September 23rd- the Eve before the Jewish New Year.
The anti-Semitic nature of the day included calls for “No joint research or conferences with Israeli Institutions, No to University Presidents' Visits to Israel, No Campus Police Training or Cooperation with Israeli Security” in addition to demanding the elimination of all study abroad programs in Israel. The effort is to prevent all academic interaction with the Jewish state and to limit people’s ability to interact with Israel and Israelis.
The attempt to isolate Israel extends to a boycott of Jewish and Israeli on-campus organizations as well. Professor Bazian has also commanded his group to demand “No to University Coordination and Strategizing with the ADL, JCRC, AJC, Stand With US, ZOA, Israeli Consulate to Limit Students Pro-Palestine Constitutionally Protected Activities.”
VIDEO: Gazan Children Cheer For Rockets To Hit America
A video from Al Jazeera’s coverage of the Israeli-Hamas war in July has recently circulated, showing footage that no mainstream American news outlet would dare cover: Gazan children cheering as rockets are fired into Israel, saying they wished the rockets would hit America instead.
CNS News reports:
For Al Jazeera's "America Tonight," foreign correspondent Nick Schifrin reported during an older segment entitled "Israel invades Gaza" on July 17. "Palestinian fighters fire a barrage of rockets," he noted, with two flying towards Tel Aviv. As the camera focused on children clapping and cheering, Schifrin translated, "They tell me they hope they land not on Israel, but in the United States."

Friday, August 22, 2014

From Ian:

Douglas Murray: Stop blaming Israel and wake up: The black flag of jihad is the REAL threat to the world
Jews are attacked here in Britain, they are blockaded into a synagogue in Paris and the chant ‘Death to the Jews’ is heard in Germany for the first time in 70 years.
But too few people seem to want to notice this or admit what it means. They think this is just about Israel, or just about Jewish people. It isn’t. It is about all of us.
The decision last month by the Israeli government to respond to Hamas rocket-fire from Gaza is the response any government would choose if rockets were fired at its citizens. The Israeli government has the right - as does any government - to stop the bombarding of its people.
However, in recent weeks it has become plain that much of the world expects a different response from Israel. They expect Israel not to fight for the safety, security and survival of their people, but to lie down in front of the Islamic extremist enemy.
JPost Editorial: Treating terror
The beheading of American photojournalist James Foley, apparently by a British member of the Islamic State terrorist group in Iraq, is yet another shocking example of the danger posed to Western countries by their own citizens who have joined the forces of jihad.
It follows several recent chilling incidents involving Western jihadis, including Twitter photos published by an Australian fighting for Islamic State holding the severed heads of two Syrian soldiers.
Estimates of the number of Western “jihad tourists” in Syria and Iraq reach as high as 3,000. Others have traveled to Yemen to join al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and to Somalia to fight with al-Shabaab. They have been involved in countless atrocities including beheadings, executions and suicide missions.
As former British foreign secretary William Hague noted in a February statement to the House of Commons, some of them “may return ideologically hardened and with experience in weapons and explosives.”
Three months later, Mehdi Nemmouche, a 29-yearold Frenchman of Algerian origin, returned from a stint in Syria, where he is believed to have fought with Islamic State – in its previous incarnation, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria – and shot dead four people, including two Israelis, at the Jewish Museum in Brussels.
It was the first instance of a “blowback” attack by a jihadi returning from Syria.
Israel's UN Envoy: Radical Extremism Affects Us All
Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, warned on Thursday that terrorism has doubled its power.
Speaking at a Security Council Debate on the subject of conflict prevention, Prosor said that radical extremism affected the entire world and not just Israel. He called for a “war against radical ideology”.
“Radical extremism has touched every part of the world from Buenos Aires to Burgas and from Bangkok to Burkina Faso,” said Prosor.
“Oppression and extremism are not bound by borders. Nowhere is this threat more obvious than in the Middle East.
Full Speech: Prosor at the Security Council Debate- Conflict Prevention 21/8/14


Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

Follow by Email

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 14 years and 30,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Categories

