Wednesday, January 21, 2009

  • Wednesday, January 21, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
Just in case you has the slightest thought that you could trust anything that Arabs are saying when they are accusing Israel of crimes...

Palestine Today quotes the Religious Affairs Ministry (not sure if it is from the PA or Hamas) saying that there were no weapons stored in mosques in Gaza, along with some good old fashioned anti-semitism:
Dr. Abdullah Abu Djerboue, Undersecretary of the ministry said in a press statement: "The ministry is in the process of inventory of mosques that were destroyed, we are still gathering information..."
He said that the destruction of mosques is "a Talmudic religious hatred and a distorted look at Islam and Muslims with the hatred as described in the Torah and the distorted, false Talmud."

He said that "these people (the Jews) killed the prophets and the messengers of the Lord of Glory as stated in the Koran," adding that "these attacks on the mosques would not only increase the hate against Jews and every conspiracy against Gaza will not go unpunished. "

He refuted Israeli claims that the mosques were being used as stores of explosives and weapons, saying that all the mosques that were destroyed and blew up do not prove the existence of the explosives and none of the explosions demonstrate the presence of weapons or explosives. "

He asked, "Is the resistance [Hamas] that stupid to store their weapons in mosques after they were targeted?"
Can't argue with that logic.

This anti-aircraft cannon and other weapons found in a mosque were clearly planted there by the Zionists:

Because what possible reason would Hamas have for storing weapons in mosques, or schools, or private houses, where Israel would be reluctant to fire and where the very act of firing at them would cause much hate among world Muslims? Really, does that make sense that Hamas would want that to happen?
  • Wednesday, January 21, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
From the Daily Telegraph (h/t Backspin):
I knew Gaza well before the attacks, so when Israel ended its ban on foreign journalists reaching Gaza on the day the ceasefire was announced, I was able to see for myself.

One thing was clear. Gaza City 2009 is not Stalingrad 1944. There had been no carpet bombing of large areas, no firebombing of complete suburbs. Targets had been selected and then hit, often several times, but almost always with precision munitions. Buildings nearby had been damaged and there had been some clear mistakes, like the firebombing of the UN aid headquarters. But, in most the cases, I saw the primary target had borne the brunt.

...For the most part, I was struck by how cosmetically unchanged Gaza appeared to be. It has been a tatty, poorly-maintained mess for decades and the presence of fresh bombsites on streets already lined with broken kerbstones and jerry-built buildings did not make any great difference. And the same can be said for the mindset of many of Gaza's 1.5 million residents. Outsiders might have expected some sort of collective anger at the loss of life, or mass outrage at the Hamas authorities whose policy of firing rockets against Israel had brought down the wrath of the Israeli armed forces.

This next paragraph needs to be emphasized:

But I found that, so steeped is the Gazan mindset in the narrative of victimhood, there was no internally-focused groundswell of anger at what had happened. Palestinians in Gaza have felt victims since 1948, when a small number of locals were suddenly swamped by a larger number of refugees, forced to flee land taken by Israel at the creation of the Jewish State. For 60 years they have dwelled on victimhood, a supplicant people grown dependent on foreign aid and reliant on the role Israel plays as the scapegoat for all ills.
This is the relevant fact that needs to be addressed for any real peace to ever happen. When one side always blames the other for every problem and loses the ability for introspection, there is no chance that they can change for the better.

The picture on what exactly is happening with aid trucks into Gaza is getting a little clearer, no thanks to the UNRWA which is keeping mum on the ugly details.

As commenter Suzanne uncovered, last year Hamas admitted it confiscated 16 trucks of aid from Jordan, meant for the Palestinian Red Crescent, and Jordan was not happy about it:
Minister of State for Information Affairs Nasser Joudeh said Hamas government on Thursday seized 16 trucks carrying emergency supplies into Gaza.

"We are surprised it should be confiscated and distributed in a manner based on political considerations...this only penalizes those who really deserve this aid," Joudeh said. Hamas claimed that the Red Crescent was not distributing the aid properly, since it is more oriented towards Fatah.
Hamas claimed that it would give that aid, which presumably was paid for by the ICRC... to UNRWA.

