Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, September 17, 2010

Arab League rejects "Jewish state"

From Ma'an:

Arab foreign ministers meeting in Cairo on Thursday decided to reject a demand made by Israel, asking Palestinian negotiators recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

In a statement issued after the meeting, the Arab League supported President Mahmoud Abbas' refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Palestinian negotiators have recognized Israel’s right to exist, but not as a Jewish state, which officials say would prejudice the right of return for refugees and violate the rights of Israel's non-Jewish residents.

If recognizing Israel as a Jewish state would violate the rights of non-Jews in Israel, then defining "Palestine" as Arab would likewise violate the rights of non-Arabs, and defining it is Islamic would - by their definition - mean that non-Muslims will be discriminated against.

Here are parts of the "Constitution of Palestine" that mentions the word "Arab" or "Islam":

ARTICLE 1
Palestine is part of the large Arab World, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab Nation. Arab Unity is an objective which the Palestinian People shall work to achieve.

ARTICLE 4
Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained.
The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be the main source of legislation.
Arabic shall be the official language.

In addition, in five instances, the constitution refers specifically to the "Palestinian Arab people" or the "Arab Palestinian people." For example,

ARTICLE 116
Laws shall be promulgated in the name of the Palestinian Arab People, and shall be published immediately in the official gazette. These laws shall come into force 30 days from the date of their publication unless the laws state otherwise.

It sounds like non-Arabs cannot become "Palestinian" and that any non-Arabs who happen to live in Palestine would be, by definition, in a lower class.

Equal rights only apply to Palestinian Arabs:

ARTICLE 9
All Palestinians are equal under the law and judiciary without discrimination because of race, sex, color, religion, political views, or disability.

Since all Palestinians are Arabs by their definition, this means that there would be discrimination against non-Arabs.

Furthermore, since the constitution says that "Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained," that means that the Constitution of Palestine is enshrining discrimination against other religions that are not considered "heavenly" by Islam. In other words, Hindus and Buddhists can expect to be treated in a bigoted way should they want to visit or live in any Palestinian Arab state.

Of course, every Arab state's constitution says things that are similar.

The hypocrisy behind the outrage at calling Israel "Jewish" cannot be more blatant.

Latest Latma

Some cute parts....

When Jews were optimistic about the UN

I just found this cartoon commercial created by the American Jewish Committee in the 1950s, promoting the UN:

We needn't have the world in pieces

Cause the world's best hope for peace is

The UN plus U, the UN plus U

...We'll fight aggression

Lick diseases

Stand for peace but not appeasers

The UN plus U, the UN plus U

Report: Egypt arrests senior Hamas official in Cairo

Palestine Press Agency and PalVoice, both Fatah mouthpieces, are quoting Egyptian security forces that Egypt has arrested a senior Hamas official at Cairo International Airport.

The Hamas member is Mohamed Debabeche, known as "Abu Radwan", the commander of the General Security Service who reports to Hamas interior minister Fathi Mohammed.

The sources linked his arrest with the recent discovery of large shipments of secure radio equipment that were being smuggled to Hamas in Gaza. The equipment was worth millions of dollars.

UPDATE: The news of Debabeche's arrest is prompting some Egyptian groups to re-open the investigation into the killing of an Egyptian guard Ahmed Shaaban by a Hamas sniper last January during demonstrations to support George Galloway's Viva Palestina convoy. Debabeche had blocked attempts by Egypt to extradite the killer.

When inner Jihad and outer Jihad meet

From YNet:

A member of the one of the Palestinian militant groups in Gaza admitted to Ynet on Thursday that the phosphorus used in the rockets fired on Israel Wednesday contained material gathered from shells Israel itself fired on Gaza during Operation Cast Lead.

"The phosphorus was taken from bombs Israel fired, that didn’t explode," he said.

The source said that the Gaza groups were continuing their quest to enhance their offensive capabilities, especially regarding rocket range and explosive capabilities.

"This has nothing to do with the peace talks, but with our desire to improve ourselves."

And, as we have been told countless times, Jihad is all about self-improvement!

By the way, Islamic Jihad called the claim that missiles with phosphorus were fired into Israel a "fabrication."

The self-hating Jews of 1893

From the New York Times, September 21, 1893:

Reminds me of these guys.

Spanish "Mecca" nightclub caves

Remember the nightclub in Spain called "Mecca" that got Muslims so upset? So much so that Moroccan hackers broke into the site?

Well, the owners caved to the demands of the eternal seethers. From the Daily Mail (via Jihad Watch):

A popular Spanish nightclub has been forced to change its name from Mecca after sparking a furious reaction around the Islamic world.

Intelligence chiefs warned owners they were being targeted by extremists who claim the disco is insulting to their religion.

Hackers broke into the nightclub's website and posted a video threatening 'a great war between Spain and the people of Islam' if the venue did not change its name.

Today the owners, said to include former Real Madrid goalkeeper Santiago Canizares, agreed to change the club's name after meeting with local Muslim leaders.

La Meca (Spanish for Mecca), was the most popular disco in the coastal city of Aguila, in Murcia, southeastern Spain, in the 1980s and 90s before it closed down a decade ago.

It re-opened on June 18 with the same name, sparking the current controversy.
Last week Spain's intelligence agency, the National Intelligence Centre (CNI), alerted the owners to threats being made online.

Moderate Spanish Muslims also called for the name to be changed.

Please be tolerant of Muslim feelings. Or else they very well might kill you.

That will teach you tolerance!

A victim of real Islamophobia

The term "Islamophobia" was never accurate because it was meant to convey the hatred of Islam, not the fear of Islam.

But now we have a real victim of Islamophobia, or perhaps more accurately Muslimophobia - a young woman who is forced to go into hiding to save her life from Muslim death threats.

In the United States.

From the Seattle Weekly News, via Jihad Watch:

You may have noticed that Molly Norris' comic is not in the paper this week. That's because there is no more Molly.

The gifted artist is alive and well, thankfully. But on the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI, she is, as they put it, "going ghost": moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity. She will no longer be publishing cartoons in our paper or in City Arts magazine, where she has been a regular contributor. She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection program—except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab. It's all because of the appalling fatwa issued against her this summer, following her infamous "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" cartoon.

Norris views the situation with her customary sense of the world's complexity, and absurdity. When FBI agents, on a recent visit, instructed her to always keep watch for anyone following her, she responded, "Well, at least it'll keep me from being so self-involved!" It was, she says, the first time the agents managed a smile. She likens the situation to cancer—it might basically be nothing, it might be urgent and serious, it might go away and never return, or it might pop up again when she least expects it.

We're hoping the religious bigots go into full and immediate remission, and we wish her the best.

Here is that horribly offensive cartoon that Molly drew:

Another nail in the coffin of freedom of speech, brought to you by radical Islam.

Some lessons from Black September

From Al-Arabiya:

Jordan and the Palestinians have turned the page on the bloody clashes of "Black September" that kicked off exactly 40 years ago on Friday but fears still remain in the absence of regional peace.

Estimates of the numbers killed in the 10 months of fighting that finally saw Jordan's army drive Palestinian fighters out of the country range widely, between 2,000 and 30,000. Palestinians have revised down the toll to 3,000.

Following the Arab defeat in the 1967 Six-Day War, Yasser Arafat, who later became Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) chief, saw in Jordan an ideal location for military bases for around 40,000 fighters to attack the neighboring Jewish state.

But the power of the Palestinian armed groups developed into a state within a state.

On September 6, 1970, the leftist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked three passenger planes, two of which landed in Azraq, east of the capital Amman. Three days later a fourth plane was hijacked, with 56 British and U.S.-Israelis citizens on board.

On September 17, Jordan's then king Hussein responded by ordering his army of 50,000 men to kick the Palestinian fighters out of the kingdom.

After 10 days of bloody fighting, during which Syria intervened to back the Palestinians, a ceasefire was signed in Cairo.

But the Palestinian armed groups got to stay in Jordan, and the fighting did not stop until Prime Minister Wasfi al-Tel drove the Palestinian fighters out of the country in July 1971.

