Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, July 10, 2018

07/10 Links Pt1: Fatah to US: “We don’t want your flour, your wheat, or your aid”; IDF stops boat seeking to break Gaza blockade; Israeli Border Police Soldiers Save Life of Palestinian Baby in Hebron

From Ian:

PMW: Fatah to US: “We don’t want your flour, your wheat, or your aid”

At a Fatah demonstration earlier this month, Abbas' deputy chairman of Fatah, Mahmoud Al-Aloul, announced that Palestinians don't want US aid, because US is "forming an alliance" with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, "the Israeli enemy":

Fatah Deputy Chairman and Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul: "Mahmoud Abbas has told him [Trump], and we are telling him, that America is not fit to be a sponsor of peace... This American Trump is forming an alliance with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, the Israeli enemy, who is sowing havoc and destruction over the land by expropriation and building settlements... We want freedom. We want independence. We want an end to the occupation. We don't want your flour, your wheat, or your aid." [Official PA TV, July 2, 2018]

Al-Aloul's statement rejecting US aid follows the passing of the Taylor Force Act in the US, in March 2018, which cuts almost all funding to the PA if it continues paying salaries to terrorist prisoners and allowances to families of so-called "Martyrs." The law was named after US citizen Taylor Force who was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist in Tel Aviv on March 8, 2016.

Al-Aloul's comments also follow the passing of a new Israeli law to deduct the amount of money the PA pays imprisoned terrorists and families of "Martyrs" from the tax money Israel collects for the PA, which was passed by the Israeli Parliament on July 2, 2018.

PMW: PA leader Nabil Shaath: Australia is “worthy of being spat on”

PA Chairman Abbas’ advisor Nabil Shaath: "This filthy talk of ‘the criminals’ in connection with our Martyrs and prisoners – while they are our heroes, the heroes of self-sacrifice and the candles of freedom. They cannot be compared to the Israeli criminals in Israel’s prisons... Australia’s decision [to stop] transferring $10 million angered me greatly... It transferred [the aid to the UN]... so that it would not serve for payment of the salaries of the [prisoners and Martyrs’] families. In other words, the truth is they are worthy of being spat on. You [Australians] are the servants of the US… I don’t want your 10 million, I don’t want to chase after them." [Official PA TV, Topic of the Day, July 3, 2018] Nabil Shaath is PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ advisor on Foreign Affairs and International Relations Australia cuts direct aid to the PA - Australia announced on July 2, 2018, that it is ceasing its direct aid to the PA, and will transfer aid through the UN. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop explained that Australia unsuccessfully sought confirmation from the PA that the aid was not going to pay terrorists. Bishop added: "Any assistance provided by the PLO to those convicted of politically motivated violence is an affront to Australian values and undermines the prospect of meaningful peace between Israel and the Palestinians." PMW has led the exposure of the salaries paid by the PA to terrorists and their families.

Father of American Victim of Palestinian Terror Calls New US, Israeli Laws Penalizing PA ‘a Good Beginning’

The recent passage of laws in both the US and Israel penalizing the Palestinian Authority (PA) over its payments to terrorists and their families marked “a good beginning, but there is much more to be done,” the father of an American military veteran who was killed in a stabbing attack in Tel Aviv two years ago told The Algemeiner on Monday.

Stuart Force, the father of the late Taylor Force, traveled to Israel to attend last week’s Knesset vote on a bill modeled on a US law — named after his West Point graduate son — that was approved by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump in March limiting American aid to the PA.

“Watching the legislation’s passage in the Knesset was a very emotional and special time for me,” Force said. “I feel that the resolve shown by both countries to address this part of the war on terror will provide a stimulus for nations worldwide to look at where their humanitarian aid actually goes.”

“If it cannot be shown that the intended recipients of our assistance are receiving it, then it should be withheld until it can,” he continued. “Something is terribly wrong when the leaders of terrorism are living like wealthy warlords, with their ‘subjects’ having no hope for a better future.”

What would we do without the European Court of Human Rights?

The European Court of Human Rights is an international court that was established by the European Convention on Human Rights, an international treaty that defends human rights. The European Court hears cases alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights established in the Convention and its protocols.

Logo of the European Court of Human Rights. Fair use

But human rights are human rights -- regardless of where you live.

