Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

The Telegraph takes a page from The Guardian

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.

Wikileaks: Brazil illustrates how to sacrifice principles for the Arabs

This 2009 Wikileaks cable discusses why Brazil, a country with a culture that is very much against restrictions on free speech, consistently abstains from any UN resolutions that are against "defamation of religion" - i.e., Islamic attempts to stifle free speech.

Embassy has raised the issue of Brazil's voting record on "defamation of religions" several times in the Department of Human Rights and Social Affairs (DDS), Ministry of External Relations (MRE). The last time was with DDS Chief (A/S level) Minister Glaucia Gauch. Brazil has not disagreed with a single argument in our previous demarches and non-papers. The response has been always the same: the concept of "defamation of religions" is repugnant to Brazilian values and principles, and it is inconsistent with Brazilian law and international law. For those reasons, Brazil cannot and will not support a resolution that purports to punish the "defamation of religions"; instead, Brazil consistently abstains.

When asked why Brazil does not vote against a resolution it finds totally objectionable, Gauch responded that it was enough to abstain. In the GOB's view, Brazil is taking a principled but practical position on the issue, not desiring to offend OIC countries, in particular powerful ones like Iran, Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia with which Brazil is attempting to deepen relations. Moreover, obtaining a permanent seat on the UNSC remains Brazil's overriding foreign policy goal. As a result, the GOB prefers to avoid antagonizing countries and groups of countries whose votes might be valuable in a future election.

In a similar vein, an earlier set of memos detail the Arab-South America Summit held in 2005 in Brazil, which turned into a farce as radical Arabs hijacked the session to put out outrageously anti-Israel and anti-American statements, leaving the major reasons for the summit (economic cooperation) in the dust.

By the time of Cast Lead, Brazil had already cast its lot with the radical Arabs.

The Brazilian government heavily criticized Israel's actions against HAMAS in Gaza, after originally suggesting it might take a more nuanced approached with its initial statements. President Lula, backed by most Brazilian media outlets, harshly criticized both Israel and the United States, and, while stressing that HAMAS bore some responsibility, minimized the group's actions. ...

According to Minister Rodrigo Amaral de Souza, chief of staff to Undersecretary for Political Affairs for Africa, Asia and the Middle East Ambassador Roberto Jaguaribe, Brazil's statements are motivated by three objectives: to reestablish the ceasefire, to allow for humanitarian assistance to go into Gaza, and get the parties back to the peace table following the process laid out at the Annapolis conference. Asked whether Brazil recognized the incongruence of asking Israel to halt its actions and return to the status quo ante knowing that HAMAS did not abide by the ceasefire in the first place, Amaral sheepishly recognized that Brazil understood Israel faced a difficult situation, but Brazil was primarily concerned that Israel's actions were threatening the progress of Annapolis and would create an irreversible momentum in a direction away from peace. Amaral also added that because Brazil has no relationship with HAMAS, it rarely addresses its actions officially.

Brazil's ambitions to become an important world player and to strengthen economic ties with Arab countries can be seen to clearly influence its actions - which it then justifies in terms of human rights.

Not that Brazil is alone in doing this, but the Wikileaks cables show its hypocrisy in stark terms.

Iranium: The Movie

The movie Iranium, about the Iranian nuclear threat, is online for a limited time.

You can register and see the entire movie for free by just clicking below and typing in your email address.

Palestine Papers: PLO distinguishes between "Wailing Wall" and the Kotel

One of the more interesting papers released in the "Palestine Papers" is something called The End Game, which is a presumably US (or perhaps Israel)-written outline of what a final agreement would look like, along with PLO comments. Meaning that it was meant to encapsulate "what everyone knows" the final agreement would be like. It was written in April 2008.

Here's one section of the main document:

The Capital of the State of Palestine will comprise essentially of the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem including the Holy Site of Al-Haram over which the State of Palestine will have sovereignty 9. Israel will have sovereignty 10 over the Western Wall 11, the Jewish Quarter and parts of the Armenian Quarter 12. The City of Jerusalem will be an open city, Capital for both Israel (Yerushalayim) and Palestine (AlQods)13.

The PLO's notes:

9 The sentence, as drafted, is both overly vague and problematic. The proposition that Arab areas will be Palestinian while Israeli settlements in “East Jerusalem” will be Israeli suggests that the Israeli definition of municipal Jerusalem is the starting point. This runs counter to the Palestinian position (and numerous UN resolutions) that Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and other parts of the West Bank is illegal and that the base line of 1967 must also apply in East Jerusalem.

The PLO position on Jerusalem is that East Jerusalem, along the 1967 borders and within its pre-occupation municipal lines shall be the capital of Palestine, and West Jerusalem shall be the capital of Israel. This articulation of the position is intended to define the Palestinian Capital in the agreement with Israel to include the Old City and its surroundings. Any possible future expansion of the city post-statehood will be subject solely to the discretion of Palestinians.

Meaning that the PLO, for all its supposed flexibility, was not giving up any part of the Old City, but perhaps just granting access to some Jews to their homes and holy place under Arab rule.

10 The Wailing Wall is part of the western wall of the Haram Al-Sharif, which must be under Palestinian sovereignty. Therefore, granting Israel sovereignty over the western wall or sections thereof would run counter to that. Israel’s primary interests are to preserve the religious significance of and Jewish prayer rights at the Wailing Wall, which can be met by other means short of granting sovereignty over the Wall to Israel (e.g., prayer/access rights, administration rights over the surface of the Wailing Wall, etc.)

