Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, May 05, 2014

A lesson of coexistence turns sour in Shfaram

Times of Israel has what looks like a heartwarming story:

In a remarkable response to the spate of “price tag” hate attacks by Jewish extremists, a group of youths from the northern Arab town of Shfaram teamed up with Jewish counterparts to send a very different message.

Members of the local school system’s youth leadership group, together with young people from Shutafut-Sharakah — a coalition of Jewish and Arab organizations working to build inclusive Israel — joined hands on Sunday to renovate the ancient synagogue in the Galilee town.

...One of the girls who came to renovate the synagogue said Sunday that Shfaram residents’ history of caring for the synagogue “is an example and a model for coexistence between our two peoples. Every form of worship in the city is part of our heritage, and comes both naturally and unreservedly,” she added.

This sounds wonderful! Jews and Arabs are working together against hate and towards understanding and coexistence.

However, this same event is being reported in Arab media a bit differently, and the message is not nearly as sunny.

Al Quds al Arabi, after spending many paragraphs on how the Jewish state is not taking "price tag" attacks seriously, says that in contrast to Jews who destroy churches and mosques, Arabs are showing how much they respect synagogues.

A youth group in the town of Shfaram responded to 'price tag' attacks by restoring an old synagogue in order to deliver a message about the Arab-Islamic civilization, in dealing with the sanctities of others. National Democratic Alliance official Murad Haddad told Al Quds Al-Arabi "that he wanted to deliver a message to the world that [Muslims] preserve the holy sites of the Jews because they are not part of the conflict. He adds 'in all restoration projects and maintenance of holy sites in the city, we included the synagogue, and this time we wanted to highlight the maintenance of the synagogue at the time that others violate the sanctity of mosques and churches and convert them into animal shelters [or the like.]'

... Murad Haddad emphasizes that the restoration of the synagogue is not related to any 'coexistence' programs between Jews and Arabs and was not initiated by Jews but was a 'self-initiative linked to the core of Arab-Islamic values that has nothing to do with Zionism.

The amount of respect given to the synagogue in Shfaram by the locals is undoubtedly remarkable and praiseworthy. Perhaps this spokesperson does not represent the citizens of Shfaram.

But this is how the restoration is being reported in the Arab media, not as a lesson of coexistence but as an example of Muslim moral superiority. (We don't need to even get into the many synagogues destroyed, deliberately, by Muslims over the centuries.)

The article shows that the leftover synagogues of vanished Jews must be treated with far more respect than living, breathing Jews who want to live in peace and harmony with Arabs.

Hamas kiddie TV show: "Shoot all the Jews!"

From Palestinian Media Watch, the latest episode of Hamas children's TV show "Pioneers of Tomorrow."

Phone conversation between Nahul the bee and Qais, a boy from Jenin (West Bank).
Nahul the bee, (adult in a giant bee costume): "Listen my friend. Are there Jews where you are?"
Boy (Qais): "No. Not at the moment."
Nahul: "I heard they come to you every day."
Boy: "Yes, but not now."
Nahul: "Listen, friend; do like this with your hands [makes fists], and when they come to you, punch them; make their face red like a tomato."
Boy: "Allah willing, so that we can liberate Palestine."
Nahul: "Allah willing." ...

[Nahul talks to TV Host, young girl named Rawan]
Nahul: "My friend Qais - anyway, Rawan, I tell him to take a stone, and when the Jews come, to take it and throw it at them."
Child host (Rawan): "Of course, the Jewish neighbors."
Nahul: "To smash them."
Child host: "If his neighbors are Jews or Zionists? Yes." ...

[Child host Rawan talks to Tulin, a girl in the studio.]
Child host Rawan: "Tulin, why do you want to be a police officer? Like who?"
Girl Tulin: "Like my uncle."
Child host: "Which uncle?"
Girl: "Ahmed."
Child host: "Is he a policeman?"
[Girl nods]
Child host: "OK, so what does a policeman do?"
Nahul: "He catches thieves, and people who make trouble."
Child host: "And shoots Jews. Right?"
Girl: "Yes."
Child host: "You want to be like him?"
[Girl nods]
Child host: "Allah willing, when you grow up."
Girl: "So that I can shoot Jews."
[Nahul the bee claps his hands]
Child host: "All the Jews? All of them?"
Girl: "Yes."
Child host: "Good."

I once made a video about how the mascot/hosts of this show all seemed to die horrible deaths at the hand of the evil Zionists.

I'm surprised Nahul hasn't bit the dust yet. Must be the blockade - tough to get new costumes.

This unity agreement is sure improving peace prospects, isn't it?

