A single 5-minute tracking shot of dozens of students lip-syncing Glee's redo of Queen's "Somebody to Love," done last week, with the videographer walking throughout the campus.
Has Joe Forgotten Joseph?
59 minutes ago
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Elder of Ziyon
I briefly mentioned a report by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies that analyzed Palestinian Arab social media (blogs, message boards, Twitter) to find current trends. Commenter "Elder of Lobby" pointed me to the actual study.
The authors acknowledge that online forums are not necessarily representative of what people really think. As with English-language Web 2.0 sites (and in real life,) the people who scream the loudest with the more extreme positions tend to get the most attention.
The survey did note that traditional polling is not any better - pointing out that the polls that the US relied on saying that Fatah would easily beat Hamas in the 2006 elections were way off, and suggesting that an analysis of social media could have headed off that mistake.
The report identifies three broad trends:
The third trend, however, I found most interesting:
Language is important. People who share a language naturally are less guarded in what they will write to their peers than they would be to outsiders. Absent peer pressure to the contrary, thsi extremism will tend to intensify. This would explain why extremists dominate in Arabic - there is no peer pressure within Arabic language posters to stand up and tell them that their ideas are wrong.
Newsweek, which just wrote an article mirroring the "Elders" saying that Hamas should come to the negotiating table and has moderated its positions, should read this report:
The authors note the incongruity that I have mentioned a number of times of the disconnect between Fatah's official political positions and what its adherents say to each other.
In general, the study mirrors what I have seen from reading the Palestinian Arabic news media and comments for the past few years via Google Translate. for example:
It would have been more effective if it showed more rigor in drawing the lines from the research to the analysis. And it would be a shame if it is not studied closely by the current US administration.
The authors acknowledge that online forums are not necessarily representative of what people really think. As with English-language Web 2.0 sites (and in real life,) the people who scream the loudest with the more extreme positions tend to get the most attention.
The survey did note that traditional polling is not any better - pointing out that the polls that the US relied on saying that Fatah would easily beat Hamas in the 2006 elections were way off, and suggesting that an analysis of social media could have headed off that mistake.
The report identifies three broad trends:
First, Palestinian social media is dominated by users who harbor radicalized perspectives. The landscape is not completely devoid of users with moderate to liberal views, but it is influenced heavily by political and theological radicals.This is no different from any other social media, so it doesn't tell us anything new.
Second, there appears to be little cross-over between radical and liberal sites, indicating a significant lack of debate between radicalized users and those with non-violent ideologies.This is also largely true in Western social media, although there are exceptions. Even where multiple viewpoints are seen, rarely will one find anyone convincing the other side of anything.
The third trend, however, I found most interesting:
Third, Palestinians who espouse moderate or liberal viewpoints online are often inclined to blog in English rather than Arabic. Indeed, there is no shortage of English-language blogs produced by Palestinians and other Arabs to address local and regional issues in general, and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in particular.That finding is important. It indicates that Palestinian Arab political moderates are not welcome to post their opinions in Arabic where (one presumes) the majority of the social web users congregate. Moderation is not rewarded in Arabic, but the English-language audience is much more inclined to identify with such thinking, meaning that an important potential source for dampening extremism in the PalArab media is missing.
Language is important. People who share a language naturally are less guarded in what they will write to their peers than they would be to outsiders. Absent peer pressure to the contrary, thsi extremism will tend to intensify. This would explain why extremists dominate in Arabic - there is no peer pressure within Arabic language posters to stand up and tell them that their ideas are wrong.
Newsweek, which just wrote an article mirroring the "Elders" saying that Hamas should come to the negotiating table and has moderated its positions, should read this report:
[T]he Palestinian social media environment gives no indication that Hamas is willing to seek peace with Israel. There were no scored posts on this topic on any of the pro-Hamas forums. Nor were there any posts attributed to pro-Hamas users on this topic on other web forums. From discussions about the flotilla violence in late May to the rumors of reinvigorated peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel during June and July, rejectionism was the dominant position among Hamas users. Accordingly, decision-makers weighing the benefits of engaging Hamas in talks should be wary of claims that the group has become more moderate and pragmatic, or that it privately wishes to negotiate peace with Israel and the United States.
The authors note the incongruity that I have mentioned a number of times of the disconnect between Fatah's official political positions and what its adherents say to each other.
Broadly speaking, most Fatah supporters embraced the notion that Israel was an enemy, rather than a peace partner.
In general, the study mirrors what I have seen from reading the Palestinian Arabic news media and comments for the past few years via Google Translate. for example:
Palestinian social media commentary on Israeli-Palestinian political reconciliation was overwhelmingly negative. Potentially positive diplomatic steps were often derided in the Palestinian online environment. Thus, despite Washington’s efforts to win the hearts and minds of Palestinians—both through new Obama administration policies and online engagement with Palestinians through a State Department initiative to explain those policies—the online forums suggest that there is currently scant support for a new peace initiative.I can see the study being accused of bias, as it does not explain well the scientific basis for its views. The description of the methodology is interesting but it doesn't translate to any real numbers or trends, and since the Foundation for Defense of Democracies is perceived as a right-wing group, its findings may be dismissed out of hand by those who need to read it most.
