Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Tomorrow we can go see him and hug him… (Forest Rain)

I had never told him how important it was for us to hug him after the war.

Yesterday I did.

More than two years after, no longer a soldier, he says he sometimes hears explosions all around him.

More than two years later, Lenny’s sons are in the army and preparing for the army. We don’t know if the next war will be with Hamas in Gaza or Hezbollah in Lebanon (or heaven forbid both). We don’t know when it will happen. We do know that it will …

How many people understand what we go through? Can you?

This is what I wrote, then (August 11, 2014)….

“So tomorrow we can go see him and hug him” I said. Lenny had woken me up to tell me that Haim had come home from Gaza [Operation Protective Edge].

Haim is the son of one of Lenny’s childhood friends. I’ve known Haim almost a decade. Lenny has known him since infancy. He was always charismatic. Even as a small child. Haim has a friendly charm that makes you smile and an exuberant personality that can’t be ignored.

He is a paratrooper and was one of the IDF soldiers on the ground in Gaza. Now he had come home.

Haim is just a few years older than Lenny’s sons and because of this Lenny had a visceral reaction to his life being in danger on the frontline. He imagined more vividly than ever before what it will be like to be in the position of a parent trying to go about his daily life, choked with fear for his son’s life. Every news update, every rumor on social media, every phone call and knock on the door could bring life shattering news: your beloved is injured, or worse, dead. You cannot protect your child or take the danger away. You are left behind, waiting, never knowing until the moment he walks back in the door and you can, once again, wrap your arms around him and hold him tight.

We went to see Haim the next day. It is hard to explain in words but it had become really important to look at him, to hug him. Maybe it was a need to see that he would be ok and in one piece. Too many of our soldiers did not come home. Too many came home not whole – arms or legs amputated, eyes damaged, hearing damaged…

Remembering the child, it was startling to see the man standing in front of us. Young but no longer a boy, Gaza had changed him.

Firstborn and the only boy, Haim had always been the delight of his family. Now they all crowded around him, talking, not really knowing what to say… excited. Watching them, it was like I was seeing two different worlds collide. Haim was in the midst of his loving family but he was also alone. None of them could ever know exactly what he went through in Gaza, only the people who were there with him could really understand.

His mother talked about the horrible heat he had to endure, the powder-like sand that got on and in everything, the inability to take a shower or change clothes. These all were certainly bothersome but they were the least of his worries. What is a sore and itching body compared to coming home alive or getting killed?

Even his father, grandfather or other Israeli men wouldn’t understand completely because the tactics used by the Hamas in Gaza are different from what was in previous wars. This was not the battle of soldiers meeting each other on a battlefield it wasn’t even like previously seen urban combat. The enemy hid behind and amongst civilians, sending children and mentally handicapped to shoot and throw grenades at soldiers. Women suicide bombers were sent to explode themselves in order to kill soldiers. Regular homes were weapons caches and launching pads for missiles. The Hamas hid in their tunnels in attempt to ambush IDF soldiers, to kill and take hostages. Everywhere they went, everything was booby trapped with explosives. Israel gave the Gazans so much advance warning of where the IDF would be focusing their efforts that it became easy for Hamas to prepare explosives in every place they wanted to stop the IDF (tunnel entrances, weapons stores etc.).

Haim told us of bullets flying, RPG rockets aimed at him and his fellow soldiers. He said: “It was like walking in to an American action movie – only real.” He told us of how terrorists tried to ambush them via one of their terror-tunnels (as they did when Hadar Goldin, Benaya Sarel and Liel Gidoni were killed). “We stopped them [unlike those who hadn’t managed to do so before it was too late],” said Haim. “We killed them.”

Haim said: “Gaza is full of miracles. We experienced lots of miracles.” Most people think of miracles as something spectacular that happens. He was talking about all the things that didn’t happen. The bullets that didn’t hit them. The terrorists that failed in their ambushes. The explosives, meant to kill them that simply didn’t explode. He told us of a house they had to enter – the whole ceiling was covered in gas balloons rigged to explode. They were meant to cause an explosion that would have incinerated the building and all the soldiers inside. But they didn’t explode. Haim and all the soldiers with him should have been dead. But they weren’t.

Thank God for miracles!

Haim’s family all had their opinions about the war with Hamas, what should and shouldn’t be done. Haim, the only one who had actually been in Gaza this time around, remained silent. When asked directly he said: “We successfully completed every task given to us. If now we are asked to do more, we will.”

His mother visibly paled at the thought of him having to go back but remained silent. She knew that he had only 48 hours to be at home and that wherever he’ll be sent, it will be dangerous. If he has to go back to Gaza, he will. If not, he will be sent to other, difficult and risky tasks. He will go because it is his turn. In two years Lenny’s sons will also go.

