Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, July 25, 2019

NGOs Attend Wrong Rally, End Up Protesting Demolition Of Security Barrier (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Jerusalem, July 25 - A mix-up in communication this morning resulted in several groups issuing loud demands that contradict every other demand they have ever made.

A cluster of activists opposed to the existence of Israel's security barrier and to the demolition of Palestinian-built structures wound up demonstrating against the destruction of the barrier instead of against the demolition of Palestinian buildings after they received confusing instructions via other activists on social media.

Placards decrying "wanton destruction," "violations of human rights," and "disregard of people's need to live a normal life" appeared near the barrier just south of Jerusalem Thursday. Small knots of protesters yelled slogans and urged authorities to "just let people live," bearing a message that at first appeared to support the continued existence of the barrier, which has saved thousands of Israeli - and Palestinian - lives since its construction last decade.

"We're not used to protesters encouraging us to keep doing what we're doing, so that was refreshing," admitted an IDF officer who gave his name as Captain Giladi. "It's good to see some consistency from self-proclaimed human rights activists, to see them acknowledge the lives this barrier has saved on both sides of the conflict: Israelis directly through the prevention and deterrence of attacks, and Palestinians indirectly through the consequent avoidance of military action. Kudos."

Witnesses reported that it took nearly an hour for the protesters to realize they had not arrived at the site of a planned demolition, with the realization occurring only after the dozen or so participants ran out of steam and began texting with friends, family, and other activists wondering where they had gone. A scheduled demonstration against the destruction of a Palestinian-built structure - built without a permit and in violation of Civil Administration security procedures - fizzled because most of the activists ended up at the security barrier instead, calling for it not to be destroyed.

"Well, this is embarrassing," muttered a protester who declined to be identified. "We're not taking money from foreign governments so we can uphold the human rights of Jews, I'll tell you that. This particular use of European Commission and Government of the German State of Hesse funds is not going in the annual report."

"I was wondering where all the journalists had got to," recalled another. "We had arranged with people from Haaretz, AP, BBC, the works - probably at least as many reporters and camera people were going to show up as participants, but I admit sometimes the line is fuzzy between those categories. Took a while till the penny dropped - we thought at first traffic held people up, but, well, oops. We won't make that mistake again."

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.

07/25 Links Pt1: Palestinian journalist tells how Hamas brings kids to front line to die; Iran fueling friction on the Golan Heights; House Overwhelmingly Passes Multiple Pro-Israel Bills

From Ian:

Palestinian journalist tells how Hamas brings kids to front line to die

A Palestinian journalist has described in detail how Hamas operatives take children in buses to protest against Israel on the Gaza border.

In a new documentary released by TPS, the journalist, whose face is blurred and his voice distorted for security reasons, says he has witnessed Hamas operatives taking chairs and sitting nearby the fence eating seeds and watching people die.

“They bring children to the playgrounds and let them play and then encourage them to do whatever they can to get close to the fence,” the journalist told TPS.

The documentary focuses on the March of Return riots, which started in March of last year. Some 2,200 terror-related incidents have been reported since the start of the riots - a combination of gunfire, explosive device and molotov cocktail attacks.

Not Only in Summer Camps - How Hamas Exploits Children During the Riots on the Gaza Border

Iran fueling friction on the Golan Heights

After its success in pushing the Iranian forces away from the Israel-Syria border in the Golan Heights, Israel is stepping up its efforts against Hezbollah’s attempts to further entrench itself in the sector.

Tuesday’s airstrike on Tal al-Hara, a strategic hill south of Damascus, was the third to be attributed to Israel by the foreign media. All of the airstrikes targeted Hezbollah assets, mainly observation posts that the Shiite terrorist group is trying to form along the border as part of a wider lineup of weapons. These posts are intended to serve Hezbollah and its Iranian and perhaps Syrian patrons to gather intelligence and, in the future, as a potential platform for terrorist activity.

Hezbollah’s efforts in the sector have known their ups and downs. Under the auspices of the war in Syria, the Shiite terrorist group tried to set up an extensive terrorist grid in the area, but the elimination of two of its leaders, Samir Kuntar and Jihad Mughniyeh – also attributed to Israel – considerably slowed it down.

The end of the Syrian war, and especially the pause placed on Iranian militias’ efforts to establish themselves in the Golan Heights, brought Hezbollah back into the picture. The organization's activities in the Golan are encouraged and financed by Iran, and the Syrian regime, by means of tacit consent.

Israel Hayom has revealed in the past that the organization's senior commander in the Golan Heights is Munir Ali Naim Shaito, known as Haj Hashem, a veteran of the organization and a key player in Hezbollah’s assistance to the Syrian army during the civil war. Subsequently, the IDF also exposed details on Hezbollah’s secret plan to establish terrorist infrastructure in the Golan using Syrian civilians, mainly Druze.

Things are heating up between Israel and Hezbollah in the Golan - analysis

Smyth told The Post that while “Trump’s statement has sent some signals to Iran,” Tehran has “upped the ante because of the situation on the ground, not because of Trump’s statement. They know that their goals will outlast the Trump administration. But if it rallies the troops, they will use it. They are very pragmatic.”

While the “Iranians have been following the same program in southern Syria for years, now they're trying to secure and resecure their gains,” Smyth said. “There’s a lot more opportunity, it’s a net gain no matter how you look at it.”

The attack on Tel Haara on Wednesday was not the first.

The site has been used by the Syrian army for years to observe Israeli movement, and since the Assad regime re-took the area from rebels last summer, there have been several strikes on the site blamed on Israel.

While the base, which has electronic surveillance capabilities, was supposed to be manned solely by regime troops, pro-Iranian militias including Hezbollah are known to be stationed in it.

According to Smyth, Hezbollah and Iran “have been at the forefront of using electronic means to counter their foes, its existed for decades and it wouldn’t shock me if they were testing the waters there.”

The opportunity was there for the taking.

The retaking of the Syrian Golan by Assad also forced Israel to end Operation Good Neighbor, where Israel provided humanitarian and, according to foreign reports, military aid to rebels in the Syrian Golan.

Israel also treated thousands of Syrians who arrived at the border,both combatants and civilians. According to officials some 70% of the wounded treated by Israel were men of fighting age while the other 30% were women and children.

A year later, “times have changed,” Smyth told the Post. “Not everyone has switched over but if your stuck in Syria and you have no options...and you can’t run into Israel...you have to back the strongest horse.”

From LPH Info:(French)

As part of the second round of playoffs of the Europa League football, Racing Club Strasbourg hosts on Thursday night team Maccabi Haifa.

In a highly questionable decision, the Strasbourg police imposed restrictions on supporters of the Israeli team, "for the sake of their safety and due to fears of violence from local elements". On Wednesday already, the Strasbourg police had announced some exceptional measures: absolute prohibition for supporters of Haifa to walk in the parks and public spaces from noon until the day after the match; the obligation for them to move only in the vicinity of the stadium of Meinau, and limiting to 600 of the number of Haifa supporters admitted to the stadium.

And Thursday morning, the Strasbourg police issued a new restriction: the absolute prohibition to brandish flags of Israel in the perimeter of the stadium and throughout the city.

This unprecedented decision prompted a reaction by the Israeli ambassador to France Aliza Bin-Noun who wrote on her Twitter account: "The demonstrations for the boycott and the BDS are allowed in Strasbourg in the name of the freedom of expression, but the authorities forbid supporters of Maccabi Haifa to brandish flags of Israel. What hypocrisy! This is unacceptable! "

Let's rephrase the police position:

"Hey, we have a lot of Jew-haters and Muslims in our town. They are animals who cannot control themselves. Best act as if you are in a zoo where gorillas are trained to attack you if they see a Star of David or hear Hebrew."

UPDATE: The flag ban has been lifted before the game. (h/t Tomer, see comments)

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 group of prominent New York rabbis have met with and written a letter to Rep. Jerrold Nadler and the House Judiciary Committee to enforce the extradition of Ahlam Tamimi from Jordan.

Here's the letter:

Hon. Jerrold Nadler
Chairman, U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.

Subject: Extraditing FBI Most Wanted Terrorist Ahlam Tamimi

Dear Hon. Mr. Nadler,

The 2001 Sbarro Massacre in Jerusalem has traumatized the Jewish community worldwide. A suicide bomber entered the crowded Sbarro pizza shop and blew himself up, murdering 15 civilians, including 7 children and a pregnant woman, and wounding 130. Malka Roth and Judith Greenbaum, pregnant with her first child, were US citizens and were killed in this senseless act of violence. A third US citizen, Joanne Chana Nachenberg, was left in a vegetative state in the bombing and remains unconscious. She is not counted among the dead. Her toddler daughter has been raised these past 17 years without a mother. It was one of the most vicious and heartless attacks modern society has seen.

Two years ago, on March 14, 2017, Department of Justice officials announced federal charges against Ahlam Tamimi, who took an active role in this horrific massacre. The DOJ announcement says Tamimi, now a Jordanian national, is charged under US federal law with conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction against US nationals outside the US, resulting in death. It calls Tamimi “an unrepentant terrorist who admitted to her role in a deadly terrorist bombing” that resulted in a massive number of casualties.

Despite being listed on the “FBI Most Wanted Terrorist” list, with a $5 million bounty on her head, Tamimi is living fearlessly, in Jordan, taking great pride in the crimes she has committed. Family members of Americans massacred with Tamimi’s help have repeatedly reached out to the DOJ and State Department officials on this matter and have yet to receive a meaningful reply.

We, the undersigned rabbis and community leaders from across the 10th District of New York, appeal to you in your role as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to seek the enforcement of DOJ policy and demand the enforcement of the 1995 Jordan-US Extradition Treaty. We demand the DOJ stand by its word and enforce its own policies. We are asking your Committee to inquire into whether the State Department is properly coordinating with the Justice Department as well as taking appropriate action necessary to bring Tamimi to America for justice.

Sincerely,

Rabbi Allen Schwartz, Congregation Oheb Zedek
Rabbi Menachem Genack, Congregation Shomrei Emunah
Rabbi Jason Herman, Hudson Yards Synagogue
Rabbi Dovid Zirkind, The Jewish Center
Rabbi Elchanan Poupko, Congregation Ramath Orah
Cantor Zev Salomon Muller, West Side Institutional Synagogue
Rabbi Gideon Shloush, Congregation Adereth El
Rabbi Mark Wildes, Manhattan Jewish Experience
Rabbi Chezky Wolff, Tribeca Synagogue and Chabad of Tribeca
Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, Founder, Chancellor Emeritus and Rosh HaYeshiva of Ohr Torah Stone; Founding rabbi of the Lincoln Square Synagogue
Rabbi Shaul Robinson, Senior Rabbi, Lincoln Square Synagogue
Rabbi Aaron D. Mehlman, Senior Rabbi Congregation Ohav Shalom
Rabbi Zvi Farber, Congregation Beth Israel
Rabbi Shlomo Kugel, Chabad of the Upper West Side
Rabbi Steven Eisenberg Eisenberg, Director, Jewish International Connection New York
Rabbi Yehuda Lipskier Chabad of Lincoln Center and Riverside South.
Rabbi Avrohom Marmorstein, Congregation Minchas Chinuch of the West Side
Rabbi Moshe Snow, Senior Rabbi, Young Israel Beth El of Borough Park

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 "objectivity" of @HRW and @Amnesty

Yesterday, Kenneth Roth of Human Right Watch told Haaretz, in context of Israeli courts looking at the legality of not renewing the work permit of anti-Israel activist and HRW researcher Omar Shakir, that “This is a campaign by the Israeli government not only to shut down human rights activity, including by our Israeli partners, but also to deprive Israelis of information about what is happening around them. Whatever happens, we will continue to report objectively on human rights violations here and elsewhere.”

Omar Shakir is objective?

Even if we ignore his pro-BDS activities before joining HRW (and he was obviously hired because of them, not in spite of them,) since he joined he tweeted this antisemitic cartoon about ISIS in Syria attacking Palestinians that claims that Jews are behind the terror group, and called the cartoon "powerful:"

OK, so Shakir is not very objective, even when he is supposedly tweeting against Hamas.

But what about HRW (and Amnesty International) as a whole? Are they objective when it comes to Israel and Palestinians?

Today, the top stories at both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty websites are both about Israel.

HRW's is about this court case:

Amnesty is still pushing its months-old campaign against TripAdvisor allowing Jewish-owned tourist spots to be mentioned, clearly the top human rights issue of our time based on its website:

What a coincidence that while there are still human rights crises worldwide, both of the major human rights organizations are obsessing over Israel!

Amnesty's headline, "Stand With Palestinians," implies that these groups are not so much interested in bashing Israel as in protecting the human rights of Palestinians. Is this true?

No.

For the past few weeks, Palestinians in Lebanon have been loudly protesting laws that penalize any businesses that either employ Palestinians or are owned by Palestinians, making their already precarious existence in Lebanon even worse.

Yet the Lebanon pages at Amnesty and HRW still don't mention a word about it.

Their purported concern for Palestinian human rights seems to end where Arab country borders begin.

I'm not even mentioning the hundreds of examples of anti-Israel bias by Amnesty and HRW in the past. This is bias you can see today by just going to their websites.

When Ken Roth claims that human rights NGOs report "objectively" from the Middle East, he is either delusional or knowingly lying.

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.

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

When the muhtasib or his agent comes to collect the jizya, he should stand the dhimmi in front of him, slap him on the side of the neck and say: “Pay the jizya, unbeliever.” The dhimmi will take his hand out of his pocket holding the jizya and present it to him with humility and submission. – al-Shayzari, The Book of the Islamic Market Inspector, quoted in Lindsey, Daily Life in the Medieval Islamic World, p. 121

The Jews Race typically had eight contestants, or sometimes 12, according to Cassiano. They would be required to run naked through the streets, covered only by a loincloth. On their forehead would be painted the letters SPQR, the abbreviation for the Latin Senatus Populusque Romanus, the official name of the city government, both ancient and modern. Since Carnival is in February, it was cold, often wet, and frequently muddy. To make the race more arduous for the runners – and more entertaining for the public – the contestants would also often be required to gorge themselves before taking off, with the result being that sometimes they would vomit, or even collapse, during the race. The spectators were also permitted to throw rotten oranges and mud at the runners. – David B. Green, “1668: Pope puts a stop to Rome's sadistic 'Jews Race'.”

Examples of Jewish humiliation in the diaspora abound. In the Middle Ages in some parts of Europe, Jews were required to wear special pointed hats or badges, supposedly in order to “reduce the likelihood of sexual intercourse between Jews and non-Jews.” Later, in the 18^th and 19^th century, many countries limited where Jews could live, what professions they could practice, whether they could study at universities, own land, serve in the military, and so on. There were supposed justifications for some of these restrictions, such as protecting the opportunities available to “native” Europeans, but the effect was to always send the message that the Jews were morally inferior beings that deserved punishment. The Nazis publically humiliated Jews even before they began to systematically murder them. Photographs of Jews being paraded through the streets in a state of undress, being forced to clean gutters on their knees, and so on are common.

The antisemitism of the Christian world can perhaps be traced to the refusal of the Jew to accept the “good news” that the Mashiach had arrived. Among Muslims, it was their stubborn refusal to accept Mohammed’s prophecy. Jews in 19^th century Morocco were forced to live in ghettos, and were required to go barefoot or wear shoes made of straw when walking outside of them. Muslim children threw stones at Jews as a matter of course. Like Europe, the treatment of Jews in the Muslim world was dependent on the whim of the ruler, sometimes being quite harsh and sometimes less so. But the inferior position of the Jews, based on Koranic principles, was no less evident than in the Christian world. And that often expressed itself in acts of humiliation.

I grew up in the US, where the kind of murderous Jew-hatred my grandparents experienced in the Russian Empire was mostly just a story. But when I did encounter antisemitism, it was always in essence the expression of the non-Jew’s need to demonstrate to the Jew, to bystanders, and to himself, the inferior social status of the Jew. In my grandparents’ day, Jews had no choice but to accept humiliation, because it was the price of avoiding far worse punishment – murder or rape could follow if the Jew resisted being put in his or her place.

Centuries of diaspora life habituated the Jewish people to humiliation. The founders of the state of Israel realized this, and the “New Jew” that they wished to create in Eretz Yisrael was a person who would no longer accept it. And in a Jewish state, a Jew wouldn’t have to choose between shame or death.

Of course there were times that it seemed that way, like when Ben Gurion decided to accept German reparations in order to finance the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Holocaust, and in fact, refugees from the Arab world as well. Menachem Begin chose honor over practicality, and vehemently opposed the deal (to be fair, perhaps in addition to honor he preferred not to see all that money flowing into government and Histadrut-owned enterprises).

Unfortunately, it hasn’t been so easy to breed the tolerance for humiliation out of the Jewish people, even in a Jewish state. When someone treats us unjustly, we often prefer to just take it rather than to stand up for ourselves. This attitude continues to surface in relations between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, as well as our old nemeses in Europe.

