Tuesday, May 30, 2017

  • Tuesday, May 30, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


There are lots of articles being published in recent and upcoming weeks about the Six Day War and its legacy.

Any article that talks about "occupation" and "colonialism" and all the other evils that are ascribed to Israel, that do not mention the Khartoum Resolution of September 1, 1967, is an example of deceit.

The main paragraph of the Khartoum Resolution said:
 The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.
That last sentence means "destroy Israel," by the way. It was not referring to the territories in any way. Nobody at all demanded a Palestinian state in the territories in 1967.

As Michael Oren writes in an abbreviated history of the Six Day War published on Sunday:
A month after the war, Israel formally annexed East Jerusalem, but it also offered to return almost all of land captured from Syria and Egypt in exchange for peace.

The Arabs responded with “the three noes”: no negotiations, no recognition, no peace.
I don't think that returning the lands would have been a good idea, but the fact is that Israel did offer land for peace - a much more generous offer than the Palestinian Arabs are likely to ever receive.

And the Arab leaders said "no."

Who can blame Israel for holding onto a small percentage of the territory it won in a defensive war, on a front where it warned its enemy to stay out of the fighting to no avail? Where the alternative is a state that is only nine-miles wide that is literally indefensible?

But Israel did make the foolhardy offer. And the Arabs responded that they would prefer war to peace - an attitude that the Palestinian Arabs have maintained and demonstrated very bloodily on multiple occasions, most notably in 2001 but also by encouraging the more recent "knife intifada."

If someone thinks that "occupation" is the ultimate evil and doesn't have a word to say about the Arab leaders' decision to reject peace in exchange for virtually all the land Israel gained in 1967, then that person doesn't care about "occupation" or peace - they support the old Arab genocidal attitude towards Jews in the Middle East.





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.
  • Tuesday, May 30, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


YNet reported yesterday that the Lebanese BDS campaign to ban the "Wonder Woman" movie because it stars Israeli Gal Gadot was unsuccessful.

It may have been premature.

From the Daily Star Lebanon, today:

Highly anticipated DC Comics American superhero film “Wonder Woman” will be banned in Lebanon, the state-run National News Agency reported Monday.

The movie’s casting, with the superhero played by Israeli actress Gal Gadot, prompted the Ministry of Economy and Commerce “to take necessary measures” to prevent the film’s screening in the country.

The ban is in alignment with Lebanon’s attempts to boycott supporters of Israel and Israeli-affiliated businesses.
But it isn't quite over. Arab News reports:
According to a circulated information poster released by the ministry, on Monday it “prepared a directive for the General Directorate of Public Security to take the necessary measures to prevent the screening of this film.”
However, despite stirring up a social media frenzy, the reported ban has yet to be enforced and when contacted by Arab News, a representative of one cinema chain in Lebanon — who spoke on condition of anonymity — said that a premiere screening has been planned for Tuesday evening, pending an official announcement.

Significantly, the Saudi-based Arab News includes the trailer for the film in its article.

Last year, Lebanese boycotters attempted to ban "Batman v. Superman" where Gadot's character was introduced, but apparently that was not successful.




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.


In its new General Principles and Policies, Hamas proclaims:
Resisting the occupation with all means and methods is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws and by international norms and laws. At the heart of these lies armed resistance, which is regarded as the strategic choice for protecting the principles and the rights of the Palestinian people.
This is actually something new for Hamas that is not found in the actual Hamas Covenant.

But the claim that the Palestinian Arabs have a right under international law to "resist" Israel "with all means and methods" -- implying including the targeting of civilians as well, is not specific to Hamas terrorists.

This latitude was already made in a 2004 post on the Electronic Intifada website by John Sigler, Palestine: Legitimate Armed Resistance vs. Terrorism:
However, among these legal forms of violence there is also the right to use force in the struggle for “liberation from colonial and foreign domination”. To quote United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24 of 29 November 1978:
“2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;”
Electronic Intifada also notes that the United Nations applies this concept to the Palestinian Arabs, and goes one step further:
This justification for legitimate armed resistance has been specifically applied to the Palestinian struggle repeatedly. To quote General Assembly Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX) of 29 November 1974:
3. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples’ struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle; [emphasis added]…

7. Strongly condemns all Governments which do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of peoples under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people;
Sigler does make 2 concessions:
o He admits that General Assembly Resolutions do not have the force of law, though he then goes on to claim, "when they [UNGA resolutions] address legal issues they do accurately reflect the customary international legal opinion among the majority of the world’s sovereign states." (Keep in mind that international law is not decided by a poll of countries)

o Sigler also will agree that civilians are off-limits. (Pity that Hamas do not make that distinction and that most of their targets actually are civilian, not military)
photo
United Nations. Credit: Neptuul, Wikipedia


One problem -- with both Sigler's and the United Nations approach -- is that the language adopted in the resolutions do not apply.

To claim that the Jewish State of Israel constitutes "colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation" ignores the fact that Jews are indigenous to the land and have been living there uninterruptedly for over 3,000 years. Since when is a people with historical, cultural, and religious ties to the land considered "colonial" or "foreign"? When archaeologists uncover finds that reveal the earlier history of the land, it is the history of the Jews -- not the Arabs. The name "Jew" comes from Judea, while the Arabs come from and are indigenous to Arabia.

But there is another issue here: since when does the United Nations sanction violence?

Article 1 of the United Nations Charter clearly states that its purpose is
To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
Article 33 adds
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
Nowhere does the charter say that in the event that you just cannot resolve your differences -- go ahead and have at it.

photo
The aftermath of a bus bombing in Haifa in 2003. Credit: Wikipedia, B. Železník


This discrepancy between these language of the UN resolutions and its original charter is the point made by Joshua Muravchik in The UN and Israel: A History of Discrimination. Muravchik sheds light on some of the history behind those UN resolutions that Electronic Intifada quotes. On the UN apparent sanctioning of violence, Muravchik writes:
This stance, which contradicts the UN Charter, originated in the struggles for African independence and then was carried over to the Arab-Israel conflict. In the 1960s, the General Assembly passed several resolutions regarding Portugal’s colonies and the white-ruled states of southern Africa, affirming “the legitimacy of the struggle of the colonial peoples to exercise their right to self-determination and independence” (e.g., Resolution 2548). In 1970, an important modification was added in the phrase “by all the necessary means at their disposal” (Resolution 2708).

The PLO, backed by the Arab states and the Islamic Conference, was to cite this language as sanctioning its deliberate attacks on civilians. In his famous speech to the General Assembly, Arafat claimed that “the difference between the revolutionary and the terrorist lies in the reason for which each fights. Whoever stands by a just cause?.?.?.?cannot possibly be called [a] terrorist.”

