Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Sunday links

My Shrapnel, a new blog of a terror victim

Another PA music video inciting hatred against Israel

Interesting analysis of the possibility of Hamas terrorists going after the multi-national forces in the Sinai

The Second Draft looks at last year's Gaza beach tragedy

HH CLI hosted (and now sponsored) by Jack's Shack

Aussie Dave continues liveblogging the situation in Israel

Fisking Khalidi's "Iron Cage" - part one

In 2006, Columbia Professor Rashid Khalidi published "The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood." Khalidi, an American of Palestinian Arab descent, occupies the prestigious Edward Said Chair in Arab Studies at Columbia University and he heads the Middle East Institute of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs.

Khalidi's book has been lauded for its supposed even-handedness in being critical of Palestinian Arabs and in describing their missed opportunities, in addition to the usual blame given to the British and Zionists for their troubles.

However, a closer analysis of the book shows that Khalidi is deceptive in his writings, and one cannot escape the fact that he is knowingly dishonest in pushing through his narrative. While he is certainly guilty of omitting and downplaying many facts of Palestinian Arab history, he is also guilty of sleight of hand where he will string together sentences that contain mostly truth but give the reader an impression that is wholly false.

An early example of such dishonesty comes from a close reading of this passage on page 39 meant to show British pro-Zionist sympathies during the mandate period:

In fact, access to those levers (of state power) was systematically denied to anyone of Arab background. The low ceiling that Arab functionaries came up against is best illustrated by the case of George Antonius, an urbane, articulate Cambridge-educated (but Lebanese-born) official of the mandatory government, who...was repeatedly passed over for responsible posts, as mediocre British subordinates were promoted over his head, until he finally resigned in disgust. Similar limitations did not apply to Jewish officials, if they were British by origin rather than Palestinian: among them were the first high commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel and Norman Bentwich, attorney general of Palestine until 1930, both deeply committed Zionists. By way of contrast, although a few senior British officials might well be considered anti-Zionist, pro-Arab, or even anti-Semitic, from the beginning of the British occupation of Palestine in 1917 until its bitter end in 1948, none of the top appointees of the mandatory administration outside the judiciary were Arabs.

Khalidi's dishonesty is subtle but representative: he decries the lack of Palestinian Arabs in high positions of the mandatory government but rather than contrast that with the number of Palestinian Jews (which would be the exact analogy) he instead mentions that some of the officials were British Zionists. He then goes on to admit that some of the senior British officials were pro-Arab - the exact analogy with those who were pro-Zionist. In other words, from parsing his sentences one can see that he has proven nothing about British pro-Zionist leanings from his proofs; he purposefully conflates British Zionists with Palestinian Zionists and he refuses to do the same between British Arabists and Palestinian Arabs, thus subtly using his command of the language to give an impression that is not borne out by his own facts, but one that the reader could be forgiven for not noticing.

Khalidi shows similar dishonesty when dealing with the British-installed Grand Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husayni. He claims in a number of places that al-Husayni kept his end of the bargain with the British by keeping his 1921 promise to "maintain tranquility" among the Arab population (p. 62.) Khalidi claims that Husayni only reluctantly abandoned his pro-British actions when he could no longer contain the "popular" uprising. Khalidi doesn't mention the evidence that the mufti was himself behind anti-Jewish pogroms in the early 1920s as well as the 1929 riots, and he only passingly mentions the Mufti's Nazi alliance during World War II. He accepts, when it is convenient for his thesis of the pro-Zionist British Mandate, that Husayni was a moderating force when in fact he was the opposite - even as Khalidi admits that the British directly subsidized Husayni's position.

Khalidi does give some evidence that the British were more pro-Zionist than pro-Arab until the 1939 White Paper but he misses the point of those leanings. For the first decade and a half of the mandate, the British were following the explicit terms of the mandate, to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. This is not as much evidence of pro-Zionist leanings as it is for British feelings of responsibility. During the 1936-39 strike and revolt, of course, the British were on the same side as the Zionists against the Arabs. The manifestly anti-Zionist 1939 White Paper showed that, rather than being inherently pro-Zionist, the British were mostly concerned with their own self-interest, and the Arab riots had changed the British calculus towards maintaining the peace in the false hope that acceding to Arab demands to limit Jewish immigration would put a lid on their anger. A pro-Zionist government would not have caved that easily.

Worse yet, Khalidi completely dismisses Arab anti-semitism - which is most properly embodied by the Mufti - and claims throughout the book that the Arabs were only anti-Zionist. The fact that the 1929 pogroms were primarily against the old yishuv - Jews whose families were in Palestine before modern Zionism - is ignored as Khalidi spends much of his book claiming that Palestinian Arab nationalism was only fighting against Zionism, not Jews.

In the coming days, I will explore some more of the specifically dishonest claims made by Khalidi, as well as the problems with his larger theses.

Egypt catches Gazans with explosives

Palestine Press Agency reports (autotranslated):

Egyptian sources revealed that the security authorities had detained several Palestinians in the Egyptian governorates of possession of explosives and advanced mobile phones capable of penetrating Egyptian security communication networks.

Deputies of the prominent ruling National Democratic Party in Egypt warned of the seriousness of leaving open the border with Gaza, without controls, saying that Palestinians carrying explosives, and a sophisticated communications, caught the night before last, and warned deputies also what it called "a blueprint for the settlement of Israelis in Sinai, Gaza residents.

During a meeting of the Egyptian People's Assembly was held yesterday evening, said deputy ruling party and the President of the Court of the President, Dr. Zakaria Azmi, "said 30 infiltrators from Gaza were arrested in possession of explosives," adding that "were found inside a belt taxis after going down in the Palestinian Sinai, will also present 18 security guards Egyptian officers were in danger of attack by armed Palestinians tried to blow up the crossing 5 times "(referring to the Hamas militias), reiterating that" Sinai will not be a substitute for Gaza. "

For its part, Egyptian security sources said the seizure of more than 20 Palestinians aged between 20 and 40 years, said: "They infiltrated into the country and was caught with someone quantity few primitive explosives, in addition to a sophisticated communications networks capable of breaking the security in Egypt, and that the security bodies are high investigate what is happening in the search for other suspects. "

I have not yet seen this in any other press reports, but there are enough specifics here to make it appear that PalPress is reporting fairly accurately.

UPDATE: Confirmed.

Iranian official threatens Jews worldwide

From the Iranian Mehr News:

International Institute for Holocaust Research Secretary General Mohammad-Ali Ramin has called on the Jewish community to break their silence on Israel’s crimes against Palestinians and give up their support for the Zionist regime.

“If the world’s Jews keep silent on the blatant genocide of Palestinians, the entire human community will hold Jewish people responsible for the crimes,” Ramin told the Mehr News Agency on Friday.

He said, “The presence of a blood-thirsty enemy at the heart of the Islamic world like the Zionist regime which poses a threat to all Islamic countries provides the best opportunity for the Islamic Ummah to preserve unity and return to its religious identity.”

Referring to Israel’s “organized massacre of Palestinians”, Ramin said, “Silence on these crimes will have irreparable repercussions for Muslims.”

Summing up:

* If Jews don't publicly declare that the Islamist viewpoint on "the Zionist regime" is correct, the entire world will be justified in punishing the Jews.

* Jews aren't human, as the "entire human community will hold Jewish people responsible."

* Israel is a direct threat to every Islamic country from Malaysia to Bahrain.

* If Israel didn't exist, Muslims would all be fighting each other, so the Zionist regime is the best hope for Muslims to unify - and get religion.

* Muslims cannot be held responsible for their actions if Israel has the audacity to continue to exist.

* The Muslim that holds these viewpoints is the leading Holocaust "researcher" in Iran.

Glad he cleared that up!

Great moments in UN history

During the discussion around yesterday's routine UNHRC one-sided condemnation of Israel came this exchange, which pretty much says it all about how serious one should take that august institution:

HILLEL NEUER, of United Nations Watch , said that the proposed draft resolution constituted a case of psychological projection. It was Hamas which deliberately fired rockets into Israel. They were the ones rejecting the very notion of distinction between combatants and civilians. Israel did the opposite by protecting its citizens. It should also be considered who had initiated this session. They included the lowest possible rated States in the annual world survey released by Freedom House. Were these the arbiters of human rights in the world today?

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS ( Cuba ), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement of United Nations Watch, said the organization was a lucrative organization amply funded by the CIA and Mossad aimed to degenerate certain States on the Council. There was nothing more barbaric than the occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

When one cannot tell the difference between websites written by loony conspiracy theorists and official UN delegates, perhaps it is time to rethink the legitimacy of the latter.

