Fixing Gaza...Permanently

Since March 30th, much of the world's press and a chunk of the so-called 'international community' has been focusing on a series of what can only be called violent riots emanating from Gaza against Israel's border.

Of course the media refers to them as protests, and the rioters as protestors and the UN as well as the usual channels refer to what has happened as 'war crimes.' So as a beginning, it's perhaps helpful to describe these so-called protests and let the reader judge.

Israel understandably has a border fence with Gaza, a precaution against the numerous terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas and Iranian proxy Islamic Jihad that have occurred in the past. The protests weren't composed of people carrying signs and making a few speeches. They were mob attacks on Israel's border, specifically on points Hamas had advised the mob were vulnerable. The mobs attacked the fence directly with Molotov cocktails, small arms fire, axes, wire cutters, explosives and knives. They used women and children as human shields, and had support from Hamas missiles and mortar shells. In other words, this was an attack, an act of war carried out against a sovereign nation.

The IDF responded the way any country's military would faced by this attack on their borders. After warnings to the mob in Arabic not to approach the border fence and tear gas didn't stop them, the IDF soldiers opened fire when the mob charged the fence in response. It is a testimony to the cool heads, marksmanship and professionalism of the Tzahal that there were so few casualties, and that even Hamas admits almost all of them were Hamas or Islamic Jihad members. If a group of Jewish women and children had approached Gaza with an actual protest asking Hamas to stop firing missiles and mortar rounds at Israeli towns, does anyone doubt Hamas would have killed every one of them and celebrated afterwards?

Hamas's Leader Ismail Haniyeh has made it clear that the riots and assaults of the fence will continue 'until Jerusalem is liberated.' And true to his command, the riots have continued, usually of Fridays after the imams have had a chance to stir up the mobs.

Another assault has been launched from the air. Incendiary kites, balloons and even inflated condoms have been launched towards Israel, resulting in fires that have already destroyed hundreds of dunams of Israeli land. One balloon containing an explosive device and a booby trapped detonator attached to the string was launched to be landed near an Israeli kindergarten only a half hour before the children were scheduled to arrive for class. Here's what it looked like:



The leftist press reacted as expected. The AP, for instance in an article I won't bother to link to had a whole sob story about how there's such limited electricity nowadays and that it was making medical procedures like tending the wounds of would-be jihadis so difficult. Of course, what this Hamas PR piece didn't mention is that the electricity in Gaza is so limited because a Hamas missile accidentally hit one of the Israeli towers that provides electricity to Hamasastan. And to add to the smell of what the AP and others are peddling, the Israelis aren't able to make repairs because of the danger to Israeli repair crew.

The UN also played its traditional role. An extremely biased UNSC resolution damning Israel for 'war crimes' was unable to pass thanks to a U.S. veto, but the same resolution passed in the General Assembly, 120-8, with 45 abstentions. About half of the EU voted for the resolution, including Spain, France and Belgium, with Switzerland, New Zealand, Iceland and Norway also voting in favor. The UK and Germany abstained. Of the major U.S. allies, only the Australians had the guts and decency to vote against this travesty openly...Advance Australia Fair indeed.





An amendment advanced by U.S Ambassador Nikki Haley condemning Hamas actually passed by a majority, but was disallowed by General Assembly president Miroslav Lajcak. While the resolution has the legal force of a stale piece of take out pizza, the fact that the UN was willing to vote to not condemn a clear aggressor against a democracy, and to actually vote in favor of establishing 'an international protection force for the occupied Palestinians' tells us quite a bit of what the UN has become. As Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon put it, if the UN approved the Palestinian resolution, “it will have signed in writing its unequivocal support for terrorism against Israel.”

“Let us not pretend,” Danon said. “If ISIS were to attack Stockholm tomorrow, ISIS would be held responsible for the attack. If al-Qaeda assaulted Paris, the UN would issue the strongest condemnation of al-Qaeda.”

“Only when Hamas attacks Israel does the UN seek to blame Israel.”

Well they did approve it, and a large part of the UN does approve terrorist attacks on Israel. And they have for a very long time.

So, how to fix this sorry situation?

Obviously the Israelis cannot depend on any cooperation at the UN. Nor can they depend on Hamas to stop attacking them or trust any negotiations they make with them. The latest laugher was Hamas's offer for 'comprehensive negotiation.' You know what Hamas proposed? They will return the remains of two Israeli servicemen,Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul they've held since the 2014 Operation Protective Edge. And they will return two kidnapped Israeli civilians Avera Mengistu and Hisham al-Sayed, prisoners who the Red Cross has not even been permitted to visit.

What do they want in exchange? Oh, just to build a seaport and an airport. When you realize the Iran has now joined Turkey as Hamas's paymasters, it's easy to figure out they don't exactly want these things for the tourist trade, but to fly and import weapons and missiles. The Iranians are particularly noted for using civilian airplanes for this purpose. And these attacks on Israel's border are largely at Iran's request, to open up another front against Israel and distract from Iranian attempts to militarize Syria.

And no mention of an actual peace treaty, of course. Israel is never going to be able to negotiate anything like that with people who would use a pretty, kid friendly balloon as a booby trap in hopes of murdering  Jewish children.

What Israel has done to date since the Hamas takeover is to wall Gaza off, destroy the terrorist tunnels into Israel and do their best not to allow Iranian heavy weapons to get into Hamas's hands. Whenever the missile firings and mortar shelling get too intense, Israel engages in  what they refer to as 'mowing the grass' to take out as many Hamas military assets as possible and calm things down until the next time. Followed, of course by the usual media and UN hysterics,

This strategy actually helps Hamas, who care very little about the people they rule or about peace with Israel.It has become, essentially a war of attrition which favors Hamas.

I have a different solution, and it's one I would implement if it were my decision to make.

Wars are won (or lost) when certain things occur. To end a war or the active threat of war, one side occupies enemy territory and subdues it while protecting its own. Or  one side simply destroys an enemy's capacity to wage war and forces them to seek terms of surrender and peaceful coexistence.

Of course, not all wars are decisively won or lost, but that is how a war in which one side is victorious ends.

My proposal is that Israel treat this like the war that it is and do what's necessary to end it. It would not be without cost, but is entirely possible. And certainly an improvement on the status quo.

First, I would inform the civilian population to leave to avoid undue hardship. Then, I would send the IDF over the borders, after announcing publicly to Hamas and the world that any hospitals, mosques, civilian dwellings or schools from which any missiles were fired would be considered  legitimate military targets and dealt with accordingly. After all, the UN is going to condemn anything Israel does anyway, so it makes sense to deal with this Hamas tactic properly, once and for all.

I would then shut off all electricity and water to Gaza. which is now provided by Israel. Men have survived for centuries without electricity, but never for very long without water. The IDF could simply dig in and besiege Gaza City and Khan Yunis while the air force and attack choppers took out the missile launching sites and anything else that was appropriate. Hamas would eventually have to come out to either face the IDF's firepower or to surrender.

After vetting them, the Israelis could definitely let a large part of the civilian population flee to Egyptian Sinai and then close off the Rafah crossing while turning over the Hamas small fry that were captured directly to Egypt's Mukhabarat for a nice, leisurely interrogation. Getting their hands on bunch of Hamas operatives is something I'm sure Egypt's al-Sisi would appreciate, especially when they spilled the beans about their fellow Muslim Brotherhood comrades in Egypt. The Hamas leaders could be subjected to a nice sit down with the Shin Bet, who are noted for their hospitality and encouragement of interesting conversation in these situations. Most of the Hamas leaderrs could probably be turned over to the Egyptians afterwards. Sharing is caring, nachon?

At that point, the Israelis would control previously hostile territory, eliminating an Iran proxy and a probable war front. Mahmoud Abbas would certainly want it turned over to him and the corrupt PLO, but Israel could and should refuse outright, and annex the Gaza Strip. They could then start doing what Israelis seem to do so well, rebuilding and improving the mess, exactly what they did to Judea and Samaria after the Six Day War. There would be no more missiles from Gaza, and not much of a Hamas threat. Perhaps even some of the inhabitants from Gush Katif could resettle there, along with other Israelis. It could even become a haven for Arab and Middle East Christians and Yazedis, whose young men would become as good soldiers defending their new country as the Druse, Bedouin and Arab Christians have been. South Africa's Jews, who are increasingly under threat from the government of their native land might be another good source of population.

