Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, August 04, 2017

Haaretz, Gideon Levy accidentally prove IDF policies aren't meant to punish Palestinians

Gideon Levy and Alex Levac write in Haaretz about a young, apolitical Palestinian man who apparently committed "suicide by IDF" - he tried to ram his car into soldiers and then exited the car attempting to stab them. He was shot and killed.

The article makes clear that the young man, Mohammed Jabrin, was the "least politically minded young man in the Palestinian village of Tuqu."

"Whenever disturbances broke out in the village, he would close his store and closet himself in the house. He was never arrested and never got into trouble," the article says.

The only explanation for his actions is that he got into an argument with his father about being allowed to drive the Mazda he used for the attack - apparently it was a stolen car that he purchased and his father forbade him from driving it. The shame of the argument seems to have pushed him over the edge.

Even the family didn't mention "occupation" once as Levy interviewed them for hours. They were all puzzled as to why this young man decided to end his life that way.

Levy and Levac gloss over the fact that Mohammed Jabrin is now being used for very political purposes, his face on a poster alongside Yasir Arafat and the Dome of the Rock as if he is a heroic martyr, and his family displays these posters in their home as if his death is something to be proud of.

But even more revealing is this small section of the article:

Even the local Shin Bet security agent, “Captain Imad,” who knows everyone in town, was taken aback. The fact is that the security forces did not demolish the family’s home, the Israel Defense Forces did not conduct a serious search of the house, and the body was returned to the family the day after his death.

If the IDF intended to collectively punish Palestinian families by demolishing their homes after attacks, then why didn't the IDF do it in this case? Why did they return the body immediately, instead of waiting to avoid a huge political funeral that could cascade into violence? Why didn't they ransack the house looking for weapons and evidence of family members colluding?

Levy, the hater of Israel, has just shown that the IDF has good reasons for when it does demolish a house. It is intended as a disincentive for terror - but Mohammed Jabrin was not a classic terrorist, he simply wanted to die. The thought of his family home being destroyed wouldn't have changed that. The family wasn't a threat.

This story also reveals that the lie that the IDF not destroying the homes of the Jewish terrorists was proof of Israeli racism, as Levy himself has argued. House demolition is not meant as punishment but as disincentive, and in cases where no one would change their habits as a result, it makes no sense.

Levy, the hater of Israel, has just proven that his own assertions about the capriciousness of the IDF are figments of his own fevered imagination.

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

You know about the Golden Rule.

You know about human rights.

You know about natural law.

But there is one little known moral principle that overrides all of these things. It is rarely spoken about, but over the past 50 years (and even earlier) it has been the overriding rule, far more important than any of the others.

And that rule is "don't piss off the Muslims."

People are up in arms over the story of the local council in Sydney, Australia, which blocked plans for a new synagogue because it may become a terrorist target and therefore is a security risk.

You might say that Australian Jews have the freedom of worship and freedom of religion and freedom of assembly. Sure they do. But those freedoms are nothing compared to the overriding moral principle of our time, Don't Piss Off the Muslims.

The decision is not surprising. The UN, the arbiter of how states are supposed to act, has adopted this rule enthusiastically, pretending it is about human rights. Western nations stung by the Arab oil boycott in the 1970s have embraced this rule, pretending that it is about international law.

The entire history of Middle East peace attempts are based on this rule. Not international law, not justified claims, nothing like that. it is all a smokescreen to cover what the real imperative is: Don't Piss Off the Muslims.

Newspapers, TV news and Hollywood have all enthusiastically adopted this rule above all others, using the excuse of "preventing Islamophobia."

Editorial cartoonists and newspaper editors censor themselves because they embrace the rule of Don't Piss Off the Muslims. Depictions of Mohammed, only forbidden under Sharia law, are now effectively illegal anywhere because of the rule, Don't Piss Off the Muslims.

President George Bush made sure that he fulfilled this rule by specifically going to a mosque while the World Trade Center was still burning and Muslims around the world cheering over the death of thousands of Americans, saying that "Islam is peace."

Even the Prime Minister of Israel embraces this rule, removing non-obtrusive detection technology at the entrance to a holy site and severely limiting the freedom of worship of Jews and Christians there, claiming - exactly like the Australians - that undefined, nebulous security concerns are more important than basic human rights.

But the real reason is the rule: Don't Piss Off the Muslims.

The Sydney town council did not do anything surprising. It is all a natural, logical application of the overriding moral imperative of today. All the other concepts of rights and morality are subservient to this rule.

To say otherwise would be Islamophobic.

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.

UNSC passes resolution to ban selling weapons to terrorists. If only they knew who the terrorists are!

From the UN:

The Security Council today urged Member States to act cooperatively to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons and called upon them to counter threats posed by improvised explosive devices and to become party to related international and regional instruments.

Unanimously adopting resolution 2370 (2017), the Council reaffirmed its previous decision in resolution 1373 (2001) that all States should refrain from providing any form of support to those involved in terrorist acts, including by eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists. The Council also encouraged Member States to take appropriate steps to prevent and disrupt activity that would violate Council-mandated arms embargos and reaffirmed its intention to strengthen relevant arms embargoes’ monitoring mechanisms.

Sounds great! Except...The UN has not, to this day defined "terrorism." And as such, it cannot define who these terrorist groups are that should not be getting weapons.

To be sure, the resolution mentions ISIL and Al Qaeda explicitly. In the preamble, for example, it says “Strongly condemning the continued flow of weapons, including small arms and light weapons, military equipment, unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) and their components, and improvised explosive device (IED) components to and between ISIL (also known as Da’esh), Al-Qaida, their affiliates, and associated groups, illegal armed groups and criminals, and encouraging Member States to prevent and disrupt procurement networks for such weapons, systems and components between ISIL (also known as Da’esh), Al-Qaida and associated individuals, groups, undertakings and entities."

But Hamas, Hezbollah, and other groups that target civilians are not covered by this resolution. UN members say this explicitly, as this video I produced last year with Human Rights Voices shows:

The UN has not, to this day, defined terrorism. And members openly promote some kinds of terrorism. So forgive me for being skeptical that a group that doesn't know what terrorism is claims that they are fighting terror.

