Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, January 19, 2014

College sociology textbook peddles anti-Israel lies - and excuses for Bin Laden

The University of Calgary (and maybe many others) is using a textbook called "Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science," (2003, 2008) by Judith C. Blackwell, Murray E. G. Smith, and John S. Sorenson.

Here is part of the blurb for the book:

Contesting the putative "even-handedness" of many introductory social science texts, this innovative book presents strong and provocative arguments on contemporary social issues that will stimulate readers to think critically. The principal theme of the book is that social science is at its best, and most exciting, when it confronts and refutes "cultures of prejudice"—intricate systems of beliefs and attitudes that sustain many forms of social oppression and that are, themselves, sustained by ignorance and fear of the unknown and the unfamiliar. Such a critical social science, it is argued, can make an important contribution to promoting human freedom and extending human capacities.

As we will see, the book does the the exact opposite of its stated purpose.

Here are two passages:

Often, nationalist ideologues propose a mystical attachment with certain territory. Where nationalism is aligned with or defined by religious identity, it may even be asserted that the group has been given the right to this territory by the authority of a supernatural being. Thus, a Chosen People will need to inhabit its Holy Land in order to fulfill its divine covenant, with unfortunate consequences for any other populations who may inhabit the territory but who are not considered part of the nation. For example, European invaders and their descendants imagined they had a Manifest Destiny to acquire the Americas and nearly exterminated the indigenous population in the course of taking possession. More recently, supernatural sanctions have been invoked by Israelis who violently dispossessed the population of Palestine. As Israel came to be defined as a Jewish state, promised to them long ago by a supernatural being, most of the Palestinian population was expelled; approximately 4.5 million still live there as refugees. Millions of Palestinians remain under military occupation, under constant surveillance and regular attack by Israeli forces, including tanks, fighter planes, and helicopter gunships. Their houses and land have been destroyed or expropriated and given to hundreds of thousands of armed settlers. Former Israeli prime minister Golda Meir simply dismissed their suffering by asserting that “Palestinians do not exist." While international media audiences are well informed about the dreadful attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers, the far higher rate of Palestinian deaths and casualties is defended as retaliations or self-defence. The 1993 Oslo peace process simply gave an extremely constrained form of power to Yassir Arafat's corrupt regime, while allowing the occupation to continue.

How many inaccuracies and baldfaced lies are in this single paragraph? Zionists did not historically invoke the "Chosen People" phrase to justify their desire to return to their ancestral lands; indeed one has nothing to do with the other. (That part alone is borderline antisemitic.) It is a lie to say that most of the Arabs were "expelled." There are not 4.5 million "refugees" living in the borders of British Mandate Palestine even by the bizarre UNRWA definitions. Palestinian Arabs are not under "regular attack." None of their houses have been "given" to "armed settlers." Golda Meir never said the phrase "Palestinians do not exist." (The authors quote it twice in this book.)

This is a college textbook, being used, today, where I can count at least 6 lies in a single paragraph.

Here's another passage:

One thing leads to another. Osama bin Laden and his al Qteda terrorist organization presented three conditions for ending their “holy war” against the United States both before and after the events of September 11, 2001: first, that Israel retreat from the territories that it occupied in 1967 and that an autonomous Palestinian state be recognized; second, that the trade sanctions imposed upon Iraq that have cost the lives of over one and a half million people, most of them children, over the last decade be lifted; and third, that United States military bases established in Saudi Arabia during the Persian Gulf War of 1991 be closed. An overwhelming majority of humankind would likely sympathize with these demands, even as they would condemn bin Laden's methods and reject his program of establishing repressive, fundamentalist theocratic states throughout the “Islamic world.” At the same time, most inhabitants of the Third World-and a great many people elsewhere-would consider the terrorist methods of al Qaeda no more “evil” (to use President George W. Bush's favoured term) than the methods employed by the US and other major powers in maintaining a global order that serves the interests of huge transnational corporations while perpetuating the grinding poverty of billions of people.

Did Bin Laden demand that Israel withdraw to 1967 lines? Did he demand a Palestinian state be recognized? Did he ask that trade sanctions be lifted? (For that matter, did 1.5 million Iraqis die because of these sanctions? )

No. His "letter to America" after 9/11 stated "The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased." His fatwas before 9/11 were to kill every single American and its allies: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."

The "letter to America" had, in fact, seven demands, not three, and they do not correspond at all with what this textbook says:

The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

What we call you to thirdly is to take an honest stance with yourselves - and I doubt you will do so - to discover that you are a nation without principles or manners, and that the values and principles to you are something which you merely demand from others, not that which you yourself must adhere to.

We also advise you to stop supporting Israel, and to end your support of the Indians in Kashmir, the Russians against the Chechens and to also cease supporting the Manila Government against the Muslims in Southern Philippines.

We also advise you to pack your luggage and get out of our lands. We desire for your goodness, guidance, and righteousness, so do not force us to send you back as cargo in coffins.

Sixthly, we call upon you to end your support of the corrupt leaders in our countries. Do not interfere in our politics and method of education. Leave us alone, or else expect us in New York and Washington.

We also call you to deal with us and interact with us on the basis of mutual interests and benefits, rather than the policies of sub dual, theft and occupation, and not to continue your policy of supporting the Jews because this will result in more disasters for you.

His second fatwa mentioned three of America's "crimes" and, again, nothing about Israeli "occupation" - he wanted Israel destroyed.

These are only two paragraphs in a book of 359 pages, looking at subjects I know something about. And the anti-Israel rhetoric doesn't end there: on page 330 we are told that while Jordan's killing of thousands of Palestinian Arabs in 1970 was "ghastly" they wouldn't have been there if it wasn't for Israel, on page 61 the same point about Jews claiming the land because of proimises by a "supernatural being" is repeated, on page 67 it says that the US has provided weapons to Israel to "kill large numbers of Palestinians," on page 90 it says that the Mossad uses torture regularly, on page 69 Israel is explicitly called a "terrorist state."

How many hundreds of distortions and lies are in this book being given to clueless university students? How can universities allow books that don't have a modicum of fact-checking? Why are the authors not today despised and blacklisted in the world of academia for their horrendous use of lies to push their own political agendas under the cover of "fighting prejudice"?

Isn't using lies to demonize an entire people the very definition of "prejudice"?

And how many other textbooks are being given to college students in the West that are just as filled with lies and distortions?

To say this is outrageous is an understatement.

(h/t Calgary United With Israel)

The Great Kuwait Zionist Potato Scare

From Gulf News:

The highly offensive potatoes

Kuwait’s commerce ministry has launched an investigation into reports that Israeli potatoes were being sold in cooperative societies.

“The ministry is currently coordinating with several parties to reach a conclusion about the allegations and ensure that they are not malicious,” ministry sources told local daily Al Kuwaitiya.

“The ministry has a zero-tolerance policy towards the import and sale of Israeli products and if there are Israeli potatoes in the stores, there will be stringent action against those involved,” the sources said.

Khalid Al Subai, the deputy head of the Consumer Protection Society, was quoted by the Kuwaiti daily as saying that Israeli potatoes had been sold in several cooperative societies and that he held the commerce and industry ministry and the country’s customs responsible.

“The product has been spotted in several places and I would like to know how those in charge of monitoring the import of foreign products allowed it into the country,” he said.
However, Abdul Aziz Al Samhan, the head of the Cooperative Societies Union, has denied the existence of any Israeli products in Kuwait’s cooperatives. “This is definitely a red line that no one is allowed to cross under any name,” he said in a statement.

“We do deplore the allegations by some people and the accusations they levelled at Al Nassem Cooperative claiming that it was selling potatoes in bags with an Israeli label,” he said.

The Customs have denied the claims about the sale of Israeli products in Kuwait and insisted that the potatoes being sold in cooperatives were from Jordan, he added.

Al Samhan called for an end to the “electoral manoeuvres” and “the fabrication of unsubstantiated accusations, slander and falsehoods.”

“We in the Union do know that putting a false label on the product bags is an indication of bankruptcy or a way of having fun at the expense of others. Such acts have unfortunately sparked an online debate and raised questions about the authenticity of the news,” he said.

For Al Samhan, placing an Israeli label on the product does not make sense at all.

“Will selling Israeli products increase sales? We will not tolerate this fabrication and there will be serious questioning. We will find out who is behind this attack on Al Naseem Cooperative, especially that we know that it has a clean record,” he said.

The story is all over Kuwait media even though it apparently started on Twitter.

Sale of Israeli goods is a violation of Law 21 of 1964. There is an entire office in Kuwait dedicated to the boycott. One newspaper said "there are tight customs procedures to prevent Jewish products from leaking to the market."

The Jeleeb website comments, "This is a calamity if it is true."

A calamity!

If you want to stop any Arab economy dead in its tracks, all you need is an inkjet printer and a blank white label sheet.The Arabs will do the rest themselves.

(h/t Bob Knot)

Joniversity takes on "two Arab chicks"

Once you get past the snark, sarcasm, profanity and side-jokes, this is a remarkably accurate and well-referenced debunking of the Arab response to Danny Ayalon's "Truth about the West Bank" video.

(h/t Bob Knot)

01/18 Links: 134 Congressmen sign anti-boycott letter, Canadian PM Harper’s moral leadership

From Ian:

134 House Members sign letter against academic boycott of Israel

A total of 134 Members of the House of Representatives have signed a letter, organized by the offices of Reps. Peter Roksam (R) and Ted Deutch (D) condeming the academic boycott of Israel passed by the American Studies Assoction. The effort was truly bipartisan, with 65 Republicans and 69 Democrarts signing. The full list of signatories is at the bottom of this post.
As previously reported, the congressional organizers were hoping for 50 signatures, so the response was better than expected. Gathering signatures on short notice was difficult, one of the staffers explained to me, because of the press of House business before members left today on break.

Report: Soccer Club Sponsor Delivers Ultimatum Over Anelka ‘Reverse Nazi Salute’

The shirt sponsor of British soccer club West Bromwich Albion (WBA) has threatened to immediately axe its multi-million pound deal with the club over the growing furor surrounding one of its star players, who recently used a quenelle “reverse Nazi salute” after scoring a goal, the UK’s Marketing Week reported.
Zoopla, an online property portal, which is concerned that its brand is being tarnished, reportedly told WBA that if the offending player, Nicolas Anelka, plays in an upcoming match against Everton on Monday its threat will go into immediate effect. Zoopla is co-owned by Jewish businessman Alex Chesterman.

British City of Liverpool Overwhelmingly Rejects Anti-Israel Motion

The city council of Liverpool, England, has rejected a motion that condemned Israel for “human rights violations,” voting it down 74 to two, the UK’s Jewish Chronicle reported on Friday.
The JC said the motion was tabled by two members of Britain’s Green Party ahead of the Liverpool International Festival for Business 2014, in June and July, when Israeli investors and businesses are expected to come to Liverpool to take part in the business networking event. The motion urged the council to “distance” the city from “condoning or tolerating the human rights violations, of some participating countries,” including Israel, Russia and China.

Saudi preacher urges jihad to overthrow "pro-Jewish, pro-Christian" Egyptian government

Egyptian media is buzzing with a video made Friday in Medina, Saudi Arabia.

Sheikh Mohammed bin Nasser Asheian, the (possibly former) imam and preacher of the Prophet's Mosque in Medina, accused the Egyptian government of implementing the demands of the Jews and the Christians to overthrow the government of President Mohamed Morsi.

Asheian says on the video clip, "Egypt, Nation of Islam, is working on the deployment of infidelity and atheism and heresy, with unbelievers behind the plot."

He added: "Muslims are being killed in Egypt and the Levant, and everyone has to get rid of the cooperation with the Jews and the Christians. We long to announce a strong man as a ruler of the Muslim jihad for the sake of God."

Here's the video. Sorry, no translation.

01/17 Links Pt2: Why can’t Arab armies be more humane like Israel’s? The Shame of Academia.

From Ian:

Al-Jazeera: Why can’t Arab armies be more humane like Israel’s?
Among the questions posed on air:

“Why don’t they learn from the Israeli army which tries, through great efforts, to avoid shelling areas populated by civilians in Lebanon and Palestine? Didn’t Hezbollah take shelter in areas populated by civilians because it knows that Israeli air force doesn’t bomb those areas? Why doesn’t the Syrian army respect premises of universities, schools or inhabited neighborhoods? Why does it shell even the areas of its supporters? …

Al Jazeera Arabic admits France, Israel better

Iron Dome: A new idea for a St James' Church Stunt (Satire)

This morning the peace-loving Palestinians fired numerous rockets into Israel - including five targeted at Ashkelon that were all intercepted by the Iron Dome system. Given how ugly the Iron dome system is - and how its only purpose is to save the lives of Israelis targeted by Palestinian terrorists, this surely is a perfect subject for the next Christmas stunt by the St James' Church Piccadilly: Build a life-size replica of the Iron dome and demand it be torn down.
In fact, to save much time and effort I have prepared the Press Release for the event

Arabs expecting another Mabhouh-type hit in Dubai

JPost reports:

Infrastructure Minister Silvan Shalom will lead an Israeli delegation to Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates, to attend a conference focused on renewable energy, his spokesman confirmed to The Jerusalem Post on Thursday.

Shalom will attend the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Fourth Assembly, held at the St. Regis Hotel on Saadiyat Island from January 18 to 19, as part of Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week.

He follows in the footsteps of then-energy and water minister Uzi Landau, who traveled to a similar Abu Dhabi conference on January 16, 2010, and became the first minister to visit the United Arab Emirates. Israeli is one of 123 member-states of IRENA, an intergovernmental organization focused on renewable energy development that is based in Abu Dhabi.

This is the first Israeli delegation visit to the UAE, with which Israel has no diplomatic ties, since the assassination of Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai on January 19, 2010.

While Israel never confirmed or denied involvement in the killing, the Dubai police chief afterward forbade all Israelis from entering the country, even those holding foreign passports.

Palestine Today says that Uzi Landau left Dubai only an hour or two before Mabhouh was killed, and it suspects that this is not a coincidence. Therefore, it believes, Israel is planning another killing in Dubai very soon.

(In fact, Landau returned to Israel two days before the Mabhouh killing.)

But this gives me the chance to ask again my question about the Dubai police investigation in the murder: where is the hotel footage of the hallway outside Mabhouh's room?

01/17 Links Pt1: Glick: Truth Hurts, Explosives found at PA Embassy in Prague, 2nd day of Rockets

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The truth hurts

In other words, the Obama administration is using Ya’alon’s private remarks, leaked by an unidentified source to a newspaper with an anti-Netanyahu editorial agenda, as a means to neutralize the most powerful voice opposing Kerry’s obsessive, messianic behavior in the Israeli government. They want to use American umbrage at the tone of Ya’alon’s private statements to upend Israeli policy and force Israel to embrace the substance of the Obama administration’s delusional and destructive actions. And to advance this goal, they are using anti-Semitic signals to castigate Israel and deny it the right to speak on its own behalf.
Israelis love America. And for that reason, it is compelled to do what anyone strapped into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk would do: try to convince him to stop driving. As a grateful ally of the United States, Israel should publicly tell the Obama administration that what Ya’alon said in private is the truth.
And yes, sometimes the truth hurts.

Belief Undeterred by the Facts

After the Israeli defense minister’s undiplomatic skepticism about the peace process prompted a diplomatic flap earlier this week, Secretary of State John Kerry announced yesterday that he is “undeterred,” explaining, “I believe strongly in the prospects for peace.” In that, Kerry isn’t alone: An entire industry has arisen around the belief that Israeli-Palestinian peace is imminently attainable, and it is consistently “undeterred” by the facts. For a classic example, consider the joint Israeli-Palestinian poll released in late December under the unequivocal headline, “The majority of Israelis (63%) and of Palestinians (53%) support the two states solution.”
That sounds very promising, until you read the fine print. And then it turns out that most Palestinians don’t support the two-state solution at all–or at least, not the one whose terms “everyone knows.” In fact, when presented with the elements of that “everyone knows” package, defined by the researchers as based on the Clinton parameters and the Geneva Initiative, 53 percent of Palestinians opposed it, while only 46 percent supported it.(h/t Bob Knot)

Police find explosives at Palestinian embassy in Prague

Czech investigators have discovered explosives at the Palestinian Embassy complex in Prague where a possibly booby-trapped safe killed the ambassador on Jan. 1, police said Thursday.
Police discovered 12 illegal weapons following the explosion at the embassy that killed Ambassador Jamal al-Jamal, but this is the first time that authorities said explosives also were found in the new complex that includes the embassy and the ambassador’s residence.
Police said experts are trying to determine whether those weapons were used in any criminal activity in the past. The ballistic testing might take weeks, police said.

Palestine Press reports that Mahmoud Abbas said in a speech that he hopes that 2014 will be the year of Palestinian independence.

Sound familiar?

Abbas says 2013 will be year of Palestinian independence

(2010) Abbas expresses hope for Palestinian state by next year

(2007) "We pray next year will be the year of independence for the Palestinian people," Abbas continued.

(2006) President Mahmoud Abbas wished Saturday that the next year will be a year of stability and peace for the entire world and the year of establishing the Palestinian state with Jerusalem as a capital.

Maybe next year will be the year that Abbas actually makes concessions that could allow peace.

Oh, that's right - he signed a law to make that impossible.

PLO says Jews visiting Temple Mount is against international law!

Ma'an reports:

A PLO Executive Committee member spoke out against visits by rightist Israeli Jewish groups to the Al-Aqsa compound on Thursday.

Ahmad Qurie warned of "catastrophic" consequences if the Jewish groups continued to visit Al-Aqsa, saying the visits violated international law.

Yes, now Jews practicing their religion is a violation of international law, according to the PLO.

Soon the PLO will define being Jewish itself as a gross violation of human rights, and the UN will praise them for it.

By the way, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." The UN's (non-binding) "Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief" amplifies this:

Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

...[T]he right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief shall include, inter alia, the following freedoms:

(a)To worship or assemble in connexion with a religion or belief, and to establish and maintain places for these purposes;

The article continues:

Qurie said Israeli police arrested Palestinian youths who were attempting to stop the groups from entering the compound. He criticized the police for making such arrests.

Qurei believes that violating the Jewish right to exercise their beliefs is perfectly acceptable.

Then the article repeats an absurd rumor that has been going around:

Earlier, the director of the Al-Aqsa Mosque told Ma'an that the visits were a "provocative and dangerous intrusion by extremists."

Azzam al-Khatib said extremist lawyer Yehuda Glick, who chairs the Temple Mount Heritage Fund, entered the mosque compound through the Moroccan Gate and later "climbed to the roof of the Dome of the Rock and verbally assaulted the guards."

Also Saturday, Palestinian security spokesman Adnan al-Dumieri told Ma'an that Israeli rightists "ascending to the roof of the Dome of the Rock" was a provocative action that would have a negative impact on Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

But Israeli police spokesman Rosenfeld said he was unfamiliar with the roof-climbing incident.

He confirmed that there were "normal visits" to the Al-Aqsa compound, but said no arrests were made.

Climbing to the roof? Religious Jews generally don't go near the Dome of the Rock; it is probably where the Holy of Holies is and believing Jews can't visit there. The idea that they could climb it without the Israeli security guards who accompany them stopping them is absurd.

But no lie is too absurd for Palestinian Arab spokespeople.

Obscene editorial in U. of Calgary newspaper

The National Post of Canada wrote last week:

A pro-Israel group says it has complained to Calgary police over Facebook comments made by a former university student group president who urged Palestinians to ‘‘spill blood.’’

“My body and soul are ready to fight and die,” wrote Ala’a Hamdan, former president of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, a University of Calgary student group. “This land will be proud that Palestinian babies are born men and women ready to spill their blood.”

In a battle hymn written to a son, Ms. Hamdan wrote: “I will soak a koffiah with your blood and save it to show to your siblings … I will be named the mother of the martyr.“

Members of the Calgarians United With Israel (CUWI) advocacy group copied the comments and posted them to their website.

“It’s extremely melodramatic and poorly written but beyond that, it’s hate speech, I think,” said Ryan Bellerose, who helped found CUWI. “This student group talks about justice and peace and she talks about blowing herself up and having her children blow themselves up. It’s hypocritical.”

It is difficult to interpret these writings as anything but advocating murder of Israeli Jews. Palestinian Arabs call suicide bombers and others who target civilians "martyrs." They also call anyone killed by the IDF to be martyrs as well, but this poem is talking about a mother pushing her son to become one, which means she wants him to actively attack Israeli Jews.

Advocating murder of a national group is pretty much the definition of incitement.

To publicize the disgusting writings of Hamdan and to denounce them is not an attack on free speech - it is free speech.

But look at this editorial in the university newspaper, the Gauntlet. They justify Hamdan's writings because they think she has a very good point. Why? Because the editors of this student newspaper don't know basic facts of history - they have been brainwashed with propaganda and aren't embarrassed to spout it themselves:

The conflict is complicated. Arguments on both sides are often fueled by emotion or religion, but the basic history is such.

Imagine it’s the 1940s. Jewish people are uprooted in Europe by the Nazis because of the Holocaust. An obscene number of them are murdered. The Second World War ends and the concentration camps are closed, but Jewish communities remain broken, individuals still stripped of their property and the stink of anti-Semitism continues to hang over much of Europe.

Under the banner of Zionism, sectors of the Jewish community have long advocated for a return to their ancient homeland, which is then referred to as the British mandate for Palestine. After the Second World War, the United Nations decides that the Zionists will get their wish, and much of Palestine transforms into the Jewish state of Israel.

The problem is that people already live there. And they don’t feel like leaving, so Israel colonizes them, violently.

A series of wars between Israel and the surrounding Arab states ensue. Arabs living in Israeli controlled territory — most of them identifying as Palestinians — are delegated to the status of second-class citizens, lacking the same political and civil rights as their Israelis elites. A flood of violence from both Palestinians and Israelis escalates every year.

These are only the basics.

These are the basics?

Zionism didn't start after World War II, as this implies. Jews had accepted partition plans twice and the Arabs rejected them. Zionists who had already built up much of Palestine over the previous decades always intended to live in peace with their Arab neighbors. The UN vote partition vote would have given Palestinian Arabs a state of their own and they rejected it because part was going to Jews. Most Palestinians would not have lived under Jewish rule under the plan. Within hours of the vote they started attacking Jews in buses and on the streets. When Israel finally declared independence, the Arabs were joined by the combined Arab armies from Transjordan, Egypt, Iraq and Syria. If the Jews would have lost they would have been slaughtered mercilessly, if you believe the rhetoric that Arab leaders said explicitly. Today, Arabs in Israel have the same rights as Jews, although there is unfortunately still some racism as there is everywhere else in the world. It pales next to the antisemitism of the Arab world that has remained constant for hundreds of years. And in no way, shape or form can Israeli actions be compared to the Holocaust, which seems to be an implication here, along with the idea that Jews are foreign colonizers when they are in fact the indigenous people returning to their homeland.

The Gauntlet is not giving a basic history lesson. It is propagating a series of lies. It adds another lie, claiming that CUWI is calling for the student group to be disbanded, something they never did. They only asked that hate speech be denounced and that they be protected from incitement. (The exact request in their letter to the Student Union was "We are requesting the University of Calgary protect us from rhetoric and action on campus that exposes us to hatred, and we are asking to be provided with a safe environment that is conducive to our academic success. ")

Now, lies may be protected free speech, but there should be consequences for a newspaper - even a student newspaper - to have such reckless disregard for the truth.

Without any seeming knowledge of the terror war that Israel endured only a few years ago, the editorial assumes that Hamdan's poems refer to military actions, not attacks against women and children that characterize most historic Palestinian Arab attacks.

Naturally, given this false framework of the conflict, the newspaper understands Hamdan's anger and defends her right to call to murder people.

But if the media would start telling the truth about the Middle East, perhaps the next generation won't be so inclined to create pathetic poetic peaens to terrorism against Israeli Jews.

UNESCO drops Jewish themed exhibit because Arabs objected. And the US agrees with their reasons!

The Simon Wiesenthal Center last week invited everyone to UNESCO's headquarters in Paris to see an exhibit:

"People, Book, Land - The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People

and the Land of Israel", co-organized by UNESCO and our Centre, will be

launched on Monday 20 January and displayed at UNESCO headquarters in

Paris from Tuesday 21 until Thursday 30 January from 9am to 5:30pm (closed weekends)

Don't bother calling the number to attend.

From The Algemeiner:

UNESCO, the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, has pulled a Jewish exhibit two years in the making, entitled “People, Book, Land – The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel,” after a zero hour protest from the Arab League, The Algemeiner has learned.

The exhibit, which was created by Los Angeles-based Jewish human rights group the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) together with UNESCO, was scheduled to open on January 20th, 2014, at UNESCO’s Paris headquarters. The invitations had already gone out, and the fully prepared exhibition material was already in place. The display was co-sponsored by Israel, Canada and Montenegro.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean of the SWC, told The Algemeiner that the move was an “absolute outrage.” “The Arabs,” he said, “don’t want the world to know that the Jews have a 3,500-year relationship to the Land of Israel.”

Hier said that his organization, which is accredited by UNESCO as an NGO, worked in intimate co-operation with the international body on the project, which his center initiated after the Palestinian Authority was unilaterally accepted as a UNESCO member state in 2011.

“We made a clear attempt to work with them and the system, they can’t say they were blindsided, they commented on every sentence (in the exhibit’s materials) and still, in the end, the Arabs protested and they kicked us out,” he said.

“It is not supposed to be a place of censorship,” Hier said, “It is not supposed to deny one nation the right to their history.”

UNESCO informed the SWC of the change on January 14th in a letter to the Center’s Shimon Samuels, asserting the Arab League’s claim that going ahead with the show “could create potential obstacles related to the peace process in the Middle East.”

In a letter to Irina Bokova, president of UNESCO, President of the Arab group within UNESCO, Abdulla al Neaimi, from the United Arab Emirates, expressed “deep worry and great disapproval” over the program showing the age old connection between Israel and the Jewish people.

“The subject of this exhibition is highly political though the appearance of the title seems to be trivial. Most serious is the defense of this theme which is one of the reasons used by the opponents of peace within Israel,” the Arab League wrote. “The publicity that will accompany… the exhibit can only cause damage to the peace negotiations presently occurring, and the constant effort of Secretary of State John Kerry, and the neutrality and objectivity of UNESCO.”

“For all these reasons, for the major worry not to damage UNESCO in its… mission of support for peace, the Arab group within UNESCO is asking you to make the decision to cancel this exhibition,” Al Neaimi concluded.

So, UNESCO immediately bowed to the wishes of its Muslim masters. Sure enough, mention of the exhibit was scrubbed from the UNESCO site - it was there two days ago according to Google's cache.

But it gets much worse:

Interestingly, 10 days prior to the suspension of the exhibit, the United States declined co-sponsorship on remarkably similar grounds.

“At this sensitive juncture in the ongoing Middle East peace process, and after thoughtful consideration with review at the highest levels, we have made the decision that the United States will not be able to co-sponsor the current exhibit during its display at UNESCO headquarters,” wrote Kelly O. Siekman, Director at the Office of UNESCO Affairs of the State Department, in an email seen by The Algemeiner.

SWC’s Hier told The Algemeiner that he was disappointed in the U.S. position on the issue, and said that he was sure the exhibition would not have been suspended has the U.S. aligned itself as a formal co-sponsor. “This is not the end of this story,” he said.

Let this sink in for a moment: The official United States position is that publicly acknowledging that Jews have deep historic ties to Israel is a threat to the "peace process."

Maybe the White House will ban publicly mentioning the Bible next, because of all those irritating references to "Children of Israel" and "the Kingdom of David" and "Judah" and "Jerusalem." We can't upset the Arabs at this sensitive time, can we? Better hide the Bible that new appointees swear on.

This is beyond disgusting. If the truth must be hidden then you end up with lies, and peace cannot be built on lies. If the US cannot publicly acknowledge that Jews have a deep relationship with their land, then there is no reason for Israel to trust the US. Talking about the "special relationship" rings hollow when basic truths become censored.

Meanwhile, the UN today launched the "Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People" - an event that absolutely no one says is a threat to the peace process.

General Assembly President John Ashe told today’s meeting that he hoped the Year leads to “robust” support for the people of Palestine. “I am sure I speak for many when I say that I hope the Year helps foster an atmosphere of dialogue and mutual understanding between the two sides of this decades-long conflict,” he said.

Dialogue? Mutual understanding? UNESCO's decision doesn't seem quite consistent with those lofty words, does it?

Oh, that's right. When the UN says "dialogue" they mean "monologue" and when they say "mutual understanding" they mean "one way propaganda." You just have to understand the lingo off the hypocrites and moral midgets that work for the United Nations.

It is scary that the US has been moving in that exact same direction over the past five years.