Comments on my Ingall post (part 2)

More good, thoughtful comments on my post about Marjorie Ingall's column in Tablet.

Joe writes a provocative comment:

I am going to be straight here and say while I agree with most of what Elder writes and I read it daily, sometimes I feel that we are in an echo chamber; from time to time we should open our eyes.

The echo chamber idea is worth a much longer treatment.

1. Perceptions are sometimes more important than reality. If we appear to be bullies, then in the world's eyes we are and they will respond in kind. And if someone like Marjorie is honest to say that's the way it appears to her, castigating her for not looking deeply enough in the books may not be the answer. Sure, her reasoning is simplistic (there are many seats on the bus, who sat where first, yadda, yadda, yadda), but it doesn't change the fact that her perception is that Israelis are bullies.

Perceptions are extremely important, but if they are false ab initio, then how do we fight them? All we have is the truth, and if Jews cannot be bothered to try to find the truth themselves, then who will? It is hypocritical for a Jew to invoke their Judaism to criticize Israel when they are not willing to even find out the other side of the story.

2. People like Marjorie might wish to investigate issues but there are as many voices to hear on both sides and they don't know whom to trust or believe. All they know is "both sides can't be right" and is often followed by a "pox on both you houses" attitude. For instance, they aren't going to read Ephraim Karsh's book and if they did, might consider it "the Israeli perspective", a one sided presentation.

That's fine, as long as they are being honest. Read Karsh, read Morris, and think critically about where they agree and where they disagree, about which of their points are factual and which are emotional. Don't be a passive container that believes everything that is written by one side (and that includes readers of this blog!) The problem with Ingall is that she isn't even aware of a counter-argument to begin with!

3. If we have to depend on American Jews giving us the benefit of the doubt because they are Jewish, then we should realize that we are not winning these hearts and minds even when the playing field is tilted in our favor.

Exactly - we are failing at getting our viewpoint out there. We all know that hasbara has been awful. But how can we reach American Jews most effectively? In schools, in camps, in youth groups, in colleges, in book clubs, with getting them involved in specifically Jewish activities, with trips to Israel, in synagogues, with singles events, with online communities, with interesting speakers directed at them. We also need to do a much better job with the media, of course, but a single Birthright trip is still the best investment in Zionist and Jewish identity for the buck. And I do not think that it it unreasonable to ask Jews to raise their children to give Zionism the benefit of the doubt. God knows that you will not find many Muslims who are raised to think as critically about their own myths as Jews are.

 4. Rather than dismissing these people, we should view it as a challenge: how do we engage these people. How do we, say a simple, effective, consistent message. Palestinians are doing this: pre-67 borders, Resolution 194, siege in Gaza. Our message is too nuanced and inconsistent like when we say "even left-wing Israelis think this way". The term hasbara - that we explain our side - is misguided. We're too smart for ourselves. The fact that liberal Americans don't understand is not their failure - it's ours.

There is a lot of wisdom here. It just needs to be concretized.

5. There are many who present everything Israel does as just and everything the Pal-arab side does is bad. This is not correct and we should not be surprised when we are dismissed as "knee-jerk Israelis". Furthermore, presenting not just facts but facts + a snarky attitude which is great when we preach to the choir but is a real turn-off for those on the fence. By not presenting facts as they are, we dilute our message and then wonder why we don't reach the Marjories out there.

There is truth to this as well, and this is part of the hasbara problem - we make too many assumptions about the audience. Too many people are news junkies who assume that everyone else is as well. I can only speak about my blog, which is really designed to preach to the choir, mostly because I want to bring facts to people's attention and let them do with it as they will.

Framing a message to a universal audience would take much more time than I have - I think I am more valuable providing ammunition than running the war (my Elder status notwithstanding.) I just wish we had better generals.

This is a real problem: we have lost the support of a lot of liberals and lately the support of a lot of Jewish liberals and middle-of-the-roaders seems to be ebbing away. This has a real cost in Israel losing US and world support. I don't know where the tipping point is but we're getting closer every day.

Which is why it is critical to shore up our base.

