Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Today's Pallywood production (update)

A Jew and his son were walking in the Old City of Jerusalem.

An Arab says something to (or possibly spits at) them as they pass by.

The man, insulted, turns around and shoves the Arab twice.

Police separate the two.

Then the Arab starts his act.

He swoons and falls to the ground, pretending to faint.

Police try to pick him up but he keeps his knees on his stomach (while supposedly unconscious) so he can not be forced to stand.

So they carry him off.

Now the Arab headlines can say 'Settlers assault Christian man who said' Allahu Akbar. '"

(Ht / Bob Knot)

UPDATE : Bob K found another angle where it Appears the police held the Arab's throat for two seconds.

# Video | settlers assaulted a young man in front of the door of the chain and the occupation forces showered beat him Mmy led to loss of consciousness and taken to Ospy.tsoar Sabreen slaves
Posted by Holy network news on Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Amnesty-USA tells a whopper

I just found out about a specific Amnesty-USA Twitter account dedicated to nothing besides Israel and the the "occupied Palestinian territories."

Amnesty International USA team on Israel/OPT/State of Palestine: Edith Garwood, Country Specialist, and Alicia Koutsoulieris, Case Coordinator.

When Amnesty came out with the Gaza Platform, this Twitter exchange occurred between Yitzchak Goodman and AI-USA:

This is as baldfaced a lie as is possible, since I documented many "civilians" in Amnesty's Gaza Platform who weren't civilian. Such as Zakariya Alaa Subhi al-Batsh and six of his relatives in the same house, all of whom were militants and all of whom Amnesty called civilian:

Or Ibrahim Jamal Nasser, reported by Amnesty to be a 13-year old boy:

But maybe AIUSA just wasn't aware of these people. So I tweeted them last night:

OK, @IOTPA, here's one. Let me know when you correct it. Clock starts now. @yitzgood @amnesty pic.twitter.com/zDd77FrrIc
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) August 12, 2015

And here are a couple more to add to their list of corrections that must be made that I took from the Meir Amit Center that I verified the Gaza Platform calls "civilian.":

Hey, Amnesty says that they correct errors. Let's see if they are telling the truth.

Even though I proved that they count fewer terrorists killed than even Hamas does.

Antisemitism on the Temple Mount (video)

This is a 12 minute video - even with edits - showing a mob of Muslims following around a small group of haredi Jews visiting the Temple Mount.

The Jews act quietly and respectfully. But the fact that they are visibly religious seems to make the Muslims even more upset.

The entire time the Jews are being harassed and screamed at, simply because they are Jewish. The Muslims aren't there for prayer or for reflection or even to play ball - their entire lives are focused on trying to prevent Jews from walking around in peace..

But good luck finding any Western media outlet describing this accurately as what it is: pure Muslim antisemitism.

The good news is that haredi Jews are starting to visit the Temple Mount. It isn't only knitted-kipah Jews any more.

08/11 Links Pt2: US intervenes in lawsuit over Palestinian terror attacks; Wistrich's last essay

From Ian:

Wistrich takes aim at ‘anti-Zionist mythology’ of left in posthumous essay

In his final essay, Wistrich went on the attack against what he saw as one of the most pernicious dogmas of Israel’s critics, firmly rejecting any comparisons between the Jewish state and European colonialist regimes.
“Jews who arrived in British Mandated Palestine manifestly did not come in order to destroy or displace the Palestinian Arab ‘nation’—contrary to the myth propagated by the pro-Palestine radical left, until today,” he wrote, asserting that economic modernization spurred by Jewish national revival turned Palestine into a land “attracting substantial Arab immigration.”
According to Wistrich, there were around six hundred thousand Arabs in the entire British Mandated Territory in the early 1920s, rising to well over a million by 1940, “hardly an example of colonial dispossession of the ‘indigenous’ population.”
Most Palestinian Arabs during the Mandatory period were “either immigrants from neighboring Arab lands or descendants of immigrants who had arrived since the late nineteenth century,” he added.
“Not only were they not Palestinian ‘natives,’ but at the time of the Balfour Declaration there was no clear or distinct concept of a Palestinian Arab nation. The left-wing narrative, especially since 1967, has consistently sidelined such inconvenient realities, replacing them with ideological fictions,” he asserted.
Wistrich wrote that he believed Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War to be a turning point for much of the liberal and democratic left in their approach to Israel, with the state’s image turning into that of an occupier which “began to erode an unwritten taboo against open antisemitism since the Shoah.”
“A much harsher anti-Israel rhetoric” emerged both on the right and the left, including “an increasingly aggressive and vituperative anti-Zionism” on the part of radical “progressives.”

WSJ Book Review Takes on "Holocaust Syndrome"

Author and former AP reporter and editor Matti Friedman has previously, like CAMERA, drawn attention to the inaccuracies in media coverage of Israel. Now, in a sharp and funny book review in The Wall Street Journal, Friedman turns his gaze to “non-fiction” inaccuracies. In a review of Padraig O’Malley’s “The Two-State Delusion,” Friedman points out:
More work should have gone into ensuring accuracy. The author asserts, for example, that Israel’s military victory in 1967 resulted from “massive U.S. assistance,” when there wasn’t massive U.S. military assistance before 1967. (France was then the main arms supplier; the planes that won the war were Mirages and Mystères.) We learn that Ariel Sharon was an agriculture minister in 1971 and that this has something to do with the genesis of the settlements; he wasn’t, and it doesn’t. The author describes Israeli soldiers carrying their Uzis “nonchalantly,” which is a nice touch. But no Israeli soldiers carry the Uzi, which was deemed obsolete after the 1973 war and removed from frontline service after that. The word “homeland” is quoted pointedly from the Balfour Declaration of 1917, where that word doesn’t appear. Would it have been too much trouble to check the text? It’s a single sentence.
The sub-headline of the review is “The idea that a collective memory of the Holocaust renders Jewish judgment defective is somehow acceptable these days,” a point Friedman illuminates with this passage:
The “bonding, primal element” of the Jewish psyche, we learn, is the Holocaust. Israelis are in thrall to weapons because of the Holocaust; they are obtuse to the suffering of others because of the Holocaust; and in general they are sort of crazy because of the Holocaust. Actually, half of the Jewish population in Israel has roots in the Islamic world. Their families were displaced by Muslims, not Nazis. Israelis think many of their neighbors are out to destroy Israel not because of the Holocaust, but because many of their neighbors say they are out to destroy Israel. Israel’s actions in the Middle East, in other words, have to do with its experience in the Middle East. The country’s objective success against long odds would have to indicate that at least some of its decisions have been reality-based, if not quite reasonable.
The idea that a collective memory renders Jewish judgment defective seems to be something acceptable to say aloud these days in connection with Israel, which is why I’ve dwelled on it. It’s important to point out not only that this observation is wrong, but that it is a patronizing ethnic smear. I don’t like the careless generalizations in Mr. O’Malley’s book or his shaky grasp of the facts. But I don’t think they have anything to do with the potato famine.
The entire review, unlike the book apparently, is worth reading.

PROOF: EU is funding anti-Israel organizations, violating international law

Israel and the EU established diplomatic relations in 1959. TheRebel.media recently sat down with the Ambassador of the EU to Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen, to discuss this complicated relationship.
Because Israel is a democracy, the EU is far more critical of them than of other Middle Eastern countries.
This double standard extends to EU NGOs pushing anti-Israel "Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions" campaigns, even though the Ambassador insists that the EU is against BDS.
According to Israeli officials, the EU is acting illegally (and violating its own signed agreements) by funding unauthorized Palestinian buildings in areas placed under Israel control by international law, including the West Bank.
Investigative journalist Ben-Dror Yemini says "Israel should tell the EU, 'enough.'"
He says that the EU's official statements about Israel often contradict their real world actions.
Igal Hecht presents a number of examples of this.

EU violating international law in relations with Israel

Islamic Jihad has announced that it will open summer camps for 6000 children tomorrow.

The purpose of the "camps" is explicit - to create the next generation of mujahadeen. The name of this year's camps are "youthfulness victory."

If there are children under 15 in these camps, then Islamic Jihad is violating international law by recruiting them. Not that "human rights" NGOs will say anything against it.

In other Islamic Jihad news, one of its military leaders now claims that their rockets can reach all parts of "Palestine."

Last week, as noted by Elder among others, the UK’s pro-BDS National Union of Teachers (NUT), the country’s largest teachers’ union, has – temporarily – withdrawn a controversial teaching resource consisting, to quote the London Jewish News (http://www.jewishnews.co.uk/nut-pulls-one-sided-literature-on-middle-east-following-heavy-criticism/), “of videos and teachers’ prompts,” while the Charities Commission investigates whether guidelines have been contravened. Developed in collaboration with Edukid and the General Union of Palestinian Teachers, the resource is widely viewed as deliberate demonization of Israel unacceptable in schools. Former Communities minister Sir Eric Pickles noted that a reference in the resource “to ‘Jews’ as opposed to ‘Israelis’ is particularly objectionable” while another Conservative MP, Andrew Percy, commented that “The NUT’s attempt to justify its indefensible document by saying they work with the Holocaust Education Trust is utterly derisory”. Percy added: “As a former history teacher, if any of my students produced such a biased piece of work they wouldn’t have expected to pass.”

As reported by Breitbart (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/03/national-union-of-teachers-accused-of-pushing-palestine-propaganda-on-school-kids/), Jewish leaders claim that the resource is “one-sided and partisan” in its portrayal of the Middle East, and the Jewish Chronicle (http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/141445/nut-pulls-one-sided-school-books-palestinians) quoted a Department of Education spokesperson thus: “The law is crystal clear that all political discussions in school should be unbiased and balanced. Teachers should only use teaching materials which are suitable for their children and we trust them to decide which resources to use in their lessons.”

Such trust may be misplaced. The resource under scrutiny is not the only item of its kind developed by Israel’s enemies in the UK for turning young minds against Zionism and the Jewish State. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign, for instance, introduced in 2009 a pernicious "Teachers Pack on Palestine" called "Exploring Palestine through Citizenship". A publicity leaflet obtained by me at the time describes it as follows:

‘PSC, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and CAABU, the Council for Arab-British Understanding have put together an excellent online educational resource designed to introduce secondary school students to Palestine. They are mainly geared towards the Citizenship Curriculum, but can be used in English, Media, History and Geography lessons. 1) Forced to leave home: After brainstorming what they would take from their homes if they had to flee at short notice, students will do short role-plays based on fleeing home; 2) Role-play – refugees: A role-play to explore some of the key questions around one of the most central issues regarding Israel-Palestine. In character students will discuss the Right of Return and who has responsibility for the Palestinian refugees. 3) Handala – a boy whose face we don't see: Students will look at 10 cartoons by Naji Al-Ali, a Palestinian political cartoonist and one of the most popular in the Arab world. Students will explore the power of symbiosis and draw their own cartoons; 4) The opinions of maps [Elder’s readers will need no prompting regarding which four maps!]: Students will look at a range of maps of Israel-Palestine representing different perspectives and identify the main themes of each map – thereby increasing their understanding of some of the main issues, improving their map literacy and addressing the question of whether any map presents only "bias-free" facts; 5) Something to cheer about? The class will prepare and conduct a press conference around the British government's refusal of visas to the Palestine under-22 football team. 6) Why didn't Reem finish school? Students will be given a series of information cards about Gaza and from these each group will construct a story to explain why a girl living in Gaza might not finish school; 7) A village and a wall – news story: Students will make a news bulletin about the weekly demonstrations in Bil'in, a Palestinian village cut through by the Wall; 8) Bil'in – role plays: Students will look at photos of Bil'in, a Palestinian village cut through by the Wall, and work in groups to make role-plays based on the photos; 9) Trading: different people, different chances – The class is split into several groups, and some of [sic] designated Palestinians and some settlers. The teacher administers the occupation as the different groups produce goods to sell – giving students an insight into how the occupation and the settlement enterprise affects Palestinian livelihoods; 10) What's in your shopping bag – is it illegal? Students will learn about fair trade and the issue of products in British supermarkets as being labelled as Israeli when they are from illegal settlements. In groups, students will produce a flyer, poster and letter to a supermarket; 11) Difference and sameness in a democracy: Students will read a couple of articles and do online research in preparation for a formal debate that takes Israel-Palestine as a case study: This house believes it is easier to be democratic when people are the same"; 12) False advertising: Students will look at an advert from the Israeli tourist board [http://daphneanson.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/travellers-tall-tale-palestine-lies.html ]that was taken down following several complaints and write their own letter of complaint. They will learn about the advertising code; 13) New news, old news, whose news? Students will look at events in a given week in the West Bank and Gaza and whether these events made it into the British press. Students will reflect on why or why not, and on the nature of news; 14) Being neutral: Students will look at the controversy around the BBC's decision in 2009 not to show a humanitarian appeal for Gaza in order to explore notions of neutrality and fairness; 15) Spray-painting the Wall: Students will analyse graffiti from the Wall in the West Bank and read an article on it, developing an understanding of the role that graffiti and art can play in such a context; 16) More on Bil'in: there are two lessons based on Bil'in, a village in the west Bank that has been the site of weekly demonstrations for four years against the Wall – which cuts straight through the village. Backgrounder on the Wall and Bil'in for teachers and for [sic] something for students.’

And watch out for The Balfour Project (http://www.balfourproject.org/), which is in the process of developing resource material for schools, and which in the meantime advises “Teachers may wish to have educational material for history lessons. Please contact us”.

The Steering Committee of this initiative consisted at the outset of Dr Mary Embleton, historian; Professor Mary Grey, theologian, writer and activist; Dr Imad Karam, academic and film maker; Peter Riddell, peace activist; Dr Monica Spooner, medical doctor; Professor Roger L. Spooner OBE, scientist; Rev Dr Stephen Sizer, Anglican vicar and author (who of course is in disgrace following that notorious Israel and 9/11 Facebook post of his in January this year), and its advisers were John Bond OAM, Former Secretary, National Sorry Day Committee, Australia; Anne Clayton, Coordinator of Friends of Sabeel UK; Abe Hayeem, architect, peace activist; Simon Keyes, Director, St Ethelburga’s Centre; Professor Ilan Pappe; Massoud Shadjareh, Chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission; Professor Nur Masalha, Professor of Religion and Politics; Dr Peter Shambrook, historian and author; Mariam Tadros, Trustee, Biblelands (name since changed to Embrace the Middle East).

On its website we read:

“The Balfour Project has been created by a group of academics and activists who believe that this anniversary should not pass unremarked. Mindful of Britain’s responsibility for what has come to pass in the Middle East, the Balfour Project will encourage understanding of what led to the Balfour Declaration, and what flowed from it. Through our website, we plan to facilitate a network of educational, political, religious and humanitarian groups who share this conviction. We aim to stimulate conferences, cultural exchanges and the production of multimedia resources. Above all, we believe that the search for the truth of what took place, and the acknowledgement of wrong-doing, can contribute to justice, peace and reconciliation in the Middle East.”

Furthermore,

“In November 1917 the government of Britain issued the Balfour Declaration which promised a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine whilst also promising to protect the rights of the existing indigenous Arab population. This was despite the fact that two years earlier Britain had promised the Arabs the same territory in return for their support against the Ottomans Subsequent British governments upheld the promise to create a Jewish homeland but reneged on the promise to protect the rights of the Arab inhabitants. Thus, a homeland for the Jewish people was achieved at the cost of freedom and self-determination for Palestinian Arabs. Almost a hundred years ago the stage was set for a struggle to control the land that has intensified from that day to this.” (http://www.balfourproject.org/about-2/)

It has since denied that its purpose is to seek an apology by Britain for the Balfour Declaration, and while the bibliography of relevant reading material on its website seems well-balanced, the fact remains that most of the individuals prominently connected with this still rather coy and curious Project appear to be overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian rather than pro-Israel. Mary Grey, indeed, recently signed an online petition requesting prime minister David Cameron and home secretary Theresa May to ban Christians United for Israel (CUFI) from establishing a presence in Britain. The petition says, inter alia, that CUFI’s “founder not only promotes war and Islamophobia, but his organisation in engaged with funding terrorism in the Middle East, and the building of illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land, contrary to International Law and UN resolutions,” and Professor Grey added her own reason for signing: “Because Christianity should not be associated with such fundamentalist racism”.

08/11 Links Pt1: Obama recognized Iran's right to uranium enrichment in 2011; There's no 'SnapBack'

From Ian:

'Obama recognized Iran's right to nuclear program in 2011'

The U.S. government began secret nuclear talks with the Iranian regime in 2011, when Holocaust-denying firebrand Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was still president, rather than after supposed "moderate" Hassan Rouhani was elected in 2013, as the Obama administration has claimed. This revelation was made public by Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a speech delivered on June 23.
According to a translation of the speech published by the Middle East Media Research Institute, Khamenei said, "The issue of negotiating with the Americans is related to the term of the previous [Ahmadinejad] government, and to the dispatching of a mediator to Tehran to request talks. At the time, a respected regional figure came to me as a mediator [referring to Omani Sultan Qaboos bin Said Al Said] and explicitly said that U.S. President [Barack Obama] had asked him to come to Tehran and present an American request for negotiations. The Americans told this mediator: 'We want to solve the nuclear issue and lift sanctions within six months, while recognizing Iran as a nuclear power.' I told that mediator that I did not trust the Americans and their words, but after he insisted, I agreed to reexamine this topic, and negotiations began."
In a July 7 interview translated by MEMRI, Hossein Sheikh Al-Islam, an adviser to Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani, said that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had relayed a letter to the Iranian regime recognizing Iran's enrichment rights.

What Iran’s hostile reaction to the Parchin issue means for the nuclear deal

Chico Marx said: “Who you gonna believe? Me or your own eyes?” Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said over the weekend that my organization, the Institute for Science and International Security, was spreading lies when we published satellite imagery that showed renewed, concerning activity at the Parchin military site near Tehran. This site is linked by Western intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to past work on nuclear weapons. But like Chico, instead of acknowledging the concern, the Iranians chose to deny the visible evidence in commercial satellite imagery. Iran’s comments would be mirthful if the topic were not so serious.
Zarif is also calling U.S. intelligence officials and members of Congress liars. They are the original source of the information both about renewed activity at Parchin and concerns about that activity. All we did was publish satellite imagery showing this activity and restate the obvious concern.
Moreover, this information about renewed activity at Parchin does not come from opponents of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action negotiated between the United States, five other world powers and Iran, as Zarif suggested. We are neutral on whether the agreement should be implemented and have made that position clear for weeks. The U.S. intelligence community is hardly opposed to the deal. Iran’s attempts to dismiss this concern as the work of the deal’s foes also is just wrong.

Treason claims leveled at Jewish senator opposed to Iran deal

The progressive website Daily Kos ran a cartoon in which an imaginary television host called a woodchuck version of Schumer a “traitor” and switched the American flag at Schumer’s side to an Israeli flag.
“The reactions are a sad example of how some individuals buy into the kind of thesis promoted by [John] Mearsheimer and [Stephen] Walt that US Jews and other supporters of Israel put Israel’s interests ahead of US interests,” said Anti-Defamation League National Director Jonathan Greenblatt.
Walt and Mearsheimer co-authored a paper and later a 2008 book in which they claimed that the “Israel lobby,” a loosely defined cross-section of American Jewish groups and others, works against US interests. They said it was characterized by “a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose is to encourage the US government and the American public to provide material aid to Israel and to support its government’s policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these goals are also a top priority.”
Critics complained that Mearsheimer and Walt essentially reinvigorated classical anti-Semitic tropes accusing Jews of acting as a “nation within a nation” and possessing dual and conflicting loyalties.
Walt, in fact, was one of those who tweeted and retweeted responses to the current back-and-forth over whether the rhetoric concerning the Iran deal constituted anti-Semitism. The Harvard professor called Schumer a “sellout” and retweeted an opinion article in the Huffington Post that called the deal’s opponents “Netanyahu’s marionettes.”
That article cited Schumer’s 2010 comments in which he reportedly said “I am a shomer [guardian] for Israel and I will continue to be that with every bone in my body” as evidence of his unpatriotic interests.
“Hurling accusations of disloyalty are a slap in the face to his [Schumer’s] lifelong record of public service,” Greenblatt complained in a written response to the rhetoric. “There is room for a legitimate debate on the Iran deal, however charges against Senator Schumer — and any other members who articulate on fact-based but alternative views — are beyond inappropriate.”
Proponents of the Iran deal — including President Barack Obama himself — have been criticized in recent weeks for what some see as criticism of their opponents that ply on historical stereotypes of Jews.

