Monday, August 6, 2012

NGO's, funding and websites: What are you hiding?

Photo: Ben Hartman
Naftali Balanson..
Op-Ed Contributor..
05 August '12..

Transparency, particularly regarding public funds, is an essential element of democracy, but for those in official positions with something to hide, the theory is often better than the practice.

This gap between words and deeds is especially apparent when it comes to the secrecy that surrounds large-scale foreign government (mostly European) funding provided to Israeli political advocacy NGOs (non-governmental organizations). The European Union’s refusal to provide any information or documentation on how decisions to fund these organizations are made is one manifestation of the problem.

In response, the Israeli Knesset passed the NGO Funding Transparency Law, which went into effect at the beginning of 2012. The law mandates that NGOs file quarterly reports about support received from foreigngovernment bodies. This information is then posted on the website of the Registrar of Non-Profits, allowing all Israelis to access data on the influence of foreign governments on domestic political discourse.

Thanks to this added transparency, Israeli citizens know that 17 NGOs received a total of 40 grants from foreign government sources in the first part of 2012. We can also determine that a sizable majority of these grants are for projects related to the conflict, and that Norway was the largest donor to Israeli NGOs (over 3 million NIS in three months).

Parallel to the efforts of the Knesset and the Registrar of Non-Profits, more and more governments are publishing details about NGO funding on their own websites. There is room for improvement – the information is not always comprehensive – but many European and American government officials understand that secrecy is no longer tenable.

Another form of nontransparency is “website scrubbing.” NGOs have removed material from their websites after NGO Monitor and others provided evidence of anti-Semitic or anti-human rights activities by these NGOs.

The purging of offensive material allows the NGO to project a false image of piety.

In order to avoid further embarrassment, the scrubbing is rarely accompanied by an apology – which one might expect from a group that claims to represent moral values and ideals. However, the net sum is a reduction of anti-Semitic and blatantly anti-Israel content on the web.

Sunday, August 5, 2012

Tonight's terror attack on the Egyptians is (of course) part of an attack on Israelis

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
05 August '12..



The IDF's Twitter site is reporting that the lethal attack a short time ago on an Egyptian police or army base on the border with Israel included an attempt by the terrorists - as yet, not identified by group or classification - to commandeer an Egyptian vehicle and drive it into Israel. The IDF is saying that:

1 vehicle exploded near Kerem Shalom Crossing, 2nd targeted by #Israel Air Force. No Israelis hurt, forces scanning area.

Ynet knows more. It's reporting that the terrorist gunmen, evidently Islamists of some stripe, seized two armored vehicles from the Egyptians, including on-board RPG missiles and explosives. The first of the two vehicles "blew up" near the Kerem Shalom border crossing with Israel (more or less where the borders of Egypt, the Gaza Strip and Israel meet) while the other one managed to infiltrate into Israel. The terrorist gunmen managed to fire tank shells toward Israeli forces stationed at the border, but aircraft of the Israel Air Force struck and neutralized the armored vehicle. There are no casualties among IDF forces.

Rants From a Failed Israeli Politician: Despising Israeli Democracy

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary/Contentions..
05 August '12..

You might think that even the New York Times would get tired of publishing rants from failed Israeli politicians denouncing not only their nation’s current government but also the entire society that had rejected them. But apparently the newspaper’s appetite for such tirades is undiminished as the publication of Avraham Burg’s in the Times’ Sunday edition today. There isn’t much that is particularly original about Burg’s piece that takes the point of view that Israel is on the brink of no longer being a democracy and is intolerant of minority views. That this is not remotely closely to being the truth is no barrier to its publication since it is exactly what American leftists want to be told. His views are an absurd conflation of egotism and blindness but his foolishness is not limited to his analysis of his own country, he also understands nothing about U.S.-Israel alliance and the strength of the across-the-board support the Jewish state has here.

In the conclusion of his article in which he envisions a post-Zionist government of Israel that will reject Jewish nationalism in favor of something more inclusive, he claims:

When a true Israeli democracy is established, our prime minister will go to Capitol Hill and win applause from both sides of the aisle.

That is, I suppose, a shot at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom he accused earlier in the piece of being a “warmonger.” But as anyone who bothered to watch Netanyahu’s address to a joint meeting of Congress last year, he was widely cheered by both Republicans and Democrats with both parties competing with each other to show their enthusiasm for their Israeli ally. This is the sort of obvious mistake that any editor, even one with no love for Israel, should have caught. That it wasn’t tells us that the gatekeepers at the Times are as out of touch with reality as Burg.

Coleslaw with a pinch of Polonium: Bad taste at the Guardian

Petra Marquadt-Bigman..
The Warped Mirror..
05 August '12..



Under the memorable headline “Making Cole-slaw of history,” Martin Kramer documented some years ago just how hilarious it is that Juan Cole calls his blog “Informed Comment” (and for “Cole-slaw”-fans, there is in fact a rich archive of additional helpings). However, it’s apparently no joke that Cole, who is the Richard P. Mitchell Collegiate Professor of History at the University of Michigan, encourages the readers of his blog to send him money because “Informed Comment is made possible by your support.”



In any case, it’s arguably hardly surprising that editors at the Guardian are fans of Juan Cole, and when the professor recently vented his displeasure at Mitt Romney’s visit in Israel, the Guardian secured Cole’s “kind permission” to cross-post the piece on its Comment is Free (CiF) site.

The Guardian made a minor change to Cole’s original title – which read on CiF: “Ten reasons Mitt Romney’s Israel visit is in bad taste” – and added a sub-title: “The Republican presidential hopeful is holding a fundraiser and playing war enabler in Israel – it’s wrong on so many levels.”

The astonishing claim that Romney was “playing war enabler in Israel” is taken from Cole’s reason #7, which reads in part:

Ali Larijani, Iran's moderate speaks again

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
05 August '12..





Ali Larijani is an important man, an Iranian philosopher, politician and the current chairman of the Parliament of Iran. We last blogged about his blood-curdling political predictions in June 2012 [our posting].

At various times, he has been described as

- "a more moderate conservative" [Chicago Tribune, June 12, 2012] compared with Ahmedinejad
- "a moderate politician" [Financial Times, London - May 2012]
- "a relative moderate" [Baltimore Sun, 2007]
- "a loquacious 55-year-old regime insider... seen as close to Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who has in recent years curbed Ahmadinejad’s authority" [Al Arabiya, May 28, 2012].

The loquacious, moderate insider says today [source] that "the fire set ablaze in Syria will burn the panicked Zionists." He is quoted at length in the official Iranian Republic News Agency mouthpiece website, Irna.ir, saying a few additional moderate things, particularly about the ongoing slaughter going on in Syria which is being done with the active participation of Iranian men and material:

(Video) Amb. Ron Prosor at UN General Assembly Debate on Syria

Israel in UN..
04 August '12..

Ambassador Ron Prosor addressed the UN General Assembly Debate on Syria on 3rd August 2012



Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

.

Again: Fatuous, feckless Friedman

Martin Sherman..
Into the Fray/JPost..
02 August '12..



Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided
– Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois) at the annual AIPAC conference, June 4, 2008

Congress maintains its commitment to relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and urges the President, pursuant to the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995... to immediately begin the process of relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.... None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be available for the publication of any official government document which lists countries and their capital cities unless the publication identifies Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
– Section. 212 of the “Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003,” relating to “United States policy with respect to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel,” sponsored by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Delaware), cosponsor of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act.

Whereas in 1990, the US Senate and House of Representatives overwhelmingly declared that Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, “must remain an undivided city”... therefore, be it – Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring) That the Congress... strongly believes that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city in which the religious rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected as they have been by Israel during the past twenty-five years; and calls upon the President and the Secretary of State to issue an unequivocal statement in support of these principles.
– Resolution S.CON.RES.113 (June 18, 1992) co-sponsored by Sen. Joseph R Biden Jr. (D-Delaware)

Keep these excerpts in mind – their relevance will soon become evident.

The cry of the ‘robbed cossack’?

It is, of course, possible to conceive of more deplorable examples of shoddy and shallow journalism than Tom Friedman’s mendacious and misleading rant, titled, “Why not in Vegas?” against Mitt Romney’s visit to Jerusalem this week. However, I must confess, none springs readily to mind.

Friedman launches into his derogatory diatribe by accusing Romney of (gasp) fund-raising. Of course, coming from an Obamaphile, that is rich.

After all, while there may be many reasons for Obama’s victory over Sen. John McCain in 2008, clearly far from the least significant among them was Obama’s massive funding advantage, outdoing his rival by a ratio of over 3:1 – and half-a-billion dollars – after opting out of the public funding option, despite a pledge not to.

So now Friedman is griping at Romney’s efforts to somewhat level the financial playing field. Imagine the impudence of the GOP upstart! How dare he? Would “hypocritical” be an appropriate epithet here?

People in glass houses

Friedman seems to be particularly upset by the support of Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson for Romney.

He attempts to wax sarcastic: “Since the whole trip was not about learning anything but about how to satisfy the political whims of the right-wing, super pro- Bibi Netanyahu, American Jewish casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, why didn’t they just do the whole thing in Las Vegas? “I mean, it was all about how big a jackpot of donations Adelson would shower on the Romney campaign in return.

Vegas would have been so much more appropriate than Jerusalem.

“They could have constructed a plastic Wailing Wall and saved so much on gas.”

Time to Remove Brussels's Hezbollah Blinders

Daniel Schwammenthal..
Wall Street Journal..
02 August '12..

When terrorists struck in Bulgaria last month, killing five Israeli tourists and a Bulgarian bus driver, Jerusalem immediately accused Hezbollah and its Iranian paymasters of the crime. Tehran and Hezbollah, as always, denied it. But no matter who carried out this atrocity on European Union territory, the EU's continued refusal to put Hezbollah on its terror list is simply indefensible.

Not designating the group as a terrorist organization gives the pioneers of Islamist suicide bombings the opportunity to organize, recruit and raise funds throughout the Continent. There are about 950 Hezbollah members and supporters in Germany alone, according to Berlin's domestic intelligence service. Hezbollah has also sent operatives from Europe to Israel for terror attacks.

Placing the group on the EU's terrorist list would allow authorities to freeze Hezbollah assets and increase cross-border cooperation in fighting their crimes. Raising or providing funds for Hezbollah terrorists within EU territory would become a criminal offense. Police and judicial authorities would have greater powers to work with their colleagues in other member states, for example in sharing evidence or information about movements and activities of Hezbollah operatives. Law enforcement agencies would also have more possibilities to investigate and curtail Hezbollah activities in the EU, such as by suppressing the recruitment of new members.

When Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman last week urged Europe to finally do the right thing, the foreign minister of Cyprus, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency, had the unenviable task of having to enunciate the EU's incomprehensible position: "Should there be tangible evidence of Hezbollah engaging in acts of terrorism, the EU would consider listing the organization," Erato Kozakou-Marcoullis said during a joint press conference in Brussels.

Can there really be any reasonable doubt among EU officials about the true nature of Hezbollah? Back in 1983, 58 French peacekeeping troops alongside 241 U.S. marines were butchered in Hezbollah suicide bombings in Beirut, followed by the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in the Lebanese capital, according to U.S. officials. Argentina accused the group of killing 85 people in the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, underscoring its global reach.

Saturday, August 4, 2012

(Video) The best therapy: Laughter

US Embassy TelAviv
03 August '12..

The Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem was smiling and laughing as a colorful group of clowns, led by "Nurse Nice" (aka Hilary Chaplain), a medical clown from New York, walked through the corridors of the Pediatric Ward and entertained sick children in the dialysis room. With her visit supported by the U.S. Embassy, Tel Aviv, Hilary gave several workshops to Israeli medical clowns and worked with the "Dream Doctor," the largest medical clowns' organization in the country, to apply new methods taught at the workshop.



Ambassador Daniel Shapiro was the guest of honor at this special event and took an active role by talking to the children and dancing with the clowns. As one mother put it after seeing a real smile on her sick daughter's face: "It's about time she started laughing after such a long period of tears ..."

See the photos at: http://flic.kr/s/aHsjB6E1dE

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

Friday, August 3, 2012

On Iran: Mission possible

It's time for an Israeli decision on Iran.

Amos Regev..
Israel Hayom..
03 August '12..





Those were dark, ominous days in the United States, perhaps the darkest in the months since the war began on Dec. 7, 1941, when the Japanese delivered a devastating surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

The Americans did not know what had hit them. Their mighty fleet, which boasted some of the best warships made by man, went up in a plume of smoke. Japanese forces had invaded the Philippines and Southeast Asia, consolidating their control of the sea and air routes. After a string of victories, they proudly planted their national flag, with its famous red sun, into the soil that had become part of their empire, one which was expanding by the day, like an unstoppable tsunami.

In Washington, officials barely had time to process what had just happened. In the American capital, the leaders set in motion the process of recovery: military draft prcodures; manufacturing and production geared for a wartime economy; building and training of forces; expansion of the military; dispatching reinforcements, and planning for combat in two theaters, one against the Japanese, who had dragged the Americans into the war, and the other against the Nazis, who were allied with Japan in the Axis of Evil.

The challenge facing the Americans was complex. What should they do in the meantime? How to take the initiative and boost morale? How would they go about proving that while anyone could take America by surprise, nobody could defeat it?

President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered his armed forces to deliver a vicious counter-blow by launching a military operation unprecedented in the annals of human history. The military was instructed to strike the Japanese by hitting at the heart of their arrogant empire, Tokyo.

From an operational and a logistical standpoint, it was mission impossible. At the time, the U.S. did not possess long-range bombers, nor did it have military bases close enough to hit Tokyo. It only had a few aircraft carriers, but even these were only able to transport short-range bombers, thus making them suitable for naval combat.

Was there no military solution? There always is, as long as one summons the necessary talent, skill and initiative, and employs the element of surprise.

This was how American planners came up with the “Doolittle Raid.” Led by Lt. Col. James Doolittle of the U.S. Air Force, it was a plan that required volunteers to undertake a dangerous mission, so dangerous that it was doubtful whether they would return home. The idea was to outfit U.S. aircraft carriers with medium-range B-25B Mitchell bombers. Although they were originally designed to operate from a terrestrial base, the plan was to place them on aircraft carriers. Once the carriers moved into position close enough to Tokyo, the planes would be ordered to take off for bombing runs of the Japanese capital.

How would these pilots get back to safety? There was no turning back. The B-25Bs were not designed to operate from aircraft carriers. B-25B pilots had never previously flown them from aircraft carriers. Because this plane lacked the necessary arrestor hook with which all planes that took off from aircraft carriers were outfited, the bombers would not be able to land back on the carriers.

This was a one-way mission. The pilots had to take off, drop their deadly payload, and continue onward in the direction of China in the hope that they would land there and hook up with friendly Chinese forces, while avoiding hostile Japanese troops.

Was this impossible? The military had no trouble in finding the necessary number of volunteers. There were 80 air crew members, five for each of the 16 planes that were to be deployed.

“I just came here to do my duty,” one of the participating pilots was quoted as saying recently, as the U.S. celebrated the 70th anniversary of the operation. “We had total faith in and complete respect for Lt. Col. Doolittle. Our country was at war. We were pilots, air crews. Of course we volunteered. Why wouldn’t we?”

On April 18, 1942, the mission received the go-ahead. Doolittle’s bombers, including Doolittle himself leading the run, shocked the Japanese when they descended from the skies over Tokyo at low altitude and began bombarding the city. One of the bombs exploded near the palace of the Japanese emperor.

Most of the air crews landed safely in China, subsequently returning to their units for active duty. Three airmen who could not eject in time were killed, and eight were taken prisoner. Three were executed and one died as a result of inadequate treatment of his wounds.

The Doolittle Raid was symbolic in nature, but it yielded tremendous psychological benefits. It convinced the American public that the Japanese were not immune, and that their capital was vulnerable to attack by the long arm of the U.S. military. The operation proved to be a humiliation for the Japanese, who had to wrestle with the realization that they were no longer impregnable or immortal. The raid also made clear to Japan that this war would be no walk in the park, and that they needed to contend with an America that was determined to summon all of its capabilities.

For the U.S. military, the raid showed that there was no such thing as “mission impossible.” There are only challenges that can be overcome with a spirit for combat.

Obviously, no two historical periods are identical in nature. It also goes without saying that any military operation designed to remove the Iranian nuclear threat would be different, unique and more complex than many other military operation undertaken in history, either by us or by others. The Israel Air Force has proved itself repeatedly over the course of the last 64 years, successfully executing missions that were far more intricate than the surprise attack on Tokyo. There was the pre-dawn raid of June 5, 1967; the attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, and (according to foreign media reports) the strike on the Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007.

The U.S. Government and Jerusalem As Israel’s Capital Issue

Barry Rubin..
Rubin Reports..
03 August '12..

(A both interesting and pragmatic approach. In the meantime, we wish Barry Rubin/Baruch ben Ilana, a complete recovery, and encourage one and all to have him in their prayers for this. Y.)

Recently there has been a controversy when State Department spokespeople refused to say what they thought to be Israel’s capital. To understand this issue we need to understand that there are two different issues involved: that of 1947 and that of 1967.

I’m not going to discuss ancient history, religious factors, and the merits of varying claims here but will merely point out some simple facts of practical diplomacy.

The U.S. embassy, like others, is located in Tel Aviv. When diplomats need to meet with Israeli officials they pile into their vans and drive up to Jerusalem. There are also restrictions on just where these diplomats can go and under what conditions, to avoid any implication that they recognize Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights or east Jerusalem.

Presidents have repeatedly promised to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem but have never made the tiniest move toward doing so because that would make Muslims and Arabs angry. In his speeches to AIPAC, President Barack Obama has said—to thunderous applause—that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and should remain undivided. But of course this was a totally cynical gesture.

One could—as Obama no doubt hoped his audience would do—interpret this as favoring Israeli sovereignty over all of Jerusalem. Under that interpretation, Obama was taking a position on the “final status” negotiations. What Obama probably really meant is that after a two-state solution is implemented there should be no wall or closed border within Jerusalem. (That’s a nice idea though how it would be implemented is a puzzler.)

Israel vs. Palestinian Authority - Air and water have no borders

Emily Amrousi..
Israel Hayom..
03 August '12..

While Israel watches every drop and forces its citizens to conserve water, the Palestinian Authority is reveling in a wet paradise: Dozens of illegal drilling holes are pumping water out of our common underground well; thousands of makeshift pipes redirect stolen water from Mekorot, Israel's leading water agency; their tap water (that's right, tap water — 96 percent of Palestinians have running water in their homes, in cities and in rural villages, they don't need to carry it in bottles) flows freely — and no one ever gets a water bill, nor is any type of payment collection even attempted. While orchards in the Sharon region are being uprooted because of the water shortage, half a mile away, beyond the Green Line, a carefree agricultural system flourishes.

This description, which is completely true, sounds just awful. We have grown so accustomed to thinking of our neighbors as eternally miserable that any claim that they are stealing water burns our ears, as if we have accused them of poisoning wells. I attended an Environmental Protection Ministry conference this week titled "Border-Crossing Environment," and it turns out that, at least from an environmental perspective, misery is actually the lot of the Israeli “occupier.”

Palestinians tell a good story about how Israel is stealing water from them. They display a thirsty, decrepit old man standing near a dried-up well, but even they have to smile every time this lie is repeated. Before the terrible Israeli occupation they were using a primitive water system based on ancient aqueduct systems and wells. This system supplied only 17 billion gallons per year, mostly for agricultural purposes.

In 1967, Israel occupied the territory and set up the infrastructure for the country's national water carrier, used modern drilling systems, connected cities and villages, and what do you know — the Palestinian water supply tripled to 47 billions gallons annually. This is on top of the illegal Palestinian drilling. Every time our friends in Jenin pump a little more water, the water level in the Jezreel Valley goes down.

The Two-State Solution Has Already Been Implemented

Lacunar amnesia is cool


Sarah Honig..
Another Tack..
02 August '12..

Science attributes selective memory to defense mechanisms that generate blanks in patients’ awareness to repress trauma or humiliation. The result can manifest as lacunar amnesia, where the mind’s record-keeping is impeded by a gap (lacuna) relating to specific events.

In individual psychology these gaps form involuntarily. But in the spheres of politics and propaganda they become intentional and inherently advantageous. It pays to deliberately blot out entire episodes, decades and even eras. Cynical misrepresentation thrives on erasing contexts and causal connections.

Therefore, not forgetting what we’re encouraged to forget is critical.

There’s enormous importance to how far back in time we go to isolate a defining milestone in our collective history. Where we mark the starting point of ongoing struggles may invariably determine what we conclude about them. Put differently, our disinclination to retrace the steps which, for better or worse, brought us hitherto may mess with our perceptions or dictate profound misperceptions.

Arab-Israeli parliamentarian Haneen Zoabi (Balad), for example, purposefully peddles insidious misperceptions. Last week, she blamed Israel for the terror attack against Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. Israelis, she insisted, have it coming because they have been “occupiers” since 1967.

The problem, of course, is that terrorist atrocities predate 1967, but Zoabi would rather we overlook troublesome truth.

Those who turn June 5, 1967 – the beginning of the Six Day War – into their zero-hour marker usually seek to advance a predetermined agenda, whereby all that preceded Israeli “occupation” is discarded, as is everything that triggered the direct outbreak of hostilities.

Their bottom line is to persuade the uninitiated that Israelis woke up one sunny morning, and overtaken by inexorable and inexcusable territorial appetites, invaded their peace-loving neighbors’ homes and usurped them arbitrarily. The cruel conquistadors then illegally settled in their neighbors’ property, which impelled the downtrodden natives to resist the interlopers.

The logic here is unmistakable. Justice demands a return to the status quo ante – in other words to the situation as it was on June 4, 1967 (while failing to mention that on that date Israel was existentially vulnerable, surrounded and threatened with extinction by the aforementioned neighbors who blusterously bayed for Jewish blood).

Obama's wedge issue - Israel

Caroline Glick..
carolineglick.com..
02 August '12..



Less than 100 days before the US presidential elections, the Obama administration is openly denying Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem. Can this be a vote-getter?

Last week, the Emergency Committee for Israel released an ad titled, "O, Jerusalem." The commercial showed administration officials squirming when asked to name the capital of Israel, and highlighted the recent refusals of White House and State Department spokespeople to acknowledge that Jerusalem is Israel's capital city. The underlying message of the ad was that the administration's policy is out of step with the views of the majority of Americans.

Barack Obama's position is certainly a political outlier. The 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act, passed nearly unanimously by both houses of Congress, explicitly stated that it is the policy of the United States that Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of Israel. The law granted the president a right to postpone the transfer of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on national security grounds. But the law's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital was unconditional.

During his visit to Israel earlier this week, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney highlighted the fact that he holds the consensus view of the American public on Jerusalem.

In his speech in Jerusalem on Sunday afternoon, Romney said simply, "It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel."

The Palestinians were predictably enraged.

Hamas Gives a Reminder

Elliott Abrams..
Pressure Points..
cfr.org..
02 August '12..

What are the beliefs of the terrorist group Hamas and how likely is it any peace can be negotiated with Hamas? Hamas is a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the advent of an MB government in Egypt–with which American officials at the level of the Secretaries of Defense and State are now dealing happily–may lead some analysts to suggest that we, and Israel, should overcome our refusal to deal with Hamas.

So we can be grateful that Hamas supplied us with a useful reminder of who it is and what it believes. The Arab news site Maan today reports that Hamas has denounced the visit to Auschwitz of a Palestinian Authority official named Ziad al-Bandak, who is an aide to PA president Mahmoud Abbas.

“It was an unjustified and unhelpful visit that served only the Zionist occupation,” said Fawzi Barhoum, a spokesman for Hamas….Barhoum further called Bandak’s visit to Auschwitz, a camp where the Nazis killed 1.5 million people, most of them Jews but also other Polish citizens, during World War Two, as “a marketing of a false Zionist alleged tragedy.”

The Hamas Charter, the group’s constitutional or founding document, is a vicious anti-Semitic screed, but once in a while it is suggested that that’s an old document that does not really represent the organization’s views any more. That’s false, as this incident shows: hatred of Jews, including Holocaust denial, remains central to the Hamas belief system. It is a terrorist group, not a potential negotiating partner. Its hold on Gaza must be ended, not accommodated.

Link: http://blogs.cfr.org/abrams/2012/08/02/a-reminder-from-hamas/

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

Kushner - From Israel: Still on the Subject

Arlene Kushner..
02 August '12..





Additional comments to provide clarification regarding an attack on Iran are in order. By way of background:

[] My information -- I received this from a key general in the Ministry of Security Affairs -- is that Israel possesses the capacity to take back Iran's nuclear development by three to five years.

[] The United States, on the other hand -- with its 3,000 pound bunker busters, the strategic proximity of American forces to Iran, and more -- has the capacity to take out Iran's nuclear development capacity. Period. To hit it so hard that they cannot recover.

[] No one is talking about a ground war with the aim of achieving a full regime change, similar to what was done by the US in Iraq. This is an important issue to understand. The goal is not taking out the mullahs or the Revolutionary Guards. It is taking out Iran's capacity to go nuclear. A big differentiation with regard to what would transpire. The military operation, as I understand it, would be exclusively or primarily an air operation of relatively short term: bombing and missile attacks on significant nuclear operational sites, and, necessarily, missile storage and launching sites, airfields, etc. (to reduce effective retaliation). We're not looking at thousands of troops fighting guerillas for years.

But will there be repercussions? Absolutely. Including, without question, but not limited to, rockets and missiles aimed at Israel from Lebanon and Gaza. Preparing a response to this is part of what Israel must do to be ready to hit Iran. It is clear we'd hit back hard -- considerably harder than has been the case in the last wars -- and quickly. And I am certain that an assessment of the situation in this regard will also have to be factored in to a decision-making process (see following).

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Hezbollah Maintains .... Balance of “Activism” Doesn’t Sound Right

Pesach Benson..
Honest Reporting/Backspin..
02 August '12..





Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah thinks Hezbollah has reached a level of mutually assured destruction with the Zionist entity. Here’s the Daily Star’s money quote from his latest speech (still given from an undisclosed location).

Speaking on the subject of Israel, Nasrallah said his party maintained “a balance of terror” with the Jewish state, which prevents it from attacking Lebanon.

What is protecting Lebanon today is the balance of resistance, a balance of terror,” he said.

Memo to Big Media and the EU: Even Hezbollah’s head honcho uses of the word terror.

Half of Lebanon wants Hezbollah disarmed. They know that the groups weapons don’t create a “balance of activism.”

Link: http://honestreporting.com/balance-of-activism-doesnt-sound-right/

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

Iranian leader says he knows how to "solve entire world problems" and it involves annihilation (his word). Guess whom?

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
02 August '12..

Over the years, apologists for the political head of the government of Iran have played down the violence and aggression of his words. This time he was quoted out of context. The next time, the translation from the Persian language was faulty. And so on and on, ad nauseum.

With those soft-hearted individuals in mind, we are copying a slab of extraordinary text here directly and verbatim from the Islamic Republic of Iran's official press service. It's called "Islamic Republic News Agency", and it publishes in English. Earlier today, under the headline "Ahmadinejad: Qods Day to liberate Palestine, solve entire world problems", it pulled the mask from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's face. Incidentally, Quds (or Qods) Day is an Iranian 'contribution' to civilization, taking place annually on the last Friday of Ramadan [Wikipedia]. This year, that means the 24 hour period starting at sunset on Thursday, August 16 according this source.

Ahmadinejad: Qods Day to liberate Palestine, solve entire world problems

Follow Your Heart: Remembering Michael Levin

Michael Levin z"l
Eric Schorr..
Times of Israel..
01 August '12..

In the summer of 2006 while working at Camp Ramah Day Camp in Philadelphia, I was coming back from a work shift when a dark sedan pulled up to the entrance of our building. Men in suits shuffled out of the car, went inside, and then escorted one of my fellow staffers, Dara Levin, into the car and drove off. It was only later that afternoon I understood why, when the camp administrators pulled the entire staff aside to inform us that Michael, Dara’s twin brother, had been killed in action in southern Lebanon.

I will never forget that moment, how surreal and unimaginable the feeling.

I had only seen and spoken to Michael weeks before, when he was home visiting his family. He had come to pick up Dara from work one afternoon. We talked about his service, what it meant, about my dream to someday serve also, and about Philadelphia sports, specifically about our mutual love of the Flyers. I asked him what I should do after graduating, “Follow your heart” he had said with a big smile.

I couldn’t begin to understand that he was gone for good, that he had truly left us.

Michael’s death didn’t just impact his family, it was felt like a wave of pain across our entire community. From his closest friends at Ramah Poconos and from his Nativ year, to his fellow soldiers in the IDF and his friends around Israel, everyone who learned of Michael’s passing sensed the loss of a truly special soul, the loss of someone who had brought so much happiness into their lives.

But in as much as we grieved for Michael after his death, our sadness and pain over the years has transformed into pride and respect. We screen the documentary about his life, A Hero in Heaven, at special memorial services each year, on college campuses, and for Birthright trips. Monuments have been constructed in order to honor the ultimate sacrifice he made for the country he loved so dearly. And his grave is one of the most recognizable on Har Herzl, with thousands of people visiting each year to pay their respects.

In these ways do we tell Michael’s story and share his memory with those who did not have the privilege and joy of knowing him.

Late Breaking News: Israel Made Me Beat My Wife, Part 2

Pesach Benson..
Honest Reporting/Backspin..
02 August '12..

Good thing The Guardian published its piece blaming Israel for Palestinian wife-beating yesterday. Had the story waited another day, it would’ve directly competed with an ugly murder demolishing the paper’s it’s-all-Israel’s-fault mentality.

Nancy Zaboun, a 27-year-old Palestinian mother of three was killed by her husband. In Bethlehem’s busy open air market. Eyewitnesses — and there were plenty — were horrified as Shadi Abedallah slashed his wife’s throat.

Associated Press notes plenty of contributing factors. Note the absence of hot-button excuses like “the occupation.”

Knesset Member Haneen Zoabi's Incitement

Sarah Honig..
Another Tack..
02 August '12..

It sounded quite unthinkable, but Knesset member Haneen Zoabi (Balad) blamed Israel for the recent slaying of Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. “Israel is not a victim, not even when civilians are killed,” she declared in an interview with Channel 10.

Zoabi elaborated: “Israel’s policy of occupation is at fault. If there was no occupation, no repression and no blockade, then this wouldn’t have happened.”

Her comments failed to rouse furor among the Israeli public, which has grown inured to brazen provocation from Arab MKs bankrolled by Israeli taxpayers. Our local media reported the story, but on the whole abstained from comment.

Zoabi’s rationalization of mass murder went right under the radar of the international community. We need only imagine the ferocious maelstrom had an Israeli parliamentarian dared hint that indiscriminately murdering Palestinian tots, their mothers, fathers and all other Arab civilians is tolerable because they have it coming.

The pandemonium would be nothing less than horrific, as would the bad press tarnishing the Israeli collective.

But this sentiment sounded by an Arab Israeli not only excites no censure, it is probably received sympathetically abroad. It is the very spurious narrative that overseas opinion-molders accept, cultivate and disseminate.

Prime Minister Netanyahu to Panetta: Time Running Out on Iran

P. David Hornik..
frontpagemag.com..
02 August '12..

“Will Israel attack Iran’s nuclear program?” is a parlor game played by numerous people who don’t have enough information to know the answer. It may be that there still is no definite answer; on Tuesday night Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu openly told a national TV audience that he still hadn’t reached a decision on the matter.

Recent events, though, seem to warrant a conjecture that something is afoot.

U.S. defense secretary Leon Panetta was in Israel on Wednesday, meeting first with Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak and then with Netanyahu. His visit came hard on the heels of visits by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two weeks ago and by National Security Adviser Tom Donilon just a few days before that (along with, from the other side of the aisle, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s visit at the start of this week).

And that string of visits by Donilon, Clinton, and Panetta is only part of an ongoing succession of top-level U.S. visitors in Israel over the past several months. David Horovitz, editor of The Times of Israel, notes that “according to one count” today’s meeting between Panetta and Barak was no less thantheir ninth this year.

The inescapable conclusion is that someone, at least—Washington—relates seriously to Israel’s warnings that it may take action against Iran, and is particularly anxious to reassure Jerusalem that the sanctions-and-diplomacy approach is working and deserves more time.

Barak, though, told Panetta on Wednesday that he saw an “extremely low” probability that sanctions would ever—on any timeline—get Tehran to give up its nuclear program, and that meanwhile Israel’s window to act is closing as Iran keeps brazenly on its course.

A Surprise? Clinton and Palestinian Culture: Not So Fast

Seth Mandel..
Commentary/Contentions..
01 August '12..

Over at the Atlantic, Garance Franke-Ruta contrasts Mitt Romney’s opinion of Palestinian “culture” (or, rather, how the media interpreted his comments) with that of Bill Clinton. With a hat-tip to National Journal’s Matthew Cooper, who dug up the quote, Franke-Ruta publishes a comment Clinton made in a speech last year in Riyadh that would seem to put him at stark odds with Romney on their evaluations of Palestinian culture.

When I read the quote, I immediately recognized it: I once heard Clinton deliver the same line–only it was to a Jewish audience, and it was meant to make the opposite point he was making to the Saudis, a point that comports much more with what Romney said. (Classic Clinton there, by the way.) First, what Franke-Ruta quotes, via the Arab News:

He said Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad have done a remarkable job in the West Bank. “It is just an example of what would happen for the Palestinian people if they are given a chance to govern,” Clinton said. “Palestinians are a hard-working and an incredible community. They have done remarkably well outside their country. I have never met a poor Palestinian in the United States; every Palestinian I know is a college professor or a doctor.”

The problem in Israel, he said, is what happens in multiparty democracies around the world. “If you take a poll today, two-thirds of Israelis will support peace and a peace agreement,” Clinton said. “However, it is hard to get an Israeli Parliament that reflects the people’s views on this one issue. But we all have to keep pushing.”

This was a clever rhetorical trick here. Clinton doesn’t say the problem is in Israel, he just switches immediately to the problem in Israel, leaving the impression this is Israel’s fault without explicitly saying so. (Also, his comment about Israelis being unable to elect a Knesset that shares the popular view on the peace process is nonsense; the Israelis have such a government now.)

"Staunch Ally of Israel" Hosni Mubarak?

SS..
CAMERA/Snapshots..
01 August '12..

A report by Isabel Kershner and Elisabeth Bumiller discussing the controversial letter allegedly sent by newly-elected Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to Israeli President Shimon Peres provides another example of how The New York Times's distorted view of Israel and the Middle East seeps into its news reporting.

Contrasting the tense relationship between Israel and Egypt's new Muslim Brotherhood political leadership, Kershner and Bumiller write,

Since the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak, a staunch ally of Israel, there has been no high-level dialogue between the Israeli and Egyptian political leadership...

A reality check is in order here. The former Egyptian president maintained the peace agreement with Israel and cooperated on isolating Hamas-ruled Gaza. For that he deserves praise. But a staunch ally? The New York Times has set the bar so low here it would challenge an expert limbo dancer. Under Mubarak's long rule, anti-Israel and anti-Jewish invective flourished in Egypt, including its state-controlled media. Economic relations stagnated and tourism was in one direction only - from Israel to Egypt. Mr. Mubarak, himself, set an example by never visiting Israel in an official capacity in 30 years as president. He visited Israel only once - a non-state visit - to attend Yitzhak Rabin's funeral.

With staunch allies like that, who needs tentative allies?

Link: http://blog.camera.org/archives/2012/08/hosni_mubarak_staunch_ally_of.html

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

US-Israel: A paradoxical relationship

Fresnozionism.org..
01 August '12..





Commentators are fond of saying that the US-Israel relationship is ‘complicated’. Actually, it’s not.

Let’s explain what is usually considered a major paradox: the US provides billions in military aid to Israel, enabling it to keep its enemies at bay. But at the same time its diplomats claim that they don’t know what the capital is, and the major thrust of US policy since 1973 has been to force Israel to withdraw to indefensible boundaries, despite the obvious damage to its security.

Israel’s foes in the US will say that the aid is extorted by the all-powerful “Israel lobby.” But this is nonsense — AIPAC (stupidly, in my opinion) brags about how powerful it is, but it has lost more than one important battle. And there are countervailing forces, like the Saudi lobby, which has been very effective in quietly working against Israel through its academic grants and “post-emptive bribery” of government officials (“scratch our backs today and we’ll feather your nest when you retire,” to mix metaphors) like Jimmy Carter.

There are several reasons for the military aid: one is that it is spent in the US, which is helpful to our economy. And where else can we sell weapons without worrying that they might some day be turned against our own soldiers? But the main reason is that the great majority of Americans strongly support Israel, want to see it survive, and express this to their members of Congress.

Walter Russell Mead, in a perceptive discussion of Mitt Romney’s attitude toward Israel, wrote,

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Letter to Nordstrom: Dear Nordstrom, It has come to my attention ...

Varda Epstein..
Times of Israel..
01 August '12..

Communicated to contact@nordstrom.com

Dear Nordstrom,

It has come to my attention that your subsidiary, HauteLook, lists “Palestine Territory, Occupied,” under the list of “countries” it serves. I find it distasteful that you are using your website to disseminate a political view that deviates from international law and spreads false propaganda. I was greatly offended to be confronted with this type of political pandering while shopping online.

Please note that Britain was the administrator for these territories under a League of Nations Mandate created after World War I. According to the League of Nations, the territories in question were to be divided between the Jews, who called their state “Israel,” and a new country called Trans-Jordan, today Jordan which was designated to serve as an Palestinian Arab state.

Later on, the UN Partition Plan carved up the land, much of it formerly intended for the Jewish homeland, even further so that a second Palestinian Arab state would be created in addition to Jordan. But the Arabs did not accept the UN Partition Plan and attacked the new Jewish State. With the war’s end in 1948, Jordan assumed the role as administrator of Judea and Samaria.

The Jordanians tried to strip the territories of their Jewish and biblical history by referring to them as the West Bank (of Jordan), rather than as Judea and Samaria, as they were known until that time.

In 1967, the Arabs once again went to war against Israel and Israel regained these territories. The international community never recognized Jordan’s sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and considered Jordan an illegal occupier of this territory between 1948 and 1967. This being the case, according to international law, Israel took back its rightful ownership of these lands after regaining them in 1967 during the Six-Day War. International law therefore does NOT recognize these lands as occupied.

Find an official liar and let him spew: The Ma'an quote game

Elder of Ziyon..
01 August '12..





From Ma'an on Tuesday:

The deputy leader of the Islamic movement in Israel, Sheikh Kamal al-Khateib, said Tuesday that the Israeli municipal council of Jerusalem planned to transform the yards of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound into public parks and gardens, to make them accessible for the Jews to visit at any time.

...In his remarks Tuesday, Al-Khateib said soldiers detained the imam of the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Friday while he was praying. “Israeli troops stormed the mosque and prevented worshipers from completing their prayer,” he said.

Both of these allegations have zero evidence behind them. They came from rumors in the Arab press that became morphed into these confident, authoritative-sounding statements from an Islamic official.

And, of course, Ma'an prints them without any skepticism.

Here's another one from Ma'an, this one from Sunday:

Israel allocates 70 times more water to each settler than to the average Palestinian in the West Bank, the head of the Palestinian Water Authority said Sunday.

Seventy times?

(Read full "The Ma'an quote game ...")

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

(Video) France 24: 5 Years of Hamas Rule in the Gaza Strip

MidEastInfo..
01 August '12..





A report by France 24 in English covering the situation in the Gaza Strip after five years of the Hamas rule. Life under the rule of the Hamas terror organization.



A review by AP: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120623/ml-hamas-five-years/ 

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
.

Media Analyses: Chris Hedges the Facts, Truth

Chris Hedges
Tamar Sternthal..
CAMERA Media Analyses..
31 July '12..

Promoting his new book on PBS' "Bill Moyers and Company," former New York Times reporter Chris Hedges makes a number of striking, and at times contradictory, assertions: truth and news are not the same thing, the great journalists care about truth at the expense of their careers, the "powerful Israel lobby" suppresses the truth, and journalism is rooted in verifiable facts. As someone who was reportedly pushed out of The New York Times (an incident to which he and his host repeatedly refer) due to his public statements against the Iraq war, Hedges clearly positions himself among the great who care for the truth at the expense of his professional advancement (and Moyers embraces this view of Hedges). These revelations are all the more noteworthy in light of Hedges' demonstrably false coverage of Gaza Strip issues from health care to water, and including his notorious, unfounded charge that Israeli soldiers kill "for sport."

The following are excerpts from his July 20 PBS appearance dealing with journalism, truth, the "Israel lobby," and the Gaza Strip:

Accidental explosion in Gaza car: One terrorist career terminates prematurely; puts two more on hold

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
01 August '12..






The English-language Palestinian news service Maan is reporting that a car exploded in Gaza City’s Tal al-Hawa neighborhood before dawn today (Wednesday). Here are the details it provides:

Ashraf al-Qidra, spokesman of the ministry of health in the Hamas-run government in Gaza, said 22-year-old Ayman al-Sharafa sustained deadly wounds in the incident and was pronounced dead later. Two other men sustained injuries, he confirmed. The cause of the blast was not immediately clear.

The cause of the blast may not be immediately clear in Bethlehem and is likely to remain unclear based on past performance. But it is evidently somewhat clearer in Gaza. There the Arabic-language daily Al-Quds is now saying ["Report: Man killed in Gaza was Hamas operative"] that the "military wing" (their term) of the terrorist organization (not their term) Hamas is mourning what it calls

Unchanged and Unreal: US Policy On Jerusalem

Daniel Tauber..
Op-Ed Contributor/JPost..
31 July '12..

Even if he hadn’t advocated moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney proved something that has vexed US spokespeople for decades: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and it’s no biggie to say so.

Romney accomplished this during his visit to Israel, stating on Sunday, “it is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.” This simple statement strongly contrasted with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney’s refusal last week to answer a reporter’s question regarding which city the US considers Israel’s capital. Carney only repeated “Our policy has not changed.” (Reporter: “Can you give us an answer? What do you recognize?” Carney: “Our position has not changed.”)

In March, a similarly comedic standoff took place with State Department Spokesperson Victoria Nuland who refused to state that Jerusalem was even part of Israel. (Reporter: “Is it the State Department’s position that Jerusalem is not part of Israel?” Nuland: Well you know, our position on Jerusalem has not changed.”) This refusal to recognize Jerusalem as part of Israel even includes Western Jerusalem, which has been part of Israel since 1948 and which served as Israel’s capital since 1950. This contradicts US President Barack Obama’s call for a solution in which Israel returns to the pre-’67 borders, whereby at least Western Jerusalem would remain part of Israel.

Much as it seems that some kind of speech disorder must be behind the official position, there is an alleged policy-rationale. According to that rationale the status of Jerusalem is something which should be determined by the parties in negotiations – and the US will not “prejudice the outcome of negotiations,” even if that means merely recognizing that Jerusalem is part of Israel.

This rationale does not make the position any less ridiculous. It makes it insulting. It rejects the threemillennia- old status of Jerusalem as the center of the Jewish people’s national-cultural-religious life and the center of the modern Jewish nationalist movement, which was named after Zion, i.e. Jerusalem, long before a Palestinian people was ever claimed to exist. Insult to national identity aside, it denies Israel’s sovereign right to choose its capital and further subjects that right to the veto of the Palestinian Authority.

The ‘culture’ remark: Building an economy and a state is hard work.

Fresnozionism.org..
31 July '12..

So Mitt Romney compared Israel’s culture favorably to that of the Palestinian Arabs, to explain the economic success of the Jewish state (and by implication, the failure of the Arab entity). “Racism,” said Saeb Erekat, PLO negotiator. “It’s all about occupation.”

Of course the Jews in Palestine were under ‘occupation’ from about the time of Nebuchadnezzar until 1948. During the period of Turkish and British rule from about 1890 until independence, they created the institutions of a new Jewish commonwealth, everything from health funds to road-building companies to labor unions to universities to collective farms to kindergartens to newspapers to an army.

They had some help from international Jewry, but it was small potatoes. Most of what they built was bootstrapped into existence, often — as in the reclamation of previously worthless land purchased dearly — at great human cost.

The Palestinian Arabs, on the other hand, are the greatest recipients of international aid in the history of the world. Billions and billions of dollars have been showered on them to help them create economic, social and political institutions that could be a precursor to statehood. They have political autonomy — total control in Gaza, and civil self-rule over 97% of the Arab population of Judea and Samaria.

Yet they have not been able to create a functional economy in either the PA or Hamas-controlled areas. Criminality and corruption characterize their regimes. Cronies of the rulers control monopolies in telecommunications, building materials, etc.

Reinvigorating the Discussion of Israel’s Rights in Judea/Samaria

Prof. Avi Bell..
BESA Center Perspectives..
Paper No. 176..
31 July '12..

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Commission to Examine the Status of Building in Judea and Samaria (the “Levy report”) has drawn a flurry of overwrought criticism due to its inclusion of a section concerning the lawfulness of Israeli settlement activity. But the report’s argument is surprisingly modest in substance; it does little more than endorse the traditional official Israeli position that the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply de jure to the West Bank, and in any event does not bar Israeli settlements. Some have argued that the Levy report is foolish politically, arguing that by asserting its legal rights, Israel will signal that it is unwilling to entertain “land for peace” compromises. This seems a doubtful thesis. Israel has asserted its legal rights to Jerusalem for decades, but yet repeatedly offered compromises on its rights in the city. What the Levy report has done is to reinvigorate the discussion of the legitimacy of Israel’s position under international law after many years in which Israel has been silent about its legal rights. That is a welcome development.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was presented with the report of the Commission to Examine the Status of Building in Judea and Samaria, headed by former Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy (the “Levy report”). The report has drawn a flurry of overwrought criticism due to its inclusion of a section concerning the lawfulness of Israeli settlement activity.

In contrast with the misinformed and sometimes outright disingenuous criticism, the report’s discussion of the lawfulness of settlements is surprisingly modest in substance. The report does little more than endorse the traditional official Israeli position that the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply de jure to the West Bank, and in any event does not bar Israeli settlements. While the report’s analysis is far from comprehensive, it is more detailed and more persuasive than that usually offered by anti-settlement activists.

Greenfield - Universal Muslim Economic Failure

Daniel Greenfield..
Sultan Knish..
31 July '12..

If Romney accomplished nothing else during his Israeli visit, he did manage to offend every single Palestinian Arab terrorist group, all of whom, the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP and the DFLP, issued press releases denouncing him. Their American media outlets, on a desperate gaffe hunt, seized on his statement that the GDP Per Capita differences between Israel and the territory under the control of the Palestinian Authority are the result of different values.

The official media narrative is that these differences are the results of eons of oppression, checkpoints and blockades. Fair enough. But then why does the IMF put Israel's GDP Per Capita well ahead of the oil rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia?

Saudi Arabia has no Israeli checkpoints, no Israeli soldiers or planes flying overhead. It has wealth literally pouring out of the ground with a fifth of the world's petroleum reserves. And yet the IMF puts it 13 places behind Israel and the World Bank puts it 8 places behind Israel. The only Muslim countries with a better GDP Per Capita rating than Israel are small monarchies drowning in oil.

The non-oil Muslim countries who are closest to Israel are Malaysia and Lebanon, 32 and 33 places behind Israel. Both countries also have sizable non-Muslim populations. Muslims make up only 50 percent of Lebanon and only 60 percent of Malaysia.

38 places below Israel is Turkey, which until recently was a secular country and actually has a statistically significant atheist population. And that's it. Below that we fall off a cliff into places like Belarus, South Africa and Grenada; all of whom still have better GDP Per Capita rates. No Muslim country without oil has a better GDP Per Capita than a Muslim country that has sizable Christian or Buddhist minorities.

What Romney didn't mention, but should have, is that the Palestinian Authority dealt yet another blow to its economy when it drove out the Christian population. Christians in the territories have traditionally made the best businessmen and the capital of the Palestinian Authority was actually started by Jordanian Christian refugees escaping Muslim persecution. And their decline follows a pattern of Christian communities across the Middle East declining and disappearing under Muslim rule.

Surprised? Syrians slaughtered, but U.N. too busy condemning Israel 3 times

Hillel Neuer..
UN Watch..
30 July '12..

As Syrians continue to be slaughtered, the U.N. is once again too busy condemning Israel to respond to those pleading for help in Aleppo and elsewhere.

The world body’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the principal organ under the U.N. Charter tasked with addressing human rights and fundamental freedoms, has just concluded its annual session by turning a blind eye to the ongoing massacres by the Assad regime. Instead, a list of all its resolutions for the entire world shows that ECOSOC condemned only one single country: Israel. Two resolutions were adopted against Israel, and one report.

Sponsored by Algeria for the Third World grouping known as G-77, and by Turkey, a one-sided and politicized resolution was adopted on July 26 with the following title: “Economic and social repercussions of the Israeli occupation on the living conditions of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan.”

It passed by an automatic and massive majority of 45 to 2, with only Canada and the United States having the courage to say no. Australia, Cameroon and El Salvador abstained.

Without any sense of shame, the resolution urges Israel to “facilitate visits of the Syrian citizens of the occupied Syrian Golan whose family members reside in their mother homeland, the Syrian Arab Republic” (par. 13).

In other words, the U.N. human rights session had the gall to actually address Syria without mentioning a word about the Syrians now being bombed, gunned down and mutilated. Instead, Syria was mentioned only for the purpose of demonizing Israel.