Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, July 24, 2016

The Parameters of the Discussion (Michael Lumish)

Most Westerners - left, right, and center - think of the never-ending conflict between Israel and the "Palestinians" as one between a country with one of the most prestigious and effective armed forces in the world versus a small and hapless, but plucky, indigenous population.

What we need to do is change the parameters of the discussion.

So long as people put the discussion within the context of a large military power versus a small indigenous population, we can never possibly win the argument. So long as the Arabs within the Land of Israel are seen as "Davids" with slingshots and the Jews of the Middle East are perceived as a "Goliath" than western sympathies will always go to feisty little David.

Thankfully, unlike the Palestinian Narrative of Perpetual Victim-hood, we actually have history and demographic reality on our side in terms of the discussion from an ethical standpoint.

History: the Jew as Dhimmi

The first thing that pro-Israel / pro-Jewish advocates need to do is put the conflict within historical context. An old pro-Israel acquaintance of mine used to say "history did not begin in 1967."

That is, in order to understand the Long Arab War Against the Jews, we need to place it within the long history of Jewish people living under Arab and Muslim imperial rule from the seventh-century until the demise of the Ottoman Empire with the conclusion of World War I.

From the time of Muhammad, until Islam ran head-first into modernity and the twentieth-century, the Jews of the Middle East were second and third-class non-citizens under the boot of Arab and Muslim imperial rule. However bad African-Americans had it in the United States under the vile rules of Jim Crow, it was never worse than Jewish people had it as dhimmis and what we call "dhimmitude" lasted one heck of a lot longer.

As dhimmis in Arab and Muslim lands, Jews (and Christians) could ride donkeys but horses were forbidden.

As dhimmis in Arab and Muslim lands, Jews (and Christians) were forbidden from building housing for themselves taller than Muslim housing.

As dhimmis in Arab and Muslim lands, Jews (and Christians) had no rights of self-defense.

As dhimmis in Arab and Muslim lands, Jews (and Christians) had no recourse to courts of law.

As dhimmis in Arab and Muslim lands, Jews (and Christians) had to pay protection money to keep their families safe from violence.

And this is one of my favorites, in certain times and places under Arab-Muslim imperial rule Jews were not even allowed to go outside during rainstorms lest their Jewish filth run into the street and infect their pure Muslim neighbors.

The point, however, is that just as we would never discuss African-American history without reference to both Jim Crow and slavery, so we must not discuss the Long Arab War against the Jews without reference to thirteen-centuries of Arab and Muslim oppression against all non-Muslims in the Middle East, including Christians and Jews.

This is not merely a political tactic. It is a matter of framing the conversation within something that resembles an historical context. The historical context is vital because without it the conflict is incomprehensible outside of the prominent western notion of mindless Jewish malice toward Arabs, presumably as unjust payback for the Shoah.

Demographic Reality: the Scope of the Conflict

Westerners think that this is a fight between big, strong, mean Israel against the innocent, thumb-sucking "indigenous Palestinians" over land.

It isn't.

What the struggle actually is is an ongoing attempt by the Arab peoples to force Jews back into dhimmitude out of a Koranic religious imperative.

This is a struggle not between Jews and "Palestinians" but between Jews and Arabs because of Arab-Muslim religious reasons. It is due to al-Sharia. If Israel were a 23rd Arab-Muslim country it would, indeed, be hailed the world over as a "light unto the nations."

The reason that the Arab peoples generally despise Israel has nothing to do with Jewish treatment of Arabs and Muslims within Israel. Arabs and Muslims within Israel are treated better than are Arabs and Muslims throughout the entire Middle East. The reason that Arabs and Muslims despise Israel is not due to Israeli behavior. They hate Israel because it is Jewish, a nation of infidels, who dare to hold land that was once part of the Umma.

And not just any infidels, but the very worst of the infidels, we children of orangutans and swine.

But the fact of the matter is that there are somewhere around 300 to 400 million Arabs within the Middle East. They outnumber the Jews by a factor of 60 to 70 to 1 and, for the most part, want those Jews either dead or gone.

This is not a war between a Jewish Goliath and a Palestinian David, as left-wing anti-Semitic anti-Zionists would have you believe.

This is a war against the Jews of the Middle East by the much larger and highly aggressive Arab and Muslim population in that part of the world. As far as Hamas and Hezbollah are concerned this is explicitly an Arab war of Jewish extermination.

But the demographics in the region are not with the Jews, not by a long-shot.

The Jews of the Middle East have been forced to create Fortress Israel, because the Arabs would not have it any other way. It is easy for the Arabs. Given the fact that they so outnumber the Jews it only takes a small percentage of their resources to put terrible pressure on the small Jewish population in the Middle East so that those Jews are forced to militarize.

And, needless to say, the local Arabs, the Palestinian-Arabs, are nothing but cannon fodder as far as their brothers and sisters throughout the rest of the region are concerned.

The Jews of Israel want peace more than anyone, because they are under constant threat and harassment in every single venue imaginable, from international sports to academia to the UN, the EU, and a continuing wave of little Arab kids with hand-axes.

Those of us who wish to stand up for the Jews of the Middle East, the Jews of Israel, need to frame the conversation in a manner that comports with history and the actual demographics of the fight.

We need to place our end of the conversation within an expanded context that includes centuries of Jewish history under Arab and Muslim imperial rule and that appreciates the actual geographic scope of the war against the Jews in the Middle East.

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.

There is another Quartet.

The Arab Quartet consists of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain. It met on the eve of the Arab Summit to be held this week in Nouakchott, Mauritania.

The Ministerial Committee issued a statement after their third meeting, which was chaired by UAE Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Anwar Gargash, saying that they "noted an escalation of dangerous Iranian interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries recently, including the intensification of hostilities and inflammatory and provocative statements issued by Iranian officials towards the Arab countries. "

They called for Iran to stop incitement to violence and support for terror groups. Which is what the other Quartet did recently, to much criticism by Palestinians.

Their statement o Iran sounds a great deal like Israel's statements towards the Palestinian Authority.

Apparently, Arabs are against incitement and support for terrorism - sometimes.

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 Economist writes what we've been saying for several years now, that the Arab world has far higher priorities than the Palestinian issue.

This has contributed to a more general sense of unease among the Palestinians. Officials in other parts of the Arab world talk more about Iran’s meddling, the wars in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, and their own domestic economic and political troubles. Such issues seem more pressing to their people. And besides, many Arabs are resigned to the stalemate in the peace process. Mr Netanyahu appears intransigent; Palestinian leaders are seen as divided, ineffective and corrupt.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, still makes the rounds in Arab capitals—and foreign leaders still profess their support. But the Palestinians are aware of their diminished status. In a recent poll 78% of them said their cause was no longer the top Arab priority, and 59% accused Arab states of allying themselves with Israel against Iran. The amount of aid flowing from Arab countries to the PA has fallen by well over half in recent years. Funds from the West have also declined.

The most telling part of the article is the very end:

What really stirs Arab emotions are scenes of Israelis killing Palestinians. Violence over the past year has left dozens of Israelis and more than 200 Palestinians dead. Most Palestinians, according to polls, back a return to an armed intifada (uprising). With the Arab world focused elsewhere, America in the throes of a presidential race and progress towards a two-state solution halted, they may see no other way to capture the world’s attention.

I don't think that The Economist quite realizes the truth of that last sentence.

The Palestinians are faced with declining support from their fellow Arabs, who are increasingly impatient with their lack of unity and apparent lack of caring about their own people, not to mention their complaints about how terrible their situation is when much of the Arab world that doesn't get the headlines has it far worse.

But instead of getting the message that they had better start to think seriously about peace while they can, the Palestinians always act as if the goal isn't a state - but to get themselves back on top of the news cycle.

The Economist has unwittingly revealed that Palestinians prefer war and terrorism to peace - because violence is where they gain sympathy. The price of hundreds or thousands dead is small compared to Palestinian Arab priorities, which are completely opposite what a real people who want a real state would assert.

This article shows that it is not only the Arab world that sees the truth about the selfish, forever entitled, whining Palestinians. The West knows this about them deep down as well. But the West is too heavily invested in the discredited memes that Abbas is a moderate, that Israel is intransigent, that "occupation" is what causes terrorism, and a litany of other Palestinian lies that have gained a foothold in the media, NGOs and academia. It is too good a story - a David and Goliath fantasy - to throw out based on mere facts.

Amazingly, the Arab world has woken up to the illusion of eternal Palestinian victimhood faster than the supposedly enlightened West. This is largely because the Arab world feels the consequences when attention and funding is diverted from places they are truly needed, like Syria and Iraq and Yemen, and instead wasted on yet more Palestinian gimmicks that only put a real solution further out of reach.

The Arab world shares with Israel the desire for stability, for a peace that can be counted on (whether official or not,) for war against terror and for a united front against the true regional villain, Iran. Compared to that, Palestinian demands before even talking with Israel are so obviously petty that Arab patience has worn very thin.

Palestinians see that they are losing support but instead of seeing what the real problems are, they are focused on how to make themselves appear relevant again. And they only have two tricks.

One is to gain more international recognition in world bodies that they then burn by placing themselves at the center at the expense of whatever good the organization had previously done. Everyone sees that for what it is, and you just know that UNESCO's leaders (for example) are fuming at how that organization has been subverted. Every cause from women's issues to children's issues to even cancer is simply another opportunity to bash Israel, and every one of those causes then loses support as a result of Palestinian selfishness.

The second trick is violence, whether it is the threat of another intifada or another war in Gaza.

One day very soon, a prominent Arab leader - probably from the Gulf - will say out loud what they have been saying privately for years, that Palestinians have been hijacking the world's attention to the detriment of everyone, not least the Palestinian Arabs themselves.

The Palestinians will respond by resorting to the gimmicks that have worked in the past - such as "Jerusalem is under attack" or "our children are being killed."

And the Arabs will simply respond that there are far more Muslims worshipping at Al Aqsa Mosque today than at any time it was under Jordanian control. That fewer Palestinians have been killed in 70 years than the number of Arabs killed by other Arabs in any given year. That the "genocide" that they claim they are suffering is somehow going in reverse.

The public solidarity with the puerile Palestinians is ending. The question is whether the Palestinians can learn to grow up before their cause disappears from Arab radar, and then from Western priorities as well.

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.

Looking for the "Talmudic Gardens" - and finding that Israel preserves Muslim history

The Palestinian Authority has claimed that Israel is building "Talmudic Gardens" all over Jerusalem.

I never quite figured out what that meant - the best I could guess is that the word "Talmud" is the equivalent of profanity in modern Arabic - but I sought them out nonetheless last Friday when I visited the Old City.

Just as we were about to exit the Old City through a small opening in the walls west of Dung Gate, I saw this:

Looking a bit closer at the signs, I saw that these were the remains of an Umayyad structure from the early Islamic period. Not the famous giant palaces adjacent to the Temple Mount, but another building from the time.

Israel has been constantly charged with "Judaizing" Jerusalem and destroying all evidence of Muslim history there. Yet here is a clear example that, meters from the holiest Jewish sites and spitting distance from the Jewish Quarter, the Israeli government is preserving Muslim heritage with the same respect that it treats Jewish and Christian heritage.

This is not a heavily traveled tourist spot. If Israel was as keen on erasing Islamic heritage as we are told, it could have easily destroyed this building and no Muslims would have known it ever existed to begin with.

It is worthwhile to mention this story that was first published in Biblical Archaeology Review in 1986:

[Archaeologist Meir ]Ben-Dov tells the story of a visit to the excavation [of the Umayyad palaces] by Rafiq Dajani, the deputy director of the Jordanian Department of Antiquities. Dajani remarked to Ben-Dov, “If we could leave politics to the politicians, I would heartily congratulate you on your work, revealing finds of which we knew very little up until now. The finds from the early Moslem period are thrilling, and frankly I’m surprised the Israeli scholars made them public.” A foreign correspondent overheard Dajani’s remarks and included them in his story. Two weeks later Dajani was summarily dismissed and later died in the prime of life.

It only takes a short stroll in Jerusalem to expose the lies of the Palestinian and other Arab leadership.

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.

07/23 Links: Is BDS headed for defeat?; Columnist Says Israel ‘Last Hope’ for Arab Christians Before Total Annihilation

From Ian:

Michael Lumish: "Occupy" is an Unusual Word

It is not a very nice word, either.
In terms of the never-ending Arab and Muslim violence against the Jews of the Middle East the word "occupy" has ominous connotations.
It implies the brutal military occupation of those heinous Jews upon another people's land.
The word "occupy" also, of course, has benign connotations when used in other contexts. For example, no one would have any problem, - other than Jihadis - with the fact that I am occupying my chair in my office.
The truth, however, is that Israel occupies Israel like France occupies France or the Czech Republic occupies the Czech Republic. There is nothing remotely illegal or illegitimate, to use Obama's term, about Jews living and building in the land Jewish people have lived in for over 3,500 years.
The Land of Israel is where Jews come from and to argue otherwise is to suggest that the Jews are, or should be, a forever wandering people.
The very word "Israel" means, along with the Jewish State, the Jewish people. Israel is the Jewish nation. So to argue that Israel is illegally occupying Israel is to argue that the Jews should have no home. And Israel includes that part of Israel that the Jordanians dubbed "West Bank" in order to rob the Jewish people of our posterity within our own homeland.
This is to say that the foundation of the conflict is an irrational and Koranically-based hatred toward the Jewish people, without whom Islam would never have emerged to begin with. Without Israel, which is to say without the Jewish people, there never would have been a Koran or the emergence of imperial Islam.

Is BDS headed for defeat?

From recent defeats, it appears that efforts by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement to undermine Israel’s legitimacy may have fallen on hard times. But appearances can be deceptive, and we – supporters of Israel as the secure, democratic nation-state of the Jewish people – cannot afford complacency.
It is true that BDS recently experienced a string of setbacks in the United States. These include an executive order from New York Governor Andrew Cuomo prohibiting his state from doing business with companies that boycott Israel, rejection by the American Anthropological Association (AAA) of a boycott resolution directed at all Israeli academic institutions, and the United Methodist Church’s repudiation of divestment and move to withdraw from the “US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation,” a pro-BDS coalition.
To understand the real threat posed by the BDS movement, however, we need to look at the forest and not just the trees. There have been and will continue to be both short-term “wins” and “losses.” The BDS movement’s long-term strategic objective is to erode the perception that Israel embodies those values underpinning its special alliance with the United States – democracy, human rights, equality under law and peace. In other words, their underlying aim is to turn Israel into a pariah state, viewed similarly to the apartheid South African regime.
While the BDS movement is very far from achieving its malicious agenda, we cannot ignore some worrisome trends. According to a Pew Research Center poll released in May 2016, overall American public support for Israel remains high. At the same time, liberal Democrats expressed greater sympathy for the Palestinians over Israel by a 40 percent to 33 percent margin. Millennials expressed greater sympathy for Israel, but even among them there has been a steady increase of sympathy for the Palestinians, from 9 percent in 2006, to 20 percent in July 2014, and 27 percent in this latest poll.

Is the BDS movement facing economic warfare?

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is staring down the barrel of economic warfare with financial assaults on BDS, replicating in many ways the sanctions architecture imposed on Iran to compel a change in its behavior over its illicit nuclear weapons program.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s now-famous anti-BDS comment from last month – “It’s very simple: If you boycott against Israel, New York will boycott you” – harks back to the strategy targeting European companies conducting business with Iran’s regime.
European banks and firms faced being frozen out of the lucrative US market if they continued trade relations with Tehran.
Cuomo’s executive order to punish companies which have state business who are engaged in BDS is part and parcel of a broader campaign unfolding in US state governments to turn BDS into a pariah movement. Robust anti-BDS legislation in Illinois coupled with State Sen. Mark Kirk’s call for an investigation into German BDS bank accounts has played a critical role in disrupting BDS funding.

A couple of years ago I blogged a long Twitter conversation between myself and a "peace activist" named Gary Spedding, as well as exchanges between him and Gilead Ini of CAMERA.

The text proves beyond any doubt that Spedding is a liar who enjoys scrubbing evidence of his hate. (He tried to say the Fogels were murdered by a domestic worker, not an Arab terrorist, for example. He then deleted the post, denied ever writing it, and when confronted with screen-shot evidence kept denying it.)

Later it was shown that Spedding had been involved in a violent anti-Israel demonstration in Belfast. As the Israeli embassy in London said then, “Mr Spedding’s entry into Israel was denied due to his involvement in organising a violent protest in Queens University, Belfast, in which an Israeli representative was attacked, and others were forced to take shelter to prevent being hurt. No country has an obligation to allow foreigners who have been involved in violent activities targeting its nationals to enter its territory.”

Spedding lied about this incident as well, claiming falsely that he was given a "ten year ban" to go to Israel merely for "lying" and being an unspecified "security threat."

You cannot grant Spedding any credibility after reading those posts of mine, or this other series.

But Haaretz can.

Spedding wrote an article about how he witnesses too much antisemitism on the pro-Palestinian side, and he is upset. Not so much because antisemitism is evil, but because the existence of antisemitism gives credence to the idea that most anti-Zionists are, deep down, antisemitic, which Spedding disputes. He says that "Israel advocacy groups weaponize anti-Semitism to stifle and shut down debate and legitimate criticism of Israel" and "activists will sometimes inadvertently share anti-Semitic or deeply offensive posts. This is the product of ignorance as opposed to malicious intent towards Jews."