Schumer Explains Opposition to Iran Nuclear Deal: Inspections Regime Has ‘Lots of Holes in It’

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) further explained his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal that he announced last week, saying Monday that the inspections regime being trumpeted by the Obama administration had “lots of holes in it” and thus did not merit his support.
“This was one of the most difficult decisions that I had to make,” he said. “I studied it long and hard, read the agreement a whole bunch of times … I found the inspections regime not ‘anywhere, anytime’ but with lots of holes in it. Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you inspect. That will allow some of the radioactivity to be seen but not nonradioactivity that goes into building a bomb, all of the kinds of other things that you need.”
Schumer is one of the Senate’s top Democrats and also one if its most prominent Jewish members. Schumer’s decision not to support Obama’s push for the nuclear deal was met with anger at the White House, with the suggestion that he may lose support to become the party’s Senate leader in 2016.

Did the Irish president snub the Israeli ambassador?

Statement from the outgoing Israeli ambassador to Ireland, received via email:

It is customary for the President of Ireland to invite Ambassadors to Áras an Uachtaráin for a meeting prior to their final departure from the country. Previous Ambassadors of Israel have enjoyed fruitful meetings with former Presidents of Ireland prior to their departure from Ireland.

The current Ambassador of Israel, Boaz Modai, who will be departing later Ireland this week, was not invited to a meeting by President Higgins. This is despite the fact that the Ambassador's date of departure was officially conveyed through the usual diplomatic channels more than two months ago, with the purpose of facilitating a meeting between the President and Ambassador Modai. The Embassy of Israel regrets that this meeting did not take place.

People who complained received this email:

On behalf of the President, Michael D. Higgins, I would like to thank you for your recent e-mail in regard to the departure of the Israeli Ambassador to Ireland and I would like to take this opportunity to briefly explain the President's interaction with the Diplomatic Corps.

Shortly after their appointment, Ambassadors to Ireland formally present their credentials to the President at a ceremony in Áras an Uachtaráin. The President also invites all members of the Diplomatic Corps to an annual reception in Áras an Uachtaráin and he regularly meets Ambassadors at various other events during the year. Some Ambassadors formally request to visit the President at the conclusion of their posting to Ireland. All such requests received by the President in 2015 have been facilitated.

No such request was received by the President from the Israeli Ambassador or on his behalf. Had such a request been received, it would, of course, have been treated positively, consistent with the President's courteous and professional approach to the entire Diplomatic Corps.

I hope that this clarifies the position for you.

Kind regards
Conor Ó Raghallaigh
Deputy Secretary General to the President

So the question is whether other outgoing ambassadors explicitly requested a meeting with Higgins.

From Ma'an:

Up to 80 Palestinian activists on Monday evening occupied the headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross in occupied East Jerusalem to express solidarity with a Palestinian prisoner who has been on hunger strike more than 50 days.

The Palestinian youths were reported to have set up tents and raised Palestinian flags and posters inside the offices in East Jerusalem's Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood.

Activist Muhammad al-Shalabi said that around 80 Palestinians had declared an open sit-in that will last until Israel ends the administrative detention of hunger striker Muhammad Allan.

Allan, who has been held without trial or charge since November, has been on hunger strike for at least 56 days, although the exact length is unclear.

On Monday, he was transferred to Barzilai Medical Center in Ashkelon, where it is feared Israeli doctors intend to force feed him.

Al-Shalabi said that the Palestinian activists are demanding that the ICRC send a permanent representative to the Barzilai Medical Center to be with Allan to prevent any attempts to force feed him.
They are also demanding that Allan's mother and family be allowed to visit him, and that the ICRC provide "protection" for Palestinians supporting Allan.