Read More

Comments on my Ingall post (part 1)

In response to my post about Marjorie Ingall's column in Tablet, Stan took offense at my overly broad characterization of American Jewish liberals:

I agree with your analysis of this person's point of view but to title the post. "The problem with American Jewish liberals, personified"  is offensive, and ridiculous.  This title would never characterize me, as an American Jewish Liberal. It demeans people like Alan Dershowitz and countless others who have worked tirelessly for Zionism and will proudly declare themselves American Liberals.

After a bit of thought, Upon reflection, I think that the main problem is with young Jewish liberals. The major pro-Israel American liberals seem to have all been born before 1960, certainly before 1970. The younger ones have grown up reading the media after 1967, when Israel was no longer regarded as the underdog and therefore (almost by definition) the oppressors. So, indeed, there are very pro-Israel American Jewish liberals, but they are aging - and they have not done a great job at finding replacements.

Sshender wrote:

The Tinok SheNishba analogy is interesting, although for me it conjures up purely religious context, whereby me and my fellow Israeli atheists were referred to as such online (without the slightest hint of irony) by religious crackpots who in turn can't even fathom the idea that what they've been brainwashed into from infantfood, may, just may, not be entirely likely or true.

On a broader sense, your claim that without knowing one's roots and traditions (i.e. Judaism) one is inevitably doomed to oblivion (at least nation-wise) is quite a challenge to us - who in spite of losing our faith in god (or having never entertained one at all) still identify themseleves as Jews first and foremost, and who passionately support the idea of Jewish self determination. There might be a grain of truth to it, but don't you feel that this kind of support or association is NOT being done for the RIGHT reasons? It takes little effort and thought to associate yourself with a group you belong with and support them with no reservation. This is the default position of most human being and is compatible with what we know about human nature in general. the problem is, that for the most part that identification with the group is the default gut feeling reaction with little if any objective thought given to the weight of the pros and cons of your position. To sum up, I see little virtue of supporting Zionism on the sole principle of being born and raised a Jew (whether religious or secular). I do, otoh, think that Zionism deserves my (and all civilized peoples') support for its substance, values and background. I admit that being a Jew myself makes me somewhat biased in favour of it, but I assure you that the reason for my support of Israel are strictly non-tribal, but humanistic, universalist and practical ones. One does not need a Judaistic moral compass to study history and take sides.

Now, as I see it, what's stopping other Liberal minded Jews from identifying with Zionism is largely their ignorance and the anti-Israel propaganda being fed to them from all over. Moreover, "thanks" to post-modernist notions of relativism, multiculturalism and PC in general many people who call themselves liberals have completely lost their ways and can no longer tell right from wrong. This woman embodies many of these themes. If Liberal Jews were taught about the history surrounding the conflict by scholars instead of propagandists, if the media actually took their declared journalistic principles seriously and if absolute norms of right and wrong were being adhered to, then Jewish secular Liberals would have been making the obvious choice that best suites their values and reason, which largely coincides with the tenets of mainstream Zionist thought.

To make a long story short, while it is true that secularization among Jews has divided their ranks, the cure, it seems to me is not getting back to religion, but to try and get the much needed and missing objective truth out there for the liberal Jews to see and decide for themselves whether it is compatible with their Liberal views. I think we'd be pleasantly surprised by the results. What more, instead of tribal support (which is great for brute force but holds little argumentative sway) we will get more critical and though-out supporters of Israel who can defend Israel on the world stage much better and more effectively counter the lies against it by solid facts and appeals to their liberal counterparts in a language they understand and empathize with.

My response was: I am not going to argue against any initiative that educates young liberal American Jews about the reality of Zionism, believe me! And I do understand and respect where you are coming from.

My view is that, beyond that, we have to think in terms of how to survive and thrive over centuries, not years. I don't see a secular Zionism or a secular Judaism as having a chance of doing that. Even the secularism of Ben Gurion and Abba Eban was infused with a sense of history, of culture, and of peoplehood that might make today's secular Jews uncomfortable.

