Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, July 24, 2011

A bit of hypocrisy by Glenn Greenwald

I don't normally read pundits who mostly deal with US politics, but I just stumbled across a gem by Glenn Greenwald.

He writes, in Salon:

For much of the day yesterday, the featured headline on The New York Times online front page strongly suggested that Muslims were responsible for the attacks on Oslo; that led to definitive statements on the BBC and elsewhere that Muslims were the culprits. The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin wrote a whole column based on the assertion that Muslims were responsible, one that, as James Fallows notes, remains at the Post with no corrections or updates.
...This article expertly traces and sets forth exactly how the "Muslims-did-it" myth was manufactured and then disseminated yesterday to the worldwide media, which predictably repeated it with little skepticism. What makes the article so valuable is that it names names: it points to the incestuous, self-regarding network of self-proclaimed U.S. Terrorism and foreign policy "experts" -- what the article accurately describes as "almost always white men and very often with military or government backgrounds," in this instance driven by "a case of an elite fanboy wanting to be the first to pass on leaked gadget specs" -- who so often shape these media stories and are uncritically presented as experts, even though they're drowning in bias, nationalism, ignorance, and shallow credentialism.

How dare people make assumptions that Islamic fundamentalists were responsible for a massive car bomb and shooting attack, killing scores? You'd never catch someone like Glenn Greenwald doing something like that!

Except, in his previous post before the identity of the terrorist was revealed, he does exactly that:

The perpetrators of these attacks are unknown, as is their motives, though one self-described "jihadi" group claimed responsibility.
It is, however, worth commenting on both the prevailing descriptions of Norway as well as the reaction to these attacks, as they reveal some important points. Most media accounts express bafflement that Norway would be the target of such an attack given how peaceful it is; The New York Times, for instance, said "the attacks appeared to be part of a coordinated assault on the ordinarily peaceful Scandinavian nation." This is simply inaccurate. Norway is a nation at war -- in more than just one country.
The NATO force of which Norway is a part has explicitly declared Libyan leader Moammar Gadaffi to be a "legitimate target" and has repeatedly attempted to kill him; one attempt on Gadaffi's life -- a bombing attack on his son's residence -- resulted in the death of the dictator's son and three grandchildren. In response, Gadaffi "vowed to attack 'homes, offices and families' in Europe in revenge for NATO airstrikes," adding that "your homes, your offices and your families, which will become military targets just as you have transformed our offices, headquarters, houses and children into what you regards as legitimate military targets."

[He then shows a screenshot of an article about Norwegian involvement in Afghanistan - EoZ.]

Regardless of the justifications of these wars -- and Norway is in both countries as part of a U.N. action -- it is simply a fact that Norway has sent its military to two foreign countries where it is attacking people, dropping bombs, and killing civilians. Historically, one reason not to invade and attack other countries is because doing so often prompts one's own country to be attacked. Western nations typically only attack countries that are incapable of responding in kind, but those nations and their sympathizers are capable of perpetrating asymmetrical attacks of the sort that Oslo just suffered.

Greenwald's natural assumption - strongly implicit, but obvious - was that these attacks were a response to Norway's involvement in wars against two predominantly Muslim countries, and he even goes as far as saying that Norway's position on targeting Libya's leader is just as "terrorist" as an attack on the Norwegian Prime Minister's office in an office building that houses many non-governmental offices as well. He quotes the bogus Jihadist responsibility claim just as seriously as anyone else did. Certainly no one would read his earlier column and think that Greenwald believed that a right-wing Christian was behind the bombings.

So his self-righteousness about how other media made the assumption that Muslims were behind the attacks is more than a bit hypocritical.

Media still downplaying Christian influence on Norwegian terrorist

As I wrote earlier today, it is too simplistic to look at Anders Breivik's writings and conclude that his brand of Christianity was the source for his hate. However, that component is seemingly being ignored or downplayed by the media, and it is an important part of the story. (See this CiF column for an example.)

So here is a bit more of what he wrote in his manifesto on justifying terrorism in the name of his Christian beliefs.

Indulgences

An indulgence is the full or partial remission of temporal punishment due for sins which have already been forgiven. The indulgence is usually granted by the church after the sinner has confessed and received absolution. The exception is actions committed by those men and women who, by virtue of their suffering, assists in the intercession for all Christians (participates in Crusades, activities which involve protection of Christians, Christian interests or Christendom itself). Indulgences draw on the storehouse of merit acquired by Jesus' sacrifice and the virtues and penances of the saints and martyrs. They are granted for specific good works and prayers.

Indulgences replace the shortening of those penances that was allowed at the intercession of those imprisoned and those awaiting martyrdom for the faith.

Crusading is not just a right, but a duty according to Canon Law

Canon Law, the ecclesiastical law of the Catholic Church, is a fully developed legal system, with all the necessary elements: courts, lawyers, judges, a fully articulated legal code and principles of legal interpretation.

Can. 992 An indulgence is the remission before God of temporal punishment for sins whose guilt is already forgiven, which a properly disposed member of the Christian faithful gains under certain and defined conditions by the assistance of the Church which as minister of redemption dispenses and applies authoritatively the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.

Can. 993 An indulgence is partial or plenary insofar as it partially or totally frees from the temporal punishment due to sins.

Can. 994 Any member of the faithful can gain partial or plenary indulgences for oneself or apply them to the dead by way of suffrage.

Can. 995 §1. In addition to the supreme authority of the Church, only those to whom this power is acknowledged in the law or granted by the Roman Pontiff can bestow indulgences.

...Pope Urban II and Pope Innocent III granted indulgence to all future Crusaders (martyrs of the Church)

In 1095 during the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II declared that he remitted all penance incurred by anyone (crusaders) who participated in the first crusade.

The Pope dispenses indulgences from a reservoir of grace tied to martyrs of the church, those men and women who, by virtue of their suffering, assists in the intercession for all Christians. In the 12th Century, Pope Innocent III, expanded the Crusade indulgence to include anyone assisting with such endeavours.

When we, the cultural conservatives of Europe seize power in approximately 5-7 decades, we will take the necessary steps to eradicate the corruption which is continuing to plague the Church (both the Catholic and Protestant church). We must ensure that we have Christian leaders who believe in; self defence, protection of Eastern Christendom and the protection of Christians worldwide.

All in all, he takes up ten pages justifying violence according to his understanding of Christian theology, not only liberally quoting the Hebrew Bible but the New Testament as well.

If he didn't care about Christianity, he wouldn't have bothered writing so many pages of religious justifications for his actions.

His use of religion to justify violence is strikingly similar to that of his avowed enemies, Islamists. This does not by any means prove that Christianity or Christian institutions are at fault for his actions - and as far as I know there is no huge support structure of Christian schools, media and churches that can be drawn upon to strengthen his twisted beliefs. They seem to have come out of his own head. I don't know if he would have done the same thing if he had been an atheist, as defense of Christianity in Europe seems to be one of his main motivating factors, but his psychosis cannot be blamed solely on his religion either.

Yet even though religion is not necessarily to blame for what he did, but it is a factor that needs to be discussed openly, just as it should be when Muslims (or Jews or Hindus) use religion to justify terror. And at least some Christians need to recognize that this problem could emerge in their churches, just as leaders of other religions need to take some level of responsibility whenever terror is done in their name. Pushing it off by redefining the terrorist as not being a member of that religious group is not useful or helpful - there needs to be some level of self-analysis to see what could have been done to head something like this off before it turned so tragic.

Most analysts and commenters are now heavily trying to spin Breivik's actions in ways that benefit their own pre-existing agendas, and we are seeing a lot of nonsense being published in the guise of analysis. (Yes, he quoted some Zionists in his writings, this does not make him a Mossad agent!) This spinning of a sickening terror attack is a shame, and it reflects badly on many prominent people on the right and the left. This is in many ways a unique case; it trivializes the victims to facilely simplify the story just so pundits can feel better about themselves by placing the blame squarely on their enemies.

JPost notices people finding news with Google Translate

From JPost:

Enter Google Translate: Interested in local Syrian coverage of anti-government riots? How the Japanese are celebrating their recent World Cup victory? Just click and translate.

Of course, the system is not perfect, but the machine translation site, which was first introduced for Arabic, has opened up the media and broken down global barriers in a way which was previously not possible. While the statistical method that the site uses to translate text, which means that grammatical rules are not applied, can at times render text almost unintelligible, by and large it means we can read news in languages that we don’t know a word of, which changes the game in a significant way.

I wish more people would be doing this; I've been doing it for years but I haven't seen the groundswell of others doing it as much as the article implies.

Not only from Arabic, either. For a while on Friday I was looking at Norwegian papers and tweeting details about the attacks on the youth camp way before the mainstream media had picked up on it.

It takes a bit of practice to get good at understanding the translated text, and even more practice to figure out how to do things like searches in the target language, but it is worth it. I recommend using Chrome as a browser because the Google Translate extension usually makes language translation seamless, and it works even for search results within websites (something that AFAIK cannot be done with any other browser.)

Hamas arresting Salafist rocket terrorists

Firas Press reports that Hamas has been waging a campaign of widespread arrests today against Salafi jihadist elements in Gaza. The campaign is is focused on Rafah and Deir al-Balah.

There was a similar arrest spree a few days ago in Rafah, where Hamas arrested a number of supporters of the Salafist organizations who fired rocket-propelled grenades and mortar shells towards Israel.

UNRWA plays the media; the media happily plays its role: Blame Israel!

Last week, I reported that UNRWA threatened to shut down its operations in Gaza in the face of protests.

This story was fairly widespread in the Arabic media, but it was covered in only two English-language media outlets that I could find.

China Radio International and RIA Novosti (Russia.)

Why did the Western media ignore a story that was mentioned by Russian and Chinese English-language media?

The reason is that the Western media is emotionally invested in the meme of Palestiniian Arab victimhood. Showing the PalArabs protesting against another darling of the media - the UN - cannot easily be reconciled with that narrative. That, plus the fact that it is obvious that a protest to stop services because they had been slightly curtailed is so incredibly shortsighted.

The Chinese and Russian media, however, while they are no fans of Israel, do not have the same love of Palestinian Arabs and are not as emotionally invested in them as the mainstream Western media. So, ironically, the media of the Communists and former Communists are more fair in this case than that of the enlightened West!

The rallies are organized and supported by Hamas. Hamas has even said that it will create an agency to oversee UNRWA operations in Gaza - because Hamas has never been happy with UNRWA's supposedly liberal, "Zionist" curriculum and it is using these protests as a means to pressure the agency. Again, this fact is practically unreported in the Western media, as it does not fit nicely into the meme of Israelis oppressing Palestinian Arabs.

UNRWA is not above using these facts to its own political advantage. They refuse to issue press releases about these protests, just as they always have except in extreme cases where it could not be ignored. And when Ma'an called their spokesperson about the demonstrations, they do not say a word about Hamas and place the blame squarely on - Israel. UNRWA's Chris Gunness says:

Make no mistake, the lack of donor funds to UNRWA is now directly affecting the stability of the Middle East with anti-UN protests threatening to shut down UNRWA on the doorstep of Israel at a time of already heightened instability in the region....The real problem is that we are asking our donors to fund emergency programs which aim to mitigate the effects of Israel’s illegal collective punishment of 1.5 million people. The International Committee of the Red Cross has called the blockade a "clear breach of international law" in the face of which there has to be transparency and accountability. From UNRWA's point of view, it would be better for those states and organizations with the power to bring the necessary pressures to bear to end the collective punishment rather than pay UNRWA to deal with its disastrous impact.

So it is not because of Hamas creating an artificial crisis by orchestrating protests, it is not the (mostly Arab) donors who refuse to pay their pledges to UNRWA. No, the problem is, of course, Israel!

And now that UNRWA has made a statement on the issue that fits with the western media narrative - now that Gunness has identified the bad guy - we can expect them to finally shine a spotlight on the issue. Of course, it is a spotlight expertly misdirected by the UNRWA spokesperson, who plays the Western media like puppets.

Israeli apartheid: Talent show winner an Ethiopian (video)

Here is the winning performance from Israel's "Kochav Nolad" (A Star is Born) singing competition, Hagit Yasou:

She is a religious Ethiopian Jew who lives in Sderot.

I just skimmed through a bit of the manifesto of the Norway terrorist Anders Breivik.

While the man is clearly a psychopath, the worst part is that it is not all crazy sounding - it is scary how sane much of the document seems to be.

He sets out a case against multiculturalism, Marxism and Islam that would not be out of place in many popular websites and blogs. In fact, he quotes a few of them.

He is not an anti-semite, but he despises left-wing Jews and multiculturalists.

But as the document goes on, he tries to come to the logical conclusion that he must kill a lot of people to accomplish his political goals. He then goes to describe a number of scenarios on planning terrorist operations.

He has a FAQ-type section:

Q: Can significant indirect damage against civilians be justified?

A: Yes and no. It can be justified in the sense that it is the only pragmatical way to move forward. When someone blows up a government building it is obviously not with the intention to kill the cleaning lady or the janitor. The target has been selected after careful consideration because it will yield the wanted results.

There are extreme and moderate forces. We are all cultural conservatives even though we use different means. We have taken it upon ourselves to use brute, cynical force so other people don’t have to. The other political fronts should welcome it as a necessary evil in order to rid ourselves of a much greater evil.

Innocent people will die, in the thousands. But it is still better than the alternative; millions of dead Europeans, which is the worst case phase 3 scenario.

He even describes his planned attack as a "martyrdom operation," and says that the slogan for his (possibly fictional) group "The Knights Templar" is "Martyrdom before dhimmitude."

Being a Justiciar Knight is not for everyone. You are normally required to plan absolutely everything alone; fight alone to see your mission through and you are likely to die alone with half of your city’s system protectors hunting you. However, I have never in my life felt that I have done anything more meaningful than what I am doing now regardless of the lack of moral support from my founding brothers or other armed resistance fighters. Support from our extremely distributed and anonymous “non-hierarchy” out there would be nice but I have managed to cope through mental discipline to become what I am today; a self driven and highly effective manifestation of an independent resistance cell. I have managed to stay focused and highly motivated for a duration of more than 9 years now. I feel really happy about my current course. In fact, I have never been happier than I am today and I do not find it problematical hide my true ideological agenda from everyone else. To all I know I am a moderate right-winger and not a resistance fighter. It isn’t easy to reach this level of mental comfort and focus while at the same time working on something so important and serious. You have to overcome difficult initial psychological challenges and perform a slight subsequent mental check every single day until the operation is complete.

...Learning the ability/rituals to motivate yourself and being able to follow this ritual on a daily basis is perhaps the most essential aspect of our armed resistance effort in phase 1. One of the reasons why Muslims are so effective at guerrilla warfare is that they keep themselves motivated by praying five times a day and reciting motivational Suras from the Quran.

Chillingly, Breivik describes in a lot of detail all of the plans he made before this attack, and even streamlined it so that a single person could mount such an attack with only 30 days of preparation.

Ultimately, it is a sickening document, but it would be a lot easier to swallow if Breivik had penned a rambling mess. The problem is that is is not a psycho in the normal sense: he is a very intelligent person and some of his political analysis is actually on target. His writing shows nuance, not something one would expect from an extremist. He cuts down neo-Nazis nearly as much as he attacks those on the Left.

If there is any point in the work where he crosses the line from a political analyst to a budding terrorist, it might be where he sets out the Christian justification for a new Crusade. He writes that "Pope Urban II and Pope Innocent III granted indulgence to all future Crusaders (martyrs of the Church)" and that "Crusading is not just a right, but a duty according to Canon Law." Ironically, he uses Christianity in exactly the same way Muslims use Islam to justify terror, even using legal language - almost like a Christian version of a fatwa. Beyond that, he justifies his sins (such as visiting prostitutes) in order to keep his mood up for the upcoming attack, reasoning that the ends justify the means.

The open question is: did he cross the line into becoming a terrorist because of his religious beliefs, or would it have happened anyway? As the first quote above shows, he uses a utilitarian argument to justify killing many to save far more; but he later uses his Christian beliefs to more starkly justify his reasoning. The parallels of his Christian terror to Islamic terror are hard to miss - but on the other hand there is a tradition of secular Arab terrorism as well.

As far as I can tell, the media has been harping on his political beliefs more than on his religious beliefs. That may be a mistake. However, while it may be attractive to dismiss him as a religious nut, that may be oversimplifying the situation. The ultimate justification for the attack seems to be based on his perception of Christian theology, but he may have done it no matter what, and found justification for his evil anyway.

That's the part that is so frightening - the ability of someone who is not obviously insane to plan an act of such unimaginable evil.

Evil can spring from anywhere. It is not a right or left issue, it is not exclusive to any religion or belief. And it means that we must all be responsible for watching out when people do cross that line, and to stop them in time.

231 injured in Cairo protest; Imam tells secularists to leave Egypt

How's that Arab Spring coming along?

From Al Masry al Youm:

At least 143 peoplewere injured in Cairo’s Abbasseya district on Saturday when thousands of demonstrators fought opponents with stones after marching to the Defense Ministry to urge their military rulers to speed up reforms, the Health Ministry said.

Central Security and military forces cordoned protesters in Abbasseya, while residents threw stones and molotov cocktails at them.

About 5000 people marched from Tahrir Square to the Ministry of Defense headquarters in Abbasseya to demand the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which has been ruling the country since February, set up a clear timetable for handing power to an elected civilian government.

A protester told Al-Masry Al-Youm that at least two activists, Amr Gharbeia and Alya el-Husseiny, were kidnapped by a group of thugs.

“We heard that the thugs are going to hand in the two activists to a police station near Abbasseya,” he said. Al-Masry Al-Youm could not independently verify the claims.

Military forces fired shots in the air to disperse protesters as they reached the area. People in the area threw stones at protesters, which injured scores of them.

The number of injured rose to 231 later in the evening.

Meanwhile, an imam called all Egyptian secularists to leave the country:

Arguments broke out between Jama'a al-Islamiya members, Salafis and others at the Fateh Mosque on Friday over the shape of the future Egyptian state.

Jama'a al-Islamiya members drove those defending a secular state out of the mosque at the end of the argument.

Abdallah Darwish, the mosque's imam, criticized proponents of the secular state, saying they should leave the country if they do not want it to be an Islamic one that adopts Islamic law. “Grow that secular seed outside Egypt. Since we were young, we have learned that this is an Islamic state.”

Saturday night open thread

Haven't had one for a while, so...here it is.

Palestinian Arabs using archaeology "to rewrite history"

AP has an article on an archaeological dig in Shechem (Nablus):

Archaeologists unearthing a biblical ruin inside a Palestinian city in the West Bank are writing the latest chapter in a 100-year-old excavation that has been interrupted by two world wars and numerous rounds of Mideast upheaval.

Working on an urban lot that long served residents of Nablus as an unofficial dump for garbage and old car parts, Dutch and Palestinian archaeologists are learning more about the ancient city of Shekhem, and are preparing to open the site to the public as an archaeological park next year.

The project, carried out under the auspices of the Palestinian Department of Antiquities, also aims to introduce the Palestinians of Nablus, who have been beset for much of the past decade by bloodshed and isolation, to the wealth of antiquities in the middle of their city.

Then comes the good part:

In Israel, archaeology, and especially biblical archaeology, has long been a hallowed national pursuit traditionally focused on uncovering the depth of Jewish roots in the land. For the Palestinians, whose Department of Antiquities was founded only 15 years ago, the dig demonstrates a growing interest in uncovering the ancient past.

The department now has 130 workers and carries out several dozen rescue excavations every year on the sites of planned building projects in areas administered by the Palestinian Authority, said Hamdan Taha, the department's director. Ten ongoing research excavations are being conducted with foreign cooperation.

All of the periods in local history, including that of the biblical Israelites, are part of Palestinian history, Taha said.

"Palestinian history" predates "Palestinians?" How can it be considered "Palestinian history" if the residents of the lands were not related to today's Palestinian Arabs? Do Jews claim that uncovering pre-Biblical treasures is part of the history of Israel? It's important, to be sure, but Israeli archaeology - despite the claims of its detractors - is populated by people who are dedicated to uncovering the truth, whether it seems to support or go against the biblical narrative. To call any ancient findings "Palestinian history" is to grotesquely mangle the meaning of the word.

This is an obvious attempt to minimize real history, and especially Jewish history, in the land and instead push a narrative of an ancient "Palestinian people" who never existed.

But don't take my word for it:

Digs like the one in Nablus, he said, "give Palestinians the opportunity to participate in writing or rewriting the history of Palestine from its primary sources."

Ah, archaeology gives today's Palestinian Arabs the opportunity to rewrite history. Got it.

(h/t Dan)

Israel taking on Silicon Valley (The Telegraph)

Nice:

Despite only being 64 years old, and constantly in a state of political turmoil, Israel is fast becoming known in technology circles, as the world’s second Silicon Valley and as a ‘start up nation’ – now also the title of a successful book by Dan Senor and Saul Singer, charting the country’s successful and often unknown tech story.

This prowess in technology has resulted in leaders and high profile figures from around the world to make regular visits to the small embattled state to see the start up nation in action. Earlier this month for instance, the Lord Mayor of the City of London, Alderman Michael Bear,flew into Israel in order to promote the UK’s capital as the best place for Israeli’s to list their companies and to find out about opportunities for UK based fund managers to invest in Israeli technology businesses.
Seeing the start up nation in action, so soon after returning from Palo Alto – the home of the original Silicon Valley, I was impressed by the same high levels of innovation, concentrated into one small area and a similar set of cash rich and investment-hungry venture capital firms waiting on the sidelines for the next golden egg.
Company after company presented to us, a small band of international journalists, many showing a different solution to a problem people often don’t yet know they need solving.
Stand out technology companies included: Waze – a mobile navigation app updated in real-time, Playcast – an on demand gaming service delivered via TVs without a games console, and JustAd TV, an advertising service which allows adverts to be dropped into time-shifted viewing.
However, where the Israeli ‘Silicon Valley’ differs to the original Californian version, is in the amount of consumer technology products being created.
I saw a lot of middleware and chip companies while on my tech tour, which definitely all fell into the business to business category.
According to Yonatan Sela, vice president of marketing of Tvinci, a pay TV on-demand platform, because of Israel’s small size, (7.7 million) and it’s rather unique inability to do business with its direct neighbours for political reasons, it’s difficult to grow a consumer technology business in Israel.
“Building a consumer brand is much harder to do outside of a big market like the US. It’s definitely very difficult to do in Israel as the population is so small that growing and scaling a consumer brand is tough. Plus we can’t rely upon the brand then to catch on with our immediate neighbours. This is why business to business solutions we can provide via technology and then sell aboard, is more commonplace."
However, Gilad Japhet, the founder and chief executive of MyHeritage, a popular social networking site for families and is a rare example of an Israeli consumer web company, thinks the focus on technology solutions for businesses is indicative of the country’s culture and expertise.
“Israelis are incredibly good at problem solving. They are trained to never accept barriers and always try and solve an issue – no matter how difficult it is. This makes Israel very strong in technology. However, Israelis are typically not good when it comes to finesse and creating slick user interfaces for the normal consumer. This leaves a shortage of business to consumer start ups in Israel as people here usually like to solve digital issues for businesses but not the consumer…I think Israelis are drawn more to algorithms and the back end stuff.”
There is also a trend happening across the country's technology start ups which is helping to create a more stable and dependable business sector. Entrepreneurs are slowly moving away from the ‘fast exit’ which Israeli founders of technology companies had become known for. Increasingly these technology businesses are being built for the long term, hoping to ape and eventually rival the giants of Silicon Valley.