Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, April 06, 2015

Why Obama's Support for the Muslim Brotherhood Matters (Mike Lumish)

Anti-BDS / pro-Israel activist and writer, Jon Haber of the Divestthis! blog, and I had an ongoing discussion for a number of months that I wish to briefly revisit. Our conversation faltered and then stopped on the taboo question of Obama's support for the Muslim Brotherhood and, therefore, his support for political Islam, more generally.

At this point, I find it rather difficult to imagine how anyone paying attention could possibly still refuse to acknowledge the obvious fact that the Obama administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood. It is not a matter of abstract conjecture, nor is it dependent upon whatever may, or may not, have been going on in Obama's mind.

The only things that matter in determining the question of Obama administration support for the Brotherhood is whether or not the Obama administration turned over funds, weaponry, and political support to the Brotherhood before or during its time in power in Egypt.

If the Obama administration did turn over funds, weaponry, and lent political support to the Brotherhood, which it did, then - pretty much by definition - Barack Obama should be said to have supported the Muslim Brotherhood.

In his retort to my latest piece in this conversation, Haber says this:

I continue to take issue with the core assertion that drives much of Mike’s argument (one he claims I agree with in his last piece) that the current President supports (or “supported”) the Muslim Brotherhood, if by “support” he means (1) agrees with the goals of that organization and (2) wishes it to succeed.

That is, actually, not at all what I mean. The reason that Obama should be said to support the Muslim Brotherhood is because he did, in fact, support the Muslim Brotherhood.

A = A.

Haber claims that Obama gave "endless slack to Islamist foes," yet he denies that he supported those Islamist foes.

Excuse me, but at what point does giving "endless slack" not begin to constitute support? Certainly giving "endless slack" is not an act of neutrality. Nor, of course, is it an act of opposition. This being the case, perhaps I can be forgiven for misinterpreting Haber's claim that Obama gave "endless slack to Islamist foes" as representing "support."

Of course, if that behavior is not oppositional and if it is not neutral, than just what is left?

Supportive seems to come to mind.

Furthermore, Obama's friendliness toward the anti-Semitic, genocidally-malignant Muslim Brotherhood is not dependent upon an ideological alignment between himself and them. The Brotherhood, as a radical Islamist organization, wants to see the world live under al-Sharia (which, needless to say, means dhimmitude or death to all non-Muslims) and called directly for war against Israel and for the conquest of Jerusalem. Barack Obama, as President of the United States presumably does not share such goals, but then one begins to wonder what kind of benefit accrues to the American people through promoting the Brotherhood or enabling an Iranian nuclear bomb?

Haber characterizes my argument, as follows:

Premise 1: The Muslim Brotherhood is a totalitarian organization with goals at odds with the US and the West, which is also the wellspring of Jihadi violence in the Middle East.

Premise 2: President Obama and his administration have made decisions and statements (especially when the Muslim Brotherhood was in power in Egypt) that involved helping and praising that Brotherhood regime.

Premise 3: Only someone who supports the Muslim Brotherhood would help and praise the Muslim Brotherhood regime when it ruled Egypt.

Conclusion: President Obama supports a totalitarian organization with goals at odds with the US and the West, which is also the wellspring of Jihadi violence in the Middle East.

Haber agrees that premises one and two are valid. He writes:

But for purposes of this conversation Premise 1 is perfectly acceptable in its present form. And I think anyone who has followed US foreign policy over the last 5-6 years would agree that Premise 2 is on safe historic ground.

This leaves only premise 3 which is, for all intents and purposes, the same as the conclusion.

Haber wants to argue that support is not necessarily support if the supporter was in the wrong frame of mind. He writes:

But a reasonable person can come up with a variety of alternatives to Premise 3. For example, someone might make crappy decisions (like the ones we’ve seen the Obama administration make) because they suck at diplomacy/realpolitique due to incompetence, arrogance or a combination of both. Or perhaps the President’s ideology blinds him to seeing forces (even Muslim Fundamentalist forces) fighting against an oppressive regime as new totalitarians in waiting (vs. successors to the civil rights heroes of old).

The funny thing is, I have actually argued both of those things in my discussions on just why Obama supports political Islam and, therefore, supports the Muslim Brotherhood. But whatever the reason why Obama supports the Brotherhood, it is hard to argue that he has not done so and Haber does not bother to try.

