No, the ICC did not determine that Israel occupies Gaza or commit war crimes at the Mavi Marmara

The first paragraph of the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC report about the Mavi Marmara incident released today describes the purpose of the report:

The Office of the Prosecutor (“Office” or “OTP”) of the International Criminal Court (“Court” or “ICC”) is responsible for determining whether a situation meets the legal criteria established by the Rome Statute (“Statute”) to warrant investigation by the Court. For this purpose, the Office conducts a preliminary examination of all situations that come to its attention based on statutory criteria and the information available. Once a situation is thus identified, article 53(1)(a)-(c) of the Statute establishes the legal frameworkfor a preliminary examination. It provides that, in order to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to proced with an investigation into the situation, the Prosecutor shal consider: jurisdiction (temporal, territorial or personal, and material); admissibility (complementarity and gravity); and the interests of justice.

This is not an investigation, it is not a determination of legal culpability. It is a preliminary analysis to see if there are reasons not to bring the case before the ICC.

One of the questions that the OTP needed to answer is whether the ICC has jurisdiction over the matter to begin with, meaning whether the incident was considered part of an international conflict. Here, the OTP shows its reasoning about whether Israel occupies Gaza for the purposes of this determination:

16.Jurisdiction ratione materiae: The hostilities between Israel and Hamas at the relevant time do not meet the basic definition of an international armed conflict as a conflict between two or more states. However, as acknowledged by the case law of the Court, the ICC Elements of Crimes clarifies that the applicability of the law of international armed conflict also extends to situations of military occupation. While Israel maintains that it is no longer occupying Gaza, the prevalent view within the international community is that Israel remains an occupying power under international law, based on the scope and degree of control that it has retained over the territory of Gaza following the 2005 disengagement. In accordance with the reasoning underlying this perspective, the Office has proceeded on the basis that the situation in Gaza can be considered within the framework of an international armed conflict in view of the continuing military occupation by Israel.

17. The analysis conducted and the conclusions reached would generally not be affected and still be applicable, if the Office was of the view, alternatively, that the law applicable in the present context and in light of the Israel-Hamas conflict is the law of non-international armed conflict. Given the crimes of possible relevance to the present situation, which are substantially similar in the context of both international and non-international armed conflicts, it is not necessary at this stage to reach a conclusive view on the classification of the conflict. Additionally, as the protection accorded by the rules on international armed conflicts is broader than those relating to internal conflicts, it seems appropriate, for the limited purpose of a preliminary examination, in cases of doubt, to apply those governing international armed conflicts.

No determination is made. It even allows that there is a doubt about the matter. (Its legal reasonings towards believing Israel occupies Gaza are flawed as well, but that doesn't matter for the purposes of whether there is doubt on the issue.)

Inevitably, Israel haters will cherry pick portions of this report to pretend that the prosecutor determined that Israel is guilty of war crimes. But the OTP says explicitly what the parameters of this report are:

It should be recalled that the Office does not enjoy investigative powers at the preliminary examination stage. Its findings are therefore preliminary in nature and may be reconsidered in the light of new facts or evidence. The preliminary examination process is conducted on the basis of the facts and information available. The goal of this process is to reach a fully informed determination of whether there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation. The ‘reasonable basis’ standard has been interpreted by Pre-Trial Chamber I (“PTC I”) to require that “there exists a sensible or reasonable justification for a belief that a crime falling within the jurisdiction of the Court ‘has been or is being committed’”. In this context, PTC I has indicated that all of the information need not necessarily “point towards only one conclusion”. This reflects the fact that the reasonable basis standard under article 53(1)(a) “has a different object, a more limited scope, and serves a different purpose” than other, higher evidentiary standards provided for in the Statute." In particular, at the preliminary examination stage, “the Prosecutor has limited powers which are not comparable to those provided for in article 54 of the Statute at the investigative stage” and the information available at such an early stage is “neither expected to be ‘comprehensive’ nor ‘conclusive’”.

The OTP did not receive any evidence from Israel (nor from Turkey,) so it made its determinations based on incomplete and public information. On that limited basis it found reason to move forward on three specific charges, one more if the blockade is not considered legal, and it also found no reason to go forward on four additional charges.

