Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, October 04, 2018

10/04 Links Pt2: Landes: Netzarim Junction and the Birth of Fake News; Murdered American-Israeli Reminds Us That Jews No Longer Go Quietly Away; Merkel says Palestinians must accept Israel as Jewish state

From Ian:

Richard Landes: Netzarim Junction and the Birth of Fake News

One of the most shocking and transformative experiences occurred to me in late October 2003, when I got to see the original raw footage that a Palestinian cameraman had shot three years earlier at Netzarim Junction on Sept. 30, 2000. It was a peek through the lens of Talal Abu Rahma, the Palestinian cameraman who had filmed what journalists later depicted as a day of riots that killed many in the Gaza Strip, including the 12-year-old boy, Muhammad al Durah.

Charles Enderlin, chief correspondent of France2, aired the footage as news with his cameraman’s narrative: an innocent Palestinian boy, targeted by the IDF, gunned down while his father pleaded with the Israelis to stop shooting. It became an instant global sensation, enraging the Muslim world and provoking angry protests where Western progressives and militant Muslims joined to equate Israel to the Nazis. Ironically, for the first time since the Holocaust, “Death to Jews” was heard in the capitals of Europe. From that point on, for many, Israel was to blame for all violence, a pariah state.

Even had the child died in a crossfire, blaming his death on deliberate Israeli action made it a classic blood libel: A gentile boy dies; the Jews are accused of plotting the murder; violent mobs, invoking the dead martyr, attack the Jews. In Europe, the attacks the al Durah libel incited were mostly on Jewish property. In the Middle East, a new round of suicide bombers, “revenging the blood of Muhammad al Durah” targeted Israeli children to the approval of 80% of the Palestinian public. It was, in fact, the first postmodern blood libel. The first blood libel announced by a Jew (Enderlin), spread by the modern mainstream news media (MSNM), and carried in cyberspace to a global audience. It was the first wildly successful piece of “fake news” of the 21st century, and, as an icon of hatred, it did untold damage.

But it gets worse. Not only did the evidence show that the Israelis could not have fired the shots that hit the boy and his father, but everything about the footage suggests the scene was staged. There was no blood on the wall or ground and footage never shown to the public appeared to show the boy moving after being declared dead. I set out to explore this staged hypothesis, first raised by Nahum Shahaf, and exposed to the Anglophone public by James Fallows in 2003.

Fathom 21 | ‘Understanding the Jews of the Middle East and North Africa is the key to understanding the whole Middle East conflict’: an interview with Lyn Julius

Earlier this year Fathom’s Grant Goldberg interviewed Lyn Julius about her new book, Uprooted, which documents 3,000 years of Jewish civilisation in the Arab world and explains how and why that civilisation vanished in a single generation in the middle of the 20th century. Julius describes what brought Nazi Germany, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem into an alliance and how this impacted Jews in the Middle East and the formation of the State of Israel. Download a PDF version here.

Grant Goldberg: What prompted you to write the book?

Lyn Julius: I have a strong connection to the region. My parents arrived in Britain in 1950 as Iraqi-Jewish refugees, and throughout my childhood I was very conscious of the connection with Iraq, mainly because I still had family there. Conditions deteriorated for the remaining 3,000 Jews of Iraq after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel’s defeat of the Arab countries. Saddam Hussein embarked on a reign of terror, executing nine Jews in Liberation Square in Baghdad. My grandparents were still in Iraq as well as various aunts and cousins and all were desperate to leave. The community’s telephones were cut off, their jobs were lost and their university entry blocked. Their very lives were in danger – some 50 Jews were arrested and never seen again.

I honestly think that understanding the Jews of the Middle East is the key to understanding the whole Middle East conflict. The way the Jews have been treated in Arab countries points to a major dysfunction in Arab society: the inability to tolerate anyone who is different from the mainstream, whether non-Sunni Muslims or minority non-Muslims.

I’ve been very involved in Harif, the UK Association of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa, which I founded 13 years ago. As well as organising events to raise awareness of the history and culture of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa, I’ve been blogging and writing. Eventually, I realised I had accumulated enough material for a book.

Also, there has not been much written about Mizrahi Jews, certainly not in English.[i] The most mainstream work was In Ishmael’s House by Sir Martin Gilbert, published in 2010. Most of the research on the subject has been done by historians writing in French, such as Georges Bensoussan, Nathan Weinstock, Shmuel Trigano, Bat Y’eor and Paul Fenton, who, despite his English origins, is a professor at the Sorbonne. David Litman also wrote about Jews from Morocco. I hoped my book would make the essence of their work accessible to English readers.

Widow of legendary spy Eli Cohen begs Syria to return his remains

The widow of famed Israeli spy Eli Cohen, who was executed in Syria 53 years ago, issued a public plea to Syrian President Bashar Assad on Wednesday to return her husband's remains to Israel for burial.

Nadia Cohen was speaking at the first International Multidisciplinary Conference on the Treatment of War Injuries at the Galilee Medical Center in northern Israel.

"Release Eli, release his bones," Cohen said, addressing her plea to Assad.

"When my mother-in-law died, I wept and said she had not been able to see her son laid to rest.

"Forgive, extend your hand, and give us the grave … so we can be at peace, and he [Eli] will feel that he is in his own land," she said.

Cohen thanked the conference organizers for giving her a platform, saying that some 18 years ago she had tried to persuade the Assad regime to release her husband's remains.

"I corresponded with Bashar … and we sent pictures of my children, my grandchildren, so he would take pity and soften his heart about releasing the body. I was happy when he wrote that it would happen 'when the time was right.' Even those two words were a comfort," Cohen said.

Accumulated Dog Poo On Jerusalem Streets Becomes Sentient, Leads Mayoral Race (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

: Credit Deror via Wikimedia Commons

Jerusalem, October 4 - A cohesion of canine fecal matter sat so long on the pavement of Israel's capital city that it has evolved a consciousness and communication skills, according to a spokesman, and now holds the front-runner position in a hotly-contested election campaign to succeed Nir Barkat at the head of the municipality.

P. Tabaat, the representative, told an assemblage of reporters Thursday that the chunk of doggy-doo sat at the intersection of Shabbazi and Lod Streets in the Nachlaot neighborhood long enough for its constituent microorganism population to develop into colonies, which, over the eons it sat uncollected, grew into a unified organism with more to recommend it than any of the humans campaigning for the mayoralty, and, seeing the opportunity to improve the city, launched its own election bid. Elections are scheduled for the 30th of this month.

