Submission to the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza Conflict by Richard Kemp

...Many people believe that your findings are a foregone conclusion, as the findings of the 2008-09 Commission regrettably proved to be. They believe that you will roundly and without foundation condemn Israel for war crimes while at best making only token criticism of Hamas and other Gaza extremist groups. If you genuinely want to contribute to peace and to improve human rights for the people of Gaza and of Israel then you must have the courage to reject the UN Human Rights Council’s persistent and discriminatory anti-Israel programme and produce a balanced and fair report into these tragic events.

Colonel Richard Kemp CBE..
Richard-Kemp.com..
20 February '15..

GENEVA, 20 FEBRUARY 2015
I was a Colonel in the British Infantry. Much of my 29 years’ military service was spent countering terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Northern Ireland, Great Britain, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Macedonia. I was Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan in 2003. I fought in the 1990-91 Gulf War and commanded British troops in Bosnia with the UN Protection Force and in Cyprus with the UN Force.

From 2002 – 2005 I was seconded to the UK Cabinet Office working on intelligence relating to international and domestic terrorism. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad were among the extremist groups that I monitored and assessed in this role, and I had access to all secret intelligence available to the UK on these and other Palestinian extremist groups.

I was appointed Member of the Order of the British Empire by the Queen in 1994 for counter terrorist intelligence services and Commander of the Order of the British Empire in 2006 also for counter terrorist intelligence services.

I was in Israel for much of the summer 2014 Gaza conflict, specifically from 14 July – 8 August and from 27 August – 5 September. During these periods I met, was briefed by and questioned Israeli political leaders, senior officials and Israel Defence Force (IDF) soldiers from general officer down to private soldier. I spent a considerable amount of this time close to the Gaza border where I also met, was briefed by, questioned and observed many IDF officers and soldiers immediately before and after they had been in combat.

I was in Israel also for much of the Gaza conflict in 2012. I visited IDF units and held meetings with many IDF officers, government officials and political leaders before and since then. I have been acquainted with the IDF and the Israeli intelligence services for many years, both during and after my military service.

This submission to the UN Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza conflict is based on observations on the ground during the conflict, 29 years’ military experience of conflicts of this type, intelligence work relating to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, knowledge of the IDF and Israeli intelligence services, study of the Israel-Palestine conflict and observations on the ground during the 2012 Gaza conflict. I should add that I have no formal, paid or unpaid, connection with the IDF or with any other organ of the Israeli government.

In my opinion the actions taken by the IDF were necessary to defend the people of Israel from the ongoing, intensive and lethal attacks by Hamas and other groups in Gaza. It is the inalienable duty of every government to use its armed forces to protect its citizens and its terrain from external attack.

In this case there was a sustained assault on the Israeli population from rockets and mortar bombs; attacks on Israeli military posts using tunnels; apparent plans to launch further attacks on Israeli military posts and on civilian settlements also using tunnels; and attempted attacks from the sea.

As the Gaza Strip is effectively a separate state, outside of Israeli control, these actions amounted to an attack by a foreign country against Israeli territory. In these circumstances I know of no other realistic and effective means of suppressing an aggressor’s missile fire than the methods used by the IDF, namely precision air and artillery strikes against the command and control structures, the fighters and the munitions of Hamas and the other groups in Gaza. Nor have I heard any other military expert from any country propose a viable alternative means of defence against such aggression.

The only other options, which I do not consider realistic in these circumstances, would have been:

A strategy of carpet-bombing to force Hamas and the other groups to desist from their attacks.

A large-scale ground invasion to find and destroy the offensive capabilities of Hamas and the other groups.

Either of these means would have resulted in far greater civilian casualties, and a ground invasion would also have incurred significant numbers of Israeli military casualties. The destruction of Hamas would also have left Gaza under full Israeli control, which would have needed an investment in military resources that Israel could ill afford given the wide range of threats and potential threats that the country faces, including from Iran, from Hizballah in Lebanon and Syria, from the Islamic State in Syria and from Islamist extremists in Sinai.

In reality, the offensive missile capabilities of Hamas and the other groups could never have been totally destroyed using air operations alone. Recognising this, the IDF commanders and their political leadership calculated that to have eradicated the threat completely would have required a ground offensive that would have caused large numbers of casualties among Gaza civilians – far more than were sustained during the operation in the summer. They also took account of predicted Israeli military casualties which would have been substantial.

The consequence was an acceptance that while it would be possible to halt Hamas’s aggression on a temporary basis, there would in the future be a resurgence of such activity, forcing yet another defensive operation along the lines of 2008-09, 2012 and 2014, and causing further Israeli and Palestinian casualties. Though unsatisfactory in the longer term, this was a proportional and pragmatic response – indeed in my opinion the minimum possible response – to the rocket fire from Gaza.

While Israel can act to reduce the prospects for such future action, including by trying to prevent munitions or materiel with the potential for offensive military use entering Gaza, it cannot fully achieve this. In the interests of a lasting peace I would strongly urge the Commission to recommend effective international cooperation against the continued re-militarization of the Gaza Strip.

It is grossly irresponsible of international actors to rely on accusations against Israel of a so-called illegal blockade and occupation of Gaza, and demand that Israeli control of Gaza’s borders be lifted, when it is clear that Israeli action is necessary to prevent the re-armament that will lead to further attacks by Hamas and other groups. It should be noted that Egypt takes similar preventive action against Gaza extremists for the same reason as Israel.

When the 'Jewish Voice for Peace' Takes Off Its Mask

...This studied ambiguity helps keep both those who merely would like Israel to withdraw from the West Bank and those who would like Israel to withdraw from the face of the Earth in the same camp. That is the camp that Jewish Voice for Peace has always belonged to, and the camp it has at last openly joined. In joining up at this particular time, Jewish Voice for Peace also declares that it is ready to lead the charge to catch up with its “European comrades” who have contributed to the anti-Semitic environment that has many European Jews contemplating emigration. Perhaps JVP, which has now openly allied itself with a movement that refuses to concede their right to live in Israel, will help drive them into the sea.

Jonathan Marks..
Commentary Magazine..
22 February '15..

Jewish Voice for Peace was a major force behind Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s 2014 divestment from companies, like Caterpillar, said to profit from Israel’s activities in the West Bank. They provided a useful Jewish fig leaf for the Church, who could assert that some of divestment’s best friends are Jews. JVP has also eagerly made itself useful to Students for Justice in Palestine, which seeks to promote divestment, among stronger measures against Israel, at our colleges and universities.

