Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Keith Ellison is Offended (Judean Rose)

Rep. Keith Ellison (D), the vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee says it is offensive that anyone would ask him to denounce antisemitism, "I got to tell you it is frustrating to be pulled out and be in... and it’s like it’s your daily moment to denounce anti-Semitism. We denounce it. We absolutely denounce it. We think it is reprehensible, murderous, and genocidal. And it offends me that anyone would insist that I do it one more time."

Oh yeah. Completely offensive. After all, why should the man be repeatedly asked to denounce antisemitism, just because he was in the room with Louis Farrakhan ~~a long time ago~~ er, not so long ago. For instance at the private dinner held by Farrakhan that Ellison attended back in 2013 (along with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani). Not to mention that time Ellison met with Farrakhan in the Nation of Islam leader’s hotel room for a long chat, WAY back in 2016.

Of course, if you ask Ellison, he’ll lie and say he hasn’t met with Farrakhan since 2006, when he first ran for Congress.

Yes. Ellison has lied and been caught at it, scrambling after the fact and calling his intimate talk with Farrakhan in his hotel room, in 2016, a “chance meeting.”

Just a "chance meeting" with Farrakhan, the guy who said things like, "Jews were responsible for all of this filth and degenerate behavior that Hollywood is putting out, turning men into women and women into men,” and “Let me tell you something, when you want something in this world, the Jew holds the door.”

But what difference does it make what Farrakhan says? Words? They aren't a danger to anyone. Says Ellison:

"In Charlottesville last year they was marching through town yelling, ‘Jews will not replace us.’ Wasn’t no black people in that crowd.

"I gotta just say this to you. Any form of bigotry at all including antisemitism is going beyond the pale. But let’s keep in mind what is gonna kill somebody. Like what happened to Heather Heyer. Like the threats to synagogues."

Because expressions of antisemitism? Nope. That's not the start of anyone actually killing Jews. Right?

But we're not speaking of Hitler. We're speaking of the guy Ellison termed a “role model” in columns he wrote in the 80’s and 90’s, before he ever ran for public office (in 2006, around the time he denounced the Nation of Islam, lather, rinse, repeat). Which tells you something about the sincerity of Ellison’s denunciation of antisemitism. Because he's still hanging with the guy, with Farrakhan. As late as in 2016.

Now what would you think of me if I hung out with Hitler in his hotel room, just by chance? Arafat? Bashar Assad? Stalin? Wouldn’t you question the nature of that meeting, that association? My character??

Of course you would. But if you question the association between Ellison and Farrakhan, it’s a smear. And Ellison? He is frustrated.

"It is frustrating to be pulled out and, it’s like your daily moment to denounce antisemitism.”

The nerve of us. Asking the man to denounce antisemitism, again and again. Well, what does it actually matter that Ellison had an intimate chat with the man in his hotel room, because Farrakhan is irrelevant. Says Ellison.

“Look, I gotta be honest with you and tell you, this thing about Farrakhan being absolutely radioactive and then trying to connect anyone possible to him and then make them radioactive, is. . . Look, Farrakhan’s organization is tiny, they don’t have any influence, nobody listens to them, they don’t have any answers for anyone. Nobody’s paying any attention to them. I’m telling you, they’re not. I mean, give me credit for leading my life.

“Farrakhan is irrelevant. To any politics. Nobody ca- - is he working on health care, is he working on anything? Is anyone thinking oh yeah, I’m gonna be an antisemite like him. No one is saying that. What I’m telling you is, the only way Farrakhan gets in the news is if someone tries to say, oh this black person whose whole life is dedicated to human rights met him or saw him or was in a room with him. It’s a smear, Man. I’m sorry, it is a smear.”

Irrelevant. Just as Hitler was an irrelevant house painter.

Until he wasn't.

Now not only are we smearing Ellison and offending him by drawing attention to his association with Farrakhan, but Farrakhan should moreover, according to Ellison, be given a pass for his antisemitism.

Because slavery.

“Let me tell you, here’s the truth of the matter, if we’re more interested in that: Farrakhan is known best for things like the Million Man March, and fiery rhetoric condemning American racism. He’s also well known for his antisemitic scapegoating of the Jewish community. Because you’re talking about people who spent 250 years in slavery, another 100 hundred years in Jim Crow government sponsored segregation and it’s only been around 16 years since anything else has been going on and we still have disparities in every aspect of American life, the black community is susceptible to a person who is going to stand up and say what’s happening to us is wrong.”

Now THAT is interesting. Because Ellison is essentially saying black people get a pass for anti-Jewish bigotry because blacks were enslaved for 250 years followed by 100 years of Jim Crow.

Which is funny.

Because the Jews spent 410 years in slavery, followed by close to 3000 years of persecution which includes the systematic murder of over 6 million of the Jewish people.

And yet in the 1960’s, the Jews were empathetic to the plight of black Americans, helped to form the NAACP, and marched alongside black people in Selma.

No. It’s not slavery or the years of Jim Crow that give black people like Farrakhan a pass for his antisemitism.

Actually, nothing does that.

And frankly, Ellison taking offense at being accused of antisemitism, instead of owning up to it—to the association with the antisemitic Nation of Islam, and its antisemitic leader Farrakhan—is offensive.

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.

Islamic Jihad Leader Hospitalized After Mossad Remotely Causes Brain Bleeding With 'Stroke Of Genius' Weapon (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Beirut, April 11 - The head of a militant Islamist group dedicated to the violent destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic state of Palestine in its place suffered a "brain attack" yesterday and underwent surgery to prevent further deterioration, following what observers believe to be the inaugural use of an Israeli device that causes such medical emergencies by remote means.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad chief Ramadan Shalah was admitted to Dahiyya Hospital in the Lebanese capital Tuesday for treatment of a stroke - the object of Israel's new weapon called the Stroke of Genius. PIJ spokesmen rushed to dispel rumors that the hospitalization resulted from poisoning, prompting observers to conclude that since all Arab or Islamic misfortune stems from Israel, the latter must be in possession of technology that induces non-poisoning medical threats from afar.

"We wish to allay fears that our brother Ramadan has been poisoned," assured Hemo Rajj, a spokesman in Damascus. "He is recovering from surgery after suffering a stroke." The report led his audience and the group's followers and supporters to determine that Mr. Shalah's medical incident must have been caused by some other Israeli action.

"Well, if not poisoning, and it's a stroke, there can be only one reasonable conclusion," surmised Anu Rism, an analyst with Al Jazeera. "First, We know Mr. Shalah takes very good care of his health and does not suffer from high blood pressure, which is normally the major factor in a stroke. Therefore all indications point to Zionist origins for this situation. Second, We also know that Islamic Jihad's hosts in Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and Sudan offer the best possible protection against direct harm. Thus we are forced to the realization that Israel possesses technology that can induce strokes by remote means. Third, and this is more speculative, we have heard much talk about Israeli maneuvers or decisions as 'strokes of genius,' a term that conveniently showcases Zionist arrogance as a name for the technology. QED, as they say."

The capabilities, range, and other aspects of Stroke of Genius remain unknown quantities, causing consternation in Arab capitals and among high-ranking members of terrorist organizations. In the assessment of Hamas spokesman Mahmoud al-Zahar, the very uncertainty can serve as a weapon in itself, much in the way Israel's official silence on the existence of the country's nuclear arsenal provided a measure of deterrence through the years. "I'ts just another thing we have to worry about," noted al-Zahar. We're all about embracing a violent death in pursuit of jihad, but embracing a doddering, incontinent senility in pursuit of jihad isn't nearly as sexy."

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.

04/11 Links Pt1: PMW: Photo of concentration camp victims misrepresented as Arab victims of Jews; Report: 80% of Palestinians killed in Gaza border crisis were terrorists

From Ian:

PMW: PA Holocaust abuse: Photo of concentration camp victims misrepresented as Arab victims of Jews

PA Holocaust abuse: PA TV misrepresented a photo of concentration camp victims as Arabs, and wrote Jews burned Arabs in ovens

PA TV lie #1: PA TV distorted a photo of victims murdered in a concentration camp. PA erased the images of corpses in striped concentration camp uniforms; erased images of the American soldiers who had liberated the camp; erased images of the concentration camp buildings; and presented photo of the remaining dead bodies as Arab victims of Jews in 1948.

PA TV lie #2: PA TV claimed that the Jewish fighters burned Arabs in ovens in 1948:
"And they [the Jews] burned the women and children in the village's oven"

PA TV lie #3: Photo of victims of massacre in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camp by Christian Lebanese was likewise presented as Arab victims of Jews in 1948

Just days before Israel's Holocaust Memorial Day, Palestinian Authority Holocaust abuse and exploitation has reached a new low. PA TV misappropriated a photo showing hundreds of dead bodies at the Nazi concentration camp at Nordhausen, originally a subcamp of Buchenwald, presenting them as Arabs killed by Jews on April 9, 1948 in the Arab village of Deir Yassin.

The actual picture, which was taken right after liberation of the concentration camp by the American army, was carefully distorted by PA TV so that the images of the corpses in the striped concentration camp uniforms, the American soldiers, and the concentration camp buildings were not seen. The following caption was added by PA TV: “When they killed and mutilated the bodies of 250 women, children and elderly residents.”

Responding to a Saudi public figure's condemnation of the Holocaust, 'Isam Shawar said Arabs should support the Palestinians "before sympathizing with the Jews and their lies."https://t.co/VvYgCZIxf9 pic.twitter.com/3sXvin5Tll
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) April 11, 2018

Michael Doran: Trump Needs to Be More Trumpian in Syria

A precipitous departure will also cede leverage to Iran at the very moment when United States-Iranian conflict is set to escalate. On May 12, Mr. Trump may well decide to reimpose nuclear sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Restructuring the nuclear deal to American specifications requires convincing Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, that America is resolute in its determination to pare down the Iranian nuclear program. Retreating from Syria will foster the opposite impression. Mr. Trump should be thinking instead of exploiting Iranian weaknesses.

Here the Israelis are the key. Their attack on Monday on an Iranian base in the Syrian desert is striking not just for the military and intelligence capabilities it demonstrated but also for the defiance of Mr. Putin. Boldness and ability of this magnitude in an ally is a four-star asset that Mr. Trump’s Mideast policy has so far failed to exploit.

Imagine if Washington and Jerusalem were to develop a joint military plan designed to contain and degrade Iranian forces in Syria.

Even a limited American military commitment to a coordinated United States-Israeli strategy would immediately change the balance of power on the ground. It would most likely engender more diplomatic cooperation from Mr. Putin while sending a powerful message to Tehran about the necessity of respecting American demands regarding its nuclear program.

Going forward, Mr. Trump should stick to his campaign promise and keep mum about his plans. Meantime, he should reconsider his intention to withdraw. As it is, the United States has a small footprint in Syria — an estimated 2,000 troops. The right strategy could reduce those numbers further while gaining even more of that precious commodity over Iran and Russia: leverage.

State Department Spokesperson Condemns U.N. for Letting Syria Chair Disarmament Forum

State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert condemned the United Nations’ (U.N.) decision to allow Syria to chair the organization’s disarmament forum in May.

In response to U.N. Watch’s question on the matter, Nauert called the U.N. decision an “outrage.”

“That would be an outrage if Syria were to take control of that,” Nauert said. “We have seen these types of things happen at the United Nations before, where suspicious countries, countries that run against everything that an individual committee should stand for, will then head up that committee.”

Nauert added that she didn’t know what United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley is going to do in response to this U.N. decision.

Hillel Neuer, the president of U.N. Watch, called out European countries for not speaking out against the U.N. on this matter.

“If UK, France, Germany & others stay silent as Syria assumes presidency of UN’s Conference on Disarmament—the body which produced the treaty against chemical weapons—this will make a mockery of everything they said this week,” Neuer tweeted.

"That Would be An Outrage" — State Dept. on UN Watch protest of Syria heading UN disarmament forum

Haaretz yesterday published what it must have thought was a sensational story of how oil from Kurdistan is coming to Israel:

One day Samir Madani, a Kuwaiti oil trader living in Sweden, noticed something strange. He had always been captivated by oil and its influence on political relations, in peacetime and wartime, so much so that he created the website TankerTrackers.com.

Some might think that watching tankers is boring, given that they usually coast along predetermined routes. But in November 2017, Madani noticed that the oil tanker Valtamed, heading to the Suez Canal from the Turkish port of Ceyhan – which is supplied by the oil pipeline from the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq – suddenly stopped somewhere in the eastern Mediterranean, off Tel Aviv but outside Israel’s territorial borders, and turned off its identification transponder. When it “resurfaced” a few days later, it was lighter, Madani realized.

After mysteriously growing lighter off Israeli shores, the Valtamed sailed to Cyprus, returned empty to its home base in Turkey, loaded up on oil that had arrived from northern Iraq and repeated the whole journey, including the disappearing act. Madani understood that this was something bigger than just a ship going haywire.

His conclusion was that the Valtamed had been shipping oil that wasn’t recorded anywhere to a country that wasn’t supposed to buy it – in other words, Israel was secretly buying Kurdish oil through Turkey.

The thing is, this has been well-known for years. i24News had a 2017 article about Kurdish oil going from its pipeline to Turkey to Israel, and Financial Times noted this clandestine trade back in 2015:

Israeli refineries and oil companies imported more than 19m barrels of Kurdish oil between the beginning of May and August 11, according to shipping data, trading sources and satellite tanker tracking. This would be worth almost $1bn based on international prices over the period.

That is the equivalent of about 77 per cent of average Israeli demand, which runs at roughly 240,000 barrels per day. More than a third of all of the northern Iraqi exports, which are shipped from Turkey’s Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, went to Israel over the period.

The KRG said it did not sell oil to Israel “directly or indirectly”, but ties between Erbil and the country stretch back several decades, with both sides finding common ground as non-Arab, western-allied states.

“We do not care where the oil goes once we have delivered it to the traders,” a senior Kurdish government adviser in Erbil said.

But now that Haaretz has published its belated expose, Iraq is upset - and a member of its parliament is hinting that Jewish brokers are stealing Iraqi oil.

A member of the committee on oil and energy in parliament, Aziz Kazem Alwan, said on Tuesday that the Kurdistan region is selling oil for a discount, and he did not exclude the theft by brokers working for Israel, buying Iraqi oil.

Alwan told Baghdad Today that "his committee does not have any information about the target of the sales of the Kurdistan region of oil," pointing out that "the lack of control by the federal government means that the region can sell oil to any country, including selling oil for less than its price."

"It is not out of the question that the oil is being sold from the Kurdistan region to Israel, through Jewish brokers," he said, stressing the need for "the presence of federal control over the sale of oil from the region, to know where the oil of Iraq goes, and even prevent the theft by Israel, brokers or others."

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

The European Journal of International Relations published an article called "Ritualised securitisation: The European Union’s failed response to Hamas’s success" by Catherine Charrett, of Queen Mary University of London.

She argues that the EU's failure to embrace Hamas as a democratic, liberal and legitimate leader of Palestinians was a type of ritual that was forced on them by Israel:

Here's the abstract:

Why and how do political leaders and bureaucrats miss opportunities or make mistakes? This article explores the pressures to conform and to perform that direct securitising decisions and practices. It begins with the assertion that the European Union missed an opportunity to engage with Hamas after the movement’s participation and success in transparent and democratically legitimated elections, and instead promoted a politics of increased securitisation. The securitisation of Hamas worked against the European Union’s own stated aims of state-building and democratisation, and increased the resistance image of Hamas. This article investigates the rituals that shaped this decision, arguing that punitive and conforming dynamics implicated the knowing of the event. Performance studies and anthropology observe how rituals let participants know how to behave in a given situation, and they performatively constitute a social reality through the appearance of normalcy or harmony. Hamas was reproduced as threat through the European Union’s compulsion to repeat a policy of conditionality, which was performative of Hamas’s ability to respond diplomatically to its own securitisation. First, at a discursive level, rituals simplify or reduce the complexity of an event by allowing participants to respond to new issues through existing regimes of intelligibility. Second, at a practice level, rituals impose an imperative to perform within the workplace, which limits the possibility for dissent or for challenging hierarchy within the institution. This investigation relies on elite interviews with senior Hamas representatives conducted in Gaza, and interviews with European Union representatives who were involved in monitoring the elections and enacting a response to Hamas’s success.

Yes, EU policy to not work with a terror organization is being represented in anthropological terms as a ritual of treating terrorists as terrorists. Of course, they are conforming to Israeli demands.

Here is a key passage in the paper:

Securitisation closes down the possibility of compromise or partial engagement. The structure of the securitising discourse replicates an either/or framing, whereby the Other is marked as either friend or enemy (Williams, 2003). This either/or framing is replicated in the conditions that the Quartet placed on Hamas. Solana expressed the EU’s support for the Quartet’s principles and, soon after, the conditions came to structure all EU engagement with the newly elected government. Either Hamas accept the conditions or be sanctioned. Rifkind (2006) argues that Hamas could not metamorphose overnight and simply accept the conditions set out by the Quartet. This would work against one of the principal reasons for which Hamas was elected: its maintained resistance against the occupation.

The Quartet had several preconditions before they would accept Hamas: A Palestinian state must recognize the state of Israel without prejudging what various grievances or claims are appropriate, abide by previous diplomatic agreements, and renounce violence as a means of achieving goals.

It is quite normal for a group to set conditions before agreeing to accept another group as a peace partner. None of the Quartet's conditions are unreasonable. But to this pseudo-academic, asking Hamas to renounce violence is unreasonable - because violence is what it is all about and why it was elected!

The paper argues that Hamas is much more liberal than the West portrays it, it is misunderstood, and it is flexible in its ideology. I found this section ironic:

Hamas members are aware that a discourse of terrorism reproduces a particular understanding of them, and they evoke an alternative iteration of themselves. They argue that the Europeans have received mistaken reports that Hamas is just looking for blood
(Majdi, 2012). Majdi (2012) continues: ‘They didn’t look at the other sides of Hamas,
which call for tolerance and humanity’. Hamas member and youth leader Hani Meqbel
(2012) stated that ‘[we held] too many workshops to discuss the way we should deal with
the West. We are misunderstood’. Puar and Rai address how the ‘terrorist’ is produced as
a particular monstrous subject, which is made intelligible through a performative grid
that imprints its supposed challenge to civilisational progress upon it. They state: ‘the
terrorist has become a monster to be quarantined and an individual to be corrected’ (Puar
and Rai, 2002: 121). Subjects regulated by discursive structures of securitisation are, by
virtue of being subjected to them, formed, defined and reproduced in accordance with the
requirements of those structures (Butler, 1990: 3). The exclusionary matrix by which
subjects are formed disavows other possible ways of recognising, so the reiteration of
Hamas’s terroristic illegitimacy works to foreclose other ways of seeing the movement.
The totalising framing works to know Hamas, before its members have even spoken, and
before any actual meetings have taken place. Etimad Tashawa (2012), Hamas representative, explains:
the EU does not know anyone from Hamas. They think Hamas are ogres. They think thatHamas is going to come and eat all of them and to end the European Union and to end Israel.And it is not — it is a flexible movement.

All of the evidence of Hamas' supposed flexibility and willingness to compromise comes from quotes by Hamas to Westerners (including the author) and from other academic papers which have the same flaws. Not once does the author of this paper look at thousands of primary Hamas sources and speeches in Arabic that clearly support the idea that it has always been a terror group hell-bent on destroying Israel and ridding the Middle East of all Jews in any political positions. The words "rocket" or "tunnel" or "bombs" or "attacks" do not appear once in this paper in relation to Hamas.

Because the point of this and so many other academic papers isn't to uncover the truth but to hide it behind a wall of polysyllabic nonsense.

The irony is that the exact same complaint that this quasi-academic has against how the world looks at Hamas so one-dimensionally applies to how her fellow academics that she quotes, like Judith Butler and Jasbir Puar, look at Israel. The very idea of "pinkwashing" is a liberal-approved method of avoiding any complexity in discussing Zionism as anything other than a wholly-evil political movement and Israel as anything other than an oppressive regime. How can Israel be liberal if it is evil? It must be hiding its evil by pretending to be liberal. Complexity and nuance when dealing with a terror group disappears when talking about a modern, liberal, law-based, democratic state.

Hamas is indeed more complex than just a simple terror movement. It is an Islamist movement, it is a political movement, it indeed engages in social service programs. But its very raison d'etre is the destruction of the Jewish state and the denial of Jewish peoplehood, and no amount of apologetics by pretend-academics can erase that fact.

No matter how hard they try.

(h/t Gerald)

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.

Algerian TV screened a documentary last month about the 2000-year history of Jews in Algeria. The documentary was quite positive towards Jews altogether. You can see the first part, with English subtitles, here.

The film includes a testimony to a Jew named Hussein who talks about his life in Algeria and the difficulties he faces because he is Jewish, although he is an Algerian.

"I am an Algerian like you, I love this country, I am Jewish," he says. But most remaining Jews in Algeria hide their origins.

There has been quite a backlash by people upset over the pro-Jewish documentary.

Al Quds, the UK-based pan-Arab news site, writes that while a couple of people interviewed liked the film, most others were aghast.

"The film is a dangerous precedent in the Algerian media, in how it has sympathized with a group with a black history in Algeria," said Mohamed Wali, an Algerian media specialist.

"The Jews met Algeria's embrace of treachery and stood with the colonizer at the beginning of his occupation of Algeria and the revolution of November 1954," Wali said.

He stressed that "the crime of treason does not fall under the statute of limitations."

Algerian journalist Hamza Dabah criticized the documentary, writing in Facebook that "the promotion of the Jews is a blatant act of glorification which attempted to give them a free halo of sympathy and glorification, and to show them in a state of piety, misery and injustice, without a trace of their own guilt."

He added that "the purpose of the work is to effect an emotional impact with the Jews, but it tramples on the facts of history and the blatant betrayal, chosen by the Jewish bloc itself, beginning with its great role in the fall of Algeria under the French occupation."

According to Ben Ajamia Bouabdallah, media officer of the Movement for the Society of Peace (the largest Islamist party in Algeria), "the film is more of a propaganda than a phenomenon or survey of an ethnic or religious component of Algeria."

"There is no other opinion in the investigation presented, and there is no trace of scientific and historical narratives contrary to the story that was adopted in the video," he said in a blog post.

"The timing of the broadcast of the tape raises more than a question about a potential Israeli incursion into North African countries, as evidenced by intelligence reports that were published in the Zionist-oriented world press."

"The timing of the film is on the anniversary of the Land Day and the right of return, which is celebrated by Muslims in general and the Palestinians in particular [is suspicious]. ...Perpetual reminders of grievances, issues such as forced displacement and persecution are topics that must be based on evidence of history and require impartiality."

"Why were they originally hidden? Why did they decide to appear? Is there still justification for concealment? Is their appearance a rebellion? Or is it internal or external? Shouldn't these questions be investigated? "

Many of the critics praised the technical aspects of the film, but they simply couldn't stomach anything that was sympathetic to Jews.

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

04/10 Links Pt2: PMW: To avenge the Crusaders’ defeat by Muslims, the West created Israel; If you were an Israeli sniper near Gaza, you would shoot too; Feminists for Sex Trafficking

From Ian:

PMW: To avenge the Crusaders’ defeat by Muslims, the West created Israel

Israel is a “colonialist satanic plant”
“This Zionist project is a temporary project”

The West created Israel:
- “to get rid of the problem of the Jewish ghetto”
- “to settle accounts with the Arabs... over the defeats [Arab Muslims] inflicted on the Crusaders”
- to serve “global capitalism’s goals and plans to take control of the resources of the Arab nation’s peoples”

Israel - “the colonialist satanic plant” - will not survive because the “Zionist project... is a project that rejects life”

The Palestinian Authority continues to deny Israel’s historical right to exist, claiming Israel is merely a colony of the West created illegally and it is destined “not to survive.” In an op-ed by a regular columnist in the official PA daily, Israel is described as “the colonialist satanic plant in the region on the ruins of the Palestinian people’s Nakba.” The Nakba or “the catastrophe,” is the Palestinian term for the establishment of the State of Israel:

“The owner of the project of Israel is the West, the entire capitalist West, and the fact that there are differences of opinion and even criticism between the capitalist bodies... does not in any way mean that they have a disagreement about protecting and perpetuating the status of Israel - the colonialist satanic plant in the region on the ruins of the Palestinian people’s Nakba - and providing all of its monetary, financial, security, and logistic needs.”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 5, 2018]

In his op-ed, Omar Hilmi Al-Ghoul lists reasons why the “capitalist West” wanted to use the Jews as “a tool to carry out the colonialist project in the warm Arab bosom,” among them the wish to get rid of the Jews. The PA and Fatah have repeated this claim numerous times as Palestinian Media Watch has reported.

“1. Getting rid of the problem of the Jewish ghetto;
2. Settling accounts with the Jews on the part of the Christians in the Anglo-Saxon West given religious and financial-monetary considerations;
3. Serving global capitalism’s goals and plans to take control of the resources of the Arab nation’s peoples...
4. Fragmenting the Arab parties of unity and power to settle accounts with the Arabs, the owners and pioneers of the Islamic Arab culture, for the defeats that they inflicted on the Crusaders, and also to prevent their development, unity, and so forth...”

Lastly, the PA daily’s writer insists that Israel is “temporary,” claiming “its Anglo-Saxon owners” will stop supporting it when it “becomes a burden.” He predicts the State of Israel will cease to exist because the “Zionist
project... is a project that rejects life”:

Gaza is nothing like Selma

When Hamas organized a “March of Return” on March 30, like the producers of a theatrical production, leaders of the terrorist group and their foreign enablers waited to see the returns from their investment and how it would fare with the critics. Given the deaths of as many 17 Palestinians and the willingness of the foreign press to blast Israel for defending its border, they had to be satisfied with both.

Though the second iteration of the march this past Friday yielded smaller crowds and fewer casualties, Hamas appeared to be equally pleased with the sequel. The reason was in large measure due to the uncritical coverage their efforts generated from news organizations such as The New York Times, which downplayed or even refused to mention the point of the “return” or to accept the Palestinians’ claims that what they were doing was an example of a successful nonviolent protest in the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s efforts to fight segregation in the United States.

That was the conceit of a piece labeled “news analysis” that appeared in the Times Sunday edition, giving the march a rave review in which it lauded participants for their “enthusiasm.” Yet the willingness of the paper to embrace the King analogy calls into question more than the veracity of its reporting. King’s legacy was very much in the news this past week as the nation commemorated the 50th anniversary of the civil-rights leader’s murder. However, if his achievements are to be compared to a march devoted to fighting a cause he supported— Zionism—and to depict an effort that was inherently violent as nonviolent, then we are forced to ask how the Times and other outlets that echoed this theme define human rights or nonviolence.

The Palestinian narrative about the marches being nonviolent that the Times embraced was contradicted even by its own reporting. The Times’s accounts of both the March 30 and April 6 events largely ignored what “return” means in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict. They also treated videos of the “demonstrators” shooting and hurling Molotov cocktails at Israeli troops as a matter of dispute, even though the evidence from both sides of the fence indicated that what was going on was hardly peaceful.

Sohrab Amari: Feminists for Sex Trafficking

The Women’s March was founded in the wake of Donald Trump’s election, with the aim of “dismantling systems of oppression” and “building inclusive structures guided by self-determination, dignity, and respect.” Yet since then, the group has been mired in controversy over its unsavory associations, a Who’s Who of hard-left radicals and haters, including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, Lenin Peace Prize winner and friend of East Germany Angela Davis, and convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Yousef Odeh.

Monday brought more reasons to doubt the March’s commitment to one of the groups it claims to speak for: abused and exploited women and girls. How else to explain the March’s decision to denounce the recent U.S. government crackdown against the website Backpage?

On Friday, federal law enforcers seized the website and raided the Arizona home of one of its founders. That action followed months of pressure from lawmakers and activists, who alleged that Backpage facilitates prostitution and the trafficking of women and girls. Backpage earlier this year removed its adult section, but many of the same postings migrated to other parts of the site. According to the New York Times, some ads “included what child advocates said were code words for underage girls, including ‘Amber Alert.'”

Backpage and its founders will have their day in court; they deserve a presumption of innocence. Even so, it speaks to the Women’s March’s strange ideological priorities that the group rushed to defend Backpage on Twitter: “The shutting down of #Backpage is an absolute crisis for sex workers who rely on the site to safely get in touch with clients. Sex workers rights are women’s rights.”

Come again? The rights of the prostitution industry–for that is what we are discussing, a vast and seedy global enterprise–most certainly don’t override the rights of exploited and abused women and girls. Or at least, they shouldn’t, in a morally ordered worldview. As the feminist U.K. journalist Julie Bindel noted in a landmark Spectator report last year, euphemisms such as “sex work” and “happy hooker” mask a grimy reality: “Women and girls in prostitution are overwhelmingly from abusive backgrounds, living in poverty, and otherwise marginalised. They are not free or empowered: they are abused and trapped. . . . It is not ‘sex work’. Most of the time, it is modern slavery.”

New Gaza houses are.....gorgeous

The United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and the Federal Republic of Germany, through the German Development Bank (KfW), announced the completion of the reconstruction of 155 houses for 158 families in Gaza through an 18-month house reconstruction project that cost 5 million euros.

The homes are...beautiful. Some are as large as 150 square meters.

Do victims of any other wars in the world get homes rebuilt by the international community that look like these?

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.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) denied rumors of an attempt to assassinate its leader Ramadan Shalah, saying that the reason he was in the hospital is that he had undergone heart surgery in Lebanon and was recovering.

The rumor was that he was poisoned.

Islamic Jihad admits that he has been ill for weeks and says he is now in stable condition.

According to press sources, Ramadan Shalah entered a coma a few weeks ago after undergoing surgery at the Al-Rasoul Al-Adham hospital in the southern suburbs of Beirut.

It is notable that until the rumors started, Islamic Jihad didn't even admit that he was in the hospital. And their denial now doesn't mean much - their willingness to cover up his hospitalization for weeks indicates that they would be willing to lie about what is wring with him. Poisoning seems unlikely, but anything is possible.

Just another reminder that what you read in Palestinian Arab media and organizational statements are primarily meant to advance a narrative, and only secondarily to inform people of the truth.

The good news is that a terror leader is quite ill.

UPDATE: After I wrote this in the morning (queuing it several hours in advance), Israeli media picked up on this, and things look more serious than I thought for the terrorist master. Sounds like he is permanently disabled, probably a stroke.

All together now...."awwwww."

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.

04/10 Links Pt1: Army clears sniper filmed shooting Gazan, denounces cameraman; Report: Palestinian journalist killed in Gaza was a Hamas activist; JPost: A flawed ICC; Syria: Fighting over the Corpse

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: A flawed ICC

The International Criminal Court has proved yet again not only that it is hopelessly ineffectual, but that it is run by people who lack context and tend to do more harm than good, despite all their lofty intentions.

On Sunday, the day after Syrian President Bashar Assad reportedly deployed chemical weapons against innocent civilians, including little children, ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda found the time to issue a statement warning Israel, of all countries, that its attempts to defend itself by preventing tens of thousands of Gazans – including many who were armed Hamas terrorists – from rushing its border with the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip might constitute war crimes.

Inexplicably, the ICC and its legal bureaucrats throw legal formalism by the wayside in the name of the higher goal of bashing Israel, while they hide behind legal formalism when questioned about their silence on the atrocities being committed by the Assad regime or by other autocrats and strongmen.

That Israel is not a signatory of the ICC’s 1998 Rome Statute and therefore not under the ICC’s jurisdiction has been conveniently ignored by the ICC, which opened investigations into the 2014 Operation Protective Edge. But when the ICC is taken to task for failing to act against Syria or rogue leaders of other countries, it absolves itself by sighting its lack of jurisdiction.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’s repeated attempts, together with dozens of other UN member states, to get the UN Security Council to refer the Syrian conflict to the ICC have been cynically blocked by Russia and China, permanent members of the UNSC. Meanwhile, the ICC finds ways to single out Israel for investigation and criticism.

That the Palestinians cannot be a signatory to the Rome Statute because, according to ICC rules, only states can be signatories and Palestinians do not have statehood – as they constantly remind the world – has also been excused by the ICC, and the Palestinians were granted membership in 2015.

The ICC even ignores the fact that the Gaza Strip is run by Hamas – defined as a terrorist organization by the European Union, the US, Egypt, Jordan and other countries – and is not the formal representative of the Palestinian people.

Army clears sniper filmed shooting Gazan, denounces cameraman

The Israeli army on Tuesday said a soldier who shot a Palestinian suspect near the Gaza border in a recently circulated video behaved appropriately, but criticized the soldier who filmed and cheered the incident for violating military values.

The army said the cameraman, who was not part of the unit serving on the border, would face a disciplinary hearing. The initial result of the investigation into the video has been handed over to the Military Advocate General Corps, which will consider criminal charges.

According to the army’s initial investigation, the video was filmed on December 22 during a violent demonstration along the Gaza border, near the Israeli community of Kibbutz Kissufim.

The army said the Palestinian who was shot was one of the people “suspected of organizing and leading” the violence along the border, which included the throwing of rocks and Molotov cocktails.

The military maintained that the sharpshooter behaved appropriately, firing one bullet as the suspect approached the fence after ignoring warnings and calls to halt. The army also refuted a claim heard in the video that the suspect was shot in the head, saying he was wounded in the leg.

IDF to discipline soldiers who filmed sniper video

A day after a video showing Israeli soldiers cheering after the shooting of a Palestinian protester in Gaza, which went viral on social media, the IDF released the findings of their initial investigation of the incident. The IDF Spokesperson's statement said the sniper fire was used as a means of last resort after non-lethal crowd dispersal measures failed.

"The video, which was filmed on December 22 near the Kisufim border crossing, shows a small portion of the IDF's handling of a violent protest that included rock hurling and attempts to sabotage the fence," the IDF Spokesperson said.

The video, which went viral on social media, calls to mind the video of Israeli soldier Elor Azaria shooting a Palestinian assailant in the head after he was incapacitated after an attempted stabbing in Hebron two years ago. After that video surfaced, the army was quick to condemn the killing and launched a murder investigation into the case. Azaria was eventually convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 18 months in prison, but the case and its impact on Israeli society and its backing of soldiers placed in combat situations, continues to reverberate.

The video came out at a time when snipers, with orders to shoot to kill, are being used extensively along the Gaza border in order to prevent attempts by Palestinians to breach or sabotage the border fence. For the last two weeks, thousands of Palestinians have been taking part in mass protests calling for their right of return to Israel. Thirty-two Palestinians, several of them with terrorist backgrounds, have been killed since the protests began, while the IDF says it is using legal force to prevent breach of sovereignty and harm to soldiers.

Once a full operational investigation of the incident is complete, the IDF's recommendation will be passed on to military prosecution. The soldiers who filmed and unlawfully distributed the videos will be disciplined according to regular procedures, the army said.

The statement also said that the cheering and swearing heard from the soldiers does not abide by the IDF's code of conduct or meet the IDF's expectations of its soldiers.

Report: Palestinian journalist killed in Gaza was a Hamas activist

Yasser Murtaja, the Palestinian journalist who was shot dead by Israeli soldiers during protests along the Gaza border on Friday, was actually a Hamas activist, security officials told Israeli news site Walla!.

According the the report published Tuesday morning, Murtaja had been an officer in the Hamas security apparatus in Gaza for years.

"We are dealing with someone who was active in the security apparatus's work on a daily basis and did much to help them," the unnamed defense officials said.

The report noted that in 2015, Murtaja had attempted to bring a drone into Gaza to aid in Hamas's intelligence gathering. The sources told Walla! that Murtaja was constantly in contact with senior officials in Hamas's internal security mechanism and many of those officials attended his funeral.

We will take down the border (with Israel) and we will tear out their hearts from their bodies.
Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, April 6, 2018, on Al Jazeera TV

The sit-in demonstration is set to culminate on May 15 — the day after Israeli independence
NBC News, April 5, 2018

Once again, whenever the conflict between Palestinian Arabs and Israel heats up, a second, parallel story develops as well: the media bias towards Israel.

Take The New York Times, for example.

On April 7, David Halbfinger reported Though Deadly, Gaza Protests Draw Attention and Enthusiasm. He informs us that:

Palestinians seem energized and enthusiastic about sustaining a generally nonviolent form of protest. [emphasis added]

Halbfinger has no problem writing that "Hamas, the Islamic militant group that rules Gaza and seeks Israel’s destruction, has always advocated armed struggle" -- and then without skipping a beat Harbfinger claims that "so for Gazans, even a tentative experiment with nonviolent protest is a significant step."

It's not just any Islamic militant group seeking the destruction of its enemy that experiments with nonviolent protest.

The Financial Times has a similar problem using the "T" word.

The Financial Times quotes Ahmad Abu Artema, one of the organizers of the protest, who admits

Hamas was no interloper — he and his colleagues, mostly penniless, disorganised and inexperienced, invited the Islamist movement in, hoping for logistics, some media coverage and moral support

and then, like Harbfinger, the article tries to soften the implications of Hamas involvement, claiming that

Hamas ordered its civilian employees to join the march, shipped in food and water and set up tents. Like everything else in Gaza, the march belonged to Hamas, and threatened to trigger a new bout of confrontation between the militants and Israeli forces. [emphasis added]

The Financial Times will not come right out and report that these "civilian employees" are trained terrorists, nor will The New York Times. In fact, the word "terrorist" does not appear in either article.

Writing in The National Post, Vivian Bercovici, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel now living in Tel Aviv, writes about the discrepancy between the claim for peaceful protests and the reality:

Israel’s critics claim the IDF fired recklessly on a “peaceful protest,” massacring innocents. Thing is, peaceful protests do not encourage participants to overrun an international border, or use weapons, while threatening to conquer the country and murder its people. Thousands of Israeli civilians live within a few hundred metres of this fence, in agricultural settlements that have been undisputedly part of Israeli territory since 1948. Peaceful protests are not organized by terrorist organizations and led by terrorist leaders, some of whom show up with Molotov cocktails and other weapons.

If taking Hamas talking points about nonviolence is not jarring to The New York Times' readers, then chances are that neither is any of the other propaganda points that the article takes at face value.

For example, Harbfinger writes that Israel uses "disproportionate force to prevent what they believe could be a catastrophic breach in the Gaza fence." The phrase "disproportionate force" is a term used in international law, and in that usage goes beyond just one side causing more damage or taking more lives than the other one.

Harbfinger uses another term of international law out of its proper context when he writes about Gazans wanting to "protest Israel’s longstanding blockade of the impoverished territory and its two million residents" and that "the 11-year-old blockade by Israel and Egypt has driven it into crisis." [emphasis added]

In What The New York Times Isn’t Telling You About Israel’s Gaza ‘Blockade’, Ira Stoll describes the hundreds of thousands of tons of supplies -- medical, agricultural and building -- to Gaza, in addition to water and electricity. The fact that Israel controls its border with Gaza, Stoll notes, is something that nearly all countries do with their borders.

He concludes:

Accusing Israel of a “blockade” of Gaza when in fact Israel is allowing food, medicine, building supplies, electricity, and water into the territory is inaccurate. It gives Times readers a false impression of what is actually happening, uncritically echoing Palestinian propaganda. That’s not to say that the situation in Gaza is a picnic. But the blame for it lies with the Hamas terrorist organization, not with Israel or some “blockade” imagined by Times journalists.

Harbfinger appears particularly invested in the Palestinian Arab narrative. He quotes Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, who "likened attempts to cross Israel’s fence to American civil rights marchers’ attempts to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., more than 50 years ago"

Here are some pictures of that protest march across Edmund Pettus Bridge in 1965:

Here are pictures from the Gazan "peace march":

Notice any difference?

Mr. Munayyer doesn't. Harbfinger goes on to quote him that

it’s very important in this moment for the international community to be supportive of the protesters. They’ve always said, ‘Abandon militancy, abandon violence.’

Actually, what "they" have said is to stop the terrorist attacks and the deliberate murder of civilians - a distinction apparently lost on both gentlemen.

Harbfinger also quotes Nathan Thrall, an analyst for International Crisis Group "who closely watches Gaza." He is more than that. Thrall is the author of the book "The Only Language They Understand: Forcing Compromise in Israel and Palestine." Last year, Thrall wrote a piece for The Guardian, entitled Israel-Palestine: the real reason there’s still no peace, an article described as "an adapted extract" from his book.

Thrall is a big fan of using force to achieve peace, especially applied to Israel, based on the premise that "Israel, for its part, has consistently opted for stalemate" -- as opposed to accepting the standard proposals that have been suggested for peace. Thrall advocates applying force on Israel, following the examples of Eisenhower, Ford, Carter and James Baker.

But to Thrall's dismay, US Administrations seem to have stopped applying that kind of pressure.

As a result, Palestinians have been unable to induce more from Israel than tactical concessions, steps meant to reduce friction between the populations in order not to end occupation but to mitigate it and restore its low cost.

Counted among those mere "tactical" concessions are apparently the establishment of Palestinian Arab control over Gaza and "the West Bank". This seems to be chump change to Thrall, who instead advocates "forcing Israel to make larger, conflict-ending concessions [that] would require making its fallback option so unappealing that it would view a peace agreement as an escape from something worse."

Harbfinger could not have picked anyone more enthusiastic to to add his two cents on the Gaza riots.

But with all of that, maybe things are changing.

Dexter Van Zile, Christian Media Analyst for CAMERA writes Don’t be fooled: Hamas is losing:

Hamas, a group that was previously able to terrorize Israelis with suicide bombings, kidnappings and rocket attacks, is now reduced to staging riots, setting truck tires on fire and getting its young leaders killed in hopeless confrontations with the IDF to generate sympathetic media coverage. News outlets assist Hamas in its PR war, but the fact is, Israelis are increasingly safe from Hamas attacks — and that’s the story that matters.

And perhaps we could finally be due for a change in that media coverage.

Writing about Downhill slide: Posturing over the ‘plight of Gaza’ has passed peak virtue-signaling, J.E. Dyer -- a retired US Navy intelligence officer -- notes:

It probably doesn’t feel this way to the people trying to explain why Israel has to defend herself, but over the past week, since Hamas’ border fence “protests” from Gaza cranked up, there has been a distinctly tinny, perfunctory sound to the adverse media coverage and political shouting.

...The difference between now and a few years ago is that there is mostly a flat, exhausted silence surrounding the rote paroxysms from the legacy media and the West’s radical partisans of Hamas. The public mind has moved on.

It has done so for good reason. The “Palestinian” narrative was always manufactured: a great disservice to the Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, because it was false and misleading, and never about constructing a future for them.

The narrative’s essentially worthless nature is thrown into stronger relief by the tectonic shifts of regional geopolitics. The Syrian civil war, with its growing Iranian menace and its recurring chemical weapon attacks, is only a few dozen miles away. Hamas bearing the brand of Iran, on the other side of Israel, is not a net positive for anyone but the radical mullahs of Qom.

Is the Middle East really changing?
And if so, how long will it take the public -- and the media -- to pick up on it?

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.

Stay in an AirBnB in a "refugee" camp near Bethlehem

Do you want to experience life in a Palestinian Arab camp?

Airbnbhas a home with a room that can be rented in the Dheisheh UNRWA camp. It's a bargain, at $24 a night. Only women and couples can apply, as the wife is home alone.

Here are the rooms in this house that the international community has paid for:

The experience was written up in a blog called Against the Compass, and between that and the Airbnb reviews it is obvious that the family is offering the room so they can engage in anti-Israel propaganda.

Ibrahim isn’t just an amazing host but he will also take you around the camp. Life in a refugee camp is pretty similar to life in any suburb, with the difference that here houses are not numbered, the streets are nameless, there are pro-Palestine paintings everywhere and Israeli police incursions occur pretty often, as refugee camps are where most of the pro-Palestinian activists come from.
The entire camp is stamped with paintings, representing Palestinian martyrs, who have either been killed or put in jail for the rest of their lives. Ibrahim knew the story behind each and every one of these martyrs. Here are some examples:


These are 3 brothers who lived in East Jerusalem and helped the activists who participated in the second intifada make their way into Jerusalem. They were arrested and punt into jail for the rest of their lives. Their brother is alive and is the neighbour of Ibrahim Translated to normal English, this means that these three brothers helped people enter Jerusalem to murder Jews. That is why they would have life sentences. But they are heroes to the Airbnb hosts and therefore to the stupid and gullible Westerners who pay for the privilege of learning to love murderers.

94 people have given mostly positive reviews to this friendly family that lionizes terrorists..

And by the way - this nice house that Ibrahim's family shares with Westerners for only $24 a night is on land that belonged to Jews and was taken away and given to UNRWA by Jordan. Just one small fact that the Western guests will not learn from their hosts.

(h/t Ahron)

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.

Palestinian media today has photos of teachers giving lessons outside to a small group of students. The reason? Evil Israel destroyed their school a couple of nights ago.

The Palestinian Education Ministry condemned the demolition, saying "it is a result of continued and systematic incitement by the occupation against Palestinian education....This reveals the ugly face of the occupier which destroys educational institutions without regard to human rights and human rights laws and charters. We call on all international institutions to intervene immediately to put an end to these violations and criminalization of education."

The school was only opened two weeks ago. It was built specifically to be destroyed, at a cost of 41,000 euros. Its dedication was attended by lots of Palestinian officials and at the time they said that the school, built in Area C under Israeli control without permits, was meant to be a challenge to Israeli authorities. The speeches that accompanied the opening emphasized how the school (and another school opened at the same time) was built in "record time" and how the entire school was meant, not as an educational institution, but as a "challenge" to Israel. The very name of the school was "challenge" (Al-Tahadi.)

Wait for the condemnations by complicit Western NGOs that will emphasize Israel's demolition of a school without mentioning that the school was meant to be demolished so that photos of children pretending to study outside can be published.

These students were in a school elsewhere only three weeks ago.

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.