Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Palestinians upset at Turkey's condemnation of Jerusalem attack

Turkey's Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım condemned the attack in Jerusalem which killed four Israelis. Speaking at Esenboğa International Airport in Ankara following his official visit to Iraq, Prime Minister Yıldırım offered his condolences for the victims in the Jerusalem and Baghdad attacks.

Deputy Turkish Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek said separately, "We once again denounce a terrorist attack in Jerusalem. Humanity demands the world's nations unite against terrorism."

This has upset the terrorist supporters.

A Turkish hashtag called "Palestinian resistance is not terrorism" cropped up, and Islamic Jihad's Palestine Today was proud that for a brief time the hashtag was trending.

Hamas denounced the Turkish leaders. Spokeperson Hazem Kassem told a newspaper on Monday, "The resistance practiced by the Palestinian people throughout the occupied territories is a legitimate right and is guaranteed by international laws." He said, of course, that "the real terrorism is what is practiced by the occupation against our people, and the massacres that practiced against the Palestinians."

But not to burn any bridges, he added that Hamas appreciates the Turkish positions of support for the Palestinian cause.

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.

01/09 Links Pt2: Bomb Threats at Jewish Community Centers in London and America’s East Coast Cities

From Ian:

NGO Monitor: Submission of the Institute for NGO Research Position Paper Regarding the Preparation of a Discriminatory Blacklist Pursuant to UNHRC Resolution 31/36

Pursuant to UN Human Rights Council Resolution 31/36, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in conjunction with BDS activists, is currently preparing a discriminatory blacklist intended to defame and economically destroy companies doing business with Israel. The ultimate goal is to isolate, demonize, and harm the Jewish State.
The UNHRC’s discriminatory blacklist operates from the premise that business in occupied territory is “illegal settlement activity” and is barred by international law. In fact, there is no such prohibition and almost every country engages in and/or facilitates business activities in settlements in situations of occupation throughout the globe.
The discriminatory blacklist also targets companies providing security services to the State of Israel, by labeling legitimate security measures (undertaken everywhere in the world) as “illegal settlement activity”. The purpose is to disrupt efforts to protect civilians from Palestinian terrorism and is part of a decades-long UN campaign to minimize and justify Palestinian violence.
The discriminatory blacklist promotes the violation of the documents known as the Oslo Accords (1993-5), mutually agreed to by the PLO and Israel, and guaranteed by the UN and the international community. It seeks to punish activity necessary to carry out Israeli security and infrastructure obligations mandated by the agreements.
In contrast to actual international law, the interpretation of “settlement activity” used in Resolution 31/36 is so absurdly broad that the UNHRC may blacklist entities with any presence and for whatever purpose over the 1949 Armistice lines. Under the UNHRC’s inexplicable logic of Resolution 31/36, being the “wrong” person (as secretly defined by anonymous OHCHR bureaucrats) who is cleaning one’s hands in a sink over the line could be enough for inclusion on the blacklist.
The discriminatory UNHRC blacklist is meant as a “backdoor” means to impose sanctions. The UNHRC, however, does not have this power. Under Chapter VII, Article 41 of the UN Charter, the power to levy sanctions and implement enforcement mechanisms is solely vested in the UN Security Council. The creation of the blacklist is therefore an illegal usurpation of the Security Council by both the UNHRC and the OHCHR in violation of the UN Charter.

Bomb Threats at Jewish Community Centers in London and America’s East Coast Cities

Jewish community centers in a widespread number of American states were evacuated due to bomb threats on Monday morning, while across the ocean, the same phenomenon was taking place in London, England as well.
Jewish schools across the United Kingdom were placed on alert after bomb threats were called into metro London Jewish schools in Roehampton, Ilford and Brent on Monday morning. The schools were “warned” that explosive devices had been planted on the premises. Thorough searches were conducted at all three sites and other schools were placed on precautionary lock-downs until the “all clear” was received.
Bomb threats were also called in to a few non-Jewish schools as well, according to the British Jewish Chronicle news site.
“Police were alerted at around 10:30am hrs on Monday, 9 January, to phone calls made to schools in Roehampton, Ilford and Brent in which bomb threats were made. Police officers attended the schools. All three incidents were stood down a short time later. An investigation into the threat will be conducted,” Metropolitan Police said in a statement.
Meanwhile, in the United States, bomb threats were called into Jewish Community Centers (JCC)s in Delaware, Tenafly, New Jersey; Miami Beach and Jacksonville, Florida; in Rockville, Maryland; in West Nashville, Tennessee, and Columbia, South Carolina. (h/t Jewess)

Obama agrees to let Iran get enough uranium to build 10 bombs. Really.

This would be farcical if it wasn't so tragic.

Iran is to receive a huge shipment of natural uranium from Russia to compensate it for exporting tons of reactor coolant, diplomats say, in a move approved by the outgoing U.S. administration and other governments seeking to keep Tehran committed to a landmark nuclear pact.

Two senior diplomats said the transfer recently agreed by the U.S. and five other world powers that negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran foresees delivery of 116 metric tons (nearly 130 tons) of natural uranium. U.N. Security Council approval is needed but a formality, considering five of those powers are permanent Security Council members, they said.

Uranium can be enriched to levels ranging from reactor fuel or medical and research purposes to the core of an atomic bomb. Iran says it has no interest in such weapons and its activities are being closely monitored under the nuclear pact to make sure they remain peaceful.

Despite present restrictions on its enrichment program, the amount of natural uranium is significant should Iran decide to keep it in storage, considering its potential uses once some limits on Tehran's nuclear activities start to expire in less than a decade.