The denial that Chris Gunness gave me saying that he was unaware of any such incidents with any NGOs, and casting doubt on their having happened, seems less and less tenable.

Today, the JPost adds more details to the more recent incident: (also h/t Suzanne)
Hamas officials in the Gaza Strip claimed that dozens of trucks loaded with food and medicine were being held on the Egyptian side of the border at the request of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

The officials said that the humanitarian aid came from several Arab and Islamic countries about two weeks ago. They said that the Egyptian authorities initially tried to deliver the aid to the Palestinians, but were stopped by Abbas.

"Abbas and Fatah are afraid that the aid would be used to strengthen the Hamas government," said a Hamas official. "That's why they are doing their best to prevent much of the aid from entering the Gaza Strip."

Another Hamas official claimed that the aid had been diverted to the West Bank, where Fatah representatives have confiscated the medicine and food. He did not rule out the possibility that some Fatah leaders were planning to sell the food and medicine in the black market.

The Hamas government said Tuesday that it has established a special fund to help the victims of the IDF operation and urged the international community not to give Abbas's authority any money.

Hamas also said that it would not allow the PA to play any role in the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. It said that the money should be channeled directly to the victims and not to Abbas's aides in Ramallah.

Fatah strongly denied the allegations and claimed that Hamas militiamen have been stealing the aid since the beginning of Israel's military operation.

Fatah also warned donors against dealing with Hamas directly.

A Fatah official said that on Monday night alone, Hamas gunmen intercepted 12 trucks loaded with humanitarian aid that had been donated by the Jordanian government to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

He said that the trucks were on their way to the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) when the gunmen belonging to the movement's armed wing, Izaddin al-Kassam, stopped them and confiscated their contents.

The Jordanian authorities confirmed on Tuesday that Hamas gunmen had seized the trucks shortly after they entered the Gaza Strip through the Kerem Shalom border crossing.

Last week Fatah activists and eyewitnesses in the Gaza Strip claimed that Hamas had confiscated fuel and food that was en route to hospitals and schools housing thousands of Palestinian families.
We have here a classic turf war, where both sides are accomplished liars. If we discount everything that any Gazan says, we still have Jordanians saying that on at least two occasions their aid convoys have been confiscated by Hamas.

The intriguing part is that Hamas considers UNRWA to be on its side. Given my correspondence with UNRWA's spokesman, and UNRWA's adamant refusal to say anything negative about Hamas even as it put untold thousands of civilians at risk, they may have good reason to consider UNRWA as their own.

UPDATE: Palpress, which is Fatah-oriented, blames Israel for not letting ten aid trucks in from Egypt, not Fatah.
I again asked the UN Spokesperson whether he could confirm or deny that a humanitarian aid convoy was hijacked by (presumably Hamas) gunmen, as reported by the official Jordanian news agency. (My initial posting on the event is here, my earlier correspondence with him is here.)

My question was:
Have you yet been able to confirm whether any trucks meant for UNRWA were attacked as Petra reported?
The reply this time is:
No which suggests it may not be true as our gaza office r normally quick to get back to me. pls send link to your site so I can see who you are. Thanks. C
When dealing with official spokespersons, one must parse their words carefully. For example, Mr. Gunness can be seen here on TV saying that he is "99.9% certain" that no terrorists were in the UNRWA school that was damaged from IDF bombs in an incident that killed 40 people, but the interviewer doesn't ask whether any fighters were immediately outside the school nor whether there were any explosives in the school itself, that could have detonated from secondary explosions set off by IDF shrapnel in shooting back at mortar fire. This explanation is consistent with both what the IDF and UNRWA spokespersons said but most reporters would not think to ask about it.

In this case, Chris is saying that he did not receive any answer from Gaza yet (he is based in Jerusalem,) which "suggests" that the incident never happened. It may also "suggest" that it did happen and that the Gaza UNRWA employees are not anxious to blame anything on Hamas, ever.

