Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, October 29, 2015

10/29 Links Pt1: Murdered American a Challenge to J Street; Fatah posts Nazi book: Don’t trust a fox or a Jew

From Ian:

Palestinian Murder of American-Israeli Poses Challenge to J Street

Will the murder of fellow-peace activist Richard Lakin spur J Street, Americans for Peace Now, and other left-of-center groups to follow Leonard Fein's footsteps and speak out?
And not just speak out in general, vague terms--but ask for specific actions, such as:
1. According to the media, one of Lakin's killers was a member of Fatah, the PLO faction that is headed by Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas. J Street should demand that Abbas order Fatah to pay restitution to the Lakin family.
2. Peace groups should urge the Obama administration to demand that the PA hand over Abd al-Majid Dudin and other Palestinian killers of Americans to the United States for prosecution. More than 130 American citizens have been killed by Palestinian terrorists since the 1960s--yet not one of the killers has yet been brought to justice in America.
3. J Street should announce that it will no longer take part in meetings in Ramallah, the Palestinian Authority's capital, until the PA changes the names of streets and parks in Ramallah that are named after Dalal Mugrahbi, a terrorist who murdered Gail Rubin, the niece of the late U.S. Senator Abraham Ribicoff (D-Connecticut)--another prominent figure in the left-of-center camp.
It should not matter that Richard Lakin was a peace activist, that Joan Davenny was a friend of a Peace Now leader, or that Gail Rubin was the niece of a liberal Democratic senator. But those are the facts.
For J Street and its allies, Palestinian terrorism is striking close to home. Perhaps these tragedies will help them recognize that speaking out against Palestinian terrorism is not a right-wing or left wing issue--it is a matter of justice, on which everyone should be able to agree.

Another American Victim of Palestinian Terror: Why it Matters

American taxpayers should care for another reason: the US government sends $500 million of their tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority (PA) every year. So the public has a right to expect the government to intervene when PA employees or PA-incited terrorists murder our citizens, or when the PA names streets, parks, and soccer teams after murderers of Americans.
The American government, too, has a special obligation with regard to American victims of Palestinian terrorism.
First, there is a legal obligation. American citizens, whether they are visiting, studying, or living abroad, are still American citizens. They pay taxes just like the rest of us, and in return the US government has a legal responsibility to act when they are harmed by terrorists abroad just as it would have an obligation to act if they are harmed by terrorists within the US.
Second, the US government has a strategic obligation to act. Fighting Palestinian terrorism must be part of America’s global war on terror. Bringing Palestinian killers of Americans to trial in the US would contribute significantly to anti-terror efforts, by making it clear to Palestinian terrorists that they could face the death penalty, or at least life in prison with no hope of release in a prisoner exchange — something that is not the case when they kill Israelis.
So, yes, it is relevant that Richard Lakin was an American. It’s not just a question of narrow national pride, or ethnic solidarity, or curiosity. For important moral, legal, and strategic reasons, the American victims of Palestinian terrorism should matter to American Jews, to the American public, and to the American government.

PMW Fatah posts Nazi children's book: Don’t trust a fox or a Jew

Today, on its official Facebook page, Abbas' Fatah movement posted the cover of an Antisemitic children's book from Germany from 1936.
Posted text: "The cover of one of the children's books in Germany in 1936 whose title is:
'Trust no fox on his green meadow, and trust no Jew on his oath'"
[Official Facebook page of the Fatah movement, Oct. 29, 2015]

Israel: Abbas’s UNHRC speech is 'the banalization of the spilling of Jewish blood'

Israel charged that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas “glorified” violence against Israelis and further “fanned the flames of the conflict” during his speech before a special session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on Wednesday.
“What we have witnessed today is the glorification of terror and violence,” Israel’s Ambassador to the UNHRC Eviatar Manor told diplomatic corp in Geneva hours after Abbas’s speech.
“What the Council allowed today is the banalization of the spilling of Jewish blood,” Manor said.
In his speech to the UNHRC Abbas said that the violence in the last few weeks was fueled by built up frustration over Israel’s “occupation of Palestine” and changes it had made to the status quo in the Al-Aksa mosque compound, known to Jews as the Temple Mount.
Abbas made no mention of the 11 Israelis killed by Palestinian assailants in some 30 attacks against Israelis since the start of October. Instead he accused Israel instead of “extra-judicial killings” and “war crimes” against his people.

Yesterday I reported that Moroccan Jews were alarmed at an anti-Israel demonstration where there was a performance showing supposedly orthodox Jews trying to demolish the Dome of the Rock when they are stopped by heroic Arabs, "stabbed" and "executed."

One of the organizers of the rally named Osidon responded by saying that the Jews are making a big deal out of nothing, because Moroccan jews don't dress the way the characters in the play did.

He then attacked the victims for even mentioning it.

He said that "those who promote the petition critical of what happened in the rally are trying to exploit the nobility of being against racism in general, and forget that the occupation of Palestine is based on racism. They are trying to create an atmosphere of tension and intimidation of members of the Jewish community to things they were not exposed to in Morocco. "

Osidon said that "those who try to exaggerate such facts to convince the Moroccan Jews that they are in danger are inciting them, and these attempts are fully compatible with the Zionist schemes intending to twist the conflict into a religious conflict, as well as to push the fine Jewish community of Morocco to escape, by promoting a climate of intimidation, which does not have a factual basis."

There you have it. Those who call out explicit Jew-hatred are the racists.

This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 11 years and over 22,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

From Ha'aretz:

Israeli Arab lawmaker Basel Ghattas visited the Temple Mount on Wednesday, touring the site in defiance of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's directive to the police to prevent Knesset members from visiting the flashpoint complex amid recent tensions and violence.

In the video, Ghattas, who is from a Christian family, addresses Netanyahu in Arabic, saying "you and your occupation will not prevent us from exercise our right to pray and visit Al-Aqsa… You and your occupation are temporary but this holy place will always remain Islamic and Arabic.

Ghattas is Christian but he is claiming the right to visit and pray on the Temple Mount, a right that he denies Jews.

But according to Islamic theology, there is no difference between how Christians and Jews should be treated. If Christians can ascend the Mount to visit and pray, then so can Jews.

Which proves yet again that the Arab claim to the site isn't based on Islamic rights - it is based on denying Jewish rights.

Another little piece of hypocrisy: The Muslims claim that the deadly 1929 riots were sparked by Jews bringing temporary partitions and benches to the Western Wall for Yom Kippur, something that they claimed was a violation of the "status quo" at the time. But notice that Ghattas is standing among the framework of what looks like a large tent being built on the plaza. Isn't that by definition a violation of the "status quo?"

Yesterday, David Collier wrote a must-read bombshell article about how he witnessed MP Gerald Kaufman accusing Israel of wantonly murdering Palestinians and fabricating evidence afterwards, and how "Jewish money" was behind Conservative support for Israel.

Here is his followup article submitted to publish here:

Two days ago I sat in government buildings within the Westminster complex and witnessed classic antisemitic slurs. I have to say primarily, that whatever one thinks of the political position of the Arabs who were present, the antisemitism *did not come from the Arabs*. At these events, it is almost always the Western ‘friends’ of the Arabs, driven by their hatred, not of Israel, but of Jews, who drive up the level of antisemitism in the room.

I spend considerable time amongst Israel ‘hater’s and you cannot walk into a room of Arabs discussing Israel and expect to ‘feel the love’. I know we would all like to, but in reality it is not going to happen. I am trying to get across that I have really thick skin, so when I suggest there was antisemitism in the room, I mean I was in the presence of full blown Nazis.

There is nowhere on the planet today that a Jew should be confronted with classic global Jewish conspiracy theories. Not even if he were listening to whispers standing in a dark room in a remote village in the hall of the local fascist party. Everyone knows where such conspiracy tales lead and nobody can walk the path. And yet, there I was in the heart of the British Government buildings, sitting in Westminster London, hearing people talk about Jewish money, the elephant in the room, secret meetings of Jewish Bankers in 1913 and classic stories of global Jewish control. And then there was Gerald Kaufman, a British MP, one of several ‘Israeli hating’ politicians present and one that just happens to be Jewish. Kaufman has a long history of virulent anti-Israeli protest and is shadowed by claims of antisemitism and self-hating.

So when he spoke I was expecting to hear distortions, but amongst the usual viciousness (he read an email claiming most of the stabbings are fabricated so Israel can execute Palestinians and then proceeded to declare ‘that is life in Israel today’), he spoke of ‘Jewish money’.

“Martin wonders why this governments policy has gone farther and farther and more and more pro-Israeli, but I’ll tell you because I can tell you in a way which perhaps nobody else in this room can tell you. It’s Jewish money, Jewish donations, to the conservative party as in the general election in May, support from the Jewish Chronicle, all of those things, bias the conservatives. There is now a big group of conservative members of Parliament, who are pro-Israel whatever government does and they are not interested in what Israel, in what the Israeli government does. They’re not interested in the fact that Palestinians are living a repressed life, and are liable to be shot at any time.”

This comment appears to accuse British MP’s of being paid off, of being bribed and of conducting their business on behalf of a distant nation rather than their voters. It also stinks of classic antisemitism. Two distinct points, not one. Remove Israel, remove the Jews and it is still a major problem. Add the Jews back into the story and we are back in the room with age old accusations of secret Jewish control. The story broke at noon yesterday, when I released my blog (http://david-collier.com/?p=1336) and a written account of the event. The local Jewish press picked it up within two hours, and two hours later British Jewish groups and antisemitism watchdogs were all over it. Demanding answers, wanting an apology, asking for explanations. The Labour party was reeling as Jewish MP’s expressed their outrage and the other MP’s who were present at the event, distanced themselves and pretended they’d all gone partially deaf.

And so we have a story of an active politician in the opposition party accusing the government of being bribed, having its foreign policy ‘purchased’ and ‘deliberately ignoring random assassinations of innocent people in the street by a rogue nation’. That the entire accusation embroils a minority that has a history of being persecuted with such accusations only adds more fuel to the mix. And not one national newspaper has said a word.

Every Jewish newspaper in the UK and several in Israel has picked it up but the British press are going nowhere near it. Even those newspapers who would love to take any opportunity to bash Corbyn’s Labour party are not touching it. And here is the truth; if Kaufman was not Jewish, this would have been headline news, at the very least in the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph and the politician in question may already have found himself out of a job. Something is protecting Kaufman and that something I am calling the ‘Kaufman effect’.

I am not suggesting the press call him an antisemite, although many others have, I am claiming that there is an issue for the press to address. It isn’t they don’t want to, they’d love to go for him, but they are too scared to touch and do not know how to handle it. How can a Jew be an antisemite? It is amongst the most ridiculous notions I have ever heard (actually a deeply antisemitic argument) that suggests the only people who cannot hate a particular race are members of that specific race. It suggests that there is actually a good reason to hate the Jews, but non-Jews are simply not ‘allowed to’.

The BBC, Telegraph, Times, Guardian, all of them, were made aware yesterday that some deeply disturbing comments had been made in the heart of the British democratic estate and yet not one of them have said a word. They need to explain to us all why they are failing to address it. They need to show us there is no such thing as the ‘Kaufman effect’. Let them show us there is no back door to Jewish conspiracy theories and no outlet for antisemitism. They have to ask the questions.

.@Amnesty "researchers" proven again to be anti-Israel slanderers (update)

Yesterday, I quoted a new Amnesty International report that supposedly showed how Israeli forces routinely murder Arabs at checkpoints for no reason at all. All of the evidence given comes from Palestinian "eyewitnesses" who often say contradictory things and who even Amnesty researchers have concluded often lie.

Let's go into more detail on the first case Amnesty supposedly "researched," the case they they claimed was the worst of all:

In an especially egregious case, Israeli forces shot dead 19-year-old Sa’ad Muhammad Youssef al-Atrash in the Old City of Hebron as he attempted to retrieve an ID card at an Israeli soldier’s request on 26 October. The Israeli police labelled the incident an “attempted stabbing” but an eyewitness watching the events unfold from her balcony said he had posed no threat when he was shot. One of the soldiers had asked him for ID, and as he reached into his pocket to grab his card another soldier standing behind him shot him on his right side, she told Amnesty International. The eyewitness said he was shot six or seven times and bled profusely as he lay on the ground for about 40 minutes afterwards, while soldiers failed to provide medical treatment. She also reported seeing soldiers bring a knife and place it in the dying man’s hand.

After I originally posted this I was made aware of Sa'ad al-Atrash's Facebook page, which is still up. Here is the profile picture he used:

It is a promo for a music video called, literally, "The Lovers of Stabbing."

A relative of Sa'ad Al Atrash named Mohammed, possibly his brother, posted this short essay on his own Facebook page:

First of all, “in the name of Allah”. I’ll tell you the story of a Palestinian hero. A (regular) guy from among the youth of Palestine and Hebron. He had dignity and manhood. This guy congratulated the father of the (female) shahid Bint Rashid, and said “Congratulations (for her martyrdom), her blood will not go unavenged.” He went and burnt the container [not sure what this means]. The next day he went and said hello to all his friends and asked for their forgiveness. He then went home and ate. He performed the ritual ablution before the prayer and read the Quran. He left his phone and his ID card (at home). He then went, as usual, to the Study Center and our Lord granted him martyrdom on his way. This is what he yearned for all the time. This is the heroic young man, the Lion of Hebron, Sa’ad Muhammad Yousef Al-Atrash. May Allah have mercy on his soul and put him in Paradise."

Mohammed then posted this immediately afterwards as his own Facebook cover photo:

Sons of Zion

Feel your necks... Slaughter is coming at them

Death to Israel (Hebrew)

This is not a man who is mourning his relative. It is someone who is proud of him.

The man whom Amnesty used as their most "egregious case" of Israeli crimes is now shown to have planned his attempted murder.

The "witness" was lying. And Amnesty's "researchers" Jacob Burns and Sunjeev Bery ignored the advice from their own about the dangers of believing people with an agenda and chose to believe her - not in spite of her agenda, but because they share it!

Amnesty must apologize and amend their slanderous report. In addition, if Amnesty wanted to retain a shred of credibility, it should for once address the real issue of anti-Israel incitement that drives people to want to stab the closest Jew they can find - incitement that often comes from the PA government and ruling political party, as I have shown many times.

But Amnesty won't do any of that. Because their goal in the Middle East, proven over and over again, is not truth nor is it justice. It is to find or help manufacture evidence to slander Israel.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

UPDATE: Mohammed's page was taken down, but it is archived here. (h/t Bob Knot, Nathan)

.@UNRWA teacher posts "Stab the Jews" video

UNRWA teacher Najlaa Nojom lives in Bethlehem.

She recently shared this video, glorifying stabbing Jews, on her Facebook timeline.

Here are some screenshots:

I think this fits right in with UNRWA's vaunted "neutrality" policy. The video is neutral about whether Arabs should stab Jews, run over Jews or stone Jews to death.

10/28 Link Pt2: Amnesty´s War on Israel; BDS wants Jobless and desperate Palestinians

From Ian:

Amnesty´s War on Israel: Accusations of "Unlawful Killings" without Evidence

On October 27, 2015, Amnesty International published a fundamentally flawed statement alleging a “clear pattern…of lethal force being used unlawfully by Israeli forces following a wave of recent stabbing attacks by Palestinians against Israeli civilians and military or police forces in Israel and the occupied West Bank.” This is at least the third statement from Amnesty since the escalation of Palestinian terror attacks beginning October 1 that makes such accusations, and demonstrates the organization’s on-going obsession with and disproportionate focus on Israel. None of Amnesty’s prior statements has focused exclusively on Israeli victims of these attacks, which have numbered in the hundreds – each one illegal and a blatant violation of human rights and domestic and international law. Moreover, Amnesty has remained silent on the vicious antisemitism and incitement campaign promoted by Palestinian officials, which has spurred on the attacks against Israeli civilians.
1. No evidence: Amnesty presents zero evidence to support its allegations. It does present entirely unverified and unverifiable testimony from anonymous Palestinian eyewitnesses. Israeli victims and security personnel are not mentioned.
2. Failure to establish a “clear pattern”: Amnesty cherry-picks four incidents out of dozens where security forces neutralized attackers. (And one of the four is from before October 1 and irrelevant to the responses to the current wave of terror attacks.) A comprehensive evaluation of Israeli responses to ongoing terror attacks would show a pattern of justifiable shootings, as well as numerous instances of Israeli police protecting wounded and detained perpetrators from vigilante justice.
3. Erroneous legal claims: Amnesty writes that “heavily armed soldiers and police wearing body armour facing a possible knife attack have a duty to use proportionate and graduated force and attempt to arrest suspects before resorting to the use of lethal force.”
4. Lack of credible researchers: The statement claims to present “findings of an ongoing research trip to the West Bank.” However, the researchers and staff members assigned to reporting on Israel have clear histories as anti-Israel activists, and generate analyses that are both inaccurate and blatantly prejudiced.
Jacob Burns (research and campaign assistant), who currently is in the region, previously worked for Forensic Architecture, a pseudo-scientific project that, in partnership with Amnesty International, made unsubstantiated charges of Israeli war crimes. In addition, Deborah Hyams (“researcher”) has an extensive background in radical anti-Israel activism, including acting as a “human shield” in Beit Jala (near Bethlehem) in 2001. Saleh Hijazi (“campaigner”) previously worked in PR for the Palestinian Authority and for the NGO “Another Voice” – under the group’s signature “Resist! Boycott! We Are Intifada!”

UK Commander Slams World’s Weak Response to ‘Human Shields’ for Causing Terrorists to Use Them More

French Minister of Defense Jean-Yves Le Drian recently made an essential statement about the war against terror and the difficulties it involves for Western countries.
In an interview with Europe 1 focusing on the French air strikes against the Islamic State, he remarked:
Daesh [ISIS] is organized in such a way that children, women, civilians are being put on front lines. Its leadership is hiding in schools, mosques, hospitals, making the action of the coalition in Iraq and the action of France and other partners in Syria difficult, because we don’t want civilian casualties. We pay as much attention to the targets we select as to the need to combat Daesh.
This is a frank admission of the “human shield” tactic practiced by Islamists, and their crippling effect on Western fighting.
Undoubtedly, Le Drian is aware that the United States and other Western partners in the coalition against ISIS are facing the same challenge, and that Israel faces similar difficulties when counter-attacking organizations like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and Fatah-affiliated terror groups.
What remains to be seen is whether he and the French government, now having this experience with human shields, will reconsider their foreign policy regarding Israel.
We asked Colonel Richard Kemp, the former British commander in Afghanistan and an expert about war ethics, to comment on Le Drian’s no-nonsense statement.

Jobless and desperate Palestinians

The most significant impact of BDS on SodaStream has been in Sweden. In response to pressure from retailers lobbied by BDS advocates, SodaStream agreed to stop shipping their machines from the West Bank factory. The Swedes have been pleased to receive products instead from a factory in China — a decidedly un-free country that “disappears” Tibetans who protest the Chinese annexation of their homeland. That has meant 150 fewer jobs for Palestinians with, again, each one responsible for an average of 10 dependents.
Perhaps the Swedes, along with other “progressive” Europeans and Americans, think Palestinians are better off as wards of the “donor community.” Perhaps they think another round or two of “peace-processing” will prompt good foreign investors (as opposed to Israeli investors) to head for the West Bank, checkbooks in hand. Or perhaps they think that if the Israelis bug out of the West Bank the result will not be — as it was in Gaza — the seizure of power by Hamas, which builds factories that make missiles rather than kitchen appliances.
Meanwhile, not far to the north, the jihadis of the Islamic State, al Qaeda affiliates and Hezbollah are watching. What sort of employment do you think they might have in mind for jobless, impoverished and desperate Palestinians?
By contrast, Mr. Birnbaum has literally been bringing the peoples of the Holy Land together, providing opportunities to earn decent livings making products consumers want and will pay for.
Those who oppose that, those who are trying to stop him and prevent others from following his example — with BDS advocates leading the pack — call themselves pro-Palestinian. Their claim is, when you think about it, nothing short of ludicrous.

State Dept stopped Bill Clinton from meeting Israeli leaders

From Politico:

During Hillary Clinton’s tenure as America’s top diplomat, the State Department vetoed at least two planned events involving former President Bill Clinton due to concerns they could upset delicate Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, according to emails newly obtained by POLITICO.

Top aides to Hillary Clinton were involved in heading off a meeting between former President Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in July 2010, as well as a speech the former president was planning to give at an event later that month marking the tenth anniversary of unsuccessful Camp David peace talks at the end of Bill Clinton’s term, the records show.

The email messages underscore how Middle East-related issues were among the most sensitive the State Department and the former president’s team sought to navigate while his wife was secretary of state.

Bill Clinton’s attempt to meet Netanyahu in New York in July 2010 was derailed after National Security Council Mideast staffer Dan Shapiro flagged NSC Chief of Staff Denis McDonough to the plan based on information picked up from top Netanyahu adviser Ron Dermer.

“Dermer told me that President Clinton asked to see the PM when he is in NYC,” Shapiro wrote. “The PM will also do interviews, a Jewish community event and a speech at CFR [the Council on Foreign Relations].” Dermer is now Israel's ambassador to the U.S., while Shapiro serves as the U.S. ambassador to Israel.

Why would Bill Clinton's meeting with Bibi or speaking at an event upset the State Department?

I cannto find a legitimate reason. It just feels like petty, anti-Israel politics where Israel cannot be seen as being "rewarded" by talking with the former president.

Notice that the State Department had no problem with another former president, Jimmy Carter, from meeting with Palestinian leaders including Hamas leaders, and Muslim groups, over the past six years.

Palestinian Researchers: Knives Can Also Be Used For Cutting Food (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Hebron, October 28 - Scientists at Ramallah's Bir Zeit University have made a surprising revelation, discovering this week that the stabbing implement known as the knife can potentially be used to cut food, and perhaps other objects that are not the body of a Jew.

Researchers applied the blade of a knife to certain readily-available, everyday, edible substances such as meat, cooked eggs, hard cheese, vegetables, fruits, and pastries, and found that depending on the shape and blade type of the knife, it performed well in cutting, slicing, or chopping the foodstuffs. In some cases, said the scientists, knives could even be used for peeling such produce as apples or raw carrots, and even for non-cutting-related food preparation activities such as spreading peanut butter or soft cheese on bread. The results of the study will appear in the upcoming issue of the journal Scientific Testing And Beyond (STAB).

"This discovery has the potential to revolutionize our view of the knife," said lead researcher Lasr Reyt. "There are of course significant cultural obstacles to overcome before such unorthodox uses of the bladed instrument become widespread, or even accepted in our society, but the promise of such a common, simple object having useful application far beyond its current role is exciting."

In the STAB article, the Bir Zeit team describes their experiment involving two each of eight types of blades, one set of which served as the control group. While the control group was placed in the hands of teenagers who were sent to attack Jews, the remaining set was given to people preparing or eating various kinds of food. Some instruction was necessary to train Palestinians how to hold a knife for cutting food, since the grip, orientation, and positioning of the implement differs markedly from the standard way a knife is wielded: the standard grip on a knife, explained the researchers, has the tip pointing down for effective, forceful stabbing, whereas for cutting or spreading foodstuffs, the implement is turned "upside down," so to speak, while the user effects a cutting motion with the long edge of the blade against the food.

The results, the article says, were unmistakable: with a little practice, food could be reduced to bite-size pieces, all but eliminating certain choking hazards. "Further study is necessary to determine the scope of innovation that this discovery heralds," write the authors, sounding a note of caution. "This is not to suggest, Allah forbid, that any knives be diverted from their essential purpose of stabbing Jews. However, this study does show that once the Jews are eliminated, any surplus blades can serve other important roles."

10/28 Link Pt1: 13-year-old stabbing victim out of hospital; Arab World: Extremists no longer welcome

From Ian:

Losing Palestine

It’s not hard to understand why the Palestinians have struggled to come to terms with the Jewish presence in this sense. The barriers to recognition are immense. If the Jews can’t be made to leave, if the foundational strategy of scaring them off wasn’t rooted in an understanding of what that might entail – that is, of how the alternatives to this homeland might appear in the Jews’ collective psyche – then what is the value of Palestinian sacrifices made on the altar of this misbegotten strategy?
Indeed, if the Jews of “colonialist” Israel cannot be dislodged, does that mean they are not like other colonial projects that could be made to collapse? If they are not colonists who can be pushed back to Germany or Russia or Iraq or Morocco from whence they came, what are they? What is to be done with the fact of the enemy’s implacable claims to nationhood, which clash so directly with Palestinian claims?
Nations have rights, and do not lose these rights when they err. That is why Palestinian leaders are so fearful of acquiescing to Israel’s demand that they recognize Jewish nationhood; among their arguments against the demand, one is paramount: it amounts to recognition of Jewish national rights, a vastly more profound concession than Palestinian moderates’ acknowledgment of Jewish power.
Failure has not yet led to any serious consideration that the premise at the heart of the Palestinian strategy may be wrong. No Palestinian who matters, who shapes opinion or controls militias, is willing to be the first to acknowledge defeat.
And so even as Palestinian public opinion grows weary of the pointlessness of the current struggle, Palestinian politics remain trapped in the lingering uncertainty, an uncertainty that is Hamas’s lifeblood and validation: What if we are giving up too soon? What if a little more pain, a little more sacrifice, will yet redeem and restore all that has been lost?
Few really believe that anymore in Palestine, but none are yet willing to seek another path.

Extremists no longer welcome

The Arab world's silence during this recent wave of terrorism, led mostly by knife-wielding Palestinian teenagers, is deafening, and it represents a certain lack of support for the Palestinians.
The Arab nations seem willing to leave these radical elements to deal with the mess they have cause by themselves. This time, the wave of terrorism not only fails to represent the Arab struggle against Israel, it fails to represent even the Palestinian themselves.
The Arab world's roaring silence is actually commendable. In the past, the slightest of incidents in Judea and Samaria, let alone on the Temple Mount, would have been enough to see masses take to the streets. Now these streets are empty, even in places prone to unrest like Cairo or Amman.
Arab media has also marginalized the story, toning down the rhetoric, with the exception of the Qatar-based Al Jazeera, where incitement is a reflex. Even Ankara is reluctant to chime in. Arab media outlets have all but refrained from condemning Israel over the current unrest, and it seems that this time, it is in their best interest not to fan the flames.

13-year-old critically hurt in Jerusalem stabbing released from hospital

A 13-year-old Israeli boy who was critically wounded in a terror attack on October 12 in Jerusalem’s Pisgat Ze’ev neighborhood was released from the hospital on Tuesday.
The boy was one of two Israeli victims stabbed by Ahmed and Hassan Manasra, 13 and 15, respectively.
He was taken to the hospital in life-threatening condition, placed in an induced coma and connected to a respirator. He woke up and began communicating with medical personnel and family members over a week ago.
Last week, as the boy regained consciousness, Prof. Ahmed Eid, head of the hospital’s Department of General Surgery, who operated on the boy, said he “has a long path of rehabilitation still ahead of him.”
Eid on Tuesday told Israel Radio the boy had been clinically dead upon his arrival to the hospital. (h/t Yenta Press)

Moroccan Jews alarmed by antisemitism at "pro-Palestinian" rally

From Algemeiner:

Thousands marched in Casablanca, Morocco on Sunday, in a show of solidarity for Palestinians amid the recent wave of Israeli-Palestinian violence, according to a video released by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

Demonstrators — among them teenagers and young children — wearing smocks bespattered in red paint, or the colors of the Palestinian flag, chanted, “Death to Israel,” and “We will sacrifice our soul and our blood to you, Al-Aqsa,” in reference to the holy site in Jerusalem that has reportedly been at the center of the recent terror surge in Israel.

Another part of the demonstration, also featured in a video uploaded to Facebook, shows two men dressed in Orthodox Jewish garb — albeit with obscenely tall cylindrical black hats — being led by West Bank Palestinian activists in black-and-white kaffiyehs (as opposed to the traditionally green ones worn by their counterparts in the Gaza Strip) holding toy assault rifles behind a miniature float of the Dome of the Rock.

At one point in the MEMRI video, the two “Orthodox” men are seen chipping away at the Dome of the Rock with pickaxes. They are subsequently rounded up, fake-stabbed and “executed.”

Moroccan Jews are aghast, and they have put together 3000 signatures on a petition condemning the play as well as another part of the rally where Muslim children trampled a Star of David. The petition says that people can demonstrate for whatever causes they want but to threaten an entire community like that is unacceptable.

The organizer of the demonstration defended the actions, Abdul Samad Fathi, denied that there was any anti-Semitism or incitement to kill Jews, saying that those who participated in the march were only referring to the "Zionist entity that usurped the land of Palestine and not the Jewish community that lived in peace and security with Muslims throughout the ages."

Fathi then raised the spectre of dual loyalties to the Moroccan Jews, telling CNN in Arabic: "Those who signed this petition are trying to fabricate an issue to change the subject of the debate which is to denounce crimes against the Palestinians. If the signatories are so keen on peace, why don't Moroccan Jews condemn those who join the ranks of the Zionist army and the killing of Palestinians?

He said that the play does not carry connotations of inciting the murder of Jews, but rather is aimed at Zionists

Amnesty International issued another one-sided report that claims that Israeli forces are shooting Arabs who pose no danger to them.

Every example they give is based on "eyewitness" testimony which even Amnesty has admitted is often based on lies.

Here is one example based purely on a supposed "eyewitness:"

In an especially egregious case, Israeli forces shot dead 19-year-old Sa’ad Muhammad Youssef al-Atrash in the Old City of Hebron as he attempted to retrieve an ID card at an Israeli soldier’s request on 26 October. The Israeli police labelled the incident an “attempted stabbing” but an eyewitness watching the events unfold from her balcony said he had posed no threat when he was shot. One of the soldiers had asked him for ID, and as he reached into his pocket to grab his card another soldier standing behind him shot him on his right side, she told Amnesty International. The eyewitness said he was shot six or seven times and bled profusely as he lay on the ground for about 40 minutes afterwards, while soldiers failed to provide medical treatment. She also reported seeing soldiers bring a knife and place it in the dying man’s hand.

Amnesty believes that a woman on a balcony can hear the security forces asking al-Atrash for an ID,which is highly unlikely. Yet they accept this absurd "testimony" even when the woman claims that the soldiers planted the knife.

The claim of planting knives has been all over Palestinian Arab media, including cases where video has proven otherwise. But the meme is strong enough that "eyewitnesses" speaking to credulous NGOs know exactly what to say.

By the way, al-Atrash made it pretty clear on Facebook what his intentions were (h/t Bob Knot)

The scenario is repeated, this time with Amnesty asking the readers to connect the dots:

On 25 October, a short distance from where al-Atrash was killed, Israeli border police shot dead Dania Jihad Hussein Ershied, 17. Shortly before she was killed, she had passed through a checkpoint equipped with a metal detector and two revolving gates, between which Israeli forces frequently lock people they deem suspicious. At a second checkpoint in front of Hebron’s Ibrahimi Mosque she was called for a second inspection by more than five border police officers, who began searching her bag and yelling at her to show her knife.

Warning shots were fired at her feet, prompting her to step back and raise her hands in the air. She was shouting at the police that she did not have a knife and still had her arms raised when police again opened fire, shooting her six or seven times.

A photo of Ershied’s body shows a knife lying near the body, and the Israeli police spokesperson has stated that she attempted to stab a border policeman. However, even if Dania Jihad Hussein Ershied had a knife in her possession, eyewitness accounts indicate she was not posing a threat to Israeli forces when she was shot, and her killing is therefore absolutely unjustified.

Amnesty clearly doesn't believe that Ersheid had a knife, because otherwise why would they mention that she went through a metal detector beforehand? But then they hedge their bets by saying that even if she had a knife, she had both hands in the air - according to the eyewitnesses. So either the eyewitnesses are lying, which even Amnesty admits they often do, or the IDF is lying and planting evidence.

It is clear which one Amnesty believes.

Even though there have been dozens of stabbing attacks causing injuries and deaths, and even though Palestinian media is glorifying the youths who are stabbing Jews, Amnesty is assuming that the people who cheer the attacks are honest and the ones who are the intended victims are liars. Amnesty believes the "eyewitnesses" who are under tremendous social pressure not to say anything that goes against their narrative.

The Amnesty employee most responsible for this one-sided "research" is Jacob Burns, currently visiting the area just to write reports like this. Burns happens to be a "researcher" behind Amnesty's "Gaza Platform" which claims that hundreds of terrorists killed in Gaza were innocent civilians, and he has refused to answer anyone on Twitter who pointed out his provable lies in that farce. So we know that Amnesty's main researcher in the territories has no integrity whatsoever. (And he is the only Amnesty employee i've seen who occasionally tweets terror attacks against Israelis, too. So everyone else at Amnesty is even worse!)

And then there is this:

[H]eavily armed soldiers and police wearing body armour facing a possible knife attack have a duty to use proportionate and graduated force and attempt to arrest suspects before resorting to the use of lethal force,” said Philip Luther

This mirrors what Amnesty said in its last biased report two whole weeks ago:

While Palestinian demonstrators have thrown rocks and firebombs towards Israeli forces in many demonstrations, and there are reports that Palestinians have shot at Israeli forces in isolated cases, Israeli military and police forces are heavily protected and must ensure that all use of force is strictly necessary and proportionate, and that firearms must only be used to protect against the imminent threat of death or serious injury.

We've seen videos of attacks that happen suddenly, Necks and face aren't protected by body armor.

And why would Amnesty mention that soldiers are "heavily armed" if they say that the soldiers and police cannot use those arms?

It is all to paint a picture of unwarranted Israeli aggression and innocent Palestinian victims. It is part of Amnesty's war against Israel in the name of "human rights." Because it sure isn't in the name of truth.

From TOI:

A former Iranian president admitted this week that the country’s nuclear program was started with the intent of building a nuclear weapon.

The comments by Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani to the state-run IRNA news agency would appear to mark the first time a top Iranian official — current or former — has said the country sought a nuclear weapon, in contravention of repeated assurances by the regime that its enrichment program is and always has been peaceful.

Rafsanjani said the program was begun while the country was at war with Iraq in the 1980s with the express consent and participation of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The comments by Rafsanjani, which do not appear on IRNA’s english website, were first reported on by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, a dissident group of Iranian exiles.

“Our basic doctrine was peaceful usage of the nuclear technology although we never abandoned the idea that if one day we are threatened and it is imperative, we would have the capability for going the other path [to nuclear weapon] as well,” Rafsanjani said, according to the NCRI translation.

According to the NCRI, Rafsanjani’s comments are tantamount to admitting that the country is still pursuing a nuclear weapon, though that assertion was not borne out by the group’s translation of the interview.

“The statement by Rafsanjani is an unequivocal testimony to the fact that the Iranian regime, from the onset until present, and under direct supervision of Khamenei and Rafsanjani, has been in search of the nuclear weapon and has never abandoned it,” NCRI said in a statement

Here are excerpts from the NCR-Iran article:

Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former Iranian regime President and present head of regime’s State Exigency Council that has been regime’s No. 2 man from the outset made unprecedented concessions in an interview that the regime was looking to acquire nuclear bomb when it initiated its nuclear program and has never abandoned the idea.

According to this interview published by regime’s official news agency IRNA on 26 October 2015, Rafsanjani in the capacity of speaker of parliament or President and Khamenei as President or Supreme Leader of this regime have been personally following up the project to acquire the nuclear bomb. Moreover, Rafsanjani has acknowledged that from the onset there has been a comprehensive clandestine nuclear plan, including construction of secret sites, enrichment of uranium, manufacture of centrifuge parts, laser technology, and the heavy water reactor.

Rafsanjani also admitted that “80% to 90% of the Iranian people… concur with the [nuclear] accord and want to be done with it [nuclear project]”. Thus, he alludes to years of falsification in regime’s propaganda that the nuclear project is popular with the Iranian people.

In this interview Rafsanjani says: “At the time that we started, we were at war and we were looking to have this capability [the nuclear bomb] for the day that our enemy would want to resort to the nuclear bomb.” He audaciously continues, “Our basic doctrine was peaceful usage of the nuclear technology although we never abandoned the idea that if one day we are threatened and it is imperative, we would have the capability for going the other path [to nuclear weapon] as well”.

Rafsanjani acknowledges in this interview that both he and Khamenei wanted to meet Abdul Qadeer Khan. He noted: “There were some talks with the Pakistanis. There was a nuclear scientist called Abdul Qadeer Khan in Pakistan… In a trip to Pakistan, I asked to see him. They did not show him to me… I had gone to Pakistan twice. In any case, I did not see him. Ayatollah Khamenei did not see him either. However, during the war, we were both pursuing to begin the work. It seemed that Mr. Abdul Qadeer Khan himself believed that the Islamic World should have the nuclear bomb. He believed in this and it was he who built Pakistan’s nuclear bomb although it took time to build the bomb. In any case, they agreed to help us a bit.”

Rafsanjani’s interview clearly indicates that from the onset the regime was after deceiving the International Atomic Energy Agency. “We had no problem with the IAEA in the nuclear activities because we were an IAEA member. They would come and sometimes point to some problems and Mr. Amrollahi and his friends would respond to them. During the early work, the agency never disturbed us although it didn’t help us either,” he says. “After my tenure as President, the West suddenly realized that we have made advances in different sections.”

The NCR-Iran article also notes that Rafsanjani didn't say a word about the supposed fatwa issued by Iran's Supreme Leader Khamanei against nuclear weapons - because he was directly involved in the nuclear weapons project, and tried to meet with Pakistan's Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the Islamic bomb!

Details about previous nuclear activities are one of the demands that the US has caved on, even though it is critical information for the IAEA to know where to look for evidence of a nuclear weapon program today.

.@UNRWA uses Hamas human shield victim for fundraising and demonizing Israel

Over the past year, Chris Gunness of UNRWA has trotted out Mohammed, a child who was tragically blinded in an Israeli airstrike, as a poster child to raise money from people who would be aghast at Israel's cruelty at doing something so vicious to such an innocent boy.

He wrote in September for Haaretz:

Behind these statistics are real lives each with a dignity and a destiny that must be nurtured and respected. Allow me to tell you about one of them – the nephew of my colleague, Kamal. A missile struck the house where he lived with his extended family. Four of his brother’s children were severely injured as they slept. Kamal’s eight-year-old nephew was wounded by shrapnel to the face. He was taken to hospital unconscious. The child awoke from his coma blind. We found a hospital in Amman to take the boy. But his mother was denied passage out and eventually his aunt accompanied the sightless boy from Gaza. Ten days later, his father was in the mosque about to pray. It was hit. The child found himself both sightless and fatherless.

In November, he tweeted this:

Mohammed 8, son of #Gaza colleague woke up from coma, blind. His father died later while praying when mosque hit RT pic.twitter.com/12fLpgtoUF
— Chris Gunness (@ChrisGunness) November 1, 2014

He used Mohammed for fundraising something called "The Vision Project":

The UNRWA Vision Project came about because of an astonishingly brave kid in Gaza, Mohammad aged 8 whose life was changed forever when a single shell hit his house and blinded him. We need to make this project a reality for hundreds of children in Gaza. Please donate today to end their suffering and help bringing them a brighter future.

More implied Israeli cruelty for his fundraising tweet in May:

The project 2 help kids like Mohammed needs some cash to make it solar http://t.co/G9uO3Eu5p4 thx. @ChrisGunness pic.twitter.com/G5KdS11NyC
— Chris Gunness (@ChrisGunness) May 25, 2015

This week he spoke about Mohammed to at least two more audiences in London, one at the US designated terror group Interpal that I mentioned previously, and one other at Parliament:

Told story of brave little Mohammed from Gaza & Vision Project in UK parliament; event attended by MPs and Lords RT pic.twitter.com/GdyIadtoZx
— Chris Gunness (@ChrisGunness) October 27, 2015

That is a lot of mileage from a kid who was blinded by an airstrike.

But who is to blame for Mohammed's blindness?

This man - Mohammed's father, Nidal, a commander for Hamas Al Qassam Brigades Nuseirat Battalion.

Nidal was a legitimate target under the laws of war by any definition,. He used his family, including Mohammed, as human shields.

No one was killed in the Israeli airstrike targeting Nidal, although Mohammed's siblings were injured.

A week later, Nidal met with two other senior Hamas terrorists in a mosque at 3:30 AM, way before dawn prayers. Israeli forces did not miss that time and all three were killed. Hamas detained an AP reporter looking at the rubble of the mosque because they didn't want him to see evidence that the mosque was in fact a terrorist headquarters.

Mohammed Badran is blind because his father was a disgusting Hamas terrorist who valued his own life above that of his family.

Gunness knows that Mohammed's father was a Hamas terrorist. He won't ever admit it out loud.

Because this is all about money, and Chris Gunness is more than happy to cynically use this victim of Hamas policy to raise money.

UNRWA cannot fundraise by telling the truth. Mohammed is young and his photos are heartbreaking. So Israel must be blamed for his injuries, explicitly or implicitly - because UNRWA raises cash from donors who hate Israel.

Truth be damned - UNRWA needs to slander Israel in order to make money so it can teach the next generation to hate Israel even more.

10/27 Links Pt2: Boycott is the enemy of peace; The dangerous idiots of academia; A Scholarly Roll of Shame

From Ian:

Vic Rosenthal: When do we stop ignoring the information war?

How did Israel allow herself, with all of her alleged intellectual muscle, to get into this situation? How could there have been such a massive failure to tell our story – our true story to the world? Can it be turned around?
Israel is failing at hasbara for two main reasons:
First, the state suffers from a massive oversupply of homegrown critics, who attack it with as much or more vigor than outsiders. I think if we had a way to measure the pro- and anti-Israel output of our media, academics and cultural figures, we would find that the negative far outweighs the positive. Naturally when an Israeli criticizes Israel, a listener is prepared to credit what he says much more than when it comes from an outsider. Anti-Israel Israelis are helped in this by the large fraction of Diaspora Jews who, for whatever reason, are always found among Israel’s most vehement critics. There is no comparable phenomenon among Arabs and Muslims, who maintain admirable message discipline.
Not only is this pervasive self-deprecation damaging to our image, it may be responsible for the fact that we don’t even try to project a positive one.
Second, like the whore in Catch-22 who hits Captain Orr over the head repeatedly with her shoe, our critics are getting paid to beat us up. Molding the way the world thinks about a subject isn’t cheap, and our enemies haven’t spared the expense. Here are just some ways anti-Israel dollars from governments and wealthy individuals (George Soros) are effectively employed as information weapons:

Honest Reporting: HonestReporting at the Gaza Border

The reality of life in the Israeli towns and communities that border the Gaza Strip is rarely in the news, particularly during supposedly “quiet” times when “only” the odd rocket is fired from Gaza.
With that in mind, HonestReporting led a one-day trip to the Gaza border with military expert Elliot Chodoff to explore the issues Israel faces in dealing with this extremely problematic area. The trip is a snapshot sample of the week-long HonestReporting Mission that takes place in the Spring and Fall every year.
Along the way, Major (res.) Chodoff discussed the complexities of first defining and then dealing with terrorists. When a group like Hamas arms itself with military weapons and tactics, it becomes harder for a state to defend itself according to traditional military doctrine. The laws of war become less clear when a terrorist group embeds itself within civilian communities and hides behind civilian targets. Policy makers must decide whether attacks against military personnel qualify as terrorism as opposed to attacks against civilians which is more clearly defined.

Ben-Dror Yemini: Boycott is the enemy of peace

In an article in The Washington Post, Steven Levitsky and Glen Weyl claim they support the boycott against Israel for their love of Israel. But one cannot reach a peace agreement by supporting a campaign that opposes any peace agreement.
“When we say '67 borders, we know that the greater goal is the end of Israel… Don't say these things to the world. Keep it to yourself" - Abbas Zaki, Senior PLO official, Al-Jazeera, Sep. 2011.
"Muslims' destiny is to kill Jews. Resurrection will come only after Jews are killed by Muslims" - the principal Palestinian Authority religious leader, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein, Jan. 2012. The authors admit that Israel "is hardly the world’s worst human rights violator". They even admit that "boycotting Israel is double standard". But they excuse it with their love for Israel.
This is an interesting argument. When haters demand a boycott, they do it because they deny the right of Israel to exist. When lovers of Israel do it, they suffocate Israel with their love. The result is the same. But what is more interesting is that there is no Palestinian or Arab movement that will demand self-responsibility from the Palestinian leadership. No calls for a boycott of the Palestinian Authority even if time and again the Palestinian leadership refused any settlement based on the idea of two states for two peoples. No calls for a boycott of the Palestinian Authority even though it makes monthly payments to terrorist murderers of Jews, including members of Hamas, who are sitting in prisons. There is no call for a boycott against the PA that continues to fund anti-Semitic incitement against Israel.
There is something very racist about the absolute exemption from criticism granted to the Palestinian side, but obsessive criticism, directed to the Israeli side. The day when supporters of peace understand that the Palestinian side has some responsibility; the day when they demand that Palestinians end incitement and terrorist funding - will be a better day for the prospect of peace.
We can assume the authors have good intentions. They strive for peace. But their way is wrong. One cannot reach a peace agreement by supporting a campaign that opposes any peace agreement. One cannot stop the occupation by ignoring Palestinian rejectionism of the two states for two peoples solution. You cannot support a campaign that opposes the existence of Israel and claim that this is due to your love of Israel.
Peace is the enemy of the boycott campaign, and the boycott campaign is the enemy of peace.