Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, November 22, 2015

11/22 Links: 3 Americans Killed By Muslim Terrorists In Israel In Last 6 Weeks; Obama Says Nothing

From Ian:

Three American Citizens Killed By Muslim Terrorists In Israel In Last Six Weeks; Obama Says Nothing

Barack Obama and his administration do not care about Jews.
It doesn’t matter whether the Jews are European or Israeli or American. Jews can be conveniently excised from the category “Westerner,” Obama has found – and he’s been eagerly putting that newfound knowledge to use.
The latest victim of the Obama administration’s egregious Jew-hatred is 18-year-old American citizen Ezra Schwartz. Schwartz, from Sharon, Massachusetts, was visiting Israel; while there, he was delivering care packages to Israeli troops when his car got caught in a traffic jam. That’s when a Palestinian terrorist opened fire with an automatic weapon before ramming another car with his own. Schwartz was killed.
The Obama State Department has yet to issue a statement specifically on Schwartz’s death. Instead, they issued their general statement essentially condemning both sides. “We condemn these terrorist attacks against innocent civilians in the strongest possible terms,” said State Department spokesman Edgar Vasquez. “As we’ve made clear, we remain deeply concerned about the situation, and continue to urge all sides to take affirmative steps to restore calm and prevent actions that would further escalate tensions.”
The Obama administration’s unwillingness to mention Schwartz’s citizenship follows hard on the heels of the Obama administration’s complete silence on the terrorist murder of dual Israeli-American citizen Richard Lakin, a peace activist from Newton, Massachusetts. He was shot in the head, stabbed in the face, and then stabbed in the head by two Muslims aboard a bus. He died in late October.
On October 6, the State Department confirmed that Palestinian Hamas terrorists murdered American citizen Eitam Henkin, along with his wife, in front of their children. This merited no special attention from the Obama administration.

Days later, US condemns Ezra Schwartz's murder

US ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro and the US State Department condemned the murder of 18-year-old American citizen Ezra Schwartz late Friday night, more than 24 hours after he was killed in a Palestinian terror attack in Gush Etzion.
"As Shabbat begins, we mourn with the family and friends of Ezra Schwartz z"l, an American citizen murdered yesterday in a terrorist attack," Shapiro posted, at 4:35 pm Friday local time. "Our thoughts and prayers are with them, and with the families of the other victims of yesterday's attacks. May God bring them comfort."
The US State Department, too, released a late condemnation seven hours later - tweeting footage of spokesman John Kirby speaking on US Secretary of State John Kerry's behalf.

The Best Way to Remember the Holocaust is by Bringing Muslims to Kill American Jews

The dumbest "refugees" meme the left has rolled out to date are the comparisons between the Holocaust refugee policies of FDR that kept out Jews and political leaders today who want to take genuine Christian and Yazidi refugees instead of fake economic Muslim migrants who pose serious terrorism threats.
Living in New York City, I've lost count of the number of Muslim terror plots against synagogues since 9/11. The previous Paris attack by Muslims targeted a Jewish supermarket. (Or as Obama put it, "random folks in a deli.")
Sure it's #NotAllMuslims. It's just enough of them that this behavior repeats itself time and time again. Until you end up with European cities like Malmo where there are so many Muslims that the Jews have to flee.
Because Muslims don't like non-Muslims and really don't like Jews.
Theologically, Islam is violently anti-Semitic. Mohammed's final command was the ethnic cleansing of Jews. The shout Allahu Akbar originated from one of his massacres of Jews.
It's that simple. Muslims hate Jews. Bringing more Muslims to America makes the country more anti-Semitic. It promotes violence against Jews and harassment of Jews.

PreOccupiedTerritory: ‘Islamophobia Airlines’ To Compete With El Al On Security (satire)

Heightened tensions in recent weeks over Islamic terrorism has air travelers opting for carriers with greater security wherever possible, making Israel’s flag carrier El Al poised to take advantage of the climate, as it enjoys a reputation as the world’s safest airline. However, a new upstart company aims to go El Al one better by playing specifically on the fear of Islamic terrorism, hoping to capitalize on increased American and European unease over sharing a flight with people of Middle Eastern appearance. Islamophobia Airlines is scheduled to offer its first flights at the end of the month, offering trips between New York and Paris, New York and London, and New York and Brussels.
While aviation security experts have long touted El Al’s multi-layer approach to security, which includes extensive passenger profiling, Islamophobia Airlines plans to adopt an even stricter standard, and will not grant boarding privileges to anyone with an Arabic-sounding last name, swarthy looks, or citizenship in any country between Morocco and Indonesia, other than Israel. It will also exclude anyone in traditional Islamic dress, or anything easily mistaken for it. In so doing, Islamophobia Airlines will compete with El Al for transatlantic passengers, though not on flights that go directly to or from Tel Aviv.
If all goes well, says Islamophobia Airlines CEO Getta Gripp, the carrier will expand service to destinations within the continental US by next summer. “We know that the Transportation Security Administration here in the US goes to great lengths to help protect airline passengers,” she said, “but it remains clear that many people would prefer some extra security, and we provide that by eliminating a priori an entire demographic that has proved especially problematic in terms of air travel safety in the last 45-50 years. No offense to the creators and users of technology – and of course we will avail ourselves of the most advanced equipment – but the human factor is the most important one in protecting our passengers, and that is where we will have an advantage.”

(h/t Meryl)

This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 11 years and over 22,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Hey Democrats,

If you want to hold the presidency in the next election go with a Hillary-Bernie ticket.

Barring any unforeseeable political catastrophes Hill-Bern could very well stomp all over any potential Republican challenger.

The Republicans - unless I am sadly mistaken, which is a distinct possibility - have no one.

Who?

Trump?

I like Donald Trump for the entertainment value and the fact that he seems like enough of a maniac that he might support US military interests abroad. I think that he would support American allies... like... ya know... Israel. And I believe that he might actually fight the Islamic State.

If by some miracle Donald Trump gets elected the President of the United States my prediction is that popcorn sales in the USA will skyrocket.

Carson?

I think that he is a highly intelligent person who probably has the finest of intentions and if I needed a neurologist - which I probably do - then he would be my guy. I think that he would be a friend to Israel and a thoughtful President of the United States.

The thing of it is, though, sometimes I have difficulty sleeping at night. I used to use a white noise machine to carry me into sleepy time. Now I use tapes of Ben Carson speeches.

Rubio?

He's barely out of short pants. And I do not think that he is a very good friend of many of my friends in the Bay Area. But, then, those friends are not necessarily friends of Israel, either.

My suspicion is that he may have a better shot the next time around.

Maybe. But I am not writing him off this cycle.

Cruz?

Give me a break.

The man has zero chance.

He is a friend of Israel, though.

That and five bucks will get him virtually nothing.

Jeb?

He's coming out swinging far too late. We all thought that he was napping. Most people do not believe his heart is in it. I predicted him as the natural Republican candidate. A more intelligent and sophisticated version of his younger brother but, at this point, I definitely do not see him gaining the nomination.

He blew his opportunity.

Fiorina?

She is an exceedingly intelligent woman. I have not investigated her closely on the issues, in part because she strikes me as a long-shot. If you bet on Fiorina and win you'll get paid off handsomely, but the odds are against you. I still want to keep an eye on her though.

Were I sitting across from her at the poker table I would not take her lightly.

But can any of these people beat Hillary-Bernie?

American Jews would flock to that ticket... like progressive-left Canadian Geese. I've found geese before and I can find them again! We know where the geese are! They congregate near ponds!

{It's not rocket science.}

Michael Lumish is a blogger at the Israel Thrives blog as well as a regular contributor/blogger at Times of Israel and Jews Down Under.

Father proud of terrorist daughter - but Arab media says Jews planted her knife (UPDATE)

This morning:

Citizens and security forces killed a female Palestinian terrorist who attempted to knife Israelis as they waited by a bus stop and a hitch-hiking post, near the Hawara checkpoint just outside the city of Nablus in the West Bank on Sunday.

Among them was former Samaria Council head Gershon Mesika, who ran over the terrorist with his car.
...
Avigail Shomriyah, 21, said that she had been at the bus stop attempting to hitch a ride to her college, when the terrorist attempted to stab her.

“I turned around and saw a terrorist with a large knife and murderous looking eyes. It was a very large knife. I ran in the direction of the soldiers, she ran after me. Then Gershon ran her over. Then they shot her,” Shomriya said.

Here is a photo showing her knife::

Shehab News Agency shows this photo and says that the Israelis planted the knife.

Fatah's Facebook page placed this cartoon next to the photo:

Fatah also quotes an anonymous "eyewitness" claiming that the girl was just trying to cross the street when the "settler" ran over her and that Israeli soldiers planted the knife.

However, the terrorist's father freely admits that she wanted to kill Jews. "Thank God my daughter has done what needs to be done ... I am very proud of her," he said.

The father, who has been imprisoned in Israel, says that his daughter would ask which are the "best knives in the house" for an attack. Her brother also says that she would watch the news with him and say that she wanted to stab Jews.

It is always interesting to see how the stories change in the immediate aftermath of an attack as Palestinians try to figure out which narrative is better for them:- innocent victims or proud terrorists.

The same Fatah page tells its readers to murder the Jew who saved lives by running her over:

UPDATE:

Father of 16 year old girl killed today near Nablus: My daughter planned the attack. She asked to donate her organs https://t.co/tJDOUg6TW8
— Khaled Abu Toameh (@KhaledAbuToameh) November 22, 2015

(h/t Yenta)

Video of Jew attempting to say "Shema" on Temple Mount today

Today:

Best EoZ posts of the week

"Why do they hate us?"

Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah says Paris terrorists are just like Israelis, blames "occupation" for attacks

Things the French can do that Israelis cannot

Most Palestinians want a new intifada, and a plurality want it to be violent

Gaza parties and weddings now feature celebrations of knife attacks

Palestinian media calls all murdered Israelis "settlers"

Amnesty is against incitement to violence - unless it is incitement to murder Jews

Which EU statement condemning attacks on civilians shows more emotion?

Also, this article from April received many hits this week:

NYT and WSJ headline bias, and the underlying anti-Arab racism of the media

This

11/21 Links: 4 wounded in stabbing attack in Kiryat Gat; Israeli killed in Mali terror attack

From Ian:

Teen girl among 4 wounded in stabbing attack in Kiryat Gat

A 13-year-old girl was among four people stabbed in a terror attack in the southern Israeli city of Kiryat Gat on Saturday evening, Israel Police reported.
A manhunt is currently underway for at least one assailant who stabbed the four people in a rampage beginning outside a soccer stadium in the city, before fleeing the area.
The attacker is believed to have been injured after being hit by a car while fleeing, according to Hebrew media reports.
Police were looking into the possibility that there was more than one assailant. A police helicopter arrived on the scene to aid in the search.
“It appears as though there was one attacker, but we always investigate the possibility that others were involved,” police spokeswoman Luba Samri told The Times of Israel
Residents of Kiryat Gat have been told to stay indoors for the moment, police said.

Douglas Murray: Of Two Minds About a Singular Peril

Two parts of the same brain. The first tells us that to be properly “European” we must allow anyone who wants to come here to come here; we must be against borders and for multiculturalism. The other part of the brain watches and waits. It can see that the new arrivals are not only coming in unprecedented numbers but are bringing unprecedented problems. The first part of the brain pretends they will assimilate and that given time Islam will go through its own “reformation”. The second part of the brain starts to realise that we may not have that time.
What will be the long-term effects of this? I would suggest that, as noted scholar of Islam Daniel Pipes has pointed out, the European publics will migrate further and further to the political right. And in reaction the European political class will migrate further and further to the left. You can already see it. In Sweden one liberal newspaper editor responded to the latest polling triumphs by the until-recently pariah Sweden Democrats by saying that he would be happy to flood Sweden with ISIS fighters in order to punish the Swedish electorate for voting for the Sweden Democrats. That isn’t such an unusual instinct. It is the same instinct that made one female refugee aid-worker and her colleagues hush up her recent rape at the hands of some recent arrivals. They feared that mentioning the rape might exacerbate anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe. This instinct fears that the European publics are far-Right extremists just waiting to break out, and the sad irony is that only by treating them in such a way for such a long time could anyone ever make them so.
The part of our brain that has fallen for the myths all these years has pushed restrictions on speech and behaviour and it is pushing them now. Sitting beside Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook at a UN lunch the other week in New York, Chancellor Merkel was heard by a microphone that was still live asking Zuckerberg what he was doing to stop Europeans writing anti-immigration things on Facebook. “We’re working on it,” was his reply.
And so we see the manner in which our continent will blow—restricting legitimate concerns and dismissing honest fears as dishonest bigotries. The only good news is that this suicidal part of our European mind, which has been the dominant part for several decades now, is beginning to lose ground to the part of the brain that still has some survival instinct. Perhaps it will succeed in wrestling back our collective mind. Perhaps it will be too late. What is certain is that after the dead of Paris are mourned the European publics will ask of their politicians why they have spent years setting the scene for just such attacks to happen. After the firebombing of Charlie Hebdo’s offices the French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, criticised the magazine’s publication of cartoons of Mohammed, saying, “Is it really sensible to pour oil on the fire?”
The European publics are beginning to ask, “Who made our societies into this fire?” There will be many physical casualties to come. But the next political casualties should be the entire political class who fed us lies for years because they themselves would not face up to some bitter truths.

Maajid Nawaz: ISIS Is Just One of a Full-Blown Global Jihadist Insurgency

As for my fellow Muslims, many have pushed back against the call to address Islamism head on and refute it by asking why they should apologize for something that they have little or nothing to do with. Again, this is an incredibly unhelpful and inconsistent rebuttal to what is everyone’s social duty. Just as we Muslims expect others to speak up and defend us against anti-Muslim bigotry—even, and especially if, they are not Muslim—likewise we must speak up against Islamist theocracy. It is not only our duty but the least we can do to reciprocate the solidarity we rightly expect from our fellow citizens.
Our political leaders have been restricting the definition of this problem to whichever jihadist group is causing them the biggest headache at the present time, while ignoring the fact that they are all borne of the same Islamist ideology. Before ISIS emerged, the U.S. State Department strangely took to naming the problem “al Qaeda-inspired extremism,” even though it was not al Qaeda that inspired the radicalism. Rather, Islamist extremism inspired al Qaeda. And in turn, ISIS did not radicalize those 6,000 European Muslims who have traveled to join them, nor the thousands of supporters the French now say they are monitoring.
This did not happened overnight and could not have emerged from a vacuum. ISIS propaganda is good, but not that good. No, decades of Islamist propaganda in communities had already primed these young Muslims to yearn for a theocratic caliphate. When surveyed, 33 percent of British Muslims expressed a desire to resurrect a caliphate. ISIS simply plucked the low-hanging fruit, which had been seeded long ago by various Islamist groups, and it will now require decades of community resilience to push back. But we cannot even begin to do so until we recognize the problem for what it is. Welcome to the full-blown global jihadist insurgency.

11/20 Links Pt2: Glick: Who is being delusional?; Oslo is Over; No Labels for Occupied Catalonia?

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Who is being delusional?

Following the interview’s broadcast, Lavie countered that if Abbas were truly interested in establishing an independent Palestinian state, he wouldn’t have cared about the political fortunes of the Israeli prime minister. He would have taken the offer and run, knowing that, as Olmert said, the likelihood that he’d get a similar offer in the next 50 years was nonexistent.
The most notable reaction to Abbas’s admission was the reaction that never came. The Israeli Left had no reaction to his interview.
Abbas is the hero of the Left.
He is their partner. He is their moderate. He is their man of peace. Abbas is the Palestinian leader to whom every leftist politician worth his snuff, from opposition leader Yitzhak Herzog to the Meretz Knesset faction make regular pilgrimages to prove their devotion to peace.
Their man in Ramallah received the most radical offer ever to see the light of day. And rather than accept it, he rejected it out of hand and refused to meet with Olmert ever again, and he openly admits it.
The Left’s non-response is not surprising. Abbas’s decision to end all speculation about whether or not he is a man of peace is merely the latest blow reality has cast on their two-state formula.
The Left’s policy of land for peace failed more than 15 years ago when Abbas’s boss, Yasser Arafat, preferred war to peace and initiated the worst campaign of terrorism that Israel had ever experienced.
Yet for the last 15 years, the Israeli “peace camp” has never wavered in its view that, despite it all, Israel must rid itself of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

Brooke Goldstein: Oslo is Over

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas wants the Oslo Accords to be annulled. We should give him what he wants.
Mr. Abbas declared his intention to annul the agreements after promising a “bombshell” in his speech to the UN General Assembly last month. Abbas claimed he would use “all peaceful and legal means” to end the peace process immediately.
His first step? Incitement to genocide.
“[The] Al-Aqsa [mosque on the Temple Mount] is ours and so is the Church of the Holy Sepulchre,” Mr. Abbas declared on Palestinian Authority TV. “They [Jews] have no right to desecrate them with their filthy feet.” Thus began what some consider to be the third Palestinian Intifada, or violent uprising. Mr. Abbas continued, “We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem. This is pure blood, clean blood, blood on its way to Allah. With the help of Allah, every martyr will be in heaven, and every wounded will get his reward.”
Prior to the signing of Oslo I in 1993 the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was a designated terror organization in the United States and Israel. Established to fight a guerilla war against the Jewish state, its governing document — the Palestine National Charter — called for Israel’s destruction. Member organizations of the PLO were responsible for bombings, hijackings, and the notorious 1972 Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes. The PLO’s main political faction, Fatah, led by PLO founder Yasser Arafat, carried out numerous acts of terror killing thousands of innocent men, women and children. The PLO was declassified as a terror group in 1994, only after the international community recognized the Oslo process as the path to Arab-Israeli peace.
Now that Mr. Abbas wants to end Oslo, he may get more that he bargained for. With the dissolution of the agreement, the PLO could return to its pre-1993 designation as a terrorist organization. As a result, funds would no longer flow from U.S. Treasury coffers and taxes would no longer be distributed to Palestinian officials through Israeli banks or customs unions. Under Executive Order 12947, individuals or entities attempting to transfer money to “foreign terrorists that disrupt the Middle East peace process”—such as the PLO—would be liable under federal laws criminalizing the provision of material support to terrorism.

Compromise for Now, the End of Israel for Later

Against the bloody background of stabbings and other deadly violence in Israel and the West Bank, Daniel Polisar’s thorough analysis of Palestinian polling data, “What Do Palestinians Want?,” makes essential reading for anyone interested in more than just the grim daily headlines. His central point—that the majority of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have long supported “armed struggle” against Israelis—is not only accurate but a fact regularly distorted by media focus on the seemingly “individual” nature of today’s terrorist incidents. Polisar’s conclusions, moreover, are well grounded in exhaustive research into the mounds of survey data that have piled up ever since the first Oslo accords of 1993—which is when I myself started to work with Palestinian colleagues in launching the first scientific polls of the Palestinian population.
Rather than repeating Polisar’s findings, I’d like to begin with a few observations and quibbles, then introduce some recent findings, mainly from a poll I conducted in June, and conclude with what I hope to see in Polisar’s larger study-in-progress on this subject.
First, quibbles. On the basis of survey results and other data, I believe that the reality is in some ways better than Polisar judges and in some ways worse. Better: there is rich evidence that the Palestinian public, when presented with a “package deal,” is considerably more inclined to accept compromise with Israel than when issues are viewed in isolation. This applies even to the most contentious issues like the future of Jerusalem, the “right of return,” or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Worse: Polisar accepts the notion that most Palestinians support violence in spite of Mahmoud Abbas’s steady and repeated opposition to it. In fact, Abbas and other Palestinian leaders consistently send a mixed message on this key issue, opposing violence in the abstract while continuing to glorify individual terrorists in official statements, ceremonies, and the media.

Which EU statement condemning attacks on civilians shows more emotion?

The EU issued a statement about yesterday's terror attacks. They even sort of implied that they were indeed terror.

The stabbing attack that killed two Israelis today in Tel Aviv, at the time of a prayer service, and the shooting attack in the West Bank that killed an Israeli, an American and a Palestinian and injured several others are both terrible and painful reminders of the volatile and violent reality on the ground.

The EU extends its condolences to the victims and their families, and wishes a speedy recovery to all those injured.

Nothing can justify terrorism. Too many innocent people have died in this current wave of violence.