#PayForSlay Abbas liar Academic fraud administrivia al-Qaeda algeria Alice Walker American Jews AmericanZionism Amnesty analysis anti-semitism anti-Zionism antisemitism apartheid Arab antisemitism arab refugees Arafat archaeology Ari Fuld art Ashrawi ASHREI B'tselem bahrain Balfour bbc BDS BDSFail Bedouin Beitunia beoz Bernie Sanders Biden history Birthright book review Brant Rosen breaking the silence Campus antisemitism Cardozo cartoon of the day Chakindas Chanukah Christians circumcision Clark Kent coexistence Community Standards conspiracy theories COVID-19 Cyprus Daled Amos Daphne Anson David Applebaum Davis report DCI-P Divest This double standards Egypt Elder gets results ElderToons Electronic Intifada Embassy EoZ Trump symposium eoz-symposium EoZNews eoztv Erekat Erekat lung transplant EU Euro-Mid Observer European antisemitism Facebook Facebook jail Fake Civilians 2014 Fake Civilians 2019 Farrakhan Fatah featured Features fisking flotilla Forest Rain Forward free gaza freedom of press palestinian style future martyr Gary Spedding gaza Gaza Platform George Galloway George Soros German Jewry Ghassan Daghlas gideon levy gilad shalit gisha Goldstone Report Good news Grapel Guardian guest post gunness Haaretz Hadassah hamas Hamas war crimes Hananya Naftali hasbara Hasby 2014 Hasby 2016 Hasby 2018 hate speech Hebron helen thomas hezbollah history Hizballah Holocaust Holocaust denial honor killing HRW Human Rights Humanitarian crisis humor huor Hypocrisy ICRC IDF IfNotNow Ilan Pappe Ilhan Omar impossible peace incitement indigenous Indonesia international law interview intransigence iran Iraq Islamic Judeophobia Islamism Israel Loves America Israeli culture Israeli high-tech J Street jabalya James Zogby jeremy bowen Jerusalem jewish fiction Jewish Voice for Peace jihad jimmy carter Joe Biden John Kerry jokes jonathan cook Jordan Joseph Massad Juan Cole Judaism Judea-Samaria Judean Rose Judith Butler Kairos Karl Vick Keith Ellison ken roth khalid amayreh Khaybar Know How to Answer Lebanon leftists Linda Sarsour Linkdump lumish mahmoud zahar Mairav Zonszein Malaysia Marc Lamont Hill Marjorie Taylor Greene max blumenthal Mazen Adi McGraw-Hill media bias Methodist Michael Lynk Michael Ross Miftah Missionaries moderate Islam Mohammed Assaf Mondoweiss moonbats Morocco Mudar Zahran music Muslim Brotherhood Naftali Bennett Nakba Nan Greer Nation of Islam Natural gas Nazi Netanyahu News nftp NGO Nick Cannon NIF Noah Phillips norpac NSU Matrix NYT Occupation offbeat olive oil Omar Barghouti Only in Israel Opinion Opinon oxfam PA corruption PalArab lies Palestine Papers pallywood pchr PCUSA Peace Now Peter Beinart Petra MB philosophy poetry Poland poll Poster Preoccupied Prisoners propaganda Proud to be Zionist Puar Purim purimshpiel Putin Qaradawi Qassam calendar Quora Rafah Ray Hanania real liberals RealJerusalemStreets reference Reuters Richard Falk Richard Landes Richard Silverstein Right of return Rivkah Lambert Adler Robert Werdine rogel alpher roger cohen roger waters Rutgers Saeb Erekat Sarah Schulman Saudi Arabia saudi vice self-death self-death palestinians Seth Rogen settlements sex crimes SFSU shechita sheikh tamimi Shelly Yachimovich Shujaiyeh Simchat Torah Simona Sharoni SodaStream South Africa Sovereignty Speech stamps Superman Syria Tarabin Temple Mount Terrorism This is Zionism Thomas Friedman TOI Tomer Ilan Trump Trump Lame Duck Test Tunisia Turkey UAE Accord UCI UK UN UNDP unesco unhrc UNICEF United Arab Emirates Unity unrwa UNRWA hate unrwa reports UNRWA-USA unwra Varda Vic Rosenthal Washington wikileaks work accident X-washing Y. Ben-David Yemen YMikarov zahran Ziesel zionist attack zoo Zionophobia Ziophobia Zvi

Blog Archive