Tuesday, June 06, 2017

  • Tuesday, June 06, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


On November 4, 2016, 3 US soldiers - Staff Sgt. Matthew Lewellen, Staff Sgt. Kevin McEnroe and Staff Sgt. James Moriarty died after coming under fire from a Jordanian soldier as they were entering a Jordanian military base.

On November 17, Eric Barbee, spokesman for US Embassy in Jordan, issued a short statement, reflecting the possibility of a terrorist motive on the one hand, and the rumors being spread that the soldiers themselves had accidentally brought the incident upon themselves.





A segment from the CBS morning news revealed more about what happened, and a taste of the various stories that were to come from the Jordanian government.



As early as November 19, two days later, it was already known that there was video footage of what had happened. Even then, the strong possibility was raised that this was a deliberate attack by a Jordanian soldier on US soldiers, Green Berets. The security footage showed a lone Jordanian gunman at a checkpoint shooting at the convoy of Green Berets who were there to conduct training at the King Faisal Air Base in al-Jafr.

It was reported at the time that a US official had, on condition of anonymity, confirmed the video showed the Jordanian soldier waived the first vehicle through the checkpoint and then opened fire on the second vehicle, killing two of the Americans inside. When US troops in the third vehicle returned fire, a third American was killed.

The video itself was not made public at the time

As for the Jordanian soldier, M'aarek Abu Tayeh, he was wounded and placed in a medically induced coma at a Jordanian hospital.

Both an FBI and a military investigation were begun.

By March, a summary of the key findings of the military investigation was revealed in a United States Special Operations Command Press Release. It provided the following outline of what actually happened:
o  On the afternoon of Nov. 4, 2016, a Jordanian Air Force guard shot and killed three Special Forces Soldiers at the entry gate to King Faisal Air Base, Jordan.

o  The three Soldiers were returning to the base in a four-vehicle convoy after conducting weapons familiarization training on a nearby military range.

o  The Jordanian Air Force guard opened fire on the second vehicle of the convoy with his M-16 rifle, killing Staff Sgt. McEnroe and mortally wounding Staff Sgt.(P) Lewellen.

o  Within seconds of coming under fire, Staff Sgt. Moriarty and another Soldier exited the third and fourth vehicles in the convoy in order to seek cover as the shooter closed in on their location. After unsuccessfully trying to communicate to the shooter that they posed no threat, the Soldiers returned fire. While the other Soldier maneuvered to gain a better position, Staff Sgt. Moriarty stood and fired his pistol directly at the shooter, who was wearing body armor. After closing in on their position, the shooter hit Staff Sgt. Moriarty with two rounds, mortally wounding him. Staff Sgt. Moriarty’s actions enabled the remaining Soldier to maneuver and engage the shooter, seriously wounding him.

o  Staff Sgt. McEnroe died at the scene. Staff Sgt. (P) Lewellen and Staff Sgt. Moriarty were medically evacuated after receiving initial treatment at the local medical treatment facility but died en route to King Hussein Hospital in Amman. Autopsy results show that no amount of medical care could have saved the three Soldiers due to the nature of their wounds.

o  All three Soldiers died in honorable service to their country. All three Soldiers were properly trained, equipped, and armed, and were acting in compliance with all procedures and accepted practices. In maintaining their position and engaging the shooter, the Soldiers acted with great valor.
Along with the summary, a redacted version of the results of the military investigation, which had been concluded on February 16, was released as well. It included 2 photos illustrating the scene of the shooting.




A March 6 letter from Dina Kawar, ambassador of the Kingdom of Jordan, to Representative Ted Poe, a Republican from Texas claimed that a joint US-Jordanian investigation concluded that there was an "absence of premeditated intentions by M'aarek Abu Tayeh," the shooter. Instead, the Jordanians accused the American soldiers not only of failing to stop at the gate but also of having negligently discharged their weapons, causing the security guards to panic and open fire.

The parents of the soldiers responded that the video, which they had been shown, refuted the Jordanian version of events. The video shows that none of the Jordanians showed any reaction, as would be expected if there had been a loud noise, until the Jordanian guard himself opened fire. The video also showed that the Jordanian guard had deliberately murdered their sons at close range.

The parents turned to the Trump Administration, demanding that action be taken against Jordan and that if the Jordanians refused to take action, that US aid to the country be cut off.

One of the parents, Mr. McEnroe expressed their feelings about Jordan:
"Over four months have passed since our boys were murdered. None of our families has heard any apology, condolences or explanation from the Jordanians other than these false narratives," McEnroe said. 
"In my mind, Jordan is at the very least guilty of complicity in the murder of three American brave servicemen," he said. 
"We are told that Jordan is an important ally in the war on terror -- a war which I support -- but I encourage our president and our administration to take a hard look at our relationship with an ally who would so callously disrespect the sacrifice made by our boys," McEnroe said.
Congressman Poe, who serves as the chairman House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, spoke about Jordan’s changing story about what had happened:
"I wrote the Jordanian king after I talked to Jim Moriarty about his son," the lawmaker said. "The response seem to say that this entire incident was a mistake and that the Americans were at fault for this whole incident." 
Last night, Poe said he received a second letter from the embassy of Jordan. 
"They now say 'it was not a mistake but that the shooter was following the rules of engagement," Poe said.
In addition, there were indications that Abu Tayeh did not act alone.
o  A second guard who manned the post with Abu Tayeh had left to use the restroom
o  A third soldier left to open the gate, leaving Abu Tayeh along
o  Other Jordanian soldiers in the area, as many as 11, did not nothing to help the American soldiers
o  Those same Jordanian soldiers fired warning shots at a US truck entering behind the Green Berets’ vehicles, preventing the truck from assisting the US Green Berets.
It was suggested that the reason for the lack of an immediate apology from the Jordanian government was the implications behind such an apology. An apology would be an admission that the elite Hashemite force that guards Jordan’s King Abdullah II had made a mistake -- or worse, that the guard had been turned by ISIS.

The FBI told the families that when Abu Tayeh came out of his coma, they had interviewed him. He admitted that he had used excessive force and was away from his assigned guard position. However, he claimed that he had heard a loud noise and that was what set him off.

The FBI also told the families that the shooter had previously been convicted of sexual on a woman with a knife. He also had anger management issues.

For their part, the military investigation was unable to find any indication for the reason behind the attack. No group ever took responsibility and there was no evidence that Abu Tayeh had actual terrorist sympathies. What they did find was that sloppiness by the Jordanian army was par for the course and it was usual for them to wave US soldiers in without coming out and personally confirm the identities as required and that gate guards “often displayed negligence for basic weapons handling and safety which could be improved.”

What was left was the series of lie after lie offered by the Jordanian government:
o  First the Jordanian government claimed that the US soldiers had failed to stop at the gate
o  When the video disproved that, the Jordanians claimed that there had been an “accidental discharge” by one of the soldiers.
o  When that was disproven, the Jordanians claimed there had been a loud noise
The video, though it had no audio, disproved all three claims.

Finally, in mid-April, the Jordanian government admitted that Abu Tayeh had not followed proper military protocol and said they would prosecute him over the death of the US soldiers. However, it was not immediately made clear what exactly the charges would be nor when the trial would take place.

Dana Daoud, a spokeswoman for the Jordanian Embassy indicated that an apology was finally going to be issued by the Jordanian king to the families and added that “the Jordanian government will do everything to ensure that justice is enacted fully.”

Mr. Moriarty was doubtful in his response:
“Any statement that doesn’t include an admission of total guilt and plans for prosecution for the murderer who killed my son and the Jordanians who have failed to do anything about it, will not be enough.”
Finally, last week, on June 1, it was reported that the Jordanian government had formally charged Abu Tayeh with murder:
o  The official charge is murder with intent to kill more than one person
o  A second charge included “insulting the dignity and reputation of the military”
o  Another charge is “violating orders and instructions of the military”
If convicted by the military court, Abu Tayeh could face the rest of his life in prison -- but a spokeswoman at Jordan's embassy in Washington was unable to confirm whether Abu Tayeh had actually been charged with murder.

