Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, February 25, 2011

Morning links

Iranian warships are just "a message of peace."

Khaled Abu Toameh discerns a bit of hypocrisy among those who are faster at condemning Israel for building houses than they are at Arab dictators slaughtering their own people.

Martin Peretz and Danny Ayalon notice that Israel doesn't seem to have anything to do with Middle East unrest. Who knew?

Gullible amnesia about the Muslim Brotherhood.

Honest Reporting resumes their excellent series on photo bias in the media, and I play a small part.

This weekend the J-Street conference will begin, and its luster has definitely gone down in the past year. Not that the JTA, Forward and other Jewish newspapers will stop their love affair with the fringe group that tries to pretend it is mainstream.

Norway's Foreign Ministry is sponsoring some friendly Israel-bashers in a conference in a "dialogue."

A British fashion designer seems to have gone on a drunken, anti-semitic rant in a Paris restaurant.

A richly deserved Dick of the Week.

(h/t David G, Zach N, Yisrael Medad, Richard Landes' excellent linkdump, Suso, Martin Kramer)

Latest Latma (2/25/11)

The Democracy Song, the UN condemns Israel for Libya, and more:

MSM Roundup (David G)

From David G:

1. Saudi Arabia:
Jackson Diehl writes that the Saudis may be next unless they do something. Maybe they'll reform; maybe they'll help stymie the change in Bahrain.

Abdullah has no love for Obama; he spurned the U.S. president's request for help in the Arab-Israeli peace process and fumed at Obama's turn against Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak. According to the New York Times, the last of their two phone calls during the Egyptian crisis "ended in sharp disagreement."

Still, I'm betting that Abdullah would rather be a Gorbachev than a Brezhnev. Rather than invade, he's more likely to embrace the strategy of trying to get ahead of the Arab wave of change before it is too late.

Diehl puts some hope in Adel al Jubeir, who is extremely westernized. (He's also as I recall, as is normal for someone of his background, extremely anti-Israel.)

But if Diehl was sounding a warning, someone may have been listening or anticipating his column. The NYT features

A Saudi Prince’s Plea for Reform By ALWALEED BIN TALAL BIN ABDULAZIZ AL-SAUD

Moreover, Arab countries have been burdened by political systems that have become outmoded and brittle. Their leaderships are tied to patterns of governance that have become irrelevant and ineffective. Decision-making is invariably confined to small circles, with the outcomes largely intended to serve special and self-serving interests. Political participation is often denied, truncated and manipulated to ensure elections that perpetuate one-party rule.

Disheartening as this Arab condition may be, reforming it is neither impossible nor too late. Other societies that were afflicted with similar maladies have managed to restore themselves to health. But we can succeed only if we open our systems to greater political participation, accountability, increased transparency and the empowerment of women as well as youth. The pressing issues of poverty, illiteracy, education and unemployment have to be fully addressed. Initiatives just announced in my country, Saudi Arabia, by King Abdullah are a step in the right direction, but they are only the beginning of a longer journey to broader participation, especially by the younger generation.

Prince Alwaleed is, of course, famous for his post-9/11 offer of $10 million aid to NYC which Mayor Giuliani rejected after Alwaweed suggested that 9/11 is partly America's fault.

There have been a few news stories about the Saudis including this from the WaPo:

16 miles away, Saudi Arabia's watchful eye looms over Bahrain unrest

"Saudi Arabia fears a constitutional monarchy in Bahrain," said Kristin Smith Diwan, an assistant professor at American University who studies Islamic movements in the Persian Gulf region. "It's about empowerment of the Shia and what that might mean for Shia in the eastern province" of Saudi Arabia, she said, in addition to fears about Iran's influence, which she deemed largely unjustified.

"In this current crisis, none of the solutions look good for Saudi Arabia," Diwan said. "A crackdown in Bahrain would be destabilizing. A reform itself would be destabilizing, unless Saudi Arabia was willing to make some reforms."

More on the eastern province of Saudi Arabia here:

The eastern province, by the way, is where the oil is.

2) You may recall in 2004 a group of former diplomats made the news when they condemned the Middle east policies of George W Bush.

The group was organized by the anti-Israel Council on the National Interest. Though they had a very clear agenda, for some reason their stunt was treated as news as a sign of deep discontent in the American foreign policy establishment.

I was surprised to learn that something similar recently happened in Turkey.

Interesting, even as a New York Times story (yesterday) holds up Turkey as an example of what we should be rooting for in Egypt, no one the MSM seems much interested in internal dissension in Turkey.

