Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, December 29, 2014

12/29 Links Pt2: How to fight a civilized war against an uncivilized enemy; PA: Jesus was a Palestinian

From Ian:

Wiesenthal Center top 10 list: Worst global anti-Semitic/anti-Israel incidents of 2014

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has ranked the 10 worst outbreaks of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism in 2014. Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the human rights organization, told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday that this year’s list seeks to show how anti-Semitic “rhetoric at the top has filtered down to average people.”
Hier said the center deliberately chose not to include principal Arab leaders and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan because the ranking system reveals the spread of hate on a grassroots level.
Rabbi Abraham Cooper, the center’s associate dean, told the Post that Europe dominated the list of incidents of Israel hatred and anti-Semitic violence, with six mentions.
The No. 1 slot went to a doctor in Belgium who refused to provide medical care to a 90-year-old Jewish woman with a fractured rib. He told her son, who had requested the care: “Send her to Gaza for a few hours, then she will get rid of the pain. I’m not coming,” and hung up.

The tale of 2014, told in 14 Times of Israel stories

The year began with hopes that 2014 would see peace talks with the Palestinians bear fruit, lawmakers broker deals to manage the economy, Syria end its civil war, Europe remain a safe place for Jews, the Arab world open up to us and Iran’s nuclear plans get thwarted. A year later, little has been resolved and many new tears have been opened in the fabric of Israeli and Jewish society, not to mention around the world.
Yet even in the darkest times, there was light and there was humanity. Grassroots efforts to spread understanding and heal rifts were ubiquitous, even in unexpected places, like the West Bank junction where three teens were kidnapped or the mourning tent of a Palestinian boy killed in revenge. The deaths of lone soldiers in Gaza brought out the best in tens of thousands, who escorted those they never knew on their final journeys. A Jewish man, in prison for years in Cuba, was freed amid a historic détente.
Through it all, The Times of Israel has attempted to bring a deeper understanding of Israel, the Jewish world and the wider universe to our readers. Looking back, these 14 stories, culled from some 20,000 published over the year, paint a picture of our year, the good, the bad, the parts we’d rather forget and those we will cherish as we move into the maw of 2015’s great unknown.

Alan Dershowitz: A Brandeis student refuses to show sympathy for assassinated policemen – and her critic is attacked

As I watched, with tears in my eyes, the funeral of police officer Rafael Ramos who was ambushed along with fellow officer, Wenjian Liu, in revenge for the deaths of two black young men who were killed by policemen, I could not help thinking of the following horrible words tweeted by a bigoted young woman named Khadijah Lynch, on the day the police officers were murdered in cold blood:
“I have no sympathy for the NYPD officers who were murdered today. IMAO, all I just really don’t have sympathy for the cops who were shot. I hate this racist, f…ing country.”
Khadijah Lynch is a Brandeis University junior who at the time she wrote the tweet was the undergraduate representative in the Brandeis African and Afro-American studies department.
Nor was this her first bigoted tweet. She has apparently described her college as “a social themed institution grounded in Zionism. Word. That a f…ing fanny dooly.” And she cannot understand why “black people have not burned this country down….” She describes herself as “in riot mode. F… this f…ing country.” She has apparently said that she would like to get a gun and has called for an intifada: “Amerikkka needs an intifada. Enough is enough. “ “What the f… even IS ‘non-violence’. “
Ms. Lynch is certainly entitled to express such despicable views- either in public or in private - just as Nazis, Klansmen and other bigots are entitled to express theirs. But when another Brandeis student, named Daniel Mael, decided to post her public tweets on a website, Lynch threatened to sue him for “slander”. Republishing someone’s own published words could not possibly constitute slander, libel or any other form of defamation, because you can’t be slandered, by your own words. You can, of course, be embarrassed, condemned, ostracized or “unfriended” by your own words, as Donald Sterling, the former owner of the LA Clippers, was. But Sterling’s bigoted words were never intended to be public, whereas Lynch’s tweets were publically circulated.

Iran claims Israel occupies strategic Saudi islands

The ever hilarious PressTV reports:(video story begins about 1:00)

Saudi Arabia and Western governments have for decades remained silent on the occupation of Saudi islands by Israel, Press TV reports.

