Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Judea-Samaria

Showing posts with label Judea-Samaria. Show all posts

Sunday, October 02, 2022

Booking.com Following Airbnb into Political Dead Sea? (RealJerusalemStreets)

By Real Jerusalem Streets

The reported news that Booking.com was to put a "warning" on Jewish-owned property rentals in Judea and Samaria listed on their website spurred a visit to the Dead Sea to see.

Leaving Jerusalem for the half-hour drive to the northern part of the shrinking Dead Sea, it's hard to miss the Bedouin encampments which have multiplied in the desert along the road.

The banks of the receding body of salt water are visible from an outlook at the Biankini Village Resort Dead Sea. For those like me who were unfamiliar with the name, and at first glance think of beach bikinis or burkinis, Angelo Levi Bianchini was an officer in the Italian Royal Navy. A street in Jerusalem near Hillel Street and the Italian Synagogue is named for the Zionist and Israel lover.

But that story is for another time.

I mention Bianchini because of the street where in 2001 a terrorist attempted to blow up the Biankini Pub, filled with nearly 200 young people drinking beer on a Friday night and celebrating 3 birthdays.

Biankini Pub owner Dina Dagan realized something was wrong when a man from Ramallah walked into her business after she had seen on the news that Ramallah had been closed because of riots.

He had indeed left a powerful explosive in a bag in the restroom. She was able to carry the bomb out to the street, get the police to believe her, and finally come and detonate the explosive, saving the lives of her patrons.

The episode is material also for a powerful story. But I mention it because Dagan grew up in Jerusalem and experienced the Intifada firsthand. She did not decide to leave until after the Moment Cafe bombing, where some of the same young people she saved were murdered by another terrorist's bomb.

Dina Dagan moved to the Dead Sea to find "peace" and started the Biankini Resort in the barren sand. The resort has grown into a mega-complex, with a large swimming pool and shul.

There are small family cabins with play areas and privacy and greenery she planted.

The newest of her 110 rooms are in a building named Sultan and one includes a suite with a private jacuzzi, and as in the rest of the resort, over-the-top Moroccan decor.

Dina Dagan, flamboyant down to her blue and white bejeweled fingernails is angry with the Booking.com warning. After working hard for over 20 years to build a business that provides 4 million shekel back into the local economy, where Arabs and Jews work together "in an island of peace" and hosts people from all over the world - Muslim, Christian, Druze, and Jewish.- now is dangerous she asked!

Booking.com watered down their warning on the site to properties in the area stating, "Review any travel advisories provided by your government to make an informed decision about your stay in this area, which may be considered conflict-area"

I have seen comments that this is not a serious development, will not hinder tourism, etc. in this place where Dagan says brings people together. They do not know and if see a warning will be afraid to come -"To the most peaceful place in the world."

Dina Dagan who carried an explosive device out to a Jerusalem street in 2001, calls what is happening, "Intifada Rishona." (First Intifada) A time of virtual shaming which is political and hurts us all - all Israelis. How can this be, a one-sided decision deciding on the borders of Israel when there are terror attacks around the world?

Airbnb and now Booking.com - who will be next in this war of discrimination, that hurts everyone?

Looking up on the way into the resort from the parking lot, we saw birds sheltering from the hot sun in a dinosaur's mouth.

On the way out, I looked down to see Queen Elizabeth and Albert Einstein waving goodbye.

International tourists should be warned - Biankini Resort has just about anything you could imagine - and more.

All images credit - @RealJStreets sharon@rjstreets.com

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!

The full results of the latest PCPSR poll of Palestinians has been published, and it finds a consistent pattern.

86% of Palestinians say there is corruption in the Palestinian Authority and 73% say there is corruption in institutions under Hamas’ control in the Gaza Strip.

That is truly overwhelming majority - and it is a story that the Western media continuously downplays. After all, if the Palestinian leadership cannot be trusted to take care of their own people, how can anyone expect them to adhere to agreements with Israel?

Another telling statistic: A majority of Palestinians under both Hamas and PA rule say that they cannot criticize their leaders without fear. 58% of West Bankers think people in the West Bank cannot criticize the PA without fear and 54% of Gazans say they cannot criticize Hamas without fear.

Again, Western media will uncritically quote Palestinian media and citizens without mentioning that people are likely to self-censor to parrot what their corrupt leaders want them so say. This results in reporting on the region that is inherently inaccurate.

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!

Defending Israel's claim to Judea and Samaria in the House of Lords, 1994

Peter Thomas, known as Baron Thomas of Gwydir, was a British Conservative politician. He was the first Welshman to become Chairman of the Conservative Party, serving from 1970 to 1972, and the first Conservative to serve as Secretary of State for Wales, holding that office from 1970 to 1974

This is the transcript of an address he made at the House of Lords on March 28, 1994:

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, says that the views of the noble Lord, Lord Haskel [that Israeli settlements do not violate Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions], are not widely shared. Listening to the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, it is clear that his views are widely shared by those who have an aversion to the state of Israel. For many years he has demonstrated his views on that matter. I applaud what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Haskel. I thought his contribution important.

However, I am somewhat anxious about the way in which the debate is going. I understand that the Question before the House is: "whether the Jewish settlements in the Occupied Territories violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention". In anticipation of my noble friend Lord Gilmour giving the reasons why he was asking the Question, I obtained a copy of the Convention for the Protection of War Victims. I assume that my noble friend is referring to the last paragraph of Article 49. It states: The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies". That is the end of the article. It begins by dealing with individual or mass forcible transfers as well as the deportation of protected persons from occupied territories. It was put into the convention at the end of the war as a result of the dreadful activities of the Nazi administration, in particular the mass transfer of population in order to get rid of people regarded as being unacceptable; in name, the Jews. They were taken to be liquidated from one country to another and were moved from one place to another. That is why we have Article 49 in the convention.

I remind the House of Article 2. It states that, "the present convention shall apply to … armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties". The convention applies, to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party. I therefore ask the House to consider this question: which is the high contracting party whose territory is occupied? In other words, which state has sovereign title to the West Bank?

In 1967 Jordan was in occupation. It is generally accepted that after its annexation of the territories, Jordan had no sovereignty in international law. Its presence in Judaea and Samaria was only given de jure recognition by two countries out of the whole international community. Therefore, if one is dealing with points of law, as my noble friend's Question seeks, it seems clear that the West Bank, at present occupied by Israel, does not belong to any other state, and the convention therefore does not apply. The answer to the first and dominant part of my noble friend's Question is therefore no.

I shall raise another matter if I have time. The last legal sovereignty over the territories was that of the League of Nations mandate of 1922. It can be argued that its provisions still hold legal weight. The mandate stipulated that the area was to be part of the Jewish homeland, and that Jewish settlement there was to be encouraged.

I have referred the House to those two matters, namely, the effect of Article 2 and the mandate, to indicate how ridiculous it is even to contemplate that major national and ethnic issues can ever be solved by raising legal points.

That last paragraph seems to me that he is not so much saying that he is making a legal argument as saying that legal arguments are irrelevant since anyone can interpret them as they wish, and the only solution is political.

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!

Ben and Jerry's sells to lots of countries that commit human rights abuses

Ben and Jerry's is suing its own parent company Unilever for selling rights to manufacture its products to an Israeli company.

When the Unilever announced the deal, Ben and Jerry's said that "We continue to believe it is inconsistent with Ben & Jerry's values for our ice cream to be sold in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. "

Here is a list of countries that Ben and Jerry's happily sells its products to up until last year:

I did a quick survey of the human rights records of some of these countries, based on NGO reports and the US State Department. Here are some results, and the list of human rights abuses is far from complete.

Australia	Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people comprise 29 percent of Australia’s adult prison population, but just 3 percent of the national population.
Austria	Excessive use of force by police; asylum seekers deported
Bahamas	Death penalty, mistreatment of migrants, discrimination against LGBTQ+
Belgium	Racial profiling by the police, inhumane prisons
Brazil	In 2020, police killed 6,416 people. More than half of the victims were young Black men.
Czech Republic	Roma children experience discriminatory segregation in schools
Dominican Republic	Unlawful or arbitrary killings by government security forces; criminalization of abortion
Estonia	Highest gender pay gap in the EU
France	Violent police attacks on peaceful protesters. Anti-Muslim speech by officials.
Jamaica	Unlawful and arbitrary killings by government security forces; life-threatening conditions in prisons; law against homosexuality
Mexico	Police, prosecutors and the military regularly commit human rights violations, including arbitrary detention, torture, extrajudicial killings.
New Zealand	Asylum seekers are placed in prison and mistreated by criminals while being processed.
Philippines	ICC investigating crimes against humanity in "war on drugs"
Poland	Laws banning abortions
Singapore	Death penalty, government goes after freedom of speech and assembly
Thailand	Torture, no freedom of assembly or speech
Trinidad &Tobago	Death penalty, unlawful or arbitrary killings by police

Even the countries universally considered the leaders in human rights - Finland, Sweden and Norway - have been accused of discriminating against the Sámi people in various ways, such as attacking their culture and limiting their land rights.

Not to mention Ben and Jerry's home country of the United States, which according to Amnesty has the death penalty, excessive police brutality, armed forces throughout the world that often kills civilians, and limited access to abortions in some states.

Is Ben and Jerry's OK selling to countries where homosexuality is illegal? Where abortions are illegal? Where the government security forces torture detainees, and violently break up public peaceful demonstrations? Where minorities are not protected and actively discriminated against? Where incarceration of minorities is way out of proportion to their population?

It sure sounds like this is not a problem for them.

No, the only country that Ben and Jerry's publicly says is so reprehensible that it won't sell there without it changing its own laws is Israel, where the crime that is so reprehensible to justify this singular treatment is that Jews build houses in their ancestral homeland, nearly all of it on land that no human being ever lived before.

Anyone can dissect any country's human rights record, in order to find excuses to be prejudiced against that country - while pretending that it is really a righteous position.

If people decided that they want to cancel, say, Trinidad and Tobago, they could find lots of human rights abuses to justify their decision. But the hate comes first, the justification comes later.

Which is exactly the case with Israel. The hate, which is by definition modern antisemitism, comes first; the justification comes later. This is why Israel is accused of such a huge variety of human rights abuses in so many areas - not because Israel is guilty of them, but because there is such an intense desire to demonize Israel that literally thousands of people are paid full time to scrutinize Israel from every angle to justify animosity towards the Jewish state. And when they run out of things to accuse Israel of, there is an academic cottage industry to create new ones.

The many real human rights abuses listed above do not get the publicity that the mostly imaginary abuses attributed to Israel get.

When you look hard enough, you can find a reason to justify hating any country. And when the bulk of that effort goes towards the only country that has a Jewish majority, it is pretty obvious that human rights is not the real reason for the scrutiny.

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!

What are Relations Really Like Between Jews and Arabs in the Wild Wild Not West Bank (Judean Rose)

What are things really like between the Jews and Arabs who live in the territories? Divided into Areas A, B, and C, under the Oslo Accords, you'd think there wouldn't be much congress between the respective populations of these areas. Jews, for example, are forbidden entry into Area A under Israeli law. But there is more interaction between the sectors than one might expect. A short drive from my apartment in Efrat to the highway that connects us to Hebron or Jerusalem, offers evidence that Oslo or no Oslo, the two populations mix in everyday ways.

Just outside the northern gate of Efrat, lies the Arab city of Dheisheh, in Area A. Area A is under the exclusive rule of the Palestinian Authority with entry to Jews forbidden. Efrat is in Area C, under Israeli rule. Arabs may enter Efrat to work or conduct business, and to shop. But Jews can never enter Dheisheh.

But the Arabs of Dheisheh are enterprising. They see opportunities for commerce with the Jews of Efrat.

This is expressed by, for instance, this pop-up car parts concern, just outside the north gate of Efrat. It looks as though it was built on a shoulder, but not too long ago, there was no shoulder. The owner created one, specifically to court Efrat patrons. As far as I know, he is not paying for the privilege of using this invented space, and no zoning czars prevented this space from coming into existence. He's for sure not paying taxes, and no one is kicking him out.

In the distance, you can see illegal Arab homes that have been built up right against the Jewish homes of the Dagan neighborhood of Efrat, where one can see a communications tower.

On the other side of the road is Sarafindi, a hardware store. The Jews of Efrat are happy to buy from Sarafindi, an Arab-owned and run establishment. The store is clean and well set-up. The prices are good. The service is superb and polite.

Not to be outdone, we next we come to the Elyaakubi hardware store. Note the prominent signs that are mostly in Hebrew, with a bit of small font text in Arabic, at bottom. The signs tell the story: Elyaakubi, an Arab of Dheisheh, wants the Jews of Efrat to come and buy his wares. Hence the nice big friendly Hebrew signage.

Just before the bend in the road that leads to highway 60, we see an impromptu Arab garbage dump next to a small guard house, where IDF soldiers are sometimes posted on patrol. The Arabs find it very convenient to dump their garbage at the bottom of this hill. This did not make Efrat very happy. We attempted to offer a solution in the form of the green garbage "frog" you see here, now overflowing with trash. Our "solution" appeared to worsen the situation. There is now more garbage than ever before. I guess the trash receptacle sanctioned the area as a place to offload domestic refuse.

Next up, a car wash. Again, the prominent Hebrew signage. The conclusion is obvious: who says they don't want to have anything to do with their Jewish neighbors? They definitely want our patronage.

This young boy came out, as I was snapping photos. He was concerned, a bit suspicious. He asked me in Hebrew, "What's wrong? Is everything okay?"

I did my best to reassure him. His eyes followed our car as my husband drove us away.

As we near the intersection of Efrat, Dheisheh, and highway 60, to the right is the red sign warning us that we are at the entrance to Area A, and that it is forbidden for Israelis to enter. The larger sign is a municipal welcome sign, all in Arabic.

Past the red sign, you can see the highway that leads to Jerusalem. Both Arabs and Jews drive on the road in either direction, freely.

On the other side of the road is an auto-body shop, Arab-owned, again with prominent signage in Hebrew. The sign says:

Mercaz HaShalom [Peace Center]
Body-Shop and Paint
Under Management by Maher

All indications are that the Arabs of Area A are happy to do business with the Jews of Area C. And the reality is that the Jews on the hilltops of Efrat can't come to Mohammed in Dheisheh, so Mohammed is coming to Efrat.

Some Efratians are naïve. They see the local Arab desire for Jewish custom as tiny seeds of peace.

Other Efratians are more like me. We think: They're happy to take our money, as long as we're here. They take pains to encourage our business. But they would, of course, much prefer we Jews would sink into the earth, disappear, and be gone for good, their giant Hebrew-lettered "Peace Center" signs notwithstanding. And they wouldn't mind lending a hand to making that happen, when push comes to shove.

Know How to Answer, part 11B "Settlements are illegal"

Nearly six years ago I gave a lecture at Yeshiva University on how to answer anti-Israel arguments. Since the lecture was over an hour and twenty minutes, I decided to break it up into 20 sections, one each to answer one popular anti-Israel argument.

Here is the second half of part 11, probably the longest clip.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.64

Know How to Answer, part 11A: "Israel is illegally occupying territories"

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

Lebanese politician tweets map of 'Palestine" that shows Judea and Samaria

Walid Joumblatt, president of the Progressive Socialist Party of Lebanon, tweeted this image that came from a Haaretz article showing an Israeli artist's depiction of Palestinians superimposed over a "map of Palestine." Joumblatt added a caption, "Palestine will remain."

If you look closer at the artwork, though, you see that it shows a decidedly Jewish perspective on the Land of Israel. Judea and Samaria are noted; Shechem is on the map without using the name Nablus as it is currently referred to, current "settlements" of Bet El (Bethel) and Shiloh are listed, there is no "east Jerusalem."

This "pro-Palestinian" tweet proves that Jews are the indigenous people of the region, having been in the area far longer than any Muslims.

Joumblatt's caption was incomplete - it should have said "Palestine will remain the Jewish homeland forever."

(h/t Yoel)

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

Are Settlements an Obstacle to Peace? (Judean Rose)

Are Israeli settlements an obstacle to peace? Lots of people say so. Bulgaria’s Mladenov said it. The EU’s Mogherini said it. And the UN has said it again and again.