A couple of months ago, Akiva Eldar wrote an article in Al Monitor, Compromise is possible on Palestinian right of return, demonstrating there is no Palestinian "right of return" according to international law:

After deliberating on a petition by Greek Cypriot refugees, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in March 2010 that claiming a certain land or property as “home” is insufficient to establish a right. An overwhelming majority of the 17 judges agreed that given that 35 years had passed since the petitioners lost their property when Turkey invaded northern Cyprus in 1974, and the local population had changed, the claimants were entitled to compensation in cash, but not necessarily in land. The judges warned that rectifying an old injustice could result in a new injustice. One can infer that UN Resolution 194 of 1948, stipulating that a refugee can choose between a return to Israel and compensation, does not grant every refugee a personal right to return. [emphasis added]

Going a step further, we can see the options are not even that narrow.

The language of UN resolutions subsequent to Resolution 194 shows that even according to Resolution 194 -- the return of Palestinian Arab refugees to their homes is not a right, but rather one of the available options.

According to UN Resolution 194, in the second paragraph of Article 11:

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations (emphasis added)

Is the UN actually suggesting repatriation AND resettlement or are those two different things?

Check out UN Resolution 393, Article 4:

Considers that, without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, the reintegration of the refugees into the economic life of the Near East, either by repatriation or resettlement, is essential in preparation for the time when international assistance is no longer available, and for the realization of conditions of peace and stability in the area; (emphasis added)

"Repatriation" by definition means to send refugees back to their original home.
"Resettlement" here means to settle them in any home -- not necessarily in their original land -- rather than leave them as refugees.

Similarly, UN Resolution 394:

Calls upon the governments concerned to undertake measures to ensure that refugees, whether repatriated or resettled, will be treated without any discrimination either in law or in fact. (emphasis added)

And UN Resolution 513, according to which the UN General Assembly:

Endorses, without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 11 of resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948 or to the provisions of paragraph 4 of resolution 393 (V) of 2 December 1950 relative to reintegration either by repatriation or resettlement...

The point is that the United Nations itself clearly indicates that there is no absolute Palestinian right of return and that while there was a possible option to return back in 1948, return back then was merely one possibility.

Now along comes the European Court of Human Rights and makes the point that "claiming a certain land or property as “home” is insufficient to establish a right".

But that is not the only European Court decision that supports Israel's position.

In 2015, Marko Milanovic, an associate professor at the University of Nottingham School of Law, wrote that European Court Decides that Israel Is Not Occupying Gaza.

The case deals with people displaced by a conflict who are later unable to return to their property and in this case denied the right to return to their village of Gulistan, located in the territory of Azerbaijan, but close to an area of conflict. The Azerbaijani government claimed that the village was not under the actual control of Azerbaijan and was inaccessible to any civilians.

Azerbaijan went so far as to claim:

The Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it is unable to guarantee the application of the provisions of the Convention in the territories occupied by the Republic of Armenia until these territories are liberated from that occupation. (emphasis added)

The European Court went to work on defining "occupation":

Article 42 of the Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 (hereafter “the 1907 Hague Regulations”) defines belligerent occupation as follows:

“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

Accordingly, occupation within the meaning of the 1907 Hague Regulations exists when a state exercises actual authority over the territory, or part of the territory, of an enemy state(1) . The requirement of actual authority is widely considered to be synonymous to that of effective control.

Military occupation is considered to exist in a territory, or part of a territory, if the following elements can be demonstrated: the presence of foreign troops, which are in a position to exercise effective control without the consent of the sovereign. According to widespread expert opinion physical presence of foreign troops is a sine qua non requirement of occupation(2) , i.e. occupation is not conceivable without “boots on the ground” therefore forces exercising naval or air control through a naval or air blockade do not suffice(3) . (emphasis added)

Milanovic points to this key paragraph:

144. The Court notes that under international law (in particular Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations) a territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of a hostile army, “actual authority” being widely considered as translating to effective control and requiring such elements as presence of foreign troops, which are in a position to exercise effective control without the consent of the sovereign (see paragraph 94 above). On the basis of all the material before it and having regard to the above establishment of facts, the Court finds that Gulistan is not occupied by or under the effective control of foreign forces as this would require a presence of foreign troops in Gulistan.

He then notes:

See what I meant? Replace “Gulistan” with “Gaza”, and there you have it! In fact, I’m pretty sure that this is at least one judgment of the European Court that Israeli governmental legal advisors will be citing all the time, whenever the issue of Gaza’s occupation is brought up (and good for them).

Actually, this is the second ruling of the European Court of Human Rights that Israel can cite. We already saw that the court also ruled that a claim to land or property is not a right.

Who knew that the European view of international humanitarian law could be so supportive to Israel's position?

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.

