Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Unity! Hamas and Fatah reportedly agree to keep two separate governments

Palestine Today reports that Fatah and Hamas plan to hold a meeting in Cairo on December 18th.

According to the director of the Center for Palestine Studies in Cairo, Ibrahim Alderawi, there will be a following meeting on the 22nd where all Palestinian Arab leaders will talk about whether the PLO should be revamped.

He said "There is a consensus between Fatah and Hamas to continue the Fatah government headed by Salam Fayyad in the West Bank, and the Hamas government headed by Ismail Haniyeh in the Gaza Strip," until planned elections in May.

The invented people in the 19th century

Palestinian Arabs and their Israel-hating friends have been freaking out over Newt Gingrich's characterization of them as an "invented people."

One does not have to go far back in time to see that the different Arab communities of Palestine had nothing in common with each other, and in fact usually fought with each other.

From The New Werner Twentieth Century Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, entry on Palestine, 1907:

The Arab tribes transplanted to Palestine their old distinctions, especially that between Northern and Southern Arabs (Kais and Yemen; cf. Arabia). The Arab peasantry is still divided into clans; for example, the districts of the Beni Hasan and Beni Malik to the west of Jerusalem, those of the Beni Harith, Beni Zeid, and Beni Murrd to the north, and that of Beni Salim to the east. Till recently the relations of the separate clans of fellahin was one of mutual hostility, and, unhindered by the Turkish Government, they engaged in sanguinary conflicts. In manners and in language (though Arabic is universally in vogue) the Palestine peasants retain much that is ancient. It is extravagant, however, to maintain from the traditions they preserve that primeval Canaanite elements still exist among them. The prevalent type, in fact, is Syro-Arabic, or in many districts pure Arabic; and their superstitious customs are partly remains of Syrian beliefs, partly modern Arabic reproductions, under similar external conditions, of ancient superstitions. These remarks are applicable to the saint worship at present spread through the whole Oriental world. The fellahin are on the whole a diligent frugal race, not destitute of intelligence. If well treated by a just Government which would protect them from the extortions of the nomadic tribes, they would be the means, with the assistance of the capitalists, of greatly improving the cultivation of the country, especially in the various lowland districts. They choose their own village sheiks, who derive most of their authority from the reputation of their virtues, their bravery, and their liberality. The Bedouins, i.e., wandering tribes of pure Arab origin, also play an important part in the country. Till quite recently they used to visit certain settled districts and exact black-mail from the peasants; and they find their undisputed domain in those districts which are incapable of cultivation, and fit only for cattle rearing, and in other fertile portions which for various reasons are not occupied by the husbandman. To the first class belong the belt of desert to the west of the Dead Sea, the southernmost parts of the country west of Jordan and the south country beyond the river (Moab); to the second belong the greater portion of the maritime plain, the depression of the Jordan valley and part of the country to the east. The divisions of the Arab tribes will be discussed in the article Syria. In Palestine east of Jordan the Beni Sakhr (Moab) are of most importance; Jebel 'Ajlun is the seat of the 'Adwan. The Ghawarine (the inhabitants of the Ghor or Jordan depression) form a peculiar race which, as they are partly agricultural, have been a long time settled in the district. In type, as well as by their degeneracy, they are distinguished from the other Bedouins. The true Bedouin style of life can be studied only beyond the Jordan or to the south of Palestine—the tribes west of the river, such as the Ta'Smire and Jehalin in the south being all more or less deteriorated.

The Palestine Exploration Fund in 1884 researched the names of the tribes around Jerusalem and discovered something fascinating:

If, however, we turn to the map of Arabia in the days of Muhammed and of Omar, we find the following tribes represented :—
Beni 'Amir, a tribe of the Nejed near Yemana, or again south-east of Medina.
Beni Harith, a tribe of Yemen north-east of Sana.
Beni Murreh, both east of Medina, and south of the Jauf Oasis.
Beni Suleim, east of Medina.
Beni Malik, a division of the Beni Temim, who lived near Yemana.

It was with the aid of these and other tribes that the famous Khaled defeated the Romans on the Hieromax in 634 a.d. ; and under Omar they swept over Palestine soon after.

It seems therefore probable that in these local names we have a trace of Omar's Conquest of Syria, and that the hills of Judea and Samaria were regularly portioned out among his followers. The noble families of Jerusalem still claim to have "come over with the conqueror" at this time. We have thus only another instance of the survival in Syria of early Moslem divisions, and the division of the Keis and Yemeni factions, which dates back to the early days of Islam, is still hardly extinct, and is well remembered in Southern Palestine.

Other more recent scholars concurred - the tribes of Palestine were transplanted splinter tribes from various parts of Arabia and kept their names.

A later work called Syrian Stone-lore, or The Monumental History of Palestine also written for the Palestine Exploration Fund seems to have heavily borrowed from the above quote, but added:

In 1881 I heard related in Taiyibeh (see 'Memoirs,' vol. iii.) a long account of the contests of these factions, occurring in quite recent times. In Palestine the Eastern Arabs were the Yemini party, and the settled village population mainly the Keis party. This feud of Keis and Yemini, which arose when the Ommeiyah ruled Palestine, was a split between the Aramaic or North Arab tribes, who claimed descent from the Adites, and the Yemenites or South Arab tribes, who claimed descent from Himyar and from Kahtan. The two factions were, however, joined by various tribes from purely political motives, so that the division is not exactly one of race. In 64 A.h. Merwan had some tribes of South Arab origin on his side at the battle of Merj Rahif.

This is not controversial. The simple fact is that the Arabs of Palestine before 1900 identified fully with their tribes and villages and not at all with each other, and they had no more in common with each other as they had with their neighbors across the Jordan and in Syria.

Saying that they were a "people" is simply fiction. An argument can be made that they are a people today, mostly because of their shared suffering at the hands of their Arab brethren, but before the 20th century it is simply not true.

Al Masry al Youm reports that leaders of the Salafist Nour party that gained about a quarter of the votes in the recent elections consider democracy to be "kufr," or apostasy.

They said that a proper government would use the system of "allegiance" to determine new leadership, as practiced by early Muslims after Mohammed's death.

They also claimed that the advertisements in the streets of Cairo are "Masonic Jewish ads" and should be banned.

If democracy is "kufr," then why did they participate and run in elections?

Could it possibly be to ensure that these are the last elections Egypt ever has?

Nah. That's infidel talk.

And the Salafists serve a great purpose: they allow the Western world to pretend that the Muslim Brotherhood is "moderate" by comparison.

Today, John Kerry even met with the virulently anti-semitic Brotherhood. Why not? They are respectable anti-semites!

(h/t Translating Jihad for confirming some of the translation for me)

Palestinian Arabs are Jebusites? ROFL!

From CNN:

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich stands by his support for a Palestinian state, his spokesman said Saturday, despite his comment about an "invented Palestinian people" that has drawn fire from leaders in the West Bank.

Gingrich made the comments in an interview that aired Friday with The Jewish Channel, a U.S. cable channel.

"I believe that the Jewish people have the right to have a state," Gingrich said in the interview. "Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we've had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, who are historically part of the Arab community."

He added, "And they had a chance to go many places and for a variety of political reasons, we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s. I think it's tragic."...

Fatah Revolutionary Council member Dimitri Diliani said Gingrich's remarks reflect "the ignorant, provocative, and racist nature of Mr. Gingrich," according to WAFA.

"The Palestinian people descended from the Canaanite tribe of the Jebusites that inhabited the ancient site of Jerusalem as early as 3200 B.C.E.," Diliani said. The "Gingrich remarks are ignorant of the basic historical facts of the Middle East."

This is too good.

The only confirmed mention of the historic Jebusites is in the Hebrew Bible. That's the only source that says that the Jebusites lived around Jerusalem. This exact same source says that one of their leaders, Araunah, offered to give the Temple Mount to King David; David insisted that he pay for it, and he did - for the amount of fifty silver shekels.

So if you believe that the Palestinian Arabs are actually Jebusites, you must believe that they sold the Temple Mount to the Jews in a legal transaction.

(Since such a sale to a Jew would get Araunah the death penalty today, perhaps the Palestinians should atone for their sin!)

There is another problem, though.

The Constitution of Palestine refers numerous times to the "Arab Palestinian people" and that "Palestine is part of the large Arab World, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab Nation." The PLO Charter similarly states "Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation."

But Jebusites were not Arabs. They were not even Semites! No self-respecting Jebusite (if any had still existed) would identify with the Arab hordes who overran his homeland in the seventh century. He would probably want to behead the infidel invaders.

Is the constitution and charter wrong? When they call themselves Arab, are they all lying?

Perhaps "Palestine" should quit the Arab League and re-assert its nebulous Jebusite ancestry.

If it isn't obvious enough already, note how Diliani chooses the Jebusites, not the Hittites or Amorites or other residents of Canaan, to be their ancestors - choosing the one tribe that is associated with Jerusalem.

A real people knows their own history; an invented people will invent their history - and change it whenever it is convenient for them. And since Jerusalem has only become important to the Arab residents of Palestine in the past hundred years, it is convenient to choose specifically that tribe that lived there to be their invented ancestors today.

In other words, Diliani's absurd assertion is actually proof for Gingrich's claims.

(h/t Dan)

The enigma of Jeffrey Goldberg (DG)

From DG's daily Mideast Media Sampler:

The other day, Jeffrey Goldberg asked a few questions and demonstrated that Max Blumenthal made up a slander against Israel.

The next day, Goldberg quoted Peter Beinart and agreed with Beinart's slander.

I think we're only a few years away, at most, from a total South-Africanization of this issue. And if Israelis believe that the vast majority of American Jews -- their most important supporters in the entire world -- are going to sit idly by and watch Israel permanently disenfranchise a permanently-occupied minority population, they're deluding themselves. A non-democratic Israel will not survive in this world. It's an impossibility. So Israel has a choice -- find a way to reverse the settlement process and bring about the conditions necessary to see the birth of a Palestinian state (I'm for unilateral closure of settlements but the military occupation's end will have to be negotiated with the Palestinians) or simply grant the Palestinians on the West Bank the right to vote in Israeli elections. Gaza is an entirely separate problem, but one not solvable so long as Hamas is in charge, but even without Gaza's Arabs, Israel would cease to be a Jewish state if West Bank Arabs became citizens.

It will be extremely difficult for any number of reasons for Israel to leave the West Bank, but it will be impossible for Israel to survive over the long-term if it remains an occupier of a group of people who don't want to be occupied. I understand the security consequences of an Israeli departure from most of the West Bank, but I also understand that there is ultimately no choice. I don't believe a one-state solution is any sort of solution at all; Israel/Palestine will devolve quickly into civil war. The only solution is a two-state solution.
I don't get it. What occupation is he referring to?

In December, 1995 the Los Angeles Times reported:

In the last seven weeks Israel has handed over six West Bank towns and more than 400 villages to the Palestinian Authority. The authority now controls about 90% of the West Bank's more than 1 million Arabs, and about one-third of the land in the Delaware-size territory.
Efraim Karsh has expanded on this (h/t Daled Amos):

On September 28, 1995, despite Arafat's abysmal failure to clamp down on terrorist activities in the territories now under his control, the two parties signed an interim agreement, and by the end of the year Israeli forces had been withdrawn from the West Bank's populated areas, with the exception of Hebron (where redeployment was completed in early 1997). On January 20, 1996, elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council were held, and shortly afterward, both the Israeli civil administration and the military government were dissolved.

The geographical scope of these withdrawals was relatively limited; the surrendered land amounted to some 30 percent of the West Bank's overall territory. But its impact on the Palestinian population was nothing short of revolutionary. In one fell swoop, Israel relinquished control over virtually all of the West Bank's 1.4 million residents. Since that time, nearly 60% of them – in the Jericho area and in the seven main cities of Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm, Kalkilya, Ramallah, Bethlehem and Hebron – have lived entirely under Palestinian jurisdiction. Another 40% live in towns, villages, refugee camps and hamlets where the Palestinian Authority exercises civil authority but where, in line with the Oslo accords, Israel has maintained "overriding responsibility for security."

In short, since the beginning of 1996, and certainly following the completion of the Hebron redeployment in January 1997, 99% of the Palestinian residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have not lived under Israeli occupation; rather, they have been under the jurisdiction of the Arafat-led PA.
(Emphasis mine)

Recently Sa'eb Erekat said something incredible:

In an interview with the Arabic radio station As-Shams two weeks ago, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that based on an aerial photograph provided by European sources, the settlements cover only 1.1 percent of the West Bank.

So if settlements cover only 1.1 percent of the West Bank, why does the entire West deem them the main obstacle to peace? Because admitting that settlements aren’t the main obstacle to peace would force it to confront an unpalatable truth: that the real obstacle to peace is Palestinian unwillingness to accept a Jewish state in any borders.
So a vast majority of Palestinians do not live under Israeli jurisdiction and the percent of the West Bank on which Jewish communities exist, is miniscule. How exactly do these data demonstrate an ongoing "occupation?"

The only possible explanation is that Goldberg subscribes to the Palestinian Authority's belief that it is the only party that can declare the occupation over. If so, Goldberg gives the PA the power to determine Israel's legitimacy. If so, what incentive does the PA to compromise or ever agree to terms? At some point, according to Goldberg, Israel will lose its legitimacy and the Palestinians will have won.

And this also means that the Palestinians are never held accountable for their incitement and their refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state. By Goldberg's calculus only Israel has legitimacy issues and the Palestinians are absolved from any responsibility towards advancing or even, maintaining peace.

So one day after demolishing one libel against Israel, Jeffrey Goldberg perpetuated another.

I would add a reference to a twitter conversation I had with Goldberg and a follow-up post I wrote.

I also made similar points to DG's in this post,

And another related post is here.

Jonathan Tobin at Commentary makes some good points as well here and here.

Latest Latma

Danny Ayalon's speech to the UNHCR

Since this seems to have been Danny Ayalon week at EoZ, I might as well finish it off with the full text of the speech he gave at a UNHCR Ministerial Meeting in Geneva yesterday:

Thank you, Mr. High Commissioner.

I would like to congratulate the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on the 60th anniversary of the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Your office and the convention are vital tools in dealing with the global challenge of helping people in need who were forced for different reasons to leave their homeland and families and to find a better life somewhere else.

The State of Israel is a country that was established as a shelter for Jewish refugees from all over the world, including, survivors of the Holocaust and those forced from their homes in North Africa and the Middle East. Our society is a mosaic of people from around 100 countries who returned to their ancestral homeland escaping the horrors of persecutions and violence.

As a result of our experience, Israel was one of the initiators of the Refugees Convention and one of the first countries to join it. Israel is committed to all its articles.

In addition, we support the application of the general principles governing the treatment of refugees worldwide to apply universally, without exception, including those in the Palestinian context. While the UNHCR has found durable solutions for tens of millions of refugees, the agency created specifically for the Palestinian context has found durable solutions for no one.

This has meant that a peaceful solution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians remains further away. This is morally and politically unacceptable.

The refugee issue is a core element towards finding a solution to our conflict and in its broader context would have to address both the Palestinian and the Jewish refugees forced to flee from Arab lands. Jewish refugees also require redress.

Israel's unique history, core values and moral compass are the basis for our sympathy toward those who require shelter and refuge. During the 70's, Israel was among the first countries to accept "Boat People" from Vietnam and decades later we gave shelter to refugees who escaped the ravages in Darfur.

In recent years, for different reasons - climate change, lack of employment, conflicts and a general desire for a better standard of living, we are witnessing an increasing number of population movements from developing countries to the developed world. It is a global challenge and the international community should work together to find the most effective and humanitarian ways to deal with these challenges.

Israel, as a flourishing democracy with a contiguous land access from Africa is facing a growing number of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers arriving in its territory. In a small country such as Israel, it has severe implications on society, economy, demography and security. There is increased debate in Israel at all levels on this issue. The dilemmas are not simple and there are no easy solutions.

We cooperate in a full and transparent manner with UNHCR in trying to formulate the best solutions. The UNHCR has assisted us in training our RSD unit and in developing a unique voluntary-return program to South Sudan based on incentives and vocational training, which we are very proud of.

Israel is committed

To continue expanding Government capacity and refugee status determination expertise;

To assuming greater responsibility for refugee status determination;

To reaffirm our commitment to the internationally recognized principle of non-refoulement;

To provide the necessary assistance and medical care to victims of human trafficking, among them many women who, on their way to Israel, were kidnapped, tortured and raped.

We are committed to continue our policy in encouraging voluntary-returns through incentives and professional training that will enable the returnees to rebuild their future and to start a new life with better tools at their disposal.

I am happy to report that Israel will increase our annual contribution to UNHCR.

And finally, we offer UNHCR the use of Israel's expertise and to work together, through MASHAV - Israel's International Development Agency, to create and implement professional and vocational training programs in mutually agreed locations of UNHCR's refugee camps around the world, with the aim of uplifting the refugees' standard of living and helping them to obtain a better future. We stand ready to start a dialogue with UNHCR on this matter as soon as possible.

Thank you.

Satellite images seem to show site of Isfahan explosion

Amazing research from ISIS:

An explosion reportedly occurred on Monday, November 28, 2011 somewhere in or near the city of Esfahan in Iran. The Times reported that the blast occurred at the Esfahan nuclear site and that it has seen satellite imagery that showed “billowing smoke and destruction.” The Times also cites “Israeli intelligence officials” as claiming that the blast was “no accident.” ISIS has acquired DigitalGlobe satellite imagery of the Esfahan nuclear site taken on December 3, 2011 and December 5, 2011. There does not appear to be any visible evidence of an explosion, such as building damage or debris, on the grounds of the known nuclear facilities or at the tunnel facility directly north of the Uranium Conversion Facility and Zirconium Production Plant at the Esfahan site (see figure 1).

It is still unclear where the reported blast occurred in Esfahan and whether it occurred anywhere near the nuclear facility. ISIS has identified a facility near the Esfahan nuclear site that underwent a significant transformation recently. The facility is approximately 400 meters away from the edge of a perimeter fence that surrounds the Esfahan nuclear site (see figure 2). An August 27, 2011 satellite image shows that the facility consisted of a ramp leading underground with several buildings along the surface (see figure 3). In a December 5, 2011 satellite image, the buildings are gone, heavy equipment can be seen around the site and there is evidence of bulldozing activity (see figure 4). These buildings were present on the site for at least 15 years (see figure 5). It is unclear how and why the buildings are no longer present at the site. It is also unclear whether this transformation is related to the November 28th, 2011 blast reported to have been heard throughout Esfahan.

ISIS has learned that this underground facility was originally a salt mine dating back to at least the 1980s, and that it has more recently been used for storage. It is unclear what Iran stored in this underground facility. The Times article quoted a “military intelligence source” saying the blast “caused damage to the facilities in Isfahan, particularly to the elements we believe were involved in storage of raw materials.”

Figure 1. December 3, 2011 DigitalGlobe satellite image of the Uranium Conversion Facility, Zirconium Production Plant and entrances to a tunnel facility at the Esfahan nuclear site. There does not appear to be any visible evidence of an explosion at these facilities.

Figure 2. Wide-view of the entire Esfahan nuclear site. The facility that underwent significant transformation recently is approximately 400 meters from a perimeter fence that surrounds the Esfahan nuclear site. It is unclear if this facility is related to the Esfahan nuclear site.

Figure 3. August 27, 2011 satellite image showing the facility before a November 28, 2011 explosion reportedly heard throughout Esfahan.

Figure 4. December 5, 2011 satellite image showing the facility after a November 28, 2011 explosion was reportedly heard throughout Esfahan. The buildings on the site are gone. Large equipment and evidence of bulldozers on the site can be seen in the image. It is unclear how and why the buildings are no longer present at the site

ISIS is being very cautious, but the upshot is that since the explosion, at least five buildings - not all next to each other, but seemingly all on top of an underground storage facility- have been bulldozed.

It sounds like the explosion might have been in the underground facility, and it was so massive that it heavily damaged or destroyed the buildings on the surface..

Which implies that there were some seriously explosive material in that former salt mine.

(h/t CHA)

Muslim Brotherhood website filled with anti-semitic canards

From Nicholas Kristof in The New York Times:

If you want to understand the Islamic forces that are gaining strength in Egypt and scaring people here and abroad, let me tell you about my dinner in the home of Muslim Brotherhood activists.

First, meet my hostess: Sondos Asem, a 24-year-old woman who is pretty much the opposite of the stereotypical bearded Brotherhood activist. Sondos is a middle-class graduate of the American University in Cairo, where I studied in the early 1980s.

Sondos rails at the Western presumption that the Muslim Brotherhood would oppress women. She notes that her own mother, Manal Abul Hassan, is one of many female Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated candidates running for Parliament.

...I asked skeptically about alcohol, peace with Israel, and the veil. Sondos, who wears a hijab, insisted that the Brotherhood wasn’t considering any changes in these areas and that its priority is simply jobs.

...“We embrace moderate Islam,” she said. “We are not the ultra-conservatives that people in the West envision.”

...So a bit of nervousness is fine, but let’s not overdo the hand-wringing — or lose perspective. What’s historic in Egypt today is not so much the rise of any one party as the apparent slow emergence of democracy in the heart of the Arab world.

They sound so enlightened!

Even worse is this video he produced with the piece (h/t EBoZ):

So just for fun, for fifteen minutes after I read this interview I went to the Muslim Brotherhood website. Not the slick one in English, of course, but their Arabic site.

And I did a simple search query: "Jews."

From the results I learned that :

The IDF is really a bunch of Jewish Nazis,
The Holocaust was a myth,
"Hypocrisy is the most prominent characteristic of the Jews,"
The Talmud tells Jews to lie to gentiles
Queen Esther seduced the king of Persia in order to get him to support the Jewish desire to perform genocide on tens of thousands of his subjects
Jews are encouraged to pretend to embrace other religions for purposes of deception,
"Nazi Jews firmly believe in force, and nothing but force, which makes them kill children, women and the elderly,"
Jews were behind the toppling of the Caliphate

....along with a call telling Jews not to forget the massacre of Jews at Khaybar and Mohammed's Army is returning.

I have a newsflash for journalists like Kristoff: Arabs are a very hospitable people. They treat their guests with respect. But just because Muslim Brotherhood hosts are charming in person does not mean that their beliefs are any less reprehensible.

A real journalist would know that. A dupe allows himself to be convinced otherwise.

But all it takes is those 15 minutes of research to see the truth, in the Muslim Brotherhood's very own words.

Hamas considers copying MB in Egypt to gain legitimacy

From pan-Arab daily Dar al-Hayat (Arabic):

Arabs and Western advisers recently suggested the Hamas movement rebuild the Muslim Brotherhood branch in Palestine in order to obtain international recognition of the growing political parties the Brotherhood controls in the Arab world. The diplomatic sources told Al Hayat that the transformation of Hamas into a branch of the Brotherhood in Palestine may exempt it from international conditions for recognition and give it the same recognition as that obtained by its counterparts in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria and others after the beginning of the "Arab Spring".

Sources in the Hamas told Al Hayat that the movement's leadership and its political bureau have discussed the proposal in depth, adding that some in Hamas found it appropriate, especially as the movement grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza and the West Bank. The idea is opposed by others saying that it would lead to the weakening of Hamas as a resistance movement by turning them into a [purely] political party.

Some of the leaders of Hamas considered the establishment of a new political party under the party name "Freedom and Justice" to run in the next election and work in the parliament and government and to allow Hamas, as the resistance movement, to avoid the complexities of working in parliament and government. The sources said that the idea has been discussed at various levels, but the movement is not ready for such a move at this stage.

It would be an interesting attempt to get around the sanctions against Hamas, but it would mean that Hamas would publicly revert to being nothing but a terror group again. On the other hand, an avowedly political-only Muslim Brotherhood party would very possibly defeat Fatah; it is unclear if Hamas would win a new election today.

Right now Hamas claims that its military and political arms are separate, but that is obviously a lie - most Hamas police moonlight as Qassam Brigades terrorists, and Nizar Rayan had served as a liaison between the two before the IDF killed him. A separate, purely political "Freedom and Justice" party would be equally a fiction but it would convince credulous Westerners that a moderate Islamist party could be the key to unlock the PA government impasse.

Hamas stops medical delegation from leaving Gaza

From PCHR:

According to investigations conducted by PCHR, at approximately 13:00 on Wednesday, 07 December 2011, Dr. Bassam al-Badri, Director of External Medical Treatment Department, received a phone call from the office of World Health Organization (WHO) in Gaza, informing him that him and 4 members of the Higher Medical Committee of the External Medical Treatment Department, nominated by the Ministry of Health in Ramallah, were banned from traveling to Jerusalem to participate in a medical conference which would be held on 08 and 09 December 2011. The conference is organized by the network of hospitals in East Jerusalem, in cooperation with WHO, to support and develop the hospitals of Augusta Victoria (al-Muttala’), al-Maqassed, St. John Eye, Red Crescent, Saint Joseph and Princess Basma. Dr. al-Badri pointed out that the remaining members of the delegation (9 doctors nominated by the Ministry of Health in Gaza and 5 doctors from NGOs) were not banned.

Dr. Mahmoud Dhaher, Director of WHO Office in Gaza, stated that he was surprised by the decision taken by Minister of Health in Gaza, Dr. Bassem Naim, to ban the five doctors from traveling for no apparent reasons. As a result of this decision, the participation of the whole medical delegation from the Ministry of Health in Gaza was cancelled.

PCHR has followed up developments relating to the decision with relevant security bodies and the Attorney General’s office, but in vain. It also contacted the office of the Minister of Health in Gaza to check the reasons for banning the medical delegation from traveling to Jerusalem. The reply was that the banned five doctors were not nominated by the Ministry of Health in Gaza. However, the current decision remains illegal as neither the Ministry nor security services have the authority to ban traveling; it is an absolute authority of the judiciary.

The conference, which is organized by hospitals in Jerusalem in cooperation with WHO, aims at reviewing the level of services provided by Arab hospitals in Jerusalem to patients from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Notice that Israel had no problem with Gaza doctors traveling to Jerusalem for this conference.

If Gaza is a prison, then Hamas is the only party that holds all the keys.

Rockets in south, IDF raids in Gaza (updated)

From YNet:

Two Qassam rockets were fired at the Hof Ashkelon Regional Council at noon on Thursday. No injuries or damage were reported.

Earlier on Friday, a Qassam rocket exploded in an open area in the Shaar Hanegev Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported. A Color Red alarm was sounded in the area.

The IDF carried out a strike against two targets in the Gaza Strip overnight Friday which Palestinian reports claim left one person dead. Gaza sources said that a Hamas training camp near Gaza city was hit in the strike and that shrapnel hit nearby residential buildings. One person was killed and 25 others, mostly women and children, were wounded as a result.

The Palestinian Ma'an news agency reported that among the victims were seven members of one family. According to the report, the person killed is 38-year-old Bahajat Zaalan. Among the victims are seven children between the ages of six months and 13, two of whom are in serious condition.

Meanwhile, it was reported that the Air Force carried a strike in the Rafah area. The IDF Spokesperson's Unit confirmed that the IAF attacked two targets and carried direct hits.

It later added that the air raid involved "additional blasts which were caused by the presence of arms in terrorist centers that were attacked." The statement noted that "the IDF regrets injuries caused to innocents but stresses that Hamas is accountable."

The Ma'an article confirms that the target was a Hamas terrorist site, showing how Hamas uses the people of Gaza as human shields since there are homes nearby.

The IDF's assertion that the victims died because of secondary blasts is quite credible. Yesterday, the IDF targeted a car on a street in Gaza City and no bystanders were killed; IDF airstrikes have been remarkably limited in firepower lately, killing only the intended terrorists.

Meanwhile, how staged is this Reuters photo of the damage?

A Palestinian girl holds her brother as she looks at a house damaged in an Israeli air strike in Gaza City December 9, 2011.

UPDATE: From NYT:

A strike on a site in northern Gaza badly damaged a house nearby, killing an elderly man and wounding other family members, according to Adham Abu Selmia, a spokesman for the Gaza medical services.

The victim was 42 years old.

This is not the first time that Gaza medical services have lied. The question is why the New York Times believes them.

Chanukah Video: Maccabeats cover Matisyahu

With special guest star Mayim Bialik.

Three good Chanukah videos released on successive days - not bad!

I know it is still a week and a half away, but if the White House can celebrate Chanukah early, why can't we?

Max Blumenthal has a big problem with facts

I have discussed how Max Blumenthal had fabricated a quote from Karen Greenberg, director of the Fordham School of Law's Center on National Security. Greenberg made it crystal clear in two other interviews that she did not in any way assert what Blumenthal says she said, namely that (in Blumenthal's words) "Israeli influence on American law enforcement is so extensive it has bled into street-level police conduct."

Blumenthal defended his reporting in a followup article - and, ironically, this new article proves even more so that he plays fast and loose with the facts.

He writes:

Greenberg's statement to me did not come out of the blue: A book she co-authored with Joshua Dratel, "The Road to Abu Ghraib," contains a lengthy section on Israeli court rulings authorizing torture and torture techniques refined by the Shin Bet. In a subsequent article, Greenberg and Dratel proposed questions for Donald Rumsfeld about torture. Here is one: "Did your discussions of torture involve consulting experts in Israel..?"

Let's look at these two sources and see if Blumenthal is representing Greenberg's words correctly.

In her book "The Road to Abu Ghraib," she does not say that there were Israeli court rulings "authorizing torture and torture techniques." Quite the contrary. She writes:

According to the Israeli Supreme Court, however, there is a necessary balancing process between a government’s duty to ensure that human rights are protected and its duty to fight terrorism. The results of that balance, the Israeli Supreme Court stated, are the rules for a “reasonable interrogation” – defined as an interrogation which is (1) “necessarily one free of torture, free of cruel, inhuman treatment of the subject and free of any degrading handling whatsoever”; and (2) “likely to cause discomfort.”

Turning to the specific interrogation methods before it, the Court concluded that shaking, the “frog crouch,” the “shabach” position, cuffing causing pain, hooding, the consecutive playing of powerfully loud music and the intentional deprivation of sleep for a prolonged period of time are all prohibited interrogation techniques.

“All these methods do not fall withiin the sphere of a “fair” interrogation. They are not reasonable. They impinge upon the suspect’s dignity, his bodily integrity and his basic rights in an excessive manner (or beyond what is necessary). They are not to be deemed as included within the general power to conduct investigations.”

The Israeli Supreme Court explained that the restrictions applicable to police investigations are equally applicable to GSS investigations and that there are no grounds to permit GSS interrogators to engage in conduct which would be prohibited in regular police interrogation.

Blumenthal breezily says that her book proved that Israel's legal system authorized torture - when in fact it prohibited it, as Greenberg makes clear.

Now, how about his second quote, where he implies that Greenberg wanted to ask Rumsfeld whether the US learned torture techniques from Israel by consulting Israeli experts on torture.

Here's the entire context:

Based on a careful reading of the hundreds of pages of "torture memos" that poured out of the White House, the thousands of pages of military reports, investigations, and original documents that have emerged from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, as well as the flood of recent FBI e-mails and prisoner complaints that have emerged from Guantanamo prison in Cuba, we might -- as a lawyer and an historian who have been working in this area for the last two years -- suggest the following series of questions for Congress:

1. Does Torture Work? Given the detailed attention shown in the White House memos to describing three levels of interrogation (from questioning to physical abuse) to be applied in the war on terror, is there an underlying assumption that torture in fact really works? That it is more effective than ordinary means of questioning prisoners? And, if so, what does it work to produce? Have you considered whether it is a means of venting frustration or a means of obtaining reliable information? Is there clinical, verifiable evidence that torture produces better information more quickly and more accurately than other methods of interrogation? Did your discussions of torture involve consulting experts in Israel, the United Kingdom, Egypt, and elsewhere? If so, what did those sources have to say in recommending torture? Or was the administration convinced of the efficacy of torture before it began drawing up its legal documents?

Greenberg and Dratel are asking whether the US used expert information on the efficacy of torture when drawing up its policy - not whether the US learned torture techniques from Israel!

Less importantly, but no less deceptive, is how Blumenthal characterizes "Did your discussions of torture involve consulting experts in Israel...?" as one of the questions Greenberg and Dratel wanted to ask Rumsfeld, when in fact the question they were asking was "Does torture work?" and this was part of that category. The article talks about 37 questions for Rumsfeld; this was not "one of them" but only a small part asking for clarity on one of them.

In other words, Blumenthal's implication that Greenberg had previously accused Israel of teaching Americans torture techniques indeed comes "out of the blue." And the fact that Greenberg made clear to two reporters that she did not assert anything close to what Blumenthal says - and yet Blumenthal says "I stand by my reporting" - is yet another indicator that Blumenthal is not a reporter, but a crusader disguised as one.

His further speculation that Greenberg supposedly changed her story because "she was intimidated by Goldberg and the pro-Israel forces he represents" is, frankly, psychotic. Everyone agrees that Greenberg is an expert in her field, yet as soon as she explains that her position is at odds with Blumenthal's fantasies - he insults her by making up a conspiracy theory.

Blumenthal first makes up his mind as to what the truth is, and then will twist whatever facts he can to shoehorn them into his pre-existing bizarre and hateful worldview. He is in no way a responsible or even a serious journalist, and his track record proves that he plays fast and loose with the facts, if not making them up altogether.

(h/t a new blog called "maxblumenthalliar" - I have no idea who is behind it and it has no track record, but its points concerning the Greenberg book are valid.)