Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, February 19, 2015

02/19 Links Pt1: Is Israel the Problem, or Are Jews the Problem?; Matt Lee embarrasses Jen Psaki again

From Ian:

Ben Shapiro: Is Israel the Problem, or Are Jews the Problem?

But undoubtedly, European anti-Semites will now claim that Netanyahu's comments simply demonstrate why Europe must force out its Jews: because Israel is just so awful. That, at least, is what a German court in the city of Wuppertal concluded after convicting two German Palestinians of setting fire to a synagogue. The Wuppertal court stated that the men were simply attempting to bring "attention to the Gaza conflict." In other words, Jews are fair game because of Israel.
But it's precisely the reverse that is true: Israel is fair game because it is Jewish. This is the dirty little secret of anti-Israel policy: It is almost entirely anti-Semitic policy. That is why Muslims attack Jewish synagogues in Paris during the Gaza war: because Israel is a stand-in for the Jews, not the other way around. Were Israel a Muslim country, the rest of the world would see it as a beacon of light and hope for the future of an entire religion. Because it is Jewish, Muslims target it for destruction, and the rest of the world tut-tuts Israel's nasty habit of attempting to survive. The extra-American world hates Israel because it is Jewish. It does not hate Jews because of Israel. Israel is merely a convenient excuse.
Ironically, radical Muslims, in targeting Jews throughout the world, reinforce the necessity of a state of Israel. Their argument seems to be that Israel is an unnecessary Jewish nationalist cancer; to prove that argument, they suggest killing Jews all over the planet, leaving no place safe for Jews except for Israel.
And so Jews go to Israel by the droves. European governments can rip Netanyahu all they want for his supposedly brusque dismissal of European tolerance, but that supposed tolerance means less and less when Swedish Jews abandon entire cities as the authorities make way for radical Muslims. European governments can condemn the Gaza war, but Jews see that war for what it was: an exercise in Jewish self-preservation, with the Europeans once again attempting to prevent such self-preservation.
Unlike the Europeans, Americans continue to side with Israel because America is founded on Judeo-Christian principles. America embraces Judaism, and so it embraces Israel, not the other way around. The formula is simple: Love Jews; love Israel. Hate Jews; hate Israel. Opposing Israeli action may not be anti-Semitism, but it sure does have a funny habit of backing the agenda of anti-Semites.

The Real Threat to Europe

Commentators in Europe voicing opinions on the terrorist attacks at Charlie Hebdo and the kosher supermarket in Paris, reverentially discussed the motivation of the terrorists, but showed distressingly little understanding of the meaning of jihad.
Europe, hedonist and dishonest, is apparently willing to cut a deal with any violent dictator, including the most potentially violent: a nuclear-threshold Iran.
To understand the fate awaiting Europe, it is necessary to listen seriously to what the upper echelons of Islam say to each other about their intentions -- in Arabic. These messages are quite different from those on Western television. What they say to each other is that the mission of Islam is to lead the whole world and eradicate all other religions, as they have been made irrelevant by the Qur'an.
Charlie Hebdo's cover after the attacks illustrates the very weakness exploited by the Islamists. The cover shown Muhammad, with a tear, aligning himself with humanism. To every Muslim on the planet, it shouted France's weakness, its increasing surrender to the Islamist threat, and the growing strength of Islam.
The real threat to Europe does not come from local Muslims who went to fight in the ranks of ISIS. The real threat comes from Muslims already in the enclaves in Europe. Their doctrine appears openly and without reservation, in books and on websites. It is spread in local languages in mosques by the imams in their communities. These communities command immigration; then the forming of enclaves in the host country, then the eventual violent takeover of the host.

AP's Matt Lee Stings Jen Psaki For Clumsy Attempt To Explain Why Kerry Isn't Speaking AT AIPAC

If there is a Matt Lee Fan Club, I want to join! Today Jen Psaki made a clumsy attempt to answer why Secretary of State Kerry wont be going to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and AP reporter Matt Lee let her "have it" in his own unique way.
It started when a reporter asked if Kerry’s absence from AIPAC had anything to do with the controversy over the Netanyahu speech to congress and that Bibi will also be speaking at AIPAC. Psaki replied that Kerry doesn’t ‘speak to the group every year and someone will fill in for him this year.
Psaki: …we have a trip we’re working on for early March, late February…”
Lee: It’s funny because the Vice President also had some unspecified travel plans that would prevent him from being at Congress to prevent him from hearing the Prime Minister’s speech. Is everyone fleeing?
Psaki: Well given we’ve all spent days if not weeks on a plane, I don’t think it should surprise anyone that the chief diplomat might be overseas, but…”
Lee: Well yeah, but it just seems to be a little unusual that both the Secretary of State and the Vice President have determined right now that they’re going to be out of town... or out of the country.
[Doing her best Jon Lovitz] Psaki answered: I wouldn’t look at it in those terms. I believe the Vice President is attending an inauguration for… uh… that new government of Panama, I believe, I can’t remember the specifics…. I expect we’ll have a presentation there.”
The First Reporter Asked: So we shouldn’t see this as a snub because the Prime Minister will be addressing said conference?
Lee: I just remember being with the Secretary at the inauguration of the Panamian Prime Minister a few months ago,” Lee said with emphasis.
Psaki (beginning to look annoyed): Perhaps that’s not the right information. I’m sure you can check the Secretary’s schedule on his website.”
Lee: (going in for the kill) Might you invent a country that he could go to if there aren’t any available?

From Ma'an:

Thirty-three sheep were killed by stray dogs on a farm in the village of Qarawat Bani Hussan west of Salfit on Wednesday, local farmers said.

Owner of the farm, Mahmoud Marie, told Ma'an that six stray dogs attacked his farm, killing the sheep in their pen.

Marie told Ma'an that each of the sheep is worth around 1,000 shekels ($260), meaning that the incident cost him nearly $8,600.

He called upon the Palestinian Minister of Agriculture and the veterinary services to solve the problem of stray dogs in the region.

Marie argued that the reason there are so many stray dogs in the area is that settlers bring them by car and leave them in the area, though this allegation could not be verified.

