Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Jerusalem, above all joys (Forest Rain)

The debate about moving the American embassy to Jerusalem emphasizes, once again, the lack of comprehension of the importance of Jerusalem to the Nation of Israel.

The destruction of the Jewish Temple meant the destruction of the most holy, pivotal location to the Jewish religion, culture and people. Destruction of the Temple was an attempt to destroy the Jewish nation – take out the cultural linchpin, the one element that ties everyone together and everything will fall apart.

It is written:
As the navel is set in the centre of the human body,
so is the land of Israel the navel of the world…
situated in the centre of the world,
and Jerusalem in the centre of the land of Israel,
and the sanctuary in the centre of Jerusalem,
and the holy place in the centre of the sanctuary,
and the ark in the centre of the holy place,
and the Foundation Stone before the holy place,
because from it the world was founded.
(Roman-Era Midrash Tanchuma)

It is believed that the Foundation Stone is the foundation God used to create the world. Around this stone the Temple was built and within the Temple, on the Foundation Stone, the Ark of the Covenant was placed. This is the source of the holiness of the Temple and its importance to Judaism.

The image people around the world today have of the Temple Mount is that of the golden domed mosque which was built on the ruins of the Temple in 691 C.E. Since that time the Dome of the Rock has been a holy place for the Moslem people – although not central to their religion. Considered the third holiest location in Islam, it is not mentioned a single time in the Koran.

It was once common practice for a conquering people to build holy sites on top of existing holy places. Historically this was a successful way to both show domination of the location as well as a way to incorporate the local population in the new religion.

The Temple has been central to the Jewish people since the construction of the first Temple (957 B.C.E.). To this day, Jews around the world pray facing the direction of the site of the Temple Mount.

The Kotel is the Western Wall of the Temple which remains standing (an external supporting wall). The wall is so important that it has become in Jewish consciousness THE Wall. It needs no other name. Millions of Jews come to the Kotel every year, it is always open and people can be found there, every day, 24/7, around the clock. The Kotel is never empty and it is in fact one of the most frequented locations in the world, seeing approximately 11 million guests each year.

Jews in exile in Babylon are described in Psalm 137 as stubbornly remembering the full glory of Jerusalem, explaining to their captors that they would always look towards the holy city: “May my tongue cleave to my mouth, if I ever think not of thee, if I ever prize not Jerusalem above all joys!”

To this day, in Jewish weddings, before the couple is formally married, the groom proclaims this statement before the guests and breaks a cup with his foot to symbolize sorrow for the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.

On what is supposed to be the happiest day in the life of the couple, they stop, putting sorrow and longing for the Temple first. This is a powerful statement.

The 9th day of the month of Av (Jewish calendar) is the day when both the first and second Temples were destroyed, the first by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E.; the second by the Romans in 70 C.E. It is a day of fasting and mourning for religious Jews around the world.

Thinking about the meaning of Tisha B’Av, the day of mourning, I am beginning to see, (or maybe feel is a better word) that this is symbolic of all our problems – Israel’s and those of the world.

The Foundation Stone of the world, the site of the Temple mount, is dominated by a mosque. It is known that active destruction of antiquities has been occurring since the Waqf was given control of the Temple Mount. Dr. Mordechai Kedar, (Department of Arabic, Bar-Ilan University) explains: “These actions are being carried out in the context of a practice known in Arabic as Tams al-ma’alem, an expression that means ‘erasing the signs’ in the sense of destroying the relics of all cultures that preceded Islam.”

Jews are allowed to enter the site of the Temple but ironically are not allowed to pray there. In fear of Moslem rioting, to avoid violence, Jews who enter the Temple Mount must not be heard praying or show any signs of prayer. If they bow to the Holy of Holies, they are escorted out of the site.

Imagine having other people in your home who, because they had been there for so long, you do not attempt to evict, but only request to share the space with them. Imagine being told that you are allowed to stand outside the back door, outside the cellar, that you can watch while others enter and leave, doing as they please in your home…

Secular Jews do not fast on Tisha B’Av and though most Israelis have visited the Kotel, only a minority has actually ascended to the Temple Mount. The drifting away from putting Jerusalem above all other joys has significance that surpasses religion, encompasses history and has direct influence on our future.

The spiritual explanation says that ramifications of being disconnected or even barred from the source of the holiness of the world deeply impacts not only on the Jewish people but the entire planet as well.

History says that the cultural significance of Jerusalem and yearning for the Temple was a key factor in keeping the Jewish people intact over the centuries. When other nations rose and fell, the Nation of Israel remained, stubborn in their focus, insisting on returning to Israel and to Jerusalem – no matter how long it took or how much suffering was experienced along the way.

The Temple is what ties us to Jerusalem and Jerusalem is what ties us to Israel. Without either of these, we risk losing all.

This is an issue of priorities, of belonging, respect and freedom. These are magnified to extreme intensity here, at the navel of the world, but they have direct impact on the lives of all people, everywhere.

America under Obama, with the support of the UN and their latest anti-Israel resolution has done much to damage Israel’s connection to Jerusalem. America under Trump can help amend this. Moving the US embassy to Jerusalem is a good start.

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.

01/24 Links Pt1: Obama sent $221 million to PA before leaving office; Yazidi Girls Sold as Sex Slaves while Women March against Trump

From Ian:

Report: Obama sent $221 million to PA before leaving office

The Obama administration in its waning hours defied Republican opposition and quietly released $221 million to the Palestinian Authority, Washington officials said Monday.
The funds were being held up by Republican members of Congress.
An unnamed State Department official and several congressional aides said U.S. President Barack Obama's outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend the money Friday morning, just before Donald Trump became president.
More than $227 million in foreign affairs funding were released at the time, including $4 million for climate change programs and $1.25 million for U.N. organizations.
At least two GOP lawmakers had placed holds on the Palestinian funds. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding. (h/t Yenta Press)

Obama Uses Last Hours As President To Funnel Money To Palestinian Authority, Which Incites Murdering Jews

Beyond the corruption of the PA, its involvement in inciting Palestinians to murder Jews has been widely documented, from publications as leftist as Newsweek to the Gatestone Institute to Christians United for Israel.
In September, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Senator Dan Coats of Indiana introduced the “Taylor Force Act,” named after the graduate of West Point who was stabbed to death on the Tel Aviv beach promenade by a Palestinian terrorist in March The bill would cut off US funding to the Palestinian Authority if it continued to pay monetary rewards to terrorists and their families.
Graham said bluntly:
We’ve got to go ahead and put sunlight on this problem. The PA incentivizes young Palestinians to commit acts of terror…I hope Congress will understand that this is inconsistent with the two-state solution and that we’ll build support [for the legislation] over time . . . there has to come a point of awakening here within Palestinian society. I want the Palestinians to make a decision as to what kind of people they are going to be. I know they’ve got problems, I’ve met [PA President Mahmoud] Abbas many times. I know Hamas is an out and out terrorist organization and the PA has a fairly good working relationship with the Israelis when it comes to security, but we’ve got to cross this bridge…American dollars are going to a government that literally rewards people for killing their neighbors. And until we get that addressed, I don’t think the peace process will ever move forward.
But Obama, ever desirous of mortally wounding the Jewish state, used his last hours to try to come closer to his goal one last time.

Ex-Israeli Official Reveals Never Before Told Story Highlighting Fraught Obama-Netanyahu Relationship

A former top Israeli diplomatic official revealed a never-before told story that shed further light on the fraught personal relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former US President Barack Obama, in an interview published Friday.
Dore Gold — who was until recently the director general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry — told the Hebrew newspaper Makor Rishon that after the September funeral of the late Israeli statesman Shimon Peres, someone from Air Force One — on which Obama, then-Secretary of State John Kerry and former President Bill Clinton were aboard — called Netanyahu’s chief of staff Yoav Horowitz and told him, “Tell your boss if he wants a funeral like Peres’, he should begin to move, to go forward,” the implication being that Netanyahu should be more flexible when it comes to the peace process with the Palestinians.
Netanyahu, according to Gold, told Horowitz to respond, “Tell him that I give up the honor because I have no intention of participating in the funeral of my country.”
Later in the Makor Rishon interview, Gold accused the Obama administration of having demonstrated a “kind of arrogance” when it came to its Middle East policies.
“They developed a vision, according to which no matter what the Arabs say or what the Israelis say, they know better the needs of both sides,” Gold said. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

Can Trump Get Israel and the Palestinian Arabs To Talk? A Last Look At Obama and Bush (Daled Amos)

Welcome to EoZ's latest columnist, Daled Amos.

Daled Amos has been blogging since 2003. He has always been insightful and does great research. (And he's a really nice guy!)

Welcome!

As of Friday, 12pm we have a new president -- President Donald Trump.

Comparisons have been made between Trump and Obama, and we can expect many more comparisons to be made over the next four years. One of those comparisons is in connection with Israel.

Obama allowed passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, calling the settlements illegal and putting renewed pressure on Israel. Now along comes Trump, who has promised -- and has reiterated his intention to keep that promise -- to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Yet both claim to be friends of Israel.

We know Obama is a friend of Israel -- after all, he's told us so.

There are some indications that Trump is a friend of Israel as well:

Trump won an Israeli poll about which presidential candidate would best represent Israel’s interests
He has won awards from the American Jewish community for his contributions to Israel and American Judaism
He was the grand marshal of a Salute To Israel Parade

This seems to point to a basic problem that Obama had from the beginning - not just how to prove that he was a friend of Israel, but that he was the bestest friend that Israel has ever had.

Let's take one last look at Obama's relationship with Israel.

During a daily press briefing on November 17, 2009, the following exchange took place between the State Department Spokesperson Ian Kelly and Matt Lee, reporter for the Associated Press on what the Obama administration had accomplished till then in advancing peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs

MR. KELLY: Well, I would say that we’ve gotten both sides to commit to this goal. They have – we have – we’ve had a intensive round or rounds of negotiations, the President brought the two leaders together in New York. Look --

QUESTION: But wait, hold on. You haven’t had any intense --

MR. KELLY: Obviously --

QUESTION: There haven’t been any negotiations.

MR. KELLY: Obviously, we’re not even in the red zone yet, okay.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. KELLY: I mean, we’re not – but it’s – we are less than a year into this Administration, and I think we’ve accomplished more over the last year than the previous administration did in eight years. [emphasis added]

QUESTION: Well, I – really, because the previous administration actually had them sitting down talking to each other. You guys can’t even get that far.

MR. KELLY: All right.

QUESTION: I’ll drop it.

One could argue that this press briefing in 2009 became the template for the drama that would play out during the next 7 years of the Obama Administration: attempts to bring peace between the two sides, resulting in failure, followed by excuses, claims of accomplishments -- and claims of friendship.

That certainly is what we recently saw in the remaining days of the Obama Administration.

During the last week of the Obama Administration, we read about how Kerry defends Obama administration’s record on Israel. During an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour last Monday, John Kerry bristled at Amanpour's observation that the Obama administration was the last in a long line of American administrations that had failed to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. This of course was true, but instead of admitting to the obvious, Kerry placed the blame elsewhere, dividing it evenly between Israel and Palestinians:

“No, the leaders of the countries involved — one country and one entity — have failed to come to the table and reach an agreement.”

Let's save time and put aside the fact that contrary to Kerry's protestations, Netanyahu has consistently offered to sit down and negotiate directly while Abbas has refused.

So just what was Kerry arguing here? By objecting to Amanpour's comment, was he saying that Israel and the Arabs are to blame for the failure -- and therefore the Obama administration attempts at peace have been a success? Make all the excuses you want, and clearly many attempts were made by the White House over the years, but at the end of the day Amanpour was right: “yet another administration has not brought peace.”

The same John Kerry who is blaming Israel for that failure is the same John Kerry who goes on to claim that he speaks "as a good, solid best friend of Israel and we have done more for this government, more for Israel than any other administration.”

US Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to CNN on January 16, 2017.
(Screenshot/CNN). Credit: Times of Israel

Some friend.

Kerry bases his claim of friendship on the $38 billion military aid package that the Obama Administration signed with Israel and on the assistance the US has given Israel in developing Iron Dome.

For both of these, Israel is of course very grateful.

After all, $38 billion is an awful lot of money.

So is $30 billion.

On June 4, 2008, candidate Obama promised the following at an AIPAC convention (the same AIPAC convention where Obama famously declared Jerusalem "must remain undivided"):

I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat - from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade - investments to Israel’s security that will not be tied to any other nation.

Not only did Obama make this promise -- he also kept it.

Except that it wasn't exactly his promise to keep. Though he failed to give credit where credit was due, Obama was actually promising to implement not a Memorandum of Understanding, but the Memorandum of Understanding -- the one that George Bush signed in 2007. And yes, Obama allowed the understanding to be fulfilled, unimpeded.

So here's my question.

If we say that George Bush was a good friend because he gave Israel $30 billion -- does that make Obama, who signed off on giving Israel $38 billion, a better friend, a best friend?

That does seem to be the gist of Kerry's argument.

Giving money and weapons to Israel makes the US friends of Israel.

Allowing passage of a UN resolution calling Israeli settlements illegal and strengthening the hand of those who want to boycott Israel is apparently tough-love, and according to Kerry, was intended to "make a statement and frankly ignite a debate" -- a novel idea since the debate over settlements has long been raging in Europe, the UN and in Israel.

And yet Obama's predecessor, George Bush, was able to go beyond funding and weapons and get Israel and the Palestinian Arabs talking.

True, by the end of his administration, Bush also had not brought peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.

But not for lack of trying or lack of some successes.

The Secretaries of State of both administrations made many, many visits to the Middle East. Kerry notes he logged 300 hours discussing peace with Netanyahu -- during 13 trips to Israel and 6 meetings with Israeli officials outside of Israel, while Condoleezza Rice made 25 trips to Israel and met Israeli officials outside of Israel on 2 occasions.

But more than that, in 2003, a speech President Bush gave the previous year was developed into the Road Map for peace, and it was approved not only by the Quartet of the US, UN, the EU and Russia -- but approved also by Israel and the Palestinian Authority as well.

President Bush, center, meets with Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, left, and

Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas to finalize the road map to peace

at Beit al Bahar Palace in the Jordanian Red Sea resort of Aqaba, June 4, 2003. AP

In 2007, he convened a worldwide conference in Annapolis to begin a year-long period of final status negotiations

Olmert, Abbas and Bush at the opening of the Annapolis talks

(U.S. Navy photo by Gin Kai)

Obama did get Abbas to meet directly with Netanyahu in 2010. After Netanyahu sweetened the deal with a 10 month settlement freeze, Abbas finally agreed to meet during the 10th month, following pressure from Hillary Clinton and persuasion from Jordan and Egypt. Abbas then insisted on another freeze before continuing, and when a frustrated Netanyahu refused, the talks broke down.

