Wednesday, February 01, 2017

  • Wednesday, February 01, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


On Wednesday, Gaza building suppliers refused to accept building materials being imported from Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing.

The reason was because Hamas unilaterally added a major tax on all such materials, and they did not believe they coul dpay the taxes and still make a profit. (Cement and other materials in Gaza have a fixed price.)

The materials that the Gaza suppliers refused to accept included cement, aggregate and iron.

From the mainstream media, you wouldn't know that Israel is bringing truckloads of cement every day, that Hamas is interfering with the distribution of those materials by imposing arbitrary taxes, and that Gaza suppliers are angry at Hamas, not Israel.




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

IsraellyCool: Stop Comparing Trump To Hitler
One thing I am seeing more and more of during these turbulent and crazy times is the pronouncement – mostly by liberal friends – that Donald Trump is the new Hitler. Or at least is on his way.
Whatever misgivings I may have about Donald Trump, I am disgusted by such pronouncements. Here’s a few reasons why.
He’s not
Donald Trump seems to be a lot of things. Arrogant. Impulsive. And even then, there are many who will disagree with me there. Nevertheless, there is no doubt he is not Hitler. Not even close.
True story. 6 million Jews murdered, and about another 5 million non-Jewish victims. That’s 11 million people murdered as a result of Hitler’s extermination program.
Donald Trump has murdered approximately 0 people that we know of. Oh, and wait, he does not have an extermination program.
I can’t believe I have to point this out. What the hell is wrong with you?
Douglas Murray: Nine questions those protesting against Donald Trump’s immigration ban must answer
In my own view it would help immensely if the people who are lambasting the Trump administration had at least given some thought to the following questions and could go some way to giving answers to such questions as:
1 – Do you accept that America (like many other countries in the world today) has security problems? Do you recognise that despite the giggly charts on social media showing lawnmowers to be more of a threat to American life than terrorism, there are legitimate security concerns that reasonable Americans might hold?
2 – Do you recognise that Islamic terrorism is not a figment of a fevered imagination, but a real thing that exists and which causes a risk to human life in America and many other countries? This isn’t to say that other forms of terrorism don’t exist – they obviously do. But how might you address this one (assuming you can’t immediately solve global peace, poverty, unhappiness, lack of satisfactory sex, masculinity etc)?
3 – If you do recognise the above fact then would you concede that large scale immigration from Islamic countries into the US might bring a larger number of potential challenges than, say, large scale immigration from New Zealand or Iceland?
4 – Is everybody who wants to visit Disney World morally akin to Jews fleeing the Holocaust? If not then what are the differences, and is it always wise to conflate the two?
5 – Would you recognise that Iran is one of the world’s leading state-sponsors of terror, and that, for example, an Iranian-born American citizen in 2011 was caught planning to carry out a terror attack in Washington (against the Saudi Ambassador)? Would you recognise that aggravating though a temporary halt on all Iranian nationals visiting the US might be, and many good people though it will undoubtedly stop, there is a reason that some countries cause a greater security concern than others? Might citizens of a country whose leadership regularly chants ‘Death to America’ present a larger number of questions for border security than, say, citizens of Denmark whose government rarely says the same? What would your vetting policy be to distinguish between different Iranians seeking to enter the US?
6 – Does the whole world have the right to live in America? This is a variant of the same question we Europeans should have been asking for years. If you do not think that the whole world has the right to live in the USA then who should be allowed to live there and who should not? Who might be given priority?
7 – If you believe in giving some people asylum, as I do, who should be given priority? Should asylum be forever? Or should there be a time-limit (such as up until such a time as your country of origin is deemed safe)? How do you deal with people who have been given asylum, whose reason for asylum is over (i.e. their country has returned to peace) but whose children have entered the school system (for instance)?
8 – Is it wrong that the Trump administration says it wishes to favour Christian refugees over Muslim refugees? This is a fascinating and difficult moral question. Many Christians refuse to accept that the plight of Christians – even when they are the specific target of persecution – should be given priority over anyone else. This is a noble example of Christian universalism, but is it wise or moral when you consider the limited numbers that can come in and if you accept that the entire persecuted world cannot arrive in America?
9 – How do you identify the type of Muslims who America should indeed welcome? And how do you distinguish them from the sort of Muslims who the country could well do without? In other words, what would your vetting procedures be? There are some people who have thought about this. But what is your policy?
If you think all of the above questions are simply ‘racist’ or ‘bigoted’ then I suppose the rest of us will just have to accept that we’re going to lose you to four years of shouting on the streets in vagina hats. But the rest of us should try to address these questions. We’re not going to be able to shout them away you know.
Brendan O'Neill: Anti-Trump hysteria lets others whitewash their own crimes
Then there’s Hillary Clinton, who was retweeted tens of thousands of times for saying of Trump’s order: ‘This is not who we are.’ But it is who she is. This is the woman who spearheaded the bombing of Libya, helping to plunge that nation into mayhem and creating hundreds of thousands of refugees in the process. Ed Miliband spoke at the Downing St demo. He was a fulsome supporter of the bombing of Libya. The people who helped to make swathes of humanity into refugees are virtue-signalling about Trump’s tough line on refugees. The people who caused, or okayed, instability in Muslim nations are pontificating about Trump’s tough words on Muslim nations. It is morally perverse. By any objective moral measurement, Clinton and Miliband did something worse to the people of Libya than Trump has, and yet this is ignored, or overlooked, drowned in the joyous moral kick that comes from hating Trump.
This is the true danger of historical illiteracy. To describe Trump as abnormal, as a break with proper American politics, makes normal the horrors of the past, of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of Vietnam, of McCarthyism, of Iraq, Afghanistan and all the rest. It tells us, implicitly, that all of that was normal, better even.
This is my problem with the protests: they promote emotional fury at the expense of historical thinking, and in the process they play down the sins of the past. This is really bad for younger, fresher protesters in particular. They’re encouraged to think that until now, from the war to today, between Hitler and Trump, things had been pretty much okay, or at least ‘normal’. The protests aren’t radical at all. In fact they’re a boon for the warmongers and liars in the corridors of power who spy in the ‘Trump is Hitler’ cry an opportunity to rebuild their own moral standing. The out-of-control hatred for Trump doubles up, unwittingly perhaps, as an uncritical, conformist apology for pre-Trump, for the rot that came before him. It redeems barbarism.