Pretty self-explanatory and it again shows that the supposed flexibility of the PLO did not extend to the sovereignty of the Kotel.

Now, they try to cut down the size of the Kotel (short for Kotel HaMaaravi, "Western Wall," the Hebrew name of the Wall for at least a thousand years:)

11 Should be the “Wailing Wall” rather than “Western Wall”. The entire Western Wall is 470 meters long, whereas the Wailing Wall portion, on which Jews practice their religion, is just 60 meters long. It should be noted that prior to the occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967 the length of the Wailing Wall section of the western wall was 28 meters. Following its occupation of East Jerusalem, Israel demolished all the houses of the Maghriba uarter adjacent to the wall in order to expand the area of the Wailing Wall to its current length of 60 meters length and to create a plaza in front of it. It should also be noted that currently there are many Palestinian houses attached to western wall from the northern edge of the Wailing Wall to the northern edge of the western wall.

The Arabs are pretending that the open plaza of the Kotel is the only place that is holy to Jews, when in fact the entire Temple Mount and supporting walls (as well as all of Jerusalem!) are holy. In the PLO's formuation, the Kotel ha-Katan (which is actually holier than the section of the wall visible on the plaza) as well as other places that Jews worship would become Jew-free - just the way the Mufti wanted it.

12 The Jewish Quarter nowadays is comprised of the historical Jewish quarter, along with the Palestinian Maghriba quarter and other Palestinian houses that were demolished by Israel. “Parts of the Armenian Quarter” is overly vague and, as such, opens the door to the further expansion of the Jewish Quarter. Furthermore, most houses currently occupied by Jews in the Armenian Quarter were seized illegally by settlers.

What is the "Palestinian Maghriba" quarter? It appears to refer to the supposed Mughrabi quarter, which was defined after 1967 as the section in front of what is now the Kotel plaza. Before 1967 I cannot find any mention of this supposed "quarter," let alone any mention of it being "Palestinian."

For the past several hundred years Jerusalem had four quarters (hence, the name "quarter"). As Encyclopedia Britannica wrote in 1888:

There are now four quarters: —that of the Moslems (including the Haram) on the north-east, the Jewish quarter on the south east, the Armenian quarter on the south-west, the Christian on the north-west. The quarters are bounded by David (or Temple) Street, running east from the Jaffa gate, and by the street running north and south immediately east of the Holy Sepulchre (called Marat el Yehud on the south and Tarik Bab el 'Amud on the north).

Britannica goes on to show that the PLO's attempt to limit Jews to the Jewish Quarter is against history as well:

The quarters are not, however, exclusively occupied by any nationality, many rich Jews having houses in the Armenian and even in the Moslem quarter. In the 12th century the present Moslem quarter was occupied by the Jews, and called the Juiverie.

Even the enlightened, intelligent and moderate PLO negotiators prove here their bigotry and tendency to lie.

Introducing "Prophet Puffs" breakfast cereal!

In a comment to this posting, Rob in Madison proposed some new Islamic breakfast foods, including "Prophet Puffs - now with extra Sharia!"

Ever since I read that, I could not rest until I created it:

Let the fatwas begin!

Horrid pictures of crowded Gaza

Palestine Today has a photo essay of what it calls "Gaza youth practicing their hobbies in liberated territories:"

All I can think of is "Just like Darfur."

When Arabs visited Israel

This is amazing. From the Toledo Blade, August 26, 1970:

In the years after the Six Day War, tens of thousand of Arabs were allowed - and encouraged - to visit Israel. And they did! Arabs even organized tours to Israel!

Which just goes to show that the hate of Israel in the Arab world has been orchestrated by the Arab leaders, and a generation of incitement has had its effect. But if there was true normalization, without the anti-semitism and Israel hatred in the Arab state media, things might be much different.

A small example of new bias from Time

Just one tiny example of bias:

Finally, there's the small matter of the occupation. Israeli troops have controlled the West Bank since 1967, when an Arab effort to eject the Jewish state ended up with the loss of even more Arab territory and opened the way to some 400,000 Jewish settlers on what the world at large recognizes as Palestinian land.

It is somewhat refreshing that Vick notes that the Six Day War was instigated by the Arabs and was meant from the Arab side to be a war to annihilate Israel.

But notice his use of "even more Arab territory." That means that Karl Vick considers Israel within the Green Line to reside on Arab territory, and the implication is that Israel itself is illegitimate as its land is inherently Arab.

This is the sort of subtle bias that reporters at large seem to hold, and one can be fairly certain that they write things that are much worse that do not get past their editors.

(It is also instructive to look at wire-service articles from the early 1970s, which consistently referred to places like Ramallah to be in "occupied Jordan," not "occupied Palestinian territory" as they are today. What the "world at large recognizes" today is of relatively recent vintage.)

Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood, tribes threaten kingdom

From AFP:

Less than a week after his appointment, Jordan's new premier is facing potential upheaval, with the Islamist opposition refusing to join his government and key tribes warning of a popular revolt.

Prime Minister Maaruf Bakhit is trying to form a cabinet tasked with pushing through reforms to counter popular discontent inspired by Tunisia's revolt and ongoing anti-regime protests in Egypt.