Is Gaza occupied?

Yesterday, the ever-reliable UN "Human Rights" Commission did what it literally always does - it condemned Israel and no one else. As Israellycool points out, the resolution used the terminology "occupied Gaza Strip" no less than four times.

Is Gaza legally occupied?

It is hard to find a good definition of "occupied territory" in international law. The best one is perhaps from the Hague Convention of 1907, which the Geneva Conventions seems to rely on:

Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

From the specifics of both the Hague and Geneva Conventions, it is clear that "occupation" means control over the day to day lives of the citizens of the territory. For example:

Art. 55. The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.

Other provisions talk about maintaining public order and the like.

From these many provisions in the Hague and Geneva, as well as in normal use of the word in English, it is clear that "occupation" means physical presence as well as the effective takeover of functioning governmental institutions and tasks, like collecting taxes.

From Israel's perspective, its (legally ambiguous) declaration of Gaza as a "hostile territory" is far more accurate, as is clear from this article by two legal experts at The American Thinker last year:

If Gaza is territory under the control of the enemy -- as it manifestly is under Hamas -- then the Israeli government is both within its rights and arguably obliged by its responsibilities to its citizens to treat the strip as "hostile territory." Siege and blockade of a hostile territory is a legitimate tactic of war, used in declared and undeclared (e.g., Cuban) conflicts and explicitly recognized by the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The Conventions' sole limitation is that there be "free passage of all consignments of food-stuffs, clothing and tonics intended for children under fifteen, expectant mothers, and maternity cases" (Fourth Convention, art. 23) -- and even this exception was conditioned on there being "no reasons for fearing... [t]hat a definite advantage may accrue to the military efforts or economy of the enemy" (for example, if resources destined for humanitarian aid will be commandeered by the enemy). Israel has carefully respected this requirement.

In fact, if anyone is occupying Gaza, it would appear to be Hamas.

Hamas never legally seceded Gaza from the PA and both Hamas and the PA keep declaring that both Gaza and the West Bank are a single legal entity. In fact, Hamas and the PA keep negotiating over where the PA might be able to take over some functions in Gaza, as well as their ultimate rapprochement, thus fulfilling another essential portion of the definition of occupation - that it be temporary.

In addition, Hamas clearly acted against the wishes of the PA and against PA laws in its takeover. Beyond that, Hamas is fully acting like an occupier, taking over the governmental institutions in Gaza like the police and the courts and collecting taxes.

Obviously Hamas has never accepted any international legal conventions. And Hamas is not a country, which complicates the definition further. Even so, as the effective occupier, it clearly violates many of Geneva's laws, including forcibly taking hospital supplies from the civilian population for its own purposes (Geneva IV, Art. 56)

Hamas' status under international law needs to be clarified, and its obligations spelled out. The current situation where a terrorist occupying force (or quasi- government) has no legal obligations is absurd, and it directly leads to travesties like this UNHRC resolution.

Two terror attacks near Jerusalem

One Israeli was killed and another wounded Thursday night in a shooting attack near the entrance to the Shuafat refugee camp in northern Jerusalem.

One of the wounded died after resuscitation attempts and the other, a female, was listed in serious condition.

IDF sources said that terrorists had approached the entrance to Shuafat by foot and opened fire at a group of Israelis nearby and then fled the scene. Military forces and Border Policemen immediately dispatched search parties to catch the gunmen.

In another simultaneous incident, two terrorists were killed after they infiltrated a high school in Kfar Etzion, south of Jerusalem.

The terrorists, armed with knives and possibly with a pistol, infiltrated the kibbutz - in the Gush Etzion settlement bloc - and snuck into a building used by the Makor Haim High School, run by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz.

“The terrorists came inside and began stabbing students,” a defense official said. Three students were injured, including two moderately. They were all evacuated to Hadassah Hosptial in Jerusalem.

Shortly after the infiltration, a number of the school’s counselors, armed with guns, arrived at the scene and shot and killed the terrorists. IDF sources hailed the student’s quick response.

“This could have ended much worse,” a source in the Central Command said.

YNet says

Fatah’s military wing, the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, claimed responsibility for the attack. A Fatah spokesman told Ynet that the organizations “Black September” activists carried out the attack.

This is of course the Fatah faction that the PA declared “dismantled” a few weeks ago and then “disbanded” a week later.

This must all be part of the celebration of breaking down the Rafah wall.

