Showing posts with label breaking the silence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breaking the silence. Show all posts

Friday, February 03, 2023

The Forward has an op-ed by David Enoch, a professor of philosophy and law at Hebrew University:
If you want to support Israel, boycott its new government

....Even if the justification of boycotts has in the past been questionable, I think that American Jews owe it to Israel, and to Israelis like myself, to promote such measures now. After the disproportionate Israeli military incursion into Jenin, and the predictably tragic cycle of violence it engendered the next day in Jerusalem, Israel’s far-right government is using this as an opportunity to further their own political goals. We cannot allow this kind of illiberalism to continue.
Yes, boycott Israel out of love!

As you can tell from this paragraph, Enoch has no love of Israel. 

And Enoch's desire to boycott Israel includes an academic boycott.

Im Tirtzu summarizes David Enoch's supposed love of Israel:

Signed a petition calling on EU member states to boycott “organizations and companies if they are active, directly or indirectly, in the occupied territories.”[1]
Draft-dodger.[2]
Compared the IDF’s activities during Operation Protective Edge to that of Hamas.[3]
Signed a petition in support of the Islamic Movement.[4]
Participated in a protest against the drafting of Christians to the IDF.[5]
Signed a petition in “support and appreciation” of students and lecturers who illegally refused to do IDF service in Judea and Samaria.[6]
Signed a petition advocating for the release of terrorist supporter Dareen Tatour, who was arrested and convicted for inciting violence and supporting a terrorist organization.[7]
Signed a petition in support of the anti-Zionist organization “Breaking the Silence.”[8]
Threatened to take legal measures against students who came in army uniform in support of an IDF officer who was reprimanded by a lecturer for arriving to class in uniform.[9]
Somehow, all these things happened before the current government was (democratically) elected. 

Enoch wants, along with many others, to use the excuse of the current Israeli government to push their hate that existed beforehand. 




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!

 

 

Wednesday, September 04, 2019

One of the more disingenuous parts of groups like IfNotNow demnding that Zionist organizations like Birthright include an anti-Zionist point of view is that no one - and I mean no one - ever even considers politely requesting so-called "pro-Palestinian" groups include the Zionist narrative in their discussions.

The reason this comes up is a small article in the PLO website. A delegation of students and professors from Glasgow University and from a university in California attended an "educational program on history, the Palestinian cause and Israeli violations against our people and their violation of international law" this summer.

Is anyone demanding that the PLO allow these students and professors to speak to Israelis, let alone Jewish settlers?

The very idea is absurd. Because absolutely no one expects Palestinians to be even-handed, or fair, or unbiased. No one demands that they consider Israeli positions as having any validity, or even that they have the right to be spoken out loud.

Birthright does give students an opportunity to ask about and learn about the Palestinian perspective. Do the anti-Israel tours - whether from the PLO or from Breaking the Silence or International Solidarity Movement - allow similar opportunities in their tours?

We all know the answer.  According to these so-called progressives, Zionist groups must include an anti-Zionist narrative and anti-Zionist groups must also teach an anti-Zionist narrative. Pro-Zionist voices must be shut down or drowned out, because only one side has any legitimacy according to these people who congratulate themselves on how open-minded they are - in one direction.



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.

Sunday, November 11, 2018


"Our No. 1 agenda item is to do whatever we can in Congress to act as the president’s blocking back."
J Street co-founder Jeremy Ben-Ami, "The New Israel Lobby," September 9, 2009


And in order to do whatever they could in Congress to support Obama, J Street took -- and continues to take -- a different approach than AIPAC.

AIPAC supports the policy of whoever is elected to lead Israel. In order to do that, AIPAC backs the idea of bipartisan support:
AIPAC is not a political action committee (PAC) and we do not rate or endorse candidates for elected or appointed office. AIPAC members in all 50 states are encouraged to be politically active and develop relationships with their members of Congress to help educate them about the importance of U.S.-Israel ties.
J Street is different on both counts:
o J Street does not support the policy of Israel's elected leaders. Instead, they follow their own agenda
o J Street has their own Political Action Committee, supporting only Democrats - Democrats who support the "two-state" solution:
JStreetPAC was established in 2008 as the first-ever federal political action committee (PAC) to explicitly promote American leadership to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Also, as part of their agenda, J Street has deliberately discarded the idea of bipartisan support for Israel in favor of support for their agenda, by supporting only Democrats in Congressional elections.

