Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, September 01, 2011

Palmer Report: The blockade is legal

Here is a slightly condensed version of the legal reasonings of the Palmer Report as to how they concluded that Israel's naval blockade of Gaza is legal.

70. ...The naval blockade is often discussed in tandem with the Israeli restrictions on the land crossings to Gaza. However, in the Panel’s view, these are in fact two distinct concepts which require different treatment and analysis. First, we note that the land crossings policy has been in place since long before the naval blockade was instituted. In particular, the tightening of border controls between Gaza and Israel came about after the take-over of Hamas in Gaza in June 2007. On the other hand, the naval blockade was imposed more than a year later, in January 2009. Second, Israel has always kept its policies on the land crossings separate from the naval blockade. The land restrictions have fluctuated in intensity over time but the naval blockade has not been altered since its imposition. Third, the naval blockade as a distinct legal measure was imposed primarily to enable a legally sound basis for Israel to exert control over ships attempting to reach Gaza with weapons and related goods. This was in reaction to certain incidents when vessels had reached Gaza via sea. We therefore treat the naval blockade as separate and distinct from the controls at the land crossings. ...

71. The United Nations Charter, Article 2 (4) prohibits the use of force generally, subject to an exception under Article 51 of the Charter for the right of a nation to engage in self-defence. Israel has faced and continues to face a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. Rockets, missiles and mortar bombs have been launched from Gaza towards Israel since 2001. More than 5,000 were fired between 2005 and January 2009, when the naval blockade was imposed. Hundreds of thousands of Israeli civilians live in the range of these attacks. As their effectiveness has increased some rockets are now capable of reaching Tel Aviv. Since 2001 such attacks have caused more than 25 deaths and hundreds of injuries. The enormity of the psychological toll on the affected population cannot be underestimated. In addition, there have been substantial material losses. The purpose of these acts of violence, which have been repeatedly condemned by the international community, has been to do damage to the population of Israel. It seems obvious enough that stopping these violent acts was a necessary step for Israel to take in order to protect its people and to defend itself. ...

72. The Panel notes in this regard that the uncertain legal status of Gaza under international law cannot mean that Israel has no right to self-defence against armed attacks directed toward its territory. The Israeli report to the Panel makes it clear that the naval blockade as a measure of the use of force was adopted for the purpose of defending its territory and population, and the Panel accepts that was the case. It was designed as one way to prevent weapons reaching Gaza by sea and to prevent such attacks to be launched from the sea. Indeed there have been various incidents in which ships carrying weapons were intercepted by the Israeli authorities on their way to Gaza. While the attacks have not completely ceased since the time of the imposition of the naval blockade, their scale and intensity has much decreased over time.While this decrease might also be due to other factors, a blockade in those circumstances is a legitimate exercise of the right of self-defence. ....

73. The Panel now turns to consider whether the other components of a lawful blockade under international law are met. Traditionally, naval blockades have most commonly been imposed in situations where there is an international armed conflict. While it is uncontested that there has been protracted violence taking the form of armed conflict between Israel and armed groups in Hamas-controlled Gaza, the characterization of this conflict as international is disputed. The conclusion of the Panel in this regard rests upon the facts as they exist on the ground. The specific circumstances of Gaza are unique and are not replicated anywhere in the world. Nor are they likely to be. Gaza and Israel are both distinct territorial and political areas. Hamas is the de facto political and administrative authority in Gaza and to a large extent has control over events on the ground there. It is Hamas that is firing the projectiles in Israel or is permitting others to do so. The Panel considers the conflict should be treated as an international one for the purposes of the law of blockade. This takes foremost into account Israel’s right to self-defence against armed attacks from outside territory. In this context, the debate on Gaza’s status, in particular its relationship to Israel, should not obscure the realities. The law does not operate in a political vacuum and it is implausible to deny that the nature of the armed violence between Israel and Hamas goes beyond purely domestic matters. In fact, it has all the trappings of an international armed conflict. ...

74. Israel was entitled to take reasonable steps to prevent the influx of weapons into Gaza. With that objective, Israel established a series of restrictions on vessels entering the waters of Gaza. These measures culminated in the declaration of the naval blockade on 3 January 2009. There were a number of reasons why the previous restrictions were inadequate, primary among them being the need for the measures to be legally watertight.

75. As required, the naval blockade was declared and notified. The Israeli authorities issued a “Notice to Mariners” through the appropriate channels, setting out the imposition of the blockade and the coordinates of the blockaded area. In addition, the notice was broadcast twice a day on an emergency radio channel for maritime communications. There is no contest about this. The suggestion that because the blockade was stated to be imposed “until further notice” means that the notification’s content is insufficient and the blockade thus invalid does not seem to us to be persuasive. The notice does specify a duration. Given the uncertainties of a continuing conflict, nothing more was required. Likewise, a limitation to certain groups of prohibited items in the blockade’s notification was not necessary. It lies in the nature of a blockade that it affects all maritime traffic, given that its aim is to prevent any access to and from a blockaded area.

76. There is nothing before the Panel that would suggest that Israel did not maintain an effective and impartial blockade. Ever since its imposition on 3 January 2009, Israeli authorities have stopped any vessel attempting to enter the blockaded area. At the same time, there is no suggestion that Israel has hindered free access to the coasts and ports of other countries neutral to the conflict.

77. Important humanitarian considerations constrain the imposition of a naval blockade. For one, it would be illegal if its imposition was intended to starve or to collectively punish the civilian population. However, there is no material before the Panel that would permit a finding confirming the allegations that Israel had either of those intentions or that the naval blockade was imposed in retaliation for the take-over of Hamas in Gaza or otherwise. On the contrary, it is evident that Israel had a military objective. The stated primary objective of the naval blockade was for security. It was to prevent weapons, ammunition, military supplies and people from entering Gaza and to stop Hamas operatives sailing away from Gaza with vessels filled with explosives. This is regardless of what considerations might have motivated Israel in restricting the entry of goods to Gaza via the land crossings, an issue which as we have described above is not directly related to the naval blockade. It is also noteworthy that the earliest maritime interception operations to prevent weapons smuggling to Gaza predated the 2007 take-over of Hamas in Gaza. The actual naval blockade was imposed more than one year after that event. These factors alone indicate it was not imposed to punish its citizens for the election of Hamas.

78. Perhaps a more difficult question is whether the naval blockade was proportional. This means to inquire whether any damage to the civilian population in Gaza caused by the naval blockade was excessive when weighed against the concrete and direct military advantage brought by its imposition. As this report has already indicated, we are satisfied that the naval blockade was based on the need to preserve Israel’s security. Stopping the importation of rockets and other weapons to Gaza by sea helps alleviate Israel’s situation as it finds itself the target of countless attacks, which at the time of writing have once again become more extensive and intensive. On the other hand, the specific impact of the naval blockade on the civilian population in Gaza is difficult to gauge because it is the land crossings policy that primarily determines the amount of goods permitted to reach Gaza. One important consideration is the absence of significant port facilities in Gaza. The only vessels that can be handled in Gaza appear to be small fishing vessels. This means that the prospect of delivering significant supplies to Gaza by sea is very low. Indeed, such supplies were not entering by sea prior to the blockade. So it seems unrealistic to hold the naval blockade disproportionate as its own consequences—either alone or by compounding the restrictions imposed by Israel on the entry of goods to Gaza via its border crossings—are slight in the overall humanitarian situation. Smuggling weapons by sea is one thing; delivering bulky food and other goods to supply a population of approximately 1.5 million people is another. Such facts militate against a finding that the naval blockade itself has a significant humanitarian impact. On the contrary, it is wrong to impugn the blockade’s legality based on another, separate policy.

...80. As a final point, the Panel emphasizes that if necessary, the civilian population in Gaza must be allowed to receive food and other objects essential to its survival. However, it does not follow from this obligation that the naval blockade is per se unlawful or that Israel as the blockading power is required to simply let vessels carrying aid through the blockade. On the contrary, humanitarian missions must respect the security arrangements put in place by Israel. They must seek prior approval from Israel and make the necessary arrangements with it. This includes meeting certain conditions such as permitting Israel to search the humanitarian vessels in question. The Panel notes provision was made for any essential humanitarian supplies on board the vessels to enter Gaza via the adjacent Israeli port of Ashdod, and such an offer was expressly made in relation to the goods carried on the flotilla.

81. The Panel therefore concludes that Israel’s naval blockade was legal.

Palmer Report: On the Mavi Marmara

Palmer Report findings

I just got a copy of The Palmer Report. It is mostly in line with what has been reported.

The findings:

The Panel finds:

i. The events of 31 May 2010 should never have taken place as they did and strenuous efforts should be made to prevent the occurrence of such incidents in the future.

ii. The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.

iii. The flotilla was a non-governmental endeavour, involving vessels and participants from a number of countries.

iv. Although people are entitled to express their political views, the flotilla acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade. The majority of the flotilla participants had no violent intentions, but there exist serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH. The actions of the flotilla needlessly carried the potential for escalation.

v. The incident and its outcomes were not intended by either Turkey or Israel. Both States took steps in an attempt to ensure that events did not occur in a manner that endangered individuals’ lives and international peace and security. Turkish officials also approached the organizers of the flotilla with the intention of persuading them to change course if necessary and avoid an encounter with Israeli forces. But more could have been done to warn the flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions.

vi. Israel’s decision to board the vessels with such substantial force at a great distance from the blockade zone and with no final warning immediately prior to the boarding was excessive and unreasonable:

a. Non-violent options should have been used in the first instance. In particular, clear prior warning that the vessels were to be boarded and a demonstration of dissuading force should have been given to avoid the type of confrontation that occurred;

b. The operation should have reassessed its options when the resistance to the initial boarding attempt became apparent.

vii. Israeli Defense Forces personnel faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they boarded the Mavi Marmara requiring them to use force for their own protection. Three soldiers were captured, mistreated, and placed at risk by those passengers. Several others were wounded.

viii. The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable. Nine passengers were killed and many others seriously wounded by Israeli forces. No satisfactory explanation has been provided to the Panel by Israel for any of the nine deaths. Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel.

ix. There was significant mistreatment of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation. This included physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.

More as I read it.

(h/t Challah Hu Akbar)

More archaeological evidence of the non-existent Jewish people

From Archaeology Daily News:

In Jerusalem and Judah, ancient limestone burial boxes containing skeletal remains called ossuaries are fairly common archaeological finds from the 1st century BCE to the 1st century AD period.

Forgers have also added inscriptions or decorations to fraudulently increase their value. So three years ago, when the Israel Antiquities Authority confiscated an ossuary with a rare inscription from antiquities looters, they turned to Prof. Yuval Goren of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology to authenticate the fascinating discovery.

Prof. Goren, who worked in collaboration with Prof. Boaz Zissu from Bar Ilan University, now confirms that both the ossuary and its inscription are authentic. The ossuary's inscription, which is unusually detailed, could reveal the home of the family of the biblical figure and high priest Caiaphas prior to their exodus to Galilee after 70 AD. Caiaphas is infamous for his involvement in the crucifixion of Jesus.

Prof. Goren's finding has been reported in the Israel Exploration Journal.

Most ancient ossuaries are either unmarked or mention only the name of the deceased. The inscription on this ossuary is extraordinary in that the deceased is named within the context of three generations and a potential location. The full inscription reads: "Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiaphus, priest of Maaziah from Beth Imri."

The Maaziah refers to a clan that was the last mentioned order of 24 orders of high priests during the second temple period, Prof. Goren explains. While there are some records of the clan in Talmudic sources that detail their lives after they spread into the Galilee in 70 AD, the reference to Beit Imri gives new insight into the family's location prior to their migration. Though it is possible that Beit Imri refers to another priestly order, say the researchers, it more probably refers to a geographical location, likely that of Caiaphus' family's village of origin.

"Beyond any reasonable doubt, the inscription is authentic," says Prof. Goren.

(h/t Dan)

Fatah blames Hamas for failure of Abbas to visit Gaza

A couple of days ago, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar's said that Hamas would welcome Mahmoud Abbas to visit Gaza, but the only problem is that they could not adequately protect him from being assassinated by his fellow Fatah members (the ones who follow Mahmoud Dahlan.)

Fatah leaders in Gaza, of course, dispute that.

Dr. Abdullah Abu Samhadana, a senior leader of Fatah in Gaza, says that Hamas is the party that is preventing such a visit, and that Fatah supports it, saying that it would help bring about that unity we've been hearing so much about.

Yes, the "unified" Fatah and Hamas are fighting over which of them is acting against unity.

PLO official: "Israel canceling Oslo would be a great service to our people"

Palestine Today reports that Rafat Saleh, member of the Executive Committee of the PLO, welcomes Israeli statements that the UN declaration stunt would cancel the existing agreements between Israel and the PLO.

He said that such threats don't scare him and the PLO is determined to go to the UN and to keep going after September in order to gain their "rights."

Saleh added, "If Israel announced cancellation of the agreements, they will do a great service to our people, who will continue their struggle for the salvation of the occupation."

Isn't it great when PLO leaders tell the world that their people, who have been living under autonomy for well over a decade now, and whose entire economy is utterly dependent on these very same peace agreements, prefer war to peace?

Conflicting reports on Egypt destroying Rafah tunnels

I noted on August 26th that Arabic media was reporting an Egyptian plan to destroy all smuggling tunnels in Rafah in order to stop terrorist infiltration from Gaza to the Sinai. Some reports even said that Egypt would build a "buffer zone" and clear out parts of Rafah for this project.

The Egyptian ambassador to Ramallah, Yasser Osman, categorically denied the story, saying that Egypt would not do anything to jeopardize the flow of goods to Gaza.

Today, however, there are reports that the Egyptian government has been moving heavy drilling equipment and bulldozers into Rafah, presumably for the purpose of destroying tunnels.

There were also reports yesterday of a large Islamic Jihad cell that had infiltrated Egypt for the purpose of mounting a major attack on Israel.

Muslims scuffle with police at amusement park over hijab ban on rides

From LoHud.com:

RYE, N.Y. — A melee broke out Tuesday afternoon at Playland Amusement Park when Muslim visitors became angry that the park was enforcing its ban on headgear by prohibiting the women from wearing their traditional head coverings on some rides.
Police from at least nine agencies converged on the park beginning at 3 p.m. after county police sought assistance in responding to the disturbance, which involved 30 to 40 people.

Two rangers were injured while breaking up a fight between visitors, and two visitors were charged with felony assault, police said. Another 13 people were arrested, most charged with disorderly conduct. Names were not disclosed, and all those charged were released by Tuesday night.

One of the rangers suffered an injured knee and the other an injured shoulder, said Deputy Parks Commissioner Peter Tartaglia.

The park was crowded with Muslims celebrating Eid-ul-Fitr, one of Islam’s two major holidays. Most were from community groups in Westchester and New York City as part of a daylong event arranged by the Muslim American Society of New York.
“It’s unfortunate because everybody just wants to be home with their families today,” said Zead Ramadan of the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Parks officials “painstakingly” told the organizer about the headgear ban, said
Tartaglia. But he said that the rules might not have been communicated by the organizer to some attendees.

Three accidents on Playland rides that killed two children and a park worker between 2004 and 2007 were unrelated to clothing the victims were wearing. But the headgear ban was among safety rules that went into effect after those deaths.

“It’s a safety issue on rides. If it’s a scarf, you could choke,” Tartaglia said.

Accounts of what happened varied, but everyone agreed the dispute began after parkgoers were told the headgear ban applied to women wearing traditional Muslim head coverings, known as hijabs.

Tartaglia said once word of that got out there were “a lot of unhappy people.”
Tartaglia said park officials were in the process of arranging refunds when members of the Muslim group got into a scuffle with each other.

Lola Ali, 16, of Astoria said she witnessed a group of girls and women wearing hijabs go to park security to confront them about the headgear issue.

She said the women were upset and yelling. She said the security officers started pushing them away and the girls stood their ground, at which point the security officers grabbed them, pushed them to the ground and handcuffed them.

Men within the park saw this and tried to intervene, Ali said, and the situation went downhill from there.

“They were beating down the girls, then they started beating down the guys,” she said of the security officers.

Earlier, a park cashier told a Journal News reporter that a woman wearing a hijab either pushed or hit a ride operator who forbade her from going on the ride. She said a police officer tried to restrain the woman and the woman’s husband took offense, at which point a multiple-person fight broke out.

In 2010 a Muslim woman was killed while riding a go-kart because of her head covering:

A young Muslim woman had died after her burkha became snagged in a go-kart.

The 24-year-old woman, who has not yet been named, died a terrifying death today when a fluttering part of her burkha became caught in the wheels of a go-kart she was driving near the town of Port Stephens, north of Sydney.

The Muslim clothing the woman was wearing flew back as she sped around the track and part of it became entangled in the go-kart's wheels.

She was strangled in a second and crashed the vehicle.

(h/t jzaik)

Syria update (Zvi)

From Zvi:

Hama attorney general defects

"Bakkour, said in another video released earlier on Wednesday that he had resigned because security forces killed 72 imprisoned protesters and activists at Hama's central jail on the eve of the a military assault on the city on July 31, which he said killed at least another 420 people, many of whom were buried in mass graves in public parks. Bakkour said the 72 prisoners were buried in Khaldiyia village in rural Hama near a Military Intelligence branch, which tried to pressure him to write a report that the other 420 people killed in the assault on the city were killed by armed groups, whom the authorities also blame for most killings across the country....

"Bakkour began drawing attention to himself this month by challenging Military Intelligence to release hundreds of protesters,"

The Syrian regime is raiding Hama again.

The Syrian regime killed at least 473 protesters during Ramadan. At least 88 prisoners have been killed in the last few months, including at least 10 minors, some as young as 13.

The death toll of 360 civilians included 25 children and 14 women, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. It said 113 government forces were also killed.

Amnesty International has said at least 10 children who had been arrested died recently in detention centres where inmates suffered beatings, burns, electric shocks and mutilation.

Syrian regime thugs molest US ambassador

It was absolutely wrong to send him back to Syria. But I'll admit that Ford has acquitted himself rather well during this uprising.

EU Syria sanctions will now include an oil embargo.

Took them long enough. 95% of Syrian oil exports go to the EU. But... .

The sanctions won't include a ban on European companies investing in the Syrian energy sector, a measure that could be adopted in future rounds, diplomats said... Anglo-Dutch major Royal Dutch Shell PLC, France's Total SA and Hungarian firm MOL Nyrt are the only European firms with significant production interests in the country.

Boycott Shell and Total. Truly.

Meet a few of the young men of the uprising in Syria, including some of the Islamists. Long article but worth reading.

Abdullah, a 26-year-old computer engineer and pious Muslim, is a wanted man. He joined the first protest in Homs in March, and since then he has emerged as one of the dozen or so leaders of the youth resistance. His savvy with technology has made him a target for the police, and this was the fifth place he had slept in in less than a week. He hadn’t been to his family’s home in two months. Around his neck he wore a tiny toy penguin that was actually a thumb drive, which he treated like a talisman, occasionally squeezing it to make sure it was still there. I sat next to him on the mattress and watched as he traded messages with other activists on Skype, then updated a Facebook page that serves as an underground newspaper, then marked a Google Earth map of Homs with the spots of the latest unrest. “If there’s no Internet,” Abdullah said, “there’s no life.”

Meanwhile, the death toll continues to rise.

Z Specialty Food - for Rosh Hashanah and year round [Advertorial]

The following is an advertorial, written by EoZ, for Z Specialty Food.

If you are looking for a great Rosh Hashanah or Sukkot gift, you have just found it.

I am not exactly a "foodie." Don't get me wrong - I love food, but I am no aficionado. My taste buds are stuck somewhere in the fifth grade and I still get enthusiastic about eating Cocoa Puffs for breakfast.
So when Ishai Zeldner asked me to write a post about his food products I admit that I was a little nervous. I want to be honest in what I post, and I was worried that maybe some of his products would not be my style.

Zeldner's company, Z Specialty Food, is a family-owned gourmet foods business based in California. His products are under the brand name of Moon Shine Trading Company and Cowboy Caviar. Ishai learned how to raise honey bees under the tutelage of one of Israel’s top beekeepers at a kibbutz in 1969. Zeldner started harvesting and marketing his own honey over 30 years ago, and then added more varieties of honey to his collection. Later his company diversified, bought other small food companies and expanded, and now his whole family is involved. He is proud that his foods are all natural and that his company is environmentally friendly.

When I received a selection of products to review I gathered Mrs. Elder and Daughter of Ziyon to help me out. And the first thing we did was set up a taste test between three of his honeys and two generic honeys.

There is definitely a difference between the honeys that even I could appreciate. The gourmet honeys we tried tend to be a little lighter in color and smoother in taste than the generic brands. The California Orange Blossom Honey had a little citrus-y “kick” that I liked; the womenfolk preferred the High Plains Sweet Clover Honey and the somewhat sweeter California Yellow Star Thistle Honey; Mrs. Elder described the Yellow Star Thistle Honey as having a “perfect texture and taste.” Indeed, that was the honey that started the company.

This is only three of Z-Specialty’s honeys; they sell some 15 different varieties from various regions in the US. Z Specialty Foods is proud that they support American farmers with all of their products.

They also sell “Honey in the Straw” – thin plastic tubes of honey that you can take with you and enjoy any time. (Eating it straight from the tube feels slightly illicit.) You can put it into tea when you are traveling. It is quite good, and they even sell Rosh Hashanah cards that include honey straws!

Next we tried the California Honey Apricot spread. This is simply a mixture of apricot preserves and honey, which is a really great idea, when you think about it. I ate it for breakfast on toast and I also tried it as a substitute for syrup on waffles. It tastes as you would expect – a sweet and tart fruit spread, with the apricot flavor accentuated. It is very tasty and a nice alternative to jelly.

A more unusual food that we tried is called Cowboy Caviar, a savory spread, made with fresh vegetables. The one we tried is called Red Bell Pepper Tuscan Style and it is almost like a mild salsa. The company recommends it with eggs. This spread was a hit with all three of us.

The last product I sampled is the one I wanted to try the most: Chocolate Almond Crunch, a spreadable chocolate nut cream. It is even better than I hoped it would be! You can dip cherries into it, or spread it on cookies, or pour it on ice cream, or eat it straight out of the jar (which I admit I am guilty of.) It’s great on graham crackers too. This stuff is simply awesome. (We are all sneaking tastes every time we open the refrigerator. It did not last long.)

As I said, the honeys especially would make wonderful gifts for your hosts if you are invited out for the holidays.

If you are more ambitious, you might want to throw a Rosh Hashana honey-tasting party with all 15 varieties – along with a good supply of apples! If you want to have a sweet year, you can’t do better than to start off like that!

All food products are certified kosher by the Igud HaKashrus of Los Angeles (Heart K). (The "royal jelly" and propolis are not certified.) The chocolate and vanilla nut spreads are dairy.

You can save 15% on your order by using the discount code ELDER at checkout.

Shana tova!

Rashid Khalidi's lies in the Chicago Tribune

Rashid Khalidi, the radical Columbia professor who felt that Yasir Arafat was too dovish for his tastes, writes an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune complaining that Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. went on a trip to Israel.

It is a typical combination of false outrage and outright lies:

[I]nstead of going to Americans hard-hit by the economic downturn, this money is used by Israel to subjugate, humiliate and segregate millions of Palestinians.

Is Khalidi equally outspoken about every US expenditure - or only the tiny percentage of the budget that goes to Israel?

Of course, American money to Israel is audited and none of it goes "to subjugate, humiliate and segregate millions of Palestinians."

Rather than spend his time touring Israel, and seeing what the flacks for Israel wanted him to see, Rep. Jackson could have stayed home and met with constituents facing difficult times.

And rather than write tendentious articles for the Chicago Tribune, Rashid Khalidi could be volunteering to help starving kids in Somalia. By his stunningly stupid "logic" he is a heartless SOB for not spending every minute of his day doing things more valuable than writing op-eds filled with lies.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's repeated insistence that Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state is entirely at odds with the principles of the modern-day United States and a throwback to an era in which the U.S. was considered a white state.

This is a baldfaced lie. Jews are a nation, whites aren't. Khalidi's denial of this simple fact, and his comparison of nationalism with racism, is indeed a manifestation of anti-semitism. He is simply denying the Jewish right of self-determination that he so tenaciously ascribes to a people who did not exist as such a hundred years ago.

Recognition of Israel as the Jewish state formally reduces Israel's 1.4 million Palestinian citizens to second-class citizenship.

This is a lie. Citizens have equal rights and would continue to do so.

If Khalidi really believes this, then he must be against the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state where its Declaration of Independence and its constitution both explicitly define the state as being "Arab" - meaning that non-Arabs are second class citizens. Would he ever dare to say so?

No, of course not. Because Khalidi will only say such things about the Jewish state.

Jackson explicitly lectured Palestinians for not using nonviolence, ignoring a long tradition of nonviolent resistance by occupied and disenfranchised Palestinians.

A laughable lie that I demolished in great detail here and here.

...Israel's massive apartheid wall, a behemoth (which is both longer and in places higher than the former Berlin Wall) that snakes through Palestinian territory, grabbing land meant for a future Palestinian state.

As Khalidi well knows, the land was always up for negotiation. It was never "meant" for a future Palestinian Arab state. In fact, when it was won in 1967, it was considered by the entire world to be Jordanian. One major objective of the Oslo process was to determine where that border would be, and the path of the security barrier has already changed a number of times.

[H]undreds of unarmed activists acting in the spirit of the U.S. civil rights movement, and who proudly claim to be inspired by Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi, have been arrested without charge. Hundreds more have been injured or killed by rubber bullets and high-velocity tear gas canisters.

MLK never advocated throwing boulders, using high velocity slings, dropping boulders onto civilians from a height, or throwing Molotov cocktails - all activities that happen weekly in the territories, often at these "non-violent" protests.

Jackson also approvingly quoted Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who has called for the forcible transfer of Israel's Palestinian citizens.

This is an absolute and complete lie. Lieberman called for redrawing borders, ironically giving more land to a Palestinian state, not to forcibly transfer one Palestinian Arab from their home.

It is no wonder then, that peace and security for all in the region is still so elusive.

When professors at Columbia can spout such errant untruths on the pages of a major American newspaper, it allows Palestinian Arab leaders to become even more intransigent and less willing to make the hard compromises necessary for peace.

Khalidi has no interest in peace in the Middle East; he wants Israel to be destroyed and in fact refers to all of Israel as "occupied." He is an extremist, and for him to talk about "peace" is the ultimate of hypocrisy - because his conception of "peace" is the destruction of a nation.

Syrians perform in Edinburgh. Where are the protests?

From Syrian government mouthpiece SANA:

Syrian dramatist Dr. Hannan Kassab Hassan, playwright Omar Abu Saada and dancing designer Osama Hilal participated in Edinburgh Festival for the British Contemporary Arts which was held between August 22nd and 28th.

The Festival presented variety of British contemporary shows and held a number of meetings to provide opportunities of opinions, experiments and knowledge among dramatists from different parts of the world. The Festival also conducted dialogues about the Arab theatre.

Prominent Arab and African dramatists also took part in the international festival, among them Director of Beirut Spring Festival Randa al-Asmar and the Executive Director of Jordan Festival Suha Bawab.

Elizabeth White, Director of the British Council in Syria said that each Summer, Edinburgh embraces new productions and opinions at all streets, halls and theatres where the coffees are crowded with dramatists, playwrights and spectators who enthusiastically discuss the good and bad works.

Somehow, I missed the protests by British "human rights" activists that must have occurred outside the festival, calling attention to Syrian war crimes.

After all, they have determined that the human rights of Arabs is far more important than any arts performance, didn't they?

Iran and Israel sending naval forces into the Red Sea

From UPI:

Iran will send a submarine and another warship from the republic's 15th fleet to the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, Adm. Habibollah Sayyari said.

The navy will continue to maintain a highly active presence in the area to serve the country's interests, Press TV quoted the navy commander as saying Tuesday.

Sayyari did not say when the naval vessels would be dispatched.

Iran's presence will not only enhance security in the area, but will convey a message of peace and friendship to all countries, he said.

Iran's announcement came shortly after Israel said Tuesday it was boosting its naval presence near the border with Egypt Tuesday, following reports Sinai terrorists plan attacks on Israel.

Due to the warnings based on concrete intelligence received by the security establishment, Israel also boosted its ground forces along the border with Egypt and Gaza.

Israel informed the Egyptian authorities of the move.

Al Masry al Youm reports that first Iran made their announcement and then Israel announced that two warships would be deployed in the Red Sea. Predictably, they interview an Egyptian "expert" who says that Israel's move is designed to "provoke Egypt."