It's not just how things are reported that reveal the bias of the media, it's also what is (and isn't) reported.

3) NYT: Protests are being held around the region

Interesting note:

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist movement that was banned for decades but is playing an active role in politics here, also pledged to hold protests in Cairo and across the country with similar demands.

After the MSM's studiously ignoring anything about about the Brotherhood, this sentence suggests that it is more influential than we've read until now.

More from around the region in the NYT:

The Washington Post reports that regimes in the Middle East are buying protection.

It might be against protesters. It also might be ...

Amid all the change sweeping the region, the multibillion-dollar business of arms sales to the Middle East may remain the one constant. The rich Persian Gulf states - particularly the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia - are scooping up as much weaponry as they can. Some of it could, in theory, be turned on their own populations. But diplomats and defense industry representatives say the goal is to defend against Iran and to secure energy infrastructure that has become even more valuable with oil topping $100 a barrel.

There's been a tendency to downplay Iran's growing influence in the region. This acknowledges that remaining regimes are concerned about it too.

4) Even as most of the MSM is ignoring Sheikh Qaradawi, Jeffrey Goldberg isn't.

Daily Alert has a summary and a link.

5) A new meme emerging from the anti-Israel left: (h/t Yaacov Lozowick and Martin Kramer who tweeted this.)

Beinart’s take on the situation — and I do not think it is an unusual one among American Jewish leftists and American leftists in general — is equal parts wishful thinking and willful self-deception. His thesis, to the extent that one can be gleaned from Beinart’s grab-bag of homilies, is that Israel is opposed to the Egyptian revolution because it is opposed to Arab democracy. The reason Israel is opposed to Arab democracy is that a democratic Arab world would make it much harder for Israel to do evil unto the Palestinians. Beinart presents no evidence whatsoever that this is actually the case, and it should be noted that the Israeli government has thus far declared no opposition to democracy in Egypt, though it has expressed strong concerns about where the current upheaval in that country may be leading. In Beinart’s eyes, however, even this elementary skepticism is simply incomprehensible and unconscionable. While he admits that “a theocracy that abrogated Egypt’s peace treaty with the Jewish state would be bad for Israel,” he informs us that this is “unlikely” because Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood “abandoned violence decades ago, and declared that it would pursue its Islamist vision through the democratic process.” He asks, “Might the Brotherhood act differently if it gained absolute power? Sure, but it’s hard to foresee a scenario in which that happens,” and reassures us that “Mohammed ElBaradei, the closest thing the Egyptian protest movement has to a leader, has called the peace treaty with Israel ‘rock solid.’” Indeed, Beinart appears to believe that Israel’s concerns about radical Islam are caused by nothing more than paranoia and craven self-interest.

Egyptian: "Unfortunately, my young son wasn't killed by the IDF"

On January 29th, a 10 year old boy named Bilal came home from school in Egypt and saw an anti-Mubarak demonstration nearby.

He immediately went to join the rally, and then was shot three times by Egyptian forces in the abdomen, and he died.

The father wants justice, but he is emphasizing that Bilal had fervently hoped to become a martyr defending Gaza from Israel.

The father told Egyptian newspaper El Shorouk, "He had wished to die in defense of the children of the Intifada in Gaza. But, unfortunately, he was not killed by Israeli soldiers."

What a touching story!

"Apartheid Week" poster #9

I had posted this photo, taken by reader Veet, a few months ago.

Hasbara 2.0, part 3: Getting the message across

The latest chapter in my Hasbara 2.0 series for NewsRealBlog is now up.

America in the 1950s and 1960s was also a more outwardly religious nation. No one was insulted at the idea that the Founding Fathers would invoke Scripture and the word “God” was not considered inappropriate to use in public. The idea of a Jewish state in the land of the Bible was simply considered fitting.

As a result, Americans were very receptive to Israel’s narrative. The “barrier” between the two nations was very low, and trust was implicit.

Today the situation is different. Because of decades of propaganda and indoctrination, America is less patriotic and less religious. Moreover, the culture of hard work being its own reward is being slowly replaced with a culture of entitlement. The unity of purpose that America had during World War II – and even after Sputnik – has eroded.

To be sure, the heartland of America remains much as our nation was five decades ago. But on college campuses and in large cities, American ideals are being replaced with a philosophy that is truly dangerous to the nation over the long term.

This is of course a very big topic on its own.