The one-sided approached has, of course, resulted in some lopsided endorsements.

For example, there is Rashida Tlaib, whom J Street endorsed despite the fact that Rashida Tlaib
o supported Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Odeh
o supported Islamic Relief, which has links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
o criticized California’s Kamala Harris for discussing cooperation between California and Israel on water management, agriculture, and cyber security
o accused Harris of “racism” for meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
o retweeted a post from Linda Sarsour supporting Ahed Tamimi, who was jailed for incitement and assaulting an IDF soldier -- and upon release voiced support for suicide bombing.
Photo
Rashida Tlaib. Public Domain


J Street did end up withdrawing their support for Tlaib.

Why?

Not because of her anti-Israel views or support for terrorists.

In their statement about withdrawing support for Tlaib, entitled "J Street Will Not Endorse Candidates Who Do Not Endorse a Two-State Solution," J Street makes clear what their priorities are:
While we have long championed the value of a wide range of voices in discussion of the conflict and related issues, we cannot endorse candidates who conclude that they can no longer publicly express unequivocal support for a two-state solution and other core principles to which our organization is dedicated.
The statement then continues:
Rashida Tlaib’s election as the first Palestinian-American woman Member of Congress will be a historic milestone for the Palestinian-American community and for the United States as a whole. We strongly support and are encouraged by her commitment to social justice, and we are inspired by her determination to bring the voice of underrepresented communities to Capitol Hill. We wish her and her campaign well, and we look forward to a close working relationship with her and her office when she takes her seat in Congress next year.
Other questionable Democrats that J Street has supported include Representative Mark Pocan, who last year anonymously reserved official Capitol Hill space for an anti-Israel forum organized by organizations that support boycotts and Representative Hank Johnson, who referred to Israelis living in Judea and Samaria as 'termites'

But at least they supported J Street's two-state solution!

In last weeks midterm elections, the Democrats regained control of the House, helped in part by the $5 million dollars that J Street used for Democratic candidates.

And what was J Street's reaction?

J Street president Jeremy "blocking back" Ben-Ami wrote an email to supporters that:
"After last night's victories, we can finally begin to retake the reins of America's foreign policy and make gains in our fight for a better future for Israelis and Palestinians."
From YouTube Video
Jeremy Ben Ami. From YouTube Video


That's one statement you will not hear from AIPAC.

But this is the same J Street that
o despite their repeated denials to the contrary, in 2008 and 2009 received funding from George Soros,  
o in 2009, claimed it "refuses to embrace" the Goldstone Report, which criticized Israel on its conduct during Operation Cast Lead. Yet when a resolution was sponsored in Congress condemning the report, and Goldstone circulated a document defending it, the source of the report was traced back to Mort Halperin of the J Street advisory council. In fact, J Street went so far as to facilitate visits for Goldstone to the Hill 
o already in 2009, had connections with NIAC, a pro-Iranian advocacy group that would become instrumental in pushing the Iran deal -- which J Street still supports. 
o brought "Breaking the Silence" to speak at Princeton University during Yom HaZikaron and Yom Haatzmaut.
And now J Street blatantly tells its supporters that their goal is to control foreign policy?

J Street is not pro-Israel.
J Street is not pro-Peace.

J Street is just pro-J Street.




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.

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Two weeks ago we reported about the Israeli Channel 2 report showing how "Breaking the Silence" asks many questions from former soldiers that had nothing to do with human rights and sound a lot like intelligence gathering against Israel.

Here is the full report with English subtitles:



It is fascinating to see how the Left is defending this.

At first, Haaretz put out a sarcastic piece that was remarkably fact-free and that ignored the charges in the story.

But then the newspaper came up with a novel defense of apparent treason: The information collected was not that sensitive!



See that? "Only!"

Haaretz believes that treason is OK if it is only minor treason. It is not concerned that the information is being passed on to BtS' European funders or to the Palestinian Authority.

Israeli soldiers have been convicted of posting similar secrets on social media without realizing the gravity of the issue. But to Haaretz, an organization dedicated to slandering the IDF is above such petty concerns as espionage.

Breaking the Silence, for its part, responds that all of its reports are cleared by the military censor so therefore it cannot be guilty. But espionage is not usually published. The concern is what Breaking the Silence is doing with the classified information it is gathering, not whether it is publishing secrets. Is it sharing the raw footage and interviews with its European funders? Is it passing information on to groups that encourage violent Palestinian demonstrations?

