Monday, March 13, 2017



A story in Commentary about choices and behaviors within anti-Trump organizations pointed me towards this interesting (and accessible) piece of academic research that discusses experiments on the impact extreme tactics have on popular support for political causes and organizations.

The paper looks at what “counter-normative, disruptive, or harmful” political tactics do for two key goals of any social movement: (1) raising the profile of a movement and its causes and (2) gaining support from the wider public (which can take the form of increased membership, donations, or general friendliness towards the movement’s goals). 

In theory, profile-raising and support-building should go hand-in-hand since the public needs to know about a group and understand its mission and purpose before they can support it.  But in our media-saturated age, it often requires extreme tactics to gain attention – especially when competing with other causes, or with other individuals and organizations claiming to represent your issue.

This is where extreme tactics such as “inflammatory rhetoric, blocking traffic, and damaging property” come into play since such rhetoric and actions are likely to get you on the nightly news (as well as more web site hits and social media likes) than quietly cultivating the public through rational discourse.  But, as it turns out, even those friendly to causes such as animal rights, Black Lives Matter or the anti-Trump movement (the subjects of the study linked above) become less likely to support those causes if their proponents turn to such extreme tactics.

In the meaty discussion section of their piece (starting at page 17 if you want to skip the description of their experiments), the authors of the study try to answer the question of why social movements turn to such tactics, given that they seem to be empirically counterproductive.  One explanation they suggest is that participants don’t understand or appreciate the negative impact of extreme tactics, confusing increased attention with increased support. 

The authors also qualify their findings by pointing out that some activists might have goals outside of winning popular support, towards which extreme tactics might make sense, priorities such as “winning funding, impacting powerful elites, psychologically empowering disadvantaged individuals, fostering commitment in existing supporters, and cathartic expression.”

To this list I would add another item drawn from experience dealing with the decades-long extremism of the BDS “movement:” fantasy-politics in which the public does not even exist to protestors, except as props in a drama taking place within the protestor’s own individual and collective heads.

Scientific evidence that the BDSer’s choice of tactics is likely to limit their effectiveness is a useful thing to know.  But such insights can also guide our choices in fighting against BDS and other forms of anti-Israel propaganda, highlighting the importance of tactics and language that will make those we want to persuade feel not just good about us but good about themselves for supporting our cause.





We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Monday, March 13, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
The Jerusalem hotel I am staying in is in the neighborhood of French Hill, which is considered an "illegal settlement" by B'Tselem and most of the world.

Before 1967, French Hill was a Jordanian military outpost that had few if any residents. Israel established the neighborhood after 1967, partially in order to join Mount Scopus, which had been isolated in 1948, with the rest of Israel.

It turns out that one of the very best falafel places in Jerusalem is French Hill Falafel.


Unfortunately, I cannot taste how good its falafel is; it is owned by an Arab and isn't  kosher.

As much as 16% of the residents of French Hill are Israeli Arabs. Which means they are "settlers."

People who support BDS - and the UN - say that any business that operates in "occupied territory" is profiting from the "occupation" and must be shunned. Such a list is being prepared by the UN and is supposed to be published later this year in accordance with previous resolutions.

Will French Hill Falafel be on that list? 

It is operating inside an "illegal settlement." It is owned (almost certainly) by an Israeli Arab. It only exists because the neighborhood exists; its customers are by and large Israelis, both Arab and Jew. 

By any definition, French Hill Falafel is profiting from the "occupation."

If it was owned by a Jew, then of course it would be on the boycott list. 

But it is owned by an Arab.

Up the hill from the falafel joint is the excellent Israeli burger chain Burgers Bar. 

So the acid test for BDS is to ask them: Would you boycott French Hill Falafel?

Then ask: Would you boycott French Hill Burgers Bar? 

Obviously the BDSers don't boycott Arab-owned businesses anywhere, even those owned by Israeli Arabs. They only boycott Jewish-owned businesses and multinational businesses who seem to benefit Jews.

Which answers the question.




We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Monday, March 13, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
I noted on Friday that American Reform Judaism leaders met with Mahmoud Abbas, and from all reports they found that they agreed with nearly everything he said.

Union of Reform Judaism president Rick Jacobs emphasized how "impressed" he was with Mahmoud Abbas, a Holocaust denier who funded the Munich Olympics massacre and whose antisemitic rhetoric includes referring to Jews' "filthy feet" when they visit their holiest spot.

In contrast, the URJ meeting with Netanyahu apparently combative ("candid" is the word used). They complained about the "muezzin bill" that limits the volume of amplified calls to prayer before 7 AM; and they complained about the bill that would legalized settlement construction after the fact in very limited circumstances.