For example, here was part of what Ben Gurion told the Peel commission in 1936:
More than 3300 years ago, long before the Mayflower, our people left Egypt, and every Jew in the world, wherever he is, knows what day they left. And he knows what food they ate. And we still eat that food every anniversary. And we know who our leader was. And we sit down and tell the story to our children and grandchildren in order to guarantee that it will never be forgotten. And we say our two slogans: ‘Now we may be enslaved, but next year, we’ll be a free people.’ “. . . Now we are behind the Soviet Union and their prison. Now, we’re in Germany where Hitler is destroying us. Now we’re scattered throughout the world, but next year, we’ll be in Jerusalem. There’ll come a day that we’ll come home to Zion, to the Land of Israel. That is the nature of the Jewish people.

This is not logic, it is emotional. The best way for emotions to span generations is a strong belief system that gets taught, by parents directly to children. The bias that makes you uncomfortable is a good thing, but I agree that support for Israel must be both innate and intellectual.

Raise your children to love their people first; then explain why.
---
More coming up...

Read More

This is all I need...

Right now if you enter "porn movies" into Ask.com the very top result - higher than Wikipedia! - is a posting of mine.

With great power comes great responsibility.....

Read More

More incitement over Jerusalem archaeology

Arab News reports:

Israeli occupation authorities began excavation works near Al-Aqsa Mosque on Tuesday, according to Al-Aqsa Foundation for Endowment and Heritage.

The foundation said in a press statement that the "new excavations are concentrated in the site of Birkat Al-Sultan (Al-Sultan's Pool,” adjacent to the western wall of the Jerusalem's Old City). The pool was a source of water supply to Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Old City, the foundation said.

It added that the "Israeli authorities sized control of the Islamic and historic site since the 1948 war and destroyed parts of it." According to the foundation, the Israeli authorities turned parts of the site into a national park.

The foundation warned of the risks and consequences of these excavations and tunnels on the foundations of Al-Aqsa Mosque.

It added that the new excavations are part of Israeli efforts "to find any proof of the alleged Second Temple under Al-Aqsa Mosque and to Judaize Jerusalem."

The foundation said that the Israeli authorities "failed since it started its excavations to prove Jewish presence in the holy city or that the Temple ever existed." The foundation stressed that the "new excavations in the Old City are provocations for Muslims." It urged Arab and Islamic states to take action to stop it.

The foundation puts out press releases like this, warning of Israeli attempts to "Judaize" Jerusalem and to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and Islamic history, every day.

Are the excavations an attempt to deny any Muslim ties to Jerusalem?

Well, let's quote the right-wing Arutz Sheva website on excavations last year around the Sultan's Pool:

"Naturally, one of the first things Sultan Suleiman The First hastened to do in Jerusalem (along with the construction of the city wall as we know it today) was to repair the aqueduct that was already there which supplied the large numbers of pilgrims who arrived in Jerusalem with water for drinking and purification," explained [IAA's Dr. Ron] Be'eri.

"Suleiman attached a small tower to the aqueduct, inside of which a ceramic pipe was inserted. The pipe diverted the aqueduct’s water to the Sultan’s Pool and the impressive sabil (a Muslim public fountain for drinking water), which he built for the pilgrims who crossed the Derekh Hebron bridge and is still preserved there today.”

Beeri added that the location of the aqueduct was extremely successful and efficient. "We found four phases of different aqueducts that were constructed in exactly the same spot, one, Byzantine, from the sixth-seventh centuries CE and three that are Ottoman which were built beginning in the sixteenth century CE. The last three encircle a large subterranean water reservoir that was apparently built before the Ottoman period”.

The Low-level Aqueduct is one of two ancient water conduits that originated at the springs in the Hebron Highlands and at Solomon’s Pools, and terminated in Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

Research has shown that the ancient aqueduct was meant to supply high quality spring water to the Temple Mount, to Jerusalem’s residents and to the many pilgrims that have come to the city over the course of generations, according to a statement by IAA.

“We can see that from the time of the Second Temple until the Byzantine period water flowed in an open channel that was covered with stone slabs. In later phases, beginning in the Ottoman period, water was conveyed in ceramic pipes which were installed inside the aqueduct,” Be'eri noted.

It seems that the right-wing Jews have no problem talking about, or even being excited over, excavations that reveal details about Jerusalem's Islamic and Ottoman (not to mention Byzantine) periods.

The only people who are denying history are the Muslims themselves, who keep saying even today that there is no evidence of any ancient Jewish presence in Jerusalem, an absurd lie that is believed by millions. Just like the lie that excavations at the Sultan's Pool could possibly affect the foundations of a mosque that is not even close by.

Read More

How many lies can Free Gaza fit in a paragraph?

On the Free Gaza Facebook page, someone asked them a question:

I read on a blog that every week Israel supplies more goods to Gaza than the whole flotilla will bring.

They listed this site: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/HumanitarianAid/Palestinians/Increased_humanitarian_aid_Gaza_after_IDF_operation_Jan_2009.htm

Is it true, or is it Israeli propaganda?

Greta Berlin, who cofounded Free Gaza, responded:

Israel sent in 550 trucks a WEEK into Gaza before the siege. They now send in maybe 50.

Well, today alone, Israel sent in 140 truckloads, and they have averaged over 500 trucks every week this year - showing that Greta Berlin is lying by an order of magnitude.

Her lies continue:

The Palestinians are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves and not being on the dole.

Really? So she would advocate the dismantling of UNRWA camps and the cessation of billions of dollars of international aid to prop up the PA? When in history, exactly, have Palestinian Arabs ever taken care of themselves as a people without outside help? When have their leaders ever shown the slightest ability of acting responsibly?

Her lies continue:

This is not about how many tons are shipped in. It's about occupation and starvation and slow motion genocide of 1.5 million Palestinians.

Gaza is not occupied by any reasonable meaning of the term. Occupation means that one nation's forces are on the ground controlling the day-to-day administration of mundane civil matters of another nation. A blockade does not fit the definition.

Not a single Gazan has been reported to have starved to death after years of the so-called "siege."

There are more Gazans alive today then there were yesterday, last week, or before Hamas' Operation Oil Stain began in December 2008. Using the word "genocide" to describe how Israel treats Palestinian Arabs is a grotesque lie.

Her lies continue:

Our initiative is not about how much we bring in, but what we bring in, supplies denied by Israel to the Palestinians.

Free Gaza is pushing to have people sponsor bags of cement - and Israel allowed more tons of cement into Gaza this week than the entire flotilla managed to get over the past four months. And Free Gaza's stated goal has never been about humanitarian aid but about "resistance."

That's a lot of lies in a small space. Unfortunately, the liars know that while it takes them seconds to come up with the lies, people who care about the truth must spend hours debunking them, so the liars have a distinct advantage.

Read More

The problem with American Jewish liberals, personified

Marjorie Ingall is a columnist for Tablet magazine. In her latest column she admits:

I am deeply ambivalent about Israel. Modern-day Israel, as opposed to historical Israel, is a subject I avoid with my children. Yes, of course I believe the state should exist, but the word “Zionist” makes me skittish. I shy away from conversations about Israeli politics. I feel no stirring in my heart when I see the Israeli flag. I would no sooner attend an Israel Day parade than a Justin Bieber concert. Neither Abe Foxman nor AIPAC speaks for me. I am a liberal, and I am deeply troubled by the Matzav, Israeli shorthand for tension with the Palestinians, and I do not have answers, and I do not know what to do about it, and I do not know what to tell my children.

From reading her column, it is obvious that her knowledge of Israel is minimal - and extraordinarily colored by her exposure to the liberal media. A later section of her article painfully shows her extreme naiveté, as she explains Israel to her eight-year old daughter:

I stumbled desperately through an explanation of why two peoples feel they have a legitimate claim to the same land.

“But having land is like having a seat on a bus,” Josie replied. “You can’t just push someone out of their seat, and you can’t just leave your seat and then come back to it after a long time and just expect the person who is sitting there now to give it to you.”

My panicked reaction to her words surprised me. I found myself trying to convince her that Israel did have that right. But that’s not what I believe. But I’m not sure what I believe. I want my children to love Israel, but I don’t want them to identify with bullies. I was spinning in my own head like the desperate, overwhelmed woman in the Calgon commercial: J Street, take me away!