The most important issue toward the Palestinians is the question of sovereignty in Jerusalem and over the Temple Mount and other sites. They understand very well that Jerusalem is the spiritual center of the country, and they keep pushing to make the Mount a no-go zone for Jews. “Who needs that Vatican?” said Moshe Dayan, but he failed to see that it is important not just as a religious symbol, but as proof that the roots of the Jewish people are here in the land of Israel, in our capital. Over time, we’ve allowed fear of “disturbances” and foreign pressure to force us to give up, little by little, the practical control of the Mount and eastern Jerusalem that we won at great cost in 1967. Our collapse over the installation of metal detectors may have been the low point.

But lately there have been some bright spots, like the demolition of illegally-built structures in the southeastern part of the city, and the excavation of the City of David despite Palestinian objections. I hope that these are demonstrations of a new seriousness and not just pre-election posturing.

Things are as bad or worse in our relationship with the European Union. It and its members, particularly Germany (!) have been trampling on our sovereignty by funding illegal Palestinian construction in Area C, the part of Judea/Samaria that is supposed to be under full Israeli control – including matters of zoning and construction. They support left-wing “Israeli” NGOs which intervene in our politics, try to embarrass the IDF in the territories, and harass the government and IDF with frivolous “lawfare.” We have taken only the mildest steps to rein them in.

Until President Trump came along, the US Department of State maintained the absurd fiction that no part of Jerusalem belonged to Israel, despite the fact that it had been the seat of our government since the founding of the state. No other country has been denied the right to determine its own capital, and if Trump had done nothing else for Israel (and he’s done a great deal), he would be remembered for ending the long humiliation that was foisted on us from the very beginning of the state.

The Arabs and Europeans are not forcing us to clean streets on our knees like the Nazis, but by ignoring our sovereignty over the land, especially in our capital, they are reaffirming their belief – both the Muslim and Christian versions – that Jews do not have the same rights as others. Like the demeaning jizya payment and associated slap, their actions both punish us in a practical sense and humiliate us. But we are out of the diaspora and back in our home, where we do not have to accept humiliation. Both Ben Gurion and Begin understood that. I wonder about today’s leaders.

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.

07/24 Links Pt2: The Forward Opinion Page Defends “Pay-to-Slay”; BDS, Omar Shakir, and Israel Eliminationism; A CAIR Leader’s Consequence-Free Antisemitism

From Ian:

The Forward Opinion Page Defends “Pay-to-Slay”

Last December, the Forward gaslit Jews with the claim that “‘From The River To The Sea’ Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means,” an opinion piece by University of Arizona professor Maha Nassar. In January, the publication gave space to Ariel Gold, an activist with the pro-Iran, pro-Maduro group Code Pink, to advocate for housing discrimination against Jews. This month, the publication once again defies all credible expectations, hitting yet another new low with justifications for Palestinian Authority payments to terrorists who murder Jews. (“Does The Palestinian Authority ‘Pay To Slay’ Jews? Here’s How We Palestinians See It,” July 10.)

In the second paragraph, author Muhammad Shehada claims “Pay to Slay” is a “canard” that has been debunked by the Washington Post. This is grossly dishonest. The Post fact-check to which he refers took issue only with the claimed total amount of the payments, $350 million, that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asserted in a speech – but the Post’s piece acknowledges, without caveat, that such payments are in fact being made: “the State Department, by law, already deducts from its Palestinian aid budget a figure that represents the amount of money the Palestinian Authority pays to people convicted of terrorism. The exact number is classified ….”

The same Post article continues, “in the Palestinian Authority’s budget, one can find $350 million in annual payments to Palestinian prisoners, ‘martyrs’ and injured, but can one with certainty say they are all terrorists?”

BDS, Omar Shakir, and Israel Eliminationism

BDS and the accompanying delegitimization are also closely correlated with violent attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions. Data published by the UK Community Security Trust (CST) shows that when reports of clashes in Gaza increase, often quoting accusations from HRW and other NGOs, the number of antisemitic incidents also goes up. HRW and other members of the NGO network ignore the antisemitic implications of their campaigns.

To promote this demonizing agenda, Shakir and other BDS campaigners need to sell the defamatory mythology that Zionism, unique among nationalisms, is racism; that Israel is a uniquely evil pariah (racist, apartheid, genocidal) state - worse than Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, China; and that Israel uniquely fits the description of a “colonial settler state” that deserves to be eliminated. HRW and BDS allies have not invested resources in campaigns to boycot Russia over the occupation in Ukraine; or China regarding Tibet and the suppression of human rights in Hong Kong; or Turkey over its occupation of northern Cyprus, to cite a few examples.

For these reasons, in 2009, Robert Bernstein, who founded HRW in the 1970s, condemned the leaders of his own organization in an opinion piece in the New York Times. HRW’s activities and biases, he declared, played a leading role in turning Israel into a pariah state. Later, he detailed the criticism of the bias, false accusations, and demonization. But Roth and the HRW Middle East division leaders, steeped in anti-Israel campaigns, expanded the efforts and hired BDS activist Shakir.

All of this is vital to the context of the case being heard in the High Court, and goes far beyond the legal issues of whether the State’s refusal to renew Shakir’s work visa is lawful. Antisemitism and eliminationism are moral and political concepts, and will remain even if Shakir is technically allowed to stay.

Regardless of the High Court’s decision, Shakir has been exposed as a major activist in the elimination campaign. And far beyond the legal arena, HRW and Shakir, like Corbyn and his ilk, are clearly in violation of basic moral norms.

NGO Monitor: Omar Shakir Fact Sheet

In October 2016, Human Rights Watch (HRW) hired Omar Shakir to serve as its “Israel and Palestine Country Director.” Shakir has been a consistent supporter of a one-state framework and advocate for BDS (boycotts, divestment, sanctions) campaigns, fitting the longstanding HRW practice of hiring anti-Israel activists to serve in key positions relating to Israel.