Finally, a newspaper has tried to get more information. From the Jordan Times:
Anonymous armed men captured a 13-truck convoy laden with foodstuff donated by Jordanians after entering the Gaza Strip, a Palestinian official told The Jordan Times Tuesday.
Now we have two sources.

Neither the convoy’s drivers nor the trucks, which entered Gaza at the Karm Abu Salem crossing, are Jordanian, said the official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The drivers were released; the hijackers drove the trucks.

The shipment was unloaded from a Jordanian convoy after it crossed into the Palestinian territories and then carried by non-Jordanian trucks rented by UNRWA into Gaza.

The Palestinian Authority official said: “This is not the first incident of this kind. We have learned that the food items, which were supposed to be given to Gazans for free, were being sold in the marketplace in Gaza City.”

On Monday, an 11-truck convoy carrying food items from Kuwait was also seized at gunpoint, he added.

The Jordan Hashemite Charity Organisation spokesperson denied he was informed of any hijacked aid convoys.

Government officials in Amman did not know about the case or were not available for comment.

UNRWA spokesperson Sami Mshasha told The Jordan Times on the phone from Jerusalem that he was not aware of any hijacked aid convoy, being busy with arrangements for the visit of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to Gaza.

Mshasha said he would follow up on the report, but remained unavailable despite repeated attempts by The Jordan Times to contact him.

There were details here that were not in the original: the number of trucks hijacked, the thought that a Kuwaiti convoy was similarly hijacked, and a couple of details at odds with the original report (such as that the truck drivers were released.) UNRWA's reluctance to get back to the Jordan Times reporter is also very interesting.

I don't think that I will get any more information from UNRWA. My guess is that the reports are essentially true; it is very consistent with reports on how Hamas acts for the past year and, as we have seen, there has not been a denial about this one nor any of the four previous instances that I enumerated, only spin. The UNRWA in Gaza, just like the reporters there, live in a constant fear of Hamas (and are generally sympathetic with Hamas' political aims as well) and as a result one will have a hard time finding the truth from named sources who are afraid that they will be shot in the legs, or worse, for making Hamas look bad.

Parenthetically, after Chris realized I had sent the link, he asked me:
where do u fit in politically? C
I answered:
I'm not sure why that is relevant, but you can see from my site that I would be considered a fairly hawkish Zionist. I spend a great deal of time trying to understand the Palestinian Arab psyche, and I am much harsher on their leadership than on the people.
Also parenthetically, I had a correspondence with this same UN spokesman last April, where he tried to diminish a fairly ugly incident where the UNRWA on the West Bank was attacked by Palestinian Arabs and shut down for three days, an incident that UNRWA never put on its website:
HI there,

There had been problems but these have now been avoided for the time being.

Chris
As I posted then:
To the UNRWA, violent attacks by the people they are meant to help are embarrassing events that should never be mentioned to the public because the UNRWA is emotionally invested in making sure that the Palestinian Arabs appear purely as victims and never - never - as being partially responsible for their own problems.
This is the fundamental reason why Israel is regularly castigated by the UNRWA, but Hamas gets a free pass.

UPDATE: More correspondence:
Is there condemnation on your site (which your link didn't get me into) of the white phosphorous attacks on neutral UN compounds? Does it carry the Secretary General statement calling for those responsible to be punished? Chris

And my response:
My site is a blog and it clearly has biases. While I do not attempt to be a comprehensive news source and my choices of stories reflect my bias, I do attempt to be as accurate as possible. (Which is not altogether different from the mainstream media, although they are not willing to admit their biases from either the right or the left.) The blog is a part-time hobby and there is no way for me to cover everything, so I tend to try to find stories that others do not cover. (And, yes, I am quite critical of UNRWA on the site.)

I touched on the white phosphorus issue, and one of my commenters wrote a comprehensive essay on the topic. My understanding is that its use is legal for illumination and for smoke screens, and that there is no evidence that the IDF used it in an illegal manner. In my opinion, it makes no sense for the IDF, as well armed as it is, to use that tool as an offensive weapon since there are plenty of legal weapons at its disposal, and it makes even less sense for the IDF to target civilians nor UNRWA facilities deliberately. The Red Cross said that they had no evidence of illegal use of white phosphorus as well. (My guess is that some of the phosphorus shells may have been exploded closer to the ground than was intended and some people may have been hurt as a result, but I am no military expert.)

