Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, December 12, 2014

Contact information for donors to terrorist loving Jordanian NGO (update)

Ahlam Tamimi, JMI "Success Model"

On Wednesday I reported about the Jordanian Media Institute, how it is well-funded from major Western governments and corporations - and how it celebrates a terrorist as its finest example of a "journalist." A photo of Ahlam Tamimi, the murderer of 15 people in the Sbarro pizza shop bombing, is on every page of the "JMI Journalists" webpage as a "success model."

Arnold Roth, father of Malki Roth who was murdered by Tamimi, has been putting together a list of contacts for the various donors to the NGO, so we can politely ask them if they support the aims of an organization that supports terrorists. I added a couple of details.

Please email/tweet/contact the appropriate contacts and ask them if they want to continue to fund an organization that considers a terrorist to be a role model.

Organization	Contact points
Anna Lindh Foundation	Twitter: @annalindh info@euromedalex.org
Embassy of Germany in Jordan	https://amman.diplo.de/Vertretung/amman/ar/Kontakt.html info@amman.diplo.de Fax +962-6-5901282
European Union via the European Commission Delegation in Jordan	Delegation of the European Union to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Delegation-jordan@eeas.europa.eu Princess Basma St., North Abdoun P.O. Box 852099, Amman 11185, Jordan Telephone: +962-6-460-7000 Fax: +962-6-460-7001
International Development Aid agency of Australia	Australia Embassy in Jordan 41 Kayed Al Armouti Street, PO Box 35201, Abdoun, Amman 11180 - Telephone: +962 6 580 7000, Facsimile: +962 6 580 7001
International Development Aid agency of Canada	Canadian Embassy in Jordan amman@international.gc.ca
Jordan Media Institute	info@jmi.edu.jo Fax: +962-6-5733183
Journalists for Human Rights	Canada office: information@jhr.ca
Netherlands Embassy in Amman	Paul van den IJssel - Ambassador Fax +962 6 5930161 amm-info@minbuza.nl
Norwegian Institute of Journalism	firmapost@ij.no
Orange - Commercial brand of France Telecom Group	France Telecom Group (“Orange”) press contacts orangegroup.pressoffice@orange.com (London) service.presse@orange.com (Paris) Head of the Press Office: Jean-Bernard Orsoni (Paris) London Press Office: Vanessa Clarke, +44 7818848848 and Nicole Clarke, +44 7811128457
Orange - Jordan Telecom Group
PricewaterhouseCoopers Jordan WLL	Fax +962-6-461 0880 Michael F. Orfaly, Country Senior Partner michael.orfaly@jo.pwc.com Tel: +962 6 500 1300 [jo.linkedin.com/pub/michael-orfaly/22/801/260]
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP	PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 7 More London Riverside, London, SE1 2RT. Fax: +44 (0) 20 7212 7500 · Ian Powell Chairman and Senior Partner [ [ian.powell@uk.pwc.com] · Javier H. Rubinstein - Vice Chairman, Global General Counsel · Stephanie Hyde, Head of Regions [try stephanie.t.hyde@uk.pwc.com ] · Warwick Hunt, Chief Financial Officer and Head of Operations [try warwick.hunt@uk.pwc.uk] · Mike Davies, head of PWC Global Public Relations – via this contact form or mike.davies@uk.pwc.com
Reporters Without Borders	Middle East Desk : middle-east@rsf.org Americas Desk : Americas@rsf.org Europe Desk : europe@rsf.org Press & Communications: presse@rsf.org Press Freedom Index: index@rsf.org Fundraising: mecenat@rsf.org Administration: administration@rsf.org
Saatchi & Saatchi	anyquestions@saatchi.com
The Swedish Institute	si@si.se
UNESCO	Twitter: @UNESCO Contact page: http://en.unesco.org/feedback/contact-us
United Kingdom government	UK Embassy in Amman cons.amman@fco.gov.uk British Ambassador in Amman is Peter Millett @PeterMillett1 (Twitter)

UPDATE: The "JMI Journalists" site is down.

One of the criticisms of UNRWA is that it, uniquely among refugee agencies, confers refugee status on all descendants of refugees through the male line forever.

UNRWA has answered this by saying that the UNHCR has similar standards to give refugee status to children. That is what Chris Gunness said to Melanie Phillips in the Voice of Israel interview this past weekend that I had dissected (Part 1, part 2, part 3)

Phillips followed up on that in an article in the Jerusalem Post:

I interviewed UNRWA’s spokesman Chris Gunness for my show on Voice of Israel, the new English-language radio station. Wasn’t UNRWA’s definition of a refugee indefensible? Uniquely, it is extended to all descendants through the male line of those who were displaced by the Arab war against Israel between 1946 and 1948. More than 60 years on, many of these “refugees” are not only still in refugee camps but their number has accordingly multiplied by more than 600 percent.

Not unique at all, replied Gunness. The UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, applied precisely the same definition which conferred refugee status on descendants while political conflict remained unresolved.

Really? I rang the UNHCR. Were there circumstances, I asked, in which it automatically transferred refugee status to the descendants of actual refugees? No, said the UNHCR spokesman. Refugee status was only granted when either governments or the UNHCR itself assessed a specific individual as a refugee. Refugee status might cover the applicant’s dependents, but not any descendants. “It’s not an inherited status as such,” she said. So much for what Gunness told me.

I decided to look into this a little more. Gunness has a detailed answer to this question on UNRWA's website in a page called "Exploding the Myths: UNRWA, UNHCR and the Palestine Refugees."

It is often said that UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian refugee problem by granting refugee status through the generations and that handing the refugees over to UNHCR would not allow this. Is this the case?

This is not the case. As I have already noted, Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of -- and pending the realisation of -- such a solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees will remain.

Questions raised about the passing of refugee status through generations stem from a lack of understanding of the international protection regime. These questions serve only to distract from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely the absence of negotiated solution to the underlying political issues.

UNHCR‘s Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status provides in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependants are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

In effect, refugee families everywhere retain their status as refugees until they fall within the terms of a cessation clause or are able to avail themselves of one of three durable solutions already mentioned -- voluntary repatriation, local integration or resettlement in a third country.

Also, Chapter 5 of the UNHCR publication, Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR’s Mandate is very clear that in accordance with the refugee’s right to family unity, refugee status is transferred through the generations. According to Chapter 5.1.2 "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

While Gunness is quoting the UNHCR Handbook correctly, he is purposefully misinterpreting it.

UNHCR defines two classes of people eligible for help: refugees and derivative refugees. Derivative refugees can claim the same benefits as refugees - but they are not defined as refugees themselves. Which means that their own dependents cannot be considered derivative refugees as well. There is no concept of "twice derivative refugees*."

If a child is born as a refugee, then when he or she grows up and has kids they are considered derivative refugees (as long as the parent is still a refugee, which is not automatic either.) But for children born after the parent is a refugee, then the children have derivative refugee status and their children will not be considered refugees.

Amazingly, this gross misinterpretation of UNHCR rules is published on the official UNRWA site,

It appears that Gunness knows that he is lying about this, because he adds this caveat: "UNRWA is not in a position to speak for UNHCR and does not purport to speak for UNHCR. However, responses to your questions require reference to documents that are posted on UNHCR’s website and are available to the public. My responses are based on UNRWA’s understanding of the plain meaning of these documents as well as the Agency‘s own appreciation of its mission and its knowledge of the system of international law and practice that govern the protection of refugees globally."

So now that UNHCR itself has made it clear that Gunness' interpretation of its documentation is completely wrong, we can assume that UNRWA will correct that article, right?