Who needs verification? PA president Mahmoud Abbas has stated that settlers release trained dogs to attack Palestinian farmers (along with wild pigs, of course.) To date, no mainstream news outlet has reported on how Abbas publicly repeats delusional stories.

It's funny that Ma'an even mentions that the accusation isn't verified. It routinely publishes false accusations without bothering to do the most basic fact checking.

"Bibi is much more dangerous than
a couple of nuclear bombs"

There is plenty to fisk in Peter Beinart's Ha'aretz article criticizing Elie Wiesel for defending Netanyahu's upcoming speech to Congress. But for today, let's look at only one aspect.

Last week, The New York Times and Washington Post ran an open letter by Wiesel supporting Benjamin Netanyahu’s forthcoming speech to Congress. In it, Wiesel makes two assertions, neither of which he makes any effort to prove. The first is that the United States and Iran are on the verge of “a terrible deal.” What makes the deal, which has not even been struck, “terrible?” Wiesel doesn’t say.

The second is that a nuclear Iran would likely mean “‘the annihilation and destruction’ of Israel.” This, too, requires evidence that Wiesel does not provide. After all, Benny Gantz, who just retired as Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, has argued that while an Iranian nuke would be dangerous, “The Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people.”

One of his predecessors in that job, Dan Halutz, has said that, “Iran poses a serious threat but not an existential one.” Earlier this month, former Mossad head Ephraim Halevy added that, “I think it is a terrible mistake to use the term ‘existential threat’ because I do not believe there is an existential threat to Israel.”

The Gantz quote was from 2012, where he argued not that Iran wouldn't use a nuclear bomb against Israel, but that Iran wouldn't try to build one to begin with. Since then we have seen countless times how Iran had hidden its nuclear weapons program and simultaneously has expanded its building of rockets whose only purpose is to deliver such a bomb, so his "rational" statement has been overtaken by facts.

Let's look at exactly what Ephraim Halevy said:

EH:I have always said that it is bad thing to use the terms ‘Holocaust’ and ‘existential threat’…

AJ: Why?

EH: Because we are not in a Holocaust situation. Then, six million Jews were herded into compounds and exterminated. And this can never happen again, certainly not in Israel. We have a very effective defence system. If you say there is a danger of a Holocaust it’s like saying the IDF is of no consequence. The IDF is here not only to prevent a Holocaust but to prevent an atmosphere of fear that we can ever be on the verge of a Holocaust. That’s exactly why we build up our defence and our intelligence community. Both serve the purpose of negating the idea of a future Holocaust. There cannot be another Holocaust.

Also, I think it is a terrible mistake to use the term ‘existential threat’ because I do not believe there is an existential threat to Israel. I think the Iranians can cause us a lot of damage, if they succeed in one way or another to launch a nuclear device which will actually hit the ground here in Israel. But this in itself would not bring the State of Israel to an end. I also think that it is a terrible mistake to tell your enemy – in this case, the Iranians – ‘you are an existential threat to Israel, we the Israelis believe that you have the power to destroy us.’ It’s almost inviting them to do so, because they will say, ‘If the Israelis themselves believe that they are vulnerable and can be destroyed then that is sufficient basis to go and do it. Don’t you think so?’

Halevy is saying two things: that a nuclear bomb that actually hits Israel would not destroy Israel completely, and that using the term "existential threat" is a bad strategy because it might encourage Iran (that "rational actor" as Beinart claims) to nuke Israel.

Elie Wiesel may be engaging in a little hyperbole in saying that a bomb that would kill, say, a half million people or so will annihilate Israel. But he is talking from the perspective of a Holocaust survivor who wants to do everything in his power to stop the incineration of hundreds of thousands of his people and the slow radiation death of many more. That is a supremely moral position.

Beinart, on the other hand, hates the current elected Israeli government so much that he is willing to take the position that the murder of hundreds of thousands of Israelis is really not that big a deal just to criticize a human rights icon for daring to speak out forcefully in favor of Bibi's defending the lives of his people.

How sick is that?

Beinart shows here that - like other Ha'aretz writers - his Bibi Derangement Syndrome makes him sound less rational than Iran's leaders. The hate for Netanyahu has become so absurd that the most mainstream of all possible Zionist positions - never allow another Holocaust, encourage Aliyah, defend Israel's security - have become the target of attack simply because Bibi advocates them. What little intellectual honesty the Haaretz crowd ever had has been replaced with rabid hate.

And Western liberals still believe that it represents a mainstream Israeli viewpoint.

HRW's criticism of Corrie ruling shows its hate for Israel yet again

Human Rights Watch has insulted Israel's Supreme Court for not ruling on a question that it was never asked and misrepresenting what it did say:

The Israeli Supreme Court ruling in a suit seeking damages over Rachel Corrie’s death sends a dangerous message to Israeli armed forces that they can escape accountability for wrongful actions, Human Rights Watch said today. Israel’s Supreme Court on February 12, 2015, exempted the Israeli defense ministry from liability for actions by its forces that it deemed to be “wartime activity,” but wrongly refused to assess whether those actions violated applicable laws of armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said.

Corrie, 23, was killed on March 16, 2003, while attempting to prevent an armored Israeli bulldozer from demolishing the home of a Palestinian family near Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip. She and other foreign nationals, wearing bright orange vests and using megaphones, shouted at and stood in front of bulldozers over the course of several hours to prevent them from destroying homes. Corrie climbed to the top of a mound of earth created by the front blade of a bulldozer, which continued forward, crushing her. The bulldozer operator claimed he didn’t see her.

“This ruling has disturbing implications beyond the Corrie family’s case, as it sends a message that Israeli forces have immunity even for deaths caused by alleged negligence,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director. “The ruling is a stark reminder that in some areas Israeli jurisprudence has veered completely off the track of international law.”

...The ruling flies in the face of the laws of armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said. The ruling grants immunity in civil law to Israeli forces for harming civilians based merely on the determination that the forces were engaged in “wartime activity,” without assessing whether that activity violated the laws of armed conflict, which require parties to the conflict at all times to take all feasible precautions to spare civilian life. Under the laws of armed conflict a state is required to make full reparation for the loss or injury caused by its violations of such laws.