My latest posting on our correspondence is here:http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/01/unrwa-tries-to-sweep-incidents-under.html with links to earlier posts. You are welcome to comment, of course.

Thanks again,

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Ma'an finally cover the story I broke this morning, although I still have not found any non-Arab media mentioning it:
The Jordanian news agency Petra reported on Tuesday that armed men held up an aid convoy after it crossed into the Gaza Strip.

The agency reported that armed men fired at the trucks and diverted them to private warehouses after they passed through the Kerem Shalom border crossing, an Israeli-controlled crossing used primarily for shipments of humanitarian aid.

The supplies had been donated by the Hashemite Jordanian charity organization. The trucks earlier crossed into the West Bank using the Allenby Bridge and then proceed to Gaza.

According to the report, the charity had coordinated in advance with UNRWA, the UN’s agency for Palestinian refugees, to receive the shipment in its warehouses after it entered Gaza.

Also according to the report, UNRWA has suspended other aid shipments as the trucks and drivers are still being held in Gaza. Negotiations are reportedly being held for their release.
Ma'an pointedly doesn't mention that it was Hamas that did this act, as Petra reported. (correction: PalPress reported it was Hamas, not Petra.)

I emailed to the UNRWA:
Mr. Gunness:

This morning the Petra news agency of Jordan reported that one or more
aid trucks from Jordan, meant for UNRWA,were hijacked at gunpoint by
Hamas. Does UNRWA have any comment?

How many times has this happened, to any NGO aid?

Has UNRWA ever condemned Hamas for such actions?

Thanks
His answer ignored the last two questions and pushed off the first:
We are looking into this and I hope to have a reply for you soon. Chris
Keep in mind that Ban Ki Moon is in Gaza as this is happening, and he is silent on a direct attack on aid for the UN!

UPDATE: I replied back:
Chris:

A appreciate any timely updates you can provide. Ma'an 's English version of the Petra report adds that negotiations are now underway with the apparent kidnappers and that UNRWA has suspended other aid shipments. Can you confirm that?

Meanwhile, could you answer the other questions I asked about any previous similar incidents you are aware of, and if the UNRWA has ever publicly condemned Hamas for these sorts of activities?

Thanks again

And Chris' reply was:
Not aware of any similar incidents -- indeed the Israelis in our regular co-ord meetings have praised our record on this -- so am slighly surprised by this alleged report. we have certainly not suspended any aid shipments. Not aware of any similar incidents in the past so no need to condemn anyone. C
I just replied back:
Chris:

Thanks again for your reply.

The similar incidents that I have seen include:

January 6, 2009:
Reports say Hamas takes a cut out of all aid that arrives, including flour and medicine. Supplies intended to be distributed without gain among the population is seized by the group and sold to the residents, at a profit to the Hamas government.

One such incident was recorded Monday, when a convoy of trucks carrying supplies through the Kerem Shalom crossing was opened fire upon and seized by Hamas gunmen. Similar incidents occurred with trucks carrying fuel.

April 7, 2008:

Hamas militiamen in the Gaza Strip on Sunday attacked fuel trucks headed toward the Nahal Oz border crossing, forcing them to turn back, sources in the Palestinian Petroleum Authority said.

The fuel was supposed to go to the UN Relief and Works Agency [UNRWA] and hospitals in the Gaza Strip, the sources said.

"Dozens of Hamas militiamen hurled stones and opened fire at the trucks," the sources added. "The trucks were on their way to receive fuel supplied by Israel. The drivers were forced to turn back. Some of them had their windshields smashed."

February 7, 2008: Hamas policemen seized a convoy of humanitarian aid bound for the Palestinian Red Crescent on Thursday evening, the second convoy it has taken from the aid agency, aid employees said.