Sheikh Mohammed Ahmed Hussein, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories, said again on Tuesday that it is forbidden to allow any part of Jerusalem and the land of Palestine to be sold to the "occupiers"

The fatwa says, "Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and prayers and peace be upon the honorable prophets and messengers, our master Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his family and companions,

"It is considered a betrayal of Allah, His Messenger, peace be upon him, and the faithfulness of Islam (Al-Anfal: 27), for the sinner who sells his land to his enemies, or takes compensation for it; because the seller of the land to the enemies results in the removal of Muslims from their homes....the sale of land to the enemies and brokering them to [middlemen?] is essentially blasphemy, and is considered loyalty to the infidels and warriors, and one whose loyalty is away from Islam is a traitor to Allah, His Messenger, peace be upon him, his religion, and his homeland.

"The Muslims must boycott him. They do not treat him or marry him, nor do they seek him, do not attend his funeral, do not pray with him or bury him in Muslim graves."

This is essentially a demand for excommunication. But excommunication in Islam is controversial even against unbelievers, as Wikipedia summarizes:

Takfir or takfeer (Arabic: تكفير‎ takfīr) is a controversial concept in Islamist discourse, denoting excommunication, as one Muslim declaring another Muslim as a non-believer (kafir). The act which precipitates takfir is termed mukaffir. Contemporary formulation and usage of the term have its roots in the 20th-century Islamist theorist Sayyid Qutb's advocacy of takfirism (doctrine of excommunication) against the state or society which deemed as jahiliyah (state of ignorance and disbelief). According to Qutb, violence is required to be sanctioned against corrupt state leaders, on the premise that quietism is not the Islamic prescriptions against one who deemed as apostates. This position is widely held and applied by jihadist organizations to varying degrees. At the same time, the concept is opposed by religious establishment as an ostensible reason for violence. They hold that excommunication against those who profess their Islamic faith is not sanctioned by Islam, or an ill-founded takfir accusation is a major forbidden act (haram).

So nowadays, the only people who try to apply this idea of excommunication are jihadists (and Iran, which did it to Salman Rushdie.) Mainstream Islam says very explicitly that if a person declares himself to be a believer, he is believed - only people who admit to be apostates can be considered to be unbelievers.

Yet the current Palestinian Grand Mufti is issuing a fatwa that places the sale of land to Jews in the same category as the worst possible crime in Islam, with a punishment that goes beyond Islamic law. He is saying that selling land is blasphemy, which has no legal basis whatsoever. (He did use a Quranic verse, 60:9, that says that those who drive Muslims out of their homes are wrongdoers, and he equates the sellers of land to the people who drive people out of their homes, but even then the Quran never says they are blasphemers.)

Mainstream Muslim clerics should be as adamant against this fatwa as they are against ISIS, since Qutb's idea of takfirism is based on a relatively new interpretation of the Quran - and the mufti Hussein is going way beyond Qutb in declaring that selling land is legally the same as blasphemy and treachery.

Apparently, perverting Islamic law is OK if it serves a valuable political purpose.

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.

Today, a Gaza group called National Authority for Return and Breaking the Siege in Gaza is putting Gazans injured during the current weekly riots on a boat in a publicity stunt.

They are pretending to try to sail to Cyprus, but they are barely pretending. They want Israel to intercept the boat and then they will try to gain world headlines about cruel Israeli practices of stopping injured people from going on a journey that would probably harm the passengers more than the capture would.

This is the second such voyage from this group. The first one was in May, Israel intercepted the boat (originally planned to be a flotilla,) and outside the region no one showed any interest.

The group is also demanding the release of the captain of the first boat, who is still being held by Israel.

Since the entire point of these things is publicity, and the first one didn't generate any, it's entirely possible that one of the passengers is deathly ill and wants to die for the cause of gaining world headlines and making Israel look bad. It isn't as if this sort of thing hasn't happened before.

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.

07/09 Links Pt2: Imagine if the London bombers had been Palestinian bombers; Progressive Democrats increasingly criticize Israel, and could reap political rewards; When FDR wanted to silence the Jews

From Ian:

PMW: Imagine if the London bombers had been Palestinian bombers

Yesterday was the 13th anniversary of the London bombings on July 7, 2005. On that day, Muslim terrorists detonated three bombs on London's Underground and a fourth on a double-decker bus. In the explosions, 52 people were murdered and over 700 were injured.

Since its creation in 1994, the Palestinian Authority has spent billions of shekels rewarding and incentivizing Palestinian terrorism against Israelis, paying monthly salaries to imprisoned terrorists as well as monthly allowances to the families of the so-called "Martyrs," including suicide bombers.
If the London terrorists had been Palestinians who had carried out equivalent attacks in Jerusalem targeting Israelis, the PA would have already paid the families of the four terrorists a combined total of £142,680 pounds (687,200 shekels).
PA Minister of Education and Higher Education Sabri Saidam announced in November 2017 that the UK government had agreed to pay its annual contribution of 20 million pounds, which is "allocated to support the [PA] general budget of Palestine." [WAFA, official PA news agency, Nov. 25, 2017]

This allocation is only a fraction of the financial support the UK government provides to the PA annually.

In its 2018 budget, the PA allocated 680 million shekels from its general budget, predominantly to pay allowances to the families of thousands of dead Palestinian terrorist "Martyrs," including those who have carried out suicide attacks.

One of the Palestinian families who receives such payments is the family of suicide bomber Wafa Idris who carried out a suicide attack in the heart of Jerusalem in January 2002, murdering one and injuring over 100.

Progressive Democrats increasingly criticize Israel, and could reap political rewards

It was during the Obama administration that Democrats’ once-united position on Israel began to fragment. The tepid relationship between Netanyahu and Obama led to voters increasingly splitting along party lines on the issue, with Democrats growing unhappy with the connection between Republicans and the Israeli government.

Over the last few decades, a handful of left-leaning Democrats have previously shown open support for Palestinian causes and regularly criticized Israel’s political and military actions. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia was arrested by Israeli authorities for her participation in an effort to send a flotilla to provide aid to Palestinians in circumvention of Israel’s 2009 Gaza blockade.

Shibley Telhami, a professor at the University of Maryland and a fellow at the Brookings Institution, has polled on American attitudes toward the conflict for over a quarter century. He believes that as public opinion has shifted on the issue, Democratic candidates have responded to their voters and have become less afraid of the repercussions of criticizing the Israeli government.

“Congressional candidates and politicians who embrace Israel or fail to criticize Israel will not be punished by and large by their constituents,” Telhami said. “Those candidates who take on the Israeli government’s specific policies could be rewarded.”

Public opinion polling shows that sentiments have indeed shifted, especially among Democrats. According to a Pew Research poll conducted earlier this year, Democratic voters sympathize about equally with the Israelis as the Palestinians, with sympathy for Israel dropping 16 percentage points in the last two years.

Telhami said Democrats have increasingly seen the conservative Israeli government as one that has an opposing set of values.

“Democrats, even separate from the partisan issue, have basically seen [the Palestinian] issue as part of their value system,” Telhami said. “They increasingly see their values as not a part of the values of Israel.”

Even as Democratic voters drifted away from their previous steadfast support for Israel, Democrats in elected office have been slower to follow their base. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has continued to take ardently pro-Israel stances, as he was one of just four Senate Democrats to vote against the Iran Deal in 2015.

Earlier this year, Schumer sponsored legislation that would criminalize boycotts against Israel that he has derided as “an anti-Semitic movement.”

Nevertheless, several Democratic candidates with ties to the party’s progressive wing have still faced some controversy for associations with causes critics deem “anti-Israel.” They have not, however, lost support from prominent Democratic officials and organizations. (h/t Jewess)

UN Watch today released "The UN & Antisemitism: 2008-2017 Report Card," at a terrific event hosted in the Israeli Knesset by MK @YairLapid. Speakers included Israel's Minister of Justice @Ayelet__Shaked, Opposition Leader @HerzogMK, Professor @IrwinCotler. https://t.co/ozb5dd855r
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) July 9, 2018

Roger Waters concert backdrop: "Resist Israeli anti-semitism"

Here are two photos of images being shown behind Roger Waters during his current tour:

Waters is saying that he is not antisemitic - because Arabs are semites, and therefore it is Israel that is antisemitic, not him.

This is one of the oldest and dumbest arguments in the book. The definition of anti-semitism is in every dictionary, and it is Waters' Palestinian pets who are antisemitic, as is Waters himself based on plenty of evidence.

But no one accused Roger Waters of having a towering intellect.

As usual with this sort of news, Israellycool is all over it.

(h/t Jonathan Hoffman)

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.

Well it’s another even-numbered year, which means the Presbyterian Church in the USA (or PCUSA) got together for their bi-annual conclave (called a General Assembly) to (1) condemn Israel while ignoring virtually all other suffering in the Middle East; and (2) put a brave face their latest membership decline as their denomination continues towards oblivion.

Throughout the 2000s and early 2010s, I was somewhat obsessed with the ups and downs of the Presbyterians, documenting preparations for each national conference as divestment came onto the agenda even-numbered year after even-numbered year.

The saga began in 2004 when the organization first passed a divestment measure, which was rescinded in 2006 after the church came under attack by both Jewish groups and their own members who were appalled over what was being said and done in their name.

But, as BDS-watchers know all too well, once an organization makes any move towards boycott or divestment, the boycotters have already decided the group belongs to them and exists for one purpose and one purpose only: to pass resolutions encapsulating their propaganda directed at the Jewish state.

And so, despite being rejected by the membership, BDS came back onto the organizations agenda in 2008, 2010 and 2012, being voted down each time, despite efforts by church leadership to box members into having only one choice (their preferred one) of returning the church to its 2004 divestment position.

Now a normal political movement might have gotten the message by then, or might have seen all of the damage their endless campaigning was doing to the church in terms of wrecking internal harmony and destroying the church’s reputation within the wider American society. But, as we all know, BDS is not in the normal business. And so the campaign continued as more and members left PCUSA (either as individuals or as whole congregations which defected to other Presbyterian branches not so obsessed with politics), and as the reputation of the church for fairness and faithful witness also headed into a tailspin.

When divestment was passed in 2004, it was possible for PCUSA leaders to convince the public that this was the democratic vote that represented the will of the membership. But after watching the corrupt leadership of the organization ally with BDS advocates to stack committees considering Middle East issues only with divestment supporters, remove anyone who could make trouble from positions of leadership, refuse members access to information and voices that contradict the BDS narrative, and insist that any “No” vote was just a postponement of an inevitable “Yes,” it became clear well before divestment was restored in 2014 that these votes demonstrated nothing but the lengths to which a degenerate organization would go to hand its reputation over to someone else.

When divestment was voted back in that year, the Jewish community decided enough was enough, refusing bad-faith calls to enter into interfaith dialog with a church dedicated to slapping Jews in the face every two years (all while claiming such slaps were given out of love and concern for their Jewish brethren).

In the meantime, the steady decline of the church continued as PCUSA coupled passage of new anti-Israel calumnies at their bi-annual events with tracking losses of another 5% of its membership. Issues of anti-Israel animus and collapse of the organization are actually linked. For as members died or left the church in disgust, those that remained represented a higher concentration of Israel haters. This was represented by a tendency we see in all organizations where the BDSers think they have the upper hand: overreach. And so, with divestment in their back pocket, the church moved on to condemning Zionism and those that support the Jewish national movement, adding slurs like “Apartheid” to the mix once they realized there were no longer enough fair-minded members ready to stand in their way.

But as the Israel haters wallowed in their “victory” within PCUSA, no one seemed to notice that their pronouncements no longer made news, or even a ripple in the pubic consciousness. Two decades ago, one could claim that a major religious organization making proclamations and condemnations represented moral statements informed by faith that should be taken seriously. But seeing how sausage (in the form of the aforementioned corrupt votes) gets made at General Assemblies for more than 15 years, who could possibly see their statements as expressions of sincere love and faith, rather than the output of venal politics?

Given that the number of Presbyterians nationwide is about to fall below the number of Jews just in New York, it’s also not clear why we need to take what they say any more seriously than they listen to us.

When I was more directly involved with helping those fighting anti-Israel bigotry in the church, I was frequently accused of being an outsider with no real concern for PCUSA and its members, beyond what they were saying about Israel. As I responded then (and continue to respond now): while it’s true I never would have come into PCUSA’s orbit had they not chosen to get into my face in such an aggressive manner, I’m perfectly comfortable that Israel will survive the slings and arrows of a hypocritical and dying organization.

But as someone who appreciates the important role Mainline Protestantism has played in American history, my fear is not for my own tribe but for what it means when this important pillar of national identity gets shattered with the pieces being dragged into the swamp, just so a bunch of anti-Israel bigots can claim to speak in someone else’s name.

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.

07/09 Links Pt1: Abbas: PA to continue paying salaries to families of prisoners, 'martyrs'; Abbas’ Foreign Affairs advisor: Spit on Australia; What you aren't hearing about Khan al-Ahmar

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: Abbas: PA to continue paying salaries to families of prisoners, 'martyrs'

The Palestinians will not allow US President Donald Trump's yet-to-be-announced plan for peace in the Middle East to pass, and will continue paying salaries to families of Palestinian prisoners and "martyrs," Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said on Sunday.

Speaking at a meeting of the Fatah Central Committee in Ramallah, Abbas said that the Arab countries have told the Palestinians that they too were opposed to Trump's plan, also known as the "deal of the century."

At the beginning of his speech, Abbas sent greetings to Palestinians who were taking part in the Hamas-sponsored protests along the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel and demonstrations against the Trump plan and the plans to evict the Bedouin hamlet of Khan al-Ahmar, near Ma'aleh Adomim.

"We are proud of these marches and protests," Abbas said.

He reiterated his strong opposition to the Trump plan, saying the Palestinians will not accept it and will not allow it to pass. "We want to affirm that our Arab brothers have told us that they too are against the deal of the century," Abbas said. "In addition, there are countries in Europe, Asia and Africa that have begun realizing this deal can't pass."

Abbas lashed out at Israel for its decision to deduct payments made by the PA to families of "martyrs" and security prisoners (from tax revenues collected on behalf of the Palestinians), saying the Palestinians will take measures in accordance with their interest. He did not provide details about the nature of the measures the Palestinians were planning.

"We won't allow anyone to interfere with the money [that is paid to the prisoners and families of "martyrs]," Abbas stressed. "They are our martyrs and prisoners and the injured and we will continue to pay them. We started the payments in 1965."

PMW: Spit on Australia, says Abbas’ advisor on Foreign Affairs

Following Australia's decision to suspend direct funding to the Palestinian Authority because the PA pays salaries to terrorists and their families, senior PA official Nabil Shaath, who is also PA Chairman Abbas' advisor, launched a verbal attack on Australia:

Mahmoud Abbas' advisor on Foreign Affairs and International Relations Nabil Shaath: "This filthy talk of ''the criminals'' in connection with our Martyrs and prisoners - while they are our heroes, the heroes of self-sacrifice and the candles of freedom. They cannot be compared to the Israeli criminals in Israel's prisons... Australia's decision [to stop] transferring $10 million angered me greatly... It transferred [the aid to the UN]... so that it would not serve for payment of the salaries of the [prisoners and Martyrs'] families. In other words, the truth is they are worthy of being spat on. You [Australians] are the servants of the US... I don't want your 10 million, I don't want to chase after them." [Official PA TV, Topic of the Day, July 3, 2018]

Shaath's definition of Palestinian terrorist prisoners as "heroes" and "candles of freedom" exemplifies the PA's policy of honoring terrorists and murderers, as documented by Palestinian Media Watch. Shaath's comments are also a result of Israel's passing of the law to deduct terror salaries from PA tax money.

The law was passed by the Israeli Parliament on July 2, 2018 and deducts the amount of money the PA pays imprisoned terrorists and families of "Martyrs" from the tax money Israel collects for the PA. The law freezes the deducted money and has Israel hold it indefinitely. Should the PA not pay terrorists' salaries or allowances to families of "Martyrs" for a full year, the Israeli government would have the option of giving all or part of the frozen money to the PA.

The Oslo process is dead, it is time to win

Eve Harrow was at the Knesset, invited to a special meeting of the Victory Caucus on the subject of ’25 Years since Oslo, Time for New Thinking’.

She recorded Stuart Force, father of Taylor z”l, whose murder by Arab terrorists galvanized the “stop pay to slay” legislation in both Israel and the US.

MidEast Forum director Daniel Pipes also spoke, as well as Arab Hevron community leader Ashraf Jabari and others.

Eve then sat down with Gregg Roman of the MidEast Forum to hear details of the joint US-Israel program, years in the making, to end incentives for terror and perhaps finally, bring some real peace to the area between the Jordan River and the Sea.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the decision in Israel to allow members of Knesset and all other Jews to visit the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest spot.

It issued a statement condemning visits from"Israeli officials including ministers, members of Knesset, military, security, ultra-Orthodox and extremist settlers" - pretty much anyone with a yarmulka.

This direct call to violate international law on freedom of practicing religion was accompanied by a call for the international community to enforce discrimination against Jews.

"The ministry warns of acceptance of daily intrusions of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and its courtyards as a matter that has become familiar and normal and does not necessitate a halt to its serious repercussions. This requires the international community and the relevant UN organizations, especially UNESCO, to implement and implement its resolutions on Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque," the statement said.

Because allowing Jews to peacefully stroll through the Temple Mount is utterly unacceptable, and banning them is "human rights."

One would normally expect real human right organizations to issue statements denouncing the fact that a government recognized by so many nations is explicitly calling to ban people from visiting and worshiping at their holy place simply because they are Jewish. But today's "human rights' NGOs would instead agree with this twisted, perverted idea that the mere presence of a Jew is an infraction on Muslim human rights.

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

Last year, China proposed a very general and ambiguous peace framework between Israel and the Palestinians. As AP reported it then:

China's U.N. ambassador urged the international community on Monday to support President Xi Jinping's new four-point proposal to end the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict and establish an independent Palestinian state.

The four points are:

— Advancing the two-state solution based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of a new Palestinian state.

—Upholding "the concept of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security," immediately ending Israeli settlement building, taking immediate measures to prevent violence against civilians, and calling for an early resumption of peace talks.

—Coordinating international efforts to put forward "peace-promoting measures that entail joint participation at an early date."

—Promoting peace through development and cooperation between the Palestinians and Israel.

This proposal went nowhere, although it was floated shortly after a state visit to China by Mahmoud Abbas.

