Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, August 29, 2010

NYT's latest op-ed nonsense (updated)

A co-founder of the Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah, who makes no bones about how he wants Israel to disappear, writes an op-ed in the New York Times.

It remains amazing that the "newspaper of record" can deign to publish such absurdities as this:

The United States insists that Hamas meet strict preconditions before it can take part in negotiations: recognize Israel, renounce violence and abide by agreements previously signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, of which Hamas is not a member. These demands are unworkable. Why should Hamas or any Palestinian accept Israel’s political demands, like recognition, when Israel refuses to recognize basic Palestinian demands like the right of return for refugees?

So according to Abunimah, for Israel to ask its negotiating partners to not demand its violent destruction is "unworkable"?

Abinimeh also tries to make a tortured analogy with Northern Ireland, as if the Irish ever demanded that Great Britain be utterly destroyed as part of their negotiating position.

Apparently, Abunimah thinks that Israel should be thrilled if Hamas is willing to negotiate the terms of Israel's destruction. Maybe they'll even be willing to wait a decade or two! Isn't that moderate?

(h/t Balfour St)

UPDATE: Zach in the comments notes that Abunimah has been the "go to" guy for the New York Times when they need an anti-Israel comment. How he has attained such stature is beyond me.

"Million dollar bill" in the UAE

Three years ago, a woman in a Wal-Mart in Georgia tried to purchase $1671.55 worth of merchandise - with a million dollar bill. She was hoping that the store would give her back $998,328.45 in change.

That same year, also in Georgia, a man tried to deposit a million dollar bill into a bank. As the article says, such a move "would raise eyebrows even in Dubai."

Well, the writer was probably right.

From the Gulf News:

Abu Dhabi Police have arrested a man for trying to exchange two $1-million bills at the UAE Central Bank.

Abu Dhabi Police said the confiscated $1-million bills were not real currency notes but had been used for decorative purposes by a group called the "International club for multi-millionaires" in the US.

Police said the 45-year-old African suspect convinced a European woman that the $1 million bills were genuine and could be exchanged at the UAE Central Bank. He also allegedly offered her 30 per cent commission on the two notes, for acting on his behalf, the police said.

When the woman approached the Central Bank, the department dealing with the counterfeit currency at the bank informed Abu Dhabi Police.

Police said the woman agreed to co-operate with the joint bank and police operation, in a bid to arrest the man.

She then convinced the suspect that the bills had already been exchanged, and arranged to meet him on the pretext of handing the money to him at a hotel in Abu Dhabi.

Abu Dhabi Police said they arrested the suspect during the meeting and that when interrogated he said he got the bills from a gold and diamond merchant in Belgium who had offered him 154 similar bills.

A parenthetical note in an article about cricket

Sometimes, hope can be found in the unlikeliest of places.

An blog entry in Pakistan's Express Tribune newspaper says:

A British tabloid, The News of the World, gleefully revealed the sad truth that has haunted our nation for generations; that our international sporting ambassadors accepted bribes in exchange for altering/shaping their performance. Whether it was bowling a sequence of no-balls or playing out a maiden over, it’s blindingly apparent that they were all guilty. And no, we can’t blame this on a Zionist conspiracy, they don’t even play cricket.

It is an encouraging sign when a journalist in a Muslim country can joke about how his leaders reflexively blame all the country's problems on a "Zionist conspiracy." At least it is a small indication that the people don't always buy what their leaders are selling.

UPDATE: Tundra Tabloids quotes a Pakistani who is a lot less tolerant of Pakistan's hypocrisy. (h/t Paul)

Whatever happened to that "blockade buster" Algerian ship?

One and a half weeks ago there were a number of news stories - from the Israeli media, then picked up by UPI and others - about an Algerian ship that was supposedly heading to Gaza.

As I mentioned, those stories were wrong, and the ship was headed to El Arish where the aid would be unloaded and sent to Gaza via Rafah.

None of the media outlets that mentioned the supposedly blockade-busting ship seem to have noticed that it never reached Gaza, that there was no showdown at sea, and that the story disappeared.

Probably because stories of Arab countries sending aid via Rafah to Gaza are not news. I could find nothing about this ship when it landed in Egypt, but I was reminded of it when a group of Algerians announced a new aid convoy to go to Gaza via Rafah, with full cooperation of Egypt.

Since Ha'aretz, the Jerusalem Post and UPI aren't going to issue a correction, I just thought I'd do it for them.

What is the worst insult Fatah can hurl against Hamas?

Fatah spokesman Ahmed Assaf has come out with an attack on Hamas, something which happens with some regularity from Fatah.

But when Fatah insults Hamas, it is usually not because they are a bloodthirsty terrorist organization. Their problem with Hamas is that it is not terrorist enough against Israel.

In this case, Assaf is mocking Hamas for cooperating with the hated Zionist enemy and even, he charges, meeting with them to negotiate.