Tabaat cited several polls showing the excrement in the lead over previous front-runner Moshe Leon, with 47% of those surveyed choosing the feces over the career politician, who polled at 29%. Likud candidate Zeev Elkin polled a distant third at 12%.

"It's an obvious choice to an clear-headed citizen," explained Tabaat. "A turd that's known the grittiness of the city's streets has much more resonance with the day-to-day struggles of Jerusalemites than any politico, especially the polished, groomed personalities of the mainstream parties. Also, a campaign being run by a piece of actual, physiological crap is shaping up to be the cleanest campaign Israel has ever seen. I know that doesn't say much, though."

Leon's and Elkin's staffs found themselves scrambling this week to explain and address the gap, which one Wednesday poll saw widening further. "It's tough to compete," acknowledged Leon campaign director Asla Authaus. "Even with the endorsement of the Haredim, which would normally prove key to victory, our candidate can barely crack the 30% mark. We're in some deep, uh, trouble."

Elkin spokeswoman Beth Hakisseh indicated that if polling continues to show the coprolite in the lead, the Netanyahu protege would consider pulling out of the race. "Not much sense in asking for humiliation on election day at the hand of a living piece of digestive waste," she acknowledged.

Even if the kaki fails to win, predict analysts, it will upend accepted wisdom about municipal elections in Israel, Jerusalem in particular. "A strong showing such as the one we're seeing really threatens the established power brokers," noted local journalist Bea Yuv. "You can tell they're producing more of the leading candidate each time they look at the polls."

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.

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

When I was a teenager in the 1950s, I was a science fiction nut. I would load myself down with books and short story anthologies from the library and even spend actual money on pulp magazines. There were a few writers that I adored and others that I hated. I didn’t like anything that had philosophical pretensions or plot uncertainties. I liked science that could be believed with only minimal suspension of belief, action, and writing that offered insight into individual and social human behavior, even when it was attributed to aliens. And there was one SF novel that I read when it came out in 1957 that absolutely knocked my socks off: Eric Frank Russell’s Wasp. It isn’t an exaggeration to say that I’ve recalled and thought about its content ever since, although for a long time I’d forgotten the name of the book or the author.

Russell (1905-1978) was a British writer, who during the war was either a lowly RAF radio operator or a super-secret military intelligence operative, depending on whom you ask. One way or the other, he well understood the potential of the combination of psychological warfare and carefully calibrated and targeted violence, as a way to leverage a very small investment in resources to hamstring an enemy with a large and powerful military, to soften it up and facilitate its defeat by a less powerful opponent.

The wasp that inspired the title was the small creature who flies into a moving vehicle and by stinging the driver causes a wreck in which several much larger and more powerful creatures are killed. The novel is set during a war between interstellar civilizations, one based on Earth and another in the Sirian system. An earthling named James Mowry who had grown up on a planet in the Sirian Empire and knew its language and culture, was trained, equipped and disguised to function as a saboteur, and planted on an enemy planet.

Mowry acted with great ingenuity to create a phony anti-war organization (the Sirian Freedom Party) and to give the impression that it was large and widespread (today this is called “astroturfing”). He did things like placing stickers with subversive slogans on the windows of stores and public buildings; the stickers were made with a corrosive ink such that even when they were scraped off the slogan would be etched into the glass, which created suspicions that the owners of the windows might be sympathetic to the organization. He paid thugs to assassinate a member of the secret police and mailed threats to numerous other officers, causing the agency to devote a great deal of resources into trying to track down the “members” of this group. At the same time, some of the general public bought into the antiwar, anti-regime message, and as a result the society was racked by uncertainty and division (is this starting to sound familiar?)

The planet Mowry was on was mostly water, and a large fleet of merchant ships was essential to its economy. Mowry released a fleet of tiny drone submarines which had no offensive capability, but appeared on radar as the periscope of a larger sub. He then exploded a mine on a ship to give the impression that it had been attacked by a submarine, causing the Sirians to think there was a large force of armed subs threatening their fleets, and requiring them to devote much energy to searching for something that didn’t exist.

Through various simple, cheap, extremely clever and effective actions, Mowry caused the authorities to divert large forces from the war effort, ultimately making it possible for a much weaker invading force to prevail.

In a very interesting thesis submitted to the US Naval Postgraduate School this year, Andrew J. Fox cites Wasp as a “prescient” account of doctrine, strategy, and tactics for an insurgency. He compares Mowry’s tactics to those of the relatively small PLO in the 1960s and 70s, when Arafat gained influence and, paradoxically, legitimacy, for his cause by attacking an essential transport network (airline hijackings) and by a high-profile murder (the Israeli athletes in Munich).

Fox notes that the Internet makes the kind of operations launched by Mowry even easier and cheaper. After all, he had to mail his threats to secret police officers! Fox is primarily interested in the potential for new strategies of terrorism and asymmetric warfare to arise, utilizing modern technology in novel ways. But I am struck by the potential that exists for psychological warfare in Mowry’s techniques – or rather, by the clear evidence that we, Israel and the West, are being actively targeted by Wasp-like tactics today.

Think about the consternation provoked by the tiny – in active members – organizations Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now. They claim many supporters, but are there more than a few dozens of active members? I strongly doubt it. Think about the political damage done in Israel by the left-wing NGOs that are paid by European governments to stir up trouble in the territories, to flood our legal system with complaints from Palestinians, to impeach the IDF, to spread demonizing and delegitimizing propaganda – the list is endless. And what does it cost them? A few million Euros a year, far less than it would cost to attack us with tanks or planes.

But there is no reason that such techniques can only be used by weak states and non-state actors. I would not be surprised to find out that Israel had released several “wasps” of its own against Iran and Hezbollah.

All of the above is out in the open. But there is another kind of subversion that is more subtle. This is the use of automated technology to leverage social media in order to create dissatisfaction and social division in society, to exacerbate existing divisions, and to create new ones. Some Democrats in America claim that Russian “bots,” stolen emails, and other ways of manipulating opinion through social media, tilted the election in the direction of Donald Trump. I doubt this, but there is documented evidence that fake Russian social media accounts pushed extremist points of view, both on the right and the left, apparently in order to increase social conflict by aggravating existing racial, cultural and class tensions.

This kind of psychological assault is highly dangerous. Like Mowry’s stickers the object is to turn various subgroups of the population against each other and to make them suspicious of each other’s loyalty. Extremists on both the progressive and conservative side push messages of distrust, for the government, the police, the military, business, the media, the educational system, and of course racial and religious groups. The ultimate goal is to split the country into quarreling pieces that will be easier to defeat than a unified nation.

Wasp was a great read. Mowry’s resourcefulness and humor were entertaining, and Russell’s understanding of the weaknesses of bureaucracies was instructive. I enjoyed watching the unsympathetic Sirian Empire lose a planet thanks to one clever man. But today, in the age of rampant terrorism and asymmetric warfare, when the “good guys” are on the other side from the Mowrys, Wasp is more of a warning than entertainment.

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.

10/04 Links Pt1: Ben Shapiro: Support of Israel in U.S; Ron Prosor: Why didn’t we stop funding UNRWA years ago?; Israeli minister: We can defeat Russian S-300 air shield in Syria

From Ian:

Ben Shapiro: Support of Israel in U.S.

There’s a trendy view these days that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has committed the grave sin of turning support of Israel partisan. This is the view of many on the Democratic left, who seem perturbed at Netanyahu’s close relationship with President Donald Trump. “Netanyahu refuses to even pretend that he cares what liberal American Jews think or feel about Israel,” sneers Eric Alterman of The Nation.

But what, precisely, is Netanyahu supposed to do in the face of the left’s gradual move against Israel over the past two decades? Alterman, for all his sneering, is a harsh anti-Israel critic — he says that Israel is either practicing apartheid today or on the verge of doing so, and has endorsed the idea behind boycott, divestment, and sanctions of Israel on the international stage. Can that be attributed to Netanyahu?

The left’s anti-Israel move has been brewing for decades. Republicans have been somewhat more pro-Israel than Democrats since the Six-Day War — Israel’s victory in that war led to an onslaught of Soviet propaganda against the Jewish state as the Soviets attempted to consolidate the support of Muslim states. Still, until 2001, the two parties remained largely pro-Israel; in 2001, 38 percent of Democrats supported Israel against the Palestinians, with 50 percent of Republicans doing so.

Then 9/11 hit. Suddenly Republican support for Israel began to climb and Democratic support for Israel began to drop. That drop was exacerbated by the advent of former President Barack Obama’s administration, which took the line that Israel’s failure to achieve peace with the Palestinians lay at the heart of broader conflicts in the region. The American left began to parrot the line of the European left that Israel’s intransigence represented the root of imperialistic Western power politics.

Ron Prosor: Why didn’t we stop funding UNRWA years ago?

When the State Department announced that the US would stop funding UNRWA, many believed it to be an ill-considered move. Some argued that it would increase the chance for another round of violence, destroy the United States’s position as an honest broker, and create a humanitarian disaster.

Nothing could be further from the truth. One comprehensive look at UNRWA’s record over the years should leave anyone with only one question: how in the world was this not done many years ago?

The United Nations Relief Works Agency was established in 1949 for the exclusive benefit of Palestinian refugees. Its core mandate was to assist and house those Palestinian refugees displaced in the war. Sadly, it has done neither of those, and in an epic way.

How do we know? Because the numbers don’t lie.

Since 1948, despite wars with neighboring countries and internal flare-ups, there has not been one single event that has left “new” displaced refugees. Yet, during these 70 years, the number of refugees under UNRWAs auspices ballooned from 700,000 to almost 5.5 million. This phenomenon of a growing, rather than decreasing, number of refugees is of course a farce. Over 50 percent of the so-called refugees found homes across the globe many years ago, and would not be considered refugees by any other standard other than that of UNRWA. UNRWA has made little progress toward “ending” the refugee status of the other 50%.

Most people are not aware of it, but the UN actually discriminates between types of refugees. Next to the UNRWA Palestinian refugees, there are all other 30 million refugees in the world, UNHCR refugees. While the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has been working overtime over the past decade due to the Syrian civil war, UNRWA operates with a budget that is four times larger — $246 per person annually. The contrast in numbers is quite astonishing. While UNRWA only treats 5.3 million people, it has 30,000 employees, three times as large than UNHCR, which treats a population that is more than 10 times larger.

These international UNRWA managers knowingly employ teachers who praise Hitler & preach anti-Semitism & terrorism. I sent @matzschmale our info & he denied everything. Now they are literally running to Israel—from their own Gaza employees—to save their own lives. EU funds this. pic.twitter.com/u27zsbAJ34
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) October 2, 2018

Following Defunding, UNRWA to Spend $100 Million on Trump Piñatas (satire)

The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), an organization established to provide essential services to Palestinian refugees, has responded to US budget cuts by ordering 10 million Donald Trump piñatas, for the refugees to take out their anger on the American president.

The agency, which has been criticized for wasting money by perpetuating refugee status across generations, is holding an emergency fundraise for the $100 million needed to buy the piñatas.

“Throughout the Middle East and beyond, Palestinian refugees face dire conditions due to President Trump’s decision to end funding for UNRWA,” said UNRWA Commissioner General Pierre Krähenbühl. “Without these piñatas, the refugees will have no outlet to express their anger.”

As of press time, US Congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio Cortez had demanded the US raise taxes to send 10 million piñatas to the Philippines.

Yes, real academic papers on Israel are just as crazy as hoax papers

I mentioned yesterday the hoax paper scandal where nonsense is accepted by what the hoaxers called "grievance study" academia and how anti-Israel "scholarship" uses the same illogic that the fake papers used.

Here's an example, from Settler Colonial Studies, by Esther Alloun (a self-described "Arab Jew") where the author is upset that Israeli animal rights activists don't relate their activities to "occupation" the way that Palestinian Arab animal rights activists properly do. The abstract:

This article examines the contemporary animal rights movement in Palestine–Israel and compares Jewish Israeli activism to Palestinian activism to illuminate the ways in which the settler colonial context shapes animal politics. The article argues that human–animal relationships constitute a significant dimension through which settler colonialism is expressed, engaged with, and resisted. As such, drawing on ethnographic material, it explores how different approaches to animal activism can obscure or reveal the racial and colonial relations they are bound up with. It considers how Jewish Israelis frame animal rights in non-intersectional ways, as a simple, single-issue movement that can be abstracted from human politics and power relations, while the Palestinian Animal League in the occupied West Bank weaves animal activism with the decolonial struggle for Palestinian self-determination in an intersectional spirit. The article hence suggests that, to a great extent, animal politics follows the patterns set up by the settler colonial regime, with the type of advocacy on behalf of animals being shaped by the sides taken within the settler state. Instances that trouble and complicate this settler/native binary are explored as well as the possibilities of coalitional politics.