Moral panic. It's a term that was coined by Stanley Cohen in 1987 in his seminal work, Folk Devils and Moral Panics, and it perfectly describes the great uproar over Trump's immigration ban (not to mention his election). A moral panic, according to Cohen, is a random or intermittent event generating widespread concern that societal norms may be in peril. The moral panic is characterized by, “a condition, episode, person or group of persons [who] become defined as a threat to societal values and interests."

Now a moral panic doesn't just up and set itself on fire. It needs the media to light the match. The mass media, as Cohen explains, seizes on a potential episode of moral panic and styles things so as to exaggerate or amplify the facts. Soon enough, the event becomes a national issue (or as in the case of the immigration ban, international).

Cohen's theory goes that had the media stayed uninvolved, the issue at the center of the moral panic would have, of a certain, have remained a piddling local story, relevant only to those directly affected. The media's involvement is the sole catalyst for any moral panic, the only reason any issue (an immigration ban, Trump's election) can end up causing widespread fear and fascination.

So what you have with a moral panic is an event sensationalized by the media. The mass media then follows things up by putting out a call for action, a demand for some sort of punitive action, a response. This, Cohen calls, "control culture."

It is moral panic that drove the Women's March on Washington as a response to Trump's election. It is moral panic that motivated the protests at airports, and had synagogues issuing heartfelt statements of umbrage over the immigration ban. And it is the mass media that inflamed the masses and fomented these mass responses. It is the media controlling the culture.

It is upsetting to know that people are so easily maneuvered and exploited into making a hullabaloo over something simply because the media desires it so. To think that people allow themselves to serve as puppets, letting their strings be pulled this way and that in obeisance to someone else's agenda so far away out of sight that the common man doesn't even know it exists! But that is the way of all effective moral panics.

And of course, any moral panic worth its salt has a whole bunch of Jews clamoring for their outrage over the issue to be seen and heard. Like a fish, this Jewish response stinks from the head down, with rabbis culling comparisons to Jewish history as reason enough to organize and demonstrate. "We were refugees, too!" they cry, dignity and righteousness in their shrill collective voices.

Just like Cohen says, had the media not run with this, sensationalized it and demanded action, you would not now have rabbis up in arms and marching with signs. Without the media, the immigration ban would have been but a momentary blip on the screen, unnoticed, and unseen.

You know how I know this?

I know this because in 2005, 11,000 Jews were expelled from their homes in the Jewish State and there were no American rabbis protesting (save for the Modern Orthodox), no Conservative or Reform Jews holding signs or expressing indignation. These 11,000 of their Jewish brethren who were forcibly dragged out of their homes consisted of 8,000 Jewish settlers in Gaza and another 3,000 from Northern Samaria. They were expelled from their beautiful homes after a national referendum in the democratic State of Israel in which 65% of the Israeli people voted against the plan.
By Israel Defense Forces (The Evacuation of Neve Dekalim) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
The effects of this expulsion reverberate until today. There remains a few hundred people who UNTIL NOW have no permanent housing solution. In the wake of the expulsion, families fell apart at the seams, with divorce rampant among the expellees. Heads of households had heart attacks and died, children lost their faith in God. It's documented.
By Israel Defense Forces (The Evacuation of Bedolach) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons 
Worst of all, rather than bring peace, the Expulsion, A/K/A "Disengagement" brought tens of thousands of missiles raining down on Israel from the very territory it ceded, from the place where those who were expelled had built beautiful homes and  businesses and schools and synagogues. The Arabs, instead of building homes and schools in the "gift" we gave them, built a terrorist enclave using what we gave them to target and kill us.
By Israel Defense Forces (The Evacuation of Shirat Hayam) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
But the Washington Post, CNN, and the New York Times, don't see the expulsion and subsequent homelessness, loss of income, and unemployment of 11,000 Jews in the same light as 90,000 people who have had their plans postponed for 120 days. And they don't care about the tens of thousands of missiles shot at us from the territory we gave them, from which we uprooted 11,000 Jewish people against their will, only 60 years after we were uprooted from Europe in the West, and Arab countries in the East.
By Israel Defense Forces (The Evacuation of Ganei Tal) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
The Expulsion isn't on the media's list of moral panic material.