So, yes, when an American president offers "help and praise (to) the Muslim Brotherhood" then it supports the Muslim Brotherhood.

When an American president offers help and praise to anyone or anything then he supports that anyone or anything.

Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood and it is important for those of us who care about the well-being of Israel to wrap our brains around this fact. Barack Obama supported an organization that exists to promote Sharia and, therefore, promote the dhimmitude and "racist" persecution of all non-Muslims. Barack Obama supported an organization that called for the conquest of Jerusalem, which is essentially the same as calling for the genocide of the Jews.

I backed off of this conversation for the simple reason that Haber said he wanted to wrap it up.

However, the reason that he wanted to wrap it up is because "our attempts to find major disagreements could devolve into a Narcissism of Small Difference destined to deliver a diminishing return on investment."

But this is not a small difference.

The fact that Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood demonstrates that he supports political Islam.

The fact that American Left-leaning Jews support Barack Obama demonstrates that they support an American president that supports political Islam.

The only questions are, why does he do it and why can't we face it?

If one wishes to understand Barack Obama's special relationship with Islamist regimes, like the Brotherhood or Iran, one must first acknowledge that which is directly before our eyes.

It is only then that we can begin to answer the question why and I would suggest that if you want to know the answer to that question, look to his ideologically-academic and religious mentors.

Look to people like Rashid Khalidi, the late Edward Said, and a certain minister in Chicago who shall remain nameless.

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.

04/06 Links Pt1: 10 key questions about ‘irresponsible, dangerous’ Iran deal

From Ian:

Israeli document poses 10 key questions about ‘irresponsible, dangerous’ Iran deal

Israel on Monday posed 10 questions to the US-led negotiators with Iran that it said underlined “the extent of the irresponsible concessions given to Iran” in the framework agreement reached last Thursday, and made clear “how dangerous the framework is for Israel, the region and the world.”
The questions were listed in a document distributed by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz, a Likud party member and confidant of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The document (see accompanying PDF here) reiterated Netanyahu’s assertion that “a better deal” can and must be reached. It protested that the framework agreement reached in Lausanne, Switzerland, and hailed by President Barack Obama as “historic,” “ignores the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program to Israel.” By contrast, it charged, “great consideration” was given to Iran, “an enemy of the Unites States, whose regime, even during the negotiations, continued to conduct aggression in the region and to call for the destruction of Israel.”
It charged that “the framework deal does not block Iran’s path to the bomb. By removing the sanctions and lifting the main restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in about a decade, this framework paves Iran’s path to a bomb.”
Echoing criticisms leveled by Netanyahu since the deal was reached, the document further protested that “not a single nuclear facility will be shut down. Iran will be permitted to continue its advanced centrifuge R&D, and [the issue of] its intercontinental ballistic missile program remains unaddressed.”

Michael Oren: The Iran Deal and How Not To Buy a Middle Eastern Carpet

Want to purchase a carpet in the Middle East? If so, the first question the merchant will ask you is, “How much do you want to spend?” Seasoned buyers never answer. They know that whatever amount they cite will become the baseline for the negotiation. They understand that the merchant’s smiles, the many cups of tea he serves, his invitations to stroll along the riverbank, are all part of his selling tactic. So, too, are his protests — in response to any offer — of wounded pride. Veterans of Middle East carpet markets expect the give-and-take to be lengthy, even exhausting, but are always willing to leave the shop.
The parameters agreement for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran is an ideal example of how not to buy a Middle Eastern carpet. In 2012, President Barack Obama declared that, “The deal we’ll accept is that they end their nuclear program” and “abide by the UN resolutions” demanding that Iran cease all uranium enrichment and dismantle its nuclear plants. The Security Council’s five permanent members plus Germany could have offered the lowest possible price as their final bid — take it or leave it. Iran would have had little choice but to sell the carpet.
Yet, in reaching the parameters agreement, international negotiators were worn down by the protracted talks. They were persuaded by Iran’s displays of warmth and earnestness, and accepted its claim that the nuclear program was a matter of national pride similar to America’s moon landing. Most damagingly, when asked by the Iranians “how much do you want to spend?” the P5+1 replied by recognizing the Islamic Republic’s right to enrich and to maintain its nuclear facilities. This became the new baseline and the only remaining questions were: How much enrichment and how many facilities? The haggling had scarcely begun and already the merchant profited.

Missing Peace: Israel: Nuclear Deal Is Capitulation To Iranian Dictates

The compromise was the brainchild of Robert Einhorn from Brookings – a top State nonproliferation official stretching back to the Clinton era – and there was a lot of talk of Iranian flexibility when they accepted it. Then this week, it emerged that, in fact, the Iranians would be allowed to keep centrifuges spinning inside the mountain.
But instead of spinning uranium, the centrifuges would be spinning germanium or similar non-nuclear elements. That’s the administration’s talking point: that there will not be any “enrichment” going on at Fordow. The claim is – bluntly – false. Centrifuges spin isotopes into lighter and heavier elements, thereby “enriching” the material. That’s what they do. In fact, that’s all they do.
This isn’t a minor point. The concession has the potential to gut the whole deal for two reasons:
1. The deal allows N-generation centrifuge R&D beyond the reach of the West- since the process is the same process, Iran will have a hardened facility where it will be able to research and develop N-generation centrifuges. Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif bragged from the stage in Lausanne that Iranian R&D on centrifuges will continue on IR-4s, IR-5s, IR-6s, and IR-8s centrifuges–and that the pace of research will be tied to Iranian scientific progress. The development of advanced centrifuges would give the Iranians a leg up if they decide to break out, and it will put them instantly within a screw’s turn of a nuke when the deal expires.
2. The deal leaves Iranian nuclear infrastructure running beyond the reach of the West. If the Iranians kick out inspectors and dare the world to respond, the West will have zero way to intervene. The Iranians will have a head start on enrichment–and a place to do it beyond the reach of Western weapons. The administration’s early pushback has been that the breakout time will still be a year, so they could, in theory, reimpose sanctions–but it takes more than a year for sanctions to take an economic toll. So, there are zero options to stop a breakout.

The talking points fact sheet upon the agreement for framework for a nuclear deal with Iran includes the White House's latest soundbite meant to assuage fears that the sanctions cannot be quickly re-imposed if Iran violates the agreement:

U.S. and E.U. nuclear-related sanctions will be suspended after the IAEA has verified that Iran has taken all of its key nuclear-related steps. If at any time Iran fails to fulfill its commitments, these sanctions will snap back into place.

The architecture of U.S. nuclear-related sanctions on Iran will be retained for much of the duration of the deal and allow for snap-back of sanctions in the event of significant non-performance.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest repeated the phrase:

If they don't live up to the agreement, sanctions would "snap" back into place, he said.

President Obama has been using the "snap back" term a lot as well, as he told the NYT, the United States would “preserve the ability to snap back those sanctions if there is a violation.”

What exactly does "snap back" mean?

In a word: nothing.

The phrase is not defined anywhere as far as I can tell. It is something left for the later negotiations.

While it sounds instant, there is no detail given to this meaningless term. Re-imposing the same level of sanctions cannot possibly be done on a moment's notice. Or even within months.

Not to mention that it took years of sanctions to even bring Iran to the negotiating table. Even if sanctions could be re-imposed instantly, Iran could weather them for the time it takes to build a bomb.

The entire reason that the phrase was coined was not to force Iran into a better deal, but to convince Americans that the deal is better than it really is.

This seems to indicate that the White House spent more time on deciding how to spin the deal than they did on actually ensuring that the deal would be as good as possible.

One thing is certain: "snap-back" sanctions will not be imposed in a snap. We deserve to know exactly what this soundbite means.

(h/t EBoZ)

Goal.com Arabic site calls all of Israel "Occupied Palestinian Territories"

Goal.com says that over 64 million football fans keep up on the sport using their website.

The ones that read the site in Arabic are also fed a diet of anti-Israel propaganda.

A recent example is the caption on this photo which says "Saturday, March 28, 2015, Sammy Offer Stadium, Haifa - the occupied territories |Wales showed their intention to run for the UEFA Cup 2016 finals for the first time in history when they defeated the Zionist entity team in the fields of the city of Haifa in the occupied territories with three straight goals, and this was the first Zionist loss in the playoffs..."

This 2013 article refers to the UEFA under-21 championships held in Israel as happening in "Palestine" and in the "occupied Palestinian territories."

There were many such examples when talking about that tournament.

This article from last summer talks about how "Zionist" teams like Maccabi Tel Aviv, Hapoel Tel Aviv and Hapoel Beersheva would not be able to play in the "occupied Palestinian territories" because of "Palestinian Hamas shelling."

This 2014 article talks about about Bosnian striker Edin Dzeko missing Bosnia's UEFA Euro 2016 qualifier against "the Zionist enemy" in the "Arab" city of Jerusalem.

Goal.com is owned by the Perform Group, which is part of Access Industries. You can contact them via their email form here. Their international site Twitter account is @goal_intl and their American Twitter account is @GoalUSA. (Australia: @GoalAustralia, Canada: @GoalCDA...)

(h/t Shawarma News)

"Jews are targeting our women through their bras"

Egyptian site Nmisr.com has discovered the latest nefarious Jewish scheme to destroy the Arab world.

Zionist Death Bras!*

The article title says it all: "Scandal .. Jews are targeting our women through the bras. There is no power but from Allah."

We go on to learn that "Yes, my dear brother, the Zionist lobby is using malicious tactics to target your sister, your mother and your wife!"

A nice Muslim woman went lingerie shopping in Algeria and bought a quality bra that made her very happy. But when she went home and tried it on, she felt something hard in the cup. She cut the cra open and found a small bag there!.

She took the bag to a doctor to examine it, and he told her that it contained a mysterious substance - a substance that causes cancer!

Whoa!

Obviously, such a scheme could only have been hatched by Jews. (Never mind that the manufacturer is named "Zhou Underwear," that is all Zionist misinformation and we all know that Jews love Chinese food.)

The website wants to make sure that the news of this terrible scandal gets as much publicity as possible, so we all need to do out part.

*With apologies to Israellycool

Palestinians, Communists force Jews out of annual Italian Liberation Day parade

April 25th is Italy's annual Liberation Day, to celebrate Italy's liberation from Nazism in 1945.

Every year, there have been representatives from the Jewish Brigade which helped liberate Italy marching in the annual parade.

Last year, the Jews were attacked by Palestinian Arab supporters:

A Liberation Day parade in Rome, meanwhile, was marred by tension between a group of supporters of the Palestinian cause and representatives of Jewish fighters who were part of the Italian Resistance during World War II. Fabio Perugia, the spokesman of Rome's Jewish Community, said the friction was caused by the presence of the flag of the Jewish Brigade of the Resistance, which features the Star of David. "We had a meeting at 9:15 to march with the flag of the Jewish Brigade, which is similar to the Israeli flag, but not the same," said Perugia. "Suddenly around 50 people with Palestinian flags came out of the Colosseo metro station and started to attack us verbally.

"If the police had not been there, they would have attacked us physically". Perugia said that the police removed the Palestinian flags.

That same day, a synagogue in Rome was defaced with graffiti saying "Juden Rauss" showing a star of David being hung.

This year, the Jewish group that represents the fighters decided not to take part in the parade after negotiations failed with the other groups that participate failed.

ANED (Associazione Nazionale ex Deportati nei Campi Nazisti - National Association of Former Deportees in Nazi camps) announced that it will not attend this year's events:

We have come to this bitter and difficult decision as a result of what happened in the meeting held at the House of Remembrance on Monday, March 30, 2015, in preparation of the event / parade for the 70th anniversary of the April 25, 1945, Liberation Day. After long hours of discussion conflicting with the organizations present, ANPI, Partisans for Justice and Freedom, CGIL, the Communist Party, the Communist PRC, the Jewish Brigade, Italian Communists, Italian Students Union, Socialist Fatherland, Social Centre Acrobat, Social Center Link, Palestine Front, Roman Palestine Network, Palestine Representation in Italy, many of them ... showed the same unacceptable conditions that, in past years, have resulted in real episodes of intolerance. We who represent the former deportees in Nazi camps, both political and racial, cannot accept that the spirit and meaning of April 25, of the Resistance and Liberation, are so totally distorted and even facts become indictments against the victims of fascism. We can not accept that representatives of the partisan struggle, liberation, are banned exclusively for intolerance. With great sadness in my heart this year, so, we cannot be there .... "

The president of the Jewish community, Riccardo Pacifici, was a bit more hawkish in describing why the Jewish community as a whole won't be there:

"Since it will be Shabbat we will not be present, but we will also not be there because even the Palestinians, who apply to be in the parade, during the war were allies of the Nazis," he said. Pacifici insists and says that "last year was a climax of insults and tensions that are repeated every year. April 25 should be a day of celebration, however last year they called me a fascist. "

The Italian community is trying to find a solution to the problem.

(h/t Bob K for photo))

04/05 Links: Arabs Blast "Obama's Deal" With Iran; Bosnian soccer fans chant "Kill the Jews"

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: Arabs Blast "Obama's Deal" With Iran

Many Arabs have expressed deep concern over the nuclear deal that was reached this week between Iran and the world powers, including the US.
Arab leaders and heads of state were polite enough not to voice public criticism of the agreement when President Barack Obama phoned them to inform them about it. But this has not stopped Arab politicians, political analysts and columnists reflecting government thinking in the Arab world from lashing out at what they describe as "Obama's bad and dangerous deal with Iran."
The Arabs, especially those living in the Gulf, see the framework agreement as a sign of US "weakness" and a green light for Iran to pursue its "expansionist" scheme in the Arab world.
"Some Arab countries are opposed to the nuclear deal because it poses a threat to their interests," said the Egyptian daily Al-Wafd in an article entitled, "Politicians: Obama's deal with Iran threatens Arab world."
The newspaper quoted Hani al-Jamal, an Egyptian political and regional researcher, as saying that the deal means that the international community has accepted Iran as a nuclear power. He predicted that the framework agreement would put Iran and some Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt on a collision course.

FoxNews: Report shoots down Hamas' claims of 'journalist' deaths in war with Israel

A new report claims Hamas owes the world a retraction for its claim that Israeli forces killed 17 journalists during last year's war in Gaza.
The terrorist organization, which clashed violently with Israel last summer when the Jewish State moved to destroy tunnels it said Hamas used to mount attacks from the Palestinian territory, claimed the journalists were killed as they tried to cover the fighting. But a closer look by the Tel Aviv-based Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Centre found that eight of the 17 dead were full-fledged terrorists and the rest were lower level, non-combatant Hamas operatives who worked for Hamas media organizations.
“Not only are the Palestinians trying to claim immunity for their military terrorist operatives, they are also trying to defame Israel by claiming it deliberately killed those "journalists" and prevented them from doing their jobs,” the report stated.

Anti-Israel protesters call ‘Kill the Jews’ in Vienna

Bosnian soccer fans joined a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Vienna on Friday and shouted anti-Semitic epithets in one of the city’s central plazas, Austrian newspaper Der Standard reported.
A video posted to YouTube shows several dozen pro-Palestinian demonstrators waving Palestinian flags in Stephansplatz and calling “free, free Palestine!”
The Bosnian fans dressed in blue, yellow and white are seen standing among the protesters and joining them in their cries, before setting out on a chant of their own: “Ubij, ubij Židove!” or “Kill, kill the Jews!”
Bosnians were in the city to watch a match between Austria and Bosnia-Herzegovina later in the day.
Austrian police said they were investigating the incident.

Bosnian Football Fans - Antisemitic Incident in Vienna, Austria

31.3.2015: Bosnian fans meet a group of pro-Palestine demonstrators and starts chanting "Ubij, ubij Židove" ("Kill, kill the Jews!") in Vienna's central square (Stephansplatz) a few hour before the international friendly Austria - Bosnia&Herzegovina.

Chag sameach! (and don't forget my Haggadah!)

(edited from the original papercut here)

A few years ago I put together a Haggadah with commentaries culled from the Web on relevant topics on Zionism and redemption. You can still download it as thousands of people have:

Elder of Ziyon Haggadah 5769 by Eldad Tzioni

Previous EoZ Passover graphics:

I will not be blogging until Sunday night or Monday morning.

Chag sameach!

04/03 Links Pt2: David Draiman: Why We Must All Stand Against Antisemitism, Now More Than Ever

From Ian:

David Draiman: Why We Must All Stand Against Antisemitism, Now More Than Ever

As frontman for Disturbed, David Draiman has captivated millions of fans worldwide. Draiman’s versatile voice fuels a salvo of anthems for the Grammy Award-nominated multi-platinum selling Chicago quartet. As a proud Jew, David is using his voice to fight against the Jew-haters and Israel haters of the world.
I would however like you to try an experiment. Type the word anti-Semitism into your search engine, and see what comes up.
The results will shock you.
The number of anti-Semitic incidents and attacks that have been perpetuated over the past year worldwide is staggering. They are at levels I have not seen in my lifetime, and they are not only directed at “The State of Israel”, or “The Israeli Government”, or even “Israeli’s” in general. They are directed at Jews, all Jews, all over the globe, whether they are of Israeli descent or whether they support the State of Israel or not.
The horrific events of the last Gaza war have enabled sleeping anti-Semites all over the world, who have been relatively subdued for some time, to reveal themselves. Thanks to freedom of speech, we now know who many of them are (all they needed was an open door and an excuse to continue spewing their baseless hatred). I would never take away their right to expose themselves. I like it when people take their masks off. At least I know who is a threat and who isn’t.
So why then did I take such strong issue with the prospective new “Daily Show” host, Trevor Noah’s history of “Jew jokes”?
Things like, “Almost bumped a Jewish kid crossing the road. He didn’t look before crossing, but I would have felt so bad in my German car!” or, “Muslims don’t hate Jews, Jews hate Muslims”, or “Behind every successful Rap Billionaire is a double as rich Jewish man” or, “South Africans know how to recycle just like Israel knows how to be peaceful”.
Surely these aren’t the worst anti-Semitic slurs/jokes that I have ever heard, why take such offense?
Because I am tired of seeing the “tastemakers” of the world continue to perpetuate the anti-Semitic stereotypes and notions expressed in the “jokes” above. I’m tired of today’s youth thinking that it is “en vogue” to hate on the Jewish people. I’m tired of seeing people frightened, hiding their heritage for fear of anti-Semitic persecution.

Who Are the Principal Violators of International Law?

In failing to adhere to international law, the United Nations has, as its principle violator, primarily itself.
The real dispute is not about a "Palestinian State." It is about who has the right to the entire area. This is also the reason the Palestinians will never sign an "end of conflict" agreement.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to depict a world without Israel. This is to be done in stages, a "salami" tactic, by which any land acquired is to be used as a forward base from which to take the rest. The Phased Plan was never rescinded.
Hamas, with whom the PA is now aligned in a "Unity Government," takes the Phased Plan a bit farther. Hamas, in its Charter, advocates not only displacing Israel, but killing all the Jews worldwide as well, or genocide. This too has never been rescinded.
And now the PA and Hamas are to be rewarded for aggression? Such a move flies in the face of the UN's own international agreements -- signed by all parties under international law. They state that the Israel-Palestine dispute is to be resolved only by face-to-face negotiations.

MEMRI: 'Al-Sharq Al-Awsat' Article: Palestinian Authority's Accession To International Criminal Court Will Harm It, As Well As Hamas, Turkey And Qatar

On April 1, 2015, four months after it joined the Rome Statute, the Palestinian Authority (PA) officially became a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. The practical consequence of this move is that the PA can now bring charges against Israelis for alleged war crimes. PA chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said that the court has already launched a preliminary investigation regarding the settlements and regarding war crimes perpetrated during the 2014 Gaza conflict.
The PLO called the PA's accession to the ICC "historic," and PA Foreign Minister Riyadh Al-Maliki said that "Palestine seeks justice, not revenge."
In an article published in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat in November 2014, before the PA submitted a formal request to join the ICC, Lebanese journalist Huda Al-Husseini warned about the potential consequences of this move for the Palestinians themselves, as well as for Qatar and Turkey, due to their ties with the Hamas movement and its leadership. Al-Husseini wrote that accession to the ICC could result in a series of charges against Palestinian figures, and also expose Qatar and Turkey to grave accusations of funding terror and even of committing crimes against humanity.

Sarah Jessica Parker in "Jerusalem Jones and the Lost Afikoman"

I finally found a poor quality, but watchable, version of the 1991 Shalom Sesame video on Passover.

It stars Sarah Jessica Parker and includes guests like Anne Meara, Mary Tyler Moore and Alan King.

The scene-by-scene summary can be seen at the Muppets Wiki.

All in all, it is far wittier than the newer versions of Shalom Sesame:

Jenin school uses "Palestine pound" as currency (update)

A school in Jenin has been using counterfeit "Palestine pound" notes as rewards for kids who do well, and they can then use them to buy snacks in the canteen and other items.

For some reason this is a big story in Arabic media, saying "for the first time in 67 years, the Palestine Pound is being used as currency."

Not quite. Actually, Palestinian Arabs abandoned the currency pretty soon, with those in illegally annexed Jordan accepting the Jordanian dinar and those in Gaza switching over the Egyptian currency in 1951.

The last people to use the Palestine pound as currency were Israelis. Israel continued to use the Palestine pound for four years before switching fully over to the Israeli pound in 1952. Those currency notes were issued by a bank that later became Bank Leumi.

The first local banks in Palestine's history were Jewish banks that started around 1900. (This comes from a UN site.)

The real question is whether the schoolkids are seeing accurate facsimiles of the original Briitsh Mandate pound notes, or if they erased the Hebrew parts of it, especially the "E.Y" in Hebrew standing for Eretz Yisrael?

UPDATE: Bob Knot found the scrip being used, and they do not erase the Hebrew.

04/03 Links Pt1: Glick: The diplomatic track to war; Horovitz: Defeatist Obama’s deal with the devil

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The diplomatic track to war

Everyone recognizes that the situation is only going to get worse. With each passing week, Iran’s power and brazenness will only increase.
Everyone understands this. And this week they learned that with Washington heading the committee welcoming Iran’s regional hegemony and nuclear capabilities, no outside power will stand up to Iran’s rise. The future of every state in the region hangs in the balance. And so, it can be expected that everyone is now working out a means to preempt and prevent a greater disaster.
These preemptive actions will no doubt include three categories of operations: striking Hezbollah’s missile arsenal; striking the Iranian Navy to limit its ability to project its force in the Bab al-Mandab; and conducting limited military operations to destroy a significant portion of Iran’s nuclear installations.
Friday is the eve of Passover. Thirteen years ago, Palestinian terrorists brought home the message of the Exodus when they blew up the Seder at Netanya’s Park Hotel, killing 30, wounding 140, and forcing Israel into war. The message of the Passover Haggada is that there are no shortcuts to freedom. To gain and keep it, you have to be willing to fight for it.
That war was caused by Israel’s embrace of the notion that you can bring peace through concessions that empower an enemy sworn to your destruction. The price of that delusion was thousands of lives lost and families destroyed.
Iran is far more powerful than the PLO. But the Americans apparently believe they are immune from the consequences of their leaders’ policies. This is not the case for Israel or for our neighbors. We lack the luxury of ignoring the fact that Obama’s disastrous diplomacy has brought war upon us. Deal or no deal, we are again about to be forced to pay a price to maintain our freedom.

Melanie Phillips: Slippery face-saver, but Iran wins

In 2003, similar hopes of a “Grand Bargain” with Iran which would disarm Hezbollah likewise turned to ashes. The west made two bad mistakes which it is still making today.
First, it pinned its hopes on Iran’s reformist-seeming presidents – but the only person who matters is the implacable Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei.
Second, it failed to grasp the central role of deception in Iranian diplomacy through the Islamic principle of taqiyya, or mandated lying in the defense of Islam. Any agreement with Iran over its nuclear program is therefore worth nothing at all.
The west thinks that it can swallow Iran.
In fact – with Obama’s free pass empowering it to extend its influence over Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza and Yemen – Iran is instead swallowing the West.
Of course, it may already be too late to stop the Iranian bomb. Credible reports suggest Iran has outsourced its development to Syria and North Korea. But then, the deal being negotiated was never about stopping Iran getting the bomb. It was all about stopping America and Israel from stopping Iran from getting the bomb.
Obama and Iran have now got more breathing space to achieve precisely that.

David Horovitz: Defeatist Obama’s deal with the devil

Extolling the virtues of his deal with Iran on Thursday, President Barack Obama made a false and extremely nasty assertion: “It’s no secret,” he claimed, incorrectly, “that the Israeli prime minister and I don’t agree about whether the United States should move forward with a peaceful resolution to the Iranian issue.”
It is indeed no secret that Obama and Netanyahu don’t agree on how to thwart Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. It is emphatically not the case, however, that Israel’s prime minister opposes “a peaceful resolution to the Iranian issue.” It is emphatically not the case, despite Obama’s insinuation, that Israel’s leader regards military intervention as the only means to thwart Iran.
Netanyahu has not been saying no to diplomacy. His endlessly stated contention is not that war is the only alternative to the deal so delightedly hailed by Obama as “the most effective way to ensure Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon.” Rather, in Netanyahu’s insistent opinion, what is needed is simply a different, far more potent deal.
As Netanyahu made plain in anguished, infuriated tones on Wednesday, in the final hours before the Lausanne agreement was struck, what was required was not no deal at all, but rather “a better deal,” one “which would significantly roll back Iran’s nuclear infrastructure” and “link the eventual lifting of the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program to a change in Iran’s behavior.” A deal to ensure that Iran “stop its aggression in the region, stop its terrorism throughout the world, and stop its threats to annihilate Israel.” That, said Netanyahu, is “the deal that the world powers must insist upon.”

Interesting historic Haggadot in Google Books

Some tweets I did this morning as I was browsing historic Haggadot on Google Books. These are all downloadable as PDF files.

This early 20th century #Haggadah has many, many Hebrew commentaries https://t.co/wU82HJ1qyH
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

This #Haggadah from 1920 also includes lots of commentaries but also interesting illustrations https://t.co/E62kh3TS7T
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

It didn't start with Maxwell House: Here's the Manischewitz #Haggadah of 1912 https://t.co/SRQQdfXCUC
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

This 1889 #Haggadah includes an in-line translation to Judeo-Arabic https://t.co/XoXCEANX9l
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

And this #Haggadah has a Judeo-Arabic commentary https://t.co/bUjn96sDwM
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

This 1746 Haggadah has some nice woodcut illustrations https://t.co/NzcBpMPNrv pic.twitter.com/f0oZPSsDOO
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) April 3, 2015

Earlier this week Egyptian officials announced they discovered the longest Gaza tunnel yet:

Egyptian border guards have discovered a tunnel, 2.8 kilometres long and three meters deep, Military Spokesman Mohamed Samir said.

The tunnel was used by "terrorists" and "criminals" in the smuggling of individuals, goods, and "arms and ammunition", Samir said in a statement on his official Facebook page.

Egypt is building a "buffer zone" at the shared border area between North Sinai and the Gaza strip. The cabinet issued a decision last October to clear 500 metres of the border area of civilians.

The area was, however, doubled to 1,000 meters in November, after discovering some tunnels in the Peninsula over 800 metres long.

And Egyptian authorities are considering tightening up the penalties for building these tunnels - with life imprisonment:

Egypt's cabinet approved on Wednesday a draft legislation proposed by the president punishing those who dig or use border tunnels for communication with foreign countries by life in prison.

The draft law amends article 82 in the penal code, adding that the life-in-prison penalty would punish whoever "digs, prepares or uses a road, a passage or an underground tunnel at border areas to communicate with a foreign body, a state or one of its subjects" or to help persons, goods, equipment or machines in and out of the country, according to a statement by the cabinet.

The same penalty applies to those who are aware of the use (or planned use) of underground tunnels for the aforementioned purposes without informing the concerned authorities, the legislation adds.

The legislation also allows the government to seize any buildings beneath which tunnels are dug or tools used to dig them.

Oops! Palestinian boycott enforcer accidentally poses in front of Israeli products

The Fatah Facebook page proudly shows photos of their roaming gangs who threaten and intimidate store-owners not to sell Israeli products.

But hold on...what's that I see in that second picture, right by the boycotter's head?

That is an Israeli product, Malty (non-alcoholic) beer, made in Ashkelon!

Sorry, store-owner. Now you will have to be firebombed for embarrassing the patriotic Arabs. .

In a recent poll, some 44% of Palestinians said they would choose an Israeli product over a local Palestinian product either all the time or if the quality was better.