In other words, they parroted the Palestinian position on virtually everything, willing to give the benefit of the doubt to those who want to destroy Israel and showing contempt for those trying to protect it.

They treated Abbas like an honored head of state who truly wants peace and Netanyahu as a person who knows less about how to protect the State of Israel than they do.

So, Rick Jacobs - whose side are you on?

Perhaps you should go through this blog's archives to find out the truth about Abbas and what Palestinians really want, since your entire worldview seems to be based purely on The New York Times and the Forward.





We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Sunday, March 12, 2017

  • Sunday, March 12, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
From Javad Zarif's Twitter:


Yes, Zarif is saying that the man who eagerly signed the decree calling for the genocide of the Jews of Persia is a hero for later countermanding that decree at his wife's behest.

This would be considered a high form of Purim humor if anyone else had said it.

(His assertion that Iran "gladly" took in Jews during the Holocaust is an exaggeration as well. One Iranian diplomat did save hundreds of Jews, confident that the leader of Iran at the time who was very good to the Jews would back him up. Also, several thousand Jews were among over 100,000 Polish refugees who had been interned in the Soviet Union who ended up in Iran in 1942.)



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Sunday, March 12, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
As bad as reading Haaretz online is, it is more disgusting to see it on paper.

Here is a headline from Sunday's edition. I honestly couldn't read the entire (full page broadsheet) article itself because the headline tells you all you need to know.


Here is what we can tell Haaretz believes by publishing this.

The "occupation" did not begin in 1967, It didn't even begin in 1948. No, any Jew who dared move to Palestine since 1917 is an "occupier" who stole Palestinian (meaning Arab) land.

Let's think about this for a second.

Any Jew who moved to Palestine a hundred years ago was an immigrant, by definition.

Haaretz, that bastion of supposed liberalism, is saying that Jewish immigrants are thieves - criminals - by their very presence on "Palestinian" land, even those that purchased the land. It's all the same crime.

At the very same time that liberals are rising up in defense of immigrants seeking a better life elsewhere, Haaretz is declaring that Jewish immigrants who were fleeing persecution had no right to move to their ancestral homeland and are in fact criminals for doing so.

 If anyone would make such a blanket statement about immigrants in any other context, they would be pilloried by the very same people who read and trust Haaretz.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sickening.




We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
From Ian:

Daily Mail: A sick new low for foreign aid: Palestinian boys and girls pretend to execute an Israeli soldier – as teachers at schools funded by YOU tell their pupils that terrorists are heroes
Britain is pumping huge sums of foreign aid into Palestinian schools named after mass murderers and Islamist militants, which openly promote terrorism and encourage pupils to see child killers as role models.
A Mail on Sunday investigation has found 24 schools named after Palestinian terrorists and evidence of widespread encouragement of violence against Israel by teachers, with terrorists routinely held up as heroes for schoolchildren.
Pictures of ‘martyrs’ are posted on school walls, revolutionary slogans and symbols are painted on premises used by youngsters, sports events are named after teenage terrorists and children are encouraged to act out shooting Israeli soldiers in plays.
Head teachers openly admit flouting attempts by British and European donors to control the curriculum at schools. They print overtly political study aids for pupils, some even denying the existence of Israel, and teachers boast of encouraging pupils to emulate teenage attackers killed in the most recent wave of terrorist attacks in the region.
One senior teacher from a prominent West Bank school, asked what he would say to a pupil threatening to attack Israelis, told this newspaper: ‘I would tell them go in the name of God.’

Watch: Murderer of 7 schoolgirls given hero's welcome in Jordan
A hero's welcome is planned for the Jordanian soldier released last night after serving 20 years in prison for murdering seven Israeli schoolgirls during a class trip in 1997.
Ahmed Daqamseh was a soldier in the Jordanian army when he opened fire on a group of students who were visiting the “Island of Peace” of Naharayim on March 13, 1997, as part of a class trip.
Daqamseh was sentenced to life in prison for the massacre, which in Jordan usually means 25 years in prison. However, he was released five years early following repeated calls for his release. In 2013, 110 out of 150 Jordanian MPs signed a petition calling for his release.
In 2011, then-Jordanian Justice Minister Hussein Mjali caused an uproar when he called for Daqamseh’s release, claiming that he is “a hero. He does not deserve prison. If a Jewish person killed Arabs, his country would have built a statue for him instead of imprisonment."
'Israelis are human waste. We must get rid of them'
Ahmed Daqamseh, the Jordanian soldier who opened fire on a group of students who were visiting the “Island of Peace” of Naharayim on March 13, 1997, as part of a class trip, killing seven Israeli schoolgirls justified his murderous actions Sunday after being released from prison five years early.
"The Israelis are the human waste which the nations of the world vomited up before us," Daqamseh told Jordanian media less than a day after his release. "Unfortunately, they occupy the purest land after Mecca and Medina."
"We must eliminate this waste by incineration or by burial," Daqamseh added.
Daqamseh relayed a message of continouous war with Israel to the Jordanian people. "Do not believe the lie of normalization with the Zionist entity. Do not believe the lie of the two-state solution. Palestine is one, from the sea to the river, from Rosh Hanikra to Um Rash-Rash. They forged the names of the cities, and unfortunately, many Arabs say 'the State of Israel.' There cannot be a State of Israel.
Daqamseh's car was surrounded by supporters after his release Saturday night. The supporters chanted, cheered, and filmed the event as the vehicle made its way towards his village. His tribe planned to hold a large party in his village Sunday afternoon for Daqmeseh, who they call a "hero soldier."