These are the questions that the Shin Bet is now investigating.

But seeing how these Israeli groups are defending apparent espionage against the State puts a lie to the idea that they are animated by their patriotism and their desire to improve the army.

(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.

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Last week we discussed the video expose from Israel's Channel 2 on how Breaking the Silence was acting in ways that look startlingly like espionage against the IDF.

Now part of the report has been subtitled in English by My Truth:



Meanwhile, Haaretz is defending the group in a fact-free editorial:

Breaking the Silence has become the biggest threat to Israel’s security, at least according to a Channel 2 investigative report last week. The report presented alleged “evidence” showing the NGO’s activists trying to obtain sensitive military information from a right-wing activist posing as a former soldier.

The “exposé” – which, it transpired, was made by the rightist NGO Ad Kan – made it to Immigrant Absorption Minister Zeev Elkin, who said he was “seriously concerned that Breaking the Silence is being used for espionage.” Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon hastened to order a probe into the incident and, on his Facebook page, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Breaking the Silence “crossed another red line” and “security officials were looking into the matter.”

Of course, Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid) took advantage of the opportunity to portray himself as a rightist, body and soul. “The NGO is undermining the State of Israel and causing it great damage internally and externally,” he announced. “While Israel is struggling against a wave of terror, Breaking the Silence is taking information and using it against the state. Israel must do everything to protect its soldiers – this organization has no right to exist in a state that is fighting terror daily for its people’s safety,” he said.

All that remains, it seems, is to demand that the cabinet declare Breaking the Silence a terror organization, arrest its members and put on trial the treacherous soldiers who passed on information about the Israel Defense Forces’ crimes in the territories. Then we will have to congratulate Channel 2 for its journalistic achievement, saving Israel from its destroyers, as it previously did with the program “Uvda,” which exposed another “enemy of the state,” left-wing activist Ezra Nawi.

This will apparently solve all the security problems that Israelis are suffering from, and for which the government has yet to devise a solution – the recent terror wave, the intifadas, military operations and other ills deriving from the prolonged occupation.

It is regrettable that instead of leading and finding real solutions to terror, the government is applying a nasty strategy of wild incitement against a human rights organization. All this is taking place in a state that boasts of its democracy and compares itself favorably to the region’s other nations.

Breaking the Silence is a vital, critical organization, whose goal is to cleanse the IDF of its soldiers’ illegal acts – abusing and harassing Palestinians, and interpreting orders in a violent way. The NGO’s objective and insistent activity against the occupation are not acts of treason. In fact, a democracy should be proud of this organization’s existence, give it full backing and stop the populist witch hunt carried out against it.

The government and right-wingers must stop their violent attempts to silence Breaking the Silence, and their repeated use of the NGO as a political scapegoat.
There is literally nothing accurate about this piece. An organization that uses anonymous stories that cannot be checked for accuracy in order to smear the IDF is not improving the IDF. The IDF has repeatedly asked for details from BtS in order to investigate these alleged abuses - and BtS refused. So how exactly is BtS a "vital, critical organization" when it cannot provide any evidence that can be used to help the IDF fix any problems yet it trumpets these anonymous, impossible to prove stories as evidence of IDF immorality?

Haaretz does not bring an iota of evidence that the information in the report is inaccurate in any way, unless you assume that anything anyone on the Right does is automatically a lie without the need to ask any further questions.

Outside of Meretz and the Arab list, members of all parties of Knesset were aghast at this report and how it apparently shows Breaking the Silence acting as foreign agents. Yet Haaretz calls all the critics "rightists."

Compared to Haaretz, I suppose that's true. But this editorial proves yet again that Haaretz represents the fringe Israeli left that hates the Jewish state, not the mainstream Israeli opinion that welcomes opportunities to improve it.

And as this report further shows, Breaking the Silence is not trying to improve Israel - it is trying to destroy it.

(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.

Thursday, March 17, 2016



Arutz-7 reports:
Channel 2 news broadcast highly incriminating video evidence Thursday evening filmed with hidden cameras by nationalist group Ad Kan, which shows ultra-leftist group Breaking the Silence engaged in what appears like espionage activity against the IDF.

‘Breaking the Silence has crossed another red line,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said after the report was aired. “The investigative security forces are looking into the matter.”

The videos were gathered by Ad Kan’s undercover agents who infiltrated Breaking the Silence over a three-year period.

They show Breaking the Silence activists questioning ex-IDF soldiers – who are, in fact, Ad Kan agents – about details of the IDF’s security operations and equipment along the border with Gaza. The questions relate to how Hamas tunnels were discovered, what special forces were deployed and when, what kind of gun is deployed atop an IDF robot vehicle and more.

None of these questions have anything to do with allegedly immoral activities by the military in Judea and Samaria, which Breaking the Silence claims to be interested in exposing. Instead, they appear to be aimed at gathering intelligence about sensitive IDF operations along the border with Hamas.

In addition, a female Breaking the Silence activist revealed to an agent that she enlisted into the IDF’s Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria with the express purpose of gathering information about it, since she had been in touch with Breaking the Silence before she enlisted.
Breaking the Silence is acting like the victim:
Breaking the Silence CEO Yuli Novak denied that she was collecting classified information, adding: "there are several organizations, together with members of the Knesset from the Likud and Habayit Hayehudi, who are working to silence whoever tries to criticize the government and the occupation."
It sure sounds like a mostly European-funded organization has been spying on the IDF. How much of the information it gathered ended up with its European funders?

To me, the more important question is how will supposedly pro-Israel leftist groups like J-Street, the New Israel Fund, Yachad-UK, Hillel and others choose to respond to this report.

If they support BTS and choose to ignore the report, they will look like they are covering for a group that has proven that it is not pro-Israel but actively against Israel.

If they accept the report, then they should loudly denounce what the organization did and distance themselves from it, never hosting them on campus any more.

Even before this report it was obvious that BtS was not a pro-Israel organization in any sense. Natan Sharansky ridiculed the idea that it is a human rights organization and even called it a BDS organization. .

Specifically, Hillel International recently invited BtS to speak at Brown and Columbia Hillel despite all evidence that it is anti-Israel.

If it goes through with this after the Channel 2 report, then any pretense that Hillel is still pro-Israel goes out the window.

So how these supposedly "pro-Israel" organizations respond to this damning report will prove whether they have any claim to be truly pro-Israel.

UPDATE: The report:


שוברים שתיקה שותלים מרגלים בתוך צה"ל***מיוחד: שוברים שתיקה בתחקיר שכולם מדברים עליו***וידאו התחקיר המלא שפורסם הערב בחדשות 2 על החשיפה של ארגון עד כאן. לפיו התחקיר הזה, ארגון שוברים שתיקה מנסה לשתול בתוך הצבא מרגלים שלהם לצורכי מודיעין! זה פשוט מטורף לחשוב שארגון הזה מסובסד ע"י מדינות אירופה ומידע רגיש שכזה עלול להגיע אליהם. צפו ולא תאמינו! שתפו.
Posted by ‎מכאן - סדנאות הסברה ישראלית‎ on Thursday, March 17, 2016


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.

Thursday, January 14, 2016

Avner Gvaryahu is the public face of Breaking the Silence, writing articles in Western media about how immoral the Israeli army is, and relating it to his own army experiences.

Now his fellow soldiers wrote a letter saying that he is full of it.

From My Truth:
Hey Avner,

It’s us, your friends from the army, from the Orev unit. We have also decided to break our silence. Want to stop reading? Don’t.
We were there no less than he was, and now the time has come for you to hear our truth also.

He shouts in every possible forum that he needs to be heard, now the time has come that he listen to us, too. We were ready to take a bullet for him once, we were with him there on the missions that he speaks of (in which we saved many lives and prevented countless terror attacks in the heart of Israel). In fact, when he says that war crimes were committed, he’s referring to each and every one of us. In every court case both sides are heard, no?

Let’s start. This post is written together by many members of the unit. Avner served together with us in the "Orev" Paratroopers (Anti-tank) unit from November 2004 until March 2007. Some of us served in the same crew, others in a parallel crew or in the unit at the same time. We decided to describe part of his testimonies which accuse us of things which never happened, or which were utterly distorted and whose connection to reality is totally coincidental, and each testimony needs to be told truthfully. To prove that you don’t have a sister is not an easy task, so be patient, you too Avner, give the minimum of respect and read until the end.

Before we begin to try to restore our name, we have one personal question for you: If we did all that you describe, you were a part of it; you were the March 2006 sniper team sergeant (by the way, this team by definition didn’t do arrests, refer to your own testimony, No. 58601 from 2011, in which you described other things), commander! What was done was your responsibility; so why did you run from responsibility? You turned a blind eye! You led soldiers behind you; don’t say that you received orders – you gave them! If there was truth in your words, then today you should be the one facing trial.

