Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, February 08, 2018

If Israel presents a plan to actually help Gaza, then the Arabs must oppose it on principle

Haaretz reported last week:

Representatives of Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the United States participated in an emergency conference in Brussels on Wednesday of countries and organizations that provide financial support for Palestinians.

Israel presented humanitarian assistance plans at the gathering for the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip with a focus on desalination, electricity and natural gas infrastructure projects in addition to upgrading of the industrial zone at the Erez border crossing with Israel. The total cost of the projects is estimated at a billion dollars, which Israel asked the international community to fund.The plan was first reported by Haaretz.

Regional Cooperation Minister Tzachi Hanegbi, who represented Israel at the conference, presented the plans but noted that carrying them out would require that the PA take responsibility for civilian life in Gaza, which has been under the control of Hamas since the Islamist movement forcefully ousted the PA there in 2007.

Middle East Memo, a pro-Hamas site, says that anything Israel suggests must be bad for Palestinians and must be resisted.

Taking their cues from the misguided and erroneously depicted narrative about Gaza, the international community will likely acquiesce to Israel’s latest demand and thus, as a result, fund both colonialism and Israel’s security narrative which is integral to the development which Israel is allegedly envisaging for the territory.

The Israeli plan for Gaza’s infrastructure, therefore, is a step towards alienation. Ushering in a new form of dependency upon Palestinians in Gaza is not a step towards economic opportunity. This time there are many opportunities for Israel, which can extend its warped concept of humanitarian aid and development to a population which it has coldly and deliberately terrorised, murdered and maimed over many decades. Approval by the international community, including finance for the proposed projects, will allow Israel to push the limits in collaboration further. In the event that Israel decides to raze Gaza again with another brutal military offensive, the financial hits will be incurred by its international accomplices, following the established pattern of Israel’s demolition of EU-funded structures, only more severely. It is clear that Israel is seeking to inflict similar repercussions on the remaining fragments of Palestinian territory and there is no swifter way to achieve this than by inviting the international community to participate.

Somehow, helping desalinate Gaza's water and providing it with electricity and natural gas is just more Israeli colonialism. And insisting that the PA take over the territory only benefits Israeli security - which cannot be allowed.

Also, by some magic, Gaza can get its electricity and water needs fulfilled without Israeli involvement.

The best part, though, is the whining that this plan would be a "new form of dependency" for Gaza. Accepting aid from UNRWA and the EU and the US and hundreds of international NGOs, each with their own agendas, is dignified, but accepting an Israeli plan that would be funded by these same states and organizations is humiliating.

There is no better example of both the honor/shame culture and the zero-sum game mentality of the Arabs than this article.

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.

02/07 Links Pt2: NYT's Accuses Jewish Billionaires of Dragging US Into War With Iran; Col Kemp: Those that deny Israel’s right to exist are modern-day Nazis

From Ian:

New York Times Accuses Jewish Billionaires of Dragging US Into War With Iran

The New York Times op-ed page carries an article by Lawrence Wilkerson headlined “A Familiar Road to War.” It warns, with zero factual basis, that the Trump administration is about to invade Iran the same way the George W. Bush administration invaded Iraq.

It’s a mystery what the Times is doing running a piece from this guy in the first place. As has been noted by both Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute and Dexter Van Zile of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, Wilkerson went on television to speculate, groundlessly, that a poison gas attack on Syrian civilians “could have been an Israeli false flag operation.” (Thanks to online watchdog Mark Jacobs for tipping me off to this on Twitter.)

Second, once the Times piece went up online, it became clear pretty rapidly that there were some accuracy problems.

The website Newsdiffs tracks the changes — at least four different versions of the article. The piece originally said, “Today, the analysts claiming close ties between Al Qaeda and Iran come from the Foundation for Defense of Democracy, which vehemently opposes the Iran nuclear deal and unabashedly calls for regime change in Iran, while taking money from hawks like Sheldon Adelson and Paul Singer, who have made clear what their goals are with Iran.” About six hours after publishing the original piece, the Times stealth-edited it by correcting the name of the research and advocacy group to “the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.” If the Times is going, falsely, to accuse a think tank of dragging America into war with Iran on false pretenses, the least you can ask is that the Times would spell the organization’s name correctly. Alas, the Times couldn’t even initially manage that bare-bones level of accuracy.

Then, nearly ten hours after the original piece was published online, the Times deleted entirely the references to Messrs. Singer and Adelson, and appended a correction:
Correction: February 5, 2018
An earlier version of this article included outdated information about the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Sheldon Adelson is no longer a donor to the organization.

2013: Wilkerson’s Shame. And Colin Powell’s

On May 2, Lawrence Wilkerson, a close confidant of Colin Powell who served as chief-of-staff during Powell’s tenure as secretary of state, raised eyebrows when he told Current TV that reports of Syrian chemical weapons use might have been Israeli “false flag operations.” His pronouncement—which was part speculation and part sourced to his friends in the intelligence community—was quickly picked up and rebroadcast as fact by such outlets as Iran’s Press TV and Hezbollah’s Al-Manar.

As the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) points out, this is hardly the first time Wilkerson has made bizarre accusations, but CAMERA does not go far enough. Wilkerson acted as a definitive source for any number of stories throughout the Bush administration until now. As Powell’s chief-of-staff, journalists accepted his pabulum uncritically, never asking whether Wilkerson was at meetings for which he purported to offer first-hand accounts. The fact is that chiefs-of-staff do not go to meetings; they manage offices. Many of those whom Wilkerson pretends to have had conversations with say they never met him.

