Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Dershowitz on Obama and Iran's bomb

Alan Dershowitz, a huge supporter of Obama in the 2008 elections, challenges the president in a strong Wall Street Journal piece:

Most people today are not aware that British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain helped restore Great Britain's financial stability during the Great Depression and also passed legislation to extend unemployment benefits, pay pensions to retired workers and otherwise help those hit hard by the slumping economy. But history does remember his failure to confront Hitler. That is Chamberlain's enduring legacy.
So too will Iran's construction of nuclear weapons, if it manages to do so in the next few years, become President Barack Obama's enduring legacy. Regardless of his passage of health-care reform and regardless of whether he restores jobs and helps the economy recover, Mr. Obama will be remembered for allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. History will not treat kindly any leader who allows so much power to be accumulated by the world's first suicide nation—a nation whose leaders have not only expressed but, during the Iran-Iraq war, demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice millions of their own people to an apocalyptic mission of destruction.

If Iran were to become a nuclear power, there would be plenty of blame to go around. A National Intelligence Report, issued on President George W. Bush's watch, distorted the truth by suggestion that Iran had ended its quest for nuclear weapons. It also withheld the fact that U.S. intelligence had discovered a nuclear facility near Qum, Iran, that could be used only for the production of nuclear weapons. Chamberlain, too, was not entirely to blame for Hitler's initial triumphs. He became prime minister after his predecessors allowed Germany to rearm. Nevertheless, it is Chamberlain who has come to symbolize the failure to prevent Hitler's ascendancy. So too will Mr. Obama come to symbolize the failure of the West if Iran acquires nuclear weapons on his watch.

(The only way to read WSJ articles in full without a subscription is to do a Google search on something like "Dershowitz," finding the article and then clicking the link.)

Crisis at "Islam Online"

Islam Online, one of the most influential Islamic publications that was under the control of terror-supporting sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, is suffering from a crisis.

On March 15, when the workers showed up to work, all hell broke loose as it became apparent that a take over was in process. According to Atef Abdel-Ghany, who runs the website’s development committee, said the new board informed the employees that come March 31, “more than 250 of the journalists will be let go.” Islam Online currently employs more than 350 people.

Since then, a new board has taken over the rabidly anti-Israel publication, employees are scrambling, and the government of Qatar has stepped in - and removed Qaradawi. Stories are contradictory but it sounds like the new board is already deleting articles from its database and trying to move it into a "less moderate" direction - and it was hardly moderate to begin with.

The publication itself has publicized fatwas encouraging suicide bombings, and in Arabic it is even worse.

Hamas "interior minister": Executions about to resume

The Hamas "interior minister," Fathi Hammad, said in an interview that Hamas plans to start executing people who had been sentenced to death, no matter how much human rights organizations object.

Most Hamas death sentences are for "collaboration."

Hammad also claimed, improbably, that the recent series of bombings against Hamas police and other targets in Gaza were done by "teenagers," and that some of them were simply personal vendettas.

Palestine Today adds that he denied that Hamas arrested anyone who tried to launch rockets at Israel, saying that Hamas prisons are open to inspection and no militants would be found there. Instead, he said that Hamas just confiscates the weapons of those who try to launch rockets.

Yemeni clerics support child marriages

From Arab News:

Some of Yemen’s most influential Islamic leaders, including one the US says mentored Osama Bin Laden, have declared supporters of a ban on child brides to be apostates.
The religious decree, issued Sunday, deeply imperils efforts to salvage legislation that would make it illegal for those under the age of 17 to marry.
The practice is widespread in Yemen and has been particularly hard to discourage in part because of the country’s gripping poverty — bride-prices in the hundreds of dollars are especially difficult for poor families to pass up.
More than a quarter of Yemen’s women marry before age 15, according to a report last year by the Social Affairs Ministry. Tribal custom also plays a role, including the belief that a young bride can be shaped into an obedient wife, bear more children and be kept away from temptation.
A February 2009 law set the minimum age for marriage at 17, but it was repealed and sent back to parliament’s constitutional committee for review after some lawmakers called it un-Islamic. The committee is expected to make a final decision on the legislation next month.
Some of the clerics who signed Sunday’s decree sit on the committee.
The group behind the declaration also includes Yemen’s most influential cleric, Sheikh Abdul-Majid Al-Zindani, whom the United States has branded a spiritual mentor of Bin Laden. Al-Zindani denies being a member of Al-Qaeda.
The religious leaders organized a protest against the legislation on Sunday by a group of women. The women carried signs that read “Yes to the Islamic rights of Women.”
“I was married at 15 and have many children now,” said one of the women, Umm Abdul-Rahman. “And I will marry my daughter at the same age if I decide she is ready for it.”
The issue of Yemen’s child brides vaulted into the headlines three years ago when an 8-year-old girl boldly went by herself to a courtroom and demanded a judge dissolve her marriage to a man in his 30s. She eventually won a divorce, and legislators began looking at ways to curb the practice.
In September, a 12-year-old Yemeni child-bride died after struggling for three days in labor to give birth, a local human rights organization said.
A rights group pushing for a ban planned a protest for Tuesday.
“The government has two options: To give girls in Yemen a chance at life or to condemn them to a death sentence,” said Amal Basha, chairwoman of the group, Sisters Arab Forum in Yemen.
Yemen once set 15 as the minimum age for marriage, but parliament annulled that law in the 1990s, saying parents should decide when a daughter marries.