Obama with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Abbas at the White House on

September 1, 2010. Reuters.

The bottom line, though, is that both administrations failed.

Bush, though, had the two sides talking to each other -- which was all he could really be expected to do.

Obama never got that far, and was reduced to spending his 8 years in office bragging about being Israel's friend, while giving it arms and money in a Middle East that became increasingly volatile during his term, and then stabbing Israel in the back during his last weeks in office.

We'll have to wait and see what happens with Trump as president.

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.

Palestine Press Agency reports (and has documentary proof) that an early Palestinian leader, Rafik Natsheh, had paid himself hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal bonuses while he was responsible for a charity for orphans.

Natsheh was born in Hebron in 1934. He is considered one of the founders of the PLO. He had been a
member of the Palestinian National Council in 1964, the PLO representative in Riyadh, member of the Revolutionary Council of Fatah, Palestinian minister of labor and agriculture minister. He is also a former chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council.

As chairman of the Board of Directors of the Orphans Foundation Natsheh withdrew bonuses worth $239,428 over the past several years, according to the documents discovered.

Oh yes, Natsheh also had another important position.

He is the president of the Palestinian anti-corruption commission.

I wonder how much of the $211 million that Obama gave the Palestinians on the morning of President Trump's inauguration ended up going towards people like Natsheh?

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.

Iran is transferring its people (and other Shias) to Syria. You know...settlers.

From The Guardian, January 13:

In the valleys between Damascus and Lebanon, where whole communities had abandoned their lives to war, a change is taking place. For the first time since the conflict broke out, people are starting to return.

But the people settling in are not the same as those who fled during the past six years.

The new arrivals have a different allegiance and faith to the predominantly Sunni Muslim families who once lived there. They are, according to those who have sent them, the vanguard of a move to repopulate the area with Shia Muslims not just from elsewhere in Syria, but also from Lebanon and Iraq.

The population swaps are central to a plan to make demographic changes to parts of Syria, realigning the country into zones of influence that backers of Bashar al-Assad, led by Iran, can directly control and use to advance broader interests.

“Iran and the regime don’t want any Sunnis between Damascus and Homs and the Lebanese border,” said one senior Lebanese leader. “This represents a historic shift in populations.”

Senior officials in neighbouring Lebanon have been monitoring what they believe has been a systematic torching of Land Registry offices in areas of Syria recaptured on behalf of the regime. A lack of records make it difficult for residents to prove home ownership. Offices are confirmed to have been burned in Zabadani, Darayya, Syria’s fourth city, Homs, and Qusayr on the Lebanese border, which was seized by Hezbollah in early 2013.

Darkoush said whole neighbourhoods had been cleansed of their original inhabitants in Homs, and that many residents had been denied permission to return to their homes, with officials citing lack of proof that they had indeed lived there.

“The first step in the plan has been achieved,” he said. “It involved expelling the inhabitants of these areas and burning up anything which connects them to their land and homes. The second step will be replacing the original inhabitants with newcomers from Iraq and Lebanon.”

The world is fixated on a very strained (and quite false) interpretation of the Geneva Conventions to damn Israel for allowing Jews to voluntarily move to their ancestral lands.

But Iran is directly violating the same article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention - and not just the part about transferring one's own population but about expelling entire populations from their homes.

And no one is saying a word.

This isn't surprising. The people who have been manipulating international law for decades to make Israel appear guilty of war crimes have no interest in applying their new laws to any other circumstance. The horrible crime of "settling" is only horrible when Israel can be claimed to be guilty, and Iran's far more egregious violations where existing residents are stripped of their rights and effectively deported to make room for the Shiite replacements are simply ignored.

All the proof you need is to realize that this Guardian article is a week and a half old and there has been no outcry by the supposed defenders of international law that attack Israel about this. Moreover, even the Guardian - which has claimed scores of times that Israel violates the Geneva Conventions by allowing Jews to live across the Green Line - doesn't mention Geneva once in this article, even though it is critical of Iran.

It is almost like international laws apply to Israel differently than to everyone else.

(h/t David G, Yoel)

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

Egypt riled up over "black magic" being used against Sisi

Egypt's Al Ahram mentions a video that supposedly shows opponents of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi using witchcraft and black magic to harm him.

The video shows strange incantations over smoke and a picture of al-Sisi - seemingly drawn as a woman but with his military cap - along with snakes, a lizard and an owl being used in the ceremony.

Koranic verses are sprinkled throughout the target image of Sisi.

Former Grand Mufti of Egypt Ali Gomaa responded: "We warn against the these people to stop interfering in the affairs of the lower worlds....Forewarned is forearmed."

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.

01/23 Links Pt2: The shocking rise of antisemitism in the US; Spanish courts deal double blow to BDS movement

From Ian:

Hotbeds of anti-Semitism in British academia

Second only to the 2016 media attention surrounding the debate on anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, was the issue of anti-Semitism in British universities. One case that got early media attention in the past year, also connected to the Labour Party, concerned the Oxford University Labour Club (OULC). It led to an investigation by a Labour member of the House of Lords, Lady Royall.
Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) has now announced its decision to drop its investigations into the anti-Semitism at OULC, with no consequences meted out to those involved. Baroness Royall responded by saying that she is “deeply disappointed by the outcome and fears that it will further harm relations between the Jewish community and our party by confirming a widely held view that we do not take anti-Semitism seriously.”
In October, the House of Lords held a meeting to discuss anti-Semitism. Twelve members took part in the debate. They asked the government what steps it proposed to take to combat anti-Semitism, with particular emphasis on higher education.
A private meeting was also held at the House of Lords in October; hosted by the peer who has over the years been spouting the most hate against Israel, Lady Tonge, together with The Palestinian Return Center. It marked the launch of a campaign to ask Britain to apologize for the Balfour Declaration. At this meeting a number of extreme anti-Semitic remarks were made, including comparing Israel to the Islamic State movement and blaming Jews for the Holocaust.
Only recently it became known that in 2009 Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn had undertaken a trip to Syria together with Lady Tonge -- then still a member of the Liberal Democrat Party -- to meet President Bashar Assad. This trip was funded by the same Palestinian Return Center that initiated the above-mentioned incitement meeting at the House of Lords.

CIA: UK armed, encouraged Arabs against Israel in 1948

New evidence has emerged to corroborate claims that Great Britain encouraged Arab resistance to the establishment of a Jewish state in 1948, and even helped arm Arab forces for what became the Israeli War of Independence.
A recently declassified CIA document dated January 27th, 1947 summarizes an interview agents held with a Lebanese newspaper publisher following a meeting with Grand Mufti Haj Ami El-Husseini, a Nazi sympathizer during World War II and one of the leading voices against the formation of a Jewish state in 1948.
According to the report, Afif Tibi, who is described as a former Nazi collaborator and owner of a Beirut newspaper, met with the Mufti in late 1946 to discuss the possible partition of the British Mandate for Palestine, established by the League of Nations as the future “national home” of the Jewish people.
During Tibi’s talk with the Mufti, the Mufti claimed that British authorities in the Mandate were “in continuous touch with” him, “and are actually encouraging him to denounce partition”.
“The Jews should not under any circumstances be allowed to assume real power in any section of the country, for the simple reason that they would immediately launch themselves on a program of armament, would attack neighboring land, and would face the Big Four Powers [US, UK, USSR, China] with the accomplished fact of a very much larger Palestine.”
According to the Mufti, the UK was enabling Arab forces to arm themselves against the possible establishment of a Jewish state.

NGO Monitor: EU Funding to NGOs Active in Anti-Israel BDS Campaigns

Executive Summary
Twenty-nine out of 100 EU grants administered through EU regional funding programs designated for Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza funnel funds to organizations that actively promote BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) – totaling €16.7 million out of €67.1 million (roughly 25%).
Forty-two out of 180 EU grantees in total support BDS – through participation in activities and events, signing of petitions and initiatives, and/or membership in explicit BDS platforms.
A number of organizations were funded through more than one EU grant, sometimes as part of the same program (“Double Dipping”).
The EU expressly opposes BDS. When confronted by evidence of funding for NGOs with agendas or values that contradict EU policy, the EU’s recurring response is that it “funds projects submitted by NGOs, in line with [the] EU’s fundamental principles and values, but not NGOs themselves.”
A grant titled “Performing Arts: A Pathway Towards Self Expression and Democracy” amply demonstrates this flawed logic. In 2014, during their participation in the EU’s Cultural Programme, all twelve beneficiaries of this grant initiated a group statement calling for a cultural and academic boycott of Israel.
Nine BDS-supporting organizations were the recipients of the EU’s Partnership for Peace Program- a program designated for joint projects involving Israeli as well as Palestinian organizations, meant to “build trust and understanding between societies in the region.”

Nasser al Qudwa, former PLO representative to the UN and nephew of Yasir Arafat, was interviewed by Fateh News about what the reactions might be to the US embassy move to Jerusalem.

..This is will be very dangerous and will have consequences.... It means abandoning the interests of many existing states in Jerusalem, and abandoning the idea of having the holy sites and abandoning the idea of a divine religions linked to this place. Such a step constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law and the fourth Geneva Convention in particular, and a violation of UN security Council resolutions including the latest resolution, which was adopted in December last year and which clearly says we should not recognized by any change in the borders, including Jerusalem, except through an agreement between the parties.

That such a thing would constitute a violation by the United States to international agreements, including the declaration of general principles in 1993 Oslo agreement as it represents a violation of previous pledges from the United States, including the letter of guarantees provided by the US government to the Palestinian side before Madrid.

As for the Palestinians, this will be a flagrant aggression on the Palestinian national rights and the civil and religious rights of Muslims and Christians in the world.

On the political side, this step means giving up the idea of a political solution through negotiations and abandoning the Oslo Accords taking away the possibility of a political solution, and the United States, changes from the role of mediator and influential party in the political process towards a political solution to become a direct party to the conflict.

It is necessary to clarify things such as the implementation of the move, which would result in the following Palestinian positions:

The embassy transfer means we will cancel US presence with the Palestinian side and on the Palestinian side we will interrupt our relations with the official staff of the US embassy located illegally in Jerusalem, and this is linked to this Palestinian political representation in Washington, where we must shut down the representative office located there, it should be done this in spite of the need for the continuation of the Palestinian readiness for dialogue with the United States in other ways, but these official channels must stop.

It must be clear to the Palestinian authorities that the US is no longer a mediator as it is not possible to cooperate with it because it has become a party to the conflict, and therefore it is necessary to search for different mechanisms for any future political process.

We should also move forward a complaint to the UN Security Council against the United States as involving a violation of international law.

We can also take other legal actions in the International Court of Justice...on the basis of the legal opinion requested by the General Assembly. Add to that the popular movement.... we expect a very angry response by all the people involved in this matter.

Essentially, the Palestinians are saying that they will ignore the US and concentrate on getting other nations to pressure Israel to make unilateral concessions without any concessions of their own. Their own sense of self-importance, evaporating quickly in the Arab world, is all they have to hold onto.

A bit of background on the one flimsy point he makes. The Security Council did pass a resolution in 1980 calling on all countries to remove their diplomatic missions from Jerusalem and the US abstained. But the US secretary of state Edmund Muskie said that the time:

Further, the Council calls upon those States that have established diplomatic missions in Jerusalem to withdraw them from the Holy City. In our judgement this provision is not binding. It is without force. And we reject it as a disruptive attempt to dictate to other nations. it does nothing to promote a resolution of the difftcuh problems facing Israel and its neighbours. It does nothing to advance the cause 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.

Linda Sarsour’s fake progressivism exposed at women’s march (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)

By Petra Marquardt-Bigman

It was perhaps inevitable that during this weekend’s women’s marches, some “progressives” would feel the need to show off their complete cluelessness about the utter lack of support for women’s rights in Palestinian society – where, e.g., 87% believe a wife “must always obey her husband”. Compared with the prevalent Palestinian views on women’s rights, Trump should have no problem to pass as a feminist.

But since facts don’t matter, “legendary activist” Angela Davis could ignore the ultra-conservative Muslim preferences of Palestinian society and firmly declare: “Women’s rights are human rights all over the planet, and that is why we say freedom and justice for Palestine.” Others proudly displayed their cluelessness (and perhaps their flippancy) on signs demanding “Free birth control and Palestine,” while still others felt oh-so “emotional” when march participants used American flag-style scarves to cover women in accordance with the 1400 years-old female “modesty” requirements of Islam’s founder.

All of this was probably very much to the liking of Linda Sarsour, the “award-winning, Brooklyn-born Palestinian-American-Muslim racial justice and civil rights activist, community organizer, [and] social media maverick,” who was one of the four national co-chairs organizing the women’s marches. But while the ambitious Sarsour certainly enjoyed the limelight at this occasion, her prominent role in the organization of the protest marches also resulted in some not so flattering revelations. I wrote about Sarsour’s fake progressivism a few months ago, but it turns out that Sarsour is much more of a hypocrite than I realized. As the Chilean Palestinian commentator Lalo Dagach showed, Sarsour has repeatedly defended Saudi Arabia against criticism, arguing that there are women in parliament and that it is ridiculous to focus on the fact that Saudi women are not allowed to drive because they get 10 weeks of paid maternity leave – which they of course only get if their male guardian allows them to work and if there is a male driver to take them to work... Astonishingly, Sarsour has also promoted Sharia Law, claiming that it would mean that “all your loans & credit cards become interest free.”

I then discovered that seven years ago, Daniel Pipes began to compile Sarsour’s greatest hits, after she falsely claimed that he had written about her (at a time when he had actually never heard of her) and that his criticism (which at that point didn’t exist) had greatly increased her popularity. Pipes’ compilation includes much revealing material concerning Sarsour’s views, and there are also some truly bizarre posts – for example, Sarsour proudly presenting herself as a Muslim mermaid; or an unintentionally funny post where Sarsour is swooning about her own good looks and taste while appearing in the colors of the Israeli flag…

But the most revealing statement is perhaps her declaration in a video for World Hijab Day 2014:

“Without my hijab, I don’t really have an identity on the outside.”

Pretty sad if your identity consists of a piece of cloth wrapped around your head – and pretty sad if this passes as “progressive”.

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.

01/23 Links Pt1: Fatah parades in "suicide belts" at rally; Linda Sarsour gets burned on Twitter

From Ian:

PMW: Fatah parades in "suicide belts" and raises knives at Ramallah rally

Three recent events by Fatah and the Palestinian Authority reiterated the Palestinian leadership's endorsement of violence and Martyrdom for Allah as PA ideals.
In the PA's capital Ramallah, Fatah held a parade celebrating the movement's 52nd anniversary. Fatah members marched wearing mock "suicide belts" while their hands held the "detonators," and their faces hidden behind black masks. Other masked men marched with raised knives, Fatah flags, and posters of Mahmoud Abbas. [Fatah-run Awdah TV, Jan. 8, 2017]
Promoting suicide terror is a recurring Fatah parade theme. Last year at the 51st anniversary celebrations it was children who Fatah had march through the streets of Bethlehem wearing black masks and mock suicide belts. [Ma’an, independent Palestinian news agency, Jan. 7, 2016]
At another event marking Palestinian Martyrs' Day in Ramallah, PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah honored "the Martyrs of Palestine," among them terrorist murderers - for "paving the way" with their "sacrifice and struggle":

Linda Sarsour gets burned on Twitter

Check out this interchange on Twitter, documented by the indomitable Chloe Valdary
Linda Sarsour, one of the co-organizers of this weekend's Woman's march is touting Saudi Arabia as a feminist, um, Mecca.
She tweets "10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes paid. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame"
In response, Israeli Dani Dayan tweets back "Well in Israel women enjoy 14 weeks of PAID maternity leave AND drive".

The Forward’s Ridiculous Claim Of No Palestine Hijacking At Women’s March

The Forward have an article claiming Israel-Palestine issues did not hijack the Women’s March on Washington – written before the march even took place! Which tells you all you need to know about how seriously to take the article.
The lack of an Israeli-Palestinian component to the march is notable due to the liberal makeup of the participating organizations and the partnership with several Arab-American and Muslim-American organizations. Linda Sarsour, a prominent New York-based Muslim and human rights activist, is part of the march’s leadership committee.
Needless to say, there was some palestinian hijacking going on (poor choice of words, I know), and Sarsour herself was part of it.

Before going on hiatus, I published an extended essay called Like Romans that looks at the fight against BDS (and pro-Israel activism generally) through the lens of warfare.

The starting point for that work was not academic analysis based on abstract principles. Rather, I tried to connect dots between the results of work done by heroic on-the-ground activists who have been experimenting with different ways to defeat the propaganda campaign traveling under the banner of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. And few experiments have been as successful (and thus as informative) as the recent defeat of academic boycott resolutions at the Modern Language Association (MLA).

As most readers probably know, academic associations have become a battleground for BDS activity, ever since the American Studies Association (ASA) became the largest academic group to pass a resolution calling for a boycott of their Israeli counterparts. Some very tiny associations (including those representing Asian-American, Women’s and Native American studies) have passed similar resolutions before and since. But their victory with ASA gave BDS activists the belief that it was just a matter of time before their program swept through large swaths of the academy.

Unfortunately for them (but fortunately for us – as well as for academia in general) all efforts to drag fields like history, anthropology, and even Middle East studies into the BDS swamp have failed. But the large (25,000-member) Modern Language Association, professional home to professors of language and literature, has been the boycotter’s coveted prize for years.

The strategy the BDSers pursue within academic associations is a variation on what they do everywhere else (a playbook outlined in Chapter 9 of Like Romans): take over the decision-making machinery of an association, propose anti-Israel resolutions before the wider membership knows what’s going on, restrict communication so that only supporters of a boycott get access to members, and do everything possible to rig a vote so that the barest majority of a minority can pass something that can then be passed off as the will of the organization (if not the entire discipline).

And if the boycotters fail, then it’s try try again as the same resolutions (possibly with superficial variations) are proposed year after year until members finally do what they’re told.

While there are a number of strategies and tactics one can choose when dealing with an enemy that outnumbers your own forces (as was the case at MLA), it is generally impossible to defeat a foe if you’ve got nothing on the ground. Fortunately, years of battling BDS within MLA (and academic associations generally) provided a small but highly skilled force (which travels under the banner MLA Members for Scholar’s Rights) which managed to not just defeat this year’s proto-boycott resolutions, but get an anti-boycott resolution passed in its place.

The number of things this group did right began with the nature of the group itself. Members were internal to the organization (which gave them credibility and deep understanding of MLA’s culture), and having battled the BDS plague within academia for many years, they were skilled veterans able to leverage previous experience and contacts.

Their background knowledge included understanding their own strengths (the aforementioned credibility and experience) and weaknesses (like limited influence over the administrative machinery of MLA), as well as those of their enemies (such as fanaticism, predictability and a tendency towards overreach). Most importantly, they understood the field of battle: an academic association where the majority of members don’t have strong opinions about the Middle East (even if the general zeitgeist of the academy might go against Israel), but who do care about scholarship and the reputation of the humanities in the wider culture.

With this understanding in place, their communication strategy focused on the appalling lack of scholarship represented by pro-BDS “research,” and the impact an academic boycott vote would have not on Israel, but on MLA, the fields of humanities, and the academy as a whole. Thus they were able to avoid getting dragged into a debate on the Middle East (the BDSers preferred terrain), and make the vote a referendum on MLA’s own scholarly reputation.

Clever tactics also allowed the group to use their minority position to advantage, finding alternative mechanisms to communicate with MLA members that avoided going through leaders who had already proven themselves to be dishonest brokers. They were then able to use their need to find these alternative communication channels to illustrate those leaders’ lack of integrity, while fitting themselves into a storyline of rebels speaking truth to power.

Finally, the choice to propose both an anti-boycott resolution and a second resolution condemning Palestinians for violating academic rights meant that voting against boycotts generally became the middle-of-the-road (usually preferred) position. While there were some complaints when the proposal condemning the Palestinian Authority and Hamas was withdrawn after the anti-boycott measure won, in terms of tactics that second proposal was serving as a feint, withdrawal of which positioned anti-boycott activists as both moderate and magnanimous.

Not every anti-BDS effort has the fortune (and misfortune) of fighting a fight you know is coming years in advance against a foe whose tactics (and personnel) are well known and understood. But any individual or group can learn lessons from the experience of other civic organizations fighting the same fight against the BDS propaganda war against Israel. Like names, faces and personalities; strategies and tactics will be different from situation to situation. But there are common elements to fighting a war, the first of which is to recognize you are in one.

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.

Famous Quran verse "Whoever kills a human being..." is the exact opposite of human rights

We have seen many times Islamic memes that resemble this:

I came across a variant poster:

I had never seen the caveat "unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land" before. And it is an accurate translation of the actual Quranic verse.

It turns out that this is a hell of a loophole.

The actual quote is in Quran 5:32. And the very next verse, 5:33, explains a little bit more what the penalty for "mischief" (or "corruption") is:

5:33 Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] mischief is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

Wikipedia explains that this is the crime of Fasad:

Fasad (Arabic: فساد‎‎ /fasād/) is an Islamic concept which means spreading mischief in a Muslim land, moral corruption against God, and any form of expression or activity by non-Muslims or apostates of Islam that creates disorder in the Muslim community.
In recent years, the law has been included in the legal code of the Islamic Republics of Pakistan and Iran. In Iran it has been used to prosecute or threaten political opposition figures.

The definition of Fasad is so expansive that it can be used to justify murder in nearly any circumstance that an Islamic cleric or Islamic government wants.

From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, "fasad fi al-ard" is the act of disobedience to God.
In his Tafsir, As-Suddi states that disbelief in Islam, disobeying sharia and acts of disobedience of authority is committing mischief on the earth.

Sunan Abu Dawud, in 38.4359, confirms that the punishment for fasad under Islam applies to Muslim and non-Muslims.

The exact same verse that Muslims use to "prove" the morality of Islam happens to also contain the justification for murdering innocent people - in the name of Islam.

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

Last year, the trailer for a documentary named "My Home" was released showing that Arab Israelis have a wide range of opinions about their state, with many of them being very patriotic.

(I don't know if the film was ever released.)

In the wake of the violence over Umm al Hiran in the Negev (background here), the filmmaker released a section of the film showing how Israeli Arab members of Knesset, in 2015, were inciting villagers to literally kill themselves rather than be relocated from their illegally built village to a new community where they would be given free land, an infrastructure, schools and everything else needed to grow.

All of the Arab MKs from the Arab Joint List (visiting the town with terror supporter and inciter Sheikh Raed Salah) disingenuously refer to the people who they are telling to sacrifice themselves as "we."

MK Jamal Zahalka said, "If blood is spilled, let it be this way....We, the sons of the Palestinian people, will die rather than be deported [sic]."

Invoking the honor/shame dynamics that are so important to Arab society, MK Ayman Odeh said "We are going with this issue until the end [with no compromise]...The demolition of the village is a humiliation to each one of us."

These members of Knesset are literally encouraging bloodshed over compromise - while they return to their comfortable homes that evening.

(h/t Yoel)

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

DNA shows where people in Arab countries came from - and some come from Jews

National Geographic has a project where they identify the true origin of "native" populations using DNA. I don't know the exact methodology but the results are interesting.

For example, and not surprisingly, most of Tunisia's collective DNA comes from north Africa and only 4% from Arabia.

Egypt is a bit more Arab, but not that much. And it has a small but significant number of Jewish genes (which, if I'm reading this correctly, means Ashkenazic, but I'm not sure.)

Lebanon is much more of a mix, with less than half from Arabia and 14% from Jews:

Ashkanazic Jews themselves are mostly Jewish, not surprisingly, with some admixture from Eastern Europe and Arab countries.

Not surprisingly, Jewish blood is also seen in Spanish communities in the New World.

I have no idea if Sephardic Jews are in any of these samples or at what date in history they judge genes to come from the "Jewish diaspora."

National Geographic offers to do a DNA test on anyone to determine their origins, with the results being added to the database (if you choose.)

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.