Moderate Fayyad can't stomach "two states for two peoples"

From YNet:

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad left a meeting with Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon outraged on Tuesday following a dispute about terminology to be used in the meeting summary.

A press conference scheduled to take place in New York after the meeting, which was held as part of the Ad-Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) meetings, was subsequently canceled.

The dispute followed Ayalon's demand that the meeting summary refer to the notion of "two states for two peoples," rather than just "two states."

"I wanted that at theV very least it will note two states for two peoples. I demanded to know what they meant. One Palestinian state and one bi-national state, or another Palestinian state?," the deputy minister told Ynet. "I made it clear that we were out of the picture if the summary didn’t say two states for two peoples."

If Ayalon's summary is accurate, this is a fascinating glimpse into even the so-called moderate  Palestinian Arab psyche.

The terminology "two states for two peoples" was controversial when Netanyahu first announced support for that principle last year. It has been emraced for years by the far left, including Gush Shalom. It goes without saying that Western leaders like Tony Blair support that formulation as a given.

Yet this formulation, which "everyone knows" will be the solution, is anathema to the most "moderate" Palestinian Arab. Obviously they feel that Palestine is for Arabs - and that Israel is ultimately for Arabs as well.

I'm sure that the moderate Arabs, after they take over Israel and rename it to West Palestine, would generously allow Jews to live within the 1967 borders as "protected" second class citizens. Of course, this would only apply to those Jews who can trace their ancestry to Palestine from before 1880, because the rest of them are evil colonialists whose very existence is an insult to Arab honor and who cannot be tolerated if they ever want true peace in the Middle East.

After all, as these moderate Arabs will be the first to insist, peace is what they want.

And, as the media never tires of telling us, Fayyad is "moderate" par excellence.

Read More

What Gazans think of Hamas

From The National (UAE), a long article about Gaza:

“We are under occupation,” said Abu Mohammed, a secular businessman with close family ties to the old Fatah security services. “After the takeover, people thought it might get better if the religious guys were in charge of the money, that security would improve and corruption would end. But they’re just as corrupt: If you’re not in Hamas, you get nothing. If anyone does anything, they are arrested, tortured or killed. Just like with the Israelis. Except the Jews always give you a lawyer.”

Anger with Hamas is not limited to secular supporters of the Fatah government in Ramallah. Militants devoted to violent resistance say they feel betrayed by what they call an epidemic of corruption – springing from Hamas’s control of the illegal tunnel economy – and by Hamas’s refusal to sanction military operations against Israel from Gaza.

Islamic Jihad, once the closest ally of the Hamas military wing, now refuses to call their former brothers-in-arms resistance fighters. According to Abu Musab, a top Islamic Jihad commander in the Rafah refugee camp, Hamas has failed at governance and resistance alike. “There’s no government in Gaza,” he said flatly. “We’re under Israeli and Hamas occupation."

“They are as big harami as Dahlan,” he said, using the Arabic slang for “thieves”. “They used to be mujaheddin, but today they are fat millionaires with nice cars,” he added, pointing to his flat stomach. “Look, you can either be a millionaire or you can lead a resistance. But you if you take the medical aid sent by Europe to help the poor people of Gaza and sell it in your own pharmacies to make money for yourself and the government, you can’t have both.”

At this point he pulled a packet of antibiotics from his pocket; it is stamped: “A gift of the people of Norway. Not for resale.”

“I just bought this from a Hamas-run pharmacy here in Rafah for my son,” he said. “I had to go to a Hamas pharmacy to make sure the pills weren’t fake or made from poor materials in Egypt. If you want real medicine, you have to buy the aid Europe sends us.”

Abu Saba, the Gazan political analyst, said that two major events had negatively reshaped public opinion of Hamas – and in both cases, he says, the damage to Hamas was self-inflicted.

“Things first started getting out of control in November, 2007 after Hamas took total control of Gaza earlier that summer,” he said. “There was a legal rally by Fatah supporters on the anniversary of Yasser Arafat’s death to honor their leader and to complain that Hamas was violating human rights promised under the constitution of the Palestinian people.”

He pauses for a moment and looks around the café nervously before going on. “It was the biggest protest in the history of Gaza, bigger than the largest protests during the Intifada,” he continues. “It got out of control when the Hamas police told everyone to go home.”

This sparked a crackdown on political dissent throughout Palestine that continues to this day, with Hamas harassing and jailing Fatah supporters in Gaza and Fatah doing the same to Hamas supporters in the West Bank. The second major blow to Hamas’s standing among Palestinians, according to Abu Saba, was the Israeli invasion of Gaza that began at the end of 2008: “When the war broke out people banded together to survive,” he says, “but after the war most people thought Hamas had provoked it [with a resumption of rocket attacks] but they acted together to portray all of the population as victims of the invasion, which we were. But over the past 18 months, Hamas has fallen further and further in ­support.”

According to one human rights activist, who asked not to be named for fear of being killed by one side or the other, the root of the problem is that both governments – Fatah and Hamas – were born of what he called “original sin”.

“The Palestinian constitution protects the right of the people to peacefully assemble at anytime for political protest,” he said. “It’s a very progressive and wonderful law. But because Hamas can only control traffic and not how people meet privately, they decided to ban all public protests through decree of the police chief. And now they use the same tools that the Dahlan regime and the Israelis used to suppress the Intifada. Torture is a chronic problem here and on the West Bank, we have both sides using illegal and arbitrary detention and it’s led to a systematic deterioration of human rights over the past four years.”

“The original sin was the refusal of the international community to recognize the Hamas victory in 2006 and the power sharing arrangement with Fatah that Saudi Arabia brokered in early 2007,” the activist said. “When Hamas saw that no one would recognize their legitimate victory – and it was a fair election victory then – they decided not to bother trying to be just rulers.”

I ask him if that means the human rights situation was better under Israeli occupation that it is today for residents of both the West Bank and Gaza.

“Why do you think I ask you not use my name? Yes, 100 percent yes,” he said. “At least the occupation had a positive effect of drawing the Palestinian people together instead of dividing them. I now fear that we’re seeing a systematic effort by Hamas and its religious backers to enter every component of society.”

...Later I described my conversation with Khalidi – and my quick chat with Abu Obeida – to Abu Nizar, a former Fatah security official. He laughed at the idea that these two famed Hamas fighters had turned their efforts to community policing: “Was Abu Obeida using community support when he was throwing Fatah officials off high-rise buildings in 2007? Are they working step by step to learn not to shoot people who disagree with them in the kneecaps? There’s a video of Obeida himself executing five Fatah officials in the Jabaliya refugee camp after they surrendered – everyone in Gaza has seen it. So why should I ever think he’s not going to one day come here and kill me?”

Fatah, according to Abu Nizar, no longer poses any threat to Hamas rule in Gaza: it would be insane, he says, for Ramallah to order its cadres to stir up trouble here, given the level of control H amas currently exerts over the population.

“We’d be massacred in five minutes if we plotted against Hamas,” he said. The real threat to Hamas, Abu Nizar continued, comes from its former militant allies. “The jihadis are much more powerful than they have ever been,” he told me, echoing a warning that has been sounded by other experts on Gaza. “Salafists look at Hamas and think they aren’t Islamic enough, because they ran in elections approved by Israel, they have failed to implement Sharia law, and they stop militants from attacking Israeli targets.”

“They can’t challenge Hamas yet. But you can’t hold them off forever. The most religious members want Sharia law and an end to this under-the-table ceasefire. They will never accept Hamas rule, but Hamas tries to appease them by banning women from smoking shisha and other moral laws. But we know appeasing al Qa’eda types never works, they’ll just ask for more and more until one day they have the support to throw Hamas out. Just like what happened to Fatah – but it will be even worse for all of us.”

...Jaysh [al Islam] was at the forefront of the fighting here, and when I asked Jihad whether Hamas fighters had also participated, he scoffed. “When they saw 200 or so policemen were killed the first day in their bases, they all went to the tunnels,” he explained. “Hamas knew Israel was coming to hurt them, so they sent all their men home or to safety. We had 18 martyrs in this neighborhood during the war and we’re a small group. Qassam Brigades has more than 10,000 men all over Gaza, and they only had eight martyrs after the first day.”

“They hid while we died for the glory of God,” he added. “Who are the real Mujihadeen?”

One [member of Jaysh al Aslam] took me by the hand and led me quietly to the edge of the tree line. Not more than 100 metres away, Israeli bulldozers, guarded by massive Merkava tanks, were clearing brush from along the fence. I could see Israeli soldiers walking along, talking to each other, sharing cigarettes and guarding the area. “Past this tree and they’ll see us and start shelling,” my young masked guide explained, before returning me to Jihad and the rest of the men.

“Hamas is our enemy,” Jihad said amid nods from his colleagues. “They have killed our brothers on behalf of the Israelis and they protect Israel from our guns.” He points to one young man who is clutching an M-16 rifle. “This boy,” Jihad says, “was arrested by Hamas for trying to attack Israelis outside of Rafah camp.”

“They held me for 22 days,” the boy says. “They beat me every day and when they released me, my father and I had to sign a paper that said if I attack Israel again, I will owe Hamas $22,000 or they will kill me.”

(h/t Vicious Babushka)

Read More

My obligatory Ahmadinejad one-liner

Ahmadinejad said that "A Jewish state means a racist regime."

The official name of his country is The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Read More

UNHRC fawns over the PA's response to Goldstone

The UN Human Rights Council came out with a report judging the respective merits of the responses by Israel, the PA and Hamas to the Goldstone Report.

It wasn't too terrible in judging Israel's responses, given that it is the UNHRC we are talking about here. They had some good things to say but were still unconvinced how independent the Israeli investigators were and they had other issues like Israel not following up with Arab complainants about the status of the investigation.

And, to their credit, they politely implied that the Hamas investigation was worthless:

86. The Committee also has concerns related to the impartiality of the second Gaza  Committee’s investigations. The report did not seriously address the recommendations by the Fact-Finding Mission to the de facto Gaza authorities....This gives the impression that the investigations sought to deflect attention from the alleged violations of IHL and IHRL by the de facto Gaza authorities and raises concerns about their credibility and genuineness.

87. Moreover, some aspects of the report sought to explain away allegations of serious violations of IHL. For example, the second Gaza Committee suggested that the unavailability of modern military technology could not preclude armed groups from defending themselves. This implicitly acknowledges the truth of the allegations in the FFM report that armed groups violated IHL by launching weapons at Israel that were incapable of striking precise targets, while seeking to justify the violation and absolve the perpetrators.

(I cannot find a copy of the Hamas "investigation," the UN did not publish it as they did the others.)

But the UNHRC absolutely loved the PA's investigation.

70. The Committee notes that the Independent Investigation Commission undertook  ndependent and impartial investigations in a comprehensive manner that squarely addressed the  allegations in the FFM report.

72. Moreover, its report demonstrates that it was thorough. In the elaboration of its methods of work, the Commission set out in detail the process it had followed to arrive at its conclusions. The fact that the Commission was able to undertake some 100 hearings in relation to each of the alleged violations illustrates the comprehensiveness of its work. The Commission met governmental representatives accused of violations, including high-level officials. The steps taken to protect witnesses and safeguard the information it obtained demonstrate its professionalism.

While the PA commission did indeed investigate even the PA itself, it can hardly be considered impartial.

As I posted in August, the PA commission tried to justify Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians by saying that such rockets "cannot be considered a violation of international humanitarian law, per se." Why does the UNHRC notice Hamas' justification for rocket fire and yet ignore the exact same justification done by the PA commission?

Beyond that, the PA commission went way beyond investigations and into squarely insulting Israel multiple times. Here is an example of the PA commission's "impartiality":

The inference from such conduct can only be either that the Palestinians are considered by their occupier as lesser human beings, or that whatever harm is inflicted upon them, no matter how indiscriminate, excessive and disproportionate, is justifiable on the basis of Israel’s exceptionalism and granted impunity.

Is it the purpose of a fact finding commission to judge parties that are not within the scope of its investigations?

The UNHRC shows yet again that even when it tries to appear unbiased, it fails.

Read More

HRW calls on Syria to release teenage blogger

From HRW:

The Syrian government should immediately release Tal al-Mallohi, a 19-year-old high school student and blogger held incommunicado without charge for nine months, Human Rights Watch said today. She has been held by Syria's security services since being detained on December 27, 2009.

State Security (Branch 279), one of Syria's multiple state security agencies, summoned al-Mallohi to Damascus for interrogation in December and immediately detained her. Two days later, members of State Security went to al-Mallohi's house and confiscated her computer, some CDs, books, and other personal belongings. Since the arrest, the security services have not allowed her family to communicate with her and have not offered any explanation for the arrest.

"Detaining a high school student for nine months without charge is typical of the cruel, arbitrary behavior of Syria's security services," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "A government that thinks it can get away with trampling the rights of its citizens has lost all connection to its people."

It is unclear why the authorities have detained al-Mallohi. According to her family, al-Mallohi, who is in her last year of high school, does not belong to any political group. Some Syrian activists have expressed concerns that security services may have detained her over a poem she wrote criticizing certain restrictions on freedom of expression in Syria. Her blog, which contains poetry and social commentary, focuses mostly on the plight of Palestinians and does not address Syrian political issues. Her homepage shows a picture of Gandhi with the quote, "you will remain an example."

What is chilling about this case is that al-Mallohi seems to be just an ignorant young blogger. Her blog contains no passionate criticisms of anyone except Jewish Zionists. Her politics seems hardly outside the mainstream for Syrians.

She has three blogs.

The first one she simply titles "My Blog" and it contains some poetry and pro-Palestinian Arab articles. She includes a picture of Raed Salah, a leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel; some praise for Venezuela and Erdogan, a picture making George Bush look like Hitler and lots of ignorant stuff about Jerusalem and how Jews have no rights there whatsoever and Israeli crimes. She signed her more recent posts "A Palestinian."

There are barely any comments on her posts there.

Her second site, "Palestinian Villages," is supposedly a list of Arab villages destroyed by Israel and their history. It includes a picture of what looks like a variant of Greater Syria.

Her third site, called "Latters" (probably meant to be "Letters") might be the one that is problematic to Syrian authorities. In that blog she writes a series of letters to the human race about human rights and freedom. It is possible that there are some veiled references to Syrian repression in those letters, but, again, this blog was hardly read by anyone judging from the number of comments.

If Syria goes after teenagers whose childish views would be all but unnoticed otherwise, and whose deviation from the Syrian version of political correctness is this slight, then the Syrian regime is even more paranoid than I thought it was. Usually such extensive paranoia accompanies equally extensive feelings of insecurity.

Which means that every citizen of Syria must live in incredible fear.

Read More

Lebanon tense following Hezbollah airport incident

Lebanon is on edge after an incident on Friday when Hezbollah acted in direct opposition to the government:

A former Lebanese general who has been summoned by prosecutors for threatening remarks made against Prime Minister Saad Hariri was on Saturday promised protection from arrest by opposition group Hezbollah.

Jamil Sayyed was detained for four years on suspicions of involvement with the 2005 assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri, the father of the current prime minister.
However, he was released in 2009 when the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) ordered his release due to lack of evidence.

Sayyed has insisted that the testimony that landed him in detention was provided by a lying witness. Last week, he publicly threatened Hariri in a press conference.

'I will not be silent until justice is made...' Sayyed said, accusing the younger Hariri of paying for the testimony that put him away.

'False witnesses must be held accountable under the law, or we shall settle the score against them in the street,' Sayyed warned.

Those remarks, including one to take justice 'with his own hands' if Hariri did not admit to his alleged crimes, prompted Lebanese prosecutor Said Mirza on Thursday to summon Sayyed for questioning regarding threats to Hariri and state security.

But, when Sayyed arrived at Beirut's international airport, he was greeted by Hezbollah lawmakers and officials, who escorted him his house amid heavy security to prevent anyone from arresting him.

Hezbollah's move is seen as a repudiation of Lebanon's courts.

Hezbollah issued a statement on Friday saying that Mirza's request to summon Sayyed was 'political,' calling for a reversal of the judiciary's decision to summon Sayyed for questioning.

'Hezbollah fully supports Sayyed,' the statement said, adding that 'any move to take legal action against Sayyed will cause chaos in the country.'

Many observers believe that the situation in Lebanon is critical and similar to the atmosphere that prevailed in May 2008, when gunmen of a Hezbollah-led alliance occupied the Sunni part of Beirut, to protest a decision by the Western-backed government to dismantle the movement's special telecommunications network.

Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah said Saturday that 'no one is capable of putting Sayyed in prison.'

Hezbollah's stance was unnerving to some observers.

'Hezbollah's warm reception for Sayyed is viewed as a direct challenge to the the Lebanese authorities and if it succeeds it will be viewed as the end to Lebanon's sovereignty,' a Lebanese government source said.

So far, the Lebanese government response has been muted, although individuals from all parties are (as usual) being quite outspoken.

Read More

Hamas denies making Shalit video

Arutz-7 reported that Hamas had created a propaganda video showing a staged execution of Gilad Shalit.

YNet reports that Hamas denied any connection with the video.

In this case, Hamas is probably telling the truth. The person who uploaded the video to YouTube called it "Exclusive video of Gilad Shalit, September 2010" but the video is obviously not real footage but a composite. Although he is a fan of Hamas videos, there is no indication that he is a member.

I see no reason to embed it here; but if you want to see it just click on the uploader's YouTube page.

Read More

Shiite cleric insults Aisha, loses Kuwaiti citizenship

From AP:

Kuwait revoked the citizenship of a hard-line Shiite scholar on Monday, accusing him of trying to stir up discord among Muslims by describing the Prophet Muhammad's wife was an "enemy of God."

The Interior Ministry made the decision after cleric Yasser al-Habib attended an event in London dedicated to attacking the prophet's wife, Aisha. Such remarks are considered blasphemous by Sunnis, who revere Aisha as being the most beloved to him.

She is also a divisive character in Islamic history because of her leadership role in battles over who would succeed the prophet in leading Muslims after his death. Those battles divided Muslims into the communities that became known as Shiite and Sunni.

Predominantly Sunni Kuwait has accused al-Habib of similar offenses in the past. In 2004, a Kuwaiti court tried him in absentia on charges of issuing an audio recording insulting the companions of the prophet and sentenced him to 10 years in prison.

The Interior Ministry is accusing al-Habib of undermining Kuwait's national interests with his latest remarks and wants him extradited from his current base in London to face a trial, the Kuwait News Agency reported.

"Al-Habib attempted to create discord among Kuwaitis and also threatened the country's interests and security," said a ministry statement carried by the news agency.

Read More

Jewish belly dancer performing at West Bank weddings?

YNet reports:

A mysterious belly dancer from Israel has become a recent sensation in the West Bank.

The woman of mystery has become the talk of the town among Palestinians, after appearing in many wedding celebrations and leaving the crowd flabbergasted.

Recently, the woman, dubbed "the Jewish dancer" appeared in a wedding at Bethlehem. Guests who saw her perform said she quickly turned into the highlight of the night, and came up in almost every conversation during the event.

The wedding sensation, whose name and other identifying details remain unknown, reportedly charges an astronomic amount of NIS 1,600 (about $425) for every 15 minutes of performance.

Her much acclaimed appearance in Bethlehem earned her at least NIS 2,700 (about $718) for the night.

Palestinian website PNN also wrote about the mystery woman, discussing whether the Jewish Israeli's presence in the West Bank is legitimate or controversial.

Maybe she should perform at the next round of negotiations.

The PNN article is here. It says that  she performed until past midnight in her Bethlehem appearance.

Read More

World Bank: Israel is a state without a region (updated)

At the World Bank site, they divide up the world into regions to make it easy to find the country you are looking for information on.

One of the regions is the Middle East and North Africa. Here's the drop-down list of countries there:

A country seems to be missing. Wait, maybe it is listed in one of their Public Information Centers?

Nope, not there.

Israel does have a page and various reports, and within the Israel page it looks like it might be a part of Middle East and North Africa:

Besides the fact that the link to what is supposed to be the Israeli flag is broken, the navigation on this page is not true - you cannot get to this page from Home >Countries > Middle East and North Africa.

On this page, they do say

The MENA Region includes: Algeria | Bahrain | Djibouti | Egypt | Iran | Iraq | Israel | Jordan
Kuwait | Lebanon | Libya | Malta | Morocco | Oman | Qatar | Saudi Arabia | Syria
Tunisia | United Arab Emirates | West Bank and Gaza | Yemen

But their PDF snapshot of the area makes clear that Israel is not in their list of countries of that region.

Isn't that interesting?

UPDATE: When you zoom in on the map of the region, you can see that Israel is explicitly excluded (the white lines of the border take up almost the entire area of Israel but a smidgen of yellow in the Negev shows that Israel is not one of the countries they consider part of MENA):

(h/t Jeanette and Samson)

Read More

Making anti-semitism sound intellectual

M. Shahid Alam is a professor of economics at Northeastern University. As a professor, he knows a lot of big words. He's also an academic fraud and a borderline anti-semite.

Check out this recent piece he published at a far-left website where he tries to explain why Zionism was successful and colonial adventures from major world powers were not.(It is apparently an excerpt from a book of his.)

How did the Jewish colons [sic] in Palestine succeed in creating an exclusionary colonial settler state in the middle of the twentieth century, and continue to grow with support from a surrogate mother country, while the French colons in Algeria, the Italians in Libya or the British colons in Kenya had to give up their colonial projects?

The answer to this question is simple. The white colons in Algeria, Libya, or Kenya simply did not have enough influence over the mother country—over France, Italy, and Britain—to overrule what the elites in the mother country had decided was in their interest: to pull out of their colonies. The Jewish colons in Palestine had more power than the white colons in Algeria, Libya, and Kenya. Where did their power come from?

The success of Jewish colons in Palestine and the failure of the colons in Algeria, Libya, or Kenya is a paradox. The French, Italian, and British settlers had a natural mother country, a country of origin, with whose people they shared an ethnic bond. The Jewish colons in Palestine did not have a natural mother country, a powerful Jewish state to support their colonial project. Yet, their colonizing project succeeded, and they drove out the Palestinians to create a nearly pure Jewish state in Palestine. The Jewish colons did not pull off this feat on their own; they succeeded because of their ability to recruit the greatest Western powers, and many others besides, to support their colonial project. Somehow, the Zionists turned what could well have been a fatal deficiency for their colonial project – the absence of a natural mother country – into their greatest asset. They gained the freedom to pick and choose their mother country.

How did the Zionists bring this about? The Jews were not a majority in any country, but there existed a Jewish minority in nearly every Western country. In itself, the presence of Jewish minorities could not have been a source of strength; a weak Jewish minority in any country could do little to help their coreligionists in another country. What made the Jewish minorities different was that they carried a weight that far outweighed their numbers. Over the course of the nineteenth century, they had become an important, often vital, part of the financial, industrial, commercial, and intellectual elites in several of the most important Western countries, including Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and the United States. Moreover, the most prominent members of these elites had cultivated ties with each other across national boundaries.

Once these Jewish elites, spread across the key Western countries, had decided to support the Zionist project, they would become a force in global politics. On the one hand, this would tempt the great powers to support Zionism, if this could buy them the help of the Jewish communities, based in a rival or friendly power, to push their host country in a desirable direction. Conversely, once the Zionists recognized this tendency, they too would seek to win support for their cause by offering the support of Jewish communities in key Western countries. ...In September 1917, this competition persuaded Britain, at a difficult moment in the execution of its war, to throw its support behind the Zionist project.

Anxious to conceal the power of the Jewish lobby, Zionists often argue that the Western powers supported Zionism only because the Jewish state served their strategic interests in the Middle East. We have shown that Zionism was in conflict with the long-term interests of Britain and the United States. Exigencies of war and the presence of a strong contingency of Christian Zionists in the cabinet of Lloyd George explain British support for the Balfour Declaration in 1917. On the other hand, the strong U.S. support in 1948 for the partition of Palestine – and later – was the product of a domestic Jewish lobby.

Alam's entire thesis rests on one simple lie: that Zionism is colonialism. Once that idea is accepted, then he must jump through ridiculous hoops to figure out why these powerful Zionist Jews from Europe and the US - so powerful that they couldn't convince their host countries to bomb the railroad lines to Auschwitz - managed to take poor, homeless, oppressed immigrants and place them as white interlopers into an Arab nation and force them to stay while under daily attack by Arabs.

Not even once does Alam consider that the Jews themselves had a millenia-long connection to their own homeland. Never does Alam entertain the notion that only a people who feel connected to the land will fight to the death for it; while the Arab inhabitants who never considered themselves "Palestinian" had much less incentive to stay and fight rather than emigrate to one of the many other Arab countries that they had traversed for centuries.

The anti-Israel crowd will never get it because they don't want to admit that Jews do have a deep, emotional connection to the Land of Israel. French people never wanted to live in Algeria, Italians never yearned for Libya and British never pined for Kenya. But Jews have prayed to return to Zion - daily - since Biblical times. But accepting that Jews are a nation means that Jews have the right to self-determination - anathema to academic fakes like Alam.

This is the "simple answer" that eludes genteel anti-semites like Alam. Accepting that Jews are a nation and are not just a religious group would upset his entire edifice of Zionism as colonialism. Instead he constructs a bizarre scenario, with zero proof: a story of outsized Jewish influence in the West in the 19th and early 20th centuries, where the stupid Westerners were manipulated by clever powerful Jews into supporting a national movement that, according to Alam, was against their own interests!

This pseudo-intellectual is forced to downplay or ignore innate cultural, historic and religious Jewish ties to Israel - all because he wants the world to accept the lie of Zionist as colonialist.

Read More

A unique experiment on anti-Israel academics

Backspin points to an interview with Fred Gottheil, concerning an experiment he undertook this year. Here's how he described it in an article earlier this month:

A year and a half ago, January 2009, David C. Lloyd, Professor of English at the University of Southern California, wrote a three-page petition concerning U.S. relations with Israel, which he addressed to incoming President Barack Obama. His petition was endorsed by nine hundred signatories, most located at universities and colleges in the United States, but some affiliated with academic institutions in Canada, United Kingdom, and even Israel.

Lloyd's petition was notable not only for its criticism of Israeli policy -- that is standard fare among the set of academics who subscribe to a post-colonial view of the world -- but rather for its demonizing of the Jewish state.

...[A]ccepting as genuine the petitioners' stated goal of seeking social justice in the Middle East, I thought it fitting to contact the signatories of the Lloyd petition to offer them yet another opportunity to express their commitment to social justice in the region, this time by endorsing a Statement of Concern regarding human rights abuses practiced against gays and lesbians and against women in general in many of the Middle Eastern countries, including the territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority. The idea was really uncomplicated: Since they expressed a concern about social injustice in Israel, they might also be willing to express their concern about human rights abuses practiced against women, gays, and lesbians in other parts of the Middle East.

...Only thirty of the 675 self-described "social-justice seeking academics" responded, 27 of them agreeing to endorse the Statement. But these 27 signatories represent less than five percent of the 675 contacted. In other words, 95 percent of those who had signed the Lloyd petition censuring Israel for human rights violation did not sign a statement concerning discrimination against women and gays and lesbians in the Middle East.

Surprised? If so, prepare for yet a bigger surprise. As many as 25 percent of the Lloyd petition-signing academics were faculty associated with gender and women studies departments. Yet of these, only 5 endorsed the Statement calling for attention to the discrimination against women in the Muslim countries of the Middle East. Put more bluntly, 164 of the 169 faculty who had chosen to focus their life's work on matters affecting women, and who felt comfortable enough to affix their names to Lloyd's petition censuring Israel, chose not to sign a Statement of Concern about documented human rights violations against gays, lesbians, and women in the Middle East.

What should we make of this? Perhaps it is that we should be aware of what we don't see when we see petitions and their signatories. While academics are entitled to voice opinions no less than anyone else, those -- as in the Lloyd petition -- who explain their criticism of Israel and demand change in our relationship to that Jewish state on grounds of "social justice" may indeed have other agendas in mind. What they were willing and unwilling to sign tells us a great deal about who they are and what social justice means to them. It appears their "social justice" is reserved only for their own kind. And it matters. After all, many of them teach "social justice" in their classrooms.

Somehow I had missed this story; it was covered by CiFWatch and others.

Read More

Egypt reiterates: Galloway banned from Egyptian soil

In light of the "Viva Palestina 5" convoy that is heading towards Egypt, Hossam Zaki of the Egyptian Foreign Affairs ministry has emphasized that George Galloway is banned from entering Egypt under any circumstances.

He also said that Egypt does not allow land convoys to enter Gaza and restricts the number of people who can enter at one time. He stated that the goods must be unloaded at El Arish where the Egyptian Red Crescent takes over all issues of distribution of the goods.

The Viva Palestina people are not commenting on any of this in their webpage.

Read More

Star of David nanoparticles discovered. Time for a boycott!

From Bloomberg:

A new type of nanoparticle that resembles the six-pointed Star of David, a Jewish symbol which appears on the flag of Israel, has been discovered by researchers at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The Hebrew University team, headed by researcher Uri Banin, said the star-shaped nanoparticles have a unique, cage-like structure. The discovery is described in an article in the October 2010 issue of the journal Nature Materials.

The particles, which are some 10,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair, may prove useful in applications ranging from the development of new ways to sense glucose in diagnosing diabetes to serving as photo-catalysts for turning solar energy into clean fuel, the university said.

“Exploration into the possible applications for the nano Stars of David has just begun, and already they have shown that they are not just beautiful; the composition and the unique cage shape makes them useful,” the university said in an e-mailed statement.

Here are those Israelis again, creating six-pointed nanoparticles just to humiliate Palestinian Arabs. Blue ones, no less! (The color is of course not real but chosen to make it easier to see.)

(h/t Mohammed the Teddy Bear)

Read More

Once I'm selling stuff....

Thanks to the people who bought items from the EoZ store!

Glancing at the other items for sale, I saw that they had...a teddy bear.

Unfortunately, I couldn't match the adorable bear I had originally designed for this post back from 2007:

Here is the best I could do:

$15.99 - a great gift for, um, Simchat Torah!

I figure at least one of my readers won't be able to resist....

Read More