The activists condemned the ICRC for "silence" on Allan's case, and accused the organization of not doing enough to save his life.

People attack the offices of the International Committee of the Red Cross, but the ICRC refuses to condemn them.

There are tweets supporting the attackers:

Meanwhile, Palestinian youth in #Jerusalem remain steadfast in occupying ICRC hq in solidarity with Palestinian hunger strikers. #PalHunger
— مريم البرغوثي (@MariamBarghouti) August 10, 2015

...but none condemning them. No "progressive" voices outraged at an attack on the most prestigious human rights NGO.

Ironically, the ICRC has been outspoken in support for the hunger striker and has visited him often.

Palestinian Arabs have often attacked the offices of NGOs that support them, and those stories are usually hushed up by these very NGOs who are so afraid of the people that they say they are helping.

If this is how Palestinian Arabs treat human rights NGOs, who can expect them to ever live peacefully with Israel? You know - the solution to the problem that "everyone knows" will work.

The "human rights" terrorist supporter that Amnesty missed

Yesterday, I noted that Amnesty International ended its three day streak of not writing an anti-Israel tweet. I assumed that the victim that they mentioned, a worker for the Al Mezan NGO, was targeted by accident.

#BeitHanoun Israeli drone fired at workers repairing pipeline, 1 bystander died: http://t.co/mx667hkltn #50Days4Gaza pic.twitter.com/a6NFtQLhmY
— AmnestyInternational (@AmnestyOnline) August 10, 2015

As Bob Knot researched, this is far from clear. Israel didn't target the workers, as Amnesty assumed. It apparently targeted the "human rights" worker, Anwar Za'anin.

This is him - a member of the PFLP terror group:

The PFLP was behind the 2014 Jerusalem synagogue massacre as well as the drive-by shooting of Israelis in a car in June 2015.

And Zaanin was a proud member of this group.

I don't know if he was an armed member of the PFLP, but chances are that Israeli intelligence identified him as a valid military target. The pipeline workers were not.

Later that same day, Ahmed Sami Ahmed Al Za'anin was targeted and wounded on the same street. PCHR admits that he was a militant. Chances are very good that Ahmed was this "human rights" worker's relative.

Another Ahmed Za'anin from Beit Hanoun who was also a member of the PFLP and had been killed by the IDF in January 2014 for shooting rockets.

Amnesty doesn't know the whole story by a long shot. Anwar was probably helping the PFLP's Mustafa Brigades, which bragged that it fought valiantly but did not admit any "martyrs" as far as I can tell. He certainly was a terrorist sympathizer, which would be considered strange for a "human rights" activist anywhere else in the world.

But there is no evidence that Israel targeted civilians for no reason, as Amnesty (and PCHR and Al Mezan) is saying.

"Jews planning to take over Libya" - and the Jewish history behind the fears

I see wild Arab rumors all the time, but it is fun sometimes to find out if there is a grain of truth behind them.

Earlier this year I reported that Libyan media was claiming that a million Jews were planning to move to Libya. Now the theory has been repeated, with interesting new details.

Egyptian newspaper Al Wafd now asks why Israel has never defined its borders. The answer, of course, is that Israel plans to take over the entire Middle East - even beyond the "Nile to the Euphrates."

In fact, Israel is after everything from Libya to Yemen!

The article tells a true story that early Zionist leaders considered the Libyan area of Cyrenaica as the location of the Jewish State around the sane time they were looking at spots all over the world like Uganda and Canada.

I even found a book about it.

An appendix to this book describes the Jewish history of Cyrenaica as a reason for Jews to return, claiming that the original Jews there had helped liberate part of Israel before the Bar Kochba revolt. It is very interesting,

I don't know how embellished this is. But it explains Libyan paranoia about Jews.

Hypocrisy starts with "J"

I get fundraising emails from J-Street.

They all whine about how much Zionist groups like AIPAC are spending to oppose the Iran deal - except when they brag about how much they are spending themselves.

Thanks to J-Street I just left a message for my senator to oppose the Iran bill. Members of Congress are swayed by the number of messages they get - being visited in person is best, and they are all home now for recess. But if you can't visit, call or email them,