JVP’s position has always been merely tactical. As the organization explained in a 2005 statement, “we face a more hostile environment than our European comrades, and thus we cannot uncritically adopt” direct sanctions against Israel. In a 2011, statement, JVP again affirmed its preference for the tactic of selective divestment, but fully endorsed the overall goals of the BDS movement, including the right of return, or, in effect, the end of Israel as a Jewish state. JVP never really so much distanced itself from BDS as reluctantly concluded that only BDS-lite was possible in the U.S. for the time being. Yet in both the Presbyterian debate and the Stanford debate over divestment, at least some advocates insisted that a vote for divestment was not, in fact a vote for BDS.

It is therefore refreshing that JVP has finally come out and joined the BDS movement, openly endorsing not only the goals but also the strategy of that movement, complete isolation and demonization of Israel as an apartheid state.

Terming a Palestinian Arab news source 'independent' might require some flexibility of definition

...The report concludes by pointing out that the Ma'an Network has close links to highly politicised non-governmental organizations that "promote conflict rather than internal development or peace-building" with the result that what it actually does "contradicts the funding aims of its donors.and contradicts the funding aims of its donors." Could it be the donors don't know this? Perhaps they ought to be advised to get their news and analysis from better sources.

Arnold/Frimet Roth..
This Ongoing War..
22 February '15..

The indispensable Elder of Ziyon posts a blog under the title "One day after Gazans killed in tunnels, Hamas claims there are no tunnels" today, in which he lets three separate news reports from a notable Arab source pretty much speak for themselves. They tell a story that mainstream news editors and reporters know but rarely convey to their readers: that Ma'an, the Palestinian news agency usually described as 'independent' pretty much is not.

Story Number 3 reported by Ma'an New Agency on Saturday (yesterday) afternoon ["Hamas accuses Egyptian media of spreading anti-Palestinian lies"] quotes the notably unlovely Hamas "spokesman" and sometime mule [background here], Sami Abu Zuhri, slamming (their word) what he calls a

a "Zionist-like" network that had spread the rumors and sought to sow discord between Egypt and Palestine.

These rumors concern tunnels running between Egypt and Hamas-controlled Gaza. Abu Zuhri says they don't exist any more, and that's exactly what Ma'an reports:

All of the tunnels under the border area, he said, have been destroyed and both Egyptian and Palestinian security forces have been guarding both sides of the borders. [Ma'an, Saturday]

Story Number 2, also from Ma'an News Agency, appeared two days earlier, Thursday, under the give-away title "Hamas fighter, civilian killed in Gaza tunnels near Rafah":

Two Palestinians died in separate incidents in underground tunnels beneath the besieged Gaza Strip and Egypt on Thursday. The al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of the Hamas movement, said that a fighter in the group was killed during a military mission in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. The brigades said in a statement that "Muhammad Talal Abu Matar, 25, from western Rafah was killed in a jihadi mission," without providing further details. However, a spokesperson for the Gaza Ministry of Health said that Abu Matar was killed in an accident in one of the tunnels. Also Thursday, a young Palestinian man died after being accidentally electrocuted inside a smuggling tunnel connecting Rafah to Egypt... [Ma'an, last Thursday]

Two deaths in non-existent tunnels? And a few days before that, on Monday February 16, there's this ["Egypt finds 2.5 km smuggling tunnel under Gaza border"], also via Ma'an:

(Continue) 

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 which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work as well as a big vote to follow our good friend Kay Wilson on Twitter, 
.

The Death of Adele Biton and The NY Times’ Justification of Lopsided Reporting

...The Society of Professional Journalist's code of ethics calls on journalists, among other things, to recognize their own cultural values and avoid imposing them on readers, to distinguish between advocacy and news reporting, and to give voice to the voiceless. In addition, it urges journalists to be accountable to their readers, clarify and explain news coverage, invite dialogue and encourage readers to voice their grievances about news reporting. Many prominent and respected journalists adhere to this code, even when criticized. And they are better journalists for it. But as long as Rudoren continues to wear blinders, block her ears, and insist that it is not necessary to explore both sides of a conflict in equal depth, non-partisan readers who want to genuinely learn about the situation fully and fairly should continue to avoid the New York Times and its partisan Jerusalem bureau chief.

Ricki Hollander..
CAMERA Media Analyses..
20 February '15..

In March 2013, three-year-old Adele Biton was travelling with her two sisters in a car driven by their mother, when a Palestinian rock-throwing attack caused the car to slam into a truck ahead. Two of the girls suffered moderate wounds, while Adele was left in critical condition, with serious neurological injuries. She underwent extensive treatment in acute and rehabilitation care facilities, but never fully recovered.

Nearly two years later, on Feb. 17, 2015, the pre-schooler died as a result of complications of pneumonia. Her mother told the Israeli newspaperYediot Aharonot that there was no doubt that Adele's illness was part of the progression of her neurological injuries “that complicated her ability to cope with medical issues."

The following day, Voice of Israel's Josh Hasten interviewed New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren. Asked what she knew about Adele, Rudoren responded:

In any society, I suppose, and certainly here, there are certain individual cases among the victims who become somewhat iconic and I think Adele was one of those. She was two years old, critically injured, spent more than a year, maybe a year and a half, in rehab. Many, many articles were written about her. Her parents, her family, captured Israeli attention, so I was aware of that. Obviously, a two-year-old girl critically injured in the conflict is heart-tugging for any observer and because of that, she had become somewhat iconic. That's why we wrote a brief item about her death.

But it was not until after Adele had succumbed to her illness that Jodi Rudoren referred to Adele and the stone throwing attack that had maimed her. The reporter wrote about Adele's death in a 169-word "world briefing" that appeared only in the newspaper's online edition.

Indeed, in a more than 1900-word feature article about Palestinian stone throwers that was published both online ("In a West Bank Culture of Conflict, Boys Wield the Weapon at Hand") and prominently on the front page of the print edition ("My Hobby is Throwing Stones," Aug. 5, 2013), Jodi found no room to mention the attack that had critically injured Adele. Nor did she mention an earlier stone throwing attack that had crushed the skull of 5-year-old Yehuda Shoham, an only child. And her only mention of a similar attack that resulted in the deaths of a young father and his infant son was in passing, presented as hearsay about unnamed victims.