Each soldier has parents, brothers, sisters, wives and children that worry themselves sick each time their beloved is called up. No one wants to go to battle. In Israel it is necessary to do so because the lives of all our people are threatened. We are not protecting political strategic locations overseas. Our soldiers are protecting their own homes, their mothers and fathers, their wives and children.

What does victory mean to you? This image, making the rounds of Israeli social media, clearly shows what we fight for…

People who hate Israel look at IDF soldiers as brutal tools of an aggressive nation. People who love Israel tend to see the strength of our soldiers. Many know of their morality and decency. Few see the gut wrenching pain of the parents (and wives) who send their beloved to protect the nation, knowing he may never return. Few realize how much we need miracles to bring them back home again…

How ironic that the Israeli people, widely accused of war-mongering aggression, so deeply desire to see the day when we will no longer have to fight.

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.

03/14 Links Pt1: Arab Factions Praise Jordanian Terrorist for Killing Israeli Schoolgirls; Obama's Legacy, a Nuclear Iran?

From Ian:

Arab Factions Praise Jordanian Terrorist for Killing Israeli Schoolgirls

After his release from prison on Saturday, Muslim Brotherhood and Palestinian factions praised a Jordanian terrorist who shot and killed seven Israeli schoolgirls and injured six others in 1997.
“The Islamic resistance movement Hamas hails the Arab hero Ahmed Daqamseh on his release and gaining his freedom. We greet his noble struggle, his historic steadfastness and his heroic positions on Jerusalem and Palestine and the Resistance of the Palestinian people,” a Hamas press statement said, as translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism.
Following his release, Daqamseh said that Israelis were “human garbage vomited into our midst by the world’s nations,” and called for the death of Israelis “whether by burning or by burying,” in comments translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).
The Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing in Jordan also rejoiced at Daqamseh’s release.
“The [Islamic Action] Party greets the people of Jordan and the family of the hero Ahmed Damaqseh on his release from prison after his sentence, and welcomes his return to practice his national role alongside the free men of this nation in construction and achievement,” according to a translation of an Islamic Action Party statement.
Even the “moderate” Palestinian Fatah Party glorified the Jordanian terrorist, and justified the murder of Israeli schoolchildren.
“It may be noted that the soldier Daqamseh opened fire on the group of girls because they made fun of him during his prayers, according to his testimony at the time,” a Fatah statement said.

Obama's Legacy, a Nuclear Iran?

Sadly, the American public remained largely oblivious to these blunders as the administration's echo chamber strategy proved extremely effective with most pundits—except a few very notable exceptions—expressing unmitigated support for the JCPOA in line with administration talking points and positions. The arms control and nonproliferation community, which should have been at the forefront of the debate, pointing out all the deal's weaknesses and potential pitfalls, was in the main uncritically lured by the administration's propaganda. On a broader level, Obama's heavy-handed delegitimization of any and all criticism and his aggressive pushing of the deal in Congress have left domestic political scars, including among Democrats, that add to the president's dismal Iranian legacy.
Obama's only achievement lies in kicking the nuclear can down the road to future administrations. But he created a reality in which it will be far more difficult to stop Iran down that road. With its nuclear program legitimized by the JCPOA, Tehran is much better poised to forge ahead at a time of its choosing. For contrary to Obama's emphatic statements, the JCPOA does not end Tehran's nuclear ambitions, nor has it lived up to the president's hope of ushering in a new era in U.S.-Iranian relations.
The challenge for the Trump administration is to try to reverse some of these negative trends. In making the best of a bad situation, the preferred route at this point—after Tehran has already pocketed billions of dollars—would be neither to renounce the deal nor try to renegotiate it but, rather, to enforce it strictly as well as strengthen its provisions. Much can be achieved by reversing the Obama administration's approach to Iran—recognizing Tehran's overt hostility to U.S. interests and responding with firm determination to its provocations beyond the direct context of the JCPOA.
These, however, are but general guidelines for future U.S. policy on this issue. After the damage wrought by the Obama administration, the road ahead will be strewn with difficulties, and there are no shortcuts or magic solutions for redressing the situation.

Do Supporters of Palestine Accept Indiscriminate Murder?

Last week he received in his Ramallah office the family of Muhammad Al-Jallad, who was shot to death while trying to carry out a stabbing. Abbas also met a 14-year-old, Osama Zaidat, who was wounded while attempting to stab civilians. In a widely circulated photograph, Abbas appears to be embracing Osama.
Abbas says that freeing the prisoners convicted by Israel is a major priority for him. At a conference in December he said, “We remember the martyrs, the wounded and the prisoners and their record. We salute our brave prisoners and respect them. We will not forget our fighting comrades.” So official Palestine stands firmly behind erratic, indiscriminate homicide.
In the 1990s Yasser Arafat, the founder of the Palestine Liberation Organization, began providing educational benefits for convicted terrorists to help them find work after their release from jail. Eventually rehabilitation expanded so that the Palestinian Agency paid the convicts generous regular salaries. A recent article in The Jerusalem Post said, “Ironically, what started out two decades ago under the pretense of a PA program to rehabilitate Palestinians convicted of violence against Israelis has become an incentive program for committing acts of terrorism.”
Many of those who admire the Palestinians from a distance must imagine them as likeable victims, people just campaigning for the rights they believe they deserve. But the true story is much more complicated.

