Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, June 19, 2015

Was Michael Oren inaccurate in his description of Abbas NYT op-ed?

Michael Oren, in his new book "Ally" (which I hope to read over Shabbat), describes an outrageous anecdote. Mahmoud Abbas wrote an op-ed in the New York Times, where, Oren says, "“Abbas suggested that the Arabs had accepted the U.N.’s Partition Plan in 1947 while Israel rejected it.” He then describes a phone conversation with the opinion editor of the NYT, Andrew Rosenthal:

“When I write for the Times, fact checkers examine every word I write,” I began. “Did anybody check whether Abbas has his facts exactly backward?”
“That’s your opinion,” Rosenthal replied.
“I’m an historian, Andy, and there are opinions and there are facts. That the Arabs rejected partition and the Jews accepted it is an irrefutable fact.”
“In your view.”
“Tell me, on June 6, 1944, did the Allied forces land or did they not land on Normandy Beach.”
Rosenthal, the son of a Pulitzer Prize-winning Times reporter and famed executive editor, replied, “Some might say so.”

But The Forward responds, saying:

There are three big problems with Oren’s account. The first, and most important, is that nowhere in his piece of May 17, 2011 does Abbas assert that “the Arabs had accepted the U.N.’s Partition Plan in 1947 while Israel rejected it.” Check it out yourself at this link.

Michael Oren didn't say that Abbas wrote those words; he says that Abbas suggested it.

The Forward is doing what they accuse Oren of doing - fabricating the facts.

Did Abbas suggest that Arabs accepted the partition? Indirectly, but yes. Here are the paragraphs in question:

It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued. ...Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, the United States granted it recognition. Our Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled.

This is about as accurate as an biographical op-ed describing the difficult life of the author, orphaned at an early age, neglecting to mention that he had in fact killed his parents (to paraphrase the old joke.)

Abbas is indeed implying that the only reason there is no Palestinian state is because of actions by Israel and inactions by the West- without mentioning that if the Arab world accepted a Palestinian state, they could have created one in 1949. In fact, you will be hard pressed to find any Palestinian Arabs who ever insisted on Jordan ceding the annexed West Bank to become a separate state. (Egypt created a puppet government with no power for Gaza, but it was a joke. The PLO founding charter explicitly excluded Gaza and the West Bank from any consideration of being part of a Palestinian state, which was meant to be only Israel.)

So the indirect implication is that the Palestinians wanted a state and the world denied them this state. No - the Palestinians wanted Israel destroyed and seethed when they failed at doing so.

Which also happens to be the situation today, although saying that out loud is not acceptable discourse for the New York Times.

Besides the false implications, Abbas also is more directly lying in these paragraphs:

Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs - No, there were no expulsions in the months after the partition plan was voted on. There were numerous terror attacks on Jews starting only hours after the vote. The Haganah stayed on the defensive for months while Arabs attacked Jews.

to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel - There were a few expulsions later on in the war, but not enough to alter the demographic character of Israel. The vast majority of Palestinian Arabs fled and were not forced out (a lie that Abbas repeats in his opening paragraph about his own flight from Safed.)

and Arab armies intervened - No, they attacked to destroy Israel. They didn't give a damn about Palestinian Arabs.

Our Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled. - As Abbas himself says, the partition plan rejected by his people was a recommendation, not a promise. There was no promise.

I fisked Abbas' op-ed at the time calling him out on his lies, as did Daled Amos. Jeffrey Goldberg also called out Abbas for his false implications.

Oren's objections were to the ahistoric nature of the op-ed, and moreover, to the double standard of how closely the NYT scrutinizes op-eds by Zionists compared to how much latitude they give to the anti-Israel crowd. I have documented the lack of fact checking enough times here, so in that dimension Oren is 100% correct.

(h/t EBoZ)

UNRWA lies, saying Gaza #3 on number of kids killed in 2014

UNRWA tweeted a lie:

Where did they get this from?

Apparently, they used the recent UN report on "Children in Armed Conflict."

Only one problem: The UN report only includes numbers when they are verified; if they have no idea they won't even bother to give an estimate.

So for example, the UN says about Syria:

197. Indiscriminate attacks launched in civilian populated areas continued to cause widespread killing and maiming. The United Nations verified the killing of 368 children (184 boys, 66 girls, 118 gender unknown) by Syrian Government forces (221), ISIL/ANF (44), FSA-affiliated groups (24), international coalition airstrikes (4) and unknown parties (75). ...Actual numbers are believed to be much higher.

That is an understatement. The Syrian Observatory of Human Rights counted 3,501 children killed in Syria - seven times the number who died in Gaza in 2014. Many of them were, no doubt, of Palestinian ancestry.

UNRWA doesn't care about them.

What about other conflicts? AP counted 5000 civilians killed in the Central African Republic between December 2013 and September 2014. There is no doubt that more than 10% are children as most were killed in vicious massacres of entire villages. Yet the UN doesn't have verified numbers, so they only reported the 146 documented cases, a small fraction of the actual number of deaths. As AP wrote:

Both life and death often go unrecorded in Central African Republic, a country of about 4.6 million that has long teetered on the edge of anarchy. Nobody knows just how many people have died in the grinding ethnic violence, and even the AP tally is almost certainly a fraction of the real toll.

The AP counted bodies and gathered numbers from dozens of survivors, priests, imams, human rights groups and local Red Cross workers, including those in a vast, remote swath of the west that makes up a third of the country. Many deaths here were not officially counted because the region is still dangerous and can barely be reached in torrential rains. Others were left out by overwhelmed aid workers but registered at mosques and at private Christian funerals.

The U.N. is not recording civilian deaths on its own, unlike in Iraq or Afghanistan, for example.

The Boko Haram insurgency killed over 11,000 civilians in 2014, but since there is no specific count of children, the UN doesn't estimate how many are under 18.

In South Sudan, where 50,000 and 100,000 have been killed, but no one is counting:

The International Crisis Group (ICG), a conflict think-tank, estimates at least 50,000 people have already died but it admits the true figure could even be double that. It also says the failure to count the dead is a scandal -- both as a dishonour to the victims and as something that has kept the country's suffering off the international radar.

"It's shocking that in 2014, in a country with one of the largest UN peacekeeping missions in the world, tens of thousands of people can be killed and no one can even begin to confirm the death toll," ICG researcher Casie Copeland told AFP.

"Surely more can be done to understand whether the figure is closer to 50,000 or 100,000?"

Other conflicts which had a higher death toll than Gaza, and probably a higher death toll of children, include Ukraine, Libya and Darfur, and possibly Pakistan.

So, yes, this tweet by a UN agency is a flat-out lie.

It also shows that the UN, by avoiding even giving an estimate of actual numbers of children killed in 2014, is contributing to the problem because they are effectively cheapening the lives of children in areas of the worst conflicts where it is too dangerous for observers to go.

(h/t Judge Dan)

Ma'an claims 1.1 million Gazans were driven out of Israel

Ma'an reports that UNRWA is closing its shelters for displaced Gazans, saying that they can take care of all of them by paying their rent.

It then says, "About 300,000 Palestinians whose homes were destroyed by Israeli forces have been staying temporarily in over 90 sheltering centers run by UNRWA since August 2014."

Did UNRWA find space for 300,000 people? "Have been" means that they are still currently displaced.

The answer is no. UNRWA did house 300,000 at the end of the war, but the number of total displaced has gone down to 100,000 by May.

Ma'an's background lies get much more absurd in the next paragraph:

Prior to the war, UNRWA already struggled to meet the needs of Palestinians living in eight refugee camps throughout the Gaza Strip, where 1.1 million of the 1.5 Palestinian million residents are refugees driven from present-day Israel.

1.1 million Gazans were driven from Israel? That's an amazing fact, since there were barely 1.1 million Arabs in Palestine in 1947 altogether!

This is what happens when you create a new definition of "refugee" that is at odds with reality. Ma'an needs to pretend that they are refugees so therefore it needs to pretend, presumably, that every Gazan "refugee" is over 67 years old.

06/18 Links Pt2: Michael Douglas: BDS is ‘Anti-Peace Movement’; The Terminator voices Waze

From Ian:

For Pro-Israel Advocates, It’s Time to Start Playing Offense

Victories aren’t usually depressing, but recent headlines about Israel include those such as: “Israel Left Off U.N. List of Parties That Kill, Injure Kids,” “Palestinians Abandon Bid to Ban Israel From FIFA,” and a couple of headlines about failed motions for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement on college campuses. Surely all of these “victories” are better than the corresponding defeats. But still, we can and should do better.
The problem with these victories is that they reflect a much deeper problem in the strategy of pro-Israel advocates. We tend to play defense far more than offense. Some psychologists might enjoy explaining just why Jews, in general, might prefer this approach, but it’s something we must overcome. What’s wrong with this strategy was beautifully laid out in Ze’ev Maghen’s famous piece, “How to Fight Anti-Semitism.”
“A man calls you a pig,” he writes. “Do you walk around with a sign explaining that, in fact, you are not a pig? Do you hand out leaflets expostulating… upon the manifold differences between you and a pig?”
Of course not. For to do this is already to cede the crucial first move to your enemy. It’s to allow that your pig-hood is even a legitimate question in the first place.
Playing defense grants the possible legitimacy of the attacks on us.
It’s time for us to go on offense.

The Biggest Mistakes Pro Israel Advocates Make #9: How To Avoid Seeming Holier Than Thou

We need to end religious-based arguments once and for all. Not only are they detrimental, but they are misleading, as the true nature of Zionism is purely secular.
That being said, I think that if you weave in the religious argument with the indigenous argument (i.e. that the Jewish religion arose from the Jewish culture, which had its genesis in the land of Israel) it can bolster it. That being said, arguing entirely from a religious standpoint is, in my opinion, completely futile.
Even if we may believe religious Zionist arguments, we should avoid them at all costs as they convince nobody but those who are already convinced, and they do more harm than no argument at all among secular people.
So what arguments can we use instead?
1) Israel is the indigenous homeland of the Jewish People. Cite archaeology rather than the bible. If archaeology proves the bible, you can use that evidence as the basis for any biblical claims you might make.
2) The Arabs as colonizers (turn their “settler colonialism” argument on its side)
4) Continuous Jewish presence in the land of Israel (also the fact that there has only been a Jewish state on that land, everything else was a colony of some larger colonialist entity).

PMW: Antisemitic Sheikh praises PMW for exposure of his hate speech

"Allah puts them [PMW] at our service," says Antisemitic teacher of Islam Sheikh Khaled Al-Mughrabi about Palestinian Media Watch, after PMW subtitled his hate speech and uploaded the videos to YouTube and PMW's website.
"The fact that this group [PMW] chose to come uninvited to our lesson, and follows our lessons and publicizes them all over the world and puts them on its websites in all the countries of the world - since they chose this - first, praise Allah for this, Allah puts them [PMW] at our service... They themselves chose to expose their true self, which Allah exposed." [Al-Msjed Al-Aqsa YouTube channel, June 16, 2015]
Earlier this month, the Sheikh defended his blood libel about Jews using the blood of non-Jewish children for making Passover matzah bread, presenting it as "advice" to Jews and an attempt to "save them from Hell."
Now, too, he explains that his previous teachings are "the truth" about the Jews "as Allah has exposed it." He even explains that he breaks this truth to Jews "gently", whereas to his Muslim audience he speaks "about them as they really are":

European Court of Human Rights ruling proves Gaza isn't occupied

From Marko Milanovic at the blog of the European Journal of International Law:

Yesterday the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered judgments in two blockbuster cases regarding the aftermath of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan: Chiragov and Others v. Armenia and Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan. These are very rich judgments raising many important issues, and I will be writing up more detailed comments shortly. But I first had to share one particular little nugget: the Court has (implicitly!) decided that Israel is not the occupying power in Gaza. How so, you ask?
...In fact, when it ratified the European Convention Azerbaijan made the following declaration (para. 93 of the judgment):

The Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it is unable to guarantee the application of the provisions of the Convention in the territories occupied by the Republic of Armenia until these territories are liberated from that occupation.

