Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, August 01, 2014

Weekly round-up

July saw the highest readership at EoZ by far - over double my average number of hits. And things keep increasing; these past seven days were also a record with over 125,000 hits to my webpage alone (including RSS feeds, emails and the like, perhaps double that number.)

The most popular posts were the ones that tore off the mask of journalists covering the war: the Spanish journalist who admitted that reporters in Gaza were under threat, the Italian journalist who said that the massacre at the Shati camp was from Hamas, and the videos of reporters being scared by nearby rocket fire.

Here's another one where a reporter admits that rockets are fired from the Shifa hospital parking lot.

The posts I liked most were:

And these are only a selection of the 60 stories I posted this week!

Thank G-d for Shabbat! I would be completely burned out if I didn't take off one day a week.

I need to thank again those who donated to the blog and who paid for the e-book of my major stories from the first three weeks of the war. You guys are the best.

08/01 Links Pt2: Goebbels on the BBC; Beinart's The ‘Myths’ Of Gaza; Obama's Gaza Game

From Ian:

Sarah Honig: Another tack: Goebbels on the BBC

Imagine Josef Goebbels invited to speak his mind on the BBC, smack dab during the Battle of Britain and the blitz. Sound absurd? Sure, but only in the context of normal nations. No sane Briton would have tolerated the notion of the BBC broadcasting German propaganda to Londoners as they ran for shelter from German bombs.
Abetting Nazi belligerence would have been a nonstarter even under the guise of a detached reporter’s interview, part of an evenhanded approach, a sporting consideration for the aggressor’s point of view.
But not so in Israel. Here we operate in an alternative universe. Nothing that would be unthinkable anywhere else is out of bounds for our broadcasters.

The ‘Myths’ Of Gaza

In Haaretz, Peter Beinart imparts readers with some hard truths about the recent history of Gaza. “Much of what we’ve been told about Israel’s ‘withdrawal’ from Gaza,” he contends, is simply not true. The mythology created by Jewish-American leaders, he writes, builds a narrative that does does little more but rationalize Israel’s “wrong” war.
Now, there are a number of problems with Beinart’s predictably distorted version of this conflict’s history—which could use a thorough debunking—but the most obvious glitch is that most of the myths Beinart claims to dispel aren’t ever actually uttered by Jewish leaders, or anyone else, for that matter.
There are three distortions Beinart believes gullible Jewish American use to justify their “skepticism of a Palestinian state in the West Bank.”

Former UN official charged with anti-Semitism, now California academic, takes on Israel in Gaza

Richard Falk, the notorious former United Nations human rights official who was widely castigated for his anti-Semitic statements and aggressively anti-Israeli stance before finally leaving office in May, is at it again.
Falk, formerly the U.N. special rapporteur on the rights of the Palestinian people, is orchestrating a new manifesto accusing Israel of making war against “the people of Gaza as a whole,” calling on the U.N and “in particular the United States of America” to hold Israeli political leaders and military commanders accountable for war crimes, and demanding that the U.N. Security Council refer the entire situation in Palestine to the International Criminal Court.
The manifesto is signed by Falk, who is now at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and 124 other legal academics around the world, including a handful in the U.S. The most prominent signatory aside from Falk is John Dugard, a South African legal scholar who was also widely condemned for anti-Semitic findings as the U.N.’s human rights special rapporteur on Palestine — until Falk took his place.

Where does Hamas get the money for the tunnels and weapons? From you!

Here's a partial answer: from you.

I just updated a chart I did a couple of years ago: (Source of figures)

There are the top recipients of international aid, sorted by aid per capita.

The PA spends over half its budget on Gaza - even when they are not controlling Gaza. Which means that Hamas has money to buy weapons and build tunnels instead of helping Gazans and building infrastructure.

As we've seen, UNRWA projects and other international projects that were allowed to import cement recently are run by corrupt people who will ensure that some of the dual-use material ends up in Hamas' hands. But the tunnels were clearly being built when Israel allowed cement to be imported, as well as when Egypt did.

So, yes, our tax dollars - which pay the Palestinians more per capita than any country every single year - went a long way towards helping build the terror infrastructure Israel faces today.

Where are the experts in ballistics and urban warfare on TV?

One of the most striking omissions in the wall-to-wall coverage of Gaza is the complete absence, as far as I can tell, of any real military experts.

You would think that with all the talking heads on TV they could dig up someone who actually knows what it is like to be in an urban battlefield, or even in a war itself.

To most Westerners, the army is an abstract, monolithic entity and people are clueless about how the chain of command works, about any checks and balances, about realtime battlefield conditions and decisions, about the rules of engagement.

All we are seeing are videos and photos of dead children and wailing mothers.

To put it mildly, this is irresponsible. Especially because news organizations, by their very names, have access to real experts and not just two token loudmouths from either side who yell at each other.

Journalists are making assumptions about the situation, based on very incomplete information. The IDF, in the middle of a war, cannot explain in real time the reasons for its decisions. But it is not a bunch of rogue cells - it has rules, it has a command structure, it plans how to react to scenarios in as effective yet safe a way as possible.

How do I know? Because I'm one of the few people who read the responses the IDF gave to critics after the 2009 Gaza war that I reproduced here.. The same kinds of incidents, with the same kinds of horrific civilian deaths, are investigated and described. Mistakes are frankly admitted. But there is an entirely different dimension to the fighting that reporters who are a few miles away in their hotels, away from the action, cannot see for themselves unless they want to put themselves in extreme personal danger.

If you want to say that all those reports on all those incidents are a whitewash by the IDF, then there should still be no objection to the media including real experts on their panels about a war. Let the viewers see inside the heads of soldiers, not only victims.

That would be journalism.

If anyone knows any real experts in these areas that would be willing to talk to me on the record, I would love to ask them questions. I would love to ask about photos of damage and injuries and what weapons were most likely to cause it. I would love to ask about the fear that soldiers face in a new, unknown situation.

And a lot of people besides me would love to hear the answers.

08/01 Links Pt1: WSJ Ed for '68: Things Permitted to Other Nations Are Forbidden to the Jews

From Ian:

WSJ Republishes Op-Ed From 1968: ‘The Jews Are a Peculiar People: Things Permitted to Other Nations Are Forbidden to the Jews’

The Wall Street Journal on Thursday republished an Op-Ed, originally printed by the LA Times in 1968, by a non-Jewish winner of the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom who spoke of the condition and treatment of the Jewish people and their struggle to defend Israel.
Written after Israel’s victory in the 1967 War, what is striking is that the challenges faced by Jews and Israel then are almost the same as today.
"There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him. The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we did in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.
The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to American and the West in general.
I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us."

'Hamas wants Israel completely destroyed'

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the world's most prominent fighters against radical Islam, defends Israel's right to fight Hamas, says the West is refusing to recognize the danger of growing Muslim extremism • "Netanyahu should get a Nobel Peace Prize," she says.
Is there any point in negotiating with Hamas? With any Muslim movement?
"You can negotiate with fellow human beings with whom you have some kind of common ground. The assumption as we negotiate is that there is fair play. The problem with negotiating with Hamas is that they have a vision, a certain kind of utopia. And for that utopia to be realized, the State of Israel must be completely destroyed. Shariah law has to be established, ideally, all over the world. You can never trust a Jew, you can never trust a Christian. That is the utopia. Women have to behave a certain way, they have to be locked up, it is very totalitarian. You can negotiate until you are as blue in the face as the American flag, but it will never yield anything on the other side.
"Everyone was upset with [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu when he said that he would not negotiate before the other side said that they recognize the existence of the State of Israel. That is a basic demand. Without that it is pointless to go to the negotiations table. It is Negotiations 101."

JPost Editorial False causes

In Gaza recently, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said: “We love death like our enemies love life. We love martyrdom, the way in which [Hamas] leaders died.”
This is the sort of rhetoric favored by the likes of Boko Haram in Nigeria, the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. These are not organizations that can be negotiated with – unless of course one is willing to submit to a violently reactionary form of Islam. Perhaps when Hamas is defeated or severely weakened there can be talk of peace. But not before. No change in Israel policy short of the disappearance of the State of Israel will satisfy Hamas. And that is not going to happen.