In May 2018, due to Shakir’s BDS ties, the Israeli Ministry of Interior chose not to renew his work visa. HRW and Shakir have been challenging this decision in Israeli courts. In April 2019, he lost his case in the Jerusalem District Court and immediately appealed to the Israeli Supreme Court. The hearing will take place on July 25, 2019. While Shakir regularly assails Israel for its “lack of democracy,” in fact, the Israeli courts allowed him to remain in the country during his appeal process despite having no obligation to do so.

Omar Shakir’s background and history of anti-Israel activity exemplifies the organization’s troubling ideological approach to Israel and retreat from the universal principles of human rights.

High Court changes tune about quick hearing to expel HRW official

In a surprise move, the High Court of Justice postponed Thursday’s hearing on whether the Israel and Palestine director for Human Rights Watch could be deported for calls he made to boycott Israel.

After the court had earlier fast-tracked the case, the postponement left many scratching their heads.

Omar Shakir, the HRW official, has been fighting government efforts to use a 2017 law to expel him for his alleged support of boycotting Israel for 14 months. Shakir denies the charge, saying that he criticizes Israel in an attempt to improve its human rights record just as the HRW criticizes other countries.

Following a long battle before the Jerusalem District Court in which the government and a range of outside groups, such as NGO Monitor, obtained an order to expel him, Shakir appealed to the High Court. NGO Monitor is neutral on whether he must be expelled, but wants him to “own” his outlook.

The High Court appeared to side with Shakir by freezing the order to expel him, and pushing off the hearing until November. However, following additional efforts by the state and some of right-wing NGOs, the court was convinced to move up the date by nearly four months to July 25.

This decision itself was highly unusual, as the court typically delays cases and rarely expedites them. This makes the latest decision on Wednesday even rarer.

From Haaretz:

The Israel Airports Authority has inaugurated a new flight path into Ben-Gurion International Airport, despite the fact that it necessitates flying at a low altitude on the outskirts of Ramallah, Beitunia and other Palestinian locales in the West Bank. Despite the security risks entailed in possible exposure of these aircraft to ground fire while they pass over hostile territory, Israel's defense establishment approved the new route.

The airport authority finished preparations for the new landing procedure at the beginning of the year, but it was inaugurated now because of both increased air traffic at the airport during the summer months and recent problems with the Global Positioning System in Israel's airspace.

This situation had led to an almost total cessation of incoming flights using the previous route, which passed over the city of Modi'in.

The defense establishment approved the new approach path a year ago, but it was only implemented two weeks ago, after installation of an Instrument Landing System that enables landing in cases where the pilots have no visual contact with the runway. Two additional routes for incoming aircraft, from the north and northeast, continue to be open.

A former high-ranking official at the Civil Aviation Authority explained while additional flight paths sometimes need to be opened, no such route deep inside the West Bank – especially at a low altitude – had been approved before, even during emergencies such as Operations Cast Lead and Defensive Edge, in the Gaza Strip, in recent years.

"If a plane is fired at, it may not be brought down," he noted, but it will be damaged and such an incident "would open the gates of hell."

I hope there is more that is not being reported on why this route above Arab towns is not a concern.

Even the threat that a single bullet "would open the gates of hell" is not reassuring, since that would give Hamas more incentive to start a war between the PA and Israel while it sits back and laughs.

Maybe they are re-routing only the El Al (or other?) flights that have anti-missile defense systems.

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.

Rashida Tlaib, according to UNRWA, is a Palestinian refugee. It doesn’t matter that she wasn’t born anywhere near territory that was once part of the British Mandate for Palestine. Nor does it matter that far from being homeless or stateless, her American citizenship is so solid that she is a member of Congress. Rashida Tlaib, the UN has decided, is a refugee.

From Dr. Rephael Ben Ari:
“According to UNRWA’s original definition, a Palestinian refugee was a person whose normal place of residence had been Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who had lost his home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 war. Controversially, in 1965, UNRWA decided to create an extension of eligibility to the third generation of refugees – that is, to children of persons who were themselves born after 14 May 1948. In 1982, the Agency took another far-reaching decision to extend eligibility to all subsequent generations of descendants, without any limitation. Further deviating from the accepted norms and arrangements regarding refugees worldwide, UNRWA also registers as ‘refugees’ those who have acquired citizenship in other counties.”

Rashida Tlaib is eligible to register with UNRWA for assistance as a "Palestinian refugee." Tlaib, moreover, embraces the identity conferred upon her by UNRWA. She self-describes as a “Palestinian American.” This is distinct from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for instance, who does not call herself a “Puerto Rican American.”

On winning her congressional seat,Tlaib wrapped herself in the “Palestinian” flag, a flag closely associated with the PLO.

Tlaib's identification as a Palestinian refugee extends to a belief in the right of return. From an interview with Valerie Vande Panne:

VVP: Where do you stand on Palestinian right of return—support or oppose?

Rashida Tlaib: Very supportive. I see what happened to African Americans in our country. I support right of return absolutely.

The right of return, which Tlaib supports, has as its aim the annihilation of Israel and the eradication of any Jewish presence in the Jewish State. This would be accomplished by flooding Israel, the indigenous territory of the Jewish people with some 6 million "Palestinian refugees." At this point, Jewish self-determination would be ended. For not only would the Jewish State no longer be Jewish, it would no longer be Israel. It would also no longer be safe for Jewish people to live there.

Some anti-Israel pundits, for instance Carolina Landsmann, at Haaretz, and Amy Addison at the Middle East Monitor, have suggested that in telling Tlaib to “go back where you came from,” the President, far from being racist, was supporting her right of return to “Palestine.”

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 14, 2019

Tlaib, meanwhile, has said she would vote against aid for Israel.

On Tlaib’s first day in office, she put up a map and covered the State of Israel with a post-it reading “Palestine.”

Someone has already made a slight alteration to the map that hangs in Rashida Tlaib’s new congressional office. pic.twitter.com/mwyshIog4r
— Hannah Allam (@HannahAllam) January 3, 2019

It is interesting that someone like Tlaib, who identifies as a Palestinian refugee with the right of return, can be a member of Congress: someone who is meant to put America first. But it is perhaps even more interesting that Tlaib began her term by accusing others of dual loyalties.

“They forgot what country they represent,” said Tlaib, in response to legislation introduced by Israel advocates to help states combat BDS.

But what country does Tlaib respresent? BDS, like the right of return, is a tool created with the express purpose of eradicating the Jewish State, albeit through economic privation. The idea is to squeeze the Jews until they leave. The founder of the BDS movement, Omar Barghouti, has been clear: "We oppose a Jewish state in any part of Palestine."

BDS and the right of return are antithetical to U.S. interests and sensibilities, not only because Israel is the one democracy in the Middle East. But because the aims of these movements are actually evil, going against every accepted standard of morality. These two values Tlaib holds dear, the right of return and BDS, are about booting the Jews from their ancient homeland; making them subservient to others; and endangering their very lives.

Rashida Tlaib believes in the merit of these tools of destruction of the Jewish State: the right of return and BDS. These are beliefs that are "Palestine"-centric. As such, we must conclude that far from having dual loyalties, Tlaib is loyal to a single country.

A mythical state called "Palestine."

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.

07/24 Links Pt1: U.S.: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Will Not Be Decided by International Consensus or International Law; US House overwhelmingly passes anti-BDS resolution

From Ian:

Jason D. Greenblatt (U.S. Mission to the UN): U.S.: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Will Not Be Decided by International Consensus or International Law

Assistant to the President and Special Representative for International Negotiations Jason D. Greenblatt told the UN Security Council on Tuesday:

"This [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict will not end on the basis of an 'international consensus.'...Those who continue to call for international consensus on this conflict are doing nothing to encourage the parties to sit down at the negotiating table and make the hard compromises necessary for peace. In fact, they are doing the opposite - allowing people to hide behind words that mean nothing."

"Let us not forget that day when the United Nations could not even find a way to build an international consensus behind the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization that relentlessly attacks Israelis by incendiary balloons, missiles, attack tunnels and other means, sometimes while hiding in residential neighborhoods filled with Palestinian families. Hamas, which ghoulishly holds [the remains of] Israeli soldiers Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul as bargaining chips. Hamas, which...continues to vow to destroy Israel."

"And how is it that we can't find an international consensus that the Palestinian Authority rewarding terrorism and the murder of Israelis using public funds, some donated by countries in this very room, is abhorrent and must be stopped."

"This conflict is also not going to be resolved by reference to 'international law' when such law is inconclusive....There is no judge, jury, or court in the world that the parties involved have agreed to give jurisdiction in order to decide whose interpretations are correct."

"The same holds true for the status of Jerusalem....No international consensus or interpretation of international law will persuade the United States or Israel that a city in which Jews have lived and worshipped for nearly 3,000 years and has been the capital of the Jewish State for 70 years, is not - today and forever - the capital of Israel."

"Let us not lose sight of the fact that Israel has already conceded at least 88% of the territory captured by Israel in the defensive war it had no choice but to fight in 1967."

"The dispute over the territory is a question that can only be resolved in the context of direct negotiations between the parties. And I am focused on how to get those parties back to that table."

Greenblatt: Palestinian Aspirations for Jerusalem Don’t Constitute a Right

The Palestinian aspiration to a have a capital in Jerusalem is “not a right,” and “international consensus is not international law” when it comes to creating a Palestinian state, said US Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt on Tuesday.

“It is true that the PLO and the Palestinian Authority continue to assert that east Jerusalem must be a capital for the Palestinians,” Greenblatt told the UN Security Council, “but let’s remember—an aspiration is not a right.”

Addressing a regularly scheduled UNSC on “the situation in the Middle East,” Greenblatt said that “international consensus is not international law. So let’s stop kidding ourselves. If a so-called international consensus had been able to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it would have done so decades ago. It didn’t.”

Greenblatt emphasized the limitations of international law in putting an end to the decades-long conflict, arguing that past UN resolutions have been “heavily negotiated, purposely ambiguously worded,” that Israelis and Palestinians have different interpretations of the law and that neither has recognized the jurisdiction of any international court.

US House overwhelmingly passes anti-BDS resolution

The US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution on Tuesday that rejects the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel, after some Democrats expressed concern last week that the measure could cause infighting within the party leading up to the 2020 election.

The bill — formally known as House Resolution 246 — also calls for increased security aid to Israel and a two-state solution. It passed by a vote of 398-17, with five abstentions.

Sixteen Democrats opposed the bill, including representatives Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. Both support the BDS movement.

One Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, voted against the resolution.

The measure “opposes the Global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS Movement) targeting Israel, including efforts to target United States companies that are engaged in commercial activities that are legal under United States law, and all efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel.”

It also says that the BDS campaign “undermines the possibility for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by demanding concessions of one party alone and encouraging the Palestinians to reject negotiations in favor of international pressure.”

Democratic Rep. Brad Schneider of Illinois originally sponsored the resolution, which had gained 349 co-sponsors by the time it was voted on.

The Federation of Arab Journalists issued a statement Wednesday denying that any of the Arab writers that visited Israel this week are members of their union.

In a press release, the Federation said that they had reviewed all their member organizations and determined that none of the visitors were considered journalists or members of their national journalist associations.

It appears that at least some of the Arab visitors were bloggers, so it is entirely possible that they are online journalists who do not belong to any syndicate. The FAJ said that they might be Arabs who now live outside the Arab world.