There are 3 basic things the parents of the US soldiers are looking for:
o  Prosecution of Abu Tayeh
o  Prosecution of the Jordanians who did nothing to help their sons
o  Serious sentences for both Abu Tayeh and the other Jordanian soldiers involved
And that is why -- based on everything the families of these soldiers have had to put up with till now -- the road ahead may still be a long one.




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.
  • Tuesday, June 06, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
The vast majority of the Palestinians who fled the West Bank did it well after the war. Voluntarily.


I received this email from UNRWA-USA, entitled "50 years of occupation. Still refugees."

This week marks a devastating anniversary for Palestinians: 50 years of the occupation of the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.
In 1967, UNRWA had already been providing services to Palestine refugees displaced by the Nakba for 17 years. The Naksa -- the new wave of displacement caused by the June 1967 war and subsequent Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza -- warranted the establishment of 10 new refugee camps, and UNRWA expanding its services to newly displaced Palestinians in need. Refugees still live in these camps today.
Please continue to stand with Palestine refugees.
For decades, generations of Palestinians -- refugees and non-refugees -- have persevered as their land is confiscated, their families separated, and their rights repeatedly violated. UNRWA will continue to stand with Palestine refugees, no matter what, until they receive a just and durable solution to their plight.
Today, and every day, we remember those, still refugees, living under an occupation that becomes more entrenched every day. We honor them as they continue to hope for a brighter future.
It's funny, because in 1967 these "refugees" were in camps in Jordan and Gaza, under foreign control. Today they are in camps in the West Bank and Gaza under the control of their own people. They are no worse off from the "occupation" than they were under Jordanian occupation; in fact their lives are markedly better in the West Bank (and in Gaza, the only reason things are worse is because of Hamas, not Israel, which tried to build houses for them and got a UN resolution condemning Israel for that desire.)

Now they have hospitals, universities, far improved health care and far better jobs for the most part compared to 1967. Yet UNRWA wants to make it sound like it is Israel that is making their lives miserable.

Most egregiously, UNRWA is skirting the main question: Why are they still in "refugee" camps, UNRWA? They live in "Historic Palestine!"

Furthermore, the Palestinians living under UNRWA auspices in Lebanon and Syria would kill to trade places with the Palestinians who live under "occupation."

Yet UNRWA-USA knows that to the anti-Israel drones who support it, there is no more magical word than "occupation." It conjures horrors unheard of since the Spanish Inquisition.

UNRWA doesn't want the world to know the truth - that it is simply a self-perpetuating bureaucracy that should have been dismantled in the 1950s. If that would have happened, the majority of people who claim to be Palestinian today would be in much better shape because the Arab nations would have been forced to take care of them instead of fobbing them off to the UN.

There is literally no reason to keep Palestinians in "refugee" camps in the West Bank and Gaza (and Jordan, where most of them are citizens)  - except to use them as cannon fodder to eventually destroy Israel. UNRWA feeds them the myth of "right to return" in schools and they happily consume it.

The Six Day War didn't destroy Israel. UNRWA is trying to leverage that victory to destroy Israel today.
.



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.
  • Tuesday, June 06, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
The centrist and left-wing Israeli media, in both Hebrew and English, had a field day with the remarks that PA official  Jibril Rajoub made on Israeli TV in Hebrew about the Western Wall, where he said  "In the end, it must remain under Jewish sovereignty. We have no argument about that. This is a Jewish holy place.”'

I reported Rajoub's official denial on Sunday morning. And today he "clarified" even more to his Arab critics, saying that he literally said that the Wall should be under Jewish "religious supervision."

The Hebrew phrase he used, ריבונות יהודית, unambiguously means "Jewish sovereignty."

Rajoub spun what he said on Palestinian TV on Monday evening, after furious blowback for his alleged "acceptance of Israeli sovereignty over the Wailing Wall." He said that the Israeli TV presenter asked him: Do you accept Israeli sovereignty over the Wailing Wall? "I told her 'no way' and I  'cannot.'"