05/05 Links Pt1: Israel's Indomitable spirit; Hamas: Do Not Believe Abbas, We Want Jihad

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: Indomitable spirit

Remembrance Day for the Fallen of Israel’s Wars and Victims of Terrorism began on Sunday at sundown and ends at sundown Monday. During these 24 hours, we pay tribute to the 23,169 casualties of war and terrorism who have fallen since 1860, the year marked as the advent of the modern Jewish Yishuv or settlement in the Land of Israel.
In truth, 1860 is an arbitrary date. The Jewish people’s yearning to return to its historic homeland extends far back in history to 70 CE, the time of the destruction of the Second Temple. And the Jewish people’s prayers and hopes for an end to exile stored up over nearly two millennia gave it unique strength.
When asked how the fledgling Jewish state, born into a state of war, managed to overcome the combined armies of the Arab states, Yigael Yadin, one of the founding fathers of the IDF, pointed to the Jewish people’s pent up desire for a state of its own where it could live in freedom and independence. Yadin likened the Jews’ longing to a “spring compressed... to the utmost of its compressibility” over thousands of years of exile, which “when finally released, it liberated.”

Khaled Abu Toameh: Hamas: Do Not Believe Abbas; We Want Jihad

Abbas's words might sound heart-warming to Westerners, but they must bear in mind that he is not a Hamas spokesman. Above all, the world needs to pay attention to what Hamas itself is saying.
Abbas knows that Hamas has not changed and will not change. Abbas is seeking to avoid a suspension of U.S. and European financial aid and potential Israeli economic sanctions. Abbas is now waiting to see if the Americans, Europeans and Israelis will buy his claim that the unity government will recognize Israel and reject violence. If they do, he will take credit for ensuring continued financial aid not only to the Palestinian Authority, but also to Hamas. If they do not, Abbas will be forced temporarily to suspend the deal with Hamas to avoid losing the aid.
Hamas signed the deal because it sees it and an opportunity to restore its relations with Egypt and other Arab countries, and to benefit from the Western financial aid that is provided to the Palestinian Authority.

Netanyahu: The Jews would be massacred like our neighbors in Syria without the IDF

Netanyahu cited the deaths of tens of thousands in Syria, as a possible fate of the Jews, without the existence of the state of Israel and the IDF.
"A few kilometers north of Jerusalem a massacre is occurring that has killed tens of thousands that do not have the power to defend themselves. Who would doubt that that would be our fate without the IDF. The IDF is the only thing that separates us from the massacres that our people knew in the past," he said.
"Israel can defend itself against any threat, but this security is gained by the loss of our sons and daughters," he said.
He said the sacrifices of the fallen make life possible in Israel.

Yom Haatzmaut 2014: 66 Israeli Heroes Share a Powerful Message
Powerful Youtube from Nefesh B'Nefesh with the message, Am Yisrael Chai!

Hanan Ashrawi proves her hypocrisy again

Over the weekend, Binyamin Netanyahu proposed a new Basic Law for Israel:

Israel already has Basic Laws that give adequate expression to the country’s democratic nature, and now needs one that articulates its Jewish character, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Sunday, explaining his decision to promote a Basic Law defining Israel as a Jewish state.

Speaking at the weekly cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said that the law he will promote will define the national rights of the Jewish people to the State of Israel, and that it will do so “without infringing on the individual rights of any Israeli citizen.”

Hanan Ashrawi, who heads an organization that had no problem pushing a blood libel against Jews until its European donors complained, is accusing Israel of "racism:"

This proposal is in itself a reflection of the behavior of racial discrimination practiced by Israel against our people, and rooted set of racist laws that prescribed by the Israeli Knesset, which is the headquarters of the only legislation in the world that recognizes the laws and regulations that are contrary to the laws of humanity and the international principles that deny racism."

Really? A Basic Law that emphasizes the nation's national character is racist?

Then why does the Basic Law of "Palestine" hammer away at the Arabness of Palestinians?

The continuous attachment of the Arab Palestinian people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact that has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence, issued by the Palestine National Council....

the right to establish an independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as a capital, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole, legitimate representative of the Arab Palestinian people wherever they exist.

...Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation. Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve.

This Basic Law takes great pains to define the "Palestinian people" as Arab, and specifically discusses the "Arab Palestinian people" multiple times.

Why?

The answer is obvious. They want to ensure that Jewish Palestinian people do not have any national rights!

As noted many times previously, before 1948 the word "Palestinian" rarely referred to the Arabs of Palestine, and nearly always referred to the Jews who lived in Palestine. You know...Zionists.

The PLO's charter, written in 1964 and modified in 1968 (to include the West Bank and Gaza among its national boundaries,) also spoke about "Palestinian Arab people" and not just "Palestinians." In those days it was still rare to speak of "Palestinians" as meaning only Arabs.

Hence, these foundational documents of the PLO and "Palestine" take great pains to define "Palestinian" as being only Arab - to the exclusion of Jews, the only non-Arab people who ever called themselves "Palestinian."

When they say, over and over again, "Palestinian Arabs," they mean "Non-Jewish Palestinians."

Is that not racist?

Not only that, but these "Basic Laws" not only deal with the national character of a Palestine in the territories, but they aim at defining the character of Israel as well, by insisting on the "right of return" not to their supposed state of Palestine but to Israel itself!

So the Basic Laws of Palestine are both racist - according to Hanan Ashrawi's own definition - and they are also aggressive against the state that they pretend to the West that they want to live in peace with.

Hamas reiterates that it will never recognize Israel and it will maintain Qassam Brigades

From Ma'an:

Hamas will never recognize Israel and will not accept the conditions laid out by the Middle East peacemaking Quartet, according to the Islamist movement's deputy leader.

Speaking late on Saturday, Mussa Abu Marzouq said Hamas, which recently signed a reconciliation deal with the Western-backed leadership in the occupied West Bank, would never agree to recognize Israel.

"We will not recognize the Zionist entity," he said at a press conference in Gaza City.

Recognizing Israel is one of the key conditions laid out in the 2003 peacemaking roadmap of the Middle East Quartet, which brings together the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia.

The other two key demands are a renunciation of violence and acceptance of all prior agreements with Israel.

Abbas, who is to head the new government, to consist of political independents, has insisted it will abide by all three principles.

But Abu Marzouq said Hamas would never accept the Quartet's conditions.

He also said the question of disarming Hamas's armed wing, al-Qassam Brigades, was "never mentioned" in talks with the PLO since the unity deal was inked on April 23.

"No one asked to discuss this," he said.

On Saturday, Abu Marzouk and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh visited the houses of the families of terrorist leaders who have been killed by Israel - including Fatah leaders.

Al Monitor has more details on how insistent Hamas is to keep its own, separate terror wing that will not answer to Fatah:

One factor complicating matters, Al-Monitor learned from the Ministry of Finance in the Gaza Strip, is that some 25,000 employees in the Hamas government work in the security services, and most of them belong to the Qassam Brigades. According to one Qassam military official, after the formation of the next government, these employees will take orders from the brigade's military leadership, not their current manager at the Ministry of Interior.

A Hamas leader who spoke on condition of anonymity dismissed all talk of dissolving the brigades. He told Al-Monitor, “This talk doesn’t deserve a response. The Qassam Brigades were created before the PA was established and has its own independent policy in dealing with Israel, away from any tutelage by anyone, including the next government.”

This is apparently what "reconciliation" means.

No one is noting that Fatah also maintains its own terror wings that it refuses to dismantle.

Al Monitor also had an important piece last week that described exactly what Hamas wanted to get out of "unity" - and it sure isn't peace:

Abbas has seemingly made a concession about Hamas’ participation in the PLO and its institutions. This had long been an obstacle to the implementation of all the previous agreements, which prompted Hamas to waive the participation of any of its members or close associates in the next — likely technocrat — government.

The Hamas source said, “The reconciliation agreement cannot succeed without the activation of the PLO and Hamas' participation in it. This is a clear and explicit condition to Hamas, and this is what was signed in previous agreements and emphasized in the latest agreement.”

The PA government is not independent; it reports to the PLO. Hamas' goal is to take over the PLO and thereby taking over the entire Palestinian Arab government eventually. This move is not nearly as much a loss for Hamas as it is being represented, because people forget this crucial fact. (It is the PLO that is recognized as the "State of Palestine" by the UN, not the sort-of democratically elected PA.)

The West keeps thinking that the PA's elections, presided over by Jimmy Carter, were meaningful. Dazzled by this fake display of democracy, they forget that the PA has no independence.

Musings on political correctness and Israel

On Sunday morning, I heard an thoroughly offensive and very misogynist song on the radio.

The singer was threatening, explicitly, to murder his girlfriend if she would be with another man. The women was referred to as nothing more than an object, one without a name, only to be disparagingly called "little girl." If caught with another man, the singer declares, that would be the end of her life. More than once the singer declares that he would rather see her dead.

The disk jockey didn't think that there was anything wrong with playing this song. No comment was made about these sickening lyrics.

What was this misogynist, hateful song?

It was "Run for your Life" by the Beatles.

In an age of extreme political correctness - where a person can be forced out of his job because of a donation he gave to an anti-gay marriage group several years previously - how can such a song be played on the radio today? Why is John Lennon's reputation clean when others who have said far less offensive things, not nearly as publicly, been viciously attacked and often lost their jobs and reputations? (A single radio station in Ottawa banned it in the early 1990s. That's it.)

What are the lines for political correctness?

It obviously has nothing to do with the offense itself - threatening to kill your significant other is certainly no more acceptable than racism is, and if, say, a basketball coach is taped threatening to kill his wife he would likely be fired.

So why is Lennon not vilified? Why is a song threatening murder getting played today?

If we are honest, the reason is because people like the Beatles. When you admire someone, you are willing to let them off the hook. You give them slack, You accept excuses for them (the 1960s were a different time, Lennon really didn't like the song, no one takes it literally....)

People feel they have a special relationship with the Beatles and John Lennon. If a brand new band (outside hip-hop, where misogyny is often considered mandatory) tried to sell such a song today they would be the object of anguished op-eds and boycotts, but people don't want to slam those they already admire.

The people who lose their jobs because of political correctness are often not well known to the public. The first that anyone has heard of them is them crossing the PC line. If they were known ahead of time as human beings, with families that they love and volunteer work they do and charities they support, the damage would be limited.

In other words, a prerequisite to demonizing people is to ensure that they are not seen as three dimensional human beings.

The Israel-haters are obviously not motivated by morality or fair play. They use the same weapons against Israelis that are used against the poor souls who are victimized by the self-righteous PC crowd.

This is why the haters are so incensed when Israel is shown in three dimensions. The bizarre logic behind the "pinkwashing" and other charges is that if Israelis are seen as sympathetic human beings, it is much more difficult for the mud to stick. So whenever Israelis do something admirable it must be silenced, using whatever methods are available.

Context is the enemy. Truth is the enemy. Anything that shows that single-minded demonization of the Jewish state is inaccurate must be blasted and belittled.

The irony, of course, is that the haters are acting exactly the same way bigots and racists have acted throughout history - dehumanizing their enemies - in an attempt to brand Israelis as bigots and racists.

Israelis have a very simple request for those who could be swayed by the haters' arguments: come and visit, speak to them, let them speak on college campuses, get to know them, listen to their side of the story. The haters, naturally, work overtime to ensure that any Israelis who could be seen as human beings be excluded from all discussion - they will do everything possible to silence them (all while they claim that their own freedom of speech is somehow being violated.)

The methods of Israel haters and those of the politically correct crowd are very similar. The way to blunt their effects in both cases is simply to provide context and allow people to see both sides of the story.

And this is what the haters are afraid of most of all.

Some of the anti-Israel speeches at the UN last week

Every month, the UN Security Council convenes for an exercise in bashing Israel. Here are what some of the delegates said at April's session last week

ZEID RA’AD ZEID AL-HUSSEIN (Jordan) said that incursions by right-wing extremists into Al-Haram al-Sharif/Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, which spiked during religious holidays and other occasions, threatened peace and security in the region and beyond. He recalled that during a recent meeting with a past Council President, a delegation of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation had outlined the essential features of the broader violations on the part of the Israeli authorities, including a blatant disregard for the decisions adopted by the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The mosque compound, together with the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, had been under Jordanian custodianship and protection since 1924, he emphasized. East Jerusalem was occupied territory under international law, and Israel, as the occupying Power, was obliged under the 1907 Hague regulations to treat religious institutions as private property, even when it was State-owned. Unless threats to the compound ceased, such provocations would engender a massive crisis with the Muslim world, and even parts of the Christian world, while jeopardizing the region’s security, he warned. The incitements must therefore end, for it would be the one crisis to overwhelm all crises in a region that could ill afford yet another.

Given that Jordan didn't exist in 1924, that is a neat trick.

CAROLINE ZIADE (Lebanon) condemned Israel, saying that its practices in Jerusalem were only part of a wider scheme to create new realities on the ground and make a two-State solution more difficult to attain.

MOOTAZ AHMADEIN KHALIL (Egypt), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, the Arab Group and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, urged Israel to review its decision to suspend its participation in the negotiations and impose additional sanctions on the Palestinians, saying its actions contravened Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, as well as international law and prior accords reached with the Palestinians and the United States mediator. He condemned restrictions on Palestinian Christians as an attempt to force the status quo on holy sites, emphasizing that Israel must end such action.

Mr. AL-ABDALLAH (Saudi Arabia), associating himself with the League of Arab States, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Non-Aligned Movement, said that Israel’s settlement policies, flouting of holy sites and apartheid practices contravened international law. He strongly condemned provocations at holy sites, which prevented people from reaching Al-Aqsa Mosque, as well as all attempts to change the historic or religious nature of such sites. Welcoming the State of Palestine’s accession to various treaties and conventions, as well as the recent Palestinian reconciliation efforts, he recalled that Israel’s Foreign Minister had called for ethnic cleansing, while his fellow Cabinet members had cast doubt on a two-State solution. Israel was hiding behind a pretext of wanting agreement among Palestinian factions, while it had no interest in such a settlement, he said.

GHOLAMHOSSEIN DEHGHANI (Iran), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that despite the clarity of international law, including demands made by the Security Council, little progress had been made towards a just and peaceful solution to the question of Palestine. That failure undermined the rule of law, compounding the conflict and human suffering. He urged the Council to uphold its Charter responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and to contribute tangibly to a settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. As a result of the illegal policies pursued by Israel against the Palestinian people, their land and holy sites, tensions had risen and there remained a vast gap between hope and expectations for the political process and the reality on the ground, he said. Rather than negotiating in good faith and abiding by its legal obligations, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel had intensified all its illegal activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including, by continuing and escalating its settlement construction, confiscation of land and forced displacement of Palestinian civilians.

Turning to the increasing acts of aggression in occupied East Jerusalem resulting from provocations by Israeli extremists, he said Israeli Government officials continued to “recklessly fuel” tensions by encouraging the extremists to carry out acts of provocation which threatened to ignite a religious conflict, with far-reaching consequences for the region and beyond. The Non-Aligned Movement was also gravely concerned about the continuing illegal Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip, which had resulted in severe hardship for Palestinians. If Israel persisted in its contempt for the law, the international community must act to uphold the law and to ensure accountability, he stressed.

Speaking in his national capacity, he challenged accusations levelled by Israel against his country during the debate, saying they distracted attention from the matter before the Council.

AHMED FATHALLA, Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States, said the League had worked to establish a genuine vision for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and endeavoured to find a fair solution in efforts to complement Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. However, Israel continued its occupation of the Golan Heights and to ignore United Nations resolutions over the years. It was therefore important that the Council tackle Israel’s aims on the ground, including its settlement plans, which it had been carrying out with peace negotiations under way. Israel seemed to be seeking a strategy to end the negations, as demonstrated after the recent Palestinian reconciliation, he noted, emphasizing that Palestinian unity was an important component of a Palestinian State and of a two-State solution. The success of national reconciliation would be the only way to ensure the unity and integrity of Palestinian territory, he said, stressing the importance of recognizing that instead of using it as an excuse to leave the negotiations.

There was also a need to change methodology and end the occupation, he continued, emphasizing that the Security Council’s limited action had previously been disappointing to the League. Furthermore, it was necessary to condemn Israel’s seizing of territory and natural resources in the Golan Heights, he said, calling for international law to be upheld in that regard.

Algerian "expert" warns that Jewish pilgrims to Tunisia are really spies

Algerian newspaper El Bilad is alarmed at the annual influx of Jews on pilgrimage to the synagogue in Djerba, Tunisia. It claims that many of the pilgrims are in reality Israeli spies intent on fomenting problems in the Arab world, and who were responsible for the "Arab spring."

The paper quotes "an expert in security affairs," Bin Omer bin Janneh, as saying that Algeria has the means to detect the Zionist schemes, either through their embassies or through their intelligence, which has allowed them to frustrate Zionist schemes in the past. He said that "the Zionist entity" is known to be looking for opportunities to hit the stability of Algeria, and is still waiting for the opportunity to prejudice the security of Algeria, which represents the state most firmly supportive of the Palestinian cause and against Jewish settlement "in all its forms."

He added that Tunisia has the absolute freedom on their territory, but they must take wary of any attempts against its stability, especially with the emergence of jihadi groups, and movements that recruit young Tunisian to fight. Presumably, he is claiming that these jihadi groups are Zionist.

While the government of Tunisia has been very supportive of the pilgrimage in an attempt to jump-start its tourism sector, there has been opposition there are well.

Assabeel reports that Jordan's Ministry of Education decided to withdraw an antisemitic book from the school curriculum and school libraries and schools.

The book's name is "The Jews: No Covenants and No Treaties," which appears to push the Islamic claim that Jews cannot be trusted to keep their word.

A member of the teachers union and former MP Basel Al-Harub criticized the withdrawal of the Jew-hating book. He told the newspaper that that the the book reveals the truth about the Jews, and exposes how the Jews forge treaties and covenants, and its being dropped will result in current schoolchildren being unaware of "the true face of the enemy occupiers. " He added that "discussion about the Jews is not inconsistent with the philosophy of the Ministry of Education." He points out that the third article of the Law on Education stresses "intellectual adherence to the Arab identity of Palestine and all parts usurped the Arab world and work to recover [the lands.]"

Presumably he is not referring only to lands Israel controlled since 1967.

At the FB page of the Jordan Teachers Association a number of teachers are complaining about this. One says that normalization and coexistence with the Jews is "this is contrary to religion and the Koran."

I am not aware if this decision was prompted by any Israeli or Jewish complaints about the book.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Israel haters really frightened by my posters

Some Facebook idiot tried to refute one of my many posters proving that Israel isn't an "apartheid state" by creating this:

'
Unfortunately, as Israellycool points out,

Amy Kleinhans was crowned Miss South Africa in 1992, the year following the repeal of South Africa’s apartheid laws. It was the official end of apartheid that paved the way for her participation to begin with.

So the Amy Kleinhans poster actually reinforces the point about the Israel-Apartheid comparison being erroneous.

Who feels like a dipsh*t now?

This is not the first time that Israel haters tried, hilariously, to counter my poster series.

It is clear that my posters are causing panic among the hate-Israel crowd, because these posters convincingly destroy the myth that they have been carefully nurturing over the years.

The posters page is by far the most popular thing I've ever published. They have been viewed over 110,000 times on my site directly and many, many more times from people who have recopied them to Facebook, Twitter and even showing them on college campuses. Just this past week, years after I started the series, more than 2000 people visited that page.

The haters are more frightened of the truth than they are of Israel itself.

(Most of my other posters can be found here.)

05/04 Links: PM: ‘We would not be here without their sacrifice’; Israeli Co. 'Reinvents the Wheel'

From Ian:

PM: ‘We would not be here without their sacrifice’

Israelis began to mark Memorial Day on Sunday afternoon, commemorating 23,169 fallen soldiers and 2,495 terror victims who fell throughout the history of the State of Israel and the Zionist movement. Commemoration ceremonies will continue throughout the country until Monday night, when Memorial Day ends abruptly with the start of celebrations marking Independence Day.
The first official event began at 4 p.m. Sunday at Yad LaBanim, or “Memorial for the Sons,” in Jerusalem. The event was attended by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose brother Yoni fell during the IDF’s rescue of Jewish hostages in Entebbe, Uganda, in July 1976. It was also attended by other families of the fallen, Israel’s chief rabbis, Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein, Supreme Court Chief Justice Asher Grunis, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat and other top officials.
“On this day, the nation adopts us and unites with us, and with the heroes of the nation,” Netanyahu said, speaking for the families of the fallen. “They came from all parts of the country, from all segments of Israeli society, and the simple and most concise truth is this: We would not be here if not for their sacrifice. We would not be here without their readiness to give their lives so we could be here. This right, this sacrifice, the ability to risk their lives in the face of the horrors of war — all this was not available to us before the founding of Israel.”

Danny Danon: ‘Every Man Has a Name’

Living among us today are thousands of people who have been named for a father, an uncle or another hero of Israel they will never meet. When I was born, I was honored to be named in memory of one of these thousands of heroes and therefore became part of a living legacy that walks among us to remind our society of those who fell defending our country.
I was named in memory of Danny Vardon, my father’s commander in the Negev reconnaissance unit.
Throughout my childhood I tried to learn as much as I could about this man, who to me was legendary.

Danny Ayalon: In Memory

In Israel, Memorial Day and Independence Day go hand in hand, showing how we cannot celebrate our independence without commemorating those who Alterman titled “The silver platter on which the Jewish state was given.” That duality of sorrow and happiness will be shown across the country, as groups of young, and not so young men, visit their fallen comrades’ families. They will come to lessen the mother’s sorrow, but she will end up comforting them. They will come in tears after visiting his grave, but will leave with smiles as even after all these years, his squad mates show up like clockwork, never missing even once.
Isaiah wrote “They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.” The sages teach that there were hundreds of prophets, but only those that carried a message for prosperity were recorded in the Bible. We must heed Isaiah’s prophecy, yearning for the day when peace will come with our neighbors, and we will not train for war anymore. But until that day, we mark and commemorate those who have given their last full measure of devotion, adhering to what King David wrote in Psalms: “Behold the Guardian of Israel will neither slumber nor sleep”.

Stand With Us: Defaming the IDF on Remembrance Day

This year, as Israelis pay tribute to their servicemen and women, a very different event will be taking place on Independence Day in London. Yachad – the British version of lobby group J-Street – together with the New Israel Fund, will be hosting “Breaking the Silence”, a notorious anti-IDF group. No one serious would suggest that Israel is beyond criticism but this is strange yet deliberate timing. Should we surmise that if Israel-bashing is a year-round sport, why should this night be different from any other?
If past experience is anything to go by, the audience will be treated to a flurry of half-truths and accusations aimed solely at blackening the name of Israeli soldiers. Indeed, “Breaking the Silence” has made its name by promoting a distorted and unfair portrayal of the IDF via its website and tours.

When Barack Obama snubbed the Knesset, and Jews who live where he does not want them to live, during his last visit to Israel, he claimed that Israelis needed to learn to see things through "their eyes." The implication, of course, was that the Jews of the Middle East are lacking the requisite compassion to gain peace for themselves and their children.

I would argue something rather different.

I would suggest that the so-called "Palestinian narrative" of pristine victim-hood has made remarkable advances into Jewish minds, particularly progressive-left diaspora Jewish minds. The problem is not that the Jews are lacking in empathy, as Obama shamefully implied, but quite the opposite. Diaspora Jews, as a group, tend to be so painfully empathetic that we cannot really bring ourselves to take our own side in a fight. This explains the fact that Israeli Jews tend to be more "conservative" while diaspora Jews tend to be more "progressive." Israeli Jews are under siege and diaspora Jews, with the growing exception of European Jews, are not. Thus Israeli Jews are tougher and diaspora Jews are softer on security issues viz-a-viz Israel.

The process through which the Palestinian colonization of the Jewish mind accomplished itself found its primary vehicles in the final quarter of the twentieth-century with the rise of post-structural and neo-colonial theories within the western academe. The former trend, following scholars such as Michelle Foucault, suggested that knowledge is subjective and represents political imperatives that bolster systems of power. This laid intellectual foundation for anti-Zionist Jews, such as Ilan Pappé , who famously claimed:

Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

The latter discipline, neo-colonial theory, as it bubbled onto the popular level with much help from Columbia University professor, Edward Said, represents a popular and snapping critique which divides the world into malicious imperialistic white people and their innocent victims of color. Given that the ruling elite within Israel tended, since its founding, to be "white" Ashkenazi Jews of eastern European descent it became very easy for the enemies of Jewish sovereignty, influenced by post-structuralist and neo-colonial theories, to jam the Israeli round peg into their ideological square hole.

In this way they simply ignored the fact that about half of Israelis are "people of color" and they did so - and do so - because portraying Israelis as white imperialist colonialist murderers fits preconceived political agendas that bare remarkable resemblance to western religious notions of Good versus Evil, with the Palestinian Arabs representing the Good and the White Imperialist Colonialist and Racist Jews representing Evil. This is not so far removed from medieval European conceptions of transcendent Jewish malice as we would generally prefer to think.

These broad popular and academic inclinations, over decades now, have had their effect on the way that westerners, and western Jews, view the ongoing Arab-Muslim war against us in the Middle East. The effect has been to entirely ignore the long history of Jewish people in Judaea and Samaria - the Jewish homeland - which they insist upon calling "West Bank," a twentieth century Jordanian term designed specifically to erase Jewish history. The very notion of "West Bank" is an erasure of Jewish heritage and therefore some of us wonder why it is that the great majority of western Jews use terminology that erases their own heritage?

One answer to that question goes under the moniker "Oslo Syndrome." Harvard University professor of psychology, Kenneth Levin, in The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege, suggests that, much like battered children who promise to be "better" in order to make the beatings stop, the Jewish minority has tended over many centuries to hope for relief by endeavoring to appease our persecutors through adopting their ways of thinking. This represents a particularly Jewish version of Stockholm Syndrome wherein the victim adopts her persecutors ways of thinking as a psychological defense mechanism. Whatever the validity of this notion, there is small question but that the tendency among diaspora Jewish progressives is to lay the great majority of the fault for Arab aggression against their fellow Jews at the feet of Jewish victims of that aggression.

This tendency of pro-Israel diaspora Jews to incorporate the "Palestinian narrative" into their intrinsic understanding of the conflict, along with the imperatives of domestic partisan politics pitting Democrats against Republicans in the United States, has inclined many of them to think of Israel's friends as enemies and some of its enemies as friends. Evangelical Christians, for example, are widely perceived among western diaspora Jews as representing a political enemy, despite the fact that the Evangelicals have long been a great friend to the Jewish state of Israel. Meanwhile some progressive-left diaspora Jews think that "BDS," the movement to bitch-slap, denigrate, and silence supporters of Israel, is actually a positive thing because Israel allegedly requires "tough love" and that they must "save Israel from itself" by imposing their will upon it.

The "Palestinian narrative," embraced by much of the western left, infuses our understanding of the conflict. The presumption, even among Jewish supporters of Israel, is that the Jews of the Middle East are guilty of horrific crimes against the "indigenous" population. There are about 6 million Jews in the Middle East and about 400 million Arabs, which means that there are somewhere between 60 to 70 Arabs for every individual Jew, yet, somehow, the tiny minority of Jews are said to be the oppressors who not only persecute the local Arabs, but who spread war throughout the region. Progressive-Left Jews who embrace the "Palestinian narrative" see Jewish self-defense as a form of aggression. They therefore blame Jewish "aggression" for Palestinian-Arab "self-defense" in the form of suicide bombings and general terrorism; a notion that they spread throughout the west, more generally.

This is a terrific mistake.

Michael Lumish writes for the Israel Thrives blog as well as Times of Israel and Jews Down Under,

Analyses of the US blaming Israel for failure of talks

Yesterday, as mentioned in the linkdump, it was reported that unnamed US officials involved in the negotiations squarely blamed Israel for the bulk of their failure.

Detailing how the US sought to solve disputes over the core issues of a two-state solution, Barnea wrote on Friday that, “Using advanced software, the Americans drew a border outline in the West Bank that gives Israel sovereignty over some 80 percent of the settlers that live there today. The remaining 20 percent were meant to evacuate. In Jerusalem, the proposed border is based on Bill Clinton’s plan — Jewish neighborhoods to Israel, Arab neighborhoods to the Palestinians.”

He quoted the Americans saying that while the Israeli government made no response to the American plan, and also failed to draw its own border outline, Abbas agreed to the US-suggested border outline.

The Americans said they had intended to begin the nine-month negotiating period with an Israeli announcement of a settlement freeze. But this proved impossible, an American official was quoted saying, “because of the current makeup of the Israeli government, so we gave up… We didn’t realize [that] continuing construction allowed ministers in [Netanyahu's] government to very effectively sabotage the success of the talks. There are a lot of reasons for the peace effort’s failure, but people in Israel shouldn’t ignore the bitter truth: the primary sabotage came from the settlements. The Palestinians don’t believe that Israel really intends to let them found a state when, at the same time, it is building settlements on the territory meant for that state. We’re talking about the announcement of 14,000 housing units, no less. Only now, after talks blew up, did we learn that this is also about expropriating land on a large scale. That does not reconcile with the agreement.

One bitter American official told Barnea, “I guess we need another intifada to create the circumstances that would allow progress.”

A third intifada, the Americans made clear, “would be a tragedy. The Jewish people are supposed to be smart; it is true that they’re also considered a stubborn nation. You’re supposed to know how to read the map: In the 21st century, the world will not keep tolerating the Israeli occupation. The occupation threatens Israel’s status in the world and threatens Israel as a Jewish state.”

Pressed by Barnea on perceived international hypocrisy over Israel’s presence in the West Bank, when the world “closes its eyes to China’s takeover of Tibet, it stutters at what Russia’s doing to Ukraine,” the Americans were quoted as responding: ”Israel is not China. It was founded by a UN resolution. Its prosperity depends on the way it is viewed by the international community.”

The final straw for Abbas was the late March announcement by Uri Ariel’s Housing and Construction Ministry of building tenders for more than 700 housing units in Jerusalem’s Gilo neighborhood. At that point, the Americans told Barnea, Abbas “lost interest. He turned to the reconciliation talks with Hamas and to the question of who would inherit his mantle.”