Then comes the obligatory statement that shows how little the words "journalism" and "Arab journalism" intersect.

The Federation reaffirmed its adherence to the rules of the Federation's statutes to stand against all forms of normalization with the Zionist enemy until the liberation of all Arab soil and the establishment of the State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital.

In other words, Arab journalists have no choice but to swear not to do any work in Israel. As this press release shows, if any of them would try to report from Israel they would be expelled from their union.

Meaning, there is not even the hint that Arab journalists can possibly report things objectively even if they would want to.

When Arab reporters only write anti-Israel propaganda, then hundreds of millions of Arabs read nothing but propaganda.

Many Arab newspapers appear very professional. Their journalists are treated like any other in the West, and their reports are used by Western reporters, without informing the readers that the source material is by definition biased.

(See also this report, the facts are contradictory but the message is the same.)

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.

If Ilhan Omar is really pro-boycott, she should support anti-BDS legislation the way they are written

Ilhan Omar's proposed congressional resolution that tries to say that boycotts should be protected as free speech is actually a wonderful argument for much of the anti-BDS legislation that has now been made into law in 27 states, as shown in red in this handy map created by the BDSers:

The state laws are not outlawing boycotts nor are they limiting free speech. For the most part all they are doing is saying that a company cannot do work for the state if it embraces BDS.

The states are boycotting companies that boycott Israel.

Which is entirely proper. States can limit business with whomever they want based on how the businesses act. One such law is New York's Executive Order 177, where any potential contractor must sign the following certification:

In accordance with Executive Order No. 177, the Bidder hereby certifies that it does not have institutional policies or practices that fail to address the harassment and discrimination of individuals on the basis of their age, race, creed, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, marital status, military status, or other protected status under the Human Rights Law.

New York State, and probably many others, say they will not do business with any company that discriminates against people. But does this limit the free speech of those companies? Not at all. They can choose not to bid.

Notice that "national origin" is a protected category in New York's Human Rights Law.

People and companies can act as they want within the law, and states can decide who they will and will not do business with. Omar can boycott Israel and she can create a business that boycotts Israel and none of these anti-BDS laws would stop her from doing that.

If Omar really supports boycotts "in pursuit of civil and human rights,", as her bill claims, she must support states choosing to boycott those that want to discriminate against Jewish people and businesses in Israel, which is what BDS advocates.

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

Iran's Tasnim News Agency writes:

Informed sources told Tasnim that Amano is thought to have been “eliminated” by the Israeli regime so that the UN nuclear agency could have a new chief.

The late Japanese secretary general of the IAEA was reportedly standing against the US and Israeli “heavy pressures to open a false case against Iran on the nuclear issue,” the sources said.

Amano reportedly died of cancer.

While the story is absurd, there is only one country that eve threatened Amano's life - and that country was Iran.

Iran's Farsnews wrote in 2015:

Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Yukiya Amano didn’t disclose secrets of its recent agreement with Iran to the US Congress for the fear of its aftermaths, an Iranian spokesman said Monday.

"In a letter to Yukiya Amano, we underlined that if the secrets of the agreement (roadmap of cooperation between Iran and the IAEA) are revealed, we will lose our trust in the Agency; and despite the US Congress's pressures, he didn’t give any information to them," Spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Behrouz Kamalvandi said in a meeting with the Iranian lawmakers in Tehran on Monday.

Kamalvandi said revealing the secrets of the roadmap wouldn't have been good for him either.

The original article had been quoted at the time with Kamalvandi saying more explicitly, "Had he done so, he himself would have been harmed."

Iran has literally bragged that it has threatened the lives of IAEA officials if the secret side deals were revealed. Those deals were later revealed to include allowing Iran to self-inspect some facilities and additional exemptions that allowed Iran to be in compliance on Implementation Day, January 16, 2016, which therefore allowed Iran to get $100 billion in sanctions relief - and a $400 million ransm for American hostages.

(h/t Martin)

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.

07/23 Links Pt2: How the Left Turned Against Israel; Republicans Do Not Believe There is Any “Occupation”; Treblinka - 77 years since Nazi death camp began operations

From Ian:

How the Left Turned Against Israel

In 1948, the then-aborning state of Israel enjoyed political support from almost the entire global left—including, crucially, the Kremlin. Even when, soon thereafter, Moscow reverted to its traditional anti-Zionist position, bringing along with it those in its Communist orbit, the rest of the non- and anti-Communist left continued to see the Jewish state in a friendly light.

Over the decades, however, that warmth faded as well. A series of landmark events—Israel’s overwhelming victory in the 1967 Six-Day War; the emergence in its aftermath of the “revolutionary” PLO; the rightward shift of Israeli politics with the ascension of the Likud in the late 1970s; Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the first and second Palestinian intifadas; recurrent clashes between Israel and Hamas once Israel ended its occupation of Gaza in 2005—each seemed to peel away another layer of sympathy for Israel on the left and to accrete another layer of hostility.

Today, the transition is almost complete. Most of the left, including the liberal left, joins in shrill criticism of Israel or even outright opposition to its existence.

Now comes Susie Linfield, a professor in the journalism department at New York University and a writer deeply embedded in the left, with her book The Lions’ Den: Zionism and the Left from Hannah Arendt to Noam Chomsky. A beautifully written and penetrating exploration of the evolution I’ve just sketched, replete with devastating aperçus, it begins with this anecdote:

I am at a dinner party with my partner and his friends, who are mostly left-wing intellectuals . . . . [T]he name of a well-known journalist . . . comes up. “Oh, he’s a Zionist!” one person says disparagingly, and the others dutifully shake their heads in condescension and dismay. . . . I debate the pros and cons of disturbing this amicable gathering, and then I say, with a slight gulp, “Well, so am I.” A frozen, stunned silence ensues . . . . ; no one addresses or looks at me, though they shoot pitying glances at my partner.

In her book, Linfield attempts no chronological account of the turn away from Israel. Rather, she offers portraits of eight influential intellectuals—Hannah Arendt, Arthur Koestler, Maxime Rodinson, Isaac Deutscher, Albert Memmi, Fred Halliday, I.F. Stone, and Noam Chomsky—together with close readings of their writings about Zionism, the Jews, and the Jewish state.

Republicans Do Not Believe There is Any “Occupation”

The terminology used by the United Nations that Israel is “illegally occupying Palestinian Land” has angered Israelis for a long time. The Israelis do not believe that the land is “Palestinian,” that they are “occupying it” or that living in and controlling such land is “illegal.”

The Trump Administration agrees with this approach.

The 2016 Republican platform discussed Israel in several sections, including the B.D.S. (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement which it labeled antisemitic, in prioritizing the security needs of allies like Israel over foes, and in moving the U.S. embassy to Israel’s capital city, Jerusalem. It also clearly mentioned Israel’s control over disputed land:
“We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier”

The logic behind such attitude has been voiced by Israel and Israeli advocates for a long time, although it gets no air in the left-wing media. In short:
- International law in 1920 and 1922 specifically called for Jews to reestablish their homeland throughout Palestine, covering all of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River;
- The “Green Line” or “1967 border,” is no border at all, but simply the armistice lines of 1949 which were deliberately and specifically not called borders but temporary lines too be negotiated for final settlement;
- Jordan illegally evicted all the Jews from the area between the Green Line and the Jordan River (an area which later became known as the “West Bank”) and annexed the land in a move which was not recognized by almost the entire world;
- Jordan broke the Jordanian-Israeli Armistice Agreement by attacking Israel in June 1967;
- Israel took the “West Bank” in a defensive war, which makes the situation completely distinct from laws regarding taking land in an offensive war, especially when such land was not part of a sovereign nation, and was designated to be part of the acquiring country in any event

In summary, Israel took the “West Bank” back from a country which had illegally evicted all Jews, illegally annexed the land and illegally attacked it (the “Three Illegal Actions”).

The 20th Century Pogroms Against the Jews of the Middle East: Will Christians Suffer the Same Fate?

A look at developments in the Middle East over the past decades gives the clear impression that the region is becoming “cleansed” of minorities, especially the Christians who have inhabited it for millennia. The process is reminiscent of what happened to the Jews of the Arab countries, who had to flee their homes amid pogroms and persecutions they suffered throughout the 20th century, especially after the establishment of the State of Israel and its victories over its Arab enemies.

It was in Morocco, where several thousand Jews have remained, that the first massacre of Jews in the 20th century occurred — in Fez, on April 17, 1912, after Sultan Mulai Abd al-Hafid signed a treaty that turned Morocco into a French protectorate. For the people of the country, this handing of the reins of authority to a Christian ruler was an act of betrayal. Unable to attack French people, the Arab mob opted to attack Jews and their properties. Fifty-one Jews were murdered, and many homes were looted.

On August 3, 1934, a Jewish tailor in the Algerian town of Constantine cursed Muslims and insulted Islam while drunk. The result: pogroms against the local Jews that killed 25 and wounded 38.

In June 1941, the Farhoud broke out in Baghdad. About 200 Jews were murdered and thousands wounded by their Arab neighbors. Jewish property was looted and many homes were set ablaze.

Four years later, on the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, large numbers of Arabs took out their frustration with Nazi Germany’s defeat by perpetrating pogroms in several Arab countries. In Egypt, 10 Jews were killed and about 350 were wounded during Muslim Brotherhood riots. Synagogues, the Jewish hospital, and old-age homes were burned and more than 100 Jewish shops were ransacked. In Libya, some 140 Jews were murdered, synagogues were burned, and homes were looted.

Anti-Israel bigotry blocks Mideast Christians’ pilgrimages

Last week, hundreds of religious leaders and activists descended on Washington for the Trump administration’s second annual ministerial gathering on international religious freedom. Yazidis, Shi’ite Muslims, evangelical Christians, Ahmadiyya Muslims, Persian Jews — the parade of humanity was simply stunning, and the conference touched on almost every aspect of religious discrimination, persecution and genocide.

As rich as these sessions were, however, they left one critical issue unaddressed: the right to pilgrimage, particularly for Christians residing in Muslim-majority countries.

Pilgrimage is an essential, if overlooked, dimension of international religious freedom — and it isn’t unique to followers of Jesus. More than 2 million Muslims visited Mecca in 2017, and more than 20 million Shi’ites visited Karbala, Iraq, for the Arba’een pilgrimage that same year. This free movement of peoples ought to be commended, and defended, at a time of heightened sectarian tension around the region.

But adherents of all faiths should be disturbed that most Mideast Christians are still deprived of the right to pray at the place where Jesus Christ was buried and rose again, according to their belief, due to political factors beyond their control.

The problem is Israel — or rather, that most Arab and Muslim countries consider Israel to be an illegitimate enemy state. Citizens who have even the slightest contact with it or its people are frequently punished under any number of formal bans and boycotts.

Recently, the Department of Preventive Health in Gaza City launched a campaign to test the swimming pools in public and private chalets to ensure that they comply with health and safety standards.

The head of department Mohammed Al-Ashi said that the campaign is being carried out around about 50 chalets within the city.

He explained that special equipment will be installed for each chalet, which will monitor the water quality, the chlorination system used in the swimming pools, and compliance with the technical safety conditions such as non slip flooring around the swimming pool to prevent slipping and a first aid box available at the chalet.

It looks like this came as a response to an investigative report from Palestine Today where it was revealed that many chalet owners are not properly chlorinating their water in the pools.

This is clearly a humanitarian crisis. I'm surprised the UN hasn't weighed in yet.

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.