Yet even after these explicit denials, most of the Israeli media has not reported on it. Haaretz today even has a sarcastic op-ed deriding those who think that Palestinian leaders are anything but flexible and wonderful based wholly on Rajoub's initial, purposefully ambiguous remarks meant to make himself look moderate:

There’s no choice: We have to liquidate Jibril Rajoub. He’s continuing to spout off about peace, and we must put an end to it.
In an interview Saturday night with Channel 2 television’s “Meet the Press,” he threw a bombshell. “We understand that the Western Wall ... is sacred to the Jews and ultimately it has to remain under Jewish sovereignty,” he said. “There is no argument over this.”
Then, to prove just how dangerous, subversive and scheming he is, Rajoub added that his Fatah party’s Seventh General Congress, which took place about six months ago, had decided “the solution to the conflict is two states for two peoples, and resistance to the occupation will be nonviolent.” Why nonviolent, for heaven’s sake? Let them blow up buses, so we can bomb them in return.
The Fatah Seventh Congress said nothing about "two states for two peoples." It is another bald-faced lie by Rajoub that Haaretz fact checkers don't want to check because it fits in with their biases of only Israeli officials lying.

In this case, it isn't only Haaretz clinging to the false narrative of a moderate Jibril Rajoub. Virtually all of Israel's mainstream media has not mentioned his about-face that occurred within a day of his original interview.

Religious newspaper Hamodia mentions Rajoub's denial in English and Yoni Ben-Menachem on News1 reports on Rajoub's habit of saying one thing in Hebrew/English and another in Arabic, noting his many incendiary statements made over the years. That was all I could find. Most of Israeli media simply chose to ignore Rajoub's heated denial of his supposedly moderate statement.





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, June 05, 2017

From Ian:

Michael Oren: Israel’s 1967 Victory Is Something to Celebrate
Israelis are celebrating 50 years since the Six-Day War — and with good reason. That victory saved us from destruction and reunited our holiest city. Ultimately, it also brought us peace with Egypt and Jordan and a strategic alliance with the United States. The Palestinians, by contrast, are mourning a half-century of suffering. They claim that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza subjected them to colonization and denied them statehood.
While the war certainly shaped the modern Middle East, it alone cannot account for the contradictory ways Israelis and Palestinians commemorate it. The chasm can only be explained by events that preceded it. Far beyond 1967, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is in fact about 1917, 1937 and 1947. Those anniversaries can teach us much about the origins of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and why peace has proved so elusive.
A century ago this November, Britain, anticipating Turkey’s defeat in the Middle East, issued the Balfour Declaration. Endorsed by the League of Nations, the declaration pledged to create a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. Britain did not commit to creating a Jewish state in all of Palestine — the national home could have been tiny — and promised to uphold “the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities.” Still, the Palestinians vehemently rejected the document. “We Arabs,” wrote Jerusalem notable Musa al-Husayni, would never accept “such a nation.”
This year, Israelis are also celebrating the centenary of the Balfour Declaration because it formalized the international community’s recognition of a Jewish nation and our 3,000-year attachment to our homeland. But the Palestinians are mourning it — their leaders have even called on Britain to apologize. Today, as in 1917, they view Jews not as a people with rights to a national homeland but as a religious group and, throughout much of Islamic history, an inferior one at that. Understanding this reality helps explain why, in the 1920s, Arab rioters murdered Palestinian Jews, desecrated synagogues and eradicated the ancient Jewish communities of Hebron and Safed.
Despite persistent Arab rejection of Jewish identity, the Zionist leadership recognized that the Palestinian Arabs were a people with sovereign rights. That acknowledgment was codified 80 years ago, in July 1937, with the Peel Commission in Britain, which divided Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. Though the Jews were allotted only one-third of the land, the Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion supported the plan. The Arabs rejected it, proclaiming that the only acceptable solution would be “the complete cessation of the experiment of the Jewish National Home.” Buckling to Arab pressure, the British cut off almost all Jewish immigration to Palestine, shutting European Jewry’s last escape route from Hitler.
Our war of defense
We all know the term "fake news," but there is also "fake history." A notable example of that is the twisted way the Six-Day War is addressed in certain quarters, especially among the Palestinians.
In the opinion of most of the Israeli public, the war is justifiably seen as one of the most significant milestones in the brief history of the modern state, whether because of ideology or reasons of security and diplomacy. The result of the war also strengthened Israel's international standing immeasurably, and in the eyes of the U.S. in particular it was transformed from what had mainly seemed to be a security burden to a strategic asset.
But in recent years, there are those who have been presenting a distorted image by speaking up about the "curse," the "disaster" and the "unnecessary war," referring both to the war itself and the situation of victory that Israel created with it. Here we must point out that no Israeli official intended to initiate a war or plan ahead of time to exploit the war's results for purposes unrelated to security considerations. In fact, at the end of the war, Israel offered to leave all the territory it had taken if Egypt and Syria would sign a peace deal with it, but the proposal was rejected by the "Three No's" of the Khartoum Resolution of September 1967.
What would have happened had Israel lost the 1967 Six Day War?
For 50 years, the Arabs tried to erase the consequences of that incredible war. For 50 years, the world has tried to force Israel to turn its back on those terribile days.
On May 16, 1967, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser ordered the UN Interposition Force to get out of the Sinai peninsula, the force which for ten years had preserved calm between Egypt and Israel. The United Nations obeyed, and at that point Nasser imposed the naval blockade of the only Israeli southern coastline, the port of Eilat, a real act of war.
During those three endless weeks, US President Lyndon Johnson tried to gather a convoy of ships from different countries that would challenge the blockade. But the attempt failed miserably. Egypt, already a military ally of Syria, struck an emergency military pact with Jordan, Iraq, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya and Morocco, who began sending military contingents to participate in the upcoming fight.
As troops and armored men lurked on all Israeli borders, radio and television broadcasts from every Arab capital announced the upcoming final war to exterminate the Israeli Jews. “We will destroy Israel and its inhabitants”, proclaimed Egyptian general Ahmad Shuqayri - and for the survivors, if there are any, ships are ready to deport them”.
Europe betrayed Israel. And in the face of the pro-Arab choice of Charles de Gaulle, a man like Daniel Mayer did not hesitate to declare: “I am ashamed of being French”.
For Israel, the waiting was terrible. Aharon Appelfeld recalls that among Israelis survivors of the Shoah “the talking about deportations, punitive actions, trains”, while Cairo's radio broadcasted hymns, slogans and songs in which they dreamed of throwing “Jews into the sea” was unbearable.
Anti-Israel, anti-semitic Arab cartoons on the eve of the Six Day War


BBC WS tells a context-free tale of Egypt’s Six Day War ‘naksa’
The June 3rd edition of the BBC World Service radio programme ‘The Fifth Floor’ included an item (from 27:13 here) billed as follows in the synopsis:
“Egypt’s Naksa Day Next Monday is the 50th anniversary of Naksa day, or Day of the Setback. The “setback” for Egypt was their crushing defeat by Israel in the Six Day War. BBC Arabic reporter in Cairo, Sally Nabil, tells us how the day is viewed there now.”
At the start of the programme presenter David Amanor described the upcoming item as follows:
“…and a six-day war with consequences much greater. We’re finding out what young Egyptians today know about the events of June 1967.”
He introduced the segment itself thus:
Amanor: “Now most countries don’t relish their defeats and I guess Egypt is no different. Next week sees the 50th anniversary of what’s generally called the Six Day War in June 1967 but its impact remains much bigger than its short time span might suggest. It was a humiliating defeat for Egypt and its Arab nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser. Israel took forces…took possession of the entire Sinai peninsula, leaving Egyptian forces to make a chaotic retreat. In Egypt the war is called the ‘naksa’. Sally Nabil of BBC Arabic tells me the story behind that name.”