Instead the reporter devoted her feature piece to Palestinian stone throwers' justifications for, and expressions of pride in, their actions, as well as their hardship in being arrested by Israeli police for these activities. At the time, CAMERA posted a sharp media critique about the article, entitled "The New York Times Romanticizes Palestinian Stone Throwers and Ignores Their Victims." In it, Rudoren was criticized for explaining the stone throwing by Palestinians as "pushback against Israel," a "rite of passage," and an "honored act of defiance" while downplaying the impact of this Palestinian "hobby" on its Israeli victims. The critique pointed out that while the reporter emphasized "the futility of stones bouncing off armored vehicles," and interviewed one Israeli who had been frightened but uninjured by stone-throwing attacks, she provided almost no information about the deadlier and more injurious results of such attacks.

BDS and the cultural terrorism of Roger Waters

...Both el-Hussein, BDS and Waters are a real threat to freedom of thought and the free world. They cultivate hatred; they cultivate silencing people; they give legitimacy to violence. Brainwashing, lies and incitement against Jews have already won once. In the world of Waters, BDS, Hamas and el-Hussein, it could happen again.

Ben-Dror Yemini..
Israel Opinion/Ynet..
20 Fberuary '15..

Never has the divide between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism been so slender. Two more attacks, in Copenhagen and then London, have eradicated what was left of the distance between these two racist phenomena. On the one hand, there was another inciteful attack from the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) brigade, led by Roger Waters, who managed to sign up hundreds of artists in the UK to a boycott of Israel. And on the other hand, there was another double attack by anti-Western and anti-Semitic terrorism, executed by Omar Abdel-Hamid el-Hussein in Denmark.

BDS is about the silencing of Israelis through boycott. El-Hussein targeted a conference on freedom of speech to silence people through gunfire.

The BDS movement, of which Waters has become one of the world's leading spokesmen, is not seeking a fair settlement of a two-state solution; it is not seeking peace, nor does it seek to end the occupation. It seeks the destruction of Israel, its elimination. Just like that.

The two leaders of the movement, Omar Barghouti and Ali Abunimah, clarify this in the clearest and most vocal way possible. Waters himself, one should note, goes a step further. He is not only anti-Israel, he also spouts anti-Semitic propaganda. In summer 2014, for example, he talked about a Jewish control of Hollywood, which he said was managing to keep people too frightened to join the BDS movement.

To complete the picture, Waters also equates what the Nazis did to the Jews with what Israel is doing to the Palestinians. If the BDS claims are correct, if Israel really has committed the unique historical crime of ethnic cleansing, if Israel is indeed committing genocide, if Israel is based on systematic apartheid, if Israel is indeed a Nazi state, and if the Jews really do control the world, one can understand and even justify terrorism against Israel and the Jews.

The thing is that el-Hussein and the supporters of BDS are products of the same inciteful propaganda and lies. It did not start this week. One inciteful propagandist, Ran HaCohen, described Israel as a state that fulfilled Hitler's vision. Another propagandist, Yitzhak Laor, claimed in a prestigious British journal that Israel does not need gas chambers because it destroys the Palestinians by increasing infant mortality. These are not criticisms, they are blood libels. This is the way of the BDS movement, spreading lies incessantly, from expressions of horror over what happened in 1948 to what is happening these days in Israel.

For the benefit of those who do not know the truth, here are the facts: In 1948, it was the Arabs who declared a war of extermination against the Jews. It was the Jews in Arab countries who suffered from pogroms. It was these Jews who were dispossessed of their property, who were expelled and became refugees. It was the Europeans in those years, with Churchill at their head, who declared repeatedly that the way to resolve conflicts was through the expulsion of populations to create nation-states. The nation state of the Jewish people also arose because the international community had adopted the principle of self-determination. The Arab world persisted in its refusal to recognize Israel. In the 1960s, the rhetoric of all the leaders of the Arab world was stepped up into the near annihilation of Israel.

Financially Strapped Hamas's New Army of Children

...Hamas has made it clear that it plans to send the teenagers to launch rockets and mortars at Israel, with the hope that they would achieve "martyrdom." But this does not seem to bother Abbas or the Palestinian Authority, or even the international community. If and when the International Criminal Court convenes to consider "war crimes" in the Middle East, the first thing the judges should look into is how Hamas sent thousands of Palestinian teenagers to their deaths and, as that was happening, how Abbas and the Palestinian Authority looked the other way.

Khaled Abu Toameh..
Gatestone Institute..
18 February '15..

For the past several months, Hamas leaders have been complaining that they do not have enough money to rebuild the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the last war with Israel.

However, it appears that Hamas does have enough funds to train, arm and indoctrinate thousands of young Palestinian men and boys.

While thousands of Palestinian families who lost their houses during the war continue to live in public shelters throughout the Gaza Strip, Hamas recently established 18 camps for military training.

The Hamas military training camps, under the motto "Vanguards of Liberation," have attracted some 17,000 Palestinian males aged 15-21. The young recruits were trained how to use various types of weapons, including pistols, rifles and mortars. They were also "educated" about the need to eliminate Israel and "restore Palestinian rights."

Samir Abu Aitah, a 15-year-old boy who joined the Hamas-run militia, said: "I now feel very happy because they trained me how to use weapons so that I could fight against the soldiers of the occupation. The Jews have killed thousands of innocent people and that's why I decided to join the path of jihad (holy war) and fight against them with weapons. We want to expel the Jews from our occupied country."

Another 15-year-old boy, Mahmoud al-Kurd, said he really enjoyed being trained with weapons at Hamas's camps. "Our enemy understands only one language – the language of swords."

Al-Kurd's friend, Ismail Elayan, who is also 15, told reporters who visited the training camps: "I decided to join the camp because this will pave the way for liberating all of our country. This is our major goal."

Mohamed al-Najjar, 16, said he joined the training camps because he "loves martyrdom." He added: "I want to pursue the path of resistance until I'm martyred."

Hamas later held a "graduation ceremony" for the young recruits who are expected to serve in its future "Liberation Army." And when Hamas talks about "liberation," it means it wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and replace it with an Islamic state.