It would have been more effective if it showed more rigor in drawing the lines from the research to the analysis. And it would be a shame if it is not studied closely by the current US administration.
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From Gulf News:
The Dubai Police chief on Tuesday confirmed the arrest in Canada of a suspect believed to be involved in the assassination of Mahmoud Al Mabhouh, a Hamas commander, in the UAE last January.He went even further:
Speaking to reporters here, Lieutenant-General Dahi Khalfan Tamim said the Canadian authorities have arrested a suspect who is connected to the murder of Al Mabhouh.
The Hamas commander was killed in a Dubai hotel on January 19 by Mossad agents.
Lt-Gen Dahi told reporters that he has been informed of the arrest "verbally" by a representative from the Canadian embassy.
Canada actually informed Emirati officials of the arrest in June, but requested that they not announce it, Lieutenant General Dahi Khalfan Tamim told Al Arabiya television.Only one, slight problem:
"I am astonished. Why this attempt to cover up on this issue? We must act transparent, reliably and quickly in such cases," said Khalfan.
Speaking to the Al-Ittihad daily, Khalfan did not say why Canada had called for secrecy, nor explain why he had not said anything until now, given his objections.
He said he went public after the news was reported in the Canadian media.
Dubai’s outspoken police chief insists a Canadian security official informed him of the secret arrest of a Mossad assassin, even though Canadian officials deny having ever told him that.So why is Dubai starting to say lies about Canada? This could be one reason:
His pronouncement has caused befuddlement in Canada’s national-security establishment, leaving some officials to speculate that Dubai is seeking to embarrass Canada amid an ongoing row over airport rights.
“Baseless,” was the word one well-placed Ottawa official used to describe the general’s claim.
Given the lack of specificity of Lt.-Gen. Tamim’s comments, the reaction in Ottawa is mostly one of confusion. “We have nothing to say at this point,” said Sergeant Greg Cox, a spokesman for the RCMP.
Two senior sources at the Canadian Embassy in the UAE told The Globe they did not inform the Dubai police chief about any arrest. “We are trying to verify this information with our colleagues in Ottawa,” one said, asking to remain anonymous. “Tamim said we gave this info to the Dubai police, and we didn’t.”
For years, Dubai has been lobbying for Canadian airports to open themselves up to more flights from the Gulf. Meanwhile, Canada has had unfettered access to the so-called “Camp Mirage” logistics base – a Dubai landing strip that’s existed for years to supply the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan with men and military hardware.
The UAE abruptly cut off Canada’s access this month, forcing Defence Minister Peter MacKay’s flight to redirect to Europe midair, after he ended a three-day tour of Afghanistan.
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
The Islamic Jihad mouthpiece Palestine Today reports that Israeli warplanes bombed Rafah this morning, causing some 13 to be injured in the huge explosion, including women and children.
The Fatah-oriented Palestine Press Agency, however, says that there was an "internal explosion" at a military site belonging to Hamas - a "work accident."
Which seems more likely?
The Fatah-oriented Palestine Press Agency, however, says that there was an "internal explosion" at a military site belonging to Hamas - a "work accident."
Which seems more likely?
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From Reuters:
While Reuters and the wannabe tribal elders claim that they want a peace agreement between Israel and the Arabs, the poster shows quite the opposite.
Right above Jimmy Carter's head is a map of Hamas' vision of "peace" - a world without Israel altogether.
It is telling that the self-proclaimed global leaders allow themselves, without compunction, to be props in a Hamas advertisement for the destruction of Israel.
One wonders whether they would take a walk with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a gaggle of wire-service reporters to survey Iran's exhibition of Holocaust-denial cartoons, or if they would have agreed to a photo-op in front of a picture of the World Trade Center crashing down.
The fact is that the public and prominent display of maps showing a Judenrein "Palestine" (whose only relationship with historic Palestine is that it portrays areas that Jews have some level of political control over) is no less offensive than proud pictures of 9/11.
The world has become numb to such an outrage, of course. You will have to look long and hard to find any so-called "peace" activist saying a word against these graphic paeans to ethnic cleansing that are pervasive in the Arab world.
But make no mistake - that is what a map of "historic Palestine" is. It's ubiquity makes it no less offensive, and for people who truly want peace, this should be obvious.
(The words on the poster are the Koranic verse that Muslims use to claim that Mohammed journeyed to Jerusalem, h/t Ali.)
Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal (2nd R) meets members of The Elders delegation Lakhdar Brahimi, Ela Bhatt, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and former Irish President Mary Robinson (L-3rd R) in Damascus October 19, 2010. The Elders are on a tour of the Middle East to build support for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
While Reuters and the wannabe tribal elders claim that they want a peace agreement between Israel and the Arabs, the poster shows quite the opposite.
Right above Jimmy Carter's head is a map of Hamas' vision of "peace" - a world without Israel altogether.
It is telling that the self-proclaimed global leaders allow themselves, without compunction, to be props in a Hamas advertisement for the destruction of Israel.