But Josie’s bus-bully analogy resonated. Baby-boomer Jews seem wedded to a sepia-toned image of Jews as victims—in the shtetl, in the Holocaust, in Israel’s early wars. But in real life, victims can turn into bullies.

An intelligent woman, who is clearly proud of her Jewishness, finds her pre-teen daughter's childish analogy of Israel's existence to a bully on a bus to be unassailable?

Here is the exact problem. Jews whose entire knowledge of Israel is based on BBC and Reuters headlines are transmitting that ambivalence and discomfort about Zionism to the next generation - and, of course, the next generation will convert that ambivalence into antipathy.

This is a profoundly saddening article. Ingalls was prompted to write it after reading Peter Beinart's controversial piece that I responded to last week, and it proves that my analysis was pretty accurate: Ingalls, along with way too many American Jews, simply do not understand what Zionism is. They do not understand that Jews are a people/nation (Hebrew "am", עם)  and that Zionism is their movement for self-determination, a right that liberals would fight for the death for in the case of Tibetans or Kurds or whatever the current oppressed-people-of-the-week are. And, given that Ingalls wrote an earlier column where she defended her choice to send her kids to public school rather than a Jewish school - because teaching diversity to her children is apparently more important to her than teaching her own heritage - it appears that Ingall's own attachment to Judaism does not extend much beyond coming up with props for seders.

She is like a "tinok shenishba", a term that I have no doubt that she has never heard of. It is no wonder that she is ambivalent about Israel - she doesn't have the basic knowledge about Israeli history, about Zionism, and about Judaism itself to mount a credible defense of Israel to anyone.

And she is raising a new generation of uninformed Jews.

Ingalls is very clear that she wants her children to learn all points of view. With all due respect for a person who makes a living on writing columns on Jewish parenting, this is good in theory and absolutely idiotic in practice. Children should be raised with a strong sense of identity, a sense of belonging to a people much bigger than themselves. They should be raised to have strong beliefs and have the tools to defend them. Children should  have joy and pride in their people, their neighborhood, their town, their nation, and their heritage. There is nothing wrong with bringing up children to have a strong set of values that reflects their heritage, and to teach them as it becomes appropriate how to defend those values. I am not saying to raise kids to be ignorant of other viewpoints, but it is far preferable for Jews to raise children to identify with their own people and history rather than to give Judaism and/or Zionism an equal timeslot with Buddhists, Mayans, Palestinian Arabs and Canadians. It is not evil nor is it bigoted to teach children that their own people come first. As they grow they have plenty of time to learn about everyone else and to formulate their own opinions, but a parent's job is not teach the kids how to surf the Internet and then let them learn everything themselves. It is to guide their learning to reflect the mores of the parents, their ancestors, their nation and their people. To ignore one's heritage is a disservice to the children.

Even worse - actually, almost unforgivable -  is to dismiss one's own people, who need to make agonizing life and death decisions every day, as mere bullies.

Marjorie, you have taken an important step in acknowledging your ambivalence. The question is, do you have the bravery to actually research the possibilities that Israel and Zionism are right? Are you going to rely on J-Street to teach you about Israel or are you going to actually take your children to Israel this summer? (Are you even aware that even liberal Israelis regard J-Street's politics as reprehensible?)  Are you going to trust a summer camp to teach your children a couple of Israeli songs and dances or are you going to spend the time to learn about your people's struggles first-hand - so you can be the one to teach them?

Believe it or not, Marjorie, there are many knowledgeable Jews who are proud Zionists and who can explain Israel better than NPR. The question is whether you will spend the time necessary to learn the truth about Israel, or if you will continue to lazily call Zionist Jews "bullies."

I can guarantee one thing, though: if you spend the time to learn the truth about Zionism, and if you learn how to be proud of your own people, your children - and grandchildren - will be the biggest beneficiaries.

Read More

The Zionist crimes of Sarah Jessica Parker

From Time Out Dubai:

It's not a massive surprise, but now it has been confirmed, Sex and the City 2 will not be shown in UAE cinemas.