Some Thoughts Concerning the White House Freak-Out

...The price that Obama thought was reasonable—sign a piece of paper and smile for the cameras—was simply not a price that Khamenei has proven willing to pay. Why pay something when you can pay nothing? It seems that Obama has finally come to understand that his legacy is in the hands of an obscurantist lunatic. You don’t have to be a high-school psychologist to see why he’s taking it out on everyone around him.

(Behrouz Mehri/AFP/Getty Images)

Lee Smith..
Tabletmag.com..
18 February '15..

It’s hard not to conclude that the White House’s Iran policy is being run by a gaggle of catty teenagers. How else can you explain a smear campaign of personal attacks and insinuations broadcast through friendly reporters and Twitter to discuss a serious policy issue that affects the lives of hundreds of millions of people and the national security of the United States?

In just the last few months, an unnamed White House aide described the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu as “chickenshit” then attacked Netanyahu, falsely, for violating “protocol” when he accepted an invitation from speaker of the House John Boehner to deliver an address before Congress. The White House is equally quick to slime Democrats with whom it disagrees. Just last month, the president himself personally accused Sen. Robert Menendez of being beholden to moneyed interests. According to the leader of his party, the New Jersey legislator wants to impose sanctions on Iran not out of a firm conviction that the Islamic Republic is a threat to American citizens, interests, and allies, born of 20 years of experience in the Senate, but because of pressure from “donors and others.”

“Donors and others” was an intentionally ugly phrase from President Barack Obama because the president meant to question not just Menendez’s personal integrity, but also his loyalty. After all, the reason it’s OK for environmentalist groups to spend millions of dollars to have the president heed their take on the Keystone XL pipeline, but it’s trouble when “donors and others” pay to have their opinions aired about Iran is that those donors might not really have the best interests of this country in mind. It’s no accident that “donors and others” sounds like an etiolated version of “New York moneymen.”

Is the Obama Administration a nest of vicious anti-Semites? Surely not. What seems more likely is that the administration is acting out because it knows it has a weak case. It can’t sell its Iran policy so it’s trying to beat everyone into submission. The fact that much of the administration’s Iran policy and diplomacy, for instance, have been conducted in secret, with its desire to silence even friendly critics, like members of the same political party, is evidence of something just as scary as the casual employment of anti-Semitic tropes. The argument for making a deal with Iran is falling apart, so every time someone steps forward to question the wisdom of the deal, all Obama and his advisers hears is that their policy has no clothes.

She was a human being whose right to life deserved to be respected

...The death of this child wasn’t mourned, let alone mentioned in the Western press. Israel’s critics don’t care about her because she was a “settler” and therefore worthy of being singled out for murder. But, like the Palestinian children who are used as human shields by Hamas terrorists, she was a human being whose right to life deserved to be respected. May her memory be for a blessing and may those responsible for her death and the many other Israelis who have been injured and terrorized in this fashion be punished for their crimes.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
20 February '15..

One of the more familiar themes of those seeking to rationalize or even justify Palestinian rock throwing is to treat it as a largely harmless activity, especially when compared to the force the Israeli Defense Forces can bring to bear when it is engaged in combat. But earlier this week we received yet another reminder of how dishonest these arguments can be. On Tuesday, four-year-old Adele Bitton lost a fight for her life that began in March 2013 when rocks thrown by Palestinians into a car driven by her mother near the West Bank city of Ariel sent the vehicle crashing into a truck. She had been unresponsive since the attack due to neurologic injuries suffered in the attack. But little Adele bravely held on until she finally died of a respiratory infection. She is not the first Jew to be murdered as a result of this practice and probably won’t be the last. Palestinians may treat it like a national sport but rock throwing is a murderous terrorist crime, not a mere protest tactic.

Like the justifications heard for the rockets launched indiscriminately at Israeli cities, towns and villages, apologists for the Palestinians say they should be allowed to throw rocks because they don’t have tanks or an air force. For Palestinians, the sight of a Jew in a car living in a place where Arabs would prefer no Jews to live is enough to justify a rock thrown at a moving vehicle. But whatever one thinks about West Bank settlements, the rocks are lethal weapons. When used in this manner they are a practice that any American who was subjected to similar treatment on a U.S. highway would consider attempted murder.

Netanyahu’s true electoral rival by Caroline Glick

...It is hard to understand either Israel’s election or Obama’s hysterical response to Netanyahu’s scheduled speech without recognizing that Obama clearly feels threatened by the message he will deliver. Surrounded by sycophantic aides and advisers, and until recently insulated from criticism by a supportive media, while free to ignore Congress due to his veto power, Obama has never had to seriously explain his policies regarding Iran and Islamic terrorists more generally. He has never endured a direct challenge to those policies. Today Obama believes that he is in a to-the-death struggle with Netanyahu. If Netanyahu’s speech is a success, Obama’s foreign policy will be indefensible. If Obama is able to delegitimize Netanyahu ahead of his arrival, and bring about his electoral defeat, then with a compliant Israeli government, he will face no obstacles to his plan to appease Iran and blame Islamic terrorism on the West for the remainder of his tenure in office.

Caroline Glick..
Carolineglick.com..
20 February '15..

Officially, the election on March 17 is among Israelis. Depending on how we vote, either Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will remain in office and form the next government led by his Likud party, or Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni will form a government.

But unofficially, a far greater electoral drama is unfolding. The choice is not between Netanyahu and Herzog/Livni. It is between Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama.

As the White House sees it, if Herzog/Livni form the next government, then Jerusalem will dance to Obama’s tune. If Netanyahu is reelected, then the entire edifice of Obama’s Middle East policy may topple and fall.

Secretary of State John Kerry made clear the administration’s desire to topple Netanyahu last spring during his remarks before the Trilateral Commission. It was during that memorable speech that Kerry libeled Israel, claiming that we would automatically and naturally become an apartheid state if we didn’t give Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to the PLO, Jew free, as quickly as possible.

Despite Israel’s venality, Kerry held out hope. In his words, “if there is a change of government [in Israel], or a change of heart, something will happen.”

Shortly after Kerry gave his Israel apartheid speech, his Middle East mediator Martin Indyk attacked Israel and the character of the Israeli people in an astounding interview to Yediot Aharonot.

Among other things, Indyk hinted that to force Israel to make concessions demanded by the PLO, the Palestinians may need to launch another terror war.

Indyk also threatened that the Palestinians will get their state whether Israel agrees to their terms of not. In his words, “They will get their state in the end – whether through violence or by turning to international organizations.”

