Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, April 25, 2014

04/25 Links Pt1: What Is Abbas Trying to Achieve?; Waiting for the Palestinian Godot

From Ian:

It’s hard not to admire Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s brazenness.
Two weeks ago, Abbas signed on to 15 international agreements that among other things require the PA to respect human rights and punish war criminals.
And this week, he signed a unity deal with two genocidal terror groups all of whose leaders are war criminals. Every leader of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the two parties that signed the deal with the PLO, are war criminals. Under the Geneva Conventions, which Abbas signed onto just a couple of weeks ago, he is required to put them on trial, for their war crimes.
Here it is worth noting that under the Geneva Conventions, every single rocket launch from Gaza into Israeli territory is a separate war crime.

Khaled Abu Toameh: What Is Abbas Trying to Achieve?

Abbas seems to be enjoying that each time he does something dramatic, the U.S. launches another big diplomatic offensive to try to convince him to backtrack. Abbas wants his people and the Arabs to see him as a hero who can stand up to the Americans.
Abbas's biggest fear is that the U.S. will cut off financial aid to the Palestinian Authority and work toward isolating him, as the Bush Administration did to Yasser Arafat in 2002. He is aware that neither the Europeans nor the Russians nor the Chinese will be able to replace American sponsorship.
Abbas is now waiting to see what the Americans will offer him for rescinding his plan to join forces with Hamas. When this happens, Abbas will most probably come up with new demands and conditions, as he has done all these past weeks.

Netanyahu: Palestinian Pact with Hamas Killed Peace Talks

Netanyahu issued a strong warning to those hoping for renewed talks between the Israelis and Palestinians while Hamas is still involved, telling Mitchell “We will not sit and negotiate with a Palestinian government that is backed by Hamas in which Hamas has effective share of power.”
The Israeli prime minister expressed his disappointment with the Palestinian unity pact, saying “[They] have taken a giant leap backward and embraced the very people who call for the eradication of the Jewish state. That’s incompatible with peace. He can’t think he can have both. He made a terrible decision for peace and his own people…”

Abu Mazen Says NO to Peace

Yet another #BDSFail as UC Santa Barbara votes against divestment

From the UCSB Daily Nexus:

After an intense nine-and-a-half hour meeting, the Associated Students Senate voted not to pass a resolution to “Divest From Companies that Profit from Apartheid” in a secret ballot, with 8 supporting and 16 opposing.

Hundreds attended and nearly 100 students and community members spoke at public forum to voice opposition or support for the divestment legislation, which focuses on divesting from five Israeli companies that the University works with. The meeting was held at Corwin Pavilion to accommodate the large crowd expected due to last year’s divestment hearings, during which Senate meetings ran well into the early morning several weeks in a row before the resolution was ultimately struck down.

What is most interesting is that there was a similar resolution last year:

A revised resolution aimed at divesting from companies that “profit from the military occupation of Palestine” failed to pass — despite a 12-11-1 vote — after it was reintroduced during Wednesday’s 11-hour Associated Students Senate meeting.

The burden of deciding the resolution’s fate ultimately fell to Internal Vice President Mayra Segovia, who was forced to determine whether or not the 12 senators in favor constituted enough of a majority to pass the resolution based on the A.S. Legal Code. Under Legal code, a simple majority is 50 percent of Senators plus one, not counting abstentions — meaning that passage of the resolution would have required a “yes” vote from 13 of the 23 senators present (rounded up from 12.5).

In other words, last year the Israel-haters at UCSB managed to get a bare majority to vote for divestment but not enough to pass; this year it was decisively defeated by a 2-1 margin.

Can there be a better illustration that the tide is turning against the Israel-haters on campus? And this is in California!

Following the even more lopsided vote at SDSU also on Wednesday night, the vote against even having a committee looking at the topic in Dearborn earlier this month, the Cornell resolution failure, the University of Michigan failure last month, and the UCLA failure (and meltdown) in February, the haters don't have much to point to in their effort to portray BDS as gaining steam. They won in the University of Windsor by using illegal methods - and that was overturned. In one of their very few victories, they barely squeaked by a vote in UC Riverside. They also lost at Loyola, University of New Mexico and elsewhere.

Electronic Intifada doesn't even bother to cover all of these losses anymore. They'll have articles leading up to a vote, and then...silence. Or at best, claiming victory by even having the vote take place, so that antisemitism and Israel-hatred can be publicly aired at universities - because that's the entire point, isn't it?

Tunisia spurns Arab League and allows Israeli Jews to visit pilgrimage site

From JTA:

Tunisia’s tourism minister has been summoned to appear before the country’s parliament to explain her decision to allow Israelis to enter the country on their passports for a religious festival.

Tunisia does not have diplomatic ties with Israel; the lawmakers say that allowing the religious pilgrims to use their Israeli passports is tantamount to recognizing Israel.

It is the first time that Israelis traveling to Tunisia for the traditional festive procession on Lag B’Omer near the Ghriba synagogue on the Tunisian island of Djerba will be allowed to enter the country on their passports, rather than use a special visa issued by the Tunisian embassy, the Associated Press reported .

Eighty-five lawmakers in the 217-member parliament signed a petition requiring Tourism Minister Amel Karboul to appear and defend her actions.

Tunisia’s interim Prime Minister, Mehdi Jomaa, on Tuesday defended the decision, which is seen as a way to boost tourism to the country.

“We must dispense with these political arguments and focus on the essential,” Jomaa said, according to AP. “All the previous government authorized Jews from Israel to come to Tunisia for the annual pilgrimage; we just decided to do it in total transparence.”

The details from Arabic website El Badil are interesting:

"The success of the tourist season is essential Because tourism is an activity that generates revenue quickly," [Jomaa] said of the Constituent Assembly a few days ago...

Tunisia is facing a serious economic crisis since 2011, and Israeli tourism - especially the pilgrimage to the Jewish Temple in Djerba - is essential for the development of this [tourist] sector, which is facing difficulties.

Some of the MPs objected to this reminding all that Tunisia is still officially "in a state of war " with Israel.

The Web site of the Secretary General of the Democratic Alliance, Mohammed Hamdi, said, "The Pilgrimage to the Temple of Djerba is not a problem in itself, but there is a political problem, Tunisia as a member of the Arab League must respect its obligations."

He added, "We must not forget that our country has ratified the decisions of the Arab League, and, therefore, Tunisia is still in a state of war with Israel, and should not turn this pilgrimage to a pretext for the normalization of relations with the Zionist entity."

The Prime Minister, in response to these accusations, said, "Let us be frank. Normalization, not normalization, set aside these big issues," calling on lawmakers to leave the "history" aside, stressing that these are procedures followed for years by all governments.

According to Elaph, only 61 Israeli tourists are expected to go to Tunisia, so the direct economic benefit to Tunisia cannot be that great. However, if Tunisia can point to them as proof that it is a safe place even for tourists from enemy countries to visit, it can be a big win.

This also shows the importance of the economy in bringing peace (or at least detente.) Here we have Tunisia's acting prime minister essentially thumbing his nose at the entire Arab world saying that their economy is more important than any number of anti-Israel slogans. No doubt this is why there is a small but growing underground trade between Israel and many Arab states.

But, as he stressed, he didn't want to make a big deal out of this because the haters are very, very loud.

The Hamas mouthpiece Palestine Information Center has an exclusive interview with Hamas sheikh and MP Hassan Youssef, where he confirms that Hamas will never recognize Israel.

Reacting to statements by PLO officials that a unity government will recognize Israel and be against terrorism, and that even Hamas will recognize Israel, Youssef asked rhetorically, "Does it make sense to ask [Hamas] to recognize Israel? The concept has nothing to do with logic and righteousness."

For the most part, Hamas leaders and media have been silent about the issue of them adhering to the existing positions of Mahmoud Abbas supposedly against terror and recognizing Israel, knowing that ambiguity is the only chance they have for unity.

Hamas political head Khaled Meshal told Al Jazeera that Hamas would do the "impossible" to facilitate an agreement with Fatah, in order for both of them together to "better able to meet the challenge of Israel, which shed lives and violated sanctities and usurped the land."

(h't Alex)

Hebrew is now fashionable - on clothing

From Haaretz:

With the official opening of the Soccer World Cup in June in Brazil, we can predict that the area on and near the pitch will be filled with players and fans wearing short sweatshirts with the word heshbon in Hebrew on the left side, right above the heart. How do we know? It’s simple: Over the past month, well-known soccer players from Europe’s leading teams, including Mario Balotelli, Didier Drogba, Seydou Keita, Eden Hazard and Marco Verratti, have done it. And the numbers are growing.

The reason is the launch of a new Paris brand last month, H’echbone Paris, with that very Hebrew word on the front. The people behind it are Yoan Barouk and Souleymane Kamissoko, two friends from the Parisian suburb of Sarcelles, the former Jewish and the latter, Muslim. Given that information, the word heshbon, which means “account” or “bill” in Hebrew, could be loaded with significance. But it turns out that the birth of the brand was fairly prosaic − it all started on a joint visit by Barouk and Kamissoko to Israel in 2011.

“We were sitting in a restaurant in Tel Aviv and when we were given the heshbon − the bill − Souleymane fell in love with the word, the way it was written and the way it was pronounced, “Barouk says. “When we founded the label last month, it was only natural that we would pick that word.”

The pair put together a small collection of shirts, manufactured them quickly and got a few of their friends involved − soccer stars who had their pictures snapped while wearing the shirts, posted them on Instagram and directed people to their homepage, which is also their sole sales outlet.

Hechbone Paris co-owner Souleymane Kamissoko, left, with AC Milan star Mario Balotelli.

Do you think anyone would notice if someone changed the logo a little?

It would be nice to see this on fashionable Europeans!

(For the Hebrew-challenged, it says "Hebron.")

04/24 Links Pt2: PA Incentives for murdering Jews; Germany funds the demonization of Israel

From Ian:

The Origins of Palestinian Refugee Relief Efforts (REVIEW)

Romirowsky and Joffe’s book Religion, Politics and the Origins of Palestine Refugee Relief is an important volume for those interested in truly understanding the origins of the Palestinian refugee issue. Utilizing a treasure trove of newly released documents, the authors link UNRWA’s (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine) origins to the Quakers/American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). For those readers who thought they knew most of the Middle East story, Romirowsky and Joffe’s version provides another twist. The authors meticulously show how prior to UNRWAs founding in 1949, the AFSC played a leading role and influence in decisions and choices.
It turns out that for the first ten years of UNRWA’s existence, repatriation of Palestinian refugees to Israel was of no interest. Numerous surprising actors from the U.S. State Department, the United Nations (UN), the AFSC and multiple Arab interest groups believed that Palestinians who left when Israel declared statehood, would be absorbed into surrounding Arab territories. More complicated was the process of identifying and defining refugee status given the frenetic frauds perpetrated by non-Israeli Bedouins, riot victims, inflated child counts and those who never resided in Israel e.g. Bedouins. Factor in religion, Holocaust memory and instead of a welcoming by neighboring Arab nations, refugee status is conferred and a politics of Palestinians is born.

NGO Monitor: Why does Germany fund demonization of Israel?

However, there is a vast gap between the words of the leaders and the actions of their government – specifically in the form of taxpayer money provided to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), political foundations and church groups that are central to delegitimization. European money, in general, and German funds in particular, pay for the fuel and ammunition for the political warfare strategy adopted at the infamous NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, whose participants declared their objective of “the complete international isolation of Israel as an apartheid state.” In many parts of Europe, including Germany, particularly on university campuses, churches and trade unions, this insidious form of warfare has been successful in demonizing Israel.
One of the most egregious examples is the German support for and cooperation with a notorious “one-state” (meaning no Israel) NGO known as Zochrot, whose mission is to “raise public awareness of the Palestinian Nakba” and to support the so-called Palestinian “right of return.” Zochrot repeats modern blood libels, in the form of accusations of “ethnic cleansing” and “forcible displacement and dispossession of the Palestinian people.”

Isi Leibler: Incentives for murdering Jews

It is a damning reflection on the civilized world that one rarely hears a word of condemnation of the criminal Palestinian society in which the murder of Jews is not only considered laudable, but has today effectively become a vehicle for achieving upward social mobility, both socially and financially.
Let us relate hypothetically to Ahmed, a typical youngster in a large and impoverished Palestinian family.
Like his peers, Ahmed has been brainwashed – since kindergarten and throughout his schooling, by the mullahs at his mosque and in the daily media – into believing that the highest level of piety is attained by killing the Israeli enemy. He knows that if he were killed while attacking a Jew, he too would become a shaheed – a martyr – and be compensated for his sacrifice by the rewards and pleasures of Paradise. Moreover, his family would be honored and would receive a lifelong state pension from our “peace partner” Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority.
Ahmed recollects the interviews he watched on PA state television of mothers displaying pride in their offspring’s sacrifice on behalf of Islam, and their frequently expressed hope that some of their remaining children follow the example of the blessed martyr.

The Serpent's Tongue - An Open Letter To Catherine Ashton, EU Policy Chief

Does that bother you at all, Lady Ashton, to be a part of providing an incentive for all those murders? In legal terms, Lady Ashton, doesn't that make you and the EU accessories to those murders? Have you even once forcefully condemned the Palestinian Authority's practice of rewarding and making heroes out of those who murder innocent men, women and children? Has the EU ever once threatened to end the cash flow unless it stopped?
And to add insult to injury, in your remarks, the murder of Baruch Mizrachi barely rates a sentence, almost an afterthought. And you equivocate by calling for 'an immediate end to all acts of violence', as though Israelis were likewise targeting Arab families for murder on the highways. And then you call on Israel and Israel alone to mend its ways and reverse these so-called punitive actions that you deplore so much.
Are you that dead to shame, Lady Ashton? Are you that blind to justice?
Do you sleep well at night?

No, no. It's one of by land, TWO if by sea.

On Sunday, Hamas announced the martyrdom of one of its heroic jihadist fighters in the playground of death, Ashraf Nassar, who was killed in an unspecified training accident while preparing to wage war against the evil Zionist usurping enemy.

Today, they found his bloated corpse floating in the Mediterranean:

Fishermen in the Gaza Strip on Thursday found the body of a Palestinian fighter affiliated with Hamas' al-Qassam Brigades, Gaza security services said.

Fishermen spotted the body off the coast of Rafah and Hamas naval units immediately rushed to recover it from the sea.

It is believed to be the body of Ashraf Nassar, 22, who was killed last week during a military drill.

What sort of accident happened at sea where he was declared dead days before they had a body? Did he just fall overboard, or was there an explosion?

Hamas appears to be trying to smuggle weapons by sea from Egyptians masquerading as fishermen, which is probably the major job of Hamas "naval forces."

Hamas and other terror groups continue to kill their fellows at higher rates than the IDF has this year.

Hamas accepting Israel? Oh, please

Haaretz reports:

The reconciliation agreement between the two major Palestinian factions, Fatah and Hamas, which was signed in Gaza on Wednesday, is based on a two-state solution and recognizes the State of Israel, senior Fatah official Jibril Rajoub said on Thursday.

"The reconciliation that we achieved will be implemented according to the program of Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmuod Abbas] which recognizes the state of Israel," Rajoub said, in an interview with Army Radio's Good Morning Israel program.

He added that the two-state solution envisages "a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders and the state of Israel with its capital in West Jerusalem." Hamas leader Ismail Haniya "is obliged to uphold Abu Mazen's policy," Rajoub stressed.

He stressed that "when the government is established with Abu Mazen at its head, he will express clearly and unequivocally that he accepts the terms of the Quartet and that his government accepts the two-state solution."

So why isn't Haniyeh saying this?

Not one Hamas media outlet says that it accepts Israel's existence.

When a Hamas official steps forward and says that, sure, Hamas accepts the terms given by the Quartet, and lives past that evening, then maybe there is something to talk about.

Until then, why is a Fatah official telling the world Hamas' supposed position?

We know Fatah is playing games. Fatah knows it is playing games.

Haaretz is a bit too dim to realize it.

Only two months ago this same Jibril Rajoub was in Iran saying that Fatah never abandoned terror. Too bad Haaretz (and Army Radio) didn't think of mentioning that when relaying his wonderful, optimistic words.

04/24 Links Pt1: The Palestinians' Real Enemies; J Street: Negotiating with Hamas is Pro-Israel

From Ian:

Efraim Karsh:The Palestinians' Real Enemies

For most of the twentieth century, inter-Arab politics were dominated by the doctrine of pan-Arabism, postulating the existence of "a single nation bound by the common ties of language, religion and history. … behind the facade of a multiplicity of sovereign states"; and no single issue dominated this doctrine more than the "Palestine question" with anti-Zionism forming the main common denominator of pan-Arab solidarity and its most effective rallying cry. But the actual policies of the Arab states have shown far less concern for pan-Arab ideals, let alone for the well-being of the Palestinians, than for their own self-serving interests. Indeed, nothing has done more to expose the hollowness of pan-Arabism than its most celebrated cause.

Khaled Abu Toameh: Analysis: Abbas’s message - My demands, or else...

Wednesday’s “historic” agreement between Hamas and Fatah should be seen in the context of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s efforts to send a message to Israel and the US concerning the crisis in the peace talks.
Abbas’s message: Look what I’m capable of doing if you don’t comply with my demands.
The timing of the Fatah-Hamas accord is not coincidental. One week before the expiration of the April 29 deadline for the peace talks with Israel, Abbas has clearly decided to try every available maneuver to exert pressure on Israel and the US.
His first move came two weeks ago in the form of a televised ceremony in which he signed applications to join 15 international treaties.
Then came threats to resign, dismantle the PA and “hand the keys back to Israel.”

J Street: Negotiating with Hamas is Pro-Israel

The Middle East advocacy group J Street is urging the United States to negotiate with the terror group Hamas, which announced that it has formed a unity government with the opposing Fatah Palestinian political party.
J Street is now advocating that the United States include Hamas in its efforts to form a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians.
J Street’s announcement was issued after a top Hamas official made it clear that the new Palestinian unity government would not recognize Israel or renounce terrorism.

J Street wants to ‘test’ Jewish state out of existence

The PLO is not now and never was committed to a “two-state solution” (TSS) in the sense of a Jewish and Arab state living peacefully side by side. The TSS, to the PLO, has always meant an Arab-only apartheid state next to an “Israel” which implements the Arab ‘right of return’, and therefore ceases to be a Jewish state. This ambiguity has been consistently maintained throughout the ‘peace process’, which is one of the reasons it has consistently failed.
The ‘test’ proposed by the deliberately ‘naive’ leaders of J Street is for the US to force the implementation of some form of TSS. At very least it will include Israeli withdrawal from the territories. If the PLO fails to meet its commitments, what will happen? Will Israel send the IDF back into the territories, which will at that point be a sovereign ‘Palestine’? Will it un-bulldoze the settlements that it will have destroyed? Will it put its society back together after the upheaval caused by the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of its own people?

EU hails Fatah-Hamas deal, says peace talks priority

The European Union welcomed Thursday the unity accord between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas but said the priority remains peace talks with Israel.
“The EU’s top priority is that the current talks continue beyond April 29,” said a spokesman for EU foreign affairs head Catherine Ashton, referring to the deadline for a US-led effort to broker a Palestinian-Israeli peace deal.
“The EU has consistently called for intra-Palestinian reconciliation behind” Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, spokesman Michael Mann said in a statement.
Such an understanding was “an important element for the unity of a future Palestinian state and for reaching a two-state solution [with Israel],” Mann added.

"Even I laugh at these idiots"

From Palestinian Media agency Al Ray:

Palestinian farmers in Salfit district appealed all Palestinian and international bodies to stop the continued destruction of their crops caused by the Israeli pigs in the district.

Farmers said '' We have encountered heavy losses in our wheat and barley crops, where the pigs destroyed them completely''.

Framers added '' We tried to get rid of the pigs with all available ways but we have failed'', pointing out the only way is to shoot them; which is difficult due to the IOF monitoring towers and checkpoints in the area.

Palestinian researcher Khaled Maali explained that the settlers found launching wild pigs toward the Palestinian farmlands was the best effective way to fight the Palestinian farmers without significant cost.

Maali pointed out that the occupation prevents the Palestinians from shooting the pigs, whereas it permits settlers to kill the pigs when they reach their colonial settlements.

Yes, Israelis raise wild pigs to attack Palestinian farmers, and the IDF defends the pigs against being shot by Arabs, but the Jews who spent all that effort raising them can shoot them dead if they stray from their lessons of only attacking Arab farms.

It is an interesting economic model.

Here's my favorite part:

These Israeli settler assaults are in direct violation of international humanitarian law, and of Israel's obligations under international law as an occupying power.

You know, the famous Zionist Pig Clause in the Fourth Geneva Conventions.

Anyway, this story naturally traveled from Al Ray to the absurd IMEMC "news" site.

From IMEMC the story went to that paragon of honesty, Hamas' Al Qassam Brigades.

And also from the IMEMC, the story was reported by the equally accurate news source relied upon by thousands of Israel-hating morons, none other than Mondoweiss,

Will Mondoweiss "reporter" Max Blumenthal put the story in his next book? It certainly meets his standards of accuracy!

(h/t Israellycool via NormanF)

One thing that Jews and Americans have in common is the desire to find solutions to problems. It is almost a pathology - if problems exist, we are hopelessly optimistic that solutions also exist.

Usually the solutions offered to the Arab-Israeli conflict come from the Left - Israeli offering more concessions in exchange for presumed goodwill that never materializes, but is still assumed. Some solutions come from the Right as well and they are usually dismissed without a consideration.

There has been some attention given to Caroline Glick's "one state solution" plan that she unveiled with the release of her book, The Israeli Solution. The plan, if I may oversimplify it for this review, is this:

Israel annexes Judea and Samaria, but not Gaza.
Arab citizens are given full rights across the board.
The demographic problems will not materialize because the population figures we have been given from Palestinian Arabs have been grossly exaggerated.
At most, Arabs would take up one third of the population.
Palestinians wouldn't have any viable options to counter this.
Arab states won't care enough to do anything about it.
Europe might offer some severe economic and diplomatic responses, but Israel could survive them.
Americans and Israelis should embrace this plan since it solves almost all the problems.

The book is divided into three sections.

The first is a good overview of the history of the region and of the peace process. There is a lot of good research here and, if expanded, it could make a fine book on its own.

Glick is also at least as critical of George W. Bush's Middle East policy as she is of Bill Clinton's and Barack Obama's. After all, Bush was the first president to declare openly that the US goal was to create a Palestinian Arab state.

The second section details the plan itself, while the third discusses potential fallout.

This is an important book because it breaks out of the "two-state" straitjacket that Israel - and the world- finds itself in. It does not cower at the supposed demographic time bomb that seems to cause Israeli politicians to panic and make unilateral offers. It is crucial to have a smart, fearless voice on the right that tackles the sacred cows of the "peace process" and that expands the discussion beyond the boundaries that are considered acceptable by the conventional wisdom.

Unfortunately, the book is also flawed. Some might not find the flaws to be that bad, and I agree that the importance of having the arguments out there may outweigh the problems, but they bother me a great deal.

Glick brings a wealth of facts to support her position. Many are new to me and I hope to turn some of them into standalone posts. But sometimes she plays fast and loose with those facts, sacrificing honesty for her arguments.

For example, on page 184 she says something astounding. In 2012 there was a poll of both Israelis and Palestinians on how they would view an Israeli plan "to unilaterally withdraw from Judea and Samaria, in a bid to advance a two state solution." 44% of Israelis supported it with 49% opposed, but she says 35% of Palestinians supported it and 59% opposed it. "That is, the Palestinians were much more opposed to an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria than were the Israelis."

This seemed fishy to me, so I looked up the poll. The suggestion was not a unilateral plan to withdraw from all of Judea and Samaria, but only from the parts east of the fence (give or take.) In other words, the Palestinians weren't opposed to the pullout - they were opposed to any remaining land of the territories being in Israeli hands. The result is quite different from how Glick represented it, and this is most disappointing.

On page 212, Glick says without qualification that "ethnic Palestinians constitute 80 percent of the population" in Jordan. She gets this figure from Mudar Zahran, a writer I respect but one who has an agenda. The truth is that there have been no censuses in Jordan to determine how many Palestinians live there; most experts assume between 50% and 70%. 80% seems very high, and it really has no support except by Zahran's assertion, and he has an interest in inflating the figures.

Less important but still problematic are things like Glick's assertion (p. 145) that Palestinian law supports older Jordanian laws that forbid selling land to Jews on penalty of death. In reality, that is almost accurate, but the law as written is really aimed at Israeli Jews, not all Jews (there was another Jordanian law to make it very difficult to sell land to non-Arabs, making it effectively but not officially impossible to sell land to Jews. Still, accuracy is paramount.)

There is also an apparent typo on page 76 saying that European Court of Auditors determined that $27 billion in EU aid to the PA was unaccounted for between 2008 and 2012. The real number is $2.7 billion.

Some of these are minor quibbles but I expect a book of this caliber, making important and novel arguments, to be very careful in its wording and arguments. Unfortunately Glick is not as careful as she should be, forcing one to double check every fact.

Even in her main thesis Glick skates over facts a little too much for my taste. I am no demographic expert, but I know that there are some demographers who disagree with the rightist demographers Glick relies on for the bulk of her argument. Those criticisms are ignored and the demographers Glick relies upon are not given a chance to defend their position on a deeper level, which is what I would like to see. Betting the future of Israel on biased statistics is a bad idea no matter which way the statistics may be biased. I, for one, would love to see a decent academic debate on this topic, and this book missed an opportunity by not going the extra mile to dig deeper instead of uncritically only reporting one side.

This is a pattern throughout the book. Obviously, Caroline Glick has a viewpoint and no one can begrudge her the opportunity to showcase it in her book , but when she ignores evidence that contradicts her theses it weakens her points significantly. This is a real shame, because even small errors will be magnified by the Israel haters to delegitimize the good points she makes.

Finally, I have a problem with Glick's key argument. Even if we allow that her demographics are correct and 67% of Israelis would be Jewish under her plan, that is not as healthy a majority as it may appear.

Since Israel is a parliamentary democracy, one only needs a bloc of 51% of the seats in Knesset to rule. In theory, if all Arabs (33%) vote as a bloc, then they could form a coalition with a mere 18% representing Jewish far left parties - meaning that Arabs could be a significant majority of a ruling coalition!

Is it that far fetched that far -Left parties would jump at the chance to be in the ruling coalition - and would agree to, say, limit aliyah or replace Yom Haatzmaut with Nakba Day to appease the Arab majority?

Even with these criticisms (and I have many others - I especially don't think that she considers all possible reactions to her plan), I want to emphasize that this is an important book and one that is worth reading. You will definitely learn things you didn't know before.

More importantly, it is critical that the discussion of potential solutions are not limited to the artificial framework that the Western world has imposed on Israel.

Another decisive defeat for BDS, this time at SDSU: 16-3-3

San Diego State University has become the latest battleground for the Israel haters, and yet again they have been soundly defeated.

It didn't look that way at first. San Diego Jewish World reported on a visit by two IDF soldiers to campus a couple of weeks ago:

Yishai and Ilana are students at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, but they weren’t visiting San Diego County in that capacity earlier this week. They came as two former active-duty 1st lieutenants of the Israel Defense Forces...

In their estimate of these two Army reservists, a visit to San Diego State University provided both low and high points of their trip, the low point coming when the student legislature took “testimony” on a proposal to divest student funds from companies doing business with Israel, and the high point coming later that afternoon when Ilana and Yishai walked and talked with pro-Palestinian students from Gaza and the United States and later had the opportunity to fully answer their charges during a presentation in San Diego’s new Hillel House.

The BDS resolution, which will be voted upon by the student Senate following the Spring break, was the subject of a hearing at which, as Ilana described it, was controlled by one student senator who already had made up her mind to demonize Israel by describing its soldiers as an occupation force who were violating human rights. There were only a few Israelis and pro-Israel speakers at the hearing, who were given two minutes each at the beginning of the meeting, and when they finished speaking, a well organized phalanx of pro-Palestinian speaker leveled emotional charge after emotional charge against Israel, charges that according to Ilana had no basis in fact nor which could be responded to under the carefully controlled format of the meeting.

But while the haters might have been noisier, and while they again tried to hijack the student council's procedures, they failed - spectacularly.

From J.J. Surbeck of Project TEAM:

The whole event started at 3:30 pm and ended around 9:00 pm, which overall was a record in speed compared to the almost all-nighters that had happened before at UCSD and other campuses.

Most of the afternoon was filled with a long string of statements made by proponents and opponents of the resolution. We had been informed that the time allotted was to be 2 minutes, only to learn upon entering into the meeting hall that it had been cut down to 1 minute! That was ridiculous. Try to make a cogent statement in 1 minute, let alone one meant to sway the opinion of on-the-fence senators! There was one way around this absurd rule, however, and that was when someone who had signed up to speak yielded his or her time to another speaker, allowing the latter to accumulate precious minutes. So some speakers ended up with 4 or 5 minutes, which is a lot better than just 1.

Be that as it may, the voices for both sides were roughly equal, and the pro-Israel students made excellent statements that balanced out the other, more emotional tones of the pro-Palestinians. Two professors spoke against. So did yours truly. On the other side, local anti-Zionist Miko Peled spoke and stayed until the end. The result must have been a bitter pill for him to swallow, not that I feel in any way sorry for him given the usual lies he presented (he enjoyed a 4 minute period). Oh, I almost forgot, Graubart spoke, too, and even if he didn’t make an impression, he of course declared himself in support of the resolution. I might add also that the pro-israel students had the backing of StandWithUs, Hillel, ADL and T.E.A.M., all represented in the room, together with several members of the community (who are to be thanked for having made the trek to SDSU for the occasion). Even though by and large they did a great job on their own without needing assistance, they knew they could count on our support and that they were not left to fight this battle alone.

Then came the crucial part. One of the council member who didn’t seem amused by this blatant attempt by SJP to hijack the SDSU AS for their narrow purposes pointed out that he had examined the resolution carefully and in particular checked every one of the links they had provided as “evidence” in support of their statements. And he had thus discovered that most were either faulty or inaccurate, or came from web sites with questionable reliability or reputation. One of the pro-Palestinian council members then dragged the council in a long, drawn-out procedural battle to “find” more reliable links. This went on until one of the pro-Israel students pointed out that maybe it wasn’t the council’s job to improve poorly drafted resolutions submitted for its approval! The council didn’t act on this fundamental remark immediately, but eventually it decided to vote against several more attempts to “improve” the content of the resolution, and finally decided to vote on the resolution itself.

While a few senators voted by simply saying “no”, most took their time to explain their votes. A clear majority defined itself quickly as opposed, most based on the fact that they found the text of the resolution offensive, crude and one-sided. In other words, the SJP shot themselves in the foot with their usual extremism. In the end, the verdict was without appeal: 16 against, 3 in favor and 3 abstentions. To call this therefore a crushing defeat for the BDS is an accurate depiction of what happened. Let’s note that while the pro-Palestinian side was loud, clapping when it was not supposed to, and would have undoudbtedly erupted in screams of joy if they had won, there was none of that on the part of the pro-Israel participants. It was very dignified. The satisfaction of having seen reason prevail among the AS members was its own, highly satisfactory reward.

There is a 4.5 hour long, often unintelligible Google Hangouts video of the entire proceedings here.

Looks like there is a clear pattern here of major BDSFails on college campuses this year. No doubt part of it is because of better organizing by pro-Israel groups to match the enthusiasm and underhanded methods of the Israel haters.

But a lot has to do with the pushback on the part of student unions when they realize that they are being manipulated by petty, hateful liars whose intolerance dwarfs anything they can say about Israel.

Not that the haters are discouraged. Their cult-like tweets after the vote try to make this sound like a victory as they promise to bring the topic up again and again and again.

The haters still do occasionally win. Last night the haters celebrated a victory at University of California Riverside by the narrowest of margins, 8-7.

And they are even organizing a "summer institute":

So while the tide has turned, it still requires hard work and perseverance to defeat the haters. Congratulations to those who did such an outstanding job at SDSU!