Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Hamas arrested a journalist. No one cared.

Hamas security forces on Sunday detained Palestinian journalist and satirist Ayman al-Aloul in the Gaza Strip, his wife told Ma'an.
His wife said that al-Aloul was arrested from their home by Gaza's internal security service, who also confiscated her and her husband's mobile phones and laptops.
Al-Aloul is best known for the outspoken satirical reports he publishes on Youtube, using both formal and colloquial Arabic to draw attention to the difficulties of life in the Gaza Strip.
He also works as a news editor for Arab Alaan (Arabs Now) news agency, and reports for the Iraqi al-Furat (Euphrates) television channel.

Today, after 8 days, Aloul was released.

While about 30 people in Gaza protested the arrest when it happened, the event received next to no coverage in Western media.

Reporters Without Borders didn't mention the arrest.

A Change.org petition against Hamas for arresting him garnered a measly 19 signatures.

What doesn't get reported - and why - is sometimes more important than what does.

We are doing everything we can to fight for Israel with hard work, research and - above all - the truth. I could sure use your help. Please donate today. If you have other skills you can volunteer for EoZ, send an email to volunteer@elderofziyon.com

From the New York Post, January 7:

The city has agreed to more stringent regulations on anti-terror cops in order to settle two federal lawsuits that claimed the NYPD violated constitutional rights by spying on Muslims.

The city will pay $2,033,416 in legal fees to the plaintiffs, but no monetary damages, and will add another layer of review to a committee that monitors its intelligence gathering. The NYPD will also remove a 92-page report, “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” from its Web site.

“New York City’s Muslim residents are strong partners in the fight against terrorism, and this settlement represents another important step toward building our relationship with the Muslim community,” Mayor de Blasio said in a statement.

The report being referred to is not an anti-Islam screed. In fact, it goes out of its way to indicate that it is only referring to Al Qaeda style terrorism in the US. It added an extraordinary two-page disclaimer to mollify Muslims who felt that the report was Islamophobic:

NYPD understands that it is a tiny minority of Muslims who subscribe to al Qaeda’s ideology of war and terror and that the NYPD’s focus on al Qaeda inspired terrorism should not be mistaken for any implicit or explicit justification for racial, religious or ethnic profiling. Rather, the Muslim community in New York City is our ally and has as much to lose, if not more, than other New Yorkers if individuals commit acts of violence (falsely) in the name of their religion. As such, the NYPD report should not be read to characterize Muslims as intrinsically dangerous or intrinsically linked to terrorism, and that it cannot be a license for racial, religious, or ethnic profiling.

But that wasn't enough for the plaintiffs.

The fact that this report, a well-researched backgrounder on Islamic extremism, was a target in the lawsuit indicates that the goal of the action wasn't to stop spying against Muslims but to shield Muslim terrorists in the US.

This is not just another report. It was praised by experts for how comprehensive it was.

One expert, Brian Michael Jenkins, Senior Advisor to the President of the Rand Corporation, described it:

Although there have been informative analyses of the paths to violent jihad in individual countries, this is the most comprehensive review across national boundaries, including the terrorist conspiracies uncovered in the United States. The resulting model will undoubtedly become the basis for comparison with additional cases as they are revealed in future attacks or arrests.
The utility of the NYPD model, however, goes beyond analysis. It will inform the training of intelligence analysts and law enforcement personnel engaged in counterterrorist missions. It will allow us to identify similarities and differences, and changes in patterns over time. It will assist prosecutors and courts in the very difficult task of deciding when the boundary between a bunch of guys sharing violent fantasies and a terrorist cell determined to go operational has been crossed. Above all, by identifying key junctions in the journey to terrorist jihad, it should help in the formulation of effective and appropriate strategies aimed at peeling potential recruits away from a dangerous and destructive course.

Alain Bauer, Criminologist at the Sorbonne University, similarly praised it:

We need to be able to move out of the culture of reaction, retrospect, and compilation. Only in this way can we arrive at the stage of forward thinking and enable early detection of the threats and dangers of the modern world, our modern world. This study is the NYPD's contribution to this essential process.

It remains a valuable tool today especially in the wake of ISIS-inspired terrorism in the West.

A great resource for law enforcement is being removed from NYPD websites because of political correctness.

Muslims who are truly concerned about Muslim terrorism - and we are told that the vast majority are - should be in the forefront of demanding that this report remain online and available for law enforcement worldwide to catch the Islamists while partnering with moderate Muslims.

At this moment, the report is still available on the NYPD website as well as the website of the City of New York.

I uploaded the report to Scribd.

(h/t Irene)

"Jewish Terror", "Arab Terror" and The New York Times

The headline in the New York Times website on Monday said "Revolt Network Foments New Brand of Jewish Terror in Israel." (Note - The headline has changed 14 hours later to "Israel Faces New Brand of Terrorism, This Time From Young Settlers", and that is what is in the print edition. The current article still uses the term "Jewish terrorism." The older headline is still out there in other news outlets that subscribe the the NYT wire feed.)

The last time that the New York Times used the phrase "Jewish terror" without quoting someone and outside of editorials, op-eds and book and movie reviews was in 2009, when a story said "Jewish terror is not new. A religious student assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, and a settler, Baruch Goldstein, killed 29 Muslims at prayer in Hebron in 1994. "

When was the last time the NYT mentioned "Arab terror" in a current news story, outside quotes, op-eds and reviews?

1996.

"Under an agreement reached by the previous Israeli Government, Israeli troops were to have withdrawn from most of Hebron by last March, but the move was delayed first by a series of Arab terror attacks, then by the election of Mr. Netanyahu and his determination to toughen the terms."

(This 2002 article uses the term "Arab terror" but it purports to read Ariel Sharon's mind when using it.)

The New York Times talks about Jewish terror today, but it has not been able to publish the term "Arab terror" as factual news in nearly 20 years.

Not 9/11. Not the second intifada. Not the scores of bombs in restaurants and buses. (The term "Arab terrorists" was used in connection with reports from the 9/11 Commission in 2004 and was used in describing the events of the Munich Olympics in articles in the 2000s.)

(To be fair, Jodi Rudoren did use the term "Palestinian terror" in 2014 referring to the Har Nof terror attacks. But even that term was very rarely used in the decade before that. The NYT peripherally used the term "Arab terrorism" in a US political article in 2015, the previous time was in 2006 speaking about "Sunni Arab terrorism. and before that was immediately after 9/11.)

To be clear:

This is the photo of Jews that the New York Times is using today to imply they are Jewish terrorists:

This photo would never be used by the NYT to refer to Arab or Palestinian terror:

(h/t EBoZ)

01/11 Links Pt2:When human rights no longer matter to NGO’s; Uproar Over Trump, Silence On Abbas

From Ian:

Why Sanctions Are Pointless: Or, How Nathan’s Famous Hot Dogs and Coca-Cola Broke the Arab Boycott

Everyone loves sanctions. But privileged Russians still enjoy imported French cheeses, and Iran’s Republican Guard is profiting handsomely from running a black market in sanction-busting imports. Even BDS may not be the dire threat that both its fevered proponents and its enemies like to imagine. Why? Because the truth is that sanctions are not really that hard to evade, and boycotts are not that hard to break. I know, because I helped to break the Arab boycott of Israel with the reluctant leverage of the Coca-Cola Corp. and the enthusiastic support of Nathan’s Famous Hot Dogs.
I was trained as an economist, and in 1964 the government of Israel asked me to take a leave from the daily Maariv, then Israel’s largest-circulation newspaper, to serve at our consulate in New York City on finding ways around the refusal of any Arab country to trade with our new nation. It had been almost a quarter of a century since I had enjoyed “The pause that refreshes” while visiting Beirut with my parents, so a thirst for Coca-Cola was hardly a habit with me or my countrymen. We all lived on short rations. Supplies of imported food and other essentials were limited during the struggle to build our nation, defend ourselves, and absorb millions of immigrants. When Coke first applied to open a bottling plant only a year after we gained our independence in 1948, it was refused as an unnecessary luxury.
But our soft drink companies yearned for a local franchise to bottle and sell Coca-Cola. This was regarded worldwide as a license to print money and usually ended up in the hands of someone with a great deal of political pull—in Hebrew protexia, or in the vernacular “Vitamin P.” Thus I became aware of the taste for Coca-Cola only after I arrived in arrived in New York to join the Israeli Economic Mission with the rank of consul.
Our mission was to convince American businessmen to ignore the Arab threat to seal off their much larger market from any company that did business with us. We also tried to drum up foreign investment in Israel, another move that would trigger the boycott. We asked Jewish-American importers to pressure their foreign suppliers to sell to Israel by warning that they would offend their customers if they refused to do business with Israel.

Douglas Murray: Germany Just Can't Get It Right

The late Robert Conquest once laid out a set of three political rules, the last of which read, "The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies." This rule comes in handy when trying to understand the otherwise clearly insane and suicidal policies of Chancellor Merkel's government in Germany. These policies only make sense if the German government has in fact been taken over by a cabal of people intent not on holding Germany together but on pulling it entirely apart. Consider the evidence.
There can be few other explanations for why Chancellor Merkel's government last year let in more than one million people (about 1.5% of the current German population) without having any idea of who they were, where they came from or what they think. No democratic leader could possibly push through such a startling measure. How else can you explain why a country that in the 20th century had such a gigantic anti-Semitism problem, would import so many people from those areas of the world which, in the 21st century, now have the same gigantic anti-Semitism problem?
A document that was leaked late last year from the German intelligence service warned that the country is "importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples..." How to explain a government and security service policy which allowed this to happen? Or a Chancellor who, when asked a very lightly critical question about all of this by a concerned German citizen, responded with a long disquisition that failed to answer even one part of the pertinent point?
More up-to-date, it is worth considering events since New Year's Eve. As the world now knows, that was when around 100 women were subjected to rape, harassment and sexual molestation by a huge crowd of migrants in the centre of the city of Cologne. It has now emerged that the first response of the Cologne police to this major incident was to hold back information about the identity of the attackers. Whether the police thought they could get away with that or not, this lie has now poured fuel onto the flames of public anger by demonstrating that the police, like the government and much of the media, are intent on misinforming the public about what is going on in their country, rather than keeping them truthfully briefed about it.

David Collier: When human rights no longer matter to NGO’s

As soon as the program was broadcast, the backlash started. On the programme itself, Illana Dayan, the shows anchor, had invited Gideon Levy, a frequent commentator on human rights to respond, and rather surprisingly, Levy’s main concern seemed to be that the show had been broadcast at all. Levy has since written an article in Haaretz saying that the show ‘should be ashamed of the report it aired which depicted human rights activists as dangerous, while ignoring the occupation.’ Rather incredibly, Levy begins to suggest the entire piece is taken out of context and ending in rather dramatic and ironic fashion, he suggests that by highlighting these actions to the world, the show has done a disservice. Here is Gideon Levy publicly claiming that some people assisting human rights abuses should not be put on TV.
And Gideon Levy is far from alone. 972 Magazine, an online outlet that spends its entire existence knocking Israel and talking up human rights, suddenly becomes blind to actions that clearly contravene the UN’S Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Today (10/1) they ran a piece by Haggai Matar, attacking those who publicised the actions of the activists. Suddenly, when analysing the words of a man who seemed to be rejoicing at the violent fate that would befall the land seller, there is a ‘but’ and an ‘however’. Incredibly, the criticism is reserved for the source of the recording, rather than the men who conspired to perhaps have someone killed. It seems that for these left wing ‘moralist thinkers’ that when it comes to human rights, some people’s rights are more important than others.
These are not the only two examples. Ever since the broadcast, the show has been attacked endlessly from sources desperate to protect the image of the NGO’s, movements that propose their very raison d’être is to protect human rights. But it isn’t just those making noise that we should focus on, it is those remaining quiet. Groups who describe themselves as being on the far left of the political spectrum, those that frequently hide behind or use the material provided by these NGO’s have temporarily stopped posting and tweeting. They have nothing to say. Media outlets like the Guardian and Independent, who would have been banging down the doors if the situation was reversed, are ducking under cover until the furore dies down. They do not want to attack ‘their own’.
We have always known this hypocrisy existed. We are well aware that these groups, these media outlets, these individuals, work in unison and are driven by personal bias and hatred towards Israel rather than a true sympathy for the Palestinians. It would have been nice to see one, just one, stand up and give the unequivocal condemnation they always demand of others. Instead we are left with those attacking the messenger, weak attempts at diverting focus and an entire part of the political spectrum simply disappearing for a while. No, this is not a surprise, but it is solid evidence that the hatred we see directed towards Israel every day, is simply that, blind hatred. Hatred that emanates from a bunch of very vocal but equally morally deficient hypocrites. It is worth remembering that next time you see one of their reports.

Bizarre, contradictory logic from the NYT's editorial page:

Iran’s Other Scary Weapons Program

The United States should lift sanctions on Iran; no, it should impose new sanctions on Iran. The short answer is that the Obama administration should do both.

The sanctions imposed to press Iran to negotiate curbs on its nuclear program should be lifted as promised when the recent nuclear agreement goes into effect, maybe as early as next week. The Obama administration is wisely planning a separate set of new sanctions in response to Iran’s two recent tests of ballistic missiles, which violated United Nations resolutions.

...Iran is advancing the range and mobility of its ballistic missiles and vowing to accelerate production. Most worrisome is a collaboration with North Korea, which has nuclear weapons and provided Iran with many of its first missiles, and still supplies key components. A recent Congressional Research Service report called their cooperation “significant and meaningful.”

In October, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Iran would walk away from the nuclear deal if new sanctions of any kind were imposed. But the administration has been clear that even after the most onerous sanctions are lifted under the nuclear deal, it would enforce those pertaining to Iran’s missile, terrorism and human rights activities. The nuclear deal lifts United Nations ballistic missile sanctions on Iran within eight years, but American sanctions on firms that sell arms to Iran will remain.

See? The New York Times can be hawkish when it needs to be!

Except....

The administration told Congress that missile-related sanctions were coming, then held back, infuriating many lawmakers. While the delay was not explained, this is a delicate moment, and it may make sense to wait because Iran is on the verge of implementing the nuclear deal. Also, an Iranian official told Reuters last week that negotiations are again underway on the possible release of the Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian and other Americans held by Iran. Another complication is the recent worsening of the conflict between Shiite-majority Iran and Sunni-led Saudi Arabia.

New sanctions on Iran’s ballistic missiles must still be pursued. The people and agencies most responsible for Iran’s program were hit with sanctions years ago; the new measures would add 11 new individuals and entities to a long list. That should not be so onerous that Iran would walk away from the economic relief it stands to gain from the nuclear deal. And it is an important and necessary way of keeping pressure on Iran to cease its unacceptable activities.

So the US should threaten sanctions that are supposedly separate from the nuclear program, but shouldn't actually implement any of them because of the threat that Iran might walk away from the nuclear program agreement that is completely separate.

Don't worry about Iran's cooperation with North Korea on an illicit nuclear program. Everything is cool on that front. Only worry about Iran's cooperation with North Korea over an illicit ballistic missiles program.

This pretzel logic is meant to justify the administration's acquiescing to Iranian demands on ballistic missile sanctions after the fact, even though we were promised beforehand the White House would never, ever mix the two issues up.

For this year's Hasby Awards, celebrating the best examples of pro-Israel advocacy of the year, we will have some categories voted on by EoZ readers.

The first category to be voted on is Best Young Defender of Israel. There are a lot of great nominees here, many of whom I was not previously familiar. Please check out these nominees' work and vote for the best based on their work in 2015, and follow them on their social media accounts.

Chloe Valdary

Daniel Mael

Sarah Bernamoff

Leora Noor Eisenberg

Alexandra Markus (Lex)

Emanuel Miller

Shay Alfasi

Voting will close on Sunday, January 17.

(Ryan Bellerose, Tomer Kornfeld and Kasim Hafeez requested to be withdrawn from the voting.)

web surveys

We are doing everything we can to fight for Israel with hard work, research and - above all - the truth. I could sure use your help.Please donate today.If you have other skills you can volunteer for EoZ, send an email to volunteer@elderofziyon.com

01/11 Links Pt1: Clinton Considered Plan to Spark Palestinian Protests; Hamas' and Hezbollah's pyromania

From Ian:

Clinton Considered Secret Plan to Spark Palestinian Protests

Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton considered a secret plan created by her then-advisers to foment unrest among Palestinian citizens and spark protests in order to push the Israeli government back to the negotiating table, according to emails released as part of the investigation into the Democratic presidential frontrunner’s private email server.
In a Dec, 18, 2011, email, former U.S. ambassador to Israel Thomas Pickering suggested that Clinton consider a plan to restart then-stalled peace negotiations by kickstarting Palestinian demonstrations against Israel.
Pickering described the effort as a potential “game changer in the region,” recommending that the United States undertake a clandestine campaign to generate unrest. Clinton requested that his email be printed.
“What will change the situation is a major effort to use non-violent protests and demonstrations to put peace back in the center of people’s aspirations as well as their thoughts, and use that to influence the political leadership,” Pickering wrote.

PMW: Palestinian children wear “suicide belts” to celebrate Fatah’s 51 years of violence

When one looks at Palestinian Authority education and messaging to its children, it is no wonder that in the last three months, most of the terror attacks have been carried out by young Palestinians. At Fatah's anniversary celebrations in Bethlehem last week, young masked children were dressed with “suicide belts” and equipped with "guns" and "RPGs".
Palestinian Media Watch has reported that a central part of PA educational messages to children is promotion of violence and glorification of terrorists.
The official PA daily reported on this Fatah event, specifically mentioning the fact that children participated in the procession brandishing toy weapons and “suicide belts,” however the PA mouthpiece did not express any reservation or disapproval over this at all:
“Children were seen carrying models of RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades) and explosive belts, and they all walked through the alleys of the refugee camp in the procession, during which the sound of songs of the national revolution were heard.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 8, 2016]

PMW: PA and Fatah glorify Tel Aviv murderer of 3

Abbas’ Fatah movement posted an uncensored version of the picture of dead terrorist murderer Nashat Melhem lying in a pool of blood. It also praised the killer of 3 as a “Martyr” and congratulated him on its official Facebook page:
Text: “Nashat Melhem died as a Martyr (Shahid) after an armed confrontation in the courtyard of a mosque in Umm Al-Fahm on blessed Friday, congratulations and may Allah receive you in Heaven” [emphasis added, Official Facebook page of the Fatah Movement, Jan. 8, 2016]
Nashat Melhem was a 29-year-old Israeli Arab terrorist who carried out a shooting attack, killing 2 Israelis, Alon Bakal and Shimon Ruimi, and wounding 8 others, at Hasimta bar in Tel Aviv on Jan. 1, 2016. While fleeing after the attack, Melhem killed a taxi driver, a Bedouin Israeli Amin Shaaban. A week after the attacks, on Jan. 8, 2016, Israeli security forces tracked down Melhem to his hometown of Arara in the north of Israel. After Melhem opened fire, the Israeli soldiers shot and killed him.
The PA Ministry of Health called the murderer “one of the dearest Martyrs (Shahids),” whose “name is engraved with his pure blood.” The ministry explained that it was unable to include terrorist Melhem on its list of “Martyrs” because he did not come from the areas under the ministry’s jurisdiction. Following criticism, the ministry issued a press release emphasizing Melhem’s status as “Martyr” (Shahid) despite the omission from the list:

MEMRI: Jibril Rajoub to Israelis: You Sons of Bitches, We Will Accept Nothing Less than a Palestinian State

At a ceremony marking the 51st anniversary of the establishment of Fatah, the movement's Central Committee member Jibril Rajoub, former head of the Preventive Security force, addressed the Israelis, saying: "You sons of bitches, we will accept nothing less than a Palestinian state. We own this place, we are its people, while you are alien here." Rajoub, who serves as the head of the Palestinian football association and the head of the Palestine Olympic committee, further said: "To this day, resistance has remained a genetic code among all Fatah members." The ceremony, held at Burqin, near Jenin, was broadcast on the Palestinian Awdeh TV channel on January 6, 2016.

Reported number of Gaza homes damaged in 2014 kept increasing in 2015. Why?

The Gaza Shelter Cluster, led by the Norwegian Refugee Committee, issues reports every month on the progress of Gaza reconstruction after Protective Edge.

Given that the war ended in August 2014, one would think that the number of damaged houses would have been pretty much stable shortly afterwards.

The February 2015 report said that 156,000 houses were damaged or destroyed.

The April report said the number was 161,700.

By October, the number of houses damaged in Gaza by August 2014 had gone up to 171,519. (It has remained fairly steady since then.)

Is it possible that the number of damaged houses increased by 10% when there were no bombs falling?

It may be possible that people waited over a year to report legitimate damage on their homes, but that seems very unlikely.

Perhaps some Gazans "damaged" their homes to become eligible to receive cement - which they could then sell to Hamas on the black market.

It is just a theory, but I can't come up with a better one.

A Salafist preacher in Gaza, Sheikh Muhammed Salman Abu Jamea, has written a legal opinion against anyone who helps Gaza youths get to the border where they clash with Israeli troops, often with fatal results.

Abu Jamea said that these clashes are a waste of the nation's youth, and do not accomplish anything. So far, he says, 40,000 young men and women have been lost with no gain. Sending young people to confront Israel "with their bare chests" only results in injuries and death, he says, and encouraging them to sacrifice themselves with no gain is not permitted.

Those who give rides to youths to start riots at the Gaza border are responsible for their deaths, the sheikh said.

There may be a political context here. Abu Jamea was in the news before, six years ago, for issuing another fatwa against building smuggling tunnels between Gaza and Egypt, pointing out that the tunnel owners exploit workers who often were killed in cave-ins.

That fatwa was issued at the request of the Palestinian Authority.

Was this one an attempt by Mahmoud Abbas to calm things down, or did the sheikh issue it on his own?

Abu Jamea also recently issued a fatwa against honor killings, so he just might be consistent in issuing fatwas to save Muslim lives.

The fact that this sounds so anomalous is itself cause for concern.

Palestine Press Agency reports that residents of a neighborhood in Beit Hanoun, Gaza whose houses have been completely destroyed in the summer of 2014 are angry because the Hamas’ Land Authority prevents them from rebuilding their houses.

Hamas says the area, known as “Azbat Beit Hanoun," is government-owned land.

An official named Dr. Yousef Al-Kafarne said that the Land Authority also prevented UNRWA from building and repairing there. UNRWA did not issue any press release about this matter.

After some complaints and the intervention of some unnamed “Palestinian factions,” the Hamas Land Authority allowed partially destroyed houses to be rebuilt or renovated.

But completely destroyed houses are forbidden from being rebuilt.

You may recall a few months ago some left-wing NGOs would say that no Gaza homes have been rebuilt from scratch, blaming Israel - even though Israel was allowing tons of construction material to enter and Hamas was rebuilding its terror infrastructure unhindered. A cash shortage from donors as well as Gaza bureaucracy were also to blame for the slowness of rebuilding.

Now we see that Hamas has been actively opposed to rebuilding homes.

And those NGOs are silent.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Surprising support by Palestinians for confederating with Jordan, Egypt

There is a new AWRAD survey of "Palestinian opinion leaders, " defined this way:

423 Palestinian opinion leaders participated. They include political party leaders, civil society leaders, high-ranking government and private sector officials,journalists, youth activists, and professionals such as academics, researchers, consultants, doctors, engineers and lawyers.

40% of those polled believe protests will continue for years; 45% believe that they will continue only weeks or months.

57% give the biggest external reason for the protests as being "threats to the status of holy places in the Old City of Jerusalem." But 70% give the most important internal factor as being "Frustration with Palestinian leadership in both the West Bank and Gaza." (The pollsters fudged the first part of that poll by saying "97% think that threats to the status of holy places, settlements and closures are driving the protests" - that "and" should be an "or.")

Not too many are optimistic about the results of the current uprising being positive for the Palestinians. A majority believes that it makes a Palestinian state less likely, that Israel will increase use of force and that Israel will establish new settlements in response.

75% support the statement that the Palestinians are no longer bound by the Oslo agreements. No doubt, they believe that Israel still is.

A majority believe that ending security cooperation with Israel would serve Palestinian interests.

81% felt that personal freedoms and democratic processes have declined over the past few years.

These answers surprised me, though:

For one thing, this shows that West Bank Palestinians are more hawkish than their Gaza counterparts.

But for 23.5% of those who oppose a two-state solution, their alternative is not getting rid of Israel - but to become part of Jordan and Egypt!

Yes, that is only 8% of those polled, but I've never even seen this question ever being asked before. And it is a solution that Israel could be interested in, even if Egypt and Jordan don't seem to want it at this time.

If that idea gets that much support when no one is talking about it, imagine how much support it could get if the seeds are planted in people's minds?

01/10 Links: The Jihad Against Jewish Hebron; Shin Bet busts Hebron Hamas cell; IsraAid in Yorkshire

From Ian:

Police open criminal investigation of far-left Israeli activist

The Israel Police have opened a criminal investigation into a far-left activist who was shown on an investigative journalism TV program last week boasting about how he helps Palestinian security forces find Palestinians who sell land to Jews.
In the hidden camera footage aired by Channel 2’s “Uvda” on Thursday night, Ezra Nawi can be seen boasting about how the Palestinian land owners are tortured and later killed after taken into custody by the Palestinian Authority’s Preventative Security Service.
“Straight away I give their pictures and phone numbers to the Preventive Security Force,” Nawi is heard saying in reference to the Palestinian Authority’s counterintelligence arm. “The Palestinian Authority catches them and kills them. But before it kills them, they get beat up a lot.”
The footage was part of a segment on Uvda about a group of Israelis who posed as far-left activists in order to infiltrate Israeli human rights NGOs working in the West Bank.

Guardian once praised Israeli ‘activist’ who helps kill Palestinians selling land to Jews

In 2009, the Guardian published an official editorial titled ‘In Praise of Ezra Nawi’.
Nawi is a Jewish Israeli ‘human rights activist’ with the group Ta’ayush, a “grassroots movement of Arabs and Jews working to break down the walls of racism and segregation”.
Prior to the editorial, the Guardian had published an op-ed by contributor Neve Gordon which was even effusive in its praise of the “pro-democracy, human rights activist”.
Fast forward to 2016.
Uvda, a respected news magazine on Israel’s Channel 2, just revealed that two Israeli “human rights activists” – including Ezra Nawi – bragged, in an exchange caught on film – that they “entrapped” Palestinians interested in selling land to Jews and subsequently turned them in to the Palestinian Authority.
Remarkably, they turned these Palestinians in even though they acknowledged – in the video secretly recorded by another NGO – that they likely faced torture or murder by the Palestinian secret police.

Haaretz outs IDF hero who infiltrated B'tselem, Ta'ayush

The Haaretz newspaper has exposed the alleged identity of the young man who infiltrated leftist groups as part of an investigative report that was aired on Channel 2 last week.
The man, who was planted in the leftist groups by a group called Ad Kan, recorded the most damning documentary materials aired on the show, by use of a hidden camera. His identity was kept secret on the show, and the IDF, too, refrained from making it public when he was awarded the Chief of Staff's citation for his courage in Operation Protective Edge.
According to the Channel 2 report, the man – who was referred to by the pseudonym "Arik," was the one who asked the IDF to keep his name secret, in order to make it possible for him to continue to infiltrate the leftist groups.
The investigative report has severely damaged the groups' image as being concerned with "human rights," by exposing that senior members of B'tselem and Ta'ayush have been informing on Arabs in Judea and Samaria who wish to sell land to Jews, in the knowledge that this leads to their arrest and torture by the Palestinian Authority (PA), which issues death sentences to people who sell land to Jews.