Editors at major publications for years have treated this person as representative of the Jewish political world.
Said it before and will say it again: There needs to be a massive reformation in how the US media talks about Israel. Who they publish, who they run to for quotes, who they rely on as experts. Top-to-bottom--if indeed there is a bottom--bedikat chametz.
If your opeds and guest spots are going to someone who says Jews are Nazis, if your 'experts' are the ones who predicted Armageddon for recognizing Jerusalem's Jewish connection, etc., you really need to understand how deeply you've defrauded your readers/viewers and atone.
How many ppl are in your 'Israel & US Jewry' rotation who denied Jewish peoplehood simply because Trump recognized it? How many 'No, the Jews aren't a nation' tokens do you still publish? It's gut check time, folks.
Every oped you gave to Mairav Zonszein instead of, say, Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll is another al-chet you owe the heavens. How you've distorted a great religion because someone's name sounded Israeli enough for you to make them your token.
The worst part is, you don't think the Jews deserve more than this.
Stephen Daisley added:
A righteous thread, but I'd go further than @SethAMandel. There is a real problem with non-Jewish editors consistently, almost exclusively, commissioning those willing to vilify the Jewish mainstream, Jewish communal groups, Israel etc. I question the motives of those editors.
Dissonant voices naturally capture the attention of an editor. That's why e.g. the NY Times is far likelier to publish a Catholic priest defending abortion than one denouncing it. This is not that. This is more deliberate and more targeted.
There are respected liberal newspapers whose commentary on Israel is largely written by people most Jews have never heard of and who espouse views most Jews do not share. Yet non-Jewish editors hold them up to non-Jewish readers as representative.
This is not about identity politics. Anyone can write about anything as long as they know about it. (As a non-Jew who does just that, that's kind of a 'duh' point from me.) The problem is one of distortion and misrepresentation.
When your good, progressive newspaper consistently presents a distorted view of Jewish thinking (and treats no other community that way) you should stop and ask yourself exactly what you're up to. Because what you're up to isn't good or progressive.
I'm not sure this is only a problem with non-Jewish editors. I think there are a high percentage of Jewish editors who have swallowed the "progressive" Kool-Aid and think that the people they follow on Twitter are representative of Jews as a whole. (This happens on other topics as well.)
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.
Sovereignty is not the same
thing as annexation. Prime Minister Netanyahu knows this, which is why he is
always careful to speak of exercising
Israel’s sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and in the Jordan Valley. The
media never seems to see this as a serious distinction, and often cites
Netanyahu as speaking of “annexation,” as in this April 26, 2020 Jerusalem
Post piece, “Netanyahu: I’m confident annexation will happen in a
couple of months.”
In fact, Netanyahu never did
say that, which the body of the same article makes clear. “Three months ago,
the Trump peace plan recognized Israel’s rights in all of Judea and Samaria,” the
article quotes Netanyahu as saying. “President Trump pledged to recognize
Israel’s sovereignty over the Jewish communities there and in the Jordan
Valley. In a couple of months from now, I’m confident that pledge will be
honored, that we will be able to celebrate another historic moment in the
history of Zionism.”
You don’t see the words “annex”
or “annexation” in the above quote. You don’t see them there, because to speak
of annexation would be to suggest that Israel is taking land that belongs to
others and adding it to the State of Israel. Instead, the prime minister says
clear as day, Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley are Israel’s lawful
territories. They already belong to
Israel, are part of Israel. And the U.S., under President Donald J. Trump has
pledged to recognize this fact.
The difference between
sovereignty and annexation is not just a question of semantics,
but of two quite different actions. Writers that insist on using the “a” word strengthen
the trope that Israel is an occupier of someone else’s land, that we acquired
the land through aggression. And that’s
not fair. Or unbiased.
It’s propaganda. It tells the
world that Israel is a thief. Which is not the case.
It is true that Israel, for
instance, kept the official status of Judea and Samaria vague from 1967, hoping
that by leaving something on the table, there would be something left to
negotiate, for peace. But that doesn’t mean we didn’t always see these
territories as belonging to anyone but Israel, ever.
And in fact, the status of Judea
and Samaria and the Jordan Valley as part of Israel isn’t just a matter of how
Israel sees things, but a matter of international law and domestic Israeli law,
too. There’s the December 23, 1920 Boundary Convention, as well as the
subsequent Demarcation Agreement of 1923, (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulet%E2%80%93Newcombe_Agreement) which protects these borders, and
which were enshrined by Article 5 of the Mandate for Palestine which says these
territories may not be ceded. Under Israeli law, there is the 1948
Area of Jurisdiction and Powers Ordinance, which states that any territory
in the Land of Israel that is entered by the IDF, is declared to be under
Israeli control and automatically comes under Israeli rule of law, every bit
the same as for Tel Aviv: "Any law applying to the whole of the State of
Israel shall be deemed to apply to the whole of the area including both the
area of the State of Israel and any part of [Mandate] Palestine which the
Minister of Defence has defined by proclamation as being held by the Defence
Army of Israel."
The only thing missing is for
Israel’s Minister of Defense to now declare these territories under Israeli
control and to apply civilian law. In short, all that is needed is the
declaration—to say: these are our territories—and to exercise the rights that
attend that declaration by ending the state of martial law.
The fact that the United
States, under Donald J. Trump, has agreed that this is so, underscores a
point the media refuses to absorb: Israel has never engaged in an illegal
occupation, and has every right to this territory, and has always had that
right. It is ours and will always be ours. The U.S. declaration is by way of
recognizing Israeli law, something some journalists can’t seem to bring
themselves to do.