David Albright, whose Institute of Science and International Security often briefs U.S. lawmakers on Iran's nuclear program, says the shipment could be enriched to enough weapons-grade uranium for more than 10 simple nuclear bombs, "depending on the efficiency of the enrichment process and the design of the nuclear weapon."

The swap is in compensation for the 70 metric tons (77 tons) of heavy water exported by Iran to the United States, Russia and Oman since the nuclear agreement went into effect.

That last sentence is far more meaningful than it appears.

Iran violated the JCPOA by creating more heavy water than allowed. So the P5+1 offered to pay Iran for the heavy water - rewarding Iran for violating the agreement.

This happened in February and again in November. Iran can now violate the agreement and know that it will be rewarded - in order to maintain the agreement that it is violating.

This is the logic, folks:

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.

Ali Abunimah’s antisemitic fantasies about ‘Israel’s alliance with al-Qaida’s Syria branch’ (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)

By Petra Marquardt-Bigman

As every Jew-hater knows, there’s no limit to Jewish cunning. It’s not just that “the Jews are our misfortune,” as the Nazis put it so pithily; it’s also that even if there is something that would seem to be very bad for the Jews themselves, any decent Jew-hater will know that the Jews could still be behind it. Take it from the Hamas Charter (Art.22):

“They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.”

Veteran anti-Israel activist (and Hamas fan) Ali Abunimah usually tries to avoid such crude echoes of the notorious “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” but his efforts to appear a bit more sophisticated can’t quite conceal how much his obsessive demonization of the world’s only Jewish state is indebted to the oldest hatred.

As reflected in Abunimah’s Orwellian definition of antisemitism, he is an ardent admirer of the Stormfront-style rants of Columbia University Professor Joseph Massad, who has repeatedly peddled preposterous claims about a meeting of minds and happy collaborations between Zionist Jews and the Nazis. A more recent version of the same theme is the idea that Israel somehow controls or collaborates with jihadi terror groups like the savage Islamic State (ISIS) and various Al Qaida-type groups. But as every good Jew-hater knows, you can’t expose Jewish evil-doing without suffering a backlash – orchestrated by the Jews, naturally!!! – and so Abunimah recently concluded that he was facing an “uptick in attacks” that had to be “related” to an article in which he was supposedly “detailing Israel’s alliance with al-Qaida’s Syria branch.”

However, as Abunimah knows full well, the “attacks” he complains about have nothing to do with Israel; instead, he is facing well-deserved criticism from erstwhile fans who largely share his views on Israel but are appalled by his failure to condemn Assad’s pivotal role in the carnage in Syria. It is of course understandable that Abunimah is frustrated to see cracks in the unified anti-Israel front, but as I have described in two previous posts (here &here), this controversy has been going on for a while and it seems to continue unabated. In his frustration, Abunimah is now resorting to his usual cheap tactics, and he is trying to discredit his critics by falsely claiming they are somehow collaborating with “extreme hasbarists” like yours truly… The terrifying result is a “Troll equivalent of Israel-Jabhat al-Nusra alliance.”

So what about these alliances between Israel and Islamist terror groups that Ali Abunimah sees everywhere?

The article in which Abunimah is supposedly “detailing Israel’s alliance with al-Qaida’s Syria branch” is a downright ridiculous attempt to reduce a publication of roughly 260 pages – the latest issue of the annual “Strategic Survey for Israel” published by the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) – to a few cherry-picked points.

Abunimah devotes one section of his article to the topic “Israel and al-Qaida in Syria” – a title that already indicates his agenda. He starts out by noting – doubtless with great satisfaction – that Israel continues to regard what he fondly calls “the Lebanese resistance movement Hizballah” as a serious threat. Abunimah then quotes comments on the situation in Syria from page 248 of the report:

“From Israel’s perspective, the best scenario is the disappearance of the Assad regime, along with the removal of Iran and Hezbollah from Syria on the one hand, and the defeat of the Islamic State and the establishment of a moderate Sunni regime in Syria on the other.”

It’s safe to assume that if this is Israel’s preferred scenario, Abunimah is ardently hoping for the opposite: that Assad will remain in power, backed by Iran and Hezbollah; perhaps he’s even hoping that the terror group Islamic State will be able to avoid defeat and will eventually get around to attacking Israel.

What bothered Abunimah enormously is that the report also argued that Israel’s best-case scenario had “materialized in limited form in the Golan Heights, where moderate Sunni rebels are successfully combating both the Assad regime and the Islamic State.”

Abunimah proceeded to claim that “Israel has long provided aid and support in the Golan Heights to Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaida’s franchise in Syria” and he misleadingly asserts that “Moshe Yaalon, one of the report’s authors, publicly acknowledged the Israeli assistance to Jabhat al-Nusra fighters in 2015, when he was Israel’s defense minister.” But Abunimah’s own link undermines his claim, because the relevant Times of Israel article emphasized that Israel’s “general policy” was not to get involved in the war in Syria, and that Israel only “provided humanitarian assistance to wounded Syrian fighters located near the shared border … under two conditions – that the fighters don’t let Islamic extremists … get close to the border, and that they don’t hurt the local [i.e. Syrian] Druze population.”

Since Abunimah obviously favors Assad and would surely be pleased to see al-Nusra attack Israel, it is not surprising that he is upset about Israel’s conditional humanitarian assistance, designed to keep the border quiet and to keep the relatives of Israel’s Druze population safe. The fact that he spins this as “Israel’s alliance with al-Qaida’s Syria branch” just goes to show what a manipulative liar he is.