He claims that Hamas is negotiating provisional borders of a Palestinian Arab state with Israel and that Hamas has agreed to stop terror attacks to make its Zionist masters happy. Further, he claims that Hamas was following Israeli orders when it destroyed the mosque of the Jund al-Allah movement last year, killing 28 people. Similarly, a recent Hamas initiative to confiscate all illegal weapons in Gaza also serves Israeli interests, as does its de facto cease fire since the Gaza war.

Even though the Fatah-dominated PLO has sort of officially approved direct negotiations with Israel, it regularly castigates Hamas for allegedly doing what the PLO has been doing, off and on, for 17 years.

How can any real sort of peace ever be expected when each side routinely insults the other by accusing them of being too peaceful?

WSJ sums up the Arab world's "dirty little secret"

An editorial in the Wall Street Journal:

As Israelis and Palestinians prepare to visit Washington next week to begin direct peace talks, it's worth recalling what refugees the Palestinians are—in Arab countries.

Last week, Lebanon's parliament amended a clause in a 1946 law that had been used to bar the 400,000 Palestinians living in the country from taking any but the most menial jobs. "I was born in Lebanon and I have never known Palestine," the AP quoted one 45-year-old Palestinian who works as a cab driver. "We want to live like Lebanese. We are human beings and we need civil rights."

The dirty little secret of the Arab world is that it has consistently treated Palestinians living in its midst with contempt and often violence. In 1970, Jordan expelled thousands of Palestinian militants after Yasser Arafat attempted a coup against King Hussein. In 1991, Kuwait expelled some 400,000 Palestinians working in the country as punishment for Arafat's support for Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War.

For six decades, Palestinians have been forced by Arab governments to live in often squalid conditions so that they could serve as propaganda tools against Israel, even as millions of refugees elsewhere have been repatriated and absorbed by their host countries. This month's vote still falls short of giving Palestinian Lebanese the rights they deserve, including citizenship. But it's a reminder of the cynicism of so much Arab pro-Palestinian propaganda, and the credulity of those who fall for it.

It's nice to see at least some of the media finally start to wake up to the real issue.

(h/t Israel Matzav)

Arab columnist almost gets it right

Diana Mukkaled in Asharq al-Awsat writes:

Hamas police proceeded to close a water park in Gaza due to the presence of "degrading and unethical gender mixing" according to the justification reported in the news. Subsequent information about this incident revealed that the citizens who were removed from the water park, following the Hamas decisions, had just sat down to break their fast [during the holy month of Ramadan], and those evicted from this water park included a charity organization that looked after orphans.

The media in our region only briefly reported this news, mainly because we do not understand how breaking one's fast during Ramadan could be considered "degrading and unethical." What exactly is the criteria for this?

In any case, this news did not gain a lot of media attention in the Arab world. In fact, those media outlets that covered this story included it on the inside pages of their newspapers or as part of a news round-up, and that is when it was reported at all.

Yet the Gaza Water Park closure is not an isolated incident, in fact similar events occur routinely [in the Gaza Strip]. Only a few weeks ago, gunmen burned down a summer camp for children organized by UNRWA because young boys and girls would be mixing together, and there was a possibility of them swimming together.

Indeed, the siege imposed upon Gaza, and the continuing strain that this has had on its people, has not prevented Hamas from overseeing ‘public morals’. For example, Hamas ensures that women's clothing stores respect the principle of modesty with regards to the mannequins on display at the shop's entrances, with the shop's who fail to do so being subject to punishments. The hardships suffered by the people of Gaza has not prevented Hamas from ensuring that women do not smoke shisha in public places, or that men do not work in female clothing shops.

And who could forget how the Ministry of Education in Gaza banned the book ‘Speak, Bird, Speak Again’ which was a collection of Palestinian folk tales, saying that this contained "shameless sexual expressions?"

What is happening in Gaza is certainly far from an accident, or a miscalculation on the part of Hamas, and in fact this represents the essence of the Hamas movement and its true religious viewpoint. Hamas took over the Gaza Strip through force of arms, and it is impervious to being held to account for its actions. One cannot question its daily practices, or its oppression of the people of Gaza as Hamas practices tyranny in the name of resistance, and hides behind slogans.

Very good so far. But then she starts to veer off a little:

Hamas does not tire from changing the features of the Palestinian cause, and obscuring its humanitarian aspects by continuing to obscure and eradicate Palestine's secular history and reality.

Um, there isn't much of a secular history. There have been only two major Palestinian Arab leaders - the Mufti and Yasir Arafat. The Mufti used religious justifications for his hate, as did Hamas' spiritual forbearer Izz ad-Din al-Qassam. The only avowed secular leaders of the Palestinian Arabs were the terrorist leaders of the DFLP, PFLP and other Marxist parties.

