Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Egypt bans Palestinian Arabs from entering country

The number of visitors to Egypt has dropped precipitously:

Minister of Civil Aviation Ibrahim Mannaa said on Wednesday that flights to Egypt have declined by 70 percent, which led to a sharp drop in profits.

Sources at Cairo International Airport said 14 of the international airlines canceled their flights to Cairo on Wednesday due to a lack of passengers.

“Passengers boarding EgyptAir flights have dropped to 54 percent,” added Mannaa. “Losses during the past two weeks can only be calculated after all losses are identified.”

But there is one group of people that Egypt doesn't want at all:

Immigration officers have been instructed to bar Palestinians from entering Egypt, an official at Cairo airport said on Wednesday after 12 travellers were sent back.

"There are instructions to stop Palestinians entering Egypt. Twelve Palestinians were sent back to the places they came from on Wednesday," the official told AFP, on condition of anonymity.

A second airport-based official told AFP that airlines had been told not to bring Palestinian passengers to Egypt.

Of course, the Arab world will unanimously condemn this blatant discrimination against Palestinian Arabs, whom they care about so deeply.

Any time now.

(h/t Herb G)

Morning snippets

Just in case you don't already have enough to read....these will keep you busy all day.

Martin Sherman in YNet:

...[W]hy the Palestinians find themselves in the miserable state in which they are today: a chronic and cavalier disregard for the truth; an enduring propensity to blame others for their fate; and an obdurate refusal to take responsibility for their own actions - and inaction.

European Foundation for Democracy (German):

The Iranian rulers see in the new mass protests in Arabic states the reawakening of Islam and speak of the "new axis of Islam in the Middle East." They think that the Islamic revolution of 1979 was the beginning of the protests against the western and "Zionist" supremacy.

Shiraz Maher interview at Harry's Place:

[T]he Brotherhood might be marginal but it is neither bumbling nor benign. It is an astute movement watching [the West] betray the legitimate sentiments of young, ordinary Egyptians. That is what the Ikhwan is waiting for so it can pounce. A marginal movement could very suddenly find itself in the mainstream. I have good evidence from Alexandria that this is already starting to happen, and it is worth bearing in mind that the Brotherhood is much better organised there than in Cairo.

PMW translates the Muslim Brotherhood in their own words:

- "...Jihad for Allah is not limited to the specific region of the Islamic countries, since the Muslim homeland is one and is not divided, and the banner of Jihad has already been raised in some of its parts, and it shall continue to be raised, with the help of Allah, until every inch of the land of Islam will be liberated, the State of Islam will be established,..."

"... despite this, the [Muslim] Brotherhood is not rushed by youth's enthusiasm into immature and unplanned action which will not alter the bad reality and may even harm the Islamic activity, and will benefit the people of falsehood..."
- "... one should know that it is not necessary that the Muslims will repel every attack or damage caused by the enemies of Allah immediately, but [only] when ability and the circumstances are fit to it."

Khaled Abu Toameh in Hudson-NY:

Jordan's King Abdullah II has good reason to be worried about the future of the monarchy in the Hashemite Kingdom. If he fails to implement real political and economic reforms, Jordan could easily fall into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood group or turn into a Palestinian state.

Yoel Guzansky in Meria Journal:

The Gulf states' policy towards Iran's nuclear ambitions has combined elements of appeasement with a fundamental reliance on the United States as a defending and deterring force. Most Gulf states lack strategic depth, have small populations, and small, untrained armies. Moreover, their significant oil and natural gas reserves have made them the potential target for aggression and dependent on outside forces for defense. Despite the great wealth and inherent weakness of the Gulf states, they have remained largely on the sidelines in the international effort to persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Jackson Diehl on how the White House ignored warnings on Egypt:

The White House was warned, publicly and repeatedly, that Egypt was approaching a turning point and that the status quo was untenable - not by an intelligence agency but by a bipartisan group of Washington-based experts who pleaded, in vain, for a change of policy.

The Working Group on Egypt was formed a year ago to sound the alarm about Mubarak's crumbling regime. The first sentence of its opening statement: "Egypt is at a critical turning point." The group is still issuing detailed proposals about how to handle the crisis. On Monday, it warned that the administration "may acquiesce to an inadequate and possibly fraudulent transition process in Egypt." Sadly, the administration is still not listening.

Also in WaPo see George Will.

Nick Cohen in "Jesus, I'm Turning into a Jew!"

British Jews are living through a very dangerous period. They are the only ethnic minority whose slaughter official society will excuse. If a mass murderer bombed a mosque or black Pentecostal church, no respectable person would say that the “root cause” of the crime was an understandable repulsion at the deeds of al-Qaeda or a legitimate opposition to mass immigration. Rightly, they would blame the criminal for the crime.

If a synagogue is attacked, I guarantee that within minutes the airwaves will be filled with insinuating voices insisting that the “root cause” of the crime was a rational anger at the behaviour of Israel or the Jewish diaspora.

Evelyn Gordon in Contentions:

Only a pathological obsession with Israel could lead administration officials to blame America’s economic woes of late 2009 on a minor war fought by a marginal trading partner a full year earlier. And curing such pathology lies more in the realm of medical science than political science.