Just a week after Arafat’s appearance, the General Assembly affirmed “the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means” (Resolution 3236). Any ambiguity in this phrase was wiped away in a 1982 resolution that lumped the Palestinian case together with lingering cases of white rule in southern Africa and affirmed “the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples against foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle” (Resolution 37/43). Since the Palestinians were engaged neither in conventional nor even, for the most part, guerrilla war with Israel, but rather a campaign of bombings and murders aimed at civilian targets, this is what was meant by “armed struggle.” [emphasis added]
From Portuguese territories to Israel is a slippery slope.

Leave it to the UN to go from UN Resolution 3236 recognizing "the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations" to using all available means, including armed struggle.

The bottom line is that just as there is no unalienable right of the remaining Palestinian Arab refugees to return, neither is there a right under international law to allow Palestinian Arab to violently attack Israelis.



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.

Monday, May 29, 2017

  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Unreal. This isn't Ramallah but Hebrew University in Jerusalem.



(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.
From Ian:

Jewish Voice for Peace’s Hidden Agenda
A Jewish Voice for Peace demonstration. Photo: Twitter.When starting a political movement, choosing the right name is perhaps the most important step. We tend to make snap decisions about whether or not to support an organization based on what its name implies. The danger, of course, is that an organization can misrepresent itself with false connotations.
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) has done just that, because the group does not represent the views of most Jews — and it does not stand for peace.
While their name may sound innocent and upstanding, JVP seeks to delegitimize and demonize the State of Israel through the use of double standards and false allegations. JVP is also an avid supporter of the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) movement, which attempts to harm, isolate and weaken Israel — the only Jewish state in the world, and the only democracy in the Middle East.
A more accurate name for the group would be Jewish Voice for Palestine — because it seems that JVP truly opposes the existence of a Jewish homeland. This year, the group even went so far as to invite Rasmea Odeh as the guest of honor at their National Membership Meeting. Odeh is a convicted terrorist who murdered two Israeli college students in 1969 by planting a bomb in a supermarket in Jerusalem. An organization that supports terrorists cannot claim that they also support peace.
Jewish Voice for Peace internet ad supported failed Palestinian terrorist hunger strike
Only hardcore anti-Israel activists in the West seemed to care, like Jewish Voice for Peace.
JVP, which also was one of the biggest supporters of convicted supermarket bomber and immigration fraudster Rasmea Odeh, was all in for Barghouti, including helping organize protests and petitions.
Very little that JVP does surprises me any more given their obsessive demonization of Israel, enabling of anti-Semitism by providing Jewish cover, and twisting of Jewish holidays into anti-Israel events.
I was surprised, though, to find a JVP pop-up ad supporting Barghouti at the left-wing Israeli Haaretz website (the image below is a pop-up ad screenshot from my phone when visiting the Haaretz home page on May 26, 2017)

Israeli government admits: UN has broken the law in Jerusalem
After repeated delays, the state finally responded Sunday to the request for an interim injunction filed by Regavim against the illegal construction carried out by the UN at the Government House in the Armon Hanatziv neighborhood.
The state admitted for the first time that the extensive construction activity there, including works to preserve the historic buildings in the compound, as well as the construction of additional illegal structures in the compound, were carried out without permits. "The planning and building laws of the State of Israel apply to the compound and to the works that are the object of the petition, and the UN is expected to act in accordance with the principles of the relevant planning and building laws."
In a petition submitted by the Regavim movement to the Jerusalem District Court two months ago, it was revealed that the United Nations had committed a large number of building offenses during the past year, in a site registered in the Land Registry in the name of the State of Israel.
The state expressed its opposition to issuing an interim injunction prohibiting continued construction of the compound, since the UN enjoys immunity from prosecution and legal action against it.
The State noted that "if there are differences between the State of Israel and the United Nations on this issue, they should be brought to a solution through diplomatic channels" and detailed the contacts held by the Foreign Ministry over the past few weeks with relevant UN officials in Israel and New York.

  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

From Iran's Farsnews:
Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani warned against the rising threat of the Israeli regime to the mankind.
"The racist and aggressive spirit of the Zionist regime has always been and will be a threat to both humanity and the regional nations," Larijani said in a message to Hezbollah, Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Monday.
The Iranian parliament speaker, meantime, pointed to the axis of resistance, and said, "Integration and unity among different Lebanese groups will bring a promising future for the Lebanese people and the Islamic Resistance."
Larijani reiterated that the Islamic Ummah can achieve its goals only through resistance and solidarity.
These are the people who make videos literally threatening to drop an atomic bomb on Israel.







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.
  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

On June 1, the City University of New York (CUNY) will honor Linda Sarsour by hosting her as a speaker at the commencement ceremony of the CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy. While Sarsour has been described as “an arsonist in our midst,” criticism of the decision to invite the controversial activist was firmly rejected by CUNY chancellor James B. Milliken, who wrote that Sarsour was chosen “because of her involvement in public health issues in New York City and her position as a leader on women’s issues, including her role as co-chair of the recent Women’s March in Washington.” The chancellor also highlighted that “Ms. Sarsour has been recognized by President Obama at the White House as a ‘Champion of Change’ and was recently named one of Time magazine’s 100 leaders and Fortune magazine’s 50 global leaders.”

In short, as far as CUNY is concerned, it is fully justified to ignore all criticism of Sarsour and to present her as a role model for the university’s graduates.

As Michael D. Cohen of the Simon Wiesenthal Center acknowledged when he recently denounced Sarsour as “an arsonist in our midst,” she is “a brilliant tactician who manipulates the media to gain attention and sympathy for her cause.” One might add that the media love to be manipulated by her, without asking tough questions about what exactly Sarsour’s “cause” is and how she pursues it.
During one of the recent controversies, Sarsour declared that she wants to be judged by her own words, but it is abundantly clear that she also wants people to ignore plenty of her own words that actually tell us a lot about Sarsour’s “cause” and her activism.

So let’s look at a small sample of those of Sarsour’s own words that are arguably very revealing, even though she will lash out at anybody who quotes them to her.

Indeed, Sarsour was recently recorded berating a student who asked her about her notorious tweet from 2011, when she declared that prominent women’s right activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali and strident Islam critic Brigitte Gabriel “don’t deserve to be women;” therefore, Sarsour wished she “could take their vaginas away.” If we take Sarsour’s response to the student who asked about this tweet seriously, White men (capital W, please!) have no business being disturbed by her vile outburst – an answer that reflects the divisive identity politics Sarsour often employs when it suits her, while calling for unity and solidarity when this seems more opportune.

But as the Dartmouth students who enthusiastically applauded Sarsour’s put-down of their impertinent White male fellow student illustrated, many people are all too willing to ignore an obscene six-year-old tweet posted when Sarsour was almost 31 – not, as she falsely claimed, in her twenties. Moreover, in spring 2011, Sarsour reportedly already served as director of the Arab American Association of New York; she was also about to be named “a fellow at the NYU Wagner Graduate School of Public Service Women of Color Policy Network” and boasted about her excellent access to the Obama administration.   

And soon enough, Sarsour would also boast about being victorious over Hirsi Ali. In fall 2012, Sarsour was still jealously wondering “What does Ayaan Hirsi Ali got that I ain’t got? Front page covers and shit. #MuslimRage;” but by the spring of 2014, Sarsour was able to celebrate a blow against her nemesis, and she jubilantly announced on Twitter: “Online activism WINS again. @BrandeisU does the right thing and rescinds honorary degree 2 hatemonger Ayaan Hirsi Ali;” she also added: “Hats off 2 @BrandeisU 4 rescinding honorary degree 2 Ayaan Hirsi Ali. U have restored integrity of your institution;” and she thanked the university’s president: “Thank you @PresidentFred for making the right choice today and rescinding honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. We are all very grateful.”




Isn’t it deeply ironic that CUNY would so strongly defend its decision to honor Sarsour who celebrated so enthusiastically when she and other activists succeeded in denying a similar honor to Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

Sarsour’s “#MuslimRage” was apparently not diminished by the fact that Hirsi Ali established a foundation that has been working since 2007 “to end honor violence [including Female Genital Mutilation] that shames, hurts or kills thousands of women and girls in the US each year, and puts millions more at risk;” the foundation also promotes “the belief that there is no culture, tradition or religion that justifies violence against women and girls.”

But very different from Hirsi Ali, Sarsour is eager to defend the conservative traditions of Muslim societies, even when they are clearly harmful to women. Sarsour has asserted that “shariah law is reasonable,” ignoring the widespread and well-documented human rights abuses committed in Muslim majority states in the name of sharia. Sarsour has even gone so far as to praise Saudi Arabia – where women are completely dependent on the whims of their male guardians: “10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”

Since Sarsour often emphasizes her Palestinian Muslim identity, it is also interesting to note how Palestinians view sharia. As documented in a Pew survey from 2013, 89% of Palestinians want sharia law; 66% endorse the death penalty for Muslims who convert to another religion; 76% support mutilation as a punishment for theft, and a shocking 84% want adulterers stoned to death. The survey also shows that less than half (about 45%) of Palestinian Muslims reject so-called “honor killings” as never justified, and 87% insist that a wife must always obey her husband.

Given that CUNY has explicitly stated that they want to honor Sarsour as a “leader on women’s issues,” it is also noteworthy that she has repeatedly defended arranged marriages like her own, in which her parents married her off at the age of 17. In late 2007, Sarsour told Al Arabiya News: “Every year, we see more than a hundred arranged marriages in our community alone […] In our community […] you not only have to find a spouse who is Arab and Muslim; that person also needs to be Palestinian and from the same village as you.” According to the reporter, “Women like Linda accept being set-up because they don’t really believe in ‘love story weddings’.” And as Sarsour reportedly added to explain the benefits of arranged marriages: “If I fight with my husband, I can always run to my father because he is the one who chose him for me.”

But Sarsour has also defended the practice recently: in an interview with the Mecca Post on March 8, 2017, which begins with a related question, Sarsour answered by asserting: “I feel I have become mature much earlier in life than may be other sisters who are still in high school or in college.”
Well, maybe CUNY should start a “Sarsour Program for Arranged Marriages” to benefit female students in their last year of high school?

The Mecca Post interview with Sarsour includes also plenty of other interesting material. She dismisses her critics as “right wing supremacists” who “engaged in alternative facts and false accusations” and asserts that “there really is nothing that they said that really is true.” She also confidently claims Jesus was “a Palestinian Jewish refugee” who is “very co-essential to us Muslims” but misunderstood by many “who call themselves Christians.” She then proceeds to press Islam’s founder into the service of her agenda, breathlessly describing Muhammad as her “inspiration”:

“he was an activist he was a human rights activist, he stood up for the poor, he wanted to stand up against tyrants and oppressors, he loved animals he loved earth and taking care of the earth, he talked about environmental justice […] He talked about racial justice, and uplifting people regardless of what colour their skin was. […] I also think about Islamophobia now, the man who experienced the most Islamophobia they did not call it Islamophobia 1400 years ago was our beloved Prophet (SAW).”

One really is left to wonder if Sarsour is too naïve to realize that if she transforms Islam’s founder into a 21st century social justice warrior, she ultimately legitimizes those who employ the norms of our time to denounce him for his marriage to an underage girl (which was then common and unfortunately remains accepted in some countries); similarly, by the standards of our time, the supremely successful warlord, who founded not just a faith, but also an empire, committed numerous atrocities.

But when it comes to anything that has to do with Islam, Sarsour is an ardent advocate of double standards. She will denounce Hirsi Ali as a “hatemonger” while uncritically embracing a group like the Nation of Islam (NOI), which, according to the the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), “has maintained a consistent record of anti-Semitism and racism since its founding in the 1930s.” The ADL considers veteran NOI leader Louis Farrakhan as “the leading anti-Semite in America;” the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) provided a similarly unequivocal condemnation, denouncing “the deeply racist, anti-Semitic and anti-gay rhetoric” of Farrakhan and other NOI leaders, whose conduct “earned the NOI a prominent position in the ranks of organized hate.”

Yet, in 2012, Sarsour embraced the NOI as “an integral part” of “the history of Islam in America,” emphasizing that “Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Nation of Islam - we are #Muslim, we are all part of one ummah, one family. #Islam.” Two years later, Sarsour insisted that it was not possible to “learn or teach about the history of Islam in America without talking about the Nation of Islam (NOI).”



As I have recently documented, Sarsour joined two other leading activists at a major rally organized by Farrakhan and his associates in 2015, where she delivered a strident speech that echoed Farrakhan’s antisemitic efforts to blame Jews for problems and hardships experienced by African-Americans. Sarsour also seems to share some of Farrakhan’s bigoted views on the malignant Jewish influence in America, even though she often claims that she firmly opposes antisemitism. In this context it is important to realize that Sarsour apparently does not accept common definitions of antisemitism and has instead endorsed (#73) the truly Orwellian re-definition that veteran anti-Israel activist Ali Abunimah published in fall 2012, reflecting his preposterous view that Zionism is “one of the worst forms of anti-Semitism in existence today” and that support for Zionism “is not atonement for the Holocaust, but its continuation in spirit.”

Perhaps CUNY doesn’t care much about Sarsour’s pronounced hostility to the world’s only Jewish state, but one would think they should care about this scene which happened in New York and was witnessed by Michael D. Cohen of the Simon Wiesenthal Center:

“Last September, I stood along with many of my colleagues at a New York City Council Public Hearing on that body’s resolution to officially condemn the BDS movement — a hearing at which all those in favor, including myself, were shouted down as “Jewish pigs” and “Zionist filth” from provocateurs strategically placed in the audience. It was Linda Sarsour who was at the forefront — manipulating the camera shots and sound bites. It was Linda Sarsour who sat for hours listening with great satisfaction to the libelous rants and screamed obscenities alleging that Israelis murder Palestinian babies. It was Sarsour who nodded approvingly and congratulated individuals who were kicked out of the hearing room for being out of order, for walking in front of individuals providing testimony in support of the resolution, and for shouting down our supporters with anti-Semitic slurs — all in the name of protecting free speech.”


So much more material could be cited to show how little Sarsour deserves to be held up as a role model for graduates of a respected American university, but let me just conclude with this: when Sarsour addresses her audience at the commencement ceremony of the CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy and says she is honored to do so, remember that she also recently said she was “honored” to share a stage with convicted terrorist murderer and confessed US immigration fraudster Rasmea Odeh.




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 Ian:

JCPA: Incentivizing Terrorism: Palestinian Authority Allocations to Terrorists and their Families
The PA maintains longstanding legislation and payments to subsidize terrorists and their families. This amounts to an officially sanctioned PA government incentive system to kill Israelis. When I learned of this in November 2015, I was quite shocked. I proceeded to raise the issue with organized American Jewish community leaders and Israeli policymakers, and was told “everybody knows.” Disconcerted by my own lack of knowledge, I canvassed numerous American political leaders who, without exception, were unaware of the PA legislation/budget. The few leaders who were aware that the PA directly pays terrorists thought that the funding was only $5-6 million; they were shocked to learn that according to the official PA budget online, it was $300 million for 2016.
During the past year, the prevailing opinion was that the wave of knifers against Israelis consisted of young and disaffected “lone wolves.” As I examined the issue more closely, I realized that the “incitement” is much more than just an errant cleric or wayward school board, but rather is an institutional campaign of violence against Israel, coordinated and funded by the PA itself. This “struggle” or war is endorsed by the Palestinian leadership, as evidenced by their 2004 legislation specifying, “The prisoners and released prisoners are a fighting sector and integral part of the fabric of Arab Palestinian society.” PA budget line items are earmarked for funding prisoners, released prisoners, and families of “martyrs.”
Brig.-Gen. Yossi Kuperwasser, my friend, led a distinguished career as an IDF intelligence officer at the most senior level, as well as a brilliant strategist, most recently serving as Director General of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs. In this study, he accurately presents the history and current state of the PA legislation/budget for terror, as well as policy recommendations.
Palestinians paid terrorists $1b in past 4 years, Knesset panel hears
The Palestinian Authority has paid out some NIS 4 billion — or $1.12 billion — over the past four years to terrorists and their families, a former director general of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs and ex-head of the army’s intelligence and research division told a top Knesset panel on Monday.
Setting out the figures, Brig.-Gen (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser told the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that the longer the period for which a Palestinian security prisoner is jailed, “the higher the salary… Anyone who has sat in prison for more than 30 years gets NIS 12,000 ($3,360) per month,” said Kuperwasser, according to the (Hebrew) NRG website. “When they’re released, they get a grant and are promised a job at the Palestinian Authority. They get a military rank that’s determined according to the number of years they’ve served in jail.”
Kuperwasser also told the committee that PA claims that the payments to terrorists’ families are social welfare benefits to the needy are false. The Palestinians’ own budgetary documents, he said, “clearly state that these are salaries and not welfare payments.”
Kuperwasser was briefing MKs days after US President Donald Trump visited Israel and held talks with PA President Mahmoud Abbas in Bethlehem. In an apparent public upbraiding of Abbas over the payments, Trump told him at their joint press conference: “Peace can never take root in an environment where violence is tolerated, funded or rewarded.”

Corbyn attended terror conference after honouring Munich killer
Yesterday Jeremy Corbyn told Sky News he was “searching for peace” when he honoured a Palestinian terrorist involved in the Munich massacre. He was looking in some odd places…
Guido can reveal the next stop on Jezza’s 2014 Tunisia trip. After the wreath-laying ceremony, Corbyn attended a conference of Palestinian terrorists in Tunis. In his own words, the future Labour leader recalled hearing speeches from Hamas and the PFLP:
“The conference… heard opening speeches from Palestinian groups including… Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine”
Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation. The PFLP is a murderous terror group – also proscribed by the UK government – which has killed large numbers of civilians in bombings and armed attacks and aeroplane hijackings. In an article for the Morning Star, Corbyn described the conference as a “special event” and praised the “shared agenda and endeavour” and “the unity between all Palestinian factions”.
Corbyn also praised a speech given at the conference by Ramsey Clark, the lawyer of Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic. Clark famously said that “History will prove Milosevic was right”. Corbyn praised his speech at the conference as “very poignant and much appreciated”. Worth noting that Corbyn has also previously defended Milosevic.

  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
There is a highly amusing article in Al Khaleej Online sputtering against the success of IDF Arab spokesperson Avichay Adreaee, who has over a million followers in the Arab world.

Adraee has wished his Muslim fans a happy Ramadan, and has discussed various Ramadan TC programs on his Facebook page. He also showed this photo of Israeli Arab soldiers in one of his Ramadan posts.


All of this is Israeli propaganda falsely portraying Israel's respect for diversity, the article sputters, saying that everyone knows that Israel is anti-Muslim and massacres Palestinians.

"It seems that Avichay Adraee represents a new type of Israeli propaganda that  is more professional and sophisticated, especially with its publications on social networking sites with pictures and videos that have been professionally produced, by experts, all considered part of modern psychological warfare" complains the newspaper.

Then the article goes off on a tangent, first complaining that Adraee encourages his readers to eat Middle Eastern foods like falafel and hummus, and then saying that Israelis have stolen these dishes.

And then, it gives an example: Gonzo's food truck in Portland, Oregon.


I don't think there is a truck anymore; Gonzo's Israeli owner, Tal Caspi, has now gone more mainstream.

But his webpage doesn't say the word "Israel" at all! He positions his foods  as "Middle Eastern." One of his menu items is called a "Kibbuts Egg." That's it.


It is entirely possible that Caspi deliberately downplays the Israeli part of his food because of the leftist, anti-Israel atmosphere of Portland. But it is clear that the animosity that the Arab world has towards a tiny food truck in Portland has nothing to do with its "cultural appropriation" and everything to do with the fact that the very politically correct owner of the enterprise is Israeli.

His food is not certified kosher, unfortunately.





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.
  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

From Haaretz:

The cabinet on Sunday approved a plan to financially induce Arab East Jerusalem schools to switch from the Palestinian curriculum to the Israeli one, as proposed by Education Minister Naftali Bennett and Jerusalem Affairs and Heritage Minister Zeev Elkin.
“The purpose of this five-year plan is to improve the quality of education in East Jerusalem, with an emphasis on encouraging the study of the Israeli curriculum in the schools,” the Education Ministry statement said. “This is part of an effort to improve the quality of life and the environment in the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem, and to enhance the ability of East Jerusalem residents to integrate into the Israeli economy and society, and thus strengthen the economic and social resilience of the entire capital.”
A source involved in the plan in the Education Ministry said, “The Israeli curriculum and the Israeli bagrut is a choice, it’s not required. Anyone who isn’t interested won’t join up. Whoever does join the Israeli curriculum, whether it’s an elementary school or a high school, will get economic incentives like extra teaching hours and curricular hours, an educational envelope, without undermining what was already there. Whoever was teaching the Palestinian curriculum and received X amount of funding will continue to receive it, with the additional budget that will be allocated to the Israeli curriculum.”

 Meaning that if Arab schools choose not to adhere to the new curriculum, they don't have to.

But that's not how the PA is reporting this.

Here is their hysterical, lying, over-the-top reaction :

The [Palestinian] Ministry of Education and Higher Education voiced extreme  disapproval and rejection of "Israel"s attempt to impose a project aimed at the Judaization of educational curricula in Jerusalem, especially after the announcement of the funding of a five-year "Israeli" government plan  under the pretext of improving the quality of education in Jerusalem, which reveals Israelization plans and attempts to attack the elements of the Palestinian national identity.

The Ministry warned, in a statement on Sunday, of the repercussions and risks of these plans, which demonstrates once again the occupation mentality and policies of the oppressive and racist violation of all international laws and humanitarian norms, notably those related to education, stressing that it will employ all the possibilities to thwart these plans in order to preserve the national identity of education in Jerusalem.

The Ministry called on all human rights, humanitarian and media organizations to expose these schemes affecting education in Jerusalem, stressing the need to devote all efforts to protect education in Jerusalem and address the Israeli attempts to fight national identity in the holy city.
It also called this voluntary plan to give more money and resources to Arab schools a "heinous crime." The media called it "a declaration of war."

This is instructive. It shows that when the PA goes equally crazy at other stuff, it is just as likely to be exaggerating, lying and using its ability to implicitly threaten violence if it doesn't get its way as leverage towards Western NGOs and governments.

Truth isn't the issue in an honor/shame society. Appearances are. And if they appear to be so upset, well, in the Western view, there must be a logical reason, right?




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.
  • Monday, May 29, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
This article by William Booth of the Washington Post is only one of many being published this week with variants of the same meme:
The Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip began 50 years ago in June.
 When did Judea and Samaria become known as "Palestinian territories?"

Certainly not in 1967. News articles routinely referred (erroneously) to the West Bank as "Israeli-occupied Jordan" through at least 1968.



The New York Times continued to refer to Judea and Samaria as "occupied Jordan" into the 1970s:


And here in 1976:
TEL AVIV, Aug. 2—Israeli forces blocked an attempt by more than 50 Jewish militants to set up an unauthorized settlement near Jericho in occupied Jordanian territory today,
Slowly, Judea and Samaria morphed from Jordanian into simply the "West Bank," a new political entity that never existed before, as in this 1977 article - which still had to spell out "West Bank of the Jordan" because the phrase "West Bank" was even then not ubiquitous enough to be understood:



The widespread use of the word "Palestinian territories" took many more years to take root. That was mostly because the UN started using that term in the late 1970s in anti-Israel resolutions - the phrase "Palestinian territories" is the only reason Jimmy Carter's government abstained from an anti-Israel resolution in 1977 rather than vote for it:

The United States was known to have tried strenously without success to induce Egypt to drop a reference in the resolution to the “Palestinian” territories, which the Americans objected would prejudge the decisions to be taken in Geneva.
The United States was said to have ‘told Arab countries two days ago that without such a change it could not vote for the text even though it had supported the language of the resolution in a number of other texts.
Privately, Arab representatives complained that the United States had delayed asking for the changes until was too late, and they suggested that the Americans had yielded to pressure from the pro‐Israeli lobby in deciding not to support the text but rather to abstain.
Either way, very few people outside the UN and Palestinian Arabs themselves referred to the territories as "Palestinian" until decades after 1967 and that is simply the results of a huge, extended propaganda campaign to change the territories from "Arab" to "Palestinian" - to convert Israel from David to Goliath.

Jordan did not officially claim not to have jurisdiction over the West Bank until 1988.

So how can it be that "Palestinian territories"  have been "occupied" for 50 years when you cannot find a single person in 1967 referring to them as such? And, more importantly: what was the exact date that these territories, promised to the Jewish people by the League of Nations and illegally seized by Jordan in 1948, become "Palestinian?"

It seems that such a date must exist, perhaps somewhere between 1977 and 1992. But no one can point to such a date.

The term "Palestinian territories" is not factual - it is propaganda that has taken root as fact.




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.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

  • Sunday, May 28, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
This photo of the Temple Mount from 1967 was published this week in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Jerusalem:


The "third-holiest site in Islam," while under Muslim control, was filled with - weeds.

No one visited. No one cared.

I had already documented the phenomenon of weeds on the Temple Mount under Ottoman rule (and made a video.)

I also have some other photos of the Temple Mount under Jordanian rule showing how few people actually visited as opposed to the thousands of Muslims that come every day now.

Mid 1950s:





1960:



The only time Muslims care about Jerusalem is when Jews (or Christians) control it.

When Muslims controlled it, there are next to no pilgrimages. The entire complex was mostly empty and decrepit.

Muslims never venerated  their "third holiest site" or "first qibla". And these photos prove it.


(h/t Josh)




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 Ian:

Corbyn honored PLO official believed behind Munich massacre
Amid an uproar over Jeremy Corbyn’s recent remarks on jihadist terrorism in the UK, a British newspaper has revealed the Labour Party leader attended a wreath-laying ceremony at the grave of a senior Palestinian official believed to have been involved in the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972.
In October 2014, Corbyn, in an article published in the radical left-wing website Morning Star, recalled a recent visit to Tunisia where he marked the anniversary of Israel’s 1985 attack on the Palestine Liberation Organization’s headquarters there, laying wreaths at a cemetery commemorating Palestinians said killed by Israeli forces in various incidents.
“After wreaths were laid at the graves of those who died on that day [at Sabra and Shatila] and on the graves of others killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991, we moved to the poignant statue in the main avenue of the coastal town of Ben Arous, which was festooned with Palestinian and Tunisian flags,” Corbyn wrote.
It seems he was talking about the grave of PLO official Atef Bseiso, PLO’s head of intelligence, thought to have been a key planner of the Munich massacre
There is no record of Israel’s spy agency carrying out an assassination in the French capital around that time, but the June 1992 killing of Bseiso in Paris has been blamed on Israel.
Israel denied any role in the killing, suggesting Bseiso’s death was the result of internal rivalries within the PLO.
Israeli officials did note, however, that as the PLO’s head of intelligence, Bseiso was likely involved in planning the 1972 massacre.

Europe Fights Back with Candles and Teddy Bears
The sad truth is that Europe has never had the political will to wage a total war against ISIS and the other jihadist groups. Otherwise, Raqaa and Mosul would already have been neutralized. Instead, Islamists have been taking over Molenbeek in Belgium, the French suburbs and large swaths of Britain. We now should be celebrating the liberation of Mosul and the return of Christians to their homes; instead we are mourning 22 people murdered and 64 wounded by an Islamic suicide-bomber in Manchester, and 29 Christians killed in Egypt this week alone.
Serious fighting would require massive bombing to eliminate as many Islamists as possible. But we are apparently not ready to abandon our masochistic rules of engagement, which privilege the enemy's people over our own. Europe also never demanded that its Muslim communities disavow jihadism and Islamic law, sharia. This silence is what helps Islamists shut the mouths of brave Muslim dissidents. Meanwhile, Europe's armies are getting smaller by the day, as if we already consider this game done.
After every attack, Europe's leaders recycle the same empty slogans: "Carry on"; "We are stronger"; "Business as usual". The Muslim Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, tells us that we must get used to daily carnage! He says he believes that the threat of terror attacks is "part and parcel of living in a big city", and that major cities around the world "have got to be prepared for these sorts of things". Does he seriously mean that we are supposed to get used to the massacre of our own children in the Manchester Arena? Islamic terror has now become part of the landscape of so many major European cities: Paris, Copenhagen, Nice, Toulouse, Berlin....
Instead of concentrating on jihad and radical Islam, Europe's leaders continue to talk about the "Russian threat". It would indeed be a mistake to neglect Russian expansionism. But did Vladimir Putin's troops attack Westminster? Did Russian agents blow themselves up, taking the lives of children at a Manchester concert? Did a former Soviet spy massacre Swedes walking in Stockholm? For Europe's leaders, talking about Putin appears a welcome distraction from the real enemies.
Salman Abedi reported teacher at his secondary school for being an Islamophobe because he condemned suicide bombers
The Manchester attacker – who slaughtered 22 people at a concert by pop-star Ariana Grande on Monday – studied at Burnage Academy for Boys between 2009 and 2011.
Abedi was part of an Arabic-speaking “clique” during his time at the school, The Times reports.
He is believed to have been part of a group of teens that became upset when one of their teachers brought up the topic of suicide attacks.
The teacher “asked what they thought of someone who would strap on a bomb and blow people up”, according to a source quoted by the paper.
The source said the boys then went to their RE teacher and lodged a complaint, telling them it was “Islamophobic”.

  • Sunday, May 28, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Al Resalah quotes an investigation by another Arabic news outlet saying that increasing numbers of prominent Gulf Arabs - princes and princesses and officials - are stealthily coming to Israel for medical treatment.

According to the investigation journalist Asaf Jaipur, there is growing medical tourism from the Gulf to Israel,  as well as more moves to allow the Gulf to open its markets to Israeli companies.

Members of the royal families and wealthy people are seeking medical treatment in Israel, flying to Cyprus and from there to Tel Aviv.

There are specialist in the Gulf whose jobs are to coordinate travel to Israel and arrange their transfer to hospitals.

They are arranging transportation directly from Ben Gurion Airport to Israeli hospitals.

The princess of the royal family in Bahrain recently arrived in Cyprus, and from there to Ben Gurion Airport, where she was transferred to the Rambam hospital in Haifa. The 50 year old princess underwent surgery and then returned to Bahrain.

A large number of princes and princesses from the Gulf  arrive in Israel to receive treatment; because of the reputation Israel enjoys for top-notch medicine.

In addition, the investigation showed that Israeli companies are operating in the Gulf markets freely through partnerships set up by the American companies.

He stressed that Israeli companies are an integral part of the global American companies operating in the Gulf markets segment, noting that the GCC authorities are turning a blind eye to the activities of these companies, although they recognized Israeli companies.



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.
  • Sunday, May 28, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
Times of Israel reports:

Hours after Palestinian security prisoners called off a 40-day hunger strike, Israeli officials denied Palestinian claims that Israel negotiated with the inmates to end the mass protest or conceded to any of the prisoner’s demands.

Senior Israeli officials told Channel 2 that Israel did not so much as consider the prisoners’ demands. They also said the deal was brokered between the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Palestinian Authority, and was not the result of US pressure.

The deal announced Saturday morning will apparently see just one of the prisoners’ demands met: that their monthly visits from family members be brought back from one to two per month.

However, the issue of visitation is not an Israeli one. Family visits to Palestinian security prisoners in Israeli jails are administered solely by the Red Cross. Last year, the organization reduced the number of visits it coordinated, citing a lack of funds and little family interest in the initiative.

Prison officials told Channel 2 that hunger strike leader Marwan Barghouti negotiated the additional monthly visit in a phone conversation with PA Minister of Civil Affairs Hussein al-Sheikh. They said officials at Ashkelon’s Shikma Prison allowed Barghouti to speak with al-Sheikh and meet with other leading prisoners in an effort to end the hunger strike before the start of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

According to the Israeli officials, Barghouti and the other prisoners agreed to call off the strike after the PA promised to pay for the additional visits, at an estimated cost of $6 million per year.

Islamic Jihad's Palestine Today claims that the specific demands that were met will be published in the future.

The only specific other demand it mentioned was that punishments that the the prisoners received for engaging in the hunger strike, like solitary confinement,

Other Arab media flatly declared victory.

None of the major demands are even being mentioned.

Israel won, just as it won in all the previous prisoner hunger strikes.

UPDATE: Ma'an reports on specific issues that were supposedly resolved, including kitchens. It is difficult to know the exact parameters of what happened. (h/t Andrew)




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.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

From Ian:

50 years since 1967: What is the West Bank's real legal status?
ACCORDING TO former Hebrew University Law School dean and Israel Democracy Institute Fellow Yuval Shany, the starting point for the discussion was Shamgar and Israel’s acceptance of the 1907 Hague Regulations applying to the West Bank.
This means Israeli control over the West Bank falls into the category of “belligerent occupation.”
In less fancy language, it means that Israel has not annexed the land and is holding it temporarily. Further, it means that Israel has certain obligations not to change the face of the land or harm the rights of the local people already there – the Palestinians.
Shany said that agreeing to apply the Hague principles “was the only possible decision since there was no political decision to annex the West Bank.”
He noted that Israel could have decided to extend Israeli law to the West Bank, as was done in east Jerusalem, “but the government did not want to make that political decision. All governments since also did not make this decision,” so accepting the international law obligations and limits of the Hague Regulations was “the only option.”
In contrast to the Hague Regulations, Shany said there has always been a debate about the application of the Geneva Conventions to the West Bank.
50 Years after the Six-Day War, We Shouldn't Lament Israel's Power to Protect Itself
In May 1967, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the President of Egypt, who had joined in a military alliance with Syrian President Hafez el Assad, daily promised to "drive Israel into the sea." Jews around the world were anxious beyond belief. It was scant more than twenty years since the liberation of the death camps in Europe and the odds were overwhelming that the next cataclysm against our people was soon to begin. In a stunning six-day victory, Israel defeated the combined Arab armies, reunited Jerusalem, took the Golan Heights and made its way to the Suez Canal.
It is difficult for Israel to extricate itself from the obligation of having to send its young people to the territories in uniform to oversee other people's lives. Israel uprooted 8,000 long-time inhabitants of Gaza to make the territory Jew-free with the hope that without an occupation Gaza could transform itself into a Singapore. We know from history that this was a terrible mistake which has exacted an enormous cost on Palestinians and Israelis in terms of suffering, treasure and death.
Some opinion-makers have opined that the Six-Day War was a catastrophe. I cannot agree. It is far better that Israel won the war decisively than were it to have lost the war entirely. It is not hard to imagine the nature of the bloodbath that would have occurred on the streets of an Arab-occupied Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.
Israel's adversaries refuse to accept its existence and the existence of Jews living in the Land of Israel. That is the root of the problem, going back more than a hundred years. Once that is solved, everything else will fall into place.
To be honest, there is something crazy about lamenting the fact that we Jews have the power to protect ourselves and that we will no longer be subject to the bullies and murderers who have tormented us. I would rather live with the moral struggle of the past 50 years than die the good death of a martyr to another round of anti-Jewish hatred and violence.
A false narrative about Israel has hijacked progressive minds. We must call people out for their selective social conscience
Simon Wiesenthal was a man of action. Not content to let complacent governments deal with the butchers of the Holocaust, he hunted them and forced them to face justice. In so doing, he announced to the world that from now on, there is a high price to pay for harming Jews.
With his help, the Mossad captured the mass murderer Adolf Eichmann in Argentina. I was then attending school in neighbouring Uruguay, where Israel’s covert operation caused massive outrage. It was a tense time to be the only Jew in my school. But I felt proud. For the first time in two thousand years, the world understood that if you mess with us, there are consequences. That Jews can — and will — deal with those who intend to harm them. That Jews are no longer at the mercy of their tormentors. That Jews fight back.
I was born in Hungary, where Jew hatred has a long and blood-drenched history. A country whose Jews took comfort in being the most assimilated in Europe. They were convinced that their social status and achievements made them untouchable. Yet, the majority of the Jewish population was massacred in a matter of weeks.
We must learn from the lessons of history, so that our children and their children never face the horrors that my parents witnessed. Today, Jews face two wars. The permanent armed struggle in defence of Israel, a battle that Israel can never afford to lose. And the war of words, throughout the diaspora — and right here in Canada.
Words matter. They are powerful weapons. Words can legitimize the criminal and vilify the just. Words can provide the fuel for hate and the alibi for persecution and violence. Libelous fabrications, like “Israel Apartheid” and “Zionist aggression,” are the pretext for the BDS movement, whose stated objective is the destruction of the Jewish State. Their false narrative has hijacked progressive hearts and minds and become gospel in politically correct circles. It feeds the new wave of Jew hatred sweeping across Europe, where, in many countries, synagogues and Jewish institutions can now only function under military protection. The false narrative thrives on our own campuses, where we must expose its lies and confront it with the most powerful weapon at our disposal, namely, the truth. Because as we know, and as Barbara Kay has written, “what ends in law, often begins in academia.”

Friday, May 26, 2017

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: Manchester, Abbas and evil losers
Whether the tragic irony was lost on Trump is not clear; his true thoughts about the Islamist tyrants on whom his powerful speech was wasted remain somewhat of a conundrum. While in Bethlehem two days later, however, he did praise Abbas for having "joined the summit and committed to taking firm but necessary steps to fight terrorism and confront its hateful ideology."
This is beyond laughable. Abbas can hardly be counted on to combat a practice he embraces and encourages among his people. Indeed, the Palestinian leader not only promotes stabbings, rammings and bombings targeting Israelis, he pays salaries to the families of perpetrators killed "in action." He also gives his clerics and educators free rein to spread hatred, particularly against Israel.
For instance, as a Middle East Media Research Institute report revealed this week, a mere four days before Abbas welcomed the U.S. president in Bethlehem, a prominent Palestinian imam at Jerusalem's Al-Aqsa Mosque prayed to Allah to "annihilate Trump and the conspirators," and to "annihilate all the Jews."
The genocidal content of Palestinian sermons is nothing new. Nor is the fact that Abbas holds terrorism dear. According to Palestinian Media Watch, during the month ahead of Trump's Mideast and European "tolerance tour" alone, Abbas, his Fatah faction and the PA glorified 12 terrorists -- 10 of whom murdered 95 people -- and named a street after one of them. Abbas' deputy honored five terrorists responsible for the murder of 38 people. The PA commended the mother of four terrorists, each of whom is serving multiple life sentences. The PA named public squares after two terrorists who kidnapped and murdered an Israeli, with Abbas sending greetings of 'honor and pride' to them. Fatah's youth movement exalted four infamous terrorists in a music video, and the list goes on.
President Trump, beware. Your description of jihadis as "evil losers" fits Abbas and the members of his apparatus to a tee.
Melanie Phillips: Denial still flows over Londonistan
In the wake of the jihadi human bomb attack in Manchester, Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May said: “We struggle to comprehend the warped and twisted mind that sees a room packed with young children not as a scene to cherish but an opportunity for carnage.”
Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel said: “ It is unbelievable that somebody has used a joyful pop concert to kill or seriously injure so many people.”
A headline in the Washington Post read: “In suburban Manchester, a search for what might have motivated the attacker”.
“Struggle to comprehend”? “Unbelievable”? “What might have motivated the attacker”? Really??
In 2006 I published my book Londonistan which analysed the supine response of the British political, legal and religious establishment to Islamic jihadi terrorism and the Islamisation of Britain. What follows below is the concluding chapter of that book. As the army patrols the streets of Britain to guard against further expected terrorist attacks, my warning about the deadly failure to face up to the true nature of the threat facing the west is surely even more urgent today.
Douglas Murray - The Strange Death of Europe [Delingpole]
Douglas Murray on Delingpole's podcast (recorded before the Manchester attack).


  • Friday, May 26, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

Dalia Mogahed is a former Obama administration advisor who directs research at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding "focused on empowering the American Muslim Community."  She's pretty much what Linda Sarsour has become in recent months - an articulate female defender of Islam using liberal phraseology.

In an op-ed today, Mogahed pretty much says that anyone who asks Muslims to condemn terrorism is an Islamophobe:

There isn’t a mode of communication through which Muslims have not tried to communicate to the world their disgust with terrorism in their name.

But is this a reasonable expectation?

Asking Muslims if they condemn terrorism carried out by a Muslim may seem legitimate to many Americans: “People carry out acts of targeted violence in the name of Islam and as a follower of said religion, how are we to know you don’t agree? We will suspect you until and unless you sufficiently convince us otherwise.”

The question is an accusation of monstrosity — cheering for the literal murder of children — for no other reason than the faith I practice and the way I look.

Imagine if white folks were collectively suspected of condoning the actions of Dylann Roof, who walked into that black church in Charleston and shot and killed African Americans in supposed defense of the white race. Or Anders Behring Breivik, who slaughtered 77 people, mostly children, in Norway in defense of white Christian Europe against brown and black Muslims.

When Robert Lewis Dear Jr. shot and killed three people in a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, I didn’t ask my neighbor, a vocal pro-life evangelical Christian, if she condemned it. I assumed she did — because anyone with the most basic human decency would abhor the murder of innocent people.

Yet this basic assumption of innocence is often denied Americans who are Muslim.

...[S]uspecting someone of something as despicable as condoning the murder of children because of their ethnicity or faith is the definition of bigotry.
It is very interesting that Mogahed makes this argument.

In 2008, Mogahed co-wrote a book with John Esposito called "Who Speaks for Islam?" where she argued, like here, that only a small percentage of Muslims support terror. Using a very strange methodology, they found that only 7% of Muslims worldwide according to Gallup polls were considered "extremist" and the rest were "moderate."

However, when one dug into the numbers - numbers that they did not publish in the book! - it was seen that they defined "extremist" as people who found 9/11 completely justified and hated the US.

If you included the numbers who found the 9/11 attacks to be "mostly" justified (6.5%) or "somewhat" justified (23.1%) then at the time fully 36.6% of Muslims could find some justification for the terror attack in the US on September 11.

Do 36% of whites support Dylann Roof or Anders Breivik? The question is absurd. But Mogahed herself knows that (as of 2007 or so) 36.6% of Muslims supported the most heinous terror attack to some extent.

Mogahed doesn't want you to know this. That's why she wrote an entire book claiming Muslims were moderate based on polling data without including the polling data.

In 2007 a Pew poll found that about one-quarter of young American Muslims believe to some extent that suicide bombings can be justified to defend Islam.

Mogahed knows this statistic as well. She doesn't want you to know.

So, yes, most American Muslims are law abiding citizens and most do not support most terror attacks. But these numbers do not exactly make non-Muslim Americans feel safe.

And I would love to see a poll that asks Muslims worldwide, as well as in the US, whether they consider Palestinian suicide bombers to be "martyrs." I am willing to bet that the number is very close to 50% if not more in the US, and nearly unanimous in the Middle East and Europe. Meaning that suspecting Muslims of condoning the murder of Israeli Jewish kids is not at all bigoted - it is very possibly entirely accurate.

After all, every Arabic language newspaper, even the most moderate, refers to such people as "martyrs." Meaning that they have raised themselves spiritually by getting killed while murdering Jews.

That isn't exactly moderate. Mogahed might even share that opinion.

Mogahed is trying to say that anyone who is frightened of possible Muslim terror attacks is a racist. But she won't tell you that it is a far more rational position than she claims.



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.

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

follow me

Follow by Email

translate

Share on Whatsapp


E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts Ever

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون

This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 12 years and over 25,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Tweets

Compliments

The Jerusalem Report:"A seemingly indefatigable one-man operation, armed only with a computer, chutzpa and stamina."

Algemeiner: "Fiercely intelligent and erudite"

Omri: "Elder is one of the best established and most respected members of the jblogosphere..."
Atheist Jew:"Elder of Ziyon probably had the greatest impression on me..."
Soccer Dad: "He undertakes the important task of making sure that his readers learn from history."
AbbaGav: "A truly exceptional blog..."
Judeopundit: "[A] venerable blog-pioneer and beloved patriarchal figure...his blog is indispensable."
Oleh Musings: "The most comprehensive Zionist blog I have seen."
Carl in Jerusalem: "...probably the most under-recognized blog in the JBlogsphere as far as I am concerned."
Aussie Dave: "King of the auto-translation."
The Israel Situation:The Elder manages to write so many great, investigative posts that I am often looking to him for important news on the PalArab (his term for Palestinian Arab) side of things."
Tikun Olam: "Either you are carelessly ignorant or a willful liar and distorter of the truth. Either way, it makes you one mean SOB."
Mondoweiss commenter: "For virulent pro-Zionism (and plain straightforward lies of course) there is nothing much to beat it."
Didi Remez: "Leading wingnut"

Interesting Blogs

Categories

Abbas liar Academic fraud administrivia al-Qaeda algeria American Jews Amnesty analysis anti-semitism apartheid arab refugees Arafat archaeology art ASHREI B'tselem bahrain bbc BDS BDSFail Bedouin Beitunia beoz book review breaking the silence Cardozo Chanukah Christians conspiracy theories Cyprus Daled Amos Daphne Anson Davis report DCI-P Divest This double standards Egypt Elder gets results ElderToons Electronic Intifada eoz-symposium EoZNews eoztv Erekat EU Euro-Mid Observer Fake Civilians 2014 Fatah featured Features fisking flotilla Forest Rain Forward free gaza freedom of press palestinian style future martyr Gary Spedding gaza Gaza Platform George Galloway George Soros gideon levy gilad shalit gisha Goldstone Report Good news Grapel Guardian gunness Haaretz hamas Hamas war crimes hasbara Hasby 2014 Hasby 2016 Hebron helen thomas hezbollah history Hizballah Holocaust denial honor killing HRW Human Rights Humanitarian crisis humor Hypocrisy ICRC Ilan Pappe impossible peace incitement Indonesia international law intransigence iran Iraq Islamic Judeophobia Islamism Israel Loves America Israeli culture Israeli high-tech J Street jabalya jeremy bowen Jerusalem jewish fiction Jewish Voice for Peace jihad jimmy carter John Kerry jokes jonathan cook Jordan Juan Cole Judaism Judea-Samaria Judean Rose Kairos Karl Vick ken roth khalid amayreh Khaybar Lebanon leftists Linkdump lumish mahmoud zahar Malaysia max blumenthal McGraw-Hill media bias Methodist Miftah Mohammed Assaf Mondoweiss moonbats Morocco music Muslim Brotherhood Nakba Natural gas Nazi News nftp NGO NIF norpac NYT Occupation offbeat Omar Barghouti Opinion oxfam PA corruption PalArab lies Palestine Papers pallywood pchr PCUSA Peace Now Peter Beinart Petra MB poll Poster Preoccupied Prisoners propaganda Proud to be Zionist purimshpiel Qaradawi Qassam calendar Rafah Ray Hanania real liberals reference Richard Falk rogel alpher roger cohen roger waters Saudi Arabia saudi vice self-death self-death palestinians sex crimes SFSU shechita sheikh tamimi Shujaiyeh Simona Sharoni SodaStream South Africa Speech stamps Syria Tarabin Temple Mount Terrorism This is Zionism Thomas Friedman Tunisia Turkey UCI UK UN UNDP unesco unhrc UNICEF United Arab Emirates Unity unrwa UNRWA hate unrwa reports UNRWA-USA Varda Vic Rosenthal Washington wikileaks work accident X-washing Yemen YMikarov zahran Ziesel zionist attack zoo Zvi

Blog Archive