Monday, September 18, 2017
- Monday, September 18, 2017
- Elder of Ziyon
- Petra MB
Omar Suleiman is a young Palestinian-American imam who
counts Linda Sarsour among his many ardent admirers. According to one flattering
profile, Suleiman is “a new kind of American imam” with “a wildly popular
social-media presence:” his Facebook
page has more than 1.2 million “Likes” and followers, and his YouTube
sermons have garnered tens of millions of views. Another article
explains that due to “his charismatic sermons and message of inclusiveness,”
Suleiman “has gained a national following” and has become a leader “of Dallas’
social justice movement.” As far as Linda Sarsour is concerned, Omar Suleiman makes her “more proud to be a Muslim and a
Palestinian.”
All this praise prompted me to try to learn a bit more about
Suleiman. Of course, I was particularly interested in finding out what Suleiman
thinks about Israel and Jews. As I documented in two recent
articles
published by The Algemeiner, the results of my research were rather
depressing: Suleiman quite obviously thinks the world’s only Jewish state
should be replaced by yet another Arab-Muslim majority state, and despite his
efforts to present himself as a deeply spiritual and tolerant preacher, he can’t
quite hide his intense theological anti-Judaism.
As I argued in The Algemeiner, one example that
reveals Suleiman’s hostile views regarding Jews and Judaism is a
lecture he gave in January 2016 on “Masjid Al-Aqsa: The occupied
sanctuary.” The advertisement noted
that Suleiman’s “passion for this topic comes naturally” because he is “the son
of Palestinian parents.” In a short promotional clip for the lecture, Suleiman
denounced the “brutal occupation” of Al-Aqsa and claimed that “religious
rights” of Muslims were being “taken away,” noting dismissively that the site
was “being called ‘Temple Mount’ all of a sudden.”
This is truly breathtaking hypocrisy for a preacher who is
supposedly “a new kind of American imam:” while claiming that the “religious
rights” of Muslims were being “taken away,” Suleiman brazenly denies the Jewish
connection to Judaism’s holiest site.
Yet, since Suleiman himself is telling a revealing story
about the victorious Caliph Umar in his lecture, there can be no doubt that he knows
full well that Jerusalem’s Muslim conquerors built Islamic shrines over the
ruined Jewish Temple.
The story takes place after the Christian Patriarch
Sophronius surrendered Jerusalem in April 637. Umar supposedly went
to clean up what Suleiman calls “masjid Al-Aqsa,”i.e. the Temple Mount, which
had become a dumping ground. Suleiman reminds his audience (1:05) that “[in]
the middle of masjid Al-Aqsa, there is this rock, this rocky area, … and it’s
right in the center, and that’s believed where Suleiman [i.e. Solomon] …
established the Temple.”
When the area was cleaned up, Umar and his companions
supposedly asked a former Jewish rabbi who had converted to Islam where to pray
and where the mosque should be built — a question that obviously
shows that there was no trace of any mosque, which should indicate to any
thinking person that the tall tale about Muhammad’s supposed night journey to
“the farthest mosque” – a story Suleiman also tells in his lecture – cannot
refer to Jerusalem and the then obviously non-existent Al-Aqsa mosque. The
convert responded to Umar’s question about where to pray: “We should pray
behind the rock.” As Suleiman explained to his audience:
“Umar sensed from that that he
[i.e. the convert] felt a reverence towards this rock. So Umar [Arabic
blessing] said that must be your Jewish influence speaking. He says we’re gonna
pray in front of the rock, haha, we’re not gonna honor this rock, we’re gonna
pray in front of it, there’s nothing special about this rock.”
So much for Islam’s supposed respect for other religions.
Yet, completely oblivious to his own hypocrisy, Suleiman claims shortly after
telling the story of the triumphant Umar: “It’s proven that other religions
only flourished in Jerusalem under Muslim rule. It never happens any other way.”
According to Suleiman, it is therefore terribly unfair that Muslims have the “reputation”
that they “want to turn Jerusalem into some sort of blood bath.” Suleiman
rejects such suspicions: “No, we recognize the sanctity of that place, we love
that masjid, we love that land, we know what that land is. No one wants to do
anything with that land except restore it to the way that it was.”
But as far as Suleiman is concerned, “the way that it was”
means that there never was a Temple Mount – indeed, his long lecture about
Al-Aqsa is a determined effort to Islamicize Jerusalem’s entire history.
Right at the beginning of his lecture, Suleiman announces that
he wants to talk about “the history” of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. It
is noteworthy that he says “history” and not “myth” or “legend,” or even
“religious tradition” — because what follows is simply mind-boggling.
Unfortunately, the narrative he presents clearly reflects some mainstream
Muslim beliefs that are obviously a major factor in the widespread Muslim
hatred for Israel.
Suleiman notes early on in his lecture that people “might
think that Al-Aqsa was built maybe by a prophet of Bani Israel, maybe it’s
something that arose from the time of Solomon […] or Jacob.” Then he turns to
Muslim tradition to answer the question “What mosque was constructed on the
face of the earth first?” According to Suleiman, the answer is that the first
mosque was built in Mecca, and that 40 years later, the Al-Aqsa Mosque was
built.
Suleiman then goes on to explain that Muslim scholars
believe that Adam built the Kaaba in Mecca, and that he or maybe his son Seth then
built the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem – which obviously means that Muslims are
supposed to believe that many centuries, if not millennia before the rise of
Islam, there were people building mosques. Later on, Suleiman repeats the claim
that Abraham and his son Isaac “raised the pillars” of the Kaaba in Mecca, and
that they “did the same” at Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa, which had both been
“constructed” and “made a sanctuary” by Adam. Suleiman then emphasizes again
that Abraham and his son built “two of the holiest masjids [mosques] in the
world.”
The bizarre assertion that the mosque in Mecca and the
Al-Aqsa Mosque go back to the time of Adam and were then built up by Abraham
and his son long before Muhammad introduced Islam is obviously intended to claim
these sites and their builders as part of Muslim heritage. Islamic supersessionism,
i.e the notion that Islam replaces and invalidates previous religions, notably
Judaism and Christianity, is apparently supposed to operate even retroactively.
In the case of Jerusalem, the claim that the Al-Aqsa Mosque was founded by the
biblical Adam and built up by Abraham serves to delegitimize all Jewish claims
to the Temple Mount — which is exactly what Suleiman is trying to do.
Thus, Suleiman tells his audience (from 18:00 of the speech)
that “Solomon is the most important king in the history of Jerusalem. Why? You
always hear of the Temple of Solomon.” While that sounds like an
acknowledgement of Jewish history, Suleiman immediately adds that Solomon “built
about 40 masjids [mosques],” including “Masjid Al-Aqsa.” He then proceeds to
spell out this vile effort to Islamicize Jewish history in some more detail:
“And as he [Solomon] builds Masjid
Al-Aqsa — and I want you guys to realize, so I’m just going to clear that
from now, Masjid Al-Aqsa is that entire rectangle, that entire sanctuary, it is
humongous, that is actually all Masjid Al-Aqsa; the Dome of the Rock is at the
center of it, so that entire compound is Masjid Al-Aqsa. So Solomon builds that
all out, the original Temple of Solomon, what’s known as the Temple of Solomon,
right, the first time that Masjid Al-Aqsa would be built in that caliber, right,
he built it throughout. The Old Testament has a lot of detail about how lavish
and how elaborate the masjid was when Suleiman [sic] built it, but we don’t
know if it’s actually true or not.”
So according to Suleiman, we may not know “how lavish and
how elaborate” Solomon’s buildings really were, but we do know that he didn’t
really build a Jewish Temple because he built “Masjid Al-Aqsa.” This is a
particularly pernicious form of Temple denial: following the bizarre “logic” of
Suleiman’s narrative — which apparently reflects mainstream Muslim myths
— there couldn’t be a legitimate Jewish Temple at the site that Muslim
imagine to have been “Masjid Al-Aqsa” since the time of Adam.
When I listened to Suleiman’s lecture I couldn’t help
wondering if Muslims don’t feel it is rather undignified to project the sway of
their faith back in time in order to claim an ancient holy site of followers of
another religion as their own. Does Suleiman’s ardent admirer and friend Linda
Sarsour support his pathetic claims that “Masjid Al-Aqsa” was built at the time
of Adam, and that Solomon’s Temple was merely a perhaps particularly elaborate
addition to what was a mosque compound since time immemorial? Or is the
“progressive” Sarsour appalled by this vile example of cultural appropriation?
And how does a “progressive” like Sarsour feel about the denial of the historic
Jewish attachment to the site where Muslim conquerors built Islamic shrines in
order to prevent a rebuilding of the destroyed Jewish Temple and to demonstrate
the splendor of their imperial power? Surely this should be completely
unacceptable for anti-imperialist progressives who champion the rights of indigenous
people?
In any case, it seems that some Muslims haven’t yet
understood that imams like Omar Suleiman expect them to insist that all of the
Temple Mount is the Al-Aqsa mosque. At the end of July, Suleiman posted
a photo (that was at least a year old) of
the Dome of the Rock surrounded by thousands of Muslim worshippers with the
text: “Breathtaking shot of worshippers at #alaqsa in prostration/protest. Wow.”
When several people noted that the photo didn’t show the Al-Aqsa mosque,
Suleiman responded on his Facebook page: “For those saying it’s not Al Aqsa,
the entire compound is Al Aqsa. Yes, Masjid Al Qibaly [i.e. the Al-Aqsa mosque]
is not in this photo.”
I can’t say I’m particularly astonished that Omar Suleiman
makes Linda Sarsour “more proud to be a Muslim and a Palestinian.” But decent
people who think Suleiman should be praised as “a new kind of American imam” are
sorely mistaken: Suleiman has only contempt for the Jews (e.g. he
claims they are to blame for the fact that food rots), and he loves to
depict Christian crusaders as beasts while presenting the Muslim conquerors of
a vast empire as admirable and benevolent rulers of the people they ruthlessly
subjugated. Suleiman probably regrets that he once publicly showed support
[archived] for the Muslim Brotherhood,
but given what he preaches, it seems clear that he would find a lot of common
ground with Islamists.
From Ian:
PMW: Fatah Spokesman: Fatah will never recognize Israel
Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians Imprison Journalists for Exposing Corruption
PMW: Fatah Spokesman: Fatah will never recognize Israel
Fatah and Hamas announced yesterday that they are moving ahead towards Palestinian reconciliation and possible national elections. While the international community is waiting to see the final terms of a Palestinian unity agreement, the fundamental messages of non-recognition of Israel and support for the use of terror against Israel are principles that Fatah and Hamas already agree upon.
Speaking last month on Fatah-run Awdah TV, Fatah spokesman Osama Al-Qawasmi forcefully told Hamas that it should not recognize Israel, since Fatah itself does not recognize and will never recognize Israel.
Fatah-run Awdah TV host: "Has the Fatah Movement recognized Israel in its political platform until now?
Fatah Spokesman Osama Al-Qawasmi: "Certainly not. This is not required, and we will not recognize Israel... I declare this clearly and in a satellite channel broadcast: ‘My friends, Hamas, you should not recognize Israel, you are not required to. The PLO, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, sent a letter of mutual recognition of the State of Israel, on Sept. 12, 1993. You are not required to.'"[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Aug. 23, 2017]
It should be noted, that Mahmoud Abbas the chairman of the Palestinian Authority is also the chairman of Fatah and the PLO. The Palestinian leadership employs double messages depending on who it is speaking to. Palestinian Media Watch has documented that Fatah regularly reminds Palestinians that it does not recognize Israel's existence or right to exist. Fatah and the PA regularly teach Palestinian children to see all Israeli cities such as Jaffa and Haifa as "occupied" Palestinian cities that will eventually be under Palestinian sovereignty. When speaking to the international community, however, Abbas focuses not on Fatah's non-recognition of Israel but on the PLO's one letter of recognition of Israel, written in 1993.
Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians Imprison Journalists for Exposing Corruption
Hajer Harb, a courageous Palestinian journalist, has been found guilty by Hamas of exposing corruption in the health system in the Gaza Strip. On September 13, a Hamas court sentenced her to six months in prison and a fine. It was the first sentence of its kind to be passed on a female journalist in the Gaza Strip.Elliott Abrams: “Like-Minded” Dictatorships and the United Nations
Harb, however, is unlikely to serve her prison term in the near future; she recently left the Gaza Strip to Jordan, where she is receiving medical treatment after being diagnosed with cancer.
Her illness, however, did not stop Hamas from pursuing legal measures against her for her role in exposing corruption in the Palestinian health system. Instead of suspending the legal proceedings against her, the Hamas court chose to sentence her to prison in absentia.
If and when she recovers from her illness and returns to the Gaza Strip, Harb will be arrested and sent to prison for six months. She will also be required to pay the 1000 shekel ($250) fine that was imposed on her by the Hamas court.
Harb's ordeal began in June 2016, when she published an investigative report that disclosed how Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were using medical care to blackmail Palestinian patients. Her report exposed how some physicians and Hamas and PA officials were demanding bribes in return for issuing permits to patients to leave the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel, the West Bank and some Arab and Western countries. Those who cannot afford to pay the bribes are left to die in understaffed and under-equipped Palestinian hospitals, the report revealed.
The United Nations General Assembly is about to open, with the traditional lead-off speech by the president of Brazil followed by the president of the United States. The speeches and activities this year will, as usual, be a mix of the interesting and the dull, the consequential and the useless, the honest and the hypocritical.
Whatever the speeches say, why can’t the UN get more done to promote freedom? The Preamble to the UN Charter says the organization’s purpose is “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights” but the organization has at best a very mixed record on doing so.
The answer is clear: so many member states are themselves dictatorships that engage in horrible human rights violations—and they stick together. The latter point is key: the worst countries are far more united in protecting human rights abuses than the democracies are in protecting human rights.
One important mechanism for this protection of human rights abuses is the so-called “Like-Minded Group,” consisting usually of Algeria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bhutan, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Russia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. As a superb new Human Rights Watch report on China’s own abuses of the UN system, entitled The Costs of International Advocacy, states:
These countries have demonstrated political solidarity in the [Security] Council and have worked together to weaken the universality of human rights standards and resist the Council’s ability to adopt country-specific approaches. They have shielded repressive governments from scrutiny by filling speakers’ lists with promoters of these countries’ human rights records during Universal Periodic Reviews, and giving uncritical statements from friendly governments and Government-Organized NGOs (GONGOs).
- Monday, September 18, 2017
- Elder of Ziyon
- Divest This, Opinion
Fair Fight
I’ve talked a number of times about how unfair the fight is
between Israel and her defamers.
Those defamers, after all, have a militant goal: the elimination
of the Jewish state. With that goal as
their North Star, strategies to weaken that state or make its destruction
appear noble and just become clear, as do tactics to achieve those strategic
aims (such as BDS). In addition, the sociopathic
nature of Israel’s enemies gives them the power to manipulate others while
feeling no guilt over their own destructive, ruthless behavior.
In contrast, nearly all Israelis and friends of Israel do
not want to see enemies eliminated. In
fact, our greatest dream (i.e., our
goal) is not to see Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims destroyed, but rather to live at
peace with them (or at least be left in peace by them). With such
non-militant goals driving our enterprise, it’s no surprise that we cannot gin
up the kind of hatred needed to drive decades-long hostile
counter-campaigns. And our unwillingness
to use others as means to an end means we are not ready to manipulate neutrals
in order to use them as weapons in our political campaigns.
While I still hold to this analysis, some recent events also
got me thinking of another way to look at “the fight,” one in which the odds
can seem stacked in Israel’s favor.
The first event was the opening of the Jacobs
Technion-Cornell Institute in New York, a two-billion dollar facility that
anchors Cornell’s Tech education and research initiative. This mammoth joint effort won out in fierce
competition between some of the most prestigious science and engineering
schools in the country. And the success
of Cornell’s bid was largely in recognition of the value of that school’s
partnership with one of the world’s most successful schools of scientific
learning: Israel’s Technion Institute.
Given that decades of harassment by academic boycotters has
led to little more than marginal professors occasionally engaging in cowardly
furtive boycotts and sputtering on Twitter, the opening of Cornell-Technion –
remarkable in itself – sends an important message to the world: that linking
arms with Israel brings success and progress, while shunning the Jewish state
leads nowhere.
Speaking of going nowhere (as well as sputtering on Twitter)
the event I’d like to use as a contrast to the opening of Technion-Cornell took
place in Dublin last week where Israel haters from around that nation gathered
to say the same things they and others have said at Israel-hating events for
more than half a century. And their star
attraction was that failed academic whose Twitter id rivals that of America’s
president: Steven
Salaita.
Mr. Salaita’s been on a roller coaster ride since being
hired to join the faculty of the Native American Studies department at
University of Illinois (despite having no qualifications for the job), followed
by his u n-hiring by school leaders unwilling to give lifelong employment to
someone advocating violence on Twitter, followed by a lawsuit and boycott of
the university (which, among other things, destroyed the department he was
going to join), followed by his decamping to American University of Beirut in
Lebanon, followed by his being let go from that university as well.
And who is to blame for this string of disasters that have
left him academically homeless (although not bereft of speaking gigs, it
appears): the evil Jews (whoops! I mean
“Zionists”) whose power apparently extends to academic institutions in nations
at war with the Jewish state.
For all his attempts to make his story come off like an epic
struggle of right against might, the Salaita tale is ultimately about someone
who never grew out of adolescence now demanding rewards (like tenure) he doesn’t
deserve, someone ready to whine and blame/punish others for his failings.
While there might be a market for such self-pity within
marginal groups (like the lame boycotters of the American
Studies Association – another field Salaita announced himself an expert
in), I can’t imagine that the professors staffing the new Technion-Cornell
Institute got to their positions by behaving in such a manner. In fact, the string of achievements on both
campuses would indicate that they have much better things to do than bitch that
no one is offering them a paid perch to spout politics that can’t be taken away.
Every few years, our Temple is blessed by a visit from young
Israeli soldiers traveling through Boston, and I’ve always been stunned by the
seriousness and maturity of kids not much older than my recent high-school
graduate. And it is these serious young
men and women who then go on to university and from there become the next
generation of Technion professors, business leaders, or successes in a thousand
other fields (all the while continuing to contribute to the defense of their
homeland).
In a contest between such serious people and freaks and
weirdos like Steven Salaita, who has the upper hand?
- Monday, September 18, 2017
- Elder of Ziyon
This article in the Davis (CA) Vanguard describes quite well the arguments made about Imam Ammar Shahin's antisemitic statements last July - as well as his "apology" - at a City Council meeting last week.
Rabbi Yitzhak Haberstein (sic - Alderstein is his name) , representing the Simon Wiesenthal Center, spoke on Tuesday. He said that tomorrow night in Los Angeles they are co-hosting a dinner for the first ruler of an Arab Country who will sign a major declaration on religious tolerance and against religious extremism.More here.
“We’re no stranger to interfaith activity,” he said. “This city is no stranger to social justice issues. It has a well-deserved reputation for being at the forefront of good progressivism. That said, there is something that happened here a number of weeks ago that’s important enough for us to want to come up here and make a statement.”
He said that any other religious leader in America who would get up in front of their congregation and “label another group fifth and call for their annihilation – all hell would break loose. There would be no easy way out.” He said, “There has been an unfortunate kind of double standard that has come from this community. It shouldn’t be.
“When you consider the importance of the preachings of Jihadist movement in mosques across the world, the bloody trail that it’s left behind,” he said. “These are not influences that can be poo-pooed or simply wished away.”
The Rabbi called it “an apology that was no apology. It did not take back the basis for the statement. The call through religious tradition, to call, three times repeated, we ask Allah that we should be part of this in word and in deed.”
Professor Emeritus Alex Groth, a retired Political Science Professor at UC Davis and a Holocaust survivor, spoke as well. He is a 54-year resident of the city of Davis. He said he is one of the few former inmates of the Warsaw Ghetto.
“I have seen words of hate translated into mass murder in World War II Europe,” he said. He said he has spoken about this subject in numerous community forums and in academic publications. “In all of my time here in Davis, I never thought even once that a time would come, when a religious leader in our city would publicly call for the destruction of the Jews with the apparent tacit consent and approval of most if not all of his congregation.
“To the best of my knowledge, the purveyor of the killing message delivered in July is still at the helm of the Davis Mosque and this is happening 72 years after the conclusion of the Second World War and 72 years after the conclusion of the Holocaust,” he said.
Jonathan Zachariou, Pastor at Davis Christian Assembly for the last 26 years, said he is not looking to suppress free speech. And he noted that the freedom of religion is mentioned before even that of speech in the First Amendment.
“I am not looking to suppress anything with regards to the freedom of religio[n], but I am here to call on this city council to formally distance themselves or to categorically say that the message that was brought by this Imam has nothing to do with the Davis community at all,” he said.
Pastor Zachariou said, “I do not doubt the Imam’s credentials.” He noted that he teaches at the university in Medina. He also teaches at UC Davis. “He knows the Quran. He knows what he’s talking about. So when he expresses the things he expressed, he’s talking about what the Quran is talking about. He did not make a mistake in his message. His message is true.
“Some Muslims will disagree with his interpretation,” he said. “But he has credentials which he’s backing up his hate speech.”
Edward Rabin, a longtime resident of Davis, said, “I want to emphasize the enormity of what has happened in the last month or two.” He made the point, “No anti-Semite in the history of this country has ever said anything remotely like what this Imam said twice to his congregation and then posted on the internet.”
He said not David Duke, not the KKK, not Father Caughlin or “any other of the reprehensible bigots that we’ve had to put up with.” In fact, he made the point that even Hitler himself was not so brazen as to openly talk about such plans.
David Kadosh, Executive Director of the Zionist Organization of America in the Western Region, said it was founded by former Supreme Court Justice Luis Brandeis 120 years ago. Much of his work has been to identify anti-Semitism in schools and university.
He said that we have seen time and again how hatred has fueled atrocities and “this evil is happening here, across the street from the university.” He read from the sermon which called on the destruction of the Jews, one by one, and not sparing a single one. “Notice how Imam Shahin prays for the death of Jews. We Jews have heard this both. The same rhetoric calling for our extermination was used by the Nazis 70 years ago.”
“The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it,” Gail Rubin said, quoting Albert Einstein. She said she is a Jew and an 18-year resident of Davis. “A mile away from my house, someone wants me and my family dead.
“Just 16 years after 9/11 we continue to hear the call and see the acts of Jihad,” she said. “Words can kill,” she argued. “Just imagine if ‘kill every Jew’ were replaced by kill every Muslim or kill every black. Would we be so quiescent in talking only about hurt feelings?”
She said that, following the statement, “[t]he Imam said sorry for hurt feelings but he did not retract his radical ideology. Did any Mosque board member or congregant denounce Shahin or walk out? No.”
She argued, “This is not just a local issue. The incitement to Genocide is illegal under state law.” She asked for law enforcement to all take action.
She concluded, “The sorry is simply not enough. I no longer feel safe in Davis. After 18 years here, I am moving away.”
By the way, the dinner that Rabbi Haberstein referred to was for the King of Bahrain, who is now under fire for his statements at that dinner where he denounced the Arab boycott of Israel.
- Monday, September 18, 2017
- Elder of Ziyon
After my story on Friday showing that despite worldwide headlines, Israel sells practically no weapons to Myanmar, I looked at the SIPRI database to learn more about who Israel does sell weapons to.
Here are the top countries to receive Israeli arms since 2000:
Two of the top ten recipients of Israeli arms are Muslim nations.
The full list:
Here is more detailed data on who Israel has sold arms to over the past 6 years:
You can even find out specifically what weapons were sold to whom. The UN leased a drone from Israel for use in Mali; Israel gave Jordan 16 second-hand AH-1F Cobra combat helicopters as a gift in 2015 to help fight ISIS.
Oh, and the weapons Israel did sell to Myanmar? A patrol boat and a second-hand naval gun. Not exactly weapons that are useful to kill the local Muslim population. But that doesn't stop the Independent and Haaretz from pretending that Israel is the major supplier of weapons to enable genocide.
Here is yet another example of how the media simply ignores real facts.
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 the top countries to receive Israeli arms since 2000:
Two of the top ten recipients of Israeli arms are Muslim nations.
The full list:
Country | Israeli arms imports, in millions, 2000-2016 |
India | 2800 |
Turkey | 854 |
United States | 840 |
Singapore | 528 |
Azerbaijan | 453 |
Colombia | 362 |
Sri Lanka | 312 |
South Korea | 304 |
United Kingdom | 241 |
Mexico | 235 |
Brazil | 229 |
Italy | 196 |
Romania | 168 |
Germany (FRG) | 154 |
Chile | 153 |
Australia | 152 |
Spain | 143 |
Viet Nam | 134 |
Greece | 120 |
Netherlands | 119 |
Equatorial Guinea | 82 |
Poland | 80 |
Myanmar | 73 |
Unknown recipient(s) | 72 |
China | 55 |
Finland | 51 |
Jordan | 48 |
Venezuela | 44 |
Kazakhstan | 40 |
Morocco | 40 |
Portugal | 34 |
Dominican Republic | 33 |
Ecuador | 33 |
Belgium | 32 |
Uganda | 29 |
Nigeria | 25 |
Thailand | 23 |
Rwanda | 18 |
France | 17 |
Peru | 16 |
South Africa | 16 |
Czech Republic | 15 |
New Zealand | 15 |
Sweden | 14 |
Georgia | 13 |
Honduras | 13 |
Angola | 12 |
Paraguay | 12 |
Cameroon | 11 |
Denmark | 11 |
Philippines | 11 |
Canada | 9 |
Ethiopia | 9 |
United Nations** | 9 |
Austria | 8 |
Taiwan (ROC) | 8 |
Senegal | 7 |
Argentina | 5 |
Hungary | 5 |
Mauritius | 5 |
Bulgaria | 4 |
Chad | 4 |
Croatia | 4 |
El Salvador | 4 |
Russia | 4 |
Seychelles | 3 |
Switzerland | 3 |
Cyprus | 1 |
Guinea | 1 |
Indonesia | 1 |
Lesotho | 1 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 0 |
Lithuania | 0 |
Turkmenistan | 0 |
Here is more detailed data on who Israel has sold arms to over the past 6 years:
TIV of arms exports from Israel, 2011-2016 | ||||||||
Figures are SIPRI Trend Indicator Values (TIVs) expressed in millions. | ||||||||
Figures may not add up due to the conventions of rounding. | ||||||||
A '0' indicates that the value of deliveries is less than 0.5m | ||||||||
For more information, see http://www.sipri.org/databases/armstransfers/sources-and-methods/ | ||||||||
Source: SIPRI Arms Transfers Database | ||||||||
Generated: 18 September 2017 | ||||||||
2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | Total | ||
Austria | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | ||||
Azerbaijan | 5 | 9 | 25 | 21 | 121 | 248 | 428 | |
Belgium | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 7 | 19 | ||
Brazil | 19 | 18 | 21 | 27 | 17 | 16 | 118 | |
Cameroon | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||
Chile | 18 | 3 | 9 | 30 | ||||
Colombia | 55 | 8 | 19 | 24 | 106 | |||
Czech Republic | 8 | 8 | 15 | |||||
Denmark | 10 | 10 | ||||||
Dominican Republic | 12 | 12 | ||||||
Equatorial Guinea | 70 | 70 | ||||||
Ethiopia | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | |||
Germany (FRG) | 6 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 24 | 90 | |
Honduras | 13 | 13 | ||||||
India | 156 | 161 | 119 | 157 | 276 | 599 | 1466 | |
Indonesia | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Italy | 21 | 16 | 10 | 20 | 20 | 37 | 122 | |
Jordan | 48 | 48 | ||||||
Lithuania | 0 | 0 | ||||||
Mauritius | 3 | 3 | ||||||
Mexico | 4 | 25 | 29 | |||||
Myanmar | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Netherlands | 12 | 12 | ||||||
New Zealand | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 15 | |||
Nigeria | 6 | 12 | 18 | |||||
Paraguay | 6 | 6 | 12 | |||||
Peru | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Philippines | 6 | 4 | 10 | |||||
Poland | 11 | 11 | 9 | 30 | ||||
Portugal | 9 | 3 | 11 | |||||
Russia | 2 | 1 | 3 | |||||
Rwanda | 13 | 13 | ||||||
Senegal | 1 | 4 | 3 | 7 | ||||
Seychelles | 3 | 3 | ||||||
Singapore | 74 | 57 | 15 | 13 | 43 | 201 | ||
South Africa | 3 | 5 | 8 | |||||
South Korea | 35 | 28 | 24 | 40 | 58 | 185 | ||
Spain | 18 | 27 | 23 | 4 | 71 | |||
Sri Lanka | 11 | 11 | ||||||
Thailand | 0 | 3 | 5 | 8 | ||||
Turkey | 22 | 9 | 17 | 15 | 63 | |||
Turkmenistan | 0 | 0 | ||||||
United Kingdom | 11 | 31 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 34 | 141 | |
United Nations** | 9 | 9 | ||||||
United States | 15 | 25 | 35 | 35 | 40 | 55 | 205 | |
Unknown recipient(s) | 5 | 13 | 3 | 3 | 31 | 54 | ||
Viet Nam | 26 | 14 | 7 | 68 | 116 | |||
Total | 572 | 449 | 432 | 399 | 694 | 1260 | 3805 |
You can even find out specifically what weapons were sold to whom. The UN leased a drone from Israel for use in Mali; Israel gave Jordan 16 second-hand AH-1F Cobra combat helicopters as a gift in 2015 to help fight ISIS.
Oh, and the weapons Israel did sell to Myanmar? A patrol boat and a second-hand naval gun. Not exactly weapons that are useful to kill the local Muslim population. But that doesn't stop the Independent and Haaretz from pretending that Israel is the major supplier of weapons to enable genocide.
Here is yet another example of how the media simply ignores real facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)