But for Israel, this means that the barrier of communication with Americans has been raised. The constant demonization of Israel in the media and on campus has turned Zionists into “the other,” people no longer to be implicitly trusted. They are now regarded as Goliaths instead of Davids, as bullies instead of the bullied, as religious extremists who cannot be related to by an increasingly secular America.

The barrier is now high, and it must be broken down.

Read the whole thing.

Who knows...I might turn it into a book one day.

Jews should visit Hebron (Moshe Arens)

Ha'aretz just had a series of articles decrying the idea that Israeli students should visit Hebron as part of their curriculum. After all, the deep Jewish connection to the ancient holy city is not nearly as important as the certainty that Arabs will be upset at Jews visiting it.

As the Ha'aretz editorial said:

Visits by schoolchildren to this place, while ignoring what Israel and the settlers have done there, is anti-educational. The visits will intensify nationalist feelings, faith in power and blindness to the injustices of the occupation.

Star Israel-bashing reporter Gideon Levy was more explicit in his hate of the idea of Jewish nationalism:

Here, too, as at Auschwitz, they will only scare them more and more. At Auschwitz they will make them frightened of the Poles and in Hebron of the Arabs. Everyone always wants to annihilate us. They will return from Hebron excited at having touched the ancient stones and even more blinded from not having touched the people who lived alongside those stones. They will see nothing and learn nothing. As at Auschwitz, they will come home even more nationalist: Hebron forever, and the force of arms.

Ha'aretz, being such a bastion of liberalism, therefore trotted out an opposing viewpoint whose words could be shouted down by the clueless commenters. But at least we have the article itself, by Moshe Arens, who is not religious but very nationalist indeed:

Who are the people, including the editorial writers of this newspaper, who have gone ballistic over the education minister's announcement that students should be taken on heritage trips to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron? Are they Zionists, non-Zionists, post-Zionists or anti-Zionists? Have their roots in the Land of Israel withered over the years, or have they lost hold of their senses in these tumultuous times?

They seem to have forgotten the very foundation of Zionism: that the Jewish State is located in the Land of Israel just because it is the ancient homeland of the Jewish people, and that the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem are the icons of the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel - constant reminders to one and all that the Land of Israel is the ancient homeland of the Jewish people, who have returned after 2,000 years in exile.

They seem to have fallen under the spell of the "1967 borders." They are infatuated by the "Green Line" drawn like a scar across the Land of Israel. West of this line Israel is kosher, not an occupier of another people, but east of that line, you had better watch out. These, they hold, are occupied territories where Israel rules over another people, and no Jew should be living there, or God forbid, be allowed to settle there.

So what is this sacrosanct Green Line? It is nothing more than the armistice line agreed between representatives of Israel and Jordan at Rhodes on April 24, 1949. It was never intended to be a border between two nations. It simply represented, with some modifications, the line where the fighting during Israel's War of Independence ceased. The British-officered and -equipped Jordanian Arab Legion that had invaded the newborn state of Israel on May 15, 1948 had reached the point during the fighting where its commander, Glubb Pasha, realized that unless Jordan agreed to a cease-fire, the Israeli army was going to advance to the Jordan River and his army would be powerless to stop it.

The armistice left the biblical heartland of ancient Israel, the mountains of Samaria and Judea, the major historical and biblical sites of the Jewish people, east of the armistice line. The War of Independence brigade commanders Moshe Dayan and Yosef Tabenkin had urged the Israel Defense Forces' General Staff to allow them to capture the Old City of Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron, but they were halted by the cease-fire of October 22, 1948.

With Jordan in control of these areas, not only were Jews not allowed to live there, but during the 18 years of Jordanian occupation, Jews were denied access to the Western Wall, the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Rachel's tomb. Masada, a site visited over the years by almost all Israelis, young and old, came under Israeli control only in March 1949, when IDF units moving from Be'er Sheva reached the Dead Sea at Sodom and Ein Gedi. One can imagine that had this "last-minute" operation not taken place, the very same people who now complain about students visiting the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron would be arguing against visits to Masada, located in "occupied territory."

This perverse objection by some to visits east of the March 1949 armistice lines seems to be part of a wider boycott movement of the whole area. Whether it is Ariel or Hebron, these rootless Israelis will not set foot there. They give credence to the frequently heard Arab propaganda that the Jewish claim of a historic connection to this land is nothing but fiction.

The supporters of the "two-state solution," who insist that Israel withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines and consider Judea and Samaria to be occupied territory, seem to give no thought to assuring contact between the Jewish people and these sites if such a withdrawal were to take place. Was this even on the agenda in the negotiations between Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat, or between Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni and the Palestinian Authority?