As I write this on the eve of
Israeli Independence Day, I can’t help but think how good it would be for
Israeli journalists to finally understand this—yes, even those who write for the
supposedly pro-Israel Jerusalem Post—and
stop spreading propaganda for the other side with misleading headlines. There
really is a difference between exercising sovereignty and annexation, and I say vive la différence.
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.
Despite these daunting challenges, Israelis have by and large proved themselves exceptional at coping with the extreme situation and adhering to the strict regulations that have been imposed.
And although we, as a newspaper, have been critical of government policy and efforts in combating the deadly pandemic, it must be acknowledged that this has been uncharted territory that ministries and government officials have been thrust into. And their exhaustive, well-intended efforts must be applauded, while at the same time scrutinized.
Even more deserving of our thanks and gratitude are the thousands of healthcare workers who have placed themselves and their families on the front lines of danger to treat the thousands of corona patients in the nation’s hospitals and emergency rooms. The same goes for law enforcement officials and IDF soldiers who have worked tirelessly to help those in need.
The question is, what kind of Israel will emerge from the coronavirus challenge? One unexpected outcome of this crisis is that we have become a more caring people.
Will we fall back into the old patterns of conspicuous consumption and tall fences between neighbors? Or will we use the lessons of the past two months to help forge a more cohesive and compassionate society, which has seen signs of emerging?
At age 72, Israel can be proud of so much. And thanks to corona, those most simple attributes that form the basis of what makes Israel a great country have come to the forefront. Let’s hope they stay with us.
President Rivlin's greeting for Israel's 72nd Yom Haatzmaut / Independence Day
Israel on Wednesday celebrated its 72nd year of independence without the traditional public revelry associated with the holiday as the coronavirus pandemic continued to impose itself on national life.
In a display of appreciation, official events were dedicated in honor of medical staff working to combat the virus and the Israeli Air Force gave a sky-high salute to those on the front lines.
The air force, which usually shows off its inventory of jets and helicopters in a cross-country flyover, instead only sent out a squad of four stunt planes that followed a flight path over the country’s hospitals and medical centers.
At each site the planes looped and circled in an expression of the nation’s appreciation for medical workers.
The IDF canceled the traditional flyover in a bid to get people to stay at home, as a nationwide curfew went into effect from Tuesday afternoon until Wednesday evening, to prevent large gatherings as Israelis celebrate the founding of the state.
Israelis were told to stay at home and avoid crowding the streets and parks for barbecues and public parties, in a bid to avoid a fresh outbreak of the deadly pathogen.
In some places, the army and other security agencies also paraded jeeps and emergency vehicles by homes instead of setting up displays around the country and at bases, as is done in most years.
Independence Day is celebrated each year on the Hebrew date of the establishment of Israel in 1948.
Independence Day celebrations began on Tuesday night as the country transitioned from the sober Memorial Day.
The annual torch-lighting ceremony, a centerpiece of the shift to Independence Day, was prerecorded for the first time at Jerusalem’s Mount Herzl military cemetery and took place without an audience present. Mount Herzl, along with all other military cemeteries in the country, was locked on Monday to all visitors, to prevent gatherings on the annual remembrance day for Israel’s 23,816 fallen soldiers and terror victims.
Israeli Air Force Honors Medical Staff on Israel's 72 Independence Day
Israel’s creation changed the life of every Jew throughout the world, whether they were Zionists or religious. It made everyone stand up taller and feel safer. And its continued survival led to a movement among the millions of Jews in the former Soviet Union to demand their rights after half a century of oppression.
While we worry about a revival of anti-Semitism in our own day in which Israel is the stand-in for traditional anti-Jewish stereotypes and scapegoats, without it, the fate of contemporary Jewry would be immeasurably worse. Those who grew up in the post-1948 world simply have no idea how much it changed the way Jews are thought of and treated. Israel was not merely the place of refuge for Holocaust survivors and nearly a million Jews from the Arab and Muslim world all seeking freedom; the creation of a home for the Jewish people also made it easier for Jews to live as equals even if they chose to remain in the Diaspora.
To its detractors, Israel is a disappointment because it fails to live up to some unrealistic standard of morality unmet by any democracy at war, as it has been for every moment of those 72 years. But the real Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East, as well as a haven for the arts and the sciences, and a “startup nation” that is at the cutting edge of so many advances for humanity.
Israel is a beacon of freedom for Jews everywhere, as well as a guarantor that the cycle of hate, oppression and slaughter that characterized Jewish history for 20 centuries would finally end. As such, it deserves the support of decent people—Jewish and non-Jewish—everywhere. While some mired in the fantasy world of anti-Semitism may dream about a world in which it never existed, the hope for the eradication of the one Jewish state on the planet is a manifestation of hate, not science fiction.
o Israel controls Gaza's air and coastline, and six of Gaza's seven land crossings. -- This is according to Gisha. We will discuss the issue of "control" below.
o Israel reserves the right to enter Gaza at will with its military and maintains a no-go buffer zone within the Gaza territory. --
It's not immediately clear what the source is, but we can all agree that Israel reserves the right to defend itself against Hamas terror attacks.
o Israel controls Electricity: At certain points during the blockade, Gaza had electricity for only 4 hours a day -- but this is based on a Haaretz article from 2 years ago, that specifically says the reason is a temporary lack of diesel fuel
o Israel controls Water Supply: Less than 4% of water in Gaza is drinkable at this point -- "At this point"? But the Oxfam article used as the source, though undated, is from June 2017 according to the HTML code.
o Israel controls the Internet: the internet in Gaza is only available when electricity is available --
this is from Al-Monitor, which doesn't sink to accusing Israel of diabolical "control of the Internet"
Their tweet includes a map from Gisha detailing the Israeli blockade of Gazan fishing -- up to 2016.
Also, note If Not Now hedges its bet by claiming that Israel is either occupying Gaza or exercising control.