One wonders whether they would take a walk with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a gaggle of wire-service reporters to survey Iran's exhibition of Holocaust-denial cartoons, or if they would have agreed to a photo-op in front of a picture of the World Trade Center crashing down.
The fact is that the public and prominent display of maps showing a Judenrein "Palestine" (whose only relationship with historic Palestine is that it portrays areas that Jews have some level of political control over) is no less offensive than proud pictures of 9/11.
The world has become numb to such an outrage, of course. You will have to look long and hard to find any so-called "peace" activist saying a word against these graphic paeans to ethnic cleansing that are pervasive in the Arab world.
But make no mistake - that is what a map of "historic Palestine" is. It's ubiquity makes it no less offensive, and for people who truly want peace, this should be obvious.
(The words on the poster are the Koranic verse that Muslims use to claim that Mohammed journeyed to Jerusalem, h/t Ali.)
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From McClatchy:
This sort of contradicts the idea of the administration being an honest broker. An arbitrator should have no personal stake in the outcome - or existence - of negotiations.
Can you say "farce"?
UPDATE: Barry Rubin figured this out two weeks ago.
So when the Obama administration says it wants peace in the Middle East, is this because this is a vital imperative to further world stability - or is it a way to get more Democrats in Congress?
This sort of contradicts the idea of the administration being an honest broker. An arbitrator should have no personal stake in the outcome - or existence - of negotiations.
Can you say "farce"?
UPDATE: Barry Rubin figured this out two weeks ago.
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
jimmy carter, unrwa
I've mentioned previously how, in the wake of blogs and (belatedly) news organizations finally covering the phenomena of malls and water parks and fancy restaurants and luxury hotels in Gaza, the fake "humanitarian crisis" meme has morphed into something else - a crisis of hopelessness, or despair, or some other non-specific formulation that is a reframing of the entire situation.
Those who pushed the convenient but lying meme of starvation and genocide - people like Jimmy Carter - are now forced to figure out how to keep the pressure on Israel but without the lazy shorthand of "humanitarian crisis."
The latest people who are scrambling to redefine Gaza are "The Elders," the "four confused geriatrics who are wandering the Middle East trying to help terrorists" as Noah Pollak writes.
Mary Robinson, one of these busybodies who just met with terrorists in Gaza (unfortunately, not in front of the cameras this time,) said "This is not a humanitarian crisis - it is a political crisis and it can be solved politically."
The Elders' blog gave space to John Ging, whose job at UNRWA gives him more than a passing interest in prolonging Palestinian Arab suffering for the next few generations. He was more expansive in his attempts to tap-dance around the topic:
These old fogies, who fully support spending hundreds of millions to maintain Hamas' hold on power, know that Hamas is a better investment than merely buying food for millions of kids who have flies buzzing around their distended stomachs.
Those who pushed the convenient but lying meme of starvation and genocide - people like Jimmy Carter - are now forced to figure out how to keep the pressure on Israel but without the lazy shorthand of "humanitarian crisis."
The latest people who are scrambling to redefine Gaza are "The Elders," the "four confused geriatrics who are wandering the Middle East trying to help terrorists" as Noah Pollak writes.
Mary Robinson, one of these busybodies who just met with terrorists in Gaza (unfortunately, not in front of the cameras this time,) said "This is not a humanitarian crisis - it is a political crisis and it can be solved politically."
The Elders' blog gave space to John Ging, whose job at UNRWA gives him more than a passing interest in prolonging Palestinian Arab suffering for the next few generations. He was more expansive in his attempts to tap-dance around the topic:
Instead of dealing with the obvious facts on the ground, the truth is either denied or ignored and instead a debate rages around whether there is a humanitarian crisis or not and whether adjusting or easing an illegality is the appropriate response. Let me say unequivocally that there is a crisis that is far larger than a “humanitarian crisis”; there is a crisis that affects every aspect of public and private life in Gaza.See? 100% of Gazans are suffering from acute despair! This is worse than starvation!
As the Elders will see, the water and sanitation infrastructure is a state of collapse with 80 million cubic litres of untreated sewage pumped into the Mediterranean every day; 90% of the water unsafe to drink by World Health Organization standards. They will also see the poverty and staggering levels of aid dependency, where 80% of the population are dependent on handouts of food from the United Nations. Yes the shops are full of consumer goods, now from Israel rather than the tunnels, but very few can afford to buy them. Unemployment is at record levels with 95% of the private sector businesses closed and the ban on commercial imports and exports still firmly in place.
The result of this and much more is that 100% of the innocent civilians despair at the mismatch between the political rhetoric of the international community and their refusal to take effective action to uphold international law,
These old fogies, who fully support spending hundreds of millions to maintain Hamas' hold on power, know that Hamas is a better investment than merely buying food for millions of kids who have flies buzzing around their distended stomachs.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
Esther Petrack, an 18 year old girl who was born in Jerusalem and attended a modern Orthodox school in Brookline, MA, is apparently competing in the TV show America's Next Top Model.She elicited some controversy when she told host Tyra Banks that she was Sabbath-observant, and then seemed to throw it all away when Banks told her this was a seven-day-a-week competition:
Clearly there was editing in that segment. (Just as clearly, there was more interest in her breast size than in her religious practices.)