What exactly animal rights has to do with "settler colonialism" is not really spelled out, but intersectional theory says it is so therefore it is.

The author is clearly frustrated that liberal Israeli animal activists are acting out their settler colonialist instincts by not including the Palestinians in their lives:

Activists embody a single-optic perspective by not acknowledging that their love and care for animals is made possible by the colonial politics (the ‘right and left issues’) they live in. The affective register of love and care is used to distance oneself from politics (a point I return to in the final section), and activists repeatedly argue that human and animal issues ‘are not the same’ and that ‘you need to separate the struggles!’ (interview with Maya, 14 February 2017). Jewish activists also justify their single optic through a universalising discourse pitted against the local human problems occurring in the region, which are trivialised as a result. Again, this does not make their feelings or concerns any less genuine, but any acknowledgment on their behalf of a multi-optic account of the problem would significantly complicate their picture of animal activism.
The single optic of Israeli animal activism, its depoliticised and selective focus, makes sense in light of the settler colonial logic at work in Palestine–Israel. Indeed, this non-intersectional approach echoes the particular modalities of Zionist settler colonialism through which animal politics operate in this context. Importantly and as Mark Rifkin posits, the settler colonial logic produces durable ‘tendencies’, ‘orientations’ and ‘momentum’ rather than ‘determining effects’. Lorenzo Veracini argues that settler colonialism works towards its self-supersession and covers its trace. Wolfe points out that it is especially the case in Israel because of the ‘ideology of return’, i.e. the idea that Jews are returning to Zion (Jerusalem), a land that they already owned. In such perspective, Jewish Israelis do not see ‘Zionism as colonialism’, and the notion of return is used to naturalise their claims to territory and the erasure and replacement of the Palestinian natives. This sets the scene for a very unreconstructed and unacknowledged form of settler colonialism.....

As such, settlers do not necessarily perceive everyday enactments and re-enactments of Zionist settler sovereignty as political or deliberate moves. Consequently, by excluding Palestinians or politics from animal rights advocacy, Jewish activists become one more point of ‘resonance’ (to use Marcelo Svirsky’s expression) of the Zionist logic, but they do not perceive this exclusion as political. Instead, it is an expression of ‘settler common sense’, and part of the ‘ordinary, non-reflexive conditions of possibility’of living in Palestine–Israel, which translates into the exclusion of Palestinians from a shared moral horizon and understanding of justice.

Notice what the author is doing. She defines Zionism as a colonialist project as a given, and therefore all Jewish Zionists are colonialists. Their not discussing their crimes of colonialsm in every context of their lives is proof of their evil.

The Palestine Animal League, on the other hand, looks at things in the correct intersectional manner:

Jewish Israeli animal advocates primarily adopt a single-optic vision that severs animal rights from its context, whereas PAL advocates a multi-optic intersectional approach that links animal and human rights.

PAL’s director also drew on the idea of intersectionality to explain how animal advocacy cannot be viewed through a selective mono lens of animals only:

Many of the projects that we are doing, we are intersectional, we work with the humans and we work with the animals in the same project, and we don’t distinguish between the rights […] rights is rights, for the humans, for kids, for women, for men, anti-occupation, against occupation, for animal rights, rights is rights, this is what it means, this is the first step. (5 February 2017)

The a priori insistence that intersectional theory applies to animal rights makes Jewish Zionists guilty of every possible crime against all rights, human and animal, if they believe that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. The paper falls just short of claiming that Israeli Jewish animal rights activists are "animalwashing" the "occupation."

This is nothing less than academically approved antisemitism.

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.

The reporter's "State of Palestine" question is more important than Bolton's answer

By now many have seen this clip of National Security Adviser John Bolton answering a reporter's question about his referring to the "so-called State of Palestine:"

Reporter: Ambassador, you just addressed Palestine and said it was a 'so-called state.' Is that language productive in achieving the president's...?

Bolton: It's accurate. It's not a state.

Reporter: But the president recommitted to, as you know, the President in New York City recommitted to his goal of achieving a a two-state solution."

Bolton: That's right.

Reporter: So is using that sort of language productive in his goal?

Bolton: Yeah, sure, of course! It's not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood. It doesn't control defined boundaries. It doesn't fulfill normal functions of government. There are a whole host of reasons why it's not a state. It could become a state, as the president said, but that requires diplomatic negotiations with Israel and others. Calling it the so-called state of Palestine defines exactly what it has been, a position that the United States government has pursued uniformly since 1988 when the Palestinian authority declared itself to be the State of Palestine. We don't recognize it as the State of Palestine, we have consistently across Democratic and Republican administrations opposed the admission of Palestine to the United Nations as a state because it's not a state.

Bolton's answer is terrific and accurate (according to most but not all legal scholars.)

What this exchange shows, though, is how far the media has gone beyond reporting facts into only reporting what they think should be the truth. The reporter isn't disputing the facts; she is seemingly offended that Bolton stating a fact is not being "productive" towards a two state solution.

The thinking that the reporter has, along with many others and most nations in the UN, is that one should only mention what you want to be true, not what is actually true. The Palestinians pretend they have a state, so it is in the world's interests to go along with that pretense, which will somehow make it true.

And if you don't go along with their fantasy, then....what? That unstated question underlies a lot of how people look at the Middle East. Jews can handle facts, but Arabs...well, we have to protect them from the facts.

Their feelings would be hurt. They might walk away from peace talks that they have already walked away from. They will be more likely to resort to terror. We must go along with their fantasies if we want to make progress.

But there can be no progress nor productivity based on lies. Treating a group of wanna-be national leaders like children is not the way to get them to the table. On the contrary, it teaches them that they will be rewarded for acting like children.

Facts still matter. It is a shame that a field like journalism has forgotten that.

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 Haaretz:

There may be some relief in store for the electricity shortage in the Gaza Strip. Under an agreement drawn up in recent weeks, Qatar will finance the purchase of fuel for Gaza’s power plant.