In the discussions before passing this resolution, the only moral clarity came from Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to the UN:

NIKKI HALEY (United States) noted that the resolution called attention to the obligation of all States to enforce United Nations arms embargoes. Despite the Council’s efforts, weapons continued to flow into Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere. That was an unacceptable stain on the Council’s authority that must be removed. Although great progress had been made against Da’esh and Al-Qaida, weapons continued to find their way into the hands of terrorists. One country, Iran, stood out for its deliberate actions to support terrorist groups. She recalled that, in 1984, the United States had designated Iran as a State sponsor of terrorism. Now, terrorist proxies were carrying out the Iranian regime’s will in Iraq and Syria, while with Iran’s support, Hizbullah was preparing for war in Lebanon through the build-up of a stockpile of weapons and battle-hardened troops. She encouraged the Council to be aware that weapons don’t just “fall” into the hands of terrorists; too often they were pushed. As long as Iran was allowed to violate the Council’s resolutions, it would be a source of weapons for terrorists.

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.

08/03 Links Pt2: The myth of Balad al-Shaykh. A massacre that never happened; Britain: A Summer of Anti-Semitism

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The Israel angle on McMaster's purge of Trump loyalists from the National Security Council

The Israel angle on McMaster's purge of Trump loyalists from the National Security Council is that all of these people are pro-Israel and oppose the Iran nuclear deal, positions that Trump holds.
McMaster in contrast is deeply hostile to Israel and to Trump. According to senior officials aware of his behavior, he constantly refers to Israel as the occupying power and insists falsely and constantly that a country named Palestine existed where Israel is located until 1948 when it was destroyed by the Jews.
Many of you will remember that a few days before Trump's visit to Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו and his advisers were blindsided when the Americans suddenly told them that no Israeli official was allowed to accompany Trump to the Western Wall.
What hasn't been reported is that it was McMaster who pressured Trump to agree not to let Netanyahu accompany him to the Western Wall. At the time, I and other reporters were led to believe that this was the decision of rogue anti-Israel officers at the US consulate in Jerusalem. But it wasn't. It was McMaster.
And even that, it works out wasn't sufficient for McMaster. He pressured Trump to cancel his visit to the Wall and only visit the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial -- ala the Islamists who insist that the only reason Israel exists is European guilt over the Holocaust.
In May, Adam Lovinger, a pro-Trump national security strategist on loan from the Pentagon's office of net assessment was summarily informed that his security clearance was revoked. He was fired and escorted from the White House like a spy and put on file duty at the Pentagon.
Lovinger is a seasoned strategic analyst who McMaster hated because he supported India over Pakistan, among other things.
Lovinger has not been told the grounds for his sudden loss of clearance but Mike Cernovich reported that the grounds were that he traveled to Israel for a family bar mitzvah. In other words, there were no grounds for dismissal. His boss at the Pentagon -- unbelievably named James Baker, is an Obama hire who hates Trump and supports Obama's agenda.

David Collier: The myth of Balad al-Shaykh. A massacre that never happened

Using historical Haganah records and the research of Uri Milstein, Benny Morris put together an account that was unable to accurately specify casualty numbers from the attack. Needing to rely on separate accounts that didn’t agree with each other, Morris was left to conclude in Birth Revisited (see page 101 of book, page 124 in PDF) that anywhere between twenty-one and seventy died.
When anti-Zionists are given a choice between two conflicting numbers, they will always choose the higher number. Ilan Pappe, who quotes Morris & Milstein as the source, simply says ‘over 60 died’ (Pappe, Ethnic Cleansing, pp59. 2006. One World). As Pappe has no other source listed, his use of ’60+’ highlights perfectly, the sort of shoddy, agenda driven, propaganda, that he produces and calls ‘history’. Thus a massacre of 60-70 people, is etched in our history books. Propaganda sites such as ‘Palestineremembered’, call it “a new years eve Massacre”. It is now firmly part of the bubble called ‘Nakba’.
Although this is the way history has recorded the Balad al-Shaykh ‘massacre’. The idea of the Palmach units going from house to house and executing dozens of people is a complete fabrication. Here is what really occurred:
....
This means that probably, nine Arabs died at Balad al-Shaykh. Seven adult males (assuming Mohammed Hasal is an adult male) and two children.
There were thirty people injured. The vast majority (about 25) male. Five of the injured were children. The male majority providing an indication of what actually happened. A mix of the two accounts. With a casualty figure stripped of the exaggeration of both sides. The Jews attempted a revenge attack for the events of the refinery, they were met with stiffer than expected resistance, they were forced to withdraw. Final fatality count. Nine Arabs, Three Jews.
This is how the Nakba myth is developed and propagated by sloppy historian activists who do not seem to care about the truth at all. An overestimate of twenty-one, became a massacre of sixty plus. In reality the death toll was probably nine. And all the while a file containing the truth was waiting to be uncovered in Kew.
As usual, this website conducts intensive research and fights to expose the truth. It is time to put the lie about Balad al-Shaykh to bed.

DISGUSTING: Australian Council Bans Building Of Synagogue Because It Could Be Targeted By Islamic Terrorists

A local council in Australia has banned the construction of a Jewish synagogue in Bondi out of fear that it could become a target of Islamic terrorism.
“The decision, which has rocked the longstanding Jewish community in the iconic suburb, was upheld in court this week as the nation reeled from the alleged airline terror threat and debate raged over increased security measures at airports and other public places,” reports news.com.au. “The Land and Environment Court backed the decision by Waverley Council to prohibit the construction of the synagogue in Wellington St, Bondi — just a few hundred metres from Australia’s most famous beach — because it was too much of a security risk for users and local residents.”
Adding insult to injury, the council is preventing the synagogue from submitting a plan with aggressive security measures. Their rationale? The measures would risk the “safety and security of future users of the Synagogue, nearby residents, motorists and pedestrians in Wellington Street and the physical measures proposed to deal with the identified threats will have an unacceptable impact on the streetscape and adjoining properties.”
Put another way, a strong security presence wouldn’t look all that great on the street corner.
The council’s campaign to shut down the synagogue has the already besieged Jewish community distraught. Community leaders are livid over what they see as a blatant infringement on freedom of religion. (h/t Yenta Press)

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

Tisha b’Av was weird for me this year. I sat in shul and listened to the eicha reading, and it spoke to me about current events, not about what happened thousands of years ago. Last week the Jewish people suffered a terrible defeat, but unlike the sack of Jerusalem life went on though the wall was already breached. Jerusalem wasn’t destroyed and we didn’t eat our children, and everything is continuing as it was before – perhaps there is an upsurge in Arab terrorism, but as yet it’s still small (give it time) – but notice or not, we have just passed over a crack in history, one of those currently invisible seams that historians a hundred years from now will describe as chasms.

