Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, April 24, 2019

04/24 Links Pt1: Singer: Trump Seems Set to Expose UN Fraud on Boundaries of Palestine; How Palestinian Leaders Encourage Terrorism; PM calls for new Golan Heights community to be named for Trump

From Ian:

David Singer: Trump Seems Set to Expose UN Fraud on Boundaries of Palestine

President Trump appears set to expose more than forty years of deceptive and misleading information disseminated by the United Nations (UN) in relation to the boundaries of former Palestine.

This welcome development comes with President Trump’s Special U.S Envoy Jason D. Greenblatt telling Sky News in Arabic on 19 April:
“there is no reason to use the term ‘two-state solution,” the reason being that, “every side sees it differently.”

The UN must take responsibility for creating such confusion by perpetuating intellectual and political fraud originating with its 1978 publication: "The Origins and Evolution of the Palestinian Problem" (referred to below as the Study).

Part 1 of the Study covering 1917-1947 was trashed by Israel’s Ambassador to the UN – Yehuda Blum – on 16 November:

“Even the most cursory reading of this document can leave no doubt that the means and machinery of the United Nations have been misused once again to disseminate highly selective and tendentious information under the guise, in this instance, of what purports to be a scholarly study.

The history of international conflicts, and particularly those with complex historical origins, can only be properly written by objective historians who enjoy complete academic freedom. The practice of writing and rewriting history according to the transient interests of a political body is, of course, characteristic of certain regimes. It is regrettable that the United Nations has now been drawn into that pattern.”

Blum then told the UN General Assembly on 30 November 1978:

“At the end of the first part of the publication, ostensibly dealing with the period of the Palestine Mandate, there appear a number of maps. The one map that is conspicuously absent is the official map of the Palestine Mandate which, until 1946, included Transjordan on the east bank of the Jordan River. This map was omitted because it does not fit into the PLO’s own scheme, as it would show too clearly that a Palestinian Arab state has already been in existence for 32 years on more than three quarters of the territory of mandated Palestine – that is, the state now called Jordan. That embarrassment is eliminated in this purportedly scholarly and impartial publication by the simple expedient of eliminating the map.”

The Military Perils of Ceding Israeli Control of the West Bank

In the years since the second intifada ended, no small number of retired high-ranking IDF officers and intelligence officials have argued that complete separation from the Palestinians is a strategic necessity for Israel. Gershon Hacohen, analyzing the geography, the changes in warfare—and Middle Eastern warfare in particular—since the 1990s, and recent history, argues that they are wrong:

The withdrawal of IDF forces from the West Bank and the establishment of a Palestinian state in these territories will constitute an existential threat to Israel. The absence of an Israeli military presence in the West Bank, especially along the Jordan River, will enable the creation of a terrorist entity, à la the Gaza Strip, a stone’s throw from the Israeli hinterland. This withdrawal will box Israel into indefensible borders, especially in light of the major changes in the nature of war in recent decades that have made the astounding achievements of 1967 impossible to replicate, not to mention the stark international response [that would follow Israel’s] takeover of a sovereign state.

The deployment of international forces in the West Bank will not, [contrary to what some have argued], ensure the demilitarization of the prospective Palestinian state, let alone prevent the entry of Arab forces into its territory (with or without its consent) and/or its transformation into a springboard for terrorist attacks against Israel. . . .

Israel [now] maintains control of some 60 percent of the West Bank’s territory, . . . which is mostly empty of Palestinian population but includes all of the West Bank’s Jewish communities and IDF bases, as well as main highways, vital topographic areas, and open spaces descending eastward to the Jordan Valley. The retention of this territory constitutes the absolute minimum required for the preservation of defensible borders and meets two conditions necessary for Israel’s security: the Jordan Valley buffer zone, without which it will be impossible to prevent the rapid arming of Palestinian terrorist groups throughout the West Bank; and control of intersecting transportation arteries, which, together with control of strategic topographical sites, enables rapid deployment of IDF forces deep inside Palestinian areas.

Eugene Kontorovich (WSJ): Saving U.S. Soldiers from Runaway Prosecutors (click via Google)

The Trump foreign policy team scored a big victory in The Hague that will protect American soldiers from illegitimate and unaccountable foreign prosecutions. The International Criminal Court dropped a more than decade-long inquiry into alleged crimes by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the U.S. would deny a visa to the court's prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda.

If the ICC were to indict U.S. servicemen, no American president would turn them over, but it would have a real effect on their lives. They would face peril in traveling to countries that have joined the ICC, including all of Western Europe. They would be international fugitives.

The court's officials are unaccountable to nationals of non-member states like the U.S. Yet they might sit in judgment of decisions made by U.S. personnel in life-or-death situations, and second-guess the judgments of professional prosecutors in democratic countries that have chosen not to join the court.

The court is currently considering whether to open an investigation into whether Israel is committing war crimes by allowing Jews to live in the West Bank. Thus the ICC would be investigating a non-member state at the behest of a non-state member, for a supposed crime that no one in the history of international criminal law has been charged with.

Swiss government spending millions on anti-Israel lawfare

The Swiss government has been directly funding legal activity targeting Israel over the past year. The funding, estimated at $2 million at least, was transferred by the Swiss Foreign Ministry through its diplomatic mission in Ramallah to a series of Israeli and Palestinian organizations one year ago.

The transfer of the funds took place shortly after the Swiss government ended its support for the Ramallah-based Human Rights and International Law Secretariat over its support for the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. Ultimately, though, the funds went toward financing similar projects.

Israel Hayom has seen the contracts, signed by both the Swiss diplomatic mission in Ramallah and six pro-Palestinian organizations in 2018. In addition, funding was allocated toward three Israeli organizations: Hamoked human rights organization, Physicians for Human Rights and Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel.

Among the activities financed in accordance with the contract: “building cases for the International Criminal Court” and “collecting testimonies, field inspections, holding interviews and [providing] legal assistance to victims of war crimes.”

It should be noted that according to the security doctrine formulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the ICC is one of the greatest threats to Israel.

Bernie Sanders says he's pro-Israel because he has family there. Uh, so does Hamas terrorist Ismail Haniyeh. (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

When it comes to proving his pro-Israel bonafides, Bernie Sanders is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

His problem is that condemning Israel has now become a popular litmus test among progressive Democrats seeking to win the party nomination to run for president. And the candidates are getting more competitive as they try to outdo each other.

Just last week, Beto O'Rourke called Netanyahu a racist.

So now this week, Bernie Sanders has called Netanyahu a racist.

Bernie Sanders. Public Domain

Funny how concerned both of them are about combating racism and prejudice when both Sanders and O'Rourke have no problem speaking at the National Action Network of Al Sharpton, whose history of inciting hatred is well known. More recently, in 2012, during the outrage over the death of Trayvon Martin, Sharpton falsely claimed that George Zimmerman used “racial language” in speaking with police, and during his prime-time program on MSNBC Sharpton claimed that Zimmerman,whose mother is Peruvian, was “white” -- implying there was a racial bias in the killing.

This is the man both Sanders and O'Rourke are courting.

On that score, not to be left out, in January a number of Democratic presidential candidates were courting Sharpton as well:

o Joe Biden
o  Elizabeth Warren
o  Kirsten Gillibrand
o  Kamala Harris

And now, in April, the Democratic candidates are at it again:

o  Beto O'Rourke
o  Andrew Yang
o  Julian Castro
o  John Delaney
o  Pete Buttigieg
o  Kamala Harris
o  Elizabeth Warren
o  Bernie Sanders
o  Kirsten Gillibrand
o  Amy Klobuchar
o  Cory Booker
o  John Hickenlooper

For his part, Bernie doesn't even stop at Netanyahu; he has been calling Trump a racist too -- and worse:

It gives me no pleasure to tell you that we have a president today who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a homophobe, who is a xenophobe, and who is a religious bigot. I wish I did not have to say that. But that is the damn truth.

And yet, at the same time Sanders defends Ilhan Omar, claiming

We must not, however, equate anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in Israel. [emphasis added]

What is not clear is how Sanders considers Omar's 'Benjamins' comment and implication of dual loyalty by supporters of Israel to be 'legitimate criticism' of Israel.

Similarly, it is not clear how Sanders walks the fine line of accusing Netanyahu of being a racist when he was re-elected in free democratic elections in Israel for a 5th term.

But if Sanders is so willing to throw Israel under the bus, condemning its newly re-elected Prime Minister and defending attacks on the Jewish state itself, what is it that makes Bernie Sanders pro-Israel?

Apparently, the only way we know that Sanders is pro-Israel is that he says so:

As a young man I spent a number of months in Israel, [and] worked on a kibbutz for while. I have family in Israel. I am not anti-Israel. But the fact of the matter is that Netanyahu is a right-wing politician who I think is treating the Palestinian people extremely unfairly. [emphasis added]

If Sanders really has to resort to this to prove he is pro Israel, he must realize how shaky his pro-Israel bonafides actually are.

Compare with Hamas terrorist leader Ismail Haniyeh, who has 3 sisters who live in Israel as full citizens. For that matter, Haniyeh's grand-daughter, brother-in-law, and mother-in-law have all been treated in Israeli hospitals.

Ismail Haniyeh. Youtube Screencap

Does that make Haniyeh as pro-Israel as Bernie Sanders?

But why does Sanders resort to such irrelevant points to begin with?

Well, how else would anyone know that Sanders is pro-Israel? After all, outside of political campaigns, does he ever just come out and talk about Israel just for the sake of talking about Israel? On the contrary, it appears that Sanders has never appeared at AIPAC, has never appeared at a pro-Israel rally and also has not traveled to the Middle East in decades.

This is not about Sanders criticizing Israel in general. Criticizing the Israeli government is practically a national pastime in Israel, and contrary to the oft-heard excuse that cries of antisemitism are just excuses to stifle criticism of Israel, no one considers criticism of Israel to be antisemitic, as long as it does not demonize, delegitimize, or rely on double standards.

The bottom line is that the arguments Bernie Sanders uses to prove he is pro-Israel are just plain silly.

And the people he chooses as friends and allies make his judgement on matters of racism suspect.

We'll leave it to others to judge whether Bernie's arguments for his other political positions are equally simplistic.

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.

Jewish and Palestinian national identities (response to @HenMazzig)

Hen Mazzig, one of the best pro-Israel voices out there, tweeted:

We can’t ignore Palestinian national identity and desire for a state of their own. If we are serious about solving the conflict, we must address this issue. Ask yourself before commenting: Do you support the right of self-determination for all people? Or only for Israelis?

I believe that the framework for the question is flawed.

There is no comparison between the quality, history and purposes of Jewish and Palestinian peoplehood, and any answer to this question must include those facts.

Jewish peoplehood was forged thousands of years ago. It remained strong throughout history, through the destruction of the Jewish nation, through persecution and pogroms, Crusades and the Holocaust. It is based on shared history, shared customs and shared laws, even as the Jewish people themselves were scattered across the globe.

Modern Zionism notwithstanding, Jewish nationalism is just as old. Every day Jews pray to return to Zion, and throughout the millennia, many of them have.

Palestinian peoplehood was created in the 1950s by the members of the Arab League. Their decision to not allow Arab refugees from Palestine to become citizens and to leave them stateless and miserable is what created the Palestinian people.

These Arab leaders weren't shy about describing why they made that decision: to keep the refugees as a thorn in Israel's side. Their misery was a strategy to destroy Israel over the long term. Every Arab has the right to become a citizen of any Arab country - unless they are Palestinian. The UN and the West eventually capitulated to this truly evil plan and allowed Palestinian Arabs to be treated as stateless refugees until they "return" - to destroy Israel.

Palestinian nationalism is not organic. It is not a yearning for a state. If it was, they would have one by now. The entire purpose of Palestinian nationalism is ta response to, and a weapon to destroy, Jewish nationalism.

Jewish nationalism is indifferent to Palestinian nationalism. Palestinian nationalism wouldn't exist without Jewish nationalism. The people known as Palestinians today would happily be Jordanians or Egyptians or Syrians depending on which countries would have taken over Palestine had Israel lost the war in 1948.

I agree that Palestinians are a people now - because of the misery they have been forced to go through as stateless and second class residents of the Arab world. But being a people is not a binary option of yes or no. The quality of Palestinian peoplehood and nationalism is far, far inferior to that of Jewish nationalism, and they cannot be treated even remotely equally, or else we are rewarding the cynicism and malevolent impulses that created that people to begin with.

In short, Palestinian nationalism can and must never be allowed to compromise Jewish nationalism in the slightest. Otherwise we are rewarding those who have been using the Palestinians as pawns for 70 years.

In real terms, this means that the Jewish claim on Hebron or Bethlehem and even Jericho and Shechem (Nablus) is morally and historically far superior to that of the recently created Palestinian people. (To be honest, any Jewish claim on parts of Jordan would also be morally and historically superior to that of Jordanians, although there is little international law support for that claim and there is no real desire to act on it.)

Israel has to be practical. It doesn't want a large hostile population under its control. For better or for worse, Areas A and B have been given up by Israel during the Oslo process and it is not realistic to reclaim those areas.

Within those areas, for the most part, Palestinians do have self determination, today. (Or they would if their leaders would set up an election.) This is not because they deserve it as a people. It is because Israel ceded its rights to those areas in the interests of peace.

Except for some isolated cases like Hebron and Bethlehem, those rights are not impeding very much on Jewish rights of self determination (although they do impede on other Jewish rights such as the right to worship at and visit holy spots.)

At the same time, Palestinians must have the right to become full citizens of the Arab nations that they were born in if they so choose. This basic human right is all but ignored nowadays. If the West wants to solve the Palestinian issue, that is a vital component of the solution. The silence from so-called "human rights" organizations on this issue tell you all you need to know about how little they truly care about Palestinians.

All peoples deserve the right to self determination, but that right does not extend to damage the rights of others whose peoplehood is far more deserving of that right. A balance must be found between the two, but when the rights are far from equal, it is immoral to claim that they are.

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.

Ever since 1949. Lebanon has refused to negotiate with Israel to determine the exact maritime border between the two nations. As a result, there is a wedge of nearly 1000 square kilometers that is in dispute in the Mediterranean (marked above), and where it is difficult for either nation to drill exploratory wells to search for natural gas or oil, which is plentiful in the area.

Israel has lots of gas fields it has discovered and it is not drilling in the disputed area.

Now, Lebanon is interested in resolving the dispute, as Lebanon's Daily Star reports:

Speaker Nabih Berri said Tuesday that Lebanon would agree to mark its maritime borders with Israel and Exclusive Economic Zone by the same mechanism used to demarcate the Blue Line, under the supervision of the United Nations.

The U.N.-demarcated Blue Line currently separates Lebanon and Israel’s lands with over 200 points, but at least 13 points are disputed by the Lebanese government.

Berri’s remarks came during a meeting with UNIFIL head Stefano del Col, where the pair discussed the situation in south Lebanon, Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty, the Blue Line and the maritime border.

Del Col said the mechanism used to draw the Blue Line could also be used to resolve the maritime border issue and enhance stability, according to a statement from Berri’s office.

What changed?

Lebanon was very aware of the potential of gas drilling in the area for at least a decade, so it doesn't appear to be economic reasons.

Could it be that the softening of the Gulf Arab states towards Israel, and Trump's embrace of Israel's side in the Golan and elsewhere, is injecting some realpolitik into Lebanese thinking?

This is especially interesting since Hezbollah slavishly does whatever Iran wants, and Iran wouldn't agree to any cooperation with Israel in any way. Either Iran changed its mind for some reason or the Lebanese government is ignoring Hezbollah's demands in this area.

The Middle East is changing in fundamental ways. It is too bad that the EU and Democratic Party in the US still think that we are in the 1990s, pushing for a solution that has never worked, while ignoring these very real changes.

(h/t Yoel)

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.

04/23 Links Pt2: Elan Carr Calls Out BDS: ‘Hatred of the Jewish State Is Hatred of the Jewish People’; Wiesenthal Center: ‘Grotesque’ for Omar, NYT to Say Jesus Was Palestinian; Sanders: Israel Is Run by ‘Racist’ Government Under Netanyahu

From Ian:

Elan Carr Calls Out BDS: ‘Hatred of the Jewish State Is Hatred of the Jewish People’

Elan Carr, the recently appointed State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, criticized the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement during an April 16 press conference for promulgating “hatred of the Jewish people.”

Carr was asked by a reporter if he viewed the BDS movement as anti-Semitic rather than just criticism of the Israeli government.

“If there is an organized movement to economically strangle the state of Israel, that is anti-Semitic, and the administration’s gone on the record as being opposed unequivocally to the BDS movement,” Carr said. “And the idea that somehow there can be movements organized to deny Israel its legitimacy and not to allow Israel to participate in economic commerce in the world, sure that is [anti-Semitic].”

“Hatred of the Jewish state is hatred of the Jewish people, and that’s something that’s very clear and that is our policy,” Carr added.

The new US envoy for combatting antisemitism Elan Carr speaks out and calls out BDS for #antisemitism: pic.twitter.com/2aQRJqHljZ
— StandWithUs (@StandWithUs) April 15, 2019

In the Journal’s February 8 issue cover story, Carr made similar comments to the Journal regarding the BDS movement.

“The idea that Israel should be singled out for disparate treatment and should be subjected to boycotts and to demonization is anti-Semitism,” Carr said. “An obsessive hatred of the Jewish state is nothing more than an obsessive hate for the Jewish people.”

You cannot fight antisemitism without attributing Israel’s success under a Benjamin Netanyahu

In 2016 a report was released, the first of its kind demonstrating that anti zionist activities including the boycott divestments sanction movement (BDS) and anti-Israel student groups faculty who alongside an academic board is at the heart of the rise of campus anti-Semitism.(AMCHA)

Understanding the report fully and how the scope of antisemitism on US campuses this report initiated and investigated over a year assessed levels of campus antisemitism by measuring the students attitudes and reports and anti-Semitic activity by focusing on incidences compiled from eyewitness reports and media accounts.

Different types of activity were equated to the rise of antisemitism this included anti-Semitic expression, tropes included imagery and incidents, the targeting of students behaviour including physical harm and physical assault, harassment, destruction of property and the boycott divestment sanction activity which endorsed the anti-Israel boycott-rhetoric and imagery intended to demonise and delegitimise Israel and the expression which is consistent with that of the United States government definition of anti-Semitism at the time.

So let’s look at what the basic idea of Zionism is. Zionism is simple. It is a movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.

Simple clarification of terminology for being pro Israel should be easy to understand, that in order for a homeland of Israel to exist, a successful environment for Jewish people to return to and to live in, we have to understand that the undermining of the present and returning elected Israeli Government,The Likud party with PM Benjamin Netanyahu at its helm, signifies two things

A strong and economically successful country, and the people of Israel freely making a democratic elected choice of Government.

However, an example of those that seem to be on the “fighting antisemitism” bandwagon, particulary groups that are on the political left, who for example expose Jeremy Corbyns antisemitism are constantly berating and criticising Netanyahu even admitting They know nothing about Israeli politics .

We know too well that there is no separation – anti Zionism is antisemitism

An Open Letter on Israeli ‘Pinkwashing’ and True Discrimination Against the Arab Gay Community

The signatories of this letter seek to address an open letter sent to Eurovision’s Irish entrant, Sarah McTernan. The letter, signed by individuals such as David Norris and Ailbhe Smith, asks Ms. McTernan not to aid in Israel’s “pinkwashing” tactics.

The Ireland Israel Alliance is saddened by the bullying that Sarah McTernan continues to receive — this time by “human rights campaigners who have long been involved in LGBTQIA activism in Ireland” — since her announcement as Ireland’s Eurovision entrant. This year’s event will be held in Israel in May.

We believe that in publicly targeting Sarah, and in attempting to pressure her into not participating, the signatories have devalued the battle fought by the gay community, and others in Israel, for recognition of their rights, not to mention the progress made so far and the battles which remain to be fought.

Instead of celebrating Tel Aviv’s annual Pride parade — and acknowledging that it and the annual Pride parade held in Jerusalem are the only annual Pride events in the entirety of the Middle East — the signatories felt compelled to enter an alternative reality and condemn the Tel Aviv parade and the Israeli government’s support of it as “pinkwashing.” Instead of celebrating the courage of those who fought against prejudice and violence to ensure an annual Pride event in Jerusalem, the signatories chose to ignore that too.

Iran sets up a shell company to sell its oil under the radar of US sanctions

Iran's MehrNews is pushing selling Iranian oil, under the name of another company, saying that buyers can make a nice profit and not be noticed by US sanctions authorities.

In this report, advantages of purchasing Iranian oil from IRENEX are compared with those of conducting direct negotiations with Iranian oil ministry.

1. Purchasers’ info not disclosed

At IRENEX the purchasers’ data remain confidential and they are not even introduced to the brokers’ and brokerage networks. Each purchaser is provided with a code and does the sales under it.

2. Lower prices

The prices of the offered crude oil and gas condensates at IRENEX are lower than Brent and the international market. For example, at the fifth round of oil offering at IRENEX, crude oil was offered 14 percent lower than the time international Brent prices i.e. purchasing each 35,000 barrels of crude oil from IRENEX would bring a purchaser a profit of $500,000.

3. Payments in rial

The payment mechanism at IRENEX is rial-based which lets the foreign investors to remain safe from the sanction. At IRENEX, foreign investors have the chance to purchase oil and cooperate with Iranian private sector i.e. the Iranian private sector, who is capable of exchanging foreign currencies to rial easily, buys oil at IRENEX and delivers it to foreign investors. The Iranian side returns the earned money to Central Bank of Iran (CBI) afterwards.

4. Exports destinations unlimited

Oil buyers can export the purchased cargoes to any country across the globe, except to the Zionist regime.

5. Small cargoes

Oil and gas condensate are offered in 35,000-barrels cargoes at IRENEX, which are small ones and allow the private companies to take part in purchases. Presented cargoes by the oil ministry are larger and no company can participate in that market. At IRENEX, the buyers can receive their cargoes both through maritime routes from Kharg Island or via Iran’s land borders.

6. Participation in IRENEX easy

Iran’s oil ministry merely sells oil to known and identified purchasers or companies with good reputation and background, while at IRENEX, the only required document to enter the market is a reliable guarantee.

IRENEX can be a golden opportunity for both Iranian and foreign investors with spot or long-term agreements.

The sanctions are clearly making Iran nervous enough to set up a shell company to sell oil. The question is whether the US can find companies that try to skirt the sanctions by going through Irenex.

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.

Andrew Ross, a professor and director of NYU's American Studies Program, came up with a novel and utterly bizarre reason why Arabs should control Israel.

Writing in The Nation, he notes that Arab labor had, and has, been often used to build buildings in Israel and in the territories. He essentially calls this tantamount to slavery.

There is nothing optional about this kind of employment. Technically, it may not be forced labor, but when the few alternatives offer little more than a starvation wage, it is certainly not free labor.

The idea that the general wages in the territories are "starvation wages" is not borne out by any facts, of course. It is a simple assertion meant to evoke feelings of hate for Israeli Jews. I have yet to find a single case of a Palestinian starving to death, not in Gaza and certainly not in the West Bank, although the accusations of Israel starving them are made so often that, like any Big Lie, they are accepted as truth.

If Palestinian wages are "starvation wages," then it is a miracle that Jordanians aren't dropping like flies of starvation, because they get paid on the average only 78% of what those starving Palestinians make.

Ross is part of the tradition of lying propaganda meant to evoke hatred for Israeli Jews.

Moreover, Israeli wages are close to triple Palestinian wages. If Israelis were trying to squeeze all the value they can from the Arabs, why would they pay such a large disparity in wages - they can get the same workforce for half the cost!

Logic (and economics) is clearly not Ross' strong suit. Like so many other articles about Israel in The Nation, the only important information is that Israelis are evil and there are some facts that can be cherry picked to pretend to prove the point. (He states flatly that Israel expelled 750,000 Arabs in 1948, a complete lie.)

As so many academics do, Ross wants to break new ground in finding reasons for readers to hate Israel. So he makes up an entirely new theory and pretends it is one that the bad guys (Israelis and Americans) have been using forever:

How does that long record of labor contributions feed into the debate about a single, democratic state on the lands of historic Palestine? Should those who build countries acquire rights within them? This proposition lies at the heart of the labor theory of property that drove settler colonialism (both in the United States and Israel): If you “improve” the land through your labor, you could rightfully claim it....If and when “final status” negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians are revived (admittedly, a big “if”), all the claims for past injuries and wrongs will still be on the table; restitution for 70 years of lost property, compensation for moral suffering, the right to return, and so on. These debts must be repaid. But the creation of a new kind of unitary state with full citizenship for all will require transitional as well as reparative justice. The political equity earned from the long inventory of Palestinians’ compulsory labor ought to be part of that reckoning.

According to this academic fraud, people who were and are paid to do work - and who generally moved their families to be closer to where they can make higher wages, as so many did before 1935 - are actually exploited and deserve to be compensated today as if they were slaves.

It's like saying that Seattle residents are enslaved by Microsoft because they can generally expect to be paid 70% more by the software giant than they can at other jobs in Seattle on average ($118K/year vs. $69K/year.)

As with all anti-Israel arguments, it doesn't stand even the slightest scrutiny. But this 'academic" is not interested in the truth. He doesn't welcome people who point out that his logic and facts are wrong, leading to incorrect conclusions.

No, Andrew Ross is just another propagandist, but he hides his hate behind academic gobbledygook, hoping that no one calls him on it.

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.

04/23 Links Pt1: Greenblatt: Care About Gaza? Blame Hamas; Who denied the Palestinians an independent state? Not Israel; Bipartisan bill urges Congress to publish annual report on PA incitement

From Ian:

Jason Greenblatt: Care About Gaza? Blame Hamas

Hamas has left Gaza in shambles. Life there is difficult, sad and abnormal. Only buildings with generators actually maintain steady power. The lack of power affects everything from preserving fresh food to treating sewage. If a person in Gaza falls ill, he is likely to find trained medical professionals unable to help because of the lack of equipment and medicines. The people there — even the talented and educated — can’t find jobs. The store shelves are empty. The shoreline, which in many other places in the Mediterranean would be filled with beach resorts, is covered in the raw sewage and debris from successive wars. The cost of conflict is seen in all aspects of life in Gaza.

If you ask why such hardships exist in Gaza, the answer will almost always be the same: the Israelis.

Really? The Arabs in Israel generally live normal lives and, in many cases, thrive. In fact, Arab citizens of Israel live freely compared with Arabs in many other countries in the region. The Palestinians in the West Bank are largely progressing in stable cities and communities. Educated workers are finding jobs (though there is much room for improvement — something the Trump administration has tried to help Palestinians with, only to be blocked by the Palestinian Authority). Trade both with Israel and abroad is providing employment and possibilities. Infrastructure has progressively improved. Power is available 24 hours every day in most communities.

Why are others moving forward while Gaza sinks further into despair and disrepair? Because Hamas, the de facto ruler of the Gaza Strip, has made choices. Hamas professes violence and the destruction of Israel as a method of gaining a better life for Palestinians. This “defense” of Palestinians has led to the problems experienced today: a decimated economy, hundreds killed in violence each year and one of the highest unemployment rates in the world. Hamas is to blame for Gaza’s situation.

The countries of the world have attempted to help the people of Gaza repeatedly since 2007, when Hamas violently seized power there from the government led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Donors have offered to build the infrastructure and the economy, but are set back years every time Hamas and other terrorist organizations fire rockets into Israel. Hamas has instigated three wars with Israel since 2007, each time leaving its infrastructure in greater disarray.

Jonathan S. Tobin: Who denied the Palestinians an independent state? Not Israel

According to The New York Times, the re-election of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has left Palestinian families seeing “no light at the end of the tunnel.”

A feature published on the front page of the paper, Monday, focused on the despair felt by Palestinian families over the current stalemate in the peace process. They know that the Palestinian Authority that rules over their cities, towns and villages is horribly corrupt and unable to reach a peace deal with Israel. And they understand that Israelis have no more faith in the prospects of peace than they do.

The piece shows that some Palestinians are rethinking the ideology that has fueled a century-long war on Zionism. But they fail to mention a basic fact that defines the current situation: The Palestinian leadership has repeatedly rejected compromises that would have given them the statehood they claim to want. It’s interesting that nowhere in the 1,000-word article does The New York Times make note of this fact.

This omission speaks volumes not only about the ignorance and obtuse nature of the criticism of Israel that emanates from the paper, but also about the chattering classes and foreign-policy establishment that take their cues on the Middle East from its pages.

Arabs living in the West Bank have good reason to distrust their current leaders. In a few moments of rare clarity on the situation that are mentioned only in passing, some of the piece’s sources admit that life was better for them before the Oslo peace process that created the Palestinian Authority.

Khaled Abu Toameh: The Persecution of Palestinians No One Mentions

In Lebanon, Palestinians have long been facing discriminatory and "Apartheid laws" that deny them basic rights, including access to dozens of skilled professions, health-care and education services. According to some reports, thousands of Palestinians have been fleeing Lebanon in recent years as a result of the dire economic conditions and government regulations that deny them basic rights.

In 2015, a Saudi court sentenced Palestinian artist and poet Ashraf Fayadh to death by beheading for "apostasy." Later, however, the court overturned the death sentence and replaced it with an eight-year prison term and 800 lashes. The "evidence" against Fayadh was based on poems included in his book Instructions Within, as well as social media posts and conversations he had in a coffee shop in Saudi Arabia.

Palestinian leaders do not seem to care about the suffering of their people at the hands of Arabs. Yet, these same leaders are quick to condemn Israel on almost every occasion and available platform. Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are so busy fighting each other (and Israel) that they seem to have forgotten about the Palestinians in Arab countries, being killed, wounded and arrested every day.

Egyptian government official says democracy and freedom is a Jewish plot

Egypt's National Council for Women is a governmental organization to deal with women's issues.

One of its 28 members is Rania Yehia, who is also a violinist and a professor at the Egyptian Academy of Arts.

She wrote an article in Albawabah News which says that "Democracy in our case makes our country weak" and that political freedom is a "Jewish tool to take control over the people as mentioned in the first Protocol of the Elders of Zion."

Political freedom, she writes, is a means to control the people and disassemble them from within, and weaken the government and the state and create chaos, so that the Jews can control everyone.

At least Yehia is not controlled by the Jews. She just thinks about how to counter their plots night and day.

(h/t WC)

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.

Jewish "progressives" like @jvplive espouse kindergarten-level Jewish ethics

TruthOut interviews Temple University Professor Emerita of English, American Studies and Women’s Studies Carolyn L. Karcher, who has just edited a book about Jews who used to be Zionists and then decided that they were to moral to allow Jews the right to self-determination.

The book is called "Reclaiming Judaism from Zionism: Stories of Personal Transformation."

Since Judaism is a topic I take seriously, I was curious as to how these people - mostly members of Jewish Voice for Peace - look at Judaism.

The answer is given by the author in the interview:

What is entailed in reclaiming Judaism from Zionism exactly? Could you tell me what it means to “reclaim Judaism from Zionism” as it pertains to this book, in particular?

As I see it, ethical precepts lie at the heart of Judaism: pursue justice, love the stranger, love your neighbor and repair the world. Obviously, all of these ethical precepts are violated by Zionist policy toward Palestinians. And so, what happens when Judaism is married to (or hijacked by) Zionism is that the protection of the Jewish people, the physical survival of the Jewish people, takes precedence over the religion’s ethical teachings.

This professor defines Judaism as a series of cherry-picked brief ethical statements, the last of which is not even in the Torah: "pursue justice, love the stranger, love your neighbor and repair the world."

This is pre-school level ethics. These "progressives" idea of Judaism does not go beyond what a five year old could understand.

I'm reminded of a joke:

On a transatlantic flight, a rabbi sat next to an astrophysicist. The scientist said that he felt that there was no reason to study the Torah in depth, because it can be summed up with the idea of "Do unto others as you would want them to do unto you." Everything else beyond that was a waste of time.

The rabbi replied that he didn't see the purpose of studying astrophysics in depth either, because it could all be summed up with "Twinkle, twinkle, little star, how I wonder what you are."

To boil down Judaism to a series of ideas no more sophisticated than a nursery rhyme is offensive to any serious Jew. Tens of thousands of Jewish scholars have pored over the source materials and commentaries on Judaism - its laws, ethics, philosophy - for millennia. Ethical questions have been debated and argued over, with arguments that span generations. And these arguments are anchored in Jewish texts and history that in many ways gave the Western world the ethical framework that we are so familiar with.

That is not the only offensive thing Karcher says in that brief section. When she says that "the survival of the Jewish people takes precedence over the religion’s ethical teachings" she is saying that the survival of the Jewish people is not an ethical idea to begin with!

Karcher and her JVP buddies look at real Judaism as an impediment to their puerile versions of "morality." After all, Abraham and Moses and David fought wars; God punished entire nations - but that version of Judaism holds no moral weight to these moral lightweights.

For her, and presumably her co-authors, there is only one moral imperative, and it is the kindergarten version of morality. They are showing not only ignorance but also breathtaking arrogance.

The questions that come up in real Judaism, and in real world Zionism, are not the pre-school level precepts JVP pretends they are - but how to balance competing ethical rules.

How to treat Palestinians while still protecting the lives of Israelis? Do you choose to attack a house with a terrorist inside from the air or from the ground, endangering more troops? Do you open the border on Jewish holidays when there is a history of attacks on those very holidays? Do you allow online incitement to go unchecked or do you arrest the ones who are advocating murdering Jewish civilians? Is it moral to abandon Jewish nationalism to give way to Palestinian nationalism? Is a 1% chance for a major terror attack enough to inconvenience 1000 people? Is administrative detention a moral choice sometimes? What is allowed in espionage?

These are hard questions. Israel has ethicists as well as rabbis who grapple with these sorts of issues. The IDF has moral codes based on these decisions, and the Israeli court systems apply them to every situation.

No Zionist claims that Palestinian Arabs do not have human rights. Not one. The questions of how to deal with this population of people, some of whom want to destroy you while others want to just live in peace with you, are what every thinking Zionist has to consider.

Those taking the moral high road, pretending that they have the only moral viewpoint yet don't have the slightest grasp of Judaism or ethics are the immoral ones.

It is not ethical to decide that Israel is wrong and then finding "ethical" arguments to support that position, while purposefully ignoring the arguments that would make you uncomfortable. It is an insult to the very idea of ethics. It is an insult to generations of Jews who take their faith seriously. It is an insult to Israelis and Zionists who struggle with where to draw the line for competing ethical directives. It is an insult to the very field of ethics. The cover of her book, showing a Torah whose teaching are directly in contradiction to her "Jewish ethics," is offensive and insulting, as is the title.

The Torah says sometimes you have to go to war. The Torah says you must prioritize the lives of your people over your enemies. "Loving the stranger" does not include people who want to murder you.

In truth, the "ethics" espoused by Karcher and JVP are unethical and immoral. All the proof we need is Karcher's statement that protecting Jews and the Jewish people is not an ethical imperative, but "tikun olam" is - the immoral idea that one should prioritize others before your own people. Taken to the extreme, Karcher's stated "ethics" would mean that she must fly to Gaza to try to save Palestinian lives ("love the stranger") while her own daughter starves to death ("physical survival of the Jewish people.")

When your morals are that simplistic, they are not moral.

Karcher, and her JVP friends, should be ashamed.

If they had any real sense of morality, they would be.

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.

Most of the reports about the Arab League meeting held on Sunday in Cairo say that it accomplished two things the Palestinians demanded: $100 million a month to make up for the funds that the PA refuses to receive from Israel, and a rejection of the Trump "Deal of the Century."

But Palestinian sources are saying that things are not quite what they appear.

The invitation for the special session said that it was meant to be an explicit rejection of the expected US peace plan. The final statement did not mention the US or the plan explicitly as Abbas demanded; it was watered down to say that the Arab league would not accept any plan or deal that does not comply with "international law, resolutions of international legitimacy and the principle of land for peace." It also mentioned the 1967 lines and Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state in line with the 2002 Arab peace plan.

Arab media understood this to be tantamount to a rejection of the Trump deal, but the statement did not go nearly as far as Abbas wanted.

Sources say that Bahrain didn't even want the word "deal" mentioned in the final statement.

Interestingly, the final statement mentioned compensation for Palestinian refugees but not return.

The final statement was also watered down by Lebanon which added demands that Israel give up the Shebaa Farms and other areas that Hezbollah demands, even though the UN certified that Israel withdrew completely from Lebanon. In addition, it demanded that Palestinian leaders to get their act together, "calling on the Palestinian factions and forces to speed up the completion of national reconciliation."

The Hamas/Fatah split is nearly 12 years old now.

As far as the monthly $100 million that the League pledged to make up the budget shortfall, it sounds like these are more empty promises, which we have seen many times in the past. Arab pledges to help Palestinians are often not backed up with actual cash. Sources say that "many countries may not be committed to these (payments) because of their financial crises or the absence of a political decision to provide support for Palestine."

In the end, the meeting was the usual platitudes of support for the PLO but in reality all Abbas got was empty words.

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.

Over 70 were killed in Iran floods. Iran spins them to say the benefits outweigh the losses!

Iran is trying to spin the recent flooding that killed at least 70 (and according to some, more than triple that number.)

Spin can only go so far before it turns into not caring about thoe who died.

From Tehran Times:

Issa Kalantari, chief of the Department of Environment (DOE), told Khabaronline that rainfalls have economic benefits for the country twice as much as agriculture sector. While DOE chief regretted the casualties caused by the flooding he highlighted that the benefits of the floods are 10 times more than the losses they inflicted upon the country.

The flood waters would bring back wetlands and rivers to life and revive Zagros forests, and also recharge surface and groundwater resources, Kalantari added.

Mohammad Fazeli, an official with Energy Ministry, also said that floodwater can play a role in dissolving chemicals in farming lands.

The increase in the amount of water after floods will promote industries and tourism in flood-hit regions, he added.

Fazeli went on to explain that while floods have destructed infrastructure, and damaged houses, farming lands, crops and livestock in the short-term, its long-term benefits outweigh the losses.

Just imagine a Western leader saying this! Imagine the loved ones of the dead being told that the deaths were all worthwhile because of the groundwater levels.

What a sick society.

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.