Note the reference to the concept of belligerent occupation. Immediately after this paragraph, the Court makes the following observations, under the heading ‘relevant international law’ (para. 94):

Article 42 of the Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 (hereafter “the 1907 Hague Regulations”) defines belligerent occupation as follows:

“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

Accordingly, occupation within the meaning of the 1907 Hague Regulations exists when a state exercises actual authority over the territory, or part of the territory, of an enemy state(1) . The requirement of actual authority is widely considered to be synonymous to that of effective control.

Military occupation is considered to exist in a territory, or part of a territory, if the following elements can be demonstrated: the presence of foreign troops, which are in a position to exercise effective control without the consent of the sovereign. According to widespread expert opinion physical presence of foreign troops is a sine qua non requirement of occupation(2) , i.e. occupation is not conceivable without “boots on the ground” therefore forces exercising naval or air control through a naval or air blockade do not suffice(3) .

And in the case of Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan the court reiterates:

144. The Court notes that under international law (in particular Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations) a territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of a hostile army, “actual authority” being widely considered as translating to effective control and requiring such elements as presence of foreign troops, which are in a position to exercise effective control without the consent of the sovereign (see paragraph 94 above). On the basis of all the material before it and having regard to the above establishment of facts, the Court finds that Gulistan is not occupied by or under the effective control of foreign forces as this would require a presence of foreign troops in Gulistan.

The court interprets the 1907 Hague Convention accurately (the Geneva Conventions do not define occupation; the Hague is the source for that.)

The blog author notes something that shows the real truth of how international law is applied to Israel differently than any other state:

I also very much doubt that the judges were really aware of the implications a categorical statement such as the one made here will have on the whole Gaza debate. If they were, I imagine that they would have avoided it like the plague.

if judges are supposed to be impartial, then why would they have acted differently if they realized this applies to Gaza?

The answer is that the supposedly impartial system of international law is in fact biased against Israel, and the author of this piece knows this quite well.

(h/t YMedad)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column:

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. — Mark Twain

…in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility. … the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. — Adolf Hitler

From the 1960s, inversion of truth and reality has been one the most favored propaganda methods of Israel’s adversaries. One of its most frequent expressions has been the accusation that the Jewish people, victims of the Nazis, have now become the new Nazis, aggressors and oppressors of the Palestinian Arabs. — Dr. Joel Fishman (2007)

The big lie and concomitant reality inversion has been a fabulously successful propaganda strategy for our enemies. One common inversion is to accuse Israel of the very crimes and intentions of their Arab enemies. So Zionism is equated to racism, Israel is accused of being an apartheid state, and Israelis are said to be trying to commit ‘genocide’ against the Palestinian Arabs.

And of course there is my personal favorite, “the IDF deliberately targets children,” an accusation reminiscent of the medieval blood libels:

If there ever was an inversion, this is it. No better example can be given than the recent murder of five members of the Fogel family, where one of the perpetrators returned to the house to kill a crying baby, and one said that they would have killed two other children if they had known they were present. There was the recent murder of a child when an antitank missile was fired directly at a yellow school bus. And there have been any number of ‘actions’ like the Ma’alot massacre, the Bus of Blood, the attack on the nursery at Misgav Am, etc., in which the victims were primarily children. — Vic Rosenthal (2011)

There are several reasons this technique works so well. As Mark Twain noted, it’s easy and quick to spread a lie; but refuting one effectively requires time and research, which in itself can be challenged. The paradigm case of the lie that won’t die is the accusation that IDF soldiers shot young Mohammad al-Dura in 2000, as ‘documented’ by the original ‘Pallywood’ video. Even after it was definitively proven that fire from the Israeli position could not have hit al-Dura, it remains a worldwide article of faith that this is the correct interpretation.

Hitler, who incidentally was accusing the Jews of lying in the quoted passage — and thus inverting reality — seems to have understood the technique well. In addition to the credibility a lie gets from its audaciousness, he observed that even when a lie has been refuted, “traces” remain, perhaps a propensity to believe similar lies.

There is also the “when there’s smoke, there’s fire” effect. Anti-Israel propagandists don’t just tell one lie, they tell hundreds. When one is refuted, others pop up. Someone who isn’t aware of the strategy might easily think “there has to be something behind all this.” There is, but it is an orchestrated campaign of lies.

And then we have what I call the “divorce court fallacy.” If the two sides have diametrically opposed positions, an observer is tempted to think that the truth must lie somewhere in the middle. But this is not the case if one side is audaciously lying and the other is telling the truth (or close to it).

All of these explanations in part account for the success of the big lie, but there is one other factor that is particularly important when the big lies are being told about the Jews and their state: the antisemitic prejudice that lurks just below the surface in so many minds, not excluding Jewish ones. A recent example of this phenomenon was the failure of NPR interviewer Diane Rehm and her producer to notice the absurdity of the suggestion that Sen. Bernie Sanders was a “dual citizen” of the US and Israel, or that the websites on which they ‘checked’ it were less than reliable.

One approach that Israel’s supporters have employed is to respond reactively and try to refute the lies, sometimes — as in the case of al-Dura — with too little and too late. This is necessary, but not sufficient. As we’ve seen, the big lie technique is resistant to the defensive approach. Sometimes attempts at refutation only help spread the original libel.

Another has been to ignore them, and to divert attention to the attractive aspects of the country, the economy, science and technology, liberalism, democracy, beaches, music, etc. While there is nothing wrong with doing this, it is also completely ineffective against the dark, poisonous weaponized falsehoods disseminated against us.

Much better to go on the offensive. To attack our enemies as the true murderers of children, the aspirants to the title of the greatest killers of Jews since Hitler, the oppressors of women and gays, the invaders and thieves, the ones whose ‘culture’ consists of incitement and whose heroes are terrorists.

We’ve been far too tolerant of the presumptive needs of the Palestinian Arabs, who actually have only one overriding want, which is that we will disappear and leave the land to them.

