Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

A new venue for my writing

I have started to write original material for the NewsRealBlog site, in a new pro-Israel section they created called "Right To Exist."

My first post there is called "Palestine Papers Show One Way the Anti-Israel Media Sets the Agenda."

Feel free to check it out!

Meanwhile....Iran hangs two protesters

From Naharnet:

Iran hanged on Monday two activists it said were members of an exiled group opposed to the 2009 presidential poll result, despite U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urging that they be freed.

The executions were the first reported hangings of protesters who staged demonstrations against the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a poll they said was rigged.

The Tehran prosecutor's office named the pair as Jafar Kazemi and Mohammad Ali Hajaghaei. It did not say where the two men were hanged.

"Two elements of the Monafeghin (hypocrites) cell named Jafar Kazemi... and Mohammad Ali Hajaghaei... were executed early today," the prosecutor's office said on its website, referring to the Iranian exiled opposition group, People's Mujahedeen of Iran (PMOI).

Mid-day links

Raymond Ibrahim on how the media downplays Christian persecution (h/t Daled Amos)

Czech PM tells JPost that Israel's outreach in Europe is "miserable."

A YNet op-ed shows, again, the anti-Israel bias of Human Rights Watch.

Major protests in Egypt today.

Archaeologists finally completed a dig of an ancient tunnel that goes alongside the Temple Mount and to the City of David. it was originally a drainage channel. The tunnel will be open to tourists.

Al Jazeera's show trial (Toameh)

Hamas logic: Palileaks proves Arafat was assassinated

A Hamas leader, Salah al-Bardawil, told a Jordanian newspaper that the "Palestine Papers" prove that Arafat was assassinated.

The weird logic goes like this: Since Arafat refused to negotiate over Jerusalem, and since the documents show that the PLO was negotiating Jerusalem, it proves that Arafat was killed so that others who were more flexible could take his place.

Doesn't it seem that the Arab mind is hardwired to find conspiracy theories?

Burning an Israeli flag with "Al Jazeera" written on it

Here's a nice glimpse into how Arab leaders think.

Egyptian newspaper al-Mesryoon is being quoted as saying that Abbas asked Egypt to intervene with Qatar in order to stop what he considered an attempt to tarnish the image of the Palestinian Authority before Arab public opinion, despite the fact that he has briefed all Arab countries on all developments in negotiations with the Israelis at all stages.

Sources reported that Egypt expressed support for the position of the Palestinian Authority in seeking ways to contain the crisis.

An Egyptian official, Rakha Ahmed Hassan, told the newspaper that Arab parties, including Egypt, might intervene in order to prevent the escalation of tension between Qatar and the PA.

The implication, of course, is that there isn't even a pretext of freedom of the press in the Arab world. It is simply common knowledge that a government can dictate what any newspaper may or may not publish.

But it's a cultural thing. To criticize it betrays Western imperialistic thinking about non-Arab concepts such as "freedom."

Erekat: "If memos are true, why is there no agreement?"

Saeb Erekat gave a rambling, sputtering statement slamming Al Jazeera for publishing the so-called "Palestine Papers" that show an inside look at the negotiations between the PLO and Israel.

Besides his conspiracy theories about Al Jazeera, he rhetorically asked more than once, "If our positions are as they claim, why didn't Israel agree and why we did we not reach an agreement with them?" In other words, Erekat is admitting that Israel would have taken the offers seriously, as opposed to how The Guardian is spinning it!

Most of his rant is aimed at Al Jazeera and the vast conspiracy that is behind the channel.

Some highlights:

Al Jazeera's shame is unprecedented in Arab history....

The Palestinian Authority cannot solve the refugee issue; it is up to the refugee to decide to return to the territories of 1948, or the State of Palestine, or to accept compensation. This is the official Palestinian position, we do not agree with Israel on anything concerning this.

Al Jazeera is part of a terribly serious criminal act, planning to destabilize the Palestinian people, whether in Jordan or Palestine or Lebanon or Saudi Arabia...such incitement is serious.

What is going on is the process of punishment for our steadfastness and our positions, especially after we went to the UN Security Council and our refusal to negotiate with Israel without a halt to settlement activity, which has always been what we insisted and we will continue to uphold our rights as approved by international law.

Everything published so far does not exceed two or three pages that were cherry-picked with malicious intent to destroy the position of the steadfast Palestinian negotiators on our inalienable rights according to international law.

[Al Jazeera's] aim is to topple the Palestinian Authority because we refuse to return to negotiations and refuse to continue the negotiations while there is continued settlement [construction] and we insist on going to the UN Security Council and we wants the world to recognize the state of Palestine.

Al-Jazeera planned this...The selectivity and distortion, alteration, and forgery is apparent in every aspect.

We will reveal all our documents and challenge them to publish them.

A group of lawyers is now considering how to deal with the theft of these documents.

The media machine (referring to Al Jazeera) and spent hundreds of millions of dollars to tarnish our reputation.

If our positions are as they claim, why didn't Israel agree and why we did we not reach an agreement with them?

Al Jazeera calls for a... revolution against the Palestinian Authority to bring down the Palestinian political system.

This region is moving toward a more dangerous situation .. not only in Palestine...there are plans in Washington and elsewhere for this region and this tool (Al Jazeera) has a very large role to play in this direction.

These documents are incitement to murder and assassination, this may lead us to go to what is more than an ordinary court.

What is being done by Al Jazeera is done on behalf of Benjamin Netanyahu and Lieberman and Washington as a nasty incitement....

This incitement comes from the administration of Al Jazeera and those who stand behind them. We have lots and lots of documents that will show who is behind this channel .. these documents are not forged, but the truth .. [showing] what is going on between them and the Americans and Israelis.

Et tu, YNet?

I've been showing how Al Jazeera and the Guardian are purposefully misinterpreting the leaked "Palestine Papers" to make Israel look as bad as possible.

Even though they link to the actual memos that prove their distortions, their false spin is what gets into print. And most people dont bother to check the original.

Apparently, "most people" even includes Israeli reporters!

From YNet:

Leaked confidential documents published by Al-Jazeera and the Guardian reveal that during her tenure as Israeli foreign minister in Ehud Olmert's government, Tzipi Livni pressed for the "transfer" of some of Israel's own Arab citizens into a future Palestinian state as part of a land-swap deal that would exchange Palestinian villages now in Israel for Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Here is the talkback I gave to YNet:

If you actually read the memos, you will see that Livni was asking that villages that straddle the Green Line be unified, one way or the other. She didn't want another Ghajar.

The anti-Israel Guardian and Al Jazeera said she meant "transfer." And now a YNet reporter evidently believed them and didn't bother reading the memo itself and do real reporting.

This could have been a story of anti-Israel distortion in the left-wing media. Instead, it adds to the distortion.

It is very disheartening that an Israeli publication would parrot the lies of those newspapers rather than simply read the memos and see the truth.

Hamas imam: "Please, Allah, kill all the Jews"

Richard Millett watched a new two-hour anti-Israel documentary claiming that Israel targeted children in Gaza. The film is now being shown on college campuses. It included this lovely clip:

Allah is the greatest.

He who thanks Allah will be rewarded.
Oh Allah, loosen your power and strength on the Jews. (Amen.)
Please Allah, kill them all…
And don’t leave any of them alive. (Amen.)
Oh Allah, with your great power. Allah!
We are asking you with your infinite power, dear Allah. Allah!
Please dear Allah, take revenge for our martyrs’ blood. Allah!
Please Allah, get rid of the Jews.
Bring them down.
They are not as powerful as you.
Please Allah, make the earth shake and destroy the pillars of their civilisation.
Please Allah, cast fear and terror into their hearts.
Oh Allah disperse them so they become lost once again.
Oh Allah, show us a sign.
Oh Allah, surprise them in a way they don’t expect.
Oh Allah, cast fear and terror into their hearts.

Wikileaks: Israeli plans to get restitution from Poland, Arab countries

A Wikileaks cable from 2005 discusses German reparations to Israel for the Holocaust:

A GOI working group charged with developing a five-year plan on Holocaust-era reparations, pensions and restitution is considering a recommendation that the GOI ask Germany for about $500 million -- possibly in the form of new German-made submarines -- in compensation for what the GOI says is that portion of the 1953 German-Israeli reparations agreement that had been attributed to East Germany, but never paid.

The end of the cable is intriguing:

Finally, xxxxxxxxxxxx noted that Poland would likely be the next area of focus of the GOI restitution efforts, and that the GOI would work in close coordination with the World
Jewish Restitution Organization (WJRO) and the other main survivor and restitution bodies in Israel and abroad. All of the above are in addition to the GOI Ministerial Committee,s continuing research into expanding pursuit of restitution claims for Jewish property and assets from Arab lands.

Peru recognizes "Palestine" - but no mention of borders

Peru has just announced it recognizes "Palestine," but, like Chile, it refused to say that it recognizes the 1949 armistice lines as borders of the state.

After the first set of South American countries made that nonsensical claim, it is significant that the last two steered away from that issue.

UN Sec. General condemns Richard Falk for "truther" statements

From UN Watch:

In reply to UN Watch’s protest, which led to this NY Daily News editorial, we just received the following letter from the U.N., in which — for the first time ever – Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemns U.N. Palestine expert Richard Falk for his denial of the 9/11 terror attacks:
UNITED NATIONS   NATIONS UNIES
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL
24 January 2011
Dear Mr. Neuer,
In response to your letter to the Secretary-General dated 20 January 2011 on the subject of a recent blog post by Mr. Richard Falk, the Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967:
You are aware, no doubt, that the Special Rapporteurs and other independent experts who represent the Human Rights Council are appointed by the Council, not by the Secretary-General. Their continuance in their jobs is thus for the Council to decide.
That said, I feel very strongly that these representatives, however eminent they may be in their fields, have a clear responsibility to uphold the high standards of the United Nations and the Council.
You specifically refer to Mr. Falk’s allegations of an “apparent cover-up” related to the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. The Secretary-General condemns these remarks. He has repeatedly stated his view that any such suggestion is preposterous — and an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in the attack.
                                                                     Yours sincerely,
                                                                     Vijay Nambiar
                                                                     Chef de Cabinet

Did Livni say she is against int'l law? Another AJ lie.

Al Jazeera writes:

It was business as usual at the United Nations in New York on November 13, 2007 when yet another discussion took place in the General Assembly about Israel's dealings with the Palestinians.

The UN Special Observer for Palestine cited from a report in which Israel was portrayed as an "extraordinary violator of human rights" and called upon the international community to hold Israel accountable.

On the same day, halfway around the world, Tzipi Livni, the then-Israeli foreign minister, told Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator of the Palestinian Authority (PA), and Ahmed Qurei, the former PA prime minister, that she is "against international law".

In one of the most candid statements that Livni made during the meeting about the framework of the negotiations at the upcoming Annapolis summit, she told the Palestinian negotiators what she really thought of the subject:

Livni: I was the Minister of Justice. I am a lawyer… But I am against law - international law in particular. Law in general.

Given the imbalance of power between the occupied and the occupier, international law and concepts of justice are the last refuges for Palestinians. However, in that November 2007 meeting Livni made clear she values neither.

Livni, who is often perceived as more "moderate" than the current Israeli government, was by that time the preferred interlocutor for the Palestinians. But during the negotiations in the following months, Livni’s propositions clearly reflected her stated disregard for concepts of justice.

Did Livni really say that?

Let's look at the memo, which was entirely about what issues should be included in a joint statement at the Annapolis summit (and remember - this is the Palestinian Arab version of the minutes of the meeting):

Livni opens the meeting: I would like to suggest that we will continue according to what I tried to at the beginning of the session yesterday, but unfortunately while doing so we ended up in some sort of a discussion. At the end of today’s meeting the minimum that is required is some sense of the six or seven points that you stated that need to be in the document. Just [a] list [of] what is agreed or not agreed. Put aside the core issues for now, just have a list of agreed and not agreed, in points. If we have this agreement… let’s not include the areas of disagreement now.

...

Ahmed Qurei: We can finish tonight the subjects – the preamble. What are the components. Not the language or the nice words etc. We should focus on three things in the preamble. One is the terms of reference [“TOR”]. The three core elements in addition to the [nice] language. One is the TOR. Second is the 2 state solution. Third is the Roadmap [“RM”]. Is there anything to be added to the preamble?

Livni: No – it’s ok. And what we called before some good words. The basic idea of where we are going. End of conflict, [the goal is] to find a way to do so… something like this.

So if you want to summarize the positions, this is something we did in our former conversation. When it comes to the TOR we want reference to 242, 338, the RM and other agreements agreed between the two sides. You added, and this is the problem, the API [Arab Peace Initiative], international law, 1515, 1397, and 194. And we wanted the three principles of the Quartet.

[more discussion of what should be included in the Terms of Reference and Preamble for the document]

Qurei: International law?

Livni: NO. I was the Minister of Justice. I am a lawyer…But I am against law -- international law in particular. Law in general.

If we want to make the agreement smaller, can we just drop some of these issues? Like international law, this will make the agreements easier.

When Livni says "I am against law" she is saying she does not want any reference to legal issues, or international law, in the joint statement. Just like the Arab side did not want the three principles of the Quartet.

That's it. She is not saying she is against international law, the notes are just a shorthand for her saying she doesn't want it mentioned in this largely ceremonial statement.

Al Jazeera is, once again, lying. And they assume that their readers are too stupid to look at the actual paper.

Unfortunately, for 99% of their readers - they are right.