And Gaza itself? It would become what it could easily have been with different rulers, a second Singapore rife with trade and prosperity. While Egypt might whine a bit about a large part of Gaza's population settling in Sinai, the increased trade between Israel and Egypt, which Egypt badly needs would be a consolation. Egypt could also probably apply to the UN or elsewhere to get some support money for these new refugees.

The UN and the usual media clowns would go insane. But they do that anyway whenever Israel takes the least step to defend itself. They would never recognize Israel's annexation of Gaza, but so what? They don't even recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, or Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, which is 50 years old. Some European nations might not accept products from Gaza, but there would be plenty of trade with Asia, Eastern Europe and the Arab world to make up the slack.

Wars end with victory. It's time this one did.

The UN Moves From 'Anti-Zionist' To Anti-Semitism

 

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)passed a resolution last week that nullified all Jewish and Christian ties and connections to the Western Wall (The Kotel) The Temple Mount, The Ma'Harat Machpelah (The Cave Of The Patriarchs, where Avraham and Sarah are buried) as well as Rachel's Tomb and other holy sites revered by Jews the world over for centuries.

The resolution not only erased any Judeo-Christian connection to these sites, but referred to them by their Muslim names, usually derived from the names of mosques that were built over them or near them centuries later during the brief Arab conquest. Here's how ridiculous this sounds:



This abomination also referred to all of East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria as 'occupied Jerusalem' and Israel as the 'occupying power.' It also 'deeply condemned' Israeli 'aggressions and illegal measures against the Awqaf Department and its personnel, and against the freedom of worship.'

'Aggressions?' 'Freedom of Worship?' You mean like this?



In spite of what the caption says, those stones are also used to target Jews worshiping below at the Kotel. This is how the Israelis are rewarded for doing something they had no imperative to do other than trying to seek peace by sharing these holy sites with the Muslims. So it's freedom of worship, all right. For Muslims and only Muslims.

Yes, believe it or not, after the massacres that drove the Jews out of Hebron, after the Arab attempt to commit genocide in 1948, after the 19 year occupation by Jordan that denied Jews any access to this holy place, one of the first thing the Israelis did was to attempt to share these shrines and the Cave of The Patriarchs shrine with the Muslim Arabs whom call themselves 'Palestinians', and who likewise claim Abraham as a father.

Israel's reward for this unbelievable generosity was repeated desecration of the shrine by the Arabs and of course, constant incidents of terrorism and murder, including the deliberate shooting by a PA sniper of 10-month-old Shalhevat Pas in her stroller.

UNESCO has along history of anti-Israel rulings and activities. After they crossed a final red line by breaking their own rules and allowing a non-existent country named 'Palestine' to join as a full member, the U.S.  and several other countries cut funding for the agency, which President Barack Hussein Obama restored after his 2012 re-election.

Voting in favor were: Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chad, China, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan and Vietnam.

Voting against were: Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States

Abstaining were: Albania, Argentina, Cameroon, El Salvador, France, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, India, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Nepal, Paraguay, Saint Vincent and Nevis, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Ukraine.

Absent were: Serbia and Turkmenistan.

Israelis on all sides of the political spectrum and yes, many non-Israeli Jews including (surprise, surprise) in America were outraged, even many of those on the Left.

So what does this mean in the real world

Even the head of UNESCO, Irina Bokova received death threats after publicly criticizing this resolution. As we know by now, that's how Islam plays the game. Not only doesn't Islam not play well with others, they want the others entirely out of the playground...or else.

Mexico's envoy to UNESCO, Andres Roemer who is Jewish was fired from his post over his reluctance to vote for this atrocity and his attempt to force a revote over Mexico's decision (along with Brazil) to change their yes vote to 'abstain.'

So, what does this mean in real life?

First, the Israelis not only aren't going to comply with this, but it underlines for them the futility of any kind of negotiated settlement. Area A of Judea and Samaria is entirely under Arab control and so is Gaza, without a single Jew being present in either place.And the Israelis have bent over backwards to be fair in allowing Muslim access to these sites. But if Israel is still being referred to as 'the occupying power' by the UN at this point, why should believe that any concessions they make are going to change that no matter how much land they give up? Why bother?

The truth is that the entire 'occupation' label is pure fiction because no such country as 'Palestine' ever existed and it had no sovereignty as a state over anything, not in 1922, not in 1948, not in 1967, never. No other country would be considered an occupying power in the circumstances except Israel, the Jew among nations. But if the notion of perpetual 'occupation' is so deeply ingrained that the UN continues to abuse it, why would Israelis expect it to ever disappear no matter how much land for 'peace' they give up?

So this is merely yet another attempt to try and legitimize this nonsense in what passes for 'international law' in certain quarters. At least in Turtle Bay.

Second, this is just a run up to a coming UN Security resolution regarding not just the erasing of Judeo-Christian ties to the holy sites but all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Those areas are now to be Judenrein and ceded to Islam and 'Palestine.'

In deference to President Obama and Secretary John Kerry who have been involved in the planning stages, this one will come after the 2016 elections no matter who wins, during Obama's lame duck period, a parting shot at Israel.

The United States voted against the UNESCO resolution because it's election time. But Obama will see to it that the US votes for or abstains from vetoing the second one, which will make the UNESCO one moot anyway. If Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem are to be ethnically cleansed of 500,000 Jews who have lived there for decades, Jews wont have any access to their holy sites anyway.

No sovereign nation would put up with this and Israel won't either. But it will legitimize the idea of Israeli 'occupation' and help to further distance Israel from the U.S. if Mrs. Clinton is the president.

Personally, if I were Netanyahu I would inform Secretary Kerry that if the United States abrogates Oslo and the Road Map in this way, Israel will no longer be bound by those agreements either and will feel free to resolve this situation unilaterally in a way of its own choosing.

In the end, that's what going to happen anyway. Facts on the ground will always trump the bigoted nonsense coming from the UN. Any ethical or moral authority it once had left a long time ago.

Jew Hatred, Cellphones And Boycotts

 

Orange Telecom is a huge French company involved in the global telecom market. Among its global partners is an Israeli company called Partner Communications, which provides Orange with a piece of the lucrative Israeli cellphone market in exchange for being allowed to use Orange's name.

 

A couple of days ago, the company's CEO, Stephane Richard, speaking at a news conference in Egypt made it very clear that he wanted to sever ties with Israel to join the BDS movement, saying he would "sever ties tomorrow" except for the danger of getting sued for violation of contract.

“Believe me I would cancel the contract tomorrow if I could,” Richard said. His comments were reported by the Daily News Egypt. The reasons he gave for doing business in Israel were that Orange could not cancel without being sued by Partner Communications.

"I know that it is a sensitive issue here in Egypt, but not only in Egypt... We want to be one of the trustful partners of all Arab countries."

In answers to questions about Orange's profit from the Israeli market being a factor, he claimed that that "the interest for us is certainly not a financial interest."

"If you take those amounts on one side and on the other side the time that we spend to explain this, to try to find a solution and the consequences that we have to manage here but also in France, believe me it's a very bad deal."

Mais oui...the consequences of explaining to possible customers in the Arab world and in France that they do business with the Jews! Pauvre Monsieur Richard...

Needless to say, the Israelis did not exactly appreciate his remarks, and asked for clarifications.

And they got them, with suspicious speed. Today, Orange unilaterally cancelled its contract with Partner, essentially telling the Israeli company 'sue me.'

Did I mention that the French government has a 25% stake in Orange Telecom? That, of course, is the heart of the matter. A big factor in the Socialist Hollande government winning the last French presidential election was their carrying the Muslim vote almost in a solid bloc. Without that support and the support of the anti-Israel Left, there's no way Hollande and the Socialists win.

Underlining this, French Ambassador to the U.S. Gerard Araud suddenly went public and defended Orange Telecom's illegal actions 'because of the settlements and the occupation.'

Of course, Ambassador Araud didn't mention what sovereign country Judea and Samaria belonged to when Israel 'occupied' their territory, but such matters apparently escape sophisticated Europeans like him. What matters is that diplomats don't make public statements like this unless their government okays it. And companies don't make illegal moves like this exposing them to litigation unless a 25% stakeholder goes along with it.

This is a reflection of the current state of affairs in France. In spite of all the platitudes denouncing anti-semitism, Jews continue to be assaulted in France with distressing regularity even in neighborhoods formerly considered safe and property is routinely vandalized, while the French government has responded by actually reducing security for the country's Jewish communities and institutions.

The only major French politician who seems to be serious about protecting France's Jews is Marine Le Pen of the National Front. The current government is not.