Nevertheless, Wilkerson remains central to some of the most pernicious—and false—rumors and conspiracies surrounding George W. Bush’s tenure:

Colonel Kemp: Those that deny Israel’s right to exist are modern-day Nazis

“The documentary film ‘Whose Land?’ is not intended to justify the right to exist of the state of Israel. I find such an argument abhorrent. Questioning Israel’s right to exist is pure antisemitism. Such fundamental prejudice should not be dignified by response or contrary argument. How often is the right of Great Britain to exist called into question? Or the United States, Germany, France, China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, any other country. How often is the right to exist of any country other than Israel questioned, argued over, debated, discussed? To do so is exceptional. Exception applied only to the Jewish State. It therefore amounts to antisemitism pure and simple.

In Nazi Germany, the right of Jews to own businesses to own property, to join the professions to go to school to receive medical treatment to live a normal life in the community. All of these were denied them.

Today, Israel’s enemies demand that the Jewish state be isolated, ostracised, banished from the community of nations. These people are the Nazis of the 21st century. Their arguments must not be dignified with a response. These modern-day Nazis are responsible for the greatest slur campaign in the history of humanity spreading false narratives, falsifying and distorting history, lying, deriding, rejecting and despising without cause and for one purpose to abolish the nation state of the Jewish people, Israel.

‘Whose Land?’ does not set out to justify the right of Israel to exist. Instead, it simply tells the truth – a truth that is clear, undeniable and unequivocal. The truth, that for the sake of human civilization and decency, must be heard above the growing cacophony of those who clamour to turn the world against the Jewish state and whose false propaganda not only maligns the innocent and brain washes the unwary but also incites violence and inflames hatred.

On January 22, I answered this question on Quora:

Why do you think there is so much violence between, the Zionist settlers and Palestinian villagers in the West Bank? Can the Ask an Israeli/Ask A Palestinian project help quell some of that violence?

I responded as follows:

The question is by way of asserting an untruth: that there is some sort of mutuality to the Arab war against the Jews (see: The Arab War Against the Jews). Jews don’t attack Arabs. The opposite is true: Arabs attack Jews.

This fact has nothing to do with settlement, which has only to do with housing. There is nothing wrong with housing, by the way, unless you believe that Jews have no right to live in homes. Which would be an extremely racist position to hold.

This project you mention is total anti-Israel propaganda because of the question it asks, which, like the question you ask, asserts an untruth, and there is no balance to the assertion. The project cannot quell what does not exist.

Even the terms used in your question assert untruths and spread bigotry. The term “West Bank” for example, asserts that Jordan is the rightful owner of Judea and Samaria (their proper geographic labels), though only two UN member states (Britain and Pakistan) accepted Jordan’s occupation of these territories between 1948 and 1967 as a legal one. The use of the word “settlers” as if it were an epithet, when all these people are doing is living on land that was acquired during a defensive war, land that belonged to their people for thousands of years. Land that shares the name of these people (Jews/Judea).

Why use the word “Zionist” in tandem with the word “settler”? Because the question asserts the untruth that there is some sort of reciprocity to the violence, using the words “Zionist” and “settler” tells anyone who reads the question to equate “Zionist” and “settler” with gratuitous violence against Arabs. Of course, there is no truth to this, as Jews are not attacking Arabs. The opposite is true and has been so for thousands of years. Arabs attack Jews. Period. There is no equivalent violent action toward the Arabs by the Jews.

The term “Palestinian” is also a piece of propaganda, as there has never been a sovereign Arab state known as “Palestine.” The term is used only to delegitimize the State of Israel, the Jewish State and in reality has no meaning.

My answer received 15 upvotes and may have received many more, except for the fact that the moderators collapsed my answer, and requested an edit, suggesting that my response violated Quora’s “Be Nice, Be Respectful” (BNBR) rule. Here is an excerpt from the official Quora explanation of its BNBR policy:

Do your best to see the world from the perspective of the person who posted the question (the original poster ["OP"]) or answer. It is often not helpful to criticize or challenge the fundamental beliefs of the OP (in an answer) or answerer (in a comment). For example, in responding to the question "Is it OK to only go to church on Easter?", the following answer would be considered disrespectful and is not allowed: "There is no God and religious rituals are a waste of time." Use good judgement and be empathetic. Answers and comments that challenge the fundamental beliefs of an OP or answerer will be held to a very high standard re: Be Nice, Be Respectful.

I knew what was bugging the Quora moderators here, I won’t pretend I didn’t. They didn’t want me speaking of “Jews” and “Arabs” but of “Zionist settlers” and “Palestinians villagers” as the OP did. They didn’t want me to challenge the assertions of the poster, but see things from his or her point of view.

Now sometimes I will edit my responses when challenged by Quora, because the whole reason I’m on this forum is to spread the truth. Why cut off my nose to spite my face? Would it have killed me to go politically correct?

Here, for instance, I might have changed the language to “Israeli Jews” and “Arab terrorists.” That might have mollified the moderators.

But this one really bugged me. The rebel in me was screaming: Since when is the truth not “nice” or “respectful?” I was only telling the truth: except for the rare exception, Jews are not attacking Arabs, but Arabs are attacking Jews. Not all of them, but a large percentage of them, and often.

It is what it is. What it isn’t, is bigotry. I used Professor Ruth Wisse’s excellent presentation, The Arab War Against the Jews, to back my assertion. I did not say that “all Arabs” attack Jews.

I believed, strongly (still do), that my answer was both fair and factual. And the curmudgeon in me was refusing to bend to an anonymous moderator’s will. To me, “Palestinian” is a propaganda term (see: Israel is Engaged in a War of Words) and it goes against my personal ethos to use the word.

