Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, May 30, 2011

Dehumanizing checkpoint photos

Here are more horrid photos of Palestinian Arabs being forced to wait for hours at dehumanizing checkpoints.

A Palestinian boy sleeps on the ground as he waits with his family to cross into Egypt at the Rafah border crossing in the southern Gaza Strip May 29, 2011.

Palestinian children wait to cross into Egypt at the Rafah border crossing in the southern Gaza Strip May 29, 2011

Hold on...they aren't being forced to wait by Israelis? Then forget what I wrote above.

These are photos of how wonderful Egypt is for allowing Palestinian Arabs to enter their country!

Saudi vice squad wonders why Saudi girls run away from home

From Arab News:

Most runaway Saudi girls — 51.4 percent — are aged 16 to 20, according to a study conducted by the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (Haia).

“Those in the age group of 21 to 25 came second among Saudi women who run away from their homes. They constituted 38.5 percent,” the study said.

The team studied the reasons why girls ran away from their homes and how to deal with them and help them integrate into society.

The study highlighted the efforts of the commission to confront the problem and reduce its complications by conducting seminars and lectures and distributing pamphlets.

The study emphasized the need for the presence of Haia officials at supermarkets and other public places to protect girls from falling prey people who exploit them.

“The Haia conducted this study in order to find out the reasons behind the phenomenon of runaway girls and how to solve it with the support of departments concerned,” an official statement said

Yet the article doesn't mention a single reason why Saudi girls run away from home - even though that was the entire point of the study.

Could it be that the Saudi implementation of Shari'a law - as embodied by the Hai'a themselves - has something to do with it?

Nah, that's crazy talk.

Iranian ayatollah confirms obligation to kill Israeli children

From the website of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi - in English:

Question 1: Some people say that martyrdom operations are considered suicide and that they are haram because they contradict Islam. They quote ahadith such as this one by Imam Ja'afar As-Sadeq(a.s.): "A Muslim may fight and get killed [by the enemy] but will never shed his own blood" and ayat such as "Do not kill yourselves, for Allah is compassionate towards you. Whoever does so, in transgression and wrongfully, We shall roast in a fire, and that is an easy matter for Allah" (An-Nisaa 4:29-30). They say this even about the martyrdom operations against the military targets such as the ones used by Hizbollah Lebanon or the ones used by the Iranian Army against Saddam's army (as I was told). The question, are martyrdom operations where a person detonate himself into the army of the enemy haram? Is it suicide? Why or why not? Please answer this question as there is lots of discussion and confusion about this issue.

Question 2: Now about targeting civilians in the Zionist state, some people say that according to the teaching of Ahlul Bayt(a.s.) and the Quran it is haram to target civilians in any case. They also say that Israelis are civilians like any other people while others believe they are settlers and usurpers not civilians. Are the operations done by Hamas and Al-Jihad against Israelis "civilians" haram? Why or why not? How about the Israeli children killed in such attacks? If it is not haram, what is the answer to those who quote the hadith about not targerting non combatants.

Question 3: About civilians in general. Given the fact that there are mass destruction weapons and that it is not always easy to prevent civilians' death in wars like at the old times, what would be the ruling about attacks that unintentionally kill civilians in wars (as in the case of the Iran-Iraq war)? Also, say we live in a Muslim country, and there is another country which attacked one of our cities with nuclear weapons and wiped it out. Then this country announced it will destroy our cities one by one using nuclear weapons. Supposing that country had all their nuclear weapons in one of their cities, would it be ok for the Muslim country to attack this city and destroy the nuclear weapons there before they are used to annihilate the Muslims even though that would mean lead to the death of the enemies' civilians in that city. This is supposing that this is the only way to protect the Muslims' life?
With Du'a for Allah to protect the Ayatollah