France is also rumored to be working closely with Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to draft a UN resolution recognizing a Palestinian State on the pre 1967 lines that includes dividing Jerusalem and creating half a million Jewish refugees.

The French government has simply chosen sides in this war.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, in a statement, "I call on the French government to publicly denounce the despicable statement and miserable actions of a company that is under partial French government ownership.”

Israeli-American media mogul Haim Saban, who holds a controlling share of Partner Communications, accused Orange Telecom of reacting to pressure from anti-Semitic groups.

“Partner is an Israeli firm in every sense. We signed a contract with them and we are considering our steps in the wake of their statement,” Saban told Ynet.

Orange “conceded to pressures from all sorts of anti-Semitic bodies,” he was quoted as saying on Channel 2. “In each generation they rise up to destroy us — we are strong and we will be united and fight them.”

The interesting part of that remark is that Saban is en route to Las Vegas, Nevada to meet with others who have to muscle to do just that.

A group of Jewish billionaires like Saban and Sheldon Adelson are meeting to create a strategy on combating Israel boycott efforts.

Adelson himself had some pithy things to say about the matter. The French government “de facto owns Orange,” he said. “The French government should speak out and dissociate itself from the head of Orange in France.”

Adelson also criticized the Israeli government -and rightfully so, in my opinion - for not setting up and funding an organization to fight anti-Israel boycotts and attempts to delegitimize Israel.

The way forward is pretty easy to define.

Right now, less than 2 percent of the agricultural and industrial products Israel exports to the EU originate in Judea and Samaria, while Israel as a whole imports far more from the EU than the EU buys from Israel (about $26.7 vs. $18.3 billion). Moreover, most of what Israel imports from the EU could easily be replaced by new imports from Asia, Australia and the United States.

So Europe stands to lose a lot more than Israel from ridiculous boycotts, and most of the EU knows it. What's really needed is a good object example to drive the lesson home.

Saban, Adelson and their group could start by advertising online and in major media advising Israel's friends, Jewish and non-Jewish, to boycott everything French..its wines, brandies and liqueurs, its cheeses, its perfumes, its electronics, fashions, everything. They could publish a 'do not patronize' list of French products, and encourage Israel's supporters not to visit France and spend money there. This would be devastatingly effective in America.

Israelis could be assisted in participating by the government of Israel insisting that all French goods imported to Israel, even goods partially manufactured in France or with French components be clearly and prominently labeled as such.

At the same time, Orange Telecom should be aggressively pursued in court for breach of contract and for damages to Partner Communication. I'm certain Haim Saban is already laying the groundwork for that.

That's the best way to destroy the BDS movement and governments leaning towards institutionalizing it. Make France the example of the high price that entails, not just with Israel but with its friends around the world.

 

Crossposted at the Times of Israel

J Street Fails In Attempt To to Prevent Anti-BDS Legislation

 


In late April, the Senate Finance Committee adopted new amendments to the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), which would require US trade negotiators to make rejection of the anti-Israel BDS (Boycott Divestment and Sanction) Movement a requirement in any Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations with the European Union, which are now ongoing.

The bill requires signers of the TTIP “to discourage politically motivated actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel and seek the elimination of politically motivated non-tariff barriers on Israeli goods, services, or other commerce imposed on the State of Israel.”

This was aimed not only at EU threats of sanctions against Israel but at EU financial support of anti-Israel BDS groups.

As you might expect, the usual suspects among Jewish anti-semites er, 'anti-Zionists' went into full tantrum mode over this one, lobbying feverishly against it.

The rabidly pro-BDS, anti-Israel Jewish Voice for Peace has been one of the leading voices opposing the legislation, along with Americans For Peace Now,and of course, "pro-Israel, pro-peace" J-Street.

They were especially enraged that the wording of the bill - which refers to all "Israeli-controlled territories" - would also make it illegal to boycott Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.


But despite the pressure from these far-left anti-Israel groups the amendments have near unanimous, bipartisan support:

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) strongly praises Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rob Portman (R-OH) for sponsoring the bipartisan United States-Israel Trade Enhancement Act of 2015 (S.619) and Congressman Peter Roskam (R-IL) and Juan Vargas (D-Cal) for sponsoring the United States-Israel Trade and Commercial Enhancement Act of 2015 (HR.825). In addition, ZOA strongly praises HR.825’s thirty-seven co-sponsors listed below. ZOA also praises Senators Cardin and Portman for annexing this anti-boycott legislation as an amendment to a bill currently in the Senate Finance Committee. [...]

The praiseworthy bipartisan co-sponsors of HR.825 (in addition to sponsors Congressmen Roskam and Vargas) include:

Steve Stivers (R-OH), Lee Zeldin (R-NY), Paul Cook (R-Cal), Blake Farenthold (R-TX), Randy Weber, Sr. (R-TX), David Schweikert (R-AZ), Mark Meadows (R-NC), Bob Gibbs (R-OH), Brian Babin (R-TX), Patrick Murphy (D-Fla), Jackie Walorski (R-IN), Trent Frants (R-AZ), Austin Scott (R-GA), Stevan Pearce (R-NM), Rodney Davis (R-IL), Martha McSally (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Chris Collins (R-NY), David McKinley (R-WV), Tim Walberg (R-MI), Kevin Yoder (R-KS), Peter King (R-NY), Ron DeSantis (R-Fla), Luke Messer (R-IN), Tom Emmer (R-MN), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Bradley Byrne (R-AL), Bill Johnson (R-OH), Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla), Earl “Buddy” Carter (R-GA), Daniel Lipinski (D-IL), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Leonard Lance (R-NJ), Susan Brooks (R-IN), Candice Miller (R-MI) and Daniel Webster (R-Fla).

And those are just the co-sponsors.

Congressman Peter Roskam (R-IL), who co-sponsored the legislation, told The Washington Free Beacon that the whole issue "is a non-story: a bunch of anti-Israel groups criticizing a pro-Israel amendment."

"While a broad bipartisan, bicameral group of Members of Congress are focused on strengthening the mutually beneficial US-Israel economic relationship, this small handful of outside organizations are more interested in defending destructive efforts to delegitimize Israel," he said.

He's got something there. Sanctions are essentially a trade A-bomb, and once the EU uses it, there's zero incentive for Israel to negotiate anything. Unlike Russia and Iran, Israel has more than one product the world wants, and lots of buyers, so even some EU countries will wink at any sanctions, especially with some convenient re-labeling and resales involved. That's exactly how the EU avoided the Arab boycott against Israel in the 1960's and the 1970's.

Not only that, but these days Israel has lucrative and established trade relations with China, Vietnam, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Burma, India, Russia and many other non-EU countries..not to mention Canada and Australia.

President Obama might of course veto this, but doing so would pretty much signal exactly how much he really despises Israel to even the most clueless, not to mention that this legislation merely reiterates existing U.S. law. Even his fellow Dems might participate in a veto overide to preserve their own political hides. And I have a feeling he too realizes that vetoing this would pretty much end what little leverage he has left to get the Israelis to negotiate anything vis a vis 'Palestine'. He has other things more important to deal with, and other plans for Israel, as I'll reveal shortly.

U Of Georgia Students Pass Resolution Calling For More Israel Investment

 

Well, they're definitely not Columbia or UCLA:

The Student Government Association (SGA) of the University of Georgia on Tuesday passed the first college resolution this year calling for the school to invest more in its relations with Israel. The resolution was sponsored and composed by the local chapter of activist group Students Supporting Israel and is the third such resolution ever to be passed.

In the resolution, the SGA, which represents over 35,000 students in Georgia, supports the expansion of study abroad opportunities in Israel for both undergraduate and graduate students across all fields of study. The text asserts that “academic freedom and collaboration are crucial to the pursuit of knowledge,” but that the university currently offers “very limited options” for study abroad in the Middle East.

The resolution calls Israel “one of the most stable countries in the Middle East, and the country with the highest ratings in freedom, human rights, and democracy in the region.” It also argues that the Jewish state is a “global leader” in science and technology research, agricultural development and practices in sustainability.

The full resolution's available at the link. And according to my source, it stands a pretty good chance of being adopted by the administration. Sanity reveals itself.

The Swedes Throw A Tantrum Over Israel

Sweden's foreign minister Margot Wallstrom is angry at Israel, and she unloaded publicly today.

"It is unacceptable how they have been talking about us and everybody else," Wallstrom said in an interview with Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter. "It has irritated not only us, but the Americans and everyone who has anything to do with them right now."

She's in a snit because she was scheduled to arrive in Israel in mid-January in order to attend a memorial service for the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg, who saved Jews during the Holocaust. And, just a coincidence, to have meetings with high level Israeli officials. Instead, the Israeli government and Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman told her that those meetings weren't going to happen...at which point she canceled the trip, which gives you a good idea how much she and her government actually cared about honoring Raoul Wallenberg.

The reason for the Israeli government's response was Social Democrat Prime Minister Stefan Lofven using his inaugural address in parliament last year to announce that his country would recognize a Palestinian state along the pre-1967 lines.

Here's what the Swedish government actually endorsed by backing that: the creation of 500,000 Israeli refugees; the forced retreat of Israel to indefensible borders; the legitimacy of Hamas as part of the government of this new 'Palestine'; the casual tearing up of treaties and agreements signed by the PLO; and the redivision of Jerusalem and the barring of Jews forever from their holy sites.

Of course, what's really bothering Margot Wallstrom and the Swedish government is that those damned stubborn Jews won't roll over and appease Islamists - like Sweden, for instance.

In her interview, Wallstrom claimed Sweden supports Israel, Palestine and peace, but then she launched into the usual diatribe of 'anti-Zionists'

"Israel has been extremely aggressive," she said.

"They have continued with their settlement policies, they have continued demolitions, they have continued with their occupation policies which entail a humiliation of Palestinians, which makes the (peace) process difficult."

Yes, in her mind Hamas wasn't being aggressive at all in launching rockets at Israel civilians or in funding terrorist raids to kidnap and murder Israeli civilians. And Abbas and his Hamas allies haven't engaged in constant incitement, lawfare, terrorist attacks and failure to actually negotiate anything.

Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon tried to clue the Swedish people in during an interview broadcast on Swedish Radio, saying, "The Swedish foreign minister would not have been given any official meetings in Israel if she had traveled here. What Sweden did was an utterly unfriendly action."

It was more than just 'unfriendly.' Sweden may be famed for its neutrality but its Leftist government has essentially decided to pick sides in a war. Can they possibly be so clueless as to not understand that officials of Sweden's government aren't welcome in Israel, the country they chose to align themselves against?

And the government is backing up their choice with hard cash going directly to Hamas.

Margot Wallstrom may claim Sweden supports Israel and peace, but the actions of her government prove otherwise. Israel hardly needs enemies with the kind of 'support' they're getting from Sweden.

The Blood Of Zion Cries Out

 

Early this morning, four Jews at morning prayers were murdered in a synagogue in Jerusalem after two Palestinian broke in and assaulted the worshipers with gunfire and meat cleavers.

Many others were wounded and four are in critical condition.

The terrorist attack took place in Har Hof a predominantly Orthodox neighborhood at the at the Kehilat Yaakov synagogue on Agasi Street.

The Murder victims were identified as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, the head of the Torat Moshe yeshiva, 59; 40-year-old  Rabbi Aryeh Kupinsky; 50-year-old Rabbi Kalman Levine; and 68-year-old Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Goldberg(HY"D). Rabbi Kupinsky, Rabbi Levine and Rabbi Twersky were all American citizens, while Rabbi Goldberg was a British subject. A Druze policeman, 30-year-old Master Sergeant Zidan Sif subsequently died of his wounds as well, and all Israel will mourn and honor him.

The killers stormed the synagogue at 7 AM local time. There was no warning and no way for the victims to defend themselves.The rabbis were murdered during the sacred prayer of Shimoneh Esrei, with siddurim (prayer books) in their hands and their tefillum on.

Eye witness Ya'akov Amos said: 'The terrorist moved to within a metre of me then started shooting. One, two, three, bang, bang, bang. I immediately hit the ground and tried to protect myself with a prayer stand. He kept screaming 'Allah hu'Akbar'.

 

There was blood everywhere, so much that one of the medical workers slipped in it and broke his leg.

The international reaction was interesting. Even U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry seemed shocked, with his voice quavering. He even used the "T" word and called for an end to incitement against Jews.

Phillip Hammond, Britain's Foreign Secretary contented himself with a bloodless statement that 'both sides' should seek to 'reduce tension.' President Obama, of course, said much the same thing. Somehow, I doubt they would have merely talked about both sides reducing tension if four imams had been murdered by a Jew and Qu'rans profaned in this way.

Israel's economics minister Naftali Bennett was interviewed by the BBC today, and provides us with another indication of exactly how sick and depraved Britain has become when it comes to Israel and the Jews.



(just a hint - when Bennett mentions Abu Mazen, he is using Mahmoud Abbas's nom de guerre, the terrorist name he used as Arafat's second-in-command.)

Notice how the interviewer doesn't even address the issue of Abbas inciting terrorism, but pulls the case of an Arab bus driver who died yesterday, as though that made the savage murder of four Jews at prayer legitimate. That Arab driver, by the way, had a full investigation and an autopsy done on him and there is no doubt he committed suicide. Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israel jails murderers no matter who they are.

I really felt like saying 'Kol Hakavod' when Bennett held up a picture of one of the victims, which the interviewer hastily told him to put down lest he upset the gentle sensibilities of her viewers. I think it is absolutely essential to do just that - to let the British public see what their government is funding and supporting. And I hope it upsets them to the point of utter shame.

At the end of the interview, Bennett says that Britain is going to have to make a choice of whether they support the Free World or not. As I'm sure Bennett knows, the British Government has already made that choice.Which is why, perhaps, they feel compelled to put up with soldiers being beheaded in broad daylight and no go areas for police and non-Muslims in London and other large British cities.



The murderers were both killed in a shootout with police at the scene. They were Ghassan and Oday Abu Jamal from the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood in east Jerusalem. Needless to say, they were acclaimed as heroes and martyrs by all the factions of the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians.







 "We responded with shouts of joy when we received the news about their deaths," Ala'a Abu Jamal said of his cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal to Yedioth Aharonoth. "People here distributed candies to guests who visited us, and there was joy for the martyrs."

In a message published on its official new website Al-Resalah, Hamas said the attack was “a quality development in fighting the occupation. We highly value the heroism of its operatives.” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri praised the attack on Qatari news channel Al-Jazeera as “heroic,” calling for more attacks of the same kind.

 Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri happily wrote on Twitter that “Jerusalem has nothing but men who love martyrdom. The heroes of the knife are in Jerusalem. The heroes of the run-over [car attacks] are in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem men take revenge.”

And he posted this on his Facebook page:

The Arab killer is asking 'Where are they hiding?" Needless to say, in spite of what this cartoon shows none of the worshipers were armed.

And Fatah? Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen issued a 'condemnation' that wasn't one. In a statement (in English, not Arabic)it said that “The Palestinian presidency" condemns violence "from whatever source" and "demands an end to the invasions of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the provocations of the Settlers."

In other words, 'So sorry, but unless you surrender Jerusalem to us expect more of the same.'

This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who accused Jews of “contaminating” Al-Aqsa Mosque last week, who just a few days ago was telling his people, in Arabic, to 'defend Jerusalem' by any means necessary. This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who said nothing when Fatah published cartoons and Facebook posts encouraging terrorist attacks on Jews and “days of rage” to defend the 'threatened' Al-Aqsa.

Tawfik Tirawi, former chief of the Palestinian General Security in the West Bank and a member of Fatah’s Central Committee made it even plainer, and in Arabic. Today he told a radio station in Hebron that the attack was “nothing but a reaction to the recent crimes of the occupation and the settlers in occupied Jerusalem and across the nation. The threats of the occupation against our people and the Palestinian leadership, represented by the president, will only increase our efforts in safeguarding our rights.”

His remarks were reprinted on Fatah's official Facebook page.

I should make something clear here. This is not the fault of Abbas, or Hamas, or any of the Arabs who identify themselves as Palestinians.

It is the fault of the Israeli government.

A significant number of the Palestinians are simply acting as they have always acted since the 1920's, and these tendencies were unleashed even further once Arafat and the PLO were allowed in to take over after Oslo.



Israeli governments since Oslo have always allowed themselves to be pressured to ignore these instances of sheer horror...to release  convicted murderers, to make concessions to the terrorist entities on Israel's borders, and most of all to avoid  finishing them off entirely when their violence and bloodshed mandated a response. This has been especially true since Barack Obama, who styles himself as the Palestinian's very own community organizer entered the White House.

Is it any wonder that this sort of thing continues to happen? Is it really so puzzling that after allowing Hamas to continue in Gaza and maintaining any kind of relationship with Abbas and the PLO once they allied themselves openly with Hamas that they would resort back to Arafat's tactics?