In 2007, Gisha published “Disengaged Occupiers: The Legal Status of Gaza”, a position paper in which it argued that the law of occupation continues to apply to all Israeli actions toward the Gaza Strip due to the significant control it still exercises over Gaza. “Scale of Control: Israel's Continued Responsibility in the Gaza Strip” updates our previous legal analysis and adapts it to reflect the changes on the round and in the patterns of control exercised over the Gaza Strip by the various actors since 2007, including as a result of the Hamas movement’s takeover of internal control in Gaza.
This position paper illustrates how despite recent developments, Israel continues to control Gaza’s airspace and territorial waters, the Palestinian population registry and passage of goods and people to and from Gaza. Israel still collects customs and value added tax for goods entering the Gaza Strip and maintains some physical presence in the Strip. Israel also controls Gaza’s infrastructure by virtue of its control over supply of electricity and other inputs to the system. [emphasis added]
The thing is, the European Court of Human Rights refuted this argument in 2015.
Marko Milanovic, who writes "EJIL:Talk!: Blog of the European Journal of Int'l Law" wrote a post in 2015 'European Court Decides Israel Is Not Occupying Gaza.' The case is Azerbaijan's claim that Gulistan is occupied by Armenia. In order to address the issues involved, the court defines what constitutes occupation.
And that is where things get interesting.
Milanovic quotes from the court decision in CASE OF SARGSYAN v. AZERBAIJAN, which notes that occupation requires foreign troops "with boots on the ground."
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], that is, 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. [emphasis added]
The source for that "widespread expert opinion" requiring the physical presence of foreign troops -- in refutation of If Not Now -- is The International Red Cross (ICRC):
2Most experts consulted by the ICRC in the context of the project on occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory agreed that “boots on the ground” are needed for the establishment of occupation – see T. Ferraro, “Expert Meeting: Occupation and Other Forms of Administration of Foreign Territory” (Geneva: ICRC, 2012), at pp. 10, 17 and 33; see also E. Benvenisti, cited avove [sic], at pp. 43 et seq.; V. Koutroulis, Le début et la fin de l’application du droit de l’occupation (Paris: Éditions Pedone, 2010), at pp. 35-41. [emphasis added]
In its decision, the European Court, indicates that w/o the presence of troops, there is neither occupation nor "effective control," refuting both of If Not Now's own myths:
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. [emphasis added]
Milanovic puts it all together:
See what I meant? Replace “Gulistan” with “Gaza”, and there you have it!...I also very much doubt that the judges were really aware of the implications a categorical statement such as the one made here will have on the whole Gaza debate. If they were, I imagine that they would have avoided it like the plague.
A key part of the decision is that it not only decides that a physical presence is necessary, with boots on the ground, but it also directly refutes both If Not Now and Gisha by making clear that "forces exercising naval or air control through a naval or air blockade do not suffice."
The term "control" is, in any case, a nebulous concept. In that ICRC report which found the majority of legal experts require a physical presence, there is this footnote:
The notion of “effective control” is not found in treaty law; it reflects an idea developed in the legal discourse pertaining to occupation to describe the circumstances and conditions under which one could determine the existence of a state of occupation under IHL. As such, effective control is reached when the three criteria derived from Article 42 of the Hague Regulations of 1907 – and discussed infra in the report – are fulfilled [ (1) foreign forces are physically present in the territory of a State without its consent; (2) the authorities of the latter State lack the capacity to exercise authority in the territory; and (3) the foreign forces have the capacity to exercise authority over the territory]. (p. 17) [emphasis added]
All this is not to say that there are no legal opinions that agree with If Not Now -- the footnote quoting the ICRC indicated a majority opinion, not a unanimous one. And there may be a time that a court of international law decides that "control" without "boots" is enough. The point is that international law is based on precedent, and this legal decision by the European Court of Human Rights provides exactly that.
But another issue remains.
Forget about If Not Now and Gisha -- what about the International Red Cross itself?
Contrary to the Supreme Court of Israel, international organizations such as the UN48 and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)49 continue to consider Gaza to be occupied territory...
Here is the source Gisha uses for the ICRC:
See for example, a news release issued by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which defines the Gaza closure as "collective punishment": Gaza closure, Not Another Year!, INT'L COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS, June 14, 2010, at: www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/update/palestine-update-140610.htm. See also posts on the ICRC website in which Gaza is defined as an occupied territory: "In 2010, the ICRC reminded the Israeli authorities of their responsibilities under IHL towards the people under Israeli occupation and called for an end to the Gaza blockade". The ICRC in Israel and the Occupied Territories, International Committee of the Red Cross, 2010 at: www.icrc.org/eng/where-we-work/middle-east/israel-occupied-territories/index.jsp. [emphasis added]
Juan-Pedro Schaerer, ICRC Head of Delegation Israel and the Occupied Territories, responded to Elder of Ziyon's post:
The ICRC closely monitors developments in the Gaza Strip, since facts on the ground are crucial to determining whether the elements of effective control required for occupation continue to be met. While it cannot be said that the Gaza Strip is a "classic" situation of occupation, Israel has not entirely relinquished its effective control over the Strip. This control includes amongst other the almost total control over the borders of the Gaza Strip (except for the border with Egypt), the control over the airspace and the entire coast line, the control over who can move out of the Gaza Strip, the control of the population register, control over all the items that can be imported and exported from the Strip and the control over a no-go zone along the Gaza fence inside the Gaza Strip. These facts and others allow ICRC to determine that Israel exercises effective control and therefore remains bound by the law of occupation in the case of Gaza.
In other words, despite the consensus in the ICRC's own report, they are intent on making a special case out of Gaza.
