02/02 Links Pt1: The Tragic Palestinian Children's Crusade; Biden Announces $50 Million UNRWA Funding; NGOs Blame the Victims: A False “Massacre” in Jenin and “Legitimate Resistance” outside a Jerusalem Synagogue

From Ian:

NGO Monitor: The Role of NGOs in Supporting the International Criminal Court (ICC) Investigation

On December 20, 2019, then Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Fatou Bensouda announced that she intended to investigate alleged war crimes in the “State of Palestine” and filed a request with the Court’s Pre-Trial Chamber to confirm her jurisdiction. On February 5, 2021, the Pre-Trial Chamber in a controversial 2-1 opinion confirmed the Prosecutor’s jurisdiction. On March 3, 2021, Bensouda announced the launch of a formal investigation.

This move is to a significant degree the product of consistent and heavy lobbying of the ICC for over a decade by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Throughout, these NGOs have been central to promoting the Prosecutor’s activities: lobbying the Court to accept the Palestinian Authority, filing complaints, representing “victims,” and submitting briefs. Key NGOs include Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, FIDH (France), and Palestinian and Israeli NGOs. The European Union, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, and other European governments have provided tens of millions of dollars to anti-Israel ICC campaigns and lobbying. In some instances, the European funding was explicitly earmarked for NGO activities vis-à-vis the ICC.

According to the legal principle of “complementarity,” the ICC is only authorized to investigate when a country’s judicial system has proven unwilling or incapable of prosecuting cases that fall within the ICC’s jurisdiction. Even if there is evidence of alleged war crimes, the Court is supposed to respect serious local investigations.

Importantly, as part of the NGO Durban Declaration and accompanying BDS campaigns, advocacy organizations have sought to turn the ICC into a court of universal jurisdiction. Like their exploitation of the UN and other international frameworks, these NGOs seek to use the ICC for demonization and to brand Israeli officials as “war criminals.” In contrast, the ICC was created for the explicit and narrow purpose of prosecuting individuals accused of specified crimes, and not for political legal warfare.

NGO Monitor: NGOs Blame the Victims: A False “Massacre” in Jenin and “Legitimate Resistance” outside a Jerusalem Synagogue

On January 26, 2023, the IDF conducted a preemptive counterterror operation in Jenin, during which nine Palestinians – eight of whom were armed members of Islamic Jihad and other organizations – were killed. The Palestinian Authority, reviving the blood libel from Jenin in April 2002 (Defensive Shield), accused Israel of committing a “massacre” and Gaza-based terrorist organizations launched rockets at Israeli cities.

The next day (Friday night, January 27), a Palestinian murdered seven Israeli civilians outside a Jerusalem synagogue; a few hours later (Saturday morning, January 28) a 13 year-old Palestinian shot and wounded two Israelis in a separate incident in Jerusalem.

NGO responses to these incidents reflect an immoral agenda that stands in direct contradiction to the human rights mandate that they and their funder-enablers claim. Palestinian, Israeli, European, and international NGOs and their officials that commented on Jenin before the Sabbath terror attacks repeated the PA propaganda of a “massacre.”

Other NGOs appeared to justify the terror attacks in Jerusalem, or otherwise blamed Israel for the targeting of Israeli civilians. Even those groups that directly condemned the terror attacks simultaneously included condemnations of Israel. One NGO, the Rights Forum (Netherlands), bizarrely denied that the murder of Jews because they were Jews constituted antisemitism.

Importantly, several very vocal and active Israeli advocacy NGOs, including Adalah, B’Tselem, Breaking the Silence, and Yesh Din, appear not to have issued statements.

The Tragic Palestinian Children's Crusade

On December 12, 2022, 15-year-old Jana Majdi Zakharna was killed during an IDF operation in Jenin. The IDF's investigation revealed that the girl was shot to death on a rooftop as she stood in proximity to a Palestinian gunman who had opened fire at Israeli troops below and that she assisted the gunmen by observing the soldiers' movements.

The Telegram channel "Jenin Al-Qassam," which serves armed Palestinian groups in the Jenin region, has published instructions for "Jihad fighters" that deal with the use of children "to conduct visual observation and information gathering." The Telegram channel also noted that Jenin has a network of observation units staffed by "young people" assisting terrorist groups by documenting on video and delivering reports about the activities of IDF forces.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has written that under international humanitarian law, "Individuals whose continuous function involves the preparation, execution, or command of acts or operations amounting to direct participation in hostilities are assuming a continuous combat function."

Biden Admin Announces $50 Million in New UNRWA Funding

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday announced $50 million in new funding for a UN agency that is dedicated solely to the descendants of Palestinian refugees and which has been widely denounced for propagating antisemitism, eliciting rebuke from a top Senate Republican.

Speaking in Ramallah alongside Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Blinken said that the money, alongside the $890 million the Biden administration has already provided to the United Nations Relief and Work Agency (UNRWA) in the past two years, was intended to “rebuild” the relationship between the US and the Palestinian Authority.

“All of these steps are part of the longer term ambition to re-establish, but then not just re-establish, rebuild our relationship, as I said, with the Palestinian people and with the Palestinian Authority,” Blinken said. “And this will allow us to more effectively work toward the goal of Palestinians and Israelis enjoying equal measures of democracy, of opportunity, of dignity in their lives. We believe that that can be achieved by a realization of two states. President Biden remains committed to that goal.”

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, slammed the move Wednesday.

“The Biden Administration is far too eager to give out US taxpayer dollars to UNRWA,” Risch told The Algemeiner. “I do not support a single US taxpayer dollar going to UNRWA without serious reform, in part because their textbooks continue time and again to include antisemitic content. That is why I will be re-introducing my UNRWA Accountability & Transparency Act which would halt funding to UNRWA until all of its antisemitic issues are thoroughly addressed.”

Read More

12/20 Links Pt1: Secret document reveals EU plans to help Palestinian takeover of Area C; Palestinian stubs toe, U.S. demands investigation; The UN's not-so-Interim Force in Lebanon

From Ian:

Secret document reveals EU plans to help Palestinian takeover of Area C

A document composed by the European Union’s mission in eastern Jerusalem and defined as secret exposes the E.U.’s intention to help Palestinians gain control over Area C of Judea and Samaria, commonly known as the West Bank, Israel’s Channel 13 revealed on Monday.

Under the Oslo Accords, Judea and Samaria is divided into three zones with Area C falling fully under Israeli control.

The six-page document calls for mapping the territory in order to prove Palestinian rights to the land and monitoring Israeli archaeological activity, as ancient Jewish ties reinforce Israeli claims.

The document also recommends strengthening Palestinian infrastructure in Area C and supporting Palestinians with legal aid.

In response to Channel 13‘s expose, the E.U. said, “As a general rule, we do not refer to documents. The policy of the E.U. is created by its 27 member states. Our policy has not changed—we are committed to a two-state solution with Jerusalem as the future capital of both states.” Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories

The report raised an outcry among politicians and various Israeli groups.

“It is not by chance that the European Union chose to classify the document as secret since it reveals its antisemitic attitude towards Israel for all to see,” tweeted Religious Zionism Party Chairman Bezalel Smotrich.

“It’s not content with accelerating the Palestinian takeover of Area C, it is important for it to thwart Israeli archaeological activity in Judea and Samaria lest the truth be revealed: ‘We have not taken foreign land, nor foreign property of our own; but the land of our ancestors…,'” he said, quoting the Book of the Maccabees.

Israel Can’t Allow Bigots to Control the Narrative on the Temple Mount

The trope that Jews are trying to seize and desecrate Muslim holy sites — “Judaizing the Temple Mount”– has been used to foment violence since the 1920s. If Israel is “Judaizing” the Temple Mount, it is certainly taking its sweet time. One might even argue that Israel is going about it all wrong.

For instance, when the Ottomans conquered Constantinople, they did not work out a deal by which Eastern Orthodox clerics and Byzantine authorities retained control over the Hagia Sophia. They just conquered it and converted it into a mosque. Israel by contrast won control of the Temple Mount in a defensive war, after imploring Jordan not to attack. Upon its military victory, Israel then gave control over the Temple Mount to the Jordanian Waqf. There is no historical precedent in which a militarily victorious country made such a concession to a vanquished foe. One might have expected that the world would credit Israel for its tolerance.

Today, the concepts of human rights, dignity, equality, and tolerance are thankfully considered to be paramount in most of the world. The demand to bar only Jewish worship at a site that is sacred to multiple religions is akin to the worst examples of segregation. Jewish worshipers on the Temple Mount are not guilty of disrupting Muslim prayer. They are not the ones rioting, shouting, burning tires, throwing rocks, or even murdering worshipers. Indeed, neither Jews nor Israel even consider banning Muslim worshipers from the holy site.

While most controversial issues in the Middle East have some shade of gray, this is one of the most black and white ethical dilemmas. Jews want to pray and let Muslims pray. Those manufacturing a crisis want the Jews banned, period.

Unfortunately, many international leaders and the international media outlets automatically blame Israel and thus, peaceful Jewish worship, for the tension. Even the US State Department called upon Israel to defuse tensions caused by Arab rioting on the Temple Mount. It is amazing that this centuries-old excuse for violence still bears weight.

Israel cannot allow bigots to control the narrative around the Temple Mount, and it is high time its leaders get out in front with a well-articulated explanation. While many Jews and Israeli officials have made this case, Israel’s leadership must make an articulate, public, and unapologetic case to its Arab neighbors and the world, that it respects religious freedom, demands that same respect, and explains that it is those perpetrating violence who are truly desecrating this holy site. This is urgently needed, not just to combat antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment, but to save the hopeful promise of the Abraham Accords.

Will Mahmoud Abbas and PA Leaders Face ICC Prosecution for Murder

In a statement, the Banat family directly accused PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas of being responsible for their son’s death, because of his responsibility for the Palestinian security forces. The family announced their determination “to go to the end and bring justice to the gang that murdered Nizar Banat.”

The PA’s trial in Ramallah of those accused of the murder opened following heavy pressure exerted on the Palestinian Authority by the Biden administration, the European Union, human rights organizations, and the Palestinian street, which held a series of demonstrations, mainly in Ramallah and Hebron, against the dictatorial regime of Mahmoud Abbas.

Until the start of the trial, the Palestinian Authority tried to reach a compensation settlement with the family in exchange for canceling the trial. It offered them a large sum of money and jobs in the PA, but all its offers were rejected.

Even after the killing of Nizar Banat, the PA continued to use force and its security forces violently suppressed the demonstrations that called for the resignation of Mahmoud Abbas, the punishment of the murderers, and the establishment of an international commission of inquiry in the case.

According to Palestinian law, the PA defendants face prison sentences ranging from seven years to life. However, this is not going to happen. The Palestinian Authority is determined to protect them. Therefore, the Banat family appealed to the International Criminal Court in The Hague to put pressure on the Palestinian Authority by opening an investigation into the case.

Meanwhile, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is taking advantage of concerns over the PA’s possible collapse and the consequences of this for regional stability, in order to delay the trial.

The murder of Nizar Banat was intended to send a clear message to all the political opponents of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, who will continue to forcefully suppress his critics and opponents, just like the other dictatorial rulers in the Arab world. There is no difference between them.

Read More

12/07 Links Pt1: When Antisemites Sue the Jews; Will Bibi Make the Left’s Nightmares Come True? It’s Never Happened Before; Terrorist Killed After Shooting at Military Post Near Ofra

From Ian:

Two former diplomats display their inveterate animus towards Israel

We must ask: Why are Miller and Kurtzer not calling on the Biden administration to simply uphold U.S. law—namely, the Taylor Force Act—which stipulates that American financial aid misappropriated by the P.A. in order to reward terrorism must be withheld? Why do the authors not criticize the administration’s decision to continue funding the P.A.— $816 million this year from American taxpayers—despite the law?

In contrast to the kind words for the P.A., Miller and Kurtzer refer to the incoming Israeli government in the most vitriolic terms: “Radical, racist, misogynistic and homophobic.” Yet Israel’s next Gay Pride Week and Parade are scheduled for June 2023. There is no such celebration scheduled in any territory controlled by the P.A. or Hamas. In fact, gays are routinely murdered—often thrown off buildings head first—in Hamas-controlled Gaza. As for misogyny, do Miller and Kurtzer really believe that women in Palestinian-controlled territories are living as equals to men and enjoy greater rights than women in Israel?

It is telling, moreover, that Miller and Kurtzer do not even mention the issue of religious tolerance. Christians live in peace and freedom in Israel. This is most definitely not the case in P.A.- or Hamas-controlled territory. Seventy years ago, Bethlehem was 86% Christian; in 2022, it is 12% Christian. Of course, Israel is routinely blamed for this, but Christians who dare to speak the truth are unequivocal: Islamists are the cause of this mass exodus, as has occurred in Christian communities in Muslim-majority states such as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey and Egypt.

Miller and Kurtzer do not confine their vitriol to Israel. Their contempt for Muslims—especially those from the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan, which have normalized relations with Israel—is palpable. The authors believe that the United States should coerce those Arab states into adopting the policies preferred by Miller and Kurtzer themselves.

It is shocking and sad that, after decades of work persuading Arab governments to adopt non-ideological and pragmatic foreign policies that could stabilize the Middle East, there are spiteful Americans like Miller and Kurtzer who want to bully those governments into prioritizing the Palestinians over the needs of their own people. It is remarkable that former diplomats, allegedly dedicated to peace, have taken positions that are inherently anti-Israel, anti-Arab and anti-peace.

Miller and Kurtzer also have unabashed contempt for their own countrymen. They fulminate, for example, over the “blindly pro-Israel Republican majority soon to control the House.” Yet Miller and Kurtzer have never had a harsh word to say about the current Democrat-controlled House, which has “blindly” tolerated antisemitic and anti-Zionist members like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.

Under Democratic control, the House has summarily ignored the proposed Anti-Semitism Awareness Act (2019) and the Israel Relations Normalization Act (2021). Miller and Kurtzer, so far as I know, have never referred to the “blindly anti-Israel and antisemitic Democrat majority that controls the House.”

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which has been adopted by the State Department, recognizes that criticism of Israel that is not leveled against any other country constitutes antisemitism. What Miller and Kurtzer have done in their screed is to judge Israel by one standard and its enemies by quite another, more generous, standard. I leave it to the reader to ponder the implications.

Nearly 50 lawmakers urge Thomas-Greenfield to work to defund U.N.’s Israel inquiry

House lawmakers are urging the U.S. delegation to the United Nations to work through the body’s upcoming budgeting process to limit funding to, and ultimately shut down, the U.N. Human Rights Council’s dedicated Commission of Inquiry investigating Israel — a new push in ongoing congressional efforts to scrap the open-ended probe.

A bipartisan group of 49 lawmakers wrote a letter, obtained by Jewish Insider, to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield on Tuesday, in which they encouraged “the United States delegation to strongly advocate to restrict this biased commission’s funding from within the UN system, and take steps to eliminate the commission completely.”

The commission was launched in the wake of the May 2021 conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. The letter was organized by Reps. Dean Phillips (D-MN) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA).

The lawmakers note that the U.S. led efforts in 2021 to cut the commission’s budget for 2022 by nearly 25%, and argue that the U.S. delegation should “assemble a coalition of like-minded allies and partners to ensure a timely end to the operations of this commission through the restriction and ultimate elimination of its funding from within the UN system.”

The letter highlights a string of concerns about the commission, referring to its “profoundly problematic” and “incomplete and biased reports,” “numerous antisemitic comments” by commission staffers and the body’s ongoing mandate.

“Respect for human rights is a core American value, and an ideal to which all international actors must be held accountable. That accounting must be done in a balanced manner consistent with international norms, and the U.N. Commission of Inquiry abjectly fails to meet these standards,” the letter continues. “The coming weeks will require the administration to redouble its diplomatic efforts to ensure that funding to this discriminatory investigation ultimately ceases. We stand ready to assist you in any way in defending our democratic ally, Israel.”

US State Department spokesman mute on Israeli ‘war crimes’ accusation

U.S. State Department spokesman Ned Price on Tuesday failed to push back on a reporter’s accusation that Israel was perpetrating “war crimes” against the Palestinians.

“I mean, what we have seen in the past couple weeks is really an uptick of Israeli aggression against the Palestinians. We see war crimes being committed on—in front of everybody. So that would not bother the United States of America, despite the fact that these guys [Religious Zionism Party head Bezalel Smotrich and Otzma Yehudit leader Itamar Ben-Gvir] have such a long rap sheet?” a reporter asked Price during the daily press briefing.

Answered Price: “Said, whether it—whether the question is government formation or any other hypothetical, we just don’t entertain those types of questions. It doesn’t do us any good to comment on something that may or may not come to pass. When it comes to governments that haven’t been formed, I’ve been asked this question from this podium for any number of democratic countries around the world—how, whether, will we work with various individuals around the world—and our answer’s always the same. We are going to judge a government on how it governs, once it is in place—on the policies that it pursues.”

Price also failed to correct the reporter’s assertion in a follow-up question that an Israeli policeman had shot “at point blank an unarmed Palestinian,” when in fact the officer in question had fired on a terrorist in the process of attacking him.

Palestinian refugee: We were told in 1948 to “leave and go to Jordan. It's just for a few weeks”

Read More

Fake News: No, Al Jazeera didn't file a lawsuit against Israel at the ICC. The ICC doesn't accept lawsuits.

From Reuters:

 Al Jazeera on Tuesday said it has filed a lawsuit at the International Criminal Court against Israeli forces over the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, who was shot during an Israeli raid in the West Bank in May.

The lawsuit following an investigation by the television news network's legal team, Al Jazeera said on Twitter.

The ICC must identify the individuals who were directly involved Abu Akleh's killing, Al Jazeera lawyer Rodney Dixon KC told a news conference in The Hague on Tuesday.

This is a joke.

There is no such thing as a "lawsuit"  at the ICC. Al Jazeera cannot initiate any sort of legal action at the ICC. Only the UN Security Council, a state party to the ICC, or the ICC prosecutor can initiate any action at the ICC.

The ICC only is tasked to prosecute four war crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and the crime of aggression of one state against another. 

All Al Jazeera did was send a letter to the prosecutor. They made it look like a big deal, flying a group to the Hague to hand in the envelope, but that it all they did.

You can write to the prosecutor, too: otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int. It doesn't mean anything.

The prosecutor has no obligation to do anything just because he received a letter. Sending a letter that will be ignored is hardly newsworthy. 

In other words, this is nothing more than a publicity stunt on the part of Al Jazeera. 

As usual, the media just parrots Al Jazeera's press release as if it is real news, without asking a single international law expert what this means. 

---

---

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.  Read all about it here!

 

Read More

11/22 Links Pt1: Hold Abbas accountable; NYTs demonstrates why Israelis have turned right; Mossad was behind intelligence tip to UK’s MI5 over Iranian terror threats

From Ian:

Hold Abbas accountable

We should recall here that last March, then-ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced the launch of an investigation into suspected crimes committed in the territories of Judea and Samaria, in east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip since June 13th, 2014. Her announcement followed a preliminary investigation in the wake of a Palestinian complaint that determined – contrary to Israel's position – that the court has the jurisdiction to deliberate on such complaints. Israel called this decision a moral and legal disgrace and officially informed the court that it would not cooperate with it.

It should be noted here that ICC investigations enable arrest warrants to be issued against suspects without any public notification. The court's signatories are required to cooperate with the investigation, honor arrest warrants, and hand over suspects located in their territory to the court. Beyond immediate harm to such persons, the opening of processes against could impact its comportment in the international arena and severely damage its international standing. In any event, in practical terms the investigation against Israel has yet to commence and this is also something that the Palestinians wish to advance through the move at the ICJ.

In fact, what Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his people are trying to achieve is a decision that the "occupation" is permanent and that it is in its entirety (not just measures within its framework) is illegal and therefore Israel should be subjected to pressures and a price should be exacted for its continued presence in Judea and Samaria. The ICC will find it hard to ignore an advisory by the ICJ that adopts these conclusions in their entirety or in part.

At present the ICJ should be busy dealing with the war in Ukraine and events in Georgia, Afghanistan, Africa, and elsewhere. But Israel should not count on the court being too busy to deal with it.The ICJ (once the UN General Assembly officially turns to it) will approach Israel, which will be required to answer the question of whether it is willing to cooperate. It would seem that the considerations that in the past led to a decision to turn down any such request, still hold.

Without any connection to all of the above, Israel will have to consider changes to its approach to Abbas and the Palestinian Authority. It should weigh measures that will make it clear to Abbas and the PA that there will be consequences to the incessant campaign to negate Israel's legitimacy. The means at Israel's disposal are not meagre. If they don't deter Abbas, they should at the very least encourage a rethink of his approach among leaders who support it.

The history of apartheid proves Israel is not an apartheid state

By contrast, in Israel, there is an official policy of affirmative action administered by the Israeli government aimed at including minority Israelis in all aspects of public life. The Arabs who chose to stay in Israel during and following the 1948 war are Israeli citizens and are entitled to the rights granted to all citizens under the law. Arab Israelis serve in public institutions as ministers, Supreme Court judges, parliament members and governmental clerks. Furthermore, the former parties of the Joint List, an Arab-Israeli political bloc, hold seats in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. For the first time, in 2019, the Joint List endorsed a candidate to become prime minister of Israel.