A senior spokesman for the National Media Council (NMC), responsible for judging films and other media in the country, made the announcement today.

"Sex and the City 2 will be banned from being shown in cinemas across the UAE when it is released for various reasons," the spokesman said. "Among them are that the film's website stated that filming was done in Abu Dhabi even though they were denied permission to do so and that they continue to attribute the locations shot in Morocco as being in Abu Dhabi, which is false, as the theme of the film does not fit with our cultural values. Also, they persisted in using Abu Dhabi's name in the movie despite the fact that no official permission was given to them to do so."

A large portion of the film is set in Abu Dhabi but was filmed in Morocco after the UAE authorities refused the film's producers permission to film in either Dubai or Abu Dhabi.

But there is another problem with SATC, a secret that only a few privileged Zionists know - and that I shall now reveal. This will cause a scandal that would make it difficult for Sex and the City to be shown in any Arab country.

Sarah Jessica Parker once played a character that, to the Arab world, is so offensive that it makes Carrie look like she wears a burqa in comparison.

The name of this character was "Jerusalem Jones." The video was Shalom Sesame episode 10: Passover.

Here is a description of her part of the episode:

	On the Aleph-Bet Network, Kippi Ben Kippod (right) announces a block of "Pey TV" programming, celebrating the letter pey (פ), which begins Passover, Pharoah, and pyramids. Due to homonym problems, Moishe Oofnik initially thinks it's "pay TV."
	The Pey TV movie-of-the-week begins, Jerusalem Jones and the Lost Afikomen. During the seder, Moishe Oofnik hides the afikomen (the piece of matzah hidden for desert), so that the seder cannot continue. Jerusalem Jones (Sarah Jessica Parker) comes to help find the lost afikomen, with assistance from Kippi. Jerusalem is unaware of the history of the seder and Passover, however. Moishe reluctantly gives them a clue, telling them to look in the Haggadah.
	As Jerusalem Jones and the Lost Afikomen continues, the Haggadah has transported Jerusalem and Kippi travel back in time. They find themselves in an ancient Egyptian cave, where they meet the Pharoah's Oofnik, who was left bereft by the exodus. He tells them that they are his slaves. They are trapped in the cave, until Kippi says "Open Sesame". She notes that "Sesame is a word that opens a lot of doors where I come from."
	As Jerusalem Jones and the Lost Afikomen continues, Jerusalem and Kippi find the oldest matzah ball in the world. In a parody of Raiders of the Lost Ark, the matzah ball quivers and threatens to come after the pair, as the entire room crumbles. Suddenly, Kippi and Jerusalem vanish.
	In the conclusion to Jerusalem Jones and the Lost Afikomen, Kippi and Jerusalem Jones find a king's crown. They eventually find the afikomen in the pages of the Haggadah.

At the end of the episode came this highly offensive montage, that ends off with brainwashed Zionist children singing "Next Year in Rebuilt Jerusalem," an obviously illegal attempt to grab the illegally occupied city to Judaize it, to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and replace it with an alleged "Third Temple," and to ethnically clean all the Muslims out of Al Quds. (Don't be fooled by the Arabic "Salaam" at the beginning of the clip. It is just another Zionist lie.)

In other words, Sarah Jessica Parker is a land-grabbing Zionist hell-bent on world domination, clearly supporting Zionism's expansionist aims and the genocide against Arabs. (Not to mention the explicitly anti-Egyptian message that is given throughout the episode.)
 
If this gets out, SATC II is doomed in (99% of) the Middle East.

Read More

50th anniversary of Eichmann's capture

The Jerusalem Post has an article about an anniversary that was ignored: the 50th anniversary of Israel's dramatic capture of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina.

One of the interesting sidelights of that event was that Argentina accused Israel of violating international law by capturing the man responsible for the murder of millions.

Argentina's original complaint specified and demanded Israeli reparations for its act, and those included the return of Eichmann to Argentina and the punishment of those responsible.

The Security Council resolution 138 that Argentina drafted was watered down by the US, but it still stated that such actions may "endanger international peace and security" and requested ("demande" in French) that Israel provide unspecified reparations to Argentina.