Perhaps supporters of the "two-state solution" would prefer to sever the connection between the Jewish people and the sites that are reminders of the Jewish people's connection to the Land of Israel. That might be one explanation for the objections voiced to visits by Israeli students to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron.

(h/t Elan Miller via Facebook)

Don't forget my earlier "Apartheid" posters

Besides the posters I've been publishing in recent days, I did make some other posters that are appropriate for printing and displaying in the upcoming "Israel Apartheid Week" on college campuses:

Afternoon links and things

CAMERA on the NYT and Qaradawi:

For the past several weeks, The New York Times has been running interference for the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization set to play a significant role in Egyptian politics after the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. In addition to publishing commentaries by two apologists for the Muslim Brotherhood, Tariq Ramadan and Essam El-Errian, on its op-ed page, the Times has published a news story that depicts the group's spiritual leader, Yusuf Qaradawi, as “committed to pluralism and democracy.”

In fact, Qaradawi is a virulent anti-Semite who has called on Allah to wipe out the Jewish people. Moreover, he has worked to undermine the democratic principle of free speech by defending the Iranian fatwa calling for the death of writer Salman Rushdie and by promoting a “day of rage” against cartoons of Muhammed printed in Sweden and Denmark.

The man has also defended the practice of female genital mutilation and affirmed Muslim teachings calling for the death penalty to be applied to those who leave Islam and encourage others to do the same.

Speaking of, Jeffrey Goldberg seems to understand Qaradawi a bit better than the Times:

Mark Gardner and Dave Rich did yeoman's work not long ago, analyzing the Egyptian cleric Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi's 2003 book, Fatawa Min Ajl Falastin, or Fatwas on Palestine, and came to the conclusion that this putatively moderate Islamic cleric argues clearly and consistently that hatred of Israel and Jews is Islamically sanctioned, and that the destruction of Israel is mandated by God.

But the NYT does have an analysis that notices that Iran is a big winner from Arab turmoil.

While it is far too soon to write the final chapter on the uprisings’ impact, Iran has already benefited from the ouster or undermining of Arab leaders who were its strong adversaries and has begun to project its growing influence, the analysts said.

Meanwhile, a Saudi man in Texas was arrested for wanting to blow up some stuff, like George W. Bush's home and reservoir dams in Colorado and California:

One extract from what is alleged to be Mr Aldawasari's diary says: "And now, after mastering the English language, learning how to build explosives and continuous planning to target the infidel Americans, it is time for Jihad."

Here's some garden variety British anti-semitism.

JoshuaPundit has a nice piece on the hypocrisy of the ICC.

A very funny article about Thomas Friedman at TNR.

A Facebook group is parodying "Israel Apartheid Week" posters.

On that same topic, an "IAW" event in New York was canceled because of objections by a Zionist gay porn director.

"Apartheid Week" poster #7

This will probably be the last one of this particular series.

Muslim Brotherhood says Camp David already null and void

Last week, a Muslim Brotherhood spokesman tried to allay fears that the group would rip up the Camp David agreement:

"The decision on the treaty does not belong to the Brotherhood, it belongs to the entire Egyptian people," said Essam al-Erian, a spokesman for the Islamist group, in an interview with Al Arabiya.

"The important thing is the position of the Egyptian people and not the Brotherhood," Erian said. "The Brotherhood will not impose their vision on the Egyptian people. The Brotherhood are part of society that accepts what the Egyptians accept and nobody can wipe out a treaty with a pen," he added.

To Iran, however, MB leaders are singing a different tune:

A senior member of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood said there is virtually no peace agreement with the Zionist regime following the recent developments in the country, adding that any treaty not approved by the Egyptian nation must be abrogated.

The Egyptian nation considers as null and void any agreement between the toppled regime and the Zionist regime which has no respect for justice and rights of the Egyptian people.

He said the world was witnessing massive changes. “People worldwide want to see unjust laws scraped. It is no surprise for the Egyptians to want the same,” he said.

Halbavi then touched on the dismantling of Berlin wall, adding that following the dismantling, many previously signed treaties were abrogated.

He said the time was over for surrender to treaties which have brought humiliation to the Egyptian nation.

Halbavi also called for permanent opening of Gaza crossing and said the closing of the crossing has been a joint conspiracy by the US, Zionist regime and Mubarak’s regime.

But of course the hard-line statements are simply posturing and the more moderate-sounding statements are the correct ones. Because it has to be that way in order for the media to continue with their memes of a progressive, socially-active, uninfluential, non-political Muslim Brotherhood.