Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, January 23, 2014

An old joke

For some reason this joke, that I originally read in The Joys of Yiddish when I was a kid. popped into my head this morning. Here's a variation I found on the web:

A Texan was touring Israel, complete with his cowboy hat and cowboy boots. We all know about the tendency of Texans to brag. While driving down a great, flat desert, he spied a tiny house in the distance, with a neat picket fence. Coming closer, he saw an elderly man leaning against the fence.

"Shalom, you all," said the Texan.

"Shalom," replied the Israeli.

"Do you speak English?

"Sure I do."

"Do you own this little house?

"Yes."

"What on Earth do you do out here in this isolated area?

"I raise chickens."

"How large is your property?"

"Well, " answered the Israeli, "In the front, it's a good eighty feet. And in the back, it must be 100, 110 feet at least."

The Texan grinned. "I don't mean to brag, but back in Texas where I come from, I eat breakfast, get into my car around 9 am and drive and drive and drive and drive, and I don't reach the end of my property until about 6 o'clock at night."

And the Israeli sighed and said, "I once owned a car like that."

According to this article, a new film being produced in Syria will center on the Jewish community of Damascus between 1850 and 1860. It appears to be an episode in a historic TV series called "Concierge of the Wind."

In the film, the chief rabbi of Damascus, a fictional character named Rabbi Bashi "Badran Farhi," wants to move the community to Palestine but the community leader named Yusuf Copper is against it, and denies that Israel is the Promised Land. So the rabbi kills a few Jews and starts rumors to incite the Muslims against the Jews.

The director says that he was looking to dramatize the roots of the conflict in the region.

The setting for the movie is interesting, as in 1840 there was a famous blood libel against the Jews of Damascus, and in 1860 Jews were falsely accused of participating with Muslims in the massacre of Christians, and 200 Jews were almost executed but were saved by outside intervention.

The episode is apparently meant to set the stage for the story of the 1860 massacre, perhaps by saying that the Jews were responsible, not Muslims.

01/23 Links Pt2: UK MP again diminishes Holocaust Memorial Day, David Baddiel on the "Quenelle"

From Ian:

David Ward MP *again* diminishes Holocaust Memorial Day

This time last year, David Ward MP was censured by his own party, the Liberal Democrats, after claiming that, “the [liberated] Jews” were inflicting similar atrocities on the Palestinian people. Ward at the time continued to dig deeper, and has landed himself square in an anti-Semitic hole, having issued many statements over the course of the last year to similar effect.
His comments about Israel not lasting forever saw him suspended from his party, while recently, and bizarrely, he gave a brief history lesson on Twitter, stating as if it were a new fact, that the Palestinians were not responsible for the Holocaust.
So little wonder that today, Ward took a stand once again, in great offence to the memory of those millions killed during the Holocaust, to somehow juxtapose the political point of the Palestinian right of return, with Holocaust Memorial Day, officially observed in Britain on Monday 27th January this year.

Israeli song a hit in Yemen

A song from an Israeli singer with Yemenite roots – but who has never visited the country – has become a surprise hit in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa, the Economist reported on Tuesday.
Zion Golan's song "Sana’a al-Yemen" is frequently heard blaring from stereos and minibus speakers. "Come with me to Sanaa," Golan sings in Yemeni Arabic. "Sanaa, my home, you'll like it."
But although the lyrics refer to Sana’a as home, Golan has never been there. As an Israeli Jew he is forbidden to travel to Yemen.

Saudi Columnist: The Number of Ariel Sharon’s Victims is Nowhere Near That of Arab Rulers

Saudi Arabian columnist Khalaf Al-Harbi recently published an article in the Saudi government daily Okaz, claiming that despite the “horrific acts of massacre” former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon carried out, the number of Arabs he killed is nowhere near that of those who died at the hands of Arab rulers, especially since the onset of the Arab Spring, according to MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute, on Wednesday.
MEMRI said the article was published on January 13, on the occasion of Sharon’s funeral. In the article, as well as pointing out the great number of Arab deaths due to Arab rulers, in Syria and Lebanon, Al-Harbi said that Zionists who had once claimed “Arabs as a barbaric people” were proven right by “a reality that exceeds imagination,” including “decapitations, bombing houses with explosive barrels, the rape of women, and the expulsion of millions of innocent civilians.” (h/t dabney_c)

Fisking Jeff Halper's diatribe at St. James

A few weeks ago, when St. James Church in London held their wall stunt, I posted an eyewitness account by Amie of the debate that was held there between Alan Johnson of BICOM and Jeff Halper, extreme anti-Israel leftist:

Alan Johnson of Bicom spoke brilliantly; cogently articulating the case for the wall as a security issue. His rhetorical devices were masterly, as he spoke of the realities of the actual wall as against the never never world of the pretend wall, which in turn facilitated the calcification of the intellectual wall which refused to recognise the reality of the need for the real wall.

He cited famous harrowing instances of bombing and terror.

He showed graphs of how the level of terror decreased dramatically after the wall.

He cited last week's abortive bus bombing where the terrorists had got through a breach in the wall, from Bethlehem.

When he finished, (to a good round of applause from the substantial pro Israel presence there.)

Jeff Halper, the next speaker, opened his mouth wide and bellowed: This wall has NOTHING to do with security.

And without his having to say a single thing more to back up or verify this bellow, the hall erupted into cheers and applause.

Since then, Amie has gotten the recording of the session and of Halper's accusations against Israel and his frantic attempts to change the topic however he could.

Her fisking of Halper is at Harry's Place. Here are some highlights:

For starters, Halper was having none of Alan Johnson’s complexity: After his klaxoned opening that the wall “has nothing to do with security, he declared: there’s no both sides here, there’s no complexity”. What then, is his simple truth?

“I reject the idea of complexity, I think it is absolutely clear there is an occupation.. “

Alas for Alan Johnson’s warning against reductivism, Halper’s reductivism wows the crowd. But then comes something more insiduous than reductivism. It is what I once termed the Tonge manoeuvre. ... just to mention something is to establish something; provided it is the favoured person doing the mentioning. I now have Halper’s exact words, thanks to the transcript:

The wall – and if you want to talk about terrorism – you talk about cluster bombs used by Israel – you talk about anti-personnel weapons, you talk about tungsten based weapons that melt your insides, if you want to talk about Palestinian children with wounds that even doctors can’t figure out, talk about Flechettes – they’re like little razors like swords thousands of them going through the air and chopping limbs off. You wanna talk about terrorism, well let’s talk about terrorism, let’s talk about state terrorism..

Note the choice of “talk about” delivered in an unbroken demagogic outpouring, rather than facts in context. The mere enumeration of these dread weapons raises the spectre that Israel must have used them, and must have used them in the worst possible way. At best, crowds are unreceptive to critical thinking and this crowd, hothoused in a week of demonisation, greets this readily with untroubled cheers.

For what it’s worth, it is left to us keyboard Casaubons to sift drily through the chaff in search of facts. This we do, fully aware that this tuquoque tactic of Halper in no way addresses the barrage of assorted armaments, outlawed or otherwise, from Gaza which gave rise to the need for the security barrier.

Amie then looks at each of Halper's accusations and finds that he is lying about every single one. Read the post for details.

As for Halper’s actual arguments:

If the wall had been built for security first of all, .. they would have built on the border. No one can have a problem with the wall including the international court of justice in the Hague had it been built on the border....
...During Q&A he was asked by the chair: Is the wall not there to prevent terrorism?

Halper: “There is no internationally accepted definition of terrorism! I prefer to use Human Rights language. Terrorism is violence against civilians. What about State terror? You hear about Al Quada, Palestinians, Hamas: what about States? Human Rights language means it prohibits the killing of innocent civilians.”
He then spoke about how it was impossible to have a Jewish State. This seemed to discomfit the chair, who queried this assertion.

Halper: “You can’t have an ethnically Jewish state in the 21stC. There must be a One State solution. We need to reframe the discussion. The issue is not security and terror. The issue is: the wall is a border. That is really why they built a wall.”

He's even contradicting himself - at first he says that a wall at the Green Line would be OK, but then he tells the truth - he doesn't want Israel to exist altogether and for it to be replaced by yet another Arab state, wall or no wall, on the border or not.

It is worth reading the whole thing as a case study in how the Israel haters will throw out lies and half-truths to a crowd that eats it all up, truth be damned. Halper comes across as even more extreme and deceptive than I had thought he was - he isn't against house demolitions, he's against Israel defending itself - actually, against Israel existing altogether.

Bolivia working with Iran on nuclear program?

BBC reports:

Bolivian President Evo Morales has announced plans to build the country's first nuclear reactor.

Mr Morales said the development of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes has become a strategic priority for his country.

Speaking to members of the Bolivian Congress, he said that Iran, France and Argentina had volunteered to help with the development of the project.

In fact, Iran's vice chancellor for European and American affairs, Mayid Ravanchi, visited Bolivia right beforehand and praised the country for being "always being on the side of the revolutionaries".

This article notes that the nuclear issue was discussed between Morales and Ravanchi, and that Morales said that Bolivia "has enough raw material" for a nuclear plant, which confirms the existence of large mineable uranium deposits in the country.

Which Iran would no doubt be interested in.

(h/t Emmanuel)

01/23 Links Pt1: Glick discusses 2-state solution, Fatah threatens to bomb Tel Aviv into a "ball of fire"

From Ian:

Fatah publicizes threats to bomb Tel Aviv on its official Facebook page

Once again Fatah has chosen to post threats of terror against Israel on its official Facebook page. Yesterday, the movement posted a video in which Fatah's military wing, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, threatens to turn Tel Aviv into a "ball of fire":
"We swear to you that we will turn the beloved [Gaza] Strip into a graveyard for your soldiers, and we will turn Tel Aviv into a ball of fire."
These threats are made by a masked man in uniform standing in front of a group of other masked men, all of whom are holding weapons. The full video is eight minutes long and shows footage of masked men in military training, arsenals of weapons, missiles being launched, as well as footage of Israelis running for shelter during missile attacks.

Only the Jewish State survives

To close; Israel’s existence comes down to the need for a Jewish state. It is a need generated by years of persecution, pogroms, and hatred; The persecution of the Jewish people is an incredibly deep contrast to the purity of the Jewish veneration of life. The history of the Jewish people but also the land of Israel, is written and bound in blood- yet what is written in that blood reads ‘hope’. If the Palestinian people, if not least their elected representatives, cannot end their hope for a demographic annihalation of their Israeli neighbours, any peace created out of those circumstances is impure and bound to fail. Peace should be, and will be achieved only when Israel is accepted as what it has always been- the only Jewish state in the world. Then and only then, is the time that friendship can come from enmity, and the hope of peace can come alive.

Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick discusses 2-state solution (starts 2m40s)

Mohammad Shtayyeh, one of the PLO negotiators who resigned in November, said the negotiations with Israel side are going to fail, and will not be extended past April 29, saying they are heading towards a "one state" solution.

During a conference called "Palestine and international law", in Jericho on Wednesday, he said "negotiations will be a failure, and then we will say goodbye to the two-state solution."

He said, "No deal is a thousand times better than a poor deal," explaining that the Palestinian Authority cannot continue afterwards and must change into a posture of resistance.

Shtayyej said that the Palestinian leadership will go to the United Nations to prosecute Israel for its crimes after the talks and called for the establishment of an international conference similar to the Geneva conference with Syria and Iran on the Palestinian issue.

He added that Israeli society is turning more extreme and that the next prime minister could be a settler.

"We must correct the error, which occurred when the Palestinian leadership chose not to go directly to the institutions of the United Nations immediately after the vote .. we should have directly to sign international agreements and join the Geneva Conventions, the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice after the vote on Palestine non-member State .. we should have done that, and we will correct this error."

He wants to internationalize the Palestinian issue so that bodies like the UN will impose a solution that would be better than anything the PLO can negotiate.

In other words, the current negotiations were never serious. The PLO used them to force Israel to release over 100 terrorists but had no intention to give anything up. They clearly have no desire for a state or for independence; the desire is to use the international community to destroy Israel for them, since Israel is not volunteering to destroy itself.

The PLO still insists on the Jewish Quarter and the Kotel being in "Palestine"

The PLO Negotiations Affairs Department put out a document last August detailing their specific demands on Jerusalem.

The introduction is filled with inaccuracies:

The June 4, 1967 border (the green line) is the internationally recognized border between the occupied State of Palestine and the State of Israel. This line separates the territory occupied by Israel during and since the June 1967 War, an occupation that has been condemned by the international community time and again, through resolutions such as UN Security Council Resolutions 242, 338 that taken in the Nakba of 1948 and the ICJ advisory opinion in 2004 on the illegality of the Wall and Settlements.

The 1967 borders of Palestine include the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The Jordan Valley, the Latrun area, the northern shores of the Dead Sea and Palestine’s capital, East Jerusalem -are all an integral part of the 1967 border.

This boundary was established through the signing of armistice agreements between Egypt and Jordan on the one hand, and Israel, on the other, following the Nakba in 1948, and the subsequent creation of the State of Israel on 78% of historic Palestine.

In 1988, the PLO declared the independence of the State of Palestine on the basis of UNGA 181 and UNSC 242, two states, living side by side on the 1967 border, or the “Green Line”. The Palestinian acceptance of the 1967 border, which includes East Jerusalem, is a painful compromise: It is the acceptance of the State of Palestine over only 22% of historic Palestine.

...Jerusalem has always been and remains the political, administrative and spiritual heart of Palestine. Occupied East Jerusalem is the natural socio-economic and political center for the future Palestinian state given its historical signiﬁcance, wealth in religious and cultural heritage sites, its commercial vitality, and its geographic centrality connecting the northern and southern parts of the occupied State of Palestine.

The Green Line was never a "border." UN 242 and 338 do not condemn Israel, and the word "condemn" is not found in the ICJ opinion, either.The boundaries of British Mandate Palestine have nothing to do with "historic Palestine" - but parts of Jordan and Lebanon are within historic Palestine. And Jerusalem was never the political, administrative or spiritual heart of any Arab or Islamic entity, except perhaps as the Sanjak of Jerusalem district under Ottoman rule for several decades, roughly equivalent to a county seat.

Within the document we see the details of how the PLO insists Jerusalem look after a "peace agreement:"

Palestine’s vision for Jerusalem is rooted in deep historical, political, cultural, social, religious and economic ties to Jerusalem that span centuries. Pursuant to our vision, East Jerusalem, as deﬁned by the pre-1967 municipal boundaries, shall be the capital of Palestine and West Jerusalem the capital of Israel, with each state enjoying full sovereignty over its respective part of the city. East Jerusalem’s connections to the remainder of the occupied Palestinian territory should be fully restored and the city should be fully integrated into the territory of the State of Palestine.

Each city should have its own municipality taking responsibility for and managing municipal and daily affairs. The open city concept, however, is an essential element to ensure the prosperity and centrality of the city. In the spirit of peaceful coexistence and cooperation, a joint development council, composed of an equal number of representatives from both sides should be established by the parties to oversee cooperation between Israel and Palestine in both parts of Jerusalem, including with respect to planning and zoning, water, waste water and the environment, roads and industrial zones. A central objective of such cooperation should be to minimize practical impediments to the free movement and access of people, vehicles, services and goods arising from the existence of an international boundary running through the city. Notwithstanding this cooperation, each state shall enjoy full sovereignty over
its respective part of Jerusalem.

So this is what Abbas means when he says Jerusalem would be an "open city" - it means that Jews must depend on Arab largesse to walk to the Western Wall. I wouldn't be surprised if "Palestine" would destroy the plaza in front of the Kotel to rebuild the slum of Arabs from Morocco ("Palestinians") that was there before 1967. (h/t Gideon, I had never seen the video where they actually say that.)

We already know that the PLO says that no Jews can live in "Palestine" so the Jewish Quarter would have to be ethnically cleansed, not to mention dozens of Jewish neighborhoods.

The chances of Jews being allowed to visit the Temple Mount would become exactly zero. The chances that Jews could visit the Kotel would slowly drop to zero within a couple of years - for "security" reasons. The best that Jews could hope for would be the way they can visit the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus today - once or twice a month in heavily armored buses in the middle of the night.

The document does not admit any concessions that the PLO supposedly made in negotiations in 2000, 2001 or 2007. It does not hint at compromise.

Here's the document:

PLO's official position on Jerusalem

PA arrests man for naming his son "Mohamed Morsi"

Ma'an Arabic reports that a resident of the Jalazoun refugee camp was arrested on Wednesday because he named his new baby as "Mohamed Morsi," after the former Egyptian President and Muslim Brotherhood figure.

Sources confirmed to Ma'an that the PA's General Intelligence Services summoned Abdel Halim Ghannam to investigate the event.

Ghannam was a prisoner in Israeli jails for more than 7 years. He was released 10 months ago, and has been summoned several times for interviews with the PA's GIS since.

Ghannam has a Facebook page showing lots of photos of his son Mohamed Morsi, who was born at the end of December. He makes no secret that he is a Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood supporter.

His mother complained bitterly about the detention, saying "Is it not enough for my son to spend years in the prisons of the occupation? My son has Irritable Bowel Syndrome and takes several medications, and we lived with the bitterness of detention time and again, is it not our right to live safe and secure lives like the rest of the people?"

(h/t Bob Knot)

Obama's "balanced" idiocy on Arab and Jewish bigotry

In a New Yorker interview, Barack Obama gave his 50,000 foot view of the Arab Israeli conflict. And he gets it very, very wrong.

“With respect to Israel, the interests of Israel in stability and security are actually very closely aligned with the interests of the Sunni states.” As Saudi and Israeli diplomats berate Obama in unison, his reaction is, essentially, Use that. “What’s preventing them from entering into even an informal alliance with at least normalized diplomatic relations is not that their interests are profoundly in conflict but the Palestinian issue, as well as a long history of anti-Semitism that’s developed over the course of decades there, and anti-Arab sentiment that’s increased inside of Israel based on seeing buses being blown up,” Obama said. “If you can start unwinding some of that, that creates a new equilibrium. And so I think each individual piece of the puzzle is meant to paint a picture in which conflicts and competition still exist in the region but that it is contained, it is expressed in ways that don’t exact such an enormous toll on the countries involved, and that allow us to work with functioning states to prevent extremists from emerging there.”

First of all, as I have documented many, many times, Muslim antisemitism is not merely "decades" old. Obama seems to be saying that it is a reaction to Israel's existence, not something that has been part of Islam and the Arab world since Islam began. I've shown books and other proof from eyewitnesses in the Islamic and Arab world who saw how badly Jews were treated in Arab countries for centuries.

If Obama cannot understand that Muslim antisemitism is independent of Israel's existence, he doesn't know the basics. If Obama's conception of history doesn't go beyond the twentieth century, then he is shallow indeed.

But more outrageous is his attempt to say that there is a symmetry between Muslim/Arab hate of Jews and Israel's opinion of Arabs.

Yes, Israelis fear terrorism. But they are not Islamophobic nor are they bigoted in general. Arabs in Israel do not live in fear of being attacked as they walk down a street with Jewish residents, but a Jew walking through certain Arab neighborhoods is literally risking his life. In Israel.

There is some bigotry, as there is in every country on the planet, but anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe is much, much worse than it is in Israel. There are no burqa bans in Israel. There are no laws outlawing minarets.

But symmetry between Arab bigotry and Israeli bigotry? The idea is not only ridiculous, but insulting.

Israel's Ministry of Justice just put out a commercial to fight bigotry in Israeli society. It is very powerful.

This commercial shows the vast gulf between how Israeli Jews think about Arabs and how Arabs think about Jews. It is inconceivable that any Arab country would release a commercial like this.

In Israel, bigotry might exist - but it is looked down upon and shamed. In the Arab world, antisemitism is in the daily newspapers and taught to schoolchildren.

Comparing the two is obscene.

Israel has dozens of organizations dedicated to building bridges with the Arab world, to mutual understanding, to fighting bigotry. How many Palestinian Arab organizations exist to understand Jews or Israelis? How many Arabs even want to understand Israel's viewpoint?

There is no equivalence. The Israeli reticence towards a peace agreement has nothing to do with anti-Arab attitudes - it has everything to do with Israelis wanting to live in peace and security in their own country and being skeptical about whether Palestinian Arabs want the same thing. Those exploding buses were a signal that Palestinian Arabs were not to be trusted after they promised to abandon terror in 1993. Given the daily anti-Israel incitement in Palestinian Arab media today, during "peace" talks, Israelis have every reason to be concerned.

Obama is dismissing Israel's very real concerns about how much Abbas and his gang want peace and instead pushing a theory of Israeli bigotry that is stopping the peace process. This is an outrageous lie, and it reveals how little the leader of the free world - who has dedicated countless hours on this very topic - truly understands.

If Obama thinks that this interview would make him seem more sympathetic to Israel, he's clueless. He doesn't even realize how insulting and patronizing his words are.

(h/t Ian via MtTB via Daily Caller)

01/22 Links Pt2: Obama claims Muslim anti-Semitism only recent, Pinkwashing counter protest.

From Ian:

Muslim anti-Semitism is only decades old, Obama claims

“Anti-Semitism is hard-wired into Islam,” from its origins before 700, said Andrew Bostom, author of three books about Islam, including “The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism,” which lists centuries of anti-Semitic hatred, murders, pogroms and apartheid-like discrimination.
Intellectuals, politicians and diplomats are loath to admit the centrality of anti-Semitism in Islamic beliefs, because it fuels conflict with Israel and the West and it can’t be fixed by Westerners, Bostom said. ”You’re dealing with an intractable situation, and people hate intractable situations,” he said, adding “diplomats are the worst.”
In an interview with The New Yorker magazine, Obama described the Muslim hatred of Israel as byproduct of recent fights, not as a consequence of Islam’s doctrinal objection to any Jewish government. (h/t MtTB)

UNESCO looks to hold Land of Israel exhibit in June

UNESCO, on its website and in letters to the Center, had always said the exhibit was postponed. The absence of an alternative date, however, gave the impression that the exhibit had been canceled.
On Tuesday, UNESCO posted a note on its website in which it reaffirmed that the exhibit had only been postponed, but not canceled.
“UNESCO is in discussions with the Simon Wiesenthal Center to finalize the last points and inaugurate the exhibition in the month of June,” it said. (h/t Bob Knot)

UNESCO Fiasco Explains Why ME Talks Fail

The reason that the exhibit was necessary in the first place was to correct the depiction of the state of Israel purveyed by the Palestinians and their international cheerleaders as a colonial error in which Jews were dumped on Arab territory in order to compensate for the Holocaust. If Jews are seen as having connections and a presence in historic Israel/Palestine millennia before 1948, it undermines the canard—a staple of Palestinian Authority propaganda and incitement—to delegitimize the notion that Jews have any right to sovereignty anywhere in the Middle East, making peace talks pointless.
That is exactly the sort of delusional perspective the State Department should be working hard to oppose. But the American decision to distance itself from the project sent an unmistakable message that the Obama administration views any talk about Jewish ties to the land as too controversial to warrant its involvement. So long as the Palestinians are enabled by both the UN and the U.S. to continue denying Jewish history, the peace process that both Bokova and the State Department claim to take so seriously has no chance of success. (h/t NormanF)

If there is an escalation in Gaza, terrorists plan to kill "spies"

From Islamic Jihad's Palestine Today:

Informed security sources of the Palestinian resistance say they will executed a number of spies during any future Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip.

The sources said in a statement that the Zionist threats against the Gaza Strip to wage war to deter resistance will force internal operations to deter spies for the Zionist intelligence by accelerating the vigilante killing of his agents in the sector.

The sources pointed out that during the next operation Gaza will see an increase in the occurrence and frequency of public executions of the spies, as has already occurred, stressing that the general attitude of the Palestinians is in favor of this because it deters espionage and hurts the enemy.

He pointed out that a number of security suspects are still under security surveillance, and they will be dealing with them on the ground in the event of any future war.

The Palestinian resistance has executed a number of spies during the war in the year 2008-2009 in public in front of people, in addition to the execution of six other spies during the eight-day war in 2012.

Remember that the Gazans gruesomely executed during Pillar of Defense were already in jail when they were taken out and one was dragged in the street behind motorcycles. And at least one of them was not a spy at all but a political rival of Hamas.

This article essentially is announcing that Gaza groups are planning to kill a bunch of Arabs, using any Israeli action as an excuse, thinking that this will deter Israel from defending itself from rockets.

I wonder if any human rights groups (or people who pretend to care about extrajudicial killings when Israel targets a terrorist before he can attack) will condemn a gleeful pre-announcement of public extrajudicial executions of Arabs.

Ha!

Hezbollah baby! (video)...and bonus Fatah kids!

From MEMRI:

Hizbullah's Al-Manar TV recently reported on a baby born in a Lebanese hospital, filmed dressed in the military fatigues of Hizbullah. "Military fatigues were the first garment to touch his tender body," said the reporter, adding that Mahdi "is a potential resistance fighter from the first hours of his life."

Following are excerpts from the report, which aired on January 18, 2014:

Reporter: Mahdi welcomed us in his own special way. He did not wear the clothes usually reserved for newborn babies. Military fatigues were the first garment to touch his tender body. He is a potential resistance fighter from the first hours of his life.

Mother of newborn Mahdi: Nothing could be better than him becoming a soldier of Imam Mahdi. This reflects the continuation of the path of the Islamic resistance, one generation after another.

Reporter: Mahdi was the only baby born in Rasul Aatham Hospital today. His family received an exemption from all hospital bills, and their baby was awarded a gold necklace, inscribed with the name of the Prophet Muhammad.

Meanwhile, on Fatah's official Facebook page we see this:

Someone responded with this:

Notice the iPad that the poor, depraved Palestinian Arab kid has.

If only Israel would compromise more, then members of these psychotic terrorist murder cult will make peace.

If not this generation...then the next.

From the IDF:

Last night, IDF forces found an improvised firearm during a search in the Jordan Valley. The Palestinian suspect had concealed the weapon in a child’s bookbag, which the forces discovered inside of his vehicle.

Late Tuesday evening, a battalion from the IDF’s Kfir Brigade discovered an improvised firearm and ammunition inside of a Palestinian vehicle during a routine inspection in the Jordan Valley. The weapon was found inside of a child’s bookbag at a checkpoint not far from the driver’s home. “The driver aroused suspicion after a preliminary search,” said Captain Sefi Mor, an IDF company commander involved in the inspection. “He seemed anxious, so we decided to perform a comprehensive search of the vehicle.”

Each day, thousands of people pass through the checkpoint, which is located on a major traffic artery in the Jordan Valley. Because of the high potential for terrorism and weapons smuggling, IDF forces stationed at the checkpoint are constantly on alert for threats. Last night, the same battalion detained another suspect who attempted to pass through the checkpoint.

About a month and a half ago, forces at the checkpoint discovered an explosive device in another Palestinian vehicle. “A large number of people pass through the checkpoint to get to work in the Jordan Valley, and we check anyone who seems suspicious,” Cpt. Mor said.

During the past several months, the Kfir battalion has been stationed in the Jordan Valley. In addition to their work at the checkpoint, the soldiers have carried out several arrests and weapons searches in the area. “It’s clear to the battalion’s fighters that their mission is to defend civilians and allow them to sleep safely at night,” Cpt. Mor added.

According to the calculus of Israel's critics, the inconvenience of these checkpoints is much more important than IDF accomplishments like these.

Because, you understand, these critics are so damn moral, as opposed to the monstrous IDF, which is merely saving lives.

01/22 Links Pt1: IAF airstrike kills Gaza terror chief, Waqf Blocked Harper over Jewish Bodyguards,

From Ian:

Anne Bayefsky: 2014, the UN Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People

Palestinians, and their undemocratic UN cohorts, are off to a roaring start for 2014, the UN Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.
Last week UNESCO tore down an exhibit on the Jewish people’s ties to the land of Israel, just before it opened to the public, because it offended Arab states. Unfortunately, the move was only the tip of the UN iceberg.
All visitors to UN Headquarters in New York, including school children from across America, walk off the elevator straight into the “Palestine” exhibit. (h/t NormanF)

Douglas Murray: Middle East Peace Process: America's Wishful Thinkers

For let us not forget that the premise upon which Mr. Kerry's peace plan, indeed anybody's peace plan, must built, is the presumption that the talks are between two parties who are sincerely and demonstrably committed to peace and not on the determination of one to annihilate the other. That is the presumption from which Mr Kerry is starting, surely? So how to explain that on the Palestinian side there appears to be, not exactly for the first time in living memory, a certain number of problems of trust which are going unaddressed by Washington?