It is clear that a formal request for extradition would have likely resulted in Eichmann's escape to another country. 

Here is a case where international law is at odds with justice. At the time, most people realized this fact (which is why the amended resolution mentions, twice, that actions like Israel's were only dangerous if repeated).

It is of course a unique situation: Argentina was actively shielding Eichmann; his crimes were genocidal; and there was no legal alternative.

Certainly the world cannot tolerate nations kidnapping people for ordinary crimes or perceived injustices. But those who slavishly claim that international law is inviolate seem to believe that the law is more important than justice - or even more important than people's lives.


(h/t Callie)

Read More

Egyptians worried about selling land to Jews (um, "Israelis")

Palestine Today reports that Egyptian officials are concerned over recent real-estate transactions in Sharm el-Sheikh.

Warrants were issued to arrest 11 people for the illegal sale of land to "foreigners" in violation of the law. There is concern that some of the buyers were Jews, trying to skirt the law against foreign ownership, but the Egyptian government denied that.

Some 1000 resort apartments were sold.

Egyptians are concerned that this is a secret Israeli operation to buy land in Egypt with the intent of annexing it to Israel. Alternatively, according to the article, they want to purchase land in the Sinai to give them to Gazans, establishing the Sinai as "Greater Gaza."

Sharm el-Sheikh is quite far from Gaza.

One of the accused reacted angrily at the accusations, saying that "everyone hates Israel, how can they accuse us of this?"

Read More

So, who are these Americans that visited Gaza?

The name of the American group that visited Gaza over the weekend keeps changing. Now it is the "American Association for International Conciliation," earlier it was the "National Institute for International Reconciliation."

The Hamas UK newspaper, Palestine Info, describes them as "political figures and university professors."

The picture in Palestine Info shows this:

And here is the one in Palestine Today:

Anyone recognize anybody?

Read More

"Siege" news

Israel, has allowed construction material into Gaza for the second day in a row.

Yesterday, truckloads of cement and iron bars entered Gaza. Today, more truckloads of unspecified "building materials" are coming in.

The amount of cement that Israel is quietly sending into Gaza in two days is roughly the same amount that the Free Gaza movement is noisily planning to bring into Gaza whenever they manage to get their ships coordinated. The difference is that Israel is coordinating with UNRWA to ensure that the cement is used for real building projects; Free Gaza's is going to go directly towards Hamas weapons bunkers.

Is anyone interested in asking a question on their Facebook wall as to whether, given Hamas being democratically elected, they support Hamas' unlimited import of weapons into Gaza like any other state?

Read More

Freedom of assembly, Hamas-style

Al Quds al Arabi reports that the Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights was prevented from holding a workshop in Gaza by Hamas.

The topic of the workshop? Rights and freedom in "Palestine!"

Hamas claimed that a meeting like that requires a permit. The NGO countered that, no, according to Palestinian Arab law,  it doesn't.

Meanwhile, Hamas also stopped an attempt to hold a protest rally against the destruction of the UNRWA summer camp facilities on Sunday morning.

Sounds like the Free Gaza flotilla of fools will have lots of opportunity to loudly protest against Hamas' crackdown of Gazans' freedom.

(That'll be the day!)

Read More

Gaza has too much stuff!

From Financial Times:

...[T]he prices of many smuggled goods have fallen in recent months, thanks to a supply glut that is on striking display across the Strip.

Some argue that Gaza's tunnel economy is becoming a victim of its own success. Hundreds of tunnels have shut down over the past year as the result of greater Egyptian efforts to stop the flow of goods - and weapons - into the Strip. But the remaining tunnels, about 200 to 300 according to most estimates, have become so efficient that shops all over Gaza are bursting with goods.

Branded products such as Coca-Cola, Nescafé, Snickers and Heinz ketchup - long absent as a result of the Israeli blockade - are both cheap and widely available.

However, the tunnel operators have also flooded Gaza with Korean refrigerators, German food mixers and Chinese airconditioning units. Tunnel operators and traders alike complain of a saturated market - and falling prices.

"Everything I demand, I can get," says Abu Amar al-Kahlout, who sells household goods out of a warehouse big enough to accommodate a passenger jet.

h/t Daily Alert

Read More

Lebanese "scholarship"

Al Quds has an article about Lebanese professor Kamal Salibi, who claims that the Promised Land in the Bible is really near Yemen.

It turns out that he floated this theory decades ago, and has written a number of books on the subject.

According to Wikipedia,

Kamal Salibi has written three books advocating the controversial "Israel in Arabia" theory. In this view, the placenames of the Hebrew Bible actually allude to places in southwest Arabia; many of them were later reinterpreted to refer to places in Palestine where the Hasmonean kingdom was established by Simon Maccabaeus in the second century BC.

The (literally) central identification of the theory is that the geographical feature referred to as הירדן, the “Jordan”, which is usually taken to refer to the Jordan River, although never actually described as a “river” in the Hebrew text, actually means the great West Arabian Escarpment, the Sarawat Mountains. The area of ancient Israel is then identified with the land on either side of the southern section of the escarpment that is, the southern Hejaz and 'Asir, from Ta’if down to the border with Yemen.

So if the Jordan of the Bible is proved to refer to a river, his entire thesis gets destroyed, right?

Joshua 3:15-17: And when they that bore the ark were come unto the Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bore the ark were dipped in the brink of the water--for the Jordan overfloweth all its banks all the time of harvest--  that the waters which came down from above stood, and rose up in one heap, a great way off from Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan; and those that went down toward the sea of the Arabah, even the Salt Sea, were wholly cut off; and the people passed over right against Jericho. And the priests that bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD stood firm on dry ground in the midst of the Jordan, while all Israel passed over on dry ground, until all the nation were passed clean over the Jordan.

 2 Kings 2:2-3: And fifty men of the sons of the prophets went, and stood over against them afar off; and they two stood by the Jordan. And Elijah took his mantle, and wrapped it together, and smote the waters, and they were divided hither and thither, so that they two went over on dry ground.(also see 2 Kings 14-15)

2 Kings 5:10-14,  And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying: 'Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come back to thee, and thou shalt be clean.' But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said: 'Behold, I thought: He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place, and recover the leper. Are not Amanah and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean?' So he turned, and went away in a rage. And his servants came near, and spoke unto him, and said: 'My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee: Wash, and be clean?' Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God; and his flesh came back like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

Also, 2 Kings 6:2-6.

Guess Salibi wasted a few decades of his life. Oh, well.

Read More

Nakbapalooza!

Pity the poor Palestinian Arab. They have to fill up weeks of Nakba celebrations with new and innovative ways to demand worldwide pity. 

After all, there are only so many victimhood points available, and Palestinian Arabs are competing with those pesky Haitians and Sudanese and others for their fair share.

And Nakba is not just a one-day thing - it is a way of life, where from roughly mid-April through the end of May the PalArabs must come up with gimmicks that will remind the world yet again how terrible things are.

Yesterday brought us one of the more original and mystifying examples of the annual Nakbapalooza pity party. In the center of Ramallah, a city that has been Judenrein for years - a city that is now, for the first time in history, under Palestinian Arab rule - an actress playing a bride, wearing a 50-meter long train on her wedding dress, walked along the streets:

Traffic was stopped on a major Ramallah street for this display.

Then, the other participants in this bizarre ceremony stepped on the dress:

The reason for this is that, if enough people stepped on the dress, it would turn black. This would be a symbol of mourning.

It symbolizes the catastrophe of Palestinian Arabs being treated like dirt for the part 62 years by their fellow Arabs, as their rights have been trampled by the Jordanians, Egyptians, Lebanese, Syrians and every other Arab country.

Oh, sorry, that's not the symbolism here. It's something else altogether. Something to do with Israel, I think. The citizens of the PA - who have an Olympic team, a flag, an UN representative, and more autonomy than most Arabs -  are taking their copious amounts of free time to create long wedding dresses that are meant to be stepped on to complain about how poorly they are treated by the Jews.

You can just imagine people in Darfur doing the same thing.

Read More