Tiran and Sanafir islands, with respective areas of 80 and 33 sq kilometers, are located at the entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba, east of the Saudi territory.

They belonged to Saudi Arabia until 1967 when King Faisal gave control of the islands to Egypt to prevent Israel from sending its ships to Eilat station during the Six-Day war. The islands were then occupied by Israel.

Actually, Saudi Arabia gave control of the islands to Egypt in 1949, specifically to allow Egypt to blockade Israel.

Yes, Arab nations hated Israel so much that they would willingly give up their own territory to hurt Israel, just as Syria no longer asserts claims to the Shebaa Farms in order to allow Lebanon to continue to claim that Israel occupies its territory and give Hezbollah pretexts to attack,

Following the war, when Egypt’s Anwar Sadat signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1978, he refused to mention the status of the islands as part of the agreement, saying they belonged to Saudi Arabia. But interestingly, Riyadh has not commented on the status of the islands since.

Some say the islands are just too small for Saudi Arabia to raise a claim on, but some argue that it is not the case as Saudis have fought with Yemen over the control of Hanish Islands that are approximately the same size.

The islands of Tiran and Sanafir are strategically very important as the control over them effectively means the control over the entrance to Gulf of Aqaba and this is Israel’s only way to the Red Sea.

Isn't it heartwarming that Iran cares so much about Saudi Arabia to let them know that they seem to have misplaced some islands?

So what's the truth?

In 1951, Egypt declared that it would allow sea traffic of "friendly countries" through the straits and it would seize "enemy" vessels.

In 1955 Israel announced that it was completing the port of Eilat and that it intended to use the Straits in order to access the Indian Ocean, and it will do whatever is necessary to ensure safe passage. In response, Egypt tightened the rules of who could pass, and gave the sole authority for allowing ships to pass to the - get this - "Regional Boycotting Office for Israel."

During the 1956 Sinai campaign, Israel occupied the islands, and gave control over to UNEF in 1957. Nasser, of course, expelled UNEF in May 1967 and took over the islands again.

Israel did occupy the two islands in 1967 - but they gave control over to the Multinational Force (meant to keep the peace between Israel and Egypt, mostly in the Sinai) in 1982. They control the islands today.

From Global Security:

Observation Post 3-11 is located on Tiran Island, five miles off Sinai's coast in the Gulf of Aqaba. OP 3-11 is manned by U.S. troops who monitor Israeli and Egyptian naval and maritime activities in the strategically vital area where the Gulf meets the Red Sea. Tiran Island now belongs to Saudi Arabia and is leased by Egypt so that the observation post can be operated there. The actual OP is located on the island's western edge, more than 800 feet tip a cliff wall overlooking heavily mined beaches. The island is accessible from the water in a few locations, but the OP's location and the treacherous slopes leading up to it make resupply by any combination of sea and ground transport almost impossible. The OP 3-11 troops therefore rely on the slingload missions flown on Thursday and Sunday mornings by UH-1's of the South Camp Aviation Platoon for their transportation to and from work, as well as for food, water, mail, fuel and just about everything else.

Observation Point 3-11 is about as big as Paradise Shoppette. It contains everything a Soldier needs, plus a few luxuries -- hot showers, full service kitchen and a day room. While on watch, Soldiers worked in three-man teams. The teams consisted of one noncommissioned officer, and two junior enlisted Soldiers. They rotated between three different shifts, pulling the same shift for two days, then rotating to another shift for two days. Once the Soldiers completed the third shift, they had a day off from guard watch.

One of those slingload missions can be seen on YouTube along with a slideshow of the island:

PressTV didn't even think up of this lie on their own. This entire report, including the "Google search" part on the video, was in this 2010 article from the equally unreliable Middle East Monitor.

(h/t Lawrence)

From Egypt Independent:

The Alexandria Administrative Court has banned the celebration of the Abu Hasira [Abuhatzeira] festival saying it violates public orders.

“The Jews have not had any particular impact on the Egyptian civilization. They did not contribute to the human knowledge of history of the civilization,” the court said.

According to the verdict, the court canceled the culture minister's 2001 decision considering the mausoleum, the surrounding Jewish tombs and the hill in the village of Damtu, outside Damanhour, among other Islamic and Coptic monuments.

It also ordered the minister in charge of monuments affairs to remove the mausoleum from Islamic and Coptic monuments records as it does not enjoy all of the archaeological characteristics and informing the UNESCO’s international heritage committee to remove it from the records.

The verdict also rejected the Israeli request to the UNESCO requesting the transfer of the mortal remains to Jerusalem, saying that Islam refuses to dig up the graves and that Jerusalem is occupied by Israel, which means that existence of such mausoleum on the Arab land of Palestine would add legitimacy of the Israel.

The festival, scheduled for 9 to 10 January, is held on the annual anniversary of the death of a 19th-century Jewish rabbi Abu Hasira, who was born in Egypt and traveled to Morocco, according to the Jewish folklore.

So because they respect graves so much they will remove the site from any international cultural protection so the residents of the village, who are overwhelmingly antisemitic, can do what they want to the shrine.

Now, that's respect.

More from Reuters:

The court said its decision was due to "moral offences" committed in previous years at the three-day festival celebrating the birth of Rabbi Jacob Abu Hasira. It did not elaborate on what the offences were.

Jews, mostly from outside Egypt, have congregated every year at the 19th century tomb around Jan. 1 even though the festival was canceled for security reasons after the 2011 uprising that ousted former President Hosni Mubarak.

Monday's ruling would make the ban permanent unless a higher court overturns it on appeal.

What were these "moral offenses?"

Egyptians have been making ludicrous claims about the celebrants for years. For example, in 2008:

[Jews] often start the celebration that get out of hand, where there is an auction for who will enter his tomb first , followed by alcoholic operations spilled over the cemetery, and then the slaughter of sacrifices that are often sheep or pigs, roasting meat, and dancing. Celebrants then hysterically sing Jewish melodies as they become almost naked, and then say some prayers, entreaties and tears to the tomb, burning, beating their heads in the Wailing Wall and asked for their needs, according to witnesses.

In 2011:

A female residents said that the Jews drink alcohol, which is forbidden in Islam, to be blessed as part of their veneration of the rabbi.

"The Jewish visitors usually get drunk and engage in obscene dancing during the celebrations," the woman, who asked not to be identified, said, demanding that the Abu Hasira festival should be cancelled after the revolution and the deposing of Mubarak, whom she dismissed as Israel's friend.

2013:

The Jewish men and women dance together while listening to jazz music.

Afterwards, the tourists make lots of noise and would bring sheep and goats. They slaughter them from the top of the neck, "contrary to Islamic law." (Kosher slaughter is not done that way.)

The meat is eaten together with "all kinds of imported wines next to a cocktail of cigarettes stuffed full of drugs."

The, naturally, the Jews turn off the lights and have an orgy, with sex being freely practiced in the tomb itself.

Those wild Jews!

In 2010, Jews visiting the grave were greeted with signs from local residents, in Hebrew, saying "Death to the Jews." So we know they will treat the shrine with all the respect that they can muster.

12/29 Links Pt1: What the Palestinian Authority Did Not Tell the UNSC; Jerusalem terrorist attack foiled

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: What the Palestinian Authority Did Not Tell the UN Security Council

Last week, Jordan submitted to the Security Council a Palestinian-drafted resolution calling for an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories by the end of 2017 and a peace deal within a year.
But what the Palestinians did not tell the Security Council is that the state they seek to establish is one that does not respect public freedoms, first and foremost freedom of expression.
This would be a state where people are detained and intimidated for using social media to express their views. It will also be a state where the president or any of his senior officials could order the arrest of anyone who dares to speak out against lack of democracy and reforms.
The draft resolution that was submitted to the Security Council fails to mention the fact that the Palestinian Authority is harassing and persecuting political opponents and critics, including Facebook users.
Moreover, the PA does not want the Security Council and the rest of the international community to know that, in the future Palestinian state, female journalists, writers and political activists can be detained for interrogation and threatened because of their work.