Now her mom is defending her, saying that she did not say what the TV show tried to make it seem like.
The fateful words “I will do it” in an answer to the question about working on shabbat were the result of editing. Esther never meant or said that she would give up shabbat for the show, neither did she do it. These words were taken from a long conversation about the principles and laws of shabbat and how Esther was planning to observe them. The producers cut out these 4 words to create a more scandalous storyline; judging from the amount of reaction, they were quite successful!
I'm not quite sure how all of this will affect her chances for a shidduch...
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
CiF Watch and Melanie Philips on the dis-invitation of a pro-Israel speaker at a panel discussion in Belfast. Not only is Israel delegitimized, but also her defenders.
Yesterday, I quoted the European Jewish Congress warning on the dangers to Jewish communities in Europe, and one example was a "throw the [Israeli] soldiers into the sea" event for children. The Philosemitisme blog has more details on that event as well as one before it. (h/t Ora)
A new study methodically monitored Palestinian Arab posts on websites and found that - surprise! - they aren't nearly as moderate as the West insists they are! (h/t Daily Alert)
The Dead Sea Scrolls are coming - to Google!
Naomi Campbell is the latest celebrity to join the Kabbalah bandwagon.
Here is a video of a diamond that shows a Star of David in its internal pattern from all angles:
Naomi Campbell is the latest celebrity to join the Kabbalah bandwagon.
Here is a video of a diamond that shows a Star of David in its internal pattern from all angles:
At this site you can see a video of a girl singing Old MacDonald - in Yiddish!
An interesting video summing up Turkey's crimes over the past century:
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From Ma'an:
In other words, Erdogan made a statement to look tough when he knew very well that he would not be forced to follow through. It was simple posturing for the media, and it worked, as his statement was picked up by a number of news services.
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said he would not attend a climate change conference in Athens on Friday if his Israeli counterpart is present, he told Greece's Skai TV on Monday.The funny part is that there is zero indication that Netanyahu planned to attend this conference. Israelis have presented at similar conferences, but there are no Israelis stated to speak here. The only other leaders mentioned in the program are the prime ministers of host Greece and Malta, as well Salam Fayyad of the PA.
Erdogan is due to attend a Mediterranean conference on climate change in Athens on Friday. "If the prime minister [of Israel] takes part in this event, I will not be there," Erdogan said.
In other words, Erdogan made a statement to look tough when he knew very well that he would not be forced to follow through. It was simple posturing for the media, and it worked, as his statement was picked up by a number of news services.
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
Once again, a group of Jews went late at night to pray at the Tomb of Joseph near Shechem (Nablus,) and the Arabic media freaks.
This time it is Palestine Today saying they are "settlers" who "stormed the shrine" and "raided" the area, which is supposed to be accessible to Jews under existing agreements.
The IDF needs to go to with them to protect the worshippers from being lynched.
This time it is Palestine Today saying they are "settlers" who "stormed the shrine" and "raided" the area, which is supposed to be accessible to Jews under existing agreements.
The IDF needs to go to with them to protect the worshippers from being lynched.
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
On Sunday, Israel killed two people who were about to shoot rockets towards Israel.
No terror group claimed them as members. And therein lies a tale.
There are reports that Islamic Jihad is separating themselves from members who act "impulsively" or who also claim membership in other groups, especially Salafist groups.
This appears to be an attempt to rein in their members. It is considered a "fateful decision," as in the past they would take responsibility for anything done by their members.
At least one of the would-be rocket terrorists were members of Islamic Jihad. Apparently, these rogue operations have been embarrassing for Islamic Jihad, especially the numbers of people killed.
No terror group claimed them as members. And therein lies a tale.
There are reports that Islamic Jihad is separating themselves from members who act "impulsively" or who also claim membership in other groups, especially Salafist groups.
This appears to be an attempt to rein in their members. It is considered a "fateful decision," as in the past they would take responsibility for anything done by their members.
At least one of the would-be rocket terrorists were members of Islamic Jihad. Apparently, these rogue operations have been embarrassing for Islamic Jihad, especially the numbers of people killed.
- Tuesday, October 19, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From Bloomberg:
He is almost certainly lying. His promises are like his mentor Arafat's promises - things that are meant for Western consumption that have no basis in reality. His actions have not been consistent with these words.
But even if we take his words at face value, they are still meaningless. If a model Palestinian Arab state is established and some sort of peace treaty signed, we still have the problem that the majority of the Arab world will not accept it in their hearts. The decades of incitement, of demands for all of Israel - that won't evaporate.
For a small example, look how Islamic Jihad reacted to Abbas' statement:
Another leading Islamic Jihad figure was even more explicit, saying that the conflict will not be over until the last Zionist departs from the soil of Palestine.
Hamas has stated similar opinions as well in the past. More importantly, they are consistent with English-language op-eds that Palestinian Arab intellectuals and academics at major Western universities write all the time.