So there I was, confronted with a choice of editing my answer, or appealing the moderator’s ruling. I decided to appeal, offering to edit whatever it was that was dishonest or offensive. I wrote:

My answer was factual. I see nothing in my answer that abrogates the Be Nice, Be Respectful rule. I was careful.

I would edit my answer to suit your guidelines, but see nothing to edit. If the moderators disagree, perhaps they could point to something specific in my answer that was rude or disrespectful so that I might make edits, as requested. Otherwise, I think my answer should be reinstated.

I really hoped to receive a reasonable response, explaining how I might edit my response. I must confess to feeling shocked at the ruling I instead received:

Hello Varda,

Your content was in violation of our Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. This core Quora principle requires that people treat other people on the site with civility, respect, and consideration. To learn more about this policy, please visit: https://www.quora.com/What-is-Quoras-Be-Nice-Be-Respectful-policy.

More specifically, your content contained what we consider to be hate speech:

Users are not allowed to post content or adopt a tone that would be interpreted by a reasonable observer as a form of hate speech, particularly toward a race, gender, religion, nationality, ethnicity, political group, sexual orientation or another similar characteristic. Questions and question details about generalizations in these topics should be phrased as neutrally and respectfully as possible.

Our decision is final, and your content will not be reinstated.

If you see content that is objectionable, we suggest you either report or downvote it. You can report questions, answers, comments, and messages by clicking on the "Report" link which is located underneath the content.

We appreciate your understanding.

Sincerely,

Amelia
User Operations
Quora

At this point, I was upset. Hate speech?? But okay, I was willing to try to edit my response. I didn’t want anyone to think I was spreading hate. The option to edit, however, had disappeared with the moderator’s ruling. I could no longer edit my answer, which remains collapsed to this day.

One bright note in this uncomfortable episode, a comment left by Brenda Newman:

“This is what gets collapsed these days? Answer may need improvement? I thought it one of your best. Apparently, decoding the language used in the propaganda war isn’t allowed.”

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.

02/07 Links Pt1: Fatah condemns Israel for killing Hamas terrorist behind rabbi’s murder; UNRWA: The greatest obstacle to peace; Saudis to allow flights to Israel through their airspace

From Ian:

Why the Reduction in U.S. Aid to UNRWA Is Justified

Europe has ignored important reasons for the Palestinians' distress - such as Hamas' huge annual investments of hundreds of millions of dollars in the manufacture of rockets and the construction of attack tunnels, all at the expense of Gaza's needy residents. No one has ever inquired how much money from humanitarian contributions ends up in the private bank accounts of Palestinian leaders.

The Europeans started asking questions only when it was proved to them that the Palestinian Authority was using aid contributions to pay sizable salaries to Palestinian terrorists who had been convicted and imprisoned in Israel, and to build public institutions and name them after terrorists.

According to the Congressional Research Service, since the Oslo Agreement the U.S. has given the PA $5.2 billion, the highest American foreign-aid total per capita. During the same period, the U.S. gave UNRWA $4.5 billion. The Obama administration doubled American allocations to both the PA and UNRWA. In 2008, the PA received $400 million; in 2009, $900 million. In 2008, UNRWA received $184 million; in 2009, $268 million.

The reduction in aid to UNRWA is justified because this agency perpetuates the Palestinians' status as refugees. Most of its employees in Gaza are affiliated with Hamas, and its schools preach hatred of Jews and Israel. Rockets are stashed beneath the floors of these schools and fired at Israel from their vicinity.

UNRWA should have been closed down long ago and its functions transferred to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, which deals with refugees on a worldwide basis.

UNRWA: The greatest obstacle to peace

The United States' definition of a refugee is similar to that of other counties. According to this accepted definition, refugee status is not passed down by inheritance and is not valid for those persons who are citizens of other countries or who live in what is supposedly their own territory. In contrast, more than 2 million Palestinian "refugees" live in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, lands they claim constitute part of their territorial homeland.

If we remove from UNRWA's list of refugees those people who do not meet any of the three criteria, we will then come back to a more reasonable number of somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 Palestinian refugees from the 1948 War of Independence. The remainder could, of course, request humanitarian aid, but they would not be considered refugees by UNRWA.

If the countries of the world are interested in funding genuine humanitarian aid for the Palestinians, this can be done through a variety of alternative channels, whose aim is to create a better future for the population. But first, they must stop using the term "refugees." This is not just a question of semantics: A change in terminology could give the Palestinians hope for a better future instead of ensuring they maintain the victimhood mentality and pass it on to future generations. Second, they must only release funds for the Palestinians on the condition they are then integrated into their host countries or alternatively, those Palestinians living outside Judea, Samaria Gaza find a third country to which to emigrate. Third, they must ensure the funds do not go toward terrorism and incitement.

The implementation of these steps will lead the PA to acknowledge its defeat in the war against the Jewish people's right to self-determination and will put an end to the Palestinian leadership's cynical use of their people and their supporters for the prevention of a solution to the conflict and finally bring about peace.

Reporter to UNRWA: 'Where has all the flour gone?'

The Israel Resource News Agency and Center for Near East Policy Research, an agency founded by American immigrant David Bedein in Jerusalem retains local professional (read that "Arabic speaking") journalists who cover UNRWA facilities in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza, producing stories about UNRWA, Hamas and the PA.

Bedein reports that a study he did of memos from UNRWA to Holland, the US, Canada, Australia and the Israel Civil Administration over last year, shows that UNRWA gave assurances that new textbooks and the atmosphere in UNRWA schools would now reflect peace advocacy. They were to be free of the indoctrination to violence which characterized both the previous UNRWA school books translated by the agency and the contents of talks with UNRWA students interviewed over the past few years.

The news agency's local journalists recently acquired the 2018 school books provided by the PA for UNRWA and have checked the contents thoroughly. A report on the textbooks and the screening of two short films of interviews with UNRWA students will take place at the Jerusalem municipality on Thursday, February 8, at 4:30 p.m.

Arutz Sheva received a preview of the report, which shows that except for two pages about peace in new PA/UNRWA school books, UNRWA indoctrination continues, in all UNRWA schools, UNRWA school books and the UNRWA public domain.

It also reveals that although 68 donor nations continue to pour food, medicine and cash into all UNRWA camps, the UNRWA workers union, under tight control of Hamas for the past 18 years, hoards all humanitarian supplies, while contracting foreign press to witness and record a staged UNRWA humanitarian crisis. "If there were a UNRWA Universal Studios, they couldn't do better," Bedein quips.

While "feminists" celebrate hijab, real Muslim women worldwide are burning theirs on #NoHijabDay

The leftist feminist movement celebrates Muslim women wearing hijab as if it is a symbol of human rights., of resistance to racism and anti-colonialist.

But real Muslim women know better:

Videos showing women burning the hijab are being posted on social media in solidarity with a protest movement against enforced headscarf in Iran.
Posted online with the hashtag #NoHijabDay, a response to last week's World Hijab Day event, the videos show women removing their headscarves and setting them on fire in front of the camera.

Anoud Al Ali, who grew up in the United Arab Emirates but is now living in France, posted a video of herself burning the hijab and called it 'true happiness'.
She details how she used to be forced to wear the headscarf by her family and in school or she would be punished with lower grades.

Here's another similar video for #NoHijabDay by an ex-Muslim Canadian woman:

#NoHijabDay

In solidarity with woman who are forced to wear the hijab.#MyStealthyFreedom pic.twitter.com/VPgLOnH1Nx
— Yasmine Mohammed (@ConfessionsExMu) February 1, 2018

This is besides the heroism of ordinary Iranian women who face jail time for taking off their hijabs:

A young woman in #Iran takes off her #hijab in front of a Basij base (Islamic Revolutionary Guard's Morality Police) to protest against forced hijab in Iran. #Girlsofrevolutionstreet #دختران_خیابان_انقلاب #قیام_بهمن #براندازم pic.twitter.com/wbYTxZp5Yt
— Armin Navabi (@ArminNavabi) February 2, 2018

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.

UNRWA's straw man arguments

UNRWA flack Scott Anderson writes in Foreign Policy:

The population that UNRWA works with is highly vulnerable and dependent upon the international community to help feed their poor, educate their children, and care for their sick. One million Palestinians in Gaza alone survive on food provided by UNRWA. Our schools educate over half a million children in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank, and they have proven to be centers of excellence, consistently outperforming government schools in the region. All of our students receive education in human rights, nonviolent conflict resolution, and tolerance of differences.

It is probably true that UNRWA schools outperform government schools. The answer is to help create a good standard for all, not to treat Palestinians as different, which breeds resentment. No modern NGOs would ever consider setting up a separate school system, and there is a good reason why: it violates the basic NGO dictum of "do no harm" and 'conflict sensitivity."

And it is also true that UNRWA teaches a human rights curriculum. However, it doesn't teach that Jews have any rights to live in Israel. It hardly fosters peace. On the contrary, it teaches children that there will be no peace as long as Israel exists as a Jewish state.

A world that is willing to watch as hungry children cannot access food, students are shut out of their schools, and mothers can no longer access prenatal care is not the world any of us want to live in.

Why cannot Palestinians be fed through the World Food Programme? Why can they not attend Palestinian or Jordanian public schools? Why do they need their own medical infrastructure separate from those of their fellow Arabs? Why, indeed, does the world tolerate Arabs discriminating against Palestinians in their midst?

Just because UNRWA provides services does not mean that it is the only entity that should provide services. This is an argument to keep an agency funded against the best interests of the people of the region. It is an argument to keep Palestinian "refugees" treated differently from their neighbors, forever.

I don't think that President Trump has handled the UNRWA issue as well as he should have, but there is a chance to open up a conversation as to why a single UN agency deserves a billion dollars a year compared the much more dire needs of impoverished people across the world, why funds should be distributed so unevenly.

Most importantly, the point must be made: UNRWA wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Arab discrimination against Palestinians since 1948, and it shouldn't exist in the West Bank or Gaza at all since people cannot be considered "refugees" when they live in their own land.

That is the conversation that UNRWA is desperately trying not to allow the world to have.

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.

Fatah and Hamas agree: Murderer of rabbi is a hero

Hamas has declared Ahmad Jarrar, the murderer of Rabbi Raziel Shevach, to be a "martyr" and a hero who followed the footsteps of his terrorist father:

But it isn't only Hamas who is enamored with Jarrar.

Fatah makes exactly the same point in this poster on its Facebook page:

The caption says "this cub is from that lion," making it clear that Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah is on the same page as Hamas in supporting the murders of Jews.

And the Fatah logo is on this poster that puts Jarrar at the center of recent "martyrs:"

Interestingly, unlike every other Hamas terrorist, Hamas has de-emphasized any photos of Jarrar holding a weapon. I found this one in a tenth of a second clip in a Hamas video, and apparently it is a photo-illustration:

It is also notable that the numbers of Palestinians who have been going in the streets to defend and support the terrorists that have murdered two Jews recently has dwarfed the number who have been attending Fatah's "Days of Rage" for Jerusalem.

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.

NGO Cites Poll Showing 50% Of Arabs Want Migrants Deported To Prove Jews Are Racist (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Tel Aviv, February 7 - A human-rights-monitoring group showcased a survey today of Arabs who hold Israeli citizenship regarding the impending deportation of illegal African migrants as evidence that the Jews of Israel harbor ethnically prejudiced attitudes.

The Rights-Auditing Committee on Israeli Social Trends (RACIST) released a report today citing that because half of the Arab-Israelis surveyed in a recent poll supported the expulsion of illegal migrants from Africa to either their country of origin or a stable third state, the Jews of Israel must be racist.

A poll this week revealed that half of the Arab citizens of Israel who responded agreed with the government's stated intention to deport thousands of such migrants. In response, RACIST issued an analysis of the survey that asserts such numbers demonstrate the systemic racism inherent in Israel's Jewish majority, and called on the international community to take measures to punish Israel for such depravities.

"First, we dispute the relevance of categorizing people as 'Jewish' or 'Arab' Israelis for purposes of the poll," the report read. "Standard practice in NGO work calls for that distinction to be made only when it fits the narrative of evil-Jews, evil-Israel, victim-Arab. Methodologically, then, this poll only shows that half of Israelis want black Africans expelled, which is a bona fide indicator of racism."

"Second, even granting the validity of an ethnically specific focus for such a survey, the results provide evidence for racism," the report continued. "Why do the Arabs who hold Israeli citizenship want Africans deported? Because the Africans compete with Arabs for low-wage, low-skill jobs. There you have evidence that the Jewish majority relegates the Arab minority to poor, second-class status, forcing them to compete with migrants in the cheap labor market." The report included no discussion of the skyrocketing rate at which Arabs are earning academic degrees, and the fact that many Jewish Israelis from the Haredi sector occupy the same economic class. However, a spokesman for RACIST dismissed that data.

"You're ignoring the first methodological point," argued Kagni Tiv de Sonantz, the organization's deputy director. "You can't just cite data without filtering it through the narrative test first. If you were to cite the data in such a way that makes Israeli Jews look bad, that would be one thing, but that's not what you're doing with your question. It's disingenuous, and therefore evidence that Israeli society is disingenuous about everything, especially it's concern for non-Jews. Assuming you're Israeli. Which I am, for purposes of this analysis, because it fits the proper narrative."

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.

02/06 Links Pt2: Trump Thwarts Irish Effort to Boycott Israel; The Cape Town water crisis — proudly brought to you by BDS; The radical left-wing rejectionist front

From Ian:

‘Arafat got a Nobel so BDS nomination no surprise’ say Israel activists

Pro-Israel activists have expressed contempt of the Nobel Peace Prize after the BDS movement received a nomination, pointing to the fact that late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat received the award in 1994.

The leader of the Red Party in the Norwegian Parliament, Bjornar Moxnes, nominated the International BDS movement on Friday, stating: “As a member of the Norwegian parliament, I proudly use my authority as an elected official to nominate the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights for the Nobel Peace Prize.”

“Awarding a Nobel Peace Prize to the BDS movement would be a powerful sign demonstrating that the international community is committed to supporting a just peace in the Middle East and using peaceful means to end military rule and broader violations of international law," Moxnes wrote in a statement published by Inter Press Service news agency.

Many pro-Israel activists took to social media to express their disdain of the nomination.

"The BDS movement is an anti-peace movement, they made this very clear over and over again," Israeli activist Hen Mazzig told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday. "They are 'anti-normalization' of the relationship between Jews and Arabs and actively pushing Palestinians and Israelis to fight each other."

On Monday, Mazzig debated Rebecca Vilkomerson, the Executive Director of the far-left organization Jewish Voice for Peace on i24 News.

Jewish Voice for Peace is reportedly among some 20 organizations on a blacklist Israel is compiling as part of its ban on BDS activists.

The US-organization tweeted that the nomination was “wonderful news.”

The Cape Town water crisis — proudly brought to you by BDS

Cape Town 2018 is what happens when a city is more concerned about politics than people. Cape Town 2018 is what happens when national government wants to demonstrate to local government who is boss. Cape Town 2018 is what happens when local government is not equipped to deal with a real crisis. And Cape Town 2018 is what happens when communication falls apart to the point that the noise is so deafening, that no message can be heard.

Cape Town 2018 is also what happens when relevant lifesaving solutions are discarded because of BDS and anti-Semitism.

Cape Town is set to be the first major city to run out of water. The city is experiencing its worst drought in history. Residents are being asked to utilize less than 50 liters (13 gallons) per day and it is unlikely that it will avoid “Day Zero.” The day the taps run dry. It is unimaginable what contingencies can be put in place to deal with the series of events that will follow this day.

We all have that friend. Mine often sends me a WhatsApp simply saying “ITYS!” At first, I had no idea what he meant, until I realized he was saying “I told you so” (but was too busy to type out the sentence). It’s annoying and frustrating and infuriating. Especially when he is right. And maybe sometimes it’s not bad to hear it.

There is no satisfaction in the fact the residents of Cape Town are on the brink of a humanitarian crisis that could have and should have been avoided. Even if we saw it coming.

Trump Admin Thwarts Irish Effort to Boycott Israel, Criminalize Trade

The Trump administration played a key role in thwarting a recent effort by the Irish government to boycott Israel and make it a crime for Irish citizens to purchase products made in contested areas of the Jewish state, a move that would have severely jeopardized Ireland's trade with the United States, according to multiple sources familiar with the situation.

The Irish Parliament was poised last week to pass a major piece of legislation that would make it crime to engage in trade with Israelis. The bill, which was seen as part of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, or BDS, would have imprisoned Irish citizens who purchased souvenirs in Israel for a maximum of five years and subjected them to a fine of more than $310,000.

Upon learning of the effort, senior Trump administration officials in the State Department are said to have scrambled to open up channels to Irish leaders in a bid to scuttle the bill and avoid a standoff with the Irish government over the measure.

Trump administration officials are said to have made clear to Irish leaders that passage of the bill would put them starkly at odds with the United States and subject them to inclusion on a list of countries supporting boycotts of the Jewish state.

While some Irish lawmakers described the effort as a "crackpot bill," its passage through the Parliament was all but assured until U.S. officials from the Trump administration became involved, multiple sources told the Free Beacon.

This week's dead Hamas terrorists

This morning, the terrorist behind the murder of Rabbi Raziel Shevach was killed by the IDF.

Hamas took credit for the attack in their press release on his "martyrdom."

Luckily, the other Hamas "martyrs" of the week managed to die without hurting anyone.

Qassam Brigades field commander Mohammed Mousa died after a long illness.

Mahmoud Safadi "died while working in a tunnel of the resistance" last Wednesday.

May all members of Hamas get the opportunity to show how much they love death sooner rather than later.

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.

You can learn a lot about @HRW's Ken Roth from a single tweet

From Ken Roth:

The Shah was wrong to ban the hijab. Iran's current government is equally wrong to require it, as Iranian women are now saying. https://t.co/EEn29HDbCf pic.twitter.com/M3zA55IAvm
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) February 4, 2018

Where to begin?

Roth feels that he can only publicly support Iranian women fighting compulsory hijab after saying that the Shah was just as wrong to ban it. The issue cannot stand on its own; it has to be contextualized to say that, hey, secular people can be just as bad as Islamists.

As other tweeters pointed out, the Shah didn't ban the hijab - Reza Shah did in 1936 and the last Shah of Iran (who is the person that "the Shah" invariably refers to) dropped that ban.

Roth hasn't said a word about compulsory hijab since the Ayatollah Khomeini mandated it in 1979. Only now, after Iranian women are bravely walking bareheaded, does Roth feel comfortable enough to take a position that he otherwise would fear would sound too "Islamophobic."

And suddenly Roth seems to care about religious freedom to wear the hijab if one wants. But ask him if Jews should have the religious freedom to visit their holiest sites unmolested and ...crickets.

This is Ken Roth in a nutshell - hypocritical, not interested in facts, and not leading the fight for human rights but pretending to support them only after the real brave women of Iran make the issue safe for him.

Because the main rule of HRW isn't human rights - it is to avoid upsetting the Muslims, and only then to tentatively ask for human rights from the Islamists once he can make sure that his message is watered down to their standards.

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.

02/06 Links Pt1: Fatah honors murderer of father of 6 as “young lion”; Raziel Shevach’s Killer shot dead by security forces in raid; Phillips: Nunes memo, Obama/Farrakhan, Poland

From Ian:

PMW: Fatah honors last month’s murderer of father of 6 as “young lion”

Abbas' Fatah Movement was quick to honor as a "Martyr" Ahmed Nasr Jarrar who led the group of terrorists who shot and murdered Rabbi Raziel Shevach, father of 6, in a drive-by shooting last month. The terrorist was killed by Israeli soldiers yesterday while resisting arrest. Fatah posted the picture of Jarrar with his father, calling him the "young lion":

Texts below faces: "Martyr Nasr Jarrar ... Martyr Ahmed Nasr Jarrar" [Official Fatah Facebook page, Feb. 6, 2018]

The image shows terrorist Ahmed Nasr Jarrar (left) and his father, terrorist Nasr Jarrar, who is holding an assault rifle. The father was a Hamas terrorist who planned two attacks in central Israel - a double suicide bombing in the Sheba Hospital and a truck bombing in a multi-story building - attacks that were thwarted when he was killed and other members of his terror cell were caught by Israeli soldiers in 2002.

After the attack, Palestinian Media Watch documented that Fatah celebrated that "a settler was killed." Fatah also uploaded a graphic image (see below) of the body of the dead terrorist Jarrar with weapons beside him, honoring him for "facing" the Israeli soldiers rather than running away:

Posted text: "'He faced forward and did not turn his back' Martyr (Shahid) Ahmed Nasr Jarrar"
[Official Fatah Facebook page, Feb. 6, 2018]

Fatah also posted the video footage of the Israeli Arab terrorist Abd Al-Hakim Adel murdering Rabbi Itamar Ben-Gal, the 29 year old father of 4, yesterday, calling the terror attack an "operation."

Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians: The Atrocities No One Talks About

Why the need to keep reminding the world of the plight of the Palestinians in Syria? It is because the international community and pro-Palestinian groups around the world do not seem to care about the atrocities that are being committed against Palestinians in Syria or any Arab country because they were not committed by Israel.

The 82-year-old Mahmoud Abbas, meanwhile, has made clear where his priorities stand. Instead of searching for ways to help his people in Syria and the Gaza Strip, where hospitals are facing a deathly shortage of fuel and medicine, Abbas has just spent $50 million to purchase a "presidential plane."

Abbas, however, could not care less. In his view, the needs of his people are the responsibility of the world. He wants everyone but himself to continue funneling financial aid to the Palestinians. For him, delivering a speech before the EU Parliament or the UN General Assembly easily takes precedence over the Palestinians who are dying due to lack of medicine and food.

Melanie Phillips: Nunes memo, Obama/Farrakhan, Poland

Please join me here as I discuss with Avi Abelow of Israel Video Network the Nunes memo, shock at the Obama/Farrakhan picture and the new Polish law against claiming Poland was involved in the Holocaust.

What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict needs most is an "honest broker."

At least that what Federica Mogherini says. When Trump announced the US was going to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, she claimed that he had forfeited a degree of leadership in leading the negotiation of peace:

Federica Mogherini, EU foreign policy chief, says Trump's Jerusalem decision "has discredited a bit the United States as an honest broker."
— David Wright (@DavidWright_CNN) December 7, 2017

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini.
Source: Union Europea En Perù

What's so great about being an honest broker anyway?

The phrase "honest broker" goes back to the German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who applied the term to himself in 1878. At the time he was trying to mediate between Russia and Austria-Hungary.

Bismarck claimed he could be an honest broker, be impartial, because his main interest was not the dispute itself, but rather to see the two sides settle their dispute amicably. In addition, Germany was allied with both Russia and Austria and wanted to maintain the diplomatic relations with both countries.

Bismarck was neither indifferent nor disinterested -- but he did claim he could be impartial.

Otto von Bismarck. From German Federal Archive. Public Domain

Compare that with Trump and his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital -- not exactly an impartial move on his part. For that matter, neither is his decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem (though it is the next logical step), cut back on the funds the US provides to UNRWA or the rumored possibility that Trump will refuse to recognize UNRWA's extension of the definition of "Palestinian refugee" to future generations.

Trump is not acting as an honest broker, nor is his claiming to be. But that was not always the case.

During the presidential campaign, Trump made a point of claiming to be neutral and said that he would not take sides during any peace negotiations.

In response, Rubio claimed that being neutral made you anti-Israel:

"The position you've taken is an anti-Israel position," Rubio said. "And here's why. Because you cannot be an honest broker in a dispute between two sides in which one of the sides is constantly acting in bad faith." Rubio said the Palestinian Authority has "walked away from multiple efforts to make peace" and cited Palestinian terrorist activity.

Once elected, Trump seemed to be taking a neutral approach. According to the Times of Israel, while visiting the Middle East last year in March, "Greenblatt worked exceedingly hard to be perceived by the players he met in Israel, the West Bank and Jordan as an honest broker." [emphasis added]

While some may have questioned Trump's ability to remain neutral, based on some of his associations - especially his Jewish son-in-law, Trump did not take any flagrant action that could be construed as favoring Israel. And then came the announcement.

But just as Rubio claimed that being neutral was the equivalent of being anti-Israel, it could be that being openly pro-Israel could be the only way to be that "honest broker" for peace. At least that was the stand Pence had taken back in 2014.

Herb Keinon quoted Pence in an article reacting to Trump's recognition of Jerusalem:

Those who say that Trump’s decision removes the United States as an honest broker in the Middle East peace process and who see the removal of this “honest broker” tag from the Americans as something that is a negative, should consider what Pence said three years ago in Jerusalem.

At a town hall event put together by Republicans Abroad Israel, Pence – then the governor of Indiana and a possible 2016 presidential candidate – said that America should not aspire to be an “honest broker” in the Middle East, but rather communicate to the world that while it wants an honest and fair solution to the conflict, “we are on the side of Israel.”

Pence said the US can “deal honestly with people on all sides of the equation,” while making clear what “side of the table” it is on.

Trump

Being an honest broker may not be all it is cracked up to be.

Take the EU for example - they have not been neutral on the issue of Jerusalem at all.

For example, in 2016 the European Union described its East Jerusalem Programme:

The overall objective of the EU's East Jerusalem Programme is based on the European Council Conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process to maintain the viability of the two-state solution with Jerusalem as the future capital of two states. The specific objective of the Programme is to strengthen the resilience of Palestinian East Jerusalem residents and to preserve the Palestinian character of the city. The East Jerusalem Programme is a multi-sectoral investment that has grown to approximately 10 million Euros annually

If Trump was "discredited a bit" as an honest broker by his Jerusalem announcement, one can ask whether the European Union was ever an honest broker -- a question all the more relevant with the EU claiming a right to be part of the search of a peaceful solution.

This goes hand in hand with the EU construction of illegal buildings, knowing that Israel would take structures down. As Elder of Ziyon notes, the illegality of the buildings is exceeded only by the propaganda value the EU is squeezing out the issue.

But creating negative PR against Israel appears to be a specialty of the EU, and they go out of their way to create it.

Last week, Algemeiner reported on a report that the EU deliberately leaked to The Guardian:

A European Union report leaked to The Guardian newspaper expressed ire over Israeli tourism in and around Jerusalem’s Old City, calling the ongoing development of Jewish infrastructure a form of “touristic settlement.”

The EU Heads of Mission in Jerusalem issued a report warning that the development of Jewish tourism in the ancient City of David, currently located within a heavily populated Palestinian neighborhood, and a planned cable car that would transport tourists from the Western sections of the city to the Western Wall plaza within the Old City, were “a political tool to modify the historical narrative and to support, legitimize, and expand settlements.” The report asserts that the projects promote the “historic continuity of the Jewish presence in the area at the expense of other religions and cultures.”

Making Jerusalem safe and open for Muslims and Christians as well as Jews is apparently not enough. Defending Jewish ties to Jerusalem, and the Old City, at a time when UNESCO is playing havoc with Jewish history, goes against EU principles.

Some principles. The EU regularly leaks these reports to the press each year. NGO Monitor reports these yearly leaks are in violation of internal EU processes and diplomatic norms:

As in the past, this EU report was leaked to the media where its conclusions were covered extensively in Israel and internationally. Yet, despite the leak, the report is still considered an internal document. Thus, the content of the report can affect policy makers and public opinion, but it remains shielded from public scrutiny and bypasses recognized diplomatic norms.

Clearly, EU is no honest broker -- so what is it whining about?
Is EU jealous of Trump doing what they do?

Or is it because Trump appears to be in the process of dismantling, to some degree, the accepted framework for dealing with the issue of the Palestinian Arabs, and in the process reminding people of just how ineffective the status quo has been.

Trump has shed the role of being an honest broker, but at least he is clear about what he is doing and why, as opposed to the EU's machinations.

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 a GoFundMe page:

My name is Emtiaz Zourob (36 years old). I am a writer from Gaza, Palestine. I have granted an asylum in 2015 and my family had an approval to come to USA in 2016. They left Gaza to Egypt and now they are in Cairo for more one year. My family's visa interview was in April 19, 2017. After the interview , they put our case under the administrative processing.

Now we are waiting the US embassy to finish what they called "administrative processing". My husband and I sent a lot of emails to the embassy telling them about our difficult situation and asked them to expedite the administrative processing but we don't get any good response from them until now. They keep saying " Your visa case is currently undergoing necessary administrative processing ".I can't understand why this administrative processing is taking a long time.

I didn't see my husband Ramzi Zourob and my two kids, Rama (9 years old) and Ahmed (5 years old) for 3 years!
...
I am trying to work hard to pay my bills and fix my old car or buy a new one but I am still so sick, I can't do it. I need money to establish a new life here for me and for my family, and to continue my study to get master's degree.

In Oct 2, 2017. I got my green card and now it is allowed to me to go to Egypt to see my family for a while then comeback. I feel so excited but the problem is I have to wait until I am done with my procedure and I don’t have enough money to pay my bills and to buy the ticket and gifts to my kids. I will spend one month there, I know it will be very difficult to leave them again, but I have to.

So please help a mom with a broken heart to be reunited with her family again.

Lancaster Online wrote last year:

Three years ago, Palestinian writer Emtiaz Zourob said goodbye to her husband and two children and fled Gaza after being warned her life was in danger because of her views.
U.S. authorities granted her asylum and led her to believe her family would be able to join her in Lancaster, where she was resettled.
Then, with election of Donald Trump as president, Zourob’s hopes for family reunification crashed.

This seems to be the same Emtiaz Zourob who wrote a book extolling female suicide bombers. (Her blog talks about her books and her moving to America, so I'm 99% sure it is the same person.)

Two students at the Islamic University of Gaza had a project to translate "Palestinian Women Through History," by Emitiaz Zoroub, into English. The book praises female suicide bombers and other female terrorists in no uncertain terms.

Female Human BombThe "Female martyers" [sic] is not an incidental phenomena in the Palestinian community. The phenomenon, which began during the second Intifada, was used against the enemy. It caused much damage to the enemy as it forced it to panically search for "human bombs" who were ready to detonate themselves anytime.

Those women, who sacrificed their lives for the cause of their country, were highly educated and satisfied in their personal lives. However, they suffered from the effects of the 1948 Nakbah, (the Palestinian Catastrophe), as well as from the continuing effects of the Israeli apartheid regime. This suffering turned them to 'movable human bombs', in order to stop all barbaric attacks against their people. So they chose to leave their families, friends, ambitions and joined the path of resistance in order to secure a bright future for their people.

Specific female terrorists are described in romantic ways:

On Sunday morning January 27, [2002] Wafa [Idris] woke up greeting her mother as usual and telling her ' the situation is so difficult that makes everyone expect death anytime" Then she left to her voluntary work in the "Red crescent". When she arrived, she greeted everyone for the last time, trying to copy everyone's face and to take with her the memories that will not die. Then she left to the Yafa street in Jerusalem city. On her way she started to remember men, women and children who were wounded or died from Israeli forces attacks; those faces that provoked her to revenge and give other peace. Idris, a volunteer medic who raised doves and adored children, blew herself to pieces in less than a minute, in a downtown shopping district, killing an Israeli man and wounding many other people.

Surrounded herself by an explosive belt Dareen [Abu Aisheh] ran to her target on 27/2/2002. She walked proudly and with confident steps as if she were walking toward the gates of Heavens, and within minutes she blew herself up near the Bit Sira military checkpoint, killing scores of Israelis and injuring others.

Why was a woman who openly praises the most heinous kinds of terrorists allowed to gain asylum, and a green card, in the US?

(h/t Michelle G)

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.

"Apartheid?" poster - Israel's Muslim Sharia courts

From Israel's MFA in February, 2016:

President of Israel Reuven Rivlin (9 February 2016) addressed a ceremony at the President's Residence marking the appointment of seven new Qadis - judges in the Muslim religious (Shariah) courts in Israel. The event was attended by Justice Minsiter Ayelet Shaked MK, as well as the President of the Shariah Court of Appeal Qadi Daoud Zini, and saw the appointment of two Shariah Court of Appeal judges, and five who will serve in the regional Shariah Courts.

The President began by congratulating all the newly appointed judges and said, "Your appointment today serves directly and tangibly the entire Muslim community of Israel. The ceremony today is especially poignant and special, as the last such appointment ceremony for Qadis held at the President's Residence was more than six years ago. Your swearing in today is a tribute to the important work of the appointment committee, whom I wish to personally thank. The new forces joining the Shariah judiciary today refresh and bring new strength and spirit to one of the oldest and most important judicial systems in the State of Israel."

The President stressed, "The existence of the state-supported Shariah courts in Israel, reflects the recognition of the unparalleled importance of the vitality of communities, cultures and traditions to the fabric of the life in the modern state. The authority of the Shariah courts - as assured by Israeli law - to me reflects the fundamental principle that an attachment to faith, to tradition, to a culture and community, is not solely the issue of the individual. Such affiliations are a basic right of a citizen in a democracy, and accordingly it is the obligation of the state to support and nurture them."

Since then, Israel has appointed the first female Qadi judge:

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.