Then she starts to veer off a lot:

Those who are united in support for Gaza and its people do not extend their solidarity towards the subsequent injustices inflicted upon the people of Gaza by Hamas, who have seized control of their lives.

Well, they sure are silent about those injustices, aren't they?

...What was inspiring with regards the Freedom Flotilla that came to challenge the Israeli blockade was that this also challenged the blockade that is being imposed by Hamas upon the lives of the people of Gaza.

How exactly did the flotilla people do a single thing - implicitly or explicitly - to challenge or weaken Hamas? On the contrary, they made very clear that they support the "freely elected government of Gaza" and their statements have made clear that if they are against any political figures in the territories, it is the PA. Previous ships and convoys have met with Hamas leaders and given them cash and gifts.

Mukkaled is doing a great job by pointing out how Hamas is oppressing Gazans, but she falls far short in not realizing who exactly it is that is propping up Hamas - the idiots who pretend to want to help the Gazans but are really only interested in the street cred and fame it gives them.

In fact, last month the Arabic version of that same paper had an op-ed by a playwright who discussed the poor quality of "aid" that was being delivered to Gaza by these same so-called "humanitarians":

"Last week, the doctors in Gaza who were in charge of receiving the medicines from the aid convoys... and of distributing them to the hospitals, announced that 70% of these medicines were months, or years, past their expiration dates. They also received Tamiflu pills – a medicine for swine flu, which has already passed through the region and the world – worth an estimated three million dollars (or 30 [million] – I do not remember exactly...). The same is true of the dialysis machines, which were useless. Another gift sent by one of the Arab countries was described as cruel. What was this gift? Shrouds. Yes, short shrouds of white cloth, 125 centimeters long. Was there ever a gift in such poor taste? The doctors added that they had given [the delegations] a list of 125 types of medicine that had run out in all of the [Gaza] hospitals, but they did not receive even one of these. Our problem now, [the doctors said,] is to find a garbage dump where we can dispose of or bury the spoiled cargo. We must get rid of it safely, so that it does not pose a threat to people or the environment.
"That was all the Gazan doctors said. I imagine that they took great pains to choose [neutral] words and not interpret what had happened. I am obliged to point out their courage in stating the truth about what happened, even if they withheld the names of those who had given them the shrouds, the [broken] machines and expired medicines... 70% of the medicines that reached the people of Gaza were expired! In an Arab pharmacy [anywhere else], if even a single bottle of medicine were found to be expired, its owner would be brought to trial!"

In no way do the flotilla fools help Gazans obtain any degree of freedom or salvation from Hamas rule.

Altogether, a solid B for Mukkaled.

(h/t Zvi)

Here's to you, Gaza Israeli flag painter

Today I saw another of these types of pictures in the Islamic Jihad-oriented Palestine Today:

Someone painted the Israelis (and don't forget the American) flag that these Islamic Jihad terrorists are happily stepping upon, in what to them is an obvious insult to Israel and the US.

The flag on the right has what appears to be two stars, the main one on top of one that seems to have been poorly erased:

Who has this job? Does he feel a feeling of accomplishment when he finishes painting the flag to be trodden upon? Was he embarrassed that the first star was not up to the correct standards and his sense of pride forced him to do it right? Did he make a conscious decision to paint the vertical Israeli flag as opposed to the horizontal? If so, was it based on aesthetics, or intended use, or was he simply following Israeli guidelines as to when the vertical flag should be used? Is he happy when his work is destroyed? Does he get paid by Islamic Jihad to paint Israeli flags? If he does a poor job in painting enemy flags, do they punish him?

Someone needs to find this guy and interview him.

Islamophobia! Attack at a Hebron mosque!

Oh, sorry, no Jews were involved.

The pro-Hamas Palestine Times reports that a Hamas politician tried to give a sermon before Friday prayers, but worshipers started a ruckus because Fatah has been limiting Hamas clerics from giving sermons in the West Bank. The situation deteriorated, and the PA deployed forces in Hebron around the mosque to keep the situation under control.

There has been a lot of tension between Hamas and the PA since the PA's religious minister declared that Hamas members would not be allowed to give political sermons.

In defense of settlers (Fred Barnes)

Fred Barnes, in The Weekly Standard, writes a rare article where Jews who live in Judea and Samaria are given a chance to actually speak.

When direct talks begin next week between Israelis and Palestinians, the fate of Jewish settlers in the West Bank – tens of thousands of them – will be a major issue in the negotiations. But the settlers themselves won’t be part of the discussion. Nor have American officials involved in the talks been willing to meet with them.

You’ve probably heard that the settlers are an obstacle to peace. That’s not exactly true. Their absentee role in the peace process is different. They’re opposed to an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians that would uproot a large number of settlers from their homes or would leave Israel with inadequate security, at least from their viewpoint.