Let’s start from the last ones, the ones from the patrol in Hebron:

You claimed that there was a position with a “machine gun” which kills with a radius of 50 meters(!) and the operator would play a kind of video game and shoot innocent people and cars, and more than this, you claimed that there would be screams of encouragement on the radio, and so he would shoot.

We were in Hebron as a team of recruits who hadn’t yet finished training, for a period of about two weeks. Which machine guns did we use? With a killing radius of precisely 50 meters? Even a grenade launcher doesn’t kill at that kind of radius. Did you even fire so much as a single live bullet anywhere other than in the direction of a cardboard target in the course of your training? We didn’t. Since when are there cries of “come on, come on, shoot!” on the radio? The normal command on the radio is that “fire is permitted”. Nobody screams at anyone, and nobody permits live fire in the direction of innocent civilians or random vehicles.

You spoke about a big football game which occurs every four years (you meant the World Cup final?) and the soldiers are frustrated that they cannot see the game, so they enter a house with a satellite dish, tie up the people there, and sit down to watch the football game (at the time of training, remember?). The only World Cup final which took place while were in the army was in 2006 in June/July – just before the beginning of the Second Lebanon War. We performed a military mission in the Nablus area and from there we proceeded northwards. We weren’t in the Hebron area at all; we were 120km away from there, in fact. In Nablus nobody went into any houses to see a football game or selected a house because of its satellite dish.

On one thing you do speak the truth, and as usual, the rest is devoid of context and distorted. The team from the unit was indeed on a mission at the time of the World Cup final. As with every mission undertaken in the unit, the house was selected according to operational parameters alone, by officers who we were blessed to be under their command. You worked closely with them, Avner, so you certainly know this. And yes, in every house like this of ‘uninvolved people’, there is indeed a family (for the most part) whose routine is disturbed. But we can attest to the fact that when we were forced to do this, dozens, perhaps hundreds, of times all of us always extended as courteous as possible an attitude to the family, while keeping in mind the operational target for which we were sent out on the mission.

The protocol for houses of ‘uninvolved people’ was that the occupants of the house would be required to go into one room, and they would generally go to sleep there while one soldier stands guard outside the room. In the case above, since the mission was longer than usual, the family watched the game in their lounge. Needless to say, nobody was tied up. Nobody is ever tied up unless they are arrested. So it’s true, the soldier who watched over the family also glanced at the television which was already on. We won’t deny this. But it’s a far cry from the picture you tried to paint of a unit of sadistic soldiers whose first interest is to mistreat the civilian population.

You present us as a barbaric bunch who kill people who are only holding a cell phone.

To remind you: In every single company discussion the general protocols for opening fire, the protocol was mentioned in the unit, and it was that before opening fire, it’s vital to verify that it’s known which weapon the suspect is carrying in hand, whether it’s a Kalashnikov, a (burning) Molotov cocktail, or an M16, and if we are unable to say which weapon he’s holding, then apparently we’re not sure that it’s a weapon at all, and we don’t fire. Should we remind you about the hospital in Jenin? From where they shot at us almost every time we passed by, including from a PK sub-machine gun, and the commands were to not return fire, and so it was.

Can you give the name of your friend who shot indiscriminately?

You tarnish the name of the unit and make claims about a lack of values in a place where if a soldier so much as sat down on a bed in the parents’ room in a house in Jenin, he would be sentenced to court martial by the unit commander for disrespect of property, and his punishment would be a month on base. These were the values, from first day of training, of the soldiers who fought with you.

[Our] War isn’t an ideal but a necessity, exceptional cases such as they are do not represent the education or the values of your friends in the unit specifically or of Israeli soldiers in general.

This biased and one-sided show which you presented in front of the UN creates a false image which fuels hatred of Israel around the world and doesn’t contribute in any way to making the army “more moral”.

Furthermore, it doesn’t match the ten commandments which the organization you represent is based upon, and more’s the pity.

We demand you to immediately cease bearing false witness about your military service and to stop demonizing your friends in the unit and crew who gave their all, and continue to give their all, in order to safeguard the security of the people of Israel.

-Members of the Paratrooper Orev unit



We are doing everything we can to fight for Israel with hard work, research and - above all - the truth. I could sure use your help.
Please donate today.
If you have other skills you can volunteer for EoZ, send an email to volunteer@elderofziyon.com

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive