Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, October 12, 2015

10/12 Links Pt1: Palestinian parents celebrate terrorist children's Martyrdom, PA promotes it

From Ian:

PMW: Palestinian parents celebrate terrorist children's Martyrdom-death, PA promotes it

Amid the current Palestinian riots and wave of terror attacks, Palestinian Authority and Fatah officials continue to praise terrorist murderers as "Martyrs" and "heroes." Some also encourage Shahada - seeking death as Martyrs for Allah. Becoming a Martyr (Shahid) represents the highest religious achievement that can be attained by a Muslim.
Shortly after the murders of 4 Israeli civilians in two separate attacks on Oct. 1 and 3, Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul addressed Palestinian youth on his Facebook page. He encouraged them to "rise up against the enemies," calling the youth "potential Martyrs for the beloved Palestine":
"#Resist_boycott_rise up (literally "make intifada") #General_mobilization_Fatah's_Shabiba [student movement]
More resistance and escalation against the occupation everywhere. Let us make the country a hell for the enemies and tell them clearly, in a way that will split the sky - resist, boycott, advance, rise up, for our land is forbidden to the enemies, and all the members of the Shabiba (i.e., Fatah youth and student movement) are potential Martyrs for the beloved Palestine."
[Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul's Facebook page, Oct. 5, 2015]
In another post, Al-Aloul stated that "whoever loves the Shahada (seeking Martyrdom) is not afraid of the settler herds." He ended with the following words of encouragement: "and #let's_continue_the_attacks" [Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul's Facebook page, Oct. 5, 2015]

MEMRI: Fatah Officials, Palestinian Social Media, Palestinian Authority Dailies Encourage Continued Violence

Fatah seems to be speaking in two voices regarding the violent events of the last few days, which have been described variously as "an intifada," a "popular awakening," the "Al-Aqsa Rage" events, etc. Alongside statements by PA President Mahmoud 'Abbas expressing a desire to avoid escalation and continue the security coordination with Israel, the Palestinian media has been publishing statements by PA officials, especially Fatah officials, as well as op-eds, that advocate continuing the violence. Some described the stabbings as acts of self-defense and others called to maintain a high level of tension and conflict. In some cases, PA spokesmen even chose to deny that violent attacks have taken place, claiming that Israel was falsely accusing Palestinians of terrorism in order to justify their killing. For example, commenting on the attempted car bomb attack at the Al-Za'im checkpoint on October 11, Palestinian Authority (PA) security services spokesman 'Adnan Al-Damiri said that the vehicle had caught fire due to an electric malfunction. The PA daily Al-Ayyam claimed that "Israel concocted a false and deceptive story about an alleged [attempted] bombing, as it has done on numerous occasions in the past." Following the death of Mustafa Al-Khatib, who was killed on October 12 as he attempted to knife a soldier in Jerusalem, the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida stated that "the occupation forces usually accuse Palestinians of attempted knifings in order to justify shooting at them and killing them."
Additionally, a delegation of Fatah officials, including figures close to Palestinian President Mahmoud 'Abbas, paid a condolence visit to the family of a terrorist who was killed after he murdered two Israelis in Jerusalem's Old City. An investigative article in the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reviewed reactions by Palestinians on social media who expressed joy at the killing of Jews.

Video: Palestinians Asked 'Is Stabbing Israelis Heroic?

As part of his "The Ask Project," in which viewers are encouraged to field questions for him to ask random Palestinians or Israelis, amateur documentary maker Gil Corey-Shuster asked a random selection of Arabs in Hevron the following question: "Do you view stabbing Israeli soldiers and civilians as heroic?"
The answers were overwhelmingly supportive, with only one interviewee making any distinction between soldiers or civilians. Even that respondent however said that Israeli civilians who carry private weapons for self-defense are legitimate targets because "if he had the chance he would use his gun and shoot" Arabs.
The most commonly given justification for stabbing attacks was Palestinians' own sense of grievance against Israel - but when asked if according to that logic Israelis who lost loved ones could legitimately attack Palestinians, all responded in the negative.
Just one Palestinian man, a shopkeeper, said he did not support such attacks and in fact expressed his outright opposition to them.

Palestinians: Is stabbing soldiers and civilians heroic? (h/t IsraellyCool)

.@UNRWA worker changes Facebook "Like" icon into a stabbing knife

Here is the Facebook profile icon for UNRWA worker Sohaib Fayyad, who lives in Khan Younis:

Fayyad, who is linking to lots of anti-Israel videos from Shehab News Agency and others, is clearly advocating that Arabs stab Jews.

His main profile image shows rock throwing as well, associating it with the colors of the PLO flagm happily proclaiming that "the intifada has begun":

Sounds like he is right in the mainstream of other UNRWA employees that we have been uncovering for months now - gleefully supporting violence against Jews.

Yesterday I reported on two other apparent UNRWA employees, both teachers, who also chose romantic allusions to violence as their Facebook profiles pictures. By any sane measure, given UNRWA's stated neutrality aims, people who literally define themselves by violence - as seen by their choice of profile pictures on Facebook - must be fired. It is the cyberspace equivalent of a teacher in the US deciding to place a tattoo of a notorious violent gang on his or her face.

But UNRWA will do nothing besides asking the workers to remove the images, because it could jeopardize their funding. Which, after all the high and mighty rhetoric about upholding the UN's ideals, is all they really care about.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Fatah poster praising Badran for his act

Sure, he tried to stab some Israelis. But he was such a sweet child!

Disgusting reporting from The Independent (UK):

Ishaq Badran was described simply as a “terrorist” after stabbing an Israeli near the Damascus Gate in occupied East Jerusalem on Saturday.

But in the mourners’ circle at his home in the city’s Kufr Aqab area, a more complex picture emerged of the 16-year-old, and what has caused others to take part in a wave of stabbings that has shaken Israel and threatens to turn into an all-out Palestinian uprising.

Ishaq, a student at an Israeli vocational school who was shot dead by Israeli police, was lauded as a “hero” and “martyr” by the mourners. He was, said those gathered at his home, simply acting to defend Islam’s third holiest site, the Aqsa mosque, situated on an area revered by Jews as the Temple Mount.

As dates, a traditional mourning food, were passed around, Ishaq’s close friends described him as an introverted, polite teen who liked weight-lifting and swimming. The oldest of six children, he prayed regularly and encouraged his friends to join him, friends said. He was not affiliated with any Palestinian faction or organisation, something he had in common with other Palestinians carrying out recent attacks seemingly of their own free will.

“I was surprised. I did not expect it,” said his father, Qassim Badran. “My son always obeyed me. Every time I’d say don’t go to any areas of trouble he would say: ‘Yes.’”

Mr Badran said that his son had been deeply upset by reports that a settler had stripped the hijab off a Muslim woman in the Old City of Jerusalem last Wednesday. The reports, which could not be independently confirmed, soon spread on Palestinian social media. “He spoke to his mother about this and cried,” Mr Badran told The Independent. “He was crying, saying: ‘No one is defending these women’.” The woman was shot as she tried to stab an Israeli man, according to Israeli police.

A friend of Ishaq’s, aged 13, said he was “extremely upset” when he saw him on Thursday and Friday last week. “We were looking at pictures of martyrs. He said that Fadi Aloun was killed in cold blood,” he said, referring to a Palestinian shot by Israeli police on 3 October for what Palestinians believe was no reason. Israeli police say he was killed after he stabbed an Israeli.

They also looked at phone pictures of Mohanad Halabi, a 19-year-old who killed two Israelis in a separate stabbing attack on 3 October. “Both of us were talking of what a heroic act Mohanad did. Ishaq mentioned what happened to the woman with the hijab and said that had we done this to a Jewish lady they would have killed us.”

What is the "more complex picture" that has emerged from this "reporting" that indicates that Badran was not a terrorist?

A young man decided "seemingly of his own free will" to murder Jews.

Which means that, yes, he is a terrorist.

He is a terrorist even though he lifted weights.

He is a terrorist even though he liked to swim.

He is a terrorist even though he liked to pray.

He is a terrorist even though he was respectful to his parents.

None of those other facts makes his actions any less heinous. Every would-be murderer in the world has other interests and hobbies, every serial killer had a mother and father, every depraved criminal had a side of himself that loved children or animals or collecting stamps. It does not excuse their actions - except for Palestinian Arab terrorists whose attempts to murder Jews must be placed into "context."

There is one other thing that we learn from this article - that incitement is deadly.

It wasn't only social media that reported that a woman stabber last week had her hijab removed by a "settler." It was the mainstream Arab press, as I reported at the time.

There are literally no journalistic standards in Palestinian Arab media. Multiply this by the thousands of bigots and haters on social media, the rumors that have swirled after every attack become "facts" in the minds of young people who feel they must avenge the baseless lies.

Arab incitement is what ended up killing Ishaq Badran. And Arab incitement is the least-reported story - one ignored by not only the media but by politicians and so-called "human rights" organizations.

Their refusal to mention the incitement results in more deaths.

Lies about the Temple Mount, lies about Israeli defensive actions, lies about the Jewish communities across the Green Line, antisemitic lies, and hundreds of lies that are promulgated every day in Arab media and Palestinian officials, are the engine of the violence. Combined with the honor/shame dynamic of Arab society and you have a surefire recipe for terror attacks. How can self-respecting people act otherwise when they are brainwashed by a daily avalanche of incitement and hate and lies?

But the Independent will not cover that story. The Independent, and virtually all Western media, will not accept the notion that their compatriots in Arab media are not only willing but anxious to make up facts - like the "ripping off hijab" lie or the "she only had an electrical fire in her car" lie or the ever popular "they opened fire for no reason" lie.

Westerners cannot wrap their heads around an entire society that was built on myths and lies combined with honoring murderers. The media cannot be bothered to research the facts for themselves, thinking that both sides must have some basis for their claims and the truth must be somewhere in between.

Media like The Independent are partially responsible by giving credence to the lies, and by not reporting on the fact that one side's claims are so often spurious that each one should be reported only with a disclaimer. Articles like this feed into the myth of Ishaq Badran's heroism, not his terrorism.

The Arab media lies. The Western media abets the lies by reporting the ones they want to believe and ignoring the ones that are too over the top for any sane person to swallow.

These lies have consequences - and often, the consequences are fatal.

Palestinian Arab media are happily pushing for a violent intifada in Arabic - but in English they are pretending that there are no attacks, and that Israelis are attacking them without any provocation.

The latest example comes from this morning's attack near Lion's Gate, as reported in TOI:

A man attempted to stab a police officer and was shot and killed in Jerusalem’s Old City Monday morning, the latest incident in a spate of terror attacks that have rocked the capital and the rest of Israel over the last two weeks.

Police said there were no injuries in the attempted attack and the attacker was pronounced dead at the scene.

The incident occurred near the Lions’ Gate entrance to the Old City, the site of two previous stabbing attacks, including one that left two people dead over a week ago.

A police spokesperson said the attacker, an Arab man, approached the area from a cemetery to the north and was asked to take his hands out of his pockets by police, who suspected something was amiss.

The man then took a knife out of his pocket and tried to stab a police officer. The officer was wearing a protective vest and was not injured.

“The officers quickly shot the attacker,” the spokesperson said.

Palestine News Network denies everything, using those famous anonymous "eyewitnesses" whose credibilty is nearly always close to zero:

A Palestinian youth on Monday morning has been executed by Israeli occupation police forces, under claims that he tried to initiate a stab operative near Lion’s Gate (Bab Al-Asbat) in the old city of Jerusalem.

Eyewitnesses at the scene confirmed that the man did not initiate any stabbing attempts, saying that he was passing in his vehicle through the old city’s narrow street, when the police stopped him, and opened fire on him for no apparent reason.

Other eyewitnesses said that he was taking out his mobile phone from his pocket, when IOF shot him.

In Arabic, however, PNN highlights photos of Arab women bravely brandishing knives.

Meanwhile, video was released showing an Arab stabbing Israeli police on Saturday, another event that PNN had tried to cast doubt on:

Amnesty International would say that the officers were "heavily protected" and had nothing to fear from a man stabbing them in the head. Perhaps they should have called up Amnesty during the attack to ask advice on the optimal method to save the life of a man desperately trying to kill them.

Muslims upset that Wikipedia has a "Temple Mount" entry in English

There have been a few articles this weekend from angry Muslims who realized that the non-Arabic Wikipedia entries on The Temple Mount are called "The Temple Mount" - and that it mentions anything besides Islamic legends about the area.

Someone seems to have started a rumor that the page has only recently been renamed "Temple Mount" and that it was formerly entitled The Noble Sanctuary or Al Haram al Sharif. The Jews, of course, are the culprits.

Dr. Aida Al-Najjar of Jordan swallowed this rumor whole, and rails againat those Jews, saying "Not only did the Zionists to kill all the Palestinians in cold blood, they also reinforce what they are doing by feigning objectivity and science concerning the conflict over al-Aqsa mosque....Wikipedia's information is based on incorrect and unscientific and inaccurate Jewish myths for distribution in foreign languages. As can be seen, Zionism replaced "the Haram al-Sharif" with "the Temple Mount." This indicates that [Wikipedia] is working in order to please the Jews who rely on their networks and contribute to change the facts.

Other articles say that the Wikipedia entry in English only refers to the sanctity of the place from the Jewish perspective while the text does not mention its religious significance for Muslims, except for one sentence that says that Jerusalem is the third holiest site in Islam, and it was the site of Mohammed's trip to heaven.

A quick perusal of the actual Wikipedia entry on the Temple Mount shows that this is quite a lie.

The discussions behind the page show some pathetic attempts by Muslims to erase history. For example, it indicates that many people tried to change the name of the article. Here is one comment:

"please change Temple Mount to AL-aksa mosque because its disrespectful to the feelings of one billion muslims in the whole world, and tha Temple Mount is just a myth in the heads of zionests "

Another would-be editor referenced the absurd NYT article from last week as evidence that no Temple ever existed:

The article discusses the religious presumption of the existence of the first and second temples on the Temple Mount as a given and a considerable amount of space is dedicated to discussing the numerous archeological digs which have taken place in order to try to locate some evidence of the existence of the temples on the Mount, however, the article does not state that so far no compelling evidence has been located to prove that the Temple Mount is the actual location of the destroyed temples, assuming that they ever actually existed, since we are talking about something that has disappeared more than 2000 years ago. There is ample independent reporting of the lack of concrete evidence of the existence of remains of the temple on the Temple Mount, see for example http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/world/middleeast/historical-certainty-proves-elusive-at-jerusalems-holiest-place.html?_r=0 and http://www.haaretz.com/life/archaeology/.premium-1.627324

The Arabic entry for Al Haram al Qudsi a-Sharif has no such issues. It doesn't mention the Temples, or even Judaism. There is no controversy in its pages. The entire entry is a straight reading of the myth of Mohammed and his flying donkey, and then goes in detail on the various structures there today.

The thing is, in a few years the French Wikipedia entry will likely resemble the Arabic one, and the English one may follow soon after.

.@UNRWA teacher celebrates the music of stabbing Jews (update)

This cartoon gained some notoriety over the weekend for its romanticizing the wave of stabbings by Arabs of Jews in Israel recently:

UNRWA teacher Hiba Miari of Lebanon wasted no time to make this "artwork" her Facebook profile image.

Will UNRWA discipline her, as they promise to for the many cases like these that I uncover, or will they just silently have the pages removed and cover up the incident, as they have been?

One thing is for sure: UNRWA is reading this blog and often acting on what I find. They know that they condone this kind of incitement and only reactive to my research, rather than pro-actively working to root out the problem themselves.

Did they send a memo to their staff warning them on how to conduct themselves on Facebook? Did they discipline any of the other teachers or schools that I showed were pushing the worst kinds of terror apologetics and antisemitism?

I have plenty more examples in the queue, and I'm finding more all the time. If UNRWA really cared, they could find them before I do.

But they don't care.

UPDATE: Another UNRWA teacher from Khan Younis also uses this as her profile picture.

10/11 Links: Abbas justifies murder as protection of holy sites; Jeremiah Wright: Jesus was a Palestinian

From Ian:

PMW: Abbas justifies violence and murder as “protection of holy sites”‎

After ongoing Palestinian riots, which have including shootings, stabbings, and rock and Molotov cocktail throwing - as well as the murder of 4 Israeli civilians - Abbas last week justified it all as legitimate defense of holy sites:
"The Palestinian side did not attack and did not do anything against the Israelis. If they [Israelis] think that the [Palestinian] people in Jerusalem are protecting themselves, that is our right. We have to protect our holy sites." [Official PA TV, Oct. 6, 2015 and Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Oct. 7, 2015]
Abbas then attacked Israel's defense measures against Palestinian terror:
"The Israeli government is escalating its strong offensive against the Palestinian people everywhere... Honestly, we do not know what the reason is for this."

After Palestinians murder 4 Israelis Abbas says “the Palestinian side did not attack”

MUST WATCH: This Is how the Palestinians Raise their Children (h/t Yoel)

In the past weeks, Israelis suffer from hundreds of terror attacks: stab attacks, firebombs, rock-throwing - all as the outcome of ongoing Palestinian incitement on social media and TV. Imagine if this was you. Imagine if this was happening somewhere else. IMAGINE.
SHARE THIS VIDEO. SPREAD THE WORD. SAY 'NO' TO HATE.

Jeremiah Wright: 'Jesus was a Palestinian'

The controversial religious leader Jeremiah Wright compared Native Americans to Palestinians at the 20th anniversary of the Million Man March on the National Mall on Saturday, going so far as to assert that “Jesus was a Palestinian."
Wright, who once served as pastor to President Obama, was one of several hours' worth of speakers in Washington, D.C., for an event called “Justice or Else!” that sought to channel the energy of the Black Lives Matter movement. Wright placed the event in historical context.
“The same issue is being fought today and has been fought since 1948, and historians are carried back to the 19th century… when the original people, the Palestinians — and please remember, Jesus was a Palestinian — the Palestinian people had the Europeans come and take their country,” Wright said.
He said African-Americans in the United States have much in common with Palestinians in Israel.
“The youth in Ferguson and the youth in Palestine have united together to remind us that the dots need to be connected,” Wright said. “And what Dr. King said, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, has implications for us as we stand beside our Palestinian brothers and sisters, who have been done one of the most egregious injustices in the 20th and 21st centuries.”
Wright, who was the reverend of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, which the president attended intermittently from 1988 to 2008, also accused Israel of being an apartheid state. (h/t Jewess)

Throughout the twentieth-century the New York Times was never a friend or ally to the Jewish people, nor is it a friend or ally to the Jewish people today.

During World War II, the Times buried the Holocaust deep within its pages and, as far as I am concerned, it will never live down that criminal negligence, that crime against the six million dead, and neither will its owner and publisher, at the time, Arthur Hays Sulzberger.

Severin Hochberg, in a 2006 review of Laurel Leff's Buried by the Times: The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper, for the Oxford University journal of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, tells us:

"Leff's grim conclusion is that the mass murder of the Jews was simply not an important enough story for the New York Times. This, in turn, was partly because it was not an important enough story for the Allied governments or the Western public. Another crucial factor in the decision to minimize the plight of the Jews, according to Leff, was the personal influence of the New York Times' publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. Sulzberger believed that the Jews were not a "people," much less a race, and that they should not be treated differently from anybody else, even when clearly targeted for annihilation. His obsessive need to deflect accusations that the Times was a "Jewish" newspaper influenced coverage of Jewish persecution and ultimately mass murder." (My emphasis.)

Little seems to have changed over at the Gray Lady or "the newspaper of record."

Many of you will recall that the Times recently published a "Jew Tracker" showing which Jewish politicians did, and which did not, support Obama's Iran non-treaty that gives that government - a government that perpetually calls for the murder of Israeli-Jews and all Americans -150 billion dollars and the ability to shortly gain nuclear weaponry.

To my astonishment the conservative Washington Free Beacon, under the byline of Adam Kredo, claims to have attained emails between senior New York Times editor, Greg Brock, and a pro-Jewish reader and critic who slammed the paper for running this vile material before public pressure forced them to remove it.

{This fiasco by the Times, by the way, raises the odor of the Rototom Sunsplash festival in Spain where public pressure likewise forced the Reggae event to accept Matisyahu simply as a performer, not a Jewish performer under some enforced BDS obligation to answer for the alleged crimes of the Jewish state.}

According to the Washington Free Beacon a reader / critic of the Times wrote editor Brock the following and called the inclusion of the Jewish list "stupid":

Are you so ignorant that you don’t understand the historical significance of what you’re doing? Are you so tone deaf? Why don’t you include addresses so that people’s homes can be attacked?...

My parents were Holocaust survivors and the first thing the Nazis wanted to know is: where are the Jews? This merely furthers the classic anti-Semitic trope of dual loyalty.

Greg Brock fired back with:

But it would be helpful if you did your homework. You’ll find that we are in excellent journalistic company. I just wish the Times had thought of it sooner so we do not appear to be copying others.

Do you ever read the Jewish press—some of the finest journalism around, in my humble opinion. If you search online right now, you will see that these publications have been keeping a running count of the voting position of Jewish senators and representatives for weeks.

To which the reader / critic responded:

Do you understand that dual loyalty is a classic anti-Semitic trope? Do you understand that the accusation that Jews are voting against their national interests and for their faith-based communal interest is a call to violence? Somehow, the sensitivity you show to racial issues is lost when your target is Jewish.

Do you understand that you’re creating a hostile environment for Jews whether they agree with the NYTimes editorial position or not?” asked the reader, who further described the post as “stupid” and offensive.

It is difficult to fathom the kind of outrageous stupidity that it takes to single out Jewish politicians for public derogation when no other ethnic group is treated with such malice. It was not so long ago that the New York Times was, in fact, considered the paper of record. When I was kid we received it in our box on a daily basis and my father would spend half of Sunday perusing the massive tome that they put out every weekend.

But those days are long dead.

The Times, it should be noted, was not the only significant publication that believed that singling out Jewish politicians for disgust was reasonable. Joshua Keating over at Slate liked the idea, although he acknowledged the crudity of it. He wrote:

It seems willfully obtuse to pretend that the position of the Israeli government and the views of at least a prominent faction of the American Jewish community aren’t a factor in this debate.

That does not sound entirely unreasonable, now does it?

However, I will look forward to the day when the New York Times tracks black politicians, as black people, or Latino politicians, as Latinos, or Gays as Gays, as they do Jews as Jews.

Until we begin to see that perhaps Greg Brock might consider not bickering with thoughtful readers over a prejudicial, bigoted, and yes, stupid, NYT policy.

Michael Lumish is a blogger at the Israel Thrives blog as well as a regular contributor/blogger at Times of Israel and Jews Down Under.

Biased @Amnesty report says IDF soldiers aren't in real danger from firebombs and boulders

Amnesty International issued a report on the situation in Israel. 6 paragraphs mentioned attacks on Israelis - and 21 paragraphs attacked Israel for defending its citizens from those attacks.

This section of the report was particularly absurd:

While Palestinian demonstrators have thrown rocks and firebombs towards Israeli forces in many demonstrations, and there are reports that Palestinians have shot at Israeli forces in isolated cases, Israeli military and police forces are heavily protected and must ensure that all use of force is strictly necessary and proportionate, and that firearms must only be used to protect against the imminent threat of death or serious injury.

The rest of the report shows that Amnesty does not consider a single case of Israeli use of force to be justified. Because the Israeli forces have magic "protection" that stop firebombs and knives and stones and sometimes bullets from being dangerous.

For example:

The Israeli military said that there had been a violent demonstration in which rocks and firebombs were thrown at Israeli forces, and that troops had used riot dispersal means before opening fire at three Palestinians who were throwing firebombs, but did not release information to suggest that the lives of Israeli troops had been in danger.

Yes, Amnesty really said that even though the IDF explained in detail that the terrorists had not responded to the exact kind of non-lethal weapons that Amnesty insists the IDF use, and they were still throwing firebombs at them, that is not enough information for Amnesty to decide that the IDF acted properly.

One wonders what else the IDF could do to prove it acted properly, and one immediately knows the answer - nothing. Amnesty is looking for evidence of guilt, not fact-finding.

Besides this, the report shows the usual extreme anti-Israel bias. It makes numerous specific demands from Israeli authorities. Just a few of the many examples:

Israeli actions to apprehend and bring to justice those responsible for such attacks must comply with international law; there is no justification for arbitrary arrests, or for torture or other ill-treatment during arrest or detention.

Amnesty International calls on the Israeli authorities to publicly disclose the current openfire regulations for Israeli police and military forces, including those being applied in East Jerusalem. The Israeli authorities must urgently issue directives clarifying that Israeli army and police personnel can only use live fire, including .22 ammunition, when strictly unavoidable to protect against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, and that all use of force must be absolutely necessary, strictly proportionate to a legitimate aim, and in full compliance with international human rights standards.

As the occupying power, Israel is also bound by the Fourth Geneva Convention, and is prohibited from imposing measures in the name of security – including restrictions on the movement of Palestinians in the OPT – that are arbitrary, discriminatory or amount to collective punishment.

Israeli forces must protect Palestinian civilians and their property from settler attacks, and end the impunity for such attacks by addressing the systematic failures in investigating them.

But the report does not ask Fatah or Hamas to do a single thing to stop terror or incitement. There are no demands. The word "must":, used liberally when insisting on what Israel must do, is completely absent in regard to the PA.

Even though Amnesty reported that a Fatah-linked group took responsibility for the murder of the Henkins, it doesn't ask Fatah's leader Mahmoud Abbas to lift a finger to stop terror.

It gives specific numbers of alleged attacks by Israel reported by biased sources, but it doesn't mention that far moreattacks on Israelis have been recorded - 440 as of Friday. No indication is given that Amnesty even tried to find such a statistic..

The real purpose of the report is to slam Israel yet again. Listing a few attacks on Jews is a fig-leaf to put on top of another hit-job.

Not putting any responsibility on the PA and Hamas shows that Amnesty really has no problem with how they encourage terrorism against Jews.

TOI reports:

A policeman was lightly injured Sunday morning when a Palestinian woman detonated explosives in her car near Ma’ale Adumim, east of Jerusalem.

The attacker was severely injured by the explosion and was evacuated to Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem’s Ein Kerem neighborhood for treatment.

Police said officers noticed a “suspicious vehicle” driven by a woman toward a checkpoint en route to Jerusalem and signaled to her to stop. The woman then yelled “Allahu Akbar” and detonated a bomb in her car, a police statement said.

Army Radio reported the wounded officer is a traffic policeman who pulled over the bomber in her car for driving in a lane specified for public transport and carpooling.

The car was was bearing Israeli, rather than Palestinian, license plates, the report said. Police found a gas canister in the vehicle and said that the woman had intended to carry out a bombing in Jerusalem.

Initial reports pointed to a possible suicide bombing, saying that the woman had died in the attack. Police later said the woman exited her car just before the bomb went off, indicating that it may not have been a suicide bombing attempt.

JPost adds:

"It is feared that a terror cell stands behind the Sunday morning explosion near Ma'aleh Adumim and it's possible that there will be more attempts to execute terrorist attacks using explosives," a military source told The Jerusalem Post's sister publication Ma'ariv.

The source questioned the sophistication of the cell however.

"The explosive device was small and unprofessional and the terrorist was not trained," he explained.

An investigation of the incident revealed that there were gas canisters in the suspect's car that were meant to explode and cause much greater damage.

She was sent to carry out the attack and the explosive was prepared for her, but the execution of the attack demonstrates that the terror cell was not organized or trained.

The source said the suspect is known to security forces and officials were checking which organization she belonged to.

Palestinian Arab media are denying the story, claiming based on "eyewitnesses" that the woman had an electrical problem with her car and it started an internal fire and that the police wouldn't let her (and her child, not mentioned in any Israeli media) leave the car. She screamed "allahu akbar" in fear, according to this version of the story.

Another Arab story claims that according to other "eyewitnesses" is that Israeli forces shot at the car for no reason.

The terrorist's name is Isra Djabaas, which happens to be the same surname as the person responsible for an attack with an excavator tractor in 2014 in Jerusalem that killed one.

Official Palestinian incitement continues

Fatah denied being part of a press release using its logo by the "General Command of the Third Palestinian Intifada".

But there is still plenty of incitement from official Fatah and PA channels.

Abbas Zaki, member of Fatah's Central Committee, stressed that Fatah has never abandoned the option of armed terror ("resistance") but said that it requires a consensus and unity.

Zaki told Anatolia News Agency, "Today, we defend ourselves...some with a stone and some with a knife."

Zaki also said that while there is no official sanction for an uprising, he praised the stabbers and stoners by saying that the attackers are "young men..(who) are driven by their consciousness and oppression in which they live."

More direct incitement to throw stones comes from the cartoonist at official PA daily Al Hayat al Jadida:

The same site published this bit of antisemitism last week:

This cartoon on the front page of Al Ayyam, also a pro-government daily, is more explicit in telling people to throw stones at Jews:

"Closer....closer"

(h/t IronyDome)

10/10 links: The New York Times Goes Truther on the Temple Mount; Why is Jaffa being attacked?

From Ian:

‘The New York Times’ Goes Truther on the Temple Mount

Was the White House ever in Washington, D.C.? Can we ever really know for sure? Not unless we dig under the existing structure and find indisputable archaeological evidence of the original structure, which British general Robert Ross is said—by some sources—to have torched in August, 1814.
If you find everything about the previous paragraph patently ridiculous, you are clearly not a reporter or an editor for The New York Times. This morning, the paper of record published a piece about Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, questioning whether or not it was the site of, you know, the Jewish Temple. “Historical Certainty,” the article’s headline reads, “Proves Elusive at Jerusalem’s Holiest Place.” Capping the piece is a quote from Jane Cahill, who the paper notes is not only an archaeologist but also a practicing lawyer and therefore, presumably, an expert on incontrovertible evidence. Did the ancient Jewish temple stand where the Dome of the Rock now stands? “The answer might be ‘yes,’ if the standard of proof is merely a preponderance of the evidence,” Cahill is quoted as saying, “but ‘no’ if the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.”
It’s hard to begin to dissect the Times’ potent blend of ignorance and malice. There’s reporter Rick Gladstone’s repulsive bad faith in continually moving back and forth in his text between the narrow question he seems to have asked Cahill and other scholars: did the Temples stand precisely on the exact spot on the Temple Mount where Aksa was built, or might they have stood, say 50 feet over? This, in addition to the idea, which Gladstone weaves in and out of the piece, that there is even the slightest credibility to the idea that “Jewish Temples” were, you know, the products of some kind of religious fever-dream that Zionists then appropriated for their own aggressive purposes.

Richard Millett: A Nice destruction of the Jewish state.

On Wednesday I went to the legal heart of London to hear a talk given by Professor Sir Geoffrey Nice QC. The talk Gaza-Israel: The Legal Military View was at Gresham College.
It was due to start at 6pm but I arrived at 5.50pm and by then every seat was taken including those in the overflow room. Latecomers were turned away with a copy of the talk, all 22 pages, Professor Nice was about to deliver.
On the tube home I read the Professor’s fantasyland; let’s call it Niceland.
In Niceland everyone is nice, except all Israelis (P.17):
And in Niceland history can be whatever you want it to be (P. 3):
“Israel as a state was thus imposed on and within Palestine in 1948…an as yet unfinished state project because the territorial ambitions of Israel were not satisfied. Thereafter, claiming to fight for the security of their people and preservation of their land, Israel fought their Arab neighbours, expanding Israel’s borders.”
And in Niceland those fantastical disappearing maps of Palestine used by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign are accurate (P. 5).
And in Niceland Israel never handed back the Sinai and made peace with Jordan (P.6):
“The 1967 war encouraged a revival of the “Greater Israel”, envisaged by the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, as extending “from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates””.

Edgar Davidson: What to say to your MP about the failure of the media and politicians to acknowledge the current war against Israeli Jews

Note this was before I heard this evening about the appalling statement by the Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond in which he blamed Israel's 'occupation' and 'violence by Palestinians and Israeli settlers' for the current situation. And there are still people who think that the Conservatives and David Cameron are 'friends of Israel'. Remember Hammond also made a blood libel antisemitic statement (one of the worst ever made by a British Cabinet member) when he said that Israel wanted to spike the Iran deal because it 'wanted to maintain a permanent state of war'. Anyway, I used the online form to contact the Prime Minister to make the following complaint:
I am appalled by the Foreign Minister's statement today which largely blames Israel for the unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks against Jewish civilians in every city of Israel (averaging 100 per day and increasing as I write) resulting in numerous dead Jews. The fact that the surge in attacks came immediately after Mahmoud Abbas (the leader of the Palestine Authority) effectively declared war against Israel's Jews at the United Nations was also unreported by the media and ignored by the Government (just like the attacks against Israelis). The media have chosen ONLY to report incidents in which the Palestinian attackers were killed in the act of committing murder. Moreover, such reports have typically led with the headline "Palestinian killed by security forces...". Now the government seems to have fallen into the same BIG LIE narrative. Perhaps Hammond could also clarify or name even one 'settler' who has attacked an Arab.