Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, September 21, 2009

Goldstone report inaccuracies, part 13

In two separate but virtually identical paragraphs, the Goldstone Commission report says:

1582. Insofar that movement and access restrictions, the settlements and their infrastructure, demographic policies with regards to Jerusalem and Area C, and the separation of Gaza from the West Bank prevent a viable, contiguous and sovereign Palestinian State from being created, they are in violation of the jus cogens right to self-determination.

1744. Insofar as movement and access restrictions, the settlements and their infrastructure, demographic policies vis-à-vis Jerusalem and Area C of the West bank, as well as the separation of Gaza from the West Bank, prevent a viable, contiguous and sovereign Palestinian state from arising, they are in violation of the ius cogens [sic] right to self-determination.

(Jus cogens means a "higher law" that must be followed by all countries.)

I am not a lawyer and have no legal training. Even so, I believe that this is an astonishing statement from a number of legal perspectives.

First of all, the right of self-determination is defined by the UN in this way:

The two important United Nations studies on the right to self-determination set out factors of a people that give rise to possession of right to self-determination: a history of independence or self-rule in an identifiable territory, a distinct culture, and a will and capability to regain self-governance.

The first factor simply does not exist for Palestinian Arabs. The second is arguable; I believe that a distinct Palestinian Arab culture is a relatively new phenomenon that coincides with (at the earliest) 1948, and that the cultural differences between Palestinian Arabs and other Arabs is no different in scope than the cultural differences that exist within any country. And the third factor is specious, given the history of Palestinian Arab politics from the 1920s up until today. Even if you argue points 2 and 3, point 1 is demonstrably false and therefore the entire idea is wrong.

Even though the UN seems to have redefined "self-determination" in order to accommodate its pet Palestinian project, this does not make these factors automatically disappear.

Secondly, if you accept that there is a people called "Palestinians," the concept of "self-determination" does not automatically mean "the right to a state." The ICJ seems to define this as the right of a people to govern their own affairs free from outside interference - emphatically not statehood, a right that the world community would never accept for fear of every minority suddenly demanding the right of independence.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the UN Charter forbids nations from interfering with the territorial integrity of other nations. The idea that a Gaza and West Bank Palestine must be contiguous necessarily means that Israel's territory would be divided. (A bridge between the two could hardly be considered creating a "contiguous Palestinian state.")

Goldstone is not trying to give legal sanction to a Palestinian Arab state with free passage between two territories; he is not trying to innovate by saying that virtual contiguity via video and computer networks could be an alternative to physical contiguity. He is advocating that Israel cut itself in two and he is trying to say that the rights of Palestinian Arabs trump those of Israelis.

It may be politically incorrect to question Palestinian Arab peoplehood or to muse whether a state is the necessary means to achieve their self-determination. This does not make that opinion factually incorrect. Goldstone's sacrifice of legal definitions to the altar of political correctness is saddening, but not surprising.

However, the idea that somehow Palestinian Arab nationhood can rightfully impact Israeli national rights, as enshrined in the UN itself, is past sloppy interpretation of the law - it is illegal itself.

UPDATE: An email correspondent with real legal credentials told me that the idea that "self determination" falls under jus cogens is laughable.

Goldstone report inaccuracies, part 12 (updated)

The Goldstone report talks about the bombing of the al-Maqadmah mosque on January 3rd:

820. The al-Maqadmah mosque is situated near the north-west outskirts of Jabaliyah camp, close to Beit Lahia. It is located less than 100 metres from the Kamal Idwan hospital, in the al-Alami housing project. At least 15 people were killed and around 40 injured – many seriously – when the Israeli armed forces struck the entrance of the mosque with a missile.

The report goes into some detail that the mosque was indeed bombed by Israel, and the IDF responses to the charges seem to be very inadequate:

829. The Israeli armed forces’ response to the allegations states:
...relating to a strike against the “Maqadme” mosque in Beit-Lahiya on January 3rd, 2009, it was discovered that as opposed to the claims, the mosque was not attacked at all. Furthermore, it was found that the supposed uninvolved civilians who were the casualties of the attack were in fact Hamas operatives killed while fighting against the IDF.

830. Apart from the apparent contradictions it contains, the Mission notes that the statement does not indicate in any way the nature of the inquiry, the source of its information or the reliability and credibility of such sources.

831. In July 2009 the Israeli Government repeated the same position.463

I have no indication that the mosque was not hit by IDF forces, and I have no reason to doubt Goldstone concerning the matter; they appear to have found forensic evidence that indicates it was an Israeli strike rather than a Hamas bomb.

There are a couple of inconsistencies, however. The claim that at least 15 were killed seems to have come from the initial PCHR report of the incident, which lists 12 people killed and claims that three more died in the following days. However, PCHR only lists 11 to have died in the Jabalya refugee camp on January 3rd; and additional 3 died in Beit Lahiya on that date (one of whom was listed in the initial PCHR report), and I found one who died later, so it is possible that 15 were killed if all of the Beit Lahiya victims were in the mosque as well, but the PCHR report indicated that three of them died at a later date and that is not reflected in the final list.

More importantly, Goldstone doesn't bother to point out that 6 of the dead were actually terrorists: (numbers are PCHR list numbers)

458 ‘Umar Abdul Hafez Mousa al-Silawi Al Qassam Brigades
459 Ra’ed Abdul Rahman Mohammed al-Msamha (pictured, unclear of affiliation)
462 Sa’id Salah Sa’id Battah Al Qassam Brigades
478 Muhannad Ibrahim ‘Ata al-Tannani Al Quds Brigades member
484 Ibrahim Mousa Issa al-Silawi Al Qassam Brigades
987 Ahmed Hamed Hassan Abu ‘Eita Al Qassam Brigades

It seems to be very unlikely that 6 of the 15 known dead in a mosque crowded with hundreds of civilians would be terrorists. Either the mosque itself had a hundred terrorists or so, or something else is going on. (Jonathan D. Halevi counts 7 dead terrorists).

Could there have been an attack from the area of the mosque? Could an informant have given the IDF information of the whereabouts of known terrorists? I don't know, and unfortunately the IDF isn't giving out any verifiable information about the incident, but this does not seem to be the "slam-dunk" that Goldstone represents it as.

And where exactly did the blast hit? Apparently, it hit outside the mosque, not inside as Goldstone implies. So it seems more likely that the IDF hit a gathering of terrorists outside the mosque rather than a few hundred worshipers. (h/t Suzanne)

At the very least, these avenues should have been pursued, using any means that Goldstone had at their disposal - the same means I and my team has had to verify the militant status of many civilians. Unfortunately, fairness does not seem to have been a part of the Goldstone mandate, and when the evidence supports the commissions preconceived notions of the truth, they have had little incentive to look beyond the biased testimonies they eagerly accepted.

Testimony from people like the sheikh of the mosque - who happens to share the same last name as two of the Al Qassam Brigades members listed above.

(UPDATE: Added one more I missed. And added about the blast hitting outside the mosque.)

Goldstone report inaccuracies, part 11

While we have already looked at some of Goldstone's inaccuracies concerning the civilian status of Gaza police, the report makes more specific mention of the police killed at the areas they visited in Gaza, mainly the Arafat police compound and the Al-Abbas police station.

435. From the facts available to it, the Mission finds that the deliberate killing of 99 members of the police at the police headquarters and three police stations during the first minutes of the military operations, while they were engaged in civilian tasks inside civilian police facilities, constitutes an attack which failed to strike an acceptable balance between the direct military advantage anticipated (i.e. the killing of those policemen who may have been members of Palestinian armed groups) and the loss of civilian life (i.e. the other policemen killed and members of the public who would inevitably have been present or in the vicinity). The attacks on the Arafat City police headquarters and the Abbas Street police station, al-Tuffah police station and the Deir al-Balah investigative police station constituted disproportionate attacks in violation of customary international humanitarian law.

436. From the facts available to it, the Mission further believes that there has been a violation of the inherent right to life of those members of the police killed in the attacks of 27 December 2007 who were not members of armed groups by depriving them arbitrarily of their life in violation of article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

From the analysis here, Goldstone takes the facts that it was aware of, where the commission believed the Palestinian Arab NGOs as to which policemen were members of terror groups and discounting Israeli sources, and says that given that information, the direct military advantage of killing members of armed groups is not great enough to justify attacking the police stations knowing that many people who were not members of such groups would be killed.

Goldstone is more explicit in the conclusion:

1720. The Mission also concludes that Israel, by deliberately attacking police stations and killing large numbers of policemen (99 in the incidents investigated by the Mission) during the first minutes of the military operations, failed to respect the principle of proportionality between the military advantage anticipated by killing some policemen who might have been members of Palestinian armed groups and the loss of civilian life (the majority of policemen and members of the public present in the police stations or nearby during the attack). Therefore, these were
disproportionate attacks in violation of customary international law. The Mission finds a violation of the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR) of the policemen killed in these attacks who were not members of Palestinian armed groups.

The implication is that if the majority of the 99 policemen killed in these specific attacks were members of armed groups, then Israel may have been justified in those attacks.

Well, guess what? The majority of the policemen they refer to were members of terror groups.

I'm not 100% sure where the number 99 came from, but according to PCHR there were 91 police killed at Arafat Police City and 9 killed at the al-Abbas police station on December 27th. Based on those 100 people, we have evidence that 65 of them were militants, or 65% - nearly two-thirds. Goldstone's flat-out statement that a majority were not members of armed groups is not true.

Beyond that, Goldstone implies that many non-police civilians would have been in the area at the times of attack and therefore Israel should have not attacked for fear of hitting them. It gives no numbers of civilian casualties in those police stations, however. At Arafat Police City, 90 out of the 91 killed were police, and one was a "driver" who was also a member of the al-Qasaam Brigades. So 100% of those killed at that police station were, according to Goldstone's criteria, legitimate targets, as well over half were members of armed groups.

At the al-Abbas police station, 7 of the 9 killed were policemen, and 7 of the 9 killed were members of terror groups. (One "jobless" civilian was a member, one policeman we found no evidence of being a member.)

It is ridiculous to say that group of terrorists who outnumber civilians by nearly 2-1 would be immune from legitimate attack under international law. While Goldstone's earlier analysis was more concerning the roles that the police were playing at the time of the attack, his conclusion seems to imply that if they were known to be members of terror groups then the attack would be legitimate.

Which is exactly the case.

It is worthwhile to mention that the Goldstone report chooses deliberately to concentrate only of specific events that would demonize Israel. Instead of looking at the total numbers of killed and the circumstances, the Commission cherry-picked specific events and looked in more detail at those events. Therefore, they chose the initial Israeli attacks on police stations on December 27th because those attacks appeared to be the most egregious attacks on civilians (in their minds.) Yet even in this case, they are wrong.

Online Monopoly game eliminates Israel

There is an online game called Monopoly City Streets where people apparently claim and trade streets worldwide.

One interesting part of the game, though, makes it very difficult to claim streets in Israel.

Because Israel doesn't exist:

There are streets in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt, but Israel (as well as the territories) are a blank slate.

The map data comes from a company called Orion Middle East which shows its coverage area like this:

(The lighter pink areas mean "coming in 2009.")

Israel is apparently not part of what Orion maps, and Monopoly took its Middle East data from Orion, which has offices in Lebanon and the UAE.

Monopoly City Streets FAQ says that the data comes from Google Maps, but Israel is well represented in Google.

At this point it looks like Orion provided the map data and Hasbro took it without looking too carefully. I'm not going to accuse Hasbro of being malicious at this point, but you might want to politely email them or comment on their blog and ask what is going on.

(h/t Daniel)

Shana Tova!

I wish my readers a Shana Tova U'Metuka, a happy and sweet new year!

I will be offline until Sunday night for Rosh Hashanah. K'tiva v'chatimah tovah!

Israeli spoof Scandanavian video a hit

From JPost:

An Israeli satirical video posted on the Internet became a hit in the very countries it criticizes.

The video was produced and posted by latma, a Website criticizing Israeli and international media outlets.

It was produced in the wake of a report by the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet which alleged that the IDF harvests organs of Palestinians killed in conflict for transplant in Israeli patients. The writer of the report has since admitted he had no way of ascertaining its veracity. Israel called the Aftonbladet report a "new blood libel."

Last week, Norway announced its divestment from Elbit, an Israeli Hi Tech manufacturer which is a world leader in the defense industry. Norway announced it would divest from Elbit because of the company's work on the security barrier in the West Bank.

After only two days on the air, the above clip was picked up by the leading newspaper in Sweden, DN.se, and by Swedish and Norwegian bloggers.

The clip has over 10,000 views and 500 comments, and Shlomo Blass, who runs the latma Web site it was initially posted on, said the success is overwhelming.

"We were surprised by how quickly the clip took-off, we must have hit a sensitive nerve," he said.

Many of the some 500 comments on the blog are anti-Israel and there are more than a handful of anti-Semitic and Neo-Nazi comments as well.

It is hilarious, and catchy to boot:

(h/t t34zakat)

The world is looking for a sweet new year

The last 500 hits on my blog included these entries from people typing in these phrases in search engines:

54	31.95%	shana tova u metuka

8	4.73%	שנה טובה ומתוקה
6	3.55%	shana tova u'metuka
3	1.78%	shana tova umetuka
3	1.78%	shana tova u'metuka!
2	1.18%	g'mar chatima tova new year 2009
2	1.18%	l'shana tova u'metuka
2	1.18%	shana tova u metuka!
2	1.18%	shana tova u metuka meaning
2	1.18%	shana tova ve metuka translation
1	0.59%	shana tova umetuka english translation
1	0.59%	chag sameach
1	0.59%	elderofziyon.blogspot
1	0.59%	shana tova u’metuka
1	0.59%	g'mar chatima tova
1	0.59%	l'shanah tovah umetuka
1	0.59%	meaning of שנה טובה ומתוקה
1	0.59%	שנה טובה ומתוקה!! translation
1	0.59%	shana tova umetuka meaning
1	0.59%	שנה טובה ומתוקה ל
1	0.59%	shana tova ??? ???? ??????
1	0.59%	shana tova u?metuka!
1	0.59%	mazel tov l’chaim translation
1	0.59%	lechaim mazel tov black eyed peas
1	0.59%	l'shana tova umetucha
1	0.59%	shana tove umetukah
1	0.59%	l'shana tova u'metouka
1	0.59%	shana tova vmetuka
1	0.59%	meaning of shana tova u'metuka!
1	0.59%	shana tovah u'metuka
1	0.59%	shana tova u metukah
1	0.59%	לשנה טובה ומתוקה
1	0.59%	перевод שנה טובה ומתוקה
1	0.59%	shanah tovah u-metuka
1	0.59%	shana tova u'metuka
1	0.59%	l'shana tova umetuka
1	0.59%	shan tov u metuk
1	0.59%	shana tova ve metuka
1	0.59%	u metuka definition
1	0.59%	ומתוקה שנה טובה
1	0.59%	shana tova u' metuka in hebrew
1	0.59%	shanah tovah umetuka
1	0.59%	shana tova msm
1	0.59%	shana tova. g'mar chatimah tovah
1	0.59%	shana tova u' metuka!!
1	0.59%	what does shana tova u'metuka!

So I think we have to work harder to give it to them, no?

Happy Qods Day!

Today is the last Friday of Ramadan, a day declared by the late Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran to be "Qods Day," where a city that Islam essentially ignored for most of the first twelve centuries of its existence is suddenly considered vitally important - only after Jews recovered control of Jerusalem.

I made a video last year on this topic, that summarizes a number of previous Al Quds posts I've written.

Here is a roundup of posts I've made to celebrate Qods Day over the years:

Introduction - An overview of how Muslims have ignored Jerusalem when they had control over the city.

The originator of Qods Day: A brief snippet of another, rather disgusting, legal ruling by the late Ayatollah.

A 1910 article showing the tremendous growth of Jerusalem in the few decades since mass Jewish return to the city, including how much land values increased and how much money Arabs were getting for selling land to Jews.

Jerusalem in Islamic art: A survey of the (non)-existence of Jerusalem in any Islamic art that pre-dates Zionism, compared to some ancient Jewish pictures of Jerusalem.

Jerusalem in Islamic poetry: A very similar posting showing every ancient Islamic poem I could find that mentions Islam's "third holiest city," plus a 12th century Jewish poem about the city.

Jerusalem in Islamic coins: Another post comparing the number of times Jerusalem was depicted in historic Islamic coins compared to ancient Jewish currency.

Jerusalem in Islamic prayer: Jerusalem, for some strange reason, is not mentioned once in Islamic prayer, but it is a central motif of Jewish prayer.

Goldstone report inaccuracies part 10 (updated)

723. The Mission considers, however, that the testimonies of the witnesses strongly suggest
that already before daybreak on 4 January 2009 the Israeli armed forces were in full control of
the al-Samouni neighbourhood. The Israeli soldiers had taken up position on the roofs of the
houses in the area. According to several witnesses, the soldiers on the street spoke to residents
who had ventured out of their houses.410 In some cases (for instance, at the house of Saleh al-
Samouni and at the house Iyad al-Samouni was in, see below), they entered the houses nonviolently
after knocking on the door. According to Saleh al-Samouni, the prolonged
identification of all the persons present in his house (his father identifying each family member
in Hebrew for the soldiers) took place outside. The soldiers appear to have been confident that
they were not at immediate risk of being attacked.

724. The Mission also reviewed the submission it received from an Israeli researcher, arguing
generally that statements from Palestinian residents claiming that no fighting took place in their
neighbourhood are disproved by the accounts Palestinian armed groups give of the armed
operations. The Mission notes that, as far as the al-Samouni neighbourhood is concerned, this
report would appear to support the statements of the witnesses that there was no combat.411

Note 411: “The hidden dimension of Palestinian war casualties…”. Only 4 of the more than 100 entries in the submission refer to combat action in Zeytoun, the much larger part of Gaza City of which al-Samouni neighbourhood is a part. The incidents in Zeytoun that are mentioned reportedly occurred on 6, 7, 11 and 13 January 2009, and consist of Palestinian combatants opening fire against Israeli troops with rocket-propelled grenades, a mortar (in one case) and detonating an explosive device.

It is difficult for me to say that there was or was not military activity in the Samounis' neighborhood on January 4th. However, Goldstone takes the absence of any mention of incidents in the Al Zaytoun neighborhood (in which the Samounis lived) in an Israeli report as evidence that there was no significant fighting there on January 4th. Goldstone's other evidence is indeed Palestinian Arab witnesses.

I do not know how big Al Zaytoun is either. However, it seems pretty clear that there was still fighting in Al Zaytoun on January 4th. PCHR names:

495 Mustafa Zuhdi Mustafa Erhayem

498 Mohammed Fou’ad Mahmoud al-He

515 Mohammed Bassam Mohammed ‘Anan

530 Hassan ‘Isam Hassan al-Jammasi

580 ‘Ateya Rushdi Khalil Aal-Khuli (16 years old!)

all as militants, actively fighting Israeli forces as they were killed in Al-Zaytoun on January 4th.

In addition, (576) Ayman Mohammed Mohammed ‘Afana (policeman) was an Al Qassam Brigades member killed in that neighborhood on that day.

And the fighting continued in Al-Zaytoun on January 5th:.

639 Mohammed Mohammed Nabih al-Ghazali (PCHR)

641 Rashad Helmi Mahmoud al-Samouni (see below) (PCHR)

681 Ahmed Hassan Abdul Karim Abu Zour listed as "resister" on PMoH site (#226)

Again, this doesn't mean that Goldstone is incorrect concerning the immediate area of the Samouni house, but it does indicate that the commission ignored easily-available data that could indicate that their implication that no fighting was taking place in Al-Zaytoun is wrong.

In para. 713 and footnote 404, they list the names of every member of the al-Samouni extended family that was killed. One of them is Rashad Helmi al Samouni (male, aged 42), whom the PCHR lists as being killed a militant. (Not only that, but another al-Samouni is listed as having been killed on January 5th: Mohammed Ibrahim Helmi al-Samouni, listed in PCHR as a civilian but who was a member of Islamic Jihad.)

So one of the civlians Goldstone lists as being killed was in fact a terrorist.

At the very least, a small amount of fact checking would have uncovered these inconsistencies. Yet Goldstone says without reservation:

721. The Mission found the foregoing witnesses to be credible and reliable. It has no reason to doubt their testimony.

I think there is more than enough reason to doubt their testimony.

(UPDATE: I misread Goldstone and thought that the commission was saying that the al-Samouni deaths were on Jan. 4th. One person with that name was killed on Jan. 4 in al-Zaytoun, but as far as I can tell he was a civilian. I corrected the post above.)

Hamas seizes charity organization in Gaza

From Ma'an:

Head of Ishraqa, a Gazan charitable society, Wasfi Naser, urged Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to freeze the society’s accounts following what he described as a takeover by the de facto Hamas run Ministry of the Interior.

Naser said he received a phone call from representatives of the de facto Ministry of the Interior last week telling him that they had appointed a new board of directors for the society.

Ishraqa currently supports approximately 250 orphaned children in northern Gaza by raising funds from charities in the EU, US, and Canada.

Naser asked that the Ministry of Interior restore control of the charity to the original board of directors who were elected, and always send their financial reports to the ministry.

He said he hopes there can be a swift resolution of the seizure.

I wonder if it was seized by Hamas' military or charity wing?

Must read: Richard Landes fisking Goldstone's NYT piece

Professor Richard Landes does a superlative job fisking Judge Richard Goldstone's op-ed in the New York Times today. And while I have been spending what time I have on the minutae of the large Goldstone Report, Landes' post goes to the very heart of the topic, and shows exactly what is problematic about the entire enterprise. It casts great doubt on Goldstone's honesty, at least with regards to this topic.

It is a must-read, as are the links Landes uses to support his arguments.

Islamic Jihad also has a "political wing"

Jihad organizations rarely have a purely military focus. They always have used charities and created Islamist schools to recruit new members, and those "wings" require their own procedures and people. Similarly, the larger ones also need to speak to the media and negotiate with other groups, and those people become the "political wings" of the organizations.

The critical point is that the political and social-service wings are not separate - their entire existence is to support the terrorist goals of the organization. They are subservient to the military goals, not independent of them.

For example, here are some pictures from Palestine Today showing a leader of the "political wing" of Islamic Jihad, Sheikh Nafez Azzam, greeting the backbone of the terror organization:

He reiterated that armed "resistance" is the only way to "defend" their people.

Hamas' non-military wings have grown the same way; out of a necessity to do some non-military tasks as necessary to continue the major focus, which remains jihad. For example, Hamas leader Nizar Rayyan's role was to bridge the military and non-military wings of Hamas - a purely practical role that indicates the primacy of jihad in Hamas.

Westerners stricken with a particularly extreme case of wishful thinking disease like to seize on these different "wings" as evidence that there is a huge separation of duties and goals between them. In Hamas' case. the fact that separate "security forces" report to the same "ministry" indicates that the separation is practical, not doctrinal. Add this to the fact that a majority of Palestinian Arab police killed in Gaza also belonged to Hamas' armed wing and it is clear that no real distinction can be made between the two, just as no practical distinction can be made between the fighters and the people who procure weapons within the Al Aqsa Brigades who are not directly involved.

Bostrom expands blood libel against Israel

Donald Bostrom, the "journalist" who wrote the infamous blood libel for Swedish magazine Aftonbladet claiming that Israel kills Palestinian Arabs for their organs, expanded his charges in a press conference in Algeria held by invitation of the National Federation of Algerian Journalists. They awarded him with an "Excellence in Journalism" award; it does not appear to be in th "fiction" category.

Palestine Press Agency reports that Bostrom has gone way beyond his initial feverish fantasies of Jewish evil and fills in the lies with additional details:

* The organ thefts started in 1960.
* Israel didn't only steal Palestinian Arab organs but also those of "martyrs of other nationalities."
* More than a thousand bodies were harvested.

Bostrom also called for "serious international action by competent international bodies to consider these inhumane practices against a defenseless people."

As far as I can tell, he provided not an iota of evidence for these additional charges, as he didn't for the initial ones (outside pointing to stitches on a body.)

PalPress goes on to say that Bostrom met with major Algerian ministers and a representative of the Algerian president, who praised him for his courage in the face of the all-powerful Zionist lobby.

UPDATE: English report here. And Al Arabiya reports that Bostrom's award included a payment of $5000.

Egypt sends aid through Rafah!!!!

Palestine Today reports that Egypt sent humanitarian aid through the Rafah crossing on Wednesday. 11 trucks filled with 135 tons of aid were sent through.

It is very nice that Egyptians have decided to help their Palestinian Arab brethren, and it deserves to be reported.

Lesser known is that Israel sends through ten to twenty times those amounts of aid every weekday. For example, last week Israel sent though 563 truckloads -14,562 tons -of humanitarian aid.

All of a sudden, 135 tons sent as a one-off doesn't sound quite as impressive. Yet for some reason, when the people who Gazans consider to be their enemies give huge amounts of aid, Palestine Today doesn't mention it. Perhaps Jews helping Arabs is a dog-bites-man story while Arabs helping PalArabs is a bit more unusual.

Or there is a more likely explanation for PalToday's omission....

PalArabs: Zionist Pigs now protected by Israelis

Palestine Today has another article about the hordes of wild boars that sometimes descend on PalArab villages, We have already seen many of these articles, where villagers invariably accuse Israeli settlers of raising these boars and letting them loose to devour, exclusively, Palestinian Arab-own crops.

This story adds an interesting twist, though. According to "experts" interviewed, Israel introduced a new law to fine and imprison any Palestinian Arab who kills these animals, with a prison sentence of 1.5 years. (Of course we also have the PalArab fears of catching swine flu from the boars.)

How evil the Israelis are! Imagine, a fine and a prison sentence! The only thing that could make the Israelis look worse would be if the story had a shred of truth!