Times of Israel Live Blog: PM tells Kerry ‘Hamas will pay’ as IDF hunts for soldier seized in Rafah during truce

IDF toll rises to 63, after 2 soldiers killed in same Rafah attack and 5 soldiers killed late Thursday; US-UN plan for 72-hour ceasefire and talks falls apart; Israel cabinet meeting Friday afternoon

IDF Blog: Live Updates: IDF Soldier Suspected Kidnapped by Hamas

Following ten days of Hamas attacks against Israel and after repeated rejections of offers to deescalate the situation, the IDF started a new phase of Operation Protective Edge. A large IDF force entered the Gaza Strip. Their mission is to target Hamas’ tunnels that cross under the Israel-Gaza border and enable terrorists to infiltrate Israel and carry out attacks. The IDF intends to impair Hamas’ capability to attack Israel.
Since the beginning of Operation Protective Edge more than 2,968 rockets have been fired from Gaza at Israel.
1:30 PM: This morning, on 9:30 AM, in violation of the latest ceasefire, Hamas terrorists, including a suicide attacker, fired at our forces in southern Gaza. We suspect that Hamas kidnapped 2nd. Lt. Hadar Goldin, an IDF officer, during the exchange of fire and dragged him into a tunnel. The IDF is currently conducting extensive searches in order to locate the missing soldier. During the event, 2 IDF soldiers were killed by Hamas fire.

The UN blames the US for helping Israelis defend themselves from terror

A few days ago, the humor site PreOccupied Territory (that has a weekly column here at EoZ) wrote this:

UN Slams Israel For Intercepting Rockets During Ceasefire

After Israel announced it will abide by the terms of a US-proposed halt to a three-week-old Israeli offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the United Nations Security Council denounced the Jewish State for nevertheless continuing to shoot down Hamas rockets aimed at Israeli communities.

The reality has caught up with the satire.

From Al Jazeera:

Navi Pillay, the UN human rights commissioner, on Thursday ...criticised the US, Israel's main ally, for failing to use its influence to halt the violence.

"They have not only provided the heavy weaponry which is now being used by Israel in Gaza, but they've also provided almost $1bn in providing the Iron Domes to protect Israelis from the rockets attacks," she said.

"No such protection has been provided to Gazans against the shelling."

Yes - the UN is blaming the US for providing purely defensive weapons to Israel, apparently because of a brand new international law she made up that all weapons must be provided to all sides of a conflict. No country may give military aid to any country without giving the exact same aid to its enemies. It's proportionality!

This is a new level of stupid even for the UN. And that's saying something.

But because Israel is the country being singled out for this idiocy, Pillay won't be pilloried.

Review of Hamas violations of international law (updated)

1. Hamas‘ rocket attacks directed at Israel‘s civilian population centers deliberately violates the basic principles of distinction. (Additional Protocol I, arts. 48, 51(2), 52(1).) Any doubt about this is resolved by the fact that Hamas itself has boasted of its intention to hit population centres. It is well accepted in customary international law that ―[i]ntentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking part in hostilities constitutes a war crime. (Rome Statute, art. 8(2)(b)(i))

2. Staging of Attacks From Residential Areas and Protected Sites: The Law of Armed Conflict not only prohibits targeting an enemy‘s civilians; it also requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish their combatant forces from their own civilians, and not to base operations in or near civilian structures, especially protected sites such as schools, medical facilities and places of worship. As the customary law principle is reflected in Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I: '―The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or shield, favour or impede military operations."

3. Use of Civilian Homes and Public Institutions as Bases of Operation - see (2) for citations.

4. Misuse of Medical Facilities and Ambulances - Any time Hamas uses an ambulance to transport its fighters it is violating the Law of Armed Conflict: Under Article 23(f) of the 1907 Regulations annexed to the Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, which reflects customary international law, it is ―especially forbidden…[t]o make improper use of a flag of truce, … as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention.. Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (1949) also provides that: ―… the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground …may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments…‖

5. Booby-trapping of Civilian Areas - see (2) for citations.

6. Blending in with Civilians and Use of Human Shields - As the ICRC rule states, "It can be concluded that the use of human shields requires an intentional co-location of military objectives and civilians or persons hors de combat with the specific intent of trying to prevent the targeting of those military objectives."

7. Exploitation of Children - Hamas has paramilitary summer camps for kids. There are reports, from this war and previous ones, of children fighting and being used for tunnel digging. violates the Law of Armed Conflict, including prohibitions against allowing children to take part in hostilities. As customary international law is reflected in this regard in Additional Protocol I, the parties to a conflict must take "all feasible measures" to ensure that children "do not take a direct part in hostilities and, in particular, they shall refrain from recruiting them into their armed forces." (Additional Protocol I, art. 77(2))

8. Interference with Humanitarian Relief Efforts - While Israel kept its end of humanitarian truces. Hamas used them to shoot rockets into Israel, including the Kerem Shalom crossing where humanitarian goods are brought into Gaza. All of these actions violate the Law of Armed Conflict, which requires parties to allow the entry of humanitarian supplies and to guarantee their safety. Article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires parties in an armed conflict to "permit the free passage of [humanitarian] consignments and shall guarantee their protection." Article 60 of the same Convention protects the shipments from being diverted from their intended purpose, something Hamas has certainly done in the past and is reported to have done in this conflict as well.

9. Hostage-taking - The Fourth Geneva Conventions, article 34, says flatly "The taking of hostages is prohibited." This is not an "arrest" as Israel-haters claim, and this is not a prisoner of war situation as Hamas has made clear - the purpose of Hamas' hostage-taking falls under the definition on the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages: "Any person who seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure or to continue to detain another person (hereinafter referred to as the "hostage") in order to compel a third party, namely, a State, an international intergovernmental organization, a natural or juridical person, or a group of persons, to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage commits the offence of taking of hostages ("hostage-taking") within the meaning of this Convention."

10. Using the uniform of the enemy - Additional Protocol I prohibits the use of enemy flags, military emblems, insignia or uniforms “while engaging in attacks or in order to shield, favour, protect or impede military operations”.[3] Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “making improper use … of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts when it results in death or serious personal injury.[4] According to some, this is considered perfidy, a war crime. (h/t Joshua)

11. Violence aimed at spreading terror among the civilian population - Rule 2 of ICRC's Customary IHL is "Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited." It quotes Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I prohibits “acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population”. Hamas rockets are aimed not only at killing civilians, but at spreading terror among Israelis.

12. Targeting civilian objects, such as airports or nuclear power plants - Rule 7 of the Customary IHL says "Attacks must not be directed against civilian objects," quoting Articles 48 and 52(2) of Additional Protocol I.

13. Indiscriminate attacks - Besides targeting civilians and civilian objects, Rule 11 of the ICRC CIHL states flatly that "Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited." By definition, every Qassam rocket attack and most of the other rocket and mortar attacks are by their very nature indiscriminate.

See also Rule 71, "The use of weapons which are by nature indiscriminate is prohibited."

14. Proportionality in attack - ICRC's Rule 14 states "Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited." Rocket attacks against civilians have zero military advantage, so by definition they are disproportionate to their military advantage.

See also Rule 18: "Each party to the conflict must do everything feasible to assess whether the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated."

15. Advance Warning - Rule 20 of the ICRC CIHL states "Each party to the conflict must give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit." Given that Hamas has used the media and SMS calls to threaten Israelis, it is clear that they have the ability to warn before every rocket attack. Their failure to do so is a violation of IHL.

16. Protecting civilians - Rule 22 of the ICRC Customary IHL states "The parties to the conflict must take all feasible precautions to protect the civilian population and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks." Hamas not only has failed to protect civilians in Gaza by building bomb shelters, they have deliberately put civilians in harm's way.

17. Attacking medical units - Rule 28 states "Medical units exclusively assigned to medical purposes must be respected and protected in all circumstances." Hamas has shot mortars at the Israeli field hospital, set up for Gazans, near the Erez crossing.

18. Protection of Journalists - Hamas has threatened journalists, implicitly and explicitly, accusing some of being spies and sometimes not allowing them to leave Gaza, making them effectively hostages. Rule 34 states "Civilian journalists engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict must be respected and protected as long as they are not taking a direct part in hostilities."

19. Mistreating the dead. Rule 113 says "Each party to the conflict must take all possible measures to prevent the dead from being despoiled. Mutilation of dead bodies is prohibited." Hamas has shown off an alleged chip cut out from the (presumably) dead body of Oron Shaul.

There are also numerous conventions that Hamas violates, but I am not sure if they reach the level of international law since they are not signatories. Customary IHL, however, applies to all. .

There are also at least three violations of international law in the way Gilad Shalit was treated, but I am limiting this only to the current war.

This morning, Israel accepted a US-brokered 72-hour ceasefire starting at 8:00 AM. At 9:30, Hamas started a seemingly pre-planned operation in Rafah, killing 2 Israeli soldiers and kidnapping one during a suicide bombing.

Terrorists emerged from a tunnel shaft, and a suicide bomber detonated himself in the vicinity of soldiers. Heavy exchanges of fire ensued, before one of the IDF soldiers was kidnapped, a senior army source said.

Clearly the ceasefire provided the opportunity Hamas wanted to perform this operation. Their acceptance of the cease-fire - including the terms that IDF soldiers can keep their positions, which Hamas knew were near a hidden tunnel entrance - can only be described as a well-planned ruse for this attack, Hamas' most sought-after prize. These were not conditions that Hamas would normally accept.

Hamas' claim that this occurred before the ceasefire is a lie, as the reports of heavy clashes in Rafah all started at 9:30, not 7:30 as Hamas says.

John Kerry said that the ceasefire was a "moment of opportunity." Hamas obviously agreed.

Here is a chronology of all the previous truces that Hamas violated.

July 15: Israel accepted the ceasefire initiated by Egypt and stopped all fire at 09:00. However, terrorists fired more than 50 rockets at Israeli communities. Only after six hours of continuous rocket attacks did the IDF respond.

July 17: Israel agreed to a five-hour humanitarian ceasefire. The terrorist organizations rejected it and fired rockets, including at the city of Be'er-Sheva.

July 20: Israel approved a two-hour medical/humanitarian window in the area of Shejaiya, following an International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) request. Forty minutes after the ceasefire began, Hamas violated it. Nevertheless, Israel implemented the ceasefire, even extending it for two more hours.

July 26-27: Israel respected an UN-requested humanitarian ceasefire from 08:00-20:00 on Saturday, 26 July. Israel announced its readiness to prolong the ceasefire until midnight, but a few minutes after 20:00, Hamas renewed firing rockets at Israeli civilians.

On the same day (26 July), Hamas announced a 24-hour humanitarian ceasefire, at 14:00. Hamas violated its own ceasefire a short time later.

Despite Hamas’ continuous fire, Israel decided to extend the humanitarian ceasefire a second time, from midnight Saturday to midnight Sunday.

July 28: Israel accepted Hamas' request for a ceasefire in honor of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr. The IDF was instructed to cease military attacks, but Hamas continued to launch rockets at Israel.

July 30: Israel announced a temporary humanitarian ceasefire between 15:00-19:00. A few minutes after the ceasefire began Hamas fired rockets at the southern cities of Ashdod and Ashkelon, as well as other Israeli communities.

(h/t TIP)

The fact that no one is willing to admit

I just watched Alan Dershowitz and Peter Beinart on CNN. (Beinart has decided to shill for the Muslim Brotherhood. Really.)

Both of them agreed with each other on one topic, though: that bringing in a Fatah-led government in Gaza is the best chance for peace.

It would be enormously better to have the PA controlling Gaza than Hamas, for everyone - for Gazans, for Israel, and for Egypt. But as usual, there is an elephant in the room that no one is willing to admit, including Israel or Dershowitz or Beinart:

Mahmoud Abbas' party has shot hundreds of rockets into Israel during this war, too.

The Abu Nidal Brigades of Fatah's Al Asqa Martyrs Brigades helpfully gives us a tally:

34 N103 missiles .
173 107 missiles .
32 Grad rockets.
53 120 mm mortar rounds
23 80 mm mortar rounds
14 60 mm mortar rounds
One RPG-7 .
Moltka anti-missile shields.

At least three other Fatah terror groups have also fired rockets at Israel.

Israel doesn't want to mention this because they want to maintain security cooperation with the PA security forces, and this would embarrass Abbas.

But the entire point of making peace with Abbas is that he is the best candidate to make peace with. Yet this "man of peace" cannot stop, or control, his own party. Or - he is unwilling to stop them from firing at Israeli civilians.

That is not exactly a man of peace. And it is irresponsible for so many to so willfully give him a pass and bury this basic fact because of their wishful thinking.

Only one reporter I could find mentioned this fact:

A senior Fatah official told me earlier this week in Ramallah that Fatah has felt obliged to fire some rockets against Israel, lest it be seen as collaborating with the Jewish state.

This is Fatah's defense for war crimes - because they don't want to look too peaceful to their own people!

The world deserves to know exactly how "moderate" - or exactly how ineffective - he is over terrorists who report to him, and who brag about their targeting Israeli cities.

PCHR described Amjad Zaher Hamdan as a "civilian."

He was really a member of Islamic Jihad's Al Quds Brigades.

As we've noted, PCHR is one of the NGOs that the UN relies on to give its daily statistics on the percentage of Gaza casualties who are "civilian."

The media and pundits don't think there is anything wrong with trusting numbers given by an organization known to lie.

Videos of Gaza reporters as human shields (UPDATE)

From France24:

And what looks like a different view of the same rocket launch, from Al Jazeera:

The Al Jazeera woman appears to be the same person as the one seen in the background of Gallagher's France24 report.

This means that there were multiple reporters at the area, doing their dispatches from the exact same place as they like to do. If there are two, there are usually a dozen.

So the terrorists who shot the rockets were using the reporters as human shields, assuming that Israel won't strike back where international reporters are.

And yet none of these reporters are saying this obvious fact on the air - even when it is on video.

UPDATE: Another from what I think is the same incident, at 2:20:

07/31 Links Pt2: B-H Levy: The ugly tide washing across Europe; Obama's Walter Cronkite Moment

From Ian:

Bernard-Henri Levy: The ugly tide washing across Europe - WSJ

The double standard is odious. And it has become increasingly evident across Europe in the past month. Bluntly anti-Semitic slogans have marred most European demonstrations "in support of the people of Gaza." Residents of Frankfurt and Dortmund were horrified in mid-July to see neo-Nazi groups join hands with left-wing Islamists in a grim chant: "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas." The center of London was blocked on July 19 by thousands who gathered in front of the Israeli embassy in Kensington to shout their hatred for Jews.
Not to mention Amsterdam, the city of Spinoza, Europe's capital of tolerance, where in certain neighborhoods it has become practically impossible to wear a yarmulke in public without running the risk of being insulted or assaulted.
For someone who has advocated, as I have, for nearly half a century the creation of a Palestinian state alongside a fully recognized Israel, this is truly discouraging. That there are sincere men and women among the demonstrators I do not doubt. But I would urge them to think twice before letting themselves be manipulated by those whose motive is not solidarity but hate, and whose true agenda is not peace in Palestine but death to Israel—and, as often as not, alas, death to Jews.

The Left Hate Israel Because It Is Everything They Despise: Capitalist, Conservative and Patriotic

Israel is a distillation of everything leftists hate about Western nations: capitalist, conservative and fiercely patriotic. It is a projection of their own prejudices about the supposed injustices of societies that cherish the ‘wrong’ values and the ‘wrong’ people. They don't share the Palestinians' spiritual beliefs, but they share a common enemy. Indeed, if Israel was removed from the equation, its critics would have little good to say about Gaza or Hamas. Theirs is a marriage of convenience.
The Left’s use of the Israeli-Arab situation as a platform for moral preening, and as a metaphor for its own hang-ups, blinds it to the evils of Hamas and the rest of the Muslim Brotherhood. It seems oblivious to the ideological conflict between Islamic fundamentalists and Western progressives, because it persists in regarding the former as pet victims of the latter. It may discover the hard way that it is giving comfort to an enemy that makes no distinction between liberal hand-wringers and any other infidels.

Hey, Liberals Who Oppose Israel: You’re All Right-Wingers Now

These, dear liberals, are the values you claim to espouse. Before you say one more thing about this conflict, ask yourself which side is fighting for a society most like the one in which you’re likely to want to live, and then support that side passionately and vigorously. And understand, please, that we’re at war, and that philosophical inquiries, existential ponderings, and musings about identity are all welcomed and valued in free societies, but that to entertain such soulful pursuits said free societies must first survive the attacks of their enemies. Unless you’re willing to embrace everything you claim to despise, we’d love to see you joining us in this war; Lord knows we could use all the help we can get.

The combat ethos is alive and well

An outsider observing the Israel Defense Forces' fighting during Operation Protective Edge will notice right away that brigade, battalion and company commanders make up a large proportion of the wounded and casualties. The Golani Brigade alone has lost a deputy battalion commander, and among its wounded are three platoon commanders and a brigade commander. Three officers are now vying to succeed the fallen commander. This is true not only in the regular army, but also -- maybe even more so in light of their stronger connection to civilian life -- among the reservists.
Even those who oppose the scope of the operation cannot ignore the obvious "IDF spirit" of it. This is the spirit that leads the IDF in its best moments. The battles of the 1948 War of Independence established the norm of "Corporals, retreat -- the commanders will cover you!" During reprisal operations carried out by the paratroopers in the 1950s, the officers' command "After me!" became the guide for IDF fighters and commanders. For the first time, general ideas like professionalism, personal example, confronting obstacles, and the rule that "We don't go back until we get it done" became iron-clad rules of thumb.

Flemish doctor refuses to treat 90-year old Jewish woman: "Go to Gaza"

From Joods Actueel:

A Flemish doctor, who was manning the telephones Wednesday night for a group of physicians, refused to provide a 90-year-old Jewish woman who had suffered a rib fracture with medical help. "I will not! Send her to Gaza for a few hours, then she will not feel pain anymore," was his reply.

The son of the 90-year-old Bertha Klein called the doctor hotline around 11:00 PM yesterday. His mother was in agonizing pain after she had suffered a rib fracture. The doctor knew very quickly that it was a Jewish patient, her name and address in Antwerp betrayed all that, as well as the accent (Klein is American).

When the family asked if the doctor could come to help with her terrible pain, he replied bluntly, "I will not," and hung up the phone. The family called back immediately, and the doctor said, "Send her to the Gaza Strip for several hours, she will not feel pain then."

The family was in shock and meanwhile phoned a friend, Samuel Markowitz, a district councilor in Antwerp for the Open VLD. Markowitz is also an EMT and knows that a physician should never refuse a patient. He called th hotline himself and confronted the doctor with his statements (the conversation was also recorded for later proof).

The doctor admitted the facts and said that he said this in "a fit of emotion." Markowitz complained to the head of the Department of Health for the Antwerp region, while the grandson of the 90-year-old woman, Hershy Taffel, registered a complaint with the police for racism and xenophobia.

Mr. Taffel tells how his grandmother burst into tears. "This reminds me of what we underwent in Europe 70 years ago, I never thought that day would ever be repeated."

There have been a series of antisemitic incidents in Belgium lately:

Michael Freilich, the editor-in-chief of Joods Actueel, said the incident is particularly alarming because it comes amid a string of incidents that have occurred since the start of Israel’s attack on Hamas in Gaza on July 8 and that involve boycotts against Jews in Belgium.

Among the other incidents: an Orthodox Jewish woman was refused service at a clothes store in Antwerp, and police removed a sign in French and Turkish from a café near Liege that said dogs were allowed but Zionists and Jews were not.

A little about Hamas' RPG-29

Times of Israel reports:

Very little face-to-face fighting is taking place in Gaza. Mimicking the tactics used by Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas heavily relies on two types of weaponry: anti-tank missiles and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The anti-tank weapon of choice is the Russian shoulder-launched RPG-29, and is used against infantry troops and armored vehicles.

If the RPG-29 is Hamas' main method of targeting IDF troops, what sort of damage does it do if it hits a building?

The Strategy Page says:

The RPG-29 is the most common recent development of the RPG line. It entered production just before the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. It is available through legitimate, or black market, arms dealers and is more expensive than the RPG-7 (which is manufactured by many countries.) RPG-29 launchers cost over $500 each, and the rockets go for about $300 each.

With a ten pound launcher firing a 14.7 pound 105mm rocket, the RPG-29 warhead is designed to get past some forms of reactive armor (ERA). The larger weapon (3.3 feet long when carried out, six feet long when ready to fire and 65 percent heavier than the 85mm RPG-7) is more difficult to carry around and fire, but has an effective range of 500 meters. The warhead can also penetrate five feet of reinforced concrete.

This is amplified bythe World Guns website in Russia:

When used against buildings or entrenchments, the PG-29V can penetrate more than 1,5 meter(5ft) of concrete or brick wall and then cause significant damage to troops beyond the wall.

If this weapon can pulverize 1.5 meters of reinforced concrete, imagine what it can do to civilian houses and buildings in Gaza - and the people inside them - when their walls are probably less than one tenth that thickness.

Oh, sorry, I forgot. Only IDF weapons cause damage and casualties in Gaza. Hamas weapons magically only hit Jews.

Making David into Goliath: How the World Turned Against Israel by Joshua Muravchik is a wonderful overview of the history of how Israel went from being the darling of the left in 1967 to becoming the victim of the UN's infamous "Zionism is Racism" resolution in 1975.

Muravchik expertly identifies, and dissects, the factors that turned the Left against Israel in such a short time.

It isn't pretty.

Muravchik identifies a number of key factors that caused this stunning public relations victory for the anti-Israel crowd. The first is Yasir Arafat, who brilliantly modeled the PLO after the anti-colonialist movement of Algeria and then cultivated, and took advantage, of relations with communist China and the Soviet Union, which crucially provided the PLO with extensive propaganda support that started bleeding into Western leftist journalist writings. Suddenly, the Arab cause turned from one explicitly geared towards destroying Israel into a "Palestinian" struggle against colonialism and imperialism. These "progressive" codewords were eagerly taken up by Western socialists and leftists, especially in Europe.

The second factor in giving the PLO legitimacy was, ironically, terrorism. Muravchik enumerates every airline hijacking and airport attack in the late 1960s and early 1970s, exposing how easily European leaders caved to the hijackers' demands, in the hope that they would be left alone next time.

The twin to that strategy was the Arab oil embargo that started in 1973. The EEC (precursor to the EU) responded with a pro-Arab position on the Middle East: calling on unconditional full Israeli withdrawal from lands gained in 1967 without negotiations or border adjustments envisioned in UNSC 242 and did not call on Arabs to make peace with Israel.

In other words, during these two crucial tests of European nations to either stick to their principles or to cave to blackmail, the European nations caved.

Psychologically, one does not want to think of oneself as a craven hypocrite who knuckles under to threats.So the only way to not fall into self-loathing is to find "human rights" justifications for cowardice.

Muravchik also details how the Non-Aligned Movement took over the UN, and brought the Palestinian issue as the single biggest agenda item in that body. He also highlights how Jewish born antisemite Bruno Kreisky, chancellor of Austria and vice president of the Socialist International, singlehandedly turned that body from pro-Israel to anti-Israel.

Finally, Muravchik details how the academic Left fell under the spell of a fraud: Edward Said. Said managed with his one work, Orientalism, to seduce generations of students into the romantic ideal of the East as being ruthlessly exploited and subjugated by the West. Said later admitted was really meant specifically to help Palestinian nationalism.

The remaining favor that the Left held towards Israel disappeared when it elected its first non-Labor government, led by Menachem Begin, a figure that most on the Left disliked viscerally. Even after the peace agreement with Egypt they didn't warm up to him, and the Lebanon war solidified the direction that they were already going in.

The book then goes on to describe how Israeli post-Zionism started to affect both Israeli and international views of the Jewish state. he goes into detail on how B'Tselem was founded and how it tried to be both a human rights organization and an political advocacy group - which is contradictory. Muravchik describes the importance of Israel's "New Historians" on Israel's self-image as well as how the world looked at the state. And he shows how Ha'aretz is complicit in demonizing Israel from the inside.

The author then masterfully takes apart the hypocrisy of the new Left's organizations that have taken on their anti-Israel cause. He dismantles the ISM, exposes HRW's insane anti-Israel stance (pointing out how their MENA head Sarah Leah Whitson went out of her way to praise Moammar Qaddafi,) and destroys Walt and Mearsheimer and their ideological cousins from Richard Falk to J-Street.

The remarkable penultimate chapter lays out the best liberal pro-Israel arguments against its critics, going from the outbreak of the second Intifada through the building of the separation barrier (and the bias of the ICJ,) the Lebanon war, Operation Cast Lead, Goldstone and beyond. The very arguments raging today against Israel in Gaza are all discussed and masterfully defeated.

Making David into Goliath is one of the best liberal defenses of Israel ever written.