Because Jews.

And so, no rabbis (other than the settler-loving Modern Orthodox) marched on behalf of the 11,000 Jews forcibly taken from their homes and left homeless with nothing. No indignation was expressed at the pulpit. No marches took place. No signs were held. No aid extended.
By Israel Defense Forces (The Evacuation of Kfar Hayam) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
No interviews appeared. It wasn't seen as a Jewish cause. No parallels in Jewish history were found. 

No rabbis issued heartfelt words about Jews expelled from Speyer, Germany, or Spain, or England.
A street in the Judengasse in Speyer, Germany. (Wikimedia Commons)
There was no moral panic. Because no media. And so the Expulsion, known so mildly when it is spoken of at all as "Disengagement" remained and remains a local blip. A painful Israeli problem that doesn't touch the Jews in New York or Boston or Washington, outside of the Modern Orthodox that is, that last bastion, the final vestige of caring for Jews who live in places Arabs covet.

It is like science fiction to me, these puppets of the media, JINO's who cannot generate their own umbrage but can only be lit up by an outside force possessing interests completely at odds with Jewish philosophy. Trump's immigration ban may be awkwardly implemented and a serious inconvenience to 90,000, some of them leaving a war zone, but it is temporary, whereas the expulsion from Gaza was forever.

And still, you don't hear a peep. No Reform rabbi mentions them in a Rosh Hashana sermon. No Conservative congregation sends them things, the expellees. No one says boo. It's not even in their consciousness. They'd sooner have an empty seat at the Seder table for Harvey Milk than Anita Tucker, whose only crime was making the desert bloom with celery. (Dollars to donuts they've heard of him, but not of her.)
By Harvey Milk in 1978 at Mayor Moscone's Desk.jpg: Daniel Nicoletta derivative work: Hekerui (Harvey Milk in 1978 at Mayor Moscone's Desk.jpg) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Anita Tucker
All of this is especially relevant and ironic today, considering what is happening right now in Amona, as I write this blog piece. Israel expels 42 families from their homes because some "human rights" organization makes a claim their homes are built on private land, though no deed must be provided as proof, and though there is actually no proof that the homes were ever owned by Arabs. Flawed law is the only reason for this expulsion as no Arabs lost their homes as a result of the construction of these Jewish homes. No one lost property, no one was hurt.

Israel expels 42 families from Amona over a contrived legal technicality, but oh the irony, takes in 100 Syrian babies. And the mass media? Silent. Not on its agenda, so not on its clipboard of moral panic material. And so the Jews of America say nothing. Do nothing. Care nothing at all about the pain of these 42 families with nowhere to go, Jews like them.


They scorn their own—Jews—in favor of a moral panic about Arab refugees, typically the enemy of their people (as they are in Gaza, the place we gave them, and the reason for the expulsion of 11,000 innocent Jewish people against their will and the will of the people of Israel).

Such is the power of the media's hold over these empty-headed Jews. They have no brains of their own. They have no impetus to do a thing, unless the media tells them to do it.

It is sick and sad and scary and did I say sick?

Because it makes me want to vomit.

Because if you are susceptible to being drawn into a moral panic, but fail to be moved by the expulsion of the 11,000 Jews of Israel and their plight, then you are no longer human, let alone Jewish. Because Jews should only be accountable to their maker, and not to the media.

American Jewry, it is certain, is in extremis.



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.
Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory

Check out their Facebook page.


Whenever I Need A Laugh, I Think Of All Those People Assuming Palestine Will Be A Liberal Democracy

By Mahmoud Abbas

AbbasNobody ever promised me the position of President of the Palestinian National Authority would be easy. I never expected it to be. Combine it with - or consider it a subsidiary role of - my position as Chairman of the Fatah faction and Palestine Liberation Organization, and you get one long work day after another. Tensions run high. Usually I thrive on that - it gives me a sense of vitality - but occasionally I need to dissipate that tension, and there's no better way to do that than to laugh. When I need a good laugh, I think of all those fools who see the nascent State of Palestine as a liberal democracy.

It never fails to crack me up. Other people's idiocy can be an amazing thing to behold, and a hilarious one. In the almost twenty-four years since the Authority was created, there has been a steady erosion - one might describe it as an active weakening - of any semblance of democratic values, leaving precious little around which one might build a democratic state. We've had the occasional elections - I was voted into this four-year term twelve years ago, and the Palestinian parliamentarians a year later - but other than that, I chuckle every time I consider what our supporters in the West believe will happen once we gain full state status. Somehow our violent political culture, our endemic corruption, our all-important tribal loyalties, and our irrational genocidal hatred of Jews will dissipate in favor of transparency, robust institutions, and rule of law. Excuse me for a moment, I'm about to lose my composure...