Let’s explain to the world that there was no ‘Palestinian’ civilization here, ever; that the ‘Palestinians’ suddenly turned nationalistic when it became the best way to oppose the Jews; that the Palestinian leadership worked with the Nazis and reveres them still; and that the culture they’ve built since the days of al-Husseini is sick and evil.

The Palestinian Arabs do not respect our culture, they do not respect our history, and they do not respect the truth. They don’t give a centimeter on their absurd demands, and they don’t stop inciting their youth to murder. Why should we show respect to them?

This isn’t a job for bloggers. It isn’t even for arbitrary members of the Knesset or particular newspaper writers. It should be made clear to the world that this is the official position of the Israeli government and Prime Minister.

Are we afraid that the Europeans will boycott us if we tell the truth? I have news: the only way to get them to not boycott us will be to give up and die. Then some of them, perhaps, will feel sorry for us as they do for the murdered victims of the Holocaust (although, truth be told, a considerable number of Europeans believe that the fewer Jews, the better).

Are we afraid of Barack Obama, a true believer in the Palestinian cause? What will he do, help Iran get nuclear weapons? Are we afraid of the UN? Will they issue another report to buttress the big lies of of our enemies?

In addition to taking an offensive role in the military and diplomatic spheres, we should take it in propaganda as well. Being the nice guy of the Middle East hasn’t worked for us. It’s time to stop.

06/18 Links Pt1: IDF is a moral army fighting in an immoral neighborhood; Kerry’s absolute idiocy

From Ian:

'IDF is a moral army fighting in an immoral neighborhood'

Israel Defense Forces Capt. (res.) Matan Katzman spoke Wednesday before the Human Rights Subcommittee of the European Parliament in an effort to counter recent testimony by Breaking the Silence, an organization dedicated to exposing alleged wrongdoings by the Israeli army.
"The IDF is a moral army fighting in an immoral neighborhood," said Katzman, who serves in the Givati Brigade and was speaking on behalf of StandWithUs, an educational organization for Israel advocacy, and the My Truth initiative, which gathers IDF soldier testimonies.
Katzman co-founded My Truth with fellow soldier Avichai Shorshan in response to a damning report released by Breaking the Silence about IDF conduct during last summer's Gaza conflict. When the group sought to export their testimony to European audiences, the My Truth organizers felt something needed to be done about the unfair portrayal of the IDF.
"Behind every Israeli soldier there is a human being, a human being that has to go out and defend his country, although he faces the complexities of war," Katzman said to the EU subcommittee.

Describing Operation Protective Edge, Katzman said,"During last summer's war, the Israeli army aborted and cancelled multiple missions from air and from ground in cases where Palestinian civilians were present, or we even thought they were present.

"Our policy is so concrete and clear that Hamas is an expert on it and uses it to their advantage. They place snipers in schools and hospitals, they stock weapons in homes. U.N.-funded medical clinics are used to booby-trap and to harm soldiers."

Israeli Soldier Testifies to EU Human Rights Committee

Good Enough for the EU: Hungary to Build Anti-Migrant 'Wall'

In Israel, the security fence has done an effective job of keeping Palestinian Authority Arab terrorists outside of Israeli communities – and other countries are learning from Israel's success. The latest is Hungary which, although it does not have the problem of Serbian terrorists sneaking over the border to carry out terror attacks in Hungarian supermarkets and coffee shops, is building 16 foot (4 meter) high fence anyway – to keep job-seekers from Serbia out.
Hungary is part of the Eurozone, and is signed onto the visa-free Schengen program – and thus provides an excellent gateway for workers from Serbia, which is not a part of the Schengen zone, to enter Europe and look for work in the more affluent areas of central and western Europe.
Tens of thousands of migrant workers filter through the border with Serbia each year, and the EU – and Hungary – have had enough, according to Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, who at a press conference in Budapest Wednesday said that “immigration is one of the most serious problems facing the European Union today.” To prevent the migrants from coming in, he said, Hungary would build a fence with a four meter fence stretching for 175 kilometers (110 miles).
Hungary isn't the only EU country building an anti-immigration fence. Bulgaria has is building one along its border with Turkey to workers from the Arab world. In recent months, Turkey has taken in millions of refugees from Turkey and Iraq. Although most of them are restricted to border areas, reports say that thousands have managed to infiltrate the rest of the country, with many attempting to enter neighboring Bulgaria in order to find work in the EU.

New video exposes provocation leading up to IDF soldiers beating Palestinian man

A new video posted Tuesday exposed the full scope of events, including provocations, leading up to an incident on Friday in which four soldiers struck and verbally assaulted a Palestinian man during a violent disturbance in the village of Jalazun.
The unsettling video shows individuals, as well as those with press vests, repeatedly approaching the group of Kfir Brigade soldiers even after being repeatedly told to leave. Swarms of press photographers followed the soldiers constantly, waiting to catch the perfect moment, as firebombs are hurled at the soldiers.
The 10-minute-long video, posted by a group calling itself the International Solidarity Movement, shows this back-and-forth of provocations which culminated in a man being beaten. The much shorter video circulated by Palestinian media shortly after the incident, showed only the beating itself, without context.
An army investigation concluded on Sunday said that the situation occurred in the course of a lengthy violent disturbance that lasted for several hours, during which rioters hurled firebombs and large rocks at soldiers. A platoon commander was injured by a rock thrown at his face and suffered a suspected eye socket bone fracture.
The Palestinian man seen in the video approached the soldiers and attempted to create a provocation, the investigation found. “After ignoring calls by soldiers to stop, and grabbing the weapon of one of the commanders, commanders decided to utilize force to arrest him,” the army said.

Palestine Press Agency (Fatah-leaning) has an article about the inhumane conditions in Hamas prisons and detention centers in Gaza.

According to the article, Hamas prison cells meant for 20 people routinely have as many as 80.

In the summer, temperatures can go past 40 degrees C (104F) with no ventilation.

Prisoners with deadly contagious diseases are herded next to others. There are no doctors available, ever.

Prisons are also filled with bugs because of how filthy they are.

And, of course, some prisoners are tortured and killed. The Independent Commission for Human Rights documented 21 cases of Hamas prisoners who died last year, most of them executed. They also received 996 complaints about torture in 2014.

Too bad Gaza doesn't have any internationally funded "pro-Palestinian" NGOs around who are interested in documenting these issues and publicizing them. It would be nice if Amnesty, HRW and Oxfam showed interest in the issue of prison conditions in Gaza. (HRW did once issue a report on Hamas torture, in 2012.)

This story from 2012 received very little attention in Western media, although independent Palestinian media has been all over it again lately:

The Palestinian Authority has plans to use an international human rights organization as a front for intelligence gathering and discrediting Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, according to documents leaked to a number of Palestinian news websites over the weekend.

The documents also appeared on the PA’s official news agency Wafa, but were quickly removed under the pretext that they are “fabrications.”

The agency claimed that hackers infiltrated its website and posted the documents.

Earlier, the agency announced that the PA has decided to establish a commission of inquiry to look into the documents out of fear that the case could embarrass the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah. Later, however, the agency removed the report, again claiming that it had been planted on its website by hackers.

There was no way to verify the authenticity of the leaked documents.

According to the documents, the PA’s General Intelligence Service in the West Bank is planning to use the Global Network for Rights and Development as a front for espionage activities.

GNRD was established in Geneva in 2008 with the aim of enhancing and supporting human rights and development by adopting new, creative strategies and policies to achieve lasting change.

The documents are said to be part of a “classified report” prepared by the PA’s General Department of Palestinian External Security.

The plan envisages using GNRD as a front for the establishment of an “effective and credible international human rights group that would be based in Geneva and whose goal would be to defend Palestinian causes” and collect information.

The cost of the project is estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars.

The report points out the important role of NGOs’ in shaping public opinion and affecting decision-making worldwide.

“These NGOs have a green card to enter any place in the world and operate freely under various pretexts,” the report said. “But we in Palestine are lacking many elements of power.”

The report claimed that many Western countries, including France, Britain and the US, have been using human rights organizations as a “striking arm” to affect policies around the world and remove governments from power. The report referred specifically to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and claims that they are funded and backed by Britain and the US, respectively.

The report recommended that the PA set up a similar “striking arm” that would operate out of Geneva and have representation in at least 50 countries. It said that the main mission would be to gather intelligence with the help of Western nationals.

The Global Network for Rights and Development is already a fake human rights organization. Brian Whitaker at Al-Bab has an impressive series of articles exposing them.

GNRD has connections with the United Arab Emirates and portrays the UAE's human rights policies in an undeservedly favourable light.

Its founder and president, Loai Deeb, previously set up a fake university in Norway which closed under threats of legal action from the Norwegian authorities.

Deeb also uses hundreds of fake Twitter accounts to promote himself and his activities.

GNRD's "High Commissioner for Europe" is a discredited Belgian politician with a conviction for electoral malpractice.

Last Friday, however, new questions arose about the activities of Deeb's strange human rights organisation. It emerged that GNRD was at the centre of a money-laundering investigation launched by the Norwegian authorities and that Deeb had been arrested. The amount of money involved is said to be $13 million.

Stavanger university has now decided that GNRD does not "meet the requirements" for partnership and has cancelled the agreement.

Universities were not the only institutions fooled by GNRD. Others include the United Nations, the European Parliament and the African Union. Even before the money-laundering case (which has yet to be tested in court) there were plenty of reasons to stay well clear of Deeb and GNRD.

In the seven years since it was founded, GNRD has made a particular point of trying to associate itself with other organisations and institutions. Sometimes there were formal agreements and a signing ceremony which was photographed for GNRD's website. Developing these ties helped to build an air of credibility.

Many of its ties, though, were much less formal but GNRD exaggerated their importance. It spent a lot of time "participating" in activities organised by other groups – which often required nothing more than attending a conference or meeting and posting a report of it on the GNRD website. Again, this helped to build credibility by association and, through the website posts, created an impression of GNRD as a busy, active organisation even when it wasn't actually doing very much.

GNRD's website carries the logos of 27 "collaborators and sponsors" (scroll down to the bottom of this page). They look impressive but the names are difficult to read – which is perhaps just as well because two of them are businesses owned by Loai Deeb. They also include two hotel companies and a travel agent (presumably used by GNRD) and several NGOs in Latin America which GNRD staff have reported meeting on their travels. Almun (the Arab League Model United Nations) is included too – apparently because GNRD attended one of its events in Cairo last year.

This "human rights NGO" is a scam - a scam that has fooled the EU, the UN and many NGOs.

The founder, Loai Deeb, is a Palestinian who now lives in Norway.

The idea that Abbas could have wanted to effectively rent out this fake organization, run by a Palestinian, which had already collaborated with known human rights NGOs and governments, is plausible indeed. It seems far-fetched that such an elaborate plan could have been fabricated by Abbas' enemies, but the idea that Abbas would want to use a human rights organization that can travel the world without scrutiny as an espionage operation - as well as another venue to bash Israel - is not too implausible.

UPDATE: I misread the date of the JPost article; it was 2012, not this year.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Harvard International Review has published an article by Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, entitled "The Imperative of a Comprehensive Strategy to Fight Violent Extremism."

The article itself is not worth fisking. It is essentially an Iranian polemic against much of Sunni Islam, regarding it as "takfirism" and not true Islam.

He gives an eight point strategy to fight "violent extremism" that just so happens to align with the Iranian strategy of global dominance. For example:

Religious leaders from around the world should be at the forefront of efforts to denounce the false precepts of violent extremism and unequivocally reject sectarianism and attacks against religious and ethnic minorities. In this context, the recent message of Ayatollah Khamenei to European and North American Youth is a serious endeavor to initiate such enlightened cultural and ideological discourse.

Or this way of blaming Israel for "violent extremism:"

The continued occupation of Palestine and the plight of the Palestinian people and their tragic predicament have been another effective recruitment tool for extremist groups like Da’esh, which require attention and action.

Or this interesting piece:

It should contain measures to counter Islamophobia, which conflates violent extremists and true Muslims, thus playing right into the hands of Da’esh and similar Takfiri groups and directly lending credence to the extremists’ messaging. While we should rightly condemn racism and anti-Semitism, and we indeed do, we should at the same time condemn and criminalize Islamophobia and blatant disregard for the values, beliefs and sanctities of Muslims.

Antisemites and racists should get a scolding. Islamophobes must get jailed. (And, if they are guilty of blasphemy, executed.)

Finally, we see the hypocrisy in its purest form:

Iranians of all ages and affiliation, particularly the youth, have been consistent in rejecting and fighting violent extremism from the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan to AQAP, Da’esh and others similar forces in Yemen, Iraq and Syria.

Just two weeks ago, an admitted Hezbollah terrorist was discovered with bomb-making materials in Cyprus, almost certainly targeting Jews.

A similar plot was foiled also in Cyprus in 2012. The terrorist told police, "I was just collecting information about the Jews. This is what my organization is doing, everywhere in the world."

Hezbollah (or at least its "military wing") is recognized by most of the West as a terrorist organization. And Hezbollah is loyal only to Iran's Supreme Leader, the one who is supposedly in the forefront against terror. Hezbollah's manifesto says

"Hizbullah considers Iran as a central state in the Muslim world...Since the declaration of the victory of the Islamic Revolution under the leadership of Wali Al Faqih Imam Khomeini (May Allah honour his soul), and since the replacement of the “Israeli” embassy with a Palestinian one, this support has been ongoing in the different shapes and forms until our day under the leadership of Imam Khamenei (may he live long)."

Do I have to list the many Hezbollah terror attacks? The father of the coach of the world champion Golden State Warriors was murdered by the "Islamic Jihad Organization" in Lebanon - which is just another name Hezbollah uses.

It isn't only Hezbollah. the Iranian Quds Force has been implicated in many terror attacks worldwide.

The director of the National Counterterrorism Center declared in 2012 that “Iran remains the foremost state-sponsor of terrorism in the world. "

And Shiite terrorism as practiced by Iran is no less fundamentalist or radical in its adherence to Islam than ISIS is:

Iran is a constitutional, Islamic theocracy. Its official religion is the doctrine of the Twelver Jaafari School. Iran's law against blasphemy derives from Sharia. Blasphemers are usually charged with "spreading corruption on earth", or mofsed-e-filarz, which can also be applied to criminal or political crimes. The law against blasphemy complements laws against criticizing the Islamic regime, insulting Islam, and publishing materials that deviate from Islamic standards. The regime uses these laws to persecute religious minorities such as the Sunni, Bahai, Sufi, and Christians and to persecute dissidents and journalists. Persecuted individuals are subject to surveillance by the "religious police," harassment, prolonged detention, mistreatment, torture, and execution. The courts have acquitted vigilantes who killed in the belief that their victims were engaged in un-Islamic activities.

Harvard should be ashamed for publishing such a self-serving, hypocritical piece of garbage without context or rebuttal.

(h/t EBoZ)

06/17 Links Pt2: Pierre Rehov - Beyond Deception Strategy; Evil spirit of BDS growing stronger in US

From Ian:

Pierre Rehov - Beyond Deception Strategy

Beyond its deception strategy, BDS has one goal : the destruction of Israel and, on the long run, the extermination of Jews. Among BDS supporters, deceived losers, neo-Nazis, Islamists, terrorists. This organization must be stopped. It always begins with the Jews, and then, you are next !

Ben-Dror Yemini: Evil spirit of BDS growing stronger in US

The BDS deniers say it's a marginal matter. There is no cause for concern. These are small groups with no influence. But the anti-Semitic incident at UCLA is repeating itself in the leading US media. This time we're already talking about a presidential candidate. The mud thrown at Beyda has reached Sanders. In both cases it’s not their views, it's just the fact that they are Jewish.
We can present, once again, surveys showing that the sympathy towards Israel is at its peak in the American public opinion. But that's an illusion. Because there is a crawling process of change taking place in the centers of power and knowledge. The evil spirit of BDS is already controlling some of the lecturer and student organizations. Among young people, Jews and non-Jews, the support for Israel is dropping.
The regular choir will continue arguing that it's all because of the occupation. Claims can be made against the Israeli policy. Some claims are true. But understanding or justifying the evil spirit of BDS under the excuse of "the occupation" is sort of like justifying racism against black people by claiming that there are violent black people.
So the evil spirit of BDS is racism which is also infiltrating the press. And no, it's not in the margins. It's growing stronger.

Suspect in 1982 Paris attack arrested by Jordan, released on bail

Jordan said Wednesday that the suspected mastermind of an attack on a Paris Jewish restaurant in 1982 that killed six people and wounded 22 had been arrested but was out on bail and banned from leaving the country.
Official sources said Zuhair Mohamad Hassan Khalid al-Abassi, who goes by the nom de guerre “Amjad Atta”, was “arrested on June 1 under an international arrest warrant. A court imposed a travel ban pending a decision on whether he will be extradited,” an official source told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity.
A source in the security services said the 62-year-old suspect was released on bail.
Amjad Atta was one of three men for whom France issued an international arrest warrant earlier this year.
Overall, between three and five men are thought to have taken part in the attack, which was blamed on the Abu Nidal Organization, a Palestinian terrorist group.
The other two main suspects in the 1982 attack have been named as Mahmoud Khader Abed Adra, alias “Hicham Harb,” who lives in Ramallah in the West Bank, and Walid Abdulrahman Abu Zayed, alias “Souhail Othman,” a resident of Norway. (h/t Alexi)

Abbas reportedly bans PalArabs from traveling to Israel for Ramadan

Times of Israel reports:

For the first time in at least a decade, the IDF will let Palestinian buses bring West Bank worshipers into Israel during the month of Ramadan, which begins Wednesday, a senior officer said.

Speaking to journalists on Tuesday, Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Maj. Gen. Yoav Mordechai announced a series of measures aimed at easing movement for Palestinians during the Muslim holy month.

In recent years, tens of thousands of Palestinians have been granted permits to enter Israel for prayer and vacation during the month-long holiday, a trend which was scaled back last year after the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers by Hamas during Ramadan.

Palestinian buses are usually stopped at Israeli checkpoints and not allowed to enter Israel proper. Permit-carrying Palestinians entering Israel typically need to board Israeli buses or taxis to reach their destination.

Mordechai said that Palestinian men over the age of 40 will be allowed to enter the Temple Mount this year without need for an Israeli permit. Women of all ages will also be permitted entry. The IDF will allow Palestinians to enter Israel freely for family visits, setting an initial quota of 100,000 believed to be the capacity of checkpoints to process the entering civilians.

Six hundred Palestinians will also be allowed to leave the country through Ben Gurion International Airport; they are usually required to travel abroad through Amman, Jordan.

But Mahmoud Abbas knows this this is just another example of Israel's Ramadan-washing. And he will not allow his people to have any part of it!

Palestine Press Agency reports that, according to multiple sources, president Mahmoud Abbas issued a decree banning the delivery or receipt of requests for the issuance of permits to enter Israel.

A spokesman complained that Israel was only allowing men to visit the Al Aqsa Mosque if they were over 40. Without any trace of irony, he added, "The right of freedom of worship is guaranteed by international law, and Israel must adhere to it. We will not allow buses from the Palestinian Authority to go to areas of Jerusalem as Israel wants."

We may want to remember that quote about freedom of worship the next time we read about "storming" of Al Aqsa by Jews who want to pray there.

Khalil Rizk, Head of the Chamber of Commerce in Ramallah, said that local merchants have been demanding from Abbas for two days to stop the permits within the Green Line, because Palestinians were spending money in Israel instead of locally, hurting merchants who prefer a captive audience.

If this is true, Mahmoud Abbas has yet again decided that his anti-Israel political objectives are more important than the human rights of the people he supposedly leads.

I think what made Abbas decide on this move was the fact that AFP was reporting the story of Israel loosening restrictions as positive. The idea that mainstream media praises Israel is too much for the man of peace to stomach.

Local BDS Group Votes To Boycott Israeli BDS Supporters (PreOccupied Territoory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Aberdeen, Ireland, June 17 - Students at the University of Aberdeen who seek to isolate Israel voted this week, for the sake of consistency, to sever all ties with Israeli groups who also want to isolate Israel.

The University of Aberdeen Student Union held a session to debate and vote on the boycott proposal, which specifically calls for Israeli BDS activists to be included in the list of people and institutions to be avoided in the effort to aid the Palestinian cause by weakening Israel and undermining the country's legitimacy.

If adopted by the university, the new policy would address a glaring inconsistency in the behavior of the BDS movement. Whereas BDS calls for a blanket boycott of Israeli groups, people, and institutions, including academics and artists sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, no international BDS supporters have applied the same rigorous interpretation of BDS to Israeli BDS activists, despite their being flagrantly Israeli. A boycott of Israelit BDS supporters by their counterparts abroad would remove this glaring demonstration of potential hypocrisy.

University of Aberdeen officials were quick to note that the vote does not bind the administration, which maintains robust ties with Israeli BDS activists. "The vote, as a welcome democratic expression of student opinion, is important, but the students' positions are not the only factor we must consider in formulating academic policy," explained University Provost Goahead McMyday. "Also, it is much easier to make idealized pronouncements than to implement them, however laudable their goals."

Other student groups are expected to follow suit when the next academic year begins in September. Organizers of campus groups promoting BDS in the US say they are especially keen to hold a vote on the issue as soon as possible.

"The students at Aberdeen put their finger on a thorny question that affects all of us," said Jewish Voice for Peace chapter president Albiya Fass-Schist of Northwestern University. "We can't honestly claim to be applying our principles faithfully if we draw some arbitrarily line between Israelis who think like us and all other Israelis," she explained. "Being Israeli by definition makes a person an oppressor, or at least an enabler of oppression, and it's disingenuous to say that that Israeliness, that culpability, is somehow negated by advocating BDS."

Israeli activists expressed shock, confusion, and anger, but ultimately, said Tel Aviv University student and BDS proponent Omar Barghouti, the move is probably healthier in the long run for all involved. "This measure will help everyone be more honest about their intentions. I do feel sorry for the Israelis who thought they'd be able to gain some legitimacy in the world's eyes by betraying their country, but they'll get over it. There's always some other outlet for self-hate."

"Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go hang my new diploma on the wall," he added.

06/17 Links Pt1: UNRWA Chief: Hamas Hid Weapons in Facilities; Oren: US-Israel ties ‘in tatters’

From Ian:

UNRWA Chief Admits Hamas Hid Weapons in Facilities

Pierre Krahenbuhl, Commissioner-General of UNRWA, the UN body tasked with aiding "Palestinian refugees," admitted on Wednesday that Hamas terrorists hid weapons at UNRWA facilities during their terror war against Israel last summer.
"We were the ones who found the weapons caches in our facilities during inspections," Krahenbuhl told Yedioth Aharonoth in an interview. "The reason that the whole world knew about it is that we told them."
Krahenbuhl's reference is to at least three separate occasions in which rockets were found at UNRWA facilities. After the first finding of rockets at an UNRWA school, UNRWA workers reportedly called Hamas to come remove them.
Likewise, a booby-trapped UNRWA clinic was detonated, killing three IDF soldiers. Aside from the massive amounts of explosives hidden in the walls of the clinic, it was revealed that it stood on top of dozens of terror tunnels, showing how UNRWA is closely embedded with Hamas.
The UNRWA head continued, saying, "we knew the revelation would lead to harsh responses against us in Israel, but try to imagine what would happen if we weren't the ones who published it. The act of publishing proves we aren't ready to allow it and show restraint."

David Horovitz: Blaming Obama, ex-envoy Oren says aspects of US-Israel ties ‘in tatters’

He said the root of Israel’s problems with Obama lies in three aspects of the president’s abiding worldview: Obama’s “unprecedented support for the Palestinians,” the goal of “reconciling with what Obama calls the Muslim world,” and Obama’s “outreach, reconciling with Iran. From the get-go. You see that right from the beginning. He comes into office going after Iran.”
But the administration is also problematic, Oren added, because it “jettisoned the two core principles of the alliance, which were ‘no surprises’ and ‘no daylight.’ Obama said it: I’m putting daylight. And proceeds to put daylight, public daylight. And then surprises. I was told that with previous administrations,” said Oren, “we were always given advance copies of major policy speeches. The Cairo speech (that Obama delivered in 2009) was twice as long as the First Inaugural Address. It touched on issues that were vital to our security. We never had any preview.”
Given the deterioration in ties, and especially given Obama’s policy on Iran, Oren concluded in the interview that “we’re on our own,” facing what he termed “a broad spectrum of monumental threats all at the same time.” He said this conclusion was inescapable after Obama failed to act against Syria, and that it was at this point that “everyone” in Israel realized that Obama was not serious about his military option on Iran.
Still, Oren tried to put a brave gloss on Israel’s lonely position: “To me that’s a refreshing Zionist moment. We realize we’re on our own,” said Oren. “It’s a different topic, but I have a thing about this regional peace conference with the moderate Arab states that everyone keeps talking about here, certain parties. To me it’s running away from what I believe is an Israeli Zionist responsibility: taking our fate into our own hands. Waiting for the Saudis to somehow bring redemption? I don’t think it’s going to happen.”
Oren concludes the book by urging that bilateral ties be repaired, and says American and Israeli leaders “must restore those three ‘no’s’ — no surprises, no daylight, no public altercations — in their relations.”
Asked toward the end of the interview whether things would be better under a Hillary Clinton presidency, Oren said that Netanyahu had “a rapport” with her, and that “she understands certain things about Israel… She gets it.” Clinton and Republican candidate Jeb Bush both made major campaign speeches this week in which they promised US-Israel ties would improve if they were elected president next year.

From Clooney to Clinton: 20 revelations from Michael Oren’s new book

1. Netanyahu’s take on the Hebrew press: Criticized on all sides in the Israeli media for his 2009 speech at Bar Ilan University in support of a two-state solution, Netanyahu tells Oren, half in jest, “If I walked on the Sea of Galilee, the Israeli papers would write, ‘Bibi can’t swim.'”
3. Kissinger’s bleak assessment of Obama’s approach to the Middle East: Meeting with Henry Kissinger early in his term, Oren finds the ex-secretary of state gloomy over the president’s eagerness to reconcile with Iran. Surely, says Oren, the White House realizes that an “Iran with nuclear capabilities means the end of American hegemony in the Middle East?” Retorts Kissinger: “And what makes you think anybody in the White House still cares about American hegemony in the Middle East?”
4. Oren stunned by Obama’s attitude to the United States: Reading the president’s memoir “Dreams From My Father,” the ambassador says he scoured the book in vain “for some expression of reverence, even respect, for the country its author would someday lead” but finds none. Instead, in Oren’s reading, “the book criticizes Americans for their capitalism and consumer culture, for despoiling their environment and maintaining antiquated power structures.” He notes that Obama accused Americans traveling abroad of exhibiting “ignorance and arrogance” — the very same shortcomings, notes Oren dryly, that the president’s critics assigned to him.
7. Abbas’s no-peace stare: At the suggestion of veteran US official Dennis Ross, Vice President Biden, visiting Israel in 2010, asked Mahmoud Abbas, when he called on the Palestinian Authority president in Ramallah, to “look him in the eye and promise that he could make peace with Israel. Abbas refused.”
8. Closed Gates: Former US defense secretary Robert Gates had “a visceral dislike” of Netanyahu, writes Oren. He’d known Netanyahu since the prime minister was deputy FM, and back then thought him superficial, glib, arrogant and outlandishly ambitious. As an adviser to George H.W. Bush, Gates had gone so far as to recommend that the young Netanyahu be banned from the White House.

Hamas whines over its impotence in the "unity government"

Maan reports:

An attendee of the 15th Fatah Revolutionary Council conference led by President Mahmoud Abbas told Ma'an Tuesday that the council will form an entirely new unity cabinet rather than pursuing efforts to reform the existing government.

Abbas announced that the government would resign within the next 24 hours, several senior Fatah officials attending the conference told AFP, with the new government formation expected to be carried out in a matter of several days.

The announcement comes as Palestinian leadership in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have struggled to maintain a unity government pieced together in June 2014.

Hamas is upset:

Hamas rejected any unilateral dissolution of the Palestinian unity government on Wednesday, hours before Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah was expected to meet President Mahmoud Abbas to present his government’s resignation and discuss the formation of a new government.

The rejection comes as senior Fatah officials reported Tuesday night that Abbas announced during a Fatah council meeting that the government would be dissolved and entirely reformed.

"Hamas rejects any one-sided change in the government without the agreement of all parties," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told AFP.

"No one told us anything about any decision to change and no one consulted with us about any change in the unity government. Fatah acted on its own in all regards."

Governmental sources told Ma'an that Hamdallah is expected to be assigned to the task of forming a new government that would potentially include the Hamas movement and other PLO factions.

Spokesperson of the national consensus government Ihab Bseiso meanwhile denied reports by Israeli media that forming a new government would not include representatives of Hamas.

Only a few years ago Hamas was the one calling the shots - its Gaza leader flying all over the world acting as heads of state, seemingly unlimited funding from Iran, absolute support from Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

Now Iran has limited its support for Hamas because it wouldn't support Assad in Syria. Egypt treats Hamas as an enemy and Gaza as enemy territory. Hamas is working to prevent rocket attacks on Israel because it cannot afford another war. And instead of defining the agenda of the "unity government" as it did in earlier failed attempts, now it is sidelined and complaining over how no one asks its opinion.

The worst thing you can do to Arabs is not to defeat them but to humiliate them, and being ignored is the ultimate humiliation.