Indyk made his statements as an unnamed US official. When his identity was exposed, he was forced to resign his position. Following his departure from government service he returned to his previous position as vice president and director of the Brookings Institution and the director of its foreign policy program. Last September, The New York Times reported that the Brookings Institute received a $14.8 million, four-year donation from Qatar, the chief financier of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

This week, Indyk was back in Israel to speak at the annual conference of the Institute for National Security Studies. There he provided us with a picture of what we can expect from the Obama administration in its remaining two years in office if Netanyahu forms the next government.

On the Palestinian front, Indyk warned that Israel shouldn’t be worried about the Palestinians getting an anti-Israel resolution passed in the UN Security Council. Rather, it can expect that the US will join with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council to pass a resolution “against Israel’s will” that will “lay out the principle of a two-state solution.”

As Indyk intimated, Israel can avoid this fate if it elects a Herzog/Livni government. Such a government, he indicated, will preemptively give in to all of the Palestinians demands and so avoid a confrontation with the US and its colleagues at the Security Council.

Indyk explained, “If there is a government in Israel after these elections that decides to pursue a two-state solution, then there is a way forward. It begins with coordinating an initiative with the United States. And then, together with the US, looking to Egypt and Jordan and the resurrection of the Arab Peace Initiative.”

As for Iran, Indyk shrugged at Israel’s concerns over the agreement that Obama is now seeking to conclude with the Iranian regime regarding its nuclear weapons program. That agreement will leave Iran as a threshold nuclear state. Indyk suggested that the US could assuage Israel’s concerns by signing a bilateral treaty with Israel that would commit the US to do something if Iran passes some nuclear threshold.

There are only three problems with such a deal.

Jerusalem and Paris: Abuse and disabuse

...Israelis and those who visit here might be wondering why the reality of people living different styles of life in this city even needs discussing. The NRG video from Paris is the answer. Israel's war with the terrorists is not so different from everyone else's. Israel's ability, learned the hardest-possible way, to safeguard the conditions for ongoing, ordinary, unremarkable lives is also not so different. In fact, compared with how some other countries' capital cities are dealing with their challenges, you might think things are not too shabby here.

Arnold/Frimet Roth..
This Ongoing War..
20 February '15..

Here's TIME's coverage of a thoroughly-viral video that tries to throw some light on what it means to be a Jew living in one Europe's most civilized and appealing capital cities:

Zvika Klein, a journalist who works for the Israeli news outlet NRG, filmed himself walking the streets of Paris for ten hours one day while wearing a yarmulke. The video opens with Klein putting on the traditional Jewish skullcap in front of the Eiffel Tower, before walking around the city. Along the way, Klein experiences what he describes as “fear and loathing,” as the camera catches people spitting on the ground near him, shouting “Viva Palestine” or simply saying, “Jew” or “Juif.” The video has been edited down into a minute and a half and Klein had to go to areas where he, or any outsider, was likely to arouse attention. Klein, who wore a tzitzit or tasseled prayer garment to emphasise his identity, told the BBC that filming took place earlier this month and that while few incidents took place in the central areas of Paris, the outskirts of the city were a different story. “As we went to the suburbs, or certain neighbourhoods in the city, the remarks became more violent,” he said. (Klein also told the BBC that some bystanders also spoke out against the abusive comments he received.) [Watch the Abuse This Jewish Man Gets as He Walks Through Paris | Megan Gibson | TIME | February 17, 2015]

The video itself is posted on YouTube [click] where it has been seen 4.2 million times as of this morning. At a guess, we think some proportion of those viewers are likely to come away mistakenly convinced that if Jewish/Moslem (or Israel/Arab) relations are this bad in the bosom of European culture, they're bound to be as bad or worse in the hateful, uncivilized Middle East.

We live in Jerusalem. It's a city where Jews, Christians, Moslems and a broad spectrum of the faithful and the not-so-focused-on-faith live, visit and bump up against each other daily. You see it on the trams, buses and streets as well as in stores, hospitals and eateries. Spend time in Jerusalem's down-town area and you're struck by the very visible, disproportionate presence of Arabs, particularly since the Jerusalem light rail (tram) network began operating in 2010 after nearly a decade of construction. (Nonetheless it is routinely stoned as it passes through Arab neighbourhoods.)

(Continue)

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 which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work as well as a big vote to follow our good friend Kay Wilson on Twitter, 
.

Why Obama’s Insistence that Iran Freeze Worked Scares Me (and Should Scare You Too!)

Iran has BOASTED that it has dramatically increased its enrichment capacity by producing centrifuges that are generations more advanced and more efficient than the damaged machines they are ostensibly replacing. Iran is PROUD OF ITS R&D ACHIEVEMENTS so that its enrichment capacity can be further increased. That’s PROGRESS!! And that’s the ONLY TECHNOLOGICAL/MECHANICAL feature of Iran’s nuclear program that was subject to any restriction during this period. Iran BOASTS that it has made tremendous progress in its missile program to deliver nuclear warheads anywhere in the world. This week they even announced plans to build a submarine armed with cruise missiles. Nothing has apparently also interfered with Iranian work on the technology for the design and fabrication of nuclear warheads. And that’s why Mr. Obama terrifies me. Because if the “Joint Plan of Action“ has been a fantastic success -- we can’t afford any more such Obama team“successes”.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
19 February '15..

A word to the Obama supporters as we wade through this slugfest over our take on the deal that’s being ostensibly finalized with Iran:

There is something you don’t need any special security clearance for in order to know there’s a serious problem with it:

And that’s the assertion by President Obama that the “Joint Action Plan” that set interim limits on Iran was effective.

This is going to take a couple of sentences – please walk through this with me:

Back on November 23, 2013 The White House Office of the Press Secretary issued a “Fact Sheet: First Step Understandings Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program”

The Fact Sheet claimed that “Iran has committed to halt progress on its enrichment capacity”

But then it DEFINED this as being:
- Not install additional centrifuges of any type.
- Not install or use any next-generation centrifuges to enrich uranium.
- Leave inoperable roughly half of installed centrifuges at Natanz and three-quarters of nstalled centrifuges at Fordow, so they cannot be used to enrich uranium.
- Limit its centrifuge production to those needed to replace damaged machines, so Iran cannot use the six months to stockpile centrifuges.
- Not construct additional enrichment facilities.