One minute they're telling us that the term "antisemitism" is being thrown around indiscriminately, and others claim they consider being called an antisemite as a badge of honor.

Now, the media and the politicians are very concerned about antisemitism in the US, and warn us not only about an unprecedented rise in Jew-hatred, but have also pinpointed the source as being the election of Donald Trump as president.

What's going on?

Bethany Mandel nailed it when she wrote already back in November after the election, that Only Because Of Trump Did The Media Suddenly Care About Anti-Semitism. This was before it became popular to describe an "unprecedented" "wave" of antisemitism bordering on a "pandemic".

Today, the national media seems to report every apparent antisemitic attack. Before the election that same media was far more selective. Back in October, swastikas, the words "SS" and "Heil Hitler" were spray painted at the entrance to the Temple Beth Shalom Cemetery in Westchester. If you don't recall hearing about it, that is because while it was reported in the local media, the national media apparently missed it.

Or perhaps the outrage over antisemitism was not yet in vogue?

Jason Friedman, a security expert dealing exclusively with Jewish institutions for the Community Security Service, is not convinced that there has been “a dramatic increase in antisemitic events, rather than a big increase in the reporting of and on such events.”

Along with the undereported story in Westchester, last year there was a foiled bombing attempt at a Florida synagogue and explosives were thrown at the homes of two Lubavitch rabbis in New York. Despite the property damage and intent to cause physical harm, neither attack received much media coverage.

One of the first to write about the media's selectiveness about reporting about antisemitic attacks is Seth J. Frantzman, who points out that the more than 7,000 antisemitic incidents under Obama were mostly ignored by the media.

He notes that based on ADL data, there were an average of 84 antisemtic incidents each month during the Obama administration, as opposed to 95 incidents between January and February of 2017. Yet, while that is a 10% increase, it does not support the narrative that there has been a wave of antisemitism sweeping the US under Trump.

ADL chart of antisemitic incidents and assaults in the US 2009-2015. Screenshot: Seth Frantzman

Looking at the broader picture, it turns out that during the Obama years from 2009 to 2015, there were:

thousands of antisemitic incidents
210 physical assaults on Jews - and an increase in those assaults during Obama's last years
3,900 threats against Jews and Jewish institutions
2,900 incidents of vandalism
180 incidents of antisemitism on campus

The national media apparently missed the fact that:

In 2015 alone, every 6 days a Jewish person in America was being attacked.
Over the last 8 years, on average there were threats every day against Jews and Jewish institutions.
On average, there were incidents of vandalism every day.

Yet the media liberally tosses around the label "antisemite" at Trump, Bannon and others, while applying it as a warning of an increasing threat.

But there is more than just an issue of exaggeration and alarm. Although he agrees there is an increased threat -- bordering on a pandemic -- Malcolm Hoenlein, head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations warns:

We have to be very careful — and it’s a warning you cannot exaggerate — about using the label antisemite. It’s a very powerful accusation. If you demean it, if you make it commonplace, you remove the strength of the accusation. It has to be used carefully and only when you can substantiate it. And it should be reserved for occasions when it is really necessary.

It is a warning that neither the media, nor Trump's Democratic opponents, have taken to heart.

But the narrative has been successful. A recent survey showed a surge in the percentage of Americans who see antisemitism as a serious problem, with 70% of Amerian voters seeing it as either a "very" or "somewhat serious" problem. That is a 43% increase from the 49% who saw it as a problem just a month ago.

Yet, the problem is not merely the sudden interest of the media, and of Trump's political opponents, in antisemitism. The problem is that when the media reports on antisemitism, they are actually targeting low hanging fruit -- threats and vandalism.

Liel Leibovitz writes that while decrying attacks against Jews, in polite society, defending 'Jewishness' becomes a cover,

an idea to be celebrated while the actual people who embody it are destroyed. For proof, look no further than Linda Sarsour, one of the organizers of the massive Women’s March, protesting the inauguration of Donald Trump: Having raised tens of thousands of dollars to help rebuild a Jewish synagogue [actually, a cemetery] desecrated by anti-Semitic vandals in St. Louis, she thinks nothing of siding with Islamic Jihad operatives or embracing convicted terrorists who have murdered two young Jewish men. To our progressive betters, this is not a problem: They embrace Judaism but have no problem with those who kill Jews. Platitudes are offered, power is preserved, and the parade of folly goes on.

This is the same Linda Sarsour who describes herself on Twitter as a "racial justice and civil rights activist," except when it comes to those critical of Islam's attitude towards women --

The issue here is Sarsour's defense of the Jewishness of dead, buried Jews while at the same time embracing terrorists dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state. It is a mentality that allows for a convicted terrorist like Rasmea Odeh to be welcomed by women's groups.

But this reflects a larger problem in the women's movement itself. In a 2013 article, Gil Troy writes about women's activist Betty Frieden, who already noticed in 1975 how the feminist movement was being coopted by anti-Zionists and antisemites during the International Woman’s Year World Conference hosted by the United Nations. The passing of General Assembly Resolution 3379 later that year, labeling Zionism as a form of racism, energized Frieden and others who suddenly saw themselves not only as feminists, but also as Jews and Zionists.

Ten years later, by the time the 1985 conference convened in Nairobi:

In the middle of yet another dreary debate about Zionism and racism, a French woman began chanting: “The women of the world are watching and waiting.” Others joined in, until the PLO and the Iranian delegates finally relented. Representatives of 157 countries, many teary-eyed, many singing the conference’s unofficial theme song “We are the World, We are the Women,” unanimously adopted a final document with, Betty Friedan exulted, “every reference to Zionism gone.” The first major international movement to declare Zionism to be racism, the women’s movement now became the first to denounce that lie. Six years later, in 1991, the General Assembly repealed its infamous resolution.

It was a victory, though not a complete one, as Sarsour's position today as a leading feminist will attest. Today we can see antisemitism and anti-zionism being incorporated in movements such as Black Lives Matter and on college campuses around the country, where Jewish students face various forms of intimidation.

But on this antisemitism the liberal national media is mute.

This is more than an issue of cheapening the meaning of the term by attempting to pin it on the Trump administration. Nor is the problem limited to the sudden focus on antisemitic threats and vandalism only now that Trump has taken office. Just as the UN has been coopted to target Israel, movements dedicated to human rights have been similary hijacked, as well as the colleges -- and this threat still flies under the radar of the media.

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.

UN gives material support to Hezbollah, sort of

Last month Lebanese president Michel Aoun effectively said that the Lebanese Armed Forces and Hezbollah are working together, stating that if there was a war with Israel the LAF would fight side-by-side with Hezbollah.

How is UNIFIL responding to this?

It's continuing to regard the LAF as a partner to get rid of the Hezbollah army (as UNSC 1701 insists) instead of an ally of the terror group.

In February:

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) today donated a number of UN-owned vehicles and other assets worth US$ 658,000 to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the LAF Intelligence at a ceremony held at the UN Mission’s headquarters in south Lebanon.

In March:

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) today donated a number of UN assets, including vehicles and information technology equipment, to the General Directorate of the General Security of Lebanon.
The donation is in line with the existing cooperation between UNIFIL and the Lebanese Government’s military and other security institutions, as mandated by the UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which forms the core of UNIFIL’s mandate.

By helping the LAF, the UN is also helping Hezbollah.

And yes, it refers to its mandate to justify it, the same mandate that says that UNIFIL must not allow Hezbollah weapons into southern Lebanon, as Hezbollah smuggles them in by the thousands.

But UNIFIL did remove an Israeli surveillance device, so it is directly helping both the LAF and Hezbollah.

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.

Donald Trump: Good for the Jews? EoZ symposium in Jerusalem TONIGHT

I will be hosting and moderating this symposium/debate in Jerusalem tonight at 7:30 PM.

A roundtable blogger discussion and debate

Moderated by Elder of Ziyon

Brian of London: Explaining left wing US Jews to Trump voters

Varda Meyers Epstein: The Most Pro-Israel President Ever (or is he?)

Gidon Shaviv: From Pallywood to Fake News - a tale of caution

Adam Levick: Why Zionists should reject the Alt-Right

Suggested donation ₪40

TUESDAY, MARCH 14 7:30 PM

PICO JERUSALEM

Poale Tzedek 2, 4th floor

(corrner of Pierre Koening)

Talpiot, Jerusalem

It should be fun! Trump is possibly the most divisive issue in the unapologetically Zionist world and there is a lot of stuff to talk about.

If you are in Israel, come on out and see us!

You can register on Facebook here, or just let me know in the comments you plan to come.

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.

Is it even possible to be a pro-Palestinian feminist?

This article in The Nation is being reported all over:

Her arguments are really nutty, but Sarsour knows how to get publicity.

So let's use her own methodology to ask whether it is possible for Linda Sarsour, or anyone else, to be a feminist while supporting Palestinian Arabs.