By why would anyone think that Jews building homes stands in the way of a peace settlement?

The homes of the 10,000 Jews the Israeli government expelled from Gaza in 2005 did not stand in the way of the unilateral gesture of peace that was Disengagement. We just knocked those homes down. We left behind the greenhouses, the infrastructure for making a living, and the Arabs knocked those down without Israel’s help, rejecting the Jew-stench that apparently still clung to these structures, in favor of poverty.

Demolition of Ganei Tal, Gush Katif

The homes of the 7,000 Israelis expelled from Sinai in 1982, similarly did not stand in the way of Israel’s peace agreement with Egypt.

This being not one, but two instances in which homes did not stand in the way of peace, what is the rationale for calling Jewish homes “obstacles to peace?”

Some say the problem is that building homes expands existing settlements. But this is not so. Settlement boundaries are already defined. Building more homes within those boundaries doesn’t expand them. The boundaries remain the same. And the settlements that are within the consensus as belonging to Israel in any peace agreement, retain their dimensions whether or not Jews build homes therein.

The real issue is that when Jews build homes in Judea and Samaria, their numbers increase in the land. The issue isn’t limiting homes, but limiting Jews. Which is antisemitism.

But can the building of Jewish homes be construed as a provocation? Is it as if the Jews are saying, “All of this is ours and this also is ours?”

Well, yes. But so what?

In what sense does this prevent the parties from sitting down at the negotiating table?

The fact is, it doesn’t.

Jews building homes on land Arabs want, doesn’t stop Arabs from demanding more land. And Jews building homes on land Arabs want, doesn’t stop Jews from being willing to sit down and discuss land giveaways.

None of this stops anti-Israel Jews like Peter Beinart from pulling a stern face when referring to the building of homes for Jews in Judea and Samaria. Because he wants what the Arabs want and not what the Jews want. He wants the land Judenfrei.

JINOs like Beinart want what Arabs want because Arabs are brown people they see as victims. People like Beinart feel better when they do nice things for the downtrodden.

Beinart and his ilk like to identify victims and feel bad about them. They like to see themselves as self-sacrificing heroes. So they demand that Jews living where they themselves don’t live, give up their homes for the people they see as victims.

As for Jews like Naomi Chazan or Amira Hass, the Israeli versions of Peter Beinart, settlers are a breed apart from “normal” Israeli Jews like them. Settlers are vermin, while they sit in their high tower, as Beinart sits in America, pointing a finger at the nasty settlers.

From their perspective, settlers are like Nazis seeking Lebensraum in Czechoslovakia, a land not their own. These high and mighty Jews see the settlements as a colonialist project. But Judea and Samaria are the indigenous lands of the Jewish people and always have been. The idea that the land is not Jewish land betrays a preference to ignore ancient history in favor of modern revisionist history that shuts Jews out and lets Arabs in.

The truth is, building homes for Jews is not a crime, never was, and never will be.

Building homes is just creating shelter. It’s part of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which ironically, is a psychological theory proposed by a Jew, which recognizes that people have basic needs. Like shelter.

Shelter doesn’t hurt anyone. And a Jew deserves a home as much as the next person.

Homes don’t get in the way of peace negotiations.

And Jews don’t contaminate territory. They’re human beings like all other human beings. The only difference is that God gave them the Torah and the Land of Israel.

Which hasn’t stopped them from sitting down with the Arabs in peace negotiations.

And it appears it never will.

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

Hey Thomas Friedman, who is dividing world Jewry?

Thomas Friedman has yet another self-righteous piece of stupidity in the New York Times.

[President Trump,] you may be the last man standing between Israel and a complete, self-inflicted disaster for the Jewish state and the Jewish people.

Let me explain it in terms you’ll appreciate: golf.

Did you happen to follow the story involving Barack Obama and Woodmont Country Club? Woodmont is the mostly Jewish golf club in Maryland, just outside D.C., where Obama played as a guest several times during his presidency. Near the end of his term it was rumored that Obama would seek membership there.