It is a vague proposal, hardly a plan, that doesn't even mention "refugees" or whether the Palestinian state. It is far less specific than a similar Chinese proposal from 2013 that also went nowhere.

Suddenly, the Palestinians are showing interest in this Chinese proposal that says very little. The reason is that they are growing more and more nervous over the US "deal of the century" gaining traction and they want to find any alternative so that they don't appear to be against peace.

Nabil Shaath, Mahmoud Abbas'advisor on foreign affairs and international relations, welcomed the Chinese initiative in an interview with Voice of Palestine Radio on Monday. He said that it would be an alternative to the so-called "deal of the century," which he claims has collapsed "because of Palestinian, Arab and international rejection."

If it collapsed, no one would be talking about an obscure Chinese proposal.

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

Last Thursday, the Moroccan government denied rumors in the Arab world that there were any official ties between them and the State of Israel.

But they pretty much admitted that there were unofficial ties.

Government spokesman Mustapha al-Khaliji told a news conference that Morocco had no formal ties with Israel, but he did not rule out "networks operating through other countries to circumvent this," - meaning that there almost certainly are informal and unofficial relations between the two countries.

There have been reports that there is $25 million in trade between the two countries over the past five years. In 2016, Morocco denied any imports from Israel when Israeli dates were found to be sold during Ramadan.

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.

14 more "innocent civilians" just discovered to be Islamic Jihad terrorists

In September 2014, Islamic Jihad admitted that 121 of its members were killed in Operation Protective Edge.

Hamas and other terrorist groups never announced total casualties of their members, as far as I can tell.

Now, Islamic Jihad says 135 of its members were killed during that war.

Maybe a few of them succumbed to injuries afterwards, but 14 seems a bit high for that.

Which means that here are an additional dozen or so more people who were reported as "innocent civilians" by NGOs like Amnesty and the UN who were, in fact, 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.

07/08 Links: David Singer: Hamas and PLO Entrench Apartheid in Gaza and West Bank; Glick: Democrats Reject Israel Because They Reject American Nationalism; The Real Modern Anti-Semitism

From Ian:

David Singer: Hamas and PLO Entrench Apartheid in Gaza and West Bank

The British Foreign Office showed appalling judgement when scheduling a visit by Prince William to a refugee camp in the West Bank which should have been closed down long ago. The Prince – obviously moved by what he saw – remarked:
“I saw at Jalazon (refugee camp) the tremendous hardships faced by the refugees, and I can only imagine the difficulties of life lived under these conditions, the ed (sic) resources and the lack of opportunity”

Regrettably Prince William failed to question why:
1. Jalazon had not been dismantled during the past 25 years after it came under Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) control.

2. Jalazon’s inhabitants should still be classified as “refugees” when they are living in part of former Palestine now under PLO occupation.

Prince William’s visit was closely followed by a meeting between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and United Nations (UN) Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process – Nickolay Mladenov.

During their meeting Abbas stressed the UN's important role in providing protection for
the “Palestinian people” and the necessity of continuing to provide services to the “Palestinian refugees” through the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

Undiscussed between them was why the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza have failed to close down the 27 refugee camps still remaining within their respective fiefdoms.

Caroline Glick: Democrats Reject Israel Because They Reject American Nationalism

The problem is that over the past twenty years or so, the American left has undergone a profound shift in values, from liberal nationalism to radical post-nationalism. This process, facilitated and accelerated during Barack Obama’s presidency, and expressed most emblematically in Democratic support for open borders, has made post-nationalism the sine qua non of the Democrats since Trump’s electoral triumph in 2016.

Israel’s relations with the American left, then, are a collateral victim of a wider shift in American society. Jewish nationalism, with its inherent affinity to American nationalism, was once the basis of Israel’s relationship with the American people as a whole. But now nationalism is the main cause of the Democrats’ increasingly fraught and antagonistic relationship with the Jewish state, while remaining the foundation of ever increasing levels of Republican affinity and support for Israel.

Perhaps Israel will be able to heed Ross’s advice, at least in terms of the Democrats. Perhaps it will be able to develop a common language with the U.S. based on shared interests. There are certainly a number of steps Israel can take to advance that goal.

But the fact is that the Democrats’ shift in values from nationalist to post-nationalist, rather than any action Israel has taken in its domestic or foreign policy, is what has caused the rupture in Israel’s ties to the American left.

So long as Meretz remains a marginal force in Israeli society on the one hand, and post-nationalist forces continue to rise in the Democratic party on the other, bipartisan support for Israel, like bipartisan support for American nationalism, will remain a thing of the past.