Nevertheless, it’s vital to understand just how deeply it runs. For it is shaping, or rather misshaping, the West’s foreign policy every day.

Arabs again digging on the Temple Mount - and destroying priceless treasures.

Richard Cohen in WaPo:

Certain pro-democracy advocates in the Western media envision a transition period of months that will produce democratic bliss in the region. Not likely. The Middle East must first pass through somewhat the same process as did Central and Eastern Europe. Before World War I, it had no democracies. The region was ruled by monarchies.

After the war, nearly every state (the Soviet Union was the most prominent exception) was a democracy and one, the most culturally and politically advanced of them all, had an exemplary constitution and a resplendent bouquet of political parties. Nevertheless, this country reeled from Weimar Republic to Nazi dictatorship in virtually no time at all.

The rest of Central and Eastern Europe was different only in degree, not in kind. By the end of the 1930s, these countries were mostly right-wing dictatorships of one sort or another. It took another World War, a Cold War and lots of help for democracy to take root. Even so, some of these countries show twitches of recidivism.

To think that the Middle East will vault this process is endearing but dotty.

Jeff Jacoby:

If Egypt is to have any hope of a transition to a genuine constitutional democracy, the Muslim Brotherhood must not be treated as a legitimate democratic partner. For more than 80 years, it has been a fervent exponent of Islamic, not secular, rule; of clerical, not popular, sovereignty. Its credo could hardly be more explicit, or more antidemocratic: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

Myths and Facts:

Europe, of course, has the right to demand and ensure that before it accepts Turkey as a member of its Union, that country is capable of economic independence and stability and that it lives up to standards of democracy and rule of law, civil, political and social rights.

Israel has just as much right to demand from the EU and other Quartet members not to be forced into accepting a Palestinian Arab state on its borders which they themselves would not accept as a functional country.

At present, the international community, including the EU and the rest of the Quartet, is adopting a disturbingly low standard by which to judge PA readiness for statehood and should it continue upon its present course, it is highly unlikely that the creation of such a state will lead to the stability and prosperity so badly needed by the Palestinian Arab people, let alone bring about an end to the regional conflict.

The Guardian shows Wikileaks cables that indicate that Saudi Arabia does not have as much oil as it has claimed - it actually lied to get Western investments - and very soon it will not be able to pump as much oil as it needs to.

And, finally, Proud Zionist presents a new fictional BBC documentary in "Normal Israelis."

Any of these is worth their own blog post. I wish I had more time!

(h/t Zach N., Silke, DWM, SoccerDad, Yaacov L, DJK, Richard B, Emet)

An ad from London's Underground

Remember last year when the British Advertising Standard Agency banned Israeli tourism ads from showing photos of the Western Wall because that implied that it was in Israel?

Well, I just received this photo of an ad in London's Underground:

So the ASA has no problem with Turkey's occupation of North Cyprus?

(I'm fairly sure that the asterisk next to North Cyprus isn't referring to its occupied status, but rather to the fact that flights from Britain to North Cyprus stop off in Istanbul first.)

(h/t Folderol)

Egyptian protest jokes

Ma'an has a selection of jokes that are going around Egypt:

At Tahrir Square, one sign says "[Mubarak:] Leave, I miss my wife," while a second man proclaimed, "Leave already, my arm is hurting."
----
When it started raining in Tahrir Square, here were the reactions from various groups:

Muslim Brotherhood: No talk with system until rain stops
[Opposition leader] ElBaradai: Regime is fully responsible for rain in At-Tahrir Square
[Opposition party] April 6 Movement: Mubarak promised us safety, but he sent the rain to sink us
Al-Jazeera: Our correspondent has informed us that thugs are responsible for rain falls
Protesters: We caught rain drops and identified them as belonging to the Interior Ministry
[Government]Nile News Channel: What the traitor channels are broadcasting is not true, there is no rain in At-Tahrir Square.
----
Police are in the service of people; they boiled the water before spraying the protesters.
----
A group of surgeons went to Egypt to make an operation of a one of kind conjoined twins called Hosni Mubarak - and the throne.
----
Army commander to Hosni Mubarak: "Everything has come to an end, you should write a farewell speech for the people."

Mubarak: "Oh! Where are they going?"
----
After the "Friday of Rage," the "Sunday of Martyrs”, and the "Week of Resistance," Mubarak might step down when it all rolled around to "Resurrection day."
----
Mubarak died and met the late presidents Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel Nasser in the afterlife. They asked him: Poisoned or assassinated? He replied: Neither, Facebook!

Saeb Erekat admits that Jews could never become "Palestinians"

Saeb Erekat was on Hardtalk this week. Unfortunately many countries cannot view the full interview at the BBC site.

But this clip is available, and it betrays the bigotry of even the moderate "Palestinian" leadership.

As Erekat dismisses the idea of a one state solution, he says:

I don't think Christian and Muslim Palestinians would convert to Judaism and become Israelis. I don't think that Jews would convert to Islam and Christianity and become Palestinians.

Since there are over a million non-Jews in Israel, his first statement betrays his hate for Israel and his propensity to slander Israel on British TV by implying that it is a Jewish-only state.

But the second statement shows that Erekat believes that Jews cannot ever be citizens of a Palestinian Arab state! Only Christians and Muslims could!