Tel was assassinated four months later in Cairo by four members of the "Black September" organization.

Jordanians have few regrets about the king's decision, however, in a country where around half of its 6.2 million people are now of Palestinian origin.

"It was not only inevitable but also necessary. If we did not act the way we did, it would have served the purpose of Israel of creating a Palestinian state in Jordan," said Adnan Abu Odeh, a confidant of king Hussein of Palestinian origin and information minister at the time of the fighting.

Jordan today justifies killing thousands of Palestinian Arabs because it was for their own good - otherwise, they would not have a chance for a state, that they would have gotten had they won. Makes perfect sense.

Palestinian political analyst Hani al-Masri said there is now a "privileged relationship" between the two governments and two peoples because there is no longer a Palestinian desire to take over Jordan.

Now, it is true that the Palestinian Arab desire to take over Jordan lasted only that brief moment in time in the early 1970s.

There is a basic question, though: why exactly don't the Palestinian Arabs want at least parts of Jordan to be a part of their nation today? Before the British Mandate, it was simply known as "Eastern Palestine." If Palestinian Arabs are basing their national claims on their historic connection to Palestine, why would they voluntarily relinquish their claim to large swaths of their historic land?

That question gets starker in light of the history of the PLO. The original PLO charter from 1964 has a most enlightening section:

Article 24: This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area.

To any observer today, this should be considered an incredible statement. The original PLO charter explicitly excludes the West Bank, Gaza (as well as the part of British Mandate Palestine that was seized by Syria) - the very lands that they now insist must be theirs in their entirety!

How can this be? How could the Palestinian Arabs of 1964 had no desire whatsoever to "liberate" the lands occupied at that time by Jordan, Syria and Egypt? How can the position of the PLO in 1964 be considered consistent with the PLO of today, when at first glance they appear to have then wanted a negative image of what they demand now?

The answer is that the PLO has indeed been remarkably consistent in its desire from 1964 to today: they want whatever land Jews happen to be controlling (or perceived to be controlling) at the moment. Before 1967, that didn't include Eastern Palestine, the West Bank, or Gaza. Now, it just doesn't include Eastern Palestine. (Himmah is a tiny strip of land south of the Sea of Galilee that extended into the East Bank of the Jordan, I think that it is part of the area captured by Israel from Syria in 1967, and an area that Syria claims as its own.)

This is the historic truth that the world refuses to notice. The Palestinian Arab national movement never had anything to do with the desire to build a nation on the land known for millenia as "Palestine." Since it began in the early 20th century, it has always been a fundamentally negative movement meant to deprive Jews of their own national aspirations and self-determination - not to achieve independence for their people. This is the only way to understand why there isn't a single Palestinian Arab who is willing to stand up today and demand the Himmah area that is also claimed by Syria, or to demand their historic section of the East Bank. This is why they were so muted in their national aspirations before 1967 - when the Arab nations still seemed poised to destroy and divide up Israel between them, and that goal dovetailed nicely with their goal as well. This is why none of their leaders are willing to compromise on land or on east Jerusalem - which they happily allowed Jordan to control and ignore before 1967 without a single peep that this was "holy Palestinian land." This is why even the "moderate" Palestinian Arabs refuse to publish a map showing a state of Palestine that does not include all of Israel. It is the reason why todays Palestinian Arabs, by a huge majority, say that the conflict will never be over until Israel is destroyed.

And this is why any "peace agreement" is doomed to failure. The basic aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs will not be met by even a full state in the West Bank and Gaza. Any peace would be temporary and ethereal. The next stage for the ultimate destruction of Israel would commence at the very moment of the White House ceremony announcing an end to the conflict.

Maybe Salam Fayyad, with no history of terrorist ties, would be happy with a state in the West Bank and Gaza only - but he does not represent Fatah, Hamas or any other major faction, let alone the majority of Palestinian Arabs who live outside the territories. Perhaps a few other ultra-moderate Palestinian Arabs would accept a peace agreement and renounce claims to Israel proper. The overwhelming evidence, however, shows that they are the anomalies, not the mainstream. It is not an exaggeration to say that generations of Palestinian Arabs have been raised on a diet of revenge and hate. To pin peace hopes on wishful thinking that most Palestinian Arabs are like the very few moderates is a guarantee for much more bloodshed in the future.

Intriguing: Fayyad fires his security guard

Firas Press reports that PA prime minister Salam Fayyad has fired his "director for personal security" who has been protecting him for two years.

No reason was given.

Given that Fayyad is not a member of Fatah, most of the PA security is dominated by Fatah, and Fatah has never been happy about a non-Fatah prime minister, is it possible that he suspected his security detail of spying on him?

The difference between Western and Arab media (Zvi)

Zvi writes:

Many Arab rulers and journalists have a very different understanding of the purpose and value of the media than the one that is popular in the United States and many other western countries.

The Western Media
In the US, the media as a whole is broadly regarded as the "fourth estate." The belief is that it is important for citizens to have a reliable vehicle for learning and understanding the reality of the society and world in which they live. The idea is that without such a vehicle, it is impossible for a democratic society to function even moderately well. And without such a vehicle, the western free market that is the beating heart of the world economy would come crashing down around everyone's ears. Widespread ability to obtain true information is crucial in a decentralized society.

Of course, every news organization has its biases, and some of these are extreme - but the diversity of the available media and, more recently, the democratizing influence of the internet, help people who want to find the truth to uncover it, and to report it.

There are specific exceptions - media outlets that have openly aligned themselves with a particular political party. But in democratic societies, it is broadly understood that the media, rather than being an attack dog for the government, is supposed to distribute true information.

The Arab Media
In the Arab world, the model is completely different, and with good reason. In the Arab world, media outlets are almost inevitably closely aligned with with the political interests that sponsor and protect them. In most cases - because all but a few Arab governments are strongly centralized and ruled undemocratically by an individual, junta or party - most of the media work, directly or indirectly, for the king/president/chief thug or his family or allies.

At the very least, reporters in these countries know that if they go too far in criticizing the regime or its allies, they will be harrassed, fired, arrested, beaten or killed.

Indeed, the general understanding among Arab regimes is that the media exists not as a neutral vehicle for delivering true information, but rather as a vehicle for presenting and sometimes testing the will of the nation - a very different thing. The "will of the nation" being what the president or king says it should be, it is expected that the media will find ways to support it. It is expected that the media will find ways to attack the enemy (often Israel, Jews, Iran or the west) and at all costs to avoid presenting the enemy in a way that might weaken national resolve.

A few countries - notably Lebanon and Iraq - are sufficiently fragmented that the media - though frequently aligned with specific political parties - can actually achieve a degree of diversity that would be impossible if these countries had strong centralized regimes like Syria or Saudi Arabia.

A few countries (Qatar, UAE) have come to specialize in blanketing the Arab world with sponsored media which, because they are not tightly beholden to the rulers of most Arab countries, achieve some independence from Arab governments other than their own (and their own government's close allies). However, these media nevertheless fall into the tribalist trap of becoming a vehicle for the Will of the Arabs rather than a vehicle for reporting the truth, no matter how unpalateable this would be for their audience.

The Palestinian Arab Media
The Palestinian media is extremely weak and is severely constrained by the PA in the east and Hamas in the west. The reporters would be out of work if they did not strongly self-identify with the Palestinian Cause and if they did not voice the Will of the People regardless of the truth. In a word, the Palestinian media is simply propaganda. The reporters working for the Palestinian media are mostly third-tier journalists. They certainly don't work for tiers 1 and 2 (the free western media and the international Arab media).

But again - for these journalists, the Will of the Nation is everything, the Cause is everything, and the truth is nothing.

Zvi may be too charitable about the Western media.

Training public school kids how to be good Muslims in Massachusetts and Germany

From the Boston Jewish Advocate:

Sixth graders from Wellesley Middle School took a trip to the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center in Roxbury in May to learn about Islam as part of their Social Studies curriculum.

The students heard a presentation on the history and culture of Islam and then the girls were separated from the boys to observe the daily prayer at the mosque.

Five boys from the class appear to have taken part in the prayer, bowing and touching their foreheads to the floor, according to a video shot by a parent chaperone. The boys were flanked by mosque members. One of them was Jewish, according to the chaperone.

The chaperone, a Wellesley mother whose identity has not been revealed, gave the video to Americans for Peace and Tolerance, a Boston nonprofit that acts as a watchdog for radical Islam in America.

“None of the teachers or school officials at the mosque intervened to stop them from participating in a Muslim ritual prayer,” said Charles Jacobs, the group’s co-founder and executive director. “One can only imagine if students were taken to a church and the priest had them kneeling and crossing themselves or taking the wafer; it would cross a line.”

From Al Arabiya:

The German state of Lower Saxony will start including Islam in its schools’ core curriculum as part of an initiative to counter growing anti-Islam sentiments in Europe.

Dr. Bernd Althusmann, Minister for Education at the northwestern state of Lower Saxony, announced that schools in the state will start including Islamic education in their main curriculum, the London-based Asharq al-Awsat reported Thursday.

“I think we will be able to start implementation by the academic year after the next,” Althusmann said during a visit to an elementary school in the city of Hanover and in which he attended an Islamic education class.

For the time being, Islamic education has not exceeded a few experimental models in 42 schools in Lower Saxony. Almost 2,000 Muslim students in these schools currently get Islamic education in the state.

The German media has been reporting this as well, although those articles imply that the Islamic education is for Muslims, not for the general student population. it is unclear however whether non-Muslim students would be required to take part in this part of the "core curriculum."

When headline writers don't read the articles

YNet, on its front page, shows this link to an article:

So is Amazon Associates offering a discount for this weekend - 20% off all machzorim and kittels?

Not quite.

Reports: Israel warns Hamas leaders that they'll be killed if rockets continue

Arab media is reporting that Israel has sent a message to Arab countries that the policy of targeted assassinations will resume unless the recent massive increase in terror attacks stops.

Jerusalem-based newspaper Al Manar reports that in response to the terror attacks and massive increase in rocket fire since the negotiations between the PA and Israel resumed, Israel contacted Arab nations to let Hamas know that there will be serious consequences for any escalation.

Although I cannot find the source now, there were reports yesterday that Hamas leaders fled a meeting out of fear that Israeli warplanes would attack.

Friends of Israel Initiative

The Friends of Israel Initiative launched in the US this week. As its press release at its US launch says:

The Friends of Israel Initiative (FII), a group of leading policymakers and world leaders chaired by former Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar, announced today the U.S. launch of their
international campaign to combat the global effort to delegitimize the State of Israel.

Organized and launched in Paris and London in summer 2010, FII is a first of its kind -- a high-level group of international leaders who insist that Israel has a legal right to exist as a normal Western democracy, and that fellow Western nations have a moral obligation to defend that right.

"It is not just a matter of Israel being the West’s first line of defense against global jihadism, and that if Israel fell the West as we know it would cease to exist," said Prime Minister Aznar.

"It is certainly all of that as well, but even more critically the issue of Israel is an ethical issue. The West has lost the moral clarity required to address anti-Semitic criticisms of the Jewish State and to defend the right of Israelis to live peacefully within defensible borders."

Joining Prime Minister Aznar in the effort are the eleven original signatories of the Friends of Israel statement and the tens of thousands who have signed the group’s petition.

Reflecting Americans’ broad, bipartisan support for Israel, FII will not support the specific policies of any government, politician or political party. Instead the organization will defend Israel as a normal, democratic country, with all the virtues and defects of any fellow democracy, and as a key member of the alliance of nations dedicated to defending the West’s fundamental values of freedom, tolerance, human rights, prosperity and stability.

Aznar's speech at the Washington launch included this:

We defend Israel because we believe is the best strategy in current times to defend the West.

When we started putting this Initiative in motion, the whole World was condemning Israel for reasons I don’t need to elaborate since you know them better than I do.

Now, the atmosphere has changed a little since direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians have reassumed and the peace process is moving ahead. Despite all the difficulties the negotiations may experience, I think we all should recognize the value, the prospects, and the hopes they represent. I am sure that Israel wants peace, and I know that all true friends of Israel want to see her achive that dream of peace and security.

But as we made clear in our first statement (which should have been on your chair tonight, by the way), there are problems in the region greater than just an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. Problems that will not go away even if a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is eventually reached.

While Israel has made peace with Egypt and Jordan, and her economy has strengthened in recent years, now not decades ago, Israel, is facing increasing dangers. She has been forced to defend her people from Hezbollah in the North and thousands of Hamas rockets in the South. And. perhaps most worryingly, Israel is increasingly threatened by the scenario of a nuclear Iran – something the world must certainly act urgently to prevent.

On top of that, Israel is under a new kind of attack. Not conventional war as in 1948, 56, 67 or 73. Not terrorism as we saw in the 70s, 80s and 90s. But a new kind of attack – an attack on Israel legitimacy, on her right to exist. A “soft-war”, where many of its adversaries are employing legal tricks, multinational bodies, and an army of dubious NGO’s to present internationally Israel as an illegitimate state, as a barbarian State, a State that should be isolated and converted into a pariah State.

We think this is intolerable. It is unjust, morally wrong, and a strategic risk -- not only for Israel and its people -- but for all of us.

Israel is an integral part of the West, and the weaker it is, the weaker the entire West will be perceived to be.

Even if we want to turn away from the traumas of 9/11, we simply do not have the luxury to choose our enemies. As Senators Baker, Dole, Daschle and Mitchell made clear in their latest report, published 5 days ago. by the Bipartisan Policy Center, the threat to our way of life from radical islamists is real, and it has not yet been eliminated.

Let me be clear. We don’t want in any case to defend any particular Israeli government or any particular set of policies or any particular party. Israelis institutions are mature enough to defend their choices. We want to stand up for the right of Israel to exist. Judeo-Christian values form the roots of our civilization. Delegitimizing Israel undermines our identity, warps our values and put at risk what we are and who we are.

So, dear friends, it is not only the threat that if Israel goes down, which, make no mistake, many of its enemies would like to see happen, we all go down. It is that letting Israel be demonized will lead to the deligitimation of our own cherished values. If Israel were to disappear by the force of its enemies, I sincerely doubt the West could remain as we know it.
So, I conclude: Is it craziness for a group, as I said before, of mostly Europeans and non-Jews, to say: Enough. Stop this non-sense of making Israel responsible for all the problems in the region, if not beyond? Enough of the short sightedness which refuses to see Israel as a corner stone of our Western civilization?

We do believe that far from it, It is vital. For America, for the West, for Israel. And for our children and grandchildren and the world they will inherit. Because there is still right and wrong in this complicated world. And if we allow those fundamentals to be blurred and eroded and confused, we will all be dangerously adrift.

Defending Israel today means strengthening the West, standing up for our values, and their right to exist as a normal country, a fellow democracy and a celebrated ally in our great western alliance.

I hope that you will share our vision, and will help us in bringing reason and decency back to the discussion concerning Israel.

Aznar also strongly defended Israel at the WJC meeting in Jerusalem earlier this month. Here's that video:

As Jeffrey Goldberg, who attended and spoke at the Washington dinner, writes,

What other country, sixty-two years after its birth (rebirth, actually) requires advocates to argue that it should continue to exist? Why is it that the world's only Jewish country is the only country to persistently face questions about its own legitimacy? In my brief remarks at the dinner, I mentioned a prime strategy of the Israel-denial movement, which is to convince self-defined liberals and leftists that Zionism is incompatible with their understanding of the world. I hope Aznar's group does a more vigorous job of recruiting pro-Israel leftists to its ranks (one of the organization's high muckety-mucks jokingly suggested Fidel Castro as a board member), because this is a prime worry of mine, that the most liberal country in the Middle East is being abandoned by people who should be its natural allies. Of course, as I've mentioned before, I believe Israel could do a much better job of being liberal -- liberal in the broadest (and American, not European) sense of the term, but Israel's many flaws have not (yet, at least) overwhelmed the fundamental truth that it is the safest and best place in the Middle East to be, among other things, a woman, a gay person, a journalist, and a dissident.

(h/t Zvi)