In the end, the OTP decided not to move forward with the case:

The information available provides a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction have been committed ...The Office emphasises that these conclusions are solely based on the assessment of the information available at this stage and in accordance with the ‘reasonable basis’ standard. Not having collected evidence itself, the Office’s analysis in this report must therefore not be considered to be the result of an investigation.

However, on the basis of information available, the Office considers that the potential case(s) that would likely arise from an investigation into the situation would not be of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court and would therefore be inadmissible pursuant to articles 17(1)(d) and 53(1)(b) of the Statute.

Read More

Official PA newspaper calls all recent terrorists "martyrs" as more car murderers are recruited

An op-ed in Al Hayat Al Jadida today by Hassan Kashef praises as "martyrs" the murderer of Chaya Zissel Braun, the shooter of Rabbi Yehuda Glick and yesterday's murderer of Jidaan Asad.

He doesn't describe exactly what they did, only saying that every Wednesday the praiseworthy Jerusalem Arabs are erupting in anger over Israeli crimes.

Needless to say, there is no condemnation of the series of terror attacks.

Elsewhere, Jew-haters are actively recruiting more terrorists, as in this poster:

The text says "The Heroes of Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque" with a Quranic verse 33:23 praising those who go out for jihad, some of whom were "martyred," who have remained faithful to Allah.

Another recruitment method is through Twitter, with the hashtag "#Drive4AlAqsa" encouraging more people to drive their cars into crowds of Jews.

Posters encouraging more targeting Jews by automobile are popping up all over:

There have been no condemnation of this string of attacks from any "moderate" Palestinian as far as I can tell.

(h/t Bob Knot, Ibn Botrous, Malka)

Read More

ICC drops "Mavi Marmara" case; IHH lies about it

Peace activists preparing to greet their guests

First came the lies:

Turkey's Humanitarian Aid Foundation (IHH) issued a statement on Tuesday saying that the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) finished its investigation into the Mavi Marmara case and concluded that Israel is guilty of "war crimes" for attacking a Turkish aid ship bound for Gaza in May 2010.

Um, no. The prosecutor did not mount an investigation and did not conclude that Israel is guilty of anything, as we will see.

Now that we have that out of the way, Reuters reports the story this way:

International prosecutors believe Israeli soldiers may have committed war crimes during a raid that killed nine Turkish activists in 2010, but have decided the case is beyond their remit, according to court papers seen by Reuters.

The move by lawyers at the International Criminal Court is likely to enrage Ankara which accused its erstwhile ally Israel of mass murder after the commandos abseiled onto a flotilla challenging an Israeli naval blockade of the Gaza Strip.

"The information available provides a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes under the Court's jurisdiction have been committed in the context of interception and takeover of the Mavi Marmara by IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) soldiers on 31 May 2010," read the paper seen on Wednesday.

But the lawyers decided the crimes in question were not of sufficient gravity to fall under the court's jurisdiction, the papers added.

Prosecutors added they had reached these conclusions on the basis of publicly available information.

"Not having collected evidence itself, the Office’s analysis in this report must therefore not be considered to be the result of an investigation," the paper read.

Without seeing the actual paper, it appears that the prosecutors read some newspaper accounts of the incident, decided that in theory there is enough evidence based on biased and third-hand sources to go ahead to a trial, but did not do any kind of investigation. Their only decision was that the case is not appropriate for the ICC.

In other words, the IHH lost, big time, and they did what Islamists often do when they lose: they claimed victory. 

(h/t Bob K)

Read More

11/05 Links Pt2: Israel slams Amnesty report; Friedman: ‘No Idea’ if Palestinians Are Peace Partners

From Ian:

---

Tom Friedman Admits: ‘No Idea’ if Palestinians Are Peace Partners

Noted New York Times columnist and author, Thomas Friedman, in an interview with Israel Army radio aired Tuesday, admitted that he has “…no idea whether Israel has a Palestinian partner for a secure peace.”
He added, however, that, despite the uncertainty, and, “given Israel’s predicament, it should be doing everything it can to test, test, test, and test again, whether it has such a Palestinian partner…”
Friedman did not mention any of Israel’s recent confidence-building gestures towards the Palestinians, including a nine-month settlement freeze, and a host of other civil and political offers to ease daily life and restart talks.
Nor did he mention ongoing Palestinian Authority (PA) – backed terrorism, and rejectionism of efforts to restart talks, vitriolic incitement in official Palestinian media against Israelis and Jews, and simply sidestepping direct negotiations in order to exploit the United Nations as a bludgeon against the Jewish state.

Israel slams Amnesty ‘war crimes’ report

Israel has rejected claims by Amnesty International that its army committed war crimes in the latest Gaza conflict, alleging that Amnesty “serves as a propaganda tool for Hamas and other terror groups”.
The Israeli Embassy in London condemned Amnesty for its “extreme bias” and for “producing no evidence” to back up allegations in a new report, entitled ‘Families under the Rubble: Israeli attacks on inhabited homes’.
The 47-page dossier focuses on eight attacks by the IDF which Amnesty said caused the deaths of “at least 104 civilians, including 62 children”. The NGO said that “several of the attacks directly and deliberately targeted civilians or civilian objects, which would constitute war crimes.”
Philip Luther, Amnesty’s Middle East director, said: “Israeli forces have brazenly flouted the laws of war by carrying out a series of attacks on civilian homes [and] displaying callous indifference to the carnage caused.”
An Israeli spokesman called the report “a narrow, decontextualised report [which] restricts its capability to advance positive change”.
As well as questioning Amnesty’s evidence, the embassy also pointed out that the report “does not mention the word ‘terror’ in relation to Hamas or other armed Palestinian groups, nor does it mention tunnels built by Hamas to infiltrate Israel and perpetrate terror attacks.” (h/t Bob Knot)

Senior Amnesty International official compares Israel to Islamic State on Twitter

Campaigns Manager Kristyan Benedict uses hashtag '#JSIL' in Tweet; Israeli embassy in London slams use of 'ugly, hateful term with anti-Jewish connotations.'
The campaigns manager for Amnesty International UK, Kristyan Benedict, published a Tweet on Wednesday comparing Israel to the Islamic State, using the contentious hashtag #JSIL.
The hashtag has been used by extreme anti-Israel groups to draw a parallel between Israel and the Islamist organization infamous for beheading its captives, including several Western hostages.

Read More

UNRWA teachers really love terrorists

This is a photo that is on the Facebook page of the group "UNRWA Teachers."

Someone holding a disintegrating Israeli flag is sinking into a sewer, with the text "Gaza won."

What do you think that these UNRWA teachers are telling their students? Are they preparing them for a future where they would live side by side with Israel? Or are they just teaching hate?

UNRWA is not supposed to be a political organization, and it claims to teach tolerance and coexistence. As we have seen repeatedly, the exact opposite is the case.

---

The Facebook page of the UNRWA teacher I mentioned who had lots of pro-terrorist posters was taken down. But he is hardly the only such teacher. Another teacher has pro-Hamas images like these:

And this UNRWA teacher in Lebanon  celebrated today's terror attack, calling the terrorist a hero:

He once took an educational trip to the Hezbollah Museum:

See how pedagogic he is?

Read More

Israeli Left, Avatars Of Democracy, Reconsidering Democracy (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory. 

Check out their Facebook page.

---

Tel Aviv, November 5 - Leading proponents of Israeli democracy are beginning to have second thoughts about the inclusion of democracy in their matrix of core ideological values, a new paper from a left-wing think-tank argued this week.

In an analysis published in its quarterly journal, the organization Social Theorists And Leaders In Navelgazing (STALIN) observes that an increasing number of otherwise committed Liberals are finding it difficult to square their love for democracy with their absolute knowledge that they know better than hoi polloi what is good for the country and the world. As a consequence, many of those who have hitherto supported a robust democracy in Israel no longer find it as appealing as they once did. STALIN claims to represent 99% of Israeli leftists.

The development, says the STALIN article, has long been an undercurrent in leftist circles, but only in recent years have the political implications become so fraught, and the consequences for Israeli democracy so stark. With the political Right more or less in control of the government since the early years of last decade, STALIN's target audience finds itself more and more on the sidelines of legislation and policymaking, a consequence of processes with their roots in democratic principles. The People, whose rights STALIN claims to represent, have consistently and democratically rejected the policies advocated by the Left, a phenomenon that now raises doubts among STALIN adherents as to the value of democracy if it does not dovetail with what might be more important values such as erasing any notion of national identity, or providing the country's sworn enemies with rhetorical or political ammunition. As in one prominent case from the 1990's, the ammunition has sometimes been literal.

The arenas in which leftist ambitions have been thwarted by erstwhile leftist values are not restricted to defense or national security. "Our constituency expresses no reservations when politicking, horse-trading, and backroom deals take place in the context of legislation or policy development," notes the article, "but when the identical activities are conducted by political opponents, the phenomenon suddenly becomes dangerous." It cited myriad examples of religious parties such as Shas promoting the interests of its voters through thoroughly democratic means, thus sparking the ire of STALIN members over religious coercion. Foisting the ideological preferences of the Left on Israeli society, however, can only be seen as beneficial - but the majority of voters have repeatedly thwarted those noble attempts by choosing representatives from the Right.

The cumulative disillusionment has many STALINists arguing in favor of jettisoning democracy unless and until it better serves their purposes, which appears unlikely in the short or medium term, a utilitarian approach with precedent in 1933 Germany.

Read More

11/05 Links Pt1: Bibi: Terror attack due to Abbas & Hamas partners' incitement; Latma Returns!

From Ian:

---

Caroline Glick’s Latma Returns

It only took three years, but the popular Internet satire program, Latma, has signed a contract with Israel Channel 1, and will be going on the air in February, as first reported in Kipa.
Latma, created by Caroline Glick, was a right-wing satirical response to Israeli political and social current events.
The show was privately funded, and ran for 4 years, until the fundraising work involved became too time consuming for Glick to maintain.
In the interim, Glick negotiated for years with Channel 1 to get the show onto Israeli TV, but Channel 1 always pulled the plug at the last minute.
Until now, political satire programming on Israeli TV has pretty much only been left-wing satire targeting the right and the religious.
It only took a major reform in Israeli broadcasting by Communications Minister Gilad Erdan, the closing of the Israel Broadcasting Agency (IBA), and Knesset Sports and Culture subcommittee discussions to finally get a non-left-wing satire show on the air.
We look forward to seeing it again.

Netanyahu: Jerusalem terror attack the result of Abbas and his Hamas partners' incitement

Speaking at the annual state remembrance ceremony honoring the slain prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, the premier condemned the vehicular terrorist attack which killed a Border Police officer and injured over a dozen others.
“In recent days we have witnessed the growing incitement of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who sent a condolence letter to the family of [Yehuda] Glick’s [shooter] and who has tried to prevent Jews from going up to the Temple Mount,” Netanyahu said.
This kind of incitement impacts results on the ground, Netanyahu said.
“The vehicular terror attack today in Jerusalem, is the direct result of incitement by Abu Mazen [Abbas] and his partner Hamas. We are in a prolonged battle for Jerusalem and I have no doubt that we will win it. We are employing all the necessary powers to restore quiet and security to the city,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu points finger at Abbas for terror attack

A Jerusalem terror attack that left one person dead and several more injured was the direct result of incitement from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu charged Wednesday.
A Border Police officer — Jedan Assad, 38, from the Druze village of Beit Jann — was killed and 14 more people were injured after an Arab man plowed his van into pedestrians on the seam line between East and West Jerusalem just after noon Wednesday, the latest in a string of terrorist vehicular assaults in the capital.
The attack was the “direct consequence of Abu Mazen’s [Abbas's] incitement and that of his Hamas partners,” Netanyahu declared, speaking at a memorial ceremony marking 19 years since prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. “We are engaged in an ongoing battle in Jerusalem. I have no doubt that we will prevail,” he added.

Read More

Abbas threatens to go to Security Council to defend "Al Aqsa" against this (UPDATE)

PA "news" agency Wafa quotes Mahmoud Abbas spokesperson Nabil Abu Rudainah saying "the Palestinian leadership has decided to go immediately to the Security Council against the Israeli escalation in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and began the rapid planning in this regard."

Abu Rudeineh said in a press statement "the Israeli government systematically continues its violations of the sanctity of Al-Aqsa Mosque, and pays settlers to storm the mosque, violating all norms and international law and international consensus, confirming that their government wants to escalate things in order to divide the Al-Aqsa Mosque. we have warned them repeatedly that this is a red line that will lead to a situation that can not be tolerated internally and regionally, and will force the Arab and Islamic nation and the world to make serious decisions'.

Here are the people who were so violently "storming" the "Al Aqsa Mosque" today, obviously on Israel's payroll.



I remember the massive amount I was paid to go up and make a video tour of the area.

UPDATE: More proof that the PA is behind incitement to violence. From PMW:

A cartoon showing an Israeli soldier about to rape the Al-Aqsa Mosque portrayed as a woman in jail was posted today by the National Security Forces of the Palestinian Authority. A woman is weeping in a prison cell while an Israeli soldier is undoing his pants outside the cell, saying: "Come on, sweetheart." The woman is wearing a headdress shaped as the Dome of the Rock. The cartoon appeared with the text: "Daily cartoon: Al-Aqsa is being raped."

Would the Security Council be interested in that?

Read More

PA says terror attack was a car accident and all victims were "settlers and soldiers" (video, update)

Here is how the official Wafa "news" agency is describing this morning's terrorist attack in Jerusalem:

A young Jerusalem man, Ibrahim Akkari, of Shuafat in central Jerusalem, was shot dead by Israeli soldiers in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of downtown Jerusalem, when his car went out of control and collided with a number of soldiers and settlers; the condition of three soldiers is described as serious.

For its part, the Israeli police and some Hebrew media were quick to claim that the incident was a terrorist action before it was clear what the incident was.

In reality, the terrorist aimed at two sets of people and then started attacking more with a crowbar. And Hamas claimed responsibility, calling it a "heroic operation."

At least one was killed, and there are unconfirmed reports of more who succumbed.

Here is video of the first part of the attack:

And during (graphic):

The last terror attack at the light rail station was also initially described as a car accident by the PA.

Read More

Latest Amnesty report shows ignorance, bias and excuses Hamas war crimes

Here's the crux of Amnesty's latest hit job on Israel:

Families under the Rubble: Israeli attacks on inhabited homes details eight cases where residential family homes in Gaza were attacked by Israeli forces without warning during Operation Protective Edge in July and August 2014, causing the deaths of at least 104 civilians including 62 children. The report reveals a pattern of frequent Israeli attacks using large aerial bombs to level civilian homes, sometimes killing entire families.

“Israeli forces have brazenly flouted the laws of war by carrying out a series of attacks on civilian homes, displaying callous indifference to the carnage caused,” said Philip Luther, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Amnesty International.

“The report exposes a pattern of attacks on civilian homes by Israeli forces which have shown a shocking disregard for the lives of Palestinian civilians, who were given no warning and had no chance to flee.”
The report contains numerous accounts from survivors who describe the horror of frantically digging through the rubble and dust of their destroyed homes in search of the bodies of children and loved ones.

In several of the cases documented in the report, possible military targets were identified by Amnesty International. However the devastation to civilian lives and property caused in all cases was clearly disproportionate to the military advantages gained by launching the attacks.

“Even if a fighter had been present in one of these residential homes, it would not absolve Israel of its obligation to take every feasible precaution to protect the lives of civilians caught up in the fighting. The repeated, disproportionate attacks on homes indicate that Israel’s current military tactics are deeply flawed and fundamentally at odds with the principles of international humanitarian law,” said Philip Luther.

I have discussed in detail the real definition of "disproportionate" under international law, and it is clear that Amnesty is more interested in damning Israel with war crimes charges than with the truth.

As we saw from the case of NATO in Yugoslavia, the lives of 15 civilians are not considered a disproportionate price to pay for taking out a communications system for a couple of hours under international law.

In this case, Amnesty allows that there were terrorists in many of the houses whose bombing they researched. I found the same.

But Amnesty stops it analysis there.

In February, Amnesty’s Secretary General Salil Shetty admitted, “We are not an expert on military matters. So we don’t want to, kind of, pontificate on issues we don’t really understand.” (source here, the original quote does not seem to be at the Al Jazeera website anymore, video of the interview is not available in the US.)

What might Amnesty not understand about what happened in Gaza last summer?

Amnesty admits that terrorists, usually only one or two, were sprinkled among many family homes in Gaza. It also seems to admit that the IDF was not bombing Gaza houses randomly, because given the number of militants in Gaza and the number of buildings, you would not expect the average building to have a terrorist.

In a normal war, the combatants don't spread out like that. This was not a normal war. So why would Gaza combatants be in so many houses?

Because, as we now know, houses were sitting on top of tunnel entrances. And on top of command and control centers. And on top of weapons caches. And it makes sense to have one person to be located at military objects like these.

In the entire 50-page Amnesty report, the word "tunnels" isn't mentioned once. Neither are the phrases  "weapons caches" or "command and control" or "rocket launcher." It never even occurred to Amnesty that Israel had any physical military objectives in Gaza!

Israeli officials from Netanyahu down the line said explicitly and repeatedly that they were targeting tunnels and underground bunkers. Yet Amnesty, whose main charge of Israeli war crimes depends on knowledge of the military value of the targets (as well as what IDF commanders knew when they chose their targets,) cannot even fathom that tunnels were being targeted to begin with.

How can Amnesty pretend to be able to make a blanket statement that Israel acted with disproportionate force when Amnesty has no clue what the military targets were -and makes no attempt to investigate that question?  Their field workers went to Gaza not to investigate the targets of Israel's attacks, but rather to interview surviving family members who all give utterly irrelevant facts like that there was no fighting in the area at the time of the strikes. They make the bizarre assumption that the combatants themselves were the targets - but they do not have the slightest military knowledge to even ask the question of what the militants were doing in these houses to begin with!

Amnesty is making a statement about international law without knowing the bare minimum of information needed to make that determination, namely what the military objective was. Given that Israel's attacks weren't indiscriminate by Amnesty's own admission, then it seems obvious that the IDF felt there were military targets within those houses. Amnesty doesn't even know enough to ask the question, and makes bizarre assumptions based on nothing but its researchers' own ignorance of military matters combined with their clear anti-Israel bias.

It gets worse, though.

Amnesty is going out of its way to excuse Hamas' use of the people in these houses as human shields.

It writes:

Warring parties have obligations to take precautions to protect civilians and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks by the adversary. As with precautions in attack, these rules are particularly important when fighting is taking place in areas with large numbers of civilians.

Each party to the conflict must, to the extent feasible, avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas.67 The authoritative commentary of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on this provision explains that the use of the term “feasible” is used to illustrate “the fact that no one can be required to do the impossible. In this case it is clear that precautions should not go beyond the point where the life of the population would become difficult or even impossible.” And it notes: “Moreover, a Party to the conflict cannot be expected to arrange its armed forces and installations in such a way as to make them conspicuous to the benefit of the adversary.”

The only reason Amnesty would choose to quote these parts of the ICRC manuals (which are not under the "human shield" section) is to exonerate Hamas for purposefully placing military objectives directly next to and under civilian objects. They want to make it look like Hamas has no choice - that it really wants to take precautions to protect civilians, but, by golly, they can't because Gaza is too darn crowded.  This is absurd, given that we know that Hamas deliberately built not only tunnels under civilian homes but also booby-trapped homes and fake military clinics, plus it shot rockets from civilian areas and in some cases told civilians not to evacuate from areas that were about to come under fire.  In no way is this permitted under international law, but Amnesty is taking Hamas off the hook - for the very thing that caused so many civilians to die. (Indeed, the ICRC specifically instructs combatants to remove civilians from military targets as much as possible, and Hamas did the opposite - another Hamas war crime which Amnesty ignores.)

Not to mention that it didn't choose to quote parts of the ICRC documents such as "State practice indicates that an attacker is not prevented from attacking military objectives if the defender fails to take appropriate precautions or deliberately uses civilians to shield military operations." No, it only quotes the parts of the laws that it can use to damn Israel, and only the parts that excuse the terrorists.

Isn't it interesting that a supposed "human rights" organization goes out of its way to ignore Hamas violations of the human rights of Gazans?

Amnesty's report once again proves not that Israel violated international law. It proves that Amnesty International again twists international law and again ignores evidence that contradicts its predetermined agenda. Amnesty's anti-Israel bias is so strong that it spills over into a pro-terrorist bias.

Read More

Facebook takes down Rabbi Yehuda Glick's page (update x2)

Here is what Rabbi Yehuda Glick's Facebook page used to look like:

See how utterly offensive it is?

Well, apparently Facebook thinks so. Because it now looks like this:

Apparently, sometime after Rabbi Glick was shot multiple times, Israel-haters  have been complaining to Facebook about a page belonging to a man who did not seek to take away any Muslim rights to pray on the Temple Mount - but only to give Jews the same rights the Muslims have.

Of course, they just told Facebook that Glick's (Hebrew!) page was offensive. And Facebook drones assumed it must be true -because so many complained!

Meanwhile, Rabbi Glick's condition is slightly but steadily improving.

(h/t NRG via Bob K and Yenta P)

UPDATE 11/5: It has been restored.

UPDATE 11/6: It has been removed, again.

Read More

11/04 Link Pt2: Jerusalem passport case divides justices; Abbas adding fuel to fire in Jerusalem

From Ian:

---

An open letter to Nobel Prize Laureate Ms. Malal Yousafza

UNRWA operates in the shadow of Hamas, which has threatened UN staff in Gaza, firebombed mixed-gender summer camps hosted by UNRWA for Palestinian children and attempted to assassinate the former UNRWA chief in Gaza, John Ging, twice.
Gaza’s education system is essentially controlled by Hamas, which has dominated UNRWA’s workers’ union for years. In the last union elections on September 2012, the “Professional List,” led by Hamas operative Suhail al-Hindi, won all 11 of the seats that were allocated to the teachers’ sector.
You are probably aware that Article 43 Hamas’ Education Law, passed in April of 2013, spells out Hamas’s educational philosophy – which specifically prohibits private schools and internationally run ones (such as those under UNRWA) from “receiving donations or aid aimed at normalization with the Zionist occupation or propagating any Zionist activity.” This prohibition precludes any curriculum containing Holocaust Studies or educating Palestinian students about peaceful coexistence with Israeli Jews or mention of the many productive collaborations that already exist between Israelis and Palestinians in environmental and other areas.
Hamas has not only subverted any hope instituting a peaceful curriculum in Gaza schools; it has systematically commandeered UNRWA school facilities and turned many into military installations – and targets.

‘Born in Jerusalem’ passport case divides justices

Middle Eastern politics infused the Supreme Court’s arguments Monday over a disputed law that would allow Americans born in Jerusalem to list their birthplace as Israel on their US passports.
The justices appeared divided over whether the law should be struck down as unconstitutional, as the Obama administration wants, or put into effect as a result of a lawsuit filed by the parents of Jerusalem-born Menachem Zivotofsky.
Twelve-year-old Menachem, a baby when the case began in 2003, and his parents sat through the hour-long argument that saw justices wrestle with questions of the president’s primacy in matters of foreign affairs and the effect the court’s eventual decision could have on simmering tensions between Israelis and Palestinians. (h/t Jewess)

Eugene Kontorovich: Zivotofsky is not about recognition (II)
Oral Arguments in Zivotofsky v. Kerry: ‘Core Powers’ Analysis And Text
Permalink to Two Quick Thoughts on Today’s Argument in Zivotofsky
SCOTUS Blog
Obama 2008: Israel can keep its undivided capital of Jerusalem, if it likes it

Australian Attorney-General George Brandis Rejects IDF-Terror Group Equivalence

In the recent episode of ABC’s Q&A, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis responds to the question of a Muslim audience member trying to equate the IDF with ISIS.
Let’s just say the audience was not thrilled with his response.

Read More