Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, March 21, 2016

Iranian media silent on Israeli victims of Istanbul suicide bombing

Three Israelis and one Iranian were killed by the suicide bomber in Istanbul on Saturday.

Iranian English-language media have been covering the story closely, but based on coverage in state-run PressTV and IRNA, not one article has mentioned that Israelis were victims.

I see six articles in IRNA English and at least five more in PressTV that discuss the terror attack.

The idea that Israelis could be terror victims is anathema to Iran, which styles itself as a major player fighting terrorism. Which is funny for a major world power behind terrorism.

Now, Turkish media is reporting that the Israelis were the targets of the bombing, and the bomber tailed an Israeli tour group, waiting for them to exit a restaurant before blowing himself up.

Iran tries to paint ISIS as an Israeli organization. Last year the regime held an ISIS cartoon contest, modeled after their cartoon contests making fun of the Holocaust. One of the winning cartoons associated ISIS with Jews.

So the idea that ISIS is anti-Israel or antisemitic cannot and must not be mentioned in Iranian media, and Israeli victims of terror are stripped of their nationhood.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Let's compare Columbia's pro-Israel and anti-Israel faculty, shall we?

From The Columbia Spectator:

Over 200 faculty members have signed a petition expressing their commitment to Columbia’s ties with Israel and opposing divestment from companies that conduct business in the country.

This petition, released Sunday afternoon, follows the launch of Columbia University Apartheid Divest, which is calling on the University to “divest from corporations that supply, perpetuate, and profit from a system that has subjugated the Palestinian people.”

Addressed to the Board of Trustees, the petition—the fourth in a series of petitions both in support and in condemnation of boycott, divestment and sanctions at Columbia—argues that the “shared values and interests” between the University and Israel are worth preserving through formal ties, though not every Israeli government policy is worth supporting.Over 200 faculty members have signed a petition expressing their commitment to Columbia’s ties with Israel and opposing divestment from companies that conduct business in the country.

“It would not be just or principled to respond to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by disengaging from Israel or from companies that do business with Israel,” the petition said. “It would be unjust to blame only one side for this conflict, and unprincipled to single out Israel for this sanction, while maintaining ties with other nations that – unlike Israel – are undemocratic, repressive, and much less restrained in their use of force.”

The list of signatories includes prominent members of the University’s faculty and administrators, including Glenn Hubbard, dean of the Business School, Dorothy Denburg, former dean of Barnard College, Nicholas Lemann, former dean of the Graduate School of Journalism, and University Professor Eric Kandel, the co-director of the Mind Brain Behavior Institute.

Former New York City mayor David Dinkins, who serves as a professor at the School of International & Public Affairs, also signed the petition in support of Columbia’s ties with Israel, which emphasizes that Columbia benefits from its links to Israeli academia, research, and technology.

“Israel is a thriving democracy. It has democratic elections, a free press, rule of law, and strong protections for the individual rights of all citizens, including Arabs as well as Jews,” the petition said. “Israel also is the home of great universities, a vibrant culture, and an innovative high-tech sector.”

Of the 69 Columbia professors who signed a pro-BDS petition. 15 of them work in the anthropology department, six in philosophy, 13 in Middle East studies, two in Gender & Sexuality Studies, four in art history, six in history and eight in English, and only one in law.

The pro-Israel petition, on the other hand, has 26 signatures from the College of Physicians and Surgeons, 75 from the Columbia Medical Center, 27 from the Law School, and many others in the engineering and other medical fields.

In other words, the professors who support Israel are overwhelmingly specialists in fields where the truth often means the difference between life and death, and the ones who are anti-Israel largely do their work in fields where truth is a quaint and elastic concept.

This explains a lot.

(h/t Diana)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

From Hebrew Tales, by Hyman Hurwitz, 1826, a collection of midrashim and other old Jewish stories translated to English and embellished.

The Quadruple Tale: Or, Rabbi Joshuah instructed.

"No person," said Rabbi Joshuah, "ever conquered me (in wit), except two children,— a little girl and a widow." He then related the following tales.

The Wise Child.

Once on my travels, I came near a town where the road separated to right and left. Not knowing which to take, I enquired of a little boy who happened to be there, which of the two led to the town. "Both," replied he; "but that to the right is short and long — that on the left is long and short." I took that on the right; but had not Tar advanced, when my progress was stopped by a number of hedges and gardens. Unable to proceed, I returned, and asked the little fellow, how he could be so cruel as to misdirect a stranger? "I did not misdirect thee," replied the boy. "I told thee what is true. But art thou a wise man amongst Israel, and canst not comprehend the meaning of a child? —It is even as I said. This road is the nearest, but still the longest, on account of the many obstructions. Unless thou wouldest trespass on other people's ground, which I could hardly suppose from so good a man. The other road is, indeed, more distant, but it is, nevertheless, the shortest, being the public road; and may, therefore, be passed without encroaching on other people's property."—I admired his wit, and still more his good sense, and went on.

The Little Boy.

Arriving in the city, I met another little boy carrying a covered dish. "What hast thou in that dish, child?" demanded I. — "My mother would not have covered it, master, had she been willing that its contents should be known;" replied the little wit! — and went on.*

The Little Girl kind and witty.

Another time, during my travels, I came near a well, where a little girl was drawing water. Being very thirsty, I asked for a draught. She handed me the pitcher.— "Drink," said she, "and when thou hast done, I will draw some for the beast on which thou ridest."

I quenched my thirst, and the good girl gave some to the poor animal. As I departed, I said, "Daughter of Israel! thou hast imitated the virtuous example of our good mother Rebekah.

"—"Rabbi," said the little girl, (with a smile, that indicated the most kindly feelings, and that the reply was a mere play of wit.)—" Rabbi, if I have imitated the example of Rebekah, thou hast not imitated that of the faithful Eliezer."*

* And it came to pass, as the camels had done drinking, that the man (Eliezer) took a golden ear-ring of a half shekel weight, and two bracelets for the hand, of ten shekels weight of gold (and gave them to her). Gen. xxiv. 22.

The Widow.

I Happened once to take up my lodging at the abode of a widow. She prepared something for my dinner, which she placed before me. Being very hungry, I eat the whole, without leaving the customary remnant for the servants.* The next day I did the same. The third day, my hostess, wishing to make me sensible of the impropriety of my conduct, so overseasoned the dish she had prepared for me, that it was impossible to eat it. Ignorant of what had been done, I began to eat ;but finding the food so very salty, I laid down the spoon, and made my repast on bread. "Why eatest thou not of what has been prepared for thee?" asked my hostess. — "Because I am not hungry," answered I. —" If so," rejoined she, "why eatest thou bread I Do people eat that by way of desert. — But," continued she, with a significant smile, "I can perhaps guess thy motive. Thou leavest this for the poor servants whom thou didst, yesterday and the day before, deprive of their due! Is it not so Rabbi?" I was humbled, and I acknowledged my fault.

* It Was a custom amongst the ancient Hebrews to leave a portion in the plate for the use of the waiters or servants, that they might partake of the same food as the rest of the family.
T. Erubin.
Medrash Echoh.

This interesting story follows, from which Arthur Conan Doyle possibly owes a debt.

The Athenian and his one-eyed Slave.

An Athenian went to study at Jerusalem. After remaining there three years and a half, and finding he made no great progress in his studies, he resolved to return. Being in want of a servant to accompany him on his journey, he went to the market-place and purchased one. Having paid the money, he began to examine his purchase more closely, and found to his surprise that the purchased servant was blind of one eye. "Thou blockhead," said he to himself—" see the charming fruits of thy application. Here have I studied three years and a half, and at last acquired sufficient Avisdom to purchase a blind slave !" — " Be comforted," said the person that sold the slave; "trust me, though he is blind of one eye, he can see much better than persons with two." The Athenian departed with his servant. When they had advanced a little way, the blind slave adr dressed his master—"Master," said he, "let us quicken our pace, we shall overtake a traveller, who is some distance before us." "I can see no traveller," said the master.— "Nor I," replied the slave; "yet I know he is just four miles distant from us." — "Thou art mad, slave! How shouldest thou know what passes at so great a distance, when thou canst scarcely see what is before thee?" — "I am not mad," replied the servant, "yet it is as I said; nay, moreover, the traveller is accompanied by a she-ass, who like myself is blind of one eye: she is big with two young, and carries two flasks, one containing vinegar, the other wine." "Cease your prattle, loquacious fool,"—exclaimed the Athenian. — "I see, my purchase improves: I thought him blind only; but he is mad in the bargain."—" Well, master," said the slave, "have a little patience, and thou wilt see I have told thee nothing but the truth." They journeyed on, and soon overtook the traveller; when the Athenian, to his utmost astonishment, found every thing as his servant had told him; and begged him to explain how he could know all this without seeing either the animal or its conductor.—"I will tell thee, master," replied the slave. "I looked at the road, and observing the almost imperceptible impression of the ass's hoofs, I concluded that she must be four miles distant; for beyond that, the impression could not have been visible. I saw the grass eaten away on one side of the path, and not on the other; and hence judged she must be blind of one eye. A little further on, we passed a sandy road, and by the impression which the animal left on the sand where she rested, I knew she must be with young. Further, I observed the impressions which the liquid had made on the sand, and found some of them appeared spungy — whilst others were full of small bubbles, caused by fermentation, and thence judged of the nature of the liquid." The Athenian admired the sagacity of his servant, and thenceforth treated him with great respect.

Medrash Echoh.
T. Sanhedrin.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Hasby Award winner for Best Celebrity Tweeter

And the winner, in a close race, is...

(drumroll)

Mayim Bialik

Mayim Bialik is one of the stars in the Big Bang Theory and a very proud, religious Jew. She is an unapologetic supporter of Israel although it is not a major part of her Twitter feed. But this was a voters' choice award and she won, edging out Roseanne Barr.

Mazel tov!

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

03/20 Links: Israelis killed in Istanbul named; Implications of NGO Espionage for European Funders

From Ian:

NGO Monitor: Implications of NGO Espionage for European Funders

A March 17 investigative report on Israel’s Channel 2 TV showed activists from Breaking the Silence apparently collecting sensitive information on IDF methods and equipment. Beyond the ramifications for the NGO and its members, this has severe implications for their funder-enablers.
NGO Monitor’s research shows that during 2012-2015, 78% of this group’s budget (some NIS 6.8 million, or $1.8 million) was provided by European governments, including Switzerland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, and the EU. Additional amounts came from the US-based New Israel Fund.
“Major donations from European governments have enabled the members of Breaking the Silence to implement their radical agenda, including obtaining potentially classified information with no connection to ethics or human rights,” Professor Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor said. “All of Breaking the Silence’s activities, including false campaigns regarding alleged war crimes and revelations regarding potential espionage, are enabled by the financial support of foreign governments. The latest revelations highlight the need for European governments to implement vital transparency and oversight, without the excuses offered in the past, and adopt strict guidelines regarding secret funding processes for political NGOs that do so much damage in the Arab-Israeli context.”
In correspondence with NGO Monitor following the Channel 2 program, EU Ambassador to Israel Lars Faarborg Andersen stated that the EU was unaware of Breaking the Silence’s activities in collecting sensitive information on the IDF, and had not requested nor received such information from the NGO.

Breaking the Silence About Spying

What we’ve learned about Breaking the Silence should shame those of its foreign backers who claim to be friends of Israel. That is particularly true of some liberal American Jews that enabled it to play a role in destroying Israel’s image, especially on college campuses. Seen in the context of competing claims by the overwhelming majority of IDF veterans who discount the atrocity stories the group peddled — and which have been largely discredited by army investigations — its time to strip away the public and the media’s illusions about Breaking the Silence. It ought now to be seen for what it is: a subversive organization whose purpose appears to be to undermine the efforts of the IDF at a time when Israel is under assault by a wave of bloody terrorism, as well as from threats from Hamas and Hezbollah. Its members are not victims of incitement but people who are actively attempting to impede the army from protecting Israel’s citizens.
The narrative promoted in the New York Times and other venues about the Jewish right trying to destroy Israeli democracy in an effort to silence well-intentioned human rights activists on the left who only want to save the nation’s soul and protect helpless Palestinians is a myth. Left-wing NGO’s like Breaking the Silence are not content to merely sabotage IDF counter-terrorism. The fundamental purpose of these organizations is to overturn the verdict of Israeli democracy as expressed by the overwhelming majority of the country’s voters who continue to re-elect Netanyahu and Knesset majorities for his governments. It is those who back foreign pressure to force Israel’s government to submit to Palestinian demands that are trying to kill democracy, not Netanyahu’s supporters.
Israeli authorities will investigate this spying on the army. But those who have cheered on efforts to promote Breaking the Silence and other like-minded organizations from abroad must now do some soul searching about their choices. No one, either in Israel or here is obligated to support every policy of the government in Jerusalem or to refrain from speaking out against actions they deem to be wrong. But there is a line between democratic dissent and espionage or other efforts that materially aid the efforts of terror groups. Breaking the Silence has crossed that line. Those who claim to be friends of Israel should never again grant it a platform or a penny of financial support.

Israeli Soldiers Speak Out

Former Israeli soldier Sagie concurs. He is an artillery officer in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), serving as a platoon commander in the Israeli Artillery Crops, a commander in the Officers Artillery Course, and today is a deputy commander of an artillery battery. He feels “the media never shows the real picture. For example, they will show me as a soldier up against a young Palestinian child. People then get the impression that the Palestinian is the underdog. Sometimes the strong can also be underdogs. Even when reporting a terrorist attack inside Israel, people hear two Palestinians killed with two Israelis. But in actuality, the Palestinians were the terrorists and the Israelis were the innocent civilians.”
Sometimes it appears that the world is going back to the dark times of the Holocaust era. Just last month, Iran, flush with cash from the sanctions relief, announced that they will give slain Palestinian terrorists $7000 if they become “martyrs of the intifada in occupied Jerusalem.” Since the Palestinian knifing attacks have started, thirty-four Israelis have been killed and 404 injured, with 202 stabbings/attempted attacks, 83 shootings, and 42 vehicular (ramming) attacks.
Sagie noted, “We are fighting on our own land. So when I am taking my soldiers with me to fight in Gaza, sometimes the missiles that we are viewing, that Hamas shot headed to Israel, sometimes my soldiers, even me myself, can see the missiles going towards my home and to my soldiers' home. That's something that you can't understand from just watching the news. Regarding the stabbings, not only is Army personnel attacked, but also civilians, mothers, and children. The minute they know it’s an Israeli, it’s a Jew, they attack them. We want to protect ourselves and it is difficult because you can’t judge someone who is under attack, if he made the right decision by killing the attacker or by running away. It is very difficult to judge someone when you haven’t been in that situation yourself.”

{Author's note - this is a slightly edited retread from a few years ago. I thought that it was worth revisiting because it remains as true now as it was then.}

The progressive movement's main claim to political legitimacy is a moral claim. The movement claims to stand for social justice and equality of rights throughout the world. Any legitimacy the left has as a political movement is grounded in the notion of universal human rights. But if the left has quietly abandoned that ideal, which it has, then it loses both moral and political legitimacy. After all, if the left does not stand for universal human rights, then just what in this world does it stand for?

The sad truth is that the left has abandoned its core reason to be. By holding different people, and different countries, to different moral standards it has effectively abandoned its alleged cor values. One cannot claim to stand for social justice, after all, if you only care about social justice for some people, but not others. If you constantly speak out against supposed Israeli human rights abuses but remain silent about the truly horrific situations in Darfur or Congo or Syria... circumstances that make the Arab-Israel conflict look like a picnic on a summer Sunday afternoon... then you cannot claim to stand for universal human rights and, therefore, any claims you may have for moral or political leadership, as a member of the left, are entirely unfounded.

This is the situation that we find ourselves in, currently, and it probably represents at least part of the reason why many Jews are becoming more and more dissatisfied with the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. Most diaspora Jewish supporters of Israel are people who at one time, if not currently, considered themselves on the progressive-left. Certainly, I did. As someone who grew up in the political aftermath of the counterculture and the New Left, I was impressed with the ideals of those movements. I was impressed with the counterculture for its apparent spontaneity, its anti-authoritarian values, and its sense of community. I was impressed with the New Left for standing against jingoism, for its anti-war agenda, and for its championing of the human rights of women and Gay people and other minorities.

Today, looking back on the movement that was for decades my political home, what I see are the ruins of what was and the rank hypocrisy of what is. The left has essentially broken itself on Israel's back and they don't even know it, yet. The reason for this is that if, as a movement, the progressive-left intends to constantly fire-off Katyushas of Hatred and Qassams of Malice toward Tel Aviv, while snuggying up to Iran, then they lose all moral legitimacy. This is particularly true given the fact that the left could hardly care less about the 5.5 million dead in the Congo, about Tibetans living under Chinese occupation, about rape as a tactic of war in Darfur, about the hanging of Gay people from cranes in Tehran, or about an Arab and Muslim world rife with anti-Semitism, homophobia, and gender apartheid.

In this way the left, which claims to be both moral and anti-racist proves itself to be, in fact, neither.

On the progressive-left, Israel is the Jew among nations. Just as prior to establishment of the state of Israel Europeans tended to ascribe a host of negative characteristics to the Jewish people, so today they ascribe those same specific characteristics to the Jewish state and they do so... gallingly enough, hypocritically enough... under the banner of social justice. For 2,000 years we lived in diaspora, that is, we lived or died according to the pleasure of non-Jews. For 1,300 years we lived as second and third-class non-citizens under the imperialist boot of Muslim rule, i.e., as dhimmis. And today, directly after the historical moment in which we re-took our freedom, progressives tell us that the institution within which we manifest that freedom, the state of Israel, is a racist, colonialist, imperialist, apartheid country which, if it should not be dismantled as the national homeland for the Jewish people, must jump through whatever hoops they lay down. If Israel fails to jump through each and every one of those hoops then clearly they do not want peace and thus deserve whatever they get.

Well, some of us have definitely had enough of this nonsense.

The Palestinians refuse to negotiate a peaceful conclusion of hostilities and the progressive-left blames Israel. The Gazans shot thousands of rockets into southern Israel for years, but the progressives only spoke up when Israel sought to defend its citizenry from those rockets. Did the progressive movement have anything to say about the Fogel family murders? No, it did not. Does the progressive movement have anything to say about Hamas's genocidal charter or the larger Jihadi movement out of which Hamas sprang?

No. It does not.

The left can barely even bring itself to tsk, tsk ISIS.

In fact, as Egypt transitioned from a military dictatorship, under Hosni Mubarak, to an Islamist dictatorship under the Muslim Brotherhood this result was, in part, through the efforts of the current president of the United States. But, then, the left has always had a weakness for the very worst actors in world history. Just as leftists often supported the Soviet Union for decades, despite the tens of millions of innocent dead due to that regime, so it now (usually tacitly, but sometimes directly) supports Political Islam.

For me, personally, the real wake-up call came during the Mavi Marmara incident in May of 2010. There were two groups of people aboard that vessel. There were the violent Jihadis seeking martyrdom... which progressives referred to as "peace activists." And the second group? Well, they definitely weren't Tea Party people. They were, in fact, progressive-left activists from around the world. Progressive-left activists literally, physically, morally, and financially supporting Jihadis in an effort to kill Jews, while telling the world that their mission was humanitarian.

The irony and cruel hypocrisy could not be more rich.

So, just why would you expect Jewish people to remain a part of such a political movement? The progressive-left may have been our home for a very long time, but clearly their values have shifted away from anything that could possibly be acceptable to the great majority of western Jews. Most of those Jews don't really get it, yet, but people are awakening. There are reasons why more and more of us are leaving the Democratic party and the progressive movement.

Because the progressive-left accepts, if not encourages, generalized malice toward the Jewish state it thereby shows the rest of us the door.

I say we walk through it.

_____________________________________________________________________

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

_____________________________________________________________________

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Last week we discussed the video expose from Israel's Channel 2 on how Breaking the Silence was acting in ways that look startlingly like espionage against the IDF.

Now part of the report has been subtitled in English by My Truth:

Meanwhile, Haaretz is defending the group in a fact-free editorial:

Breaking the Silence has become the biggest threat to Israel’s security, at least according to a Channel 2 investigative report last week. The report presented alleged “evidence” showing the NGO’s activists trying to obtain sensitive military information from a right-wing activist posing as a former soldier.

The “exposé” – which, it transpired, was made by the rightist NGO Ad Kan – made it to Immigrant Absorption Minister Zeev Elkin, who said he was “seriously concerned that Breaking the Silence is being used for espionage.” Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon hastened to order a probe into the incident and, on his Facebook page, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Breaking the Silence “crossed another red line” and “security officials were looking into the matter.”

Of course, Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid) took advantage of the opportunity to portray himself as a rightist, body and soul. “The NGO is undermining the State of Israel and causing it great damage internally and externally,” he announced. “While Israel is struggling against a wave of terror, Breaking the Silence is taking information and using it against the state. Israel must do everything to protect its soldiers – this organization has no right to exist in a state that is fighting terror daily for its people’s safety,” he said.

All that remains, it seems, is to demand that the cabinet declare Breaking the Silence a terror organization, arrest its members and put on trial the treacherous soldiers who passed on information about the Israel Defense Forces’ crimes in the territories. Then we will have to congratulate Channel 2 for its journalistic achievement, saving Israel from its destroyers, as it previously did with the program “Uvda,” which exposed another “enemy of the state,” left-wing activist Ezra Nawi.

This will apparently solve all the security problems that Israelis are suffering from, and for which the government has yet to devise a solution – the recent terror wave, the intifadas, military operations and other ills deriving from the prolonged occupation.

It is regrettable that instead of leading and finding real solutions to terror, the government is applying a nasty strategy of wild incitement against a human rights organization. All this is taking place in a state that boasts of its democracy and compares itself favorably to the region’s other nations.

Breaking the Silence is a vital, critical organization, whose goal is to cleanse the IDF of its soldiers’ illegal acts – abusing and harassing Palestinians, and interpreting orders in a violent way. The NGO’s objective and insistent activity against the occupation are not acts of treason. In fact, a democracy should be proud of this organization’s existence, give it full backing and stop the populist witch hunt carried out against it.

The government and right-wingers must stop their violent attempts to silence Breaking the Silence, and their repeated use of the NGO as a political scapegoat.

There is literally nothing accurate about this piece. An organization that uses anonymous stories that cannot be checked for accuracy in order to smear the IDF is not improving the IDF. The IDF has repeatedly asked for details from BtS in order to investigate these alleged abuses - and BtS refused. So how exactly is BtS a "vital, critical organization" when it cannot provide any evidence that can be used to help the IDF fix any problems yet it trumpets these anonymous, impossible to prove stories as evidence of IDF immorality?

Haaretz does not bring an iota of evidence that the information in the report is inaccurate in any way, unless you assume that anything anyone on the Right does is automatically a lie without the need to ask any further questions.

Outside of Meretz and the Arab list, members of all parties of Knesset were aghast at this report and how it apparently shows Breaking the Silence acting as foreign agents. Yet Haaretz calls all the critics "rightists."

Compared to Haaretz, I suppose that's true. But this editorial proves yet again that Haaretz represents the fringe Israeli left that hates the Jewish state, not the mainstream Israeli opinion that welcomes opportunities to improve it.

And as this report further shows, Breaking the Silence is not trying to improve Israel - it is trying to destroy it.

(h/t Yoel)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

The Shin Bet counts over a hundred firebomb attacks every month. Every one of those attacks has the potential to be as deadly as the firebomb attack that killed members of the Dawabshe family in Duma.

Yet these incessant attacks are simply not reported by the media.

Here is a video of an attack last night where about eight terrorists throw a dozen Molotov cocktails near the Beit Orot yeshiva in Jerusalem.

Imagine how your local police would respond to incidents like this. Imagine how your local media would cover it.

This happens every single day in Jerusalem. But it simply isn't considered news.

(h/t Yisrael Medad)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

"Jews are planting Gharqad trees to protect themselves"

There is a famous Muslim hadith that says,

"The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews."

A Palestinian newspaper today reports that Israeli Jews, frightened of being stabbed, are planting Gharqad trees all over the place to protect themselves:

Indeed, the Jews now planted Gharqad trees in the occupied territories in the knowledge that Islam is right and they know that there will be a confrontation between them and the Muslims in the end of days and in the video you can see the Gharqad tree.

Unfortunately, there is no video, but apparently they are referring to this video of which there are many variants on YouTube:

I also found this Arabic video of Israelis who were outside during a warning siren. They don't seem too panicked, but a couple of seconds of a shot of a tree is enough proof for the Jew-hating fanatics to "prove" that Jews like to hide under Gharqad trees to protect themselves.

The idea that Jews are planting massive numbers of Gharqad (usually translated as boxwood) trees is quite popular. A Muslim actually asked Jews on Yahoo Answers, "Jewish people. Why do you plant Gharqad tree all over the Israel? Do you believe the hadith and afraid of Muslims?"

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

03/19 Links: 3 Israelis said killed, at least 11 others hurt in Istanbul bombing; Tuvia does Germany

From Ian:

3 Israelis said killed, at least 11 others hurt in Istanbul bombing

Turkish officials said three Israelis were among the five people killed in a suicide bombing that rocked a main pedestrian thoroughfare in the heart of Istanbul on Saturday. At least 11 Israelis were among the 36 injured in the explosion.
Turkish authorities identified another of the people killed as an Iranian national.
Turkish Deputy Health Minister Ahmet Baha Ogutken confirmed in a statement to the Daily Sabah newspaper that an Israeli woman was killed in the explosion.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed that two Israelis had been killed and said it was possible there was a third Israeli fatality.

Turkish official fired after wishing death on Israelis hurt in bombing

An official from Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party was reportedly fired Saturday after saying she hoped Israeli tourists injured in Saturday’s deadly suicide bombing in downtown Istanbul had died.
Irem Atkas sent her ill-wishes over Twitter shortly after a bomb was detonated in central Istanbul, killing three Israelis and wounding 11 others, according to Turkish officials.
“I wish that the wounded Israeli tourists were dead,” Irem Aktas, a board member in the women’s branch of the party in the Istanbul neighborhood of Eyup tweeted shortly after the attack. Her account was removed from social media site not long thereafter.
Aktas was reportedly dismissed from her duties immediately afterwards.

Tuvia does Germany

When he talked to Germans, “I found out that eight out of 10 Germans hold anti-Semitic views,” he said. “By anti-Semitic, I mean that most of them, if you ask them if they are, would scream ‘Not me!’ but if you ask them they tell you that Jews control world politics, all the money, and the stock exchanges and the banks. I ask them stupid questions.
“I go to Wannsee, where they decided to kill the Jews.” Tuvia’s talking about the Berlin suburb where Nazi officials, meeting in January 1942, decided to commit genocide. “Right cross the street from it there is a hotel and restaurant. It is packed. They do weddings there, and you have to reserve well ahead of time. I ask the owner stupid but honest questions about how it works, how do young German girls say to their young German lovers, ‘Honey, let’s get married right next to where they decided to gas the Jews’?
“I ask childlike questions like that. That’s how you get people to talk.”
Germans are “obsessed with the Jews,” Tuvia continued. “Why do they know the names of Israel’s prime minster, defense minister, foreign minister? When you ask about German ministers they have no idea. Why do they know about everything that’s going on in Israel? When I ask them what about Chechnya” — which after all is far closer to them than Israel — “they can’t answer.”
Germany is building “a beautiful Jewish center,” he continued. “But when you go to the synagogues, there is nobody there, except maybe tourists. Germany is rebranding themselves as being Jewish. Germany is actively engaged in covering up its soul. But are Germans nice to the Jews? F••• no.”

03/18 Links Pt2: Collier: Lies and more lies. Raw hate on campus; Jews can’t trust [UK] Labour Party

From Ian:

Fighting Jew Hatred Isn’t Optional

In response to this, some on the left urge us to speak softly and, above all, not seek to engage with the BDS haters and their economic war on Israel and to label what they do as anti-Semitism. Rocking the boat in that manner will, they say, hurt more than help. As that anonymous Hillel director seemed to think, it will also turn off Jewish students and cause them to abandon the Jewish community rather than allow themselves to be recruited in a fight they want no part of.
But standing up to this movement isn’t optional. It is nothing less than of the key moral issues of our time, and it demands that we demonstrate the moral courage to respond it. If support for Israel is not fashionable, then Jews and non-Jews of conscience must fight fashion.
It is true that Jews who are raised without a strong sense of their own identity are ill equipped to fight this battle. But that does not excuse us, or them from having to engage in this struggle.
It might be more pleasant to opt out of this battle and to ignore the “Israel Apartheid” smears or accept BDS advocates as misguided but well-intentioned activists. But the ultimate cost of such acquiescence will be far higher than the inconvenience associated with fighting back. When Israel is delegitimized, so, too, will be Judaism eventually. American exceptionalism means that the rising tide of global anti-Semitism hasn’t taken hold on these shores the way it has in Europe or elsewhere. Yet if BDS movements are not labeled for what they are — expressions of anti-Semitic hate — then Americans will be taking a fearful step towards acceptance of the European disease that is making Jewish life increasingly untenable in Europe.

David Collier: Lies and more lies. Raw hate on campus

At what point does a university assist in inciting and supporting violence? How about charities and NGOs that are supposed to be on a mission of peace? These are questions I was left asking myself after recent events at both the University of Kent and UCL.
The latest event in Kent, involved a speaker from the charity ‘War on Want’, Ryvka Bernard. Ryvka is listed as the ‘Senior Campaigner on Militarism and Security’. Forming part of the university based ‘Israeli Apartheid Week’, Ryvka’s talk was titled “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions: Responding to the ‘Palestinian Call for Justice”.
Ryvka’s presentation was devoid of historical fact and context. I was accompanied to this event by an ex-student from Kent, Natacha Woodcock, and together we raised several issues about BDS that exposed much of the hypocrisy. When questioned, Ryvka only appeared comfortable sticking to the script prepared by the slick PR of the BDS campaign. At one point I brought up the 1947 partition, only to find out that Ryvka wasn’t even aware the Arabs rejected it. Worse still, when someone in the crowd displayed their own ignorance by suggesting the rejection was a ‘mutual affair’, Ryvka pushed the point that ‘yes, this is the way it happened’.
A personal note to Ryvka: you do not know what you are talking about. Whether you did it through ignorance or not is irrelevant. You spread disinformation amongst impressionable students about one of the defining moments in the conflict. Your ignorance not only helps to create and spread irrational hatred, it tears up your own argument that your cause is one of ‘justice’. How can you deliver justice without knowing the facts?
When discussing ‘Palestine’, Ryvka Bernard, like ‘War on Want’, uses the word ‘justice’ a lot. It is entirely misplaced. A movement that uses a false narrative to inflict a punishment on another side without stopping to check the accuracy of the events is not a movement of justice. A force that only pushes one side’s argument whilst deliberately ignoring justified grievances from the other party has nothing to do with fairness. BDS isn’t about justice at all. BDS is a movement of hate and revenge.

VICE News: Flight to the Holy Land: Europe's Jewish Exodus (Part 1)

In the wake of recent terror attacks in Europe — several of which targeted Jewish institutions — some politicians and religious leaders have predicted an exodus of Jewish people from the continent. In some ways, the numbers stack up. Last year, a record 8,000 Jews arrived in Israel from France — with another 15,000 coming from Eastern Europe.
But some critics argue that reports of Jewish flight are overblown; they accuse Israel of taking advantage of fears in Europe to attract new immigrants and serve the interests of the Israeli state. "We are preparing and calling for the absorption of mass immigration from Europe," said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in February 2015. "I would like to tell all European Jews and all Jews wherever they are: Israel is the home of every Jew."
VICE News investigates these predictions of a mass Jewish migration — and the forces behind them.
In the first of a three-part series, VICE News heads to Paris to accompany 200 French people on a one-way flight to Tel Aviv. Once in Israel, we meet up with the chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, an organization with a $400 million annual budget, which coordinates immigration programs with the Israeli government. We learn about what is pushing Jewish people out of France, and what is pulling them to the Middle East.

Europe's Jewish Exodus (Full Length)

Old Jewish jokes, part 7

Another one from the early 20th century, from the Joke Book Note Book:

The illustrations in the book don't seem to have any connection to the jokes.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Morocco's occupation of Western Sahara is, by any measure, far more oppressive than anything Israel is doing in the territories.

A brief recap:

In 1975, in violation of a World Court judgement, Morocco invaded the former Spanish colony and effectively annexed it. The people who lived in the territory, the Sahrawi, fled in their thousands as their villages were burned and livestock slaughtered.

Tens of thousands were driven into refugee camps across the border with Algeria where they remain to this day, surviving as best they can on pitiful levels of humanitarian aid. Those who stayed in their homes face severe repression in a police state which maintains an armed force over 100,000 strong for a population of just 500,000.

Also, Morocco moved hundreds of thousands of Moroccans to Western Sahara to change its demographics and ensure that it would not be separated again.

Morocco is also far more aggressive than Israel when it comes to how people treat it. The latest example comes from how Morocco reacted when Ban Ki Moon referred to the Western Sahara as occupied:

Escalating an angry dispute with the leader of the United Nations, Morocco gave the organization a 72-hour deadline on Thursday to evacuate 84 members of its mission in the disputed Western Sahara territory.

The Moroccan order threatened to paralyze the work of the mission, which has played a peacekeeping role for 25 years.

The United Nations Security Council held urgent private consultations on Thursday afternoon over the Moroccan order, which came a day after Morocco announced a big cut in civilian support for the mission; withdrawal of its $3 million in financial support; and other unspecified steps.

The president of the Security Council for March, Ambassador Ismael Abraão Gaspar Martins of Angola, emerged later to tell reporters that members were continuing to talk and that they wanted to ensure the mission’s stability. He offered no specifics but said, “every problem has a solution.”

The moves suddenly transformed Western Sahara, a former Spanish protectorate riven by a war for independence after it was seized by Morocco in 1975, from a sensitive, percolating issue into something more pressing.

It complicated the Security Council’s agenda in the midst of crises in Syria, Yemen, Libya and other hot spots.

The Moroccan foreign minister, Salaheddine Mezouar, who held a tense meeting with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Monday at Mr. Ban’s office at the United Nations, said his country’s actions were a response to what he called Mr. Ban’s “unacceptable statements and condemnable actions” in describing Western Sahara as an occupied region.

Mr. Ban used that terminology during a trip this month to neighboring Algeria, where he visited a camp for Western Sahara refugees.

In an unusually blunt response, Mr. Ban reiterated to the foreign minister that Western Sahara’s status had yet to be decided. Mr. Ban also said he had been personally offended by protests directed at him and the United Nations in Morocco last Sunday over his perceived bias on the Western Sahara dispute.

Morocco routinely arrests journalists who report on protests by the Sahrawi. It acts with an impunity and aggression far beyond what Israel has ever done.

And it is rewarded. The UN and EU refuse to call the Western Sahara "occupied," but "disputed," as this NYT article does. There is very little press coverage about the repression and thuggery practiced by Moroccan troops. Even HRW and Amnesty, whose members have been expelled from Morocco, refuse to call Western Sahara "occupied."

The only difference I have found is that Israel didn't annex the West Bank, and says that its status is disputed. Yet Jerusalem, which Israel does claim, is never referred to as "disputed" by the media or the UN and EU.

In other words, Morocco plays hardball, and it is rewarded by the people it treats with contempt. Israel tries to act like a good citizen and accommodate those who are hostile to its very existence and who use any excuse they can to damn the Jewish state - and it results in more negative coverage and contempt by the world community for its actions.

There is a lesson or two here.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

03/18 Links Pt1: Glick: The Obama doctrine, unplugged; Phillips: The EU’s illegal settlements

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The Obama doctrine, unplugged

As an intelligent man, as the consequences of these four policy lines began smacking him in the face, Obama could have been expected to change course. George W. Bush for instance changed his foreign policy stance from one of sparing internationalism before September 11 to democratic interventionism in its aftermath. And when his democratic interventionism failed in Iraq, he abandoned it in favor of a more traditional realist approach.
Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were also quick to change their policies when they were faced with evidence they had failed. Ronald Reagan changed his policy for bringing down the Soviet Union from one of confrontation to one based on cooperation when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power.
In other words, unlike his recent predecessors Obama has never shifted gears. He has never found fault with his judgment. He has never revisited a decision.
It is easy to chalk this up to arrogance. Obama is certainly one of the most arrogant leaders the US has ever had – if not the most arrogant president in US history. But given his intelligence, it is hard to escape the impression that Obama’s epic arrogance, which makes it impossible for him to admit failure, is just as much of a style preference as a character trait. That is, arrogance, like coolness and “Spockian” rationalism, is an attitude that he has adopted on purpose.
What that purpose may be is indicated by the consistent strands of his foreign policy. Obama’s belief in America’s moral turpitude, his eagerness to trample US credibility, reject traditional US policy goals; his refusal to see the dangers inherent in his radical policies or acknowledge their failures let alone accept responsibility for their failures, and his trampling of US allies while appeasing its enemies all point to Obama’s true doctrine. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

Melanie Phillips: The EU’s illegal settlements

This is creating, in effect, one contiguous illegal Beduin territory on indisputable Israeli sovereign land.
To give some idea of the scale of what is happening. Regavim estimates that while 205,000 residents in Beersheba inhabit only 3,500 hectares (8,650 acres) of land, 211,000 Beduin now lay claim to about 60,000 hectares (148,260 acres).
“Aid to the Beduin” is Palestinian Authority policy intended to expand its control over Area C and undermine Israel. It is quite obvious that the EU is not only assisting it in that aim but is also seeking to create a Beduin state within a state inside Israel itself.
Both the UN and the US condemn Israeli settlements as illegal and accuse Israel of expropriating Palestinian land. Yet they fail to condemn the EU for its illegal and colonialist activities.
Such outrageous and manipulative meddling in the affairs of a sovereign state incontestably illustrates the EU’s true agenda.
Through its illegal settlements policy, the EU is conducting a stealth war against Israel.

Col. Richard Kemp: Israel Cannot Withdraw from West Bank and Golan, insists British General

JCPA: At a Jerusalem Center briefing on Feb. 17, Col. (ret.) Richard Kemp, former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, slammed the international community for advising Israel to do things they would never suggest to their own governments. Kemp said, "Israel has to have strategic depth with which to defend itself. Israel cannot possibly, at any stage, withdraw from the West Bank or the Golan Heights."
"Gen. Allan, America's military envoy in relation to the recent negotiations on peace with the Palestinians, came up with a solution as to how Israel could withdraw from the West Bank and perhaps replace its presence with international forces including American forces and technology. But I know for sure that if he had been asked to advise America, his own country, on how to deal with a similar problem on their borders, he would never have advocated what he is advocating here. Never. And if he had, he would have been fired by the President. So I think it was completely unrealistic."
"So many members of the international community, including the U.S. and the EU, are desperately keen to tell Israel what it must do, but they certainly would not consider taking the same action with respect to themselves. When you look at rocket fire from Gaza, for example, and how Israel mustn't retaliate in the way it does to defend itself, no country in the world would restrain itself when faced with that situation. Britain was faced with that situation back in 1943-44. We didn't just sit back and watch it. We pummeled the hell out of the Nazis who were developing rockets."

Here's another part of the DW interview I excerpted earlier. In this section, the interviewer asks PA prime minister Rami Hamdallah repeatedly whether he condemns terror attacks against Jews, and Hamdallah refuses to answer him.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.