As Elder of Ziyon notes, it is one thing when the UN mischaracterizes Gaza --
In the case of the ICRC, it is worse. Because the ICRC acts like it is the ultimate authority on international humanitarian law, so when it says Gaza is occupied - against the legal reasoning of the experts it consulted* - it has gravitas.
The argument first used by Mr. Schaerer was taken near verbatim from one invented by Gisha, a political pro-Palestinian NGO. It is not an argument that has any basis in general international law.
Mr. Schaerer’s argument consisted of a list of factual assertions, some of which are obviously correct but irrelevant (yes, Israel controls Israel’s own land borders with Gaza), and some of which are obviously both false and irrelevant (no, Israel does not “control … all the items that can be imported and exported from the Strip” – Gaza imports and exports goods through its land borders with Egypt).
None of the factual assertions relate to the generally understood legal criteria for effective control as understood in international law, as ICRC officials would readily acknowledge if Israel were not in the dock. [emphasis added]
Rather than Gisha merely using the ICRC as a source in its report, their relationship appears to be symbiotic.
And, like If Not Now, Schaerer is so intent in emphasizing Israeli "control" that he get some details wrong.
Another point to keep in mind is that as mentioned earlier, that footnote in the ICRC report notes that "control" is an abstract idea and not originating in treaty law, which may be why it is anchored in those 3 criteria -- possibly to curb the kind of loose interpretation that the ICRC is using.
Another indication of the weakness of the ICRC's defense of its contradictory position is found in a second clarification that Schaerer sent:
In response to your comments and for the purpose of clarification, I wish to emphasize that the ICRC does not maintain that Israel has retained all elements of authority and governmental functions in Gaza. Rather, our position is that even after the withdrawal of its forces in 2005 Israel continues to exercise effective control over certain key elements of authority in Gaza and therefore remains bound by obligations under the law of occupation within the territorial and functional limits of the competences it has retained. This reflects a functional approach to the law of occupation that emanates from the underlying purpose and rationale of that body of law. In simplified terms it means that to the extent that an occupying power retains control of key functions and authorities in the occupied territory it also remains bound by the relevant provisions of the law of occupation. Where there is control there is responsibility. For an elaboration on this see T. Ferraro, Determining the beginning and end of an occupation under international humanitarian law, 94 IRRC 133, 159 (available online here:)
Prof. Bell points out, Schaerer clarification only makes matters worse:
Mr. Schaerer’s “clarification” is even more mystifying. He appears to be saying that the ICRC acknowledges that Gaza is not occupied by Israel, but that the ICRC claims that Israel can still be bound by some of the rules of belligerent occupation due to legally insufficient effective control. This is a novel theory that was advanced by Gisha after its earlier arguments that Israel “occupies” Gaza found no support among legal scholars not pre-committed to the Palestinian side. Needless to say, Gisha’s new theory has no basis in the text of any treaties, and it has never been applied against any other country in recorded history. In other words, it is a brand-new anti-Israel theory aimed to create legal duties that restrict the conduct of the Jewish state, but not of any other state in the world. [emphasis added]
Schaerer's attempt to defend ICRC's disregard for its own report by claiming a "functional approach" is making a difference without a distinction -- Prof. Bell notes that "I cannot find a single public statement of the ICRC that acknowledges that Gaza is not actually belligerently occupied by Israel."
This novel distinction is apparently only for the benefit of readers of the blog and makes no real practical difference in international law, except for the purpose of singling out Israel.
Despite all its scrambling in an effort to escape from the blatant discrepancy between its own report and its actions, in the end The International Red Cross reveals itself as a biased, as opposed to a neutral, organization.
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.
Yesterday, the International Committee of the Red Cross tweeted:
The need for social distancing is making this Ramadan tough for many families in the West Bank.
It will be especially so for those with relatives in detention in Israel, who are currently unable to visit their loved ones due to the #covid19 pandemic. pic.twitter.com/Rs8auTDMhS
A poor old woman, pining to visit her son in prison, but she is being stopped. How sad.
Except that there is no difference between her and pretty much everyone else on the planet who cannot visit their relatives. What makes her situation any different? Prisoners in Israel can and do make phone calls, the same way we are all getting by with phone calls. The COVID-19 restrictions are meant to save people like this old woman.
On first glance, this tweet seems like a gratuitous effort to keep the plight of Palestinian prisoners in the spotlight when the world has other issues to deal with.
On second glance, this is much worse.
The unnamed woman was profiled by the ICRC last year, giving only her first name, Mayzouna. They did a photo essay on her visiting her son, where she told them that she lost her eyesight four years ago after a stroke but has not told her son when she visits him.
Yet the photos shows her looking at her outfit to wear, looking out the window of the bus, walking unaided.
A little research shows that this is Mayzouna Ben Srour, and the son she is visiting is Nasser Abu Srour, who along with his brother Mahmoud and another relative murdered a Shin Bet handler for yet another relative. In 2016, when 19-year old Abad al-Hamid Abu Srour killed himself with a bomb on a Jerusalem bus, Times of Israel ran through the family history:
Abad al-Hamid Abu Srour is not just another “lone wolf” terrorist. He was known to Palestinian security forces, and possibly the Israelis too; one of his family members was killed during recently during clashes with Israeli security forces not far from his home near Bethlehem.
His last name is well known among operatives in the Shin Bet security service: In January 1993, Maher Abu Srour, a Palestinian informant who comes from the same clan, along with two members of his family, Nasser and Mahmoud Abu Srour, killed his Shin Bet coordinator Chaim Nachmani.
Maher had made an appointment with Nachmani in a safe house in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Rehavia. When he arrived, Abu Srour charged at Nachmani with a knife before his two family members joined him to finish off the murder. A week later, Nasser and Mahmoud were arrested but Maher repeatedly evaded arrest by Israeli security forces until he was killed while trying to carry out another attack five months later in Jerusalem’s French Hill neighborhood.