Well. As you can see, that stuff is hella funny. It just doesn't get old. I could spend hours rewatching clips of my advisers pontificating on democratic values being trampled by Israel, and how all the dysfunction of our society going back a thousand years is all Israel's fault - and these people eat it up! they can't get enough! We started playing a game back in the 1980's who could get the Western press to take the most outrageous thing at face value, and we've yet to hit rock bottom. Most of us thought we'd grow tired of it, or discover the limits those imbeciles' credulousness, within a couple of months, but we've yet to encounter either phenomenon. New vistas of ridiculousness open up daily.

Don't ever stop, Western liberals. Please. We desperately need you for comic relief.




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

PMW: Terror poems for kids on PA TV
Twice this month Palestinian Authority TV’s children’s program The Best Home had young children recite poems encouraging violence. One poem called for murder of Israelis “as we slaughtered them in your streets, Beirut.” The poem also urged Palestinians to seek death, emphasizing that if you are a member of Fatah, Mahmoud Abbas’ party, your “blood is food for the revolution”:
Boy: “Today, O our West Bank, our Gaza, raise your voice
O our land, the time has still not passed
As we expelled them from Gaza and Sderot
As we slaughtered them in your streets, Beirut
For you, Yasser Arafat, for you we shall die
After the night comes the light of day, and the fig leave will be removed...
Tomorrow we will take our vengeance, and their leader will be carried in a coffin
We, Fatah, are a storm, and our blood is food for the revolution...”
PA TV host: “Bravo, Muhammad, thank you, thank you, thank you!”
[Official PA TV, The Best Home, Jan. 6, 2017]
What's Holding the Arab World Back?
What's holding the Arab world back? Why, by nearly every measure, are Muslim nations so far behind the West economically, culturally and scientifically? Bret Stephens, Global View columnist for the Wall Street Journal, explains.


Nikki Haley Pledges to Block Anti-Israel Actions by United Nations
Nikki Haley, the newly appointed U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, phoned her Israeli counterpart on Monday to reinforce America's "ironclad support" for the Jewish state.
Haley pledged to Ambassador Danny Danon that she would block anti-Israel actions taken by the U.N., citing the security council's decision last month to condemn Israel for erecting settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
During her confirmation hearing before the Senate earlier this month, Haley vowed a pivot in U.S. policy toward Israel. The former South Carolina governor criticized the Obama administration's decision to abstain from the U.N. vote, calling the resolution a "terrible mistake."
"I will not go to New York and abstain when the U.N. seeks to create an international environment that encourages boycotts of Israel," Haley said on Jan. 18. "I will never abstain when the United Nations takes any action that comes in direct conflict with the interests and values of the United States."

  • Wednesday, February 01, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
At the Amnesty International Australia Facebook page, after they criticized the US ban on some travelers from some countries, someone asked if they were also against Arab states banning Israelis.

Their response? Not at all!


After people complained, Amnesty removed the post and claimed that it was a mistake:


So Amnesty Australia staffs its official social media accounts with volunteers who know absolutely nothing about what they are talking about? Who think that Arab nations started boycotting Israel after "occupation"? Who think that Palestinians are being displaced from their homes by "illegal settlements"?

And even the apology doesn't include a specific condemnation of Arab nations. It was just a backtrack saying that freedom of movement is a human right, and that Amnesty won't speak out against Arab violations of human rights because they only have finite resources.

You know how expensive it is to post a statement on your own Facebook account. It would strain the resources of any multi-million dollar NGO.

Even with this poor apology, we can see that Amnesty will hire people who are reflexively anti-Israel. You will never see any "mistake" that is pro-Israel on any of  their social media accounts. 

You cannot blame the poor "volunteers" either. They only know what they see from Amnesty, after all, and while Amnesty's official statements strive to be technically accurate, they know very well that their readers won't parse the statements to the degree necessary to figure out the truth. Any casual reader of Amnesty and HRW press releases would be convinced, just like this supposed volunteer, that Israel is evil, that Arab nations bravely stand behind Palestinians with their boycott of Israel that began before there was a state of Israel, that "illegal settlements" are displacing hundreds of thousands of Arabs, and that the IDF routinely engages in "atrocities." 

This is the message that Amnesty gives out even if they won't say it explicitly, and they know very well how their statements are read.

But Arab antisemitism? PA arrests of dissidents? Hamas expelling people from homes? The PLO  paying terrorists? No, that cannot be discussed - because there are only so many hours in the day and so many dollars in their budget, and the 741st anti-Israel report takes precedence over any research that might show Arabs as being anything other than poor victims of Israeli brutality.

(h/t Yenta)



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.
  • Wednesday, February 01, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
I noted on Sunday that Fatah and a Palestinian Authority minister had slammed UN Secretary General António Guterres for mentioning the Temple in Jerusalem during his Holocaust Remembrance Day speech.

Now the PLO itself (which is the self-styled representative of all Palestinians worldwide and which the Palestinian Authority reports to) has officially stated that Jews have no history to speak of in Jerusalem, by denying that there was ever any Temple on the Temple Mount.

Guterres had told Israel Radio that it is “completely clear that the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.”

The PLO issued a statement saying that the entire area (including the "walls," a reference to the Western Wall) is entirely Muslim and no others have any claim, and that UNESCO agrees with this.

The PLO slammed the Secretary-General, questioning his neutrality, saying that his remarks showed that he openly sides with the state of the Israel and its "occupation" and that his words "betrays his ignorance of clear international resolutions on Jerusalem."

The PLO went on to demand an apology from the United Nations and from Gutteres himself for "these dangerous statements, which are contrary to international law, which the United Nations has the task of maintaining and applying."

It went further, calling on the international community and NGOs in general, and Arab and Islamic countries in particular, to "play their role and respond to those allegations."

This isn't the first time that major Palestinian officials have denied any Jewish history in Jerusalem. Yasir Arafat famously denied that the Jewish Temple was in Jerusalem during peace negotiations. There are many other examples.  Yet I had never seen it as an official statement from the PLO before.

This is a perfect topic to ask Saeb Erekat or Hanan Ashrawi about the next time they are interviewed. Too bad reporters aren't willing to challenge these liars on basic questions.

Fantasy and lies are part and parcel of the PLO's positions. Which means that any agreement with them is impossible, since they cannot be trusted to tell the truth about anything.




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.
Mondoweiss has an article that says that there is a "Zionist connection" to the Quebec mosque shooter - because he "liked" the IDF on his Facebook page.

Ali Abunimah, of Electronic Intifada, made the same claim.

This is the level of discourse that the anti-Israel crowd uses. They know it is garbage but they always try to find the most ridiculous connections between anything Israel-related and any mass murderer or reprehensible human being in a pathetic attempt to discredit Zionists. (In one example they tried to link me to mass murderer Anders Breivik by falsely claiming that I praised his manifesto in an article where I called him "evil" and a "psychopath.")

I tweeted how ridiculous this logic is after Max Blumenthal did the same thing:



So I decided to see how easy it is to link Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada and Blumenthal to the neo-Nazi site, Stormfront, using their own methods.


Stormfront doesn't just put a Facebook "like" to these anti-Israel sites. It quotes them repeatedly.

Stormfront has quoted both Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada over 100 times each! Ali Abunimah himself is quoted by the neo-Nazi site some 36 times. Philip Weiss manages to get quoted 90 times. Max Blumenthal gets quoted  (almost always approvingly) over 80 times.  

Clearly, neo-Nazis have a warm space in their hearts for Philip Weiss, Ali Abunimah and Max Blumenthal. 

Keep in mind that I am in no way saying that these anti-Israel sites and writers are neo-Nazi. They are politically distant from the far-Right (except for the fact that both the far Left and far Right are antisemitic.)

But I am saying that if you accept the stupid methodologies of Mondoweiss and EI and Blumenthal, then you must accept that they themselves have a lot in common with and inspire neo-Nazis, by their own stunning pseudo-logic.

Joking aside, the neo-Nazi ties to these individuals and sites are far deeper than the supposed Zionist links of the neo-Nazis. Hundreds of quotes linking them are far more significant than a Facebook "like."

EI and Mondoweiss truly are the research arm for neo-Nazis. And that is beyond dispute.

So every time they claim that some far right murderer and terrorist is linked to Zionists, point out that they are much more "guilty" of this linkage than Zionists are - by their own methodology. Feel free to use the image I created. Let's see how much they like taking their own medicine.

(By the way, I'm quoted in Stormfront too a couple of times. For example, they were excited that I discovered a UNRWA official posting [fake] Hitler quotes on Facebook. In other words, they were on the UNRWA official's side, not mine.) 



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.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

From Ian:

Edwin Black: Replacing the UN with ‘The Covenant of Democratic Nations’
For years, foreign policy critics, politicians and outraged members of the general public have been urging the US to defund and quit the United Nations. Some have advocated that a rival or successor organization should be established. Now there is a movement calling to “defund and replace” the troubled organization with a new world body: The Covenant of Democratic Nations. This writer has been a participating witness to the birth of that movement.
Just days after controversial UN Security Council Resolution 2334 declared, among other things, that Israel’s Jewish connection to the Western Wall was effectively illegal, concrete replacement action began. It started with proposing an official international conference to endorse a diplomatic convention that would be ratified by countries as a binding treaty. The entire process would be limited to nations governed by democratic principles. Each member would or could defund the United Nations, while it labored to construct a successor entity dedicated to world peace along democratic principles with equal respect for all people regardless of religion, gender, race, identity or national origin. This body would also include a mechanism to resolve disputes.
A prime mission of the new world organization would be to re-ratify, amend or nullify all acts and resolutions of the United Nations and its agencies such as UNESCO. Just as unjust American laws perpetrating slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and institutional inequality were overturned, updated and reformed, so too could the damage done by the UN. Sensibly, most CDN nations would remain as vestigial members of the UN, overseeing its collapse — just like when the League of Nations was dissolved after World War II and replaced with the present UN.
Caroline Glick: The lessons of Roosevelt’s failures
The American Jewish uproar at Trump’s actions shows first and foremost the cynicism of the leftist Jewish leadership.
It isn’t simply that left-wing activists like Hetfield and Eisner cynically ignore that Trump’s order is based on Obama’s policies, which they didn’t oppose.
It is that in their expressed concerned for would-be Muslim refugees to the US they refuse to recognize that the plight of Muslims as Muslims in places like Syria and Iraq is not the same as the plight of Christians and Yazidis as Christians and Yazidis in these lands.
The “Jews” in the present circumstances are not the Muslims, who are nowhere targeted for genocide.
The “Jews” in the present circumstances are the Christians and Yazidis and other religious minorities, whom Trump’s impassioned Jewish opponents and Obama’s impassioned Jewish champions fail to defend.
Trump’s executive order is far from perfect. But in making the distinction between the hunters and the hunted and siding with the latter against the former, Trump is showing that he is not a bigot.
Unlike his critics, he has learned the lessons of Roosevelt’s moral failure and is working to ensure that the US acts differently today.
Shmuley Boteach: Playing politics with the US Holocaust Museum
The gravest sin he committed, however, one which should disqualify him for any association with the Holocaust Museum, is his complicity in the genocide in Syria.
Like Nero, Obama has figuratively fiddled while Syria burned. After stating that Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his opponents would cross a red line that would trigger a US military response, Obama failed to back up his threat. This cowardly act was universally viewed by friends and foes alike in the Middle East as a sign of weakness, and left allies, including Israel, questioning whether they could depend on the US to protect their interests.
Fortunately for Obama, he had Rhodes to manipulate the “echo chamber” and sell the amoral narrative that America could not act to stop war crimes and genocide in Syria because it would jeopardize nuclear talks with Iran.
A bystander to genocide has no business in a position of honor or responsibility at an institution devoted to documenting past genocides and preventing future ones.
Rhodes was worse than a bystander, he was an active participant in the decision not to act to prevent the slaughter.
President Trump should call for Rhodes’ immediate resignation. In addition, a campaign should be conducted through the echo chamber calling on the chairman and the rest of the museum’s council to remove Rhodes forthwith to prevent his presence from tarnishing the reputation and mission of this vital institution.

  • Tuesday, January 31, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Islam Maquosi, a man in his twenties, died from burns suffered after setting himself on fire a few days ago in from of a charity for people with disabilities in the Bureij camp in Gaza

Maquosi poured gasoline on himself and set himself on fire to protest against how he has been treated.

A few years ago, a Hamas jeep hit Maquosi, injuring him. Hamas refused to take responsibility for the accident that cause years of suffering to the young man.

Just another story from Gaza that you won't read about in the media.




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.
  • Tuesday, January 31, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

Hamas today honored the memory of Mohamed Zouari, who was assassinated in Tunisia on December 15, with a parade.

Zouari was the engineer behind the Abadil drone that Hamas has used on occasion. At the ceremony, they unveiled a memorial statue for him.

During the ceremony Hamas admitted that Zourani had visited Gaza clandestinely many times.

Hamas has blamed Israel and the Mossad for his assassination, and when you read the details of the operation, they are almost certainly right.

France's Liberation describes the details:
In Jerusalem there is no comment on the assassination in Sfax, although the military reporters, a small caste of about thirty "trusted" journalists with access to classified information, have eyes that sparkle and smile in the corner [when asked]. In private, most of them suggest that the services of other countries would not be alien to the operation. Others stressed that Egypt also wanted to put an end to the engineer since Hamas would have helped the Islamists linked to Daesh who are fighting the Cairo army in the Sinai desert.

In any case, the "liquidation" of Al Zoari was conducted like a James Bond movie: a truck blocked his car and two European-type killers riddled it of with about twenty bullets, of which three hit him in the thorax.

According to the Tunisian police, at least eight men were involved in the case. Four suspects, including a Belgian of Moroccan origin and a mysterious Hungarian "journalist" who met Al Zoari on the eve of his assassination before disappearing without a trace, are currently being sought. In addition, four cars (including two rental) linked to the assassination were found as well as two pistols equipped with silencers.

In order to erase the traces of the operation, hackers broke into the surveillance system of a restaurant near the place of the assassination and erased the contents of the recordings made by the cameras.
Hamas, as always, vowed revenge.






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

Yitzhak Rabin's Vision of Defensible Borders for Israel
Since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, almost everything has changed. Above all, new threats have emerged with a previously unknown military logic of their own.
The Oslo idea, in its quest to end Israeli control over Palestinian citizens, was largely realized by 1996, when Israel concluded the withdrawal of its forces from the populated territories of the West Bank. Some 90% of the total Palestinian population of the West Bank has been controlled since then by the Palestinian Authority (PA). Moreover, the Israeli presence in Gaza ended in 2005.
Eastern Jerusalem and Area C in the West Bank, held by Israel, are the minimum required for the conservation of a defensible territory. Without the buffer area of the Jordan Valley, it would be impossible to prevent the quick arming of Palestinian terrorists in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, in his last speech in the Knesset (October 1995), was resolute on Jerusalem and emphasized the crucial hold by Israel of the Jordan Valley and the lateral routes leading to it. Rabin envisaged a political entity short of a fully-fledged Palestinian state.
Rabin implemented the Oslo Accords to reshape the area delineated by Israeli security interests. As part of this effort, he led a drive to construct a network of bypass roads in Area C, without which the IDF would have had great difficulty advancing its forces during Operation Defensive Shield (2002).
Without a constant hold on Area C, Israel has no defensible borders. The way Rabin delineated the expanse of Area C demonstrates his farsighted understanding of the importance of those areas beyond the 1967 borders, which must be in Israel's full control.
Prof. Eugene Kontovorich PodCast: The UNSCR 2334 Against Israel: What Is President Trump To Do? - Podcast
(Kontovorich starts at 23:30, the first guy is terrible)
Since the Obama administration abstained from the United Nations Security Council vote on Resolution 2334 that condemns Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem, there has been much speculation as to the force, effect, and consequence of this Resolution. There are many concerns, including that this United Nations declaration may enable boycotts of Israel and that the Palestinian government might attempt to utilize the pronouncement to bring Israel before the International Criminal Court. President Trump’s has stated that he intends to alter or blunt the instrument. What will be the effect of this United Nations censure, and what are the options available to President Trump?
Featuring:
Prof. Bernard Avishai, Adjunct Professor of Business, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Visiting Professor of Government, Dartmouth College
Prof. Orde Kittrie, Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Professor of Law, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
Prof. Eugene Kontovorich, Professor of Law, Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
PMW: “God, grant us Martyrdom... a million grooms and brides... have written the marriage contract in blood” in Fatah TV music video
A music video broadcast twice on the Fatah-run TV station Awdah featured photos of suicide bombers while the lyrics promoted death as a Martyr for the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
The music video opens with a recording of Yasser Arafat infamously saying: "They [the Israelis] want me captive, exiled or dead - but I tell them: [I will be] a Martyr! Martyr! Martyr!" Excerpts from the song promote Martyrdom as an ideal. The video includes photos of two female suicide bombers who in total murdered 3 Israelis and wounded over a hundred during the PA terror campaign in 2000-2005 (the Second Intifada).
"Al-Aqsa has called, and its call is precious
For its sake, life is insignificant, even if it's precious...
God, grant us Martyrdom there
God, promise us, we beg of you...
A million grooms and brides at the celebration
Have written the marriage contract in blood on the veil
(visual of suicide bomber Wafa Idris, killed 1 and wounded over 100, in Jerusalem attack)
A million grooms and brides at the celebration
Have written the marriage contract in blood on the veil
(visual of suicide bomber Ayyat Al-Akhras, killed 2 and wounded 28, in Jerusalem attack)
Filled with desire, they are going to the Paradise of immortals
To a wedding procession with angels that fill Palestine with light."
[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Jan. 23-24, 2017]
The clip also shows pictures of two Palestinian children who died during the PA terror campaign.





It is 1967. What would become known as the Six Day War has begun and Menachem Begin, invited by Prime Minister Levi Eshkol to join an expanded emergency cabinet, has an idea.

There is a meeting in the basement shelter of the Knesset and the news is announced that Jordan has decided to join Egypt and Syria in battle. Begin and Labor Minister Yigal Allon suggest that the reaction to Jordan's shelling of Israel should be the liberation of the Old City of Jerusalem, lost in the 1948 War following a UN ceasefire. Begin urges quick action before a similar ceasefire again leave the city divided.

Moshe Dayan opposes the idea based on the human cost of expected house-to-house fighting in addition to the potential damage to Christian and Muslim holy places -- leading to a world-wide outcry against Israel and opposition to Israeli control over Christian and Muslim holy places. Instead, Dayan suggests it would be enough to just surround the Old City and wait for it to fall.

Allon responds that the Jordanian lines were crumbling and Israel could go in. More to the point, it is essential for there to be a Jewish presence both deep within the Old City and on the Temple Mount itself.

In the end, a 4am news report from the BBC that the UN is planning to declare a ceasefire leads to another meeting where it is agreed to recapture the Old City. [Source: The Prime Minsters, by Yehuda Avner, p157-9]

The rest is history.

---

The issues then have not changed over the years when discussing the step of moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The Israeli reaction has.

The question of Congressional legislation to move the embassy came up during the 1984 presidential campaign. Democrats Walter Mondale and Gary Hart both came out in favor of the bill introduced by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynnihan, while President Reagen threatened to veto such a bill.

The response of an Israeli Foreign Ministry official at the time was less warm: "I'm very leery of trying to tread on a Congressional debate and an argument between the President and Congress, a constitutional problem of who runs foreign policy."

A decade later, in May 1995, news about what would become enacted that November as the Jerusalem Embassy Act, did not excite Israelis either. Prime Minister Rabin, suggested the Likud was behind it with the aim of "torpedoing" peace negotiations. Foreign Minister Peres tried to distance Israel from the bill, saying there was "no need for our involvement."

Fast-forward to today. During his presidential campaign, Trump made a point of talking about moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

And now he is the President.

Again, it is not so simple.

Moshe Feiglin, founder and chairman of the Zehut party, was interviewed the day after the elections -- and he predicted that once moving the embassy became a very real possibility, Netanyahu would not be any more enthusiastic or outspoken than past Israeli officials. See the video below, starting at 1:03:




Events seem to justify Feiglin's pessimism.

This past Friday, Marc Zell, chairman of Republicans overseas Israel indicated that the Israeli government did in fact have cold feet:

He followed up on his criticism the following day:

Zell even went so far as to imply that once Israel indicated its approval, plans for the embassy move could proceed right away



But when Haaretz published an interview with him the same day:
The co-chair of the Republicans Overseas organization in Israel, Marc Zell, says that recent foot-dragging by Donald Trump's White House on moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, is happening at Israel’s request.

Zell told Haaretz, citing both Israeli and U.S. sources, that “Trump has been unequivocally in favor of moving the embassy and remains so” but “he is proceeding cautiously because of concerns raised by Israeli officials.”
...Zell used Twitter again -- this time to walk back what he said:
For his part, Netanyahu came out out Sunday with an apparent response to Zell:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu voiced support on Sunday for moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem but mentioned no time frame, after a Republican activist accused Israel of pressing the Trump administration to delay the pledged step.
Even in welcoming the idea, Netanyahu appears cautious.

Now as in 1967, a mix of of the threat of Arab violence and world disapproval appears to be the issue.

Back then, there was no time to delay, as the threat of a missed opportunity was very real. Then again, who today is as blunt and influencial as Menachem Begin?

The question is how much time does Israel really have to take Trump up on his offer, before he too decides to put the offer on the back burner or take it off the table altogether.

After all, at heart -- Trump is a businessman.





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.
  • Tuesday, January 31, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

From The Independent:

Donald Trump’s ban on travel to the US from some Muslim-majority countries has been denounced by the UN's rights chief as “mean-spirited” and illegal under international human rights law. 
Zeid Ra'ad al Hussein said: “Discrimination on nationality alone is forbidden under human rights law."

The UN Human Rights Council that al Hussein heads includes  Bangladesh, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

All of those countries ban Israelis from entering.

Because of their nationality.

(h/t David A)




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.
  • Tuesday, January 31, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Refugees are in the news. People are pledging to help them any way they can.

And UNRWA USA is trying to cynically make money off of the phenomenon - even though the organization does not want a single "refugee" under its mandate to ever move to the US and become a citizen.

The entire point of the protests is to allow refugees to come and live safely in the US. The entire point of UNRWA is to keep Palestinians in Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria, not to give them opportunities to become citizens anywhere in the world. UNRWA teaches generations of kids that they will one day "return" and therefore they should not seek better lives elsewhere.

UNRWA calls some 2 million Jordanian citizens "refugees." They aren't.

But UNRWA-USA wants to call them that so they can raise money.

UNRWA calls some 2 million people who actually live in the areas of British Mandate Palestine "refugees" - even though they live in the land they are supposedly refugees from. They aren't refugees.

But UNRWA-USA wants to call them that so they can raise money.

UNRWA claims there are twice the number of Palestinian "refugees" in Lebanon than are actually there. Lebanon discriminates against them and they suffer horribly - but "non-political" UNRWA, not shy about attacking Israel, won't say a negative word against Lebanon. It raises money based on 200,000 phantom "refugees" who are now in Europe or spread through the Arab world.

I have no problem with UNWRA helping Syrian Palestinians with food and shelter, but UNRWA's very existence means that they cannot be taken care of by UNHCR. These real refugees from Syria cannot take advantage of UNHCR's efforts to find homes for the other Syrian refugees.

UNRWA refuses to remove any "refugees" from that status - even if they become citizens elsewhere, even if their great-grandparents weren't born in the area of the Mandate  Many are descended from people who were never refugees to begin with, but UNRWA refused to remove them from the rolls even in the 1950s. . There is no cessation clause in UNRWA's rules and regulations. Once a "refugee," your descendants can claim benefits from UNRWA for centuries to come.

This campaign is pure cynicism, and it is immoral in that UNRWA-USA is trying to fool well-meaning people who truly want to help refugees into instead donating to a giant self-perpetuating bureaucracy that wasn't meant to exist past 1951.

If you want to help refugees, give to UNHCR - which actually tries to solve the problem of refugees. Don't give to UNRWA whose existence is based on perpetuating the Palestinian "refugee" problem for generations to come.

And they know that - because the slogan here implies that UNRWA will continue to exist forever, as the number of fake "refugees" increases every year.




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.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive