Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: z can't make this stuff up

Showing posts with label z can't make this stuff up. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 20, 2023

Palestinian militants in Ein al-Hilweh break into houses and steal - bras

Lebanon24 reports that a man was interviewed by the new youth oriented Blinx network in the Lebanese camp Ein al-Hilweh.

The man, who didn't want his name used, spoke about how terrorists there stole everything from his house - even bras. He asked, "Why do they need bras?"

A Palestinian next to him then explained why Lebanese terrorists like bras.

"Bras are very important for the gunman... In Lebanon, during the civil war between 1975 and 1990, a civilian would cross the front lines and try to avoid being shot by a sniper. He would carry a bra and wave it over his head because it is like a transit card.

“My father used to tell us this and we used to laugh about it, but through many stories about the same subject I am now certain that it was true. That's why the gunman, if he wanted to cross from one place to another without a weapon, could carry this bra so that the snipers in the camp would think that he was a civilian. It's actually very funny."

The victim also said that his wife's jilbabs (long loose fitting robes that cover the entire body) were stolen as well, and he speculates that the Islamist terrorists use them to dress up as women so they would not be stopped and searched.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

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!

How to become a post-doctoral fellow at Columbia? Write 341 pages of anti-Israel gibberish!

Columbia University's Center for Palestine Studies welcomes its newest post doctoral fellow!

Ali H. Musleh will be working on his first book project, To What Abyss Does This Robot Take the Earth? Using his dual background in design and political theory, he focuses on Israel's design, development and deployment of drones, autonomous weapons and artificial intelligence, treating them as technological processes of managing and differentiating forms of life.

Apparently, this book is a version of Musleh's 341-page PhD dissertation, with the same title. Here's the abstract:

How do weapons make the colonial worlds that Palestinians and Jewish-Israelis inhabit? My dissertation attends to this question starting from an experience shared by Palestinians: that the majority of us have never encountered an Israeli settler, whether in uniform or out of uniform, who is not attached to a weapon, be it an assault rifle, a fighter jet, or a tank, etc. Taking this experience as a philosophical provocation, I subject the settler colony to a form of insurgent study exercised everyday by Palestinians that confronts the settler as contingent and transitory human-weapon ensembles. These studies are bodying and worlding. They reveal and unravel the spatialized embodiments, sensations, affective terrains, orientations and regimes of truth that weapons generate as lived world(s) of experience. In doing so, Palestinians exercise a fleshy sociality that constantly puts into question the self-evidence of the settler and the settler state. Thinking with Palestinians and alongside peoples of struggle, my dissertation is a performance in reverse engineering that moves from micrological sites, scenes and bodies of war, to macro formations of sovereignty. My itinerary focuses primarily on encounters with remote and robotic weaponry as technologies of engineering spatial and procedural distance between the settler and weapon. My task has been to show how that distance became the abyssal site from which forms of war, apartheid, and erasure emerge that consign settlers to martial automatisms that materialize and mediate their existence. The result is a work that dissects settler colonialism as a form of life inseparable from weapon power, as I also consider Palestinian rehearsals of decolonial life in the robotic age of war.

This abstract is a combination of gobbledygook, lies, obfuscation and antisemitism.

Gazans indeed don't have much of a chance to see Israelis., settlers or otherwise, since no Israelis live there. But it is really true that West Bank Palestinians never see "settlers" without weapons? The thousands of Palestinians that visit Rami Levy supermarkets shop alongside Israeli civilians. Well over 100,000 Palestinians work in Israel, and tens of thousands more work in settlements - and most "settlers" do not walk around their towns toting assault rifles. Those "settlers" who roam the Temple Mount, where they are seen by thousands more, don't carry weapons. Most Jews at the Mamilla Mall in Jerusalem, where many Palestinians shop, don't carry weapons. His assertion that most Palestinians never see Jews without weapons is a fabrication.

And then there are Israelis who visit Palestinian towns on their own to go shopping or get their cars repaired. Like Shay Silas Nigreker and his son Aviad Nir who went shopping in Huwara and were murdered two weeks ago because they were Israeli Jews. They weren't "attached to weapons," but they were murdered by Palestinian weapons.

