Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

They might not be "dirty Arabs" but they are liars

Joharah Baker writes in the "Palestine Chronicle" (this article has also been published in literally hundreds of other Arab and left-wing sources):

What unwritten law is out there that allows Israelis to sling racist insults at Palestinians with impunity? After all my years in this country and the absurdities that come along with it, this is one absurdity I still find hard to digest.
Obviously, my outrage has been most recently rekindled by Israeli Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch, who during a tour of the old central bus station in Tel Aviv called a Palestinian-Israeli policeman a "real dirty Arab." Once the words were out, the minister was forced to apologize, saying his remarks did not reflect his worldview. A spokesman for the ministry also issued a statement saying that, "in a moment of jest, and using common slang, the minister said what he said, not intending to hurt anyone."
If this were an isolated incident or if it were not an Israeli right-wing minister who said it, we might, just might, be inclined to believe this sorry excuse for an explanation. But in Israel's history with the Palestinians, this can hardly be considered slip-of-the-tongue. Instead, such slurs are embedded in a historically-rooted relationship between Israeli Jews and their perceived Palestinian-Arab subordinates, a relationship that is so lopsided it allows room for those who wish to be verbally abusive against Palestinians to thrive.

Ms. Baker must have hundreds of examples of such instilled hatred, right? Let's check them out.

This is certainly not the first time an Israeli political or religious figure insults Palestinians or calls them some degrading name. In 2001, the spiritual leader of Shas, Ovadia Yosef called Palestinians snakes and called on God to "annihilate Arabs." In an interview with the Israeli daily Maariv, he said, "It is forbidden to be merciful to them, you must give them missiles, - annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones."

Expecting that such remarks might not be received well by the public and the media, a Shas spokesperson at the time clarified that Yosef had only been referring to "Arab murderers and terrorists." Doesn't that make us all feel better?

OK, her first example is not from an Israeli official, in a quote that indeed referred to terrorists, from eight years ago. Not quite the best example of Zionist racism, but she has more:

Still, some may say Yosef was an overzealous, ultra-religious fumbling fool who should not be taken seriously. Fine. What about Israel's prime ministers? Those who the Israeli public voted into office? In 1982, in a speech to the Knesset, Prime Minister Menachem Begin said, "The Palestinians are beasts walking on two legs."

Unfortunately for Baker, that (quite distorted) quote was also referring very specifically to terrorists. As CAMERA notes, the full quote is this:

The children of Israel will happily go to school and joyfully return home, just like the children in Washington, in Moscow, and in Peking, in Paris and in Rome, in Oslo, in Stockholm and in Copenhagen. The fate of... Jewish children has been different from all the children of the world throughout the generations. No more. We will defend our children. If the hand of any two-footed animal is raised against them, that hand will be cut off, and our children will grow up in joy in the homes of their parents.

But Baker isn't finished:

A year later, Raphael Eitan, then-Israeli army chief of staff told the New York Times, "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle."

This is the only slightly accurate quote Baker finds, and even that one is way out of context. Eitan was arguing against shooting Palestinian Arab stone-throwers, saying "The Arabs will never win over us by throwing stones. Our response must be a nationalist Zionist response. For every stone that’s thrown–we will build ten settlements. If 100 settlements will exist–and they will–between Nablus and Jerusalem, stones will not be thrown. If this will be the situation, then the Arabs will only be able to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle." Certainly nothing to be proud of, but hardly reflective of a deeply biased Arab-loathing society.

Her last example is from a Ha'aretz article where the people quoted as singing "All Arabs must die" weren't even Israelis.

Of course there exists some bigotry against Arabs in Israel as well as elsewhere. (Iranians are famously not fond of Arabs, for example.) And within the Arab world, there is even more bigotry against Palestinian Arabs - see how they were treated in Iraq after Saddam's fall, in Kuwait after the first Gulf War, in Jordan in 1970, in Lebanon today. However, considering the fact that Israel is literally surrounded by Arabs who are far less reticent to openly speak of their own ambitions to destroy all Jews, Israelis and Zionists, Israel's record is pretty damn good.

Baker's thesis is that "Israelis sling racist insults at Palestinians with impunity." Her biggest example was a case where an Israeli minister who indeed made a bigoted remark was forced to make a public apology. Perhaps she doesn't understand the meaning of the word "impunity." Or perhaps Baker is simply another liar who projects her own hatreds onto her perceived enemies.

Baker digs up a few mostly inaccurate examples sprinkled over three decades. I can easily find far more examples of prominent Arabs saying far worse things about Jews, and thousands of examples of them saying worse things about Israelis and Zionists, just over the past year.

Including lying articles like this that baldly equate Zionism with racism.

Afternoon Links

Contentions: What was Jimmy Carter's proposal to Hamas?

WSJ: Israel radio show captivates Iranians

Qantara: Turkey, the Jews and the Holocaust

The worst ex-prime minister in history

From Ha'aretz:

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert offered Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas that the Holy Basin area of Jerusalem would be under no sovereignty at all and administered by a joint committee of Saudis, Jordanians, Israelis, Palestinians and Americans, the former prime minister told Newsweek magazine in an interview in the current issue.

The proposal to internationalize the Holy Basin was intended to achieve a breakthrough in the negotiations around the issues of sovereignty over holy sites in Jerusalem, the issue which had reportedly caused the breakdown of the Camp David talks in July 2000.

Olmert also told Newsweek he suggested to Abbas Israel would withdraw from 93.5 to 93.7 per cent of the West Bank, compensating the Palestinians with territory equivalent to 5.8 per cent of the West Bank, and allow for direct crossing between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The fact that Olmert was willing to give away the most important sites in Judaism is not news.

The fact that he is willing to tell the world that Jerusalem is not nearly as important to him and his secularist, wishful thinking cronies as it appears to be to Palestinian Arabs - and implying that most Israeli Jews agree with him - is also not novel.

But what is new is that an ex-prime minister is actively trying to subvert the current elected leader of Israel by publicizing his incredibly foolhardy offer. By telling these details to Newsweek - an offer made while he was a lame duck PM, one that there is no evidence he could have pushed through the Knesset - he is telling the world that Binyomin Netanyahu is not pushing a consensual view of the Israeli electorate. He is telling everyone that anything less than this offer is not serious, and that Palestinian Arabs have no reason to compromise beyond his terms because if they wait out Netanyahu, they'll get more. He is not only showing his poker cards - he is telling the other players that Netanyahu is bluffing. He is encouraging the West to pressure Israel mercilessly until it meets Olmert's idea of what needs to be freely given away for a worthless piece of paper.

The incompetent, immoral and likely criminal Olmert is undermining Israel democracy and security to boost his own ego and gain legitimacy in Western eyes as a "peacemaker." And he is selling Israel down the river to do it.

Even Barak didn't do anything like this when he left office.

Great Britain, 1929. Barack Obama, 2009.

On September 23, 1928, on the evening of Yom Kippur, the Jews of Jerusalem placed a removable screen at the Western Wall to separate the male and female worshippers.

This was not new; they had done this in years and decades past. But this year, the Arabs decided that such a partition was an unacceptable structure, symbolizing Jewish attachment to Jerusalem, and they told the British authorities to take it down or risk mass riots.

While the elderly Jews at the Wall pleaded to at least allow the screen to stay until the fast was over, the British took the Arab side. Ten armed policemen with steel helmets came on Yom Kippur morning and destroyed the screen, while Arabs chanted "Death to the Jewish dogs!"

The British felt that the screen was a provocation to the Arabs and it was easier to cave to Arab demands than to risk riots.

Of course, it emboldened the Arabs to riot anyway, as they did in 1929, killing some 135 Jews.
After the 1929 Arab riots, the British caved again, forbidding Jews from bringing chairs and Torahs to the Wall and also from blowing the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur to placate the angry Arabs and avoid new "disturbances."

The entire British policy during the Mandate period can be characterized that way. The British agreed to limit Jewish land purchases and to limit Jewish immigration in the face of Arab threats.

All of this was "legal." Jews who violated these rules - by immigrating to Palestine, by blowing the shofar on Yom Kippur - were acting "illegally."

The Arabs, of course, weren't basing their objections on legal issues. They simply hated the Jews and feared their increasing power. The British were willing accomplices because they could be counted on to cave to Arab pressure. After the fact, they could justify their actions by saying that they were simply enforcing the rule of law.

The appeasement policy didn't work. The Arab uprising in the 1930s was as much against the British as it was against the Jews, and it took that long for the British to finally realize that their appeasement in the previous decade only encouraged more violence.

But it was too late. The net result of this legal, immoral British policy was that millions of Jews who could have been saved from the Holocaust by fleeing Europe to Palestine were murdered instead.

Today, the Obama administration is saying that Jews do not have the right to build anything even in the Old City of Jerusalem. Not in the Jewish Quarter, not near the Western Wall - nothing.

"We're talking about all settlement activity, yes, in the area across the line," [State Department spokesman Ian Kelly] said, referring to neighborhoods in Jerusalem over the Green Line, or pre-1967 armistice line, in response to a question on where America's calls to halt construction in the settlements would be applied.

The official reason is that such construction is "illegal." The real reason is because this administration fears Arab pressure and threats, just as the British did.

It wants to appease the Arabs in a foolhardy attempt to gain their trust, just as the British did.

The Arabs are more than willing to use this new leverage to demand the Americans add more and more restrictions on the Jews, just as they demanded from the British.

The next logical question to ask the State Department would be - would the Obama administration consider erecting a removable screen at the Western Wall an illegal expansion of the Old City Jewish "settlement"?

Trader Joe's boycott attempt fails miserably

The attempt to "de-shelve" Israeli products from Trader Joe's this past weekend has apparently fizzled, and the store sold lots and lots of Israeli products. Details can be found here.

Jew visits holy place; Arabs call it a "provocation"

From Ma'an:

Israel’s Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch visited the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem’s Old City under heavy guard on Tuesday morning in what Palestinian officials condemned as a provocation.

...The Al-Aqsa Foundation for Heritage said in a statement that the Israeli minister also barged into the Marwani mosque and into the Dome of the Rock, and circled the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The organization said, “This visit shows that the Israeli institution are targeting Al-Aqsa,” and it asked, “is this incursion a provocation only or is there something else behind the visit?”

Finally, the last paragraph shows that the visit was coordinated with the Waqf:

Shiekh Azzam Khatib, the director of Jerusalem Waqf (Endowment) said the visit was carried out with coordination with the Waqf, which has jurisdiction over the compound. He said he did not know the reason for the visit.

Which means that the "provocation" was not that an Israeli minister "barged in" or unilaterally trespassed or anything like that. It was planned and known ahead of time.

The "provocation" is that a Jew decided to visit the holiest place in Judaism.

UPDATE: Ma'an now changed the story to "without coordination."(h/t Yitz)

Today's Syrian drought - and the Hauranites

YNet reports:

Some 700,000 households in Syria – about 3.5 million people - have no income. In other words, an average of one family of five in Syria leans on monthly governmental aid in order to survive, according to a comprehensive study conducted by the Social Affairs and Labor Ministry in Syria, whose main findings were published by the local al-Watan newspaper.

These reports join a recent international report, which states that some 160 villages in northeastern Syria have been abandoned by their residents due to the food shortage. These villagers immigrate to the country's big cities, putting a great amount of pressure on the already shaky infrastructures in Syrian cities.

This reminds me of what happened in the Hauran district of Syria in the early 1930s. A severe drought there also prompted tens of thousands of Hauranites to leave - and the emigrated to the most logical place to make money, Palestine:

The Hauranite "invasion" was so massive that both Arabs and Jews protested the illegal immigration: (all articles from the Palestine Post)

Nonetheless, the Hauranites did find jobs and sent back money to their families:

Palestine in the 1930s was a logical place for Arab immigration, for precisely the same reasons - its economy was the envy of the Middle East. More importantly, Arabs didn't feel a strong attachment to the areas they lived in (outside their villages) - the nascent Arab nationalism that the intelligentsia adapted from the West did not permeate the villages and the peasants, who were itinerant and moved where ever they wanted whenever it made economic sense, corssing "national" boundaries.

Many (although not most) of todays' "Palestinian" Arabs are actually descended from these immigrants from Syria, Iraq and Transjordan. They didn't consider themselves parts of these nations - they simply considered themselves Arab.

When the fighting began after the 1947 partition agreement many of them crossed borders again, thinking that their Arab brethren would allow them to settle in new homes as they had for centuries before when circumstances prompted Arabs to relocate elsewhere in the Middle East. They didn't anticipate that they would become pawns in a power game against Israel for the next six decades and beyond, and that their Arab brothers - and leaders - would do everything possible to keep them stateless.

Open thread - summer's here

Even though the East Coast has had one of the coldest Junes on record, it is summer nonetheless. Time for an open thread!

Meanwhile, a nice link.

Proof that Hamas controls the tunnels

The media likes to portray the smuggling tunnels under Rafah as pure capitalism at work, where people desperate for money or goods are forced to engage in this dangerous but heroic activity to bring in candies, schoolbooks and cattle into Gaza.

However, a story in Palestine Today puts a lie to that.

There have been a large number of motorcycle accidents in Gaza over the past few months, and many people are complaining about it. As a result, Hamas has put a number of restrictions in place on motorcycles, mandating helmets and restricting underage drivers and so on.

One of their restrictions is to ban the import of more motorcycles from Egypt through the tunnels.

How can Hamas restrict the goods being smuggled into Gaza unless they know about and control each tunnel?

And if Hamas does control the tunnels, how much effort do they place in importing weapons and explosives compared to consumer goods?

The media doesn't seem to worry about that part of the issue very much.

The subtle politics of a Cambridge conference

From the University of Cambridge:

A major conference, to be opened by Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan this week, will shed new light on the underexplored subject of Arab Jews.

The Jews of Arab Culture: 1948-2009 conference, which takes place from 22-24 June, is being co-hosted by Cambridge University's Department of Middle Eastern Studies and the Centre for the Study of Muslim-Jewish Relations of the Woolf Institute of Abrahamic Faiths.

Over the course of the 20th century, Arab Jews came to Israel from Arab countries ranging from Morocco to Iraq and now constitute more than 50% of Israel's Jewish population. While the study of medieval and early modern Judaeo-Arabic culture and literature is a comparatively well established field in Western academia, the complex identity of the recent influx of Arab Jews to Israel and its impact on the culture of the Middle East has been little studied.

The conference will examine the cultural repercussions of the absorption process of Arab Jews by the State of Israel, the impact this has had on Arab Jewish literature, and the reactions which followed in Palestinian literature.

The conference, which will be held at Westcott House and will include internationally renowned academics, will be accompanied by the screening of various films and a concert of Jewish-Arab music played on the 'Oud and Violine by Israel-Iraqi musician Yair Dalal, all of which are open to the public.

Professor Yasir Suleiman, Director of the Centre of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, said: "Arab Jews have historically been an important part of Arab culture well before the advent of Islam. In Arabia, Spain, Iraq, Egypt, and the Levant Jews have played an important role in creating a culture that belonged to all those for whom Arabic was a native language. The conference will tap into this past to challenge and repair some of the ruptures of the present by showing the richness and diversity of an inclusivist culture that belonged to all the communities that helped create it."

Gregor Schwarb, Ariane de Rothschild Academic Director of the CMJR, said: "Showing the richness and dynamism of the culture of Jewish Arabs dispels the myth that there is a total divide between Arabs and Jews. In this way, we hope that the conference will contribute towards greater understanding, a spirit of reconciliation and a greater respect of differences".

Research shows many Arab Jews look with affection and pride on their Arab heritage; others see themselves as "forgotten refugees", whose cause is akin to that of Palestinian refugees. In a recent open letter, a group of prominent Israeli Jews whose parents came from Arab or Islamic lands wrote that "the culture of the lands of Islam, the culture of the Middle East, and the Arabic culture, are all part of our identity, a part of it that we cannot sever and wouldn't wish to sever, even if we could." They added: "The rift between Israel and the Arab and Muslim world cannot be a permanent one, since it splits our identities and our souls."

In general, such a conference is to be welcomed. But some of the details show that what should be a purely academic conference still has plenty of political bias.

First of all, why is there a separate Palestinian Arab track that has essentially nothing to do with the topic of the conference? Here's that description:

14:30–16:00 Panel VII – Palestinian Literature
Chair: Shmuel Moreh (Jerusalem)
Atallah Mansour (al-Nāṣira), The Shadow of the Political Conflict on Hebrew and Arabic literature in Palestine/Israel
Sayyed Kashua (Jerusalem), Language-Choice and Perception among Palestinians and Jews in Israel
Manar Makhoul (Cambridge), Palestinian Novelists in Israel: the Writing and the Context

Secondly, the conference seems to spend a bit of time on the problems that Jews from Arab countries had in integrating to Israeli society - a very valid and important topic - but nothing about the anti-semitism they suffered in their old homes that prompted them to leave. To speak of one and ignore the other puts the responsibility of the disappearance of this culture entirely on the backs of the only place where it still exists.

One of the speakers is Rachel Shabi, an outspoken leftist critic of Israel who emphasizes the Zionist attempts to attract Mizrahi Jews and downplays the Arab countries' discrimination against their Jews. While she correctly points out that there was both a "push" and a "pull," she doesn't seem to realize that the very existence of a Jewish state gave the Jews of Arab lands an alternative that was never available to them - an opportunity to shake off their dhimmi status. There are no comparable speakers who talk about the very real Arab anti-semitism that caused the Jews of Arab countries to all but disappear.

Thirdly, characterizing the Jews of Arab countries as "Arab Jews" is actually offensive to many of them, who never considered themselves Arab and always felt like outsiders, even as they adopted much of Arab culture in their own lives.

This is probably because the conference is consciously trying to be as pro-Arab as possible, inviting the Jordanian prince to open it.

Jimmy Carter, "honest broker"

Jimmy's comments of Netanyahu's speech in his "trip report"show exactly how honest a broker he is:

NETANYAHU'S SPEECH: I watched his speech and was appalled by his introduction of numerous obstacles to peace, some of them insurmountable. He rejected sharing of Jerusalem and a settlement freeze and defined any future Palestinian state as demilitarized, no control over airspace, still including many Israeli settlements, and probably without the Jordan valley – provided they remove Hamas and all other Arabs will accept Israel as a Jewish state (with 20 percent Arab citizens). I've been involved with these issues for 30 years, and none of them are acceptable, except perhaps through give-and-take negotiations.

Carter doesn't even pretend anymore to be even-handed. Hamas, which still confiscates materials from social services organizations, still intimidates the press, openly violates international humanitarian law and effectively runs a police state, is only praised by Carter and he looks at Israel as nothing but a set of obstacles.

Also, it is apparent that Carter believes that a Palestinian Arab state should have the ability to shoot passenger planes out of Israel's skies.

His being upset at Israel being considered a Jewish state shows just how far out of the mainstream he really is, not to mention how much he truly hates Israel. Apparently, according to Carter, Jews are not allowed to have any self-determination.

Hamas quotes Carter: "Obama wants to abandon Quartet conditions"

According to a report in Al Quds, Jimmy Carter has essentially turned into both Obama's liasion with Hamas as well as an advocate for the terrorist organization.

The article says that Yahya Moussa of Hamas stated that Carter is the one who suggested that Hamas support a Palestinian Arab state outside the 1949 armistice lines without recognizing Israel as a first step in trying to get a dialogue going with the Obama administration and to bypass the Quartet's conditions for Hamas participation.

Carter's plan to bypass the Quartet includes Hamas' acceptance of the Arab "peace" initiative and the concept of two states, without actually recognizing Israel and without abandoning terrorism. According to these sources, Carter told Hamas that if they accept these two terms then the Obama administration would be amenable to opening direct talks with Hamas.

Moussa said "Carter told us that the American President (Barack Obama) wants to go beyond the conditions of the Quartet, and has the desire to do so, but Hamas has to provide an acceptable scenario" for accomplishing this.

How things could be in the Palestinian Arab territories

From Ha'aretz:

The skies lit up over Jenin last month, set off to mark the occasion of the opening of Hirbawi Home Center, a new luxury establishment on the city's outskirts.

The five-story building near the Jalame checkpoint cost $5 million to build, says its owner, and it is filled with deluxe, foreign-made products seen mostly in the pages of newspaper supplements.

This shopping opportunity is intended to interest the upper crust of Jenin, and while some might think the proposition suggests financial suicide, the profit forecasts for the project have been so favorable the owner plans to open four more shops in the West Bank and one in Jordan.

The next city to enjoy a Hirbawi Home Center is Ramallah, where one is already in partial operation; then Hebron, Tul Karem and Nablus.

"It may sound mad to outsiders," says the chain's CEO, Ziad Turabi, "but to us it makes perfect sense. We believe we can make a very handsome profit. Many people in the occupied territories have money but they have nowhere to spend it if they're after quality. We offer them the best quality there is."

This may not sound like the familiar description of the occupied territories - the impoverished Palestinian village or the overcrowded refugee camp, a population sustaining itself on international aid. But it turns out that quite a few Palestinians consider a plasma screen, a surround sound stereo and comfortable chairs to be fairly essential items.

Here, on the fifth floor of the Jenin operation, overlooking the fields separating Israel from Jenin, are the in-demand electric gadgets: enormous TV screens, vacuum cleaners, espresso machines, and the list goes on and on.

"We've been working for a few months now and every day had been like opening day. We are very pleased, and the profits have been very satisfying so far. Don't worry, we're not going to lose, and we truly believe that. "

Part of the reason for the success of a venture like this is that the PA - together with American Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton and Israel - have worked together to stop terror from what used to be a haven for terrorists:

"Abu Tarek," the Jenin area commander, seemed pleased. He and his predecessor, "Abu Hadid," have turned "terrorism capital" into the quietest, safest city in the West Bank. Jenin, the flagship project of the American administration and the U.S. security coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, has become the success story of the new PA. "What brings Hirbawi and others is the security situation", Abu Tarek says. "We solved quite a few issues and, Inshallah (God willing,) we will see many more investments. Even the refugee camp is quiet now. There are no militants and we react very quickly to any incident. The residents believed in the security apparatus. They trust us and assist us.

"And you can see it on the street. Shops are open until late, women can go around fearlessly.

"It's been over two years since the last attack from Jenin against Israel. We went to great length to prevent terror attacks, and your people know that."

A third factor which makes the change in the West Bank possible is the Israel Defense Forces. Abu Tarek says the Israeli army was still carrying out operations in the West Bank but became "a lot less violent." And one of the Palestinians present, who witnessed his brothers' arrest recently, chuckles: "They're very gentle nowadays. They come quietly, knock on the door and say politely: Army, please open up."

This goes to show what is possible - when Palestinian Arabs take responsibility for terrorism, Israel has no need to bother them and no need to stop them from succeeding. In fact, Israel has every incentive to turn it into a win-win, a mindset that most Arabs unfortunately have not yet embraced.

It also shows that when Palestinian Arabs act like responsible adults, the benefits to their people are immediate and concrete. It is not Israeli actions that are stopping them from prospering; it is their own. Gaza's problems could go away in a few months if its leaders would act like Jenin's. This is in everyone's interests, except for those so-called "leaders" who have no real interest in the well-being of their own people and every interest in using them as pawns against Israel.

Not surprisingly, Hamas is not happy with General Dayton's actions:

[Khaled Meshal said] "If Fatah doesn’t like the situation in the Gaza Strip, Hamas also doesn’t like the situation in the West Bank. If Fatah believes security services in Gaza are affiliated to Hamas, Hamas believes the security services in the West Bank have no affiliation. They are not affiliated even to Fatah, as [US] General [Keith] Dayton keeps forming them again and again, selecting people who have no history to be in the middle of security services. There is tremendous destruction going on, which impedes conciliation philosophy," he added.

With regard to the situation in the West Bank, Mashal said that it is the US security coordinator Keith Dayton who makes decisions and that he is building the Palestinian Authority’s security services and training them on how to be oppressive.

This story illustrates more than any other how Hamas is hurting its people.

And isn't it remarkable that this success was not impeded at all by the existence of "settlements"?

Palestinian Arab "eyewitnesses" to lies

Ma'an has two stories this morning damning Israeli settlers as wantonly attacking innocent Palestinian Arabs, and both confirmed by "eyewitnesses."

Here's the first:

Three Palestinians from a small hamlet near Yatta, south of Hebron, on Sunday narrowly escaped death after Israeli settlers set fire to a tent while they were inside.

Local residents told Ma’an that Israeli settlers from the nearby Susia settlement, which sits on Palestinian land, set fire to a large tent used as a meeting hall for the small village.

I am not saying that there haven't ever been any cases of Jews harassing Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank, but the idea that they would set fire to a tent with people in it for kicks seems a bit far-fetched.

Combined with the fact that the "local residents" aren't identified, they give no details about the "attack," the fact that most fires are accidents and that Palestinian Arabs are known to blame Jews for everything possible, both to get headlines and to get compensation from Israel, make this story more than a little suspect.

Adding a little evidence to this is Ma'an's other "eyewitness" article this morning:

A herd of boars released by settlers in the northern West Bank attacked neighborhoods and farmland in Salfit on Sunday, according to witnesses.

Meanwhile, the head of the Agriculture Trade Union in Salfit, Khalil Omran, expressed fears that the boars may transfer the so-called swine flu among residents there, calling on residents to avoid contact with the animals.

Yes, the "settler pigs" continue to be a staple of Ma'an's absurd reporting, and that story is all the proof you need that Ma'an has no regard for journalistic integrity when it comes to stories that blame "settlers" for every evil in the world - including swine flu.

Incidentally, Susia is the site of one of the oldest synagogues ever unearthed, dating from the 4th century CE and remaining a synagogue until the 10th century when Muslims converted it into a mosque. The Arab village by that name was not settled until the 1830s.

Hamas rejects Red Cross call for Gilad Shalit

The ICRC issued a statement:

Since Mr Shalit's capture in June 2006, the ICRC has repeatedly asked Hamas to allow the exchange of Red Cross messages between Gilad Shalit and his family. The most recent requests were made at the highest level, but these and all others have been refused.

"We welcome the fact that yesterday former US president Jimmy Carter handed Hamas a letter from Gilad Shalit's family to him," said Béatrice Mégevand-Roggo, the ICRC's head of operations for the Middle East and North Africa. "However, this cannot replace the regular and unconditional contacts with his family that Gilad Shalit is entitled to under international humanitarian law. The ICRC regrets that in his case political considerations are judged more important than the simple humanitarian gesture of allowing a captive to be in touch with his family after three years of separation."

Repeated requests by the ICRC to visit Gilad Shalit to ascertain his conditions of detention and treatment have also been refused. Visiting people deprived of their freedom and enabling them to exchange personal news with their relatives is one of the ICRC's main humanitarian tasks.

Ms Megevand-Roggo added that the people holding Gilad Shalit were entirely responsible for ensuring that his treatment and living conditions are humane and dignified.

The ICRC has held several meetings with Gilad Shalit's parents, Noam and Aviva Shalit, to brief them on its efforts regarding their 22-year-old son. "We share their concerns. Despite the lack of progress so far we will continue to press for family contacts for Mr Shalit and for ICRC access to him," said Ms Mégevand-Roggo.

Hamas responded:

The de facto government in Gaza's Ministry of Prisoners' Affairs was astonished on Friday that the International Red Cross has asked Hamas to allow captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit regular contact with his family.

In a statement to Ma'an, the ministry said that the Red Cross' demand came while "Gaza prisoners have been continuously deprived family visits for more than two years, which has negatively affected their living and psychological situation."

"Under what pretext of international law is it that the Red Cross can demand that Hamas allow Shalit to contact his family?" the the de facto government ministry asked. "Did the Red Cross denounce the [Israeli] occupation for its daily violations of international law against Palestinian prisoners, who are deprived from every human right?"

"At the least, stated international conventions demand that the sick aren't denied necessary medical treatment; instead, they die slowly due to medical negligence," the statement went on to say.

The ministry also denounced international organizations' calls for better treatment of "this single Israeli captive," demanding that they show that they "care about the situation of 11,000 Palestinian prisoners, against whom everything is banned and international crimes are committed."

"Israel is continuously bypassing international conventions to legitimize crimes being committed, including the deprivation of visitations, imposing an orange uniform by force and implimenting the 'illegal combatant' law," the statement noted.

The ministry concluded by calling on the international community and human rights organizations to stop so-called double-standard policies that urge Hamas to meet demands concerning Shalit but stop at demanding Israel ease living conditions of its thousands of Palestinian prisoners.

Hamas is employing doubletalk that is even more egregious than usual. As far as I can tell, the Red Cross does not accuse Israel of any violations of prisoners' rights, although they have called for Israel to allow visits from family members.