Policemen from Hamas halted 14 trucks filled with food and medicine at a checkpoint after it crossed an Israeli checkpoint into Gaza on Thursday, said employees of the Palestinian Red Crescent, who declined to be named, fearing reprisals from ruling group Hamas. A Hamas official said the aid was seized because the organization was distributing aid to former Fatah fighters and not to impoverished Palestinians.

Employees from the Red Crescent said they were meant to distribute the aid to some 8,000 needy Gaza residents from lists of people the organization keeps. The aid came from the organization's regional headquarters in Jordan, an employee said.

Are you saying that you were not aware of any of these incidents, or that each report was found to be false after investigation?

Thanks again,



UPDATE 2: Chris replied:
If u read the reports carefully (and I am not sure any of them r true) they don't include reports of unrwa aid being stolen. Can u send me a link to your site?
Which I did.

He is technically right; the only report that mentioned UNRWA mentioned an attack towards trucks going to Nahal Oz to pick up fuel for UNRWA, not stealing fuel meant for UNRWA. The other stories talked about aid meant for Red Crescent and unspecified aid, until today's story (which the UNRWA has not confirmed or denied yet and that Petra has not followed up on.)

It seems strange to doubt five stories of five separate incidents (including this one) from different sources all saying that Hamas interferes with aid, but since eyewitnesses who would out their words on the record would likely be killed by Hamas pretty quickly, the UNRWA can maintain plausible deniability about these reports.
  • Tuesday, January 20, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
From the Saudi Arabia-based Arab News:
We have an entrenched judicial system that is based on Divine Law and not personal whims. This is the reason why I could not understand two recent court verdicts handed out on the same day.

In the first ruling, two thieves who stole two rams were sentenced to three years imprisonment and 1,000 lashes each.

The second ruling of two years imprisonment and 200 whiplashes was for a husband who beat his wife until she swallowed her tongue and died.

Apparently, two rams is are worth over 50% more than a woman under Saudi Arabia's sharia-based laws.

  • Tuesday, January 20, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
Here's an open thread, illustrated with a photo I took today.

Also, check out Shrinkwrapped's followup on my post yesterday about psychobabble.
  • Tuesday, January 20, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
My posting will be spotty again today, but there is some great stuff out there:

Wistful Wishful Thinking by Yaacov Lazowick

IDF Spokesperson Hamas Exploitation Maps:
These maps are very high-resolution, so you can see exactly how close Hamas' rocket and mortar launches were to civilian structures.

Judeopundit on the Guardian's doublespeak.

Simply Jews on the amazing and ageless Mohammed Badwan, Human Shield.

Something I was not aware of: Iran's Occupied Territory.

An Iranian.com writer on supporting Israel.
  • Tuesday, January 20, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
Jordan's Petra News Agency reports that Hamas hijacked Jordanian aid trucks after they crossed into Gaza through the Kerem Shalom crossing on Tuesday.

The aid was to go to UNRWA. As the truck drivers started unloading the aid, Hamas gunmen opened fire on them and forced them to go to Hamas-run stores.

The Palestine Press Agency has many angry comments from readers about the episode.

(The first news flash about this occurred about 6 hours ago. Even so, this has not yet been reported in any English language media - not even Petra's English service. Here's Petra's Arabic original story.)_)

Monday, January 19, 2009

  • Monday, January 19, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
The Huffington Post has an article from a representative of a group called "Conflict Analysis Professionals for Enduring Security" who attempt to place the Israel/PalArab conflict in terms of modern psychobabble.

It is a fairly good example of how people whose only tool is a hammer think that every problem is a nail. In other words, it shows how even experts in psychology can be easy prey for muddled thinking.
Dear President Obama,

Congratulations on your election. We look forward to working with you to heal our country in every way we can.

We are interdisciplinary conflict analysis professionals including psychologists and other social scientists devoted to the study and practice of violence prevention, tension reduction, conflict transformation and reconciliation. Like you, we are deeply concerned for our friends, colleagues, relatives and all citizens of Israel and Gaza. We fear the consequences of this cyclical violence and failure to respond appropriately to the devastating damage. It will require expert intervention to heal wounds and reverse cycles of violence.

Right off the bat, we see the first problematic premise: that there is a "cycle of violence," similar to perhaps a married couple having a bad feud.

One of the problems of psychology as often practiced today is the aversion to blame. There is no right or wrong; there is only different ways of looking at things. Teach each party how to empathize and then the problem is halfway solved.

The problem is that in real life, there is right and wrong. I daresay that there is evil.

You recently said, "If my daughters were living in a house that was being threatened by rocket attacks, I would do whatever it takes to end that situation."

In conflict, it can be difficult to remember that "whatever it takes" includes caring for basic human needs -- food, water, warmth and protection, allaying fears, and providing safety, as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. What if "whatever it takes" requires supporting legitimate political goals, addressing just grievances, and allowing life with dignity, self-determination, prosperity and freedom? People prefer to get their needs met by decent means, and resort to violence when thwarted.

Barry Rubin recently wrote that Israel's situation is similar to living next to a serial killer. The CAPES people are insisting that the solution to that situation is to send him a box of candies.

Someone should remind the kind authors that when Hamas' spiritual forebears attacked and killed scores of Jews in 1929, nearly all of them from families who have lived in Palestine for generations, they were not "resorting" to violence as a reaction to anything the victims had done to them. There was no state, there was no "land theft," there was none of the factors that these self-defining experts are so sure are part of Arab grievances against Jews (and the victims were generally not Zionists.) Perhaps a wonderful social worker could have defused the situation then?

Our children would be safer if we could empathically bear equal witness to each historical narrative and rise above both sides to gain a true perspective of cause and effect, and the dynamics of asymmetrical power.
Uh-oh. Here's comes the psychobabble with both barrels:
We have two traumatized peoples, gripped by fear and moral outrage, who have spiraled into escalating reverberating reactions of mutually provoked traumatic reenactment, endlessly ricocheting back and forth. In this malignant process, each side draws people into believing the need to destroy the other. However, many on both sides work for peaceful coexistence.

Severe trauma on both sides, fear, envy and humiliation, and anger (towards ingroup and outgroup), make it critical to provide a massive infusion of healing interventions demonstrated effective. Please lead us in healing wounds, compensating losses, and using principles of restorative justice rather than punitive approaches which only fuel instability, as history has repeatedly shown. Time doesn't heal wounds, people do.

Actually, time does heal wounds if they are not continually re-opened by people who would not be the best candidates for the "massive infusion of healing interventions." And the analogy is exact: the Palestinian Arab refugee problem, which is seen to be the core of the conflict in the limited context that these authors are looking at history, is only existing today because of the active decisions made both by Palestinian Arab leaders and the leaders of every Arab country since 1948; decisions that are aimed at only one thing: perpetuating the pain to create a weapon against Jews controlling land in the Middle East.
We are aware of political pressures to take positions falsely framed as so-called "pro" or "anti" Israel or Palestinian. This zero sum thinking has no endgame. The only way to be more secure is to make your enemy more secure.
If the enemy has a reasonably functioning psychological makeup, perhaps the bolded words might make sense. However...
We must rethink what it actually means to support Israel and be pro-coexistence, and establish a policy of "Mutually Assured Survival," and mutually supported flourishing.
Since the times of early Zionism, this has been exactly what the Jews have been trying to do! It hasn't exactly worked. Only one side has consistently tried, decade after decade, to empower the enemy - often with disastrous results.

A rich body of knowledge, not well known outside academia, describes methods demonstrated to reverse cycles of violence. We are beginning to understand how terrorism ends and how extremist groups become nonviolent and productive through participation in legitimate political processes -- and also what causes radicalization and drives people to extremes (as, in this connection, when Hamas won in a fair election, they were prepared to form a coalition with Fatah, until they were punished and threatened).
According to these would-be brain surgeons, Hamas - which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel as well as pure anti-semitism, as its charter states clearly - should be rewarded because it won an election.

(Notice also the neat sleight-of-hand used by the author - earlier, she states accurately that "many on both sides work for peaceful coexistence," however, now she is discussing Hamas, which [by definition] does not have a single member who shares that goal. But one needs to read this article very skeptically to notice this deception.)