Bahrain minister laundering money for Iran?

The Arabic media is abuzz over rumors that a high-ranking Bahraini minister was fired because he was laundering money for Iran's Revolutionary Guards.

The LA Times blog Babylon and Beyond is more skeptical, but it is a story worth following.

J-Street's polls are designed to elicit the answers they want

J-Street is trumpeting a poll that, they say, shows that American Jews agree with their politics. A short examination of their methodology shows that the poll itself was designed to generate the answers that the J-Streeters are looking for.

Since they do not give the exact methodology, it is hard to go into detail on the bias inherent in the poll, but one question they show in full:

Professional pollsters know that the order of the choices can influence results. The wording here shows that they always presented their own preference first for this question, and the "other" side last.

Since the poll shows pretty convincingly that most American Jews do not follow Israel closely, it means that the interviewees are especially prone to manipulation since they do not have strong views on the topic.

In this case, J-Street first presents a statement that sounds reasonable to an little-informed subject:

Some Jewish organizations in the United States say that America has a special relationship with Israel and we must support our democratic ally, but this latest incident that took place during Vice President Biden's visit to Israel was an insult to America and damages our interests in a region where we are fighting two wars. The relationship between the United States and Israel must be a two-way street that allows an honest public discussion, and even criticism, when our two countries disagree.

A person without strong opinions will hear that statement and will generally agree as it sounds reasonable. The question itself is a form of education for the person polled.

Then, J-Street talks about "others," meaning people who do not agree with the already established reasonable statement:

Other Jewish organizations in the United States say that Israel is America's closest ally in the Middle East, and the Obama Administration's recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. The Obama Administration should work closely with Israel in a manner befitting strategic allies, make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel, and take immediate steps to defuse tension with the Jewish state.

Now that the subject already has committed himself to the first statement, he will be reticent to change his mind so quickly when hearing the second, "other" statement.

I can guarantee you that if the two questions were reversed, switching "some" with "others," the results would be reversed as well.

It is also telling that J-Street doesn't bother finding out what Jews who are care the most about Israel feel. They rely on the ignorant, apathetic Jewish majority for their support. Which means that they rely on Jews they can manipulate.

Hi Lady Liberty, nice to see you again

In my career, I have been fortunate enough to have worked in two locations where I had a clear view of the Statue of Liberty, one of them from my desk.

For the last couple of years, though, I did not have that privilege.

Today, I happen to be working in an office from which I can see Lady Liberty again. It is a cloudy day and she is not too close, but I didn't realize how much I missed her until I saw her again. My camera phone doesn't do her justice.

Nice to be back, even if only for a day.

Palestinian Arab researcher: BBC biased - towards Israel

This is too funny:

A researcher at Birzeit University submitted findings Saturday outlining what she found to be un-objective coverage around "the question of Palestine" on BBC Arabic's broadcast news.

The study, focusing on the daily news program World News This Evening's broadcasts between 8 November and 8 December 2008, found external political motivations swayed coverage of Palestine only weeks before Israel launched its Operation Cast Lead on 26 December 2008.

Sound like cherry-picking?

Masters student Buthayna Hamdan, who pioneered the study, explained that she measured the objectivity of the reports by BBC's own standards, and basic precepts of news coverage.

Benchmarks for measurement included: Omission of facts, clear differentiation of facts and opinions, and avoiding prioritization of accounts.

The research found that the news coverage employed Israeli terminology, describing the military as "defense forces" when its actions were offensive, labeling locations with Israeli place names like the illegal settlement Har Homa, built on appropriated land known as Jabal Abu Ghnaim.

Because the settlement and the expropriation of land is illegal under international law, the study argued, the area where the settlement is located should retain its Arabic name.

So, according to this unbiased Palestinian Arab researcher, the BBC should call the Israel Defense Forces the "Israel Offense Forces" because, in her weird world, that wouldn't be biased. And a place that houses thousands of people who call it one name should be given another name by the BBC - when it was empty space beforehand.

I guess that Hamdan would agree that the Al Aqsa courtyard should be called the "Har HaBayit" as that was its name before it was illegally expropriated.

It also noted the use of the term "military arsenal" to describe home made projectiles fired toward Israel by militant factions in Gaza.

And this is biased, how, exactly? Especially since most of the rockets were manufactured in small metal workshops, not in homes - the term "home-made" would be incorrect as well as biased. Also, mortars aren't home-made, and mortars make up more than half the attacks.

During the study period, the research found 25 news events in Palestine, including the death, injury and detention of Palestinians including children, that went unreported by the news program. The same period saw the full coverage of every home made projectile launched from Gaza into Israeli territory, a total of 14.

Wow - the BBC covered every one of the 14 projectiles shot at Israel, according to this researcher, a master's degree candidate for a prestigious university. Only one problem - there were at least 92 Qassams shot at Israel in that time period, not to mention well over 100 mortars. The BBC covered less than 8% of them, according to this report.

So which direction is the bias now?

And what accounts for these non-existent cases of bias? Take a wild guess:

Following the analysis, and citing works by British journalist Robert Fisk, the report suggested that BBC Arabic's news coverage was influenced by an Israeli lobby, and a mass supply of Israeli government-produced news and information.

See? The famous British Israel Lobby influences BBC's Arabic coverage.

Here is a description of one of the BBC reports during that time period that was supposedly so biased towards Israel:

It's a rare week that passes without the BBC providing a welcome bully pulpit for those who like to bash Israel. And so it was this morning that Oxfam was afforded the opportunity to attack those bad Jews for having the temerity to stop the free movement of goods (and weapons!) in and out of that land running with milk and honey which is Gaza. When it was mildly suggested to the Oxfam spokesman by the BBC interviewer that "militants" (Love that word, so much nicer than depraved Hamas terrorists) were firing off rockets into Israel (even one was launched during the interview!) the Oxfam response was to dismiss that aspect of things entirely and focus instead on the "humanitarian" plight of those who live in the moral sewer of Gaza. The BBC interviewer did not pursue this line of enquiry as it was obvious where his sympathies lay. The only opinion expressed was the venomous anti-Israel take from Oxfam - the utterly discredited Hamas-apologists.

Yeah, that's real pro-Israel bias right there.

Hamas plans to name three areas after female "martyrs" - including Corrie

Hamas, seeing how much the naming of Dala Mughrabi Square near Ramallah upset Israelis, has announced that it will name three public areas after famous female martyrs in Gaza City.

The first will be named after Dalal Mughrabi as well.

The second will be named after Reem Riyashi, who exploded herself in 2004 at the entrance to the Erez Industrial Zone by claiming to be crippled and insisting on a body search, killing four. Hamas claimed credit for the attack.

And the third will be named after Rachel Corrie, whose parents must be enormously proud that their daughter is in such esteemed company.

"Arab summit will not help Palestinians at all"

Palestine Today reports that Hani al-Masri, a political analyst, says that he expects zero help for Palestinian Arabs at the Arab summit to be held later this week in Libya.

al-Masri said that from the experience of previous such summits, the Arab nations will talk a good game and, in the end, do nothing.

He was especially harsh with Egypt, saying that they were more interested in maintaining their peace agreement with Israel than in helping Palestinian Arabs.

Since "al-Masri" means "the Egyptian," perhaps he is upset at his ancestors who moved to Palestine and turned him into a stateless person who is not welcome back to his homeland.

Arabs reject Israeli shipments of clothes and shoes to Gaza!

More news from that awful "siege" of Gaza:

Israel has trucks full of clothing and shoes ready to be shipped to Gaza, but the Gaza economic minister rejected the shipments altogether. He said that they were not adequate and he demanded much more.

Apparently, it is too difficult to coordinate the sales of such items among the many shopkeepers who want to sell them, so the government would rather not have that headache.

The clothing was donated by Egypt and the PA. Palestine Today says that they are ready to send five truckfuls a day, but the Hamas government is demanding 30-50 trucks a day.

A very brave Saudi woman

From AP:

It was a startling voice of protest at a startling venue. Covered head-to-toe in black, a Saudi woman lashed out at hard-line Muslim clerics' harsh religious edicts in verse on live TV at a popular Arabic version of "American Idol."

Well, not quite "American Idol": Contestants compete not in singing but in traditional Arabic poetry. Over the past episodes, poets sitting on an elaborate stage before a live audience have recited odes to the beauty of Bedouin life and the glories of their rulers or mourning the gap between rich and poor.

Then last week, Hissa Hilal, only her eyes visible through her black veil, delivered a blistering poem against Muslim preachers "who sit in the position of power" but are "frightening" people with their fatwas, or religious edicts, and "preying like a wolf" on those seeking peace.

Her poem got loud cheers from the audience and won her a place in the competition's finals, to be aired on Wednesday.

It also brought her death threats, posted on several Islamic militant Web sites.

Hilal shrugs off the controversy.

"My poetry has always been provocative," she told The Associated Press in an interview. "It's a way to express myself and give voice to Arab women, silenced by those who have hijacked our culture and our religion."

Her poem was seen as a response to Sheik Abdul-Rahman al-Barrak, a prominent cleric in Saudi Arabia who recently issued a fatwa saying those who call for the mingling of men and women should be considered infidels, punishable by death.

But more broadly, it was seen as addressing any of many hard-line clerics in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region who hold a wide influence through television programs, university positions or Web sites.

"Killing a human being is so easy for them, it is always an option," she told the AP.

Poetry holds a prominent place in Arab culture, and some poets in the Middle East have a fan base akin to those of rock stars.

"I have seen evil in the eyes of fatwas, at a time when the permitted is being twisted into the forbidden," she said in the poem. She called such edicts "a monster that emerged from its hiding place" whenever "the veil is lifted from the face of truth."

She described hard-line clerics as "vicious in voice, barbaric, angry and blind, wearing death as a robe cinched with a belt," in an apparent reference to suicide bombers' explosives belts.

The three judges gave her the highest marks for her performance, praising her for addressing a controversial topic. That, plus voting from the 2,000 people in the audience and text messages from viewers, put her through to the final round.

New Al Azhar head refuses to visit "Islam's third holiest site"

The new head of Al Azhar University, Sheikh Ahmed Al-Tayeb, has stated that he refuses to visit Jerusalem while it is under "occupation" and he called on Muslims not to visit Jerusalem.

It is a little funny, because Muslims had no problem visiting Jerusalem when it was under British occupation. Apparently, as holy as Jerusalem is purported to be, hate for Israel trumps the holiness of Islam's supposedly third holiest site. I wonder if they would refuse to visit Mecca and Medina should they ever be occupied?

Religious Jews jump through hoops to visit Jewish shrines under Arab control, in Shechem as well as in Egypt and Jordan. The idea that politics is more important than religion is usually not something that religious figures espouse.

al-Tayeb also said he would refuse to meet with any Zionist officials, and would not participate in any conferences where Zionist officials are invited.

The horrors of "occupation" (guest post)

From Zvi:

To see how the WB and Gaza grew under Egypt/Jordan and under Israel, and to see how catastrophic was Arafat's decision to launch his intifadah, go to http://www.gapminder.org/world

Check the box for West Bank & Gaza

You can see that 1967 was an inflection point in WB/Gaza prosperity. The data points become more widely spaced, as both GDP/capita and lifespan increased more rapidly than prior to 1967.

Let's look at lifespan first.

In 1966, the average Palestinian lived to the ripe old age of 51, 2 years ahead of the average Egyptian. 10 years later, the average Palestinian lifespan was 60 years, vs. 53 for Egyptians. By 1993 (Oslo), the Palestinian average was 70 (on par with eastern Europe, and having surpassed countries like Turkey, Iran and Brazil that had been ahead in 1966). At this level, rates of increases typically decrease.

The Palestinian average lifespan continued to rise monotonically and was 73 in 2007. In fact, this figure has increased monotonically - never dropping - throughout the Israeli occupation of the WB and Gaza.

Now let's look at GDP per capita.

As with lifespan, GDP per capita shows distinct improvement (wider spacing) after 1967, [Not in the GDP-only chart here - EoZ] and while the economies of Jordan and Egypt crash and incomes fall, the economy of the WB and Gaza forges ahead. In 1966, per capita income in Jordan was $2812; that of Egypt was $1879 and that of WB/G was $2500. Syria, Morocco and other non-oil Arab countries were peers. By 1976, after 10 years under Israeli control, WB/Gaza per capita income was $3565, vs. $2775 for Jordan and $2532 for Egypt. Jordan caught up for a while, but its performance (unlike that of the WB/Gaza under Israel) was extremely erratic, and it crashed again before 1993. By 1993, the WB/G figure was $6219, vs. $3524 for Jordan and $3774 for Egypt. The Oslo accords increased the growth rate significantly, so by 1999, the WB figure was $7865, vs. $4483 for Egypt and $3626 for Jordan. It had passed Turkey and Russia, left Syria and Tunisia convincingly behind and was closing in on Iran, Libya and Brazil. Most of its peers at this point were eastern European and Latin American emerging markets.

At this point, Arafat, observing the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, decided that a peace through negotiation wasn't sexy enough. He had to be a war hero and drive the Israelis out.

Boy, that sure worked out well.

When alumni of the intifadah say they don't want to see a return of the bad old days, they mean that they don't want to go back to hiding in basements. When the businessmen of the West Bank say that they don't want a return of the bad old days, they're thinking of the economic free-fall that occurred when due to Hamas suicide bombings, Israel stopped allowing Palestinian workers into the country, and criminal/terror gangs - often thinly disguised as "resistance" groups - took over the streets of WB cities and used them as terrorist staging areas. Per capita income crashed to $3124 by 2007 (but as lifespan continued to increase, there was no starvation).

The tool's data ends in 2007.

In 2007, the PA appointed Salaam Fayyad and started to restore law and order, although the process took time. As this progress became evident, Israel began to reduce measures, such as roadblocks, that had been necessitated by the PA's prior lack of interest in preventing terror attacks. Businessmen began to feel confident in the WB and began to invest in their businesses. Today, the growth rate is 5.5%. If the PA's crazed, politically-motivated decision not to allow workers to work in "settlements" - including east Jerusalem - or do business with them does not cause the WB economy to crash again, and if Abbas and his cronies don't lose control of the intimidation tactics (riots) that they're currently using, there's a chance that the WB will continue to recover. But under the best of circumstances, with a peace treaty miraculously signed and honored, it will still take decades to undo the damage done by the Arafat Intifailure. Prior to the Intifailure, many Palestinians benefitted directly from proximity to Israel, as Israelis came to the WB to shop and WB Arabs came to Israel to work and sometimes to study.

Those days are, as they say, history.

Hillary: Worse than clueless?

I spent three posts talking about the cluelessness of Lady Ashton and other well-meaning but ignorant Westerners who have been led to believe Arab lies over the years.

In some ways, Hillary Clinton made a statement today which is even worse.

Israel Matzav points out that Hillary Clinton said this at the AIPAC conference:

When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones in this conflict.

In a very, very narrow sense, she is right. El Bireh, the suburb of Ramallah that named a public square after Dalal Mughrabi, has a Hamas-majority city council. (So does Nablus and many other West Bank towns.)

But the naming of the square was purely a Fatah initiative and a Fatah celebration. Mughrabi was a Fatah terrorist. The entire episode was a damning indictment of Fatah - the party whose leader happens to be so-called "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas. Hamas has nothing to do with it.

Which means that the US government is knowingly misinterpreting and downplaying the glorification of terrorism by Fatah.

The reason is presumably because the US government has already put itself on the line for a farce of a "peace" process that is utterly dependent on Fatah acting like mature, responsible human beings. For Hillary to admit the truth in front of a pro-Israel organization would open up the Obama administration to charges of hypocrisy and double-standards.

It is impossible to build real negotiations on a facade, and the idea that Fatah is any better or less terrorist that Hamas is exactly that. The US is so heavily invested in Fatah as a "peace partner" that it is willfully ignoring Fatah's own excesses and support for terror, instead pretending that Hamas is the only "bad guy."

This is not cluelessness. This is deception. And it is really, really ugly.