Today's attacks only highlight further the need for all sides to do their utmost to prevent further violence, and to take the necessary steps to restore a political perspective for the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The statement does not take a guess as to who actually were the murderers. It doesn't name the victims. It looks like a boilerplate, written by a computer or a committee.

Just for comparison, here was the EU statement after the firebombing of the Dawabeshe house:

The cold-blooded killing of Palestinian toddler Ali Dawabsha, presumably by extremist settlers, is a tragic reminder of the dramatic situation in the region that highlights the urgent need for a political solution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The EU extends its condolences to the Dawabsha family for their tragic loss and wishes a speedy recovery to the mother, father and the sibling of little Ali that were also injured in the arson attack in the village of Duma in the West Bank.

A full and prompt investigation to bring the perpetrators of this terrible crime to justice is required. The Israeli authorities should also take resolute measures to protect the local population. We call for full accountability, effective law enforcement and zero tolerance for settler violence.

Acts like this terrible attack can easily lead to a spiral of violence and bring both sides further away from a negotiated solution. Restraint and calm on all sides are needed so that the already tense situation on the ground does not aggravate further.

The EU reiterates its strong opposition to Israel's settlement policy that seriously threatens the two state solution.

There seems to be a difference in tone, no?

11/20 Links Pt1: Pollard released after 30 years behind bars; Why the Palestinians Keep Killing

From Ian:

Pollard released from US prison after thirty years behind bars

Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard was released Friday after 30 years behind bars from the federal prison in Butner, North Carolina, after serving a life sentence for passing classified information to an ally.
His wife Esther greeted him at the prison and drove with him to an undisclosed location where they will be spending Shabbat together. The couple released a statement saying that they are grateful to everyone who worked for his release and that Pollard's lawyer would release more details later Friday.
President Reuven Rivlin on Friday welcomed the news of Pollard's release, commenting that it was Israel's responsibility and obligation to secure his release.
"We all welcome the release of Jonathan Pollard from prison after so many long and hard years," Rivlin said.
"Throughout the years, our pain was Pollard's pain... we felt the responsibility and obligation to secure his release," the president added.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a statement saying that he had been looking forward to this day for many years after repeatedly raising Pollard's fate with multiple American presidents. Netanyahu wished Pollard well and said he hoped he could enjoy the rest of his life with peace of mind.

JPost Editorial: Bring Pollard to Israel

In July, the US Parole Commission, in a unanimous 3-0 decision, decided to grant Jonathan Pollard parole and announced that he would be released on November 20, 2015.
Today, after spending 30 years in prison for a crime that did not deserve such a harsh punishment, the 61-year-old Pollard will leave the federal prison in Butner, North Carolina, and take the first delicate steps toward continuing with his life. He will at last be able to celebrate this coming Shabbat outside prison walls.
Pollard is expected to be welcomed by his wife, Esther, and his attorney, Eliot Lauer. They – and Pollard himself – have said that it is his dream to make aliya.
“I am looking forward to being reunited with my beloved wife Esther,” Pollard has said via his attorneys. “I would like to thank the many thousands of well-wishers in the United States, in Israel, and throughout the world, who provided grassroots support by attending rallies, sending letters, making phone calls to elected officials, and saying prayers for my welfare. I am deeply appreciative of every gesture, large or small.”
Pollard is the only American citizen sentenced to life in prison for passing classified information to a US ally – in this case Israel. He has been behind bars since his arrest in 1985, even though he was convicted two years later. After finally giving him official recognition as an agent, Israel granted him citizenship 20 years ago, on November 22, 1995.

Knesset caucus vows to fight Pollard’s parole restrictions

The Knesset caucus dedicated to Israeli-American spy Jonathan Pollard vowed on Friday that it would continue to work to ease Pollard’s parole restrictions which, among other things, prevent him from moving to Israel.
In a letter to Pollard, who was freed on Friday morning from a North Carolina federal prison after serving a 30-year jail sentence, caucus chairman MK Nahman Shai congratulated him on his release and pledged to combat any “violation” of his rights.
“Jonathan, the Caucus will not cease its activity until we remove the limitations imposed on you upon your release. We continue to demand the removal of any restriction on your freedom of movement, communication or other violation of your rights,” he wrote.
“We will not rest until you are free to depart the United States for any destination of your choosing, first and foremost — Israel.”

Pollard's lawyers say they'll appeal 'unreasonable, unlawful' parole terms

Attorneys for Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard announced on Friday that they are planning to appeal the conditions of his parole just hours after he was released from a federal penitentiary following a 30-year incarceration.
As per the terms of his parole, Pollard has to check in regularly with a parole officer for a year and can be returned to prison for poor behavior. He is not permitted to leave the United States for five years, to give interviews or to go online. He must also wear electronic monitoring devices that enable the government to track his whereabouts.
The official Free Pollard campaign and Pollard’s attorneys have declined to comment on the parole conditions, but they did encourage US congress members to ask the Justice Department to ease them. World renowned criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who represented Pollard in the past, told The Jerusalem Post that although such parole conditions were not unprecedented, they are “totally irrational.”

Micahel Oren: Come Home

In my conversation with Pollard, we discussed the situation in the Middle East, but he also shared with me his physical and mental struggles. I left him with the promise that Israel would continue to work relentlessly for his release. It was the most difficult meeting I held during my period as ambassador.
I completed my term with a sense of disappointment over failing to bring Pollard home.
Now five more years have gone by, and he is finally free. I wish to thank the leaders of Israel who did not abandon the petition to free him, the Pollard supporters, who dedicated many years to lobbying for his release, and President Obama, who did not object to his parole.
On this special day, I am hoping that Jonathan Pollard, like me, will realize his dream of coming home to Israel.

A reporter mentions that Hezbollah censors all media reports from southern Lebanon

A very interesting article from Channel 4 reporter Lindsey Hilsum says that the reason the Paris attacks get more coverage than similar attacks in Beirut is because the audience doesn't care:

It’s not that we don’t cover bomb attacks in Beirut and elsewhere, but sometimes the viewer shows less interest. Many are more interested in show business, celebrity and news closer to home.

I have spent my whole career reporting atrocities in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. That’s what I do. Some people watch and care. But many people, if I’m honest, switch off.

At Channel 4 News we continue to report the war in Syria (I was just there – did you watch my reports?), the resulting refugee crisis (ditto) and events like the Al Shabaab attack in Garissa, in northern Kenya in April.

But sometimes I feel we’re howling in the dark because so few of you respond.

She has a point, but only to an extent. The media editors are the ones who decide what prominence to give stories, and they are the ones who choose entertainment over news in Africa or Arab countries. The huge coverage over Boko Haram kidnapping of schoolgirls in Nigeria the exception that proves the rule: the media can drive the agenda when it wants to.

But there is an important point that Hilsum makes that is all too rarely mentioned, and even she downplays it:

There are also practical issues – South Beirut, where last Thursday’s bombing occurred, is controlled by Hizbollah, who rarely let journalists film and never freely. There’s no way the hundreds of journalists who descended on Paris would have been permitted to flood a Hizbollah area for days on end. But that’s just a logistical issue, not your problem.

Which means that atrocities in Arab countries that censor the media cannot have the same coverage as incidents in countries with a free press.

Reporters are partially at fault here. Only rarely do they mention, when they are filing their reports, that they cannot say the full story. And the readers and viewers not only have a right but an obligation to know that they are not seeing the whole picture. If journalists cared about getting the truth out there, they would publicly push back on Hezbollah and Hamas and other terror groups that control territory rather than roll over and report what the despots want them to report. Reporters have the ability to shame the terrorists, but given a choice of telling the truth or quietly acquiescing to file the half-story, they almost invariably choose the latter. (An enterprising reporter can do far more - give their bureau chiefs anonymous quotes that support the full picture and have them co-write the story from the main offices out of reach of the terrorists, for example, and to publicly report the threats that they receive.)

(h/t Louis)

.@Amnesty is against incitement to violence - unless it is incitement to murder Jews

This week, Israel banned the Islamic Movement Northern Branch because of its history of incitement:

The Prime Minister’s Office said that outlawing the northern branch of the Islamic Movement is an essential step in maintaining public security. The decision, the Prime Minister’s Office added, is directed toward those who motivate and support incitement and racist activities, destabilize the area and cause loss of life. “This move is not directed against the Arab and Muslim public in Israel, the great majority of which upholds the laws of the state and disavows incitement and terrorism,” the Prime Minister’s Office emphasized.

“The northern branch of the Islamic Movement has for years lead a deceitful campaign of incitement under the title ‘Al-Aqsa is in danger,’ falsely accusing Israel of intending to harm the mosque and deviate from the status quo,” read documents disturbed by the Prime Minister’s Office. The document added that “the northern branch established a salaried group of activists (called the Morabitat) aimed at initiating provocations on the Temple Mount. This action significantly raised tensions on the Temple Mount. A large portion of the recent attacks were carried out against the backdrop of this incitement and propaganda.”

The document adds: “The northern branch, led by Sheik Ra’ad Salah, is a sister-movement of the terrorist organization Hamas. The movements maintain close, secret ties. The northern branch of the Islamic Movement is a separatist, racist group that does not recognize the institutions of the State of Israel, denies its right to exist, and calls for replacing it with an Islamic Caliphate in its place.” Salah was sentenced in October to 11 months in jail after being convicted in 2013 of incitement to violence over remarks he made in 2007. He has not begun serving his term.

Amnesty, as always, takes the side of those who incite to kill Jews:

The human rights organization Amnesty International said the decision to outlaw the Islamic Movement raises concerns over freedom of speech and association in Israel, noting in particular the raids, preventative arrests and property confiscations as causes for concern. “Especially worrying is the fact the decision was made by the Israeli cabinet, without a fair process which gives the movement the chance to defend itself in legal proceedings,” said a statement released by Amnesty.

“We’re worried by the selective enforcement, that while those who encourage the atmosphere of incitement against the Palestinian minority in Israel, like Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and cabinet ministers and other high officials enjoy immunity, the northern branch of the Islamic Movement has been outlawed due to remarks made by individual members,” said Yonatan Gher, CEO of the Israel branch of Amnesty International.

Amnesty's lies are particularly disgusting here. No one in the Israeli cabinet incites against the entire Arab population, only against terrorists and their supporters, and Amnesty is libeling Netanyahu by claiming that he does it personally.

But the Amnesty official is also ignoring the ties of the movement to Hamas, its direct incitement over supposed Israeli schemes to demolish Al Aqsa, leader Raed Salah's antisemitism, his absurd lies meant to inflame Arabs, and his explicit support of terror.

One only needs to glance at Raed Salah's Facebook page:

He celebrated the murder of Jews praying a year ago with the Koranic quote "'How terrible will be the mourning of those who were warned'" - The heroic operation of Jerusalem 2014/11/18"

He added a smiling face for good measure. The caption says that these pictures "gives you an appetite" for more.

He's a big fan of running over Jews in cars as well:

This is the free speech Amnesty supports - the ability to inflame thousands of followers to murder.

Salah also explicitly supports Hamas:

He has more recent posts inciting stabbing Jews for Al Aqsa as well:

And shooting them as well:

There are also many posters glorifying those who stabbed Jews to death recently.

The Islamic Movement is not a West Bank organization. Its audience isn't Arabs in Gaza or Hebron - it is trying to convince Israeli Arabs to kill Jews.

Amnesty is not an absolutist for freedom of speech. Here is what Amnesty says about incitement in other contexts:

International human rights law also obliges states to prohibit advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.

Amnesty was more adamantly against incitement in Moscow in 2004:

It has been reported that an extremist organization has been calling upon people to attend a public meeting, under the slogan “Cleanse Moscow of Chechen bandits!” Amnesty International is concerned that this may amount to incitement of hatred on grounds of nationality and incitement to racially-motivated violence. Prominent Russian human rights groups have also expressed their concern regarding the demonstration.
"In the current climate, we are concerned that the meeting could lead to incidents of racially-motivated violence. The authorities must take all necessary steps to protect potential victims in line with their international obligations, and uphold constitutional guarantees in relation to equality of citizens. Such inflammatory slogans appear to be aimed at inciting racial hatred and should therefore be immediately removed from all public places in the capital", Amnesty International said.

But there apparently is an exception clause in Amnesty's opinion: when the incitement is merely to murder random Jews shopping and praying, then it is a "freedom of expression" issue, not a human rights issue.

Because, to the bigots at Amnesty, Israeli Jews just don't count as human.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)