The Arabs noticed. What most Jewish Israelis saw as yet another incident in Jerusalem (and most diaspora Jews had no idea even occurred) was marked by the Arabs with celebrations, giving out sweets and firing in the air. The Arabs who breathe the air of symbolism and national honor understood the significance of their victory over the yahood.

All your enemies have opened their mouths wide against you; they hissed and gnashed their teeth and said, "We have engulfed her! Indeed, this is the day we longed for; we have found it; we have seen it!" – Eicha, II-16

At first it seemed the opposite. It seemed as though we might have started to turn around what has been an inexorable process of retreat and submission that began almost immediately after our great victory in 1967, when the entirety of the holy city of Jerusalem and its Temple Mount came into our possession for the first time since the days of King David. “What do we need this whole Vatican for?” said Moshe Dayan, when he relinquished control of the Mount to the Muslim waqf and planted the seed for the conflict over the heart of our land that has been simmering and sometimes boiling ever since.

Dayan and the de facto alliance of Haredim and leftists that would be happy without “this whole Vatican” ignored the symbolic importance of this spot, the center of the world for Judaism. But the Arabs did not ignore it. Every chance they got, they pushed and chipped and nibbled away at the “status quo,” which actually hasn’t been static at all but has moved steadily in the direction of the Muslims for the past 50 years.

So our government installed metal detectors and cameras in response to the bloody murder of our policemen, a step that any rational being can understand, and the Arabs answered by inciting their street to rage and murdering three members of a Jewish family. But then the unexpected happened. The waqf called for a boycott of the site, and for the first time in years Jews could walk about on the Temple Mount unmolested!

Some of us thought that this time the Arabs had overreached themselves. This time all we have to do is stand firm to assert our sovereignty over the place that, after all, is in the center of our capital. Maybe this can be the start of a process that could bring about a change in the demeaning policy that Jews aren’t allowed to pray on the Temple Mount, or do anything (even to cry) that looks to our Muslim overlords like praying. Maybe more hours could be allocated to Jewish visits, and maybe the banshees that shriek allahu akbar into Jewish ears could finally be banished.

But as everyone knows, we did not stand firm. None of the above will happen. There were riots all over the country and even in Europe and the US, and our leaders, our Prime Minister, blinked. We removed the metal detectors, took down the security cameras, and when that didn’t calm the ravening mob we even removed the scaffolding that had been installed to hold the cameras. At the same time announcements were made about new super-high tech security devices that someday would replace them.

As if. The Arabs weren’t fooled. They understood that we had submitted to their demands, submitted, actually, to the power of Islam, because the Jewish people are weak, because we are cowards, because we aren’t prepared to fight for what belongs to us. All of the explanations, the excuse of the crisis with Jordan – we had to bring the hostages home, didn’t we? – the need to calm things down, the argument that the metal detectors would be difficult to use and wouldn’t provide adequate security (so no security is better?), it’s all a bunch of crap and the Arabs know it.

And the victory has made them hunger for more. Maybe it will become harder for Jews to visit the Mount. Or maybe they will press their claim for what they call the “al-Buraq wall” (our Kotel). Maybe they will find a new issue that nobody has thought of yet. Or maybe they will just try harder to murder Jews wherever and whenever they can.

What starts in Jerusalem spreads throughout the country. Just a few hours ago in a town next to mine, an Arab walked into a supermarket, pulled out a knife and stabbed one of the workers. The victim is currently fighting for his life. Expect more like this.

Our government made a serious mistake. But not because nobody predicted what would happen. Many voices in and out of politics told them to be strong. And not because they didn’t know what to expect. Simply, they couldn’t take the pressure, so they gave in.

Personally, I have lost confidence in PM Netanyahu. Not because I think he didn’t understand the situation or our enemies, but because he did. He understood, but he didn’t act with strength as he should have. It’s not the first time.

Today the Jewish state and Jewish people are threatened from multiple directions. There is very little room left for mistakes or weakness.

Where (and who) are our leaders?

And gone from the daughter of Zion is all her splendor; her princes were like harts who did not find pasture, and they departed without strength before their pursuer. – Eicha, I-6

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.

I saw this in Al Moslim in an article called "Do Jews Control the World?"

It doesn't matter what the final judgment on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is, whether they are true or false. What is happening on the ground has bypassed the Protocols and shown their validity implicitly; it does not matter if the document is true or fabricated.

There ya go.

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.

08/03 Links Pt1: Abbas' Guard: "Water freedom with blood of Palestine`s sons"; Gaza-Turkey-Hebron terror money trail uncovered

From Ian:

PMW: Abbas' Presidential Guard: "Water freedom with blood of Palestine`s sons"

Palestinian leaders have portrayed the last few weeks of Palestinian riots and protests against Israel's enhanced security measures at the Temple Mount as a "battle for the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem." When Israel ultimately removed its metal detectors and cameras, it was portrayed by Palestinians as a "victory," yet the PA warned it was only one of more "rounds of battle."
Celebrating this "victory," and possibly expecting future "wins" for Palestinians, the PA's Presidential Guards posted this comment, glorifying the sacrifice of "the blood of Palestine's sons" for "freedom":
"A people like the people of Palestine that has watered the freedom with the blood of its sons can only win #Yasser_Arafat" [Facebook page of the PA Presidential Guard, July 31, 2017]
Palestinian Media Watch has shown that PA and Fatah leaders are fond of the imagery of "watering Palestine with blood," and at times almost worship the "blood of Martyrs" who have "died for Palestine," as was the case during the wave of Palestinian terror attacks in 2015-2016.
The image posted with the PA Presidential Guards' endorsement of "watering with blood" shows a picture of Yasser Arafat overlaid with the colors of the Palestinian flag together with the PA map of "Palestine" that presents all of Israel as "Palestine" together with the PA areas, painted in the colors of the Palestinian flag. This designates Palestinian sovereignty over the entire area. As PMW has documented, the denial of Israel's right to exist is a consistent message of the PA.

UNRWA Jordan staff page celebrates Hamas rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. "You became Gaza. Allahu Akbar." https://t.co/6qAaeOl8r3 pic.twitter.com/eGzwG0IMc4
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) August 2, 2017

US video against PLO state a huge hit in Israel

A 5.5-minute video in which Middle East strategy analyst Mark Langfan explains the dangers on the "two state solution" has become a viral hit in Israel, more than three years after it originally aired on CBN.
After being featured in November on a Facebook page created by grassroots Zionist activists called Kol Ha'am ("The People's Voice"), the Hebrew-subtitled clip has garnered 367,000 views to date, which – combined with its views elsewhere on social media, puts it at a total of about 500,000 total views, most of them from Israelis.
In terms of views per population, this would be the equivalent of 33 million views for a video targeting the US audience. It is currently shooting up at over 20,000 views per day.
In the video, Langfan, a New York-based attorney, pro-Israel activist and media analyst appears on Erick Stakelbeck's show, "The Watchman", to clarify what could – and probably would – happen, if Israel were ever to allow Palestinian statehood in Judea and Samaria.
Using a three dimensional map of Israel, a few pieces of colored Plexiglas and a lot of old-fashioned common sense – Langfan demonstrates the ease with which Arab control of the mountainous Biblical heartland would place 70% of Israel's Jewish populace and 80% of its industrial base within the range of truck-based chemical weapons of mass destruction.

Hebrew Subtitles - Langfan on Stakelbeck The Watchman -- Part 1

Palestinians: "The US is not an honest broker. It doesn't support murdering Israelis" (ElderToon)

Has anyone else noticed how utterly insane this is?

Palestinians demanded Israel remove all security measures installed at the Temple Mount following the July 14 shooting. Greenblatt and Trump’s senior adviser (and son-in-law) Kushner made behind-the-scenes efforts to defuse the crisis. The Palestinians argue that the administration backed the Israeli government’s position while dismissing the Palestinian point of view.
“Greenblatt picked a side and represented Netanyahu throughout the crisis,” an unnamed senior Palestinian source told the Al-Monitor website this week.

The truly insane thing is that Israel caved on its own security in the face of Arab threats.

(Although I believe that, behind the scenes, Israel is going to quietly put increased security on the entrances to the Temple Mount over the next year without drawing any attention to it, betting that the Palestinians won't make as much of a stink without a noisy crisis accompanying it to mobilize them, like the one day closing of all access to the area. Whether these hidden cameras or whatever are as effective as metal detectors is a separate question.)

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.

Remember after Trump won the election, how the media suddenly became so concerned about antisemitism? We were bombarded with editorials and op-eds about a sharp rise in Jew-hatred, insisting that Trump bore the brunt of responsibility.

You might have forgotten.

After it saw the potential in attacking Trump for alleged ties to Russia, the media apparently dropped the "Trump encourages antisemitism!" meme and decided to pursue a more promising line of attack.

But over the course of one week, from February 15 through 21, the media claimed antisemitism was on the rise because of Trump, and The Washington Post featured pieces such as these:

o Trump was asked a question about anti-Semitism. His answer was about the electoral college.
o A CNN panel debates the president’s anti-Semitism trump card: His daughter Ivanka
o President Trump thinks asking him to condemn anti-Semitism is ‘insulting.’ Why?
o Why was it so darned hard to get Trump to condemn anti-Semitism?
o A brief history of Donald Trump addressing questions about racism and anti-Semitism

Matters had gone so far that by March 8, David Bernstein wrote a piece at The Washington Post on how out of proportion the claims of a rise in antisemitism had become:

...I’ve been rather taken aback by the panic in the Jewish community over American anti-Semitism since Donald Trump won the election. The recent spate of hoax bombing threats to Jewish community centers and other Jewish institutions around the country has been a precipitating factor, but the fear is drastically out of proportion to the threat; no bombs have been found, and there are no indications that there is any real physical threat to Jews.

Meanwhile, from February 21 to 23, The New York Times chimed in with:

o At Jewish Cemetery, Seeking Answers Amid Heartbreak
o The New American Anti-Semitism
o When Hate Haunts a Graveyard

At the end of that month, Ira Stoll wrote about Trump’s Big Achievement: Making the New York Times Care About Antisemitism, noting that while there were 10 incidents of Jewish graveyard desecration from 2008 to 2016, only 2 of them were reported by The New York Times.

Well -- good news!

Judging by the media's change in focus over the last few months, antisemitism is apparently no longer a problem.

Or is it just that the media has gone back to ignoring antisemitism again?

That would explain the media's reaction to 2 actual cases of antisemitism, cases that cannot be blamed on Donald Trump.

Imam Ammar Shahin. Source: YouTube screenshot

On July 21, Imam Ammar Shahin delivered a sermon at the Islamic Center of Davis, northern California -- inciting hatred against Jews:

Allah does not change the situation of people 'until they change their own situation.' The Prophet Muhammad said: 'Judgment Day will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Jews hide behind stones and trees, and the stones and the trees say: Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah...' They will not say: Oh Egyptian, oh Palestinian, oh Jordanian, oh Syrian, oh Afghan, oh Pakistani. The Prophet Muhammad says that they time will come, the Last Hour will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews. We don't say if it is in Palestine or another place. Until they fight... When that war breaks out, they will run and hide behind every rock, and house, and wall, and trees. The house, the wall, and the trees will call upon the Muslims. It will say: Oh Muslim... It will not say: Oh Palestinian, oh Egyptian, oh Syrian, oh Afghan, oh Pakistani, oh Indian... No, it will say: Oh Muslim. Muslim. When Muslims come back... 'Come, there is someone behind me – except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews. Except for a certain tree that they are growing today in Palestine, in that area, except this form of tree, which they are growing today... That's the tree that will not speak to the Muslims. [emphasis added]

In that sermon, Shahin quotes a Hadith known for its inclusion by Hamas terrorists in their charter:

The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,' except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews." (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim)

While he does not quote the last part about the trees telling Muslims to kill the Jews, Shahin's audience that day was likely familiar with the Hadith and could guess the point he was making, based on the rest of his sermon.

Jews in the area got the Imam's point too:

“He spelled out what he wishes for every Muslim who follows the Quran and the Hadith to follow what the Hadith says which is …find the Jews hiding behind trees and stones and kill them,” said Sorele Brownstein.

“To me, it’s clear this is direct incitement,” said Shmary Brownstein.

Rabbi Shmary Brownstein and his wife Sorele are the leaders of the Chabad in Davis. They say they’ve been on guard since the video was posted online. Their family is now being harassed by drivers passing by their home, which is also a house of worship.

Following the outcry over his sermon, and before his "apology" Shahin's gave an interview to CBS News -- and Shahin was not inclined to be apologetic:

The mosque where Shahin preaches was also not in an apologizing mood:

The mosque said in a statement Tuesday: “MEMRI, an extremist agenda driven organization that supports Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, and other Islamophobic news organizations, accused Imam Shahin of anti-Semitism, quoting edited, mistranslated, passages of the sermon out of context.

“If the sermon was misconstrued, we sincerely apologize to anyone offended,” it said. “We will continue our commitment to interfaith and community harmony.” [emphasis added]

Only after the outcry persisted, did Shahin finally apologize.

Meanwhile, on the same day Shahin preached against Jews, another California Imam, Mahmoud Harmoush, was praying for the destruction of Israel:

"Between World War I and World War II, so much of the immigration that came from Europe toward the Islamic world, whether North Africa or the Mediterranean area – Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and all of this... Muslims were opening their homes and saying: Those are our brethren, persecuted by the Christians in Europe. The Jews were coming from Germany, Poland, Italy, and everywhere else, and [the Muslims] would give them rooms, shelter them, and help them out, not knowing that there was a plan. Within the thirty years between the two incidents, until 1948 and the British occupation, everything was plotted to take over that beautiful land, in the way that we all know – with killing, crime, and massacres..."One brother sent me a video, showing a naked woman walking into the holy mosque under the occupation forces, just to insult more and more the psyche, honor, and dignity of the Muslims..."Allah wants us to have jihad in our lives, no matter what and where we are and what is happening. That's until in our hearts, we accept what is true and we reject what is false..."When you happen to be in Jerusalem, for example, around the holy mosque, and people are shooting you, putting you in the hospital, or killing you, you have to resist and fight back as much as you can. Otherwise our life will be meaningless..."Dear brothers and sisters, the conflict is not only in Palestine. They are going there, and they will be demanding that next..."I promise you, it is not only Palestine. If you are going to be like that, most of the Middle East, and even, as I said, Mecca and Medina...They will say: 'Muhammad has died. He left only daughters.' Muhammad died, and he left female children, who cannot fight. Then they will call, in their fighting: 'Oh, we will take revenge for Khaybar.' Where is Khaybar? They will go back to it. They will make every Muslim pay, one way or the other. Wake up, it is time to be a Muslim. Prayer is not the only thing..."Oh Allah, liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque and all the Muslim lands from the unjust tyrants and the occupiers. Oh Allah, destroy them, they are no match for You. Oh Allah, disperse them, and rend them asunder. Turn them into booty in the hands of the Muslims. [emphasis]

Like Shahin, Harmoush, does not directly mention Israel; he directs their hatred -- and Allah's destruction -- toward Jews.

So how did the media -- the same media that was so concerned about antisemitism early in the year -- react to these antisemitic sermons?

The reaction of the Washington Post was not to report on the antisemitic sermon when it was actually given. Instead, the newspaper waited until after Shahin finally apologized.

At Legal Insurrection, David Gerstman wrote that the Washington Post whitewashes California Imam’s “Annihilate the Jews” sermon:

For a full week The Washington Post was silent about this crude anti-Semitism. Only a week later did the Post cover it and a number of things are readily apparent.

1. The Post only reported once Shahin offered a dubious apology.
2. The Post never reported on Harmoush’s sermon. Harmoush did not apologize.
3. The Post reported uncritically a false claim made by Shahin and one of his supporters.
4. The Post got an expert to reinterpret part of his sermon so that it was somewhat less offensive.
The first two items are related. The news, which was first reported by MEMRI, on July 21 was that two California imams gave virulently anti-Semitic speeches calling for the killing of the Jews. That was the news.

The false claim referred to is that Israel supposedly closed the Al Aqsa Mosque. The truth is that it was closed at first after Arab terrorists killed 2 Israeli guards at the Temple Mount, while Israel finished its investigation. The Al Aqsa Mosque was then reopened, but Muslims were urged by the Waqf not to enter, because of the cameras and metal detectors installed for security.

The expert reinterpretation referred to was done by Nair Harb Michel, who basically substituted "desecrations of the Jews" for "filth of the Jews" and "defeat each of them" for "annihilate them".

Gerstman also notices that the reporter, Boorstein, acknowledges receiving a statement from Shahin on Wednesday -- 2 days before her article came out -- but held off until Shahin officially offered his public "apology". Again, The Washington Post appeared more interested in the damage control than in reporting about the kind of antisemitism they were apparently so keen on reporting earlier this year.

But regardless of how you translate the sermon, the fact remains that Shahin quoted a Hadith which clearly describes, if not encourages, killing Jews.

The Washington Post was not the only newspaper to play down the threatening nature of Shahin's sermon.

CAMERA noted that the Sacramento Bee Sanitizes Anti-Semitic Sermon. Among the criticisms made about the newspaper story:

o The Sacramento Bee reported the sermon's content as "Islamic texts about an end-times battle," deliberately concealing from its readers Shahin's actual language about Muslims fighting Jews.
o The Sacramento Bee reported that Mosque officials claimed the imam was mistranslated and thus taken out of context, yet in his sermon Shahin made statements about a "corrupted" Jewish Torah and the "Muslims fight the Jews," which were made in English and clearly illustrate his intent.
o The reporter, Anita Chabria, asked University of California, Berkeley, Near East professor Hatem Bazian to check the MEMRI translation, which he said "missed nuanced distinctions". However, CAMERA notes that Bazian:

is the founder of the radical anti-Israel group Students for Justice in Palestine, slurs Israel as an apartheid state, and is affiliated with, and fund-raised for, groups and individuals that have illegally financed Hamas, a designated terror organization committed to Israel's destruction.

CAMERA also refers to MEMRI, which notes that Shahin's sermon from the previous week was along the same antisemitic lines:

May Allah protect the Al-Aqsa Mosque from the harm of the Jews. Oh Allah, protect our brothers in the land of Palestine. Oh Allah, let us pray in the Al-Aqsa Mosque before we die. Oh Allah, allow Jerusalem to be liberated. Oh Allah, liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews. Oh Allah, show us the wonders of Your ability that you inflict upon them. Oh Allah, show us the black day that You inflict upon them. Oh Allah, show us the black day that You inflict upon those who wish ill upon [the Al-Aqsa] Mosque. Oh Allah, keep them preoccupied with one another, and make a deterrent example out of them. Oh Allah, count them one by one and destroy them down to the very last one. Do not spare any of them. Oh Allah, destroy them and do not spare their young or their elderly. Oh Allah, show us the black day that You inflict upon those who occupy Palestine. Oh Allah, show us the wonders of Your ability that you inflict upon them. Oh Allah, turn Jerusalem and Palestine into a graveyard for the Jews.

On the other hand, The New York Times settled for a bare-bones report about the sermon, provided by the Associated Press. It noted:

In a July 21 sermon, Shahin condoned the annihilation of Jews and those restricting access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The truth of course is that Shahin did not condone the annihilation of Jews -- he was encouraging it. His apology is noted, but leaves unclear how an imam can talk about annihilating Jews yet can apologize -- and apparently have his apology accepted.

As opposed to The Washington Post (30 paragraphs) and the Sacramento Bee (23 paragraphs) which go into depth in their whitewash of Shahin's sermon, The New York Times uses the AP story, which amounts to playing down the incident in 9 short paragraphs, as if the whole thing is not worth the reader's attention.

How did Jew-hatred suddenly become so unworthy of being considered a news item?

Trump should only be so lucky.

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.

Ma'an denies it promotes terror. It is lying.

On Tuesday, I was the first one to report on a music video, produced in Hebrew, that glorified killing Jews. I pointed out that Ma'an News Agency was pushing this video on its Arabic website.

Now Ma'an has responded on its English website:

Far-right Israelis denounced Ma’an news agency on social media on Wednesday for publishing an article about a song advocating for violence against Israelis, erroneously claiming that the song itself was written and produced by Ma’an.
On Tuesday, Ma’an’s Arabic-language site posted an article entitled “A song in Hebrew for the Al-Aqsa Mosque,” reporting that a Hebrew-language video clip called “Defending Al-Aqsa” was being shared on social media, and clarifying that neither the singer nor the songwriter were identified.
The song threatened the use of violence against Jewish Israelis, with lyrics such as “Intelligence, soldier, settler, and police/ I’ll attack, stab, and smash you,” and calls to “cleanse Palestine of Jews.”
Ma’an General Director Raed Othman has confirmed that Ma’an did not produce the video, but had only written about its existence.
Both the article and the video have since been removed from Ma'an online platforms.
However, a number of Israel supporters shared a link to one of Ma’an’s Youtube accounts -- on which the news agency uploads all videos it links to on its website -- showing the video out of context and claiming that it was created and condoned by Ma’an.

I certainly didn't claim that Ma'an was behind the video. As far as I can tell, neither did anyone else. But there is no doubt that Ma'an publicized it, without a negative word about its violent, pro-terror and antisemitic content.

It acted as a marketing partner for a video that incites violence without the least moral qualm.

Every single other Arabic site I could find, that mentions the video, links to Ma'an's (now removed) YouTube post of the video, not the original, indicating that if it wasn't for Ma'an, no one would have heard of it. If it was going viral on social media than at least one other news site would have linked to the original instead of to Ma'an's edit. It was difficult to track down the original on YouTube. That video only had a few thousand views - hardly evidence of it being popular considering the hundreds of thousands of views we've seen other videos get.

Moreover, as far as I can tell, Ma'an only mentioned the video being removed on its English website. It didn't publish this denial on its Arabic website. The reason is because Ma'an's Arabic website is the one that routinely calls any dead terrorist a "martyr" and that indeed tacitly celebrates terror attacks. In Arabic, Ma'an was clearly linking itself with the video, although not explicitly. It only denies such linkage for its Western donors who don't bother to read the Arabic site.

Ma'an didn't seem to try too hard to find out who the originator of the video was, which seems strange for a news organization that pretends that it only published the video because it was newsworthy. Without any background, any indication of how popular it is, any quotes from anyone about the video, Ma'an wasn't reporting about a newsworthy video - it was simply advertising it.

Putting all of these together, Ma'an is acting disingenuously by denying something that no one really accused it of (as far as I can tell) and by only distancing itself from the video in English, not in Arabic.

I found another Hebrew-language music video that celebrates murdering Jews even more explicitly with similar graphics and a similar theme that was released in February, that also did not achieve any real fame. YNet says that this was from Hamas, which indicates that the other one was from Hamas as well. (h/t Israellycool)

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.

08/02 Links Pt2: Camp Stupid USA; Former UN Rapporteur Falk is a member of antisemitic FB groups

From Ian:

Camp Stupid USA

Ordinarily a story like this – the “Palestinian” flag flying over a Jewish camp for kids in Washington State, USA – would rate scant attention, except that it symbolizes two points: 1. Our desperate need to be loved. 2. It happened at the time when an Islamic preacher in California got caught sermonizing death to all Jews.
That imam at Davis, CA lamely apologized (to stem the bad PR), and so did the officials at Camp Solomon Schechter who explained that they won’t do it again, but that they hoisted the flag because some Arab kids were coming to visit so this would be a good time for some solidarity.
According to them at the camp, it was meant to provide “a teachable moment” and to foster “empathy…”hope”…”love”…and “peace.”
Talk like that is not exclusive to that camp where the leaders meant no harm and no disrespect to Israel. Their apology, I do believe.
They were simply caught being stupid.
Stupid is who we are when we keep pleading for acceptance against enemies who just won’t take love for an answer.
Groveling is what we do even at home in America and even with Israel at our side; blessings that ought to make us feel high spirited and invincible instead of pathetic and submissive. (Borrowed from and based upon the novel “The Bathsheba Deadline.”)
I guess it’s too late to remind (some) American Jews that the “Palestinian” flag represents nothing, zero, since there is no “Palestinian” country or nation…and if it does mean anything, it means precisely what that imam preached – “the annihilation of all Jews everywhere.”

Author of anti-Israel UN report is mixed up in antisemitic FB groups

Richard Falk, an American professor who has held multiple positions at the United Nations which he has in the past notoriously used to propel an anti-Israel agenda, was discovered to be a member of an antisemitic hate group on Facebook.
Sources close to The Jerusalem Post discovered Falk is one of 5,408 members of "Shoah," the Facebook group of an organization by the same name. The British group began operating in 2011 with the aim of ending "Zio-Nazi oppression" and the "environmental destruction of Palestine."
Although the complete members list and the true total number of members is visible only to accepted members, The Jerusalem Post obtained a screenshot of Falk's membership as of Sunday, July 30, 2017:
Screenshot of Richard Falk's membership in the Shoah: Palestinian Holocaust Facebook Group, taken in July, 2017.Screenshot of Richard Falk's membership in the Shoah: Palestinian Holocaust Facebook Group, taken in July, 2017.
The Shoah Facebook group has spread severely anti-Israel and antisemitic imagery, often depicting Israel and global Jewry as one and the same:
When questioned about his membership in the group, Falk told The Jerusalem Post, "Thank you [for] notifying me. I had never heard of this group before. I went to the link for the group, and found out that I had been added by someone named John Phoenix, whom I don't know..."
This is a curious statement, considering Falk is friends with John Phoenix (the administrator of the Shoah group) on that same Facebook account. Being "friends" on Facebook requires action by both parties:

Breaking silence, AIPAC announces support for Taylor Force Act

A day before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider a revised version of a measure that would strip US funding to the Palestinian Authority over its practice of paying terrorists and their families, the most powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington broke its silence and came out in support of the bill.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) urged the committee Wednesday to vote yes on the Taylor Force Act. The committee is due to meet on Thursday and the bill is on the committee’s agenda. Passage would send the bill to the entire Senate chamber.
For the last several months — since South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) introduced the motion in February — AIPAC has refrained from unequivocally endorsing the bill, instead saying simply that it supported its principle objective.
But after the Senate unveiled an updated version Tuesday, AIPAC was prepared to fully embrace the bill.
The new text incorporates some of the concerns expressed among committee members, like allowing for continued funding to the PA for humanitarian efforts and security cooperation, but it does not include a waiver that would grant the US president the ability to disregard the law on national security grounds.
AIPAC signaled on Wednesday that the provisions were critical for earning its backing.

Michael Behar broke an important story this week, though you've probably never heard of him. He's the guy who first wrote about Camp Solomon Shechter flying a Palestinian flag. But you'd never know it from reading the coverage of that story. Because not a single one of the news outlets that subsequently ran the story thought to credit him.

Not the JTA nor any of the various news outlets that subscribe to this resource, for instance, Fox, Tablet, and Israel International News.

Not that Michael cares. What he cares about, is Israel. That is at the heart and soul of all the work he does.

(Of course, I thought it was DISGUSTING. Journalists and bloggers who do that sort of thing—yoink stories without credit—are generally shunned. Basic journalistic standards demand crediting one's sources for stories. It's just not right what they did, those news outlets.)

That story was a shocker. The camp did its best to clean up the mess it made after the fact, but its apology ran far short of even a modicum of sincerity. The administrators of the camp seemed only to be sorry about the fact that things got "political." As if it were not "political" for a Jewish camp to fly the flag of a wannabe state that would be founded on the principle that Israel cease to exist.

Now Mike and I have been friends for five years. He has shared every single piece I've ever written during that time (and that's a considerable number of pieces). We also collaborated on articles here and there.

No one has been as staunch a supporter of my views as Michael Behar. So naturally, I was going to share his shocker of a story. But I was going to share it even if I didn't know Michael from a hole in the wall. Because it was a huge story. And being that it was, in fact, coming from Michael, I knew it was a TRUE story, to boot.

He's the most honest guy I know.

Friends were sharing my share of his piece, and oddly, people kept sending me the link to it by PM. That's how I knew this was a big story. The kind of story bloggers dream about. Except for bloggers like Michael, who really don't care about fame and page views. (In case you're wondering, his piece got over 9K likes, which is all but unheard of in blogging circles, an amazing number.)

Like I said, Michael cares about Israel. So much so that during the last war with Gaza, Mike and his wife had siren apps on their phones so their kids would know what Israel was going through, and empathize. Michael's blogs are all about fighting the good fight for the land he loves most of all.

Imagine my surprise then, to wake up to a message request from one Yohanna Kinberg. She wrote:

"Please do not share anything from the Mike Report. He brings shame to Israel and the Jewish people through his lies, propaganda and hatred. He targets other Jews and fosters baseless hatred in our community. Sharing his words reflects poorly. Please delete what you shared, especially what he wrote about Camp Solomon Schechter. You do not want to be a part of spreading such negativity and animosity towards fellow Jews. Ahavat Yisrael: let us foster love and not hate."

This to me, was worse than what the journalists did by not crediting Michael for breaking the story. Kinberg was saying terrible things about Michael, horrible things, things that seemed the complete opposite of what I knew to be true. This, during the nine days leading up to Tisha B'Av, a time when observant Jews attempt to rectify the sin that led to the destruction of the Temple, that of baseless hatred.

Moreover, Michael's piece was honest. The camp did, in fact, fly the Ashaf (PLO) flag. Note that the PLO's charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. Not to mention continued terror against Jews. Which they call "resistance."

Why did Kinberg want to suppress Michael's blog piece? Why was she smearing him, a hateful act, and accusing him of "baseless hatred?" How does it foster love to fly the flag of a people determined to annihilate us?

It sure did seem like the animosity was all hers: all Rabbi Kinberg's.

I went to Michael and asked him if he knew her, and what this was all about. He said:

"Look, my blog focuses on the intersection of Israel and the Pacific Northwest so naturally as a local public figure, Rabbi Kinberg’s anti-Israel activism from my perspective is newsworthy. I’ve been told that Rabbi Kinberg has been on some sort of angry personal crusade against me, that’s okay—I see it as a symptom of the frustration she and her cohort feel over not having a monopoly on the narrative. I don’t take it seriously; she pretty much just lashes out online in the same way President Trump does when the press doesn’t frame a story to his liking.

"I am amused by her serial contradictions. Let me give you a few examples. She asserts that it is noble and brave to publicly vilify the Jewish state, but divisive and cowardly for bloggers to report that she has publicly vilified the Jewish state. She railed against a local synagogue for screening a film critical of J-Street, saying it was divisive, and then joined a public rally against AIPAC. She marches with the rabidly anti-Israel group IfNotNow and then excoriates anybody who dares to question her pro-Israel bona fides."

I was beginning to understand. "But," I wondered aloud, "Doesn't it bother you, her going behind your back and saying such awful things about you?"

"Nope. Aside from when I am reporting on her anti-Israel activities, I give her not a moment’s thought."

"Wow," I said. "I couldn't do that. I would be up all night tossing and turning."

"Well, I bear no animosity towards Rabbi Kinberg, I believe she is in many cases wrong, but she is entitled to her opinion.

"She seems to sincerely believe that she can march in an anti-Israel rally and that nobody is allowed to report on it unless it includes praise for her resilience, virtue and bravery. Her idea of Israel advocacy is marching with IfNotNow, a radical group that is agnostic on whether or not a Jewish state should even exist. She seems to be upset that I identified the anti-Israel march in which she participated. She libels as haters those who love Israel and long for peace.

"If she wishes to foment hate towards her fellow Jews that is her right, but it doesn't reflect well on her or her congregation."

"No it certainly doesn't," I said. "Especially so close to Tisha B'Av."

"Exactly," said Michael, "At a time when we need to have difficult conversations with those with whom we disagree Rabbi Kinberg is doing real damage to our community. She simply labels good people as haters and tries to shut them down.

"Baseless hatred brought destruction to our people. My prayer is that Rabbi Kinberg will open her heart to her fellow Jews, even Israel lovers. She cannot seem to fathom that those with whom she disagrees may be good people who long for peace as much, if not more so than her."

"Okay," I said. "But to simply shut people down, to try to suppress opposite viewpoints??"

"Shutting down the conversation is exactly the wrong approach, we need to be able to listen to one another," said Michael. "She has a history of trying to shut down different perspectives. She tried to stop a pro-Israel film from being screened in Seattle and seems to think supporting Israel is hate speech. To her, those who disagree are not just wrong, they are expressing anti-Jewish values. Of course, she gets to decide what Jewish values are."

All that day and during the long Tisha B'Av fast, I tried to make sense of it: Michael telling the truth, Rabbi Kinberg attempting to suppress his piece and calling it hate. Should it not be somewhat shocking to be approached during the Nine Days by a rabbi spreading rechilut (defamation) and lashon hara (harmful gossip)? This, in fact, was why the temple was destroyed.

In Rabbi Kinberg's words, I saw nothing of peace, understanding, or love. I saw one Jew denigrating and demonizing a fellow Jew, someone I knew to be a lover of peace and a lover of Israel.

My friend, Michael.

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.

Truck Drivers Unloading Tons Of Food In Gaza Unaware Of Brutal Siege (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Kerem Shalom Crossing, August 2 - Logistics personnel handling the hundreds of tons of foodstuffs, commercial goods, medical supplies, and other essentials that move into the Gaza Strip each day from Israel remain oblivious to the fact that the Gaza Strip is under siege, with nothing allowed in or out, local sources are reporting.

Truck drivers, fork lift operators, and other cargo delivery and processing professionals on the Palestinian side of the facility handle hundreds of incoming truckloads of such goods and materials each day from Israel, receiving delivery and coordinating further distribution of the cargo throughout the coastal territory. However, not a single member of the staff at the facility, nor a single driver, clerk, or other functionary appears to know about the cruel Israeli siege that is stifling Gaza's economy, causing shortage of medical and other crucial supplies, and threatening the entire population of almost 2 million Palestinians with starvation. Instead, they continue to process the importation of thousands of tons of goods per day to deliver, to supermarkets, warehouses, restaurants, hotels, hospitals, luxury boutiques, and other establishments that have imported the goods from or through Israel, as if no siege is underway.

"I don't know how they can be so ignorant," remarked Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch. "Don't they get their news from the same sources as the rest of us, according to which Israel's blockade and control of the border with Gaza are causing rampant malnutrition, power outages, and other disasters?"

The mystery of the workers' apparent ignorance deepens when one examines official Palestinian rhetoric, notably that of the Islamist Hamas organization that runs the Gaza Strip. "There is no way they can be unaware of the barrage of 'we're under siege' and 'they are depriving us of basic necessities' talk from Palestinian sources inside and outside Gaza," observed Jacob Burns of Amnesty International. "It's axiomatic that Israel's policies are the root of all Palestinian suffering - the human rights industr- I mean community established that long ago. Its doubly confusing to have such people who must answer to the Palestinian leadership, owing to the nature of their jobs, not aware that they are supposed to be acting accordingly, not just receiving tons and tons of goods without so much as a mention of the deadly, sadistic, illegal siege."

"In fact it's so bad that Gazans have taken to desperate measures to assuage their own suffering," he added. "It's painful to watch."

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.