But Abunimah’s attempt to vilify Israel as having an “alliance with al-Qaida’s Syria branch” is also particularly pathetic in view of the fact that Hamas and Hezbollah – the Islamist terror groups Abunimah likes to glorify as noble “resistance” movements – are really not picky about their alliances: plenty of reports reveal the collaboration between Hamas and the Islamic State group’s Sinai branch, and it is well documented that Hezbollah has been very busy helping Assad butcher Syrians. Of course, these are alliances that Abunimah would warmly endorse – not least because when it comes to individuals and groups that want to destroy Israel, it’s quite obvious that as far as Abunimah is concerned, no alliance is too sordid. And as long as Abunimah hopes the “resistance” he champions will eventually turn on Israel, he couldn’t care less how many Arabs were killed by these groups before they get down to the eagerly anticipated business of killing Jews.

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.

01/09 Links Pt1: Families, friends mourn 4 soldiers killed in Jerusalem terror attack; Weaponized International Law

From Ian:

Families, friends mourn 4 soldiers killed in Jerusalem terror attack

The families and friends of the four soldiers killed in a truck-ramming terror attack in Jerusalem expressed their shock and grief at their deaths ahead of funerals for the four taking place on Monday.
The four were identified late Sunday as IDF Lieutenant Yael Yekutiel, 20, of Givatayim, Cadet Shir Hajaj, 22, of Maaleh Adumim, Cadet Shira Tzur, 20, from Haifa, and Cadet Erez Orbach, 20, from Alon Shvut.
Seventeen people were injured in the attack, perpetrated by an East Jerusalem terrorist.
Sixteen others were injured, two of them very seriously, in the attack Sunday which occurred as a group of soldiers were getting off a bus at the promenade in Armon Hanatziv, a popular tourist spot in southern Jerusalem, when Fadi al-Qunbar drove a large flatbed truck into them.
The driver accelerated as he struck the group. After he hit the soldiers, he put the vehicle into reverse and began to run over them a second time.
The terrorist was shot by soldiers and a civilian tour guide, police said. He died of his wounds.

Soldier killed in ramming attack, a US-Israeli citizen, laid to rest

Erez Orbach, one of four soldiers killed on Sunday in a truck-ramming attack in Jerusalem, was laid to rest to Monday in the military plot of the Kfar Etzion cemetery. Thousands attended the funeral.
Orbach, 20, of Alon Shvut in the Etzion settlement bloc south of Jerusalem, had been exempt from army service for health reasons, but fought for the opportunity to volunteer and was in officers’ training school at the time of his murder.
Orbach and three others were killed when a terrorist from East Jerusalem rammed his truck into a group of soldiers at the Armon Hanatziv promenade in the capital Sunday.
He held US citizenship as the child of an American, the US Embassy in Israel said. Consular officials had been in touch with his family.

Soldier wounded in ramming attack still fighting for her life

An Israeli soldier wounded in a deadly terror attack remains in a coma but doctors have managed to partially stabilize her, a doctor at her hospital said Monday morning.
The soldier, whose name has not been released, is still in life-threatening condition but has begun to improve, Dr. Ofer Marin, head of the trauma unit at Shaare Zedek in Jerusalem, told reporters.
She was one of 16 people injured in the Sunday attack, in which a driver plowed his truck into a group of soldiers standing near a bus on a popular promenade in the capital. Four people were killed — three officer school cadets and one officer.
Marin said the seriously wounded soldier is sedated and breathing with the help of respirator and will need to undergo additional operations until her condition stabilizes. He said she suffered multiple internal injuries.
No other victim is in life-threatening condition, and at least four soldiers were released overnight, the hospital said.

Official Palestinian news agency pays tribute to the child of a "martyr" terrorist

Wafa, the official Palestinian Authority news agency, has an article about the hard life of "martyr's sons."

It starts off with the image of 3-year old Qais Aidah hearing the gunshots that killed his father, Amer Aidah, in 2004.

He describes how his father became a "martyr:"

On September 8, 2004, while my father with his friends were standing on Palestine Street in Jericho, two vehicles loaded with bags stopped. Gunmen in the uniforms of the occupation's "undercover forces"[?] emerged and asked my father and the group to place their weapons to the ground. My father refused and as he raised his pistol at the ready to fire, they shot four bullets in his chest and legs...My father was one of the founders of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the Al-Amari refugee camp, and most of his friends now among the martyrs and prisoners and wounded.

The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades are Fatah's terror group. Mahmoud Abbas doesn't only tolerate them - this story shows that the PA actively encourages them while pretending to be against violence.

Not that mere facts can get in the way of the worldwide psychotic fantasy that Abbas is a man of peace.

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.

UNICEF's quarterly Humanitarian Situation Report for the Palestinian-controlled territories mentions that the group tried to understand what makes kids attack Jews at the beginning of the "knife intifada" in October 2015.

Following the rapid escalation in violence between children and Israeli Security Forces (ISF) in East Jerusalem in October-December 2015, UNICEF undertook a rapid appraisal in five areas (Old City, Silwan, Issawiya, Jabal Mukaber & Shu’fat Refugee Camp). 80 children (61 boys and 19 girls), and 30 caregivers were interviewed and identified key drivers to violence as being priority humanitarian service delivery gaps: in order of priority

1) retaliation and revenge response to alleged humiliation by ISF and settler violence,
2) role of social media in response to witnessed incident(s),
3) act of patriotism and
4) peer pressure and bullying

were identified as main drivers within a context characterized by poor domestic conditions, boredom, and lack of playing spaces.

Yes, bored kids all over the world decide to stab people.

The methodology from UNICEF is unclear; kids will often answer how they think they are expected to answer so the "retaliation and revenge" idea seems nebulous. There was no difference between how Israel acted towards the Palestinians in August or in October of 2015; the spark that was mentioned in all media and social media was rumors about Israel taking over the Al Aqsa Mosque, which UNICEF actively avoids mentioning.

The role of social media is another whitewash by UNICEF, as it doesn't mention that the kids are being directly incited by a constant barrage of mainstream and social media communications that make "martyrs" into heroes and that demonize Jews.

The least important factors mentioned by UNICEF, peer pressure and bullying, are perhaps the most important ones in reality. "Peer pressure" to stab Jews makes no sense because any peers who actually do it tend not to remain peers - they are in prison or killed.

That leaves bullying. One can easily imagine a kid who is being abused by his classmates wanting to use a terror attack to escape the situation, and become a hero at the same time. Using the "occupation" as an excuse will satisfy the bigots at UN agencies who want to ascribe all the evils of the world to Israel, but it seems very likely that kids going on stabbing sprees are acting out of the same motivation as some female suicide bombers - a way to escape a bad life and/or to erase shame and transform it into honor. And Palestinian society honors terrorists more than any other kind of role model, a basic piece of information that UNICEF does not deem important enough to mention in its quest to find the root causes of child terrorism in 2015 (that they euphemistically call "violence between children and Israeli Security Forces.")

The epicenter of the child attacks was not Jerusalem, but Hebron. UNICEF did not seem to prioritize Hebron in this "rapid appraisal" but they mention Hebron in a different context in a more recent report, "UNICEF Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa completes visit in the State of Palestine."

Cappelaere also met with social workers at the Hebron Directorate of the Ministry of Social Development, with whom UNICEF works closely. They explained how they investigate suspected cases of child abuse and take appropriate action to protect the children, despite being overwhelmed with a growing number of cases.

There are literally an overwhelming number of child abuse cases in Hebron - the spot where most of the attacks took place. The earlier report hints at the same factor when it mentions the "context" of "poor domestic conditions."

Reading between the lines, it appears as if Palestinian child abuse, and the lack of protections of children from being hurt by their peers and parents, is a significant driver motivating abused kids to want to escape their horrible lives. And the constant message that terrorists are heroes makes attacking Israelis the easiest and most logical solution.

(h/t Irene)

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.

Mahmoud Abbas was elected President of the Palestinian Authority on January 9, 2005, for a four-year term.

That same week, terrorists from Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades - who report to Abbas - killed six Israeli civilians at the Karni crossing into Gaza.

But Abbas was hailed as a man of peace.

In 2006, after one year in office, Abbas announced that he would not seek to remain the leader of the Palestinians after his term expires in 2009.

In 2007, Fatah terrorists killed three civilians in a bakery in Eilat.

But Abbas was hailed as a man of peace.

In 2009, Abbas announced that he would extend his term in office for an additional year, in a very controversial move within Palestinian legal circles.;

But he was still hailed as a man of peace.

By 2010, Abbas didn't even bother to pretend that he was allowed to extend his term legally - he just did. And he has remained the president for eight years past his term and eight years after he promised to step down.

In that time he has solidified his hold on the PLO, the PA and Fatah, expelling his enemies and becoming for all intents and purposes, a dictator. He has incited violence directly and indirectly through his media and schools. He has praised terrorists, treated them as heroes and called the dead ones martyrs.

But he is still hailed as a man of peace, by a world that simply looks the other way at the basic facts of his career.

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.

Insane Arab antisemitic theory of the day: Stalin recognized Israel because of the Soviet "Jewish lobby"

Ali Al-Hil, a professor at a Qatari university, writes in Al Masa Online about how deep the Jewish plot extends - into Russia.

Al-Hil says:

The Jewish lobby in the Soviet Union and former Russia is currently one of the largest and oldest lobbies in Europe and the eastern and western parts of the world, and can even be greater than those in North America.

This lobby, possibly through extortion, persuaded the Soviet Union in 1948 to recognize "Israel" and before that to vote in the United Nations in 1945 [sic] as soon as World War II ended in favor of the decision to grant Palestine as a homeland for the Jews, and previously to support the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and before that paid hundreds of thousands of Jews from the Ukraine and others to go to Palestine from Tsarist Russia starting from 1881. This lobby possibly engineered the Syrian situation and possibly other scenes.

This lobby, for example, is what drove Moscow in to become the Great Satan of the Muslim world and devote enmity between the Sunnah and Shiites in order to convince the Russian public opinion and even decision-making circles, that there is no ally in the Middle East, and Russia could only trust Israel. Many analysts say that this, developed by the Jewish lobby in Russia, is an explanation of air strikes carried out by "Israel" against targets in Syria, and certainly there was a green light from Russia.

Yes, that Jewish lobby in the former Soviet Union was so influential on Stalin that he had them all killed. And even after death they are influencing Russia today!

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've got to hand it to him, his propaganda ability approaches that of Goebbels.

From Fateh News:

Erekat: Draining the swamp of occupation is the key to stability and security in the region

Secretary of the Executive Committee of the PLO, Saeb Erekat, stressed that to drain the swamp of the Israeli occupation is the key to stability, security and guarantee to defeat terrorism in the region.

This came during a political forum, held on Sunday evening in Jericho, on the importance of the history of the Palestinian revolution from historical, political and militant perspectives to get to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, as part of the celebrations of the fifty-second anniversary of the start of the Palestinian revolution and the Fatah movement.

Erekat stressed that the Palestinian national struggle was launched based on a set of rights and national principles seeking to achieve national self-determination and that the Palestine culture and civilization is a bridge that enhances security and world peace.

He pointed to the importance of the vote of 177 countries for the Palestinian right to statehood at the United Nations, as well as the political and national value of the Security Council resolution condemning settlements and calling for an end to occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

He added that this diplomatic and political victory in international forums is the result of the Palestinian struggle and the wisdom and statesmanship of President Mahmoud Abbas, alluding to his meeting which is scheduled to be at the Vatican with Pope to raise the flag of Palestine, followed the next day by the Paris International Conference on the national rights of the Palestinian people and the need for a two-state solution.