Then he clashed with Netanyahu over Obama’s refusal to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel’s relentless expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Shortly thereafter, The Washington Post reported that a Woodmont member, Faith Goldstein, had sent a private email to the club’s president declaring that Obama “is not welcome at Woodmont” because of his U.N. vote.

It was appalling to think that Jews, who for so many years were themselves excluded from joining certain country clubs, would consider excluding our first black president, especially for his acting on the basis of what half of Israel believes — that continued expansion of Jewish settlements into Palestinian-populated zones of the West Bank will eventually make the separation of Israelis and Palestinians in a two-state solution impossible, and thereby threaten Israel’s character as a Jewish and democratic state.

Fortunately, in the end, the decent members of Woodmont prevailed. As The Washington Post reported, the club’s president, Barry Forman, invited the Obamas to join, declaring that “it is all the more important that Woodmont be a place where people of varying views and beliefs can enjoy fellowship.”

Why am I telling you this story? Because Israel is getting closer every day to wiping out any possibility of a two-state solution. Just last week, Netanyahu’s government pushed through the Knesset a shameful new law declaring that wildcat Jewish settlers who had illegally set up caravans on private West Bank Palestinian land, and erected their own settlement there, will have their settlements legalized, although the Palestinian landowners have to be compensated.

First Friedman essentially calls Jews racist, even though President Obama's race had zero to do with the country club story. (He also completely misrepresents the "Regulation Law" pretending that Israel now allows "wildcat Jewish settlers" to just grab land without checking if it is privately owned.) And calling Jews racist seems to be the only reason for Friedman to tell over this story, because the only tie he brings between the country club story and his usual anti-settlement screed is this:

I don’t expect Israel to just up and leave the West Bank without a Palestinian partner for a secure peace, which Israel doesn’t now have. But legalizing this land grab by settlers deep in Palestinian areas is not an act of security — it will actually create security problems. It is an act of moral turpitude that will make it even harder to ever find that Palestinian partner and will undermine the moral foundations of the state. This is about right versus wrong.

And if that is where the debate goes, what happened at Woodmont golf club will happen everywhere. That debate will tear apart virtually every synagogue, Jewish organization and Jewish group on every campus in America, and around the world. Israel will divide world Jewry.

It isn't Israel that is dividing world Jewry, it is the Thomas Friedmans of the world who claim that Israel has no rights in its homeland to begin with. That's why he equates his fake Jewish racists with Jews who believe that there are actual legal and moral reasons why Judea and Samaria should not be Judenfrei.

Who is more divisive than a smug columnist who declares every Jew who disagrees with him to be the morally equivalent to racists? How much can Tom Friedman care about Jewish unity when he makes such a claim?

While Friedman pays lip service to the fact that Palestinians aren't a peace partner, he lays the blame on Israel by saying that only Israel is killing the two state solution - despite the fact that Israel has lready accepted and offered the Palestinians a state multiple times.

Let's put this in terms Friedman might be able to understand.

Here is the top of the PLO official webpage, today:

I'll increase the size of the logo in case your reading glasses aren't on:

Where, exactly, is Israel on this PLO map of their ersatz state?

If Friedman wants to unite Jews, he should write about how the "moderate" Palestinians have never budged from their position that the "peace process" is a Trojan horse to destroy Israel. That's something all Jews should be aware of, but they certainly wouldn't know it from reading Friedman's columns.

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

Hillary Bids for Jewish Support (Mike Lumish)

Hillary Clinton has a recent piece in The Forward entitled, How I Would Reaffirm Unbreakable Bond With Israel — and Benjamin Netanyahu. Despite her role in the most anti-Israel administration in American history, Clinton wants us to believe that she cares about Israel, has an "enduring emotional connection" to the land and its people, and has done all sorts of good work in supporting the Jewish state.

She tells us:

I have stood with Israel my entire career. As a senator, I fought to get Magen David Adom accepted to the International Red Cross when other nations tried to exclude the organization. I wrote and co-sponsored bills that isolated terror groups, and pushed to crack down on incitement in Palestinian textbooks and schools. As secretary of state, I requested more assistance for Israel every year, and supported the lifesaving Iron Dome rocket defense system. I defended Israel from isolation and attacks at the United Nations and other international settings, including opposing the biased Goldstone report.