So Musleh's "philosophical provocation" that is the very basis of his paper and book is bullshit to begin with. But what thesis advisor has the knowledge or guts to dispute the falsehood that underpins the text?

To Musleh, all Jewish Israelis are "settlers." After all, how would Palestinians know that Israelis in fighter jets or tanks are settlers or not? And in the first sentence he considers all Israeli Arabs to be "Palestinian" which means that when he says "settlers," he really means "Jews" from either side of the Green Line. Further proof from a similar article he wrote in Politics Today, where he said, "Weeks, months, if not years can go by without an inhabitant of Gaza encountering a settler, but they are more likely to encounter a faceless machine in their day to day life."

To Musleh, every Jew is an implant, who has no business living in the land of their forefathers. If that isn't antisemitic, what is?

Beyond that, to Musleh, every Jew in Israel is not a human being. They are hybrids of humans and weapons. They are essentially cyborgs. The entire paper is meant to dehumanize every Jew who lives in the region.

Musleh tries to sound intelligent by using words that either don't exist or in contexts that make no sense. There is no such words as "bodying" and "worlding." And does his treatise on Israeli evil really deal with "micrological sites"?

Musleh himself characterizes the paper not as reflective of objective truth but as "a form of insurgent study" as well as "a performance" in finding links that simply do not exist in real life, which he falsely calls "reverse engineering" to make it sound quasi-scientific.

Another form of antisemitism we see in this abstract is that it accepts libels against Israel that are not at all universally accepted, and that are provably false, as truisms. "Settler colonialism" and "apartheid" are routinely used in academia and much of the media as fact, but they aren't. By pretending that these lies are truth, the paper is nothing more than naked propaganda.

Yet no one in Columbia University is the least bit bothered by these issues. After all, the social sciences are filled with self-serving propagandistic garbage like this, where the "feelings" of the writer are considered more factual than actual facts.

To Columbia, this self-serving propaganda filled with lies and Jew-hatred are a feature, not a bug.

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 UN's latest anti-Israel legal argument is predicated on lies

On Thursday, the UN published a document titled, "Study on the Legality of the Israeli Occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Including East Jerusalem."

It is 107 pages of tendentious and one-sided arguments all intended to declare Israeli actions since 1967 to be illegal. There are counterarguments to each of their arguments - but they don't let the readers know that.

However, the entire basis of the paper is bogus. Turn to page 18, which declares its "methodology.":

The study takes it as a starting point that the Palestinian territory – i.e., the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip – was occupied by Israel in 1967, in the course of an international armed conflict.

Setting aside Gaza for now, the question is - when did that territory become "Palestinian?"

Looking at newspaper articles in the years after the Six Day War, the West Bank was usually described as "occupied Jordan."

Here are two articles from 1972, the first about how militant Arabs threatened fellow Arabs running for office in the first elections in the West Bank after the war:

When, exactly, did the territory turn from "occupied Jordan" into "occupied Palestinian territory"?

It never happened. The world just went along with Palestinian propaganda and eventually believed it.

The question gets starker when we realize that Jordan's annexation of the West Bank in 1949 was illegal, and almost no nations recognized it. It was never legally Jordanian territory.

So the West Bank was never "occupied Jordan." It was part of the British Mandate of Palestine, the same mandate that promised the land to be the Jewish state. Not a Palestinian homeland - only a Jewish homeland.

This is international law, that has never been abrogated. Israel has a superior legal right to Judea and Samaria than anyone else. Israel's characterization of the territory as "disputed" was probably a mistake - it should have always claimed it all. But "disputed" is accurate, "occupied" is not.

Which is why the Mandate is never mentioned, and the "methodology" deliberately omits it, pretending that the territory is "occupied Palestinian territory" without ever saying when, legally, it became "Palestinian."

The paper spends a lot of time on the argument that the Mandate system provided a "sacred trust" for the rights of self-determination of the peoples in the territories. But as the Palestine Mandate document above shows, only the Jewish people were given that right under the Palestine Mandate. And the reason is as simple as it is unpalatable to the UN's legal "experts" - in 1920, no one considered that there existed an Arab "Palestinian people." The Arabs of Palestine who were speaking of nationalism wanted to become part of Syria, their interest in an independent state only arose (with very few exceptions) after the West drew the borders of British Mandate Palestine and unity with Syria was no longer an option.

To apply the League of Nations Mandate language to apply to the self determination of a people who didn't exist as a people at the time - who didn't even consider themselves a people - is the height of deception.

The next part of the "methodology" is even more absurd:n"The study also takes it as a starting point that Israel continues to occupy the Gaza Strip."

Before Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, no legal expert had ever said that an occupation is possible without soldiers physically on the ground controlling the territory.

For example, see the definition in the 1972 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms:

Military occupiers are obligated, under international law, to set up a court system, to ensure that cities are governed and continue to run, to set up an entire bureaucracy to run the territory. That is impossible without "boots on the ground," the informal definition of occupation for over a hundred years.

Israel does not control Gaza. It cannot stop rockets or mortars, weapons manufacturing or military exercises. Israel cannot create a military court system - which is required under the rules of occupation. It cannot arrest anyone.

The second sentence makes it quite clear that Area A in the West Bank is not "occupied" even if one accepts that somehow the West Bank is "Palestinian territory."

As with all other legal analyses when it comes to Israel, this paper was intended from the outset to determine that Israel's actions and "occupation" are illegal. It set the ground rules to ensure that pesky arguments like the League of Nations Mandate or the accepted definitions of occupation pre-2005 not even be brought up. (When JFK blockaded Cuba, did the US "occupy" Cuba?)

This isn't international law. It is twisting international law against only one state - coincidentally, the only Jewish state.

And that is only the beginning of the problems with this document. But since the methodology itself is based on lies, that ensures that the rest of the document built on this foundation of lies is invalid as well.

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!

A Lebanese SWAT team shows their skills confiscating Israeli kitchen towels! (video)

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Lebanon’s National Security Ministry confiscated Israeli goods from store shelves around the country, its National Security Ministry announced, according to Lebanese media reports on Tuesday.

It is unknown how the Israeli goods ended up in commercial centers in Lebanon, as the two countries do not have diplomatic relations and do not engage in trade.

According to the reports, the Lebanese ministry stated that “relevant parties had been summoned for questioning.”

According to Ynet, among the Israeli goods confiscated in Lebanon were kitchen towels from the Netanya-based home goods company, Golf & Co. as well as sealing strips from PROMAX.

This doesn't come close to capturing the absurdity of Lebanon's zealousness at enforcing Article 285 of the Lebanese penal code which prohibits trade with an enemy state.

Lebanese State Security released this video dramatizing how their strangely masked employees received the information of the dangerous goods, then enter a vehicle while heavily armed, where they race down the streets in order to confiscate the contraband that is, shudder, "MADE IN ISRAEL."

It is a clown show, yet they are taking this all so seriously.

The entire country is going to hell, but at least Lebanese citizens can sleep at night knowing that their security forces are protecting them from Zionist kitchen towels.

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!

A cringy woke apology for complaining about Hezbollah T-shirt at a gay pride event

Two weeks ago, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that anyone who engaged in a homosexual act should be killed.

A week later, at the Berlin Whole LGBTQ festival, a person was seen wearing a Hezbollah T-shirt on the stage, which upset a Lebanese citizen at the event, who complained about seeing someone wear a symbol of oppression to gays.

He then apologized for complaining!

This apology is truly remarkable.

The hezbollah t-shirt on beach stage

@Chris on #general -

@Chris on July 31, 2023:

To the person who was wearing a Hezbollah t shirt on the beach stage, I'm sorry if my complaint caused you upset. I unfortunately felt triggered by the t-shirt because the party leader recently encouraged the killing of queer people. I understand that wearing the t-shirt was used as a trendy fuck you to the hypocrisy of what is called terrorist vs what is not, and I understand being told that it's not ok to wear it by a white man can be triggering - however, given that whole is about celebrating queerness, I feel that perhaps there are other symbols to wear that are less complicated politically and more inclusive to the different experiences of people. I'm sorry again that it happened this way, I hope you are ok now. To the security people who listened to me and talked to the person, thank you. I wish you let me speak to him directly, it would have been validating and perhaps he would have understood the nuances of my views given that I'm Lebanese myself, but I also understand you wanted to make sure we are both heard.

Needless to say, we don't have any similar apology from the Hezbollah T-shirt person.

A week earlier, at a different Berlin gay festival, someone was seen wearing a gay version of a Lion's Den terrorist group T-shirt, with pink submachine guns.

At these same demonstrations, anti-Israel posters and rhetoric are commonplace.

There must be a name of the psychosis where one loudly supports those who would murder them and opposes those who fight for their rights.

We could apply that same terminology to the small set of "progressive" Jews as well who avidly support those who want to destroy Jews.

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 world sends a message: Israel should just accept Jews being murdered

From Times of Israel:

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres on Thursday said Israel used excessive force in the counter-terror operation in Jenin earlier this week and blamed Israel for the violence in the West Bank city.

During a press briefing at UN Headquarters in New York City, Guterres said he had been “deeply disturbed” by news of the Jenin operation and “strongly condemns all acts of violence against civilians.”

Asked if his condemnation applied to both sides of the conflict, Guterres said, “It applies to all use of excessive force and obviously in this situation there was an excessive force used by Israeli forces.”

“Israeli airstrikes and ground operations in a crowded refugee camp were the worst violence in the West Bank in many years, with a significant impact on civilians,” Guterres said, blaming Israel for disruptions to water and electricity services, and blocking people from accessing medical care, a charge that Israel denied.

“I once again call on Israel to abide by its obligations under international law, including the duty to exercise restraint and use only proportional force,” Guterres said. “The use of airstrikes is inconsistent with the conduct of law enforcement operations.”

“I understand Israel’s legitimate concerns with its security but escalation is not the answer,” he added. “It simply bolsters radicalization and leads to a deepening cycle of violence and bloodshed.”

The article goes on to quote other UN officials also claiming that the Jenin operation was excessive and disproportionate.

Guterres is the least anti-Israel UN Secretary General in many decades. But his statement reveals the thinking of much of the Western world, even from Israel's putative allies. When they frame their criticisms in terms of proportionality, they are saying that Israel should simply accept that terrorists will kill Jews every few days, and only use token methods to try to stop them.

Jenin's camp had turned into a locus for terror. The PA didn't do anything to stop that from happening. The Jenin Brigades have been building a Gaza-style military center in the midst of a civilian area - just like Gaza. The longer Israel would wait, the more difficult the inevitable counter-terror operation would become, and the more it would affect civilians.

The IDF managed to destroy critical terror infrastructure, something that could not easily be done with only ground troops. The operation took months to plan and clearly the Israeli intelligence on targeting crucial infrastructure was excellent. The additional force and airpower used reduced the number of casualties compared to what a ground-only operation would have done. And every single Palestinian killed was an armed militant - a valid military target.

In other words, this operation was successful by every metric, including proportionality. And while the IDF cannot stop all "lone wolf" operations, it can stop much bigger attacks that were being planned.

But Guterres and much of the Western world, outside of military analysts, simply do not understand the facts. They don't see that the increased firepower is necessary because of the increased capabilities of the terrorists. And they cling to how they pretend things are, not the reality on the ground.

Which brings up another point from another UN official:

On Tuesday, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk decried the cycle of violence in Israel and the West Bank... Turk said the scale of the Jenin operation, including the use of repeated airstrikes, along with the destruction of property, raised serious issues regarding international human rights norms and standards.

Some of the methods and weapons used “are more generally associated with the conduct of hostilities in armed conflict, rather than law enforcement,” he said.

“The use of airstrikes is inconsistent with rules applicable to the conduct of law enforcement operations. In a context of occupation, the deaths resulting from such airstrikes may also amount to willful killings,” he said.

Turk is saying that as an occupier, Israel is only legally allowed to do "law enforcement" and not treat this as an armed conflict.

He has it exactly backwards. Israel doesn't occupy Jenin - if it did, then the terrorists there would never have been able to build such an extensive infrastructure. Jenin is not under Israeli control, and it is clearly not under Palestinian Authority control - it is under Iranian control by proxy. The terrorists are not "criminals." Criminals don't walk around openly with M-16s.

If Israel would wait longer, Jenin would become another Gaza, and the steps necessary to protect Israeli lives would be much harsher. If these UN officials really cared about human rights, they would want terror groups combatted earlier rather than wait until it is too late.

Israel's actions are the only way to minimize civilian casualties (outside of really re-occupying much of Area A.) People whose very jobs are to uphold human rights should understand these basic facts - and when they are so ignorant of the realities on the ground, they shouldn't say anything until they learn the entire story.

(That being said, Israel once again did not do a good job explaining this operation.)

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!

BBC's blood libel came straight from a recent antisemitic Haaretz op-ed

The BBC has weakly apologized for presenter Anjana Gadgil saying, as a fact, that “Israeli forces are happy to kill children” during her interview with former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett.

In a statement, the BBC said, “While this was a legitimate subject to examine in the interview, we apologise that the language used in this line of questioning was not phrased well and was inappropriate.”

But how could Gadgil have even thought that Israelis are such monsters to begin with?

The answer is almost certainly - Haaretz.

A review of news articles from the past 20 years finds that it is very rare for even the most extreme haters of Israel to accuse Israelis of happiness at killing children.

During the 2009 Gaza war, in The Guardian, a resident of Gaza writes in an op-ed, "A short message to the pilots in the Israeli F-16s: does it make you feel happy to kill Palestinian children and women? Do you feel it's your duty? Killing every child and woman, man and teenager in Gaza? I don't know what exactly you feel, what exactly you think, but please think of your mother and sister, your son and daughter." But even for a Gaza resident seeing airstrikes, the idea that Israel wants to kill children was not stated as a flat fact.

A satirical Israeli filmmaker in 2012 prompted children visiting a war museum to say that killing Arabs makes them happy, which the Electronic Intifada promoted as if they don't understand how Borat-style filmmakers can elicit the responses they want from people eager to please an interviewer.

But outside of those contrived cases from years ago, I cannot find even the most biased news source making such a libelous claim that killing children makes Israelis happy.

Until this two months ago.

That's when Haaretz published an op-ed by an execrable person named Yossi Klein who wrote, "Killing children is designed to cause pain, to strike the most sensitive place of all. It isn’t designed to stop terrorism; it’s designed to deter the terrorists and make us happy."

The Haaretz headline that everyone saw, since changed, was "Killing children brings Israelis together."

At the time I argued that this was the most antisemitic article ever published. Hitler never claimed Jews relish killing children. Medieval Christians and later Muslims said that the Jews murder gentile children for religious reasons, not out of sheer pleasure.

Only Haaretz made that claim.

Western news professionals rely heavily on Haaretz to inform themselves of the alleged Israeli zeitgeist. It cannot be a coincidence that Gadgil's libelous accusation comes on the heels of Klein's own blood libel. No one would have dared to say something so outlandishly false unless they felt that it was backed up by facts - and Haaretz gave the antisemites of the world the ammunition they need to go even beyond the classic blood libel accusation.

When the Haaretz article was published, I wrote that Klein's words "will be used by antisemites forever as proof that Jews admit their happiness at murdering Arab children."

That is exactly what happened here.

And it will keep happening - because what would be unthinkable to say out loud gets a kosher stamp of approval when a Jew says it.

(Interestingly, as of this writing, Haaretz has not reported on the BBC interview nor on the apology. Could it be that they do not want people to make this connection between their own libel and that of Anjana Gadgil?)

(h/t Benjamin)

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!