*UPDATE: Rex Brynen, a professor at McGill, tweeted to me that there are some UNHCR third generation derivative refugees (he says Afghans in Pakistan, I think there may be from Somalia as well.) Even if true, it doesn't mean that they are considered full "refugees" under UNHCR's definition, as UNRWA's are, and by default UNHCR tries to remove their refugee status, while by default UNRWA tries to maintain it.

The US Navy storms the Al Aqsa Mosque! (1922 video)

If Jews peacefully strolling around the perimeter of the Temple Mount is called "storming to Al Aqsa Mosque," then US Navy sailors going into the mosque itself in 1922 must be a full scale invasion, right?

And the Muslim man is even helping them!

While we are at it, here we can see some British troops "storming the mosque:" without anyone objecting at 0:25:

Waqf again says Jewish Temples are fiction, contradicting what they said in 1950

Panet reports that the Al Aqsa Foundation has released yet another statement warning about dastardly Israeli schemes to destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque.

It ended off by saying that "the myth of the alleged temple is only a figment of the imagination, which does not match the reason and religion; we stress that the entire Al-Aqsa Mosque area - including the Western Wall - is an Islamic Mosque and will remain so, and the Jews have no right to one speck of its soil."

This is as good a time as any to show the Waqf's Guide to Al Haram al Sharif of 1950, which is the last edition of that guide to flatly state that Jewish Temples were there before the Al Aqsa Mosque.

You can read it all here, with reference to King David on page 2 and Solomon's Temple as well as the temple during Josephus' time mentioned on page 3.

Saudi men caught in cybersex blackmail trap

From Saudi Gazette:

There is an increasing number of cases involving citizens from the African continent blackmailing young Saudi men for large sums of money by threatening to post footage of them performing cybersex, Al-Hayat newspaper reported.

The blackmailers, mostly from Morocco and Algeria, impersonate attractive women on Facebook and contact Saudi young men.

They then develop the relationship to include Skype chats and cybersex. The blackmailers save the video chats and use them to blackmail the victims for huge sums of money by threatening to post the videos on YouTube.

Some of the victims, who preferred to remain anonymous, said their intention was just to have fun and enjoy their time with what they thought to be women. Some even paid the ransom.

The article doesn't have any quotes from the Saudi religious police about what would happen if they report the blackmail to their local authorities.

But it does give advice on what to do if their Saudi readers find themselves in that predicament.

12/11 Links Pt2: Syrian vs Palestinian Refugees; Why a student switched to anti-BDS; Zohar Argov!

From Ian:

New York Times "Correction" Fails to Correct Blumenthal Error

After publishing Max Blumenthal's anti-Israel rant, The New York Times unsurprisingly had some errors to correct. But at least one of the corrections failed to redress the error, and only served to put the newspaper's own fingerprints on Blumenthal's misinformation.

3) After correspondence with CAMERA, a third "correction" was made to Blumenthal's article.

Original: Marzel is a leader of Lehava, a group funded in the past by the Israeli government that campaigns against romantic relationships between Jews and Arabs.

Amended: Marzel is a leader of Lehava, a group indirectly funded in the past by the Israeli government that campaigns against romantic relationships between Jews and Arabs.

Editors updated the correction line to note: "Correction: An earlier version indicated that the Prawer Plan had been fully implemented and that Lehava had been directly funded by the government."

But the Israeli government has never funded Lehava, either directly or "indirectly." It has funded Hemla, a separate organization with a separate mandate, and the funding was earmarked for a specific project at Hemla related to "treatment, support and personal and social rehabilitation" of at risk girls staying at the hostel.

MELANIE PHILLIPS: The ‘humanitarian’ weapon of war

The reality is that UNRWA simply could not operate in Gaza without mutual cooperation with the Hamas administration. And Gaza’s children are being indoctrinated into hatred and war by Hamas supporters teaching in UNRWA schools.
Mamoun Abunaser is a deputy principal at an UNRWA school in Syria. His profile picture on Facebook says: “When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” Luay Shehab is a UNRWA school principal in Nablus.
He shows photographs of Israelis in burial shrouds and coffins on his Facebook page, with a caption reading: “Oh Allah, make the number of their dead as [every time a Muslim says] “Amen”! And several UNRWA teachers are known to be highly connected Hamas supporters.
Gunness says UNRWA guards its neutrality.
Yet enraged by an article in this paper by Bassam Eid, Gunness last week tweeted a call to boycott The Jerusalem Post. Clearly, he employs as creative an approach to the word “neutrality” as he does toward the word “refugee.”

Rising above personal attacks, the time has come to examine UNRWA policy

Gunness categorically states there is no evidence that Hamas terrorists are on the payroll of the UN. Yet successive reports of the US Congressional Research also show that UNRWA, which receives $300 million per year from the US government, reports that UNRWA has never vetted its staff to see if UNRWA employs members of Hamas.
Meanwhile, the European Parliament funded a study that documented Hamas’s takeover of the UNRWA unions in March 2009. The pro-Hamas al-Resala newspaper, right before the September 2012 UNRWA union elections stated that, “It is noteworthy that Hamas has controlled the UNRWA staff union in the elections since its inception....”
Al Quds, a Fatah-leaning paper, wrote after the elections: “According to multiple sources within the Election Commission...that the ‘Professional’ slate of Hamas won 25 seats out of 27, divided by 11 seats out of 11 in the teachers’ sector and 6 out of 7 in the labor sector elections, and 8 seats out of 9 in the services sector election.”
Gunness states that whenever there are allegations of UNRWA employees violating UNRWA’s neutrality policy, “They are always investigated and disciplinary action is taken up to and including dismissal.”
Yet in March 2013, in my presence, Gunness told staffers of the US Congress that Hamas leader Suhail Hindi, head of the UNRWA teachers’ union in Gaza, had been dismissed.
However, Hindi was suspended for less than a week. Hindi functions in his capacity to this day.
So much for removing Hamas on staff.

Syrian Refugees Get Resettled But Not Palestinians

Though UNRWA operates as if it is a humanitarian agency, its purpose has always been primarily political. The population of Arab refugees from the former Mandate of Palestine was created by the war waged by those acting in the name of those Arabs to strangle the State of Israel at its birth. Rather than accepting the UN partition of the land into what were explicitly called Jewish and Arab states, the Arab and Muslim world chose to wage war to prevent the creation of any Jewish state, no matter how small its territory. With a few exceptions, several hundred thousand refugees fled because of the spread of the war as well as the explicit instructions from some Arab leaders that they flee in order to ease the path of invading Arab armies. When the War of Independence ended with the new Jewish state alive, albeit existing in truncated and unsafe borders, the tactics of Israel’s opponents shifted. From that point on, their efforts sought to highlight the plight of Arabs who had fled in order to promote a military or diplomatic attempt to continue the war. Indeed, even as Syrian refugees in camps in neighboring nations are allowed to resettle elsewhere, Palestinians still stuck in Syrian refugee camps remain in place unable and unwilling to budge from the site of their misery.
The result of this policy was not merely to render all efforts to make peace between Israel and the Arab world impossible; it also ensured that the Palestinians would live in misery in increasing numbers and growing squalor. At the same time, a nearly equal number of Jews were forced to flee their homes in the Arab world as pogroms and discrimination made their plight intolerable. But while UNRWA kept the Palestinians in place to suffer, Jewish groups ensured that their refugees would not suffer in this manner and all were resettled in Israel or the West.

Earlier this week there was a dispute between the PA and Hamas about the price of cooking and domestic gas that Israel pumps into Gaza.

A dispute between Gaza's Ministry of Finance and the Palestinian Authority's General Directorate of Petroleum has led to a gas shortage in the coastal territory, local unions said Tuesday.

The petroleum directorate has allegedly refused to provide gas stations with fuel to protest a four-shekel ($1) tax imposed by the finance ministry on every 12-kilogram gas container, head of the union of gas station owners Mahmoud al-Shawwa said.

As a result, Gazans could not get cooking gas (which many also use for their converted cars and heaters.)

The crisis escalated until an agreement on Thursday.

Normally, Israel closes Kerem Shalom on Fridays, which would mean that the Fatah/Hamas dispute would hurt Gazans all winter weekend without domestic gas.

But on the same day that the PA announces that they will be stopping security coordination with Israel, Israel announced that it will open Kerem Shalom on Friday for the pumping of cooking gas and diesel.

Once again, Israel shows that it cares more about the welfare of people in Gaza than Hamas or the PA. An once again, a story like this will never be covered by the mainstream media.

(Yes, I hear the snickering, and I am serious.)

An amazing story from Arutz-7: (condensed version)

Among the many new Knesset hopefuls looking to run on the staunchly nationalist [Jewish Home] party's Knesset list is a somewhat surprising face: Anett Haskia identifies as proudly Zionist, pro-"settlements"... and a Muslim Arab.

Haskia realizes that her chances of running as a Jewish Home MK this time round are relatively slim; party members who wish to stand in the primaries have to have been members for at two and a half years, while Haskia herself is only now in the process of joining.

"But I'm still hoping for a Hanukkah miracle," she quips, and thinks there is an outside chance that Bennett - who as part of the new party rules can unilaterally select every fifth seat on the party list - could see in her precisely the kind of candidate to simultaneously reach out to new pools of support, while still remaining committed to the party's ideology.

Indeed, Haskia is an avowed Zionist, whose children enlisted voluntarily to the IDF with her encouragement (apart from the Druze, Israeli Arabs are not included in the mandatory military draft). She has long campaigned against extremism within the Israeli Arab community, while arguing for more Arab inclusion and participation in wider Israeli society. She says there are a growing number of Israeli Arabs who think like her - a phenomenon which has been making headlines periodically in recent years, particularly, though not exclusively, regarding Israel's Arab-Christian minority.

But there are plenty of Muslim Arabs who also support the state, serve in the army (like many Bedouins) and, most importantly for Annett, do not feel represented by any of the current Arab MKs. It is that part of the "Arab voting public" she says she is fighting for.

But still, why specifically join the Jewish Home? Why not one of the left-wing parties, or the Arab parties?

This clearly strikes a chord with Haskia, who has a bone to pick with the notion that "only the Left" or the existing Arab parties can look after the interests of the wider Arab-Israeli public. Instead, she describes an Arab community trapped between two camps claiming to have their best interests at heart, but who are really only interested in "using" them to serve particular ideological agendas.

"For 65 years the Arab parties have harmed the Arab sector," she laments, emphasizing that while discrimination does exist - a problem that is high on her list of priorities - the Arab parties are in fact largely to blame.

"They stigmatized us" by taking radical anti-Zionist positions and even supporting terrorism, she fires, while claiming to speak for the entire Arab public. At the same time, they spend most of their energy and resources engaging in political grandstanding, instead of actually tackling bread-and-butter issues facing the constituency they claim to represent.

In particular, she accuses Arab MKs of conniving with the Education Ministry to effectively abandon the Arab education system - leaving the curriculum open for extremists to indoctrinate young Arabs to perceive the state as their enemy. "The Education Ministry doesn't bother with the Arab sector - they don't even know what's going on in the schools... the children don't know anything about rights and obligations (to the state). They learn about the 'nakba' instead of Independence Day!"

"They have done a deal with the Arab MKs - at our expense. For how long should I pay the price for their actions?"

Many of her friends feel the same way, she says, and while a lot of them do not necessarily support the Jewish Home they have been supportive of her ambitions.

"Then there's the Left, Labor and Meretz, etc., who for many years have 'ruled' the Arab sector. They 'loved' the Arab sector the most, they were the 'good Jews'," she says sarcastically.

Yet she accuses that very same "Left" of presiding over a system which directly contributed towards the "widening gap" between Jewish and Arab Israelis. Through compromises with terrorists and a softly-softly approach towards the extremists within her own community, extremist elements have only become emboldened and more vocal, alarming many Jewish Israelis and drowning out moderate Arab voices like her own.

Instead, she calls for tougher anti-terror measures to target the bad apples, while addressing the grievances of ordinary Israeli Arabs.

"It can't be that a terrorist goes to jail and gets five-star treatment!" she exclaims. "It can't be that someone goes to join ISIS - an organization even more murderous than Hamas - and then when he comes back they give him just 22 months (in prison)! That says that the state allows them to do that, gives them the legitimacy to go."

"Why even let him come back?" she asks. "Remove his citizenship!"

"A terrorist who carries out an attack - destroy his house! Why just destroy a single room?" she continues, noticeably exasperated, listing the restraints placed on the IDF due to pressure from leftist groups.

"If when a terrorists goes to jail he gets five-star treatment, sits on his butt all day and can finance his family - do a degree, a masters, receive a salary from the Palestinian Authority - what's bad about that? Why shouldn't more people do it?

"Then people say: 'the Arabs are terrorists.' No! Stop blaming the Arabs of Israel. The Jews need to open their eyes; there is such a thing as law and order. Toughen the laws and things will change quickly."

Ironically, Haskia says the only serious negative reactions to her intentions to join the Jewish Home party have come from left-wing Jews, not her fellow Arabs. She cites that backlash as proof that left-wingers are only interested in giving Arabs freedom of expression when it suits their own ideological agenda.

"One of them told me: 'If Bennett comes to power, you'll be first to the gas chambers!' Is there anything more disgusting than that? And it was a Jew who told me that - that's the Left for you. Why can't I choose? I never shook hands with Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), so they attack me.

"I remember when I was growing up they told us the Likud was racist, that they wanted to kill the Arabs. But then what happened? The Likud began accepting Arabs and has had Arab MKs and that stigma went away.

"There is no reason why I shouldn't join Bennett's party. It's not a party that says 'let's kick all the Arabs out'... I want to change this way of thinking."

Another perception she is looking to change is one held by many Israelis, and others around the world, regarding the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria.

"Regarding the so-called 'settlers.' These are people, from all over the country, who live there (in Judea and Samaria) and are a human line of defense. They risk their lives to protect the state's borders, to cover our backs, because without them the terrorists will be at our front door. We saw after the Disengagement (from Gaza) what happened - so many attacks...

"I don't want another disengagement, so I stand with the 'settlements'. And it is my honor to do so."

Whenever there is a story like this, I always wonder how many other Arab Israelis really think like this. But her perspective is certainly fresh and welcome, and she is exactly right - if Israel cracks down on the terrorists the way they should, then the law-abiding Arabs will be better off.

12/11 Links Pt1: Bayefsky: UN marks Human Rights Day by promoting violation of human rights

From Ian:

Eugene Kontorovich: 'Isolation' and the elections

European hostility to Israel, and sympathy for the Palestinians, has an internal logic and energy of its own. It will proceed at it is own face, largely indifferent to the internal details of Israeli political life. For example, even the great coup of the Left, the withdrawal from Gaza, has not changed the European view that Gaza remains occupied, and that Hamas should be a diplomatic partner.
The Europeans have come to believe that Israel has stolen land that "belonged" to Palestinians, that Jews have no rights in these lands, and thus the thieves must return them independent of any guarantees of security, worship, or an end to the conflict. These are not conditions that any Israeli government can or will accept, and thus the diplomatic unpleasantness will continue. Indeed, even if Israel were to withdraw from territories, it would only be the beginning of another unpleasantness, with Israeli retaliation for attacks across the long new border becoming then new pretext for boycott movements and the like.
One can just hope that whoever wins the elections will ignore baseless threats and theories about isolation and keep only Israel's real interests in mind.

Anne Bayefsky: UN marks Human Rights Day by promoting violation of human rights

Hiding in plain sight at the UN is the reason for the lack of peace between Israelis and Arabs – and it has nothing to do with 1967 and “occupation.” For Palestinians and Arabs across the Middle East, Israel is one big settlement.
As Palestinian representative Riyad Mansour openly told his U.N. audience on November 24, 2014: “Our people are suffering immense and growing hardships, all stemming from the grave injustice done to them in Al-Nakba of 1948 and thereafter.”
The month of November saw six full days at U.N. headquarters dedicated to dehumanizing Israelis, led by speakers from UNRWA, the Palestinian Authority and Iran. Israel was guilty of “an onslaught,” “ethnic cleansing,” “an inhumane blockade,” “torture,” “massacring civilians with a vengeance,” “virulent racism,” “barbarism,” “a policy of terrorism,” “genocide,” “apartheid,” “savagery,” “terror rampages,” “horrific abuse,” “supporting Al Qaeda,” “heinous crimes,” “beating and torturing juveniles,” and “crimes against humanity.”
That was in addition, to repeating “Zionism is racism” and analogizing Israelis to Nazis. Lebanon, for instance, said: “From 1948 until today, many Palestinian young girls and boys are just as determined as Anne Frank to conquer their fear of the occupier…”
How many more stabbings, rapes, and killings of Jews around the globe will it take to end American tolerance for incitement to racial and religious intolerance at the United Nations?
Eleanor Roosevelt would have had an answer.

Israel's Mission to the UN: UNbelievable

Wow! Look at the UN try to whitewash Chris Gunness' tweets!

As I mentioned last week, UNRWA's Chris Gunness had a Twitter meltdown over a reasoned, thoughtful op-ed piece by Bassam Eid in the Jerusalem Post, going on full attack mode by trying to smer the Post and calling to boycott the newspaper.

See how the UN spokesperson whitewashes this incident:

There was no "heated exchange" on Twitter, most of Gunness' tweets were unilateral and his call for boycott was way before anyone from the Jerusalem Post responded. He simply showed himself to be an unprofessional, spoiled whiner who lashes out when criticized.

And, of course, Gunness did call for a boycott. There is no other way to interpret his tweet.

Isn't it amazing that organizations like the UN that love to throw the word "impunity" around are the ones who always act with impunity with their holier-than-thou attitudes?

(h/t Ian)

PCHR lies about Ziad Abu Ain's death. What else do they lie about?

PCHR, a "human rights" organization that the media and the UN rely upon heavily, pretended to "investigate" the death of Ziad Abu Ain, and states without any qualification that Israeli forces killed him:

According to investigations conducted by PCHR and the testimony of Ansa Hosheih, the media official in the Commission against the Annexation Wall and Settlement Activity, at approximately 10:30, Ziad Abu ‘Ain (55), Director of the Commission against the Annexation Wall and Settlement Activity arrived at al-Dhohour area, east of Termis’ia village, north of Ramallah.... Upon their arrival, Israeli forces fired tear gas canisters and then a clash erupted between the protestors and the Israeli soldiers. Abu ‘Ain approached one of the soldiers and a serious discussion started between them. The soldier wearing [a helmet] rammed Abu Ain’s chest. He then held Abu Ain’s neck who fell on the floor and lost consciousness.

There is video that shows no such thing, except for perhaps a border policeman shoving him in the neck and shoulder area for less than half a second. Moreover, PCHR implies that Abu Zaid fell to the ground immediately after the altercation but it happened some time later; he was seen talking to reporters between the shove and his sitting down. There is no continuous footage to show exactly how much time elapses. He is never seen touching his neck as if in pain; on the contrary he wants to continue to attack the Israeli forces and is being held back.

This video includes an interview with Abu Ain, it is unclear if it is before or after the shoving but I believe before.. If it is before, then it looks like he was having labored breathing beforehand; if afterwards, it shows that there was a significant time lapse between the shove and the collapse.

It is clear that PCHR is stretching the truth as to the sequence of events by implying that he collapsed immediately after the shoving, and is flat-out lying when claiming that he was killed before the autopsy results are in.

The initial autopsy results show that he definitely suffered a stress-induced heart attack, although there are still some questions to be answered as to what caused it:

Israeli and Palestinian medical officials seemed to agree on the results of the autopsy of the Palestinian minister who died after being shoved and grabbed by the neck by an Israeli policeman at a West Bank protest, but issued conflicting interpretations Thursday.

Abu Ein, a Palestinian Authority cabinet minister, collapsed and died in the afternoon hours of Wednesday. Now a Palestinian-led autopsy claims his cause of death was a stress-induced heart attack.

The report, being led by Palestinian, Jordanian and Israeli pathologists, said the death was caused by blockage in the coronary artery, and said there were signs of light internal bleeding and localized pressure on the neck, at least according to the Israeli version of the report published by the Health Minixtry

The deceased suffered from heart disease, and there was evidence that plaque buildup were clogging more than 80% of his blood vessels, as well as signs that he had suffered heart attacks in the past.

Dr. Hen Kugel, the Israeli doctor who took part in the autopsy, told Ynet that the report was not final and that they were awaiting on the return of some tests, however "we know what happened there – he died from a heart attack. He had significant blockage of the arteries and his heart was in bad shape. When they grabbed his neck it caused massive stress which led to bleeding and then full blockage which is what killed him."

"There is no disagreement with the Palestinians about this, the only thing we still need to find out about is wounding to his front teeth, tongue and windpipe. These could be a result of resuscitation attempts or an attack as the Palestinians claim, but it doesn’t matter, he died because of his heart and stress," Dr. Kugel said.

UNRWA propaganda for Human Rights Day

For this year's Human Rights Day, UNRWA has been pushing the idea that it teaches human rights in all its schools on social media and in this HuffPo article:

UNRWA works to empower students to advocate and promote a culture of human rights despite the challenges they face. This very day, in 687 United Nations-run schools in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, children will advocate for human rights principles. Human Rights Education in UNRWA schools enables students to critically reflect on ways they can contribute to the realization of rights and contribute directly to their society and global community in positive ways....[W]e in UNRWA remain committed to the ideal of human rights for all. We teach it in our classrooms. We encourage our children to live it in their lives.

Well, not quite.

A 2011 study showed that UNRWA's human rights curriculum didn't teach anything about tolerance of religions and does not contribute one bit to Middle East peace.

The actual human rights curriculum materials on what used to be UNRWA's Arabic "human rights" website teaches anti-Israel lies.

A document on that same site said that Jews do not know anything about human rights.

A poem, also found on the UNRWA human rights website, said this:

Palestine should know I adore madness
Jaffa, I should know I'll come back to it
Let him know it's the crazy sons of Zion
With their thought of raping Palestine
The land of Canaan will be only to those who love her
Those who are occupied by people who do not
The land of Isra and Mi'raj cradle of the prophets
The land of jihad and martyrdom

I'm not talking about the normal hate being taught at UNRWA schools as part of history classes, for example. This hate was part of the very human rights curriculum that UNRWA so proudly trumpets to the West!

An idea floated by UNRWA to mention the Holocaust in its human rights curriculum was vehemently opposed by teachers, and ultimately shelved a couple of years ago. In fact, the teachers union itself officially denies the Holocaust - even while other teachers groups say they support Hitler's aims.

So while the US State Department compliments UNRWA on how well it teaches human rights with US funds, UNRWA is taking that same money and teaching the exact opposite of human rights when it comes to Jews.