Fresno Zionism takes the accusations apart:

The officials’ account is riddled with inconsistencies — for example, they claim that the last straw, the final blow that caused Abbas to abandon negotiations was the announcement that Israel intended to build in the Gilo neighborhood of Jerusalem:

Abbas lost interest. He turned to the reconciliation talks with Hamas and to the question of who would inherit his mantle. According to the Americans, this is the reason for his recently launched public front against Mohammed Dahlan.

The Americans understood from their Israeli counterparts that the Gilo tenders announcement was an intentional act of sabotage, one of many, by Housing Minister Uri Ariel, an extremist who opposes any agreement with the Palestinians.

But earlier they said that Abbas agreed to the Clinton parameters regarding Jerusalem: Jewish neighborhoods would be in Israel, Arab neighborhoods would become part of Palestine (never mind that this might be a terrible idea). What is Gilo if not a Jewish neighborhood? And they fail to mention that prior to this announcement, Abbas violated his commitment not to seek statehood through the UN, and applied to join various UN treaties and conventions. So how could this have been the ‘last straw’?

Israel is not China. It was founded by a UN resolution. Its prosperity depends on the way it is viewed by the international community.

This is a remarkably ignorant statement. The Jewish nation is actually a lot like China, going back thousands of years, always with a presence in and a connection to the land of Israel. Created by a UN resolution? Do they mean the non-binding and never implemented 181? The modern state of Israel was created by the struggle and blood of the Jewish people who threw out the British colonialists and defended themselves against the genocidal Arabs, who quite literally subscribed to Nazi doctrine.

Excuse me, these are the diplomats who represent the US? Or just a pair of idiots?

Alex Joffe, in TOI, notes:

One of the more remarkable statements from Barnea’s interlocutor shows just how little understanding there is regarding “settlements” as an Israeli political issue. “We didn’t realize continuing construction allowed ministers in his government to very effectively sabotage the success of the talks.”

Since the 1980s there has been a predictable manner in which low and mid level Israeli committees embarrass prime ministers engaged in peace negotiations with announcements of construction tenders, some for projects far in the future. This is a major Israeli political problem, but reasonably informed American observers should at least be aware of it.

Amazingly, the Americans appear not to have been. Instead, they reacted with outrage, which is more foolish than simply being surprised and disappointed, since it rewards the Israeli right wing. It also betrays just how ill-informed American diplomats appear to be about the convoluted, if not demented, nature of Israeli politics and bureaucracy. Allowing Abbas to collapse the talks because of housing tenders issued for Gilo – a Jerusalem neighborhood that no reasonable observer could possibly expect to be evacuated – is doubly so.

Dr. Aaron Lerner adds:

Once again, the Americans are pathetically clueless, relying on the words of encouragement from their lefty Israeli friends rather than actually appreciating what the country really thinks. They thought they would hurt Netanyahu with this piece when the opposite is the case.

And now to the real puzzle: If they actually believe that the Palestinians "will get a State for themselves in the end" then why all the fuss?

After all, according to the narrative these folks subscribe to, once the Palestinians have a state of their own we will enjoy Utopian Peace. [Only someone who thought there would be Utopian Peace would think that a deal that completely removes the IDF from the scene within 60 months is a deal that promises Israel security].

The intervew seems to reveal far more about American cluelessness than about Israeli intransigence.

(h/t Bob Knot)

Al Arabiya (Arabic) reports:

Assistant Iranian President for Nationalities and Religious Minorities, Yonsei Ali, called to fight "Salafists and al-Qaeda and Zionism" which he called extremist ideas in a speech on Friday evening during a visit to a synagogue in Shiraz, southern Iran.

During his speech to the Iranian Jews, Yonsei strongly criticized religious extremist tendencies in the world, and considered them a threat to international peace.

He said: While there may be relatively few members of al Qaeda and Salafist Islam and the Zionist Jews and pro-Christian extremists, they pose a threat to international peace, and everyone must address them."

It appears that Ali visited a church as well.

No official word on what would have happened to any of the honored Jews if they would have publicly disagreed with him about Zionism.

Oh, by the way, a Long Island mosque funded Al Qaeda

Ujaama

Which is bigger news: that a mosque on Long Island funded a terror group, or that a Brooklyn mosque didn't?

The New York Daily News decided the latter:

When a Seattle man working in London with hate preacher Abu Hamza al-Masri flew to New York to raise money for jihad fighters in Afghanistan, a Brooklyn mosque told him to get lost, he testified.

Witness James Ujaama said a Long Island mosque chipped in to help Abu Hamza’s Supporters of Sharia group. “What was the reaction you received from the mosque in Brooklyn?” a prosecutor asked Thursday. “Not very supportive,” Ujaama said.

Abu Hamza, 56, is charged with aiding Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

I haven't been following the case, but I don't see anything else about any Long Island mosque funding terrorists (although there have been terrorists that attended at least one mosque on Long Island.)

It appears that political correctness forces the media to emphasize when American Muslims don't support terror, and all but ignore when they do. This is pandering and ultimately an insult not only to the general readership but to US Muslims as well, as it implies that Muslims who say no to terror are somehow praiseworthy while those who support terror are the norm.

Meanwhile, shouldn't people know the name of this Long Island mosque whose members happily fork over money to terrorists?