The arrangement, which is supposed to go into effect in the coming days, will allow a significant increase in the supply of power to Gaza residents. Israel hopes that this development, which should provide an immediate improvement to residents’ daily lives, will reduce the risk of a military confrontation with Hamas.

Gaza now gets around four hours of electricity a day. The Qatari aid, estimated to be tens of millions of dollars, aims to raise the average to eight hours a day.

As Haaretz reported last week, talks on this issue have been taking place over the past few months under the UN envoy to the region, Nickolay Mladenov. Qatar was represented by its envoy to Israel and the territories, Mohammed al-Amedi. The Israeli official most involved was National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat. The breakthrough was reached at the conference of countries that donate to the Palestinians, which took place last week in New York alongside the UN General Assembly sessions.

Here's the part that Western media is so reluctant to report:

Previous talks had raised the possibility of increasing the electricity supply from Israel by upgrading the power line from Israel to Gaza, but this proposal met with difficulties because the Palestinian Authority objected. Understandings reached in the past regarding electricity were linked to legal and financial commitments by the PA. But Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has refused moves to improve the electricity supply in Gaza unless there is progress in the PA-Hamas reconciliation talks.

Israel needs to negotiate with its enemy Qatar to provide electricity to Palestinians in Gaza, against the wishes of Palestinians in Ramallah. The Qatari fuel would be pumped directly from Israel into Gaza.

If it could, Israel would provide more electricity directly to Gaza but it is limited by existing agreements with Abbas.

These two facts by themselves shows that Israel cares more about the welfare of ordinary Palestinians than their own leaders do.

It is a stunning indictment of Palestinian leadership. But the media and world diplomats won't say anything negative about "peacemaker" Mahmoud Abbas, so this story gets buried along with the many others that show that Palestinian leaders don't care about their own people except as cannon fodder and political pawns.

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.

10/03 Links Pt2: Evelyn Gordon: ICC’s anti-Israel bias shows America is right to shun it; Bolton: Palestine ‘Is Not a State’; 'Blonde washing' terrorism

From Ian:

Evelyn Gordon: ICC’s anti-Israel bias shows America is right to shun it

In a public speech earlier this month, the American national-security adviser John Bolton sharply criticized the International Criminal Court (ICC) and threatened retaliation should it try to prosecute the U.S. or Israel. As Evelyn Gordon notes, multiple complaints against Israel have been submitted to the court, and its judges have twice failed to respect basic principles of impartiality with regard to those complaints. In one instance, the pre-trial chamber—tasked with determining whether charges filed by the prosecutor are sufficient to necessitate a trial—rejected the prosecutor’s own decision that Israel’s actions didn’t justify prosecution. And the court made an even more outrageous move in July:

Without waiting for [the ICC’s prosecutor Fatou] Bensouda to conclude any of her other Israel-related probes (the Palestinian Authority inundates her with complaints), the pre-trial chamber ordered the court’s registry to establish “a system of public information and outreach activities for the benefit of the victims and affected communities in the situation in Palestine,” open an “informative page” on the court’s website exclusively for Palestinians, and report to the chamber on these operations every three months with the goal of creating a “continuous system of interaction between the Court and victims, residing within or outside of Palestine.”

Bensouda has yet to conclude that any crime even occurred, much less that the court has jurisdiction over it (which is far from self-evident). Moreover, the judges have yet to see any evidence in the cases at issue. Yet by declaring the Palestinians to be victims to whom the court must reach out, they have effectively announced that they’re already convinced both that crimes have occurred and that they’re within the court’s jurisdiction. And if the judges have decided all this without even bothering to review any evidence, how could they possibly be trusted to evaluate the evidence fairly should Bensouda actually file charges?

Moreover, by twice sending Bensouda clear signals that they want her to indict Israel, the judges have undermined her credibility as an independent prosecutor. If she ever does file such charges, will it be because she truly considers them justified or only because it’s easier to placate the judges above her than to keep defying them?

Thus the court’s track record on Israel alone provides ample justification for Bolton’s broadside against it. Indeed, it ought to concern many countries since a court that’s biased against one country can’t be trusted to eschew bias against others. . . . And by refusing to overlook that uncomfortable fact—by refusing to grant a travesty of justice the honor due the real thing—America is upholding its highest ideals.

Bolton: Palestine ‘Is Not a State’

National Security Adviser John Bolton clarified for a reporter on Wednesday that Palestine is "not a state" when asked why he referred to it as a "so-called state."

"You just addressed Palestine and said it is a so-called state. Is that language productive?" a reporter asked, prompting Bolton to say his comment was "accurate" and that "it is not a state."

The reporter referenced President Donald Trump's support for a two-state solution on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict last week and asked whether Bolton's language is productive in helping him achieve his goals.

"Yeah, sure. Of course. It's not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood. It doesn't control defined boundaries. It doesn't fulfill the normal functions of government. There's a whole host of reasons why it's not a state," Bolton said. "It could become a state as the president said, but that requires diplomatic negotiations with Israel and others, so calling it the so-called state of Palestine defines exactly what it has been."

Bolton said the "so-called state of Palestine" description reflects a "position the United States government has pursued uniformly since 1988 when the Palestinian Authority declared itself to be the State of Palestine."

"We don't recognize it as the State of Palestine, we have consistently across Democratic and Republican administrations opposed the admission of Palestine to the United Nations as a state because it's not a state," Bolton said.

UNRWA recently announced it would fire some 100 Gazan Arab employees due to budget cuts. This resulted in massive protests held Monday, unbeknownst to Jewish Israelis, who were celebrating Simchat Torah, a short distance away. The protests must have been bad, for they struck abject terror in the hearts of all the lovely dedicated European souls who administrate UNRWA from within Gaza. We know this because the Israeli government was forced to step in and evacuate ten of them.

These international UNRWA managers knowingly employ teachers who praise Hitler & preach anti-Semitism & terrorism. I sent @matzschmale our info & he denied everything. Now they are literally running to Israel—from their own Gaza employees—to save their own lives. EU funds this. pic.twitter.com/u27zsbAJ34
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) October 2, 2018

The Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) issued an official statement, confirming the evacuation of UNRWA officials:

"A number of foreign UNRWA employees have been evacuated from the Gaza Strip to Israel. This is due to the tensions as a result of the financial crisis UNRWA is facing and subsequent concern for the safety of its foreign staff.