Obstacles or not, they’ve become “the most stereotyped and demonized people in the world,” says Dani Dayyan, the leader of the Yesha settler council for the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Gaza. Yet the settlers have a case. It’s neither incoherent nor unreasonable, but it’s politically unacceptable and thus off the table in the new talks.

The settlers insist, for starters, that their settlements aren’t located on “occupied” Palestinian territory. Rather, they live on “disputed” territory, claimed as a homeland by both Palestinians and Jews (some of whom don’t consider themselves Israelis). “This is my homeland,” Dayyan says. “How can you ‘occupy’ your homeland?”

And Israel has a “morally flawless” claim to the West Bank and other land it captured in the Six Day War in 1967, according to Dayyan. “We took what we thought was ours in a defensive war” against Arab countries, he says. “The rule that winner takes all was set by the Palestinians,” since they were prepared to claim any land seized in the war.

The settlers also point to the ancient past. “Jewish civilization and history come from Judea and Samaria,” Dayyan says. “Everything Jewish was born” in the West Bank. King David never visited Tel Aviv, but “his first capital was Hebron” in the West Bank. Today, a Jewish settlement has been established in the heart of Hebron.

There’s an overriding concern. Israel’s security would be jeopardized without settlers in the West Bank, Dayyan insists. “We are the guarantee of Israel’s security. Israel is indefensible without Judea and Samaria.” At one point, Israel is 9 miles wide. The Ben Gurion Airport is “geographically controlled by the hills of Samaria.” Thus, he says, Hamas or al Qaeda terrorists with shoulder-fired rockets could attack the airport and “paralyze” the country.

The worst fear of the settlers is that the West Bank, were it to become a Palestinian state, might fall under the control of Hamas, which favors terrorism as a tactic and the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. When Israel withdrew from Gaza, it was “ethnically cleansed of a Jewish presence,” Dayyan says. Hamas now controls Gaza.

“It’s naïve to think something different would happen if the West Bank is separated from Israel,” he says. “It would be completely impossible to defend Israel without Judea and Samaria.” Besides, Hamas and “Islamic fundamentalist groups won’t recognize an agreement” that provides for Israel’s security.

Read the whole thing.

(h/t My Right Word)

Barely legal

Junior Elder is in Israel for the year. He just sent me some pictures that he took from his dorm room in Jerusalem.

So I went to Google Maps to see which direction the pictures had been taken from, and saw it showed a dotted line only a couple of hundred meters to east. I highlighted that line here:

Of course, that is the Green Line that represents the 1949 armistice lines between Israel and Jordan.

Just yesterday, Hamas leader Haniyeh said "No negotiator who would give up Jerusalem has a national mandate," and by that he means that terror and war will continue until every square centimeter of land to the east of that line is given to Arabs and every Jew uprooted from their homes that were built on the "illegal" side. (Actually, he didn't say "East Jerusalem" Western analysts know what he really means so we'll let that go.)

As we all know, a line that was never considered a border for a mere 19 years has more legal standing than a city that has been unified for 41 years, and everything done in that city for four decades must be rolled back to those wonderful days when a stroll to the places on the right side of this picture could get you killed. Those 19 years of a wall cutting through the Jerusalem, a tiny blip in its 3000 year history, is considered by the wise men of the international community to be the hallowed "status quo." According to these geniuses who fondly recall how peaceful things were from 1948-1967, the importance of those 19 years far outstrips the importance of the city of Jerusalem itself or the lives of its residents.

I don't know how accurate that line is, but just to play it safe I'll have to warn Junior Elder to make sure that when he takes a Shabbat walk to avoid going past the houses on Ramat HaGolan street that are bisected by that line. If he sees the residents of those two houses, as well as the ones on Tzalmona, Maavar HaMitle and other affected streets, he should give them sage advice to voluntarily destroy the eastern parts of their homes. After all, why antagonize the Arabs and the legal scholars who say that it belongs to a country that never existed?

Belated Thursday links

I meant to post this yesterday...

Alan Dershowitz reviews Mitchell Bard's new book, "The Arab Lobby."

Sultan Knish writes a provocative piece on the media's "Anti-Semitic Hate Machine."

And George Will continues his columns from Israel with his skepticism about the "peace process."

The myth of "Islamophobia" in America

Time magazine's cover story last week asks a simple question:

Jonah Goldberg, writing in the Los Angeles Times, shows that the number of anti-Islamic bias incidents in the US peaked in 2001 for obvious reasons, and then plummeted in 2002, and has never gone back up.

I went to the FBI hate crime page and pulled out the anti-religious hate crimes statistics for the years 2004-2008, the most recent ones published. It shows that anti-Islamic hate crimes were trending down:

The number of incidents, combined over fifty states, does not seem to be too alarming. One could spin a story about the massive increase in anti-atheist hate crimes, as they soared from 6 to 14 in 2008, an increase of 133%!

I purposefully kept a dataset out of this graph. Because when you add anti-Jewish hate crimes in America, they would be off the chart:

Can you imagine Time magazine having a cover story on the relatively large number, and increase, of anti-semitic crimes in America (at the very same time that anti-Islamic crimes were going down)?

Of course not. As Goldberg points out,

Why aren't we talking about the anti-Jewish climate in America?

Because there isn't one. And there isn't an anti-Muslim climate either. Yes, there's a lot of heated rhetoric on the Internet. Absolutely, some Americans don't like Muslims. But if you watch TV or movies or read, say, the op-ed page of the New York Times — never mind left-wing blogs — you'll hear much more open bigotry toward evangelical Christians (in blogspeak, the "Taliban wing of the Republican Party") than you will toward Muslims.

In other words, Time's cover story is not trying to uncover a truth but rather it is trying to obscure one. "Islamophobia" is a gross exaggeration that has been peddled by Muslim political leaders with an agenda.

In New York State, the very spot where Islamic terrorists murdered nearly 3000 people, the number of anti-Islamic crimes were a mere six in 2008. The number of anti-semitic crimes? 129.

In liberal, tolerant California, also in 2008, there were 11 hate crimes against Muslims - less than once a month. Anti-semitic crimes? 294.

Let's look at all hate crimes in America, not just those against religion. Here are the FBI's 2008 statistics, sorted by number of incidents:

Type	Amount
Anti-Black	2,876
Anti-Jewish	1,013
Anti-Male Homosexual	776
Anti-White	716
Anti-Hispanic	561
Anti-Other Ethnicity/National Origin	333
Anti-Homosexual	307
Anti-Multiple Races, Group	209
Anti-Other Religion	191
Anti-Female Homosexual	154
Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander	137
Anti-Islamic	105
Anti-Catholic	75
Anti-Multiple Religions, Group	65
Anti-Protestant	56
Anti-Mental	56
Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native	54
Anti-Heterosexual	33
Anti-Bisexual	27
Anti-Physical	22
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.	14

The answer to Time's titular question is a resounding "no."

In context, so-called "Islamophobia" is virtually non-existent, only 1.3% of all hate crimes, which are in themselves only a minute percentage of all crimes in America.

All hate crimes need to be taken seriously, but to exaggerate one set is to minimize the many hate crimes that far outstrip anti-Islamic crimes.

About that Lebanese "charity" that killed 2 Hezb men (updated)

I mentioned yesterday that Hezbollah members were in a firefight with an Islamic charity, and three ended up killed - two on Hezbollah's side.

It turns out that the so-called charity is known as al-Ahbash or the AICP- Association of Islamic Charitable Projects. It espouses a controversial view of Islam, and it claims to be moderate while it tends to be pro-Syrian.

This "moderation" apparently allows one to walk around with RPGs and machine guns.

It turns out that the AICP is not only a Lebanese group, but it also has a number of branches in the US, as well as the UK, Canada, France, Australia and Switzerland.

From a quick look at a number of their websites I cannot determine exactly what "charities" this association comprises of, or gives money to. They solicit donations, of course, but they are very light on how exactly those donations get spent, outside of proselytizing Islam.

So while some Sufi-oriented Muslims might consider gifts to the AICP to be considered part of their Zakat (charity) obligation, to call it a "charity" seems a bit of a stretch.

To call it "moderate" seems a bit of a joke.

UPDATE: Zvi finds out much more:

More details about al-Ahbash from a 2008 postby Daoud Ibrahim:

The name al-Ahbash, recently mentioned in the media in connection to the UN investigation into the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, refers to The Association of Islamic Charitable Projects in Lebanon which was founded by A Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Hirari, nicknamed “al Habashi”, referring to his Ethiopian origin. Born in the city of al Hirara , near Somalia , al Hirari settled in Lebanon in 1950 where he taught religious studies and cultivated a personal following.

Maintaining strong relations with the Syrian government, the groups leader, Nizar al Halabi was killed in 1995 by Ahmad Abdul Karim al Saaid, known as Abu Mihjin, who headed “Asbat al Ansar”or the League of Partisans. The latter was sentenced to death in absentia for his crime.

In April 2001, al Ahbash organized a series of public rallies to counter demonstrations called by those opposed to Syria's presence in Lebanon on the anniversary of the civil war. Members took to the streets dressed in black and wearing face paint and masks, the al-Ahbash members chanted pro-Syrian slogans before the TV cameras while waving nail-encrusted broomsticks, kitchen knives, brass knuckles, chains, axes, old rusted swords and hammers.
Released on Friday, the UN report into the assassination of Hariri featured the name of three brothers, Ahmad Abd al Al, an active member of al Ahbash currently in Lebanese custody, Walid, a member of the Presidential Guard, and Mahmud, also member of al Ahbash who, according to the investigation telephoned Lebanese President Emile Lahoud moments before the bombing which targeted Hariri’s convoy on February 14 th 2005. Mahmud was arrested on Sunday on a warrant issued by Magistrate Judge Sai Mirza. Police in Beirut also raised a sweet shop in Tariq al Jadidah neighbourhood owned by Hashem Mahmud Alian, allegedly a member of al Ahbash where hand grenades were found and confiscates and Alian arrested.
...