The most hilarious part is where Spedding, who went to great lengths to delete his offensive writings from the Internet, self-righteously says "Whatever the motivation, it's the words that matter; this is what makes the public record."

The bulk of the op-ed isn't that terrible; Spedding does call out a real problem. But the entire op-ed is a pathetic way for Spedding to try to rehabilitate himself, and Haaretz is all too happy to allow this violent anti-Israel activist to use its platform to try to make him sound like a peacemaker.

Haaretz and Spedding belong together.

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.

07/22 Links: Phillips: The invisible Jewish victims; Netanyahu: LGBTs an integral part of Israeli society

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: The invisible Jewish victims

As a Western, ethnically based nation, Israel is therefore damned in the liberal mind three times over, and its military actions against “oppressed” Arabs to protect its people from further attack place it automatically beyond the pale.
It isn’t just Israelis who are thus airbrushed out of the victim picture but Diaspora Jews too. In Britain, there was widespread surprise that French Jews were targeted in the attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris following the atrocity at Charlie Hebdo.
In similar vein, there is shock at the vicious Jew-hatred which has openly erupted within the British Labour Party under the leadership of the ultra-left “friend” of Hamas and Hezbollah, Jeremy Corbyn.
Yet for many years French Jews have been under murderous attack by Muslims which the British media have for the most part failed to report at all. As for Jew-hatred in Britain, this has been rampant within British progressive circles for more than 15 years.
With their minds twisted by the demonization and delegitimization of Israel which is the default narrative of the liberal establishment, the British have failed to grasp that this is merely a fresh mutation of the oldest hatred – hatred of the collective Jew.
Refusing to see Israel or the Jewish people as victims is part of the moral sickness of the West. This has blinded people in the West to the threat they themselves face.
It guarantees the impotent shock with which they will continue to respond to the atrocities and challenges which are undoubtedly and tragically yet to come.

Caroline Glick: Turkey – Roger out

To make a long story short then, the Turkish military is no longer capable of cooperating in any meaningful way with the US or NATO . Erdogan, never a reliable ally, is now openly hostile.
He is in the midst of committing aggression against NATO forces at Incirlik. And he is embracing Turkish jihadists who are ideologically indistinguishable from ISIS.
The US surrender to Russia means that America cannot protect Turkey from Russia. And Erdogan has chosen to blame American for Turkey’s fast approaching economic doomsday.
Under the circumstances, if NATO takes its job of protecting the free world seriously, it has no choice but to quit with the business as usual routine and kick Turkey out of the alliance, withdraw its personnel and either remove or disable the nuclear weapons it fields in the country.
As for anti-ISIS operations, the US will have to move its bases to Iraqi Kurdistan and embrace the Kurds as the strategic allies they have clearly become.
In the aftermath of the failed coup, Turkey is a time bomb. It cannot be defused. It will go off. The only way to protect the free world from the aftershocks is by closing the border and battening down the hatches.

Abbas Hugs War Criminal President of Sudan, Aims to “Restrain Israeli Movements” in Africa

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is coordinating with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, a wanted war criminal, in order to “restrain Israeli movements” in the African continent, the PA’s foreign minister said on Wednesday. The International Criminal Court charged al-Bashir with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Darfur, where he is accused of seeking to exterminate three non-Arab ethnic groups.
“President Mahmoud Abbas and his Sudanese counterpart Omar al-Bashir discussed developing a strategy for the African continent and coordinating to restrain Israeli attempts to make a breakthrough in Africa,” Riyad al-Maliki told reporters in Khartoum.
Abbas kicked off his three-day visit to Sudan on Tuesday, embracing al-Bashir upon his arrival and signing a number of bilateral agreements — including one to create a mechanism for consultation between the PA and Sudan.
In a Facebook post published after their meeting, Abbas extended his support to the Sudanese government and expressed “solidarity with Sudan against unjust economic sanction [sic].”

Palestinian writer angry at Bibi's message to Abbas

Last week, Benjamin Netanyahu sent this message to Mahmoud Abbas:

I hadn't noticed any reaction until today.

Al Quds al Arabi, a pan-Arab site, said that Bibi had the ultimate impudence and Zionist arrogance to mention how Abbas' people support terror. After all, the author says, Israel is a fascist terrorist state that is so racist that it is now "post-fascist" and "beyond racist."

Then he gives us a history lesson, where we learn that the Palestinians aren't Canaanites or Jebusites at all:

Palestinian Arabs live Palestine for thousands of years, and particularly since the third century BC, when they came from the island of Crete in and founded the cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod , and Ekron.

He is saying that they are Philistines, and he says the Jewish scripture proves it!

Of course, if they are from Crete, they aren't Arab....

The we learn something even more amazing. The first Jews only came to the land in the 19th century, when 1500 came to a Jew-free land in 1840! They have no relationship to the Jews of the Bible, of course - they are Khazars. He helpfully tells the readers to check out Israel Shahak and Roger Garaudy for juicy details.

He then quotes some supposed Israeli archaeologists who say that they have dug for years and still not found any evidence of Jews in Jerusalem. I guess that this artifact I photographed last week from the Second Temple in Hebrew was fake:

The author ends off with, "In the end, I demand you take your things, and get out of our land. Conditions have changed and you'll have to implement our demands."

I am always amazed how people suffering from genocide and torture and land theft and oppression have the ability to demand things from the oppressing party. Aren't they afraid that they will be wiped out by the immoral torturers for their insolence?

Apparently not.

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.

Barely reported earlier this month:

United Nations Special Rapporteur Michael Lynk will undertake his first official mission from 10 to 15 July to gather first-hand information on the current human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. He will visit Amman, Jordan, due to Israel’s lack of response to his request to travel to the OPT.

Mr. Lynk is the new independent expert designated by the UN Human Rights Council to monitor and report on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.

“I am very much looking forward to meeting with the many representatives of civil society, government officials and UN officers to learn more about recent developments in the human rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory,” he said. “Their work is invaluable, and it will shape my understanding of what is happening on the ground.”

Israel doesn't let the UNHRC enter because of its extreme anti-Israel bias. So Lynk had to come to his conclusions without stepping foot in the Palestinian territories.

Which wasn't hard, because the conclusions are foregone.

Ma'an Arabic quotes him as saying exactly the same memes that the UN has been spouting for years:

"The people who live in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, are suffering more and more from feelings of despair, especially among young people. It is clear that the continued occupation has become more entrenched than ever, and that this had a significant impact on a large segment on the path of development in the occupied Palestinian territory for human rights issues."

He called the Israeli authorities conduct a thorough investigation of excessive use of force and extrajudicial killings.

He expressed particular concern about recently published police procedures which state that the Israeli police forces can use live ammunition in response to stone throwing. The use of lethal ammunition should only be done in limited cases and only when facing a life-threatening risk to law enforcement.

Said Link, "The existence and the spread of Israeli settlements amounts to a serious violation of international law , which results in a host of other violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law.

The 50 years anniversary of this occupation in 2017 makes it obligatory for the world to pay more attention to the situation which is the heart of this seemingly intractable situation.

His other memes that he regurgitated from his predecessors based on talking to professional propagandists in Jordan included the "kids can't go to schools" meme, the "patients can't reach hospitals" meme, the "NGO law is awful" meme, and "Israel really should let me in so I can lie about them with more impunity" meme.

The lack of any coverage to this visit and his statements (at least so far) seem to indicate that the world is really fatigued with this disproportionate attention given to Israel from a human rights body that all but ignores 99.5% of the world in its zeal to zero in on one nation.

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.

You won't believe this Palestinian journalist's arguments about incitement

Daoud Kattab is a well-known (and award-winning) journalist who writes for Al Monitor and elsewhere, and has published in major media outlets.

Writing in Byline, he has an article "THE FALSE BALANCE BETWEEN THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION AND PALESTINIAN 'INCITEMENT'" where, among other things, he tries to argue that there is really no incitement for violence in Palestinian schools and media.

Obviously he is not going to mention the many examples of incitement that have been shown by MEMRI, Palestinian Media Watch or myself. Instead he says "The often-repeated accusations that Palestinian school textbooks and media are instruments of incitement to violence have long been scientifically debunked even though they were regularly repeated by Israeli officials and Israeli apologists."

Ah, "scientifically debunked."

The studies that showed Palestinian school textbooks aren't so bad are flawed, but Kattab tries to pretend that if the textbooks don't teach hate, then the teachers don't teach hate either:

The claim that Palestinians teach their children hate has been rejected by tens of and European, as well as Israeli and Palestinian, academic studies since the turn of the millennium.

No, the evidence of Palestinian schools teaching hate outside the textbooks is overwhelming.

The head of the Jerusalem Teachers Association said on Palestinian TV, "In our schools, we teach what our religion and conscience dictate: That Jerusalem is Arab and that Palestine - from north to south, from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea - is Islamic Palestinian Arab, and will remain so in spite of the damned occupier."

And I have documented that even UNRWA schools - which have some amount of oversight - had ceremonies supporting stabbing Jews, with kids holding up signs saying things like “How can the light appear, if our blood would not be its fuel, and how could we regain Al-Aqsa if we would not be its soldiers” and “We heed your call, oh Al-Aqsa, our blood and souls we will sacrifice for you, oh Al-Aqsa” and “We will live like flying hawks, and we will die like steadfast lions, and all of us for the Palestinian homeland”.

This official school incitement was not only to stab and run over Jews - but to die in the process.

What "scientific study" can debunk this, Daoud?

But his arguments then descend into the farcical. Here is how he describes why mentioning incitement in Palestinian media is not fair:

In the Palestinian-Israeli context, a much more complicated problem has to be accessed. There is little similarity between the current Israeli media, which have developed over 70 years and are now a strong, vibrant, well-funded sector, and the current Palestinian media that, by and large, are less than 20 years old and are highly restricted because of working under occupation.

While a few newspapers existed before the Oslo Accords and were subject to Israeli military censorship, radio and television, as well as a further two newspapers in the West Bank and a couple in Gaza (plus online media) are less than two decades old.

Palestinian journalists have been regularly subjected to harassment, restrictions and physical attacks.

Local and international media rights organisations documented violations against Palestinian journalists by the Israeli army.

Journalists, including a member of the Palestinian journalist union, are currently administratively detained in an Israeli jail without charge or trial.

Palestinian journalists also work under harsh professional conditions, for lower salaries, and face severe travel restrictions.

Kuttab doesn't attempt to debunk Palestinian media incitement, but instead he tries to change the subject. However, this only proves the point even further.

If Palestinian journalists are working under such harsh conditions and Israeli restrictions - if they are worried for their lives or being imprisoned for their writings - then wouldn't you expect them to publish less incitement, not more?

Indeed, Palestinian journalists are frightened of writing incitement - against the PA. (And in Gaza, against Hamas.) So when they publish antisemitic and pro-terror screeds, it not only reflects their own thinking, but also the fact that Palestinian authorities welcome such incitement against Jews. Indeed, official PA TV is filled with such incitement, as a glance at Palestinian Media Watch could confirm.

A more fair comparison would be between Palestinian media under occupation today and the Zionist media on the eve of the creation of the state of Israel.

Palestinian media has not been under Israeli censorship for over 20 years. There are no restrictions on what they may publish. And they choose to publish stories that lionize terror and they choose not to publish anything that is remotely supportive of peace with Israel (in Arabic.)

The idea that the conflict is perpetuated because of Palestinian incitement to violence is akin to accusing a woman of responsibility because she used foul language or for forcefully scratching her attacker while being rapped [sic].

Notice how Kattab changes from "there is no incitement" to "incitement to murder Jews is fully justified and anyone criticizing it is immoral."

Yes, this is the level of discourse from a Palestinian intellectual.

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.

07/21 Links Pt2: Will anti-Israel academic boycotters now also boycott Turkish universities?; The day I met Islamophobia

From Ian:

David Collier: The day I met Islamophobia

It was the terror attack in Nice that finally made me realise what real Islamophobia is. It is the fear of silence that Islamism generates within society. Why does our ‘free press’ refuse to call a spade a spade when it comes to Islamic terror? Islamophobia.
The word is incorrectly being applied as a cover for Islamic extremism, through which any action, regardless of how violent, cannot be labelled as being related to Islam. Islam cannot have a problem. If we mention it, we become Islamophobic, we become targets for public rejection, or retribution. Who would want to place themselves in that situation?
The Muslim children at schools who are wearing a more conservative dress code because others in the school began to do so are Islamophobic. The victim of FGM or honour violence who cower in silence in fear of further action from a family member, they are Islamophobic too. The Israeli who cannot identify as Israeli at university, the Jew who will not publicly wear a Kippa, all Islamophobes.
Our teachers, our local politicians, our unions, our universities, they all suffer from Islamophobia. The woman in Nice is Islamophobic, not because she is biased against Muslims, but because the right to air her opinions has clearly been stifled through the effect of radical Islamic threats and violence.
If you cannot stand up and suggest there are deep rooted issue within Islam that need reform, if you cannot stand by those like Quilliam who seek that reform, if you cannot directly state the connection between the terror attack and Islam, then you too are suffering from Islamophobia.

NGO Monitor: NGO Influence on the House of Lords "Library Note" (withdrawn) on Palestinian Children

In July 2016, the UK House of Lords Library posted a briefing paper: “Living Conditions, Health and Wellbeing of Palestinian Children,” which was “withdrawn” without explanation on July 19, but is available on unofficial websites. The authors present a narrative of Palestinian suffering as a result of Israeli security policies, without examining the means available to protect Israeli civilians from Gaza-launched rocket barrages and terrorist attacks. In addition, the role that Palestinian violence, corruption, and mismanagement contribute to the wellbeing of Palestinian children is ignored, as is the widespread exploitation of children (child soldiers) for attacks against Israelis.
This narrative reflects an ongoing, multiyear political campaign in which political advocacy NGOs (non-governmental organizations) are central participants. The objective is to demonize Israel by alleging abuse of Palestinian children.
The withdrawn House of Lords library note promoting this agenda is a prime example, relying heavily on publications from UN agencies and media platforms that largely cite NGOs to make their claims. These NGOs are highly politicized and biased, lack credibility, and suffer from basic and documented methodological flaws.
For example, the note repeats the entirely unverified allegation of Defence for Children International- Palestine Section (DCI-PS) that “detained children were subject to physical violence” and “interrogators used position abuse, threats, and isolation to coerce confessions.”

Commemorating the 40th anniversary of Israel's July 1976 Raid on Entebbe: The State of Israel ensures that "Never Again" remains a reality

Seventy years ago, in the wake of the Holocaust, the Jewish people took a vow: Never Again!
After the Nazis murdered six million Jews, we came to recognize that we only have ourselves to rely upon for our defense. In today's tumultuous world, the sole guarantor of Jewish safety is a strong Israeli military. Jews around the world facing mortal danger can count on the State of Israel to protect them.
This year commemorates the 40th anniversary of the July 1976 Raid on Entebbe, when Israel demonstrated what Never Again really means. After an Air France plane with about 300 passengers traveling from Israel to France was hijacked by terrorists and brought to Uganda, the Israeli and Jewish passengers went through a Nazi-like selection process and were kept as hostages while the non-Jews were set free to return to Paris.
The terrorists declared that they would kill all the hostages if their demand for the release of 53 international terrorists, held in Israel and other countries, was not met. Yet it was only the State of Israel that chose to take action and save the Jewish captives. Israel refused to accept the execution of Jews by the terrorists, and in a daring and carefully planned mission, Israeli forces used four American Hercules C-130 cargo planes, travelled 2,400 miles and rescued the hostages. One IDF officer, Lieutenant Colonel Yoni Netanyahu, brother of current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and three hostages were killed. More than 100 were saved.
But this is not the only time in recent history that only the people of Israel were willing to put their own lives in harm's way to protect their brothers and sisters in other parts of the world. After a lethal pogrom in Yemen in 1947 after the U.N. vote to partition the British Mandate of Palestine, Israel secretly airlifted 45,000 Yemenite Jews to safety in Israel with Operation Magic Carpet. And again with Operation Solomon in 1991, the IDF airlifted 14,500 Ethiopian Jews out of harm's way in Africa to Israel. With these incredible rescue missions, Israel has made it clear that it will do whatever it takes to protect global Jewry.

I mentioned that New York attorney David Abrams filed a lawsuit against the National Lawyers Guild for discrimination, under the legal theory that an Israeli organization is considered a "person" under New York anti-discrimination laws.

He has filed a similar lawsuit against the American Studies Association on behalf of the same Israeli organization, Athenaeum Blue & White. As the lawsuit says,

In late 2013, ASA announced a boycott of Israeli organizations. Thus, because of its citizenship and origin, Plaintiff is barred from joining ASA or NYMASA; barred from sending a representative to events put on by these organizations; barred from applying for grants offered by these organizations, and barred from enjoying any other benefits offered by these organizations.
At the time the boycott resolution was enacted, ASA's president admitted that many nations, including many of Israel’s neighbors, are generally judged to have human rights records that are worse than Israel’s, or comparable, but stated, "one has to start somewhere."
In the two and a half years since that statement, ASA has not boycotted any other nation besides Israel and not even put any such other boycott up to a vote of its membership. In other words, the ASA started and finished with Israel.
Athenaeum was recently formed; has an interest in American Studies, and as part of its intended activities would like to join the ASA (and therefore NYMASA); send a representative to activities in New York; and otherwise enjoy the benefits of membership in ASA and NYMASA.

The lawsuit only asks for $100,000 - and for the ASA to overturn its anti-Israel rules.

Why sue the ASA and not one of the other groups that proudly support BDS?

Well, one has to start somewhere.

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.

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

Everyone knows that party platforms are just for atmosphere. They bind nobody to anything, and are quickly forgotten after the election. But I must say that the Republican platform plank on Israel – regardless of what one thinks of the candidate – is remarkable, including the very fundamental statement that “[w]e reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier…” as well as recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and not, as in theDemocratic platform “a matter for final status negotiations.”)

And then there is what is not there. What has especially been noted is the absence of any mention of the so-called “two-state solution” (TSS), a consistent part of US policy since 1993.

Leaving it out today is not unreasonable. For the past 23 years we have been trying and failing to come up with a TSS acceptable to both sides, and as we shall see, there are good reasons for this. A partition of the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean to create a sovereign Palestinian state is only one of numerous possible solutions to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. Why should the platform of an American political party insist on one particular solution to a foreign conflict that ultimately can only be solved by the parties involved?

But Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, who is himself neither a Republican, an Israeli nor a Palestinian, finds it ‘ominous’, a “dangerous turning point.”

Jacobs’ arguments are surprisingly weak. For example, he says,

But a one-state solution, the only alternative anyone has ever offered, allows the settlers to stay in place in their entirety, which perhaps is the intent of [David] Friedman [an adviser to Donald Trump involved in the platform drafting process], a strong backer of the settlements. This would subject Israel and the Palestinians to an endless cycle of violence.

I presume he is referring to the idea popularized by Caroline Glick and others that Israel should extend Israeli law to all of Judea and Samaria. One of the points in its favor is that one of the main causes of violence is precisely the Palestinian Authority, which incites murder on a daily basis in its media, official mosques, schools, and so forth. If it were removed there would be less violence, not more.

There is also the argument that the PA’s massive corruption is one of the main reasons for Palestinian unhappiness and frustration, and that the cause of peace would best be served by improving the daily lives of the Arab residents.

But in any event, this is not the “only” solution anyone has proposed. For example, Naftali Bennett, who presently holds the Education and Diaspora Affairs portfolios in Israel’s cabinet, suggested that Israel annex that part of the territories that are under full Israeli control under the Oslo accord (Area C), and leave the PA in control of Arabs living in the other areas. Area C contains the great majority of the Jewish communities and only a small number of Arabs.

There are still other possibilities. But Jacobs is stuck on this idée fixe that has held the Israeli Left and the American government in its grip for the last several decades, the TSS.

Let’s look at some of the reasons that a TSS is unacceptable, even if such an agreement could be reached (don’t forget that far-reaching TSS proposals by Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert were rejected by the Arabs as not giving them enough).

1.       Security, security, security. The topography of the region is such that the only way to protect Israel’s center from rocket attacks and to defend the country from invasion from the east is to control the high ground in Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley. This is a matter of brute geological fact, not politics. Recent history in Lebanon and elsewhere shows that no international force or guarantee can replace the IDF.

2.       Land for Paper. Nothing that is agreed upon with one regime, the PA, would be binding on any future entity that might take control of the area, such as Hamas or even Da’esh. As a matter of fact, the PA itself has systematically violated the Oslo accords that it signed, so even without a regime change there is no reason to trust signed agreements.

3.       National Aspirations. Mahmoud Abbas himself made it clear that in the event of the establishment of a Palestinian state in the territories, he would immediately press claims against Israel “at the United Nations, human rights treaty bodies and the International Court of Justice.” The PLO, which runs the PA, does not aspire to live alongside Israel, it wants to redress Palestinian grievances from 1948, including ‘return’ of millions of descendents of Arab refugees to Israel, not the Palestinian state. This is why Abbas has always vehemently refused to agree that Israel is the state of the Jewish people or agree to a formula of “two states for two peoples.”

Jacobs also reruns the demographic argument, that

It seems axiomatic that the alternative to two states is one state, since the demographics indicate that in the near future, the majority of that one state would not be Jewish. Such a state would then either be a Jewish state that would cease to be a democracy and disenfranchise millions of Palestinian souls, or it would be a democracy and cease to be Jewish.

There are several reasons this isn’t true. First, nobody is including the 1.8 million Gazans in any “one-state” plan. Second, the number of Arabs in Judea and Samaria is overstated by at least one million by Palestinian sources. And third, the Arab birthrate is dropping and the Jewish one is rising, so there will not be a demographic ‘time bomb’. If Israel were to annex all of Judea and Samaria today, the population of the combined state would be 66% Jewish (the current percentage within the Green Line is about 80%). I am not arguing that Israel should do this, just pointing out that it would not change the fact of the Jewish majority.

Finally, Rabbi Jacobs refers several times to “extremists on both sides.” I presume the Palestinian extremists are the countless terrorists who stab, shoot, blow up and run down Jews every day because they are Jews. And the Jewish extremists? They write slogans on walls and build illegal shacks on hilltops in Judea and Samaria. Yes, there is one in an Israeli jail now accused of firebombing a Palestinian house and killing three family members. Even if it turns out that he is guilty – and I am still doubtful about that – it will be one person, rejected by almost all of Jewish Israel and punished by its justice system, alongside hundreds of Arab terrorists incited by the PA, encouraged and, afterwards, venerated by their society.

Rabbi Jacobs is for coexistence. So am I, which is why I oppose creating a base for terrorism on our doorstep, and why I see the Republican platform as a breath of fresh air.

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.

07/21 Links Pt1: Refugee Camps or Terrorist Bases?; A Deadly EU Blind Spot on Israel

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: The Palestinians: Refugee Camps or Terrorist Bases?

The 450,000 Palestinians in Lebanon are still banned from several professions, especially in the fields of medicine and law. They refer to these restrictions as apartheid measures. The Lebanese apartheid measures against Palestinians are rarely mentioned in the Western media and international human rights groups. The UN does not seem overly concerned about this discrimination.
Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon have become in the past few decades bases for various innumerable militias and terrorist groups.
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees, UNRWA, is formally in charge of the refugee camps in Lebanon, including those that are now providing shelter to Islamist terrorists.
The Lebanese authorities are increasingly running out of patience with the growing Islamist threat.

A Deadly EU Blind Spot on Israel

Following last week’s terror attack in Nice, a Belgian Jewish organization issued a highly unusual statement charging that, had European media not spent months “ignoring” Palestinian terror against Israel out of “political correctness,” the idea of a truck being used as a weapon wouldn’t have come as such a shock. But it now turns out that European officials did something much worse than merely ignoring Palestinian attacks: They issued a 39-page report, signed by almost every EU country, blaming these attacks on “the occupation” rather than the terrorists. The obvious corollary was that European countries had no reason to fear similar attacks and, therefore, they didn’t bother taking precautions that could have greatly reduced the casualties.
The most shocking part of the Nice attack was how high those casualties were: The truck driver managed to kill 84 people before he was stopped. By comparison, as the New York Times reported on Monday, Israel has suffered at least 32 car-ramming attacks since last October, yet all these attacks combined have killed exactly two people (shootings and stabbings are much deadlier). Granted, most involved private cars, but even attacks using buses or heavy construction vehicles never approached the scale of Nice’s casualties. The deadliest ramming attack in Israel’s history, in 2001, killed eight.
Firstly, this is because Israel deploys massive security for mass gatherings like Nice’s Bastille Day celebrations, forcing Palestinian assailants to make do with less densely-populated targets, like bus stops or light rail stops, which greatly lowers the death toll. As an Israeli police spokesman told the New York Times, an Israeli event comparable to the one in Nice would entail “a 360-degree enclosure of the area, with layers of security around the perimeter,” including major roads “blocked off with rows of buses, and smaller side streets with patrol cars,” plus a massive police presence reinforced by counterterrorism units “strategically placed to provide a rapid response, if needed.”
Secondly, Israeli security personnel have no qualms about using deadly force against terrorists in mid-rampage if less lethal means would take longer to succeed because they understand that the best way to save innocent lives is to stop the attack as quickly as possible. This lesson was driven home by a 2008 attack in which a Palestinian plowed a heavy construction vehicle into a crowded Jerusalem street. A policewoman tried to stop him without killing him; she wounded him and then climbed into the cab to handcuff him. But while she was trying to cuff him, he managed to restart the vehicle and kill another person before he was shot dead.

ISIS Praises “Palestinian Tactic” of Truck Attack in Nice

ISIS supporters have praised the terrorist who used his truck to kill 84 people in Nice, France last week, hailing the Palestinians for developing the car ramming method.
“Killing by ramming using civilian cars and trucks is an idea born from the Maqdisi [Palestinian] mind, which has an innovative nature of thinking up jihad tactics,” one ISIS supporter commented on the social network Telegram. “Yesterday they taught us [about] the explosive vest, and many plans for street fighting, and today they taught us this tactic. May Allah bless Jerusalem and the environs of Jerusalem, and may Allah bless all of the Levant… Oh Aqsa, we are coming.”
Vehicular attacks have become a hallmark of Palestinian terrorism. According to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 46 car ramming attacks have been carried out by Palestinian terrorists in Israel since last September. One particularly high-profile incident in October 2015 saw a Palestinian terrorist ram his car into a group of people waiting at a bus-stop, then proceed to exit the vehicle and hack one of those wounded — Rabbi Yeshayahu Krishevsky — to death. (The terrorist involved was later called a “martyr” by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who met with the killer’s family.)

Official Palestinian news agency Wafa reports:

Torching a Palestinian house by suspected Israeli Jewish arsonists in the Nablus village of Duma in the northern West Bank hit the front page headlines in Palestinian daily newspapers.

Al-Quds said a Palestinian family survived an arson attack against their house in Duma village and that ]Israeli[ settlers are suspected of perpetrating the attack.

Al-Ayyam and al-Hayat al-Jadida said settlers torched a house belonging to the Dawabsha family in a fresh arson attack.

Al-Ayyam reported Palestinian Cabinet Spokesperson Yousef al-Mahmoud slamming the arson attack as a “cowardly and brutal act”.

However, it was done by locals:

An Israel Police representative told The Jerusalem Post that an initial investigation indicated that the incident did not appear to be a nationalistically motivated, but rather the result of a local village conflict. The representative later added that a deeper investigation confirmed the results of the initial investigation.

The previous day, Wafa's news roundup showed very similar behavior:

Killing a 12-year-old Palestinian boy by Israeli forces during clashes in the Jerusalem town of al-Ram hit the front page headlines in Palestinian dailies.

The three dailies said Israeli forces shot dead a Palestinian by in the Jerusalem town of al-Ram.

Yet once again, the truth is much different:

Israel police spokeswoman Luba Samri said Israeli forces never opened fire. Israeli border police officers were in Al-Ram to return the body of a suspected Palestinian attacker who was killed in an incident approximately a week ago, she said.

According to Samri, protesters threw Molotov cocktails at the forces, who responded with tear gas and stun grenades.

The Palestinian media, of course, doesn't report the truth. They purposefully hide the facts in order to keep their readers good and angry at Israel.

A legitimate media organization should at least mention that there is another side to the story. But Arab media has no journalistic standards and their primary purpose is propaganda and incitement, not reporting the truth.

Which means that any legitimate news organization that quotes Palestinian Arab media without mentioning the caveat that they do not have any journalistic standards are themselves betraying the trust of their readers.

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.