Although I do not distrust Hillary's intentions toward Israel, you know what they say about good intentions and the direction of its paving. It is her foreign policy ideology that I do not trust. It is her unwavering belief in the ongoing failed Oslo nonsense.

It is the likelihood that after eight years of Obama's antics we will get more of the same from Hillary.

She reminds us that "in 2012 I led negotiations for a cease-fire in Gaza to stop Hamas rockets from raining down on Israeli homes and communities."

The is sort-of true. Clinton did lead the cease-fire effort at the time, but its primary effect, whatever its intention, was to save Hamas from Israeli retaliation. If Clinton was interested in preventing Hamas rocketeers from ruining the lives of Israeli children then she might not have waited until the moment that Israel started shooting back before interfering. Hamas sent thousands of rockets into southern Israel in the years preceding that engagement and if Hillary was so opposed she might have used her influence to see about de-funding the Jihadi organization.

She didn't.

Aside from outlining the various ways that she has been allegedly friendly to Israel in the past, she also assures us that she will be friendly to Israel in the future.

And while no solution can be imposed from outside, I believe the United States has a responsibility to help bring Israelis and Palestinians to the table and to encourage the difficult but necessary decisions that will lead to peace. As president I will never stop working to advance the goal of two states for two peoples living in peace, security and dignity.

This is the big problem.

And it is why no one who cares about the well-being of the Jewish State of Israel, or the well-being of Jewish people, in general, should support Hillary's campaign for president. Hillary, like Barack Obama, is a devotee of the Oslo Delusion. We already know how this movie is going to end because we have seen it many times before.

It looks something like this:

1) The US and the EU demand negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

2) The parties agree to talk and then the PA, the US, and the EU demand various concessions from Israel for the great privilege of sitting down with the PA's foremost undertaker.

3) Israel fails to meet all the concessions, thus causing the PA to flee negotiations, which they never had any intention of concluding to begin with.

4) The PA and the EU and the left-leaning American administration place the blame for failure at Jewish feet.

5) The EU and various European countries announce additional sanctions, thereby essentially joining the anti-Semitic anti-Zionist BDS movement.

6) Jihadis seek to murder Jews.
We are in phase number six of the current round at this particular moment... as anyone who cocks their head out the car door window in Jerusalem, and listens to the screams, will attest. Young Arab-Muslim men are running around Israel stabbing old Jewish ladies and young Jewish children and many in the West believe Israeli Jews richly deserve it. Part of the reason that many in the West, particularly on the Left, think that Arabs have every right to kill Jews is because people like Barack Obama and his administration constantly blame Arab violence on their Jewish victims.

For years, Barack Obama - and people who think like him - have essentially told the world that the real problem is that Jews are so arrogant that they think that they should have the right to build housing for ourselves in Judea... not to mention Samaria. Thus, suddenly, the word "settler" begins to gain evil connotations and the Jewish people are encouraged to split between those of us who oppose these evil settlers and those of us, being evil ourselves, support the evil settlers.

I support the evil settlers.

That land and those hills represent the very heartland of the Jewish people and no one is going to tell me that Judea belongs to the Arab conquerors of Jewish land. Since at least the Peel Commission of 1937, the Jewish people in the Land of Israel have, over and over again, demonstrated their willingness to share what little bit of Jewish land there is with their hostile neighbors.

Time and again they were rebuked.

What Hillary Clinton needs to understand, and what Barack Obama never learned, is that this is not a war over land. It is a centuries-long Arab-Muslim imposition of imperial supremacy upon all non-Muslims, most particularly those that they call the children of orangutans and swine, i.e., the Jewish people.

What Hillary Clinton needs to understand is that while Israeli-Jews are not victims, because they refuse to be victims, this does not mean that they are oppressors, either. It is the Arabs, not the Jews, who have turned that particular human tendency into an art-form.

Michael Lumish is a blogger at the Israel Thrives blog as well as a regular contributor/blogger at Times of Israel and Jews Down Under.

This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 11 years and over 22,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.