Answer:
1. It is regrettable that the propaganda of the enemies of Islam has influenced the Muslim `Ummah so much that Muslims instead of planning for the uprooting of the Zionist regime and its arrogant supporters have occupied themselves with questioning and discussing the legitimacy of the Palestinians' self-defence which is carried out under the most oppressive conditions imaginable. For sure, when protecting Islam and the Muslim `Ummah depends on martyrdom operations, it not only is allowed, but even is an obligation (wajib) as many of the Shi'ah great scholars and Maraje', including Ayatullah Safi Golpayegani and Ayatullah Fazel Lankarani, have clearly announced in their fatwas. Consider the rewayah from the prophet of Allah (SA) who said: "Whoever is killed in defence of his belongings, he/she is Shahid." (Wasa'il al-Shi'ah, v.15, p.121)

2. Muslims should not attack those civilians of the occupied territories who have announced their opposition to their government's vicious crimes, except for situations in which they are used as human shields and fighting the aggressors depends on attacking those civilians.

3. In the case of conflict between two Muslim nations, Muslims should assist the oppressed against the oppressor. But before the war is waged, initiating attacks for the purpose of prevention depends on a permission from Valyy-i Faqih.

With prayers for your success.

Answer #2 indicates that Israeli children must be killed according to Yazdi's version of Islamic law.

Yazdi is the director of the Imam Khomeini Education and Research Institute in Qum.

(h/t Memri)

Egyptians freak over Israeli online TV software

There is an Israeli company called "Online TV Software" that, for a fee, allows you to watch thousands of satellite channels on your PC.

This is no big deal; there are lots of similar services.

However, Egyptians are freaking out upon finding out that the software was actually based out of Israel, and now Arabic media has stories about how the Mossad is using this software to monitor Egyptian Internet users.

Their main evidence was their "discovery" (which is trivial) that the IP address of the website is in Ramat Gan, Israel.

Arabic media described the software this way:

Within minutes after installing the program, the Mossad receives details of Egyptians through their computers inside their homes - their e-mail addresses, correspondence, telephone and personal uses of the computers, and the private information about hobbies and whether they are educated or a lover of adult movies and who they correspond with, and what are their personal views and whether they are politically active.

The software is not specifically marketed to Egyptians. The main webpage is in French.

Now it is possible that the program does include spyware to help determine some of these things - there are lots of such programs out there - but the evidence that the Mossad is behind this is, literally, zero. Why would the Mossad base such a company out of Israel if they want to hide this?

Some Egyptian who knows a tiny amount about computers did a geolocate of the IP address and found that the company was Israeli, he freaked out and contacted a newspaper, and now the paranoia has taken over.

Report: Lebanese army stopped a rocket attack last week

From the Daily Star Lebanon, in an article about last week's attack on UNIFIL forces in Lebanon which wounded six:

Before Friday, the most recent attack against UNIFIL personnel was on Jan. 8, 2008, when a road side bomb exploded on the coastal highway near Rmeileh beside a jeep carrying Irish soldiers, lightly wounding two of them. The bomb consisted of 10 kg of explosive buried about 15 cm underground beside the median strip and was detonated by remote control, according to investigators.

Friday’s bombing of the Italian convoy took place just 20 m from where the Irish were attacked in 2008. Investigators are still examining the remains of the explosive charge, although initial reports suggest it was of a similar size to the 2008 bomb.

There are other similarities between the two incidents besides the location and size of the bomb. Hours before the Irish were hit in 2008, two 107mm Katyusha rockets were fired from south Lebanon and struck the Israeli border settlement of Shelomi. It was the second rocket attack against Israel since the 2006 war.

Last week, the Lebanese Army caught a militant planning to fire rockets from somewhere near Hasbaya, just outside UNIFIL’s area of operations, according to security sources. The claim remains unconfirmed and the army released no statement on the alleged arrest of the militant.

The claim was repeated in the As-Safir newspaper as reported by Palestine Today.

Everything is political - even blood

Palestine Press Agency reports that Egyptians are donating blood through the "Palestine Embassy" to "support the steadfastness of the people of Jerusalem."

Somehow, I don't think they mean the Jews of Jerusalem.

Is there a particular reason why Arabs who live in Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem are in need of blood? Is there a shortage we have not been told about?

Or are there any activities planned in the coming days - for example, "Naksa Day" on June 5 - where it is expected that Arabs will be in need of blood?

Of course this is hardly the first time that blood is used to score political points.

"Aid" ships to Gaza usually are claimed to contain blood or blood platelets, even though no one has claimed that there is any shortage of blood in Gaza.

In 2009, Hamas refused to accept blood from Israel after Operation Cast Lead/Operation Oil Stain.

In late 2008, Jordan's King Abdullah and his wife donated blood for Gaza as well. How did it get delivered? Through Israel?

In 2001, Yasir Arafat staged a fake donation of his own blood to counteract the videos of Palestinian Arabs celebrating the 9/11 murders of thousands of Americans.

As with everything else, blood is used cynically by Israel-haters and by the Arab world to score political points more than to actually help people.

Muslim Islamicization of Jerusalem - in 1872 (updated)

Sheikh Yusuf Juma Salma, the Imam of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, has once again accused Israel of "Judaizing" Jerusalem. One of his complaints was that there was an official Israeli government function in the Tower of David last week, and there happens to have once been a mosque there (in fact, the tower itself was built as a minaret.) So even though it is open to the public, with a museum and lots of events, when the Israeli government does something there it is of course sacrilegious.

One of the permanent exhibitions at the Tower of David museum is a remarkably detailed model of Jerusalem as it looked in 1872. The museum describes it this way:

A one of a kind model created in 1872 by Hungarian pilgrim Stephen Illes. The model depicts Jerusalem as it was in Illes’ time and is unique both for its many details and for the fact that it documents the city’s appearance prior to the significant changes it underwent in the 20th century. For example, the model immortalizes the Jewish Quarter before it was destroyed in 1948.

The model was first displayed in 1873 in the Ottoman pavilion at the World’s Fair in Vienna. At the demand of Ottoman authorities, the model included some deliberate distortions such as the disproportionately large minarets. From Vienna, the model traveled to various European cities and was purchased in 1878, by community leaders in Geneva. It was on display at the city’s Salle de la Réformation for some 40 years.

Forgotten for 64 years in the attic of the Geneva Public and University Library, it was rediscovered in 1984 in a comprehensive research project conducted by Moti Yair, a student at the Hebrew University.

In 1985, the model was transferred to Jerusalem and restored. It is now exhibited on permanent loan at the Tower of David Museum.

The museum page shows part of the model, that includes the Hurva and Nissan Bek synagogues whose domes visually dominated the Jewish Quarter. Here is what they really looked like in a photo from 1931:

And here is what they looked like in Illes' model, modified to make the Ottoman authorities happy:

Note the minaret next to the Hurva - a minaret that simply was never there! (UPDATE: It is there, but much, much smaller.)

The entire purpose was to make the Hurva look like a mosque, and to have a taller Muslim minaret placed next to it. In fact, given that the Jewish Quarter is on a hill, the dome of the Hurva was higher than the Dome of the Rock, a fact that Muslims could not stomach.

So it is very amusing that a Muslim leader is claiming that Israel is distorting the history of Jerusalem when we can see that Muslims have been trying to strip Jerusalem of its Jewish character since even before Zionism started as a political movement!

A UN resolution to recognize "Palestine" would be illegal (JCPA)

From JCPA:

May 25, 2011

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon,
Secretary-General of the United Nations,
1st Avenue & 44th St.
New York, NY 10017

Excellency,

Re: The Proposed General Assembly Resolution to Recognize a Palestinian State "within 1967 Borders" - An Illegal Action

We, the undersigned, attorneys from across the world who are involved in general matters of international law, as well as being closely concerned with the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, appeal to you to use your influence and authority among the member states of the UN, with a view to preventing the adoption of the resolution that the Palestinian delegation intends to table at the forthcoming session of the General Assembly, to recognize a Palestinian state "within the 1967 borders."

By all standards and criteria, such a resolution, if adopted, would be in stark violation of all the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as contravening UN Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and those other resolutions based thereon.

Our reasoning is as follows:
1. The legal basis for the establishment of the State of Israel was the resolution unanimously adopted by the League of Nations in 1922, affirming the establishment of a national home for the Jewish People in the historical area of the Land of Israel. This included the areas of Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem, and close Jewish settlement throughout. This was subsequently affirmed by both houses of the U.S. Congress.

2. Article 80 of the UN Charter determines the continued validity of the rights granted to all states or peoples, or already existing international instruments (including those adopted by the League of Nations). Accordingly, the above-noted League resolution remains valid, and the 650,000 Jews presently resident in the areas of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem reside there legitimately.

3. "The 1967 borders" do not exist, and have never existed. The 1949 Armistice Agreements entered into by Israel and its Arab neighbors, establishing the Armistice Demarcation Lines, clearly stated that these lines "are without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto." Accordingly, they cannot be accepted or declared to be the international boundaries of a Palestinian state.

4. UN Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) called upon the parties to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and specifically stressed the need to negotiate in order to achieve "secure and recognized boundaries."

5. The Palestinian proposal, in attempting to unilaterally change the status of the territory and determine the "1967 borders" as its recognized borders, in addition to running squarely against Resolutions 242 and 338, would be a fundamental breach of the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, in which the parties undertook to negotiate the issue of borders and not act to change the status of the territories pending outcome of the permanent status negotiations.

6. The Palestinians entered into the various agreements constituting what is known as the "Oslo Accords" in the full knowledge that Israel's settlements existed in the areas, and that settlements would be one of the issues to be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations. Furthermore, the Oslo Accords impose no limitation on Israel's settlement activity in those areas that the Palestinians agreed would continue to be under Israel's jurisdiction and control pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.

7. While the Interim Agreement was signed by Israel and the PLO, it was witnessed by the UN together with the EU, the Russian Federation, the U.S., Egypt, and Norway. It is thus inconceivable that such witnesses, including first and foremost the UN, would now give license to a measure in the UN aimed at violating this agreement and undermining major resolutions of the Security Council.

8. While the UN has maintained a persistent policy of non-recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem pending a negotiated solution, despite Israel's historic rights to the city, it is inconceivable that the UN would now recognize a unilaterally declared Palestinian state, the borders of which would include eastern Jerusalem. This would represent the ultimate in hypocrisy, double standards, and discrimination, as well as an utter disregard of the rights of Israel and the Jewish People.

9. Such unilateral action by the Palestinians could give rise to reciprocal initiatives in the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) which could include proposed legislation to declare Israel's sovereignty over extensive parts of Judea and Samaria, if and when the Palestinians carry out their unilateral action.

Excellency,

It appears to be patently clear to all that the Palestinian exercise, aimed at advancing their political claims, represents a cynical abuse of the UN Organization and of the members of the General Assembly. Its aim is to bypass the negotiation process called for by the Security Council.

Regrettably, this abuse of the UN and its integrity, in addition to undermining international law, has the potential to derail the Middle East peace process.

We trust that you will use your authority to protect the UN and its integrity from this abuse, and act to prevent any affirmation or recognition of this dangerous Palestinian initiative.

Signed by jurists and international lawyers

Signatures can be seen in the Hebrew version of the letter.

Egypt op-ed debunks Egyptian stereotypes about Israel

A rare voice of relative reason in The Daily News Egypt:

While anti-Israeli attitudes are not uncommon in Egypt, they are becoming more virulent after the revolution so much so that 54 percent of Egyptians prefer annulling the peace treaty with Israel, according to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center.

The point of interest here is not to morally judge these attitudes, but to examine whether or not their underlying assumptions are logically justified. Three myths about Israel appear to continue dominating Egyptian public opinion:

1. Israel works to weaken Egypt
Common among conspiracy theorists in Egypt is the notion that Israel wants an Egypt that is weakened, divided, and torn by sectarian violence. Deputy Prime Minister Yehia El-Gamal stands out in expressing this notion while in office, though a considerable number of intellectuals and former high-level officials do not hide their belief in it. Typifying this view is the editor of the state-owned daily Al-Ahram who argued that Israel supports the counter-revolution forces in Egypt, citing the rumor that Israeli former chief of military intelligence confirmed his success in sowing seeds of division within Egyptian society.

In fact, a stable Egypt is in Israel’s interest. A divided Egypt might turn into another Iran, where organized Islamists took over a shattered state after a democracy-seeking uprising. Alternatively, it might turn into another Lebanon, where state weakness allows actors like Hezbollah to attack Israel at will. Would Israel be interested in creating a similar situation in which Jihadists join Hamas and operate from Egypt? Of course not.

At best, a chaotic Egypt might turn into a Mexico (or a Pakistan?) where another weak state fails to stop cross-border illegal immigration, drug and weapons trafficking. Thousands of African illegal immigrants enter Israeli territory from Sinai each year, despite measures taken by Egyptian authorities. Skyrocketing numbers of African infiltrators, drugs, let alone explosives, would reach Israel in case the Egyptian government loses control, or is domestically too busy to control borders.

None of these scenarios are good for Israel, and therefore it would certainly be interested not in undermining Egypt, but rather in an in-control, stable government in Cairo to keep the peace, and maintain order on the southern border.

2. Israel wants to occupy Egypt
The conventional view that Israel plans to occupy Egypt or re-occupy Sinai is part of a broader myth that Israel’s long-term strategic objective, out of Jewish religious beliefs, is to rule from the Nile to the Euphrates. Alleged “evidence” maintains that over the Knesset’s entrance hangs a map asserting that “the Land of Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates,” and that the Israeli flag’s two horizontal blue lines represent the Nile and the Euphrates rivers. Yet the truth is that there is no such a map in the Knesset, and the lines in Israel’s flag are derived from the design of the traditional Jewish prayer shawl.

The “Greater Israel” claim is as true as the contention that Muslims plan to establish a world-ruling Islamic caliphate. Some ultra-extremists might want to, but the vast majority does not even think of it. First, it would take a fairly insane Israeli leadership to bear the massive military and economic burden of invading a country of Egypt’s scale. Note that occupational experiences have exhausted Israel in areas as small as the Gaza Strip, southern Lebanon, and even the West Bank. Second, paradoxically, this claim contradicts another generally accepted view by the Egyptian public asserting that Israel is militarily superior and enjoys full, unconditional US support. Why, if this really is the case, has Israel not attempted an invasion? The answer is simple: Israel is satisfied with the current status-quo — in which, it perceives, Israel is the one deterring its neighbors and not vice versa — and is not interested in a territorial expansion that would go far beyond its capabilities.

3. Israel is all-powerful
Most Egyptians apparently believe that the premises of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, displayed in an Egyptian TV series titled “A Horseman without a Horse” in 2002, are true. Within this framework, obviously inflated notions — such as that Israel exploited agricultural cooperation with Egypt to either cultivate cancer-causing products in Egyptian soil or export these products to Egypt, and that the Mossad stood behind the December 2010 fatal shark attacks to hit tourism in Egypt’s Red Sea resorts — are easily accepted. Notwithstanding that such allegations have no factual or logical grounds, no one stops to ask why should an Israel facing serious security challenges (Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.) busy itself with that kind of stuff.

On a larger scale, Israel, or the Jewish people (as people hardly distinguish between Jews and Israelis), is viewed as a mighty force that rules the world through Jewish communities. It follows that any Israeli (or Jewish) economic or cultural activity in Egypt is seen as part of a “grand plan” to penetrate the society and gradually pervade all walks of life. While the Israel lobby in the US and elsewhere is truly powerful, the claim that the Jewish state controls the world provides, unfortunately, a tool to cover up one’s own failures than a realistic proof.

That these misconceptions are shared by a large part of the Egyptian public, which in a representative democracy will significantly influence the foreign policy agenda, is disappointing. That is because the revolution against the old regime has not yet removed old myths which deny the public opinion credible and informed judgments, regardless of whether a democratic Egypt would see in Israel a friend or a foe.

Amr Yossef is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the American University in Cairo

(h/t Callie)

Hamas opening a terror shrine

From YNet:

The Hamas government decided to open the home of its former spiritual leader and founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was assassinated in 2004, to visitors.

A Hamas official announced the decision will allow visitors to learn more about Yassin's "Jihadist career" as well as his activities against the "Israeli occupation."

"The goal is to commemorate his image in a place which saw him devote his life to the distribution of Islam," the official remarked.

In little, tiny, bloody pieces blown apart by bomb vests.

Hamas prime minister in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh gave his blessing to the project, saying: "It will help us revive the memory of the Sheikh amongst the Arab and Islamic population."

Visitors will be able to see the many pictures hanging in Yassin's living room, including photos with such leaders as Former Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat.

It will be fun and instructive to see how many Arab leaders, or writers, or pundits, publicly show disgust at the idea of such a museum.

Because we are always told that the majority of Palestinian Arabs want peace and abhor terror. So certainly we'll be seeing lots of angry op-eds and statements by the peaceful Fatah faction that the West loves.

Certainly Salam Fayyad and Mahmoud Abbas and Saeb Erekat and Nabil Shaath will speak up and voice their displeasure. After all, they are respected and honored leaders and diplomats. I'm sure we'll be hearing their outrage.

Any minute now.

Syrians burned photos of Nasrallah (video)

An editorial in Asharq al-Awsat:

The Syrian people quickly responded to the calls made a few days ago by Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah for the demonstrators to stand with the Syrian regime "of resistance", and the popular Syrian response to this was to burn pictures of Nasrallah on what was dubbed the "Friday of the Guardians of the Homeland."

This is not the first response of its kind from the Syrian protestors, indeed a slogan that was previously being chanted by the Syrian demonstrators was "No to Iran, No to Hezbollah…we want somebody who is God-fearing!" This means that Hezbollah, and its leadership's reading of the Syrian uprising has been wrong, as has been their reading of all other events in the region. It is clear that Nasrallah's reading of the situation in Syria was wrong, for just a few days after he came out to call on the Syrian people to "preserve their country" and maintain al-Assad's "regime of resistance", the Syrian people came out to burn his picture!

Here's video:

When are we going to see similar videos coming out of Lebanon?

If the world supports the Arab Spring, shouldn't Jordan become Palestine?

I linked last week to an article by Victor Shikhman pointing out that the Arab Spring should have important consequences for Jordan:

The real question, in light of the Arab Spring, and the mass uprisings which we are told are driven by the universal human urge towards democracy and freedom, isn't whether Jordan is Palestine, or even whether it could be Palestine. The real questions are whether Jordan should be Palestine, and whether Jordan will be Palestine. Is this not the most moral, just and inevitable outcome for an overwhelming majority ruled, against its will, by a minority? We should consider the possibility.

Apparently, a new movement led by Jordanians is aiming to do exactly that. From IsraelSeen, in an interview with Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian dissident:

Were the Hashemites not ruling the eastern part of Palestine then the Palestinians already would have had a country for sixty years and nobody would have pressured Israel to give away its land. Yet this is not the case and the Hashemites are ruling the place and constantly telling the Palestinians they are merely refugees.

However, the world will only change its views on the location of the future Palestinian state if it wakes up to the problem of Jordanian apartheid. This is something my colleagues and I are constantly trying to do. As much as we can we’re telling the world that the Palestinian majority in Jordan is oppressed and discriminated against. Yet I am stunned by how little interest the world, the International Criminal Court, the US and other Western governments show in our rights. I believe they are more interested in bashing the “evil Jews” in Israel rather than securing our rights. Anti-Semitism has surely made a well-groomed comeback.

Jordan is a vicious apartheid state; how come there is no Jordanian Apartheid week in the UK or the US?

His party, the New Jordan Party, recently wrote to Secretary of State Clinton about Jordan's discrimination against and demonizing of Palestinian Arab residents of that country.

The problem is that both the Jordanian protesters and the Hashemite government hate Palestinian Jordanians, and the majority Palestinian Jordanians are not willing to speak upfor fear of more persecution.

Yet if the West truly cares about getting rid of Arab dictatorships with minority rule, then shouldn't there be more talk about Palestinian Arabs gaining a proportionate amount of political power in Jordan?