Abbas represents only a tiny percentage of Palestinian Arabs worldwide, and probably not even a majority in the borders of 1947 Palestine either. His assurances are worthless.
The descendants of refugees whom he has not lifted a finger to help or even represent will vigorously disagree with any tampering of their sacred Right to Return - the only bone that their Arab hosts have ever thrown them.
As soon as a state is established, Arab countries will begin the process of expelling their guests to a state that does not want them and cannot absorb them, and these stateless Arabs will insist that they don't want to go to Ramallah anyway - but to Jaffa.
The number of terror groups will multiply out of frustration, and as we have seen, the West will cave to pressure by Palestinian Arab terror groups and start demanding more concessions from Israel - no matter what assurances they gave Israel in the past. It might take a decade or two, but it will happen, and no agreement drafted today can stop that from happening*. They'll hang those demands on some excuse - perhaps saying that lands outside the 1947 partition lines are also illegally occupied, or that some future fake massacre by Israel justifies how Palestinian Arabs must be returned to their historic nation, or that Israel does not allow free enough travel between Gaza and the West Bank.
Whatever the excuse, the maximal demands that we see today will not evaporate in the wake of a new Arab state on the West Bank. Like the "peace process" itself, it is a diplomatic fantasy that is far removed from reality.
And no one on the Palestinian Arab side is working to change that reality. No one - not Abbas, not Fayyad, nobody - is fighting against the daily incitement, no one is making statements to reassure people in refugee camps that they are fighting for their rights, no one is laying the groundwork for Day One of independence. On the contrary, they are (by their actions or inactions) doing everything they can to ensure a Palestinian Arab state is merely the first of two (or three) such states that will eventually encompass all of Palestine.
* If the agreement includes Arab countries agreeing to naturalize their Palestinian Arab guests, then there might be a slight chance. Of course, no one is even discussing that today.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said he is willing to renounce all future claims on Israel after a Palestinian state is established, though he stopped short of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state.Although he didn't spell those claims out, he almost certainly meant the "right to return" as well as claims on land within the 1949 armistice lines.
“We are ready to put an end to historic demands” once a Palestinian state is established on land outside Israel’s 1967 borders, Abbas said in an interview with Israel’s Channel 1 television late yesterday.
He is almost certainly lying. His promises are like his mentor Arafat's promises - things that are meant for Western consumption that have no basis in reality. His actions have not been consistent with these words.
But even if we take his words at face value, they are still meaningless. If a model Palestinian Arab state is established and some sort of peace treaty signed, we still have the problem that the majority of the Arab world will not accept it in their hearts. The decades of incitement, of demands for all of Israel - that won't evaporate.
For a small example, look how Islamic Jihad reacted to Abbas' statement:
[His words] affect the national principles, strength and strategic vision for our people, and do not represent the Palestinian people.
Another leading Islamic Jihad figure was even more explicit, saying that the conflict will not be over until the last Zionist departs from the soil of Palestine.
Hamas has stated similar opinions as well in the past. More importantly, they are consistent with English-language op-eds that Palestinian Arab intellectuals and academics at major Western universities write all the time.
Abbas represents only a tiny percentage of Palestinian Arabs worldwide, and probably not even a majority in the borders of 1947 Palestine either. His assurances are worthless.
The descendants of refugees whom he has not lifted a finger to help or even represent will vigorously disagree with any tampering of their sacred Right to Return - the only bone that their Arab hosts have ever thrown them.
As soon as a state is established, Arab countries will begin the process of expelling their guests to a state that does not want them and cannot absorb them, and these stateless Arabs will insist that they don't want to go to Ramallah anyway - but to Jaffa.
The number of terror groups will multiply out of frustration, and as we have seen, the West will cave to pressure by Palestinian Arab terror groups and start demanding more concessions from Israel - no matter what assurances they gave Israel in the past. It might take a decade or two, but it will happen, and no agreement drafted today can stop that from happening*. They'll hang those demands on some excuse - perhaps saying that lands outside the 1947 partition lines are also illegally occupied, or that some future fake massacre by Israel justifies how Palestinian Arabs must be returned to their historic nation, or that Israel does not allow free enough travel between Gaza and the West Bank.
Whatever the excuse, the maximal demands that we see today will not evaporate in the wake of a new Arab state on the West Bank. Like the "peace process" itself, it is a diplomatic fantasy that is far removed from reality.
And no one on the Palestinian Arab side is working to change that reality. No one - not Abbas, not Fayyad, nobody - is fighting against the daily incitement, no one is making statements to reassure people in refugee camps that they are fighting for their rights, no one is laying the groundwork for Day One of independence. On the contrary, they are (by their actions or inactions) doing everything they can to ensure a Palestinian Arab state is merely the first of two (or three) such states that will eventually encompass all of Palestine.
* If the agreement includes Arab countries agreeing to naturalize their Palestinian Arab guests, then there might be a slight chance. Of course, no one is even discussing that today.
Monday, October 18, 2010
- Monday, October 18, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
(Misoziony is my term for rabid, pathological hatred of Israel and Zionism. It is my opinion that it is just as irrational and dangerous as anti-semitism.)