Yasser Arafat himself outlined for his followers what this war was really about. On Jordanian TV, right after signing the Oslo Accords he was criticized for signing a peace agreement with the Jews. He responded by reminding his audience of the Peace of Hubidiyeh, a treaty Mohammed made with the Quraysh tribe that he violated as soon as he was strong enough to massacre them, a story every Muslim knows. And then he outlined exactly what this war was about, saying that "either the Jews will push us into the sea or we will push them into the sea."

Arafat, the leaders of Hamas and numerous members of Fatah have sung the same songs for years. Is it their fault that Israeli governments for years have refused to take them seriously?



It is time they did.

The violence in Jerusalem can be curtailed, not by more security patrols and not by putting guards in front of every synagogue and public building but by teaching the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians that there are real world consequences for their actions.

As you may have noticed, no matter how much innocent Jewish blood is spilled, it is always Israel who is advised to 'reduce tensions' and 'avoid provocation.'  It is always Israel who is castigated for building homes for its people, in spite of over an estimated 40,000 illegal Arab-built structures in East Jerusalem, and an entire city  being constructed from scratch with EU and US Aid money that encroaches on Israeli communities in Area C of Judea.

This is the first time I have ever heard John Kerry mention the constant hatred being spewed by the mosques, media and schools in both Gaza and in the PLO occupied areas of Judea and Samaria as something counterproductive to any real peace. And even his condemnation of this horror as well as the other ones from the UN and EU that will no doubt be voiced are maddeningly hollow..because they still fund and support this evil.

As Naftali Bennett said, they are going to have to choose sides, and that particularly applies to the United States.But Israel has some choices to make as well.

Are they going to settle for the status quo and a war of attrition that favors Israel's enemies? Or are they are they going to do what's necessary to end it and win the right to live peacefully?

I've always favored Israel simply delineating its own borders and annexing that land,along with a transfer of populations to the respective sides of those borders. But at the very least Israel should answer every terrorist attack with the outright annexation of more land in Judea and Samaria, showing the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians that they are there to stay, and that attacks on Israel cost them dearly. Build on the land, and call the EU's bluff. In the unlikely event that they follow through on their threats to indulge in sanctions,they have a lot more to lose than Israel does right now economically.

When there are violent riots, as there were in Jabal Mukaber today, simply arrest the perpetrators,take away their Israeli ID cards and expel them to Gaza or to Area A for Abbas to deal with.Aside from providing real world consequences, it will also separate those Arabs who like the good life in Israel and are willing to live in peace (and there are more of them them you think) from those whom want to poison the well with violence.

Make the disarmament of Hamas an iron clad condition for any further reconstruction aid, especially since Hamas is already diverting money and materials to remaking its terrorist infrastructure. Both the EU and Secretary of State Kerry have given lip service to the importance of disarming Hamas for peace. Hold them to it.

If the Muslim Waqf that is in charge of the al-Aqsa Mosque continues to incite riots and stone throwing on the Temple Mount and refuses to allow Jews to enjoy it peacefully, simply explain to them that the next time it happens the police will respond in force, the Waqf's control of al-Aqsa and the Mount will be ended, the members of the Waqf expelled from Israel and the mosque shut down.

And allow Israelis to sue the PLO and Hamas in Israelis courts for damages to property and person, taking the judgments out of the tax monies Israel collects for the PLO.

These are the sort of steps that are ultimately going to defeat the Third Intifada. It's long past time to treat Hamas/Fatah like the hostile entity it is. And if it becomes necessary to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, so be it.

I am tired of seeing headlines like I saw today, tired of seeing the Arabs whom identify themselves as Palestinians celebrating each new atrocity, tired of seeing world leaders being complicit with this evil.

And I am especially tired of Israel accepting this hypocrisy. I am sick to death of it. It is one thing to be the Jew among nations, but something else entirely to live on your knees and internalize it.

Selah.

Surprise! Loretta Lynch Belonged To An Anti-semitic Pro-Terrorist Group at Harvard

In my last article on Loretta Lynch, President Obama's pick for attorney general, I revealed quite a bit of information, including how she was vetted by none other than Al Sharpton.

We also saw how she is virulently against voter ID laws, has an exaggerated sense of racial grievance, and favors race-based standards and selective harassment and prosecutions, i.e towards 'white southern schools' as opposed to all others.

And finally, in a speech she made, we saw how she equated violent terrorism with. 'fighting for your rights' and a Soviet trained self-admitted terrorist like Nelson Mandela with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a true civil rights icon.

After that bit of information, my sarcastic comment was that she probably hearts Che and Arafat too.

It turns out I was entirely correct.

During her time at Harvard Law, Ms. Lynch was a proud member in good standing of the Harvard Black Law Students Association (BLSA) from 1981-1984 when she was a student.

Aside from endorsing a number of frankly racist positions, the group, led by one Mohammed Kenyatta had a major love affair with Yasser Arafat and the violently anti-Israel PLO - and remember, this was pre-Oslo, when they were still considered a terrorist group.The BLSA brought members of the PLO and their allies to campus every year Lynch was a member.

Not only that,but when confronted by Jewish groups on campus protesting this,(which included Allan Dershowitz) Kenyatta and his cohorts reacted with behavior and statement that were borderline anti-semitic.

This was too much even for the politically correct Harvard Crimson which condemned the group's behavior on one of these occasions in 1984:

"The Black Law Students Association (BALSA) committed an unjustifiable and discriminatory violation of student liberties last week when it denied Jewish students an opportunity to participate in a campus forum featuring a representative of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).

More than 30 Jewish Law Students Association (JLSA) members attended the panel discussion, outnumbering members of BALSA and the Third World Coalition, the event’s sponsors. But after opening the forum to questions from the floor, BALSA moderator Muhammad I. Kenyatta refused to recognize any of the white hands raised in the audience. BALSA and TWC members were to be given priority, he announced, proceeding to call on a Black student who hadn’t raised his hand.

We defend the PLO’s right to appear in an open forum at Harvard. All groups have a right to present their views; had Kenyatta permitted all students to challenge the speaker with critical questions, the ensuing discussion might have provided a constructive exchange of ideas and opinions.

By stifling debate, however, Kenyatta reduced the event to little more than a propaganda platform for a terrorist organization that has pledged to destroy the State of Israel. His refusal to open the floor to all students views showed a glaring disregard for the principles of free discussion that are vital to an enlightened academic community."

But wait, there's more.

The group made notorious efforts to blackmail white churches for 'reparations', and Kenyatta's specialty was to 'invade' churches and cause damage and chaos.

They spilled blood on the altar of one church, took over church offices, dumped out collection plates, damaged church property, and and on several occasions took over community centers and trashed and vandalized them. One can only presume that Loretta Lynch took part in these activities.

Ordinarily, I think you could make the argument that a lot of people do stupid things when they're young.

Except Lynch wasn't all that young when this occurred, being in her mid to late twenties.And the speech she made earlier this year that I linked to here tells us her ideology hasn't changed much since then.

Like Eric Holder, it looks like Loretta Lynch is an excellent example of what Emmet Tyrell Jr. famously called a 'coat and tie' radical, someone whom  dresses in costume and bores from within.

No wonder Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer raised no objection to delaying her confirmation hearings until after the new congress gets seated in January.

(h/t to Tom at Virginia Right for the head's up)

Chickensh*t

 

That quaint kid's playground epithet is the money quote from an article entitled "The Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations Is Officially Here," posted by Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic.

It's what Goldberg reports that an anonymous senior Obama administration official called Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu in a conversation Goldberg had with him. And in the article, Goldberg also mentions that President Obama "in interviews with me, has alluded to Netanyahu’s lack of political courage."

Now, for all that Jeffrey Goldberg has consistently been a fairly servile apologist for the president and the Obama Administration when it comes to Israel, he's not entirely wrong that Netanyahu has been guilty of a lack of courage in some instances. But that lack of courage is from an entirely different direction than Goldberg supposes.

Contrary to the tile of Jeffrey Goldberg's piece, the crisis in US-Israel relations started from the moment Barack Hussein Obama was elected president. Where Netanyahu and certain other Israeli leaders have exhibited a lack of courage is in trying desperately to deny and fend it off, and make believe it wasn't happening.

Barack Obama started his presidency by stating openly (once he was safely elected) that he wanted to create daylight between the U.S. and Israel, and he has been doing so ever since.

