Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Saturday, May 09, 2015

05/09 Links: Brainwashed at Bowdoin; Bye-Bye, George Galloway, David Ward and Natalie Bennett

From Ian:

William Jacobson: Brainwashed at Bowdoin: Anti-Israel Boycotters Miss a Teachable Moment

Bowdoin College in Maine recently held a student-body referendum for a full academic and cultural boycott of Israel. Unlike more common student-government resolutions seeking “divestment” from a handful of companies, the Bowdoin referendum sought an unprecedented cutoff of all academic and cultural ties. The referendum was initiated by Bowdoin Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), part of a growing national SJP movement on campuses.
I have covered SJP antics at Vassar (the picketing of a classroom because a course involved a trip to Israel, and later posting of a Nazi cartoon), Cornell (a protest leads to physical and verbal harassment of pro-Israel students — and me!), Northeastern University (a protest over suspension included chants of “Long live the intifada,” the bloody suicide-bombing and terrorist campaign), and New York University (the posting of mock eviction notices), and elsewhere.
Wherever I see SJP, I see a messianic absolutism directed at the deligitimization and demonization of every aspect of Israeli society. It is a view that presents Israel as uniquely evil, and Palestinians as uniquely pure victims.
The most messianic of all are some (not all, by any means) left-wing Jews who lead SJP chapters or are fellow travelers like the members of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP). For that sub-group of left-wing Jews, demonizing Israel has become a religion.

Ben-Dror Yemini: A manipulation of human rights

The IDF is not perfect, and some of Breaking the Silence's claims on the fighting in Gaza may be true, but these deviations have been put on display, without any context or proof.
The report released by Breaking the Silence is already making waves around the world. Isn't it simply wonderful to preach human rights? It's a position in high demand. The thing is, we're dealing here with another piece of major deception, another link in the chain of effort to turn Israel into a living monster, and more help for the BDS campaign.
Why deception? First, when Israel is accused of harming civilians, or when people talk about proportionality, one has to ask: What are the proportions? It turns out there aren't any – and not by chance either. Because every comparative review definitively shows that Israel causes less civilian casualties than those witnessed on other similar battlefields.
Second, a country like Britain also has anti-war organizations. But no foreign country supports exposing the testimonies of British troops who have returned from conflict zones. So why the hell does Britain allow itself to finance Breaking the Silence? Why do the British think their dual morality is morality?
Third, four other countries – Switzerland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark – are funding a Ramallah-based organization, the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat, which also aids Breaking the Silence. HR IHL funds a series of groups such as Al-Haq, BADIL, Al-Mizan and others, which are a part of the BDS campaign network.
We're not dealing with criticism of Israel, but an ideology that opposes the very existence of Israel. This is the ideological environment of the Breaking the Silence report.

Bye-Bye, George Galloway

Within that big picture are some huge specific wins. Specifically, the losses by anti-Israel maniacs George Galloway, David Ward and Natalie Bennett.
George Galloway is the poster child for anti-Israel hate, an obsessed creep who spews anti-Israel conspiracy theories, regularly appears on Iranian Press TV, attacks critics of the Mullah regime, and Jew-baits under the guise of anti-Zionism, British MP George Galloway storms out of debate when finds out opponent is Israeli:
Also losing was Liberal Democrat Party member David Ward, who had previously been suspended by his own party for his anti-Israel comments. Ward notoriously demanded that Holocaust Remembrance Day include remembrance of Palestinian refugees, and tweeted that if he lived in Gaza he would fire rockets at Israel. Ward’s reaction to the Paris unity march after the Charlie Hebdo massacre was to say he was “sick” that Benjamin Netanyahu was in attendance.
Rounding out the threesome, Natalie Bennett, Chair of the Green Party, also lost. Bennett is a big supporter of the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Bennett’s fanaticism was just the tip of the iceberg, England’s Green Party Has an Anti-Semitism Problem:

05/08 Links Pt2: Never Mind the Bomb--Israel Is Looking Fantastic; Let’s Call it Red-Washing

From Ian:

Joel Pollak: Never Mind the Bomb--Israel Is Looking Fantastic

True, the headlines are dominated by one crisis after another, internal and external. The riots by Ethiopians angry at police brutality. The mounting threat of a nuclear Iran. The Palestinians’ refusal to discuss peace. The near-collapse of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new coalition.
And yet from a broader perspective, the country is thriving as never before, and maintaining a relentless day-to-day optimism in the face of its many challenges.
This past week, I returned from a whirlwind five-day trip to Israel, where I covered a conference on law and terrorism organized by Shurat HaDin, a legal advocacy group that sues terrorists on behalf of victims and their families. It was, somewhat inexcusably, my first trip back to Israel in nearly eight years. And the changes were remarkable—the result of a rapidly growing economy, an increasing birthrate, and vastly improved national security, which enables everything else.
The changes were most noticeable in Jerusalem. Eight years ago, security guards and fences were still ubiquitous around every restaurant and café. If you wanted to go out to eat, you had to be prepared to subject yourself and your belongings to a thorough search, because terrorists had made a habit of blowing themselves up in places of public accommodation.
Now the only place that still has the same level of security is the bus station—and even that is more relaxed.
The reason public life has become safer and more convenient is that the much-reviled security barrier—the so-called “wall,” which is actually a fence for most of its length—actually worked.

Let’s Call it Red-Washing

Israel has sent one of the largest aid teams to Nepal after the recent devastating Earthquake. Over 250 doctors and experts in search and rescue were dispatched to the region. Israel’s ability to respond with such a massive and effective force is not only due to decades of experience on the battlefield, but it also expresses a centuries-old tradition of Jewish devotion to the medical arts.
The great Jewish Physicians of the medieval period are more widely known for their written works in poetry and philosophy. Their ranks included Yehuda Halevi and Moses Maimonides.
And the tradition continues today where Israel is a leader in medical innovation the world over and is currently providing emergency care not just in Nepal but also on the Syrian front, where its field hospitals are overwhelmed by the non-stop stream of victims from Syria’s civil war.
And yet despite these life-saving efforts, I suspect the critics of Israel will find a way to malign the Jewish state. Positive stories about Israel’s acceptance of gays are labeled “pink-washing”, Israeli green technology, including organic farming, solar energy and water conservation – all desperately needed in the world today – are dismissed as “green-washing”. So, here’s to a new term: “red-washing”, because no matter how you paint it, Israel won’t stop providing medical aid wherever it is needed.

Giving voice to Muslims who support Am Yisrael

As busloads of frum Jews flocked to the funeral of Zidan Seif, the Druze policeman who sacrificed his life to protect Jews in the Har Nof massacre in November 2014, our community proudly and openly showed its support for righteous gentiles. Just as we reach out to those who make the ultimate sacrifice, we have an obligation to educate ourselves about those who promote peace – especially those Muslim leaders who are striving for a peaceful Islam. These leaders are on the front lines of an intellectual battle; they are defending the Jewish claim to the land of Israel, and defending the Jewish people as authentic “people of the book” – deserving of respect and protection. They are doing so at personal sacrifice and even risk from their less appeasing brethren. And they deserve our attention.
This article is a first in a series. I will be introducing you to Muslim leaders who support the Jewish people. We need to know this information because, as Jews, we are enjoined to respect the righteous among the nations, and surely to lend support to those who wish to support us. Many prominent Rabbanim have been active in dialogue with Muslims:

The most goyishe Jew (in stock photos)

For some reason, I was checking out an online presentation tool called Canva. It claimed to have over a million images of clip-art and stock photos, so for fun I did a search on "Jew."

I found a hilariously goyishe "Jew."

How many things are wrong with these pictures?

The famous seventy-eighth night of Chanukah.
When you wear a tallit.

Here the tallit is more subtle. But definitely a "tallit koton!"

Yes, writing the ancient texts sideways - and with a ballpoint pen.

Not since Harrison Ford put on a yarmulka has there been as unconvincing a Jew as this guy.

Yes, I know Ford wasn't playing a Jew.

How Israel helped the apartheid-era blacks of South Africa

One of the supreme ironies of those who claim Israel is "an apartheid state" can be seen from this 1997 article, by David Kaplan, recently rediscovered, which describes Israel's involvement in helping the blacks of South Africa during the apartheid era.

That it has been doing so without any fuss or fanfare may explain why so few Israelis or South Africans know about it. A closely kept secrete, the programme has been running since the dark days of Apartheid.On the day that a delegation of the South African Zionist Federation in Israel (Telfed) visited the campus, the atmosphere amongst the participants was jubilant. Met with traditional South African dance and music, the 28th group of participants was celebrating the near completion of their course with a farewell cocktail party.Among the veterans of the Beit Berl programme are over two dozen mayors of South African towns and cities including the present mayors of the country’s two largest cities, Johannesburg and Cape Town, as well as those from smaller towns like Randburg, George, and Grahamstown. To that list, we can now add Port Alfred’s mayor, Eric Khuluwe. He tells us,

“Port Alfred is growing at an enormous pace as people are streaming in from the rural areas, seeking employment. The job situation is bleak and we are finding it an uphill battle to provide basic civic services. We have sixty-one local councils in my district and we need to involve as many people on the local level as possible in decision-making. This is the policy of the ANC government and is indicative of the nature of our democracy that empowers people to determine their own destiny. The Beit Berel three-week intensive course was excellent; it widened my horizons and provided practical guidance on team-management. I feel far better equipped to return to my city now and impact on its future. “

Since 1986,over twenty South African Members of Parliament, as well as hundreds of local government officials and ministers of provincial councils have passed through Beit Berel. Patrick Adams, a Coloured man in charge of Emergency & Disaster Management for the Cape Metropolitan Council in Cape Town, says,

“The course was very professional. I am in charge of Reconstruction & Development programmes in the Western Cape region, and my team is currently immersed in running numerous housing and community projects. Not only have I learned a new dimension of problem solving, but I have also been exposed to the problems in Israel and enjoy a greater understanding of the issues here.”

What seems routine today all began in the undercover world of the early 80s when clandestine contacts took place between progressive Israelis and the anti-apartheid forces in South Africa. The local powerhouse behind this project is Professor Shimshon Zelniker, who has masterfully manoeuvered between South Africans, Americans and Israelis, a fascinating amalgam of colourful characters including Hollywood stars, Jewish politicos, civil rights activists, freedom fighters and donors.Zeinicker, a professor of political science at Beit Berel and at UCLA, was a member of Shimon Peres’ advisory team in 1982.

“I was given responsibility for third-world policies, and my first mission was making positive contact with leaders of the struggle in South Africa”

The players in this unfolding theatre of clandestine operations spread across three continents. In South Africa, Clive Menell of Anglovaal paved the way by bringing on board Archbishop Benjamin Tutu. Soon other internationally renown personalities like Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden joined the circle, as did Ethel Kennedy, who twisted Tutu’s arm into meeting with the Israelis.This was the turning point, for what followed was a secret meeting in South Africa between a delegation of Israelis representing anti-apartheid sentiment and prominent Blacks, such as Albertina Sisulu and Ntatho and Sally Motlana.

“We came out of the meeting with a clear mandate for action. Armed with an understanding that there would be no political manifestos and no pictures of politicians kissing each other, but a programme geared solely to assisting in the struggle, we approached Jews in the United States for support. In Israel, Yossi Beilin, Alon Liel, Ruth Baron and myself, among others, spearheaded the programme to be called the Israeli and South African Centres for International Cooperation” (ICIC) and would be based at Beit Berel."

CLANDESTINE RECRUITMENT
The early days saw us

“pounding the pavements in South Africa for some twenty months recruiting support and participants. The success of the operation was predicated on our ability to keep it under wraps.”

Asked how that was possible, Zelniker replied, “You know how porcupines makes love? Very carefully”.

The first group of twenty arrived in 1986 representing three constituencies – Soweto, the Cape Coloured community and Women’s groups.

“We brought in the Histadrut to help in the initial training,” said Zelniker. “After the success of that first group, it was easier to obtain more funding. We approached very prominent, radically anti-Israel, Black leaders in the U.S. and received their blessing. Individual Jews donated large sums of money in the full knowledge that they would receive no recognition, and the American Government very quietly also assisted us in funding.”

Zelniker’s shuttling to and fro between Israel and South Africa was not without risk.

“My associate Ruth Baron was also detained. There were many ways the South African Authorities could have derailed the programme and they made it crystal clear that physical intimidation could be escalated. We were worried about the graduates being whisked away on their return from Israel for interrogation and intimidation, which on occasion did happen.”

Despite all the harassment, including infiltration by the South African Bureau of State Security (BOSS), the programme flourished.At one point in the late 1980s, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times bumped into a group of Black trainees in Tel Aviv. He thought he had uncovered the scoop of the century – ANC and AZAPO forge secret ties with Apartheid’s ‘ally’!

“He telephoned me and said,‘this is sensational. What’s it all about?” When I explained to him the need for secrecy I thankfully managed to persuade him that the programme and South Africa’s future were far more important than his ego. He dropped the story.”

It was only a year or so after Mandela’s release that the programme’s profile entered the public domain.

“In 1993 we introduced a rural community development programme in the former homelands, and it was then that we came out into the open,” reveals Zelniker.

Today the programme has wide appeal throughout South Africa. Another participant in the present programme is Thabisile Msezane from Boksburg, who runs a day care-centre. Thabasile explains, “In the Boksburg area there were no schools and children loitered aimlessly in the streets wasting away their lives. Each day I noticed a little boy roaming around the shopping centre where I bought milk. He would ask me for money to buy food. I thought,

“What kind of future does this child have?”As I was starting a day care centre, I wanted to enroll this kid and so went in search of his parents. I was directed to a shabby compound behind a farmhouse, where I found his them. While speaking to the boy’s father, the child spread the word amongst his friends telling them he was going to school. By the end of my conversation, I had enrolled another twelve children. Today I have 150 pupils, some of whom walk a distance of twelve kilometres to get to the school.”

Trevor Ngwame, a councillor from Johannesburg, was all praise for the Beit Berel programme.

“We are dealing with the legacy of apartheid – no jobs, lack of housing and poor education. My approach is to offer people hope, and motivate them to organize themselves. We have seen how successful Israelis have been in overcoming insurmountable odds.Like South Africa, this country has never been short of problems and yet it manages to advance amazingly. This is what we want to do. Of course, Israel’s problems are very different, and in the South African context we have to ensure that people see a light at the end of the tunnel. I am not naïve to believe that matters are going to fall into place overnight. While the government must deliver the goods, the people also have to rise up to the challenge and they need the tools to it. This programme has been a tremendous help in this regard.

Zelniker concludes, “As a Jew I have learnt that liberation is not simply about taking the people out of the ghetto. It means taking the ghetto out of the people. To say that I am proud of this programme would be an understatement.”

05/08 Links Pt1: Glick: Siding with the victims of aggression; Honig: Salami slices some salami

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Siding with the victims of aggression

There is a third, more general reason that we recoil from the thought of blaming rape victims for their suffering. One of the foundations of liberal societies has always been that victims of aggression are not to blame for their attackers’ behavior.
Over the past few days, we have witnessed a dangerous erosion of this principle among American elites.
Last Sunday two Islamic terrorists armed with assault rifles tried to massacre participants at a Muhammed cartoon drawing contest in Garland, Texas.
The goal of the contest was self-evident. The organizers wished to defend the freedom of speech – and the right to life – of critics of Islamic totalitarianism.
Rather than standing with the contest’s organizers and participants, the US media from MSNBC to Fox News attacked Pamela Geller, the event’s main organizer and accused her of responsibility for the attack.

Sarah Honig: Salami slices some salami

Who says history has no sense of humor? Just as US President Barack Obama seeks to hide away the salami slices shaved off his deal with Iran, an Iranian named Salami exposes an extra-thick and very telling slice.
Without much ado, the Deputy Commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Brigadier General Hossein Salami, gave the lie to one of Obama’s most significant contentions about the deal that America’s Commander in Chief is cooking up with the nuke-craving ayatollah regime.
Significantly, Salami didn’t whisper off the record. He didn’t speculate about hearsay in a back room. He didn’t impart hints given to conflicting interpretations. Salami said his piece openly on state TV. He announced out loud that, contrary to American claims, there would be no foreign inspections of Iranian military sites. Period. End of. No quibbling.
Inspections, railed Salami, would be “selling out.” To hear him, “a tour of military facilities by foreign inspectors is to be equated with the occupation of a country. Iran will not become a paradise for spies. We will not roll out the red carpet for the enemy… They will not even be permitted to inspect the most normal military site in their dreams.”

JPost Editorial: Palestinian elections

A “government of war which will be against peace and stability in our region” was the way chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat chose to describe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s newly formed narrow coalition.
This was hardly an auspicious start to renewing relations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Erekat does not surprise with his criticism, made to an AFP reporter Thursday, but he does open himself up to painful comparisons with his Palestinian government.
Disparage it as you will, our incoming government came into being through a fair, democratic process; it represents the will of the majority of Israeli voters; and it is a legitimate political leadership.
The same cannot be said about Erekat and his political cronies in the PA.
Take Mahmoud Abbas, for instance. Among the hats he wears, which include chairman of the PLO and president of the Palestinian Authority, Abbas also calls himself the second president of the “State of Palestine,” taking over from the late Yasser Arafat.
He was sworn in as president of the “State of Palestine” on May 8, 2005 – exactly 10 years ago. But what was supposed to be a four-year term has stretched to a full decade.

Muslim artist in Tunisia paints Jews - respectfully

Al Jazeera has an article about Tahir Mamith, a Tunisian Muslim artists who specializes in painting Jews.

There are several thousand Jews remaining in Tunisia.

He specializes in paintings of Jews who are doing religious rites. A collection of his paintings were on exhibit in the Djerba synagogue that was the focus of the annual Lag B'Omer pilgrimage.

The turnout at this year's festival seems to have been much lower than last year, with the crowd being described in most articles as in the hundreds, as opposed to over two thousand last year.

Part of that may have been because of Israel's warnings of a potential for a terror attack during the event.

IDF soldiers refute allegations of Breaking the Silence

From Shai Levy in Mako:

I'm flooded with messages from IDF soldiers and officers. Not long after "Breaking the Silence" published the testimonies of IDF soldiers who fought in Operation Protective Edge , I was approached by the same soldiers and officers in every way possible: phone, messaging, Whatsapp and even through email. Everyone sent a clear message, "They stuck a knife in our back with a malicious plot", as a tank officer with the rank of lieutenant wrote me. They vehemently deny the evidence disseminated by Breaking the Silence and expose cases that prove their claims, as well as the difficult feelings.

It is important to mention that all interviews in the article were made independently and not through the filter of the army, and not in cooperation with the IDF spokesman.

Lt. Oren (a pseudonym) was a platoon commander in the 7th Brigade during the Gaza war. In one of the testimonies of Breaking the Silence, one argued that, "They just chose [a house] – the tank commander said, “Just pick the farthest one, so it does the most damage.” Revenge of sorts. So we fired at one of the houses. Really you just see a block of houses in front of you, so the distance doesn’t really matter.. "Lt. Oren says he knows the event personally, and even took part in his capacity.

He said, "This is an event about late Levitas (Captain Dimitri Levitas), which is simply not true. I have personally seen his body and we were frazzled. But even then we maintained our military ethics. It is true we did heavy firing, but we fired at the source of fire or suspicious places, all in accordance with the procedure and we followed a very strict identification procedure. Understand what I'm saying: our commander was killed, a friend, and we kept shooting according to appropriate procedures. This nonsense of shooting at the house because we want revenge is just a blatant lie. I can not believe that one of us said anything like that, certainly not someone who was there. "

He said commanders in the field use very precise intelligence information referring to almost any home. They know where the majority of the tunnels are, where there are no civilians is no less important, all shells shot only after a proper procedure they have been practicing for a long time before the operation. "Before and after the operation, we emphasized to the officers and soldiers the importance of accurate shooting, to identify the target of not shoot innocent people. More than that, Lotan brigade commander (Col. Nadav Lotan) still talking about even during every minute of a respite. Even then to the soldiers and commanders, he kept saying, 'Be sure to be careful and accurate so as not to shoot innocent people. "

He also revealed, "I can tell you about the two cases we were able to target what we suspected was a dispatcher, and we desisted for fear of hitting innocent people. One of them turned out to be a dispatcher for sure that hid near civilians."

In a conversation with the then battalion commander, an officer who was then a lieutenant colonel told me that "we had a crazy amount of intelligence. We double checked, and verified the verification," the officer told me. He also said during the waiting time before they would enter the Gaza Strip, "the fighters already studied the importance of accuracy and injury prevention against the innocent." According to him, this is an issue that many officers also emphasized to the soldiers during the fighting.

"Almost all the shooting got my approval and, if not mine then the officer in charge. All of our entrances to areas were made after we announced to them (citizens) with messages from planes, phones and what not. Now give me one example in history, one of the Army in announcing to its enemy where he plans to act and what to do. It is a scene bordering on madness. "

The officer said, "So as not to hurt innocent civilians, we informed them what we're going to do. That's how, by the way, the guys of Hamas could manage their fighting much better. They knew where we worked and where not, and then they could send the their fighters to the right place, you know what I mean?" he asked angrily and assessed that this conduct cost lives and wounded.

An infantry soldier testified, "In some places they called and told us we should not shoot.They were saying we were permitted to return fire only if we identify the enemy in the eye, and clearly. Conditions were very intense and some of us took it poorly, as if our lives are worth less than the Gazan with AK. But I can say we even understood this. Besides, that's the difference between us and a coward terrorist who fires behind the back of a woman or a child. "

His fury was not really hidden, he added, "then these people come and tell me we fired freely. Bullshit, I bet that they did not speak with a single real fighter in Protective Edge". He also revealed that in one of the skirmishes they did not receive permission to shoot artillery fire, because of the proximity of the source of Hamas's shooting to civilians. He said, "We were under fire and my squad commander ordered artillery support, a conversation I heard with my own ears. Any approval of artillery had to be done twice, ...I remember that under a real source of fire in a specific location. We waited a long time until we have received assistance and it was precise fire from the Air Force. "

Another soldier talked with me as well, a sergeant, reacted to the issue of Hamas lookouts, as mentioned in testimonies of Breaking the Silence, which said the IDF fired there on unarmed women who with phones. [BTS: "They were two young women walking in the orchard. The commander asked to confirm, “What do you see,” and whether they were incriminated or not. It was during daytime, around 11:00 AM, or noon. The lookouts couldn’t see well so the commander sent a drone up to look from above, and the drone implicated them. It saw them with phones, talking, walking. They directed fire there, on those girls, and they were killed. After they were implicated, I had a feeling it was bullshit.]

A paratroop officer told me that Hamas often used women and children to alert their men of where to fired at IDF forces. He says he personally witnessed such a case:"A woman with a child came very close to our position and really you see how she points to our positions . You see how she talks on the phone and after a moment passed, we started taking sniper fire and mortars." He noted you are allowed to shoot such observers but not freely, there are procedures that must be adhered to, and in this case by the time they finished the procedures she was gone.

According to him and other respondents, there were dozens of cases in which women and children were sent with phones to locate the positions of the army, which of course caused terrorist organizations to open fire. It cost the lives of soldiers. "So there were cases where we fired in such circumstances, and it is absolutely legal becaue this is a real threat to life. But there were many cases of doubt where nobody opened fire," said the lieutentant colonel we spoke with.

"I have no problem with people on our side who want to repair the world and be angels", a paratrooper told us, "but that's not the case. We went to war against a terrorist organization and specifically those we went to defend, are betraying us. It's really a betrayal. I read the evidence where it seemed like they were describing another war, I was there and that's just not true. What they did is to make our blood worthless, really, and it is unbelievable. "

Oren, an officer in the armored units, said, "We feel this report is very difficult. They made us into war criminals while we, we left to protect them, we were the only ones operating in morality and maintained the purity of arms. This is something that is impressed upon us from the start, not to mention in the command courses, and yet they come against us. I do not believe in protecting these people. I am in favor of investigating properly. I was upset about what was published, some people looted money, it was great that the IDF investigated and stopped them. But to accuse us of systemically acting against civilians, as if we freely fired, it's just a shame and betrayal of Israeli soldiers. "

Another interviewee is Air Force fighter pilot who took part in a Protective edge and Pillar of Defense. He said many attacks were canceled because of proximity to civilians and had difficult personal feelings from the publication of Breaking the Silence. "They claimed that there was active heavy fire as part of the policy. And I ask, what exactly do you expect? That our soldiers would enter into an area that wasn't made safe? And I tell you that this happened in some cases. In the testimonies I read they said fired at houses before entering and turn on heavy fire in neighborhoods, They say it's part of the IDF's destruction policies and I can tell you that it is nonsense. I personally witnessed the military's efforts to evacuate civilians from a place where we attack, I saw a lot of activities that do not reveal how UAVs are used to confirm that no civilians are there right up to the moment you press the button. "

The pilot indicates that for him, the report of Breaking the Silence "is not intended to fix anything. Apparently it's part of our self-flagellation. They use columns of Gideon Levy, people who were not in war rooms and don't see what we are doing to preserve the purity of weapons. Or they fabricated their evidence, or somebody gave them information from frustration and to take revenge, I do not know. What I do know is that they hurt us, a very deep trauma. I can say that personally these things, these plots are disturbing to me. These things cost us and stay forever, components of a false and cruel blood libel that is part of their DNA.

"Breaking the Silence" responded by saying that nothing in the new testimonies contradicted their claims, and that the case of the shelling of the 7th Brigade in memory of a soldier killed, the claim was examined and it is not the same case referred to by what they published.

The testimony above shows that some of the women and children who are listed as "civilians" killed - even according to the Meir Amit Center - were in fact acting as spotters for terrorists and were legal targets under the laws of armed conflict.

It also shows that, shamefully, the IDF accepts casualties in its own soldiers in order to avoid even the appearance of being too reckless with the lives of its enemies.

That is a real scandal, and one that no NGO would ever get funding to document.

(h/t Yenta)

From Israel's News1:

After labeling settlement products and boycotting Israeli companies, Europe exacerbated its anti-Israeli policy-and this time the decision is particularly problematic.