David P. Goldman: The Real Modern Anti-Semitism

A Brezhnev-era joke asked whether it was a crime to say that the party chairman was an idiot. The answer was yes, because it’s a state secret. For those who miss Soviet-era humor, French President Emmanuel Macron has provided some consolation, by firing the French ambassador to Budapest for observing in a private memorandum that the president of Hungary is not an anti-Semite. Evidently that is a state secret in France.

In a June 18 dispatch, Eric Fournier, the French ambassador to Hungary, reported that the alleged anti-Semitism of Hungarian President Viktor Orban was “a fantasy of the foreign press.” He added that the allegation diverted attention from the “real modern anti-Semitism,” whose source is “Muslims in France and Germany.” The private memorandum was leaked by the left-wing website Mediapart and reported widely in the French press. Hungary’s “management of illegal immigration” might be a model for France, Fournier added.

The French president denounced the memo as “contrary to the French official position,” saying that if it were shown that Fournier’s views had been made in public, he would be removed. The memo was private, but Macron fired him anyway. Fournier’s memo had struck a raw nerve. On April 18, 250 French notables, including former president Nicolas Sarkozy, had denounced the “new anti-Semitism” arising from “Islamic radicalization,” declaring: “We demand that the fight against this democratic failure that is anti-Semitism becomes a national cause before it’s too late. Before France is no longer France.” Nearly a tenth of France’s half-million Jews have emigrated in the past decade in response to Muslim violence against Jews.

Ambassador Fournier was entirely correct: Polling data provide massive evidence of Muslim anti-Semitism in France. Fifty-six percent of believing and practicing Muslims in France believe that there is “a Zionist conspiracy on a global scale,” according to a 2014 Fondapol study. French soldiers guard synagogues and Jewish schools. French Jews are advised by their community leaders not to show themselves on the street with visible signs of Jewish identity, such as a kippah.

By contrast, Hungary’s 100,000 Jews—a larger presence relative to the country’s population of 8 million—walk unmolested to synagogue in traditional Jewish costume and hold street fairs with minimal security presence. During a visit to Budapest in May, I walked from my hotel to synagogue on Friday night and Saturday wearing a kippah, crossing the city four times. No one looked at me twice. I wouldn’t attempt that in France or Germany.

In the same meeting that I mentioned previously where the Palestinian ambassador to Iran claimed that "international Zionism" controls Donald Trump, the Iranian official he was meeting with said some pretty outlandish things himself.

"The Zionist regime tries to gain dominance over Syria after Daesh, but resistance forces and military advisers from the Islamic Republic of Iran will continue their presence alongside Syria to counter terrorism," Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, the Iranian parliament speaker's special adviser on international affairs, said.

Up until now Iran insisted that ISIS was a Zionist group. Now they are saying that Israel is trying to take over the vacuum left by the defeat of ISIS.

This is a neat example of psychological projection, as Iran is seeking to control Syria. It is now trying to justify its continued presence there in order to fight imaginary Zionist terrorists, just as its proxy Hezbollah justifies its stranglehold on Lebanon in order to defend against imaginary Israeli designs on that country.

Iran's goal is to establish a contiguous Iranian and Shiite presence from Iran to the Mediterranean, and it continues to use Israel as the excuse for its attempt to take over the Arab Muslim world. It is even moving Shiite "settlers" into formerly Sunni towns in Syria, taking over houses of Sunni Arabs who had fled during the war.

For some reason, I'm not seeing any protests on college campuses against Iranian imperialism, colonialism and illegal settlements.

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.

A Palestinian diplomat, echoing antisemitic theories from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, stated that "Zionists" are controlling the US president.

Palestinian Ambassador to Iran Salah al-Zawawi, while meeting with senior adviser to the Iranian parliament speaker for international affairs Hossein Amir Abdollahian, said US President Donald Trump is "an instrument in the hands of international Zionism," according to Iran's Tasnim News.

Zawawi also said that Israel's Likud party, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is seeking to control the Muslim world.

Zawawi has a history of saying outlandish things. Last year he said that he prayed that Iran would produce 1000 nuclear bombs, presumably to destroy Israel.

In 2014 he said that all Jews whose families emigrated to Israel since he beginning of Zionism must move back to the countries they came from.

And more recently he said that Palestine must be liberated "from the river to the sea" using terrorism like car ramming attacks and stabbings and rockets which he praised.

While all of these statements are ostensibly against official Palestinian positions, he remains in his position - perhaps the only diplomat who can brazenly contradict the official diplomatic position of the entity he represents without so much as a reprimand.

Perhaps this is because while he is spouting words that go against the carefully measured statements of Abbas and Erekat to the West, he is quite accurately describing the unofficial Palestinian position on what they would like to see in the Middle East.

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.