He also added how important it is to unify with Hamas, ignoring the fact that Fatah is now on a propaganda campaign against Hamas to take advantage of electricity shortages in Gaza which the people are blaming on Hamas, not Israel. Here's a cartoon about it from the Fatah website.

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.

01/08 Links: Don’t Defund the U.N., Just Say ‘Go!’; The UN Has Broken All Its Promises to Israel

From Ian:

Don’t Defund the U.N., Just Say ‘Go!’

We are voluntarily underwriting an institution that — with Obama having formally boarded the anti-Israel train — is joining the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. The General Assembly, which is steered by the sharia-supremacist Organization of Islamic Cooperation, has just created a BDS database to target companies that do business with Israeli settlements in what the U.N. has declared is “Palestinian territory.”
What else is new? As UN Watch has reported, in 2015–16, the General Assembly adopted 20 resolutions condemning Israel, compared to just three against the rest of the planet — including none against such favorite U.N. human-rights havens as China, Russia, Cuba, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia.
Now consider this: There is one reason and one reason alone why the U.N. is relevant: because the United States is in it. It is not our financial support that the U.N. needs; it is our participation. The U.N. is a corrupt institution that is hostile to our interests and system of government while living off our prosperity, banking on our rule of law, and luxuriating in the very society it so routinely condemns. And we continue to legitimize it.
Basta!
Of course the United States must have robust, vibrant international relations. We need friends with common interests, and we have to deal with the hostiles. We do not need the U.N. for any of that. We do not need the U.N. at all — it needs us. And if we were out of it, we could still deal with it and support what little good it does.
It is not enough to cut off funding from a bad organization. We should disassociate from that bad organization. We should stop helping it be a consequential bad organization by denying it legitimacy. Don’t defund the U.N. Just say, “Go!”

The United Nations Has Broken All Its Promises to Israel

A lot has been written about the UN Security Council resolution declaring all Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem to be illegal. Even so, there is an important point I haven’t seen made.
The West Bank was “created” by the armistice agreement of 1949 that ended Israel’s War of Independence. The agreement was brokered and monitored by the UN. It did not require any Arab recognition of Israel, nor did it require either side to give up any claims to territory on the other side of the line. It reads: “It is also recognised that no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.”
It must be remembered that when this agreement was actually in effect, it provided no legitimacy or safety to Israel. No Arab country recognized these borders. It was only when they lost the West Bank after the 1967 war (which they started) that they supported this “border.” But a border has to work both ways if it is to mean anything at all.
The armistice agreement was with Jordan, not with the Palestinians. And only two countries (Pakistan and the UK) recognized the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank as legitimate. Yes, King Hussein gave the West Bank to the Palestinians in 1988. But it was never his to give.
In passing the latest resolution, the UN has clearly reneged on the armistice agreement. So why should Israel trust the UN or any government that voted for (or abstained from) this resolution? Every conceivable “solution” to this conflict requires Israel to give up something tangible for the false promise of security and peace. The UN has broken its word to Israel time and time again.
So if no one feels obligated to keep its word with Israel, then Israel has no reason to trust any promise that the world, or the UN, makes.

David Singer: Congress rebuffs Obama and Kerry for abandoning American Policy on Israel

Here, hot on the heels of his previous must-read article (see previous post), is Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer's latest incisive contribution.
He writes:
The US Congress has swiftly moved to rebuff the efforts by President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to reverse long-standing American policy in relation to Israel. By a vote of 342:80 Congress resolved on 5 January 2017:
“the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 undermined the long-standing position of the United States to oppose and veto United Nations Security Council resolutions that seek to impose solutions to final status issues, or are one-sided and anti-Israel, reversing decades of bipartisan agreement”
Congress’s decision goes a long way to restoring America’s reputation and integrity.
Congress now needs to rectify Obama’s abandonment of the written commitments made to Israel by President Bush in his letter to then Israeli Prime Minister Sharon on 14 April 2004 (“Commitments”)
Congress has a vested interest in seeing those Commitments restored - because it overwhelmingly approved Bush giving those Commitments to Israel by a massive vote of 502 to 12.
Among those voting to support those Commitments was Senator Hillary Clinton.
Senator John Kerry – whilst not casting a vote in the Senate – made his position very clear to moderator Tim Russert on Meet The Press on 18 April 2004:

The Jewish political community is divided and distressed.

As I write, Israel is reeling over the Azaria case, the United Nations is pushing all-in on Jew Hatred, Jihadism is on the rise in Europe, white nationalism and anti-white racism are both on the rise in the United States, Obama is hitting the road (or, at least, crossing the street), the Russians are unhappy and shaking their fists, and Donald Trump is eagerly chomping at the bit.

Anything can happen and nobody knows what will.

For example, will Trump move the US embassy to Jerusalem?

I hope that he does. In fact, I will be damn pissed-off if he doesn't. But if he does so in a timely manner it will demonstrate a clear change in direction concerning US policy on the Long War. Oslo was a disaster and the two-state solution is dead dead dead. Perhaps Trump will recognize this and, if he does, it means pretty much everything is up for grabs. Will Israel seize the day and annex? And if so, annex what exactly? And how will "the world" respond?

Or will Israel, as is my bet, simply react to circumstances as they develop while wobbling back-and-forth on what to do with Judea and Samaria? No matter what it does, however, interested parties throughout the world are gearing up to give Israel a good ass-kicking if they can. Prior to the recent American election all the elements lined up with the EU, the UN, the Obama administration, the progressive-left - not to mention almost the entire Arab and Muslim worlds - in agreement that Jews have no rights to sovereignty on ancestral Jewish land.

While the ascendancy of Trump represents a giant question mark, Israel definitely dodged a bullet with Hillary. Unless, of course, you think that another four to eight years of degrading Israel in order to pressure it into complying with the demands of its enemies would have been a good thing. Now, at least, there is the possibility that the United States will go back to a more sensible foreign policy which honors allies while confronting enemies. We shall see.

But what happens if the Democrats install Keith Ellison as Chair of the Democratic National Committee?

We're waiting with bated breath on that one, aren't we? Speaking for myself, I am very much looking forward to the Democrats handing the DNC Chair to Keith Ellison. I hope that they do it because Ellison is a fair representation of the party as it stands now. He covers enough of the bases, from issues of diversity to those of progressive economics, to make most Democrats happy.

Of course, there is that niggling little problem with his anti-Semitic anti-Zionism which the rest of them studiously ignore - and make no mistake, all anti-Zionism is by definition anti-Semitic - but if you don't like it you can lump it. That's the attitude of the party, but I consider this a good thing because this way everyone knows where everyone stands.

It's Naked Lunch.

Everyone sees what's on the end of every fork.

And will Alan Dershowitz actually leave the Democratic Party???

Yes, the earth will tremble and Balrogs will arise from the Deep.

It's my bet that Dershowitz will leave the Democratic Party in his life no sooner than did Ed Koch in his.

Nonetheless, for the first time we are seeing significant numbers of Jewish Democrats acknowledging something that has been clear to many of us for a very long time. The Democratic Party is shaking off support for Israel because it tends to view Israel through an anti-imperialist lens and because Muslims are a more important constituency in the long run for the party. In terms both broad and crude, this is what it comes down to.

We can acknowledge this truth or pretend otherwise, but truth it remains.

Meanwhile the American Jewish community, if not the diaspora Jewish community, more generally, is cracking along various ideological fault-lines. Tensions are mounting between "progressive" and Democratic Party Jews versus conservative and Republican Party Jews over U.S.-Israeli policy. Fault lines are continuing to crack between Israeli Jews and American Jews over the same question. And even within Democratic Party ranks, Jews are squabbling among themselves over the direction of the party and whether or not to split from the Democrats, as I did maybe 5 years ago.

This is not new, it is just getting more and more vital and intense.

Political sands have been shifting for many years but this moment is a true transitional moment. For Jewish people the election of Trump, whatever else it may mean, staggered the Oslo-Clinton-Obama anti-Israel status quo. Thus I find myself among those who sense opportunity in the moment.

While diaspora Jews are in no position to tell our brothers and sisters in Israel what to do, there is no reason why we should shy away from making suggestions. My suggestion, modest or not, is that Israel take the opportunity to declare its final borders. What those borders will be should entirely be up to Israel. A few years ago I would have suggested that they be determined through negotiations with Palestinian-Arab representatives. However, since at this point it could not be more clear that there is no Arab intention of creating a Palestinian-Arab state in peace next to Israel they forfeit any consideration.

The so-called "Palestinians" are all-or-nothing kind of folk for whom compromise represents a kick in the head. And you know what they say about all-or-nothing kind of people, don't you?

If they can't get it all...

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.

Over ten years ago I wrote an article called "The Diplomacy of Fear":

For decades, the Arab world specifically and the Muslim world in general has used threats as its main leverage to get the West to bend to its will. The threats aren't usually direct; most often they take the form of "if you don't do what we want, the Arab street will erupt" or "the terrorists will have an excuse." In other words, if Arab thugocracies do not get what they desire from the West, then they will be powerless to stop the irrational forces within their borders from damaging Western interests.

I have given lots of examples, one as early as 1877:

Since the commencement of war between Russia and Turkey, the world has several times been startled by the announcement that the "Flag of the prophet" was about to be unfurled in the streets of Stanbul. Such an event, if it should happen (which may Heaven avert), would proclaim a crusade in which all true Musslemans would be bound to take an active part and to fight against Christianity in every part of the world. They may be in India, Arabia, Egypt or wherever else their scattered race has found a home; the raising of the green standard is a call in which none may disobey without, as the Koran lays it down, sacrificing all his hopes of Paradise.
This fearful appeal to all the worst passions of the Eastern races hangs like a menace over the Mohammedan world; and if the word was once uttered and the dreadful flag unfurled, there is no telling to what sanguinary excesses it might lead an enthusiastic people.

Up through a British denial to save the lives of 20,000 Jews in 1939:

Documents show that after deciding that the move would upset Arab opinion, Britain decided to abandon the Jewish refugees to their fate.

“His Majesty’s Government asked His Majesty’s Representatives in Cairo, Baghdad and Jeddah whether so far as they could judge, feelings in Egypt, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia against the admission of, say 5,000 Jewish children for adoption… would be so strong as to lead to a refusal to send representatives to the London discussions. All three replies were strongly against the proposal, which was not proceeded with,” a Foreign Office report said.

And it is happening today - with the issue of the US Embassy in Jerusalem.

The PA tells the West that the entire Arab world will erupt in violence, even though an embassy to the western side of the Green Line changes nothing. And even though Palestinians themselves don't really care.

The Jerusalem Post asked Arabs in the capital what they thought about the move:

[A] cross-section of Palestinians outside the Old City’s Damascus Gate on Wednesday expressed overwhelming apathy.

Indeed, more than two dozen Arab passersby of all ages entering or exiting the once volatile east Jerusalem entrance either said they were unaware of the proposal or simply did not care.

Asked his reaction to the possible relocation, Hasan, a Palestinian man in his 60s, who requested his last name not be published, responded: “It does not matter to me. Why should I care about where the US Embassy is located? It does not change my life one bit.”

Fadi Kiswane, 18, who sat with several friends on the stone steps outside the historic gate, said he was unaware where the embassy was currently located.

“The US Embassy is in Tel Aviv?” he asked with genuine incredulity. “And they want to move it to Jerusalem? So what?”

Donned in a scarlet hijab, Marrah Sofian, who is training to become a secretary at an area vocational school, also said she was unaware where the embassy was located, or that there is ongoing discussion about moving it to Jerusalem.

“This is news to me,” she said. “I don’t understand why it matters though. I don’t think most residents of east Jerusalem know or care about this.”

Meanwhile, a burly Palestinian cab driver in his 40s, who refused to provide his name, brushed off the question as “stupid.”

“Don’t waste my time with such unimportant things,” he said heatedly. “I have better things to think about.”

This is problematic to the PA. So while they tell the West that the Arabs will go crazy, they are inciting the Arabs to act that way:

On Friday the issue was the chief subject of religious sermons throughout the West Bank, with Palestinian Authority leadership instructing mosques it controls to focus on the matter, Israel Radio reported.

Official Palestinian television also broadcast excerpts from several such sermons, in which clerics urged their followers to wake up to the danger. One warned relocating the embassy would be an attack on the Muslim faith and against history. Another said it was an assault on Islam’s holy place and on Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The PA also instructed Jordanian leaders to buttress their threat, and Jordan's Information Minister was happy to oblige:

Jordan's government spokesman warned on Thursday of "catastrophic" repercussions if President-elect Donald Trump makes good on a campaign promise to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to contested Jerusalem.

Such a move could affect relations between the U.S. and regional allies, including Jordan, Information Minister Mohammed Momani told The Associated Press, addressing the issue publicly for the first time.

An embassy move would be a "red line" for Jordan, would "inflame the Islamic and Arab streets" and serve as a "gift to extremists," he said, adding that Jordan would use all possible political and diplomatic means to try and prevent such a decision.

Is any of this based in fact? Of course not. The Arab street wouldn't erupt over this issue - unless they are incited to by the very people who are "warning" the West about their "spontaneous" anger.

But John Kerry happily parrots Saeb Erekat's threats of "chaos, lawlessness and extremism:"

Moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem would cause “an explosion” in the region and have a detrimental effect on Israel’s relationships with Jordan and Egypt, outgoing US Secretary of State John Kerry said over the weekend.

In an interview with CBS News on Friday, Kerry said the move promised by President-elect Donald Trump would cause “an explosion, an absolute explosion in the region, not just in the West Bank, and perhaps even in Israel itself, but throughout the region.”

It would also “have profound impact on the readiness of Jordan and Egypt to be able to be supportive and engaged with Israel as they are today,” he warned.

The Arab world is used to bullying the West with threats about the "Arab street". Too many Westerners have been willing to throw Israel under the bus rather than worry about whether these threats have any basis in reality.

In this case, we see the direct incitement to people who otherwise wouldn't care one bit about the issue. To give in to these "threats" is the absolute worst thing that can be done, because it emboldens these wannabe bullies to use those same threats again and again.

But there is an easy solution to Abbas' and Erekat's constant threats.

Donald Trump should call Erekat into his office - Erekat is dying to speak to him already. And he should say these words:

You know as well as I do that the US has every legal and moral right to move the embassy to Jerusalem and that it does not affect the chances for peace one bit. But you claim that your people cannot stop themselves from violence if the US does something that is fully within our rights. And you imply that you cannot stop this inevitable violence.

If that is the case, then by your own admission, your people are not mature enough to be trusted to uphold a peace plan or run a state of their own. Any violence of this type would set back your cause by years.

If in fact, as reports indicate, your leaders are the ones inciting the violence as a means to pressure me, I do not take kindly to such threats. I hold you and Mahmoud Abbas personally responsible for any terror attacks that occur while your own media and your own mosques and your own textbooks are supporting hate and terror. And in this case, the evidence that your leaders have been trying to incite your people against the US Government is pretty compelling.

I am a negotiator. I like to make deals. Threatening me by claiming that your people are irrational is a negotiating tactic, and I appreciate that. But keep in mind that it cuts both ways.

You have a choice. You can continue to act as if your people are unable to act like human beings, or you can act as if your people are human beings with responsibility for their actions. If you continue to pretend and goad your people into acting like animals, then you belong in a zoo, not a state of your own. If, on the other hand, you can demonstrate a level of maturity that is consistent with being a leader of a people who truly want independence and you stop using threats of violence to get your way, the United States - and I presume Israel - will be only too happy to negotiate with you as normal adults do.

The choice is yours. Please relay that message to Mahmoud Abbas.

Good day.

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.

At the same time that Israel-haters were decisively defeated at the Modern Language Association convention in Philadelphia, they also lost an attempt to bypass their defeat last year at the American Historical Association meeting in Denver.

From History News Network:

The leading organization of historians in the United States won't be joining other scholarly groups harshly critical of Israel.

A year after the American Historical Association was roiled by a controversy over resolutions that slammed Israel the Council decided not to take action on a petition filed by the same group led by historian Van Gosse.

The petition filed by Van Gosse on behalf of Historians Against War (HAW) asked the "Council to investigate the charges that academic freedom is widely violated in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories." The Council made its decision this weekend during the annual meeting of the organization.

This was the third year in a row that Historians Against War attempted to put the AHA on record against Israel's treatment of Palestinians. The first time the group's resolution was dismissed on procedural grounds after organizers missed a deadline. Last year a resolution was considered by the Business Meeting of the AHA and rejected in a decisive vote, 111 to 51, after a bitter fight complete with dueling advertisements in the AHA's magazine, Perspectives.

This time HAW leaders decided to bypass the Business Meeting and take the matter directly to the Council via a petition, but they met with no better success than they had in the past. The AHA has traditionally been leery of taking part in political activities not directly related to the organization's scholarly mission.

The BDSers will claim one "victory." They did help push through a statement meant to counter the Canary Mission, which publicizes academics whose anti-Israel positions turn the classroom into a platform for propaganda. But that statement did not reference anything about Palestinians.

The original statement that the anti-Israel crowd demanded was this:

The AHA upholds the right of students and faculty to engage in nonviolent political action expressing diverse points of view on Israel/Palestine issues. We condemn all efforts at intimidation of those expressing such views. Specifically, we condemn the maintenance of blacklists, such as those on the anonymous "Canary Mission" website publicizing names, photographs, and contact information for hundreds of supporters of Palestinian rights, predominantly Arab American students.”

The statement that was approved took out all specific language referencing the Canary Mission, Arabs or Palestinianism, and became this:

The AHA upholds the rights of students, faculty, and other historians to speak freely and to engage in nonviolent political action expressing diverse perspectives on historical or contemporary issues. We condemn all efforts to intimidate those expressing their views. Specifically, we condemn in the strongest terms the creation, maintenance, and dissemination of blacklists and watchlists—through media (social and otherwise)—which identify specific individuals in ways that could lead to harassment and intimidation.

I agree with the revised statement. The purpose of publicizing the names of overtly anti-Israel academics is not to harass them but to expose their views to the larger public, which potential students (and their parents) have the right to know. Publicizing their opinions, and their hate, is not intimidation - it is the same free speech rights that they assert.

All in all, BDS movements in academia - which seemed to be unstoppable only 18 months ago - has seen many reversals and defeats in 2016 and now in 2017 as well.

And the academic associations that jumped on the BDS bandwagon early like the American Studies Association and the National Women's Studies Association look more and more like idiots.

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.

01/07 Links: Ireland's Pseudo-Academic Anti-Israel Hate-Fest; Will Trump Embrace Bush’s Letter?

From Ian:

Denis MacEoin: UnCorked: Ireland's Pseudo-Academic Anti-Israel Hate-Fest

This will not be an academic conference in any real sense of the word. It is, from the outset, a hate-fest of international anti-Zionist, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric and distortion. It is totally without balance.
Some of those 45 participants will be more vehement in their criticism of Israel, but none, so far as is known, is wholly without some degree of association with bias. How do we know this? First, because a significant majority of the participants have made no secret of their support for the boycott of Israeli academics.
For more than 3,000 years, the "original 'aboriginal' inhabitants" were the Jews – along with Ethiopians, Nubians, Carthaginians, Phoeneicians, and eventually the Romans, Christians and eventually several Arab Muslim imperialists, culminating in the Ottoman Turks. The Jews were the people who inhabited Canaan; the Jews are why Judaea is named Judaea. An Arab "Palestine", bluntly, never existed. If the Jews do not belong in Israel, then the Europeans do not belong in New Zealand, Australia or North and South America.
Prominent at Southampton, and again planning to address the conference, were some of the leading academic activists working both in the universities and outside for the destruction of Israel, regardless of whether that means the expulsion or genocide of the country's Jewish population.
In "Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust," Richard Falk compared some Israeli policies with regard to the Palestinians to the Nazi record of collective punishment, warning (unbelievably) that Israel may be planning a Holocaust in the same way Nazi Germany did. It is arguable that he has done more than any other figure to inspire loathing for Israel worldwide.
This conference is an outright attack on everything academic work is about. Many are already protesting in the hope that UCC can be persuaded to recognize the threat to scholarship that such a conference poses for academic teachers and researchers everywhere.

Spain's Valencia region adopts official BDS policy

Spain’s Valencia region reportedly adopted a boycott against Israel as its official policy.
A vote on Israel at the Provincial Council of Valencia, a semi-autonomous region with over 250 municipalities and 2.5 million inhabitants, took place during a general assembly on Dec. 29, according to the local faction of the far-left party València en Comú, which submitted the motion with other far-left factions.
“Today the Provincial Council of Valencia declared itself a free space from Israeli apartheid,” a party spokesman wrote on its official Facebook page.
The approved motion, the statement read, was co-written by the local branch of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, or BDS, and party deputy Roberto Jaramillo Martínez. Boycott promoters celebrated the vote as a major victory.
“It is a grand success for the Palestinian cause,” the statement also read, vowing to “keep on fighting until Palestine is free.” On Twitter, Martinez’s party also said the motion passed “unanimously.” It provided no additional information about the vote.

State Dept. Grilled on Why Obama Admin Abstained From Anti-Israel UN Resolution Vote

State Department spokesman John Kirby was grilled Friday by Associated Press reporter Matt Lee on why the U.S. abstained from a United Nations Security Council vote last month on a resolution condemning Israel rather than voting either for or against the measure.
“If you support the resolution enough to allow it go through, why didn’t you just vote ‘yes?'” Lee asked.
Kirby said that he did not want to reopen debate on the abstention but added that Secretary of State John Kerry still supported the decision.
“Why isn’t an abstention a cop out here?” Lee asked. “You allowed it to go through, yet you didn’t vote because you clearly, it would seem that you supported it because you didn’t veto it. So why not take a stand for what you apparently believe in and vote ‘yes,’ or ‘no’ if you disagree with it?”
Kirby referred to an explanation put out by the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Samantha Power.
“You talk about leadership and taking an active role, and you essentially vote present. That doesn’t seem to be taking a leadership position,” Lee responded.