But his relatives said Abu Srour was more of a Palestinian preppy, the scion of a well-to-do and well-known clan of eight prosperous brothers, who own and operate a string of furniture outlets and are rich enough to take their young sons for holidays in Jordan and to set them up with their own shops selling clothes.
“We are financially comfortable, you could say very comfortable,” said his uncle Mahmoud Abu Srour,who was gathered with relatives in a courtyard at a family house in Bethlehem awaiting the return of his nephew’s body so they could bury him.
Abu Scour’s teenage cousins listened to their uncles speak but kept silent. They wore pricey watches, skinny jeans and fancy sneakers.
Mayzouna is part of a family that is not poor, not desperate and quite well-off.
Even though some of them still choose to live in the Aida "refugee camp" where UNRWA provides free housing.
The story doesn't end there. Mayzouna is a celebrity, a go-to person for interviews by dozens of news outlets, as a symbol of Palestinian suffering.
She spoke to Russia Today about being a witness to the "Nakba." She told Mondoweiss that money from the PLO paid for Nasser's bachelors and masters degrees from Hebrew University while in prison and how the family couldn't afford for him to even buy olive oil from the prison canteen if it wasn't for the program now known as "pay for slay." Only last month she described how she is dealing with being under closure for the pandemic and she told Arab media that no one should complain about being in quarantine since her son has been in prison for 27 years.
This is who the ICRC is choosing to highlight as an example of the cruelty of the Israelis and the coronavirus.
(h/t iTi)
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
I wrote the original essay around 2002 and I have been modifying it since then. Here is this year's version:
========================
I am a Zionist and I am proud of it.
I know that Israel has the absolute right to exist in peace and security, at least as much as any other country. Given Israel's unique history and the resurgence of antisemitism worldwide, Israel arguably has more moral legitimacy than any other nation on Earth.
I am proud of how the IDF conducts itself during its never ending war on Palestinian terror. There is no other country on the planet that tries to minimize civilian casualties in such a situation where innocent Israelis are being threatened, shot at, mortared, rocketed, stabbed and murdered in cold blood. At times there are discussions whether the IDF's moral standards are too high and end up being counterproductive - and what other army could one even have that conversation about?
I am also proud that Israel investigates any mistakes that happen on the battlefield and keeps trying to improve its methods to maximize damage to the terrorists while minimizing damage to the people that the enemy is hiding behind. This is not done because of pressure from "human rights" organizations - it is done because it is the right thing to do. Even when everyone knows that the world will accuse it of "war crimes," the IDF retains incredibly high moral standards, which can be easily proven for anyone who wants to investigate the situation impartially. (People willing to do that are, regrettably, few and far between.) It would be so easy for Israelis to say that since the world will accuse them of atrocities anyway, then why bother with holding themselves to such standards - but young Israeli soldiers do, day in and day out. The rare exceptions prove the rule.
I am proud that Israel remains a true democracy, with a free press and vigorous opposition parties, while on a constant war footing. One only needs to read the hateful articles in Israel's left-wing publications on Israel's Independence Day to fathom how far press freedom goes in Israel.
I am proud of how Israel responds to seemingly intractable problems. In the early days of the intifada there seemed to be no solution - but the IDF found one, managing to bring deadly suicide attacks from 60 in 2002 down to practically none today. For every "successful" attack (if you can use such a term) there have been many failed attempts, and these are truly miraculous. The 'knife intifada," car rammings, and other violent "innovations" by Israel's enemies have largely died down because of Israeli defensive actions and innovative pro-active work on social media. Hamas has been reduced to celebrating attacks that cause only minor injuries because most of their major attacks, thank God, are foiled. Today there are new challenges, but each one is met and solved with brains and creativity.
The enemy has not stopped trying, and the history of antisemitism shows that it never will. If the Israel haters had their way, Israel would resemble Libya or Afghanistan today with the Jews as frightened as minorities are in every other Middle Eastern country.
Jews know something about being singled out, about being judged with double standards. We have been attacked for being too rich and too poor, too successful and too needy, too capitalist and too socialist, too religious and too secular, too insular and too integrated. These same wildly inconsistent attacks are targeting the Jewish state. Israel will survive and thrive, just as Jews themselves have, despite these attacks.
And the best survival technique is success.
Israel has succeeded and continues to succeed in its many accomplishments in building up a desert wasteland into a thriving and vibrant modern country, with its countless scientific achievements, incredible leadership in high-tech and the environment, world class universities and culture. Practically every computer and mobile phone being built today includes technology and innovations from a single small Middle Eastern country. A tiny nation, under constant siege, with few natural resources besides breathtaking beauty, has used its smarts and strength to build a modern success story. In a short period of time Israel made itself into a strong yet open nation that its neighbors can only dream of becoming.
And they are indeed starting to dream. Arab nations are waking up to the reality of Israel and the desire to be more like her.. Despite the constant incitement against Israel in their media, ordinary Arabs know that Israel treats its minorities with more respect, and gives them more civil rights, than Arab nations give their own Arab citizens. Miraculously, in recent years, we are seeing some of Israel's intractable enemies now accepting that Israel has the right to exist and seeking to partner with it. This was unthinkable a few years ago, and the reason is because of Israel's strength, both militarily and economically. The biggest (and artificial) dagger that has been used against Israel for 72 years, the Palestinian Arabs, is quickly losing its effectiveness in the Arab world except for lip service. Israel is simply more valuable to the Arab world as a partner than as an enemy, and this is directly due to wise and forward thinking Israeli policies..
Zionists have every reason to be proud of the incredible achievements of the Jewish national movement. There is a right and a wrong in this conflict, and I am proud that Israel is in the right.
The word "Zionist" is not an epithet - it is a compliment.
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.
Here is the audio of the lecture I gave last year on Yom HaAtzmaut on the topic of the miracles that helped the rebirth of Israel.
And here are the notes I used for the lecture. Sorry, I don't have links to most of the sources any more. And the last few minutes I spoke without notes.
--------------------
Christian proto-Zionism
—As early as 1753 there were tracts in England about the “restoration of the Jews”
—John Adams, 1819: “I really wish the Jews again in Judea, an independent nation; …once restored to an independent government, and no longer persecuted…”
—On March 5, 1891, the clergyman William E. Blackstone presented what became known as the “Blackstone Memorial,” a petition advocating the restoration of Palestine to the Jewish people, to President Benjamin Harrison.
—All of this before the First Zionist Congress
—Generations of Christians were used to the idea
Could Zionism have gained traction without this?
The Balfour Declaration
—In 1915, Home Secretary Herbert Samuel (Jewish) presented a plan to the British Parliament to create a Jewish center in Palestine under British rule
—The only enthusiastic member of Parliament was Lloyd George, Christian who wanted to see a Jewish state in Palestine
—The Prime Minister, H. H. Asquith, ridiculed the plan.
—Asquith lost his position in 1916, his successor was Lloyd George
—The other Zionists in the government at the time included Winston Churchill and Arthur Balfour, who pushed a Uganda plan for Jews many years earlier
—Amazing that this happened in 1917 before the war ended
—In 1922, George was replaced by Conservative politicians who had been opposed to Balfour (but reluctantly decided to keep it in order to maintain access to the Suez Canal and not to look bad to the League of Nations, which by that time had effectively ratified Balfour)
—Balfour could only have happened in that short time period 1916-1922
The UN Partition Plan
—Stalin had no love for Jews; quite the contrary, he murdered them whenever it suited his purposes. But during the crucial years 1947-48, he was guided by temporary considerations of Realpolitik, and specifically by what he saw as the threat of British imperialism.
—Stalin ignorantly supposed that the way to undermine Britain’s position in the Middle East was to support the Jews, not the Arabs, and he backed Zionism in order to break the “British stranglehold.” Not only did he extend diplomatic recognition to Israel but, in order to intensify the fighting and the consequent chaos, he instructed the Czech government to sell it arms. The Czechs turned over an entire military airfield to shuttle weaponry to Tel Aviv; the Messerschmitt aircraft they supplied were of particular importance. Then, in mid-August 1948, Stalin decided he had made a huge error in judgment, and the obedient Czech government ordered a halt to the airlift within 48 hours. But by then the war had effectively been won.
—President Truman was pro-Zionist, and he needed the Jewish vote in the 1948 election. It was his decision to push the partition scheme through the UN in November 1947 and to recognize the new Israeli state (de facto, not de jure) when it was declared in May 1948. But the contrary pressure he had to face, both from the State was immense. If the crisis had come a year later, after the cold war started to dominate the thinking of the West to the exclusion of almost everything else, it is likely that the anti-Zionist forces would have proved too strong for Truman.
—The five East European communist bloc, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Ukraine, Byelorussian SSR, and the Soviet Union all voted for a Jewish State. Were it not for Soviet influence, it is unlikely in the extreme that Poland and Ukraine, with their long and deep history of anti-Semitism, would have voted for the establishment of Israel. Benny Morris[7] (“1948” pg. 60-61) notes the direct impact the United States had on the aye votes from Haiti, the Philippines and many Latin American countries which otherwise planned to vote against the establishing a Jewish State
Six Day War
—On the very morning of June 5th, three hours before the Israeli air strike, Egyptian intelligence did in fact issue a warning that an Israeli air attack would begin "within minutes." At that point, Egypt still had time to get its planes off the ground and save them. The message reached the command bunker in Cairo. An aide-de-camp signed a copy, but no one bothered to look for the Commander in Chief.
—On the same morning of the attack, Egyptian officers stationed at the radar station in northern Jordan picked up the scrambling Israeli aircraft, and sent a red alert message to Cairo. The sergeant in the decoding room of the supreme command tried to decipher the message using the previous day's code and failed.
—And where was Egypt's Commander in Chief? The night before, he and most of his top officers attended a party at an air force base in the northern delta area, at which a renowned belly dancer performed. Early the next morning, he took off for the Sinai, where he had ordered all his top commanders to assemble in order to meet a high-level Iraqi delegation. When the Israeli strike happened, not one senior officer was at his post.
Yom Kippur War
—Armored Syrian force of 1,400 tanks, 400 of the Syrian tanks were T-62s, state-of-the-art modern Soviet tanks at the time.
—Israeli force were the 7th Armored Brigade in the north and the 188th Barak Brigade to the south. Combined, they had 170 tanks, many WWII vintage
—By October 9, Israel was down to only six tanks protecting the northern section of the country. As the 7th Armored Brigade began to pull back, they were reinforced by a small force of 15 tanks. The Syrians saw the fresh Israeli equipment arriving and assumed it was the vanguard of major reinforcements. They immediately began to retreat.
—In the southern Golan, on October 6th an estimated 600 Syrian tanks attempted to breach the line held by the Israeli Barak brigade with just 12 tanks. A defensive minefield and heavy artillery fire destroyed several dozen Syrian tanks in the initial attack.Yet with overwhelming superiority, Syrian forces kept attacking. Israeli fighter jets were called in to even the odds but many were shot down by newly acquired Syrian anti-aircraft systems. The Israelis resorted to quick hit and run tactics with their limited tanks and artillery. This may have stopped Syrian forces from overrunning the southern Golan Heights that night. The Syrians apparently believed they were facing a larger enemy than was the case. On October 7, Syrian tanks started another advance. With almost no tanks left, the Barak Brigade commander, Colonel Yitzhak Ben-Shoham, prepared for a last stand. He fought in a holding pattern against the advance until he was killedand the Brigade completely destroyed. The Barak Brigade’s last stand and a Syrian pause after the battle bought Israel more time. By that time Israeli reserve units were streaming to the front. Within a few days, the Syrian advance had become a full retreat.
—On 9th October, the 9th Brigade (reservists) attacked a force that included about 600 tanks that were divided in all directions, mainly westward. The attacking force was 9th Brigade, a mechanized reserve brigade that included the old Sherman Battalion. These forty tanks attacked this huge Syrian defender, which also included additional forces, armored infantry, and anti-tank missiles. The attack started when the additional forces attacked first. Then brigade commander Motke Ben Porat sent the armored Sherman battalion, whose battalion commander was killed on a mine, but after a few hours' battle they decided to storm the Syrian compound. The person who led the attack was an amazing armored officer named Yehuda Arazi from Ein Horesh. He was deputy commander of the Shermans and who had nine tanks; he flanked the Syrian compound, in the vicinity of the present-day settlement of Keshet, and attacked them from the rear with three tanks covering while six stormed. When they reached the line they saw before them a massive array of tanks and cannons and a huge arsenal of weapons. The soldiers said we needed to retreat and Arazi said there was no option of withdrawing, we storm into life or death.
—"He charged, and already at the first stage they overran the Syrian artillery, hit trucks full of shells and fuel and the whole Syrian compound turned into a big wall of fire and thousands of Syrian soldiers began a panic flight, and then the additional battalion stormed them. By nightfall the Syrian column collapsed. The problem was that the 9th's tanks were out of ammunition. They entered camp at night and returned to the attack the next morning, and found hundreds of armored personnel carriers, cannons, trucks and tools up in flames, and they continued to the Syrian border.“
—Five of you shall give chase to a hundred, and a hundred of you shall give chase to ten thousand; your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.
1991 Gulf War
— Yitzchak Shamir hesitant to act, GH Bush insisted Israel not respond to attacks
—This goes against Israeli DNA to defend itself
—Jews had nothing to do…but pray
—42 Scud missiles launched, only two deaths
—Patriot missiles ineffective – some caused more damage
—Would they be chemical or explosive? Sealed rooms in top floors, not bottom
—At about 7 am on 19 January, one of four incoming Scud warheads struck a building but failed to explode. Of the two warheads that did explode in or near Tel Aviv, one struck next to a municipal center, blowing open a basement that was used as a bomb shelter (but which was empty at the time), and the other fell in a park
—Empty buildings, collapsed houses with minor injuries, one case of people who went to an underground bomb shelter against the rules and survived (1/25)
—~Statistics based on V1 and V2 rockets estimated one or two deaths per rocket even with warnings
—Saddam had 50 rockets with chemical weapons and 25 with biological weapons, If he had used them hundreds or thousands would have been killed
—US military barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, on 25 February 1991, when 28 soldiers were killed and other 110 injured
Yasher koach to my friend Jack who helped arrange the lecture. He's a security network/firewall engineer and is looking for a job, so if you know anyone who needs a talented engineer, let me know.
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.
Four people succumbed to the coronavirus late Monday and early Tuesday, bringing the Israeli death toll to 208, the Health Ministry said, as the country prepared to reopen schools and more businesses in the next few days.
The number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 rose to 15,589, with 123 new cases over the previous 24 hours. The tally was nearly double the 68 new cases seen in the 24 hours before that, but still showed a steep drop-off from last week, which had seen more than 200 cases daily.
However, the improved figures were tempered by statistics released by the ministry showing that testing had dipped to below 10,000 samples a day, after reaching close to 14,000 daily tests a week earlier.
According to the ministry, 9,031 tests were performed on Saturday, 8,393 tests on Sunday — when fewer than 100 cases were confirmed for the first time in over a month — and Monday saw a slight uptick with 9,546 tests.
The Health Ministry said 117 people are hospitalized in serious condition and 94 are on ventilators, numbers that have also steadily declined in recent days.
So far, 7,375 people have recovered, according to Health Ministry numbers.
Israel’s Health Ministry director-general on Friday defended the country’s tough lockdown measures in the battle against COVID-19, saying if it hadn’t acted responsibly it could have found itself in a similar situation to Belgium.
Moshe Bar Siman-Tov was asked in a TV interview whether his own prediction in recent weeks, and that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that tens of thousands of Israelis could die from COVID-19, was exaggerated, when the current Israeli tally is below 200 fatalities and the restrictions are gradually being rolled back.
“We have a very simple check,” he said. “We were at a rate where the number of new patients was doubling every three days… There was a single day when the number of seriously ill patients rose by 50%.
“If that trend had continued, today we’d have over 600,000 people [sick], over 10,000 on ventilators, and many thousands who would have ended their lives.”
Pushed directly on whether that kind of concern has proven exaggerated, especially with Israel’s economy tanking and unemployment having soared from below 4% to over 26%, he replied: “I don’t think so… There are enough control groups — look at Belgium.” Belgium has a population slightly larger than Israel’s and a death toll approaching 7,000.
Israel should end all coronavirus restrictions and reopen the country to international travel, according to a Hebrew University research team that includes a prominent epidemiologist and two finance professors.
They crunched statistics from around the world and concluded in a newly published study that while lockdowns were necessary in London, New York and various other places, Israel didn’t need to confine people to houses or impose other strict rules.
Though researchers admitted that without those limitations, Israel’s death toll would have been higher, even significantly so, they believed it would have stayed within manageable rates, while protecting the economy from massive damage.