“The Hamas terrorist organization did not protect the agency's staff from the violence directed against them,” read the statement from Israeli officials.

Imagine that: 10 senior international UN employees begging to be rescued by the country that body has condemned more times than North Korea, Syria, and Iran combined! And specifically, from the UN agency that provides antisemitic schoolbooks to the children of Gaza, inciting them to violence against Israeli Jews.

And for more info on Matthias Schmale, chief of UNRWA's international staff in Gaza who are now fleeing to Israel—to save their lives after being threatened by their own Gaza employees—see thread: https://t.co/tUGrsgp3d3 @matzschmale
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) October 2, 2018

What are we to make of all this?

@Palestine_UN @COLRICHARDKEMP @epavard @haaretzcom Well, Well, look at this... @UNRWA running to Israel for help, imagine that...
— BrooklynBorn (@evanparke) October 2, 2018

The main takeaway seems to be that no matter what you give them, no matter how much land, money, and freedom they have, the Arabs can’t properly run a state of their own. You can analyze the reasons until the cows come home, but the fact remains: given all the tools of statehood, they have failed to create an independent state. Independent, that is, from Israel.

Israel always has to step in and rescue them from themselves. Or alternatively, to rescue the international workers sent to help them. It’s just pathetic.

The 2005 Expulsion of the Jews from Gaza (A/K/A Disengagement) was a chance for the Arabs to show they could build a state, given land, some infrastructure, a budget, and a government. It was a chance for them to show they didn’t need to depend on Israel for aid, jobs, or medical care. Alas, the Arabs ran true to type, destroying the greenhouses left them by the Jews, using the monies they receive to support pay to slay schemes and swollen government salaries, and as in Judea and Samaria, electing to be governed by terrorists.

Meantime, they protest in the tens of thousands, demanding to be let into Israel, the state they say should not exist, the state they continue to try to destroy, the state they should have no need of, with all that was provided them by Israel and by the world.

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.

I had a Twitter conversation with Arab-American journalist Ray Hanania on Sunday. It is worth reading.

My tweets are in plain text left-justified, Ray's are italicized and right-justified.

Jordan’s King Once Again Smears Israel at the UN

‏

It's about time someone called out Israel atrocities and violations of international law.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You mean Israel is silencing UNHRC agenda Item 7 dedicated to Israel, the hundreds of resolutions at the UN, dozens of your own articles and thousands like them?

No, Ray, it is about time someone put Israel's actions in context of how EVERYONE ELSE ACTS.

Because Israels' human rights record compares favorably not only with the Arab regimes but also with other Western democracies, especially but not only when at war.

While you are to be commended for occasionally calling out Palestinian atrocities and attitudes, you cannot be serious and claim that they get the same airplay as Israeli actions that are far less evil.

So an Israeli soldier who puts a civilian nurse in his sniper scope and kills her from across the border because she is protesting or helping other victims. I guess that "far less evil"? Yikes! You look really bad pal

Compare with any nation at war. In history. Don't take out of context. Sometimes bad things happen, I would need to check out the incident, but has that ever happened in France? Spain? UK? US? They've done worse and you don't care.

Selective outrage means that there is another agenda than human rights.

Israel does more to protect civilians among its enemies than any country in history. Prove that wrong and we can talk.

But comparing Israel and only Israel against a standard of perfection is bias, period.

Soon I will write an article on how Israel's treatment of Muslims compares with that of European countries. Hint: No Burqa bans, no bans on minarets, and very few restrictions on the volume of the call to prayer (comparable to Muslim nations!) Why don't you write that instead?

Oh yea, but Israelis tend to kill more Muslims than Europe. Well, at least the victims can wear their hijabs when they are shot to death?

Ray, again, you are proving you are no journalist. Independent groups say as many at 10,000 killed in allied airstrikes against Syria and Iraq. voanews.com/a/us-led-coali…

Compare the transparency on Israeli investigations on unintentional killings in Gaza with US/EU investigations in Syria/Iraq. No comparison. But you don't want to compare, because context is your enemy. Only sarcasm. Keep proving that facts don't matter to you.

"Transparency"? Israel CENSORS Journalist reports inside/ outside, & expels journalists who violate the censors. Ask family of Abdel Fattah al-Sharif murdered by Israeli soldier Elor Azaria about transparency. Israel punished the person who videotaped it. Facts don't matter to u

Sigh. Vietnam, Grenada, First Gulf War, Iraq War - all censored by the US military.

Once again, you compare Israel against perfection rather than against other Western democracies at war. Which I mentioned earlier in this thread. Which is proof of bias, Mr. Journalist.

How you close your eyes to murder is really appalling and so unJewish, inhumane and really terrible. So you think it's ok that Israeli soldier snipers shot to kill protestors on the Gaza side of the border? Wow!

No. I'm saying that when the IDF denies targeting civilians I believe them over you who assumes they are. Because if they wanted to kill civilians, there were be tens of thousands dead.

You call them liars. I call you a liar. Who has more proof?

And of course you ignore my main point that Israel compares better than any other country. Do you claim otherwise? You are a journalist, Ray - do research and dig up facts rather than point to isolated accidents as proof of Israel's evil.

It's very un-Christian of you.

I have NUMBERS on my side. Every Friday Israeli snipers shoot, kill civilians but you look at Christians and Muslims as not being human or equal. That's apartheid racism. I feel like I am back in 1980s arguing over SouthAfrica Apartheid. Same responses. All u have is namecalling!

Please, Ray. Did you look at the videos of last Friday's "peaceful protest" complete with hand grenades?

You can't win on facts, Ray. You haven't disproved a single thing I have written. Including that the IDF doesn't target civilians.

Hamas puts civilians at the fence. Children. I have video. You cannot deny it. Israel tries to avoid killing civilians. You cannot deny that either because the casualty count is so low for tens of thousands at the border.

So you have yet to disprove anything I've said.

I have to go now. I'll make a blog post and I promise I'll keep all your words intact. I challenge you to do the same for me in an article. If you are so certain that you are right.

Me too, Thanks. But, I DON'T Believe the Israeli soldiers when they say killings were accidental or the victims were engaged in terrorism. That's a lie and an excuse & u know it. I ALWAYS speak out against violence on BOTH SIDES. When have u ever denounced Israeli violence?

As far as believing the IDF, I have read in detail many of the reports of investigations done my the independent @IDF_MAG_Corps and have been blown away at how meticulous they are. Have you ever read one of them and found something incorrect or missing? If you have, PUBLISH IT.

Amnesty and HRW don't bother to read them. They just look at the conclusion, say "whitewash," and you believe them. I have yet to see a single substantive criticism. So don't tell me IDF soldiers wantonly target civilians. It is a lie and a libel as a blanket statement.

Amnesty is one of the most reputable human rights organizations in the world, until they started criticizing Israeli practices and killings, and suddenly they are bad. So hypocritical.

If you are interested, I can prove Amnesty's bias against Israel beyond any doubt. Start here: Their "Gaza Platform," still online, contains HUNDREDS of lies (fake "civilians" Hamas admits were fighters) and they STILL refuse to correct it.

Read my research on it, contact Amnesty and demand that they update their figures. Then I would believe that you care about the truth. (Or disprove my research. Good luck.)

Here's one place where I unequivocally condemned the unjustified murder of a Palestinian youth.

But for the record, I want to make it clear that I want Israeli human rights to be even better than they are now. But not at the expense of the security of Israel's own citizens.

There is always room for improvement. That is not proof of being evil. Not even close.

So my question for you is, why don't you show some intellectual honesty instead of joining on the bandwagon to demonize Israel for things that EVERY OTHER WESTERN DEMOCRACY does without a word from hypocrites like you?

When so many do this so consistently, with only the Jewish state being so targeted, it sure feels like antisemitism.

And claiming that no one talks about supposed Israeli crimes is simply ridiculous.

You have yet to address my specific issues.

I'll make it clear, Ray: Saying that Israel, and only Israel, must come under extra scrutiny and criticism while EVERY OTHER NATION acting worse gets a virtual pass proves double standards. A grave violation of your supposed journalist standards.

He could not answer anything I said about double standards applied to Israel and only Israel.

He could not answer about his absurd implication that no one stands up for Palestinians when the world is obsessed with supposed Israeli crimes.

He could not admit that I have indeed spoken out against crimes by Israelis.

He could not admit that he was very wrong in his claim that Israel kills more Muslims than Europeans have. (Of course there are far more wars than the ones I mentioned.)

He could not provide proof that Israeli soldiers target innocent civilians.

People who are anti-Israel hate context. Israel must be compared to a standard of perfection, and always will fall short. Every single shortcoming is given as "proof" of Israeli evil, while every other Western democracy at war acts worse - higher percentage of civilian deaths, less transparency in their investigations, less independence in their investigations, less tolerance for Muslim minorities. But they aren't judged to the standards Israel is.

It seems too much of a coincidence that Israel is the only state that gets treated this way, and that Israel is the Jewish state.

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.

10/03 Links Pt1: UN Watch slams UNRWA officials who 'fled Gaza to Israel'; Intellectuals, Journalists In Gulf Attack Hizbullah Following Israeli Revelation Of Its Missile Sites In Beirut

From Ian:

Bibi’s Rallying Cry

"Anyone but King Bibi," is the sort of derisive comment you'll hear from a Tel Aviv resident in a bar after a couple of Goldstar lagers. But Israel's prime minister earned the nickname as praise after his United Nations appearance last week. Like him or not, Benjamin Netanyahu has proven effective at moving the ball down the court on the Iran issue. Even the extreme leftwing Haaretz complimented him for "one of his most convincing and effective performances."

It was a far cry from the Obama years when Netanyahu appeared to be "on the wrong side of history," a worn-out phrase favored by our ex-president, who could now use it to describe himself. As Netanyahu said: "When I spoke here three years ago Israel stood alone among the nations. Of the nearly 200 countries that sit in this hall, only Israel openly opposed the nuclear deal with Iran."

The difference this time is that Netanyahu has a 500-pound gorilla grinning behind him. On this issue America has Israel's back. Even as a candidate, Trump blasted the Iran deal as a sham. In May, he announced the United States was exiting the deal. In August, he re-imposed sanctions. Indeed, it's hard to imagine the United States could have done more to signal its support last week. "We are with Israel 100%," the president said at a joint press conference with Netanyahu Wednesday, a day after shredding Iran in a speech at the General Assembly in which he said Iran's leaders "sow chaos, death, and destruction" and "spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond."

National Security Adviser John Bolton got his shots in during a speech in New York, warning Iran of "hell to pay" if it defies America. "The days of impunity for Tehran and its enablers are over." Netanyahu also held warm meetings with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Watchdog slams UNRWA officials who 'fled Gaza to Israel'

Hillel Neuer, director of U.N. Watch, a nongovernmental organization that monitors the U.N.'s performance, ridiculed UNRWA's decision, saying it only confronts Hamas, the terrorist group that rules Gaza, when its employees' well-being is jeopardized.

"UNRWA foreign staff flee Gaza to Israel after Hamas allows protests, death threats [against them]. Yet not one word criticizing Hamas from UNRWA, its chief [Pierre] Kraehenbuehl, spokesperson Chris Gunness or Gaza chief Matthias Schmale. But they attack Israel daily," Neuer tweeted.

"Case in point of UNRWA hypocrisy. Hamas-led attacks on Israel border with guns, grenades, Molotov cocktails and wirecutters is Palestinians 'exercising their right to protest.' Protests targeting UNRWA's German and British managers is 'threat to security.'"

Kulanu MK and former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren also lambasted the agency, tweeting, "Hypocrisy or stupidity? Funny how the agency speaks of the Palestinians' right to protest when Hamas organizes 'Marches of Return' [the weekly violent demonstrations on the Gaza border, which include terrorist attacks on Israeli troops], but now UNRWA directors are fleeing for their lives into Israel because Hamas has threatened them. Confused? Me too."

According to Israeli officials, about 10 UNRWA employees were taken out of the Gaza Strip, but the agency's director of operations and deputy have remained there.

IDF denies Palestinian claims of fatally shooting elderly Gaza farmer

The Israel Defense Forces rejected a Palestinian claim that troops on Tuesday shot dead an elderly farmer in the Gaza Strip, saying it was unaware of any shooting incidents in the area at the time.

Earlier the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry said a 78-year-old Palestinian, Ibrahim Ahmad Nassar al-Arouqi, was killed at his home by by Israeli fire near the al-Maghazi refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip. Some Palestinian reports claimed the man was killed by bullets, while others said he was hit by fragments of a tank shell.

The ministry said its investigation confirmed that al-Arouqi was killed by “the occupation” — its term for Israel.

An army spokesperson said the IDF did not know of soldiers or tanks opening fire in the area around the time of al-Arouqi’s death.

The 78-year-old was said to have been hit outside his home in the al-Maghazi refugee camp, which is located over a kilometer from the security fence — a long, but not impossible, distance for a bullet or shell to travel.

IsraellyCool: Latest Palestinian Libel: The Killing of The Elderly Dual-Identity Farmer

The palestinow Facebook page laments the “killing” of 72-year-old palestinian Ibrahim-Al-Arouqi, who looked like the average, loving grandfather. Well, except for the Hamas hat and scarf.

Quds News Network lament his “killing” as well. Except according to them, he was someone else – 72-year-old Ibrahim Nawwaf.

Note also how palestinow claimed we killed him after randomly opening fire at protesters at the fence, while Quds News Network claims he was killed after we opened fire at houses.

And the inconsistencies don’t end there. Palestinow report about the supposed killing on their website, claiming he was hit by a 250-mm bullet – fired by a tank.

Except there is no such thing as a 250-mm IDF tank bullet (confirmed with a military expert friend in the IDF). Note also how here, palestinow claim he was shot while in front of his house, which is “relatively far from the border fence” – even though in the Facebook post they claimed he was shot after we opened fire on protesters at the fence.

According to Ha’aretz, the Gaza Health Ministry say he was shot in the back – which I suggest would be difficult if he was sitting in front of his house as claimed above – unless he was sitting facing his house. Again, this does not seem kosher.

And in yet another version of what supposedly happened, Iran’s Press TV claims he was shot while working his land.

Add all of these inconsistencies to the fact that this has not even been reported by other palestinian news agencies like Ma’an and Wafa, and I am willing to bet this is yet another libel.

What the "grievance study" scandal means to the Arab-Israeli conflict (UPDATE)

This story is all over today:

A trio of concerned academics has published seven intentionally absurd papers in leading scholarly journals, making bizarre recommendations including chaining up children and keeping men on leashes.

The trio say the papers, which used fabricated authors and credentials, are an attempt to expose political bias in fields that study race, gender and sexuality, which they see as being misled by biased research and poor methodology.

Their papers argued for a slew of bewildering positions, including chaining up privileged school children as an educational opportunity and a push to include “fat bodybuilding”’ in professional bodybuilding competitions as a way to nullify fat shaming.

Another paper rewrote a chapter of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, replacing parts of Hitler’s political manifesto with terms including “solidarity allyship”, “neo-liberal feminism” and “'multi-variate matrix of domination”.

Each of the papers were peer-reviewed before being published, meaning they passed the highest level of critical assessment in their fields.

The trio went public with the project after The Wall Street Journal uncovered it, saying a paper which claimed dog parks are “petri dishes for canine ‘rape culture’" was ridiculous enough to pique the publication's interest.

"We intentionally made the papers absurd and used faulty methods to see if they could pass scrutiny at the highest level of academia. Concerningly, they did," James Lindsay, one of the authors of the papers, said.
"A rambling poetic monologue of a bitter, divorced feminist written by a teenage-angst poetry generator shouldn't be accepted as a scholarly article worthy of publishing."

In US humanities departments an academic with seven papers published within seven years is awarded tenure, an indefinite academic appointment. The trio completed these seven papers within 10 months.

I once noted the difference between two sets of Columbia University faculty that signed an anti-Israel or pro-Israel petition.

The anti-Israel professors were mostly concentrated in "soft science" fields like anthropology, gender studies, sociology, history and Middle East studies.

The pro-Israel professors were concentrated in engineering, medicine and law.

The hoax papers showed that in the soft sciences like sociology, scholarship is a joke. Papers are judged based on their conclusions, not on the rigor of their arguments, which means that these papers are written with the conclusion determined first, and the "facts" cherry picked or made up to support the foregone conclusion.

We see the same thing with anti-Israel "scholarship." The conclusion comes first - Israel is an apartheid state, Israelis are racist, the IDF targets civilians, or whatever the outrage flavor of the day is. Then they find some "facts," often fictional or highly deceptive, and publicize them. Actual facts and context are to be hidden if they don't match the "narrative." In fact, any Israeli actions that contradict the narrative are spun as if they prove the narrative (i.e., "pinkwashing.") Just as in "grievance studies," the conclusion is the driver to the evidence, not the other way around.

No wonder that academics who value truth and rigor tend to be pro-Israel and academics who favor narratives and political correctness lean towards the very victim-posing Palestinians.

And no wonder that the pro-Palestinian side tries to hijack any other grievance cause - women, people of color, first peoples, the disabled - to pretend that they are fighting the same fight, when in fact Palestinians are among the least liberal people on the planet.

UPDATE: One of the journals that fell for the hoax, Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, published this anti-Israel dribble in 2016. Who can tell the difference between hoax and anti-Israel "scholarship?"

Drawing upon subaltern geopolitics and feminist geography, this article explores how militarisation shapes micro-geographies of violence and occupation in Israel–Palestine. While accounts of spectacular and large-scale political violence dominate popular imaginaries and academic analyses in/of the region, a shift to the micro-scale foregrounds the relationship between power, politics and space at the level of everyday life. In the context of Israel–Palestine, micro-geographies have revealed dynamic strategies for ‘getting by’ or ‘dealing with’ the occupation, as practiced by Palestinian populations in the face of spatialised violence. However, this article considers how Jewish Israelis actively shape the spatial micro-politics of power within and along the borders of the Israeli state. Based on 12 months of ethnographic research in Tel Aviv and West Jerusalem during 2010–2011, an analysis of everyday narratives illustrates how relations of violence, occupation and domination rely upon gendered dynamics of border collapse and boundary maintenance. Here, the borders between home front and battlefield break down at the same time as communal boundaries are reproduced, generating conditions of ‘total militarism’ wherein military interests and agendas are both actively and passively diffused. Through gendering the militarised micro-geographies of violence among Jewish Israelis, this article reveals how individuals construct, navigate and regulate the everyday spaces of occupation, detailing more precisely how macro political power endures.

It sounds like Jews in Israel are prone to violence. Nah, nothing problematic about that.
(h/t Irene)

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.