  • Monday, June 05, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Fatah and Islamic Jihad and DFLP terrorists can rest easy. Mahmoud Abbas is hitting Hamas and pretending to do it to appease the US.

From Reuters:
Scores of former Palestinian prisoners freed by Israel and living in the Gaza Strip said on Sunday their stipends from the Western-backed Palestinian Authority have been suspended in an apparent bid to appease Israel and the United States.

A spokesman for Palestinian prisoners said that 277 freed prisoners in the Gaza Strip, most of whom are aligned with the Islamist Hamas group that runs the coastal enclave, were surprised to find their May stipends had not been paid.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has demanded that the Palestinians, who view prisoners as national heroes, stop paying stipends to them and their families, and U.S. lawmakers have warned that Palestinian funding could be cut off unless Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas halts the practice.
This is politics, not morality. The PA continues to publicly praise terror attacks. It is simply a way for the PA to pressure Hamas while pretending to do something against the terror it wholeheartedly supports.

(h/t Yerushalimey)



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.
When a suicide bomber blew himself up among the crowd leaving a concert by teen idol Ariana Grande in Manchester on May 22, most Israelis were immediately reminded of the very similar Hamas attack targeting Israeli teens at a popular Tel Aviv discotheque almost exactly 16 years earlier. A Legal Insurrection post on the 15 year anniversary of the Dolphinarium bombing has some interesting quotes from the media coverage at the time. According to The Guardian, the father of the suicide bomber described his son as “an observant Muslim who moved [from Jordan] to the West Bank two years ago in search for a better job.” The father added: “I am very happy and proud of what my son did and I hope all the men of Palestine and Jordan would do the same.” An ABC report quotes a similar statement from the father and describes how the terrorist was celebrated and idolized in his town. A nine year old boy told the reporter: “When I grow up, I want to be just like him.” The late Palestinian psychiatrist Eyad Sarraj confirmed that by perpetrating a murderous attack, a terrorist gives his family the highest status ever. His name becomes immortal.” Sarraj also explained: “The teaching of Islam tells you if you die for God, you don’t actually die […] In fact, you find in the last seconds of people acting this act, they smile.”
Sixteen years later, the popular Irish television comedy writer Graham Linehan takes offense when Israel’s prime minister declares after the attack in Manchester:Terror is terror is terror. We must all unite to defeat it […] We will defeat them.” In response, Linehan sneered: “Bibi bombed children playing football on a beach. What’s this we business? Linehan’s tweet garnered some 2350 “Likes” and was re-tweeted by 1853 people (at the time of this writing); among those who re-tweeted it were Linda Sarsour and Ali Abunimah. Abunimah also re-tweeted an antisemitic parody account of Netanyahu – but then, he has of course long been a dedicated purveyor of updated versions of the medieval blood libel.


When you check out the responses to Linehan’s accusation, you will see that one Twitter user challenged him: “Motive for intentionally killing kids on a beach ? Good PR. ? I really don’t think so. Use your brain.” But apparently, Linehan’s brain is such that he responded: “? No idea what point you’re trying to make here but if it’s a genuine question then--to spread terror. It was terrorism.

So according to Linehan, Israel – or at least its prime minister – is just as much a terrorist child killer as the suicide bomber who caused carnage in Manchester.
Almost exactly two years ago, Linehan also tweeted about the incident he referred to in his recent tweet. Unsurprisingly, he was incensed that the New York Times reported about the findings of Israel’s investigation into the strike that targeted a compound used by Hamas, but resulted in the killing of four boys playing nearby on a beach in Gaza. Linehan made clear that he preferred the version of Mondoweiss – which, for good reason, has been described as a “hate sitethat traffics in antisemitism and caters to people who think one Jewish state is one too many.

A Hamas mouthpiece like the Middle East Monitor will also be considered by Lineham as a reliable news source, and occasionally, he will turn to the award-winning antisemite Max Blumenthal to confirm his views about the world’s only Jewish state.
Needless to say, Lineham has long been upset about “the tactical, disingenuous use of the anti-Semitic smear against anyone who criticises Israel;” he has long realized that “charging Israel’s critics with ‘anti-Semitism’” is just a pathetic effort to “effectively silence them.” And he has such pearls of wisdom to share: “’Peculiar how Israel is always violently attacked but it’s only the ‘attackers’ who die.’” Pity, isn’t it – if only more Israelis died


And another insight that his followers appreciated: “Want to be called a Nazi? Criticise Israel and wait two days. Works that way for me, at least.


Well, it’s so funny, isn’t it – but as a matter of fact, today’s Nazis fully share Linehan’s concerns about “the tactical, disingenuous use of the anti-Semitic smear against anyone who criticises Israel. Indeed, Linehan could just go to David Duke’s website and search for “anti-Semitism” and get plenty of results that reflect his views on the matter. They even created such a funny little image to go with some of the relevant posts!!!

Linehan could also check out Stormfront, where he could find gems like “The Truth is anti-Semitic”… And needless to say, David Duke (who is of course a favorite on Stormfront) is as furious as Linehan when it comes to Israel’s murderous rampage in Gaza, and it just so happens that he also thinks Israel is terrorist…
Of course, we can’t know if Linehan would consider Duke and his Stormfront friends as Nazis, and we can only wonder how he feels that, when it comes to Israel, he seems to have quite a bit in common with them.



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:

Arab states cut ties to Qatar for backing terror
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE and Egypt all announced they were cutting ties to Qatar and booting the country from an Arab coalition fighting in Yemen early Monday, amid a deepening fissure between Gulf Arab nations.
The move came to weeks after US President Donald Trump visited Saudi Arabia, calling on Arab and Muslim leaders to fight extremism and terrorism, and isolate Iran.
The dispute between Qatar and the Gulf’s Arab countries started over a purported hack of Qatar’s state-run news agency, running a false story quoting a top official touting relations with Israel and Iran. The crisis has spiraled since.
Bahrain blamed Qatar’s “media incitement, its support for acts of terror and financing for armed groups associated with Iran to carry out subversive attacks and spread chaos” for its decision.
Saudi Arabia followed with an announcement that it too was cutting diplomatic ties to Qatar and it had pulled all Qatari troops from the ongoing war in Yemen.
Seth J. Frantzman: Five reasons why Israel should care about the Qatar crisis
Israel's image in the region likely can improve amid the current developments.
1. It hurts Hamas
Qatar has supported Hamas over the last decade and hosted former Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal for the last five years in Doha. In 2012 Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani visited Gaza and pledged hundreds of millions for the Strip. Qatar therefore provided Hamas not only a home in Doha but financial support and diplomatic succor. The new pressure on Qatar has encouraged it to expel Hamas members and will reduce its support for the group. This may also isolate Turkey’s relations with Hamas. Qataris are now focused on which airlines will still fly to the country tomorrow, spending money on the Gaza Strip and hosting Hamas may seem like a liability they don’t need now. Hamas will find itself with even fewer allies which could give Israel leverage to encourage the group to change its ways. More likely, Hamas may lash out against Israel to show its relevance.
2. It brings Israel closer to Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Gulf
Israel has shared interests with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states in opposing Iran. Because Qatar has supported Hamas, the new crises encourages those states that oppose Qatar to see Israel as a partner against Hamas and against Iran. This relationship has already been quietly growing in recent years, but the crises with Qatar allows writers in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf to speak out more firmly against Hamas. Saudi's Al Arabiya has showcased interviews with Wonder Woman's Gal Gadot.
3. It shows US influence is back in the region
The background of the current crises was a feeling that US President Donald Trump’s speech to “drive out” terror gave a blank check to local states to act. Under Barack Obama Israel sometimes felt isolated, especially as the US pursued the Iran deal. Now Israel feels that the Americans are back in the region and will stand by their allies.
Iran official blames Trump visit for Qatar rift
The head of Iran’s influential parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy said the differences between Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the result of US President Donald Trump’s recent visit to the region.
The official IRNA news agency on Monday cited Alaeddin Boroujerdi as saying that the move was predicated by the signing of a major arms deal between the Saudis and the US during Trump’s trip.
“It is not unlikely that we would witness more negative incidents in the region,” in the wake of the deal, he said.
Boroujerdi added that Washington has always made it a policy to establish a rift among Muslim countries. He said: “Intervention of foreign countries, especially the United States, cannot be the solution to regional problems.”
Iran and Saudi Arabia are major rivals in the Middle East, with the two countries backing their respective Shiite and Sunni proxies in a number of regional conflicts, namely Syria and Yemen.

  • Monday, June 05, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
These Powerpoint slides were shown - and a worksheet based on them handed out - at Bellaire High School in Houston, Texas for a tenth grade class on decolonialization.

They start off merely as ahistorical. They then move into lies and culminate with blatant anti-Israel propaganda that would make Electronic Intifada and Mondoweiss proud.

 The McMahon-Hussein correspondence did not include all the land taken by the Ottoman Empire; there were explicit exceptions in Syria and the British interpreted the letters as specifically excluding Palestine.
Not one mention of the Jewish people's history in the region. 

There were always Jews in the area, and the more modern migration began in the 19th century, before Arab nationalism.




The graphic does not mention that the Muslims built their structures, deliberately, on top of the site of the Jewish Temples. 

It, unbelievably, does not mention the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. It does not mention the Bible.

Oh, and ever hear of another religion called Christianity that also finds the region to be slightly important?


"Civil war begins"? Arabs attacked Jews within hours of the partition resolution.

Opposite to what this slide claims, the Jews accepted the two state formula, the Arabs didn't.  

The British withdrew in 1948. 

No one considered the territories "Palestinian,." 

The territories were never controlled by the UN.

Jordan and Egypt's control of the territories is not mentioned.  

This slide is a series of lies from top to bottom.



The photos here are taken straight out of the "Israel is Evil" playbook - the Neturei Karta member who represents exactly zero percent of all Jews worldwide, the implication that Israel has not wanted negotiations while Arabs have which is the exact opposite of the truth, the photo of an Israeli soldier that, while it may or may not be Photoshopped,  makes no sense as reflecting reality (soldiers don't pose with their weapons in such a bizarre way where they would fall on their rumps if they fired, for example, and the angle of the photo with a shaky provenance is intended to make it look like the soldier is aiming his weapon at the poor Arab family, when he is not.)

The text is just as bad - nothing about Israeli offers of land for peace, nothing about the wars that Arabs started to try to destroy Israel, nothing about Palestinian terrorism. Nothing about how Israel reached peace treaties with its two most important Arab neighbors. And nothing about how Israel built an amazing nation while under constant threat from hundreds of millions of antisemitic Arabs. The only Arabs in these slides are the ones who are today referred to as Palestinians.

This isn't theoretical. Here is a photo of the final slide taken by a student when it was taught this year in the classroom.



Here's the worksheet with the flawed information verbatim from the slides.




The first question is predicated on a false assumption about the McMahon-Hussein correspondence, written in a way to elicit an "It's not fair!" reaction from students who assume the "fact" about the letters are accurate.

But look at that last question, in the present tense, stating as fact that Jews are warmongers and there would be peace if those uppity Jews just let the UN do its job.

Even with the understanding that teachers must condense facts for tenth graders, this lesson is outrageous in its lies, focus and omissions. It looks like it had been written by a member of "Students for Justice in Palestine."

This slide deck is educational malpractice and it is unimaginable that the creator did not know the actual facts. It is propaganda aimed at high school students who implicitly trust that what they are being taught is true.

It appears from the metadata on the original show that the slide deck is at least a couple of years old. (I have the name of the most recent editor of the deck who is indeed a teacher at that school.)

And this is just one school among thousands. What are the others teaching? Who fact checks these teachers?

There is something very rotten going on, and students are getting taught propaganda instead of facts.

(This is not the first problematic issue at Bellaire High School, by the way.  A ninth grade geography teacher once had students read an ISIS recruiting blog for a "critical thinking" exercise. )




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