According to the UN, there are no specific laws or provisions in the Palestinian Authority or under Hamas rule that protect women against domestic violence and sexual violence.

If women are not able to provide/show evidence of “force”, “threats” and/or “deception” to support rape claims, they risk being criminalized for “adultery.”

The Palestinian Authority has adopted the Jordanian 1960 "rape marriage" law that says that a rapist will not be prosecuted if he marries his victim. These laws often result in rape victims being coerced by family or courts to marry their rapists.

While rape is illegal, the woman is often the one who must defend herself since the rape laws only apply “provided that such a woman is not a prostitute and is not known for her immoral character.”

Murderers who claim to have murdered women in order to ‘maintain family honor’ can be exempted from judicial sanction.

Marital rape is not against the law.

This study showed that Palestinian women only went public about being abused sexually only where the abuse was extremely traumatic, publicly apparent, and the victim absolved of blame. 10% of the women who went public were murdered. Usually the family would respond with measures like hymen reconstruction, marriage to the rapist, and abortion to “nullify” sexual abuse.

Women are not allowed to marry without permission from their guardian, Men may marry up to four wives.

A Palestinian Arab man can divorce his wife for any reason, but Palestinian women can request divorce only under certain circumstances. When a divorce is initiated by the woman it means that she must give up any financial rights and must return her dowry.

Sexual abuse of women and children are rampant but swept under the rug. 37% of married Palestinian women were exposed to some form of violence by their husbands in the previous year alone, nearly 12% exposed to sexual violence in the previous year. 65% of those who were exposed to violence stayed quiet about it because of cultural mores.

20% of Palestinian women are married before they are 18, almost always to older men, which is a human rights violation. Because of child marriages, 10% of all Palestinian women between 15-19 give birth in any year.

The highest rates of violence against women are found where the families tend to be more religious, in Gaza and Hebron.

The Palestinian Basic Law, by saying that ‘the principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a principal source of legislation’, can be interpreted in a manner which undermines the rights of women according to a UN study.

I'm not even going into Shari'a law here, which is far worse than Palestinian law for women. (Linda Sarsour has publicly defended Shari'a law, which calls into question her own qualifications to be called a feminist.)

Liberal "Pro-Palestinian" activists rarely if ever mention any of the issues listed here. The media is also complicit in its silence on these topics. Yet Palestinians know all about them, and it is likely that Sarsour is quite aware of them and chooses to remain silent, because that would blunt her anti-Israel message.

Her hate for Israel is more important to her than the rights of Palestinian women.

Sarsour says "You either stand up for the rights of all women, including Palestinians, or none. There’s just no way around it." Which means that Sarsour is not a feminist by her own definition because she does not stand up for the rights of Palestinian women who are suffering so badly under a patriarchal, Islamic-based system of laws and customs. In fact, her anti-Israel stance is her way to divert attention from the very real discrimination and abuse that Palestinian women suffer.

Sarsour, with her silence, is actually enabling the daily abuse of Palestinian women from the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and the misogynist Palestinian society that she idealizes for the cameras.

Linda Sarsour, and all so-called "feminists" who use their platform as a means to bash Israel, are in fact anti-feminist and tacitly support discrimination against and abuse of Palestinian women that happen every day.

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.

03/13 Links Pt2: The Dirty Little Secret of Palestinian Journalism; Intel buying Mobileye for $15 billion

From Ian:

The Dirty Little Secret of Palestinian Journalism - with Agence France-Presse Collusion

Nasser Abu Baker, Chairman of the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS), who also works as a correspondent for Agence France-Press (AFP), also lashed out at Al-Quds for publishing the Israeli advertisement. "We are determined to combat normalization and those who promote it," he vowed.
Abu Baker, who recently ran in the election for the Fatah Revolutionary Council, is the architect of the PJS campaign to boycott Israeli journalists and media outlets. His political activism constitutes a flagrant violation of the regulations and principles of AFP, and a conflict of interest. However, this does not seem to bother his employers at the French news agency, who apparently do not see a problem with one of their employees running in the election for Fatah's Revolutionary Council.
Abu Baker and his colleagues have one mission: to "combat normalization" with Israel. For them, this task far exceeds in importance exposing financial corruption in the Palestinian Authority (PA) or reporting about assaults on freedom of expression. It is also evidently more important than protesting the arbitrary arrest and torture of their colleagues at the hands of the PA and Hamas.
One can only imagine the response of the Western mainstream media if the chairman of the Israeli Journalists Union or the Government Press Office called for a boycott of Palestinian journalists.

Arab-Israeli teen rounds on ‘hypocritical’ BDS campaign in UK address

An prominent Israeli Arab teenager has rounded on the “hypocritical” campaign to boycott Israel as he outlined his journey to becoming a high-profile supporter of the Jewish state during an address at University College London.
Mohammed Zoabi, who is preparing for his IDF service, said he was determined to ensure there was dialogue after another talk by an Israeli speaker at the campus was shut down last year.
The 19-year-old from Nazarath Illit previously had to flee Israel after receiving death threats over videos he posted online calling for the return of three kidnapped Israeli teenagers.
He said: “I’m sick of conflict, I’m sick of hatred, I’m sick of fearing for my life. I’m sick of so many things, but I think when you’re tired of something and not optimistic about the future, you don’t give up.”
At the talk, organised by UCL Friends of Israel and StandWithUS, he recalled the experiences that led him to his current views, starting with the rocket attacks during the 2006 conflict with Lebanon.
“I remember hearing a siren and hearing my mum yelling, grabbing me to the bomb shelter. She was screaming there was a rocket coming at us”, he says.
Their Christian neighbours were yelling for their children and upstairs a Jewish neighbour was calling to their kids in Hebrew. He recalls being struck by the way violence didn’t discriminate, how in that moment all fled the same threat.

Vic Rosenthal: The transformative power of the Palestinian narrative

The hundred-year war between the Jewish people and the Arabs that hate them will not be over any time soon.
There are a million stories that prove it. This is just one.
Most Israelis remember the heartbreaking tragedy that took place twenty years ago tomorrow, at the Island of Peace at Naharayim on the Israel-Jordan border. This lovely spot was owned by Jews before the War of Independence, and in 1921 an electric power plant was built there by Pinchas Rutenberg, “the man who brought electricity to Palestine.”
The area was cultivated by Israeli farmers. In 1969 the IDF blew up Rutenberg’s villa, which was used as a staging point for terrorist attacks into Israel. But in 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a peace treaty. The Jordanians got the island, but agreed to lease the land back to Israel so that the farmers could continue to use it. It is a beautiful place, and Israelis often visited it, including school groups. It was used as an example of what peace would be like.
A group of schoolgirl from Beit Shemesh was there on March 13, 1997. Jordanian Corporal Ahmed Daqamseh was insulted by their behavior, saying that they were making noise while he was praying. A driver, he took an M16 from another soldier and opened fire at them, killing seven 13- and 14-year old girls and injuring 6 others. Had the rifle not jammed, these numbers would have been higher.

Of course Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah praises today's terrorist as a "martyr"

This morning a Palestinian Arab stabbed two Israeli policemen multiple times. They killed him.

Naturally, Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah is extolling him as a "martyr" and making sure that his act is viewed as a religious obligation.

This is all to let the next terrorist know exactly how his acts will be honored.

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.

By Petra Marquardt-Bigman

Ali Abunimah and his Electronic Intifada colleague Asa Winstanley marked last week’s International Women’s Day by denouncing a Reuters report that described “Israel’s women combat soldiers” as being “on [the] frontline of battle for equality.” As far as the Electronic Intifada crew was concerned, this was a “Pathetic Reuters propaganda piece for Israel’s occupying killers” because these Israeli women should be condemned as having joined a “battle for equal rights to murder Palestinian babies.” Judging from the 90 re-tweets and 66 “hearts” the tweet garnered, many of their fans appreciated this view.

Since accusing Jews of murdering babies has been a favorite of Jew-haters since the Middle Ages, I thought it was perhaps time to document that Abunimah is one of the foremost purveyors of this age-old calumny in our time. The slideshow below offers just a glimpse of the numerous examples that can be found in Abunimah’s Twitter output, reflecting his ceaseless efforts to demonize the world’s only Jewish state in pretty much the same terms that Jew-haters from the Middle Ages to the Nazi “Third Reich” found so useful.

Let me just add a few relevant points that are useful to keep in mind when you watch the slideshow. While Abunimah relentlessly accuses Israel of wantonly murdering Palestinian children, he himself glorifies terror groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad – that are only too happy when they succeed in murdering Israeli children – as noble “resistance,” or as the “Palestinian defense forces.” And Abunimah has nothing to say about the obscene glorification of killers – including the killers of Israeli children – by Palestinian and Arab society. The most recent example is from today’s news about the hero’s welcome prepared for the Jordanian soldier who was just released from prison after serving a 20 year sentence for killing seven Israeli school girls on March 13, 1997, during a school field trip to the “Island of Peace,” a joint Israeli-Jordanian tourist resort. But given Abunimah’s open admiration for groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, it seems fair to assume that as the son of a high-ranking Jordanian diplomat, he may well warmly sympathize with the glorification of this killer by his fellow-Jordanians.

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.

03/13 Links Pt1: Israel bars entry to British BDShole; The Israelization of anti-Semitism

From Ian:

Israel bars entry to British activist over BDS support

The Chairman of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, a pro-BDS organization, was denied entry into Israel Sunday night. In a joint statement the Interior Ministry’s Population and Immigration Authority and the Strategic Affairs Ministry said British national Hugh Lanning was denied entry over alleged efforts to promote boycotts against Israel.
“The organization Mr. Lanning heads is one of the leading anti-Israel delegitimization and BDS organizations in Britain, and one of the largest in Europe,” the ministries said in a statement Sunday night.
Spokeswoman for the Interior Ministry Sabine Haddad said Lanning landed in the afternoon, but the decision to deny him entry was only reached at approximately 9:00 p.m.
Hugh Lanning has served as chairman of the PSC since 2009 and worked as a head of prominent trade unions in Britain.
The statement, from the Population and Immigration Authority and the Ministry of Public Security, cited the PSC's connections to other British groups critical of Israel and the presence of some of its members on ships that aimed to break Israel’s blockade of Gaza in 2010. The statement said Lanning had personally met with top Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza in 2012. Included with the statement was a picture of Lanning standing for a group photo with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
Minister of Strategic Affairs Gilad Erdan, said Sunday night that “Whoever acts against Israel should understand that the rules of the game have changed. No sane country would allow entry to key boycott activists working to harm the country's core interests and lead to its isolation”.
Interior Minister, Aryeh Deri, said “The decision we made tonight is an unequivocal statement against boycott activists,” adding that a Knesset law passed last week allowing the Interior Ministry to refuse entry to supporters of boycotts is “another step in fully implementing this policy.”

Antisemitic global terrorist Carlos the Jackal faces trial in France

Carlos the Jackal, the 67-year-old Venezuelan terrorist who executed horrific terror attacks in the 1970s and early 1980s , will be tried in France on Monday for the deadly bombing of a Paris shop he has allegedly committed 40 years.
Carlos, whose real name is Ilyich Ramirez Sanchez, was apprehended in 1994 by French police and is serving a life sentence for the murder of two French policemen and a Lebanese revolutionary. He had also been convicted for four bombings in the cities of Paris and Marseille in the early 1980s, which resulted in the death of 11 people and injured close to 150.
Carlos, who is known to be sympathetic with the Palestinian cause not unlike multiple modern-day lone wolf terrorists who target Western countries in the name of political and religious agendas, is the former leader of a gang that attacked targets for pro-Palestinian causes.
The international terrorist has expressed his hatred of Jews and the Jewish state on numerous occasions in the past. As AFP reported in 2014, while in prison Carlos verbally attacked a female prison official, calling her an "Israeli," "Zionist" and "dirty Jew." He was later fined for his antisemitic lashout.
In a different antisemitic incident that occurred in 2009, Carlos issued a campaign in which he endorsed France's Anti-Zionist Party. He expressed his solidarity with the views of the anti-Israel party in a move that came after he had blamed Israel for framing him in the three murders he was charged with. Carlos, who joined the Front for the Liberation of Palestine back in 1970, has made multiple remarks against Israel in the past, with one of them being that Israel was "the first terrorist state in history."

The Israelization of anti-Semitism

Monika Schwarz-Friesel and Jehuda Reinharz are the authors of Inside the Antisemitic Mind: the Language of Jew-Hatred in Contemporary Germany, available through Brandeis University Press/University Press of New England.
Antisemitic attacks throughout the centuries have been grounded in demonizing Jews as the ultimate evil. This concept was found repeatedly in the messages we studied. For example, in one 2007 letter to the Israeli Embassy, the writer states, “The Israelis are and remain, no matter what a show they put on, the greatest racists, war criminals, warmongers, murderers, child-murderers, violators of international law, torturers, robbers and thieves, Nazis, liars, [and] terrorists…” Another message sent to the embassy in 2008 announces plainly, “Here’s one in the kisser for you, you filthy Jew. You’re to blame for the misery in the world!”
In addition to demonization, a second millennia-long antisemitic idea delegitimizes the very existence of Jews, paving the way first for segregation and then elimination or genocide. Just as Jews have no right to exist, it is claimed, a state so abysmally evil and destructive has no right to exist. In the minds of these antisemites, Israel has become the Collective Jew and should be destroyed. Racist delegitimization draws on stereotypes of Jews as exploiters, parasites, and homeless nomads, as in this message from 2006 sent to the Central Council of Jews in Germany: “Only dissolution of the Israeli state can counter the Jews’ solidarity and thereby also their highly aggressive tendencies as a united people that ruthlessly indulges its congenital aggression and frustration. The Jews who move away from Israel will then have the possibility of settling elsewhere. In Old Testament times, the Jews were already a nomadic people that emigrated at one point to Egypt, at another to Babylon, the latter, by the way, because of moral turpitude, after which they moved back to Israel.”
Looking at the messages as a whole, there was little variation among the different years except the spikes we noticed during times of military conflict such as the 2014 war in Gaza. This event ignited a storm of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish commentary in Europe and the United States that continues to this day—spread most widely online. It is also interesting to note that these conflagrations were defined always in one-sided terms, with Israel as the sole aggressor. This unilateral framework applies not only to Israel’s military conflict with the Palestinians and Arab States but also to the condemnation of Israel for human-rights violations that are defined as almost exclusively characteristic of Israel in comparison to the records of other countries.
When Israel, the Jewish state, is denounced as uniquely evil and immoral, antisemitism is clearly at play. Modern antisemites have turned “the Jewish problem” into “the Israel problem.” In this world where we are trying to eliminate racism, misogyny, homophobia and more, it is time to include the age-old hatred of Jews as well.

A story in Commentary about choices and behaviors within anti-Trump organizations pointed me towards this interesting (and accessible) piece of academic research that discusses experiments on the impact extreme tactics have on popular support for political causes and organizations.

The paper looks at what “counter-normative, disruptive, or harmful” political tactics do for two key goals of any social movement: (1) raising the profile of a movement and its causes and (2) gaining support from the wider public (which can take the form of increased membership, donations, or general friendliness towards the movement’s goals).

In theory, profile-raising and support-building should go hand-in-hand since the public needs to know about a group and understand its mission and purpose before they can support it. But in our media-saturated age, it often requires extreme tactics to gain attention – especially when competing with other causes, or with other individuals and organizations claiming to represent your issue.

This is where extreme tactics such as “inflammatory rhetoric, blocking traffic, and damaging property” come into play since such rhetoric and actions are likely to get you on the nightly news (as well as more web site hits and social media likes) than quietly cultivating the public through rational discourse. But, as it turns out, even those friendly to causes such as animal rights, Black Lives Matter or the anti-Trump movement (the subjects of the study linked above) become less likely to support those causes if their proponents turn to such extreme tactics.

In the meaty discussion section of their piece (starting at page 17 if you want to skip the description of their experiments), the authors of the study try to answer the question of why social movements turn to such tactics, given that they seem to be empirically counterproductive. One explanation they suggest is that participants don’t understand or appreciate the negative impact of extreme tactics, confusing increased attention with increased support.

The authors also qualify their findings by pointing out that some activists might have goals outside of winning popular support, towards which extreme tactics might make sense, priorities such as “winning funding, impacting powerful elites, psychologically empowering disadvantaged individuals, fostering commitment in existing supporters, and cathartic expression.”

To this list I would add another item drawn from experience dealing with the decades-long extremism of the BDS “movement:” fantasy-politics in which the public does not even exist to protestors, except as props in a drama taking place within the protestor’s own individual and collective heads.

Scientific evidence that the BDSer’s choice of tactics is likely to limit their effectiveness is a useful thing to know. But such insights can also guide our choices in fighting against BDS and other forms of anti-Israel propaganda, highlighting the importance of tactics and language that will make those we want to persuade feel not just good about us but good about themselves for supporting our cause.

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.

How to prove that BDS is antisemitic

The Jerusalem hotel I am staying in is in the neighborhood of French Hill, which is considered an "illegal settlement" by B'Tselem and most of the world.

Before 1967, French Hill was a Jordanian military outpost that had few if any residents. Israel established the neighborhood after 1967, partially in order to join Mount Scopus, which had been isolated in 1948, with the rest of Israel.

It turns out that one of the very best falafel places in Jerusalem is French Hill Falafel.

Unfortunately, I cannot taste how good its falafel is; it is owned by an Arab and isn't kosher.

As much as 16% of the residents of French Hill are Israeli Arabs. Which means they are "settlers."

People who support BDS - and the UN - say that any business that operates in "occupied territory" is profiting from the "occupation" and must be shunned. Such a list is being prepared by the UN and is supposed to be published later this year in accordance with previous resolutions.

Will French Hill Falafel be on that list?

It is operating inside an "illegal settlement." It is owned (almost certainly) by an Israeli Arab. It only exists because the neighborhood exists; its customers are by and large Israelis, both Arab and Jew.

By any definition, French Hill Falafel is profiting from the "occupation."

If it was owned by a Jew, then of course it would be on the boycott list.

But it is owned by an Arab.

Up the hill from the falafel joint is the excellent Israeli burger chain Burgers Bar.

So the acid test for BDS is to ask them: Would you boycott French Hill Falafel?

Then ask: Would you boycott French Hill Burgers Bar?

Obviously the BDSers don't boycott Arab-owned businesses anywhere, even those owned by Israeli Arabs. They only boycott Jewish-owned businesses and multinational businesses who seem to benefit Jews.

Which answers the question.

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.