The Netherlands decided to cut pensions of survivors living beyond the Green Line. Channel 2 news reporter, Lee Na'im, reported that "D.", a 90-year-old Holocaust survivor from the Netherlands, had recently decided to immigrate to Israel and be with her family. She moved to a neighborhood in the Modi'in area, just beyond the Green Line.

The son of D. says: "Mother immigrated to Israel a few months ago. After seeing what is happening in Europe, she decided she did not want to continue to live there and instead go to Israel."

D. was receiving legal assistance from the Justice Ministry to realize her rights as a Holocaust survivor in Israel. In addition, she receives from the government of Netherlands a 1,100 euro old-age pension and an additional pension she is entitled to because she was a Holocaust survivor.

She updated the Dutch government with her new address and received a surprising response.

The letter sent to her said: "Madam, due to living in the West Bank, an area that we do not have any agreement with, we are obliged to deduct a large percentage of your old age pension."

"It gave my mother such a shock that she just burst into tears," said her son. "She has not slept since. She lost her trust and want to go back out of Israel."

Within a few days D.'s allowance was cut to 740 euros, 35% less than she had received to date.

The official explanation of the Dutch authorities is that any settlement in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights to be a separate political entity from Israel, with which no Dutch government has political agreements.

The family of D. is trying to fight and change the decision, and in particular find it difficult to understand the directive following a law passed The Dutch government.

This is sickening - and discriminatory..

Even if you believe that the West Bank is occupied by Israel, this woman's decision to live there was voluntary - which means she wasn't "transferred" in the language of the Geneva Conventions. The intent of the Geneva Conventions was to stop the forced transfer of citizens. It is perfectly legal for an individual to move wherever they want to under international law.

Except nowadays, when international law is twisted against Jews in Israel and only Jews in Israel.

Furthermore, if D. would have moved to towns occupied by Turkey or Morocco or Russia, there is no law on their books that would reduce the pension.

A pension agreement is between a country and its citizens, not between a country and the place that they live.

This law is only meant to punish Jews who don't have the right to live wherever they want, as opposed to everyone else.

(h/t Yenta)

UPDATE: English story here.

05/07 Links Pt2: Dodging swastikas and Israel hate, Jordan’s secret Jews; Rivlin salutes aid workers

From Ian:

Israel’s Haters and Racism in Israel

Suggesting that racism is unique to one group of people is itself racist. Racism is the portrayal of one group of people as inferior or superior to other groups. Saying one group is uniquely racist is to portray them as inferior to other groups of people, which fits the definition of racism.
The Israel hating crew is attempting to hijack an internal Israeli matter in order to boost up their racist agenda. Their agenda doesn’t line up with the Ethiopian-Israeli struggle. Ethiopian-Israelis are proud Israelis. The man who was attacked was wearing an IDF uniform at the time he was attacked. At the demonstration, HaTikvah was sung and Israeli flags were common.
The protesters are not on the side of the Israel hate crew. Israel’s haters support a cause that seeks to destroy the state that Ethiopian-Israelis are (judging by them waving Israeli flags at the protests) are proudly a part of. Israel’s haters support a people which 93% of the population is anti-semitic. Israel’s haters support a group whose own charter calls for the death of all Jews worldwide, including the Ethiopian-Israeli community and Jews of all colors around the world. My message to these people: This is not your fight. Stop trying to sugarcoat your intentions and pretend to sympathize with these people when you support a group that openly advocates a genocide of them all.

Ryan Bellerose: Pro-Israel Advocacy: Out With The Old, In With The New

Effective,modern Israel advocacy is the opposite of what many existing organisations want. It is vibrant, unapologetic, boisterous and in-your-face. It is positive and yet unafraid to attack the other side’s hypocrisy. It is not defensive but rather, proactive. Its music festivals, ethnic food, and aggressive messaging target the emotional switches. Its events aren’t at the JCC but at the centre of campus and downtown in the city, not hidden away and preaching to the 15 Jews and 3 evangelicals in the choir. It is inclusive and builds bridges with other minorities, bridges that for too long were ignored because those communities offered no obvious benefit. Now, university students themselves are building these bridges – often with little or no help from existing organisations. They are, in fact, reanimating and redefining advocacy.
Effective speakers are no longer the slick suit-wearing pyramid scheme prophets, but genuine people who have captivating stories. They might not all sound like they attended Oxford like my friend Kaseem Hafiz,a man who at one point hated Jews so much he was considering how to become a terrorist. His awakening led him to become one of the most outspoken of young pro-Israel advocates. This new breed of pro-Israel advocates have something common with him: they all have engaging stories and are compelling speakers. There are people like Dumisani Washington, a tall African American Christian pastor, an incredible Zionist, who also happens to be an awesome dreadlock-wearing musician. I cannot make up these stories! You have guys like Izzy Ezagui, a good-looking American kid from Miami, who is very well-spoken – and who not so incidentally happens to be an incredible warrior who lost an arm in a mortar attack, rehabbed, and rejoined the army. Izzy, though, didn’t simply rejoin the regular army, but the ISRAELI SPECIAL FORCES, in less than a year (yes, with one arm). The average university student can relate to these guys because of their story alone, even if they may not agree with their politics. There’s Chloe Valdary, a young Black woman whose unapologetic advocacy should be the bellwether for any advocate. Chloe, who attended university in New Orleans, just decided one day she didn’t like seeing so much Jew hate and became a force for change. She started a pro-Israel music festival, and she speaks out against the coopting of the social justice movement by people who do not give a damn about social justice but simply stole the language.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali addresses Anti-Semitism on campus at the Boston premiere of Crossing the Line 2

From Rania Khalek in Electronic Intifada:

The similarities in suppression tactics employed by Baltimore and Israeli security forces are no coincidence.

Under the cover of counterterrorism training, nearly every major police agency in the United States has traveled to Israel for lessons in occupation enforcement, including many of the agencies active in Baltimore last week.

In 2002, Baltimore city police officers went to Israel on a junket organized by the neoconservative Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), where they studied Israeli occupation tactics used against Palestinians, including “crowd control, and coordination with the media,” according to a JINSA press release. “Participants resolved to begin the process of sharing ‘lessons learned’ in Israel with their law enforcement colleagues in the United States,” boasted JINSA.

Baltimore city police returned to Israel for more occupation training in a 2009 trip arranged by the American Jewish Committee’s Project Interchange.

On a 2007 training session in Israel, Baltimore County police reportedly “received valued lessons from Israeli officials…about gathering human and electronic intelligence” that can “apply to investigations into organized crime and gangs.”

The Montgomery County Police Department, which sent dozens of police officers to assist in the Baltimore crackdown, has attended several training sessions in Israel, including one in 2010 and another in 2012, both hosted by Project Interchange.

This is phenomenally stupid on multiple levels.

First of all, the programs that Khalek highlights are not for riot control. One of them mentions a demonstration of "crowd control" during a terror attack - not a training session - but most of the training was for counterterrorism techniques such as intelligence gathering and operations to capture terrorists before they begin their operations; border security, mechanisms to delay terrorists on their way to a target such as checkpoints; and site security - the protection of the restaurants, shopping malls and buses that are the preferred terrorist targets, preventing bombings, securing airports and border crossings and performing mass rescue operations.

Secondly, even if Israel did offer training in riot control, it is up to individual police departments to decide on their techniques. They wouldn't photocopy Israel's manual for riot control. They take the lessons that they like and incorporate them into their own programs. One has to be thoroughly consumed with hate in order to blame Japan if someone kills another with a karate kick. (In fact, I am very surprised that Khalek didn't notice that the Baltimore police offers krav maga seminars. )

(For those interested, here is a blog post from someone who took Baltimore cop riot training in 2000, with a comment from someone who took it in 2008. Nothing about Israel, of course. )

According to Khalek's moronic logic, there is another organization responsible for Baltimore police actions:

The United Nations.

Yes, the UN offers police commander training, and one of the sessions was attended by a major in the Baltimore Police Department. Clearly the UN is culpable for the Baltimore riots.

Do you hear how stupid that sounds?

That is how stupid Rania Khalek's argument, the same argument used by other Israel haters, is.

But it isn't stupidity that animates Khalek's half-baked theories. It is pure hate.

The Electronic Intifada readers who buy this argument, however, are truly stupid.

(h/t Mitchell)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column:

Earlier this week, Avigdor Lieberman decided, for some reason, that he would not join PM Netanyahu’s coalition (yes, he gave ‘reasons’, but nobody takes them seriously). Coalition negotiations with Naftali Bennett’s Jewish Home party, the last to get on board, continued until a few hours before the deadline for Netanyahu to present his putative coalition of 61 Knesset members to President Rivlin.

As I make the final update to my post on Thursday morning, the excitement is over. Bennett demanded and got the Justice Ministry portfolio for Ayelet Shaked. There will be a Likud government with 61 mandates, the narrowest possible margin, a government that can be knocked over by the defection of a single member.

There were other possibilities. Netanyahu and Bennett might not have come to agreement, or some other member of the coalition suddenly might have decided to make a new demand despite having signed an agreement. Netanyahu might have chosen to invite Labor’s Herzog into a unity government; given the proper inducements, he would have agreed despite his protestations.

If Netanyahu hadn’t succeeded at the last moment, the President might have given the job of forming the coalition to some other Knesset member, like Herzog, who would probably have had even more trouble than Netanyahu. He might have tried to force a unity government. There is even the possibility that no member of the Knesset could form a coalition, in which case there would have to be new elections.

This is tremendously frustrating. There are big problems — internal and external — that require attention, and the PM and various party leaders who are ministers have spent almost two months negotiating with each other, having meetings (open and secret), hatching plots (Lieberman), etc. This is after the excruciating election campaign that went on from December to March.

I admire PM Netanyahu for being able to carry on at least the most important affairs of state during this protracted period, but this system is dysfunctional. And a 61-member coalition means that it isn’t over — Netanyahu will have to try to broaden the coalition after its inauguration unless he wants even more instability.

The parliamentary system is a good one, because it makes the government highly responsive to the will of the electorate, as expressed by their representatives in the Knesset. An ineffective government can be removed at any time. If only the US had such a system, Obama would be long gone! But the coalition process is problematic.

One suggestion is to simply get rid of the process by appointing as Prime Minister the leader of the party with the greatest number of seats. But this could have unintended consequences, if there are more than two parties in the race. Suppose there were three parties, two on the Right and one on the Left. If the right-wing parties received 39 seats each, and the single left-wing party got 52, the latter would win by a large margin — but the clear preference of the electorate for a right-wing government would be thwarted.

Another possibility would be to elect the Knesset and then have the MKs choose a Prime Minister from among themselves, by majority vote. One problem with this is that it removes the direct connection between the voter and the PM that is important if the people are to have confidence in the PM. Worse, it would produce backroom wheeling-and-dealing similar to what goes on in coalition negotiations, except that there wouldn’t be explicit coalition agreements.

What about direct election of a Prime Minister? Israel tried American-style separate elections for the Knesset and the Prime Minister in 1996 and 1999. This proved unsatisfactory because the elected PM didn’t necessarily have the base needed in the Knesset to form a stable coalition. Other suggestions that detach the PM from the Knesset could bring about the kind of paralysis that has characterized the relationship between the US President and the Congress.

Yet another idea would be to raise the minimum percentage of votes needed to enter the Knesset from the present 3.5% (5 Knesset seats) to a much larger value and then require that each party designate another party that would get its votes if it did not reach the threshold. This would make it more likely that one of the larger parties would get a majority, and simplify coalition negotiations if not. But it would also reduce the representation of minority views in the Knesset, in effect disenfranchising their voters (it could also produce an outcome with two large Jewish parties, each without a majority, and one smaller Arab party holding the balance of power).

Despite the frustration, this isn’t a simple problem, especially since the political propensity is to find ways to exploit unplanned loopholes in any system. Possibly, to paraphrase Churchill’s famous comment on democracy, the coalition system is the worst way to form a government — except for all the others.

05/07 Links Pt1: The Cartoon Wars; A Reset Button for Israel?; How I learned to love the Iranian bomb;

From Ian:

Douglas Murray: The Cartoon Wars

Of course, this idea goes to one of the false presumptions of our time: that people on the political left are motivated by good intentions even when they do bad things, while people on the political right are motivated by bad intentions even when they do good things. So a cartoon promoted by Charlie Hebdo may be thought to be provocative in a constructive way, whereas one promoted by AFDI can only be thought if as being provocative in an unconstructive way. Whether people are willing to admit it or not, this is one of the main problems that underlies the reaction to the Texas attack.
Such a distinction is, needless to say, a colossal mistake. When people prefer to focus on the motives of the victims rather than on the motives of the attackers, they will ignore the single most important matter: that an art exhibition, or free speech, has been targeted. The rest is narcissism and slow-learning.
It does not matter if you are right wing or left wing. It does not matter if you are American, Danish, Dutch, Belgian or French, or whether you are from Texas or Copenhagen. These particularities may matter greatly and be endlessly interesting to people in the countries in question. But they matter not a jot to ISIS or their fellow-travellers. What these people are trying to do is to enforce Islamic blasphemy laws across the entire world.
That is all that matters. If we forget this or lose sight of it, not only will we lose free speech, we will lose, period.

Michael Lumish: Say Hello to the Devil

If Pamela Geller is a racist I have yet to see the evidence. What I see is a much maligned woman standing up to the enemies of the Jewish people and to the enemies of the infidel west. What I also see are a whole bunch of moral cowards who defame this woman even as they turn a blind eye to the rise of political Islam throughout the Muslim Middle East.
The rise of political Islam during the Obama administration may be the single most significant geo-political event in world history since the demise of the Soviet Union. The Muslim Middle East is moving from a period of secular-authoritarian nationalism, as exemplified by people such as Gamal Abdel Nasser, to a period of rising theocratic-authoritarianism in the name of Islam. This, it should be emphasized, is not an improvement. On the contrary. While Hosni Mubarack may have been a dictator he, at least, did not believe in some Allah-given right to slaughter Jews and he did not set himself up as an enemy of the United States and the west.
This is what the Muslim Brotherhood has done and it is precisely what Geller opposes.
Of course, it should be something that anyone who believes in secular democracy should oppose, but they don’t. Mainstream media throughout the United States and Europe largely pussy-foot around political Islam despite the fact that it represents everything that the secular west allegedly opposes. Devotees of political Islam (or “radical Islam” or “Islamism”) oppress women, hang Gay people from cranes, and promises the slaughter of the Jewish people and they do so in the name of Allah.
What’s not to like?
Ask Pamela Geller, she’ll have some words.

‘Draw Muhammad’ Winner on Growing Up in Islam and Defeating the Jihad

Breitbart News spoke with Bosch Fawstin, an accomplished artist, cartoonist, and anti-Jihad activist who won first prize at Sunday’s “Draw Muhammad” free speech event in Garland, Texas.
The event came under attack by AK47-weilding jihadists, who were neutralized by a police officer before they could commit mass murder against the free speech art display’s attendees.
Fawstin talked about his unique experience growing up in the Bronx as a Muslim, how his life changed after the 9/11 attacks, and he shared strategies to defeat the global jihadist movement. His artwork is featured throughout the interview.
Breitbart News: You won first prize at the Muhammad Cartoon Contest? What inspired your first-place artwork?
Bosch Fawstin: Quite simply, I wanted to do something different because I’ve been drawing Muhammad for a long time. Ever since the Danish cartoons, and after the Charlie Hebdo attack. Every time something horrific happens. If free speech was under assault, under siege, I drew Muhammad.
This drawing of Muhammad showed him threatening me. He says, angrily, ‘You Can’t Draw Me,” with a sword in his hand. I respond, ‘That’s Why I Draw You.’”