Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, April 04, 2017

J-Street U fantasizes that BDS wouldn't exist if it wasn't for "occupation"

J-Street sent out an email from Brooke Davies, president of J Street U, after the anti-BD conference at the UN last week.

She writes:

Two days ago, I was part of a J Street U delegation attending a major summit at the United Nations dedicated to confronting BDS. We went because we too oppose the Global BDS Movement and wanted to offer a serious, effective alternative to the failed right-wing pro-Israel advocacy that we see every day on college campuses and around the country.

Really? Because J-Street is practically invisible in the fight against BDS on campus. A couple of years ago I asked for a single example of a picture of a J-Street booth or table at any campus in the US handing out anti-BDS literature. Maybe something has changed since then, but I have yet to see it. Someone, please find me some literature that J-Street U passed out during this year's "Israel Apartheid Week".

On the other hand, groups like Stand With Us and grassroots individual campus groups like Calgary United For Israel - which would be considered "right-wing pro-Israel advocacy" by J-Street - are hugely effective. Those are the groups that have been in the forefront of turning back BDS on campus, not J-Street U.

Instead, the event perfectly encapsulated why the Jewish community is losing the fight against BDS -- and turning many young people off of Israel entirely.
When we conveyed the message that effectively confronting BDS requires opposing the occupation, we were met with scorn and abuse.

She returns to this theme a number of times.

Opposing BDS means also opposing the occupation....There’s no way to fight BDS without fighting the occupation. Most support for the Global BDS Movement stems from very real concerns about human rights violations in the West Bank and the threats the occupation poses to Israelis and Palestinians.... I couldn’t help but think that if the Jewish establishment spent as much time fighting for peace as they do fighting against BDS, it would soon be a thing of the distant past -- and Israelis and Palestinians might be much better off....We know that the most effective way of opposing BDS is supporting a two-state solution and opposing the occupation.

How exactly does that work? A BDSer says "Boycott Israel because they occupy Palestinian territory" and J-Street U answers, what, exactly?

Do they say "We agree with you that the occupation is the source of all evil in the Middle East so please don't boycott Israel"?

Do they say "We would prefer that you boycott the settlements and leave Green Line Israel alone"?

Exactly what argument does a J-Street U that says they agree with the official stance the boycotters say they have for boycotting Israel? I can't think of any consistent J-Street argument that wouldn't strengthen the BDSers.

After some searching, I found J-Street U's arguments against BDS used at Vassar College last year:

- BDS is NOT the only way to be pro- Palestinian and anti- occupation
- BDS does NOT support a two state solution
- BDS supports academic boycotts
- BDS disempowers students and orgs from making their own decisions on this issue
- BDS silences the anti-occupation Israeli left
- Our academic environment should be committed to exploring all narratives in an issue, not siding with one
- BDS silences student voices and activism on campus

Notice that J-Street U is not arguing against divesting from Israel, boycotting Israel or placing sanctions on Israel. They are arguing against the BDS movement, not against boycott/divestment/sanctions against Israel! Except for the implication that an academic boycott is wrong, they cannot come up with a reason why people shouldn't boycott Israeli goods or why campuses shouldn't divest from Israeli investments!

This list of reasons to oppose BDS given by J-Street U is a smokescreen for the fact that J-Street U, by accepting the "occupation is evil" argument, cannot defend Israel. They cannot brag about any Israeli accomplishments because they would be targeted for "X-washing the occupation." The same logic that claims that Jews have no rights whatsoever to Judea and Samaria can be easily used to say that Jews have no right to Tel Aviv and Netanya.

J-Street U can't even bring itself to support a Jewish state, instead saying that "Israelis" have the right to self-determination, not Jews.

Of course, J Street U's premise that two states would defang BDS is absurd. Asthe Vassar list shows, even J-Street U knows that BDSers don't care about "occupation;" they want to destroy Israel and they've made that clear over and over again. "Occupation" is an excuse. After all, Arabs boycotted Israel before "occupation" and they brought arguments that were meant to be just as attractive to Western progressives while, in Arabic, they were clear what the real goal was.

If Israel would sign a peace agreement with the PLO tomorrow, next week there would be a new push for "right of return" and UN resolutions stating that "Palestinians who are Israeli citizens are living under apartheid" and a half dozen other arguments that are only meant to justify, ex post facto, the desire to destroy Israel.

Rather than being an effective fighter against BDS, J-Street U's demonization of Israel gives oxygen and ammunition to the BDSers.

In the end, J-Street is an organization that is dedicated to demonizing Israel in the name of "peace." I have yet to see a substantive argument that J-Street has ever given to defending Israel, even at their own conferences.

J-Street cannot say anything nice about Israel.

Just like JVP.

And just like the BDS movement itself.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

04/04 Links Pt1: Over 100 killed in chemical attack in Syria; Disgraced UN agency equates Israeli 'occupation' to US slavery

From Ian:

Over 100 killed in suspected chemical attack in Syria

A suspected chemical attack in Syria's northern Idlib province Tuesday killed over 100 people and wounded over 400 others, Syrian opposition groups reported. The Syrian government has denied using any such weapons on civilians.
The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said at least 11 children were killed in the attack. The group said an airstrike by Syrian government or Russian jets that pounded the town of Khan Sheikhoun in rebel-held Idib, adding it had serious concerns the number of casualties will continue to grow.
The strikes caused many people to choke, leading to suspicions that the substances dropped was chlorine gas.
If inhaled, chlorine gas, a deadly agent widely used in World War I, turns into hydrochloric acid in the lungs, which can lead to internal burning and drowning through a reactionary release of water in the lungs.
Syrian opposition activists described Tuesday's attack as among the worst poison gas attacks in the country's six-year civil war.
Photos and video from Khan Sheikhoun that surfaced on social media show limp bodies of children and adults. Some are seen struggling to breathe; others appear foaming at the mouth.

Rocket Hits Syrian Hospital Treating Victims of Deadly Chemical Attack

President Bashar al-Assad has been accused of a sarin gas attack in the northwestern Syrian province of Idlib that killed 100 civilians, including at least 11 children, on Tuesday.
Doctors treating victims at makeshift hospitals in the area say dozens of victims from Khan Sheikhoun are showing signs of sarin poisoning, including foaming at the mouth, breathing difficulties and limp bodies.
Moments after the attack a projectile hit a hospital in the area, bringing down rubble on top of medics as they struggled to treat victims.
Syrian opposition activists have claimed the chemical attack was caused by an airstrike carried out either by President Assad's forces or Russian warplanes. Russia's military said its planes did not carry out any strikes near the town.
It is believed that another 400 people were injured after being exposed to toxins the attack.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said those killed had died from suffocation and the effects of the gas. The monitor could not confirm the nature of the gas, and said the strike was likely carried out by government warplanes.

Israeli leaders urge action, condemn Syria gas ‘massacre’

Israeli leaders called for the international community to take action Tuesday after a gas attack in Syria killed at least 58 people and injured over 200, many of them children.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “sharply condemned” the attack and called on the international community to complete the process of removing all of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles.
“When I saw pictures of babies suffocating from a chemical attack in Syria, I was shocked and outraged. There’s no, none, no excuse whatsoever for the deliberate attacks on civilians and on children, especially with cruel and outlawed chemical weapons,” he said in English at a memorial service for president Chaim Herzog.
Netanyahu also said the lack of action proved the international community was not to be trusted to come to Israel’s aid.
“This terrible war underlines our main imperative– we will always defend ourselves with our own strength, against any enemy and any threat,” he said.

PreOccupiedTerritory: Being Propped Up By Iran And Russia Is Totally Not Going To Be Shameful For My Regime By Basher Assad, President, Syrian Arab Republic (satire)

We Arabs are a proud people. Honor is perhaps the strongest value in our culture, often trumping life itself. It is a point of pride for an Arab nation to attain self-sufficiency, and a source of ongoing shame that few, if any, Arab states can hold their own without some kind of support – military, economic, or otherwise. But that will totally not be a problem for Syria in the long term as it becomes necessary to rely in greater and greater measure on the non-Arab military and economic support from Iran and Russia just to keep my regime intact, I promise.
Perhaps the greatest source of shame is our collective inability to oust from our midst the Zionist entity, which, by all assessments, we should have swept aside like so much detritus in 1948. They were ragtag Holocaust survivors (not that I’m accepting the historical reality of the Holohoax, but you understand the rhetorical angle here) who shouldn’t have lasted a week against our mighty warriors. Instead we found ourselves outfought even when we weren’t outgunned. Our continued impotence against the Jews only grew worse in 1967 when we lost the Golan Heights, from which we used to spend time taking potshots and lobbing artillery shells at Israeli kibbutzim. Good times.
In the years since, as Israel has emerged as a regional powerhouse whose economy is larger than all of ours combined, you can imagine how shameful the whole things has become for us. This Western colonial enterprise, as we call it, has consistently humiliated us on every front, driving home the reality that we Arabs simple cannot compete with the advancement and influence of the non-Arabs.

Back in 2003, an Egyptian legal scholar claimed he was going to sue Jews around the world for allegedly having stolen gold during the Jewish exodus from Egypt. The scholar, Nabil Hilmy, even figured out a methodology for determining how much world Jewry should pay:

“If we assume that the weight of what was stolen was one ton,” Hilmy said, its worth “doubled every 20 years, even if annual interest is only 5%… hence after 1,000 years it would be worth 1,125,898,240 million tons… This is for one stolen ton. The stolen gold is estimated at 300 tons, and it was not stolen for 1,000 years, but for 5,758 years, by the Jewish reckoning. Therefore, the debt is very large.”

While nothing came of Mr. Hilmy's lawsuit, his example seems not to have gone unnoticed.

When the UN's Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) came out with a report last month accusing Israel of an apartheid policy against the Palestinian Arabs, it was condemned by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, the report was withdrawn and ESCWA head Rima Khalaf resigned in protest.

But that wasn't the end of the matter.

ESCWA has a more ambitious project against Israel, outlined in a paper dated from August. The aim of the report is to put a dollar amount on the 50 years of Israeli control over the areas the Palestinian Arabs claim for their own state. In fact, the report may be timed to come out during the 50th commemoration of the Six Day War. The fact that no methodology exists for such calculations will not stop the group, which has announced that it has formulated "an innovative methodology." Based on South African apartheid, slavery in the US and Greece's request that Germany pay for Nazi massacres during WWII, ESCWA plans to come up with a framework for future reparations.

Here is a sample model illustrating some of the elements of Israeli control which would serve as a source for calculating reparations.

ESCWA Sample Model for Determing Reparations from Israel

Items on the chart such as access to water, access to education and living standard indicate from the start the bias that we can expect from the report. After all, as Ephraim Karsh points out, along with the problems, Israeli control brought advantages to the Arabs:

The larger part, still untold in all its detail, is of the astounding social and economic progress made by the Palestinian Arabs under Israeli "oppression." At the inception of the occupation, conditions in the territories were quite dire. Life expectancy was low; malnutrition, infectious diseases, and child mortality were rife; and the level of education was very poor. Prior to the 1967 war, fewer than 60 percent of all male adults had been employed, with unemployment among refugees running as high as 83 percent. Within a brief period after the war, Israeli occupation had led to dramatic improvements in general well-being, placing the population of the territories ahead of most of their Arab neighbors.

The point is not to use the positives as an excuse to ignore the problems. Rather, the point is that converting positives into negatives seems to be part of ESCWA's "innovative methodology."

The suspicion of bias is only confirmed by the presence of the separation barrier ("the wall") -- which reduced fatalities caused by Palestinian terrorism -- listed on the chart as something for which Israel should pay reparations. Similarly, the blockade to prevent weapons from reaching Gaza is portrayed as a negative. It's probably too much to hope for that Israel's provision of supplies to Gaza will be referenced at all.

The whole idea of comparing Israel to South Africa and the US in terms of apartheid and slavery also makes another issue conspicuous by its absence.

The history of the Arab slave trade makes one question why ESCWA points to slavery only in the US, unless it is in response to the US condemnation of ESCWA's previous report.

The point though is not to play US slavery against Arab slavery.

In the chapter The Roots of Muslim Rage, in his book From Babel to Dragomans, Bernard Lewis writes:

The accusations are familiar. We of the West are accused of sexism, racism, and imperialism, institutionalized in patriarchy and slavery, tyranny and exploitation. To these charges, and to others as heinous, we have no option but to plead guilty -- not as Americans, nor yet as Westerners, but simply as human beings, as members of the human race. In none of these sins are we the only sinners, and in some of them we are very far from being the worst.

...Slavery is today universally denounced as an offense against humanity, but within living memory it has been practiced and even defended as a necessary institution, established and regulated by divine law. The peculiarity of the peculiar institution, as Americans once called it, lay not in its existence but in its abolition. Westerners were the first to break the consensus of acceptance and to outlaw,first at home, then in the other territories they controlled, finally wherever in the world they were able to exercise power or influence, in a word, by means of imperialism.

The US is being targeted for slavery, just as the West is accused by the Arab world of imperialism, while the long history of Muslim invasions, conquests, and occupation is forgotten.

Ignoring the US role in the abolition of the slavery in the same way as disregarding the numerous benefits Palestinian Arabs get from Israel, reveals the one-sidedness of this "report" as well as its dishonesty. Will the report take into account the reparations owed by Hamas for the rockets fired and the wars it started? Will it take into account the incitement by Abbas againsts Israel?

The report just taking for granted that the West Bank is occupied, when there has never been any such official legal determination, is an indication that Nikki Haley is going to have her work cut out for her. The fact that this report will be even more bizarre than the previous one will not necessarily make it easier to dismiss.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Everyone's getting it wrong: New Hamas manifesto is NOT a replacement of the Hamas charter

Ma'an writes:

While a draft version of Hamas’ new charter has raised questions over whether the movement would explicitly accept a Palestinian state along pre-1967 borders, the document will make clear that "our rivalry is with the occupation who occupied our land," Hamas official Ahmad Yousif told Ma’an on Sunday.
The text of the new agenda -- which is to revise the Hamas charter for the first time since it was declared in 1988 -- was leaked by Lebanese news site Al-Mayadeen Sunday evening.

Avi Issacharoff in Times of Israel writes:

The Jewish people can finally breathe a sigh of relief. The new Hamas charter, set to be published in the coming days, will reportedly not include racist rhetoric against Jews akin to that in the original version, which made reference to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Rather, only statements negating Zionism and the State of Israel have made it into the updated charter, according to a draft leaked to the Lebanon-based news outlet al-Mayadeen this week.

I reported over a month ago (and again later) that Hamas never characterized this as a charter, and in fact Hamas leader Salah al Bardawil said explicitly "This new document of the Hamas organization will never be considered to constitute an alternative to the organization's founding charter."

If you read the Al Medayeen article that leaks the new manifesto, it also does not use the word "charter". It calls it a "political document."

And there is essentially nothing in the new document that contradicts the Hamas charter, if you read it with a critical eye instead of through the lens of wishful thinking that journalists too often have. The emphasis is different, the style is different, but the principles are the same: the entire land of "Palestine" is a Muslim land and Jews have no rights to be there except as second-class citizens.

This quote from the original charter, for example, is perfectly consistent with this new manifesto:

The manifesto says "[Hamas] will continue the resistance and jihad to liberate Palestine as a legitimate right and a duty and an honor for all our people and our nation."

All the rest is spin.

There is no difference. Just because Hamas now says that they aren't targeting Jews who support Hamas' aims does not mean that they have deviated from the charter. .

Even the 1988 charter emphasized that Hamas was against "Zionism" and the Jewish part was peripheral. Here is part of what it said:

World Zionism, together with imperialistic powers, try through a studied plan and an intelligent strategy to remove one Arab state after another from the circle of struggle against Zionism, in order to have it finally face the Palestinian people only. Egypt was, to a great extent, removed from the circle of the struggle, through the treacherous Camp David Agreement. They are trying to draw other Arab countries into similar agreements and to bring them outside the circle of struggle.
The Islamic Resistance Movement calls on Arab and Islamic nations to take up the line of serious and persevering action to prevent the success of this horrendous plan, to warn the people of the danger eminating from leaving the circle of struggle against Zionism. Today it is Palestine, tomorrow it will be one country or another. The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.
Leaving the circle of struggle with Zionism is high treason, and cursed be he who does that. "for whoso shall turn his back unto them on that day, unless he turneth aside to fight, or retreateth to another party of the faithful, shall draw on himself the indignation of Allah, and his abode shall be hell; an ill journey shall it be thither." (The Spoils - verse 16). There is no way out except by concentrating all powers and energies to face this Nazi, vicious Tatar invasion. The alternative is loss of one's country, the dispersion of citizens, the spread of vice on earth and the destruction of religious values. Let every person know that he is responsible before Allah, for "the doer of the slightest good deed is rewarded in like, and the does of the slightest evil deed is also rewarded in like."
The Islamic Resistance Movement consider itself to be the spearhead of the circle of struggle with world Zionism and a step on the road. The Movement adds its efforts to the efforts of all those who are active in the Palestinian arena. Arab and Islamic Peoples should augment by further steps on their part; Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews.

Hamas can easily claim that the reference to "warmongering Jews" only refer to Zionists, that he Protocols are for the Zionists. And they will never disavow the hadith against Jews.

In other words, you cannot find a single part of the 1988 Hamas charter that Hamas will now disavow.

The "new" claim of Hamas accepting a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza does not mean that they accept Israel in any way, shape or form. It means that, like Arafat, they want to destroy Israel in stages. And Hamas has been officially saying this for years anyway.

Unlike Fatah, Hamas tries to be very careful not to explicitly lie. They have been very consistent in their positions since 1988. It is a shame that the "experts" are so credulous to believe that when Hamas changes its style it has also changed its substance.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

From Channel News Asia:

An imam who made controversial remarks against Christians and Jews during his Friday sermon at a mosque was on Monday (Apr 3) handed a fine of S$4,000, after pleading guilty to a charge of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race.

Nalla Mohamed Abdul Jameel arrived at the State Courts accompanied by religious leaders from other faiths, who came to “support him and give him assurance”, his lawyer Noor Marican said.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said in a separate press release on Monday that Nalla has paid the fine and will be repatriated.

"Any religious leader from any religion who makes such statements will be held accountable for their actions," MHA said. "Under Singapore law, we cannot, regardless of his religion, allow anyone to preach or act divisively and justify that by reference to a religious text."

The imam, who is from India, had on Friday apologised in front of Christian, Sikh, Taoist, Buddhist and Hindu representatives, as well as members of the Federation of Indian Muslims, saying that he was "filled with great remorse" for the inconvenience, tension and trauma caused by his remarks.

n January and February 2017, the imam made supplications at Friday prayers where he recited an old Arabic text which originated from his village in India. The text read: “God help us against Jews and Christians”, which is not an extract from the Quran.

The incident came under police investigation after a video of the incident was posted on Facebook, sparking heated debate.

The imam, trying to stay in Singapore, apologized to Jews, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists a few days ago. (Or at least his lawyer did.)

TheHindu.com adds a troubling postscript:

Two others were given stern warnings in the case: a person who published the video of the speech online and a tenured National University of Singapore Associate Professor who posted on Facebook about it.

The whistleblower, who is a Muslim convert, was in fact the subject of a hate campaign. An associate professor at National University of Singapore, Khairudin Aljunied, posted a parable about the whistleblower Terence Nunis because he felt that a Muslim shouldn't publicize the hate that Muslim leaders say:

The Imam and the Silly Convert

Once, there was a convert who was unhappy with what he heard from an Imam. So he went up to the Imam angrily and said:

Convert: Can you stop saying things that will hurt people?

Imam: I am sorry brother, but what did I say that might hurt anyone?

Convert: You said those things and you know it. It’s offensive! I’ve just shared a video of what you said.

Imam: I was speaking to Muslims in this small congregation but you, my brother, shared it to the world. Now everyone is offended. So was I wrong or you?

Convert: [already feeling stupid] But you said things that are offensive to others! I must expose you.

Imam: [gently putting his hand on the convert] Brother, I think you should stop being a Muslim for now.

Convert: What!!!

Imam: I read verses from the Quran and these verses have been read on the pulpit every Friday and during Eids since the time of the Prophet Muhammad till this day for over a thousand years. Muslims and non-Muslims lived peacefully even when these verses were read. Things change when you came.

#sillyconvertmakestheloudestnoise #shareatwill

NUS suspended the professor for his post.

(h/t Gideon)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

04/03 Links Pt2: Panelists Prove Jewish Voice for Peace is Neither; Kemp: The chutzpah of Sayeeda Warsi

From Ian:

Eugene Kontorovich: Federal judge advances lawsuit challenging academic group’s Israel boycott

I noted the case in these columns when it was filed a year ago, and helped advise the plaintiffs’ legal team. Back then, Palestine Legal — an activist group that provided legal advice to the ASA during its adoption of the boycott — claimed the lawsuit was designed to “chill speech supporting Palestinian rights,” and predicted the lawsuit would be would “thrown out by the court.”
Instead, a Memorandum Opinion by Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the defendants’ demands for dismissal of most of the plaintiffs’ causes of action (waste, breach of contract and violation of the D.C. Nonprofit Corporation Act).
The court rejected what was perhaps the defendants’ most vocal contention, which invoked the First Amendment. They claimed the group had a broad “right to engage in a boycott,” and that enforcing the group’s own associations rules, or general provisions of corporate law, would infringe on their free speech. The judge noted the obvious — the dispute does not involve any state action, but rather members of an organization seeking to enforce the group’s own private rules and arrangements. Judicial enforcement of contractual arrangements does not constitute state action, and the defendants were surely unwise to rely on famous outlier cases such as Shelley v. Kraemer. Moreover, the fact that complying with the requirements of the D.C. nonprofit code might make it harder for the association to pass boycotts does not make it a First Amendment issue.
The ASA case will now proceed to discovery, which may shed more light on the full circumstances and considerations that lead a group of academics to adopt a unique boycott of a foreign country’s academic institutions.

Col. Kemp: The chutzpah of Sayeeda Warsi

The chutzpah of Sayeeda Warsi. I mean that in the Yiddish sense of despicable insolence, but likening the Israel Defence Force to the Islamic State is much worse, it is dangerously irresponsible. Warsi excuses IS and Muslims who leave Britain to murder and rape for them yet condemns the IDF and British Jews who serve in their honourable ranks.
Coming from the most prominent Muslim parliamentarian, this will make Islamic jihadists sniff blood. It will encourage UK Muslims to join terror groups and embolden IS. Repeating the lie that Israel committed war crimes in Gaza validates Hamas’s human shield strategy and encourages further violence and killing. She has blood on her hands.
Her arguments are absurd. She obviously doesn’t care about the so-called loophole she demands is closed: allowing British citizens to join a foreign army. If she did, she would apply the same in reverse, condemning the thousands of Gurkhas and Commonwealth soldiers in the ranks of the British forces today.
She would also condemn the hundreds of thousands from her parents’ native Pakistan who served in the British Army, including in two world wars.
Among them were both her grandfathers.
So what is this all about? Warsi objects to the increasing action against hundreds of UK Muslims fighting with Islamic terror groups and wants an excuse to demonize Israel as she’s done before.

Brendan O'Neill: The short path from censorship to violence

The news that Ayaan Hirsi Ali has cancelled her speaking tour of Australia due to ‘security concerns’ should concern anyone who believes in freedom. It is a dark day when a woman who fled to the West to escape the Islamist suffocations of Somalia, and precisely so that she might think and speak freely, feels she cannot say certain things in certain places. That even a Western, liberal, democratic nation like Australia cannot guarantee Hirsi Ali the freedom to speak her mind without suffering censorship or harm is deeply worrying. It points to the mainstreaming of intolerance, to the adoption by certain people in the West of the illiberalism that makes up the very Islamist outlook that Hirsi Ali and others have sought to escape.
Hirsi Ali’s Oz tour, ‘Hero of Heresy’, had been due to kick off this Thursday. She would have visited Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne, hosted by Think Inc., an organisation devoted to ‘the promotion of intellectual discourse’. But today, citing, among other things, ‘security concerns’, Think Inc. announced the tour was off.
This isn’t the first time Hirsi Ali has effectively been hounded out of even tolerant nations, made to feel unwelcome in the West because of her strong, critical take on Islam and its treatment of women. She had to leave her adopted home of Holland after receiving death threats for her involvement in the 2004 Islam-critical film Submission (the film’s director, Theo van Gogh, was stabbed to death by an Islamist). She still has heavy security whenever she speaks in public. Certain campuses in the US have made it clear she isn’t welcome, because she’s ‘Islamophobic’. That is, she criticises Islam, which today is treated as a species of mental illness. How perverse that even a woman who has suffered under extreme forms of Islam can be treated as dangerous for daring to ridicule that religion.

Hamas continues to recruit children to be terrorists

From a graduation ceremony of the "Futawwa" paramilitary youth group in Gaza:

Hey, its only a violation of international law. No biggie.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Just a reminder of what a Hamas news conference looks like

For those who like to consider Hamas to be a sort of moderate, progressive group, here's a reminder of what a Hamas news conference looks like:

You will see more articles in coming weeks about how Hamas has turned moderate with their upcoming new manifesto that is not quite as explicitly antisemitic as their (still extant) Charter. It all goes to show that anti-Israel Western "academics" are dumber than the average Arab in the street, who knows very well that Hamas is a terror group.

And it is partly because they see pictures like this in their media, while Westerners don't.

People who choose to cover their faces when speaking in public are pretty much guaranteed to not be the most upstanding citizens.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

04/03 Links Pt1: Six Reasons to Reject HRW’s Latest Gaza Attack on Israel; Palestinians: The Diploma for Terror

From Ian:

NGO Monitor: Six Reasons to Reject HRW’s Latest Gaza Attack on Israel

On April 3, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a 47-page report and a press release, complaining that Israel blocks its employees and those of other NGOs from entering Gaza ostensibly “to document violations of human rights and international humanitarian law (IHL) and to advocate for their remediation.” In this context, HRW references the International Criminal Court (ICC) preliminary inquiry into the 2014 Gaza War, and alleges that Israel’s restrictions “rais[e] questions not just about the capability of the Israeli authorities to investigate potential violations of the laws of war but also their willingness to do so.”
1. HRW’s main contention is both absurd and illogical. Israel’s ability to conduct its own investigations is not contingent on the activities of NGOs that lack both military and forensic expertise. If anything, NGO interference with these processes contaminate evidence and disqualify witnesses, making real investigations much more difficult.
Indeed, NGO Monitor has documented repeatedly how inquiries by NGOs into armed conflict, and in particular those conducted by HRW, are characterized by methodological problems, factual errors, and legal distortions.
HRW’s lack of capacity to investigate armed conflict is particularly acute in areas tightly controlled by terror groups as Gaza is by Hamas. Therefore, the only violations and evidence that HRW can “investigate” in Gaza are those that Hamas allows. In other words, HRW will be unable to do any credible research on co-locating of Hamas weaponry in civilian areas, plans for targeting Israeli civilians, Palestinian casualties from misfired rockets or secondary explosions, failure of Hamas to wear distinctive emblems, Hamas military operations and strategy, tunnel construction, and theft of humanitarian aid. Without this information, HRW allegations accusing Israel of “war crimes” amount to gross distortion if not outright fraud.
2. Nearly three years after the fact, the ability of NGOs to “bring relevant information to light” about the 2014 Gaza war is negligible at best. In its baseless claim that Israeli officials are “unwilling or unable” to investigate violations of the laws of war, HRW ignores the hundreds of investigations that have been completed or are in process by the Military Advocate General, does not provide any comparative criteria as to what constitutes sufficient investigations, and blatantly disregards the findings of three independent military investigations by actual experts (here, here, and here) dismissing HRW’s claims.
3. The real purpose is clear: this publication is the latest HRW attempt to denigrate Israel’s investigatory process and judicial system in order to bolster the NGO’s long-standing lawfare campaign, aimed at pushing the ICC to indict Israeli officials. The latest effort shows the absurd lengths to which HRW will go in pursuit of this ideological goal.

Human Rights Watch gives Israel ultimatum over Gaza war crime probe

Human Rights Watch demanded on Monday that Israel allow its investigators into Gaza if it wants the International Criminal Court "to take seriously" Israel's own war crimes investigations.
The ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda started a preliminary examination of 2014 Gaza war crimes allegations in January 2015.
HRW accuses Israel in a 47-page report of preventing its researchers for accessing Gaza. It has also accused Egypt of preventing HRW visits to the coastal territory since 2008.
Israel has not yet issued a response to the report but has said it investigates allegations made against its own soldiers and has long accused HRW of unfair bias against Israel.
Recently, Israel has taken a more aggressive stance toward some human rights NGOs, barring some activists from entering Israel, and accusing them of involvement in the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) campaign and general efforts to delegitimize Israel.

You’ve all seen him: on Wikipedia, on blogs, and at the top of almost every mainstream news story that needs an image about the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions “movement” (i.e., BDS).

In our lazy journalistic age when an illustration to your story is just a right click away, I’ve always wondered why this guy seems to have become Mr. Clip Art when it comes to BDS.

The one clue to his identity (or at least affiliation) is the name “FAMSY” which appears on the sign behind Mr. BDS’s Israeli flag one (the sign that beings “Gaza Children” and seems to end with “What have you done?” – presumably something terrible that must be laid at the feet of Israel alone).

FAMSY stands for the Federation of Australian Muslim Students and Youth (their web site seems to be under construction, although their Facebook page is available). As far as I can tell, this is a national youth group in Australia for Muslim youngsters whose agenda seems to cover more than holding signs about Israel bombing babies.

It’s not clear whether the fellow up front, who looks a bit old to be either a student or a youth, is a member of FAMSY, or just happens to be standing next to one at one of the many anti-Israel rallies that break out around the world (including in Australia) the moment Israel decides to shoot back.

Anyway, if there are some Aussie readers out there who can help me solve this mystery, I would deeply appreciate it. If not, the image above seems ripe for meme-ifying if anyone out there has some Photoshop (or even Microsoft paint) skills and a sense of humor.

(EoZ: The rally was in Melbourne, June 5 2010. You can see a seemingly different guy holding the same sign at 7:06 of this video, so it might have been passed around.)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Here are excerpts from the brilliant David Collier's daily reporting from the anti-Israel and (as he shows) antisemitic Cork conference this weekend.

(Day 1)

Today I am in Cork, Southern Ireland. This is a story that began two years ago, with a failed attempt by a twisted academic at Southampton, to place a fake academic veneer on part of the delegitimise Israel campaign. Those that suggest this is not true are simply not listening to the organisers, the speakers or even the delegates. Activism as a central theme was ever present. There is little denying that this conference is about attempting to place additional tools in the arsenal of the anti-Israel activist. Indeed, it is clearly the primary purpose.

Two failed attempts to hold a conference in Southampton, sandwiched between legal attempts to force the hand of the university, has led us all to Southern Ireland and to Cork, where finally, Oren Ben-Dor got to hold his circus of hate. This, even though the University at Cork, distanced themselves from the event.

It soon became apparent that the conference had attracted the true haters from across the globe. The first face I saw was Tom Suarez, who had delivered a vile talk at SOAS just a few months ago. Suarez has recently written a book about ‘Zionist terror’, that completely removed Zionist actions from context, used tenuous links to build vague conspiracy and that almost entirely airbrushed Arab violence out of existence.

[Richard] Falk during his speech, referenced the Tom Suarez book. This an indication of the incestuous nature of this ideological exercise. Suarez creates a conspiracy tale, Falk uses this as a basis for his own masturbatory acrobatics and this in turn will be used by others to Barkan and Suarezfurther their own agenda with an ever increasing tale of nonsense. From Pappe’s highly dubious historical rendition, to the latest works of those like Falk and Suarez, a small group of academics are using each other as ‘legitimacy props’ , to build an ideological argument out of little more than internal strands of twisted hatred.

One of the loudest rounds of applause is reserved for the ‘true Torah Jew’. The one who denounces the vast majority of Jews as ‘false’. The crowd love this. The hypocrisy passes everyone by. This is not a humanitarian, but rather a fundamentalist who has an entirely different vision of what should come to pass. At a coffee break, this true Torah Jew spoke to me about anti-Zionist Jews in Europe during the 1920’s. I pointed out the vast majority of those people burnt in Auschwitz. Given that, I argued, they support my argument far more than they do his.

There were moments of humour too. After the true Torah Jew had delighted the crowd by refuting the Jewish nature of Zionists, a woman ran up to give him a hug of appreciation. Two impossible world’s colliding for a brief moment of total awkwardness.

(Day 2)

Just as was the case yesterday, a vicious antisemitic question went unanswered. This one was truly vile. Be prepared to read this twice:

It suggested Zionist parents *deliberately* starve their children of affection in order to create the internal callousness necessary to do what Israelis apparently do to Palestinians.

As it went unanswered by the panel, there were protests from two members of the audience, who demanded to know why such a question was not rejected outright. Just as with a similar question the day before, this question removed the humanity from Israelis, and by failing to respond, the panel were indirectly legitimising the question.

As the two expressed absolute outrage at the suggestion Zionist mothers deprive their children of love to ‘breed killers’, members of the audience, including I believe, Claire Short, expressed dismay that these people were vocally disrupting the event. ‘Behave yourselves’ was the cry. Not for the first time recently, I sat as a witness as Jews were expected to sit quietly and simply swallow unacceptable antisemitism and were then berated for speaking up against it. Simply horrendous. A whole room full of people, and only two people spoke up, and when they did, there was an attempt to belittle and silence them.

Another speaker used the term ‘untermenschen’ to describe Israeli attitudes towards Palestinians. A deliberate and vile reference of course to Nazi Germany and their attitude towards Jews. During the Q&A session an anti-Israel activist spoke up suggesting such comparisons do their cause no favours. A moderating comment truly appreciated by the handful of Zionists in the room. He received light applause from maybe 10 of the attendees. This however was not going to go unanswered, and Ghada Karmi once more took to the floor. Not only was such terminology acceptable she said, it was ‘understandable’. She went on to say it was important to describe it as such, and argued it played to an ‘agenda’ if such terminology was restricted. Karmi went on to suggest there is “no other way to describe” Israeli attitudes to Palestinians.

It probably can be said without causing surprise that Karmi’s more extreme and particularly vile comments received loud applause. This is the way such events pull people towards extremist positions. Not everyone in the room is full of hate, but it spreads like a poison, infecting previously unaffected individuals. Rather than moderation receiving the loudest applause, extremism does. And as this conversion takes place, the more moderate voices become ever more scarce in the room.

(Day 3)

It is the final comments of Independent Researcher, Joel Kovel that will no doubt take the headlines, but in truth, his entire speech could be classified as a horrific antisemitic attack. Kovel began his talk with a prophecy of doom. We are he declared, ‘at the end of days’.

He then began, as many ‘ecologists’ do, to describe how capitalism and human existence are destined for the ultimate clash, unless of course, we learn to return to ‘nature’. Which country does he see as underpinning the ‘existential’ ecological front line? Israel of course. The audience seemed to appreciate the suggestion that the world is ecologically doomed unless you can remove Israel from the Middle East. UCC cork is now pushing the idea that the outcome of the global environmental crisis centers on the destruction of Israel.

Then he actually conjured up the ‘dancing Israelis’ antisemitic conspiracy story from 9/11. Remember, this is happening in an Irish university campus (UCC).

He was supported in his ideas, by an audience member who shouted ‘Mossad agents’, before Kovel confirmed it himself. But this is what you get when you allow these misfits to gather under one roof. Yesterday we had accusations that Jewish mothers deliberately deprive their children of love in order to breed callous killers, today 9/11 conspiracy theories. Inside the UCC, from the front desk of a UCC lecture hall. Cork has placed itself firmly into bed with rabid antisemites.

*Important note*. Although someone in the audience did vocally oppose this horrific antisemitic conspiracy theory, there was no comment or official rejection by any of the organisers. Only antisemitism gets this type of public shrug, this air of acceptability. It isn’t as if the venues were not warned this would happen.

The absurd and surreal continued to arrive at breathtaking pace.

Far too many incidents to mention them all. Like George Bisharat suggesting Israel ‘owes’ compensation to the Arab states for taking the Jewish Arabs away from them. There are no limits to absurdity at a conference such as this. And of course, every time Oren Ben-Dor opened his mouth, the same words seem to reach the microphone. A story of ‘being’ and ‘denial’ and ‘Jewishness’ and ‘pathology’. He asked several questions during the three days, which boiled down to a single repetitive refrain:

“dear (insert name of speaker here), are your thoughts about Jewish ‘pathology’ as twisted as mine”?

It is difficult to express how accurate the above is, to someone who has not just sat through three days of this conference.

One final incident worthy of comment came at the very end of the final panel. Philip Franses, who suggested he had a ‘Jewish upbringing’, was painting a utopian picture of everyone living together and sharing the land. Franses was indeed an odd one. At one point in his talk, he seemed to suggest the Arabs had welcomed the Jewish refugees as they entered British Palestine (go take a history lesson Philip). Anyway, during an exchange, he asked Dr Atef Alshaer, another panelist, whether he thought it would be possible to create a shared poetry, both in Hebrew and Arabic together. (I know, I know, just accept it).

Alshaer had politely navigated the question. This accommodating position was far too nice to the Jews for UCC’s very own James Bowen, who felt he had to interject. Bowen suggested that Alshaer had been ‘too nice’, and went on to repeat Ghadi Karmi’s absurd stance that Palestinians were the real descendants of the Jews. But then he went even further.

He actually laid a claim for the Palestinian people to ‘Hebrew’, as being their language. I imagine in his head, Judaism is a Palestinian invention too. The Jews were visibly stripped of their entire identity. Zionists are fake invaders with absolutely no ties to the region at all. That Bowen’s internal issues are driving his agenda are clear. How this conference ended up at Cork should also be clear to all.

Any real academic should be horrified that the speakers are considered academics and largely have jobs spewing their lies and bile to students.

Read the whole thing. Especially if you think that those who talk about antisemitism in academia are crying wolf.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

From Columbia/Barnard Hillel's Facebook yesterday:

This evening at 8:00PM, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD) will present a referendum to Columbia College Student Council (CCSC) urging Columbia to join the movement to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel (BDS). There will then be a vote about whether to put this referendum on the ballot for CCSC's general elections in a few weeks.

Here is a series of tweets from last night by Daniella Greenbaum about the proposed BDS resolution being presented to the student council:

Columbia student council votes tonight on whether or not to put a #BDS resolution on the ballot.
— daniella greenbaum (@DGreenbaum) April 2, 2017

Aryeh president @DoreFeith explaining to Columbia student council why israel is NOT an apartheid state. #pride #roar #investinpeace
— daniella greenbaum (@DGreenbaum) April 3, 2017

Students at Columbia have been debating whether to put #bds on ballot for last 3 hours. No decision as of yet
— daniella greenbaum (@DGreenbaum) April 3, 2017

Very proud of @DoreFeith and the rest of the pro israel students at Columbia. Student council vote is in-- #bds will not go to a vote
— daniella greenbaum (@DGreenbaum) April 3, 2017

I have heard that Scripps College also blocked a BDS motion last night, but cannot confirm.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.