Reactions to Time's slander

It seems that the full article is even worse than the excerpts.

See:

Honest Reporting

The reference to the "blood feud with the Arabs whose families used to live on this land" is particularly telling. Vick appears to subtly reject Israel's historic claims to the land and to imply that Israelis are at fault in the conflict, since the land really belongs to the Arabs.

Bret Stephens at WSJ:

Journalism aside, there's also a moral dimension here, especially for a magazine that recently devoted its cover to the question of whether Americans are "Islamophobic." That dimension is known as the delegitimization of Israel—the idea that the country ought not to exist. Insisting that Israel be wiped off the map, as Iran's leaders do with such numbing frequency, is one method of delegitimization. Suggesting that Israelis don't care about peace—not all of them, of course; there's always a remnant of politically anguished Israelis to be found, quoted and celebrated for the purposes of native standing and moral cover—is another.

Which of these methods does more lasting harm, the malignly blunt or the well-meaningly insidious? Probably the latter: It shapes a climate of supposedly respectable opinion that doesn't hesitate to tar one nation the way it never would any other. Or did I somehow miss the Time covers devoted to why Russians don't care about democracy, or Kenyans about corruption?

Victor David Hanson at NRO:

In fact, Vick argues, the Jews are so obsessed with making money that they don’t much care what happens in the future: “The truth is, Israelis are no longer preoccupied with the matter. They’re otherwise engaged; they’re making money; they’re enjoying the rays of late summer. A watching world may still define their country by the blood feud with the Arabs whose families used to live on this land and whether that conflict can be negotiated away, but Israelis say they have moved on.”

You see, Vick has discovered that the rather worldly Israelis, after stealing their land from Arabs, don’t much care for the hard negotiations that the Obama administration is now engaged in (“big elemental thoughts”), not when it is a matter of — yes, making money: “With souls a trifle weary of having to handle big elemental thoughts, the Israeli public prefers to explore such satisfactions as might be available from the private sphere, in a land first imagined as a utopia.”

Soccer Dad has a larger roundup.

Read More

"Rape by deception" case was really "deception by media" case

In July, this story became pretty big - here's the AP version, but it was all over the media:

Lying for sex. It happens all the time.

Yet a married Palestinian man has been ordered jailed for 18 months for having sex with an Israeli woman after giving her the impression he too was Jewish, as well as single and interested in a relationship.

His conviction of "rape by deception" has drawn charges of racism and questions about whether courts should be delving into this fraught topic.

Saber Qashor, a 30-year-old father of two, says he was approached by the woman in September 2008 on a downtown Jerusalem street where he had parked his motorcycle, and introduced himself as "Dudu," a common Israeli Jewish nickname.

Within half an hour they were having sex in a Jerusalem office building stairwell.

After nearly two months, he was arrested and told the woman had accused him of forcible rape. Last week, he was sentenced to prison and fined 10,000 shekels ($2,500) for "rape by deception," an offense that may be unique to the Israeli legal code.

"This is a case where it is obviously not rape but fraud, and it smells of racism," said historian and commentator Tom Segev. "It's a real ugly example of how basic values in this country are deteriorating."

All of these articles were written based solely on the Arab man's interview. The victim did not speak to the press. The conclusion was often simple: that Israelis are inherently racist and would never convict an alleged Jewish rapist under such circumstances. For example, Andrew Sullivan (via The Volokh Conspiracy)

But it’s the visceral emotional core of this that is so offensive. It’s about racism, religion and the risk of miscegenation. It’s about the deep disgust of some Israeli Jews toward Arabs, upheld by the courts. It’s a variant of the racial sexual panics of the Jim Crow South. 

Other examples here.

Now, Ha'aretz (in Hebrew only) found the victim, and her story is completely different.

Elizabeth at MidEast Youth translates and summarizes the belated Ha'aretz investigation; here is her summary:

Last week, Haaretz daily published a long expose on the matter (my full translation below), revealing what was behind the plea agreement. The report shows, that the victim, B., was raped by her father since she was six-years-old, and was later forced into prostitution by him. At the time of the rape, B. was staying in a women’s shelter after another sexual assault by her father. According to B.’s testimony, first revealed in the Haaretz report, after Kashur claimed that he was a Jewish bachelor, he enticed her to come into a stairwell in a Jerusalem building, where he brutally raped her. B. was left bleeding, beaten up and half naked by Kashur.

Following the rape, B. was hospitalized in a mental institution, where she was investigated by the police. The Prosecutor’s office decided to charge Kashur with rape and sexual assault based on B.’s testimony and other evidence. When B. later appeared in Court to give her testimony, which was confused and contradictory at times, she was confronted by the Defense attorney with her past occupation as a prostitute and her father’s abuse and rape from an early age. The court appearance left B. severely traumatized. When the Defense learned that B. previously filed 14 complaints against her father and other men for sexual assault, it asked to cross-examine B. once again about the past complaints, while focusing on a number of them that didn’t result in an indictment and convictions due to contradictions in her story. The Defense planned to use B.’s past complaints to shatter her credibility. Wanting to avoid another traumatizing event, the Prosecution formulated a plea bargain with the Defense that reduced the charges to “rape by deception”. Essentially, using the threat of once again subjecting a vulnerable rape victim to a traumatizing interrogation, the Defense was able to reach a plea agreement with greatly reduced charges, which didn’t correspond with the facts of the incident.

The Israeli media has failed to thoroughly investigate this matter, resulting in widespread victimization of a rapist and mockery of the “gullible” woman. B. was victimized and abused by her surrounding from an early age, and unfortunately, the Israeli and foreign media, pundits and the blogosphere, victimized her once again.

Not only was the victim's pain minimized, but the entire case was looked upon in opinion pieces and blog posts as yet another example of Israeli racism against Arabs, when in fact it was nothing of the sort.

Will we see retractions? Not very likely. Even Ha'aretz hasn't put this report out in English (they alluded to it here), so the lazy employees in Israel from AP and Reuters aren't aware of this update to begin with, since they use English Ha'aretz as their main source for their "reporting."

Read More

90.7% of PalArabs want to destroy Israel

As Time magazine castigates Israel and Israelis for not truly wanting "peace," a recent poll by AWRAD (Arab World for Research & Development) shows how Palestinian Arabs think.

This poll gives a long list of possible answers and asks which ones are "Essential," "Desirable," "Acceptable," "Tolerable" or "Unacceptable."

Some of the results are at odds with the conventional wisdom, to say the least.

IMRA highlights a few of the results. To put it mildly, they show an unwillingness to compromise that are orders of magnitude worse than the most intransigent, hawkish, right-wing Israeli leaders have ever been:

With regards to the final status of Palestine and Israel please indicate which of the following you consider to be Essential, Desirable, Acceptable, Tolerable or Unacceptable as part of a peace agreement.

Historic Palestine – from the Jordan River to the sea as a national homeland for Palestinians
Essential 78.2% Desirable 12.5% Acceptable 4.3 Tolerable 3.1 Unacceptable 2.0

Two state solution – two states for two peoples: Israel and Palestine according to UN resolutions
Essential 17.7 Desirable 15.7 Acceptable 13.6 Tolerable 15.2 Unacceptable 37.7

The number of refugees returning to Israel should be limited to family members and numbers agreed between Israel and Palestine

Essential 3.7 Desirable 7.8 Acceptable 11.9 Tolerable 16.9 Unacceptable 59.6

Palestine should be demilitarized, including the disbanding of militias and
the standing down of the military.

Essential 7.8 Desirable 5.5 Acceptable 4.0 Tolerable 7.6 Unacceptable 75.0

All of Jerusalem (East and West) should remain in Palestine

Essential 84.1 Desirable 10.3 Acceptable 2.2 Tolerable 1.6 Unacceptable 1.7

Other results include:

A majority saying that Israel should be de-militarized (41% Essential, 26% Desirable)

All the settlers should leave the Occupied Territories and settlements closed
Essential 90.8 Desirable 6.3 Acceptable 1.4 Tolerable 0.8 Unacceptable 0.7

Dismantle most of the settlements, move settlers to large blocks and exchange land
Essential 9.6 Desirable 9.0 Acceptable 10.0 Tolerable 17.9 Unacceptable 53.6

Resist occupation through violence to achieve a state
Essential 36.7 Desirable 18.7 Acceptable 16.8 Tolerable 14.0 Unacceptable 13.7

This is not some Israeli right-wing commissioned poll, but from a Palestinian Arab institution.

All of the conventional wisdom that says that Palestinian Arabs want a two-state solution and to live in peace with Israel is wrong. Other polls are constructed in such a way so that it appears that this is what they want, but that is a means to an end, not the desired end itself.

Which is why this poll will not get any publicity in the mainstream media. This is why there will be no Time articles about how Palestinian Arabs do not want peace and how compromise is not in their vocabulary. The mdeia simply cannot deal with these simple truths, so it will ignore the facts.

And, instead, blame Israel.

(h/t sshender)

Read More

Another reason the "peace process" is a farce (Samson)

Samson, in the comments, writes:

---

There are many reasons why these "peace talks" are doomed to failure, most of them well known to the readers of this blog and nearly everyone else. Yet another reason, not often acknowledged, is that the Arabs (and Palestinians in particular) hate the "peace process" and everything about it, including any possible outcome. Americans (well, at least their Presidents) have come to love the whole thing, right up to the handshakes on the White House lawn. For the Arabs, this is yet another humiliation, just the kind of thing they hate more than anything in the world - a bunch of Christian Americans and Europeans supervising their "negotiations" with the hated Jews! For the Palestinians, not particularly well respected among their Arab brethren to begin with, this is the ultimate sign of their inferiority. No wonder they resist direct negotiations.

More important, however, is the discordance between a negotiated settlement and victory, which is what they crave. The idea of 62 years of futile "struggle" followed by a negotiated peace that gives them anything less than 100% of Israel simply doesn't fit into their "narrative." Their national myth requires them to "recapture" "Palestine" with an armed struggle against the evil Jewish Zionists, not settle for the West Bank and Gaza (or less than that) without Jerusalem thanks to US or other third-party intervention. Not that obtaining a state was ever that serious a goal for them compared with destroying Israel in the first place, but even a deliberately deceptive negotiation in which the "agreement" is viewed as the first step in complete and ultimate victory is not enough. Let's face it, the Palestinians have a pretty shallow hold on nationhood to begin with, with little history of accomplishment other than terrorism and suicide bombers, and it just wouldn't do to have their moment of national birth come without martyrdom, armed struggle and victory.

It's not hard to see why they are jealous of the State of Israel, which really does have a long and remarkable pre-history, and whose moment of rebirth occurred as a genuine struggle for survival and nationhood against absurdly long odds. Not that further sacrifice or heroics was what the Jews wanted, needed or asked for, but just as the English can thank the Nazis for their "finest hour", so, ironically, can Israel thank the Arabs. Of course, when Olmert said in 2005 that "....We are tired of fighting, we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies...." he had a point, but sadly, the war is not over, only transformed yet again into a different type of conflict. It cannot be resolved militarily at this point, but any attempt to end it by a "peace process" is doomed for the above cited and many other reasons.

Hazak ve'ematz my friends, the fight for Israel must continue.

Read More

About that Time cover story....

A number of people are upset over Time magazine's cover story for the September 13th issue:

I would like to read the entire article (still not online) to give an honest opinion, but from what we can see so far it seems fairly certain that Time magazine sees no distinction between "peace" and "the peace process."

For example, while the cover talks about "peace," the blurb describing the article says:

The Good Life And Its Dangers (Cover)
Israelis feel prosperous, secure--and disengaged from the peace process. Is that wise?

The cherry-picked example given in the online article teaser says:

In the week that three Presidents, a King and their own Prime Minister gather at the White House to begin a fresh round of talks on peace between Israel and the Palestinians, the truth is, Israelis are no longer preoccupied with the matter. They're otherwise engaged; they're making money; they're enjoying the rays of late summer. A watching world may still define their country by the blood feud with the Arabs whose families used to live on this land and whether that conflict can be negotiated away, but Israelis say they have moved on.

From what we can see, Time is making a major mistake that many on the world are making.

To say that Israel, or Israelis, don't care about "peace" is so off-base that it borders on calumny. But to say that Israelis don't care about an inherently flawed "peace process" that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people over the years is perfectly reasonable.

The title on the cover, and the cover itself, are very clearly implying that Israelis do not care about peace itself. The Time editors do not seem to understand basic English. Right now, there is peace, by and large.

On the other hand, Israelis know that the almost automatic result of giving more concessions is terror, not peace.

Hezbollah was not dismantled when its supposed raison d'etre disappeared when Israel withdrew behind UN-drawn borders - on the contrary, it was strengthened. Hamas didn't get weakened by Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza - it moved into the vacuum left by an impotent PA, that just happens to be Israel's "peace partner." What person it their right mind would support moving into act 3 of this drama?

Meanwhile, Abbas himself said "[i]n the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life." Hate to break it to Time, but that is the definition of peace - Israelis and Palestinian Arabs are living together, cooperating on security, and the economies of both groups are improving.

Making more parts of the West Bank Judenrein is not going to improve things; evidence indicates that the opposite is true.

There are many other reasons to be skeptical of the peace process. Last time I listed them, I had 16 of them, and they are not going away.

This does not mean that Israel doesn't care about peace. Israel's actions since the Intifada have reduced the number of victims of terror - and number of victims of IDF actions in the West Bank - by a huge amount. Israelis can travel on buses and go to restaurants without fear. West Bank Arabs are also prospering.

Isn't that what peace is all about?

Read More

Labor Day weekend open thread (updated)

On another micro vacation and not near a computer. So here's an open thread to tide us all over.

UPDATE: Now even opener! And threadier!

Still a few hours away from a normal computer.

Read More

Egyptian state media publishes pictures to shame ElBaradei

Mohammed ElBaradei, who is considered a strong contender to become the next president of Egypt, has charged the Egyptian state media and the ruling National Democratic Party with publishing pictures of his daughters in bathing suits and near alcoholic beverages at a wedding (his daughter married a Christian) in order to discredit and embarrass him.

The photos were apparently taken from ElBaradei's daughter's Facebook page.

Here is one of the shocking alcohol photos:

And if you think that is scandalous, just check out this pornographic image of ElBaradei himself with a girl in a bathing suit:

This appears to be the picture of ElBaradei's daughter that is really getting people upset:

Yes, these are the photos that is causing the uproar.

Read More

Egyptian op-ed questions Khaled Meshaal's masculinity

An op-ed in Egypt's Rosalyousef newspaper questions the masculinity of Hamas "political leader" Khaled Meshaal.

Abdullah Kamal, editor in chief of the paper, says that Meshaal cannot do anything from Damascus except pt out irrelevant statements every now and then. He is not in Gaza itself defending the people there; all he does is denounce and criticize.

While he claims that the talks in Washington have no legitimacy because the PA has no mandate, Kamal asks, who gave Meshaal himself any legitimacy? No one elected him.

The article goes on to ask what gives Meshaal any "manhood?" Is it the ability to criticize from afar? Is it the fact that he would not dare say a word without first checking with his Iranian sponsors and Syrian hosts? Is it throwing a wedding for his daughter that could have come out of Arabian Nights while Gaza starves?

Is it macho to keep thousands of prisoners in jail rather than deal them for Gilad Shalit?

The article concludes that Meshaal has no virility nor ethics, that he is not a real fighter, and simply takes advantage of his position for personal gain with no risk.

Ouch!

Read More

An interesting set of hadiths

I just stumbled across this series of hadiths, from Kitab Al-Salat, book 4 chapter 47:

Book 004, Number 1079:
'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said during his illness from which he never recovered: Allah cursed the Jews and the Christians that they took the graves of their prophets as mosques. She ('A'isha) reported: Had it not been so, his (Prophet's) grave would have been in an open place, but it could not be due to the fear that it may not be taken as a mosque.

Book 004, Number 1080:
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Let Allah destroy the Jews for they have taken the graves of their apostles as places of worship.

Book 004, Number 1081:
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Let there be curse of Allah upon the Jews and the Christians for they have taken the graves of their apostles as places of worship.

Book 004, Number 1082:
'A'isha and Abdullah reported: As the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was about to breathe his last, he drew his sheet upon his face and when he felt uneasy, he uncovered his face and said in that very state: Let there be curse upon the Jews and the Christians that they have taken the graves of their apostles as places of worship. He in fact warned (his men) against what they (the Jews and the Christians) did.

At least one modern Islamic scholar says that such a mosque, if built after the grave was already in place, must be destroyed. It appears to be the mainstream thinking in Wahhabism.

So how come no Muslims are publicly calling to destroy the mosques that are at the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Rachel's Tomb, the Tomb of Joseph and Samuel's' Tomb, among others?

Could it be because the Jews have built places of worship there, and it is more important to erase Jewish connections to the land than it is to observe a series of explicit hadiths?

Read More

Erekat vs. Erekat - which one do you believe?

From JPost:

Israel and the Palestinian Authority have agreed on the “core issues” that will be discussed during their direct talks, Saeb Erekat, the Palestinian chief negotiator, said over the weekend.

Erekat claimed that PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu agreed at their meeting in Washington on Thursday that the peace talks would be resumed from the point where they were stopped two years ago under then-prime minister Ehud Olmert.

From YNet:

Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat said Saturday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to apply stall tactics to negotiations, and that all of his suggestions thus far have been rejected by the PA.

Erekat told Jordan's al-Dustour Newspaper that the Israeli prime minister suggested forming 12 committees dedicated to the various issues of the peace process, but his suggestion was rejected.

The chief Palestinian negotiator said that Netanyahu's "procrastination" has effectively made the peace talks grind to a halt: "There are decisions to be made, so that first and foremost we create a vision," he told the newspaper, adding that such action is the only thing that would allow negotiations to start at the point at which they were left off during the Olmert Administration.

So which Erekat do we believe?

The answer is simple: neither.

Why should we believe any word that comes out of an established liar's mouth?

Read More

Yet more Iranian paranoia

Here's an interesting episode from a couple of weeks ago. From the BBC:

An Iranian-made television series about the life of Christ being shown on two Lebanese channels has been taken off air after complaints from Christians.

The series was being shown during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan on the Hezbollah-linked TV channel, al-Manar, and another station, NBN.

Lebanon's Christian community has condemned the show as a distortion of their beliefs.

Christians have complained that it is based on an apocryphal gospel, rejected by the Church.

The Gospel of Barnabas has a very different version of Christ's life from that found in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

The key variation is that it says Jesus was not crucified and was not resurrected -- the two fundamental Christian beliefs.

In this, it is actually very close to the story of Christ as told in the Koran.

It turns out that the cancellation of the series really ticked off Iran. From Iran's PressTV:

The complaints lodged by the Lebanese Catholic Church that forced two networks to stop airing an Iranian-made series on the life of the Prophet Jesus (PBUH) is all part of a rampant Iranophobia spreading across the Arab world.


Political factions and US-linked seditionists with the final aim of forcing the Lebanese Resistance Movement (Hezbollah) into political isolation hatched this plot.

After several episodes of The Messiah were broadcast on NBN and Al-Manar television channels, the country's Catholic Church issued a statement requesting a ban on the broadcast of the series.

...Some Islamic countries fear the growing demand for Iranian series in the Arab world and are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to cut the flow of Iranian art and culture into their countries.

These regimes are seeking to promote obscenity in the Arab world through a set of shallow television dramas that lack any moral message and which they widely endorse in their satellite channels.

For example Arab networks broadcast a number of lengthy, romantic series with obscene plots made by a certain Muslim country.

The main objective of this move is the cultural and artistic isolation of Iran in Islamic countries as well as boosting a culture void of all ethics or moral values. This policy can be best described as Iranophobia.

The two concepts of "Shiaphobia" and "Iranophobia" have long been on the US agenda, and Washington has been working with several Arab regimes toward this end.

Extensive propaganda against the dangers of the spread of the Shia faith in the world and the supposed threat of Iran's bids for nuclear technology was persistently broadcast in Arab channels to isolate Hezbollah and Iran.

This is hardly the only time that Iran is charging the world with "Iranophobia." I first noted this in May, and since then it has become a recurring theme on Iranian news sites.

Google News records about a dozen examples of Iranian media using that word in the past month.

Here's a recent one:

Iranian Justice Minister Morteza Bakhtiari warned that the US and the other arrogant powers have hatched plots to promote Iranophobia in the world.

"The world arrogance has once again resorted to its old agenda and is seeking to spread Iranophobia after its plot failed to spread seditions following the tenth presidential election in Iran," Bakhtiari told FNA on the sidelines of massive International Quds Day rallies in Tehran on Friday.

Apparently, Iran has taken to heart the successful promotion of the false idea that the world is Islamophobic - a stunningly successful campaign that is almost complete nonsense - and want to adapt that to the new claim of "Iranophobia," perhaps to gain sympathy.

Yet they are already using that as an excuse for everything that doesn't go their way, including the ludicrous idea that a TV series about Jesus is being criticized not for its content but because of its origins.

Read More

Iran thinks peace talks designed to interfere with Quds Day

We already saw how disappointed Iran's supreme leader was that Quds Day was a bust outside Iran.

He had his own theories. Here's another:

A senior Iranian lawmaker said on Saturday that the talks in Washington between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) had been designed to decrease the effects of the International Quds Day rallies throughout the world.

Paranoia can be really funny.

Read More

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - the videogame!

From Iran's Mehr News:

Iran released two anti-Israeli computer games on the eve of the Quds Day.

“Devil Den 2” and “Freedom Convoy”, which have been produced by the School Students Basij Organization, were unveiled during a ceremony on Thursday.

“Devil Den 2” is about the Israeli protocols, Brigadier Mohammad-Saleh Jokar, the director of the organization, which is affiliated to the Education Ministry, said in the ceremony.

“The illegitimate regime has said in its protocols that they will abolish all beliefs,” he stated.

“We have witnessed that the foundations of the illegitimate Zionist regime have been weakened and our younger generation must be familiarized with the protocols and the antihuman ideology of the regime,” he added.

Iran plans to produce six sequels to “Devil Den”. “Devil Den 1” was released in 2009.

In “Devil Den 1”, a number of top Iranian students are abducted by U.S. troops during their pilgrimage to Karbala in Iraq. They are handed over to the Zionist regime to convert them into Israeli soldiers. One of the students manages to escape and tries to help liberate the other students.

Well, it's about time they turned my work into a videogame. But there's one big problem:

A large number of the games were distributed free of charge among the demonstrators participating in the Quds Day rally on Friday in Tehran.

They're cheating me out of my royalties!

I'll have to capture the distributors, convert them into Israeli soldiers, brainwash them to hate all religion, confiscate all their money, humiliate them, kill them, and sell their organs.

After all, I have a reputation to maintain.

Read More

Twit Khameini tweets

Iran's Supreme Leader, Honcho and Big Cheese now tweets!

Today, in honor of Al Quds Day, he tweeted:

Israel Is A Hideous Entity In the Middle East Which Will Undoubtedly Be Annihilated

A half hour later, perhaps thinking that he didn't properly make the point, he added:

Israel Is Rushing Towards Its Decline And Is Doomed To Annihilation.

He also posted this picture:

If "Allah has ordained that Palestine will be liberated" then why is he doing such a poor job of it? Wouldn't things have been easier in 1948?

Anyway, to make his point crystal clear, he tweeted in Farsi:

Israel will be destroyed

Even more amusing was his article in honor of Al Quds day. You see, the day was made up in 1979, and pretty much only Shiites and terrorists who rely on Iran for money (like Hamas and Islamic Jihad) are celebrating this annual hatefest. Other Arab governments have other days of the year to bash Israel - Naqba Day, Balfour Day, Partition Day, the anniversary of the Christian dude who set a fire in Al Aqsa, and pretty much any day that has a "d" in it.

But their failure to embrace Iran's special day really ticks off Khameini. Obviously, they are Zionist!

So he writes on his English website:

The battle against Quds Day by Israel’s official supporters and their allies – which are the unofficial supporters of Israel – is an interesting fight. They created a rival for Quds Day and tried to erase it from people’s minds. In no part of the world of Islam have global powers allowed local governments to encourage people to take part in Quds Day rallies. Unfortunately, the policies of the bullying global powers are influential in many Muslim countries. This is one of the misfortunes of Muslims and the world of Islam. Is there any reason why Muslim governments should not encourage their people to take to the streets on Quds Day? What harm would this do to them? If they support the ideals of Palestine, why do they not allow their people to take part in Quds Day demonstrations?

Does this sound like the supreme leader of a great nation, or a five year old child who didn't get his way? What a tool!

(h/t Foreign Policy blog)

Read More

IDF video of Hezbollah arms cache explosion

I mentioned this earlier today, and the IDF took video:



As the IDF said,

Today’s incident is only one of many that clearly show that Hezbollah systematically violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which stipulates that Hezbollah should be disarmed and that no paramilitary groups will be active south of the Litani river.

Read More

Rabbis so open-minded their brains fall out

From JTA:

A group of Jewish interfaith educators is asking rabbis to talk about Islam next Shabbat.

A letter signed by six prominent rabbis and scholars points out that Shabbat Shuvah, the Sabbath between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, falls on Sept. 11, the ninth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

In light of the controversy over the Islamic center planned near the New York site, the letter asks rabbis and rabbinical students to “speak out against the bigotry that has erupted,” and promote the ideals of religious freedoms for Muslims as well as Jews.

Rabbis in leading positions at the Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative seminaries, as well as the rabbinical school at Hebrew College, signed the appeal.

It reads, in part: “The proposal for the ‘Mosque at Ground Zero’ that turns out not to be a mosque and not at Ground Zero has brought to light this simple fact: We Americans need to know a whole lot more about Muslims and their religion.”

I have no problem with people learning more about Muslims and their religion. It is important.Bigotry is certainly something to be fought against and real education - not relying on sanitized, second hand materials -  is the best tool to fight it.

But the major problem in the Jewish community is not ignorance of Islam - it is ignorance of Judaism. Shabbat Shuvah is part of the "Days of Awe" when Jews should be improving themselves and discarding bad habits, something that requires serious contemplation and time if it is to be done correctly. Rabbis on Shabbat Shuva transitionally talk about repentance and getting closer to God, about strengthening their own communities and striving to do better.

This is not the time of year for rabbis to prioritize teaching Jews about Islam. It is the time to teach Jews about their own religion.

If they want to make a "get to know Islam day" in their temples on some weeknight in November, fine. Choosing specifically this date indicates that they put a higher priority on the secular calendar than on their own Jewish calendar. One would hope that rabbis would have their priorities a little straighter than that.

Unless they really do have more respect for the nebulous concept of multiculturalism than for their own beliefs and traditions.

Read More

Fairies, unicorns and a peaceful bi-national state

George Bisharat, writing in the Washington Post, paints a lovely picture of how well a bi-national state in Palestine would work:

The answer is for Israelis and Palestinians to formalize their de facto one-state reality but on principles of equal rights rather than ethnic privilege. A carefully crafted multiyear transition including mechanisms for reconciliation would be mandatory. Israel/Palestine should have a secular, bilingual government elected on the basis of one person, one vote as well as strong constitutional guarantees of equality and protection of minorities, bolstered by international guarantees. Immigration should follow nondiscriminatory criteria. Civil marriage between members of different ethnic or religious groups should be permitted. Citizens should be free to reside in any part of the country, and public symbols, education and holidays should reflect the population's diversity.

Although the one-state option is sometimes dismissed as utopian, it overcomes major obstacles bedeviling the two-state solution. Borders need not be drawn, Jerusalem would remain undivided and Jewish settlers could stay in the West Bank. Moreover, a single state could better accommodate the return of Palestinian refugees. A state based on principles of equality and inclusion would be more morally compelling than two states based on narrow ethnic nationalism. Furthermore, it would be more consistent with antidiscrimination provisions of international law. Israelis would enjoy the international acceptance that has long eluded them and the associated benefits of friendship, commerce and travel in the Arab world.

It sounds so lovely! Palestinian Arabs from Lebanon, Syria and Jordan can move into this new binational Palestine by the millions, but don't worry: they won't do anything to hurt their treasured Jewish minority.

Once upon a time, not too terribly long ago, there was an Arab majority in Palestine. How well did they treat the minority population? Here are the news briefs for a single day, September 4, 1938, in the Palestine Post:



Wasn't life just grand then? Didn't everyone live together in peace and harmony? No need for a state for Jews - that would be racist. No, they can live in peace among the Arabs, in full safety and security, knowing that they are protected as dhimmis by force of Koranic law.

Bisharat couches his dream in multicultural terms:

The main obstacle to a single-state solution is the belief that Israel must be a Jewish state. Jim Crow laws and South African apartheid were similarly entrenched virtually until the eves of their demise. History suggests that no version of ethnic privilege can ultimately persist in a multiethnic society.

The idea that there are 22 or so states that define themselves as "Arab" - and discriminate against non-Arabs - is not a problem at all for Bisharat. The fact that the constitutions of many of those states proclaim that their state religion is Islam, and that the Koran is the source for their laws, is also just peachy for oh-so-cultured Bisharat. No, the only evil is a Jewish national home - that is racist! Jewish self-determination is inherently evil, while the addition of another de-facto Arab state is supremely moral.

His plan recalls another Arab plan.

In 1947, on the eve of the partition, Arabs put forth another single-state plan in a desperate effort to avert the possibility of a Jewish state, however tiny, in Palestine.

Notice how they stressed so much that the state would have equal rights, free access to holy places, and they would even deign to let Hebrew be spoken in certain ghettos where Jews would be the majority.

This plan was just as utopian-sounding as Bisharat's plan today, and its purpose was exactly the same: to destroy Israel.

Yet one only has to look at what happened a mere ten days after this transparent Arab plan couched in liberal terms of equality and tolerance and co-existence was offered. Jews were attacked mercilessly by the very people who were supposedly ready to display tolerance towards them.

And what happened when the relatively liberal kingdom of Transjordan took over the Jewish areas? Jews were forbidden to visit their holy places. Every Jew in the country was expelled. The Jewish Quarter was destroyed; the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives gutted, dozens of synagogues burned down in the course of a few weeks.

This is the reason why a Jewish state is needed. To have a tiny area in the world where Jews can live as Jews, without fear. The morality of a Jewish state where Jews can live safely and securely far outweighs the pseudo-morality of Bisharat's vision where the clock would go back to the days of Jews being bombed in markets because of a never-ending series of perceived injustices and affronts.

When the Arab world shows that it can treat its minorities with the sensitivity that Israel treats hers, then maybe Bisharat can make a valid point. When Jews can buy land in Jordan and Lebanon and Syria and Saudi Arabia and move there without fear, then maybe we can talk about how Israel discriminates against parts of its population. When that day occurs, and Jews can live anywhere in the world with as little fear as Muslims can today, then the raison d'etre of a Jewish state would melt away.

However, today, it is Arabs themselves who show by their actions exactly why a Jewish state, in the Jewish homeland, is not only  necessary but moral.

(H/t bc. I have linked to the two articles previously, here and here.)

Read More

Some comedy from Ken O'Keefe

A few weeks ago, when the BBC aired their Panorama show about the Mavi Marmara, anti-Israel activist Ken O'Keefe was furious.

O'Keefe is the former Marine who had been a prominent passenger on board the ship.

He wrote about how the BBC lied to him, how they twisted his words, how the entire program was a lie...well, just read it yourself:

The BBC, absent of integrity, contemptuous of humanity, attempts in this program to turn disarmed, helpless Israeli commandos into heroic self-rescuing commandos who managed to Superman their way out of a circle of well over 100 very motivated men whose brothers lay murdered with multiple gunshot wounds. That is what we call a bald-faced lie. Big time lie, in your face lie, you in the audience are a bunch of drooling idiots lie.

He claims that his jihadist comrades let the Israeli soldiers go - which is, of course, a lie.

Anyway, this paragon of honesty was on Iran's PressTV a couple of weeks ago, showing the world his idea of truth.

I'm sure that this TV appearance boosted his credibility - in that Bizarro world of "truthers," wackos, psychopaths, anti-semites, America-bashers, and Israel haters.

Read More

New terror coalition to kill Israelis

13 terrorist groups are establishing a "joint operations room" to coordinate attacks on Jewish civilians in Israel.

Since this is the 21st century, they called a press conference to announce themselves.

Since they are terrorists, here's how they looked:

Look at all those microphones!

They promise to come up with new and novel ways of killing Jews, with "iron and fire," and they stressed their intention to stop the PA from any compromise in negotiations.

Read More

Lebanese residents change name of "Jewish" neighborhood

From The Daily Star:

A Sidon neighborhood referencing the Jewish people was renamed by locals in honor of the besieged Palestinian Gaza Strip on Thursday.

Residents of the southern city of Sidon raised a metal sign that read “Haret Gaza,” Arabic for Gaza neighborhood, in an area known as “Haret al-Yahoud,” Arabic for neighborhood of the Jews.

The redubbing of the street was organized by a number of locals who wished to show solidarity with the International Quds Day, or Jerusalem Day, which falls on Friday.

“The move to rename the neighborhood is concurrent with the launching of negotiations between the Zionist entity and Palestinian authorities … It also expresses our refusal of the unjust siege that has been imposed on Gaza for more than four years,” said Sheikh Khoder al-Qabsh. Qabsh called on Sidon authorities and all officials to fully adopt the new name.

The original name of the neighborhood dates back to when most of its residents were Lebanese of Jewish religion. They started leaving the country in the 1950s and were absent by the time the Civil War erupted.

The new name given to the neighborhood stirred the interest of young people and many children carried plastic weapons and acted out battle scenes between the Resistance and Israel. “The Resistance won of course,” said the child leader of the make-believe Resistance Mahmoud al-Rifaii.

Nah, no anti-semitism here.

Don't tell Fareed Zakaria!

Read More