Is Jeffrey Goldberg suffering from amnesia? Do we really need to revisit the climate that's been created between the US and Israel since Barack Obama took over as president?  His repudiation of the agreements made with Israel by President Bush  that convinced Israeli PM Ariel Sharon to go ahead with the Gaza disengagement, claiming they never existed? His call for Israel to re-divide Jerusalem and retreat to indefensible borders? His telling Iran that Israel was on its own in the event of any hostilities? His insisting that Israel has no right to Jewish religious sites? His repeated statements that the Palestinians need not recognize Israel as a Jewish State and his continued funding of the Palestinian Authority in spite of their continued support and incitement for terrorism against Israeli civilians? His instituting what amounted to a de facto arms embargo for six months during the early part of his first term? His approval and funding of the new Hamas/Fatah entity which includes a genocidal terrorist group? The list could go on for quite some time.

Would any other sovereign nation put up with constant temper tantrums from a foreign government over building homes in its own capital? With pressure to release convicted murderers from its jails as a 'gesture for peace?' With mysterious holdups for bureaucratic 'review' of badly needed military supplies in the middle of a war? With deliberately insulting treatment of its elected leader by the president of what was supposed to be a closely allied government?

While Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have sometimes made statements that have revealed a lack of discretion,it's been in reaction to a long climate of outright hostility from the White House that makes even former President Carter's tenure look benign by comparison. Jeffrey Goldberg might wish to forget it, but it was the overt actions and attitude from this president and his administration towards Israel and Netanyahu that came first and poisoned the well.

The Israelis never figured on a president getting elected in America who had an animus towards Israel, and their futile attempts to muddle through and somehow make the relationship work only made President Obama more insistent, unreasonable and demanding.

And speaking of political courage, let's take a good look at what gave Barack Obama the license to act out this way towards Israel. It was America's Jews on the Left - like Jeffrey Goldberg.
Remember this,from back in 2008? (courtesy of Omri Ceren):

So, all you rumor-mongering, fever-headed Jewish conspiracists: Support McCain, if you want, and there are credible reasons for doing so, but stop smearing Obama in the face of overwhelming evidence that the man is a great friend of Jews and of Israel. After a point, it becomes obvious that what you fear is not Israel's destruction, but the presence of an African-American in the White House. And that's disgusting.

Obama's background and his feelings about Israel were obvious to anyone whom bothered to look at him honestly. President Barack Obama has had close associations with Israel haters and in some cases open anti-semites his entire life. Frank Marshall Davis, Edward Said, Rashid al-Khalidi, Khalid al-Mansour, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Al Sharpton and others like them all figure or have figured prominently in his background.

So how did this all slip by?

What happened is that many on the Left and those in media simply didn't want to know, especially Jews. They made a clear decision that voting Democrat and embracing their Leftist politics meant more to them than supporting their brothers and sisters in Israel. It was this hideous betrayal that enabled President Obama to act out and make support for Israel as an ally a partisan issue once he was elected. A significant number of American Jews voted Democrat in 2008 and found solace in candidate Obama telling them what they wanted to hear, in political groups the George Soros financed J-Street,and the NJDC, and in the bogus mantra of 'the two state solution'. It enabled President Obama to neuter AIPAC, as well as other Jewish groups. With a few honorable exceptions, they all fell in line with the New Order. And even after they had ample evidence of President Obama's attitude towards Israel during his first term, most of them voted for him again.

And this backing of Obama and his agenda led,in case no one's noticed, not only to the increased intransigence of Abbas and Fatah but to the increased hostility towards Jews and Israel in places like the EU and and a rising climate of Jew hatred in places like university campuses, again with some rare exceptions. The backing of the majority of America's Jews for Obama and their tolerance for his policies was and is the protective cover and the impetus for all of it.

And it's ironic that Goldberg himself, whom I'm sure knows this as well as I do is still drinking the same Kool-Ade. Read this from his article today:


Unlike the U.S. secretary of state, John Kerry, I don’t have any hope for the immediate creation of a Palestinian state (it could be dangerous, at this chaotic moment in Middle East history, when the Arab-state system is in partial collapse, to create an Arab state on the West Bank that could easily succumb to extremism), but I would also like to see Israel foster conditions on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem that would allow for the eventual birth of such a state. This is what the Obama administration wants (and also what Europe wants, and also, by the way, what many Israelis and American Jews want), and this issue sits at the core of the disagreement between Washington and Jerusalem.

I'm sure that in the rarefied bubble Jeffrey Goldberg lives in, there are plenty of Jews who have no problem with creating Jewish refugees, redividing Jerusalem again and making it Jew-free 'for peace'. But hardly any Israelis do, now that they've seen up close what that means. Fully 76% of them,more than three out of four would oppose any kind of Palestinian state that would redivide Jerusalem and put half of it under the control of Hamas/Fatah.

What 'conditions' does Jeffrey Goldberg expect Israel to foster? Stop building in Jerusalem while the Arabs continue to build illegally and make East Jerusalem into their de facto capital? Stop Jews from living there because they're Jews? Ignore the current terrorist attacks and the intifada in Jerusalem incited and ordered by Abbas and Hamas, something that was planned by them a year ago and was just awaiting the proper excuse to be launched? Ignore Abbas's alliance with a genocidal terrorist group?

Actually, what the Jeffrey Goldbergs want is a lot simpler. They want Israel to bend over, do whatever President Obama and John Kerry tell Israel to do and stop embarrassing them.

And they think Bibi Netanyahu 'lacks political courage?'

It is highly possible President Obama will have the U.S. abstain from Mahmoud Abbas's attempt to push through a UN Security Council resolution gifting Hamas/Fatah all of Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem to create 'Palestine' on the pre '67 lines. If that happens and it passes, or if the president seeks to impose his own, similar diktat on Israel, Israel will simply refuse to comply, since they can't without committing national suicide. The response from the usual suspects is easy to predict. How dare Israel defy the UN diktat to create half a million Jewish refugees, redivide Jerusalem and to give Abbas and Hamas the ability to turn Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem into attack platforms like Gaza! How dare they defy President Obama! What an ungrateful ally!

At that point, unless congress intervenes in some fashion, U.S. military sales to Israel could very likely be cut off or 'suspended' by executive order and favorable trade treaties revoked.

If that's how it goes down, President Obama will then have achieved his goal of distancing America from Israel. And those of America's Jews who have been so eager to support Barack Obama's hostile agenda on Israel or simply keep quiet about it may just find out what a really bad idea that was, both for America and for them personally.

That story has already been played out before elsewhere. Just ask the Jews of England, France and elsewhere in Western Europe whether it was Israeli institutions being targeted or Jewish ones when Israel was recently defending its citizens from Hamas and see what they tell you.

The Book of Esther, a bit of scripture some Jews may be familiar with is another example.

As Mordecai reminded her when Esther was tempted to go with the flow and look the other way where her fellow Jews were concerned..If you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s  family will perish.

There's a reason the Book of Esther is read every Purim for all Jews to hear and remember. The Goldbergs of the world ought to do some serious thinking about that.

Pat Condell Video - "Boo Hoo Palestine"

Pat Condell with another no holds barred video.

Sweden Recognizes 'Palestine' As A Sovereign State

One of the results of the recent Swedish election which put a Leftist minority government of Social Democrats and Greens in power is the recognition of 'Palestine'. Prime Minister Stefan Lofven announced the move today.

"The conflict between Israel  and Palestine can only be solved with a two-state solution, negotiated in accordance with international law," Swedish PM Stefan Lofven said during his inaugural address in parliament.



"A two-state solution requires mutual recognition and a will to peaceful co-existence. Sweden will therefore recognize the state of Palestine."

So Sweden is going to recognize a  'country' with no recognized borders, ruled for the past decade by an unelected dictator and partnered up with Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group.

 

The former center-right coalition government did not recognize 'Palestine' for exactly those reasons.

This still needs to be voted on in Sweden's parliament.If the Leftist government pushes this through Sweden would be the first country to recognize 'Palestine' while being a member of the European Union.

The American response by State Department spokesperson  Jen Psaki called Sweden's action "premature"

 “We believe that the process is one that has to be worked out through the parties to agree on the terms of how they’ll live in the future of two states living side-by-side,” she said.

The U.S., Britain and Australia are on record as opposing the UN Resolution by 'Palestine' to impose a settlement.

The Swedish government's action is, of course, not really concerned with international law or even with peace or 'Palestine' as such. This is simply  a hit out as Israel.Does anyone really think Sweden would recognize a non-state like 'Palestine' if they weren't in conflict with the Jews?

The ironic thing is that, based on the news I hear coming out of Sweden almost every day,  the last thing the Swedes ought to be concerned about is 'Palestine' and empowering Islamists like Hamas. They'd be far better off concentrating on saving their own country, their quality of life, their culture  and their women and children from what appears to be a great many  of the Muslims they've imported.

Music To Hate By - The Met and The NYT Bring Anti-Semitism Mainstream

The Metropolitan Opera has an interesting choice in its repertoire for this year's season.

It's the debut of its production of John Adams’s The Death of Klinghoffer on October 20, just under a month from now. The opera is fairly controversial, because of the way it treats the victim of a heartless atrocity and the terrorists who committed it.

 

Leon Klinghoffer was a 69-year-old American Jew who was a decorated American World War II veteran, wheelchair bound and was taking a cruise in 1985 with his wife and 11 friends to celebrate his 36th wedding anniversary on the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro.

The ship was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists from Black September, and Klinghoffer was taken aside and shot to death, murdered on the direct orders of Yasser Arafat. His body and his wheel chair were then thrown into the sea. He was no physical threat to the terrorists and was murdered simply because he was a Jew.

An opera based on these events was composed by John Adams with the libretto written by apostate Jew Alice Goodman, a convert from Judaism who's now Anglican.

The opera was apparently designed to 'equivocate' the Arab terrorists and their victim morally and show the 'humanity' of both sides. The very title, using the word 'death' rather than 'murder' is a good indication of where this opera stands.

Needless to say, given the expansive growth of Jew hatred, including the recent beheading of a Jewish journalist by Islamic State, this drew some major flak, to the point that last June the Met cancelled a gala worldwide HD broadcast of this performance scheduled to stream to theaters and on radio.

But they are still putting on the opera.

Actually, the opera itself doesn't merely 'morally equivocate' an old, harmless Jew in a wheel chair and his murderers. It comes down squarely on the side of the Arab terrorists.

It openly refers to the Israelis as the new Nazis. The opening scene shows graffiti on a wall, “Warsaw 1943, Bethlehem 2005,” while Jews wearing kippot are shown planting trees and building on 'plundered Arab territory'. The Palestinian chorus sings, “My father’s house was razed in 1948 when the Israelis passed over our street.” The Palestinians sing, “We are soldiers fighting a war. We are not criminals and we are not vandals but men of ideals.”

 

Yes, brave soldiers fighting one unarmed 69-year old Jew in a wheel chair. How heroic!

And the rest of the libretto is riddled with typically anti-semitic stereotypes and slurs. At one point, the principal terrorist says, “Wherever poor men are gathered, they can find Jews getting fat. You know how to cheat the simple, exploit the virgin, pollute where you have exploited, defame those you cheated, and break your own law with idolatry.” Later, he yells at Klinghoffer, “America is one big Jew.”

That of course reveals the truth of the relationship between a crippled American Jew and Palestinian hatred. It has never been about Israel per se, but about the Jews. All Jews, where ever they are, no matter how Left-leaning and 'anti-Zionist' they are, not matter how self-degrading.

 

And the music itself deliberately  underlines the superiority of the viewpoint of Arabs as freedom fighters and victims. The Palestinian choruses are strong, virile and filled with emotion, especially as the opera progresses and more of their grievances against Jews are revealed and explored in the opera and the libretto. The Jewish choruses and lyrics are flabby and vague..exactly the way Adams wanted the two sides portrayed.

It is the Palestinian who are shown throughout the opera as heroic with justifiable anger while the Jews are shown as money grubbing and exploitative, always in an unfavorable light. What the music and the libretto both underline in a particularly sick way is that Leon Klinghoffer's murder was justified, because his death was a sacrifice for the 'crimes' of his fellow Jews.

Needless to say, both the Met and the New York Times are beating the drum of 'artistic freedom' to justify putting this propaganda - because that's exactly what it is - on stage. The Times in particular praised Met general manager Peter Gelb for being “true to its artistic mission.” 

Now I wonder...what would happen to a composer who wrote an opera about KKK members in the South during the Reconstruction lynching a negro who was a tool for their carpetbagger oppressors and attempted the same sort of 'artistic statement' that John Adams and Alice Goodman put together, showing moral equivalence of murderers and victim? Would the Met stage that opera? And would the New York Times laud it as 'artistic freedom'? Would the composer ever get another commission to compose anything? I think we know the answers to those questions.

Does the Met have the right to put on this anti-semitic work in a mainstream cultural arena that justifies violence against Jews? Of course they do. Did John Adams have the right to compose it? Of course he did. Was a it a moral and decent thing to do? Are they being sympathetic and respectful of the feelings of the Klinghoffer's children? Do they bear some responsibility for violence done to Jews as a result of what amount to a justification for it.

Absolutely. And no amount of rationalizing about 'artistic freedom; cleanses that guilt, before G-d or man. To even try to do so is to reveal oneself as morally dead.


Peter Gelb can be reached at pgelb@metopera.org or call (212) 799-3100.

Elizabeth Warren Gets Taken In By Anti-Israel Fake Holocaust 'Victim'

 

Progressive icon and Leftist demagogue Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was speaking at Tufts University in Massachusetts when she got played...and big time. At one point, taking questions, she picked Elizabeth Moseley, who threw Israel and Gaza into the mix. Here's a transcript of what went down:

Moseley: “Eva Moseley, I’m not a student, I’m not an alumnae, but was in faculty life. I was also a Holocaust refugee and I’m extremely concerned that Jews don’t do to another people what was done to them.”

Warren: “I think that’s fair.”

Moseley:"You recently said that you believe that Israel has the right to self-defense," the activist continued. "Do you also believe that the Palestinians have a right to self-defense?”

Warren:“Of course. And the answer is yes. The direction we ought to be moving is not toward more war. The direction we need to be moving, as I said, I believe we need to move to a two-state solution where both peoples can be secure and safe within their own borders. So, I’m there.”

At that point, one of Moseley's friends weighed in: “You specifically apologized for Israeli actions attacking schools and hospitals and you’re going on the congressional Israel trip which we all know is like AIPAC alignment, is what that is. So as a progressive, as someone who wanted you to come be a progressive, how can you say what you’re putting forward on Israel is progressive?”

Warren: “You know, look, you can do whatever characterization you want of it, but listen only to my words. I didn’t apologize for anyone. I made clear what my view is. I don’t want to see anyone kill more people.”

Then back to the scripted talking points...“You know, it’s – I think that peace favors both peoples and that’s what we really need,” Warren said, adding, “But I always want to be clear about this. The parties themselves are the ones that will have to negotiate this – it is not up to America to impose it.”

So let's analyze this a bit.

 

First of all, who's Eva Moseley? She is a retired Harvard clerical worker who is also a prominent BDS supporter and a member of the ultra far Left Cambridge Peace Commission who has made Israel-bashing her vocation. Eva Moseley is who the Commission goes to when they need an Israel basher for one of those 'as-a-Joo' moments.

Nor, by her own admission is she a Holocaust victim. She left Vienna with her parents for America in 1939, and as she said in this fan letter to Holocaust denier and Hezbollah fan Norman Finklestein, "I'm one of the lucky few who escaped and, because I was only six at the time of the Anschluss, escaped virtually all the trauma as well."

In spite of admitting having no connection with Judaism or the local Jewish community, Eva Moseley definitely knows how to use the accident of her birth to slime Israel. As she told her pals on the Peace Commission, "I can do my 'I escaped from Nazi Vienna and am unhappy with what Israel does' schtick, if you think that would help."

Next, let's see what she and her fellow Palestine groupie were able to manipulate Senator Warren into endorsing.

That 'Palestinian right of self defense' is well established code for terrorist attacks against Israel's civilians, part of the 'resistance.' If Senator Warren doesn't know that, she hasn't been paying attention much to the region or the Arab rhetoric on this subject and I would question her fitness to lead.

Second, when the unidentified Pal groupie attacked her for 'apologizing' for Israeli actions, Senator Warren's reaction was to say 'I am too a progressive, I didn't apologize for Israel, you know I just really want peace, kumbayah.'

Senator Warren, like more than a few Democrats is willing appear to be pro-Israel when it suits them for donor money and votes. But she  is also  apparently more than willing to 'triangulate' that support to appeal to her progressive, predominantly  anti-Israel base. Not only that, but the fact that she got so easily manipulated and doesn't appear to actually know much about the region except the talking points she's been fed is a bad combination.

Massachusetts voters who think Israel does have the right to defend itself and to exist should take note.

Ridiculous To Criticize Israel's 'Appropriation' Of Vacant Land In Judea

 

The latest cause for criticism of Israel has to do with its declaring 4,000 dunams of vacant land (about 1.54 square miles) in the Israeli bloc of communities known as Gush Etzion to be public land, and thus available for building.

The response from the usual suspects was predictable.

“We have long made clear our opposition to continued settlement activity,” a US official told Reuters. “This announcement, like every other settlement announcement Israel makes… is counterproductive to Israel’s stated goal of a negotiated two-state solution with the Palestinians.”

“We urge the government of Israel to reverse this decision.”

Someone should tell this man (not that he'd listen) that the 'negotiated two-state solution' ship sailed a long time ago. That was before Mahmoud Abbas partnered up with Hamas. And even if it was still viable, Israel isn't going to give up the area in question anyway and retreat to the kind of borders John Kerry and Barack Obama envision

The British and French, with all those restless Muslim voters to appease were even stronger in their language.

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said in a statement "The UK deplores the Israeli government's expropriation of 988 acres of land around the settlement of Etzion."

"This is a particularly ill-judged decision that comes at a time when the priority must be to build on the ceasefire in Gaza. It will do serious damage to Israel's standing in the international community."

Really, Mr. Hammond? Are you guaranteeing that Hamas will disarm if Israel doesn't build a few houses on vacant land it controls? And why is the ceasefire a priority for Israel, rather than for Hamas? Wouldn't disarming Hamas do a lot more to 'build on the ceasefire?'

France also rebuked the Israeli announcement on Monday, with spokesman Romain Nadal saying that France "condemns" the action and "calls on the Israeli authorities to reconsider their decision."

The UN, of course, also weighed in, saying it was 'alarmed by yesterday’s announcement by Israeli authorities to declare as so-called ‘state land’ nearly 1,000 acres of land in the Bethlehem area of the West Bank."

The wording of the UN statement is revealing. Actually, the area in question is adjacent to Gush Etzion, a bloc of Israeli communities with almost 100,000 people in it rather than Bethlehem, a small town of 25,000 now controlled by the Palestinian Authority. The biased language is obvious.

It's good to know with the region on fire, the UN, Obama Administration, UK and France have their priorities in the right place!

The Hamas/Fatah unity government known as The Palestinian Authority was predictably florid in its rhetoric.

Chief negotiator Saeb Erekat, formerly the right fork of Yasser Arafat's tongue was in overdrive.

“The Israeli government is committing various crimes against the Palestinian people and their occupied land,” he told AFP. “The international community should hold Israel accountable as soon as possible for its crimes and raids against our people in Gaza and the ongoing Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.”

The response from the Arabs whom refer to themselves as Palestinians can be discounted, since they're essentially a hostile entity to Israel. But let's look at what the other actors are saying.

  The biased, hypocritical nonsense spewed by the UN, the Obama Administration and other members of 'the international community tells you everything you need to know. Their idea of the perfect solution to everything is for Israel to retreat to the indefensible pre '67 borders and hand Mahmoud Abbas and his Hamas allies the keys. They have the outcome of any 'negotiations' all worked out in advance and then get upset when Israel doesn't go along with the program of its own extinction.

The area in question is vacant land adjacent to Gush Etzion. That puts it in Area C, a part of Judea and Samaria that is under Israeli sovereignty anyway according to the Oslo Accords and the Road Map, both of which the United States was a signatory to as well as Israel and the Palestinians. Since there are no counter claims of ownership, there was no reason for Israel not to make it public land, and they had every right to do so.

 

Moreover, they had a compelling reason to do so. Among other things, this is a response to the kidnapping and murder in June of three Israeli teenagers in the Etzion Bloc by Mahmoud Abbas's good friends and partners Hamas.That heinous crime set off Operation Brother’s Keeper, the huge search effort to locate the teenagers and a crackdown on Hamas operatives in Judea and Samaria that put hundreds behind bars.

This new land will be an extension of a community in Gush Etzion known as Gvaot, home to a number of families and a well known winery. Now, it can become a city.That's the appropriate response to what happened. They destroy, Israel builds.

 

And actually, this is one of the more intelligent things the Netanyahu government has done, and I hope it continues.

After each attack on Israel, whether its terrorism, lawfare or diplomatic, put some more land under Israeli control and then annex it. Trust the Land. Build on it. Let a thousand bulldozers sing..

 
 

Just like a recalcitrant puppy that continues to make on the rug, providing real world consequences for bad actions will send a message soon enough that better behavior is called for. That is what may actually bring about realistic negotiations in the end, if it happens at all.

Genocide Is In The Eyes Of The Beholder!

 

By Michael Haltman

It's mainstream media coverage that slants the news in all of the wrong directions!

Note: The numbers in the poster by now no doubt need to be ratcheted higher.

As we have seen it's not until an issue or humanitarian crisis in some way makes it unavoidable for news outlets to report it, that the average TV watching idiot learns anything about it.

For example if the story of Iraq's Yazidis trapped on a mountain had never reached the mainstream media, Barack Obama never would have learned about it and for him, ISIS would still be a JV team.

True to form, however, now that he knows they are anything but a JV team our Commander-in-Chief is still doing nothing to stop them!



Cross posted at The Political Commentator

Yet Another Biased Anti-Israel U.N. Investigative Committee Formed

 

By David Gerstman

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has decided that Israel's self-defense needs to be investigated. (Note in the UN"s announcement the words "Hamas" and "rockets" are nowhere to be found.) After Operation Cast Lead the UNHRC picked a panel of four individuals, all of whom had prejudged Israel's guilt. The leader of that investigation, Judge Richard Goldstone of South Africa later recanted his group's conclusions, but the damage was done.

The UNHRC has decided that having a committee that is biased against Israel is necessary and selected an Irish professor of human rights law named William Schabas to head the new committee. Schabas has been involved in the travesty called the Russell Tribunal on Palestine along with crackpots such as Cynthia McKinney. At a hearing this "tribunal" in 2012, Schabas said "[m]y favorite would be Netanyahu within the dock of the International Criminal Court."

UN Watch has compiled a list of statements and from Schabas showing his bias against Israel, including:

- A few years earlier, Schabas called for “going after” Israeli president Shimon Peres in the ICC, saying, “Why are we going after the president of Sudan for Darfur and not the president of Israel for Gaza?”

- In a 2009 blog post about the UN’s infamous Durban II conference on racism, Schabas urged the world not only to “ignore” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s statements, but to stop “exaggerating” them. According to Schabas, those who “deserve the blame” are “Israel and its friends, who have manipulated the truth about the nature of the work of the United Nations by gross exaggeration of the role and intervention of certain fanatics.” Schabas described Ahmadinejad as nothing more than a “provocative politician,” and not a torturer of dissidents, inciter of genocidal anti-Semitism, and arch-sponsor of terrorism.

- In 2011, Schabas went to Iran to co-sponsor conferences with the Tehran-based “Center for Human Rights and Cultural Diversity,” despite its intimate ties with the fundamentalist regime, and avowed propaganda agenda. The center’s director, Kamran Hashemi, a former political officer with Iran’s foreign ministry, wrote his Ph.D under Schabas at the Irish Center for Human Rights.

After citing Schabas' record, Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch, wrote "“Under international law, William Schabas is obliged to recuse himself because his repeated calls to indict Israeli leaders obviously gives rise to actual bias or the appearance thereof.”

After Goldstone retracted the report that bears his name, Schabas mocked Goldstone for  being “certainly more indulgent towards Israel.”

None of this surprising as the UNHRC as Israel is the subject of a permanent agenda item of the council.

George Clooney's fiance, Amal Alamuddin was also selected to serve on the panel but declined.

"I am horrified by the situation in the occupied Gaza Strip, particularly the civilian casualties," Alamuddin said in a statement, "and strongly believe that there should be an independent investigation and accountability for crimes that have been committed." ...

Clooney's wife-to-be wished the other panelists "courage and strength," as they go forward with the inquiry into Israel's actions during the month-long Operation Protective Edge.

Alamuddin didn't decline on account of principles. She even falsely called Gaza "occupied," when Israel withdrew from the territory in 2005.

Early reporting on Schabas had him acknowledging that Israel's actions during Cast Lead "were not on the same scale as more serious violations elsewhere in the world." But the reasonableness of such a claim has been outweighed by Schabas' overall record. Last year Schabas argued that Syria's use of chemical weapons was not technically a war crime and instead used the killing of over 1000 civilians to argue that it was the United States that wants to "monopolise" its possession of weapons of mass destruction.

 

Crossposted at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion