Mandel - Obama’s Curious Interpretation of International Borders

Seth Mandel
Commentary/Contentions
02 August '11



http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/08/02/obama-international-borders/#more-762489

The Associated Press touched off a round of Knesset-ology yesterday when it reported, based on an Israeli TV report, Benjamin Netanyahu “has agreed to negotiate the borders of a Palestinian state based on the cease-fire line that marks off the West Bank.” The story termed this a “dramatic policy shift.”

Was Netanyahu now capitulating to President Obama’s declaration that negotiations start at the 1949 armistice lines? Did something change? Unfortunately, the subsequent articles in the Israeli and American press weren’t much help. Both sides are being vague about what it actually means, but it’s all based on one question: whether the 1949 armistice lines (also referred to as the 1967 lines) should be treated as though they constitute an international border. Curiously, however, we were given a reminder this week of an actual international border where U.S. assets have been attacked and its clear boundary recognition ignored. Yet the president, far from giving a national speech hectoring the leader of that country (as he did to Netanyahu) seems unmoved.

Last week, Eli Lake reported U.S. intelligence officials have confirmed a previous claim by Georgia that a bomb blast at the American embassy in Tbilisi last year was carried out by the Russian military. “It is written without hedges, and it confirms the Georgian account,” an American official told Lake.

In a follow-up, Lake reported the Russian intelligence (GRU) officer suspected, Maj. Yevgeny Borisov, remains at his post in the Georgian province of Abkhazia–a clear swipe at American officials’ concern:

Some U.S. intelligence officials complained that the U.S. reaction to the possible state-sponsored terrorism has been too weak. “The fact that this GRU major is still at large in Abkhazia should tell you all you need to know about how effective our response has been,” one U.S. intelligence official said.

Normally, intelligence officers who are exposed by another government are recalled home and their careers are cut short.

In today’s edition of the New York Times, Ellen Barry received a response from Russia’s foreign ministry to Friday’s Senate resolution describing Abkhazia and South Ossetia as “occupied by the Russian Federation.” The statement was utterly dismissive of the U.S. government’s right to declare borders in Russia/Georgia: “The statement of the American senators about this testifies either to illiteracy of international law, or else complete disregard for the real facts.”

And what are those real facts? Barry explains:

Little has changed on the ground since Russia and Georgia agreed to a cease-fire after five days of combat in August 2008. The French-brokered deal required Russia to withdraw its troops to prewar positions, but Russia then argued that its recognition of the two enclaves nullified that commitment. Although the United States has maintained that Russia is in violation, the dispute has been soft-pedaled amid efforts to work cooperatively with Moscow on issues like Iran’s nuclear program and the war in Afghanistan.

So the Russian line is since it declared South Ossetia and Abkhazia to be its possession, the matter is solved. The U.S. has not fought the Russians on this, because we’re trying to get their cooperation on other matters. It is interesting to see–whether or not you agree with the president’s position on either issue–the difference in the way the administration practices statecraft with regard to Russia and Israel.

Russia invaded another country’s sovereign territory, crossing international borders and refusing to give up their claim to land inside Georgia. Our response is not to challenge them on it. Israel, however, is quite clearly our ally with whom we have a great relationship that benefits our national interests in the Middle East. The White House’s response is to browbeat Netanyahu into recognizing lines that are explicitly not international borders to bring him in line with the president’s disregard for Israelis living on the other side. It’s quite a contrast.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Rubin - As Hizballah Prepares for War, The Ceasefire Is Going “Very Well”

Barry Rubin
Rubin Report
02 August '11



http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/08/02/as-hizballah-prepared-for-war-the-ceasefire-is-going-very-well/

Israel is constantly urged to put its trust in the international community, an idea that hasn’t worked out too well in the past. Now the UN special envoy for Lebanon has given another reason why Israel shouldn’t take risks and make concessions based on the hope of support from international guarantees.

While he did about the best he could given his situation, Michael Williams, the British diplomat working for the UN in this job, said the UN-sponsored ceasefire that ended the Hizballah-Israel war in 2006 is holding up “very well.”

Technically, this is quite true. There hasn’t been a new war or cross-border attacks. But that’s merely because Hizballah has been too busy taking over Lebanon successfully and preparing for the next war. As Williams admits, arms have flowed to Hizballah (from Syria, though he doesn’t say that). Williams only says that Lebanon’s borders are “porous,” a wonderful diplomatic euphemism for state-sponsored arms smuggling. The Gaza Strip’s borders with Egypt, by the way, have become porous in the same way.

Hizballah has also moved back into southern Lebanon–something the UN was supposed to prevent–and rebuilt its system of tunnels and military strongpoints. In five years, the UN force has never interfered with these Hizballah activities–not once.

Imagine if you will how UN and international guarantees would work with a Palestinian state. Would the General Assembly vote to condemn Palestine for breaking its commitments? Would any foreign “peacekeeping” force that was part of a peace treaty ever act forcefully to stop weapons or terrorists from crossing the border into Palestine? Would they fight to stop terrorists from crossing the border from Palestine into Israel?

Of course not. Yet that point is not taken into account by any Western government, academic study, or mass media coverage. But it is taken into account by Israel. Otherwise we will read about the UN special envoy for Israel-Palestine peacekeeping talking about how well things are going as incitement, terrorism, and violations of the agreement take place daily.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Navon - The Chienlit Revolution

Emmanuel Navon
For the Sake of Zion
02 August '11

http://navonsblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/chienlit-revolution.html

As French students and intellectuals were playing Robespierre and Mao on the streets of Paris in the Spring of 1968, Charles de Gaulle came out with a formula that was typical of his linguistic creativity: “La réforme oui, la chienlit non.” Journalists and commentators had to look up “chienlit” in the dictionary since nobody ever heard of that word. Chienlit was used in old French and it means “carnival mask.” What could the General possibly mean? A pun of course: divide-up the word with hyphens (“chie-en-lit”) and you get “shit-in-bed.” Ahem.

Israel was completely disconnected from “Mai 68.” France was at the height of its power and de Gaulle’s rule was unchallenged. Jean-Paul Sartre’s existentialist philosophy offered the perfect antidote to a bored youth. Israel’s young generation, by contrast, had just emerged victorious from the Six Day War. Fighting for their survival, and being involved in building a new country, young Israelis had no time for planning revolutions from the terrace of a café.

Aside from the “Black Panthers” in the 1970s, Israel never had a social revolt organized by the youth. Being raised in a conformist society with a uniform public discourse, and being taught to respect authority in the army, Israelis were never known for their revolutionary zeal. Add to this the challenge of making a living in a socialist economy and the stress of being in a permanent state of war, and you understand why Israel never had the equivalent of Mai 68.

So the fact that Israelis are finally taking to the streets is actually good news: It shows that Israel has become so wealthy and secure that people actually have the time and luxury to talk about changing the world with nargilas and guitars. Like the French who had never had it so good in the late 1960s, we too are having our “chienlit revolution” (“chiant,” by the way, means “boring” in French).

This is not to say, of course, that there is no economic hardship in Israel. There is poverty and there is hardship. But it is Israel’s pervasive oligopolies and unfair tax system that make it impossible for middle class families to make ends meet, let alone save money. Real estate is unaffordable because there is no offer; and there is no offer because Israel’s Land Administration abuses its monopoly. Nobody has done more than Benjamin Netanyahu break up monopolies and to lower taxes, so protesters are picking a fight with the wrong person.

Like the Mai 68 strikes, Israel’s current social protest is not led by the union movement. During Mai 68, France’s main workers’ union, CGT, tried to contain the spontaneous militancy by channeling it into a struggle for higher wages and other economic benefits. Even the Communist Party got cold feet, and Jean-Paul Sartre accused the Communists of “fearing revolution.” What rioters really wanted was the ousting of de Gaulle. Although the trade union leadership negotiated a 35% increase in the minimum wage, a 7% wage increase for other workers, and half normal pay for the time on strike, the workers occupying their factories refused to return to work. They demanded new elections.

Likewise, the main organizers of today’s protest in Israel are more interested in ousting Netanyahu than in improving the lot of struggling families. This is why the Im Tirtzu movement pulled out of the protest: it realized that protesters were looking for a fight, not for solutions.

At the end, Mai 68 was a flop. De Gaulle called for early elections and his party won the greatest victory in French parliamentary history. After the carnival, it was time to go to bed –in clean sheets.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Widlanski - Study Shows UN Refugee Agency Aids Terror, Not Peace

Dr. Michael Widlanski
Israel Resource Review
01 August '11

http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=4110&q=1


The UN agency specializing in aid to Palestinian refugees has become a chronically corrupt organization whose funds are siphoned off by terror groups, especially in Gaza, according to a new series of studies by an American think tank.

Of the 1.2-billion-dollar annual budget of UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency), about 550-million dollars in education funds is going through the hands of HAMAS, declared researchers at the Center for Near East Policy Research.

"When HAMAS takes over the UNRWA teachers union, it gets their money," asserted Dr. Mordechai Kedar. He said this was probably about 50 million dollars a year from the UNWRA budget, half of which is financed by American and European tax payers. About 268-million dollars of UNRWA money comes from the US, and a similar amount from the European Union according to Arlene Kushner, who has been studying UNRWA for more than a decade.

Hamas control of UNRWA is not just a financial matter, said Kedar, an Arab affairs expert at Bar Ilan University and an-ex-IDF intelligence officer. He stressed that the terror group controlling Gaza has converted UNRWA school programs into recruiting agents for suicide bombers.

The researchers backed their findings with a 35-minute documentary film entitled "Palestinian Refugee Policy: From Despair to Hope." The film showed just how deeply Hamas has penetrated the UN agency, using school posters and interviews with UNRWA teachers to highlight how the ideal of killing Israelis-rather than working for peace-had come to dominate a UN agency.

The researchers said UNRWA had a 60-year record of failing to help Palestinians, and, instead was perpetuating their refugee status for its own bureaucratic needs, continuing to control 59 refugee "camps" in several Arab countries, involving a population officially estimated at about four million persons. Outside observer believe there is a great deal of "number fudging" in UNRWA refugee rolls, with deaths and births not recorded accurately.

INN interviews David Bedein about their new video release "UNRWA - 
Connected to Hamas and Bad for the Refugees"

Uploaded by IsraelNationalTV on Aug 1, 2011

Kushner and Kedar showed that another UN agency-the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)-had a totally different record: successfully resettling millions of refugees from wars and natural disasters all over the world, usually within a ten-year time limit. They cited the fact that UNHCR had successfully resettled Palestinian refugees from Iraq, who were threatened by war there, in Chile, Brazil and Iceland, among other locales.

Kushner - From Israel: Confronting Rumors

Arlene Kushner
Arlene from Israel
02 August '11

There were reports yesterday -- from at least one Internet and one broadcast source -- that Netanyahu had caved to Obama's demands and was willing to participate in negotiations with the PA that might lead to withdrawal to the '67 lines. With this a creeping panic set in, within nationalist circles here and abroad

But I do not believe those rumors are true as claimed -- they are an exaggeration of the reality. The reality? Not precisely what nationalists -- myself among them -- would prefer in an ideal world. But not nearly as alarming as those rumors.

Yesterday, Netanyahu told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that "we are interacting with the US to put together a document using language from Obama's second speech."

~~~~~~~~~~

Ah. The second speech. That is the AIPAC speech, given on May 22, 2011. It followed by days a speech give by Obama at the State Department that called for permanent borders based on the '67 lines. Obama took a lot of flack for that speech and was upbraided by a furious Netanyahu in a meeting that followed the speech. That was the best of Netanyahu, a prime minister of whom we were able to be very proud.

Obama then went to AIPAC and backtracked, explaining what he "really meant" in his earlier speech, "since my position has been misrepresented several times."

"...it means that the parties themselves -– Israelis and Palestinians -– will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967 [the Green Line]...It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years. It allows the parties themselves to take account of those changes, including the new demographic realities on the ground, and the needs of both sides."

~~~~~~~~~~

This sounds similar to the letter that President Bush gave to Prime Minister Sharon in April 2004, which read in part:
As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers [in Judea and Samaria], it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949 [which is what the '67 lines refer to], and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities."

If that is what Obama meant, there would be reason to be reassured. But Obama is not Bush (as Obama himself is always eager to tell us).

The sticking point here, and it's a serious one, is whether that border alluded to by Obama -- which would be "different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967" -- would require land swaps so that in the end the PA would end up with land equivalent to everything beyond the Green Line. If that is the case, in spite of the fancy footwork, this would be an agreement based on the '67 lines.

In recent years it has become an article of faith in political/diplomatic circles -- internationally, certainly, and even among the left wing here -- that the '67 lines represent the starting point. But seez who? The SC Resolution 242 indicates nothing of the sort. Even Bush's 2004 letter doesn't allude to this. It has crept up on us by virtue of solid PR from the other side.

I do note, however, that Obama also talks about the "needs" of both sides. If he were serious in this regard, it would be clear that -- with all of the instability in the world today, including the threat of a Hamas takeover of PA areas -- Israel's security needs require a presence in the high places of Samaria and in the Jordan Valley. Then we would truly not be talking about '67 lines. Big if. Security Council Resolution 242 recognized our need for secure borders, but this hasn't been Obama's position.

Gordon - Raja Khalidi’s Revisionist History

Evelyn Gordon
Commentary/Contentions
02 August '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/08/02/raja-khalidi-revisionist-history/#more-762471

Last week, the Palestinian Authority sought an urgent Arab League meeting to discuss its financial crisis: PA employees received only half their salaries in July, because donor states had delivered only one-third of their promised $970 million in aid. The delinquents were mainly Arab states, not Western ones, and UN development economist Raja Khalidi offered an instructive explanation for this fact in an interview with Haaretz this week:

“Even two generations after 1948, no Western donor, especially European and American, can be oblivious to their historic responsibility [for the Palestinians’ plight], and to the immediate security and political interests that the continuation of this conflict implies. Hence anything needed to keep a lid on things is to be expected, and indeed comes without asking the cost. As for Arab donors, they do not feel at all the historic responsibility for this situation.”

For those with any historical knowledge, this statement is mind-boggling – because Arab states certainly should feel historic responsibility. Had they not rejected the 1947 UN Partition Plan, a Palestinian state would have arisen in 1948. Had five Arab armies not invaded the nascent Israel that year, there would have been no Palestinian refugees. Had Jordan and Egypt so chosen, they could have created a Palestinian state anytime from 1948 to 1967, when they controlled the West Bank and Gaza, respectively. Had three Arab states not declared war on Israel in 1967, Israel wouldn’t have captured these territories. And had the Arabs accepted any of Israel’s numerous peace offers since then, a Palestinian state could have arisen long ago.

Western states, in contrast, have no historical responsibility whatsoever: They supported a Palestinian state back in 1947 and have tried hard to midwife one ever since.

Unless, of course, you believe the problem isn’t the lack of a Palestinian state, but the very existence of a Jewish one. For that, the West does bear some responsibility. Britain’s 1917 Balfour Declaration made it the first major power to support establishing a Jewish “national home”; the Western-dominated League of Nations approved this goal in 1922; Britain’s control of Mandatory Palestine (1917-48) advanced Jewish preparations for statehood, despite London’s later efforts to thwart Israel’s birth (including closing the gates to Jewish refugees from Hitler’s Europe and arming the Arab states that invaded Israel in 1948); Western and Western-backed states provided the UN majority that approved Israel’s creation in 1947; and Western arms sales have since been vital to Israel’s defense.

Unfortunately, much of the Arab world still does view Israel’s existence as the fundamental problem. That’s precisely why two-thirds of Palestinians still say their ultimate goal is Israel’s eradication, and why Palestinian and other Arab leaders adamantly demand a Palestinian “right of return,” aka Israel’s eradication by demography. That’s also the main reason why the conflict remains unresolved.

But Khalidi’s insight has another important ramification: Because the Arabs, Palestinians included, still deny all responsibility for creating the Palestinian problem, they feel no obligation to compromise in order to solve it. After all, why should innocent victims have to accommodate their oppressor’s demands?

And that’s precisely why the “forget history, let’s just move forward” approach favored by the West and Israel’s left keeps failing. In this conflict, the historical facts are vital. Only if the Arabs acknowledge their responsibility for the problem will they be willing to compromise to resolve it.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Kay - Once again, the Jewish question

Jonathan Kay
National Post
19 July '11
H/T Israel Resource Review

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Once+again+Jewish+question/5122436/story.html

If money could buy peace, this would be a golden era for Middle East peacemaking. Notwithstanding activists' much-hyped "boycott, divestment and sanctions" campaign, Israel's economy is booming: Growth last year was 4.5% (despite a maximum marginal tax rate of 60% - please explain that, AIPAC/ Tea-Party supply-siders). And growth in the Palestinian West Bank (which, unlike Gaza, is ruled by Fatah, not Hamas) is even higher. Here in Ramallah, construction seems to be taking place on every block - not the slapdash Arab McMansions you can see from Israeli highways, but proper office buildings, stores and apartments. The downtown sidewalks are so thronged that shoppers have to dodge cars on the street to get from store to store. Arab Jerusalemites and British Arabs come here for parties and fancy weddings. At a local museum, a major Picasso exhibition has opened up.

Money is pouring in from NGOs and relatives in the West, with a healthy dose of local grassroots private investment as well. The Western trained police strut about with polish and confidence. Scarred by the example of Gaza, where Fatah activists were rounded up and killed by Hamas, Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces have made common cause with Israel (whose military presence here is non-existent - at least during the day) in eradicating Hamas from public life.

The international community, enchanted by pro-Western PM Salam Fayyad, has noticed: Earlier this year, the IMF and World Bank jointly declared that the West Bank, under its current moderate leadership, has all the financial tools needed to form a sovereign state - a testimonial that will be trumpeted when and if President Mahmoud Abbas unilaterally petitions the United Nations for statehood in September. Fayyad has called the World Bank/IMF declarations the "birth certificate" of a future Palestinian state.

Yet on the ground in Ramallah, the economic boom is being greeted with studied joylessness. None of the Palestinians whom I interviewed last week - even the PA officials who take credit for recent improvements - describe the betterment of life here as much more than a means toward a larger end. In fact, they seem wary of expressing any satisfaction at all. "For us, the important thing is that the improved economy moves us toward the goal of ending the occupation and achieving self-determination and freedom," the PA's bookish media director, Ghassan Khatib, told me. "For Israeli PM [Benjamin] Netanyahu, on the other hand, the improvements are a way to prolong the occupation. This is not a new Israeli strategy. They call it 'Fill their stomachs.' This strategy hasn't changed."

What has changed, Khatib tells me, are the Palestinians' own tactics for thwarting Israeli occupation. Like everyone else I speak to in Ramallah, he is careful to pay homage to those "martyrs" who engaged in "legitimate armed struggle" during the second Intifada. (Attacking military targets was legitimate, he explains. Blowing up school buses was not.) But he also tells me that violence has been a dead end for the Palestinians: "The experience of 2000-2003 was very costly for us. Violence is to Israel's advantage. It is not wise for us to be dragged into Israel's area of strength."

Ettinger - The Palestinian fiddle

Yoram Ettinger
Israel HaYom
02 August '11


http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=269


Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Palestinian issue is not a primary Middle East concern.

Pro-Western oil-producing Persian Gulf leaders are traumatized by the lethal Iranian nuclear threat, by a raging Arab street of their own and by a potential Iraqi earthquake in the aftermath of the U.S. troop withdrawal. The pro-Western Hashemite regime in Jordan is threatened by intensified discontent among its Bedouin power base. The Muslim Brotherhood hosted an anti-Western Arab conference in Cairo on July 24 to 25 and strategically critical Turkey is becoming more Islamic and less Western. All the while, the pro-Western Moroccan monarchy is imperiled by the ripple effects of turmoil in North African countries Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. Islamic terrorism is gaining ground; Russia, China and North Korea are expanding their penetration into the Middle East and the U.S.'s deterrence ability is substantially slipping away.

However, while the Middle East burns – irrespective of the Palestinian issue, the Arab-Israeli conflict or Israel's policies and existence – the foreign policy establishments in the U.S. and Europe are playing the Palestinian fiddle. Their track record features the support of Ayatollah Khomeini and the betrayal of the Shah in Iran, the embrace of Saddam Hussein as a constructive force, the crowning of Yasser Arafat as a messenger of peace, the hailing of Bashar Assad as a moderate leader, the legitimization of Moammar Gadhafi as a reformed ruler and the idolization of Hosni Mubarak as an Egyptian Rock of Gibraltar.

They are convinced that the Palestinian issue is a root cause of Middle East turbulence and the crown jewel of Arab policy-making. They assume, therefore, that resolving the Palestinian issue – by pressuring Israel to surrender Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians – would tame the Middle East, rein in anti-Western terrorism, appease the Arabs, enhance Western ties with Arab countries and facilitate a Western-Arab coalition against Iran.

But the real Middle East invalidates such foreign policy assumptions. The root causes of regional turbulence are inherent fragmentation, instability, unpredictability, volatility, violence, terrorism, hate-filled education and tenuous policies, commitments and alliances. None of these 1,400-year-old root causes is related to the Palestinian issue, which is less than 100 years old.

Arab leaders have never considered the Palestinian issue their prime concern, seeing it instead as a pawn against Israel. They are aware of the subversive and treacherous history of the Arafat-Abbas wing of the Palestinians, which was expelled from Egypt in the late 1950s, from Syria in 1966, from Jordan in 1970, from Lebanon in 1982 and from Kuwait in 1991.

Arab leaders thus marshal their rhetoric, but not their resources, on behalf of Palestinians. During the October 2010 Arab Summit in Libya, Arab leaders pledged $500 million to the Palestinians – only seven percent of it was ever delivered. During the first and second Palestinian Intifadas against Israel, Arabs pledged more than $2 billion in support, but less than $500 million actually reached the Palestinians. During the 1980s, Arab financial support for the PLO was less than 10 percent of Arab financial support for the anti-Soviet Muslims in Afghanistan.

Arab regimes did not actively support the PLO during its 1982 war (in Lebanon) against Israel, nor did they flex their significant muscles on behalf of the Palestinians during 2008's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. This lack of intervention has been the Arab status quo toward the Palestinian issue since 1948, irrespective of the identity of the Palestinian leader: Haj Amin al-Husseini, Shukeiri, Hammuda, Arafat, Abbas or Haniyeh.

The red carpet, which is rolled out to welcome Palestinian leaders in the West, is transformed into a shabby rug upon landing in Arab capitals. What do Arab regimes know about the Palestinian issue that Western policy makers do not know or understand?

Yoram Ettinger is a former ambassador and head of "Second Thought: a U.S.-Israel Initiative."


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Fresnozionism - Moty & Udi: A country with normal problems

Fresnozionism.org
01 August '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/08/moty-udi-a-country-with-normal-problems/

This week’s cartoon is about the affordable housing protests that are currently taking place in Tel Aviv. There is no doubt that a young couple simply cannot afford to buy or even rent an apartment in many parts of Israel. There are a lot of reasons for this — simple supply and demand, the lack of a stable rental market (most rentals are temporary, the owner of the property being abroad or waiting for his children to get married, etc.) — but it is a fact.

Our cartoonist wishes to draw attention to another side of the protests. For example:

“My Israel” (Hebrew site here) is an umbrella organization that specializes in the use of social media to spread the message of its member groups. Although Israelis would call it ‘right-wing’, that’s misleading to English-speakers — ‘Zionist’, ‘pro-IDF’ and ‘pro-settlement’ would be more accurate.

My Israel offered on Friday to join the protest, on condition that the national anthem would be sung. However, on Saturday night, it announced that housing protest leader “Daphni Leef’s people evaded and evaded” committing to singing Hatikva at the event in Tel Aviv.

“This should be a protest for all Israeli organizations, Left and Right, because centralization and monopolies do not know the difference between right and left wing,” My Israel chairwoman Ayelet Shaked said. “Therefore, we decided [on Friday] to join the struggle.”

However, the “minimum requirement for joining should be obvious. The protest’s purpose and participants should be Israeli, and its organizers should not stop demonstrators from singing Hatikva, as they did last week,” Shaked said…

“We are not willing to join a protest that aims for anarchy and pointlessly harming the government ‘because Bibi [Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu] is bad’ and that is lead by anti-IDF and anti-Israel elements. We would be happy to work side by side with leftwing Zionists who support the State of Israel, but think territory should be given up. They are our brothers, even if we disagree with them,” My Israel explained…

My Israel wrote that the activists involved in the housing protest “do not want Israel to be a Jewish state.”

On Friday, Ma’ariv columnist Kalman Liebskind listed various leaders of the housing protest and their associations with left-wing organizations and parties, such as Leef, a film editor for the New Israel Fund, Yehudit Ilani of the Balad Party, and Alon Lee Green of the Hadash Party.

– Jerusalem Post

Balad and Hadash are parties with mostly Arab memberships (Hadash is the Israeli communist party). And the New Israel Fund is an American NGO which consistently supports anti-Zionist causes in Israel. It is absolutely not an exaggeration to say that these elements “do not want Israel to be a Jewish state.”

The less-extreme opposition is also hitching a ride on the anti-government aspect of the protest:

Addressing the social struggle and demands for social justice vocalized in protests and tent protests across the country, opposition leader Tzipi Livni said that “Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is not the solution, he’s the problem” …

While acknowledging that protesters don’t want to hand their struggle over to any political party, something she praised, Livni said that “at the end of the day, this is a problem that will have to be solved politically.”

The opposition leader also called on the prime minister to cancel the Knesset’s scheduled summer recess. Livni also said she hopes that elections come soon, saying, “Israel deserves [an opportunity] to change this government.”

PM Netanyahu is putting forward a plan to improve the housing market and reduce the cost of living in general.

All this goes to show that Israel can be a normal country with normal problems when the pressure of the security situation is relaxed, if only temporarily.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Rubin - Peace Process Profiteers and The Blessings of a Preferable Status Quo

Barry Rubin
GLORIA Center
01 August '11



http://www.gloria-center.org/peace-process-profiteers-and-the-blessings-of-a-preferable-status-quo/

Israel’s historic position toward the territories captured in the 1967 war has been: Israel will control this land until it can achieve peace or at least a better situation for itself by leaving them. Jordan made peace. And it agreed to pull out of most of the Gaza Strip and much of the West Bank when the PLO promised (that’s a key word and a promise not kept) to make peace.

In contrast, Israel later withdrew from the Gaza Strip and dismantled all of the settlements there for two reasons. First, as a gesture that it hoped would show its desire for peace and would promote that goal. Second, because it seemed better to have its forces on a defensible line.

Believe it or not, there are some military advantages to the withdrawal and Israel’s casualties might have been higher if it hadn’t been carried out. Nevertheless, this policy did not work out so well and Israel ended up in a worse strategic situation without making any serious gains (arguably the reverse was true) in international support.

Regarding the West Bank, the lesson of the Gaza Strip withdrawal and also the southern Lebanon withdrawal have been learned. There, Israel turned over all of the populated sections (except for a small portion of Hebron) to the Palestinian Authority. Since 1993, no new settlements have been established (there have been small new outposts against government policy though the government has not always removed them) or expanded in their size. The status quo isn’t wonderful but itis quite tolerable.

Recently, a number of people–many of them with a wide public audience–in the West have started clanging the bell that Israel must clear out of the West Bank as soon as possible or else face a terrible situation. Their arguments have no merit but since the other side is not given equal time (and often no time at all) their audiences are deprived of seeing how ridiculous are the claims being made.

Glick - The media revolutionaries

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
01 August '11



http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/08/the-media-revolutionaries.php

Last Monday Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz gave an interview to Channel 2's news anchor Yonit Levy during the prime-time news broadcast. Levy began the interview with a revealing "question."

Oozing professional probity, Levy said, "I assume you came here armed with wonderful data about the drop in unemployment and rising economic growth, but I want to ask you, Mr. Steinitz if for all your data you've forgotten the people, you've forgotten an entire class of working people who can't live?"

Not that she has an opinion.

Levy's question encapsulates the pathology of the Israeli media and the public discourse it engenders. In the case at hand, it is true that the facts show Israel has never been economically better off. But how about "the people"?

Levy and her comrades want to discuss abstractions, not facts. Abstractions like the amorphous "people," are attractive because they are meaningless and are therefore subject to politically correct interpretation. Facts are unattractive because they contradict the media's effectively uniform worldview and prejudices.

Due to this uniformity, for the past three weeks Israel's public discourse has been dominated by the media-supported "social justice" protesters. Three weeks ago fewer than a hundred protesters set up tents along Tel Aviv's tony Rothschild Boulevard and demanded lower rents in Tel Aviv - Israel's highest priced real estate market.

Ignoring the basic laws of supply and demand, the media immediately embraced the protesters as "the authentic voice of the nation." And so Israel's newest "social revolution" began.

And it has all been downhill from there.

If the protesters' initial demand for government intervention in the Tel Aviv rental market was simply dumb, their current demands are little less than a declaration of economic war against Israeli prosperity.

The protesters' are effectively demanding no less than the destruction of Israel's free market and a reversion to the state-controlled economy that doomed Israel to economic sclerosis for its first 45 years of independence.

Shapira - Hizbullah's Predicament in Light of Syria's Decline

Dr. Shimon Shapira
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Vol. 11, No. 10
31 July 2011


Click here for original link

Five years after the Second Lebanon War, a war whose results Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah considers a "divine victory," Hizbullah has currently reached one of its lowest points due to the endangered survival of the Assad regime in Syria, as well as the international tribunal that has demanded the extradition of four Hizbullah members suspected of murdering former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri.

Damascus functions as the primary bridge between Iran and Hizbullah in terms of all military and other assistance arriving from Tehran. This comes on top of the direct transfer of rocket and missile weaponry from the Syrian army's arms depots to Hizbullah's fighting units.

Hizbullah has adopted a clear-cut stand in support of Bashar Assad, and therefore Hizbullah flags are being burned in the streets of Syria together with Nasrallah's portrait. Without Syrian backing, Hizbullah will find it hard to continue dictating political moves in Lebanon.

Recent signs of Hizbullah's weakened position include the public revelation of an espionage network run by the CIA of people in important positions within the movement; the open sale of alcoholic beverages in Nabatiye, Hizbullah's capital in southern Lebanon; and the attempt by the Lebanese government to appoint a security chief for Beirut International Airport from within the Maronite community, contrary to Hizbullah's wishes.

In light of all this, Nasrallah is looking for a new pretext to confront Israel, focusing this time on the gas fields that Israel is developing within its maritime economic zone. Nasrallah believes his threats will distract attention from the decline in Hizbullah's status and the international accusations that it currently faces.

Hassan Nasrallah delivered an address on July 26, 2011, commemorating the fifth anniversary of the Second Lebanon War. He recounted the war's achievements from his perspective, including Hizbullah's increased military build-up and its power to deter an Israel that is frantically maneuvering to protect its civilian rear. As a result, Israel has strictly preserved the quiet in southern Lebanon. Nasrallah made it clear that Israeli warnings about "surprises" that it was preparing for Hizbullah in the event of a military confrontation were merely psychological warfare that was doomed to fail. In response to the demands by the international tribunal in The Hague (STL) to extradite Hizbullah members accused of murdering former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri, Nasrallah observed that the accused are examples of the "honorable resistance" and they would not be extradited.1


Nasrallah used the occasion to make it clear that in addition to acting as the defender of Lebanese security, henceforth he would also protect the Lebanese state's natural resources. "Lebanon now has a real chance to become a wealthy state since treasures of natural gas and oil lie opposite its shores." "These treasures do not belong to any sect or party, but constitute the national treasures of the Lebanese state and are valued at billions of dollars. This represents an opportunity to improve living conditions in Lebanon and pay off the Lebanese state's debts. This is a golden opportunity and we must behave responsibly." Israel claims about 850 km of maritime waters that contain Lebanese gas and oil and Israel has no rights to this gas and oil, Nasrallah said.

Roth - School's out, so 26 rocket attacks on Israelis in July and two more tonight

They're prepared for life with the best
skills that foreign aid (more per
capita than for any other region on
earth) can give them. [Source]

Frimet/Arnold Roth
This Ongoing War
02 August '11

http://thisongoingwar.blogspot.com/2011/08/1-aug-11-schools-out-so-26-rocket.html

It's high summer and the end of the school year. With so many of Gaza's young men coming to the end of their training for life, a training that prepares them for terrorist activity and rifle and rocket fire on Israelis - and little else, we are seeing a significant increase in those attacks.

Early this evening (Monday) according to the only report we have seen so far, another Gazan mortar was fired into the Western Negev region, doing no damage, causing no injury, and therefore failing to live up to the hopes and prayers of the thugs doing the firing.

Later tonight, a Qassam rocket also fired by the terrorists of the Gaza Strip landed in southern Israel, lightly wounding a 50-year-old woman. Haaretz says it fell near one of the communities in the Hof Ashkelon area, causing shrapnel wounds to the civilian woman's legs. She was treated at Barzilai hospital in Ashkelon, along with several other civilians who suffered shock. INN says the shrapnel victim, a Bedouin woman, is the wife of a shepherd from Be'er Sheva who tends his flock in the area several months each year. The shrapnel penetrated her legs while she was at home inside the family tent.

Two additional rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip into southern Israel yesterday (Sunday) near Pit'hat Shalom and Shaar HaNegev. AFP quotes the IDF saying there were 26 such rockets fired at Israelis by the dark forces of the Gaza Strip during July. Every last one of them was directed at Israeli civilians.

It's maddening to us that these rockets go unreported. (Try to find any coverage in the news media serving your area.) Everyone who pays attention understands that there's a kind of roulette process at work here. The Hamas-ruled jihadists fire them off as often as they can manage without being detected, taking care not to be eliminated by Israeli defence forces in the process. The rockets are not fired for their effect. These are hardly fireworks. They are deadly weapons. The intention is for them to kill and maim. They fail more often than they succeed, but the jihadists don't plan to fail and every so often they succeed.

What would you do if they were your neighbours?

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Rubin - The Economist Makes Israelis Into Monsters, Follow-Up

Barry Rubin
Rubin Reports
pajamasmedia.com
01 August '11

http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/08/01/the-economist-makes-israelis-into-monsters-follow-up/

I wrote recently of how The Economist ran an incredible article trying to make Israelis look like horrible war criminals based on what seemed to be made up and distorted material. The one person actually quoted by name in the article was Eran (distorted to “Iran”) Segal. I sent him the paragraph in question:

“For some of Halamish’s settlers, irritated by the tear-gas that wafts into their living rooms from across the hill, this is not harsh enough. `The soldiers don’t maim enough Palestinians,’ complains Iran Segal.”

Mr. Segal responded that he only talked to the reporter about how the Friday stonethrowing–note, not the tear-gas (fired by Israeli soldiers) but the stones thrown at him by Palestinians–makes life impossible. He explained to the journalist that stones can kill.

The only thing he said about what the army should do was that if it had taken the problem more seriously in the past that the stone-throwing would have stopped.

I believe Mr. Segal, who seemed genuinely shocked by the statement attributed to him. Note how his complaint about being a victim (stones thrown to injure and perhaps kill him) was changed into making him seem a bloodthirsty aggressor (wanting to maim harmless little kids who had done him no harm at all).

Whether or not the settlements should be there, the land traded to the Palestinians in exchange for peace (if that’s ever possible), or the settlements should be dismantled after a peace agreement (if that ever happens) is irrelevant. That’s for the editorial pages.

The views of people quoted and what actually happens should be represented fairly. One reporter I know who worked for a major American newspaper told me she was forbidden to write anything about settlers that might be deemed the least bit sympathetic. The narrative was that Palestinians were victims and that’s what all the stories should reflect.

Mr. Segal has been slandered, but then that’s true for all Israelis.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Elder - Europe's BDS targets Palestinian Arab farmers!

Elder of Ziyon
01 August '11

Israel's only agricultural exporter, Agrexco, has been in some financial difficulty as it has tried to transition to a private company earlier this year. It is now facing bankruptcy.

Smelling blood, BDSers in Europe are calling again for a total boycott of all Agrexco goods:

We, Palestinian and Europeans together, affirm our determination to put an end to Agrexco’s presence in Europe. Our actions are taking place within the framework of the Palestinian-led global Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

We have established a European wide coalition of organisations committed to coordinating our boycott campaigns and court actions against Agrexco. Secondly, we are calling for a European day of action against Agrexco on Saturday 26 November 2011.

We aim to build the widest possible alliance of individuals and organisations across Europe concerned with international law and refusing to be complicit in the violations of the rights of the Palestinian people perpetrated by Agrexco.

Agrexco is dedicated to exporting agricultural products. Sold under brand names such as Carmel, Coral, Biotop, Eco-Fresh, etc. these products embody Palestinian suffering: grown on stolen land with stolen water, produced through the exploitation of Palestinian labour – including child labour – they are part and parcel of a policy of colonisation, dispossession and apartheid carried out by Israel in Palestine. Agro-industrial corporation turned towards exportation, Agrexco is developing an industrial agriculture which harms the environment and destroys peasant agriculture in Palestine as well as in Europe.

There are a couple of things to note in this letter.

First is that, even though they claim to be a coalition of  "Palestinians and Europeans together," there is not a single Palestinian Arab signatory.

Second is that the BDS movement is apparently not as confident that hating Israel is enough to get them support so they are adding charges about the environment, child labor and how somehow Agrexco's existence is threatening "peasant agriculture" in Europe. It sounds like the same argument could be made against most importers of produce in Europe.

The most interesting part, though, is that this group is explicitly boycotting Coral. Coral is the brand name of Palestinian Arab agricultural products sold in Europe. In order to be certified for export, they agree to be exported through Agrexco under that brand name, and if you want to buy produce from Palestinian Arab farmers, that is the brand name you must look for. Gaza bell peppers and strawberries are likewise sold under the Coral brand.

BDSers are going out of their way to destroy the only non-domestic market available for Palestinian Arab farmers.

(Read full "Europe's BDS targets Palestinian Arab farmers")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Cohen - The Dangers of an Israeli Apology to Turkey

Efraim Cohen
Hudson New York
01 August '11

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2308/israel-apology-to-turkey


Recently, there have been renewed rumors of a possible deal to help heal the rift that developed between Israel and Turkey following the deaths of eight Turkish citizens on the ship Mavi Marmara as it sailed toward Gaza in May 2010. The broad outlines of the deal suggest that Israel would offer a limited apology for "operational errors," and would pay compensation to the families of those who died. In return, Turkey would recognize the legality of Israel's naval blockade of Gaza, and would agree not to seek legal action against Israeli soldiers who were involved.

A quick review for those who may not recall what happened: The Mavi Marmara set sail from Turkey as part of a flotilla whose primary aim was to break Israel's naval blockade of Gaza. Israel had imposed the blockade to prevent the importation of weapons and dual-use material that ultimately could be used by the Hamas government against Israeli civilians. The Israeli Navy interdicted the flotilla and boarded the ships after they refused to turn back. As is clear from the video of the events that followed, the navy commandos -- who were armed only with paintball guns and side-arms -- were attacked as they boarded the Mavi Marmara by a group of passengers wielding iron bars, knives, and possibly guns. Several commandos were wounded in the ensuing battle, and nine members of the Turkish group IHH -- which claims to be a humanitarian organization but has long supported radical Islamic groups, including Hamas -- were killed. The boarding of all other ships was peaceful. It appears that the confrontation had been prepared for, and instigated by, the members of the IHH.

The UN then established a commission headed by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer, and that included representatives of both Israel and Turkey, to investigate what happened. The Palmer Commission's report was scheduled to be issued during the last week in July, but has been delayed until late August as the two countries seek to reach a compromise agreement.

The problem with the proposed deal between Israel and Turkey is that an Israeli apology could very well exacerbate the rift between the two countries, at the same time causing a worldwide public relations nightmare for Israel.

While the apology would refer specifically to "operational errors," the world will not recognize such diplomatic nuances. Instead, Israel will be seen as accepting full responsibility for the deaths of the IHH "activists." The media and UN will be flooded with self-righteous statements of "I told you so," along with renewed allegations of a "brutal response" by Israeli commandos to "peaceful resistance."

Stern - Hey, Gaza - You Can't Have it Both Ways...

Paula R. Stern
A Soldier's Mother
01 August '11



http://israelisoldiersmother.blogspot.com/2011/08/you-cant-have-it-both-ways.html

A man writes to me - your blockade isn't working since Arabs continue to smuggle in rockets to fire against Israel. He is urging me to somehow make peace. I haven't really been able to explain that though I'm somewhat respected in the field of technical writing and my community often says I'm really good at baking cookies, I can't actually make the government make peace.

But anyway, an interesting thought crossed my mind - our enemies take pride in the fact that Gaza has found a way to continue arming itself with rockets to fire at Israel. One person wrote to me that the blockade clearly isn't working.

Isn't that interesting - the blockade isn't working when they need to smuggle rockets in, but apparently they don't think it odd that they claim they are starving, have no medicines, etc. I mean, if you had tunnels that could bring in rockets, wouldn't you think to use them to bring in food and other essentials.

Unless, of course, you already have those essentials and, as we've already had the UN and the Red Cross confirm...there is NO humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Guess the rocket fire against Israel is a good thing - it proves there is no humanitarian crisis there...or perhaps no humanity...or perhaps....perhaps both.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

CAMERA - The New York Times' Bronner Advocates for Fringe Group, Censors Mainstream Concerns

by Ricki Hollander, Gilead Ini
CAMERA Media Analysis
27 July '11



http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35&x_article=2091

The New York Times' Ethan Bronner has once again provided a platform for a fringe extremist Israeli group to air its views unchallenged ("Where Politics Are Complex, Simple Joys at the Beach", New York Times, July 27, 2011). The reporter's July 27 article is, in effect, an advertisement for a radical organization which calls itself "We Will Not Obey," whose purpose is to illegally smuggle Palestinian women into Israel. The story's simplistic message is that the Palestinians have been deprived of the joys of swimming in the sea by harsh Israeli policies, and the noble Israeli organization is affording them this experience.

The article alternates between the group's shrill criticism of Israel's security policy and its members' ludicrous moral preening, interspersed with mawkish descriptions of the Palestinian women's innocent joy after a life of alleged privations.

Beginning with a depiction of Palestinians finally enjoying themselves after being deprived of freedom by an unfair Israel, Bronner promotes the actions of the Israeli group, granting its members nearly a quarter of the article to express in their own words condemnation of Israel and self-congratulatory praise for themselves and their radical agenda. One of the organization's members even goes so far as to compare Israel to Nazi Germany, and herself to those who tried to resist Nazi crimes:

"What we are doing here will not change the situation," said Hanna Rubinstein, who traveled to Tel Aviv from Haifa to take part. "But it is one more activity to oppose the occupation. One day in the future, people will ask, like they did of the Germans: 'Did you know?' And I will be able to say, 'I knew. And I acted.'"

It is not only the extreme words of the group that is disturbing; it is that they put out false information, and that the reporter does not bother to challenge it. An Israeli newspaper advertisement by the group is quoted extensively. (In Israel, the group has to pay for such advertising. The New York Times gives it to them here for free.) The ad alleges that Israel's Law of Entry "allows every Israeli and every Jew to move freely in all regions between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River while depriving Palestinians of this same right."

In fact, the law says no such thing. Current restrictions on freedom of movement apply both to Palestinians and Israeli Jews and are a direct result of the security threat presented to Israel and Israeli citizens. Both Palestinians and Israelis had complete freedom of movement "between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River" until after the first intifada, when Palestinian violence against Israelis began to rise. Today, Israeli Jews are barred from entering Palestinian Authority-controlled areas of the West Bank, while Palestinians are issued permits to cross Israel's pre-67 boundaries. So the advertisement is simply false.

Fresnozionism - Sarkozy is closer to Israel’s position than Obama

Fresnozionism.org
31 July '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/07/sarkozy-is-closer-to-israels-position-than-obama/

This is interesting, but probably will make no difference:

At a press conference in Madrid last week, [French] Foreign Minister Alain Juppe publicly declared that “there will be no solution to the conflict in the Middle East without recognition of two nation-states for two peoples. The nation-state of Israel for the Jewish people, and the nation-state of Palestine for the Palestinian people.” Then, lest anyone overlook the statement’s significance or think it a mere slip of the tongue, his ministry yesterday circulated copies of it.

This is truly groundbreaking. Until now, no EU country has been willing to state publicly that an Israeli-Palestinian agreement must recognize Israel as the Jews’ nation-state, though the EU routinely details the concessions it expects Israel to make…

So what made Sarkozy get off the fence and approve Juppe’s public declaration of support for a Jewish state? It’s not that he suddenly joined the Zionist movement; neither have most of the countries favoring such language. Rather, they have finally grasped that no agreement is possible without satisfying Israel’s minimum requirements. No Israeli government will ever sign a deal that mandates full withdrawal to the 1967 lines, lacks adequate security provisions or doesn’t acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. The major Israeli parties differ on precisely where the border should run and precisely what security arrangements are required, but they all agree on these basics.

Sarkozy, however, has now gone one step further: He’s realized since Israel won’t sign a deal without such provisions, Europe does need to start publicly demanding these concessions of the Palestinians. Otherwise, they will keep deluding themselves the world will eventually force a complete Israeli capitulation.

– Evelyn Gordon, Commentary

You will recall that President Obama also referred to “Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people” in his May 16 proposal. But he did not insist that the Palestinians agree to it before Israel withdraws to pre-1967 lines! This makes his statement no more than window-dressing.

Gordon notes that Sarkozy does intend that recognition must be part of any agreement — putting him closer to Israel’s position than Obama — but so far the rest of the Europeans have not gone along. She writes that

Op-ed - Lebanon War distortions

Abraham Bell, Gerald M. Steinberg
Israel Opinion/Ynet
31 July '11

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4102602,00.html



Op-ed: Study shows NGOs issued baseless, fabricated accusations against Israel

This summer marks the five-year anniversary of the Lebanon war between Israel and the Lebanese-Iranian terrorist organization Hezbollah. The Second Lebanon War traumatized Israel politically as well as militarily. Militarily, Israel failed to dislodge the terrorist organization from its southern Lebanese foothold; politically, Israeli leaders found themselves overwhelmed by a flood of false accusations of “war crimes,” “indiscriminate and disproportionate” force, and “violations of international law.”

International non-governmental organizations played a critical role in the political warfare against Israel. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International – ostensibly neutral watchdogs – led the campaign. In 35 days, they issued over 40 press releases, statements and pseudo fact-finding reports, comprising hundreds of pages, largely ignoring the war crimes committed by the terrorist organization and instead focusing overwhelmingly and negatively on alleged Israeli crimes.

The HRW and Amnesty allegations were immediately accepted, at face value, by the world’s media. Politicians and diplomats then echoed the war crimes accusations, without any fact-checking.

We are now completing a multi-year study of all the HRW and Amnesty allegations regarding the 2006 Lebanon war, and the results so far are shocking. In our systematic and detailed research, supported by the Israel Science Foundation, we found major contradictions as well as numerous unsupported charges, double standards and false or invented “evidence.”

Stern - Arab Spring, Israeli Summer

Paula R. Stern
A Soldier's Mother
31 July '11

http://israelisoldiersmother.blogspot.com/2011/08/arab-spring-israeli-summer.html

The wave of protests going across the Arab world has been called Arab Spring. It's characterized by vicious attacks against protesters, government forces opening fire on civilians. Over 1,600 have died in Syria; dozens killed in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt. On and on it goes.

And now, tens of thousands of Israelis are marching in the streets protesting the cost of pretty much everything. No, this isn't Arab Spring, this is Israel in the summer. I drove past one protest last night on my way home. Perhaps 300 people were standing with signs and calling out. Cars honked as they drove by. The people filled the sidewalks - no one attempted to stop the traffic on the large street in the middle. When the light stopped us, many people crossed the street to the other side where more people stood.

Police were readily apparent on both sides of the street - their main goal was to make sure no one was hurt and that the intersection remained clear. They weren't, they didn't, it wasn't. We drove home - it was hot, so incredibly hot in Israel in July. One of those miserable days that lead into the night where there is barely a breeze. It was such a pleasure to get home and back into our air conditioning.

Israeli housing prices have been rising for years - many things have driven the price beyond what many consider reasonable. I have a home...but will my children ever be able to afford to buy their own homes if the prices continue on this mad path to the sky? All the prices are so much higher - gas prices, food prices, everything.

I'm not really sure what the government can do about it all - I'm finding it quite funny that the left has suddenly awakened and decided that it could blame Bibi Netanyahu's government when the greatest jump in prices happened under their own watch, not ours.

Never mind, the point of this is something different. No one died here in Israel during these protests. The government didn't open fire on its own people. No, this isn't an Arab Spring - this is our democracy rising up. You don't like something - go stand on a street corner and scream - carry a sign.