Two east Jerusalem brothers indicted for planning terrorist attack in capital

The Jerusalem District Attorney’s Office on Monday filed an indictment against two east Jerusalem brothers for working with Hamas to carry out a major terrorist attack in the capital.
According to the indictment, the brothers, aged 28 and 23, were recruited by a Hamas operative in the Gaza Strip to form a terror cell in Jerusalem to carry out the unspecified attack at a public venue.
While the details of the planned attack and the investigation into it remain unclear, the brothers have been charged with joining a terrorist organization, conspiracy, theft and other offenses.
Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said security personnel continue to investigate potential accomplices of the suspects.

PA minister legitimizes murdering Israelis

Ali Sa’ada, a terrorist prisoner who murdered a father and his one-year-old baby, was fined 3.5 million shekels by Israel. That fine is “delegitimizing ‎the [Palestinian] national resistance,” says Prisoners’ Affairs Authority Director ‎and PA Parliament Member Issa Karake. According to Karake, who holds the rank of ‎minister, the killing of one-year-old Israelis is legitimate “resistance.”‎
In his capacity as Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs, Issa Karake has a long history of glorifying terrorist murderers, as documented by Palestinian Media Watch.
Karake defines being a victim of Palestinian terror as “being exposed to resistance by Palestinians”:
“[Israeli] courts have been... passing sentences on prisoners that force them to pay large sums in financial compensation to Israelis who have been exposed to resistance by Palestinians.” [WAFA (the official Palestinian news agency), Dec. 16, 2014]

Gisha is an Israel-based NGO that calls itself the "legal center for freedom of movement" concentrating on the rights of Gazans and goods to go in and out of Gaza.

While it has a website, a blog and a Twitter account, somehow it missed this widely reported story:

A group of 37 orphans from Gaza Strip were prevented from crossing into Israel Sunday after Hamas backtracked from a deal reached to allow the kids to tour the Jewish state, saying the tour was an attempt to "brainwash" the kids. The indicent took place amid claims of clashes along the border between the IDF and Palestinians.

The group, comprised of children aged 5 to 12 whose fathers were killed in the 50-day summer war between Hamas and Israel, were all ready to go at the border crossing with Israel when Hamas rescinded its initial agreement to the visit.

Wouldn't this be right up Gisha's alley - Gazans being denied the right to freely travel? Not to mention that they are orphans! How could Gisha miss this?

A look through their archives finds that it missed some other stories as well: my story earlier today of Hamas blocking certain Israeli items from being imported, Hamas not allowing sick Gaza children from traveling to Egypt, Hamas stopping human rights workers from leaving Gaza, Hamas banning Fatah politicians from going to the West Bank, and others - all that involve daily violations of the rights of movement by Hamas against Gazans that are even more restrictive than Israeli regulations.

Gisha will talk about Egyptian closures of the Rafah crossing. But as far as I can tell, this Israeli NGO cannot find a negative thing to say about Hamas actions hurting the freedom of movement of people and goods from and to Gaza!

Gisha has a budget of about a million dollars a year, and is funded by donors such as the European Commission, United Kingdom, Oxfam GB, Trocaire, Oxfam Novib (the Netherlands), Irish Aid, Norway, UNDP, Broederlijk Delen, and NDC (joint funding from Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark and the Netherlands).

Isn't it interesting that such a lavishly funded NGO will not say anything against a terror group that violates every aspect of freedom of movement in Gaza that Gisha supposedly monitors?

Gisha claims to be non-partisan - yet it cannot find anything wrong with Hamas actions in Gaza against its people. That is a pretty large blind spot for a "non-partisan" organization.

UPDATE: I guess I embarrassed them. Two days after I wrote this post, and four days after Hamas denied the children from exiting, Gisha reported on the story, saying "it’s unfortunate that Hamas officials also obstruct travel for political reasons."

Amazing that UNRWA can say this with a straight face

The most recent report of the Commissioner-General of UNRWA to the UN, covering 2013, includes this head-scratcher of a line:

"The situation also affected the 1.9 million registered Palestine refugees in the State of Palestine."

So on one hand the UN and UNRWA recognize the "State of Palestine." On the other hand, they consider citizens of this state to be refugees from that same state!

A week ago, I had a brief Twitter discussion with Rex Brynen, an UNRWA apologist professor at McGill University, who claimed that UNHCR and UNRWA definitions for "refugees" were virtually identical.

UPDATE: As Brynen points out in a response, since he admits that Jordanian citizens wouldn't be considered refugees, it is not accurate for me to characterize his views of the definitions as "virtually identical." He did, in this Twitter discussion before he disappeared, seem to try hard to equate the two and to defend UNRWA's indefensible definition.

He said that all of todays' UNRWA refugees would be considered "derivative refugees" under UNHCR rules, pointing out a tiny minority of third-generation refugees under UNHCR auspices in Afghanistan (I believe there are some in Somalia as well.)

When I asked why he considers those in the West Bank and Gaza to be refugees even though they live in "Palestine," he replied that they were stateless.

(He never answered that, nor my many follow-up questions about UNRWA.and his fawning article supporting the Chris Gunness article I thoroughly fisked.)

So (at least according to Brynen) the reason that 1.9 million people in the "State of Palestine" are refugees is because they are stateless - at the very same time that UNRWA claims that they are citizens of a state called Palestine!

As far as I can tell, there is no official definition of "citizen" under PA law. Their Basic Law, article 7, just says "Palestinian citizenship shall be regulated by law" without defining what it is. A 1995 draft law for defining citizenship is noteworthy: someone is considered a citizen if he/she "(1) was a holder of Palestinian citizenship (other than Jews) before 15 May 1948; (2) was born to a Palestinian father; (3) was born in Palestine to a Palestinian mother even if the citizenship of the father is not known; (4) was born in Palestine to unknown parents; and (5) was born outside of Palestine to a Palestinian mother and to a father whose nationality was not known – provided that this person opts for Palestinian citizenship within one year after reaching maturity, that he notifies the minister of interior of his intention to become a Palestinian citizen, that he becomes habitually a resident of Palestine, and that the minister does not object to this applicant within one year from the time he receives the notice from the applicant."

At any rate, it seems clear that the PA considers all residents to be citizens of a UN-recognized state. To say that 1.9 million of them are "refugees" is the height of absurdity.

And one that UNRWA is happy to say publicly.

(We're not even talking about the 1.8 million or so with Jordanian citizenship, which even Brynen admits are clearly not refugees - so about 75% of the 5 million so-called UNRWA registered "refugees" have UN-recognized citizenship.)

Hamas bans import of batteries, appliances from Israel

Palestine Press reports that Hamas has banned the import of various electric and electronic devices from Israel, including batteries, refrigerators, washing machines, computer monitors and CRTs.

The reason given is because of the environmental impact of disposing of them.

And another reason: because they are not energy-efficient.

An additional reason was given: "The import fees benefit only the Israeli treasury without any returns on the Palestinian national economy."

There is an old rule of thumb that when someone gives multiple reasons for doing something, chances are that none of them are true. If I had to guess, I'd think that Hamas is worried about Israel inserting spy equipment in electronic devices.

The impact to Gazans for this new rule?

Oh, since when does Hamas care about the people it rules?

Two Hamas cartoons

This one I posted on Twitter a few days ago:

And this one is in response to the story today about Hamas not allowing kids to leave Gaza to meet Israelis:

Jordanian sheikh repents for his fatwa allowing Jews to worship on Temple Mount (update: with translation)

I reported that a Jordanian sheikh, Yassin Al-'Ajlouni, who had called on Jordanian authorities to allow Jews to build a synagogue on the Temple Mount, in the spirit of Islamic religious tolerance.

In response, the Jordanian Iftaa Department issued their own fatwa against Sheikh Yassin Al-'Ajlouni, calling him "ignorant" and having "no legitimacy."

Now, Yassin Al-'Ajlouni has repented of his Jew-loving ways, with a new video (now translated) where he retreats from his earlier opinion:

Also, he published a poem on his Facebook page calling on Jews to abandon any plans to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque and to convert to Islam, saying that Islam will be victorious over the Jews so there is time to switch sides before it is too late.

Sort of like how he switched sides in the face of threats.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

The year in EoZ videos

Some of my videos from this year:

(December 2013 but close enough)

If you like what you see, why not give a donation to EoZ?

Last Thursday, I scooped all English-language media with the news that Egypt and Morocco were banning the Ridley Scott biblical epic "Exodus: Gods and Kings" because it implied that Jews built the Pyramids and that the splitting of the sea was done by an earthquake. Later Egypt also said that the movie was "Zionist."

A day or two later, the story had been picked up by major news services - first the Egyptian ban and then the ban in Morocco.

Now, the supposedly moderate and modern UAE has decided to ban the movie as well.

Juma Obaid Al Leem, the media content director at the National Media Council of the United Arab Emirates, announced they will prevent the screening of the film in theaters in the UAE because of the "religious mistakes" in the film, not only Islam related, but also inaccuracies for other religions.

You read it here first. As usual.

(If getting the most accurate news first is important to you, then please consider donating to EoZ. I do stuff like this all the time without usually bragging that I scooped the world. I'd rather not put up obnoxious pop-ups asking for money like other sites do at the end of the year, so if you think this is valuable, look at the right-hand sidebar to donate.)

12/28 Links: Palestinians create instructional video on stabbing; BDS fail - Gaza loves Caterpillar

From Ian:

US senator Graham threatens to defund UN over Palestine bid

Visiting US Senator Lindsey Graham threatened Saturday to withhold US funding from the UN, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at the Palestinian Authority, a day after a senior Palestinian official said the PA will push for a UN vote on the Palestinian statehood bid by Monday.
“This is the same PA that joins hands with Hamas, incites constantly against Israel, the same PA is going to try to bring to the UN Security Council a resolution that seeks to impose on us conditions that will undermine our security,” the prime minister charged on Saturday at a press conference in Jerusalem with the Republican senator from South Carolina.
“We will stand firmly and reject such a diktat,” Netanyahu said.
Graham, a staunch pro-Israel senator, expressed support for the PM’s position, declaring that Congress would not “sit back and allow the United Nations to take over the peace process.”
Graham went so far as to say that “any effort by the French, the Jordanians or anyone to avoid direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians over the peace process, anyone who tries to take this to the UN Security Council” will be met with “a violent backlash by the Congress that could include suspending funding to the United Nations. We will not sit back and allow the United Nations to take over the peace process.”

The Palestinians' Real Enemy: Europe

Listening, in both English and Arabic, to the latest speeches of Palestinian Authority [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas and his fellow Fatah Central Committee members, we get the uncomfortable feeling that the Palestinian State, now being promoted in Europe, will not only be a threat to the stability of the entire region, but to us who have to keep living here, as well to those countries in Europe who promote it.
As Palestinians discuss among themselves -- far from the diplomats in their five-star hotels -- rather than accept this "gift" that Europe seems determined to push down our throats, many people increasingly see no choice but to launch a "Palestinian Spring" revolution. It would not be, as you might think, to rid them of Israel but finally to rid us of our wretched leadership and corrupt system of government -- and to stop the European counties that are imposing this brutal system on us by financing it.
We have been fortunate enough to see from Israel how a democracy works. So although a Palestinian Spring revolution might cause chaos in the region and elsewhere for a while, its chances of success are far more assured than in the other places in the Middle East, where it has been tried but has not always succeeded.
We do not want to do this, of course, but if we are forced by Europe to have this corrupt dictatorship called Palestine, terrorist groups such as Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, and ISIS will flood the West Bank in less than week, and our lives will be even worse than what we have now. We simply do not know what else to do to defend ourselves from these "Goodists" of Europe.

Palestinians create instructional video on stabbing

Palestinians have uploaded an instructional video on the internet that shows would-be attackers the most lethal ways to stab somebody.
The step-by-step video, titled “How to stab correctly,” was circulated on YouTube and its links were shared with the Facebook and Twitter groups of Palestinian organizations and activists in East Jerusalem, the Hebrew news site NRG reported Saturday.
The 72-second clip comes in the wake of a number of stabbing attacks throughout Israel and the West Bank. Most recently, two border policemen were injured when an assailant attacked them in the Old City of Jerusalem Friday morning.

"Palestinian" How to stab someone video

There is no more rational defender of Israel against the racist BDS movement than Jon Haber.

In fact, I am a tad pissed-off that none of Jon's writings were included in Nelson and Brahm's The Case Against Academic Boycotts of Israel. The reason for this is academic snobbery. There is no one making a better, more consistent, and academically rational case against BDS than Jon Haber at divestthis!

Haber has been fighting a lonely fight against BDS for years and he is one of those bloggers that should not need to be brought from the shadows. This is a gentleman that any university would do well to stand up before students in order to talk about political social media and discourse around the Arab-Israel conflict.

This does not mean, however, that we are entirely in agreement.

We most certainly are not.

Jon and I are having a conversation over the role of the western-left in the ongoing persecution of the Jews in the Middle East.

My argument is that the Obama administration has done a terrible disservice to both the Jewish people and the American people through accepting political Islam within the realm of rational political actors. When I voted for Obama in 2008 the last thing that occurred to me was that he would legitimize religious hatred against Jews.

But, hopefully each of us learn from experience and from the rousting of our own political naiveté.

For reasons that are somewhat unclear to me Haber remains in defense of the Obama administration.

What I have primarily argued is that because the Obama administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood, and the rise of political Islam via the so-called "Arab Spring," that his administration never deserved the popularity of Jewish Americans, if those Jewish Americans support the well-being of the Jewish State of Israel.

It is really as simple as that.

No politician, including the President of the United States, can support the enemies of the Jewish people and still expect the support of the Jewish people.

In Jon's latest retort he stands behind three essential premises.

The first is that a single example of Obama administration stupidity in briefly supporting the Brotherhood is not sufficient to condemn the administration.

The second is to excuse the Obama administration as simply following the line as put down by the Carter administration in terms of financial support for Egypt as a bribe to not kill Jews.

The third is to suggest that my criticisms are largely partisan.

Let me briefly take these in reverse order. First off, the charge of partisanship is entirely without merit, nor can it be substantiated. Although I have been a Democrat throughout the great majority of my adulthood, I am currently without political party. I am thus not a partisan and I do not support the Republican Party... not yet, in any case.

However, the idea that the Obama administration is simply following American foreign policy as put forth by the Camp David Accords is not a fair criticism. The point was never that the Obama administration merely provided financial and military aid to the Islamist government in Cairo, but that the administration went out of its way to assist that government in a variety of manners, not the least of which was the UN speech suggesting that the rise of political Islam was something akin to the Spirit of '76 and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

The main point, however, that I want to address in Jon's argument is his first.

He claims that one single example of administration stupidity is simply not enough to condemn it.

He writes:

genuine understanding can only come from focusing on more than one fact
I absolutely agree and would make two suggestions.

The first is that the single fact is very interesting because it demonstrates the central contradiction at the heart of Obama's foreign policy. I am relieved that the Egyptian people had the basic decent common sense to get rid of the Brotherhood and am entirely horrified that Barack Obama supported that gang of racist thugs to begin with.

My reasons are not limited to the mere fact that Obama supported a short-lived anti-American and anti-Jewish regime in Cairo, but that it shows the central incoherence of the administration's foreign policy viz-a-viz political Islam.

The Muslim Brotherhood is the parent organization of both Qaeda and Hamas. Obama tried to square a circle by supporting the Brotherhood while opposing Qaeda and remaining indifferent toward Hamas.

It simply does not work that way, Jon. If one opposes Qaeda because one opposes political Islam as a rising movement throughout the world, than one must oppose the Brotherhood and all factions of this misogynistic, homophobic, anti-Semitic, and head-chopping authoritarian movement arising within the Middle East.

That is my first point.

My second point is that criticisms of Obama administration Middle East policy are hardly limited to his support of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Another highly significant criticism would be the administration's insistence that Jews building housing for themselves in Judea is somehow a crime against peace. If there was any chance at a peaceful resolution of the conflict under Obama's watch it was not going to come from demanding that Jews be allowed to live in one place, but not another.

Finally, there is the question of history.

In Jon's conclusion he references his admiration for the writings of Harvard professor of Yiddish literature, Ruth Wisse, and Hebrew University historian, Robert Wistrich. I, too, have considerable admiration for both, because both understand that the conflict cannot be meaningfully discussed without the proper context.