It is also common to find many Arab Israelis holding only Israeli citizenship. Between 2011 and 2013, Professor Sammy Smooha, a researcher from Haifa University, conducted a poll among Arab Israelis, asking if they identify as Israeli or Palestinian. More than 20% responded “Israeli” or “Israeli-Palestinian.” Furthermore, according to his findings, when Arab-Israeli participants were asked if they would move to a Palestinian state if it is formed, 65– 77% percent of them replied that they would not.

A walk through the streets, shopping malls and hospitals of Israel will permit one to see and appreciate the integrated society that exists within all of Israel. People of all religions, all races and all beliefs are treated with respect in all public places; have access to all religious places; are protected in their right of prayer and assembly; have full access to healthcare treatment without regard to their race, religion, sexual orientation or beliefs; and enjoy freedoms not known anywhere else in the Middle East.

Where South Africa intended to and did impose a segregationist regime and called it apartheid, the allegation that Israel is similarly an apartheid state originated not from fact or from governmental policy but from Israel’s enemies as an intentional distortion of her commitment to building a wholesome society where diversity is cherished and rights are protected by the rule of law. Applying the moniker of apartheid to Israel today is another example of an antisemitic double standard applied exclusively to the Jewish state and ignores much greater injustices suffered by minority ethnic and religious groups around the world.

To put it bluntly, the attempt to equate Israel with South Africa is defamatory and disingenuous. Moreover, calling Israel an apartheid state under these circumstances does great injustice to Israel’s vibrant democracy and further disrespects the real and genuine struggle against the racism of the apartheid regime in South Africa. Moreover, the accusers against Israel who are in the Palestinian territories are obligated to look at their own leadership, and to look inward, as they essentially call for the future Palestinian state to be judenrein—free of Jews.

Who is it that is practicing apartheid?

'The New York Times’ demonstrates why Israelis have turned right

From Abdulrahim’s previous dispatches for the Times, it is clear that she has visited Gaza. That means either she is suffering from hallucinations that Israel is “controlling” things there, or she is fully aware that it is not, but wants to give the impression that it is in order to blame Israel for the Gaza fire.

Either of those two possibilities should be grounds for immediately firing her.

Not that Ms. Abdulrahim’s journalistic misbehavior relieves her editors of any responsibility. After all, they knew what they were getting when they hired her earlier this year. She had previously received awards from the anti-Israel organization CAIR after she wrote a letter denying that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations.

A staff reporter for one of the world’s most influential newspapers maliciously smears Israel with a blatant falsehood, and her editors look the other way.

This is one reason Israelis have been turning more hawkish in their voting preferences. No matter how many concessions they make, no matter how many risks they take, no matter how many territories they withdraw from—they still get blamed for anything and everything.

You can’t blame Israelis for feeling like, no matter what they do, they just can’t win. Israel’s critics will never play by the rules. They will lie and smear in order to turn public opinion against the Jewish state. They want to see Israel isolated, hated and harangued. And when Israel is threatened, they want the international community to stand idly by.

That leaves Israelis to conclude that their only hope for survival is to strengthen their military resolve and fortify their security policies—in other words, to vote for parties on the political right.

Israel’s critics complain that such thinking represents a “siege mentality.” Maybe that’s because Israel really is under siege—including in the information war, where combatants such as Raja Abdulrahim, pretending to be journalists, hurl dart after dart at the Jewish state without the slightest regard for the facts.

Read More

11/08 Links Pt1: Israel Won’t Ever Be the Country of American Fantasies—Nor Should It Aspire to Be; US Backs IHRA Definition After UN Criticism; German institute holds ‘Shoah, Nakba’ event on date of Kristallnacht

From Ian:

Israel Won’t Ever Be the Country of American Fantasies—Nor Should It Aspire to Be

Following last week’s election, the veteran Middle East reporter Thomas Friedman authored a New York Times column under the headline “The Israel We Knew Is Gone,” full of dire predictions about what will befall the Jewish state now that its citizens have returned its longest-serving prime minister to power. Daniel Gordis dissects the column’s faulty assumptions and misguided conclusions, which distill misconceptions that plague much American commentary on Israel:
Here’s the heart of the problem. There are many people around the world who want Israel to be something it does not wish to be. They want it to be successful, but humble. They want it to be strong and secure, but still desperate for foreign support of all sorts. They want it to be Jewish, but in a “nice” kind of way. Israeli dancing (which I haven’t seen here in years), flags at the right time, a country filled with “Hatikvah moments,” as some call them. A country traditional enough to be heartwarming, but not so traditional that it would dare imply that less intense forms of Jewish life cannot make it. A country steeped in memory, but also one that is finally willing to move on.

An Israel moderate in every way would be an Israel easy to love. It would be a source of pride, but not a source of shame. It would be an Israel that would make us feel great as Americans and as Jews. The only problem is that that Israel doesn’t exist, and it never has.

And what of Friedman’s more specific gripes?
Tom Friedman writes that “Netanyahu has been propelled into power by bedfellows who see Israeli Arab citizens as a fifth column who can’t be trusted,” intimating that Israeli Arabs are not a fifth column. Some are; some aren’t. . . . I’ve interviewed many Arab women and men who are quite the opposite. But if you live in the Negev, if you have farmland you can’t protect from Arabs in the south or the north, you’re fearful. If you’re a young Jewish Israeli woman afraid to walk in downtown Beer Sheva, you don’t think a “fifth column” is a ludicrous claim. . . . Friedman can dismiss it, but Israelis increasingly don’t. The left and center ignore the issue, and now, Israelis are ignoring them.

Eugene Kontorovich [WSJ]Israel’s Right-Wing Coalition Gets the Cold Shoulder From Biden

The victory of Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition has many on the left bemoaning the end of democracy in Israel. Even before voting began, Sen. Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) threatened harm to bilateral relations should Israelis vote to the right. The State Department has said it would boycott some right-wing ministers, and President Biden waited almost a week before calling to congratulate Mr. Netanyahu. Yet Secretary of State Antony Blinken apparently had time Friday to phone Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who last stood for election (to a four-year term) in 2005.

What has degraded Israeli democracy, according to critics, is the electoral success of Itamar Ben-Gvir’s party. Mr. Ben-Gvir’s critics cite his past in the far-right Kahanist movement. For all the consternation, one would think he was the future prime minister, rather than the head of a second-tier party, with seven of 120 seats in the Knesset.

Yet those saying Mr. Ben-Gvir’s inclusion in the government is unacceptable were untroubled by the departing government, which included Ra’am, a party affiliated with Israel’s Islamic Movement, which was founded by a convicted terrorist; or the far-left Meretz, with roots in an actual Stalinist party; or by Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s apparent willingness to accept support from Hadash, a still-Communist party whose members of the Knesset recently justified terrorism against Israeli civilians.

Another theme in the dire forecasts for Israeli democracy are legal-system reforms that the new government may pursue. The measures would actually reinforce democracy and introduce checks and balances to a political system in which the Supreme Court has far more power than its American counterpart.

Like the U.S. Supreme Court, Israel’s strikes down laws as unconstitutional—even though Israel doesn’t have a written constitution. The court has, without statutory authority, taken upon itself the power to strike down any law or government action as “unreasonable”—that is, anything the justices don’t think is a good idea. The justices—they currently number 15—decide what laws to bestow “constitutional” status on. They also dominate the committee that appoints new justices as well as lower-court judges. Candidates don’t undergo confirmation hearings before the Knesset.

The legal reforms being discussed would weaken the ability of sitting justices to pick their successors. The reforms would allow the Knesset, in some cases, to override Supreme Court decisions based on interpretations of Knesset legislation—much as the Canadian Parliament can do. Such a measure would be a far less radical check on the court’s power than the court-packing U.S. Democrats have entertained as a way of reining in the judiciary.

For years, Israeli prosecutors have pursued Mr. Netanyahu for the crime of “breach of trust.” Some in the incoming government seek to do away with this offense because no one knows what exactly it prohibits. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Skilling v. U.S. (2010), struck down as unconstitutionally vague a similar statute about denying “honest services.”

The potential legal reforms don’t undermine the values Israel shares with the U.S. Instead, they would bring Israel closer to the American model.

Jerusalem publishes zoning for new US embassy in Jerusalem

The Jerusalem Municipality on Tuesday published the zoning description for a new US Embassy complex in the capital city.

The embassy will be on Derech Hebron between Hanoch Albek Street and Daniel Yanovsky Street, an area known by its British Mandate-era name, “Camp Allenby.”

The complex will include an embassy, offices, residences, parking and security structures. The buildings can be no more than 10 stories high, and the wall surrounding the area will be 3.5 meters high.

Time to start planning the move
Members of the public will have 60 days to submit their opposition to the plan to the municipality.

“After almost four years of hard work with the American Embassy in Jerusalem, we are pleased that the zoning plans were published this morning for the new Allenby complex,” Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Fleur Hassan-Nahoum said Tuesday.

“The US Embassy in such a central part of the city will upgrade the urban landscape of the neighborhood and connect it to all areas of the capital through the [Jerusalem] Light Rail network that will stop almost at its doors,” she said. “We hope that more countries will follow and move their embassies to our capital, Jerusalem.”

The US Embassy moved to Jerusalem in 2018, a few months after President Donald Trump recognized Israel’s capital.

Read More

Palestinians brainwashing the world: a tiny example that exposes the entire industry of Palestinian lies

The Palestinian Authority has signed numerous international conventions, without any reservations. It never intended to adhere to any of them. The only reason it signed them, as admitted by Palestinians themselves, is to make it appear to be a legitimate state so it can bring charges against Israel at the ICC.

However, these conventions do have requirements, so the Palestinian leaders must then submit to the UN a sheaf of lies to cover for the fact that they never did anything substantial to take on their obligations under international law. 

One of the many international conventions the PA signed was the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 2014. (It also signed the Optional Protocol to the Convention in 2017. )

One of the provisions in the Convention is the issue a report within one year of signing the Comvention and then an additional one every four years afterwards on how it has implemented the Convention. The PA has finally issued its initial report that should have been published in 2015.

The 67-page report is a joke.  It brags about passing laws and says nothing about actual efforts on the ground to stop torture. It is a whitewash that even Palestinian NGOs are upset about. UN Watch dissects it very nicely.

Beyond that, as always, the Palestinian Authority uses this report not to discuss its own human rights abuses, but to blame Israel for everything. To do this, it resorts to a torrent of lies. 

It is difficult to overstate how pervasive the Palestinian industry of lies is. Every statement, every document, every official press agency report is simply filled with falsehoods, and the average observer simply cannot believe that the "State of Palestine" would lie so egregiously in official reports to the UN or official statements to the world. The Palestinians have created a brand new propaganda method - instead of the famous Big Lie of Hitler and Goebbels, the Palestinians have perfected a Sea of Lies technique, making up thousands of little lies that build on each other so the overall effect is that so many lies in such seeming detail must be true.

It would take encyclopedias to expose every single one of the falsehoods in the Sea of Lies. I will show only one of them here. 

In Paragraph 47, the Palestinian authors claim:

The conditions of detention in which Palestinian women [in Israeli prisons] are held are wretched.... They are forced to give birth with their hands bound, regardless of the pain they endure in labour and childbirth.

There are no footnotes for the charge that Israeli prison authorities shackle pregnant prisoners during childbirth.

It is completely made up. 

The last pregnant Palestinian prisoner in Israeli prison was Anhar al-Deek, who had tried to stab Israelis. After a public campaign she was released to give birth while under house arrest. She had smuggled out a letter claiming that she would be shackled while giving birth in an Israeli hospital, but it simply isn't true.

The source for the lie seems to be from a previous prisoner who gave birth in an Israeli hospital, 15 years ago. Palestinian NGOs submitted to the UN this "testimony" which itself is highly suspect, but even she doesn't claim that she gave birth while handcuffed: "After delivery, I was cuffed by having one arm and one leg tied to the bed. In this position I was left for several hours before being taken back to my room."

What is not said is that this woman - a mother of eight - had attempted a suicide bombing while she was already nine months pregnant. She didn't seem to have much concern for her unborn child then. And that is a pretty good reason to take extra precautions to ensure she didn't escape from a hospital room only weeks after attempting to mass murder Jews.

It is obvious that Israel doesn't handcuff Palestinian prisoners as they are giving birth. Even the most anti-Israel NGO doesn't make that claim. But the Palestinian Authority does, in official documentation sent to the UN.

The major goal in everything they do, every statement they make, is to demonize Israel. And their citizens are expected to do the same. The rules are clear.

This one sentence in this one document proves that you cannot believe a word the Palestinian Authority says. 

In a sane world, a consistent pattern of lying would destroy the credibility of the liar. But with the Sea of Lies, the web of falsehoods is perceived as increasing the credibility of the lies and the liars. The media is guilty of not bothering to do the slightest fact check of Palestinian statements; indeed they report them uncritically - because they want to believe the lies of a Jew-hating, terror supporting organization.

---

---

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.  Read all about it here!

 

Read More