On violence and terrorism, the group says the following. I wish they included some indication that non-Muslim civilians - e.g. Jews - are innocent and must not be harmed. But they don't:

“The Association rejects the Takfir ideology and opposes the use of violence against the ruling authorities and the killing of the elderly, women, and children. It does not depend on any government for financial support and rejects the takfir ideologies that denounce Muslims as infidels”.

Read the rest.

The group itself says,

Unlike the followers of Sayyid Qutub [ Muslim Brotherhood - Zvi ] who deviated from the right path by following an erroneous idea that sprung fifty years ago, and unlike the followers of Muhammad ibn ^adbil-Wahhab [ the Wahhabis - Zvi ] who deviated from the right path by following an erroneous idea that sprung two hundred years ago, unlike them we are following the right path of the prophet, his companions and their followers.

The group runs The Islamic Education School, several colleges, a couple of radio stations, etc.

The Michigan chapter says,

The A.I.C.P goes counter any form of extremism that allows the killing of innocents, and it is clear of any connections to any form of deviations or extremism that considers the mere fact of visiting the tomb of Prophet Muhammad or celebrating his birth as a type of heresy. Rather, the association warns against extremism and labors to prevent its spreading. The association considers the deviated and extremist practices of certain groups in the name of religion as a form of treason to the people and a cause for fracture among the unity of the nation.

Their Australian branch recently held a Ramadan dinner that attracted a lot ofgovernment officials as well as foreign Muslim dignitaries, including both the premier and the opposition leader of New South Wales, several MPs and ministers, and consuls general from Iraq and Bangladesh, plus the Syrian ambassador.

The al-Ahbash organization in Sydney had a long-running feud with the infamous Sheikh Hilaly (of "uncovered meat" fame). They probably are moderate when compared with psychopaths like Hilali.

On the other hand, there is this claimed quotation from "one al-Ahbash leader": “As Muslims, we must never support and encourage false religions”! (i.e. no assisting Vietnamese Buddhists).

What I can verify is that I was unable to find any instance at all in which the AICP participated in any inter-faith event.

Time to buy Ahava products

Last night, the Ahava store in London was vandalized:

An Israeli skin care shop has had red paint thrown across its windows in a suspected targeted attack.

The Ahava store – famous for its Dead Sea products – was covered in the paint during the incident in Covent Garden, central London, on Wednesday night.

Staff discovered the damage when they arrived for work on Thursday morning.

Every time an Israeli store is vandalized by "peaceful" opponents of Israel, I will put up a free ad for that store on this blog, and I encourage other blogs to do the same.

So this is a good time to give Ahava a free ad:

UPDATE: Just for kicks, I issued a press release for this initiative. I have no idea if it will go anywhere outside the press release website, but I always wondered about how they work, so I decided to give it a shot.

Elder of Ziyon Blog offers free advertising to victims of anti-Israel aggression

In reaction to the vandalism of the Ahava store in London, the Elder of Ziyon blog announces free advertising for every Israeli store that is attacked.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) – Aug 26, 2010 – On the night of August 25, 2010, the Ahava cosmetics store in central London was attacked by vandals who splattered red paint on its windows.

The vandals were part of a movement that wants to boycott all Israeli products.

These groups are not interested in equality, or fairness, or even in the Palestinian cause. They simply want to put a self-righteous veneer on their hatred for the existence of a Jewish state and their opposition to the Jewish right of self-determination.

In reaction, the Elder of Ziyon blog has announced a new policy: all stores and organizations that are similarly attacked will get free advertising in the blog.

It is to be hoped that all right-thinking blogs will follow suit, so that these sorts of anti-Israel and often anti-semitic stunts end up helping the intended victims.

The Elder of Ziyon blog is a popular Zionist website that draws thousands of pageviews daily. It can be read at http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com.

The full story about the vandalism of Ahava can be seen at http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2010/08/time-to-buy-ahava-products.html .

UPDATE 2: Commenter Bill mentions the Buycott campaign, which is specifically set up to support companies targetted by boycotters.

Kuwait apologizes to Morocco over TV cartoon

From the Arab Times:

The Kuwaiti Ministry of Foreign Affairs has officially apologized to the people of Morocco for the animated comedy series screened by a Kuwaiti TV channel, reports Al-Seyassah daily.
It has been reported the improper depiction of the Moroccan women has sparked an outrage.
The Ministry apology said Kuwait respects the Kingdom of Morocco and its people. The apology also stressed on the fact that issues such as these cannot affect the distinguished and brotherly relations between the peoples of the two countries.

This came when the Moroccan community in Kuwait expressed its resentment of the TV program which greatly offended the Moroccan people and requested the Ministry of Information to delete the two episodes which were telecast on Aug 17 and Aug 18.

The Moroccans said this incident is unprecedented in the Arab world since this is the first time one Arab country has insulted the people of another.

In the meantime, the Kuwaiti daily newspaper Al-Watan, an affiliate of the channel, has issued a formal apology on its front page under the title ‘All love and respect for Morocco’. According to the paper, the play was not meant to offend the Moroccans.

I am trying to figure out what the exact offense was, and as far as I could tell, in the offensive skit, a Moroccan mother greeted two guests and gave them coffee, but was surreptitiously practicing magic on them to make them want to marry her two daughters. It might have implied that the guests specifically came to Morocco to meet and sleep with women.

Between the witchcraft and implied prostitution, Moroccans were a bit miffed.

Asharq al-Awsat on direct talks (Zvi)

From Zvi:

A group of Asharq al-Awsat commentators have weighed in to discuss the direct talks between Israel and the PA. It's a mixed bag of naivete, delusion, lies, hatred, skepticism, ignorance, bogus conventional wisdom, oppressive worry, realpolitik, actual wisdom and occasional flashes of insight.

Dr. Mamoun Fandy (outside of the region) presents six "signs" that make him think that Obama is optimistic about the direct talks. These are:

* There is a 1 year deadline, which he thinks indicates "at least 70%" confidence. It is hard to understand why he thinks this. Many "deadlines" have come and gone already. For example, Bibi Netanyahu froze settlements, a freeze that is intended to expire in September. Mahmoud Abbas burned an entire year and now will start negotiating just as the freeze expires, giving him an excuse to immediately quit negotiations. (Has anyone else noticed this?)

* He thinks that Sen. Mitchell's shuttle diplomacy has contributed to this confidence, and he hopes (apparently) that this will result in a historic victory for Obama entering the election season. He can keep on hoping; I see no reason why Obama administration policy vis a vis the Middle East will be any wiser than it has heretofore. Obama/Clinton/Mitchell have already nearly destroyed the peace process by encouraging Abbas to become even more uselessly intransigent, before finally backing off.

* He thinks that Obama has a blueprint that is "almost acceptable to all parties." I would like to hear what this blueprint is supposed to be; even the BBC is asking whether the administration has any plan at all, and I certainly have not heard anything that would work.

* I will actually quote the 4th "sign" because it is kind of an unusual perspective:

The fourth sign is that Israel and the United States have agreements on a number of common interests in the region. The most important of which is the stability of the Gulf region as a source of energy, preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb, and peace in return for [access to] the Gulf markets – in other words, a peace agreement would open the Gulf markets to Israel, and undermine Iran's nuclear capability.

Aside from implying that Israel may actually favor stability in the Arab world (which it does, but Arab commentators either don't grasp this or rarely admit to it), he is not shying away from defining what normalization might mean. Of course, he phrases it in a way that casts it as an agreement between Israel and the US, not a proposed offer by the Arabs.

* He is encouraged by the invitation of Mubarak and King Abdullah, because

This invitation could be seen as a ‘vaccination’ or "inoculation" against the failure of the 1998 Clinton – Arafat agreement where Yasser Arafat and the Israelis reached an agreement under the auspices of former US President Bill Clinton. However as soon as Arafat arrived in Gaza and descended from his plane, he rejected the agreement. The American explanation of Arafat's sudden change of heart was that some Arab leaders convinced him that he would not be able to ‘market’ what had been agreed [to the Palestinian people], and therefore, it would be better to reject the deal and announce an Intifada which would subsequently make him a leader, and that is indeed what Arafat did.

There is an unusual amount of honesty here (give or take the erroneous date; the Arafat Intifadah did not start in 1998).

He goes on to say that

the United States will guarantee Israel's signature and actions whilst Egypt and Jordan will guarantee the Palestinian signature – which is to say guarantee that the Palestinians will not violate the principles of the agreement.

* He believes that if talks fail, the world will declare a Palestinian state, regardless, so it's in Israel's interest to make the talks succeed. But if this is the case, why would the Palestinians negotiate in good faith. Abbas will sit back and complain, throwing spanners in the works at every opportunity.

He closes by saying that the PA/Hamas division is really an Arab division, and also that Arab countries that oppose normalization talk and trade with Israel behind the scenes. "However, unfortunately, Israel today has relations with the majority of Arab states."

With this "unfortunately", as with some of his other comments, Fandy demonstrates ignorance of what makes Israel tick; Israel has always been much more ready to make concessions when approached by people who hold out their hand than it has when approached by people making threats. This error reflects the collective blind spot of most of the region's opinion shapers. It's always about threats, because the idea of making concessions in order to get what you want is anathema, and because the Arab world has never come to terms with the fact that destroying Israel is off the table. Anwar Sadat was wiser. He realized that Israeli leaders serve their people, and he realized from the moment he came to Jerusalem that in the end he would need to make sure that the Israeli people were ready to accept a deal. Three and a half decades later, the rest of the Arab world still doesn't get it.

Fayyad: PA financially independent in 2013

PA prime minister Salam Fayyad said in a speech yesterday that the PA plans to no longer be reliant on foreign aid by the end of 2013.

He did mention that their "Arab brothers" tended not to pay their pledges, although they of course remained the biggest supporters of Palestinian Arabs. Funny way they have of showing it.

The only concrete infrastructure initiative I saw him mention was a plan for 15 new schools over an unspecified time period. I have a feeling that there are more than 15 new schools in the Jewish towns of Judea and Samaria every year.

Obviously, he said nothing about dismantling "refugee" camps that are wholly in PA-run territory, or of cutting the 60% of the PA budget that goes to Gaza.

He might be a brilliant economist but the idea that, with its rotten and corrupt officials still in place, the PA would be on its feet in less than four years is a pipe-dream.

Amnesty's apology leaves a bad aftertaste

I had linked to this story about how the head of Finland's branch of Amnesty International, Frank Johansson repeatedly and unapologetically referred to Israel as a "scum state" in his blog.

Now, under pressure, Johansson has not apologized but claims it was just "poorly worded" and a "mistranslation."

As the Tundra Tabloids blog proves, however, Johansson had many opportunities to clarify his wording and he refused to do so.

A reader emails me with a response that she received from Amnesty when she complained:

Thank you for your email to Amnesty International.

The comments made by Frank Johansson in a blog on the website of the Finnish daily newspaper Iltalehti are personal comments and should not be taken to reflect those of Amnesty International, including Amnesty International Finland, or to be endorsed in any way by Amnesty International.

Amnesty International has never described Israel as a “scum state” or used such terms to describe Israel or any other state and would never do so.

Obviously, we regret not only that this term was used but also that inadequate steps were taken to make clear that Frank Johansson was expressing an entirely personal view and not speaking on behalf of Amnesty International or expressing a view which reflects in any way the view of Amnesty International. Amnesty International totally disassociates itself from the comments expressed by Mr Johansson and has made this clear to him.

We have discussed this issue with Frank Johannson. He has issued a full and open apology for his ill-judged personal comments and for the offence that his comments have caused. This was an important error of judgment but there can be no doubting Frank Johannson’s long and deep commitment to human rights and to working impartially to end human rights abuses worldwide.

Best wishes, Luna

Amnesty accepts his mealy-mouthed pseudo-apology as a "full and open apology." Of course, when the Jerusalem Post reporter asked him to clarify the statements, he made very clear that they reflected exactly how he felt about Israel. Even worse, even though Johannson is very clear about his disgust for the state of Israel, Amnesty is saying as a fact that he is impartial! Meaning that Johansson will continue to work at this formerly prestigious organization as if his personal venom towards Israel is irrelevant to his work there.

Amnesty needs to do better than that.

In some ways, this is worse that Marc Garlasco's hobby of collecting Nazi memorabilia while at HRW. That was at least separate from his activities there; it was a sick indicator of bias but not nearly as direct and explicit as Johansson's. Johannson proudly and publicly displayed his hatred of Israel on a blog where he also publicly identified with Amnesty; Garlasco did not publicize the connection between his HRW human-rights activist persona and the person who was fascinated with Nazi SS jackets and Iron Crosses.

Amnesty, as a purportedly impartial organization, should fire Johannsen immediately. If they are not going to fire someone for such a statement outright, which would already reflect badly on them, they should publicly say that he will never have the slightest input into any of Amnesty's reports about the Middle East, because of his obvious and clear bias.

But this citing of his fake apology, and the facile statement that he is impartial, casts much doubt over Amnesty's commitment to truth.

Children of IHH attackers used as props for hate

A random set of children of the IHH members who were killed while attacking Israeli troops aboard the Mavi Marmara were treated to a vacation by a Turkish charity - whose level of "charity" seems to be in line with the IHH itself, leavened with hate.

The trip was a PR stunt, where the children met with other anti-Zionist societies besides Islamic cultural sites. Even the organizers admit that the "vacation" was primarily a "message to the world" to champion the "Palestinian cause," and the children were mere props.

These "orphans" were asked to speak in front of the anti-Israel groups that hosted them, saying how their fathers were killed by "insidious Zionist occupation forces" and how they hoped to meet next year in Jerusalem.

The charity plans on further trips, this time to other countries, to spread their message of hate.