...“Israel’s impunity laws slam the door on civilian victims in Gaza, and look like further evidence that Israel is not genuinely willing to hold its own forces accountable for serious violations,” Whitson said.

Everything HRW and Sarah Leah Whitson said shows how willing the "human rights group" is willing to lie in order to demonize Israel.

Professional Israel-basher
Sarah Leah Whitson

HRW's first claim is that the Supreme Court "wrongly refused to assess whether those actions violated applicable laws of armed conflict." Besides HRW's purposeful misreading of the laws of armed conflict, this was not what the Court was asked; the entire case was about whether the Corries could sue for damages. It is not the place of a court to go beyond the specific question it is being asked; indeed if it had done so it would show that the Supreme Court has little regard for actual laws and legal procedures and is recklessly violating all mores and procedures of a mature legal system. HRW is demanding that the Supreme Court do something which is illegal!

The organization is also wrong in claiming that the accidental killing of Corrie is a violation of the laws of war. Israeli law had already ruled that clearing operations at the Gaza border to find smuggling tunnels were considered wartime activity because Arabs would routinely violently attack the IDF at those times. Accidentally killing someone in wartime is not a violation of the laws of war, and in this case Corrie purposefully and stupidly put herself in front of a moving vehicle in a war zone. (The Court noted that the US government had warned citizens to stay away from Gaza because it was dangerous, showing yet again that the only party who acted negligently towards Corrie's life was Corrie herself.)

Next, Sarah Leah Whitson says the ruling "sends a message that Israeli forces have immunity even for deaths caused by alleged negligence." This is another lie. The court ruling, referring to the earlier Haifa court ruling that it upheld, stated that "the district court addressed the allegations raised by the appellants on their the merits and determined on the basis of the evidence brought, including expert opinion submitted by both parties, that none of the soldiers involved the day saw that Rachel was standing in front of the bulldozer because she was standing in a blind spot in relation to the occupants of the bulldozer. Therefore, it went on to hold, there is no reason to attribute to IDF fighters intentional harm against Rachel and therefore even without the immunity granted to a state [for acting in a war zone] the tort of assault does not exist in the circumstances of this case."

So there was no negligence - and no message that soldiers can act negligently, as HRW claims.

HRW's claim that Israel acts with "impunity," one of their favorite words, is belied by the fact that the Court did not dismiss another aspect of the case, about how Corrie's remains were handled. The only people acting with impunity are those with HRW, which makes wild claims based on lies about the facts and about international law.

HRW cannot back up its claim that the Supreme Court is going against international law. It makes mere assertions with no legal basis, and it even advocates that a professional legal system violate its own ethics and laws.

02/18 Links Pt2: Leila Khaled: ISIS Is a Zionist-American Organization; new Zion Awakening Video

From Ian:

Zion Awakening - Orim Shimshon: Ken O'Keefe: The most dangerous anti-semite living in the West

ISIS Is a Zionist-American Organization, Says BDS Heroine

Last month, I drew attention to Leila Khaled’s tour of South Africa under the sponsorship of BDS-South Africa. Khaled is a member of the “Political Bureau” of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The PFLP has claimed credit for murdering four worshippers and a policeman at the Kehillat Bnei Torah synagogue in Jerusalem in November. Khaled, who made her name as a hijacker and remains an advocate of violent resistance, is out raising money for the supposedly nonviolent boycott, divestment, sanctions movement against Israel.
So far, the trip is going quite well. Khaled has been welcomed by the ruling African National Congress, scoring a seat at President Zuma’s State of the Nation Address. People seem to be responding to her pitch. For example, as I wrote last week, the student government of the Durban University of Technology, a day after a visit from Khaled, called for the expulsion of Jews (the student government has since apologized: “oops, by ‘Jews’ we meant ‘people funded by the Israeli government.’”). BDS South Africa has proudly reported on the tour, including its finale in Soweto. Rebecca Hodes, who was on the scene in Soweto, gives this remarkable description of Khaled’s remarks.
According to Hodes, toward the end of her speech, Khaled said: “ISIS, I tell you, is a Zionist, American organization. Boko Haram is another Netanyahu. [Its leaders] are more Zionist than the Zionists… Beware the imperialists. They are vicious and they are collaborating with the Zionists to control the whole world….”
You may think that BDS-South Africa, just for the sake of damage control, would distance itself from Khaled’s remarks, or at least avoid mentioning them. Instead, they repeated them on Twitter. After the speech, Khaled “was presented with a gift as dozens of audience members vied for a decent angle for a cell phone snap.” But not before the crowd sang “one more revolutionary song” for, as BDS-South Africa put it, the “freedom fighter.”
Although Khaled has made similar statements in the course of her tour, not one supporter of BDS, as far as I know, has seen fit to distance himself from her. Wouldn’t want to alienate the base.

IDF medics treating wounded Syrians battle mental toll

Ever since Israel opened its border to Syrians wounded in the country's civil war, the IDF has provided medical aid to thousands, many in serious condition; medics say traumatic scenes have taken their toll, causing mental anguish.
Two years have passed since the State of Israel opened its gates to permit victims of Syria's conflict to enter the country and receive medical treatment. While the media occasionally publishes articles that include interviews with the wounded or the civilian doctors who provide them treatment, issues such as the stressful and traumatic circumstances IDF paramedics experience in their work are rarely brought to the public's attention.
The harrowing events experienced by soldiers during their long hours of work has been taking a toll the IDF can no longer ignore. Testimonies collected by Ynet from IDF medics and paramedics who served in the area for the past two years paint an alarming picture, detailing the extent to which IDF medical teams are influenced by the difficult scenes they encounter on almost a daily basis.
Two Nahal Brigade soldiers who served in the line of duty were discharged after suffering a deterioration in their mental health, while others receive psychological treatment from mental health officers.

In The Syrian War, The IDF Assists Wounded Civilians

19th century antisemitic book illustrates how to identify a Jew

The American Jew: An Exposé of His Career, by Telemachus Thomas Timayenis, was the second of a trilogy of antisemitic books by this Greek writer.

A brief biography of the proud antisemite (who once planned to sell a newspaper called The Anti-Semite:)

Thomas Telemachus Timayenis rates high in the rogue’s gallery of Greek criminals, scoundrels and ne’er-do-wells who made the United States their home. Few Greeks arrived in North America with better prospects than Timayenis. Fewer still have disgraced the Greek people so profoundly as this one man. No comprehensive history of the Greeks in the United States can be presented without the inclusion of this problematic individual. Teasing a part of a balanced presentation of Timayenis’ life story is difficult primarily because he so vigorously involved himself with so many prominent individuals and with an amazingly diverse series of causes. What follows is a much abbreviated account of Timayenis’ career and enduring influences.

In short, Timayenis was a professor, novelist, playwright and one of the first to publish a discourse on what was then known as the Jewish Question along racial lines in the United States, rather than considerations of religious doctrine. Compounding what we would call today a hate crime, as we shall see, Timayenis did not even bother to fully compose the text of the argument himself but plagiarized from another author.

In 1888, Timayenis left his academic work and established Minerva Publishing Company in New York, the first company in American to publish books critical of Jews. Timayenis anonymously authored three tracts on the Jews: The Original Mr. Jacobs: A Startling Exposé, ‎The American Jew: An Expose of His Career‎, and Judas Iscariot: An Old Type in a New Form. In The American Jew, Timayenis provided several illustrations showing physical characteristics on how one might identify a Jew. None of these books have ever been out of print and can be found free on the Internet.

Initially, Timayenis based his accounts largely on the publications of Edouard Drumont, founder of the Anti-Semitic league in France. But Timayenis’ writings progressed he clearly had his own ideas. Jonathan D. Sarna writes in The ‘Mythical Jew and in the Jew Next Door a chapter of “Anti-Semitism in American History” edited by David A. Gerber (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1986), that in The Original Mr. Jacobs, Timayenis “calls non-Jews who conform to his Jewish stereotype Jews,” evidence to the contrary notwithstanding: “Has ever a man of observation asked himself the question: ‘Is there any Jewish blood in the veins of John D. Rockefeller?’ We do not hesitate to affirm from an intimate knowledge of the man, that if Rockefeller is not actually a Jew, he has many Jewish traits … The spirit of the Standard Oil Company is simply the spirit of the monopoly, of cruelty, of annihilation of all competitors, a spirit in fact such as manifests itself in the scandalous enterprises of the Jews…” While these three tracts sold in great numbers Timayenis proved so unstable a character that sustained legal battles left him penniless and his anti-Semitic both best-selling volumes and reviled accounts. Various authors adamantly contend that Timayenis’ work spread a permeating ideological fog over the 1880s such that Anti-Semitism gained new ground across the United States.

The books themselves are filled with the most vicious anti-Jewish lies you can imagine, and were apparently best-sellers. Here's a typical paragraph in the 219 pages of The American Jew:

This is before Henry Ford and Charles Coughlin. It was before the publication of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." While his first book about Jews was plagiarized from a French volume, this second book seems to have come from Timayenis;' own twisted mind, and much of modern antisemitism comes from this book which was apparently one of the first in English to attack Jews on racial rather than religious lines.

The New York Times wrote about him in 1888, but the bulk of the article was not about how bigoted he was, but about death threats that he claimed to be receiving several times a day from New York's Jews. Yes, the New York Times was more sympathetic with a proud antisemite than with Jews in 1888.

Hamas Outraged At Duplicate Fake Names Among Gaza Casualties (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Muhammad Wasmadad, a journalist killed on July 29.

Gaza City, February 18 - Officials at the Ministry of Health expressed anger today that the compilers of casualty figures from this past summer's war with Israel sloppily included multiple instances of the same nonexistent people, instead of merely reclassifying dead fighters as civilians and journalists.

Hara al-Susa, head of the ministry's Political Leveraging Division, laced into his staff this morning for failing to adequately oversee the compilation and editing of the casualty lists, an important element in the Hamas movement's strategy to engineer, magnify, and exploit suffering to be blamed on Israel. He pointed to the irresponsible inclusion of the same people several times over on the lists, among them individuals variously identified as journalists, mannequins, and livestock.

"Is this supposed to be a joke?" bellowed al-Susa, who claims to have lost several goats over the summer to whom he was reportedly "very close." "We expect the international media to swallow our figures unquestioningly, but that cannot lead us to become complacent and just throw in whatever names we feel like."

The aftermath of an Israeli strike on the AP headquarters.

Especially irksome, said al-Susa, was a group of at least fifty names, perhaps more, that were obviously manufactured for purposes of the report and appeared to be the product of a bunch of puerile middle school pranksters. "Yubik Manoz? Alaik Tuswallo? Arek M'balsak? Tell me, how credible do you think we're going to remain if Mr. Salaambam Thankyumam appears multiple times on these lists?" he continued.

"No one is going to believe there's more than one poor schmuck with those names - but you expect people to accept that there was one guy named 'Ailaik Anal' who was a journalist killed by an Israeli airstrike; another who was a twelve-year-old struck down by naval artillery; and a third, who - get this - was chowing down in his corral with the other sheep when an Israeli sniper took him out."

"Sloppy, just outrageously sloppy, he added.

Analysts believe the carelessness grows out of at least a decade's experience of having the international media uncritically parrot Hamas-provided casualty statistics. "There's little point to due diligence when whatever you throw out there is eaten up," notes media expert Joseph Goebbels. "Sooner or later, the people involved will try to get creative and see how far they can push things. It's a perfectly natural reaction."

"Just ask my Gazan colleague Yusuk Kaki," he added.

02/18 Links Pt1: Baby Adelle Biton Laid to Rest; Hamas's Army of Children; White House delusions

From Ian:

Baby Adelle Biton Laid to Rest; 'A Great Soul in a Small Body'

Four-year-old terror victim Adelle Biton was brought for burial early Tuesday afternoon in her hometown of Yakir in Samaria.
Adelle had struggled to survive since being struck directly in the head by a fist-sized rock thrown by Arab terrorists in March 2013 while riding in the family car outside Ariel in Samaria. She suffered critical wounds, and doctors said Adelle's recovery from the blow was nothing short of miraculous.
For roughly two years Adelle went through rehabilitation, but the severe nerve damage she never recovered from eventually led her to pass this Tuesday after suddenly coming down with pneumonia.
Adelle's mother Adva spoke at the funeral, saying in tears "they didn't give you a chance but you didn't give up for anyone. I didn't agree that they say you don't hear or don't understand, and you proved to me that you hear and understand. You never gave up, my warrior. Those vile people didn't take your beauty even after you were wounded."
"My Adelle, you're my whole world. Yesterday I saw your suffering, struggling for every breath. When they put you on emergency care I said to the Holy One blessed be He - either life or death, enough of your suffering. The Holy One blessed be He decided to take you to Him," added the bereaved mother.

I Know Exactly Who is to Blame for Adele Biton's Death

Little Adele Biton died from wounds sustained in a terrorist rock attack. Many eulogies will be published during the next few days and the Palestinian Arabs will be blamed, justifiably, for their vicious anti-Semitic infanticide.
But I know exactly who else is to blame.
I blame the ignoble Israeli Jewess Amir Hass. “Throwing stones is the right and the duty of anyone living under foreign rule", wrote the official Haaretz correspondent for what the newspaper labels the "occupied territories".
I blame Israel Prize laureate leftist Professor Zeev Sternhell, who praised “that wonderful boy who smashed a windshield”.
I blame those Israeli journalists who legitimize Palestinian nationalism and condone genocide. For them, stoning a Jew such as baby Adele is the minimum right granted by the international community.
I blame Western symbolic violence against the Jews, such as an 8,000-word New York Times magazine cover story justifying Palestinian Arab terrorism and calling for another Intifada. After all, weren’t the Palestinian Arabs who killed Adele Biton just fighting against “the occupation”? Weren’t they?
I blame Obama, because the truck driving in front of the Biton family was attacked during the Arab riots that erupted in Judea and Samaria ahead of the US President's visit. What did Obama say then in front of an enraptured Israeli audience? “See the world through the eyes of Palestinians”. It was an invitation to “liberate” the territory "stolen by the Jews" in 1948 and in 1967.

The Hares Boys are now murderers

Two years ago, the Biton family 's existence changes in the blink of an eye. Adva Biton, and her three young daughters Avigail, 4, Naama, 6, and Adele, then 2 were injured when Palestinian "boys" hurled rocks at their vehicle, causing their car to swerve off the road and collide with an oncoming truck.
The thugs who nearly destroyed the Biton family became a cause celebe in anti-Israel circles.
The ISM started a letter writing campaign. in support of the "schoolboys", Mohammed Kleib, Mohammed Suleiman, Ali Shamlawi, Ammar Souf, Tamer Souf, saying they "were were arrested and charged with 20 counts of attempted murder for allegedly throwing stones at an Israeli settler’s car", and alleging " They received these charges despite an overwhelming lack of evidence". There was not a word about the devastating injuries received by Adele.
A mother and 3 young girls were nothing more than "setters" to the ISM, and the thugs terrorized them were repeatedly framed as the victims, with the ISM writing, "It is difficult to comprehend how terrible this ordeal must be for the boys and their families."
Today Adele Biton died from complication from the injuries she received in the accident. May she rest in peace. The "Hares boys" are now murderers.
People of good faith, from all regions and all walks of life mourned the little girl.

Edgar Davidson: Comic Relief funds the people who legitimize the murder of 4-year-old Adelle Biton

Two years ago Adelle Biton (then aged two) miraculously survived a rock attack by Palestinian terrorists which left her with severe neurological damage. She died today after her condition deteriorated rapidly. Adelle is one of many Israeli civilians who have been killed or severely wounded by Palestinian rock attacks in the last few years. These attacks are never reported in the Western media (and, indeed, the overwhelmingly leftist Israeli media also does its best to cover them up) except in the context of them being an example of 'weak Palestinians throwing harmless stones against evil Zionists with guns'.
Organisations like War on Want and the openly terrorist supporting International Solidarity Movement (one of whose founders Atif Choudhury is a member of War on Want's Council of Management) regard stone-throwing by Palestinians as legitimate, 'peaceful' acts of resistance. Their relentless campaign to delegitimise Israel also ensures that children like Adelle Biton are dehumanised as "Zionist settlers" deserving of punishment. They even encourage and brainwash westerners to go to Israel and participate in the harassment of Jews. For example, Kayla Meuller (the American recently murdered by ISIS) was a member of ISM sent to Israel and who was proud to boast of her participation in the stone throwing; the world media called her a 'human rights activist dedicated to world peace'. They say the same about War on Want and the many dozens of other organizations dedicated to the delegitimisation (and ultimate destruction) of the Jewish State.
I have been warning about War on Want for many years. Yesterday the newly formed Jewish Human Rights League protested about the organisation's continued antisemitism and its recent anti-Israel stunt that involved handing out fake guns to British students.

Giuliani defends Netanyahu, slams Obama (video clip)

Here are two minutes from a speech that Rudy Giuliani gave at an Iranian-American Community of Arizona symposium entitled “Countering Islamic Fundamentalism and a Nuclear-Armed Iran,” on February 13.

The cloud over Schocken Street

A poll in 2013 showed that Israelis were the 11th happiest people in the world.\

Another survey in 2014 showed that among the 10 countries with advanced economies polled, Israel ranked second in satisfaction with how things were going.

Yet another survey last August showed hat 86% of Israelis were satisfied (or very satisfied) with their lives.

But not 100%.

There are some Israelis, a tiny minority, who are miserable, and they spend every waking hour telling the world how awful things are.

Arabs? Mizrahi Jews? Haredim? No, no and no - their happiness numbers are all better than world averages.

The most miserable people in Israel are the people who write for Haaretz.

Every single day, Haaretz has multiple articles about how absolutely awful Israel is. I'm not exaggerating. Most are of course rabidly against the current government and obsessed with anything negative they can find there, but others are angry at pretty much everything and everyone, and they want the world to realize how terrible the country that they live in is.

Here is one of today's articles in Ha'aretz, by Zvi Bar'el, in its entirety. I won't even fisk it; :

European Jews moving to Israel are trading anti-Semitism for racism

French and Danish immigrants will find that Israel swallows its immigrants, but it doesn't digest them.

By Zvi Bar'el | Feb. 18, 2015 | 2:48 AM

Dusty old plans stored at the Immigrant Absorption Ministry and the Jewish Agency and its affiliates are being revived. Everyone is ready to welcome the big wave of immigrants expected to move to Israel following the terrorist attacks in France and Denmark. No country in Europe is safe for Jews anymore, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says, not forgetting of course to remind these future refugees that the continent remains “that same old Europe.”

Actually, not only the Jews of Europe aren't safe. The Jews of Israel have a hard time being convinced that their haven can face up to the threats in the region that Netanyahu warns them of daily. But let's assume that thousands of Jews do decide to abandon their businesses, studies, homes and livelihoods and board rescue flights to Ben-Gurion International Airport. What will they find here?

They'll see right-wing videos portraying the Israeli left as Nazi collaborators out to destroy the country. They'll learn how fortunate they are not to have come here as refugees from Eritrea or Sudan, or even as Jewish immigrants from Ethiopia.

Jews who have suffered European anti-Semitism will trade it in for Israeli racism. They'll discover they've become citizens of an occupying country, the occupation that has contributed to that same anti-Semitism that made them pack their bags in the first place.
And here are two other facts that European Jews should be aware of. Israel's murder rate is 1.8 per 100,000 people, while in France it’s 1 per 100,000 and in Denmark 0.8. Last year, 27 people were killed in terror attacks here. In France and Denmark not a single person was.

The situation in Europe could worsen, but in Israel the risk that the situation could worsen is far greater. If European Jews come to Israel immediately, they can vote in the March 17 election and support the person who promised them a safe haven and invited them to immigrate, or more accurately ordered them to.

True, quickly enough they'll discover that their safety isn't subject to the whims of the Islamic State or Al-Qaida, and they won’t suffer murderous manifestations of anti-Semitism. But to be real Israelis, they'll have to adapt to the Israeli depression and the constant fear of war or mass destruction — or both.

Of course, Jews from Europe can respond to all this with the question: “If things are so bad in Israel, why do you Israelis stay?” The answer is implied in the question: We are Israelis. Our identity is dictated to us. Hebrew isn't only our language, it's our culture. Our solidarity is limited to ourselves; our collective memory as Israelis isn't shared.

That is, there are Palestinians in Israel, but they're the enemy at the moment. The anger that some of us feel isn't directed at the country but rather at the country’s leaders, the ones who distort the national identity and dip it in racist-religious acid. We're proudly surviving with the help of the saying “We survived Pharaoh and we’ll survive this.” Survival rather than quality of life is the linchpin of our identity.

You, the Jews of Europe, were taught to demand quality of life. In Israel, anyone seeking quality of life like that in Berlin is considered a traitor. And please don’t confuse Israeliness with Jewishness. Israelis don’t go crazy for foreigners even if they're Jewish. Just ask the Russians. About 150,000 of the immigrants from the former Soviet Union have left.

And ask the Ethiopians, the Bukharans and the Kurds, who decades after arriving are still identified by where they came from. Of course, you're entitled to immigrate, and of course you'll receive a warm welcome at the airport. But remember that Israel hastily swallows its immigrants. It doesn't digest them.

The amount of self-loathing shown here is off the charts. But at Ha'aretz, this is pretty much par for the course.

To be fair, the writers for +972 Magazine are just as filled with self-hate as those at Ha'aretz.

From a Swedish Radio interview with Israeli Ambassador Isaac Bachmann:

She doesn't even ask if Israeli actions or "Zionists" are responsible for antisemitism - she is asking whether Jews are!

The ambassador replied appropriately, comparing her question to asking if women are responsible for rape.

From TheLocal:

On Tuesday, a journalist for Sveriges Radio (SR) asked ambassador Isaac Bachman on air: "Are Jews themselves responsible for the progression of anti-Semitism?"

The ambassador appeared shocked by the suggestion, and replied: "I purely and simply reject the question."

When the journalist asked "Why?", Bachman said: "There was no reason to ask this question."

The station removed the programme from its online archive and issued a full apology.

Here is the apology:

Israeli Ambassador Isaac Bachmann was a guest in this afternoon's Studio Ett. He put forth an interesting reasoning of the causes of the growing anti-Semitism, but was asked an unfortunate question of whether Jews has a personal responsibility.

We apologize for the question. It is misleading and blames both individuals and a vulnerable group.

The Jewish community has suffered terrible terror and have all our sympathy.

An editorial apology was broadcasted at the end of Studio Ett's transmission.

We have received questions about how the interview will be saved, so therefore this clarification:

We have chosen to publish an edited version of the interview on our website. It is an unusual step, but we do not wish to contribute to the formulation being further circulated.

The original transmission is saved according to the usual procedures which among other things means that it is transferred to the Royal Library.

Anne Lagercrantz, director Dagens Eko
Klas Wolf-Watz, director P1 morning and Studio Ett
Magnus Westberg, producer Studio Ett"

(h/t Bjorn, Erik)

From Ma'an:

Deputy head of Hamas Mousa Abu Marzouk says the last visit to Gaza by international Quartet envoy Tony Blair came to notify the Hamas movement of a new set of preconditions before the war-torn coastal enclave could be rebuilt.

Blair is now talking about five new preconditions to be imposed on Hamas before Gaza reconstruction and improvement to the living conditions, the official said.

Blair's five new preconditions, says Abu Marzouk, include Palestinian reconciliation, a Palestinian political program based on a Palestinian state on the pre-1967 borders, and confirmation that Hamas is a Palestinian movement seeking to achieve Palestinian goals rather than being part of an Islamic movement with regional dimensions.

He also says Blair wants approval that the two-state solution is a final solution to the conflict and a reassuring message to Egypt that Hamas won't be a base for "terrorism in Sinai" and that it would hold talks with the Egyptian government to "prevent terrorism."

In response to the alleged preconditions, the Hamas official said his movement is a Palestinian, Arab and Islamic resistance movement. Its goals are to achieve the Palestinian people's aspirations of return, freedom and liberation, and its top priorities "at this stage" are reconciliation, ending inter-Palestinian dispute and unity of all the Palestinians wherever they live.

Furthermore, Hamas looks forward to operating within a national Palestinian consensus whose goals are withdrawal of Israeli occupation from the West Bank and Jerusalem and establishment of an independent Palestinian state whose capital is Jerusalem.

Hamas, according to Abu Marzouk, is using all available means to achieve those goals and to have distinguished relations with all Arab countries especially with Egypt.

Palestinian reconciliation has already been accomplished, added Abu Marzouk, confirming that his movement is willing to put into effect every single term of the reconciliation agreement.

The question is, said Abu Marzouk, would Israel accept a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders? Would they accept to evacuate the West Bank settlements and stop seizing lands there? Or is it still looking forward to expanding even beyond the West Bank so as to "devour" the West Bank and impose facts on the ground? he asked sarcastically.

With regard to Hamas' insistence that it doesn't have regional plans, the Hamas official said such an assumption would need evidence that the movement has political programs and agendas in that direction. "Where are such agendas and programs?!" he wondered.

Abu Marzouk also commented on the two-state solution as a final solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and confirmed that Hamas "won't agree to sign" an agreement that "confiscates the rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people."

He finally reiterated that it was indisputable that Hamas cared about Egypt's security and stability and would never intervene in Egyptian internal affairs.

A casual reading of this would make it sound like Hamas accepts a two-state solution, with a vague caveat.

Which is exactly how Hamas wants to appear to Tony Blair.

Hamas media, however, reports that Abu Marzouk explicitly rejected Blair's demands for a two state solution and that he emphasized that point. He said that "the hopes and aspirations and identity and attachment to the land can not be eliminated or changed by the signing of a leader or the approval of a faction," meaning that no agreement will ever stop Palestinian Arabs from trying to destroy Israel. He accuses Blair of trying to force Palestinian Arabs to waive their "rights" to Israel.

His entire statement is here.

And yet there are still plenty of idiots who will point to lying declarations and mentally fill in vague statements to confidently declare that Hamas has accepted the two state solution.

Challenge antisemitism (Deutsche Welle)

A nice op-ed from Deutsche Welle Editor-in-Chief Alexander Kudascheff:

Islamist terrorism has a hold on Europe - a hold of fear. This year, it was France first, now Denmark - and everyone wonders where the terrorists will strike next.

No one doubts they will attack again. But at least the fear of danger and the terrorist threat hasn't diminished or blocked political common sense. Europe presents itself as determined not to be forced to its knees or give up its values. Europe wants to hold fast to the ideal and reality of an open, free society and to resolutely defend freedom of opinion against a closed theocratic system.

This terror targets all of us, but it particularly targets Jews in Europe. It targeted Jews in Paris in a shop that sells kosher food, it hit Jews in a synagogue in Copenhagen. It humiliates them by targeting Jewish graves - for years, Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated across Europe, in particular in France, where tombs were vandalized just this past weekend.

Many will shrug off these news reports, but it is important to stress that these vandals disturb the peace of the dead and offend the feelings of relatives and friends. They vilify people's memory, which is disgusting no matter whether the perpetrators are far-right extremists or Islamists.

It's high time Europe remembers that it not only has a Jewish legacy, but as Jewish present, too. Apart from great Jewish personalities in European history like Albert Einstein and Moses Mendelssohn, murderous anti-Semitism also shaped the old continent for a thousand years: during the Crusades in Britain and France, the 1492 expulsion of Jews from Spain and the Holocaust, the genocide of European Jews by Nazi Germany.

The history of Jews in Europe is a history of persecution, discrimination, social ostracism and murder.

That is why today, Europeans must defend the Jews if they don't want the exodus of Jews from the continent to continue. Of Europe's roughly two million Jews, only 30,000 emigrate to Israel every year, but many more leave Europe unnoticed, heading for Canada or the US.

Europe is remaining levelheaded even in the face of Islamist terrorism. Hardly any laws have been changed, and there has been no hysteria. Societies are not paralyzed by fear of the invisible threat - not yet. But Europe and the Europeans must get more involved in the fight against anti-Semitism.

Europeans must give Jews in their countries the feeling that as a matter of course, they stand by their side. It's a scandal that many people appear to have got used to police protection for Jewish kindergartens, schools and synagogues.

Politically, it is more than alarming that criticism of Israel (for instance in the Gaza war) often turns out to be nothing but veiled anti-Semitism.

But Europe, and every single European, must stand united against rampant anti-Semitism. Not just in demonstrations and other events, but in everyday life. Do not stand idly by when your neighbor's life is threatened, the Bible says.

We shouldn't stay silent, but raise our voices in anger.

Believe it or not, this editorial was translated into Arabic and published in Egypt's Shorouk News.

02/17 Links Pt2: British artists shun Israel’s ‘blood money’ but accept Britain’s; CIA and Anti-Zionism

From Ian:

Richard Millett: As Jews are murdered why is War On Want handing out fake guns to British students?

With Jews being murdered in France, Belgium and Denmark there’s an ominous feeling that British Jews are awaiting their own round. With that in mind a group of concerned British Jews from Jewish Human Rights Watch protested this morning outside the offices of War On Want in central London.
War On Want is one of Britain’s most respected charities but it is, sadly, now being run by people determined to import the Israeli-Palestinian conflict onto the streets of Britain.
Quite unbelievably, after what has happened this weekend and in Belgium and Paris, War On Want’s current campaign includes handing out fake guns to students to help mark what is sickeningly termed “Israeli Apartheid Week” which begins next week on British university campuses.
Many British Jews are feeling insecure and accuse WOW of helping to spread propaganda and hate against the Jewish State which could well lead to the events of Paris, Belgium and Denmark being repeated in the UK. They are asking: Is War on Want helping to promote a War On Jews?
I questioned John Hilary (see below), WOW’s executive director, about this and other issues as he approached his offices. As you can see Hilary refused to answer my questions about WOW handing out guns to British students, a two-state solution, Israel’s future or the bombing of innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas.

Why, as Jews die, is War On Want handing out fake guns?

Brendan O'Neill: British artists shun Israel’s ‘blood money’ but accept Britain’s

Seven hundred British creatives have signed a pledge saying they will never work in Israel or take the Israeli government’s filthy lucre so long as it continues to wage war in Gaza and kill Palestinians. So why, then, are they happy to take money from the British government, when the British government has in recent years bombed Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and left a trail of destruction and line-up of corpses that make last year’s Israeli clashes in Gaza look like a tea party in comparison? Come on. There must be an answer to this question. What is it? Why shun Israel’s ‘blood money’ but accept Britain’s?
A quick glance at the list of 700 Israel-boycotters reveals numerous people who have built their careers on cash from the coffers of the Iraqi-killing, Afghanistan-repressing British government. There’s Ken Loach, recipient of monies from the government-backed UK Film Council, here chiming in with all the others to say he will ‘accept neither professional invitations to Israel, nor funding from any institutions linked to its government’. So, Ken, why are you happy to accept money from institutions linked to a government that has killed way more people in the Middle East than Israel has?
There’s Mike Leigh, who’s also been funded by the UK Film Council, and who threw a massive hissy fit in 2010 when the Film Council was wound down in its current form and reorganised. Ladies and gentlemen, the principled film-directing doyen of decent Hampsteadites, who makes angry public statements over two things: his implacable, principled refusal to take blood money from the Israeli killing machine and his fury at having his bloody money from the British killing machine taken away from him! What a guy!

Jewish-led UK artists’ boycott greeted with derision

Laura Marks, senior vice-president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, alluded to the timing of the boycott letter, calling it “offensive” in an interview with The Times of Israel.
“There is something ironic in the demand for a cultural boycott and the demand not to engage when the attacks in Copenhagen and Paris were made on people who wanted to express themselves,” Marks said.
Marks claimed a cultural boycott of this sort is also “racist.” “As the APPG report makes clear, negative language towards Jews becomes the norm if you don’t challenge it,” she said.
“How do we change attitudes if people want to close down communications? Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and [these artists are effectively] saying that they will continue to work with all sorts of awful regimes and that Israel is the only one they aren’t going to deal with.”
On Monday, an editorial in The Times weighed in, saying, “The egregious campaigns for a cultural boycott of Israel are stoking ugly, atavistic movements in Europe. These need to be confronted by civilized opinion. Israeli governments are fallible but the Jewish state is a force for democracy in a region that is short of it.”
Chairman of Britain’s Zionist Federation Paul Charney was equally dismissive when speaking with The Times of Israel.
“The signed letter says much more about the myopic views of a small clique of navel-gazers then it does about any wider support for boycotts in this country,” said Charney.

ISIS threatens "Rome"

From Time:

The executioner speaks in English and points his knife toward the Mediterranean. “We will conquer Rome, by Allah’s permission,” he says.

The video released by the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) on Sunday showing the killings of 21 Egyptian Christian workers, appeared to be directed at the Christian world, the continent of Europe and gloried in its brutality.

It was filmed in Libya on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. The video made no reference to the other powers in Libya’s civil war, in which both of the country’s rival governments claim to be combating ISIS.

Unlike the statements of other Islamist groups in the region, the video also made no mention of the Egyptian state, which has cracked down on political Islam since the removal of elected President Mohamed Morsi in 2013. Egypt’s government is also participating in the fight against Islamists in Libya.

Instead, the five-minute film is concerned with more international themes. The targets are not modern states, but rather “Rome” and Christians, who are labeled “the people of the cross, the followers of the hostile Egyptian Church.” The message was phrased in religious terms intended to transcend national boundaries. The video ends with the Mediterranean waves dyed red from the blood of the murdered men.

The spectacular appearance of ISIS on the Mediterranean’s southern shores alarmed European governments. Italy’s Interior Minister Angelino Alfano called for NATO to intervene in Libya. “ISIS is at the door,” he was quoted as saying. “There is no time to waste.” If the country’s conflict is not resolved soon, U.K. special envoy Jonathan Powell declared, Libya risks becoming “Somalia on the Mediterranean.”

From ANSA:

Italian Foreign Minister Paolo Gentiloni warned Friday that "Italy is under threat from the situation in Libya, 200 nautical miles away". In a television interview, he said it was a grave concern that Islamic State (ISIS) militants may be as closed as Sirte in Libya. Earlier, the Italian government urged citizens to "temporarily leave" Libya as ISIS appeared to be making headway.

This shows that the advice of Graeme Wood in his otherwise excellent article mentioned yesterday, to contain ISIS instead of destroying it, will never work. He writes:

Properly contained, the Islamic State is likely to be its own undoing. No country is its ally, and its ideology ensures that this will remain the case. The land it controls, while expansive, is mostly uninhabited and poor. As it stagnates or slowly shrinks, its claim that it is the engine of God’s will and the agent of apocalypse will weaken, and fewer believers will arrive. And as more reports of misery within it leak out, radical Islamist movements elsewhere will be discredited: No one has tried harder to implement strict Sharia by violence. This is what it looks like.

Perhaps IS can be contained in Syria and Iraq, but when territorial contiguity is unnecessary - as its members in Libya and the Sinai show - then it can always give the appearance of growing. And in Islam, appearances are more important than facts. (This is a byproduct of the honor/shame dynamic.) Other hardline Islamist groups will inevitably decide to join IS for practical reasons: it is a name-brand chain of radical Islam, freeing the other groups from worrying about marketing, recruiting and fundraising.

(h/t Yoel)