Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, November 09, 2011

A lexicon of the Middle East

A great article at FrontPage, cross-posted at Honest Reporting.

Excerpts:

I have come to realize just how difficult it may be to decipher news about the Middle East, Islam, Israel, the Arab World, and all these powerful and explosive issues of our times for those who rely on such media stalwarts as The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the major television networks, cable news, etc. for their information. For example, how is a person to ascertain whether the slayer of a family is a terrorist or a militant or a gunman or an assailant or an activist or a freedom-fighter?

So, purely as a public service, I have organized the following glossary of the most pertinent terms and expressions, as typically used in the above-mentioned news sources. I hope, insha’allah, the reader will find it helpful to unravel the Gordian Knot of language that is today’s (and yesterday’s and tomorrow’s) Middle East!

Aggression: Killing people who are trying to kill you.

Apartheid: The political/social system of the one and only country in the Middle East that integrates Jews, Beduins, Arabs, whites, blacks, Muslems, Ethiopians, Russians, Christians, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Bahai, et al.

“Apes & Pigs”: See “Jew” below.

Arab King: Military dictator.

Arab President: Military dictator.

Arab Prime Minister: Military dictator.

Arab Spring: Replacement of one dictatorship with another, with the help of Western money and media cheerleading.

Compromise: To give something palpable, such as land, in return for a promise not to keep on trying to annihilate you.

Developing Country: A country that is not developing.

Disproportionate Response: Winning.

Father of the Palestinian People: An Egyptian man, raised by his uncle, Hitler’s buddy, and one of the world’s most successful kleptocrats. (See “PLO” below.)

Hamas: The democratically elected government of Gaza whose founding charter calls for genocide.

Holocaust: That genocide that did not happen, but that the Jews orchestrated in order to steal Arab land, and that of which the Jewish presence in Palestine is worse than.

Moderate Palestinian Leader: Former KGB operative, Holocaust denier, and financier of Munich Olympic massacre.

Peace: War of attrition.

Peace Process: The dismantling of Israel.

Peace Talks: The avoidance of peace.

PLO: Organization created in 1964 to end the 1967 occupation.

Palestinian Authority: The world’s most successful kleptocracy.

Palestinian Hero: Murderer of children.

Zionism: The ideology of the Jews who aspire to control, dominate and take over the world.

Zionist: Someone who is worse than a Nazi.

Zionist Entity: That place that does not exist, as on Arab maps, but that must be destroyed.

There's lots more, read the whole thing.

(h/t Ruchie)

Another Israeli TV show being retooled for the US

From Deadline Hollywood:

The CW has bought Danny Hollywood, an hourlong project based on the successful Israeli half-hour series of the same name. Easy A writer Bert V Royal is writing the adaptation and is executive producing with Mark Harmon, Eric & Kim Tannenbaum and Martha Haight for CBS TV Studios. In the time travel fantasy-musical, a young documentary filmmaker travels back in time in order to prevent the death of her ’90s musical idol Danny Hollywood, and finds that the story is even more complicated than she thought. In the original, created and produced by Tmira Yardeni and Ori Gross, the 21st century documentary filmmaker travels back to 1968. The series aired 200 episodes on Yes Stars channel, more than tripping the channel’s average viewership over its run and garnering a 12% market share — six times the channel average — for its finale.

This is the third broadcast project based on an Israeli format this development season, joining CBS’ Life Isn’t Everything, a comedy based on the successful Israeli sitcom of the same name; and NBC’s adaptation of mystery drama Timrot Ashan, aka Pillars Of Smoke.

Here's a trailer created after season 1 in Israel. It looks like a fun show.

Wow, the Zionists really are taking over Hollywood. (Although the American adaptation of Traffic Light [Ramzor] was pretty bad and was mercifully canceled very quickly.)

UC Davis Jewish Studies Dept. hosts an academic fraud (updated)

A very disturbing article by Gail Rubin, co-chair of the Davis Chapter of StandWithUs, at BlueTruth:

Some UC Jewish Studies programs seem to be part of the growing problem of anti-Israel and anti-Zionist bias on UC campuses. Consider the lecture sponsored by the UC Davis [UCD] Jewish Studies Program on October 21st.

The lecturer was University of London professor Gilbert Achcar, author of the controversial book, “The Arabs and the Holocaust: The Arab-Israeli War of Narratives.” He was introduced by Diane Wolf, current chair of the UCD program, Professor Susan Miller, and founding chair, David Biale. Professor Miller praised Achcar and called his scholarship “courageous.”

Achcar may have been courageous in acknowledging the Holocaust was a uniquely horrifying event directed at Jews and that Palestinian leader Haj Amin al-Husseini’s anti-Semitism and collaboration with Hitler were deplorable. But after these observations, he careened into anti-Zionist, anti-Israel charges and distortions. Despite ample evidence to the contrary, he argued that the Mufti’s Jew-hatred had little influence on Palestinian and Arab hostility to Israel. He dismissed evidence about the cross-fertilization of Muslim anti-Semitism and Nazi-inspired anti-Semitism as hyperbole and charged that Israel exploits the Holocaust and exaggerates the Mufti’s influence only for propaganda purposes.

More disturbingly, he has argued that the rise of Zionism in 1920, not prejudice, spawned Arab Jew-hatred, essentially accusing Jews of causing anti-Semitism. Indeed, in his book, he excuses the current popularity of the Czarist anti-Semitic forgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” in the Arab world, arguing it must be read from an anti-Zionist, not an anti-Semitic, perspective.

Achcar minimized pogroms against and expulsions of Jews in the Arab world after World War II and after Israel’s reestablishment, equating their expulsion with the American internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. He repeated anti-Israel clichés, denying Israel’s right to exist and referring to it as a “settler colonial project” built on “Arab land,” accusing Zionists of "ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians", and downplaying any suggestion of Pan-Arab racism toward the Jewish people.

Despite these tendentious charges, challenging questions were not welcomed during the Q & A. I was abruptly censored while attempting to establish facts to challenge Mr. Achcar’s skewed conclusion that the Grand Mufti’s anti-Semitism had only a minimal impact on both Jews and Arabs. Professors Miller and Biale angrily told me the questions were insulting and to either stop or leave the room. So much for free speech and scholarly discourse in academia.

She has more about the more general issue of problems at UC Davis' Jewish Studies that is worth reading, but I would like to concentrate on Achcar.

In July 2010, I looked a little at Achcar's book. Immediately I saw that his claim that Arab anti-semitism was a reaction to alleged Zionist expulsion of Palestinian Arab farmers, or as Rubin describes him at UCD saying that it only started after 1920, is laughable.

The first Arab attack on Jews in Palestine was in 1886 in Petah Tikva, a community built on swampland that did not displace any Arab.

A quote from an 1874 travelogue says ""Men in Palestine call their fellows 'Jew,' as the very lowest of all possible words of abuse."

From the Saturday Magazine, 1840:

The most distressed position in which the Algerine Jews have been placed, was when the country was under the military despotism of the Janissaries. Often when the Janissaries met them in the streets, they would beat and otherwise ill-treat them, without their daring to offer the least resistance; and their only resource was, to run away if they could. If any one among them dared to complain, the Cadi would ask the offending Turk why he had struck the Jew. "Because he spoke ill of our holy religion," would be the reply. This sealed the poor Jew's doom; he was immediately put to death, and his property confiscated to the State. When a Jew went to a fountain, he was obliged to wait until every Mahometan had left it, before he presumed to take a drop of water. A Jew passing before a mosque was often butchered by the populace, if he chanced to turn his head towards the sacred building. The Jews were excluded from all public places frequented by the Mahometans, with the occasional exception of the bazaars. When a Jew met a Turk in the street, he was obliged to salute him by bowing his head almost to the ground. The Turk would enter a Jew's house, eat, drink, insult the family, and take away anything he had a fancy to, without the master of the house daring to offer any remonstrance.

This dreadful state of persecution was somewhat mitigated under subsequent governments; but still Jews have always been treated at Algiers with the contempt which they so generally meet with in Mahometan nations.

Another book from 1857, talking about Jews in Sanaa:

These poor people are awfully oppressed. The Jew is the object of continued insult and oppression. If he passes through the streets, the very beggars may knock him down, and he dare not venture to resent the insult. He is even not allowed to call a Mohammedan by his true name, but in addressing him must give him the title, "My Lord."

While Arab anti-semitism was and still is far different from Christian anti-semitism, it was real and obvious to many observers who came through Arab areas in the 19th century. It is also worth noting, however, that Palestinian Christians imbibed in traditional Christian anti-semitism and in no small part influenced their Muslim neighbors in the decades that followed.

But Achcar is far worse than just being selective in his history. As I proved in my earlier post, he actually frequents anti-semitic websites and used at least one quote in this book that was directly lifted from neo-Nazi literature - the proof being that he misspelled the name of the source in the same way that countless neo-Nazi sites do.

And his interest in insulting anyone who asks hard questions did not start at UC Davis; he acted in a similar way at a talk he gave with another fraud of a historian, Shlomo Sand, at SOAS.

Why would UC Davis Jewish Studies Department give any respect for a quasi-historian who gives no respect to his adversaries or even to the truth itself?

UPDATE: A long critique of Achcar's book and his response can be seen here. (h/t Alice)

PLO admits it will lose the UN vote

From AP:

The Palestinian foreign minister admits for the first time there is not enough support in the U.N. Security Council for recognition of a Palestinian state,

This comes as the Security Council receives a report saying there's no consensus among the 15 members. Nine votes would be needed for approval, and any of the five permanent members could cast a veto.

The U.S. and Israel insist that a Palestinian state must result from negotiations.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki told The Associated Press Tuesday, "It is clear now, with the U.S. counter effort and intervention, that we are not going to have these nine votes." They can still apply to the General Assembly.

According to the current thinking, here is how the voting would go:

	Yes	No	Abstain
Bosnia			x
Brazil	x
China	x
Colombia			x
France			x
Gabon	x
Germany			x
India	x
Lebanon	x
Nigeria	x
Portugal			x
Russia	x
South Africa	x
UK			x
USA		x

Which leaves the PLO one vote short of its goal of embarrassing the US.

The next question is - what is their Plan B? Dismantling the PA? Another threat by Abbas to quit? Swallowing their pride and going to the General Assembly?

Because one thing is for sure. They have no plans to return to serious negotiations that would necessitate their compromising in order to get a state that even Israel would vote for. No, their need for independence is not that pressing.

They prefer stunts to peace.

Speaking of....what's going to happen to that symbolic chair that went on a world tour? Or, for that matter, that giant UN chair shown off in Ramallah?

I hope they end up on eBay.

(h/t CHA)

Syrian Mufti threatens West - but says it nicely

From Gulf News:

The influential Grand Mufti of Syria, Shaikh Ahmad Hassoun, was quoted as saying on Monday that President Bashar Al Assad may return to practising ophthalmology after he implements promised reforms.

"There is no such thing as president for life," the cleric, a close confidant of the president, told the German magazine Der Spiegel.

Al Assad is a UK-trained ophthalmologist. He left the profession to assume the presidency following the death of his father Hafez Al Assad in 2000.

Why, he sounds so moderate!

But then...

The Grand Mufti also warned against NATO intervention in Syria saying it "could lead to disaster and suicide bombings in western countries".

Hmmm. And who would be responsible for such a terror spree?

For that, we must go back an entire month:

Syria's top Sunni Muslim cleric has warned Western countries against military intervention, threatening to retaliate with suicide bombings in the United States and Europe if his country comes under attack.

Grand Mufti Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun gave a speech and told the U.S. and Europe that "we will prepare suicide bombers who are already in your countries if you bomb Syria or Lebanon."

The state-appointed cleric and loyalist of Syria's embattled President Bashar al-Assad spoke to a delegation of Lebanese women who came to offer their condolences for his son's death earlier this month at the hands of unknown gunmen.

To the Western media, he uses a passive voice ("could lead to...") but to Muslim women he makes it clear who would make the decision to fight with terrorism ("we will prepare suicide bombers....")

If I didn't know that Islam was the religion of peace, I would have thought that this Grand Mufti was threatening the West with terrorism against innocent civilians.

Notice also that Hassoun clearly considers Lebanon to be just a part of Syria.

The IAEA report on Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions is released

The IAEA report on Iran's nuclear program has been released.

It details evidence, both direct and indirect, that Iran is actively working on all stages of a nuclear weapons program.

The summary:

52. While the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at the nuclear facilities and LOFs declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement, as Iran is not providing the necessary cooperation, including by not implementing its Additional Protocol, the Agency is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.

53. The Agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the Agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. The information also indicates that prior to the end of 2003, these activities took place under a structured programme, and that some activities may still be ongoing.

The specifics are found in the annexes, which go through much detail on what is necessary to create nuclear weapons and specific evidence of how Iran is shown to be engaged in every one of those activities:

Programme management structure
Procurement activities
Nuclear material acquisition
Nuclear components for an explosive device
Detonator development
Initiation of high explosives and associated experiments
Hydrodynamic experiments
Modelling and calculations
Neutron initiator
Conducting a test
Integration into a missile delivery vehicle
Fuzing, arming and firing system

Intriguingly, the report alludes to some information that seems to have been obtained via espionage:

A Member State provided the Agency experts with access to a collection of electronic files from seized computers belonging to key members of the network at different locations. That collection included documents seen in Libya, along with more recent versions of those documents, including an up-dated electronic version of the uranium metal document.

Altogether, the IAEA has pieced together a very convincing - if sometimes irritatingly circumstantial - argument that Iran has been, and still is, actively working to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran: "Western 'soft war' uses media, narcotics, sex"

From Iran's PressTV via MEMRI. No translation needed!

Reporter: The hidden invasion - the term refers to a new type of war with very different weapons, weapons that are not made to kill, but are made to create doubts, plant ideas, and change ideologies. The Hidden Invasion exhibition was inaugurated on Wednesday in Tehran, with one aim.

Ali Gholami, Iran Aerospace Industries: The aim of this exhibition is to familiarize our people with the soft warfare that is taking place as we speak in the country and its tools.
...

Major-General Hassan Firoozabadi, Joint Chief of Staff Iranian Armed Forces: Our definition of soft warfare is using means to, first of all, separate man from his rationality, and control him through his animal instincts and feelings, and stimulants, such as narcotics and sex.

They use many means to put their plan into action. They use satellite TV, radio, magazines, pictures, Hollywood movies, and fashion, especially for the young, and articles that one gets attached to, like ornaments or signs on their backs, clothes, and other belongings.

This system, as a whole, tries to change a revolutionary Iranian, and separate him from his school of thought.

Military experts say that Orange Revolution, Ukraine, is a good example of soft warfare and how it works.

Reporter: Military officials here say that soft war is the base for any successful hard war, and without a soft war campaign, the occupying forces will face resistance by the people, and will be defeated sooner or later.

So if I am reading this correctly, Iran's leaders consider their own message so weak that a TV show can counter decades of propaganda.

And who is behind Hollywood and the media again?

Apparently, the US does not accept the Green Line

From AP yesterday:

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a Jerusalem-born boy's challenge to U.S. State Department policy that prevents him from having his passport show he was born in Israel.

Middle Eastern politics and the battle between Congress and the president over foreign policy are at play in the case being argued at the high court Monday. The boy, Menachem Zivotofsky, and his parents, Naomi and Ari, flew in from Israel to attend Monday's Supreme Court arguments.

The Obama administration, like its Republican and Democratic predecessors, says it does not want to stir up anger in the Arab world by appearing to take a position on the ultimate fate of Jerusalem. Longstanding U.S. policy says the status of the city that is important to Jews, Muslims and Christians should be resolved in negotiations.

But lawyers for 9-year-old Menachem argue that the foreign policy concerns are trivial. Thirty-nine lawmakers from both parties are siding with the boy and his parents, defending a provision in a 2002 law that allows Israel to be listed as the birthplace for Americans born in Jerusalem.

President George W. Bush signed the much larger law, but said the provision on Jerusalem interfered with his power over foreign affairs, including the authority to recognize foreign states. Bush issued a signing statement at the time in which he said that "U.S. policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed."

Israel has proclaimed the once-divided city as its capital; the U.S. and most nations do not recognize Jerusalem as the capital.

Had Menachem been born in Tel Aviv, the State Department would have issued a passport listing his place of birth as Israel. The regular practice for recording the birth of a U.S. citizen abroad is to list the country where it occurred.

But the department's guide tells consular officials, "For a person born in Jerusalem, write Jerusalem as the place of birth in the passport."

In late 2002, Naomi Zivotofsky, Menachem's mother, showed up at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv to get her baby a U.S. passport, one that listed Israel as his birthplace. After State Department officials refused her request, the family sued.

While the case is very interesting on a number of legal and political levels, there is one important aspect that is being downplayed.

Menachem Zivotofsky was born on the western side of the Green Line.

Whenever you hear anyone claim that the Green Line represents "internationally recognized boundaries" - which it never did - ask yourself why exactly the world does not recognize the parts of Jerusalem under Israeli control since 1948 to be officially part of Israel.

Whenever you hear that American leaders follow their "Zionist masters," ask yourself why both the current and previous administrations were so dead-set against recognizing any part of Jerusalem as being in Israel.

People who insist that Israel withdraw to "pre-1967 lines" seem to be selective in recognizing Israel's claim to the western side of that same line.

Either the Green Line is a fiction or it isn't. Saying that even the western part of Jerusalem is not part of Israel - the official White House position for the past two administrations - is a fundamentally inconsistent position with stated US policy, and it makes one wonder how much Israel should trust its best friend.

Anti-semitic Iranian film is a hit

From Walla:

An Iranian film with anti-Semitic insinuations is recently gaining much publicity in Iran. "Saturday's Hunter", a film originally screened at a film festival in Tehran, is featured in many publications, local television networks and social networks.

The plot centers around Zionist Rabbi Hanan, an Orthodox Jew wearing a skullcap with long side curls, who takes on his grandson Benjamin to teach him to create a war machine to destroy all the nations. Little Benjamin completes the transformation that his grandfather wanted to make him into a fearless warrior. "You should not kill people," the grandson says and his grandfather answers: "Only Jews you can not kill."

Menashe Amir, Israel Radio commentator on Iranian affairs, said that prominent Jewish community leaders [in Iran] sent letters of protest to the government in response to the movie, but got no answer. The director of the film, however, sent them a strong response, arguing that "Judaism is a symbol of evil" and that "these films will continue and will be filmed in the future."

Here are two Farsi-language trailers:

(h/t Yoel)

Miniature Christian prayer box found in Jerusalem

From Ha'aretz:

Walk through the Christian quarter of Jerusalem's Old City and you'll see souvenir shops selling assorted varieties of small plastic Christian prayer boxes displaying miniature icons, usually Mary and Jesus, surrounded by a gold halo. Not far from those shops, Israeli archaeologists have discovered what may be the oldest miniature Byzantine prayer box to date, archaeologist Yana Tchekhanovets announced last week.

The discovery - made by Tchekhanovets and fellow archaeologist Doron Ben-Ami about a year ago during an Israel Antiquities Authority excavation in the Givati parking lot across from the City of David - sheds light on art in ritual in Byzantine-era Jerusalem.

The box, discovered in the Byzantine strata (324-838 C.E.) in the plaster between two floor tiles, is approximately half the size of a matchbox: 2.2 centimeters by 1.6 centimeters, and a few millimeters high. The inside contains delicate and partially erased drawings of Christian icons. With a little effort it is possible to discern a blurred feminine face and, on the bottom, a clearer male face. The colors used to make the icons have survived and shades of red, blue, brown and white are detectable, all against a delicate gold background.

"Never before have we held such an object in hand," said Tchekhanovets, who announced the discovery at an archaeology conference held at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in conjunction with the Israel Antiquities Authority. "It's very exciting that we uncovered it," she said.

The big question revolves around the identity of the two icons in the prayer box. The likely answer, says Tchekhanovets, is that they are Jesus and Mary, but it is certainly possible that they could be other local saints who flourished in that era. Like the prayer boxes sold today in souvenir shops, its Byzantine predecessor was used as a personal ritual object that could be taken anywhere. When worshipers wanted to pray, they would open the box and pray before the icons, and it would function as a miniature church.

Of course, this object - from the 6th century CE - predates Islam.

And isn't it interesting that it was found in the City of David archaeological dig? Anti-Zionists like to charge that Israel's archaeology, and City of David in particular, is politically-motivated and meant only to find Jewish objects. Yet these hateful Zionists seem quite proud to have discovered a Christian relic.

And those Zionist archaeologists find and publicize Islamic-era finds all the time as well.

(h/t Dan)

Journalists agree to not embarrass Sarkozy, Obama over Netanyahu quotes

From YNet:

French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly told US President Barack Obama that he could not "stand" Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that he thinks the Israeli premier "is a liar."

According to a Monday report in the French website "Arret sur Images," after facing reporters for a G20 press conference on Thursday, the two presidents retired to a private room, to further discuss the matters of the day.

The conversation then drifted to Netanyahu, at which time Sarkozy declared: "I cannot stand him. He is a liar." According to the report, Obama replied: "You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!"

The remark was naturally meant to be said in confidence, but the two leaders' microphones were accidently left on, making the would-be private comment embarrassingly public.

The communication faux pas went unnoticed for several minutes, during which the conversation between the two heads of state – which quickly reverted to other matters – was all but open to members the press, who were still in possession of headsets provided by the Elysée for the sake of simultaneous translation during the G20 press conference.

"By the time the (media) services at the Elysée realize it, it was on for at least three minutes," one journalist told the website.

This is a big story, and others are all over it. But there is another troubling aspect to the story that is being overlooked.

The conversation happened on November 3rd. The story was only reported yesterday, November 7th, and then only because a French media watchdog website broke the story.

Which means that none of the journalists who were there reported about this explosive story.

Why not?

The surprising lack of coverage may be explained by a report alleging that journalists present at the event were requested to sign an agreement to keep mum on the embarrassing comments. A Reuters reporter was among the journalists present and can confirm the veracity of the comments.

A member of the media confirmed Monday that "there were discussions between journalists and they agreed not to publish the comments due to the sensitivity of the issue."

He added that while it was annoying to have to refrain from publishing the information, the journalists are subject to precise rules of conduct.

Ah, so it was an ethical thing. Because of "sensitivity."

While I cannot find anything in the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics to preclude reporting on a story like this, I guess we should trust their judgment that some open mic stories are fair game and others are way over the line. (There was another time that Obama kept his mic open and journalists reported on what he said, but he didn't say anything embarrassing.)

Under the same circumstances, these ethical journalists would no doubt have kept quiet about similarly indiscreet comments from, say, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney, and they would have happily signed an agreement muzzling them from reporting them.

And there would have been no news reports about how outrageous it is for world leaders to demand that something embarrassing to them be kept quiet.

(h/t amiyena for Bush link)

Guardian travel writer says Zionists colluded with Hitler

CiFWatch uncovers a tweet from Guardian travel writer Gail Simmons that explains a lot about the world view - and journalistic standards - of the anti-Israel Left.

The link takes you to the Neturei Karta "Jews Against Zionism" website. It seems curious that a writer for a major British publication would uncritically link to a heavily-footnoted article by a set of seemingly ultra-religious Jews who have generally never stepped foot in a library in their lives.

In fact, the article is clearly filled with bogus quotes that were liberally taken from neo-Nazi websites, quotes we have seen before (one example here where the source is badly misspelled so we can trace its origins back to a book by a notorious Holocaust-denier.)

Now, why would a journalist - even a travel writer - uncritically believe an article on a fringe website? Is she so bereft of critical thinking skills that she cannot distinguish between scholarship and hate propaganda? Does she really think that the existence of footnotes automatically proves the worthiness of an article written by a madman? Is she that stupid?

No, the answer is that Gail Simmons already had made up her mind that Zionism and Nazism are equivalent. Her seething hate precedes her interest in the truth. So since she already "knew" the truth, all she has to do is do a quick web search for "Nazi Zionism" and choose the very first hit that confirms her preconceived bigotry!

The Israel-haters have no real facts to back themselves up, but there are plenty of similarly heavily-footnoted pieces they can find at anti-semitic, ultra-right and ultra-left websites written by crazed haters.

Why use critical thought when someone else already seems to have done the job for you?

(h/t jzaik)

Jordan warming relations with Hamas

Ammon News reports that Jordanian officials are floating the idea of increasing their relations with Hamas, twelve years after Hamas offices were closed in Amman.

Prime Minister Awn Khasawneh stated on Monday that the Hamas departure from Jordan was a "political and constitutional mistake."

Former PM Abdel Raouf al-Rawabdeh said that if his government's decision to deport the political bureau of the Palestinian Islamic resistance movement (Hamas) from Jordan in 1999 was a political and constitutional mistake then the new prime minister should correct it.

Hamas political leader Khalid Meshal had called Jordan's new Prime Minister Awn Khasawneh to congratulate him on the appointment and formation of a new government, and Hamas leader Muhammad Nazzal visited Khasawneh in his home last week.

It looks like Jordan is hedging its bets on who will end up leading the Palestinian Arabs in coming years. After all, the Islamist axis will not stop in northern Africa but will likely go through the PA/Hamas territories to Lebanon and Syria. Jordan cannot afford to isolate itself from the coming Islamic winter.

Jewish blood libel in Syrian opposition paper

From MEMRI:

In an article titled "Syrian Blood for Matzas," posted on Sooryoon.net, which is close to Syrian Islamic opposition circles, Dr. Osama Al-Malouhi claimed that a public opinion poll conducted in Israel shows that 80% of Israelis support Bashar Al-Assad's remaining in power, and adds that Israel's support of Assad is the reason the world does not act against him. He goes on to state that this poll brings to mind the Jewish ritual murder to obtain blood for Passover matzas, recalls the 1840 Damascus blood libel, and says, "It may be that the Jews are reviving their heritage and religious rituals, and are taking pleasure in watching Syrian blood being spilled. Perhaps the murderer [Assad] will [even] bring it to them for [their] matza."

The following are excerpts from the article:[1]

"The clear truth is that Bashar Al-Assad is the most popular [leader] among Israelis. [They] want Bashar the murderer to stay [in power]. A few days ago, a public opinion poll was published in Israeli papers, according to which 80% of Israelis support Bashar remaining in power. [Another] poll published in Israeli papers several days ago showed that [Israeli PM Benjamin] Netanyahu's popularity rose following the Shalit deal, exceeding 50% for the first time. This means that Bashar receives more popular support among Israelis than Netanyahu at his best times.

"What is the reason for the Israelis' indirect, unlimited support for the murderer Bashar? Do they really fear the [Islamist] extremists that the [Syrian] regime claims exist? How can the Israelis believe this, when the regime also claims that these extremists have ties to Israel, and that they were found to possess Israeli weapons? Does Israel view every Syrian who does not support Assad as a hostile extremist who must be killed? Why, after seven months of slaughter, does the Israelis' support for Assad's remaining [in power] exceed [their support] for any Israeli prime minister since the [Zionist] entity was established in 1948? Is it conceivable that, after it became clear to the entire world, and especially to the Israelis, how much Syrian blood he has spilled, they still support him and want him to remain?...

"They want that sucker of Syrian blood to remain and continue to prey and suck blood. They not only want their security, but also to enjoy the sight of Syrian blood being spilled, and possibly [to enjoy] its taste it in [their] matza. Asking myself why Jewish support of Bashar increased [even] after they saw the rivers of Syrian blood this mass-murderer spilled in Syrian towns, an old image leapt to my mind, of Jews bleeding people and using their blood to prepare matzas. Logic does not accept this, but the facts prove it.

"The killing of [Christian priest] Father Thomas in Damascus in 1840 by Jews in order to obtain Christian blood for the Passover matza is a terrible event that startled and engaged the world.[2] It may be that the Jews are reviving their heritage and religious rituals, and are taking pleasure in watching Syrian blood being spilled. Perhaps the murderer [Assad] will [even] bring it to them for [their] matza. We must face this clear truth. The world's silence continues because Israel wants the murderer [to remain in power] and pressures everyone to allow this. And [Assad] knows this..."

Needless to say, there has been no poll showing that 80% of Israelis support Assad. And it is indeed disheartening to know that the Syrian opposition is just as bigoted and hateful as the government is - perhaps more so.

(h/t Yoel)

Juan Cole isn't very "informed" about Gaza

I stumbled across this piece of stupidity by Juan Cole where he takes already suspect statistics from HRW and elsewhere - and twists them even more:

Truckloads of goods per year allowed by Israel into Gaza today: 1,000

Truckloads of goods per year allowed by Israel into Gaza in 2005: 2,500

Exports from Gaza to the rest of the world allowed by Israel: 0

HRW's numbers are per week, not per year. One would think that a celebrated academic would know the difference.

Beyond that, the number of truckloads to Gaza is now about 1250 a week - 25% higher than Cole says. And a few events happened between 2005 and now, which Cole and HRW don't address, that make security an issue.

Israel allows exports of strawberries and flowers from Gaza, and did this year as well. Growing season ended in May. HRW says this, Cole ignores it. Cole is lying when he says that the amount of exports from Gaza are "zero."

Moreover, Israel requested a one-time export of tens of thousands of palm fronds in September, which was refused by Hamas. Does Cole approve?

Percentage of Palestinian children in Gaza who are stunted from malnutrition: 15%

In fact, the latest Lancet study showed:

6% of 1883 children who were assessed were stunted (8% of 930 boys vs 3% of 950 girls, p=0·01), less than 1% had wasting, 2% were underweight, 11% were anaemic (7% of boys vs 14% of girls), and 15% were overweight and obese (11% of boys vs 20% of girls; 11% were overweight, and 4% were obese).

Moreover, a higher 11.5% stunting rate was considered a fantastic achievement in a recent World Bank report, and the stunting rate in Gaza is small compared to many other Arab countries!

Number of key medicines which have gone out of stock in Gaza because of the blockade and consequent money problems: 163

There are no restrictions on importing medicine into Gaza. None. Any shortage of medicines is because of the PA (not Hamas) not paying for them. The blockade has nothing - nothing at all - to do with this.

Poor Juan, so blinded by hate that he is forced to bend statistics and believe unreliable sources to push his agenda.

Al Akhbar charges Israel with stealing Syrian (Jewish) culture

Last month I mentioned a fascinating story about how Israel managed to smuggle out priceless Jewish biblical manuscripts that belonged to the Jewish community in Syria.

Al Akhbar English has a different spin on the story:

Israel's Manuscript Theft: Appropriating Jewish Arab History

Ancient Jewish manuscripts have been stolen and smuggled from Arab countries including ones briefly displayed in Jerusalem earlier this month. The consistent Israeli practice is an attempt to undermine the existence of Jewish presence outside of Israel.

The ‘Damascus Crowns’ are Bible manuscripts between 700 to 1,000 years old originating from Damascus’s Jewish community. The manuscripts were smuggled to Israel and were stealthily displayed earlier this month for a few hours in Israel’s National Library in Jerusalem. This was the second time Israel claimed possession of the documents.

Syrian Jews were renowned for being ‘rich in books.’ The 11 manuscripts that form the ‘Damascus Crowns’ were guarded in some of Syria’s 24 synagogues. None were written in Syria, but arrived there with Jewish migration and held in the Jewish community’s libraries. In the 1970s, with the smuggling of Syrian Jews to Israel via Turkey, the manuscripts were quietly spirited away.These human and manuscript smuggling operations received financial backing from Israeli authorities.

Somehow, according to this article, manuscripts that were not written in Syria "originated" in...Syria!

The author uses a UNESCO convention, which Israel did not sign, as proof that the manuscripts belong to Syria. However, the intent of the Convention makes it clear that it should not apply here: From Article II:

The States Parties to this Convention recognize that the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property is one of the main causes of the impoverishment of the cultural heritage of the countries of origin of such property and that international co-operation constitutes one of the most efficient means of protecting each country's cultural property against all the dangers resulting there from.

Syria was not the "country of origin."

While the Convention does seem to say that any "cultural property found within the national territory" of a country belongs to that country it does not seem to address private property nor property belonging to communities. And that is not a clear cut topic; the issue of Jewish cultural artifacts in Lithuania has been discussed in law literature with many arguments being made that it should properly belong to the Jewish community, not to Lithuania. Most of the same arguments apply here:

While the Lithuanian Government currently claims ownership of the Jewish cultural artifacts, both legal and moral arguments can be made that the objects should be returned to the community that created them. The Jewish community can claim that the cultural property was not taken lawfully by Lithuania. Additionally, it can argue that the Vilnius Judaica collection [*156] is "property for grouphood" n58 and, like other property belonging to pre-World War II Jewish communities, should be returned.

The Lithuanian Constitution preserves the inviolability of property, which can only be seized by the State for "the needs of society" and with adequate compensation. n59 The Law on Protection of Movable Cultural Properties likewise provides that cultural property can only be taken from an owner for failure to observe regulations and mismanagement, again subject to compensation. n60 The Jewish community can argue that neither of these conditions has been met. In fact, if any party could be accused of mismanagement, it would be Lithuania, for almost fifty years of neglect.

Lithuanian law also provides that where an owner of cultural property cannot be established or where the owner has lost the right to ownership, the property can be transferred to the State. n61 While it is true that some of the objects do not bear identification marks, many in fact do. According to the United Nations, rightful owners should have a right of action for recovery of lost items of cultural property. n62 Moreover, the Jewish community can argue that it did not "lose" its rights of ownership. The United Nations has recognized that the "transfer of ownership of cultural property under compulsion arising directly or indirectly from the occupation of a country by a foreign power shall be regarded as illicit." n63 The "abandonment" of the property in Lithuania can be seen as resulting from the hostile environment created by the occupation of either the Nazis or the Soviets.

In addition to possible legal arguments, heirs to cultural patrimony "have strong equitable claims to their ancestral property." n64 In determining whether certain property should be held inalienable, the theory of "property for personhood" was developed. The theory posits that some property is so [*157] bound up with a person's identity that it should not be transferred through the market. In fact, personhood property "has a stronger moral claim than other property." n65 Recently, the ideas behind property for personhood have been analogized into the group context, providing that groups have certain rights in cultural property. n66

The new classification of "property for grouphood" that has been proposed would address the tension between cultural identity and the rigid classifications of property ownership. n67 The use of this category of property in the area of cultural property is particularly useful, as "cultural objects nourish a sense of community." n68 "The notion that groups have intrinsic rights to exist, develop, flourish, and perpetuate themselves, and that these rights often are intertwined with groups' relations to history and objects justifies both creating a category of property which promotes grouphood and distinguishing between that property and merely fungible property." n69

To determine if certain objects should be designated property for grouphood, the fundamental question is whether the property is substantially "bound up" with the group identity. n70 In the case of the Jewish objects in Lithuania, the cultural property is "bound up" with the Jewish identity in the sense that it links the members of the group to past and future generations. The Lithuanian Government itself recognizes the connection between cultural property and "cultural continuity." n71 The books, manuscripts, and other materials give the group identity and symbolize its shared values. n72 Furthermore, many of the objects date back hundreds of years and tell of the glorious era of Jewish Enlightenment in Eastern Europe. "Groups have legitimate rights to 'foster, strengthen, and enrich their members' sense of community' by preserving and providing access to a common cultural heritage." n73 The goal of developing the group, in this case the Jewish community, [*158] would be furthered by group control over the collections. n74 If one accepts the classification of the Judaica collection as property for grouphood, then the next step would be the return of the property to the group that created it and that would be strengthened by it today.

Whether Syria likes it or not, Israel represents the Jewish community. Moreover, it represents the Jewish nation, which might not have owned territory in the centuries before 1948 but which never relinquished its nationhood.

Furthermore, it is insulting that the nation that for decades oppressed their Jewish community, and which did not lift a finger to protect priceless Jewish cultural treasures while the community was still there, should now claim that these same treasures are part of the culture that it successfully destroyed within its borders. It is the height of hypocrisy to claim to love the products of a community when at the same time the community itself was ethnically cleansed.

Syria marginalized and destroyed Jewish culture and history in its borders. It cannot now claim that this same culture is part of its own.

(h/t Zach N for Lithuania article)

Syria kills 13 more

...on Eid al Adha.

Syrian forces shot dead at least 13 civilians on Sunday in a continued military assault on the restive city of Homs and in attacks on pro-democracy demonstrations that erupted after prayers marking the main Muslim feast, activists said.

Arab leaders have ramped up criticism of Assad as the killings mounted, but shied from demanding major political change in the country for fear chaos could ensue, given Syria's volatile sectarian divisions. Syria is dominated by Assad's minority Alawite sect while Sunni Muslims form the majority.

Damascus has described increasing Arab criticism as unproductive and based on false media reports.

It says the unrest has arisen largely from a foreign conspiracy to divide Syria and that security forces are using legitimate means to confront "terrorists" and Islamist militants bent on wrecking a reform drive by Assad.

Islamists in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia thinking of an alliance

The al-Moslim website, quoted by Palestine Times, discusses the idea of a pan-Islamist alliance between the Islamist parties in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt.

The article mentions that most of the Islamist groups in the area come from the Muslim Brotherhood and that it makes sense for them to work together.

According to the article, since Arab liberals are aligning with each other in those countries then the opposing Islamists must do so as well. (I am not aware of any liberal pan-Arab movements.)

Islamists are claiming that there is a great hunger among the people in these countries to learn more about Islam and to adopt the practices that could be taught by these groups.

What is certain is that the Islamists remain by far the best organized parties in each of those countries, and they have traditionally been much better at long-term strategy than democratically-minded liberals who only think in terms of the next election cycle.

Flotidiots contradict themselves

From Saeb Press, a report from one of the Irish flotidiots:

The takeover of the MV Saoirse was violent and dangerous. Despite very clear protests from the occupants of the two boats that they did not want to be taken to Israel, they were forcibly removed from the boats in a violent manner. The whole takeover took about three hours. It began with Israeli forces hosing down the boats with high pressure hoses and pointing guns at the passengers through the windows. I was hosed down the stairs of the boat. Windows were smashed and the bridge of the boat nearly caught fire. The boats were corralled to such an extent that the two boats, the Saoirse and the Tahrir, collided with each other and were damaged, with most of the damage happening to the MV Saoirse. The boats nearly sank.

Funny - the reporter from Al Masry al Youm must have been on a different flotilla:

As Israeli naval vessels loomed around our boat, the Israelis made a proposition that they would send one person to inspect for weapons, and if he found nothing, they would let us pass. The proposition was met with skepticism among the activists, although some thought this could really be a way to get to Gaza. The Irish boat, which was sailing with us, staunchly refused the proposition.

As the Israeli ships closed in on us, we found the Irish boat heading into our direction and hitting our boat so aggressively that they damaged their entry point. We speculated that this could be a form of resistance to the forced Israeli boarding, but we couldn't communicate with them to find out.

At this point, the Israelis had withdrawn their proposition and sent radio messages to our boat, asking us to stop sailing because they would board the boat and take us to the Israeli port of Ashdod. When our boat refused to surrender, they aimed their canons at us, showering us with salty water. This came a few minutes after Heap had warned us, “get ready for a shower.”

The Irish "witness" says that the Israeli actions forced the Irish boat to ram the Canadian boat; the reporter says that the Irish boat seemed to ram the other boat on purpose.

The Irish man said that the water cannons preceded the crash, the Egyptian reporter says the opposite.

The Irish man accuses the IDF of extreme violence, the Egyptian reporter did not report any violence.

Expect more fantastic tales from the sea.

The "Russell Tribunal" is racist!

The current "Russell Tribunal on Palestine" taking place in South Africa is an absurd exercise in hate masquerading as justice.

Besides the obvious facts that its verdict was decided years before the "trial," that the "judges" are extremist haters of Israel, and that the entire proceedings make a mockery of any pretense of objectivity, it is worth looking at how the "tribunal" is twisting the legal issues.

The purpose of this session is to "prove" that Israel is violating the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, specifically Article II.

Here is Article II:

For the purpose of the present Convention, the term "the crime of apartheid", which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them:

(a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person:

(i) By murder of members of a racial group or groups;

(ii) By the infliction upon the members of a racial group or groups of serious bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of their freedom or dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

(iii) By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group or groups;

(b) Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part;

(c) Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognized trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;

d) Any measures including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof;

(e) Exploitation of the labour of the members of a racial group or groups, in particular by submitting them to forced labour;

(f) Persecution of organizations and persons, by depriving them of fundamental rights and freedoms, because they oppose apartheid.

It is obvious that Jews and Palestinian Arabs do not belong to different racial groups, as well as that Israeli Arabs are not a different racial group than Palestinian Arabs. The entire legal argument is specious from the start.

But that small fact does not stop the "tribunal:"

After attempting to establish a legal framework, the testimony that followed over the two days examined different aspects of article II with regard to the Israeli-Palestine situation, including whether Palestinians are a separate racial group and the specific actions that may constitute the establishment and maintenance of Jewish domination over Palestinians. The response to the former, submitted by Ingrid Jaradat on behalf of the Palestinian Boycott Divestments Sanctions national committee, was a de-facto yes. While Palestinians don’t usually define themselves as a racial group, they are viewed and discriminated against as though they were a group, according to Jaradat.

Just to be clear on how absurd this is, here is the US' legal definition of "racial group:" A set of individuals whose identity as such is distinctive in terms of physical characteristics or biological descent.

It seems self-evident that a racial group is one that no one can voluntarily leave, yet there is nothing stopping Palestinian Arabs from converting to Judaism. Similarly, if an Israeli Jew would decide to renounce his citizenship and move to Ramallah, would Israel treat him any differently than they would an Arab?

Moreover, the Convention specifically says that the definition of apartheid is where "domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons." They must not only define Palestinian Arabs as a racial group, but they must also define Jews as a race!

The "Russell Tribunal," in order to make its charges, is forced to ascribe racial categories on a religious/national group of people. Even though Jews are comprised of all races by any definition, the "tribunal" must use racial terms to describe Jews as well as Palestinian Arabs in order to even start their hateful path.

This joke of a "tribunal" is, in fact, racist because it defines Jews as a race for the specific purpose of demonizing them.

New IAEA report will say Iran is preparing nuclear weapons

From Reuters:

The U.N. nuclear watchdog is expected this week to issue its most detailed report yet on research in Iran seen as geared to developing atomic bombs, heightening international suspicions of Tehran's agenda and stoking Middle East tensions.

Western powers are likely to seize on the International Atomic Energy Agency document, which has been preceded by media speculation in Israel of military strikes against Iranian nuclear sites, to press for more sanctions on the oil producer.

But Russia and China fear the publication now of the IAEA's findings could hurt any chance of diplomacy resolving the long-running nuclear row and they have lobbied against it, signaling opposition to any new punitive U.N. measures against Iran.

Iran rejects allegations of atomic weapons ambitions, saying its nuclear program is aimed at producing electricity.

The report is tentatively scheduled to be submitted to IAEA member states on November 9 before a quarterly meeting the following week of the agency's 35-nation board of governors in Vienna.

It "will be followed by a U.S.-European Union push for harsher sanctions against Iran at the U.N. Security Council, where Western powers will meet stiff resistance from Russia and China," said Trita Parsi, an expert on U.S.-Iran relations.

The document is expected to give fresh evidence of research and other activities with little other application than atomic bomb-making, including studies linked to the development of an atom bomb trigger and computer modeling of a nuclear weapon.

Sources briefed on the report also say it will include information from both before and after 2003 -- the year in which U.S. spy services estimated, in a controversial 2007 assessment, that Iran had halted outright "weaponization" work.

Many conservative experts criticized the 2007 findings as inaccurate and naive, and U.S. intelligence agencies now believe Iranian leaders have resumed closed-door debates over the last four years about whether to build a nuclear bomb.

"The primary new information is likely to be any work that Iran has engaged in after 2003 ... Iran is understood to have continued or restarted some research and development since then," said Peter Crail of the Arms Control Association, a U.S.-based advocacy group.

The sources familiar with the document said that among other things it would support allegations that Iran built a large steel container for the purpose of carrying out tests with high explosives applicable to nuclear weapons.

"This is not a country that is sitting down just doing some theoretical stuff on a computer," a Western official said about the IAEA's body of evidence, which is based on Western intelligence as well as the agency's own investigations.

This is not the first time that the IAEA has sounded a warning on Iran's nuclear program.

Ma'ariv reports that a high ranking Russian diplomat said that his country "would not shed any tears" if the West attacked Iran's nuclear sites, even though Russia is publicly against the IAEA release of this report.

The Washington Post adds that there is evidence that Iran received crucial information on nuclear weapons design from a Russian scientist as well as from Pakistan and North Korea.

On the other hand, the New York Times is bending over backwards to criticize the IAEA report before it is released.

The Guardian adds some crucial context:

Enriching to 90% [the amount of purification needed for weapons] is not easy, as the level of impurities in the uranium fuel becomes more of a challenge. However, since February 2010 Iran has been successfully making 20%-enriched uranium at Natanz, ostensibly to fuel a medical research reactor in Tehran.

Western governments allege this is a pretext as Iran lacks the means to manufacture the necessary fuel rods. They point out that, in terms of technical difficulty, 20% uranium is nine-tenths of the way to weapon-grade material. In fact, leaked US diplomatic cables reveal that as far back as April 2009 US officials were convinced that Iran had mastered the process.

Iran has more than 70kg of 20% uranium – about a fifth of the quantity needed to make a bomb if further enriched. Of even greater international concern was the confirmation in the September IAEA report that Iran had installed a set, or "cascade", of centrifuges at a new site at Fordow, near to the Shia holy city of Qom.

The Fordow site, whose existence was revealed in 2009, is under a mountain and would be extremely difficult to damage by aerial bombing. Iranian authorities claim 10 other enrichment sites are being prepared but no sign of them has materialised.

At the moment it is the transfer of enrichment to Fordow that represents the ticking clock for western military intervention. Once the bulk of production is established there, the programme would be a much harder nut to crack.

The transfer of Iran's stockpile of 20% uranium from the relative vulnerability of Natanz to the impregnability of Fordow would be seen as even more threatening. "That would be a huge red line – a very significant move that would be very hard to ignore," a western diplomat said.

It looks like those people that Reuters dismiss as "conservative experts" who criticized the 2007 NIE report were right. I gave my own criticisms of the NIE report here.

(h/t Yoel for Ma'ariv article)

Israelis saving the world - again

From Israel21c:

As we get older, modern medicine will help more of us live with cancer rather than die from it. That's the assumption behind a vaccine to treat cancer, being developed by a pharmaceutical company in Israel.

Vaxil BioTherapeutics' main product, ImMucin, is now in advanced clinical trials at Hadassah University Medical Center in Jerusalem.

CEO Julian Levy tells ISRAEL21c that this therapeutic vaccine doesn't prevent cancer from invading, but activates and enhances the body's natural immune system to seek and destroy cancer cells already present in the body, such as those lingering after cancer surgery.

Malignant cells normally get out of control by tricking the immune system not to notice them, a strategy that works especially well in older people because immune systems get less efficient with age.

The vaccine is currently being tested against a blood cancer called multiple myeloma. However, Vaxil's scientific breakthrough is based on a drug platform, VaxHit, which can be tailored to treat not only 90 percent of cancers, he says, but also diseases such as tuberculosis.

This disease is cropping up in developing nations as existing vaccines are proving less and less effective.

"Two billion are affected by the pathogen," says Levy. "Ten percent will develop the active disease. And while TB can be treated by drugs, it takes several months and it can be brutal."

According to Levy, the vaccine presents no side effects, and can be taken indefinitely, like vitamins. ImMucin is designed to overcome cancer cells that mutate, rendering other drugs ineffective.

Depending on the outcome of clinical trials, the ImMucin vaccine could be ready and marketable within the next six years. It could have major implications for the treatment of leading killers like prostate and breast cancer.

A promotional video by Vaxil can be seen here.

Remember, BDSers, to demand your doctor not use Israeli products when treating your loved ones for deadly diseases. By using Israeli products to save the lives of the ones you love you are helping to promote the worst human rights abuses known to man. You wouldn't want to do that. It would be evil and wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong!

Instead, consider the medical benefits of camel urine. This wonderful technology is being pushed by a country that is not nearly as oppressive as Israel.

(h/t Israel Awareness)

Why are Falk and Mearsheimer promoting an anti-semitic book? (Dershowitz)

From Alan Dershowitz in The New Republic:

As the discourse about Israel on university campuses continues to degenerate, there is growing concern that some of Israel’s most vocal detractors are crossing a red line between acceptable criticism of Israel and legitimizing anti-Semitism. The recent endorsements by several internationally prominent academics—including John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Richard Falk of Princeton—of an overtly anti-Semitic book written by a notorious Jew-hater illustrate this dangerous trend.

The book in question is entitled The Wandering Who? and was written by Gilad Atzmon, a British jazz musician. Lest there be any doubt about Atzmon’s anti-Semitic credentials, listen to his self-description in the book itself. He boasts about “drawing many of my insights from a man who … was an anti-Semite as well as a radical misogynist” and a hater of “almost everything that fails to be Aryan masculinity” (89-90). He declares himself a “proud, self-hating Jew” (54), writes with “contempt” of “the Jew in me” (94), and describes himself as “a strong opponent of … Jewish-ness” (186). His writings, both online and in his new book, brim with classic anti-Semitic motifs that are borrowed from Nazi publications:

Throughout his writings, Atzmon argues that Jews seek to control the world:

·     “[W]e must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously.”

·     “American Jewry makes any debate on whether the ‘Protocols of the elder of Zion’ [sic] are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy.”

...Atzmon rehearses many of these ideas in The Wandering Who?:

·     “[T]o be a Jew is a deep commitment that goes far beyond any legal or moral order” (20) and this commitment “pulls more and more Jews into an obscure, dangerous and unethical fellowship” (21).

·     If Iran and Israel fight a nuclear war that kills tens of millions of people, “some may be bold enough to argue that ‘Hitler might have been right after all’” (179).

...·     Children should be allowed to question, as he did, “how the teacher could know that these accusations of Jews making Matza out of young Goyim’s blood were indeed empty or groundless” (185).

·      “The Holocaust religion is probably as old as the Jews themselves” (153).

·       The history of Jewish persecution is a myth, and if there was any persecution the Jews brought it on themselves (175, 182).

In light of this Der Stürmer-like bigotry against Jews, it should come as no surprise that even some of the most hard-core anti-Israel activists have shunned Atzmon out of fear that his anti-Semitism will discredit their cause. ....

Hard-core neo-Nazis, racists, anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers, on the other hand, have happily counted Atzmon as one of their own. David Duke, America’s premier white supremacist, has posted more than a dozen of Atzmon’s articles on his website over the past five years and recently praised Atzmon for “writ[ing] such fine articles exposing the evil of Zionism and Jewish supremacism.” Kevin MacDonald, a professor at Cal State Long Beach whose colleagues formally disassociated themselves from his “anti-Semitic and white ethnocentric views,” called Atzmon’s book “an invaluable account by someone who clearly understands the main symptoms of Jewish pathology.” Israel Shamir, a Holocaust denier (“We must deny the concept of Holocaust without doubt and hesitation”) who argues that Jews ritually murdered Christian children for their blood and that “The rule of the Elders of Zion is already upon us,” refers to Atzmon as a “good friend” and calls Atzmon one of “the shining stars of the battle” against “the Jewish alliance.”

But neither Atzmon’s well-established reputation for anti-Semitism nor the copious anti-Semitic filth that fills The Wandering Who? has deterred Professors John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk from actively endorsing Atzmon’s work. Mearsheimer, the Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, calls The Wandering Who? a “fascinating” book that “should be read widely by Jews and non-Jews alike.” Falk, Milibank Professor of International Law Emeritus at Princeton University and United Nations Special Rapporteur on “human rights in the Palestinian territories,” calls The Wandering Who? an “absorbing and moving” book that everyone who “care[s] about real peace” should “not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Falk’s endorsement appears prominently on the cover of Atzmon’s book. Mearsheimer’s endorsement is featured on its first page. These professors are not merely defending Atzmon’s right to publish such a book; they are endorsing its content and urging their colleagues, students, and others to read and “reflect upon” the views expressed by Atzmon. One wonders which portions of this bigoted screed Professors Mearsheimer and Falk believe their students and others “should” read and “discuss widely.”

Mearsheimer has defended his endorsement (on Stephen Walt’s blog) by questioning whether his critics have even read Atzmon’s book. Well, I’ve read every word of it, as well as many of Atzmon’s blogs. No one who has read this material could escape the conclusion—which Atzmon freely admits—that many of his “insights” are borrowed directly from classic anti-Semitic writings. Mearsheimer claims, however, that he has endorsed only Atzmon’s book and not his other writings. But the book itself is filled with crass neo-Nazi rants against the “Jew,” “World Jewry,” and “Jewish bankers.” He claims that “robbery and hatred is imbued in Jewish modern political ideology on both the left and the right” (123). And like other anti-Semites, Atzmon is obsessed in the book with Jewish names. It was Jews, such as Wolfowitz and Libby, who pushed the United States into war against Iraq in the “interests” of “their beloved Jewish state” (26). “How is it that America failed to restrain its Wolfowitzes?” Atzmon asks (27).

Likewise, according to Atzmon’s book, it was “Jewish bankers,” financiers, economists, writers, and politicians such as Greenspan, Levy, Aaronovitch, Saban, Friedman, Schiff, and Rothschild who have caused the economic and political problems of the world, ranging from the Bolshevik revolution to the wars of the 20th century to the current economic troubles (27,194). And like other classic anti-Semites, Atzmon doesn’t simply fault the individual Jews he names; he concocts a worldwide Jewish conspiracy motivated by a “ruthless Zio-driven” (27) “Jewish ideology” (69) that finds its source in “the lethal spirit” (122) of the Hebrew Bible. This sort of conspiratorial drivel is borrowed almost word for word from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion—the Czarist forgery that became a staple of Nazi propaganda.