Bakhit has met MPs, senators, trade unions as well as the powerful Islamist movement, which said on Sunday it has rejected an offer to join the new government after questioning the prime minister's reformist credentials.

At the same time, 36 members of major tribes, which form the backbone of the regime in Jordan, condemned the country's "crisis of authority" and corruption, warning of a popular revolt.

"We did not discuss the details of the offer, but all what I can say is that taking part in this government under the current circumstances is out of the question," Hamzah Mansur, leader of the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, told AFP.

"We are not asking for miracles. Our demands are realistic, practical and do-able. We demand early general polls in line with a new electoral law."

The tribal leaders joined the Islamists in their demands.

And from CNN:

In unprecedented criticism of Jordan's royal family, three dozen prominent Jordanian tribal figures issued an urgent call for reform Sunday and warned that the country may follow Tunisia and Egypt into turmoil without it.

The statement from 36 members of the country's major tribes attacked what they called the interference of Queen Rania in running the country. The queen, "her sycophants and the power centers that surround her" are dividing Jordanians and "stealing from the country and the people," the letter states.

The tribal figures said they were sending a clear message to King Abdullah II. They warned that if corruption was not prosecuted and reform was not implemented, "similar events to those in Tunisia and Egypt and other Arab countries will occur." The internet and satellite television had overcome the ability of regimes to stifle the thirst for information, the statement said.

There has been no response from the royal palace to the statement, which was posted on a popular Jordanian website. But the website, ammonnews.net, later complained that it had been the target of "intentional hacking" and that the statement had been removed.

The fun never stops!

How's that state-building coming along? PalArab contractors stiffed.

From Ma'an:

In the course of its state-building program, the Palestinian Authority has accumulated millions of dollars in debts owed to contractors, the union of Palestinian contractors said Sunday, urging officials to pay companies what they are owed.

"The union demands that the Palestinian government pays contractors in return for the projects they executed for the government. Huge debts have been accumulated since November 2010, and some contractors have overdrawn their bank accounts," said Adel Auda, union chief in the West Bank.

Auda said the PA Local Governance Ministry owed contractors over $10 million, while the Ministry of Public Works owed over 70 million shekels (around $19 million). Several other ministries also owed hundreds of millions of shekels, he added.

Over 450 contractors are registered with the union, and they provide employment for 22 percent of the Palestinian workforce, the union official said, adding that contractors were struggling to pay salaries.

"Eventually that will all have a negative impact on Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's plan to build state in two years," he said.

Auda said if the government did not pay its debts, the union would summon all contractors to a meeting and "all options will be open."

But those Jewish communities in the territories are paying their bills to the Arabs who help them build their homes...

Iranian TV bans Italian, French cooking shows

From YNet:

After ridding Iranian universities of "Western subjects," authorities in Tehran are making sure that local cooking shows also adhere to the spirit of the Ayatollah regime.

On Sunday, Iran's broadcasting authority forbade television channels in the country to air cooking shows featuring "Western" dishes. As it turns out, the dozes of official TV stations in Iran currently feature shows that offer their viewers recipes for Italian and French dishes, an apparently grave sin in the Islamic republic.

"Television should show viewers abroad and Persian speakers the great and important achievements of the Islamic revolution," the broadcasting authority's deputy director, Ali Darabi, was quoted as saying as he explained the move. The decision was taken ahead of "Islamic Revolution Day," which will mark the 32nd anniversary of the Persian shah's downfall.

I guess that gefilte fish and matzoh ball soup is completely out.

Super Bowl open thread

Good game. Fun watching Christina Aguilera mess up the national anthem. Good half time show complete with a "l'Chaim!"

What's not to love?

Palestine Papers: Fake letter from "Palestinian businessmen" to Obama

In the trove of so-called "Palestine Papers," we find a draft letter that was supposedly written by anonymous "Palestinian businessmen" was written to then-President Elect Obama.

The letter was obviously drafted by the PLO, as it echoes similar letters ghost-written by Abbas to Obama in the same time period.

This is a cynical ploy, akin to presenting a petition with fake names. It is a good example of the deception that the PLO uses when trying to influence world leaders. Even more cynical is that the fake "businessmen" can tell baldfaced lies to Obama without being called out for being liars - something that the PLO negotiators cannot do directly. Some are highlighted below.

November 10th, 2009

Dear President Obama,

As Palestinian businessmen, we wish to share with you some major Palestiniane’s concerns about today’s deteriorating situation brought about by Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestinian territory.in our long-lasting conflict with Israel.

We are grateful for your diplomatic efforts and will to solve the Palestinian-e – Israeli conflict, d. This despite the fact that for almost a whole year, the United States has been unable to impose a settlement freeze by Israel.

Mr. President, nothing sows more distrust in the Palestinian minds than crushing Palestinian homes from which families are ejected for the purpose of replacing them with Jewish settlers. True some Israeli checkpoints have been dismantled; but with more than 500 checkpoints and physical obstacles still in place in both the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, Palestinian business remains fragile. Israel continues to retain control of all borders. Nothing can get into or out of the West Bank or Gaza without Israeli permission. Because of the tenuous political situation, few domestic or foreign investors are willing to invest in the Palestinian economy, and many Palestinian businessmen holding American passports are being denied entry by the Israeli authorities to Palestine.

Israeli restrictions, together with Israel’s fragmentation of the occupied West Bank, remain the greatest impediment to economic development in Palestine and to reaching a two-state solution.