Our understanding of the context of the conflict needs to be expanded both geographically and in time. From a geographic standpoint the conflict is between the Jewish people of the Middle East and the greater Arab-Muslim world. It is not a matter of a Jewish Goliath versus a "Palestinian" David. It is, rather, a conflict between around 400 million Arabs who, for the most part, oppose 6 million Jews seeking to maintain their freedom and autonomy.

Furthermore, this conflict did not begin in 1948 with the Arab attack on the Jewish people, but has been ongoing since the time of Muhammad. This is a war fundamentally grounded in Arab-Muslim theocratic bigotry against Jews. The local Arabs do not want a state for themselves in peace next to Israel. If that is what they wanted they could have had it many times over by now, but they have rejected any such accommodation. What they want is what they always tell us that they want.

They want Israel gone and the Jews dead.

And, yet, for some reason Barack Obama honestly thinks that the real problem is that Jews are living where neither he, nor Mahmoud Abbas, want them to live. And that, my friends, is not only wrong-headed and counterproductive, but entirely racist, as well.

Michael Lumish is a blogger at the Israel Thrives blog as well as a regular contributor/blogger at Times of Israel and Jews Down Under.

Earlier this year, a video was publicized in Arabic media of a fatwa by Sheikh Osama Qusi, saying that a man is allowed to surreptitiously watch his potential wife bathing in order to make sure that she is attractive enough for him. (no translation)

It is being highlighted in some end-of-year collections of outlandish fatwas.

“If you were really honest and wanted to marry that woman, and you were able to hide and watch her in secret, see the things that she wouldn’t usually let you see before marrying her, then it is acceptable as long as your intentions are pure.” Qusi said.

“One of the Prophet’s companions did that. Some disapproved and told him: ‘How do you do that when you’re one of the Prophet’s companions?’ The Prophet answered: ‘If you can see something that would make you want to marry her then go ahead and do it.’”

It was immediately slammed by many Arabs. The Egyptian Minister of Religious Endowments, Mohammad Mukhta, responded, “Where is the glory and masculinity in watching a woman shower? Would you allow this to happen to your daughter?"

The fatwa seems to be contradicted by a hadith that says "If any person peeps at you without your permission and you poke him with a stick and injure his eye, you will not be blamed." But maybe that allowance is only for men.

Historical revisionism about Cast Lead

Ma'an writes:

Palestinians around the world on Saturday commemorated the sixth anniversary of the beginning of Israel's 22-day offensive on the Gaza Strip in 2008-9 that left more than 1,400 dead.

The offensive, known by its Israeli moniker "Cast Lead," began on Dec. 27, 2008 around 11:30 a.m., when Israeli warplanes launched more than 100 airstrikes on Gaza simultaneously.

Israel launched the attack at the conclusion of a six-month ceasefire with Hamas that it repeatedly violated, despite Hamas' general adherence.

Let's take you back to Ma'an, December 25, 2008:

The military wing affiliated to Hamas, Al-Qassam Brigades released a statement on Thursday morning briefing the group's military activities over the first twenty four hours of an operation they called "Oil Stain" which started Wednesday morning.

According to the statement, a total of 87 shells have been fired at Israeli targets bordering the Gaza Strip including 54 mortar shells, 31 homemade projectiles which Hamas calls "Qassam", and two Soviet-made Grad missiles.

Al-Qassa Brigades threatened to enlarge the "Oil Stain" to get more thousands of Israelis "under fire". The group asserted that its fighters are "far greater than surrendering to Israeli threats and that they became much more prepared to counter Israeli aggression and to defend themselves than in the past."

Hamas started what later became known as "Cast Lead" three days before Israel retaliated. They kept the name of the operation "Oil Stain" for a week into the war. (Here's an example of its use on December 30 by a Hamas newspaper. Hamas Al Qassam website used the term many times. )

I've noted in the past how Hamas soon abandoned the narrative of heroically starting the war and changed it to being the victim of Zionist aggression - a lie that was repeated by Amnesty, HRW, Goldstone and many other supposedly "objective" observers.

(h/t Bob K)