4,200 Balloons

From YNet:

The Israeli consulate in New York released 4,200 red balloons Thursday, equal to the number of Qassam rockets fired at Sdeort since the Gaza disengagement, outside the United Nations headquarters in the city. The display aimed to protest the international community's disregard for Qassam fire at Israel.

Consul for Media and Public Affairs in New York, David Saranga, said that the protest aimed to place the distress faced by Israelis on the American and global agenda.

"To this day, all attempts to place this issue on the American media's agenda have failed," Saranga said.

So far, none of the major wire services have posted a single photo of this protest.

But protests against Israel that appear to have attracted a dozen or so people get prominent coverage, like this one from Lebanon. AP posted no less than 10 pictures of this protest, each one cropped in such a way so that you cannot see how tiny it really is.

Which proves Israel's point precisely.

This of course begs the question - why does AP consider a small protest of Hezbollah-supporting college students in front of the Egyptian embassy in Beirut to be infinitely more newsworthy than Israel's more creative and innovative protest taking place opposite the United Nations?

From FARS
(h/t NRO Corner)

An interesting "martyr"

Palestine Today keeps up the tradition of finding roughly one person a day who dies in a hospital in Gaza and blaming his death on Israeli travel restrictions:

Palestinian medical sources announced last night on the death of a patient due prevented by the Israeli authorities from leaving the Gaza Strip to receive the necessary treatment abroad.

The same sources stated that the young Naji Hamdan Cream (36 years), resident of the Rafah governorate joined the caravan of martyrs of patients travel ban after suffering from heart disease.

What makes "Number 77" interesting is that he died while the border to Egypt was open. In fact, he is a resident of Rafah!

Did anyone notice in the crowds of hundreds of thousands of supposedly desperate Gazans streaming to Egypt whether any of them were transported by ambulance or stretcher to go to Egyptian hospitals? I have yet to find any such picture, among the photos of the "starving" Gazans carrying large-screen TVs back to their homes. If the medical crisis is so acute (and of course it isn't - Israel is still allowing dozens of ill Gazans to enter Israeli hospitals daily) then why haven't we seen a surge of sick PalArabs being escorted through Rafah to Egyptians happy to help them out?

Fertilizer for bombs and terrorists going through Rafah

From the Daily Telegraph:

And somewhere in the teeming crowd, came people anxious to exploit the day for their own less innocent purposes.

Fertiliser, broken down into half bags for lugging through the many tunnels that arms smugglers normally use for delivery into Gaza, was to be seen as it was manhandled overland.

It was white, oily, crystalline and a dab on the tongue left a sharp, burning sensation.

In most countries fertiliser has a perfectly innocent function but in Gaza militants use it to make explosive.

"Hey, hey, hey," shouted a man as I took a photograph of a pile of fertiliser half bags.

His aggressive tone jarred with the mood the crowd as he grabbed my camera lens firmly.

From the Washington Post:

Along one teeming road in the Egyptian part of Rafah, a Hamas security official who had been stranded on Egypt's side of the border since June -- fearing arrest by Israel during a crossing if he tried to return -- met his mother and sisters in the surging crowd. "Eight months I haven't seen him!" his mother exclaimed after a flurry of hugging and kissing.

The man excused himself for not talking. "I'm on the wanted list," he explained.

Israel accuses Egypt, increasingly sharply, of allowing smugglers to bring arms and explosives into Gaza. It was clear Wednesday that contraband and gunmen could cross the border that day with little chance of being stopped.

... Seven or eight Egyptian border guards stood lined up along one stretch of no man's land, which was thick with milling Palestinians and livestock.

The Egyptian guards watched but did not move. "Don't speak to us! Don't even look at us!" one Egyptian officer shouted after someone in the crowd moved toward them.

(h/t Backspin)

Morning links

Israellycool continues his liveblogging of the situation in Gaza, Sderot and vicinity.

Egypt Today on the Israeli film The Band and why Egypt refuses to screen it.

YNet and BackSpin on anti-semitic Arab cartoons.

Canada decides not to attend Durban II : "We'll attend any conference that is opposed to racism and intolerance, not those that actually promote racism and intolerance"

Brazilian singer: "I constantly ask myself why I need suffer so. I am not Jewish, I did not crucify Jesus.”

Sderot Reality

And. from what I can tell, it's been about 36 hours since the last Qassams, although mortars have continued. B'li ayin hora.