Mr. President, as Palestinian businessmen, our hope and dream is to build a sovereign, viable and thriving Palestinian state, alongside Israel.

But without a political outcome that secures Palestinian territorial rights, including East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, and a just solution for refugees, more problems will lie ahead. A settlement freeze is a crucial first step to saving the two-state solution. What is needed is an intensification of your will and a display of greater resolve by taking some bold steps forward to ending the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Sincerely,

Palestinian Businessmen

rephrase

get more exact number

Of course, the Palestinian Arab economy has boomed since Netanyahu has been in office. And the relevance of "East Jerusalem" and "refugees" to "businessmen" is never quite explained.

This is nothing but cynicism and an easy excuse to promote lies.

Some Sunday links

I know a few people sent me some that I misplaced, but here are a few:

The JCPA looks at what the Muslim Brotherhood wants - in its own words

Just Journalism on Egyptian attitudes towards Israel

British PM David Cameron has some surprisingly good things to say in this speech at the Munich Security Conference, but not quite good enough:

We have got to get to the root of the problem, and we need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of where these terrorist attacks lie. That is the existence of an ideology, Islamist extremism. We should be equally clear what we mean by this term, and we must distinguish it from Islam. Islam is a religion observed peacefully and devoutly by over a billion people. Islamist extremism is a political ideology supported by a minority. At the furthest end are those who back terrorism to promote their ultimate goal: an entire Islamist realm, governed by an interpretation of Sharia. Move along the spectrum, and you find people who may reject violence, but who accept various parts of the extremist worldview, including real hostility towards Western democracy and liberal values. It is vital that we make this distinction between religion on the one hand, and political ideology on the other. Time and again, people equate the two. They think whether someone is an extremist is dependent on how much they observe their religion. So, they talk about moderate Muslims as if all devout Muslims must be extremist. This is profoundly wrong. Someone can be a devout Muslim and not be an extremist. We need to be clear: Islamist extremism and Islam are not the same thing.

The problem is that such a distinction is not as easy to make as Cameron thinks. In the end, Islam is both a religion and a political movement (as was Christianity a few hundred years ago) and placing Western labels on it to create artificial distinctions when the adherents themselves do not is not helpful.

But at least he calls it Islamist terror, and not generic "terror."

Palestine Papers: How the PA tried to write an Obama "peace plan"

In May, 2009, the Palestinian Arab negotiating team tried a new tactic: They wrote their own "road map" together with the Arab League and tried to make Obama adopt it as if it was his idea.

SE: We are working hard on one thing: the Regional Road Map (RRM). I have shared it with Russia (Lavrov), Javier Solana, Spain (Moratinos), UK (Miliband), French, Germans. The Jordanians made comments; they want to identify their role in Jerusalem. Egypt wanted to change “Rafah” to “all crossings” and wants to change the term “terrorism.” We are still waiting on comments from Syria, we should get them by the 14th. They have said they will have stylistic, not substantive changes.The Saudis said the RRM is excellent but want to add Morocco. Solana also said it is excellent. This time we are involving the Chinese and Japanese. Mitchell heard about it and said he needs a copy before Obama receives it so I gave him a copy.

We are breaking the Arab behavior of going to America and telling him what we need. Instead we are telling Obama that we can help. We can help in Pakistan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. And Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan all need to tell Obama how they can help him. I went to Kurdistan. If other countries think they can use Hamas as a card we will do the same with them. We are not running a charity. Iran is playing games; they are using Hamas as a card.

We are taking the RRM and telling Obama we consulted with everyone on earth, now it’s your plan not ours. Make it your own. We can tell all the Arab countries, we got this document from Obama, are you in, yes or no? Put your money where your mouth is. We are instituting a zero tolerance policy for bullshit.

There are 4 new elements in the Obama administration: 1) They are pushing for the two-state solution as an American national interest, 2) they are saying the two-state solution is the only solution 3) their strategy is not a Palestinian-Israeli track, but a comprehensive regional peace, a matrix of interests and responsibilities 4) they are urging Palestinian institution reform and Fatah reform.

Rami Dajani: Is there a risk that Obama will say the RRM is a great start but then start dissecting it, like it seems he is doing with the Arab Peace Initiative (API)?

SE: whether we like it or not, Obama will take the approach we don’t want of taking baby steps. But if we give the RRM to him, it might open up his thinking. We will tell him, if you take baby steps you must define an end game and a definitive end date, and demand a complete settlement freeze.

Azem Bichara: Will you present the RRM publicly?

SE: No, not publicly. It’s Obama’s plan, we worked on it for him for free.

Azem Bichara:There is lots of buildup to Netanyahu’s meeting with Obama, how can we help with that? Should we write an Op-ed before AM’s meeting outlining our ideas?

SE: Do one in my name. Prepare for me a good press conference after AM’s meeting. We need to issue a statement right after Netanyahu’s meeting.

Look at the comments from Jordan and Moratinos and tell me what you think, what we should incorporate. We don’t want Jordan involved in Jerusalem.

Also, change the title. Maybe something like “RRM for a Comprehensive Peace.” But get rid of API [Arab Peace Initiative] in title.

This was right before Obama's Cairo speech.

Abbas again brags about his intransigence

From Ma'an:

President Mahmoud Abbas on Saturday told his party's young members that the Palestinian Authority never abandoned the national agenda.

“The Palestinian leadership is still adherent to the national agenda which was approved by the Palestinian National Council in 1988, and never gave up on any of the inalienable principles as some claim."

Meeting with Fatah Youth in his Ramallah office, the president said negotiations with Israel were suspended because of the PA's firm stance.

Meaning that the PLO has not changed it's position one bit since Arafat's heyday, just as Abbas has said in the past.

If the Palestinian Arab leadership brags about how they have not deviated from the position devised by a master terrorist - who continued to use terror long after 1988 - what exactly makes them "moderate" again?

Another senior Hamas member arrives in Gaza from Egypt prison

From Ma'an:

A leader of Hamas' armed wing arrived in the Gaza Strip on Saturday after escaping from an Egyptian prison.

Thousands of prisoners broke out of jail in Egypt amid security chaos as ongoing anti-government protests spread across the country.

Al-Qassam Brigades militant Ayman Noufel returned to Al-Buriej refugee camp in central Gaza, where he was received by his family and senior Hamas leaders.

Noufel was detained three years ago in El-Arish, when thousands of Palestinians broke out of Gaza through the wall on Egypt's border.

He was one of eight Palestinians who escaped from Egyptian jails, and six of the group have returned to Gaza.

Hezbollah weapons cache explosion?

Palestine Press reports that yesterday morning there was a massive explosion near Tyre, Lebanon.

Officially, the explosion was at an electricity generator, but Hezbollah men surrounded the area of the explosion, a building where they control three floors.

According to witnesses, Hezbollah prevented the Lebanese security forces and the Lebanese army and UNIFIL forces from approaching the scene. A fire broke out that lasted several hours.

According to Lebanese sources, the place where the explosion occurred was a meeting place for Hezbollah militants.

I cannot find the story anywhere else at this time.

Palestine Papers: PA trying to get rid of Netanyahu

Here is another theme of the "Palestine Papers" that The Guardian did not believe is newsworthy: The PA is using the negotiations - and refusal to negotiate - as a way to get rid of Netanyahu and to bring back Livni.

When Netanyahu first started forming a government, Saeb Erekat tried to use his supposed intransigence as a weapon to get the US to go against him. From a February 27, 2009 meeting with George Mitchell:

It seems they are moving towards a government with 65 seats. Livni told Netanyahu her conditions for coalition: two states and political negotiations. AM [Abu Mazen/Mahmoud Abbas] cannot demand less than Livni. We want to continue the political process and negotiations. We are committed to that. But if Israel doesn’t recognize the two-state solution and continues settlements, it will be the last nail in AM’s coffin if we send him to negotiate.

...If Netanyahu forms a government with a party that has 15 seats, with an official platform of ethnic cleansing and expulsion of Muslims and Christians who are Israeli citizens … if Barack Obama wants a policy of reconciliation with the Muslim and Arab world … with your kids dying all over the region.

You have a choice. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. You have either the cost-free way: pressure us to negotiate, which means AM negotiating with Netanyahu under continuing settlement and without recognition – this would be the last nail in AM’s coffin, or you have another choice: take the Annapolis statement: two states, and negotiations over all core issues. If the Israeli government doesn’t include in its mandate the two-states and negotiating on all issues including Jerusalem … [hands GM paper submitted to the EU via the Czechs] We are committed to peace and negotiations for two states, but we won’t engage without this.

Netanyahu will go to President Obama and tell him “Iran.” He will say he is committed. Then he will build settlements in E1 and elsewhere – like he did in Har Homa. You cannot be expected to demand less of Netanyahu than what Livni demanded.

In a later meeting with the Negotiations Support Unit, Erekat talks a little more frankly about his strategy with to split Obama from Netanyahu and get him to wholeheartedly take the Palestinian Arab side.

Hamas is a tool for Netanyahu, he is counting on them to stay the course. And Hamas is counting on Netanyahu to stay the course. Netanyahu’s only card is Palestinian division, and also Ahmadinejad. Everyone can see how Israel is using Ahmadinejad’s comments. Ahamadinjed should be saying we want to add Palestine to the map, not removing Israel from the map. He doesn’t serve our cause with his holocaust denials.

As far as contact with Israel, its business as usual. I talk with Amos Gilad and other generals. Uzi Arad and I mutually do not want to meet with each other. I want to wait to see what they present to Obama. Netanyahu is saying he doesn’t want a two state solution. It is not us who are saying we don’t want to negotiate. Anyone who says they don’t recognize the two-state solution rejects final status negotiations. The question everyone should be asking Netanyahu is, “will you talk about Jerusalem, refugees, etc., Yes or No?”
...
Azem Bichara: There is lots of buildup to Netanyahu’s meeting with Obama, how can we help with that? Should we write an Op-ed before AM’s meeting outlining our ideas?

SE: Do one in my name. Prepare for me a good press conference after AM’s meeting. We need to issue a statement right after Netanyahu’s meeting.

Alex Kouttab: Do you have any concrete idea of what Netanyahu is going to propose to Obama?

SE: He is going to say “we will remove road blocks, outposts, etc. but if a settler child needs a new bathroom, we will build it.” But he will continue to build E1 and demolish homes. He is a master of ambiguity.

At this point, the PA's main card with the US has been their conviction that Netanyahu was going to remain publicly against a two-state solution.

Then Netanyahu publicly said he would support a two-state solution under specific conditions.

This put the Palestinian Arabs on the defensive:

Dr. Mohammad Shtayyeh
1) AM must deliver a speech and he should use the opportunity of the graduation of the Arab American University in Jenin to deliver it from there.

2) We need to have a diplomatic campaign across the world to explain what was misleading
and false in BN’s speech and what our positions are.

3) We have to give BN a hard time in the international arena.

4) We need to summon the Consuls General and brief them so they will deliver the message
to (their) respective capitals before BN goes to Europe.

5) We must not give the impression that we are dealing with this Israeli government. This is a very wise decision. Limit interactions to a minimum and to the most urgent. We need to
focus our time away from negotiations and on our internal affairs.

We don’t need a spokesperson, we need a media machine. We want to launch this campaign
– not have the journalists come to us or wait for us. We have to think of our objective: What
is the purpose of this? A) isolate BN, B) make him resign, or C) or make him change his
position.

Erekat to George Mitchell, October 20, 2009, shows the PA's new intransigent position regarding Netanyahu:

Either they are partners – 67 border, swaps – anything short of that, that’s it. This is a defining moment for the government. Don’t listen to him [BN]. He’s dead, if he has no engagement with us.

And then the next day:

[Erekat]: We cannot have resumption of negotiations with this government. We will punish Netanyahu. He can’t survive without a process with us. We won’t give him leverage of taking us for a ride and continuing settlements while we negotiate. Am I clear, David? This is the decision of the leadership – the PLO executive committee and the Fatah central committee. They won’t allow it. Period. Finito.

David Hale: Your staying in this position means no direct negotiations.

SE: No direct negotiations if there is no freeze and an exclusion of Jerusalem.

DH: So what do you propose?

SE: I know what I’m talking about and I see where things are heading. ... So no Palestinian decision-making body will change this position on the freeze. Not after Goldstone.

... We're also in touch with Israelis and Jewish groups – not [just] J street or just the Labour party. We don’t see Netanyahu as the end of the world – the Lieberman/Netanyahu cabinet. If we go for negotiations with them we will kill the others.

There's a lot more in that last memo that we will get to soon.

(h/t Kramerica)

PA rejects unilateral Israeli proposals

Netanyahu proposes several specific moves to help the PA and its citizens - and the PA rejects them.

From YNet:

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat rejected on Saturday a series of economic incentives proposed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Quartet envoy Tony Blair.

During their meeting Friday, Netanyahu and Blair agreed on a new Israeli proposal aimed at easing economic and security restrictions imposed on Palestinians in the West Bank as part of the effort to bolster Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and convince the Palestinians to return to the negotiation table.

The proposal was presented as the committee of the Quartet – made up of the United Nations, the United States, the European Union and Russia – prepared to meet in Munich, Germany. It reportedly includes expanding Arab construction in east Jerusalem and giving the Palestinian Authority security powers in seven West Bank cities.

Netanyahu also agreed to begin discussions on the development of a Palestinian Authority gas field adjacent to an Israeli gas field off the coast of Gaza. The PM said future revenues from the Palestinian field will go to the PA.

Erekat said the proposal "is just a trick and procrastination of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu."

"What Netanyahu should do, if he wants to build confidence, is immediately stop settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem and recognize a Palestinian state on the territories occupied in 1967,” the Palestinian news agency Ma'an quoted the chief negotiator as saying.

Once again, the "hawkish, right-wing" Israeli is the one making concrete suggestions for moving along the peace process - suggestions that could be worth missions of dollars - and the "moderate, flexible" PA is rejecting it.

And there's more:

Addressing the dramatic political developments in the Arab World, Erekat said "what is driving the region to violence and extremism is the continued occupation and Israeli insistence to maintain the settlement enterprise."

Why does anyone take this guy seriously anymore? Seriously!

The Palestinian Arab leaders are just babies who want all or nothing - and they complain when their enemies want to give them stuff for free that would help their own citizens.

And the West will ignore this further evidence of Palestinian Arab intransigence as they always have, because it doesn't fit the meme.

What the West needs to understand about the Muslim Brotherhood

It is maddening to see Western reporters get the Muslim Brotherhood so very wrong.

The MB publicly eschewed violence in the 1960s, but it was a tactical move (and a response to Nasser's crackdown on them), not a sea change in their methods.

The MB is now saying that they do not seek an Islamist state and that they will not field a candidate for President - and these are tactical moves as well.

The question that Western observer need to be asking is: what are their goals?

They are very explicit in answering that question. Their main goal is to restore the caliphate, creating a single state run according to Islamic precepts that would stretch from Spain to Indonesia.

Once you know what their goals are, it is shortsighted to accept their statements made today as indicating anything opposing those goals. In fact, everything they are saying is consistent with their overarching goal of overthrowing not just Egypt but the governments of dozens of states with Muslim majorities or that were once under Muslim conquest.

The goals of the Muslim Brotherhood are exactly the same goals as their offshoots Hamas and Al Qaeda. At this time, their methods are different, but that does not make them any less of a long-term danger to world peace.

While it is not an MB offshoot, one only needs to look at how Hezbollah effectively has taken over Lebanon. They also claimed they did not want to upset the status quo; they also claimed to respect democracy; they also claimed that they did not want to field a candidate to lead the country. Yet here they are, with veto power over everything that happens in that state and with their own independent army and communications system, poised to gain more power in the coming years as Christians flee and organized opposition withers or flees in fear. The most-watched (and feared) speeches in Lebanon are from Hassan Nasrallah, who is not even part of the government. They became the de-facto rulers of Lebanon - even without being a majority - by executing a strategy that completely and thoroughly outmaneuvered any competition. They are still treading carefully, and going slowly, but one day in the not too distant future Lebanon will wake up to being an Iranian satellite with no possible recourse.

Islamists take a very long-term view of events. While Westerners think in terms of election cycles, Islamists think in terms of centuries. To these groups, a decade is an eye-blink.

To Islamists, the Crusades were an unfortunate century or so, which they rectified. They look at Israel the same way - as an anomaly that will inexorably be destroyed in the coming decades, due to their current strategy of picking away at it piece by piece and enlisting clueless Westerners to rally to the cause in the name of "international law" and "human rights" that the Muslim world itself utterly rejects. Their patience and ability to take the long view is their strength.

The important word is "strategy." The Islamists have one - a long term plan - and the West does not.

In most Arab countries, the Islamists have been quietly gathering strength for the eventual takeover of the lands - if not this decade then in five. They act with one voice. They use social service programs to gain acceptance with the masses. They engage in outreach to gain adherents. They happily use new and old media to spread their ideology. They are executing a brilliant, long term strategy.

Their strength comes from their single-minded purpose, their lack of internal dissent, their apparent authenticity and honesty, their seeming care for every Muslim, and their consistent message over the decades.

Is their any countervailing strategy that the West has? Is there any already existing, pro-Western movements in Egypt or any other Arab country that have been quietly building up an organization and adherents, ready to take advantage of the political vacuum and chaos that could occur at any time?

The very idea is absurd. To Westerners, creating a pro-democracy satellite TV station that is not viewed by anyone is the height of strategic thinking. And even if we had a strategy, the next occupant of the White House would probably change it, as would his successor.

Western-style freedoms and democracy are not as easy a sell as we think. And building truly democratic institutions is time consuming.

Egypt and Tunisia shows us how poor our planning has been. We should have been prepared for these events - because our enemies sure have been. (and, yes, the Muslim Brotherhood is gearing to eventually take over Tunisia as well, even though they are relatively weak now.)

Even worse, the Islamists have co-opted Western terminology to advance what is ultimately an anti-Western, anti-freedom agenda, making any legitimate Western ideals seem like a cheap knock-off of Islamist propaganda.

They have a strategy. We don't. And you cannot win over the long term without one.

(See also here.)

Gas pipeline attacked in Egypt (updated)

From Ma'an:

An Egyptian-Israeli gas pipeline targeted by an explosion early Saturday in the Sinai supplied Jordan with gas, according to Egyptian officials who said the line was connected to others used by Israel.

The Israeli-Egyptian gas company, East Mediterranean Gas, said attackers blew up a measuring station at the Jordanian sub-line.

The attackers used explosives against the pipeline in the town of Lihfen in northern Sinai, near the Gaza Strip, a security official said. Some media initially said the pipeline to Israel was attacked.

The pipeline which exploded originates in Port Said before it splits off in two directions, one toward Israel and the other to Jordan through the Sinai, Ma'an's El-Arish correspondent reported from the scene.

"The pipeline to Jordan has been attacked and the supply to Israel has been cut off," an official said.

Security sources said foreign saboteurs were suspected and Bedouin forces were on heightened alert.

Egyptian forces shut down the gas supply from the main source immediately after the explosion. The army has taken precautionary measures to stop the fire from spreading, an official said.

It was not immediately clear who was responsible, or whether the attack was linked to the deadly protests against President Hosni Mubarak's rule, which entered their 12th day Saturday.

Egyptians have been vocally opposed Egypt's selling natural gas to Israel, and it seems likely that the saboteurs were trying to blow up the Israel pipeline and made a mistake.

UPDATE: Jordan says that the bombing is going to cost the kingdom some 3 million dinars a day.

Huge sale at The Elder store February 5th

This coming Saturday, February 5th, you can get an amazing 45% discount on all the items in the Elder of Ziyon Printfection store.

T-shirts, sweatshirts, mouse pads, mugs, cutting boards and more are on sale.

Use coupon code FEBLUV11.

Incredible find: Byzantine church that may cover Zechariah's tomb

From AFP:

Israeli archaeologists unveiled on Wednesday the remnants of a newly discovered Byzantine-era church they suspect is concealing the tomb of the biblical prophet Zechariah.

The church, with intricate and well-preserved mosaic floors, was discovered on the slopes of the Judaean hills at Horbat Midras, the site of a Jewish community in Roman times, southwest of Jerusalem.

Underneath is a second layer of mosaics dating from the Roman period, with a cave complex still further below which archaeologists think could be Zechariah's tomb.

"Researchers believe that in light of an analysis of the Christian sources ... the church at Horbet Madras is a memorial church designed to mark the tomb of the prophet Zechariah," the Israel Antiquities Authority said.

A statement noted, however, that more work is needed to confirm the hypothesis.

Al Arabiya adds:

Beneath the church's altar is a burial chamber that the Antiquities Authority said may have been the tomb of the prophet Zechariah, known from the eponymous book in the Bible, written around 520 BC.

The claim, which a number of experts have based on Christian sources and an ancient diagram known as the Madaba Map, has not been proved and is still being studied, they said.

Like many ancient structures, it was built on even older foundations dating back to the Roman Empire and the period of the second Jewish Temple. It includes a subterranean complex of caves and tunnels used by Jewish rebels fighting the Romans in the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132 AD.

The AP photos are amazing (click to enlarge):

The Madaba Map is the earliest known map of the Holy Land. Its map of Jerusalem is famous:

Archeologists recently found the main road shown on that map going through the center of the city.

But the Jerusalem map at is actually a detail of the much larger map:

This larger map covers places as far as Ashkelon.

Qaddafi's plan for Egypt, 1973

What a prophet - he called for a democratic revolution in Egypt!

The word "democracy" is cheap. The implementation is hard.

Israeli bomb-sniffing mice?

From New Scientist:

ONE day, there may be more than X-ray machines and full-body scanners awaiting you at the airport. Listen out for the snuffling of sniffer mice as you pass through security.

The critters will not be angling for a snack, though. They are part of a bomb-detecting unit created by Israeli start-up company BioExplorers, based in Herzeliya, which claims that trained mice can be better than full-body scanners and intrusive pat-downs at telling a bona fide passenger from a terrorist carrying explosives.

Eran Lumbroso conceived the mouse-based explosives detector while serving as a major in the Israeli navy. Along with his brother, Alon, he founded the company and built a device that looks much like an average airport metal detector or full-body scanner.

Along one side of an archway, a detection unit contains three concealed cartridges, each of which houses eight mice. During their 4-hour shifts in the detector, the mice mill about in a common area in each cartridge as air is passed over people paused in the archway and through the cartridge. When the mice sniff traces of any of eight key explosives in the air, they are conditioned to avoid the scent and flee to a side chamber, triggering an alarm. To avoid false positives, more than one mouse must enter the room at the same time.

"It's as if they're smelling a cat and escaping," Eran says. "We detect the escape." Unlike dogs, which are often trained for explosives and drugs detection, mice don't require constant interaction with their trainers or treats to keep them motivated. As a result, they can live in comfortable cages with unlimited access to food and water. Each mouse would work two 4-hour shifts a day, and would have a working life of 18 months.

What's more, mice beat dogs for olfactory talent, and by much more than a nose: dogs have 756 olfactory receptor genes, while mice have 1120, resulting in a more acute sense of smell.

The company ran its first field test in December last year at Azrieli Center, a large shopping mall in Tel Aviv. More than 1000 people passed through the detector, 22 of whom were asked to hide mock explosives in pockets or under shirts. All 22 packages were detected, the Lumbrosos claim, adding that the false-alarm rate was less than 0.1 per cent.

Their web page is here...and it is awful.

I don't know how scalable this solution is, but it is interesting.

Palestine Papers: PA says "refugees" must be resettled in Arab states

I found where Al Jazeera put all of the "Palestine Papers" and, in response to the Guardian's absurd assertion that they have already published everything that is newsworthy, here is exhibit A showing otherwise:

On July 2, 2008, the PA produced a "talking points" memo about how the so-called "refugee" problem would ultimately be solved. Presumably this was meant to be used in negotiations with the US and Israel. But by its nature, it is not an off-the-cuff comment of negotiators floating trial balloons to the other side, but an official (if unpublished) position of the PA.

First of all, the PA makes it very clear that they do not want to be the place that some 7 million "refugees" will move to live:

The viability of the future Palestinian State is closely linked to the evolution of the Palestinian population that will live within the future State’s borders. In this regard, the terms of a settlement of the Palestinian refugee issue and the number of Palestinian refugees who will be offered to resettle or return to the future State of Palestine is a core parameter required to assess the viability of that State.

The resettlement/return of refugee communities touches numerous issues such as housing availabilities, access to water, education and social services, employment opportunities, infrastructure, environment etc. The ability of the Palestinian State to meet refugee needs and ensure an efficient functioning of these services will ultimately determine its viability.

Unlike Israel in 1948, which opened its doors to Jews all over the world even though it was severely restricted in resources and cash, the PA is not going to start an open-door policy. In other words, they don't seem to care nearly as much about their fellow "Palestinians" living in stateless misery as Israel does about Jews.

While the PA will still insist on the theoretical "right to return," it recognizes realistically that other Arab states are going to have to offer citizenship:

The Palestinian/Arab peace proposal regarding Palestinian refugees is to find a “just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UNGA resolution 194”. The goal is to reach a multilateral solution that will be accepted by all parties. For the resolution to be a success, Israel, host States (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon) and third countries will have to offer attractive options to refugees. Therefore, the viability of the Palestinian State also greatly relies on the ability of these stakeholders and the international community to provide with concrete relocation options to Palestinian refugees.

All of this is obvious, but the PA is publicly silent on the issue. Instead of laying the framework to get these Arab countries to gear up for their ultimate naturalization of their Palestinian Arab population, the PA's public position has been the opposite of what this paper states.

In fact, only a few months earlier, Mahmoud Abbas told The Daily Star of Lebanon:

"We would not accept any settlements that would lead to a demographic change in Lebanon. This is totally unacceptable ... We won't accept a settlement that obliges Lebanon to naturalize even one Palestinian."

It is impossible to believe that Mahmoud Abbas was not aware of the contents of this talking points memo. Which means that either he was lying to the Lebanese, or he was lying to the Americans.

Either way, it shows that he is a liar.