We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
How Arab newspapers illustrate "Jewish settlers"

The official Wafa news agency has another scoop courtesy of Ghassan Daghlas, the man who is literally paid by the Palestinian Authority itself to make up lies about Jewish settler activity and yet gets quoted by major news sources dozens of times a year even though he never backs up his accusations with any actual evidence.

This time Daghlas claims that Jews not only uprooted over 140 olive trees - something that is literally impossible without major earth moving equipment and a lot of time - but that they stole them!

How many trucks would be needed to steal over a hundred olive trees? Unless they are saplings that were just planted this past year or so, this story has zero credibility.

As most of Daghlas' fantasies have.

Which doesn't stop wire service reporters from quoting him liberally.

Of course, this absurd accusation of Jews stealing trees is all over Arab media.

And if the Jews are stealing trees, then Daghlas doesn't have to show any evidence - the evidence was stolen!

There is a difference between fake news from the Palestinian Authority's official news media and from any other media. No one (besides me and a very few others) calls them on it. So when the mainstream media swallows their lies, they have more incentive to add to the lies.

It would be so easy for a Washington Post or AP to launch an investigation into the lies of the PA's official news agency. A single story would do more for peace than a hundred anti-Israel stories. But there is no interest in exposing Arab lies, and that lack of interest in covering what would be a major story in the West feeds into the fantasy that both sides have equal credibility.



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Sunday, March 12, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


The headline is Purim, but the rest of this article is not.

"Rabbi" Michael Lerner of Tikkun Magazine writes:
We at Beyt Tikkun have been struggling internally about how to deal with the Jewish violence and revenge that is part of the Purim story.

The question we struggle with is: Should we boycott this holiday entirely? Is there a way to challenge its hurtful parts without discrediting the legitimate joy our people feels when it is saved from the intended violence against us?
...
At a Purim celebration last year Rabbi Dev Noily presented this very moving introduction to those chapters that momentarily woke up those who had come to “just have fun” with a message that forced everyone to realize that we were talking about Jews involved in mass killing....  Please read Rabbi Dev’s valuable words.

Rabbi Dev Noily's introduction to chapter 9 of the Book of Esther:

And now, my friends, here comes the part
that, if you have one, will break your heart.

Na'hafoch na'hafoch,it's all reversed,
all turned around and gone berserk.
What's good is bad what's bad is good,
there's bloodshed where the hero stood.

Our people are spared, no one kills any Jews
and that, of course, is very good news.

If only the story could stop right here,
we'd offer thanks, we'd raise a cheer!
We'd dance and sing and shout in glee,
we'd be just who we hoped we'd be.

The Jews of Shushan would fall to their knees
with gratitude to the Source of Being.

But no, my friends, we'll have no such luck.
As the story unfolds, we think,What the F - ???

This "Rabbi Dev" and "Rabbi" Lerner don't even understand the basic plot of the Book of Esther. No, they cannot find a possible way to interpret the text in any way beyond bloodthirsty Jewish revenge.

This ridiculous poem is an introduction to Chapter 9 of Esther. Yet Chapter 8 explains exactly why the Jews were going on the offensive. It was because the king's decree that would allow his subjects to murder all the Jews was still in force (verse 5), and a royal decree cannot be reversed (verse 8). Haman's followers were sharpening their swords to murder the Jews at the very point in time that this ridiculous Tikkun "rabbi" claims that the Jews were saved.

Moreover, while the decree that Mordechai wrote would have allowed the Jews to kill not only the men but also their wives and children and to take their possessions, in chapter 9 there is no mention of any killing of women and children - it says in Shushan that 500 men were killed, and the 75,000 killed elsewhere are described only as "enemies" and "those who hated" the Jews. Furthermore, the chapter makes clear that the Jews did not take the possessions of their enemies, which again the edict would have allowed.

Why did the Jews not follow the edict allowing them to take the spoils? The answer may be because the wording of the edict in chapter 8 was meant to instill fear in the  enemies of the Jews as verse 2 of chapter 9 states, "no man could withstand them; for the fear of them [the Jews] was fallen upon all the peoples."

Similarly, the wording of the edict used the word "avenge" - but the actual description of the fighting in chapter 9 does not.

There is a clear disconnect between the words of the edict and what is reported about what actually happened. How deep that disconnect is, we cannot say for sure.

What we can say is that not only are the Tikkun "rabbis" completely wrong in their assumption of Jewish bloodthirsty revenge for no reason,  but the very words of Esther can be easily interpreted to say that the Jews only destroyed the hard-core enemies bent on genocide, while the others who felt the (intended) fear from the edict opted out of the civil war, and the edict was worded in a way to avoid unnecessary casualties.

Why can't Tikkun have figured out a way to interpret Esther in a way that would adhere perfectly to the Geneva Conventions as I showed here using only the plain text of the Megillah?

The answer is that, to Tikkun, the narrative of the warmongering militant Jew hell-bent on murdering civilians for no reason is too compelling for them to abandon. They aren't bending over backwards to interpret the story in a way that they can tell their children that the Jews acted properly; they are bending over backwards to tell their children that they are more moral than the savage Jews of yesterday - and today.

(h/t JW)




We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Saturday, March 11, 2017

From Ian:

The BDS Movement Claimed Eight Victories in 2016. They Were All Actually Losses
One of the key tactics of the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign is to make claims that are, at best, overstated—and in many cases provably false—in order to bolster their appearance of success.
For example, organizers claimed in 2010 that the American rock band the Pixies had cancelled a show in Israel due to their advocacy. In fact, the Pixies cancelled due to security concerns, and eventually played a concert in Israel in 2014. The Pixies are even planning to return to Tel Aviv for two shows this summer. Other big names to tour Israel in recent years include Alicia Keys, Lady Gaga, Bon Jovi, and the Rolling Stones.
An article on the website of the Palestinian BDS National Committee, the main BDS advocacy organization, claimed that the campaign chalked up eight impressive victories against Israel in 2016. Predictably, the claims are misleading, overstated, and often outright false.
Below is each claim, followed by an explanation of why it is wrong.
Hamas trains UNRWA pupils to become terrorists
An excerpt from an upcoming documentary on the relationship between the Hamas terrorist organization and UNRWA shows Gazan children being led into a mock terror tunnel, where they are taught how to attack an Israeli kibbutz.
"The UNRWA kids were recruited by Hamas to help build the tunnels, and then infiltrate through the tunnels," said David Bedein, the director of the Center for Near East Policy Research, which is producing the documentary.
Bedein said that Hamas has diverted international aid to construct tunnels with which to attack Israel. "At the same time, Hamas has been getting full supplies, including from Israel, for the past year, and they are able to get cement to continue building [the tunnels]."
He said that the tunnel in the video was a "model tunnel that they built" for training purposes, including the training of school children to kill Israelis.
"Hamas controls the UNRWA teacher's union, and Hamas comes into the schools and [takes the children for this training] as one of their after-school activities."


Trita Parsi’s Accusations Over Kansas Shooting Are the Least of NIAC’s Problems
Last week, Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), co-wrote an article for The Huffington Post called “Trump Didn’t Start The Anti-Iranian Fire.” In it, Parsi and NIAC fellow Tyler Cullis write about a deadly February shooting at a Kansas Applebee’s, after which the suspect, a middle-aged man named Adam Purinton, told a bartender that he’d shot “two Iraninans.” For the authors, the shooting proves that the “anti-Muslim and anti-immigration rhetoric that rode Donald J. Trump to the White House has now spilled over into fear for the physical safety and security of Iranian Americans.”
Per Parsi and Cullis, journalists, think-tankers, and policy advocates who have allegedly demonized the Islamic Republic regime also bear some responsibility for the Kansas atrocity. More than a few people on Twitter noticed that the only people the authors’ called out by name—Michael Rubin, Eli Lake, Adam Kredo, Josh Block, and David Keyes—had one curious thing in common: They are all Jews.
Parsi and Cullis argue that these five, a list that includes a Bloomberg columnist, the CEO of The Israel Project, and the English-language spokesperson for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “push war with Iran in the most hyperbolic terms, all the while defaming those – most particularly, those in the Iranian-American community – who urge a peaceful resolution to the historical tensions between the two countries.” The Kansas shooting, the authors argue, was the inevitable result of this group’s allegedly warmongering work. “A decade of messaging like this, though, has now had its payday: Adam Purinton walked into a bar and shot to kill what he believed to be Iranians.”
The authors rhetorically connect five of their perceived political opponents to a hate crime without going through the effort of proving that the shooter had drawn any inspiration from their work, or even knew that these five people existed. The causal nexus between the Kansas killing and the Washington Free Beacon is left unexplained.
But these logical leaps represent the least of NIAC’s current issues, as the organization is now facing increasingly visible opposition from the constituency it claims to represent.

  • Saturday, March 11, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
  • ,
Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch tweeted this:




This is not what Bennett said.

Here is what he said:

Hunting rocket launchers during a war is almost impossible, Bennett told Haaretz this week, adding that he says this “as someone who specialized in hunting rocket launchers.”

...11 years have passed and Hezbollah has learned to deploy in a more sophisticated manner. “They moved their launchers from the nature reserves, outposts in open areas, to dense urban areas. You can’t fight rockets with tweezers. If you can’t reach the house where the launcher is, you’re not effective, and the number of houses you have to get through is enormous,” he explained.

... “Today, Hezbollah is embedded in sovereign Lebanon. It is part of the government and, according to the president, also part of its security forces. The organization has lost its ability to disguise itself as a rogue group.”

Bennett believes this should be Israel’s official stance. “The Lebanese institutions, its infrastructure, airport, power stations, traffic junctions, Lebanese Army bases – they should all be legitimate targets if a war breaks out. That’s what we should already be saying to them and the world now. If Hezbollah fires missiles at the Israeli home front, this will mean sending Lebanon back to the Middle Ages,” he said. “Life in Lebanon today is not bad – certainly compared to what’s going on in Syria. Lebanon’s civilians, including the Shi’ite population, will understand that this is what lies in store for them if Hezbollah is entangling them for its own reasons, or even at the behest of Iran.”

At the same time, he notes that this is not necessarily the plan for a future war, but instead an attempt to avoid one: “If we declare and market this message aggressively enough now, we might be able to prevent the next war. After all, we have no intention of attacking Lebanon.”

According to Bennett, if war breaks out anyway, a massive attack on the civilian infrastructure – along with additional air and ground action by the IDF – will speed up international intervention and shorten the campaign. “That will lead them to stop it quickly – and we have an interest in the war being as short as possible,” he said. “I haven’t said these things publicly up until now. But it’s important that we convey the message and prepare to deal with the legal and diplomatic aspects. That is the best way to avoid a war.
Bennett never said he wanted to bomb civilians, but he wants to relay the message that Israel is prepared to bomb civilian infrastructure that is being used illegally by Hezbollah - which are legitimate and legal targets in war. Yet he is not saying that this should be Israel's actual war plan, but something to warn the Lebanese to understand the consequences of allowing them to essentially give their government over to Hezbollah and Iran, both of whom would gladly sacrifice Lebanese lives in their zeal to hurt Israel.

This is his plan for avoiding war. The execrable  Ken Roth is framing it as if Bennett is telling the world that he wants Israel to attack civilians.

Even the leftist Haaretz doesn't spin this interview with Bennett to make him appear to be a warmonger the way Roth does. Author Amos Harel, who has written a book about the 2006 Lebanon war, praises Bennett's military positions as "complex" and says he displays a "healthy skepticism over positions taken by top defense officials, and he refuses to accept their insights as indisputable conclusions."

It is bad enough that the leader of a human rights organization is so willing to lie to denigrate Israel. Roth would no doubt argue that he doesn't single out Israel but he will expose anyone worldwide who threatens to attack civilians.

Yet only in February Hezbollah threatened to launch strikes at Israel's nuclear power plant and at ammonia tanks in Haifa, which he said could result in the deaths of 800,000 Israelis.

Civilians.

The people that Human Rights Watch pretends to care about.

Unless, dare I say it, they happen to be Israeli Jews.

Because a direct threat by the effective leader of Lebanon towards nearly a million Jews is not worth a single tweet from self-appointed arbiter of morality Ken Roth from among the 600 tweets he has written since then.

Ken Roth is an abomination.

He has turned Human Rights Watch into a joke and yet he can act with impunity since the media won't go after a "human rights" NGO.

If anyone applied the standards of morality, truth and fairness to Ken Roth that he pretends to demand from others, he would fail miserably. He is a hypocrite, a liar and openly and provably biased.

(h/t Yenta P)



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Saturday, March 11, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
For those of you who are outside Jerusalem now, have a freilichen Purim!


(h/t JB)



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 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.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive