Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

"Let's Boycott Israel" (poster)

A few months ago, the New York Times reported:

The American Studies Association has never before called for an academic boycott of any nation’s universities, said Curtis Marez, the group’s president and an associate professor of ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego. He did not dispute that many nations, including many of Israel’s neighbors, are generally judged to have human rights records that are worse than Israel’s, or comparable, but he said, “one has to start somewhere.”

I finally figured out how to make a poster out of that supremely idiotic comment.

So since tonight the BDSers are going crazy trying to intimidate the student government of the University of Michigan to symbolically boycott Israeli products, here's the poster. It is already being widely retweeted:

03/25 Links Pt2: Saudi Arabia denies visa to JPost correspondent; Stones confirm concert date

From Ian:

White House expresses 'deep disappointment' after Saudis deny visa to 'Post' journalist

Riyadh on Monday denied a visa to Michael Wilner, The Jerusalem Post’s Washington bureau chief. Wilner, who was the only journalist denied access to the president’s trip, despite firmly-worded requests from US National Security Advisor Susan Rice and assistant to the president Tony Blinken to Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the US, Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir.
"We are deeply disappointed that this credible journalist was denied a visa," US National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said on Tuesday. "We will continue to register our serious concerns about this unfortunate decision."

On the theft of indigenous struggles

I see people claiming commonalities with my people all the time. They tell me “My people are just like yours,” but the reality is quite different. I hear people telling me “My people have similar experiences to yours,” when the reality is that they have undergone nowhere near the marginalisation or oppression that my people have somehow survived.
When someone invokes the experiences of Native North Americans in order to claim commonalities with us, it’s almost always in order to demonise another country. In the majority of cases I see, it’s Arabs or white people trying to demonise Israel, first by calling them colonisers, and second by inferring that they stole the land on which they built their state. The irony should be obvious. (h/t Alexi)

New Anti-Semitism Tailored for Evangelicals

Despite the attempt to shroud the real agenda of the "Christ at the Checkpoint" conference, its manifesto is revealing . It "condemns all forms of violence unequivocally," yet states that "Christians must understand the global context for the rise of extremist Islam" and furthermore "blames the 'occupation' as the core issue of the conflict;" and although CATC boasts a mandate of dialogue and reconciliation between Israeli and Palestinian believers, there are still those voices that are seemingly rejected from the conference. In a report released by Israel Today, entitled, "The Message 'Christ at the Checkpoint' Didn't Want to Hear," it is argued that CATC organizers do not want to hear from those Israeli voices that have been victimized by Palestinian terrorism or able to expose the Palestinian nationalist agenda.
One case has been highlighted: in late 2010, Israeli tour guide Kay Wilson and her visiting Christian friend, Kristine Luken, were attacked by Palestinian terrorists outside Jerusalem. Luken was killed and Wilson suffered severe injuries. Wilson approached one of the CATC speakers about speaking at the 2012 convocation, but was told that her story was "not what the Lord wants," a phrase that is sadly abused by some Christian leaders to exercise control -- akin to a kind of spiritual or psychological extortion -- over the follower. Wilson then expressed dismay about "how any Israeli.... Messianic believer, could justify participating in a conference that has chosen to associate itself with theologians advocating Replacement Theology and Palestinian officials with clear ties to recognized terrorist organizations." She further stated, "For any self-respecting person, and especially for Israelis such as myself, the endorsement of terror by association, at a Christian conference, is obscene."

In January, I reported about a sociology textbook that was being used at the University of Calgary that had many libelous inaccuracies about Israel and Zionism, as well as (also inaccurate) excuses for Osama Bin Laden's terrorism. I noted a number of its false anti-Israel claims in detail.

As soon as the news about this textbook was publicized, the Calgary Jewish Federation met with university officials while many concerned people emailed to them about this egregious use of anti-Israel propaganda in a college textbook.

Today, I received an email from Calgary United with Israel that because of the complaints by people concerned about the integrity of college texts - and specifically my write-up showing its lies - this book will no longer be used at the University of Calgary.

Great job, all!

(h/t Sarah)

Falk's final report for the UN includes the usual lies and slander

I just looked at Richard Falk's final report as "Special Rapporteur" issued in January.

Falk says this:

“Legitimacy war”. In the pursuit of Palestinian rights under circumstances of prolonged occupation, there is increasing reason to believe that despite the authority of international law and the expressed will of States Members of the United Nations, the situation is essentially frozen, if not regressing. In addition, Palestinians seem increasingly disillusioned with armed resistance and with traditional intergovernmental diplomacy. Palestinian hopes for the realization of their fundamental rights have now shifted to engagement in a “legitimacy war”, which involves a worldwide struggle to gain control over the debate about legal entitlements and moral proprieties in the conflict supported by a global solidarity movement that has begun to sway public opinion. The United Nations has a crucial role to play in this process by lending support to Palestinian claims of rights and providing assessments of associated grievances resulting from the violation by Israel of international humanitarian law and international human rights principles and standards.

What Falk doesn't mention is that he is actually the coiner of the phrase "legitimacy war," and his own definition is far more radical than he lets on here:

The essence of this legitimacy war is to cast doubt on several dimensions of Israeli legitimacy: its status as a moral and law abiding actor, as an occupying power in relation to the Palestinian people, and with respect to its willingness to respect the United Nations and abide by international law. Those that wage such a legitimacy war seek to seize the high moral ground in relation to the underlying conflict, and on this basis, gain support for a variety of coercive, but non-violent initiatives designed to put pressure on Israel, on governments throughout the world and on the United Nations to deny normal participatory rights to Israel as a member of international society.

Yes, Falk is a leader of the movement to cast doubts on Israel's legitimacy as a state altogether, and then he congratulates the movement in a UN report for its successes, conveniently hiding his own role in this "war."

How's that for objectivity?

I also noticed that he used, as a source, the "findings" of the publicity stunt/kangaroo court known as the Russell Tribunal on Palestine.

Here's one of the statistics he attributed to them, in trying to prove that Israel is an "apartheid state:"

[I]t is noted that there has been a sharp drop in Israeli use of Palestinian workers since the 1990s, especially as it is now impossible for Gazans to work in Israel and since in the West Bank the construction of the wall has further diminished the number of Palestinians working in Israel or for Israeli employers.

Actually, over the past few years, the number of Palestinian Arab workers in Israel has steadily increased, and their salaries are double the average salaries they make in their own towns.

Falk of course couldn't say this because he cannot admit anything that contradicts his single-minded hate for Israel.

Naturally, Falk doesn't mention what exactly happened between the 1990s and today that necessitated building a security barrier.

Good riddance.

(h/t Gidon Shaviv)

03/25 Links Pt1: Palestinians Dream of Destroying Israel, Peace Treaty or Not; Erekat’s New Spin

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians Dream of Destroying Israel, Peace Treaty or Not

Palestinian Authority [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas has good reason to be worried in the aftermath of the latest show of force by Hamas. When tens of thousands of Palestinians take to the streets of the Gaza Strip to call for the destruction of Israel and an end to the peace talks between the PA and Israel, it is clear that a large segment of Palestinian society remains opposed to any compromise with Israel.
The pro-Hamas rally is also aimed at sending a message to the U.S. Administration that Mahmoud Abbas does not have a mandate to sign any document that declares an end to the conflict with Israel.
U.S. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry may be able to force Abbas, under threats and pressure, to sign a "framework agreement" with Israel. But as this week's rally of hatred in the Gaza Strip shows, even after the signing of an Israeli-Palestinian "peace" treaty, a large number of Palestinians will not abandon their dream of destroying Israel.

Caroline Glick: Why bring down Ya’alon?

The media chose to focus the campaign against Ya’alon on his purported irresponsibility and loose lips because they cannot argue with him on substance.
His claim that there is no chance that Palestinians will agree to a peace deal with Israel is self-evident.
His assertion that Israel cannot trust Obama to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power is undeniable.
And this is why the media chooses to create artificial crises with the US over Ya’alon’s private remarks and why the Obama administration so enthusiastically cooperates with Channel 2, Yediot and Haaretz.

Amb. Alan Baker: Changing the Historical Narrative: Saeb Erekat’s New Spin

The Erekat Family History
Erekat’s family, presently residing in Jericho, previously lived in the village of Abu Dis near Jerusalem. In fact, the Erekat family was never part of the Jericho tribal system. It is a Bedouin family which, according to Bedouin genealogy, came to the area from the south of Jordan, an area called Husseyniya and Rashaida, at an undisclosed time.
According to genealogical research of the Bedouin families in Israel, the Erekat family belongs to the extensive Huweitat clan, which originated in the area between the Liya valley, near Taif, in the vicinity of Mecca in the northern Hejaz region, close to the town of Hekl in the Sarawat Mountains, 350 km. from the Jordanian border, and northern Aqaba. Bedouin genealogical literature claims that the Huweitat clan is a Sharifi clan allied with their cousins the Hashemites. The Huweitat clan settled not only in Israel but also in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Sinai Peninsula by Ras Seeder.
A branch of this clan settled in geographic Palestine in several waves of immigration that started some 200 years ago, ending during the period of the Arab Revolt and First World War. Apparently, the family to which Erekat belongs settled in Abu Dis near Jerusalem during the last of these waves, which occurred in the early twentieth century, after the Jewish immigration to the area.

Sinem Tezyapar

This article by Turkish writer and TV producer Sinem Tezyapar, written last October, was just translated to Arabic and published in Al Quds.

Whenever a calamity falls upon Muslim-majority countries, there is always “others” to blame. There is no need to look for any other reason. Is there a revolution against a tyrant regime subjugating its people? Is there a clash between Sunni and Shia groups? Who else can be responsible? The West.

This irrational inclination to blame Judeo-Christian Western world for every failure going on in the Middle East has been the trend for quite some time. A wide-spread variety of people from different countries, ethnicity, ideologies, sects—even enemies of each other—invariably point to one direction. This madness of putting the blame on “others” is such a knee-jerk reaction that there is no logical explanation to this evasion of responsibility.

Now let’s look at what is really going on in the Islamic-Arab world. There is a continuous and unending stream of hate; hate the Shia, hate the Wahabbi, hate the Sunni, hate the Alawi, hate the Christians, hate the Jews, and so on ad infinitum. Hatred is deeply ingrained in their tradition, in their culture, in their own education and this fierce, venomous style is what is tearing the Islamic world apart; this is exactly what is happening in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan and others—Muslims killing Muslims.

So it is illogical and unreasonable to put the blame on Judeo-Christian world for some Muslims’ ignorance, bigotry, cruelty, lovelessness, and involving themselves in brutal sectarian fanaticism. This is an outcome of the intense efforts of some Muslim clerics themselves. There is a serious deterioration in their ideology and belief system. We find this hatred in Muslims’ own books. We find this hate in their own speeches; are these clerics Rabbis or Priests? Of course not. This occurs entirely within their own jurisprudence. They educate hatred of the “other” thoroughly. No one says, “Both sides are brothers, let’s love each other”; do we ever see them talk about love and compassion? Since we see many Muslim clerics inciting violence, since we see them in their own words explain the reasons for the need to hate thoroughly, why do we put the blame on others? We only see Muslims massacring each other.

Muslims killing each other, and both sides then turn around and blame the West. How does the West make Muslims kill other Muslims? Muslim clerics hand out fatwas (Islamic rulings) calling for sectarian violence like candy. Wahabbi scholars say that all Sunnis are unbelievers and should be destroyed: Sunni scholars say Shias are unbelievers and their death is obligatory: Shias say that it is obligatory to kill Sunnis, as they are enemies. These are Muslim clerics who are promoting the most violent brand of sectarianism, preaching hatred and calling upon their followers to commit massacres. When their followers then heed these calls for violence, these same clerics turn around and promptly blame the Jews and Christians; that is disgraceful. What about Muslims’ not killing each other? What about Muslims’ being united without declaring each other as unbelievers and solving their own problems without resorting to violence? What about the Organization of Islamic Cooperation with its 57 member states or the League of Arab States with its 22 states which are utterly helpless to bring about any solutions?

...
So—as Muslims—let’s stop pointing the finger at others for our problems: Now it is time for the Muslim world to take responsibility and to ponder upon what has gone so horribly wrong with the Muslim world; why is there so much bloodshed. An Islam based on the Qur’an is not being lived at all; superstitions, innovations, localized traditions and bigotry have replaced the Qur’an in some Islamic countries, and their religiosity is a deeply artificial one. This hatred has to stop and Muslims must embrace the true spirit of the Qur’an which is love, compassion and brotherhood for all.

(Al Quds does translate opinion articles even from Zionists in Israeli newspapers, to its credit.)

Sinem Tezyapar seems to be a true Muslim peace activist. Her Facebook page and personal website look to be quite good. Here is an excerpt from a more recent article:

Today one of the most common views among the Islamic world is that one cannot be a Muslim and endorse Zionism at the same time, as if they are somehow mutually exclusive. However the truth is that affirming the concept of Zionism is not conflictive with one’s being a Muslim at all: The Zionist conception of the Jewish people, who simply wish to live in peace and security in Israel alongside Muslims, to worship in the lands of their forefathers and to engage in business, science, art is perfectly normal from an Islamic perspective.
In fact according to the Koran, God wants the Jewish people to live in the Holy Land:

“Remember Moses said to his people: ‘O my people! Call in remembrance the favor of Allah unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. O my people! Enter the Holy Land which Allah hath assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.’” (Koran, 5:20-21)

It is also stated in the Koran that God has “…settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place, and provided for them sustenance of the best…” (Koran, 10:93), hence disproving the allegation that the people of Israel have no connection to the region where they reside today.

...Although Zionism is simply the right of Jews for self-determination in Israel as their national homeland, it has been associated with the most derogatory concepts and negative sentiments, not permitting anyone to speak fairly about it. Especially in the widespread political arena of the Middle East, being opposed to Zionism or Israel in general has long been a classical right-wing position.

In other words, when someone takes an anti-Zionist stance, blames Israel for the calamities in the Islamic world and utters anti-Jewish statements, then he rapidly gains “trust”, popularity and political power; the same goes for a writer or a leader of a religious group. Therefore, anti-Israelism becomes a “necessity” to be seen as “pious”, to gain acceptance and to cling to power in the Islamic world.

As an outcome of this outlook, there are a substantial number of misguided people who falsely believe being anti-Zionist is a precondition of justice and an obligation of conscience. Hence, no one dares to counter the narrative and speak out impartially about Israel or to be affiliated with it in any positive context.

As a matter of fact, anyone who speaks in a friendly manner on the subject would promptly find himself labeled as a traitor or a supporter of oppressors, racists, world hegemony seekers and so on. Thus even those who are neutral to Israel would just simply evade the subject so as to avoid public pressure—and in some cases, even more severe intimidation.

Among the Muslim community, there are also huge numbers of people who say that they are not against Jews, but only against Zionists. At first glance, this suggests no hostility towards the Jews as a people, nation, or as a follower of a religion but only seems like opposition to an ideological policy. However, when one scratches the surface and questions why only the six million Jews of Israel—out of some 14 million Jews throughout the whole world—are singled out, one can clearly see that anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are intertwined. That anti-Zionism is often used as a cloak for anti-Semitism.

She is definitely worth following.

UPDATE: A Turkish Jewish commenter is far more skeptical.

UPDATE 2: I looked a little more into this. She is definitely a fan of Adnan Oktar, quoting him often in her Facebook page, and Oktar is a complete nutcase (claiming to be the Jewish messiah!) - and possibly far worse according to some blogs.

I was never a fan of damning anyone by association, however, so if Sinem writes good stuff, I care far more about the content than the motivation - especially if her audience is meant to be Muslims who do not even want to pretend to accept Jews as humans. And the articles I've seen so far are impressive, even if she follows a crazy messianic Muslim.

Remember last November when students at Al Quds University held a fascist-style terror rally?

Brandeis University cut ties and then seemed to have reinstated them when the university said it would offer a class on hate speech this summer and when they issued a study claiming that Al Quds had taken appropriate steps to avoid anything like this happening in the future.

The experts who wrote that study don't look so expert any more.

This past Sunday, the university was at it again, with a large Hamas rally that glorified terror.

But it had full participation of women, so it should still pass the Brandeis test for inclusiveness. and one of them even kept her face uncovered!

The four-fingered gesture symbolizes solidarity with the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.

As Tom Gross reports:

The Al-Quds university authorities have consistently misled everyone (and some gullible journalists have repeated their assertions without question) that last November’s Fascist-style rally on the university campus (organized with the full cooperation of the university authorities) was a one off-event, when in fact there were several such rallies last year.

Palestinian students at the university whom I spoke to yesterday, who say they are sick and tired of the university authorities allowing terrorist groups to hold military parades around campus, tell me the rally lasted for about two hours and involved hundreds of students.

One of those many westerners who helps fund programs at Al-Quds university is George Soros, and I am told by one of his assistants that Soros has looked at my previous dispatches on this subject and has already threatened to cut his funding. -

Jimmy Carter thinks "Jewish State" means Muslims must convert!

It is mind-boggling that this man was once president.

From AP:

“I don’t see how the Palestinians or the Arab world can accept that premise, that Israel is an exclusively Jewish state,” Carter said.

“This has never been put forward in any of the negotiations in which I was involved as president, or any president, before (Benjamin) Netanyahu became prime minister this time. And now it has been put into the forefront of consideration,” he added.

About a fourth of Israel’s people are Arab or other non-Jewish citizens.

“Israel can claim `We are a Jewish state.’ I don’t think the Arab countries will contradict that Jewish statement. But to force the Arab people to say that all the Arab people that they have in Israel have to be Jews, I think that’s going too far,” Carter said.

Carter accepts the absurd premise, being spouted by Palestinian Arabs as well as others across the Arab world, that if Israel is recognized as a Jewish state then it means that only Jews can live there.

He even goes further than the idiot Arabs who keep repeating this, by claiming that it means that Arabs "have to be Jews" to live in Israel.

Given this level of cluelessness, it is hardly worth pointing out that Carter is also wrong in saying that Netanyahu is the first to demand Israel be recognized as a Jewish state.

Interactive map of Israeli startups

Here is a neat interactive map of Israel's startups, as well as other relevant contacts for those who want to create/invest in/research startups in Israel.

03/24 Links Pt2: Double Trouble- The Leftist Threat and the Islamist Threat; Israel in the World Cup?

From Ian:

Double Trouble: The Leftist Threat and the Islamist Threat

Focusing on Islam, however, does not preclude worrying about the left. Both are worrisome. More to the point, they are not unrelated threats. It is unrealistic to think of the two ideological movements—the one secular, the other religious—as separate and distinct, as though we can afford to tackle the immediate threat first and the remote one later. In reality, leftism and Islamism are best understood as a combined threat. Radical leftists and radical Islamists share similar ideologies and goals and have formed numerous alliances, both tacit and not-so-tacit.
The words “Islamism” and “Islamist” were chosen because of their similarity to “communism” and “communist,” but the ideological similarities between Islam and communism were noted long before the politicized terms came into common usage. The list of philosophers, historians and intellectuals who have likened Islam to communism includes Bertrand Russell, Arthur Koestler, Whittaker Chambers, Jules Monnerot, and Bernard Lewis. More tellingly, the three most influential Islamic theorists of the twentieth century—Hassan al-Banna, Sayyid Qutb and Maulana Maududi—were all deeply impressed with Soviet communism. Though they rejected the atheistic element of communism, they recognized its affinities with Islam, and their writings reflect the influence of leftist thought.

The Real Problem With Academia Isn’t the Anti-Israel Boycotts; It’s the Horrible Ideas

Just what is wrong with academia these days? If you’ve been reading Tablet, you are surely versed in the grand guignol that is the attempt by clusters of professors in a host of professional associations that have little or nothing to do with the Middle East to single out Israel as the world’s singular source of evil. It’s a fun story to follow, mainly because—as that great poet of power, Henry Kissinger, noted—the politics are so vicious because the stakes are so low. With precision that would’ve made Newton swoon, for every BDS action there is an equal and opposite and much greater anti-BDS action, and unless you’ve got your mind set on becoming a post-modernist, post-colonialist, post-Focauldian doctoral candidate in a second-tier university, chances are you can live a happy and fulfilling life and never give the rumbles of a few nasty and misguided fools another thought.
But BDS isn’t the problem. What should concern us, what is truly harmful, isn’t what a few academic organizations choose to do, but what many academic departments choose to teach. And the spirit of what they choose to teach is intimated in Evelyn Barish’s thrilling new biography of Paul de Man.

How to thwart terrorism at 29,000 feet, by the only pilot who ever did

With world attention focused on MH370, Uri Bar-Lev recalls how he saved his El Al passengers from an attempted skyjacking, and says other pilots should have been trained to do the same — on 9/11 and in countless other cases
On September 6, 1970, Bar-Lev, who had flown as a 16-year-old in the 1948 War of Independence and later during the 1956 War, was picked up from his Amsterdam hotel and brought to Schiphol airport to fly the second leg of El Al Flight 219 from Tel Aviv to New York. Before take-off, El Al’s security officer on duty at the airport told the pilot that there were four suspicious people seeking to board the flight. Two held Senegalese passports with consecutive numbers; two others, a couple, carried less suspicious looking Honduran passports, but all had ordered their tickets at the last minute.

Desperate Egypt may buy Israeli gas at 4x what it used to sell it for

This is more proof that a strong economy is just as important for Israel's security as the IDF.

Al Monitor reports:

Egypt is plunging into darkness every day. Across the country, authorities are scheduling power outages to take the pressure off the national grid as Egypt struggles to deal with chronic energy shortages.

According to Hafez El Salmawy, managing director of the Egyptian Electric Regulatory Agency, Egypt will lack at least 20% of the natural gas it needs to properly power its electricity plants this summer. As energy usage spikes in the heat, these outages will become longer and more frequent.

The new president, widely expected to be popular army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, will take office as the worst months kick in. His toughest challenge will be dealing with disgruntled citizens as they struggle through blackouts and fuel shortages; these same problems contributed to the downfall of President Mohammed Morsi, the very man Sisi overthrew last July.

In desperation, the state-owned Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company (EGAS) is turning to Israel, a former export destination of Egyptian gas. Egypt lost an estimated $10 billion selling underpriced natural gas to Israel, Jordan and Spain between 2005 and 2011, according to a new report by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. The sales to Israel alone cost the country over $1 billion, estimated Mika Minio-Paluello, an energy researcher and one of the report’s authors.

Corrupt businessmen, including convicted Egyptian tycoon Hussein Salem, colluded with the state under ousted autocrat Hosni Mubarak to bypass normal bidding processes and secure the lucrative contracts.

But just two years after Egypt canceled the unpopular 20-year export deal, the Egyptian government is looking to buy Israel’s newly discovered natural gas for at least four times the price. A drilling consortium led by Israeli company Delek Group Ltd. and Texas-based Noble Energy are currently in talks with companies in Egypt after signing a historic gas deal with Jordan that will provide it with 1.8 billion cubic meters (63.6 billion cubic feet) a year for 15 years.

But the Egyptian deal could be four times that, with as much as 8 billion cubic meters (282.5 billion cubic feet) a year piped to Egypt, both Egyptian and Israeli sources told Al-Monitor. The deal makes sense as the direction gas travels in the existing pipeline can be reversed, one official at Delek Group Ltd. said.

The prices are expected to match Jordan’s $6.60 per million British thermal unit (btu), four times what Egypt received for the gas it exported to Israel.

...Egypt's government spends $15 billion a year, or a fifth of its budget, on subsidizing both fuel for transportation and natural gas for electricity, encouraging consumption. The subsidies drain foreign currency badly needed to pay off spiraling debts to foreign energy companies that are now refusing to invest further in extraction. But the government could risk riots if it raised domestic energy prices at such a volatile time. When late President Anwar Sadat cut bread subsidies in 1977, he faced nationwide revolt.

So Egypt has been redirecting gas earmarked for export back to the domestic market, to ensure the country is not bled dry.

Jordanian and Egyptian citizens hate Israel and are also the most antisemitic of all people in the Middle East (with the possible exception of Houthis.) But if they need Israel, they'll clench their teeth and dea with it.

Israelis want to be loved, but it is not going to happen. Detente is the best that can ever be hoped for. And deals like these ensure that Israel is secured not only by the IDF but by pragmatic neighbors who need Israel for their own security.

From AFP:

The head of the Russian republic of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, inaugurated Israel's largest mosque on Sunday, in a village near Jerusalem whose inhabitants claim descent from Muslim migrants from the Caucasus.

"Chechens were only able to declare their nationality freely 11 years ago thanks to Akhmad Kadyrov who drafted the Chechen constitution and enabled us to say to the world we are Muslim Chechens," he told the gathering.

The new $10-million mosque in the Palestinian-Israeli village of Abu Ghosh, to which Chechnya donated $6 million, is named for the Chechen strongman's father and previous president, Akhmad Kadyrov, who was killed in a bomb attack in 2004.

The new mosque can accommodate more than three thousand worshipers and covers an area of 3,200 square meters.

Only the Al-Aqsa mosque in East Jerusalem, whose annexation by Israel is not recognized internationally, is larger.

Villagers on foot and on horseback waved Chechen flags as Kadyrov arrived.

You mean, those bigoted Zionist Israeli Jews allowed Muslims to build a mega-mosque within their borders? But,,,but...everyone knows that they define Israel as a Jewish state and therefore must want to expel all non-Jews! Why would they allow this?

And the poor, native Palestinian Arabs of Abu Ghosh who lived there for thousands of years really immigrated to their town from the Caucasus region a few hundred years ago?

How can AFP publish something that goes against everything we know about the Middle East?

It must be a case of mosque-washing. Yes, that must be it.

And the Chechen Muslims who somehow became Arabs are really descended from Canaanites and they migrated to the Caucasus before they returned.

Whew. It all makes sense again.

UPDATE: TOI notes that "The land on which the mosque sits, 3.5 dunams (0.86 acres), was donated by the Israel Land Administration."

Oh, great. More cognitive dissonance.

(h/t Zvi)

03/24 Links Pt1: Abbas Rules Out End-of-Conflict Clause; PA TV Suicide bombers are "stars"

From Ian:

Report: Abbas Rules Out End-of-Conflict Clause in Any Deal

Skeptics of Palestinian intentions have long turned to the first two rejections — made consistently by Palestinian leaders over the years — as proof that PA leaders had never negotiated in good faith, using the talks as a ploy to legitimize later violence and bolstering the international movement to delegitimize Israel. Yet with the third rejection — No to an “end of conflict” clause — it becomes difficult to understand what the point of talks was in the first place. By stating from the outset that negotiations will not bring a termination of the conflict, Palestinian leaders remove nearly all the incentive for Israeli compromise. Indeed, the absence of an end-of-conflict clause is widely seen as one of the main failings of the catastrophic 1993 Oslo Accords.

“Right of Return” Is Not About “Refugees”

In “A Jewish State,”the Wall Street Journal notes that “the right of return, with its implicit promise to eliminate Israel, is the centerpiece of the conflict” between Israelis and Arabs. The Journal observes that it is a “right” recognized “for no other refugee group in the world,” and that its acceptance by Israel would risk “a demographic time bomb that could turn the country into another Lebanon, sectarian and bloody.” The Journal explains the Palestinian rejection of a Jewish state as follows: “As to why Mr. Abbas won’t accept a Jewish state, it’s because doing so means relinquishing what Palestinians call the ‘right of return.’”
The Journal’s otherwise excellent editorial confuses a tactic and a goal. The reason the Palestinians won’t accept a Jewish state is not because it means relinquishing the “right of return.” It is the other way around: they won’t relinquish the “right of return” because it would mean accepting a Jewish state. Nor is this simply a matter of substituting the converse for the Journal’s formulation. Rather, it reflects a fundamental point that Ron Dermer (then one of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s closest aides and currently Israel’s ambassador to the U.S.) made in a May 2009 AIPAC presentation. Dermer’s point was that the “core issue” in the conflict was not refugees, but recognition:

Three More Palestinian “No’s” to Peace

Indeed, though Kerry attempted to create a framework that was more or less on the terms that the Palestinians have always demanded–an independent state whose borders would be based on the 1967 lines that would include a share of Jerusalem–they have refused to assent to it since it would obligate them to actually end the conflict and recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders would be drawn. Obama’s decision to publicly hammer Netanyahu while praising Abbas seems to have emboldened the Palestinian to think he has carte blanche to up the ante on the Israelis while giving nothing in return. That Kerry and Obama cheerleaders like the left-wing J Street group have endorsed Abbas’s refusal to say those two little words—Jewish state—that would indicate his willingness to envision actual peace only reinforces his reluctance to give an inch.
Israelis are now expected to release the last of the murderers Abbas demanded as a ransom for his presence at the table just as he is abandoning it with the extra insult that the names of the terrorists on the list are actually Israeli citizens rather than residents of the territories. The bottom line is that after issuing three historic “no’s” to Israeli peace offers including statehood in 2000, 2001, and 2008, Abbas has now added three more refusals that add up to yet another instance in which the Palestinians have rejected a compromise that would end the conflict. How many more “no’s” will convince the administration that Abbas hasn’t the courage to challenge the Palestinian political culture of intransigence that he helped create and therefore must be held responsible for the deadlock rather than Netanyahu? Right now, Abbas is betting the number is infinite. (h/t Norman F)

Forward article justifies smiley photos at Arafat's grave

Elisheva Goldberg at The Forward says "Harvard Group Was Right To Visit Arafat's Grave."

After dismissing critics of the trip, including me, as "far right blogs," she misses the point completely:

The point is that allowing students to engage in conversation on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with Palestinians themselves is still taboo among the American Jewish establishment. And it’s high time that changed.

First, let’s establish the obvious: These Harvard students were well within their rights — on purely touristic grounds — to visit even the tomb of a man as reprehensible as Arafat. Imagine going on an educational tour of Berlin and not stopping at Hitler’s bunker. Or trying to see the sites of a conflict like the American Civil War without taking a look at the Confederate Memorial Carving of Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Hitler killed 6 million Jews and 5 million others, but no one would argue that your visit to his bunker was meant to “honor” him. Davis, Lee and Jackson were considered war criminals in the North in their time, but no one is going to argue that you’re embracing their side of the Civil War at their monument. These students were not “paying homage” to Arafat. They were visiting a crucial site in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Goldberg's analogies are obviously bogus. The analogy to Arafat's grave is not Hitler's bunker; it would be a shrine to Hitler maintained by neo-Nazis. Contrariwise, the analogy to Hitler's bunker would be the room in the Muqata where Arafat made his decisions, which would be a quite appropriate place to visit.

Beyond that, her dishonesty is transparent. The smiling photo at Arafat's grave can in no way be compared to visiting a historic site. There is nothing historic about that gravesite; it is propaganda to make Arafat look like a leader of a nation and not the murderer of thousands. Even worse, thousands of Israelis today have lost friends and loved ones because of the policy of this monster, still barely cold in the grave. It is not merely tasteless to pose at his grave, it is offensive. (Oh, I forgot. Arabs and Muslims are allowed to be offended in today's world, Jews are supposed to be better than that.)

This photo (detail below) of students smiling, clearly without having been told ahead of time how heinous Arafat was, is the problem. If they would have known, and known how much it hurts Jews to honor such a monster, they would never, ever have smiled. The students clearly were not told ahead of time how posing in front of his grave is hugely inappropriate. The Israeli-born Zionist student leaders of the trip should have refused to enter the building, and explained exactly why they refused, while allowing the students to make their own decisions.

That would have been educational. A mindless selfie-type image is not. And from what I can tell, the leaders of the trip are smiling right along with the students, despite their later claims that they "discussed how difficult it was for them to stand by the grave of a man so evil in their eyes." Sorry, I'm not buying it.

I never said that the students shouldn't hear the Palestinian Arab side of the story. On the contrary, from the mainstream media that often is all they hear; a trip like this is meant to show the Zionist side of the story. Even so, for this audience it would be entirely appropriate to hear a lecture from a Fatah leader in Ramallah.

Goldberg's embrace of open dialogue also rings hollow. Would she encourage the same students to visit and listen to the right-wing Jews in Hebron? Is she that liberal? Or does her embrace of seeing all sides of the story have some limits, where Jews who want to live in their ancestral homes are shunned but Arabs who want to ethnically cleanse them are to be embraced?

Moreover, for her to be consistent, she shouldn't only say she wants to see the undergraduates visit Hebron, but to also visit the grave of Baruch Goldstein. No doubt she is more offended at that idea than visiting the grave of a far worse mass murderer. I would say that such a visit is inappropriate, but Goldberg can't do so easily without exposing her hypocrisy.

Perhaps this "far right blog" is more accepting of people hearing all sides of the story than progressive, liberal Forward columnists are.

Israel is just too darn democratic for the Left

John Podhoretz wrote a great article in Commentary this month that was paywalled, but the Jewish Press republished it:

David Landau, one of the lions of Israeli journalism, published a stunningly revealing article in Haaretz at the beginning of February – one that gave perfect voice to the Israeli left’s disgust with the nation’s own democratic system.

Due to the efforts of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Landau wrote, “the dream of Israel’s peace camp is coming true.” The dream itself is the “most yearned-for and most oft-repeated” wish, though Landau cautioned it is only spoken of “in private.”

There’s a twist, though: The dream, it turns out, isn’t a Palestinian state. A state is the culmination of the dream. No, the dream is “that friendly foreign governments summon up the political will to force Israel to end the occupation at last, in the interests of its own future as well as in the interests of world peace.”

Israeli leftists “do not dare to say it publicly,” Landau wrote, because they have been cowed into submission by the political rules of Israel’s “semi-theocratic, colonialist democracy.” The right has successfully arrogated to itself “the power to delineate the rules of public debate and the proprieties of political usage. ‘Zionism,’ ‘Judaism,’ and above all ‘patriotism’ are at the mercy of the right, chiefly the religious right, for their definition.”

Amazing how that happened, really, given that the left dominates the Israeli media, the academy, and elite conversation in the country. But it has, and it has because of those darned voters. The left has “concluded, correctly, that to be seen or heard encouraging friendly foreign governments to take tough positions against the occupation – threatening, for instance, economic boycotts – would draw down domestic condemnation, because the public is fairly brainwashed by the usage and definitions of the right.”

Hard to imagine, isn’t it, that a political movement supporting economic boycotts of your own country might rain down condemnation on you within your own country! But such is the deep injustice that has been visited upon Landau and his friends. The “semi-theocratic, colonialist” monstrosity for which they express such loathing and disgust no longer turns to them for leadership. Fancy that!

So powerful has this “brainwashing” been that it has “enfeebled” Landau’s own camp and reduced it to “the constant need to hope and pray that Israel’s foreign friends will step in and rescue her at last, effectively imposing the peace camp’s policy on her, because the peace camp cannot seriously hope to win power in Israel based on that policy.”

Well, wonder of wonders, it may finally have happened. The posse may have arrived. And so, in Landau’s view, “the peace camp would do well to seize upon Secretary Kerry’s warnings as the moment when its dream of foreign support begins to come true and when domestic and international public debate can be pushed back into pragmatic parameters.”

Landau once reportedly told Condoleezza Rice when she was secretary of state that Israel needs to be “raped by the U.S.” for its own good. That was a disgusting way of revealing a deep truth about him, the Israeli left, and its J Street supporters in the United States. They don’t just want their own policies imposed on the body politic that has rejected them. They want it to hurt, too. They want Israel’s electorate humiliated, degraded, and violated for the sin of rejecting them and their pipe dream of peace.

It is not only the Israeli Left that disdains Israeli democracy. The entire purpose of J-Street is to influence US politicians to pressure Israel against the will of most Israelis.

Some of the European-funded NGOs in Israel are dedicated to influencing Israeli voters to change their minds.

I once had a very short Twitter conversation with an Israeli leftist who said that my opinions were worthless compared to hers because she lives in Israel and I do not. I answered along the lines of "I respect that. Therefore you are against having outside Leftist organizations trying to pressure Israel, right?"

She never responded.