From AFP:
One is simply called "The Flag". It shows an Israeli flag, splattered with blood, standing in a pile of human skulls.
The other one, a detail in a 3-part series called "Invasion Triptych," shows an IDF tank with a dead Gaza child on top where an Israeli flag is partially visible.
And the French embassy didn't withdraw the paintings because they are incitement to hate, or because they represent baldfaced lies, or because they are slanderous, or because they are simply disgusting. They withdrew them because of the fear of offending people who might think they were somehow supportive of Israel!
Try to wrap your head around that one.
We have a Norwegian artist, a French cultural center and the Syrian/Iranian art lovers, all vying to see who can outdo the others in their public, visceral hatred and demonization of the Jewish state.
The exhibition was already shown in Beirut and it travels next to Israel's peace partners in Amman, Jordan.
UPDATE: One other angle: notice that the wire services don't bother to describe the paintings themselves, because their narrative is of the poor artist being censored by a French embassy, not the fact that the artist is filled with bile - that would just distract from the story.
From AFP:
Two paintings by Norway's Haakon Gullvaag that show an Israeli flag have been withdrawn from an exhibition at the French Cultural Centre in the Syrian capital, the artist said on Monday.And what were the pictures that had the Israeli flag that were pulled out of fear that people would think they were too pro-Israel?
His "Terra Sancta" exhibition contains works about the Israeli offensive against the Islamist-ruled Gaza Strip in December 2008 and January 2009.
Two of the works in which the Israeli flag features were removed from the show on Saturday, an angry Gullvaag told AFP by phone from Oslo, adding the French embassy in Damascus "explained to us that it was their decision.
"This was done without contacting the artist, the curator or the Norwegian embassy. I have never experienced something similar in my entire life."
The artist said the French embassy said it had concerns about a hotel near the cultural centre which normally has many Iranian guests.
"They were afraid that the Iranians would misunderstand the motifs as being Israel-friendly. Then the cultural centre claimed that some students have complained about showing the Israeli flag at all," Gullvaag said.
One is simply called "The Flag". It shows an Israeli flag, splattered with blood, standing in a pile of human skulls.The other one, a detail in a 3-part series called "Invasion Triptych," shows an IDF tank with a dead Gaza child on top where an Israeli flag is partially visible.
And the French embassy didn't withdraw the paintings because they are incitement to hate, or because they represent baldfaced lies, or because they are slanderous, or because they are simply disgusting. They withdrew them because of the fear of offending people who might think they were somehow supportive of Israel!
Try to wrap your head around that one.
We have a Norwegian artist, a French cultural center and the Syrian/Iranian art lovers, all vying to see who can outdo the others in their public, visceral hatred and demonization of the Jewish state.
The exhibition was already shown in Beirut and it travels next to Israel's peace partners in Amman, Jordan.
UPDATE: One other angle: notice that the wire services don't bother to describe the paintings themselves, because their narrative is of the poor artist being censored by a French embassy, not the fact that the artist is filled with bile - that would just distract from the story.
- Monday, October 18, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
From JPost via OlehGirl:
In the first years of the state, Cuban planes and pilots brought nearly 150,000 Jews to Israel from Iraq, Iran, Yemen and India, the official Cuban newspaper Juventude Rebelde (Rebel Youth) reported on Saturday. Unreported for 60 years, the airlift was one of the largest in history.I found the original article in the Cuban magazine, although it is possibly the slowest Internet connection I've been on since 1994. And the end of the article goes on to talk about Israel's "genocide" of Palestinian Arabs. But it looks very interesting!
In the years after Israel declared independence, Jews in Arab countries began emigrating to Israel as their lives became more difficult. However, due to the lack of cooperation by the Arab governments, traveling by land was very difficult. Since there were no diplomatic relations between Israel and the Arab countries, it was necessary for the aircraft to be from a neutral country, according to the Juvente Rebelde report.
The Cuban connection stemmed from someone in the Israeli trade mission in New York's close friendship with Cuban businessman Narciso Otero-Roselló, a licensed pilot, according to the report. The businessman became president of new air company, Aerea de Cuba, which took ownership of the aircraft to be used in the years-long airlift and established offices in Havana and Nicosia in Cyprus.
The Cuban pilots who flew the planes on the historic mission recalled several close calls to Juvente Rebelde. They told of dust storms suffocating their engines in Iraq, making stops on desolate airstrips in Oman when making the long flights from India to Israel, emergency landings, and crashes while transporting Jews to Israel.
In early 1953, when their special mission was completed, the pilots returned to Cuba, Juvente Rebelde reported. This newly discovered chapter in Jewish and Israeli history shows how far-off countries assisted the Jewish people in the building of the state of Israel.
- Monday, October 18, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
Glenn E. Robinson writes in Foreign Policy about the tenth anniversary of the second intifada. While the article is not terrible, it makes some mistakes, and in at least one case it appears that Robinson is purposefully misrepresenting a quote. (see update below*)
As I noted at the time, the Arabic media did not ignore the anniversary at all. Palestine Today published Islamic Jihad's gleeful tally of "martyrs" as well as the number of Israelis they had killed; Hamas followed with its own stats. Al Jazeera published a ridiculously biased history of the intifada. To these Arabs, the terror spree was a point of pride; they do not see it as a disaster at all. The fact that this contradicts all common sense is not relevant - the anniversary was celebrated.
More troubling, the Malley/Agha article that Robinson links to and quotes was not talking about this narrative at all, but rather about the competing narratives about the Syrian peace initiative at the time. It is a bit dishonest to misquote them so brazenly.*
And, seriously, what political and human rights do Palestinian Arabs in Area A - some 95% of those living in the West Bank - lack? Certainly the ones in Lebanon and Syria and elsewhere are lacking in rights, but a Palestinian Arab state would not solve their problems, because there is precious little indication that a new "Palestine" would welcome millions of new immigrants or even provide them with citizenship. (Why are we not seeing them give Lebanese Palestinians any passports?) But the PA has representation in the UN that arguably has more real political power than Israel's, PA citizens are living the same lives they would if there was a state.
If there is any takeaway from the tenth anniversary of the intifada, it is that Israel cannot trust mere words coming from the Palestinian Arabs. Remember that the letter that Arafat sent Rabin to kick off the Oslo process claimed that the PLO has renounced violence, and yet more Jews were killed during the first five years of the Oslo "peace" process than during the last five years of the abrogation of Oslo that the intifada represents.
(h/t Zach)
UPDATE: Zach emailed my post to Robinson, and he replied, "Having read that blog posting, I cannot take it very seriously. As to Malley’s quote, it is not a misquote in the least."
Well, there you have it.
*UPDATE 2: Re-reading the Malley/Agha article, I see that their quote was indeed directed at the entire narrative of Camp David, not only about the Syrian track that was being mentioned immediately previous to that quote. So I was wrong in saying that Robinson misrepresented their article, and I apologize.
This year's 10th anniversary of the start of the second Palestinian uprising passed with barely a mention in the Israeli, Palestinian and American media. This is not surprising, considering the uprising is widely seen as a disaster for most Palestinians and Israelis, putting the Middle East peace process into a deep and perhaps permanent freeze.
As I noted at the time, the Arabic media did not ignore the anniversary at all. Palestine Today published Islamic Jihad's gleeful tally of "martyrs" as well as the number of Israelis they had killed; Hamas followed with its own stats. Al Jazeera published a ridiculously biased history of the intifada. To these Arabs, the terror spree was a point of pride; they do not see it as a disaster at all. The fact that this contradicts all common sense is not relevant - the anniversary was celebrated.
The dominant Israeli narrative, shared by many in the United States, can be summarized as follows: Israel offered a generous deal at Camp David, which Yasir Arafat rejected -- and then went home to make war against the Jewish state. In this narrative, the second intifada was a planned event, led and directed by Arafat himself, demonstrating that the Palestinians will never accept Israel.First of all, while there may be some doubt as to exactly when Arafat took over the running of the second intifada, there is no doubt that he controlled it fairly early on and that he was planning for an uprising. David Samuels goes into detail on these points, with interviews with major Palestinian Arab colleagues of Arafat. Hamas recently announced that Arafat had instructed them to strike at internal Israeli targets at the very start of the fighting.
The problem with this narrative is that it is factually wrong on all counts. Former peace negotiators Robert Malley and Hussein Agha have done more than anyone else to destroy the myths that were propagated about Camp David. Their work is now supported by a slew of memoirs and other accounts. As they noted recently, their "revisionism" of 2001 has now become orthodoxy that "barely elicits a raised eyebrow."
More troubling, the Malley/Agha article that Robinson links to and quotes was not talking about this narrative at all, but rather about the competing narratives about the Syrian peace initiative at the time. It is a bit dishonest to misquote them so brazenly.*
...The intifada was a strategic disaster for the Palestinians. As a stateless people, Palestinians lack many basic political and human rights and statehood presents the only viable path toward securing these rights. The uprising put off statehood by at least a decade (and perhaps permanently), and at high levels of human suffering and economic devastation.If you assume that the goal of the Palestinian Arab leadership is to create an independent state and end the scourge of statelessness that their people suffer under, no doubt it was a disaster. That assumption does not account for many other actions of that leadership, however.
And, seriously, what political and human rights do Palestinian Arabs in Area A - some 95% of those living in the West Bank - lack? Certainly the ones in Lebanon and Syria and elsewhere are lacking in rights, but a Palestinian Arab state would not solve their problems, because there is precious little indication that a new "Palestine" would welcome millions of new immigrants or even provide them with citizenship. (Why are we not seeing them give Lebanese Palestinians any passports?) But the PA has representation in the UN that arguably has more real political power than Israel's, PA citizens are living the same lives they would if there was a state.
Secondly, the intifada created a cult of martyrdom among Palestinians. Suicide bombings were unknown in the Middle East until Hezbollah in Lebanon learned of their effectiveness from Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers in the 1980s. After 400 Palestinian Islamists were exiled to southern Lebanon for a year in 1992, they brought the technique home with them. A smattering of suicide bombings in the 1990s gave way to an average of one every two weeks during the first four years of the uprising. The tactic of suicide bombing was accompanied by a cultural motif to support, justify and venerate the "martyrs."There were 21 suicide attacks between 1993 and 2000 before September. A little more than a "smattering," I would say, though of course they increased dramatically afterwards.
Third, the intifada killed the Zionist and post-Zionist Left in Israel. Israel's center-left staked its political future on a peace deal with the Palestinians, which itself was based on the presence of a Palestinian partner for peace. The dominant Israeli narrative of the intifada holds that there is no reliable Palestinian peace partner; this has led to the virtual extinction of the Zionist Left in Israel. Since the start of the intifada, Israelis have elected only prime ministers who cut their political teeth in the right wing Likud party: Ariel Sharon (three times), Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu.This is true, to a point. However, others have noted that the mainstream Likud-led government now holds an official position that is very close to what the Israeli Left's was in 1993. Likud officially supports a two-state solution - something that no American president said publicly before 2001! In a larger sense, the Left has won, and they then marginalized themselves by moving further and further from the center.
Fourth, the intifada empowered the forces of Greater Israel. The biggest political winner over the past decade has been the Israeli settler community. About 500,000 Israelis now live on the Palestinian side of the 1967 Green Line, and they and their political allies are now arguably the single most powerful political force inside Israel.This is absurd. The residents of the territories were powerless to stop the abandonment of Gaza. West Bank communities have been dismantled. This is an Arab talking point, but it does not represent the consensus within Israel. (Far more recently, President Obama's amateurish handling of the "peace process" has made many Israelis more intransigent towards giving up any land, but that is for different reasons and that doesn't reflect inherent political power of the Jews of Judea and Samaria.)
And lastly, the information revolution has arrived in the Middle East. During the first intifada, uncensored events were only occasionally caught on video by private citizens and the videos were only disseminated if a friendly television station was willing to broadcast them. The second intifada was seen in real time, through videos and cell photos that were posted on the Internet within minutes of being taken.Yet the vast majority of these pictures are still going through layers of left-leaning media, meaning that the events that end up being seen are still the ones that the media wants you to see. The recent staged Silwan stone-throwing event illustrates that nicely.
If there is any takeaway from the tenth anniversary of the intifada, it is that Israel cannot trust mere words coming from the Palestinian Arabs. Remember that the letter that Arafat sent Rabin to kick off the Oslo process claimed that the PLO has renounced violence, and yet more Jews were killed during the first five years of the Oslo "peace" process than during the last five years of the abrogation of Oslo that the intifada represents.
(h/t Zach)
UPDATE: Zach emailed my post to Robinson, and he replied, "Having read that blog posting, I cannot take it very seriously. As to Malley’s quote, it is not a misquote in the least."
Well, there you have it.
*UPDATE 2: Re-reading the Malley/Agha article, I see that their quote was indeed directed at the entire narrative of Camp David, not only about the Syrian track that was being mentioned immediately previous to that quote. So I was wrong in saying that Robinson misrepresented their article, and I apologize.
- Monday, October 18, 2010
- Elder of Ziyon
The 8th Annual Doha Conference on Interfaith Dialogue is to start tomorrow, but prominent Islamic Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi is boycotting the conference, according to Palestine Today.
The reason? Because there will be Jews there!
He participated in the first, second and third conferences because they were centered on Muslim/Christian dialogue. But he refuses to participate when Jews attend, quoting the Koran 29:46 ["The Spider"], "Do not argue with People of the Book...." [the verse goes on to make an exception of certain types of arguments, and then an exception to the exception, against those Jews who "oppress," if I am parsing the verse correctly.]
Qaradawi said, "So why should we dialogue with the Jews, who... shed blood, and violated the sanctities, and burned farms, and destroyed homes... .. to sit with them on a single platform?"
The article does not say "Zionist Jews" but merely "Jews." He has met with the Neturei Karta in the past, though.
The rest of the Koranic verse makes clear that Islamic "dialogue" with other "divine" religions is limited to telling them about Islam. Which makes it more like a monologue.
Even so, credulous non-Muslims keep thinking that there is value in these fake one-way "dialogues."
The reason? Because there will be Jews there!
He participated in the first, second and third conferences because they were centered on Muslim/Christian dialogue. But he refuses to participate when Jews attend, quoting the Koran 29:46 ["The Spider"], "Do not argue with People of the Book...." [the verse goes on to make an exception of certain types of arguments, and then an exception to the exception, against those Jews who "oppress," if I am parsing the verse correctly.]
Qaradawi said, "So why should we dialogue with the Jews, who... shed blood, and violated the sanctities, and burned farms, and destroyed homes... .. to sit with them on a single platform?"
The article does not say "Zionist Jews" but merely "Jews." He has met with the Neturei Karta in the past, though.
The rest of the Koranic verse makes clear that Islamic "dialogue" with other "divine" religions is limited to telling them about Islam. Which makes it more like a monologue.
Even so, credulous non-Muslims keep thinking that there is value in these fake one-way "dialogues."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
