Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal
As heated as the arguments between us can get, we can all agree that all of these positions, and their many variants, are entirely within the bounds of legitimate political debate—and that none of them are evidence of anyone’s intent either to rush America to war or to obliterate the State of Israel.Amnesty UK’s Campaigns Chief In Hot Water Yet Again Over Anti-Israel Tweets
What we increasingly can’t stomach—and feel obliged to speak out about right now—is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it. Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South.
This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately—some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives. Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about “money” and “lobbying” and “foreign interests” who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card. It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States—and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it.
We do not accept the idea that Senator Schumer or anyone else is a fair target for racist incitement, anymore than we accept the idea that the basic norms of political discourse in this country do not apply to Jews. Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry—no matter who does it. On this question, we should all stand in defense of Senator Schumer.
The Israeli Embassy has lodged a complaint with Amnesty UK after one of its senior directors launched into an anti-Israel tirade on Twitter. This is not the first time that the staff member, Kristyan Benedict, has been criticised for his views, which in the past have been investigated for anti-Semitism.I am a Zionist because I am an Arab
Eitan Na’eh, charge d’affaires at the embassy sent a letter to Amnesty UK director Kate Allen after Benedict, who works as campaigns manager for Amnesty UK, tweeted repeatedly about the arson attack on a Palestinian home in the village of Douma last week which resulted in the death of 18-month-old Ali Dawabshe, the Jewish Chronicle has reported.
One of the tweets accused the Israeli government of “getting away with murder”.
Mr Benedict has form on this matter. Last year he used the hashtag #JSIL, sometimes used by extreme anti-Israeli groups to draw parallels between Israel and ISIS.
In 2012, Amnesty International’s disciplinary panel cleared Mr Benedict of anti-Semitism after he tweeted: “Louise Ellman, Robert Halfon and Luciana Berger walk into a bar…each orders a round of B52s … #Gaza” When fellow twitter users pointed out that he had named only Jewish Members of Parliament, he responded that it the tweet was “a giggle” and “light-hearted,” adding: “apols to those who booed.”
Amnesty ruled that “the tweet in question was ill-advised and had the potential to be offensive and inflammatory but was not racist or anti-Semitic.” The incident came a year after Mr Benedict was forced to apologise by Amnesty’s disciplinary council after he threatened to “smack” a pro-Israel activist.
I am sometimes asked how despite being an Arab, I support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. My answer is that I support Israel because I am an Arab.
Israeli Arab and Muslim Sarah Zoabi said, “I want to say to all the Arabs of Israel to wake up. We live in paradise. Comparing us to other countries, to Arab countries – we live in paradise.” Sadly, we cannot all live in Israel, and even if we could, unless we change ourselves first, Israel would become one more failed Arab state.
Palestinian-Jordanian Mudar Zahran argues that we need Israel for strategic reasons, concluding that “if the day were to come when Israel falls, Jordan, Egypt and many others would fall, too, and Westerners would be begging Iran for oil. We can hate Israel as much as we like, but we must realize that without it, we too would be gone.” While I agree with Zahran, Israel has no obligation to defend the whole Arab world while we Arabs keep demonizing her.
The reason I support Israel is because I want good things to happen not only in Israel but in the whole Middle East. Israel is a role model that we can emulate. Unlike fake “pro-Palestinian” activists, I want an end to hate, violence, oppression, destruction, and deaths.
Black and White and Read in Farsi
Surrounded by radical “Iran experts” assuring him that Khomeini was practically a saint — a wise old religious leader, lacking in political ambitions, whose clout was solely spiritual — Carter was able to sleep soundly at night, even when his embassy staff in Tehran were taken hostage the first time. Yes, there was a “first time,” in February 1979, two weeks after Khomeini’s return to Iran, and nine months before the famous, full-blown hostage crisis that lasted 444 days.Glick: Iran Nuclear Deal Poses As Much a Threat to Israel as US
At the time, renowned Orientalist Bernard Lewis, now professor emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton, wanted to find out who Khomeini actually was.
“So I did what one normally does in my profession: I went to the university library and looked him up,” he told me in an interview for my book, “To Hell in a Handbasket: Carter, Obama, and the Arab Spring.”
What Lewis came upon was a bound collection of Khomeini’s speeches, called “Islamic Government.” He read it in one sitting and was shocked.
What it revealed was a philosophy of Islamic statehood that used the harshest possible rhetoric to denounce non-Muslims and called for the spread of Shariah law across the world.
Deciding that something had to be done to expose the ayatollah and his intentions, Lewis contacted the op-ed editor of The New York Times, Charlotte Curtis, and offered to write a piece on the book.
Curtis rejected his proposal.
“I don’t think our readers would be interested in the work of some Persian author,” she said.
This is but one example of the many and varied ways in which the White House and the media colluded to create facts on the ground based on fantasy. Sound familiar?
It certainly came to mind while reading Amir Taheri’s piece in the New York Post on Saturday, in which the Iranian-born intellectual describes a new book he obtained, penned by Khomeini’s successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current supreme leader of Iran.
Called Palestine, the 416-page tome is devoted to the issue of Israel’s inevitable demise, with a blurb on its back cover calling the author the “flag-bearer of jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”
In a security briefing Thursday, U.S.-born Israeli journalist Caroline Glick said that the Iran nuclear deal poses just as much a threat to American security as it does to Israel.Iran Deal: Jews Now Oppose 2-to-1; Youth 4-to-1
“As a result of the Israel-centric focus of the debate, the issue of Iran’s strategic threat to the United States has been thrown by the wayside,” Glick said. “As Prime Minister Netanyahu has said, those ICBMs are not for Israel, they are for the United States of America.”
Glick said there are three central flaws that will hamper efforts to prevent a nuclear Iran.
The deal would immediately enrich Iran with $150 billion dollars in sanctions relief. Glick said Iran is more likely to use this money to fuel regional aggression than “to finance domestic economic growth.”
Iran is “a state with hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East, genocidal ambitions towards Israel and the United States, and with international aspirations to foment an international jihad,” Glick said. “Putting this kind of money in the hands of the ruler of this regime is a recipe for disaster.”
Glick said the deal’s timeline would allow Iran to resume the development of nuclear capabilities and is skeptical that Iran would even abide by those measures given lax inspection rules. She predicted that the deal would delay nuclear development by a matter of three or four months, rather than several years.
American Jews now oppose the Iran deal by a margin of two-to-one, according to a new poll–with those between 18 and 30 against the deal four-to-one.Schumer, White House at war over Iran
The telephone poll of 1,035 registered voters, conducted by McKeon & Associates July 29 and 30, found that a large plurality of registered Jewish voters oppose the deal, 45% to 22%.
That is a sharp reversal from initial polls (though polling questions have varied).
As the Iran deal debate began, a large plurality of American Jews supported the Iran deal, 49% to 31%. A week later, a plurality opposed the deal, 45% to 40%. A week after that, the margin widened substantially.
The latest poll was commissioned by Citizens for a Safe Middle East, a group that was formed to oppose the Iran deal.
The White House lit into Sen. Chuck Schumer on Friday for his decision to vote no on the Iran deal and suggested that he’s put his clear path to be the next Democratic leader in doubt.Opposing Iran Nuclear Deal, Chuck Schumer Rattles Democratic Firewall
And a person familiar with Schumer’s decision said the senator’s allies blame the White House for leaking news from a private call Schumer made to President Barack Obama on Thursday afternoon and breaking a direct request the senator made to the president to give him until Friday to put word out about his decision. The person also noted, with more than a little acidity, that Obama was the only person Schumer told of his decision before the news started to leak out.
“I wouldn’t be surprised” if Senate Democrats consider Schumer’s decision in picking their next leader, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Friday, eagerly lumping in the New York Democrat in with the Republicans that Obama has said are against the Iran deal for the same reason they were for the Iraq War.
“There’s no denying that this difference of opinion that emerged overnight is one that has existed between Senator Schumer and President Obama for over a decade,” Earnest said.
Asked if Schumer’s leadership of the Democratic conference is now in doubt, Earnest made a very noticeable duck: “This is a question for Democratic senators,” he said.
Obama and aides had never much expected Schumer to be a yes. But the way Schumer said no is what’s enraged them: not the timing of a statement put out at 10 p.m. on the night of the first GOP debate, but the timing of such a high-profile rejection with four weeks and lots of undecided members to go.
Schumer’s allies suggest that Obama’s side violated a private agreement and put the news out amid the Republican debate to quash as much attention as possible to an embarrassment that Obama and his team were expecting, just not quite yet.
The decision by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York to oppose the Iran nuclear deal has rattled the Democratic bulwark around the accord, emboldened the deal’s opponents in both parties, and set off a wave of condemnation from liberals for the man who hopes to lead Senate Democrats in the next Congress.Will Schumer Do More Than Vote Against the Iran Deal?
But supporters of the accord said on Friday that Democratic defections would not be enough to bring it down.
To scuttle the deal, opponents have two high hurdles. They will need 60 votes in the Senate for a resolution of disapproval to overcome a filibuster by supporters of the accord. If the opponents get that, the president will veto the resolution. The opponents would then have to secure the votes of two-thirds of the lawmakers in both chambers to override the veto.
“It is less likely than not that Congress is going to override,” said Representative Brad Sherman of California, a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who came out against the nuclear accord on Friday. “That happens almost never, and even less often on foreign policy.”
Mr. Schumer’s voice is powerful, and his politics are wily, but he alone cannot stop the international agreement, which Republican leaders in the House and the Senate have promised to bring to a vote in mid-September.
“It is a decision that many people, including our whip operation in the House, had been watching closely, no question about that,” said Representative David E. Price, Democrat of North Carolina and a member of the House’s informal team whipping up support for the accord. “I wouldn’t underestimate the importance of Chuck Schumer, but he’s not likely to reverse the situation.”
The point of Obama’s heavy-handed attacks on domestic critics as well as the Israeli government on this issue isn’t just to ensure that he scares enough Democrats into backing him. The rationale of the Iran deal isn’t to be found in the arcane arguments about how many centrifuges Tehran is being allowed to keep, an inspection process that gives it 24 days warning of visits or even the shocking fact that it may not be forced to divulge the extent of its military research. As the statements from the president and the secretary of state have made clear, the real justification for it is an effort to craft a new détente with the Islamist regime. The administration truly thinks the “Death to America” chants being led by Iran’s Supreme Leader are unimportant and that Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other Iranian officials don’t mean it when they repeatedly say they intended to eliminate Israel. Obama’s legacy isn’t just a nuclear pact, but a new Iran-centric foreign policy that will downgrade America’s existing alliances with Israel and the Arab states that are just as upset about the deal as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.Kerry’s Dangerous Fantasy
But in order to ensure that this new Middle East policy succeeds, Obama needs more than to let his deal sneak through Congress via a reverse ratification process rather than as a treaty that would, as the Constitution requires, a two thirds positive vote in the Senate. He also needs to divide and ultimately undermine the bipartisan pro-Israel consensus that has helped build the alliance between the U.S. and the Jewish state. It’s not just the “no” votes on Iran that he wants to hamstring. The president also wants to kneecap AIPAC and isolate it and other Israel backers by branding them as warmongers who are not loyal to the U.S.
That is why Schumer and others who also see themselves as guardians of the alliance can’t merely vote no and then shrug their shoulders while other Democrats allow this disgraceful act of appeasement to survive Congressional scrutiny. The fact that Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, a close Schumer ally, has now said she will vote for the deal is an ominous sign that New York’s senior senator is sitting this fight out.
Schumer may be right to worry that efforts to persuade other senators to join him will undermine his claim to be Reid’s successor. But if he really wishes to make good on his boasts that he is the shomer — in Hebrew, the guardian — of the alliance with Israel, he must do more than vote against the deal. The stakes for America’s security and for the pro-Israel community are greater than his ambitions. Though the Schumer Iran deal statement is a powerful one, his silence in the Senate cloakroom as the votes are being counted will speak even louder as to his real intentions.
Irrespective of Western attempts to portray Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Jordan and Egypt as supporters of the Iran nuclear deal, leaders of these countries, and especially the House of Saud, consider the accord a colossal, lethal threat. They see it as a reckless, short-sighted and self-destructive policy, which will initially plague the Arab world and subsequently the Western one, including the U.S. — “the Great Satan” as the ayatollahs call it.Iran Deal: California Democrat Hits Back at Obama
While Saudi leaders are restrained in their official reaction to the Iran nuclear agreement, they voice their authentic concerns and assessments via the House of Saud-owned media, which has traditionally served as a convenient venue, providing the element of deniability, sparing diplomatic inconvenience.
During a recent visit to Capitol Hill, I was told by legislators in both chambers, on both sides of the aisle: “While Israel is concerned about Iran’s nuclearization, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are panicky.”
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed, the House of Saud-appointed general manager of Al Arabiya TV and former editor-in-chief of the leading Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat, dismissed U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s assertion that “once fully implemented, the Iran deal will contribute to the region’s long-term security.”
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) officially announced Friday that he would oppose the Iran deal, and hit back at President Barack Obama for lumping critics of the Iran deal with supporters of the Iraq war.We’re doing road repairs near Parchin, claims Iran’s Zarif, denying a nuke clean-up
“The President reminds us that many prominent critics of the Agreement supported the invasion of Iraq,” Sherman said in an addendum to his official statement. “It should be noted that many supporters of the Agreement also supported the invasion of Iraq, including: Vice President Biden, Secretary Kerry and Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.”
Sherman recently told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview that the Iran deal meant “terrorism with impunity,” and said that his “goal is to make sure all Americans know this is not morally or legally binding on the U.S. and the world, because I see how ugly this deal is in the next decade.”
In Friday’s press release, Sherman expanded upon the theme of legality:
Under International Law and the U.S. Constitution, the Agreement is a mere ‘executive political agreement’ and is not binding on America, Europe or Iran. However, if the Agreement was not only signed by the President, but also supported by Congress, it may appear binding. Appearances matter. In future years, many would argue as long as Iran appears to be complying with the Agreement, America cannot insist on modifications or extensions of nuclear restrictions. A strong Congressional vote against the Agreement is the best way to make it clear that the Agreement is not binding on Congress, the American people or future administrations.”
Iran is fixing up roads near the Parchin military site, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif insisted Saturday, dismissing reports that it is engaged in a hurried clean-up of a site where it is alleged to have carried out illegal nuclear-related activity.Iran: ‘Bragging’ Obama is ‘Under An Illusion’ About Nuke Deal
“We have announced that road construction operations are being carried out at Parchin,” Zarif told reporters in Tehran, according to the semi-official Fars news agency. Claims to the contrary, he said, were “lies,” he said. “All allegations against the Islamic Republic of Iran in this ground have always been baseless,” Zarif added.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, suspects that the Islamic Republic may have experimented with high-explosive detonators for nuclear arms at Parchin, a military facility south of Tehran. On Thursday, the Institute for Science and International Security, a nonproliferation institute, said new satellite imagery of Parchin shows crates, trucks and construction that may be linked to a renewed attempt to clean up the site before an IAEA inspection.
The IAEA plans to visit the site soon as part of the new deal between Iran and six world powers focused on limiting Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the removal of economic sanctions. Access to Parchin would follow years of refusal by Iran.
A senior Iranian official close to the Supreme Leader recently mocked President Obama’s remarks about the recently signed nuclear accord as “bragging” and accused the U.S. leader of being “under an illusion” about the Islamic Republic’s hate for America, according to translation of Persian-language comments performed by the CIA’s Open Source Center.Iran's military chief voices support for nuclear deal despite prior skepticism
Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Asudi, an adviser to the Supreme Leader and official in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), lashed out at Obama for claiming that the recently inked nuclear accord would moderate Iran and bring it closer to the United States and other Western countries.
“If Obama opens his ears he can hear the voices of millions of Iranians who shout, ‘Death to America’ on various occasions,” such as the Feb.11 anniversary of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, which brought hardliners into office, Asudi said, according to Iran’s state-controlled Mehr News Agency.
Obama “seems to be under an illusion, and when someone is under an illusion he does not know what he is saying,” the IRGC leader said, adding that Obama has been “bragging” about the deal and Iran’s intentions.
Asudi pushed back against a speech earlier this week by Obama in which he claimed that Iran’s anti-American sentiment exists solely among hardliners and not the entire Iranian population.
Asudi claimed that this is simply not true.
Iran's military chief and a close ally to the Supreme Leader expressed his support on Saturday for the country's nuclear deal with world powers, a key endorsement for the accord that faces strong opposition from hardliners.Leftist Author Makes Dubious Claim that Iranian Jews Support the Iran Nuke Deal
Conservative members of the Iranian parliament and chief commander of the elite Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad Ali Jafari, have sharply criticized the deal, saying it undermined the Islamic Republic's military capabilities.
While Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not publicly approved or disapproved of the deal, he has told officials and experts to take legal procedures to ensure the other side does not breach it, saying some of the world powers involved were untrustworthy.
Major General Hassan Firouzabadi listed 16 "advantages" to the deal, which Iran signed in Vienna in July, without detailing any drawbacks.
After visiting Iran, Left-wing journalist Reese Erlich has concluded in his piece, “Iran’s Jewish community gets behind nuclear deal with the US,” that there is little to no dissent among Iran’s Jews on the supposed positive implications of the Iran nuclear deal.Hezbollah Under Strict Iranian Orders Not to Respond to Alleged Israeli Strike
In his article, which was reposted on Friday in USA Today, Erlich makes the case that Iran’s Jews are unified in favor of the deal.
To come to his consensus that the Jewish “community” supports the Iran deal, Erlich only cited three Iranian Jews– two who have been approved by the Mullahs as Jewish community representatives, and one who was seemingly afraid to give the author his full name, likely for fear of reprisal.
Dr. Siamak Morsadegh, the state-sponsored Jewish representative in the Iranian parliament, who had to be approved by the Ayatollah’s Council of Guardians before he was allowed to take his seat in the majilis, proudly told the author that Jews can pray at their synagogues without fear of being killed by a rogue jihadi. However, he then revealed that as a racist apartheid state, Iran prohibits Jews and other religious minorities from holding higher leadership positions in government.
Iran ordered its Lebanese terror proxy Hezbollah not to respond to a recent alleged Israeli strike against targets in Syria, Israel’s NRG news website reported on Wednesday.The secret of Iran's success
As of yet, Hezbollah hasn’t even issued a verbal response to the attack, also a result of strict Iranian orders, since Tehran wants to avoid any escalation with Israel at this time, according to the report.
Apparently, Iran fears a conflict between Hezbollah, which receives extensive Iranian funding and assistance, and Israel, which is the most vehement and vocal opponent to the nuclear deal sought by world powers and Iran that could unfreeze up to $150 billion in Iranian assets.
Additionally, Hezbollah is currently heavily engaged in fighting alongside the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad against rapidly advancing rebels and can ill afford to open a second front against Israel.
Last week, reports on the pro-Hezbollah TV channel Al-Manar — also a U.S. designated terrorist outfit — claimed that an Israeli strike was carried out within Syrian territory. According to the report, the strike killed two pro-Syrian government soldiers and three Hezbollah fighters.
In the past, Hezbollah has been known to seek swift revenge on Israeli targets in response to attacks by Israel.
Persian civilians and government representatives have been giving and taking with foreigners for thousands of years, employing a different type of business or political discourse than the West is familiar with. Due to its basic principles these negotiations will, more often than not, primarily serve the Persian interest.Iran and Its Terror Proxies: A Guide to a Dangerous Future
Therefore, we should not be surprised this was the case throughout the negotiations between Iran and the United States and other world powers. The Iranian delegation won significant results through its dogged adherence to the four negotiating principles of the Persian bazaar.
Firstly, the Persian bazaar approach to negotiating aims to secure the maximum result, which is predetermined and from which there is no intention of backing down. From the Persian point of view, the negotiating process is not designed for facilitating a compromise between the opposing sides. It is also not designed for reaching a middle ground between the sides' original proposals. Its goal is singular in purpose, which is to allow the Persian side to meet its objectives. If not -- the negotiating process is delayed until an unknown future date, when the conditions are deemed more favorable to achieving the objectives. In the meantime, the Persians will buy time and learn to live with the situation, as difficult as it may be.
The deal reached in July 2015 by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany—the P5+1—and Iran, ostensibly to curb the latter’s nuclear program, will have far-reaching consequences beyond the scope of Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. One key realm in which the world can anticipate a deeply negative impact concerns the support for international terrorism provided by the Iranian regime.Father of Palestinian baby killed in Duma attack dies of injuries
In exchange for accepting major Western concessions on its nuclear research activities, the Iranian regime will receive significant sanctions relief, readmission to the international financial system, and the gradual easing of a United Nations-imposed arms embargo. Collectively, these steps amount to the lifting of punitive measures levied against Iran over the past decade by the United Nations, the European Union, and a variety of national governments—including the United States—in response to Iranian obstruction over its clandestine nuclear activities. Whether the deal struck in Vienna in July 2015, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), will actually prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb remains to be seen. What is indisputable, given the nature of the regime, is that Iran—the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism—will continue and likely increase its support for such nefarious activities.
Senior administration officials, all the way up to the president himself, have conceded this point, which is remarkable given their obfuscations about many other, smaller details of the agreement. At a press conference soon after the JCPOA was announced, President Barack Obama himself acknowledged that the United States and Iran “will continue to have profound differences,” namely over the latter’s “support for terrorism” and “its use of proxies to destabilize parts of the Middle East.” Asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer if Iran’s newfound windfall may lead to increased “support [for] international terrorism,” National Security Adviser Susan Rice responded, “We should expect that some portion of that money would go to the Iranian military and could potentially be used for the kinds of bad behavior that we have seen in the region up until now.” As sanctions ease, there is every reason to believe that such “bad behavior” will not only continue, but that it will increase substantially.
The father of the 18-month-old Palestinian baby who was killed in a firebomb attack by suspected settler extremists died Saturday morning of the wounds he sustained in the attack, his brother told al-Jazeera.Israel braces for West Bank escalation after death of Ali Dawabsha’s father
Saad Dawabsha, his wife Riham and their four-year-old son Ahmad were critically injured in the July 31 attack on their home in the West Bank village of Duma in which Ali, 18-months-old, was burned to death. The father was being treated at Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba.
Riham and Ahmad Dawabsha are still in grave condition at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer, near Tel Aviv.
Ghassan Daghlas, a Palestinian Authority official in the north of the West Bank, said Palestinian and Israeli authorities were trying to make arrangements to transfer Saad Dawabsha’s body for the funeral.
Dawabsha’s funeral Saturday was attended by thousands, and marked by calls for “revenge” and declarations that “a million martyrs are marching on Jerusalem.” Israeli security officials believe the firebombing of the Dawabsha home in Duma, south of Nablus, was carried out by Jewish terrorists. There have been some reports that the assailants came from nearby settlement outposts, but a gag order has been imposed on the investigation.Uncle Sam trusts UNRWA: New US-UNRWA Accord Modeled on US Teheran accord
Fatah and Hamas flags flew at the funeral. Israeli security officials said Hamas was pushing hard for an intensification of terror attacks on Israeli targets in the West Bank and inside Israel. Israel’s Channel 2 quoted West Bank Hamas leader Hassan Yousef declaring Saturday that the time had come for “a third Intifada.”
Israel has boosted its military deployment in the West Bank since the firebombing attack. In the wake of Saad’s funeral Saturday, dozens of Palestinians threw stones at IDF soldiers and lit tires on fire near Duma. Military forces responded with riot-dispersal means. Forces remained on alert for further clashes.
Speaking at the funeral, Dawabsha’s brother Nasser criticized Israel for not making any arrests connected to the attack. Israel “could have prevented this crime. Eight days have passed since the attack and those responsible are still free,” he noted bitterly.
Riham Dawabsha, Ali’s mother, is still fighting for her life in Tel Hashomer hospital, doctors said Saturday.
As the eyes of the world focus on the dysfunctional US-Iranian accord, yet another dysfunctional accord with the US government has escaped public scrutiny: The new understandings reached between the US government and UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, most recently posted on the website of the US State Department.One Week Later, Back to the Usual Terror in Israel
The US, the largest funder of UNRWA, (Reaching $400 million this year, one third of the UNRWA budget), could have predicated further funding of UNRWA on a humanitarian commitment to resettle UNRWA’s client population: 5.4 million descendents of Arab refugees from the 1948 war – into decent permanent living conditions.
Yet the US-UNRWA accord mentions nothing of the kind.
Instead, the US-UNRWA accord mandates that thousands of these descendents of Arab refugees who have wallowed in the indignity of refugee life for 66 years, must continue to live in refugee squalor “until a comprehensive and just solution is secured”, something which UNRWA will not let happen.
Dr. Arnon Groiss, a journalist from the Arabic language service of the Israel Broadcasting Authority, who has extensively studied PA textbooks used in the UNRWA schools, has concluded that no solution to the refugee issue is offered by UNRWA for the future of the Palestinian refugees except for one: the “right of return” to villages that existed before 1948.
Manifestations of the “right of return” in PA textbooks, as taught in UNRWA’s schools are not nostalgic literary pieces.
Why is this happening? Some will, as they always do, blame Israel and treat Palestinians as if they were incapable of rising above violence because of the injustice of the “occupation” even though Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and ISIS consider all of Israel to be “occupied” territory and not just remote West Bank settlements that many if not most Israelis would be happy to exchange for genuine peace.IDF strikes Hamas target in Gaza after rocket attack
But the reason why Palestinian dissident groups shoot at Israel or applaud lone wolf attacks isn’t just a matter of their extremist beliefs. Such attacks are carried out in order to bolster these organizations standing in Palestinian public opinion. The pattern is a familiar one. Smaller ones outflank larger groups because the latter are accused of not shedding enough Jewish blood or display enough aggression toward the Zionist enemy. That’s how Hamas got its start at the expense of Yasir Arafat’s Fatah terrorists. Islamic Jihad bolstered its following by showing up Hamas as insufficiently bloodthirsty, and now ISIS plays the same deadly game. But none of them would do it if terrorism against Israel were truly unpopular.
The problem is that, fed by an official Palestinian media that lauds terrorists, calls for Israel’s elimination and spreads hate against Jews on a daily basis, the political culture of the Palestinians continues to treat violence as praiseworthy. Those Palestinians, like former Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad, who preach peace and prioritizing development, are isolated and without support among their own people even as foreigners praise them. Even supposed moderates like PA leader Mahmoud Abbas know that even if he wanted to make peace with Israel, he could never survive the signing of such a pact.
To note routine Palestinian terror is not to excuse or rationalize violence from Jews. No matter how provoked West Bank settlers may be, there is no justification for breaking the law, let alone murder. But those who long for a two-state solution to the conflict must understand that as long as Palestinians are still unready to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders are drawn, it isn’t possible. Hopes for peace will only be realized when Palestinians are as angry and outraged about the usual terror attacks on Israelis as Jews are by price tag violence.
Israeli planes struck a Hamas military facility in the central Gaza Strip Friday night, hours after a rocket shot from the Palestinian enclave landed in Israel.In pivot, Egyptians are warming to Jews, Israel
The Hamas facility suffered a direct hit from the airstrike, the IDF Spokesman’s Unit said in a statement, adding that the army held Hamas responsible for any rocket attacks on Israeli territory.
Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry said two people were injured in the strike.
Ministry spokesman Ashraf al-Qudra told AFP that one person was seriously hurt and the other moderately in the strike on a training facility of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, near El Bureij refugee camp in the centre of the strip.
It’s been a particularly challenging summer for Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi. Within one week in late June and early July, his attorney general was assassinated in the upscale Cairo suburb of Heliopolis and an Islamic State affiliate launched a two-day siege in the North Sinai town of Sheikh Zuweid.Jeremy Corbyn's 'long-standing links' with notorious Holocaust denier and his 'anti-Semitic' organisation revealed
But just days after the bloody Sinai battle, Sissi put aside two hours to meet with a delegation from the American Jewish Committee, the global Jewish advocacy group, and then delivered a matter-of-fact account of the meeting to the state-run Middle East News Agency. The conversation revolved around regional terrorism threats, the stalled peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians, the nuclear deal with Iran and the preservation of Egyptian Jewish heritage, according to the AJC’s director of government and international affairs, Jason Isaacson, who coordinated the delegation.
The AJC meeting at the presidential palace came at a time when Egyptian attitudes about Jews are changing. Egyptians are reassessing 1950s-era nationalization policies that squeezed out the Jewish community and other ethnic minorities. The word “Jew” is used less frequently as a curse word, and the historical TV drama “Jewish Quarter” was a breakout hit during Ramadan. The series cast the Islamist group the Muslim Brotherhood as a greater threat to Egypt’s unity and security than the Jews and, sometimes, even the Zionists. (Past TV series during Ramadan have traded in negative tropes and stereotypes about Jewish “treachery” and hostility, so “Jewish Quarter” represented a major departure.)
“I find more tolerance,” said Isaacson, referring to the period since Sissi came to power in 2013. “I find more respect for Israel and more feeling of commonality between Egyptian and Israeli strategic concerns with common attitudes towards Hamas, especially toward the connections between Hamas and other extremist groups.”
Paul Eisen, the self-professed Holocaust denier, has given Jeremy Corbyn his support in an extraordinary blog post in which he says that he has been close to the Labour leadership contender for more than 15 years.The Dangerous Rise of Jeremy Corbyn
'One evening 15 years ago I cycled over to see [Corbyn],' he writes. 'I was just beginning to establish Deir Yassin Remembered [a controversial, pro-Palestinian pressure group] in the UK and I wanted him to join.
'I'd hardly begun my feverishly-rehearsed pitch before his cheque book was on the table.
'From that day on, without fuss or bother, whether DYR was flavour-of-the-month or the maggot-at-the-bottom-of-the-food-chain, he attended every single Deir Yassin commemoration.'
The group that Eisen mentions, Deir Yassin Remembered (DYR), focuses on controversial allegations that Jewish soldiers killed about 100 Arab villagers in the run-up to the war of 1948, and seeks to promote its remembrance at annual events.
It highlights the fact that the village of Deir Yassin is situated close to Yad Vashem, Israel's Holocaust museum.
Many mainstream Palestinian activists view the group as anti-Semitic and in thrall to 'anti-Semitic conspiracy theories'.
In 2007, the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign proposed a motion disowning Eisen's group, stating that 'membership or participation in DYR is incompatible with being a member of Palestinian Solidarity Campaign. You cannot oppose racism against the Palestinians and turn a blind eye to anti-Semitism.'
The DYR website contains a picture appearing to show Corbyn attending one of the organisation's event in 2013 (above).
Corbyn, popular within the anti-War movements and a patron of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign has stormed to the top of the polls. A recent poll found him 22 points ahead on First Preferences and he would clinch the party’s nomination in a narrow victory over Yvette Cooper in the Second Round. The betting agencies are starting to place Corbyn as their favorite for the leadership.A very Moodey retraction of a blood libel against Israel
How, might you ask, has this happened? In part, Mr Corbyn has tapped into the despondency among Labour party activists and members regarding their recent General Election defeat to the Conservatives, which saw the re-election of Prime Minister David Cameron. His anti-austerity rhetoric has fired up the trade unions to sign up their members to support his candidacy. Town Hall meetings, such as one last night in Camden, are packed to the rafters with people queuing outside in large crowds. The phenomenon ‘Corbynmania’ is sweeping Britain.
The impact of a likely Corbyn led opposition party in the UK Parliament is hard to foresee, given the potential of a Labour party backlash among more moderate MPs and supporters. It is also hard to imagine a Corbyn led Labour Party picking up the necessary marginal seats in England to reverse the defeat of May 2015 at the next election in five years time.
The major impact may be with the left and the Jewish voters, especially those that define as Zionists and are supporters of the State of Israel. This goes beyond the much-documented comments Corbyn has made about Hamas and Hezbollah being his ‘friends’. Alan Johnson, editor of Fathom in a Left Foot Forward article brilliantly takes apart the rationale for Corbyn’s support of the two terrorist organisations proscribed by the UK. ‘And why are Hezbollah your friends? They are an anti-Semitic Islamist goose-stepping ‘Party of God’ who persecute (and assassinate) liberals and democrats in Lebanon whenever they can. The Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said, ‘If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.’
Here is what Moodey appended to his Nov. 16, 2012 blog entry, which included an image of Misharawi in his father’s arms:Berkeley Students Call Terrorist Attack on Chattanooga Soldiers 'Legitimate'
"UPDATE (25 July 2015): The above image of Omar Misharawi was carried in many of the world's news outlets, including the BBC and Guardian websites, along with reports that the shrapnel which killed Omar had come from an Israeli rocket.
"Israeli military officials had privately briefed journalists that they had been targeting a militant who was in the building, hence the assumption about the source of the rocket. However, in March 2013 a UN agency reported that Misharawi may have been killed by a Palestinian rocket, not an Israeli one. This later report has only now been brought to my attention, hence this clarificatory update."
Moodey’s “clarificatory update” falls short for two reasons. First, his initial accusation that Misharawi had “been murdered” by the Israelis was false and defamatory as soon as it was leveled, even if Omar Misharawi had been killed by shrapnel from an Israeli missile.
As Moodey’s clarifactory note indicates, the boy was never the intended target of an Israeli air strike (and without intent, there is no "murder"). According to Moodey, Israel “had been targeting a militant who was in the building”, which is why people initially blamed Israel for his death.
But even if Misharawi had been unintentionally killed as the result of an Israeli air strike directed at a legitimate military target -- such as a Hamas terrorist -- it would not qualify as murder. If, for example, a terror organization, say Hamas, targeted civilians with rockets and civilians were killed, that would qualify as murder.
You may know filmmaker Ami Horowitz for this video in which he compares the reaction on the UC Berkeley campus to waving an ISIS flag versus waving a flag of Israel. Or from his 2012 film UN Me, which I reviewed for FrontPage Magazine here.
In his new video, Ami recently returned to the Berkeley campus to ask students a question that should have been a no-brainer: "Was the recent terrorist attack on the unarmed soldiers at the Chattanooga recruiting station legitimate?" But it turns out that "no-brainer" is a better description of the students themselves.
In an email exchange with Ami, he told TruthRevolt,
"I have to admit, this is one of the first times that I thought the students would never go this far. I guess I was wrong. There is truly no limit to their anti-American sentiments."
Watch the whole short video to get a clear picture of the effect that institutions of higher propaganda learning are having on our youth.
Shocking video shows terrified women surrounded by jeering men as they walk along promenade in Saudi Arabia
Appalling YouTube footage has captured the moment two terrified women are hounded by a horde of jeering men as they walk along a promenade in Saudi Arabia.Jewish Groups Say Cartoon Could ‘Stimulate Renewed Violent Attacks Against French Jews’
In the minute-long video, the two young women - dressed in traditional burkhas and face veils - become visibly distressed as they are harassed and intimidated by the men in the city of Jeddah.
The clip recently went viral in the country and sparked public outrage, prompting a police investigation which reportedly led to six boys being detained and questioned.
But shockingly, the women are now being blamed for 'provoking' the primal reaction from the crowd by being 'indecent'.
The outlandish claim is being supported by the emergence of a new video supposedly taken from the scene, which has been shown on semi-official news channels.
Two Jewish groups on Friday blasted French cartoonist Plantu after he published a drawing on Facebook which they said may incite further violence against the French Jewish community.Start-up cracks wheat genome – in months, not years
Dr. Shimon Samuels, the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Director for International Relations, and Sammy Ghozlan, director of the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Antisemitism (BNVCA) in France, criticized “the continual provocations” of the artist, “whose notorious attacks on Orthodox Jews and Israelis have crossed a new threshold.”
Ghozlan said that Plantu “abuses the French constitutional right to freedom of expression” and that “what he calls anti-Zionism has an inevitable stimulus on French antisemitic jihadists to renew violent attacks on French Jews.”
Plantu, a political cartoonist for the French publication Le Monde, posted the image on Sunday. It depicts an Israeli soldier shooting at Palestinian civilians while a bearded stereotypical religious Jew stands behind him saying, “Look! Shoot faster! I am in a rush to move in.” The Jewish figure is holding a suitcase tagged “New Colonies.” Plantu captioned the image, “Israeli settlements.”
Samuels also called on Le Monde‘s Director Jérôme Fenoglio to reconsider the publication’s relationship with the artist and insist he make a public apology for his “offence to the Jewish People.” Failing to do so may result in Le Monde being viewed as co-responsible for any attacks against Jews that are inspired by Plantu’s “provocations,” Samuels continued.
For a decade, dozens of scientists in 55 countries toiled to figure out the DNA sequence of wheat – but were unable to meet their goal.Frutarom makes near-record ninth 2015 acquisition
Enter Israeli biotech start-up NRGene, which announced this week that — working with experts at Israeli universities — it was able to map out the genome for wild Emmer wheat in about three months.
“It’s a tremendous accomplishment, both from the technology point of view and for helping to prevent world hunger,” said Guy Kol, founder and vice president of research and development at Ness Ziona-based NRGene. “As a result, it will be much easier for scientists to develop breeds of bread wheat that will thrive in drier, hotter climates. This is going to be crucial as the world’s population grows, and climate change becomes even more pronounced in the coming decades.”
“The repercussions of the mapping will be felt around the world,” said Dr. Assaf Distelfeld, PhD, of Tel Aviv University (TAU), a renowned wheat geneticist and the primary researcher on the project. “Scientists will now be able to identify key genes in the Emmer wheat and introduce them into commercial wheat via classical breeding, creating hardier varieties across environmental conditions, ultimately increasing the global food supply.”
The acquisition of any new company by a large Israeli firm is major news. But for Frutarom, its acquisition of Scandia Citrus, LLC of Florida last week — its ninth this year — is a unique accomplishment: It approaches the record number of companies acquired by a corporation in a single year — the Massachusetts-based Alere Global bought 10 companies in 2007.Israel-India Relations Grow Stronger
Now the seventh-largest flavoring and ingredient company in the world, Frutarom’s latest acquisition makes it one of the world’s leaders in the citrus business: In 2014, the company acquired CitraSource, which also specializes in citrus and whose production facilities and development labs are also situated in Florida, not far from those of Scandia.
As Florida “natives,” both Scandia and CitraSource are very familiar with the citrus market — Florida is by far the biggest supplier of citrus products in the US. Frutarom, the company said, plans on leveraging the acquisitions’ “extensive knowledge in citrus, R&D and marketing capabilities, and its ingenuity, which includes a unique technology for the molecular distillation of citrus oils,” in order to develop new and better citrus flavorings for use in food, beverages, and other products.
With this year’s acquisitions, including one in Australia, Frutarom has a presence on every continent (except for Antarctica — so far), and is now the seventh-largest flavoring and ingredients company in the world. Established in 1933, Frutarom offers a total of some 31,000 products, which are sold to more than 15,500 customers in 145 countries around the world — including Algeria, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, via its Flachsmann A/S subsidiary.
The shift in India's position on Israel also reflects several international trends.Holocaust Education Fellowship Helps Train Non-Jewish Teachers
First, it shows that India is gradually growing into its elevated status on the world scene and increasingly behaves in accordance with its own interests, and with diminished sensitivity to other actors. Although India has always claimed a special role in international affairs, following the end of the Cold War and the liberalization of the Indian economy its potential for great power status is coming to fruition.
Second, it reveals the true power of the Arab world. As the Arab tragedy unfolds, particularly since the so-called Arab Spring, the Arab world is in disarray and unable to wield much international pressure.
Third, it indicates that the Indo-Israeli relationship has matured and entered into a new stage. India recognizes the importance of relations with the Jewish State and is willing to take into consideration Israel's interests. Obviously, the contents of the bilateral relationship are more important than votes at the United Nations – a morally bankrupt institution. But India's gesture is welcome nonetheless.
Finally, India's shift is likely to resonate beyond the corridors of the United Nations, and Third World countries might follow its example. After all, India is considered one of the leaders of the Third World bloc. We have already seen how African countries such as Nigeria have sided with Israel at the United Nations. Israel is a strong country with much to offer the international community, while its Arab enemies are losing influence in the international arena. Indeed, one important lesson from India's behavior is that the fears of international isolation among Israelis are greatly exaggerated.
History teacher Frances Kennedy, a Lerner fellow who attended this summer’s Europe trip, said she can now add “that I have been there, I have experienced it… [By] seeing what I’m actually teaching about, I’ll be able to personalize it.”
Kennedy, who is Christian, has been teaching for 33 years and currently works at William T. Dwyer High School in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. Thirteen years ago, she founded an elective course on the Holocaust that initially had 30 students. Today, she teaches five classes with a total of approximately 170 students.
“I wasn’t born long after the war,” she said. “This was my parents’ generation’s war, so I grew up just very aware of it, and it was always a passion of mine. As I went further into history, [teaching about the Holocaust] became more and more of a specialty.”
The Holocaust course Kennedy offers in Palm Beach Gardens also touches on more contemporary genocides, such as the ongoing atrocities in Darfur.
“This is one of the genocides I’m teaching [about] that’s still going on, and you can actually do something about,” she said.
In fact, last year, Kennedy’s students wrote to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power, who is largely credited with sparking the Obama administration’s interest in the Darfur conflict.
Webeck, too, wants her lessons to translate to real-life actions.
“I want so badly to believe that people are good, and so many of this history [on the Holocaust and other genocides] is proof to the contrary, that they’re not. …That stings, and I want to teach and encourage the younger generations that it is possible to be good and to rebuild from horrible events, and teach in small ways to make kind choices and to be good to other humans,” she said.