“The purpose of publishing this isn’t to criticize what was done,” Prof. David Gershon, an economist with the Jerusalem Business School at Hebrew University, told The Times of Israel. “It isn’t political, but it raises the question of why we are still in semi-lockdown. Why are we keeping the cemeteries closed on Memorial Day? It shows that there’s an overreaction.”
They assert that in retrospect Israel should have adopted a similar approach to the lockdown-free Sweden, despite the human cost. Sweden’s population is only slightly larger than Israel’s, but it has seen 11 times the number of COVID-19 deaths so far — 2,194 compared to 202.
While Sweden eschewed lockdowns and appealed for voluntary social distancing, Israel has implemented strict regulations, punishable by fines, to fight coronavirus. Israeli schools and universities were closed on March 12, soon followed by most workplaces, and most Israelis have been largely confined to their homes for weeks.
Restrictions are now being slowly eased, with many workplaces and stores reopening for business — under heavily restrictive conditions — and schools set to partially reopen next week.
But health officials have warned that a too-swift return to normal could see infection rates spike amid a second, potentially worse wave of the disease. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned that a spike in cases is possible and could cause a return to lockdown.
Arab-Israeli Medic to Be Honored on Israel's 72nd Independence Day
Earlier today, Ali Abunimah of Electronic Intifada tweeted:
As the article he links to shows, clothing factories in Gaza - which have been steadily increasing their exports because Israel has been loosening restrictions on Gaza exports in recent years - were forced to shut down when the pandemic hit. Some 6000 workers lost their jobs.
Since then, Israeli fashion companies have pivoted and asked the Gaza factories to sew PPE with materials that the Israelis provide. (The PA is also ordering PPE from the Gaza factories.)
The Gaza factory owners are happy that they can hire hundreds of people back. The workers are happy that they have job. But Ali Abunimah isn't happy, because Israelis are racist and their helping out Gazans is just part of their racism.
Nope, it isn't Israel that hates people without reason. It is people like Abunimah who do that.
Also recently, Haaretz published a "review" of Fauda written by a Palestinian named George Zeidan. Some of his criticisms about accuracy are 100% true, and I am a little surprised that the director and writers didn't do proper research.
But then he wrote this:
This leads me to my biggest problem with the show. Every chance that they have, Fauda’s writers present the Israeli commandos as personally and operationally principled, lingering on their deep concern for protecting the civilians of Gaza, going out of their way to fulfil their promise to the family of the Palestinian informer who supported them. They aren’t shown shooting or killing any Palestinian women or childen. [sic]
So it is unrealistic for the actors playing undercover agents in Gaza to use the word "habibti" to a young woman they do not know, but it would be realistic for them to blow their cover by sometimes randomly murdering women and children for no reason? Because, of course, Zeidan and Haaretz know that this is the truth.
Zeidan even brings proof!
But this is Fauda’s war on truth. All the data shows that the opposite is true. According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in relation to just one of the Israel-Hamas conflicts, the 2014 Gaza war, 2251 Palestinians were killed, of which 1462 were civilians 551 were children and 299 were women. Israelis need to know the unvarnished truth: that their army is responsible for killing all these civilians, and to recognize the chasm between those deaths, their perpetrators and Fauda’s fantasy soldiers.
Well, except for the fact that many of the children killed were human shields for their terrorist relatives, although some were accidentally killed by secondary explosions and the like.
Zeidan is portraying Israeli soldiers - meaning most Israelis - as bloodthirsty and eager killers based on poor reporting from a war 6 years ago. He hasn't compared Israel's record of avoiding civilian casualties in urban areas with that of any other army in history. He just "knows" that Israelis randomly murder women and children for no reason.
Which means that Zeidan is guilty of what he is accusing Israelis of being - someone who hates a group of people for no reason and with no proof, but just because.
Projection is alive and well.
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.
Interestingly, Hamas also is proud that they started the 2014 Gaza war on Ramadan. Just like the 2009 Gaza war, the Western media always dates these wars according to Israels' reactions to Hamas acts of war, not to Hamas' acts to begin with. Here we see Hamas saying:
Ramadan 10, 1435/July 7, 2014 Al-Qassam Brigades launches the "Battle of Consumed Straw" in the face of (Al-Jarf Al-Samid), during which it revealed many surprises and carried out operations behind the lines and captured a number of enemy soldiers.
That same day they shot some rockets towards Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa and called it the "Tenth of Ramadan Operation" - because the Egyptian/Syrian attack that started the Yom Kippur War was also on the tenth of Ramadan. (Egypt still refers to it as the Ramadan War.)
Why does the media always say Israel starts wars, and date the wars from the time of Israel's reactions, when the Arabs themselves are happy to take credit for starting them?
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.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Christmas Eve
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Christmas, Bethlehem, Israel, antisemitism,]
And to all a Good Night!.
* * * Please support DRY BONES (through PayPal or your Cr...
Ireland is Committing Genocide Against Itself
-
The obsession of the Irish government with falsely accusing Israel of
genocide is only equaled by its determination to commit an actual genocide
against...
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024
-
[image: This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024] This Week’s
Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024 IsraelSeen.com
This Week’s Sanity Report f...
Israel’s Anti-UNRWA Campaign is Working
-
The IDF has gathered evidence that proves that dozens of UNRWA staff
members took part in the atrocities — rapes, tortures, mutilations, murders
— carried ...
An Observation on Israelis and Archaeology
-
Ariel David of Haaretz reported on a new find, one that appears here and
deals with An Israelite Residency at Mahanaim in Transjordan?
It deals with "th...
Hamas/Gaza War Musings #36- Dangerous Surrender!
-
As a student of the Bible/Tanach, most recently Prophets/Navi, that's the
message. Gd will save us if we do the right thing. That's how we won the
1967...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
.jpg)