Would the CAPES people be as sanguine if the Ku Klux Klan won fair elections?
We offer any assistance in analyzing conflict dynamics, working with you to design strategies for healing and detraumatization, and guiding the delicate work of reconciliation needed to rebuild viable social and political institutions and reach equitable solutions to this historic tragedy. There are many creative strategies of conflict transformation, beyond diplomacy and negotiation, beyond carrots and sticks, and even beyond Smart Power. Wise Power can address complex ecology of interacting forces and events within the depths of human experience. Understanding principles of conflict studies, psychology, and other social sciences will go along way to help produce conditions for viability and enduring security and a lasting, just peace.
I would guess that other psychology professionals might disagree with this assessment.
  • Monday, January 19, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
This video is going around the 'sphere. You may have to go to the YouTube original to see the subtitles, but this Al Arabiya reporter, off the air, is laughing upon finding out that missiles are being launched from beneath her Gaza office.



She didn't seem too concerned that Israel might strike back.
  • Monday, January 19, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
One of my commenters, Chas Newkey-Burden, has recently written an article for the British newspaper Totally Jewish:
As a vocal, non-Jewish supporter of Israel I've heard some strange remarks in my time.

One of the most memorable came from a former work colleague - also a gentile - who, during a heated water-cooler debate we were having about the Jewish state, gave me a knowing stare and told me: "You should know better, Chas." I asked him to elaborate and he explained that he meant that as a gentile, I shouldn't be "in any way" pro-Israel.

I found this most peculiar, but he isn't alone in thinking this way. I've become only too accustomed to that look: the one that other gentiles give me when they discover I support Israel. It's a probing study of my face that says: 'But he doesn't look Jewish.' To my eternal disappointment I don't - but so what? If non-Jews should not support Israel does that mean all Jews should? If so, you want to have a word with your internal communications department because I think the ghastly Alexei Sayle might have missed out on a memo.

It's not just gentiles that are surprised by my love of Israel. I will always remember a hilarious woman I met in Jerusalem who, on discovering I was not Jewish asked me why on earth I was so in love with the Jewish state. "You don't hate us?!" she asked, exasperated. "What happened, did your Mum drop you on your head as a child or something?" She didn't, but if that's what it takes then maybe more mothers should start doing it, particularly in the light of the current situation and the challenges to come.

I'm proud to love Israel but ashamed by the hatred that spews out across this country whenever its name is mentioned. As the inevitable Operation Cast Lead proceeds, the atmosphere in Britain really does turn uglier by the day. As this newspaper has reported, anti-semitism is once again on the rise as people line up to slam not just Israel, but - increasingly - Jews in general. I hang my head in despair when I hear these bigots, but what depresses me just as much is that us British gentiles who support you have not done more to drown out the ugly voices of the anti-Israel bandwagon.

There are more British 'goys for Israel' than you might think. True, in my case I am a card-carrying philosemite, so loving the Jewish state is kind of part of my job description. But I also know numerous non-Jews who don't know their Masada from their matzoh yet will cheer Israel every step of way as it defends itself against Hamas terror. I recently started a group on Facebook called 'I'm British and I love Israel'. I am amazed by how many messages I receive via the group from gentiles saying how grateful they are to find a way to show the world that they back the Jewish state.

And why would they not back it? There countless humanitarian reasons to support the Jewish state but there is also a walloping great selfish one. It doesn't take a genius to work out that Israel is in the defensive frontline against a tyranny that wants to envelop us all. If Israel were to fall, the rest of us would not be far behind. Last week's Israel rallies in London were truly inspiring events. May our cities host many more shows of support. I just hope in the future that more and more non-Jews will attend these events and show the world that you don't need to be Jewish to support the state of Israel.
Yasher koach, Chas!
  • Monday, January 19, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
Explicit anti-semitism has ballooned throughout Britain, with 150 known attacks on identifiable Jews, Jewish organizations, and synagogues. So it is nice to know that at least certain Jews can count on protection from the police:

The Jews that hate Israel.
British Jews have been attacked for expressing support for Palestinians suffering under Israeli military strikes in Gaza. Police confirmed yesterday that they have provided protection to a number of people believed to be victims of UK-based Zionist extremists angered by expressions of solidarity with Palestinians.

Rabbi Elchenon Beck, 39, was among six rabbis expressing support for Gaza's Palestinians who were set upon by a gang of what they allege were Zionists while walking back from opposing rallies outside the Israeli Embassy on 6 January. "They were shouting and pushed someone to the floor, so we called the police," Rabbi Beck said. "All the time they are trying to intimidate us, but we get used to it."

Rabbi Aharon Cohen, a Palestinian sympathiser and member of the anti-Zionist group Neturei Karta, had his letter box destroyed by a powerful firework after attending the peace march in Manchester this month.

It is interesting that the British police can find manpower to protect this tiny subgroup who probably exaggerated a couple of incidences of people yelling at them, yet ignore Jews who are listed on a "hit list" on Muslim websites.
  • Monday, January 19, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
The Arab fabrications and spinning is now in overdrive, as the terrorist-associated media has article after article each with more ridiculous claims than the one before.

Paltoday describes scenes of dead women and children, of course killed with "phosphorus bombs," being eaten by dogs in the streets of Gaza camps. Many terror-supporting doctors are throwing in their expertise in these claims, such as one who said that "white phosphorus kills brain cells" which explains why otherwise lightly injured children are dying.

Another "eyewitness" describes how the IDF poured gasoline on his body and threatened to light him up. Of course, he miraculously escaped. And then we have the story of hundreds of houses in a single town destroyed by phosphorus bombs!

But the lies are not only about how Gazans are hurting but also about how much damage Hamas supposedly inflicted on Israel. Hamas claims that they killed 80 Israeli soldiers ("49 that they confirmed first-hand,") which is twice the number of "martyrs" they admit to have lost. In addition, they are repeating an embellishing their accusation about abducting Israeli soldiers, now saying that they held a soldier for two days in a house before Israel bombed it and killed the soldier, whose name they still cannot seem to have discovered.

Fatah, which was almost silent recently, is also now claiming to have shot 85 projectiles during the three weeks, as well as sniper and other attacks against the IDF, apparently to establish that they are just as macho as Hamas is.

Expect these lies to start finding their way into anti-semitic websites within a couple of days.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

  • Sunday, January 18, 2009
  • Elder of Ziyon
When Ehud Olmert says that Israel was going to have a unilateral cease fire because "all of its objectives have been met," I must admit that I am mystified.

If I was Israel's leader, I would have thought that the major objective was to stop rocket fire so residents of Sderot could live without fear. It would not have occurred to me that the increase of the rocket radius to cover nearly a million Israelis would be one of the objectives of the operation.

If I was Israel's leader, I would have thought that getting Gilad Shalit back would be one of the objectives of such an operation. It would not have crossed my mind that he would be ignored - "unilaterally."

If I was Israel's leader, I would have thought that one of the lessons of Lebanon's war was to ignore world opinion and press on when you have the advantage, not to stop at a time that the enemy could call it a victory for themselves. I never would have thought that a good end-game would be one where Hamas is poised to regain all it has lost in a short period of time; where it still has the capacity to violently suppress Fatah (as PalPress is reporting) and where it has solidified itself as the de facto leader of Gaza that the world now gives more legitimacy to.

If I was Israel's leader, I would have thought that one major point of the operation was to restore Israel's psychological deterrence, and that Hamas firing of rockets in the immediate hours after the "cease fire" was proof positive that this did not happen as of yet.

If I was Israel's leader, I would have thought that one goal of the operation was to show the world that Israel will not rely on third-parties for its security and will step in when necessary. I would never have thought that a piece of paper could stop tunnel digging and weapons smuggling, when we know from bitter experience that even Israel had a hard time keeping the tunnels from being dug when it still controlled the Philadelphi corridor.

In my ignorance, I am not aware of a single objective that has been met.

I guess that's why it is lucky that Israel still has a prime minister who is so wise that he can understand things that are way beyond my limited mental abilities.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

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

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