He could have framed it in national terms ("I don't think that Palestinians want to be citizens of Israel; I don't think that Israelis would want to become citizens of a Palestinian state") but instead his terminology shows that the entire Palestinian Arab national project is really about keeping Jews out of "Palestine," and in the short term limiting the areas that Jews could live, not building a state.

"Honor killing" news

From IOL News:

A Jordanian court on Sunday gave a reduced sentence to a 64-year-old man for killing his wife and two daughters last year over the woman's alleged “bad behaviour”, an official said.

“The court had initially sentenced him to life in prison, but it found mitigating factors and gave him instead a 15-year jail term,” the official said.

“The convict came home one night in March last year and saw a strange man secretly leaving the house. He got enraged and shot and killed his daughters and wife after she denied seeing any man.”

The official said the husband has told police he killed his wife because of her “bad behaviour”.

Murder is punishable by death in Jordan but in so-called “honour killings” courts can commute or reduce sentences, particularly if the victim's family or relatives agree to leniency.

Between 15 and 20 women are murdered in honour killings every year in Jordan, despite government efforts to curb such crimes.

Last month, a Jordanian court gave reduced sentences to a man convicted of stabbing to death his cousin for shunning his brother, and another for murdering his raped sister.

Another court in the Red Sea port of Aqaba jailed a man in January for two years for running over and killing his wife after “she threw a stone at him because he was upset that she bought a new car”.

And, on Tuesday:

A Jordanian man was charged on Monday with the premeditated killing of his sister to "cleanse the family's honor" because she became pregnant after being widowed, a judiciary source said.

"The attorney general charged a 26-year-old man with premeditated crime for having killed his 30-year-old sister, who was eight months pregnant 18 months after being widowed," the source said.

"The crime took place on Monday and the brother handed himself in to the authorities after stabbing his sister 35 times with a knife," the source added.

Murder is punishable by death in Jordan, but the courts often grant clemency in cases of so-called honor killings.

Parliament has twice refused to amend its penal code to increase the penalty in the kingdom for such murders, which claim the lives of 15 to 20 women a year on average.

Overnight cute

A ten day old female baby Hamadryas Baboon suckles from her mother, at the Ramat Gan Safari Park near Tel Aviv, Israel, Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2011. Twenty year old Hamadryas Baboon named Scud gave birth to a rare red-haired female ten days ago at the Ramat Gan Safari Park near Tel Aviv, the first red-haired Baboon monkey to be born at the Safari Park in thirty years.

Hypocritical PA leaders have Jordanian citizenship

From JPost:

Senior Palestinian Authority and Fatah officials, including President Mahmoud Abbas and his two sons, have been given Jordanian citizenship, a top Jordanian politician disclosed on Tuesday.

The Palestinian leaders were given Jordanian citizenship despite the fact that the authorities in Amman have been revoking the Jordanian citizenship of thousands of Palestinians.

According to the Londonbased Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper, a significant number of PA leaders are registered as full Jordanian citizens.

The paper pointed out that the leaders applied for Jordanian citizenship at a time when they were urging the Jordanian authorities to stop giving Palestinians Jordanian citizenship, in order to “consolidate their Palestinian identity.” The Jordanian government had justified its decision to strip Palestinians of their citizenship by using the same argument.

Al-Quds Al-Arabi quoted sources in Amman as saying that Abbas and his entire family carry Jordanian passports.

Other PA leaders who carry Jordanian passports include former PA prime minister Ahmed Qurei, Abbas’s spokesman Nabil Abu Rudaineh and Fatah’s Muhammad Dahlan.

The paper did not say when the Palestinian officials were given Jordanian citizenship. PA spokesmen in Ramallah refused to comment on the report.

So the would-be president of "Palestine" maintains his citizenship in another country!

Yet he encourages Jordan to strip the citizenship from his people!

(h/t TLB)

Egyptian college argues over Mubarak posters

From Al Masry al-Youm:

A heated discussion broke out between the dean and vice dean of the University of Alexandria’s Faculty of Engineering over the removal of posters of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak which cover the wall of the dfean’s office.

Vice Dean Hamdi Seif had called for the removal of Mubarak posters from five faculty offices and replacing them with the Egyptian flag. Meanwhile Faculty Dean Adel al-Kurdi refused the proposal, claiming the posters were put up in accordance with official directives.

Seif said since Egypt is embarking on a new era, what he described as “outdated thoughts” must be deposed of. He went on to say that whether or not Mubarak remains in power, posters of presidents should not be hung on walls and that this practice is only found in third world countries with totalitarian governments.

“We spend thousands of pounds each year to renew the president’s posters in all institutions,” said Seif, pointing out that the Engineering Faculty alone had 15 old posters of the president in their warehouses and that replacing one poster costs LE500.

500 Egyptian pounds is about $85.

I wish I had that gig - selling posters of dictators to thousands of institutions that are forced to hang them, changing them every year, and charging inflated prices for them!

My blog for sale: only $10 million

If the Huffington Post is worth $315 million, then how much is Elder of Ziyon worth?

In terms of unique readers, HuffPo gets about 250 times the number of readers I get (unique readers per month.) So purely from that perspective, my blog is proportionately worth about $1.2 million.

But in terms of number of substantive postings, my rough estimate is that HuffPo publishes about 20 times the number of posts I make. Which would make my blog worth about $15 million.

Then again, you don't have to read a lot of fluff pieces on my blog, and no articles trying to get you to worship me the way that Arianna uses her site to promote her personal cult. I also have far more scoops that HuffPo does. So my blog's value is probably on the high end of that continuum.

Not only that, but the demographics that read my blog are an advertiser's dream. My readers generally have gone to graduate school and are older with more disposable income. Any way you look at it, EoZ is worth a fortune.

But, for you, I've got such a bargain!

For only $10 million, I'll sell my blog to any major conglomerate that wants it. I'll stay on as Chairman of the EoZ Media Group, and I would have to be able to hire a young, smart, energetic staff to work for me so that I can expand the brand and maximize your profits.

Major corporations pay big bucks for content, and I am a content generating machine. Not only that, I'm not nearly as partisan as Arianna.

So if you want a great bargain in cyberspace, look no further.

Al Jazeera tries to get into US

From the Huffington Post, by Wadah Khanfar, director general of Al Jazeera:

This has been an unprecedented month in Al Jazeera history. Transformational events in the Middle East have brought enormous demand for news about the region.

As director general of the region's largest TV network, I am proud to say Al Jazeera Network has been reporting from the region's hot spots well before they "mattered" in January 2011. From Sudan to Tunisia to Palestine to Egypt, our trademark "journalism of depth" has been on display for all who are able and care to see. ...

[I]n the United States, Al Jazeera faces a different kind of blackout, based largely on misinformed views about our content and journalism. Some of the largest American cable and satellite providers have instituted corporate obstacles against Al Jazeera English. We are on the air and on the major cable system in the nation's capital, and some of America's leading policymakers in Washington, D.C., have told me that Al-Jazeera English is their channel of choice for understanding global issues. But we are not available in the majority of the 50 states for much of the general public.

We believe all Americans, not just those in senior governmental positions, could benefit from having the option to watch Al-Jazeera English -- or not to watch us -- on their television screens.

What kind of American would be against freedom of expression? How can cable companies be so heartless?

But wait...he has another example of Al Jazeera's excellence in journalism:

Before Egypt's street protests exploded last week we made the historic presentation of the "Palestine Papers," an unprecedented leak of more than 1,600 records of secret negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The Papers were produced by the newly formed Al Jazeera Transparency Unit, and became a world exclusive for both our Arabic and English broadcasts. It was also a top story of our colleagues and partners at the Guardian newspaper in the United Kingdom.

Through investigative and on-location journalism, our ultimate goal is to bring greater awareness, painting a more complete picture of the Middle East's realities. Armed with more information, we believe the people of this region and further afield can make better choices to guide their lives -- hopefully ones that will lead to a more peaceful and democratic future, regardless of where they live.

Al Jazeera's coverage of the Palestine Papers was riddled with lies, and with even more omissions. It was not journalism - it was advocacy. It was meant to embarrass both the Palestinian Authority and Israeli negotiators. They selctively quoted the papers to push their agenda.

While their Egypt coverage was quite dramatic, and frankly was great TV, Al Jazeera is acting in no less an advocacy role there as well. Perhaps it is a role that Americans are more naturally inclined to identify with, but it is still advocacy, not journalism.

It is also well known that the network will not say anything remotely critical of its sponsor, the Qatari emirate. Its news is skewed but AJ-English's bias is subtle enough that most casual TV viewers would not notice that they are being brainwashed.

So while Al Jazeera is recruiting useful idiots to push their pseudo-democratic cause, expanding their presence in America is not a good idea.

I am happy that Al Jazeera is on the web, and I visit their site. But to legitimize them as a major news network in the US on par with the others would be a big mistake. Their biased and anti-American views do not belong on US cable systems.

The Telegraph takes a page from The Guardian

From The Telegraph:

Mr Suleiman, who is widely tipped to take over from Hosni Mubarak as president, was named as Israel's preferred candidate for the job after discussions with American officials in 2008.

As a key figure working for Middle East peace, he once suggested that Israeli troops would be "welcome" to invade Egypt to stop weapons being smuggled to Hamas terrorists in neighbouring Gaza.

The details, which emerged in secret files obtained by WikiLeaks and passed to The Daily Telegraph, come after Mr Suleiman began talks with opposition groups on the future for Egypt's government.

Did Suleiman really say that Israel was welcome to invade Egypt? Does that even make sense?

Let's look at the memo, from December 17, 2007:

A serious political commitment, supported by dedicated and properly trained personnel, is key to progress. The Egyptians claim that they respond aggressively to Israeli intelligence leads, while both sides bicker over whether and how Egypt could deploy more Border Guard Forces. Meanwhile, the Egyptians continue to offer excuses for the problem they face: the need to "squeeze" Hamas, while avoiding being seen as complicit in Israel's "siege" of Gaza. Egyptian General Intelligence Chief Omar Soliman told us Egypt wants Gaza to go "hungry" but not "starve." Minister of Defense Field Marshal Tantawi and the Director of Military Intelligence MG Mowafy both pressed recently for the return of EUBAM monitors to oversee the crossing between Gaza and Egypt of Palestinians with urgent humanitarian circumstances. In their moments of greatest frustration, Tantawi and Soliman each have claimed that the IDF would be "welcome" to re-invade Philadelphi, if the IDF thought that would stop the smuggling...

The Philadelphi Corridor they are talking about is on the Gaza side, not Egypt (hence the terminology "re-invade.") Israel controlled the corridor before the disengagement from Gaza, when they handed it over to the PA, and then Hamas took it over when they took Gaza.

Certainly Suleiman made statements that would not endear him to the Arab street, such as saying that Egypt wants Gaza to go hungry but not starve (a statement that mirrors one that Dov Weisglass said in 2006 and was slammed for.) But it is absurd to say that Suleiman would welcome an invasion of his country!

For the Telegraph to push this lie is simply more Guardian-type advocacy journalism - misrepresentations of primary source documents specifically meant to influence Egyptians into thinking Suleiman was an Israeli patsy.

Arabs use Israeli technology to filter the Internet

From AllGov, picked up later by Al Arabiya:

The government of Egypt’s attempted crackdown on mass protests has been aided by an American firm that sells telecommunications software that allows the authoritarian regime to spy on citizens’ emails and cell phone communications.

Narus, located in Sunnyvale, California, sold the Egyptian government Deep Packet Inspection equipment, a content-filtering technology used to inspect, track and target content from users of the Internet and mobile phones.

According to a Narus executive, owners of the software can record everything that goes through the Internet in their country, allowing them to read emails and attachments, view browsing histories and even reconstruct phone calls made over VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol).

Founded in 1997 by Israeli security experts to create and sell mass surveillance systems for governments and large corporate clients, Narus is now owned by Boeing.

The Al Arabiya article (original link missing, copy here) says that Narus technology was used to shut the Internet down in Egypt altogether, which does not appear to be the case. I have no doubt that it is being used to monitor the network, though.

Moonbats have already started protesting at Narus offices.

Narus' website mentions that they help protect a number of service providers, including Telecom Egypt and Saudi Telecom.

Five Hamas members arrested in Egypt with weapons

Multiple Arabic media sources are reporting that police in El Arish, Egypt arrested five Palestinian Arabs and are holding them for 15 days.

They are charged with possession of weapons and ammunition, and attempted acts of sabotage that threaten the security of the state. They were also accused of infiltrating the Egyptian territories.

They were picked up on Saturday when they were traveling in a Mercedes. They were found with five hand grenades and three weapons that were marked "Al-Qassam Brigades - Hamas."

On Sunday, Hamas denied media reports that it was trying to fuel tension in Egypt.

PLO upset at Quartet statement

From Ma'an:

PLO official Yasser Abed Rabbo told Kuwait news agency KUNA Monday that the latest Quartet statement on the peace process was "regretful" and fell short of the Palestinians' expectations.

The statement, which focused on getting sides back to the negotiating table as an "imperative" for regional stability, did not mention Israel's failure to stop settlement construction on Palestinian lands, an issue PLO negotiators say remains the stumbling block to a return to talks.

In their statement, the Quartet urged sides "to undertake urgently efforts to expedite Israeli-Palestinian and comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, which is imperative to avoiding outcomes detrimental to the region."

Abed Rabbo told KUNA that he blamed Quartet Envoy and former British premier Tony Blair for the weak statement.

In fact, the Quartet statement did say

The Quartet regrets the discontinuation of Israel’s ten month moratorium on settlement activity and strongly reaffirms that unilateral actions by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations and will not be recognized by the international community.

So once again, the PLO is lying.

What they are really angry about is that the statement called on them to resume negotiations, and they don't want to have their intransigence exposed for the world to see. They'd rather pretend that the "settlements" - with all of the building activity being within existing boundaries of the communities, none of them expanding into any areas that the Palestinian Arabs would end up with at the end of any negotiations - are the obstacle.

But perhaps they weren't happy that the statement also condemned rocket fire from Gaza.

Erekat accuses Qatar of investing in Jewish settlements!

The "Palestine Papers" has really caused Saeb Erekat to go off the deep end:

Chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat threatened Monday to expose official documents about investments he said proved that Qatar holds in companies that operate in illegal Israeli West Bank settlements.

More than 24% of the biggest Israeli companies in the Qarne Shomron settlement, located in the northern West Bank district of Qalqiliya, rely on Qatari investments worth millions of US dollars, said Erekat.

"The time will come in future to reveal these documents," he threatened.

The statement was the latest in a series of accusations targeting the Emir of Qatar Shaykh Hamadi bin Khalifa Ath-Thani, who was singled out for attacks in the wake of a series of aired documentaries on Al-Jazeera, which publicized in Arabic highlights from a set of 1,600 leaked documents from over 10 years of talks between Israeli and Palestinian officials.

Come on, Saeb, release this supposed proof. Why wait? I promise I'll blog prominently about it!

Erekat's speech got even better:

During his speech, Erekat reiterated earlier statements that the PA would officially complain to the International Federation of Journalists, saying that the complaint would be submitted in the following two weeks. The complaint would not "oppose scoops or getting information, but [stress that media] should avoid distortion," he said.

Erekat, master liar, wants the media to avoid distortion?

You can't even parody these clowns.

Thomas Friedman's version of "truth"

From Thomas Friedman's column in the NYT:

I’m in Tahrir Square, and of all the amazing things one sees here the one that strikes me most is a bearded man who is galloping up and down, literally screaming himself hoarse, saying: “I feel free! I feel free!”

In a region where the truth and truth-tellers have so long been smothered under the crushing weight of oil, autocracy and religious obscurantism, suddenly the Arab world has a truly free space — a space that Egyptians themselves, not a foreign army, have liberated — and the truth is now gushing out of here like a torrent from a broken hydrant.

...This is not a religious event here, and the Muslim Brotherhood is not running the show. This is an Egyptian event. That is its strength and its weakness — no one is in charge and everyone in the society is here....

You almost never hear the word “Israel,” and the pictures of “martyrs” plastered around the square are something rarely seen in the Arab world — Egyptians who died fighting for their own freedom not against Israel.

I have no doubt that Friedman is reporting what he is seeing and understanding in English, but he was not in Tahrir Square last Friday - when hundreds of thousands prayed together:

It is folly to deny the religious dimension here. Egypt's "seculars" are far more religious than Western secularists.

As far as no mention of Israel, John Rosenthal uncovered - just by doing regular Internet searches - many anti-Israel and anti-semitic messages at the protests:

And just today, the Palestine Times paper discusses some of the Arabic slogans that can be heard in Tahrir Square, including "Leave Mubarak, Tel Aviv is waiting for you!" and "Mubarak is a stooge selling gas to Israel."

One other joke going around the protests is that if you want to get Mubarak to leave, you have to speak Hebrew to him so he understands.

If Friedman wants to report the truth, just parachuting onto the scene for a day and relying on locals to translate is not the way to be a reporter. But his ego is so huge now that he is convinced that his limited perception is representative of what is going on and he fearlessly reports things as true when it is easy to find proof that he is missing large parts of the story.

(h/t SoccerDad)

The UK keeps the "refugee" lie alive

From Ma'an:

The UK on Monday announced a contribution of £1.5 million to UNRWA to assist Palestinian refugees in Lebanon.

The UK development agency DFID said the funding would help the UN agency for Palestinian refugees to provide medical supplies to over a thousand families and ensure shelter for 3,500 families.

Over 425,000 Palestinian refugees are registered with UNRWA in Lebanon, and many were displaced again in 2007 during internal fighting in the country in 2007.

DFID Minister Alan Duncan said the support would help these families, especially during winter months, but added that it was not a sustainable solution.

"[T]he only long term solution for Palestinian refugees across the Middle East is a negotiated peace agreement with Israel. The UK is continuing to work with both parties and the international community to achieve a just and fair two state solution."

That bolded statement is delusional.

As the Palestine Papers have shown (if unreported by The Guardian and Al Jazeera), even the Palestinian Authority privately recognizes that the vast majority Lebanese of Palestinian Arab origin will not all go to either Israel or to a Palestinian Arab state, but will need to be integrated into Arab countries and other nations.

The PA explicitly said in their position paper that it can't absorb them, and Israel will never take more than a token amount.

This means that even after a peace agreement, there is no solution for the vast majority of these stateless people besides naturalization in other countries - a move that Arab nations have been bitterly opposing for decades.

Everyone knows this - except, apparently, the Palestinian Arabs themselves, who are incited to hate Israel for 62 years rather than to hate the Arab nations that are jailing them today.

Rather than the UK continuing to repeat this lie, it is way past time for the truth to be stated publicly: Arab nations will need to naturalize their Palestinian Arabs, and every day they delay is a day that they are abusing their "guests."

No one benefits from the lie that a peace treaty will solve the problem, least of all the so-called "refugees" themselves. The West needs to tell the truth, and to hold Arab nations directly responsible for keeping millions of people stateless for over half a century.

The Real Realism of Israel (Jonah Goldberg)

From the LA Times, by Jonah Goldberg:

One of the few things that critics and friends of Israel can agree on is that Israel is a special sort of nation. It represents a special idea; it is different.

This is especially so for America's so-called realists. Whether they are sympathetic to Israel or scornful, they are convinced U.S. support for Israel fuels hatred and instability. Hence their obsession with the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

For instance, when then-national security advisor Gen. James Jones spoke in 2009 to J Street — the "pro-Israel" lobby that isn't very pro-Israel — he said that if he could solve just one problem in the world, it would be the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the "epicenter" of U.S. foreign policy.

Such thinking falls somewhere between wild exaggeration and dangerous nonsense. Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Al Qaeda remains dedicated to our destruction. Turkey, a once-staunch ally, is Islamifying. Russia is careening toward autocracy and China is on the march. Oh, and the United States is fighting two land wars. But the national security advisor's No. 1 priority was keeping Israelis from building houses in East Jerusalem? Really?

This too is the product of treating Israel like an abstraction. Obviously, hatred of Israel and the plight of the Palestinians (real and imagined) contributes to the Middle East's problems. But the simple fact is that Israel is not the source of the Middle East's problems, never mind the keystone to U.S. foreign policy challenges.

In Egypt, the popular uprising unfolding is not about Israel but about autocratic brutality, economic stagnation and skyrocketing prices. The same goes for Tunisia as well as the popular protests brutally crushed by Iran's mullahs in 2009. Turkey is not Islamifying because of the Palestinians. Al Qaeda surely hates Israel, but its roots lay in hatred of the Saudi royal family and the Islamist ambitions of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

And yet the "realist" fantasy that an Arabs-first (or Muslims-first) foreign policy will yield rich rewards endures. The French have followed that advice for generations. They nurtured the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in exile. They give special preference to their former colonies. They pander to Arab sensibilities. And what has it gotten them? A lot of burning cars but few lucrative oil deals.

As we've recently been reminded, Israel is the only truly democratic regime in the region, and therefore the most stable. But, we are told, if we were only more conciliatory to corrupt dictatorial regimes and more sympathetic to the "Arab street," the region would be more stable. (Ironically, this is very close to Israel's own position, no doubt because it will take any peace it can get.)

No doubt this is what the solons of American foreign policy hear from their Arab and Muslim interlocutors. And it is certainly what the autocrats in the Middle East want everyone to believe, starting with their own subjects. Tyrants always want to focus on scapegoats, insults to national honor and shadowy enemies. Why apologize for skyrocketing bread prices when you can demonize the "Zionist entity"?

Addressing the real problems in the region is just too hard, particularly when any effort to take attention off the Palestinians is greeted with outrage from an anti-Israel industry that cravenly singles out Israel as the worst human rights abuser in the neighborhood. Israel puts Arab critics in the Knesset. Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia put them in jail or in an unmarked grave.

All of this would be just as true if Israel retreated to the 1949 armistice lines tomorrow.

Israel's actual realists know this because they can't afford the self-indulgent abstractions and the cynical lies that pass for "realism" outside its borders.

Pan-Islamism, 1883

From Oriental experience: a selection of essays and addresses delivered on various occasions, by Sir Richard Temple, 1883.

There has been for some years past, and there still is, a stir among the Muhammadan nations of the world. It is called "Pan-islamism" by Europeans: the word "islam" meaning the Muhammadan religion. As is well known, the Slavs of Europe, or their political leaders, have recently been writing and speaking of " Panslavism." This implies a general union among the Slavs living in Russia, in Austria, in European Turkey. In the same way "Pan-islamism" implies a general union among Muhammadans dwelling in the various countries of Asia and in some parts of Africa. This Pan-islamism, then, is a real movement, though perhaps it has not gone very far as yet. But no man can say to what lengths it may go. At all events, it deserves the watchful attention of Englishmen. For England, herself a Christian Power, has now more Muhammadan subjects than any Muhammadan Power in the world. Englishmen may perhaps be surprised to hear that, but it is the case. While Britain has been busy with her fields and her factories, her trade, her ships, and her colonies,—her sons have, within the last generation, raised up for her a dominion among the Asiatic Muhammadans. In the presence of that Anglo-Muhammadan dominion, the Sultan of Turkey, the Shah of Persia, the Grand Sherif of Mecca, must droop their flags. There are in India, Ceylon, and other British possessions, 50 millions of Muhammadan subjects or feudatories of the British Queen. In Afghanistan, Beluchistan, and other places there are 10 millions more under the political control of England. On the whole, then, the Anglo - Muhammadan dominion includes about 60 millions of souls. As compared Math that, the other Muhammadan Powers of Asia have altogether only 32 millions. This is exclusive of China, which has a body of Muhammadan subjects whose numbers are not exactly known. In Egypt and the rest of Africa there may be several millions of Muhammadans.

But it may be said that the mere numbers of the population prove little. What is the power and wealth of the AngloMuhammadan dominion as compared with that of the other Muhammadans? Well, as regards power, it is impossible to distinguish the Anglo-Muhammadan power from that of Britain herself. To describe the effective might of such a power, as compared with other nations, might savour of national vanity. We need not, therefore, dwell upon that. But as regards wealth we may remark that the agriculture of the Muhammadan peasantry of India, the navigation in the hands of her Muhammadan sailors and boatmen, the trade conducted by her Muhammadan traders, greatly exceed anything that can be shown by any other Muhammadan nation—indeed, by all other Muhammadan nations together.

Moreover, the Anglo-Muhammadan population is increasing fast, whereas in Turkey and Persia it is understood to be decreasing.

In all the counsels of political Muhammadanism, then, the British Sovereign is entitled to a place in the very first rank, as representing the dominion over the largest and richest Muhammadan population in the world.

In India the mass of the Muhammadans are peaceful, industrious, and loyal. It is well that Englishmen should realise this great fact. But it is also necessary for them to remember that among these generally sober-minded Muhammadans there are many persons of a different stamp. These are bigoted, even desperate; and nothing that we can offer will pacify them. Therefore Muhammadan troubles have from time to time arisen in India. The assassination of Chief Justice Norman at Calcutta, and of Lord Mayo at Port Blair in 1872-73, are instances fresh in the public memory. Bad as these events were, even worse things might possibly happen if England were to fall asleep. But if she remains wakeful they may, under Providence, be prevented.

It may then be asked, Why are the Muhammadans bestirring themselves in these days, and what is it that they are thinking about?

Well, outside India, they feel that they are politically decaying. They are generally disposed to shut their eyes to that which is disagreeable. But they can no longer help seeing the strides which the Christian nations are making in wealth, power, and civilization. Thus they dread the advance of Christendom. The leaders among them look back wistfully to the great days when the Crescent drove back or bore down the Cross in many of the fairest and holiest regions of the earth. When the Cross rallied under Christian warriors, such as Charles Martel of France and John Sobieski of Poland, and stopped the Crescent in its career, they comforted themselves with the thought that South-Eastern Europe, Northern Africa, and a goodly part of Asia still remained to Islam. They perceive, however, that within the last hundred years the Christian power has been making inroads upon Muhammadanism in all directions. Yet some of them have been trusting that Allah and their prophet Muhammad would somehow draw once more the flashing scimitar to scatter the unbelievers. Others of them, again, who do not rely upon divine interference, have been dreaming that destiny (Kismet) would at last set all things right. Now, however, they are becoming aroused by the idea that Christian influence and authority are drawing so near as to threaten the very existence of Islam itself. The alarm is gradually growing in their minds. This alarm refers in the first place to their political power, but in the second place to their religion also. Possibly they might view with some sort of patience the loss of mere earthly dominion. But in their minds worldly power cannot be quite separated from religion. They all, from the highest to the humblest, revere their faith as pure and lofty. In fact, like many other faiths, it has in practice been often clouded over with mummery and superstition. Still there remains something of grandeur about it. In the hearts of its followers it is associated with splendid and glorious memories. Its triumphs of war, in politics, and in art, its efforts even in the cause of science, are well known to the upper classes, and are dimly understood by the multitude. It was skilfully contrived by Muhammad, its founder, to appeal forcibly to the notions and sentiments of hot-blooded races dwelling in sunny climes. Though it is really opposed to human progress, though it blights the prospects of civilization, and stunts the growth of society— yet it reigns in the affections of many millions of bright-eyed and strong-handed men. Such men will turn out to fight for it, and in the excitement of action will face death on its behalf. They used in former times to make converts by the sword; indeed, no religion has ever spread itself so much by force and indirect pressure as theirs. Strangely enough they continue to gain men over (though by gentler means) to their faith in Africa and in Eastern Asia.

The question then arises as to whether the Muhammadans have anything like a policy, while raising this movement of Pan-islamism. Is this stir merely a breeze ruffling the surface of the political waters, or does it portend a real storm? The answer depends, no doubt, largely on the conduct of the Western Powers. The Muhammadans have certainly got a general policy, which is this, to resist the further encroachments of the Christian States, to hold at least their own, and to keep what remains to them of the broad regions that submitted to the Prophet of Arabia. We must acknowledge, too, that this is reasonable in theory. In practice, however, a great power, such as theirs once was, does not yield to dangers from without so long as it is solid and prosperous within. It is the canker eating into the vitals of the State that makes them yield to foreign pressure. The Muhammadans probably are well aware of this also. They know that somehow their body politic is becoming feeble; that their lands are becoming less productive, that their cultivation is shrinking, that their flocks and herds are lessening. They see that famines come and decimate the people sadly, and that afterwards the population does not recover. They feel that there is something fatally the matter with them, but cannot make out exactly what it is. The feeling is aggravated by the sight of neighbouring nations in blooming health and vigorous life. All this is enough to make them despair, and at times they must be somewhat downhearted. But at bottom they are brave; and, while preserving an apathetic appearance, they have an enthusiasm burning within them. If common sense were joined to this enthusiasm, they would soon learn to set their social house in order, to give light and liberty to the people, to secure to every man the fruits of his toil whether of brain or of hands, and to spread abroad that sort of useful knowledge which makes people thrifty, self-reliant, and intelligent. If this lesson did not come to them by inspiration, they might gather it from the example of several among the Christian nations. They would doubtless wish to do this if they could, but they do not know how to set about it. So they drift on towards political ruin. Meanwhile they are becoming very uneasy under the prospect, and are thinking that some plunging struggle must be tried. Instead of looking their misfortune quietly in the face, and devising really workable remedies, they seem to believe that the first thing needful is to restore the energies of their religion. Reformations of sorts are thus undertaken. The Wahhabi revival in Arabia, of which the public has heard much, was an attempt of this nature. It is likely that similar movements may arise in various quarters; indeed, they are springing up already.

There might, then, be a rising in the Muhammadan world, outside the Anglo-Muhammadan dominion above described. Such a combined movement would manifestly affect British interests. It would of itself be serious indeed; still England is quite mighty enough to withstand or overcome it, if only she were left to herself. But would she be let alone? Obviously not. Other Christian powers would be naturally jealous of her acting singly. They would lift up their voices and put in their claims. Thus political complications would arise. In the midst of such complications any rash proceedings on the part of one or other of the Christian Powers might bring on a deadly quarrel within Christendom itself about the affairs of the Muhammadan world. That would indeed be an unseemly spectacle to be exhibited by Christianity in the presence of the heathen.

Such is the outline of political Muhammadanism on the whole, or "Pan-islamism," as it is beginning to be called.