Now here is the wording from the actual agreement:

Geneva, 24 November 2013
Joint Plan of Action
…
Iran will continue its safeguarded R&D practices, including its current enrichment R&D practices, which are not designed for accumulation of the enriched uranium.
===

Variation On the Bird-Jew Theme by Sarah Honig

...Our slavish striving not to incur more wrath makes just about as much sense as it did for the two Jews in the following variation on the bird-Jew theme. These Jews faced a firing squad. One of them cursed the executioner who offered him a blindfold. The other was horrified and exclaimed in trepidation: “Why are you making him angry? You’re going to get us killed!”

Shalom Aleichem: although realizing
he’s about to be put to death anyway,
the bird-Jew played along with his
executioner

Sarah Honig..
Another Tack..
19 February '15..

In his autobiography, legendary Yiddish author Shalom Aleichem recounts a harrowing story his grandfather had told him about “the bird-Jew.”

That was how the grandfather called Noah, a pious Jewish innkeeper who lived in constant dread of his Russian landlord, the village squire. Trembling, Noah headed for the manor to renew his lease. His timing was off, because the courtyard was full of festive guests ready to go hunting.

The squire, in a jovial mood, agreed to extend the agreement if Noah would climb the stable roof and pretend to be a bird – so he can shoot him. Fearful of angering the nobleman, Noah obsequiously did his bidding. He clambered up as ordered, bent forward, flung his arms sideways and assumed a birdlike pose. At that instant the squire fired and Noah fell, as any slain bird would.

Although realizing he’s about to be put to death anyway, the bird-Jew played along with his executioner, still absurdly terrified of what might happen if he didn’t. This is the cringing mentality, the fear of giving offense to one’s mortal enemies, which Zionism was established to eradicate.

But not with full success, it seems.

You can take the Jew out of the Diaspora, but not all the Diaspora out of all Jews. Israel’s Left and its media mouthpieces are prime examples. To hear them, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has unpardonably angered the nobleman from the Oval Office. It was Netanyahu’s duty to obediently assume the role of the bird-Jew and self-destruct to appease his boss.

Otherwise, President Barack Obama might become unfriendly.

Of course there’s the minor matter of the boss having been unfriendly to begin with – inimical in fact. But why quibble about sundry details? Who cares what came first – Netanyahu’s effrontery or Obama’s antagonism?

The West’s Israel Obsession and Its Palestinian Victims

...In short, in numerous cases where the West could use its leverage over the PA to better the lot of ordinary Palestinians, it has refused to do so, because it only cares about Israel’s actions. And thus the biggest victims of the West’s Israel obsession have ended up being not Israelis, but the Palestinians themselves.

Evelyn Gordon..
Commentary Magazine..
18 February '15..

I’ve written frequently about how the West’s obsession with Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians helps perpetuate global misery by diverting attention from people in far greater distress (think Syrians or South Sudanese). Yet this obsession also perpetuates suffering among the one group it’s ostensibly supposed to help–the Palestinians. Three Jerusalem Post reports over the last week show why.

One warned that a leading Palestinian hospital is at risk of closure because of a $30 million debt. A major reason for this debt is that for years, the Palestinian Authority has failed to pay Mokassed Hospital for many of the patients it treats. This isn’t because the PA lacked money; it has ample funds to pay generous salaries to thousands of terrorists sitting in Israeli jails. Rather, it’s a matter of priorities: On the PA’s scale of values, paying terrorists for killing Israelis is evidently more important than paying doctors for healing Palestinians.

Almost 40 percent of the PA’s budget consists of foreign aid, with the vast majority coming from Western countries. The West is therefore uniquely placed to pressure the PA to alter its spending priorities. But it has never tried to do any such thing, because it only cares about what Israel does or doesn’t do.

Thus one factor that has recently exacerbated Mokassed’s problems has elicited worldwide condemnations: Israel’s withholding of tax revenues from the PA over the last two months in response to the latter’s egregious violations of the Oslo Accords, including joining the International Criminal Court. Yet even if Israel handed over that money tomorrow, there’s no reason to think the PA would suddenly start using it to pay Mokassed when it never did so in all the years before Israel halted the transfers.

In short, pressuring Israel won’t actually solve the problem; only pressuring the PA would do that. But since the West doesn’t care what the PA does, Palestinian patients will continue to suffer.

Californians and Jewish Palestinians

...So, yes, everyone who resides in the former British Mandate of Palestine is "Palestinian," if we insist on using outmoded and counterproductive terms of expression. But if we must use the term "Palestinian" than we should make it clear that this recent social construction of an identity is entirely "racist" and discriminatory in its essence because those who claim that identity do so in an exclusionary manner. Not that Jews want to be "Palestinian," of course, but everyone who resides in what was the British Mandate of Palestine is, in that sense, a "Palestinian." The local Arabs have no exclusive rights... unless you want to embed their hatred into eternity.

Michael Lumish..
Israel Thrives..
18 February '15..

Here is a question. If there are Palestinian Muslims and there are Palestinian Christians, how is it that there are no Palestinian Jews?

Here is a possible answer.

Prior to 1948 the Jews of the British Mandate of Palestine referred to themselves as "Palestinian" in a manner not unsimilar to the way that I refer to myself as a "Californian." The Jerusalem Post was the Palestine Post, the Israeli Opera was the Palestine Opera and so forth and, therefore, the Arabs did not use that attribution. It was only after the formal establishment of Israel that the Arabs could start comfortably calling themselves "Palestinian" and most did not do so until the late 1960s.

{In this way, I am myself older than are the "Palestinians" as a people.}

So much of our approach to understanding the Arab war against the Jews is trapped in outmoded tendencies of thought that are buttressed by loaded terminology derived from the so-called "Palestinian narrative." "West Bank," for example, always leaps to mind. The very term "West Bank" deletes 4,000 years of Jewish history on Jewish land, yet it is used daily by almost everyone who discusses the ongoing war.

The term "Palestinian" serves a similar function, except inside out and backwards. If "West Bank" erases Jewish history, "Palestinian" invents a distinct nation, with a contrived history, where no such nation was previously understood to exist. "Palestine" is simply a word that the Romans used to rename Judea and Samaria after the Philistines. Once the Romans destroyed and scattered the Jewish remnant in the First Century CE they renamed Judea and Samaria (or Yehuda and Shomron in the Hebrew, if you prefer) after the ancient enemies of the Jewish people.

In the twentieth-century, of course, "Palestine" referred to the British Mandate of Palestine. In this way "Palestine" was merely considered a region or a district and the people who called themselves "Palestinians" were mainly the Jewish residents of the area. The term was never meant to denote a distinct ethnicity or nation any more than, say, Saharan represents a distinct ethnicity or nation.

Or, for that matter, Californian.

Everyone who resides in the state of California is a "Californian." No specific ethnic group who live here get to decide that they, and only those of their choosing, can legitimately refer to themselves as "Californian." Any effort to legalize such ridiculous distinctions would be laughed directly out of the halls of Sacramento.

And the Winner of 'The Most Miserable People in Israel Are....

...The amount of self-loathing shown here is off the charts. But at Haaretz, this is pretty much par for the course. To be fair, the writers for +972 Magazine are just as filled with self-hate as those at Haaretz.

Elder of Ziyon..
Algemeiner.com..
18 February '15..

A poll in 2013 showed that Israelis were the 11th happiest people in the world.

Another survey in 2014 showed that among the 10 countries with advanced economies polled, Israel ranked second in satisfaction with how things were going.

Yet another survey last August showed that 86% of Israelis were satisfied (or very satisfied) with their lives.

But not 100%.

There are some Israelis, a tiny minority, who are miserable, and they spend every waking hour telling the world how awful things are.

Arabs? Mizrahi Jews? Haredim? No, no, and no – their happiness numbers are all better than world averages.

(Continue) 

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 which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work as well as a big vote to follow our good friend Kay Wilson on Twitter, 
.

Can and Will Britain Do the Right Thing on Boycotts?

...The anti-Israel artists-turned-activists insist they won’t be silenced. Very well. But then the rest of us cannot afford to stay silent either about the racism inherent in what these people are doing.

Tom Wilson..
Commentary Magazine..
18 February '15..

There is something fundamentally Stalinist about the notion of a cultural boycott of Israel. The idea that even the free exchange of ideas and expression should be censored by the strictures of ideology is a total affront to all the usual virtues associated with the arts. And unlike the economic boycott of Israel, which can at least claim to have practical objectives—albeit completely indefensible ones—the cultural boycott appears to be aimed at doing nothing more than alienating and ostracizing Israelis by any means possible. So it’s deeply troubling that a group of British artists are now leading just such a new boycott initiative. And yet, there are also encouraging indications that mainstream British society will not stand for this.

Around a hundred allegedly prominent cultural figures have released a letter pledging not to travel to Israel on an official invitation, nor to accept funding from Israel or organizations that are associated with the Israeli government. In addition, this campaign claims to have the supporting signatures of a further 700 artists (almost all entirely unknowns). And naturally along with a few celebrities who are now notorious for their obsession with bashing Israel—such as Roger Waters—there are also several notable Jewish individuals who have been pushed to the forefront of the campaign.

Two Jewish directors who have evidently played a particularly leading role in promoting this boycott are Mike Leigh and Peter Kosminsky. Their involvement gives a pretty clear indication of precisely what kind of movement this is. When asked about Gaza, Leigh once dismissively retorted “I don’t want to know about rockets. What I am concerned with is humanity.” Humanity? Then in what category does Leigh place the people the rockets are aimed at? And then there’s Kosminsky, a remarkable figure to be boycotting Israel when much of his own acclaimed television drama The Promise was shot in Haifa. That by the way was a British TV mini-series that was not only viciously anti-Zionist but in which Jewish characters were without exception either overtly unlikable or ultimately untrustworthy. The non-Jewish characters, through whose eyes Israel’s story was told, were repeatedly let down, manipulated, or betrayed by every single Jew they came across.

These are the luminaries leading the cultural boycott against Israel.

The website of the campaign is also particularly revealing. Most bizarre is the section in which the campaigners insist that they will not be censored. What is boycotting Israeli arts if not censorship? Indeed, the activists pledge their solidarity with London’s Tricycle Theatre, which last year announced that as part of an Israel boycott it would no longer host the Jewish Film Festival. So the last thing that these people can claim is principled opposition to censorship.

As the Threat to Israel is No Longer Theoretical, is an Iranian Assault on Israel Drawing Near?

..."Israel faces a fateful crisis. As much as it feared the Iranian nuclear program, it never imagined that Iran would be standing on its border even before its nuclear agreement with the Americans was complete. The Iranian threat to Israel is no longer theoretical, nor does it have anything to do with Israel's deterrent of using its nuclear weapons, which cannot be used considering the international power balance. The threat has become direct, practical and conventional." One conclusion that is implied, though not spelled out, is the importance to Iran of completing an agreement on its nuclear program that leaves its capability intact. With a capacity to rapidly deploy nuclear weapons, Iran could nullify any Israel threat of using un-conventional weapons with one of its own. One only hopes that MEMRI underestimates the foresight of the Israeli defense establishment and that Israel has been actively developing the means to counter the imminent and escalating Iranian threat.

Steven Stotsky..
CAMERA Snapshots..
18 February '15..

A comprehensive report by MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute) warns of Iran's accelerated preparations for a massive attack on the Jewish state.

According to the report, Iran has established substantial forces within striking distance of Israel's border. The Iranians can call upon regional Shiite forces, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and a new Hezbollah force formed out of local Syrian militias numbering 70,000 that is made up of Syrian Alawites, Shiites and collaborating Sunnis.

However, to supplement this force, Iran has "130,000 trained Iranian Basij fighters waiting to enter Syria."

These forces only represent the first line. Iran, with a population of over 70 million and the allegiance of regional Shiites, has enormous manpower reserves that could be mobilized in time of war.

MEMRI quotes Yahya Rahim Safavi, former IRGC commander and security affairs advisor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who boasted in May 2014: "Our strategic depth reaches to the Mediterranean, and above Israel's head."

Surprise! More Bad Advice From a False Prophet

...Shimon Peres’s lifetime of service to Israel may balance out the disastrous nature of some of the policies he advocated in the historian’s ledger. Prophets may never be honored in their own time, but unfortunately false prophets often are. So long as Peres is treated as an authority by the media and Western governments, his urging of more such fiascos on his successors is not only deplorable, it is downright dangerous.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
17 February '15..

After a career that stretches back to Israel’s birth, 91-year-old Shimon Peres is a revered national institution. His multifaceted work in helping to build the state and especially its defense establishment demands respect and admiration. So, too, does a record of public service that saw him serve in virtually every key position of responsibility in the Israeli government. Thus, when Peres speaks, he deserves a hearing. But as much as he should be considered the last of the country’s living founding fathers, his past performance as a prophet is as bad as his resume is impressive. Thus, when Peres tells us today that European Jews shouldn’t panic, that Middle East peace will happen in his lifetime, and that, far from worrying about Iran, we should think the Islamist regime’s days are numbered, these predictions should be dismissed as not only wrong, but dangerously wrong. The problem with Peres is not just that his optimism is foolish, it’s that all too many people in the corridors of power in Washington and Western Europe think he knows what he’s talking about.

Peres served as the headliner at a Times of Israel event held Sunday night in New York and if his hosts were hoping that he would say something faintly newsworthy, the former Israeli president didn’t disappoint. He opposed Prime Minister Netanyahu’s calls for aliyah from Europe as being “political,” claiming that in doing so he was making Israel “a land of fear” rather than one of “hope.” Not satisfied with that astounding claim, he went on to claim that peace would soon break out in the Middle East, said he “trusted” President Obama to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat, opposed any “unilateral” acts against Tehran by the U.S. or Israel, and predicted that the Islamist regime in Iran would fall: “In 10-15 years, Iran will be out of water and thus out of ayatollahs, in my judgment.”

To which friends of Israel as well as supporters of the West can only say “amen,” even as they shake their heads in disbelief at the absurdity of much of what Peres said.

We might dismiss this as just a little more of the same optimism Peres has been selling for the last 25 years. Such statements are very popular, especially with American Jews who dislike being confronted with the intractability of the Arab-Israeli conflict as well as the awful scenarios that the Iranian nuclear program forces us to contemplate and he has done a brisk business peddling these notions among credible Western audiences for a long time.

But as ridiculous as Peres’s pie in the sky sermons may be, they are neither harmless nor without cost to Israel.

Excellent question. Why are Israel's cultural power centers ceded without putting up a fight?

...It’s true that the left exploits its control of Israel’s cultural power centers to systematically exclude people of the wrong political persuasion. But leftists didn’t achieve their dominance of these power centers by divine decree; they achieved it through decades of intensive effort. So if the right wants to contest left-wing domination of the intellectual and cultural elite, it needs to invest equivalent effort. If it just keeps waiting for the left to share this power of its own accord, it will be waiting until the Messiah comes.

Evelyn Gordon..
Analysis from Israel..
17 February '15..

One of the more perceptive responses to the recent uproar over the composition of the Israel Prize juries came from columnist Ariana Melamed. Responding to the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s complaint that these juries have become a “private playground of the radical Left,” Melamed retorted, “while it’s true that a huge number of leftists have won the prize, that [is] only because the right has failed to establish an alternative to an elite that began turning to the left way back when Begin was giving speeches in city squares.”

Though her explanation of this failure is ludicrous (she essentially argues that great artists and intellectuals almost by definition vote left), the failure itself is undeniable. Because an intellectual or cultural elite isn’t just a random collection of individuals who produce intellectual or cultural output; it’s a power center. And while Israel’s center-right produces both intellectuals and artists, not only has it failed to mobilize these resources to pose any real challenge to the left’s cultural dominance, but for the most part, it hasn’t even tried. Instead, it makes do with whining about the leftist elites’ lock on intellectual and cultural power centers, from universities to the legal establishment to the media to the Israel Prizes.

Last week brought a classic example of this willful refusal to contest control over such power centers: Prof. Asher Cohen’s ouster as head of a professional advisory committee on the school civics curriculum because he ran in Bayit Yehudi’s party primary.

Leftists have always understood that control over the civics curriculum is vital, because it shapes students’ views on critical questions like whether Zionism is essentially just or inherently unjust, whether a “Jewish and democratic” state is a reasonable goal or an oxymoron. Consequently, they have made great efforts to influence this curriculum. Thus, for instance, Cohen’s predecessor, Adar Cohen, approved a civics textbook which not only termed the Law of Return a violation of civil rights (the law exemplifies “a clash between civil liberties … and Israel’s purpose as a Jewish state”), but even claimed that Judaism was originally only a religion, not a nationality (a blatant contradiction of Judaism’s formative text, the Bible, which refers to the Jews repeatedly as “the nation of Israel”).

Former Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, one of the few rightists who do understand the importance of cultural power centers, consequently braved a storm of opposition to replace Adar Cohen with Asher Cohen in 2012. That put the latter in a unique position to shape the views of generations of schoolchildren. But instead, he threw it away for a chance to enter the Knesset, where his influence on future generations would have been incomparably smaller even had he not fared so poorly enough in the primary that he certainly won’t get in.

An Appreciation of the Miracle of Israel

...We knew many cared about the plight of the Syrian people Assad and ISIS are killing with total abandon, but who would have thought Israel, Syria’s pronounced enemy, would care enough to reconstruct the face of an unknown Syrian. Who would have thought, given the hate spread against Jews, their empathy towards people who hate them would deliver such humanity. This is the miracle of Israel in our midst, and the face of Mohammad reconstructed denies the haters the spread of their lies.

Farid Ghadry..
Times of Israel..
17 February '15..

I read a BBC story about an Israeli medical team headed by Dr. Yoav Leiser who reconstructed the face of an injured Syrian at the Rambam hospital in Haifa. Against a background of savage killings, beheadings, and barrel bombs, it is hard to describe the hope such an act of compassion injects into Syria’s theater of death and destruction.

We knew many cared about the plight of the Syrian people Assad and ISIS are killing with total abandon, but who would have thought Israel, Syria’s pronounced enemy, would care enough to reconstruct the face of an unknown Syrian. Who would have thought, given the hate spread against Jews, their empathy towards people who hate them would deliver such humanity. This is the miracle of Israel in our midst, and the face of Mohammad reconstructed denies the haters the spread of their lies.

I doubt if Mohammad, the pseudo name of the injured Syrian patient, wrote the hospital or Dr. Leiser and his brave team asking for a new face. I doubt even more that Mohammad could have foreseen living a normal life if he remained untreated. The fact the hospital offered to reconstruct his face is testimony to how lucky Syria and Syrians are to find Israel as their neighbor to the south. A blessing Assad has done his utmost to keep Syrians from that knowledge.