PM Netanyahu: It is not wise just to annex - IMRA - Dr. Aaron Lerner

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: PM Netanyahu cites American recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. It should be noted that American recognition came 38 YEARS after Israel wisely applied Israeli sovereignty over the Golan WITHOUT waiting for American recognition of the move.]

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA..
08 December '19..
Link: https://www.imra.org.il/story.php?id=73608

"The second opportunity is to finally determine our eastern border, to apply Israeli law on the Jordan Valley and to do so with international recognition, i.e. American recognition. It is not wise just to annex, even though this is an important step which, to my regret, is impossible for a transitional government. For a future government, of whatever kind, it is possible. This is a legal restriction. However, it is not enough.

Israel and the issue of preserving the peace with Jordan - by Caroline Glick

Jordan’s actions over the past several weeks reinforce what has been clear for some time. In its rush to protect Abdullah and the peace, Israel has forgotten to deter Abdullah to preserve the peace. The time has come for Israel to correct its behavior. (Including requiring Jordan to  extradite the terrorist Ahlam Tamimi - YH)

Caroline Glick..
Carolineglick.com..
06 December '19..
Link: http://carolineglick.com/preserving-the-peace-with-jordan/

Tuesday Israel’s Channel 13 reported that President Donald Trump’s Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates held a meeting at the White House last week with the ambassadors of Oman, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Morocco. She reportedly asked the emissaries to check whether their governments are willing to consider signing non-aggression pacts with Israel.

The story, which the White House did not deny indicates the Trump administration has embraced an Israeli initiative, raised publicly last month by Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz. The idea is that through the non-aggression pacts, which are less than peace treaties, Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to sidestep the issue of formal relations, replete with embassy opening ceremonies, and simply engage in open relations, for the benefit of all sides.

This has been the central goal of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s diplomatic strategy. For decades, foreign policy practitioners and activitists in the U.S., Europe and the Israeli left have insisted that peace between Israel and the larger Arab world is impossible so long as Israel has not concluded a peace treaty with the PLO. This view gives the PLO the power to dictate if, when and under what conditions Arab nations will be “allowed” to have normal relations with the Jewish state.

Netanyahu’s goal has long been to rescind the PLO’s veto. By working behind the scenes to build constructive, stable ties with the states of the region predicated on mutual interests, Netanyahu has made great strides in achieving this goal. The very fact that Coates reportedly held the meeting with the Arab ambassadors in the White House is testament to the success of his efforts.

The dimensions of Netanyahu’s achievement are clear when you compare Israel’s constructive, mutually beneficial ties with states with which it lacks formal peace treaties to Israel’s ties with Jordan.

In recent remarks before a Knesset meeting marking the 25th anniversary of the signing of Israel’s peace treaty with Jordan, Netanyahu explained that the basis of Israel’s peaceful relations with Egypt and Jordan is not emotional. The Egyptians and Jordanians haven’t embraced Israel as a neighbor and friend. Rather, Israel’s peace treaties are the products of its deterrent power.

In his words, “As long as we are stronger – they are with us. If we become weaker, then the peace agreements will hang by a thread.”

That means that practically speaking there is little substantive difference between Israel’s ties with say, the UAE, and Israel’s ties with Egypt. So long as both perceive Israel as strong and helpful, and impossible to destroy, they will have good relations with it. If Israel becomes a strategic basket case on the other hand, then those relations will rapidly deteriorate.

In Egypt’s case, the combination of Israeli strength and shared interests in combatting Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood improved relations to an unprecedented degree. Acting on these shared interests and his recognition of Israeli power, Egyptian President Abdel el-Fattah a-Sisi played a significant role in cultivating ties between the Sunni Gulf states and Israel.

Jordan is a different story. While Israel’s relations with Egypt have never been better, its relations with Jordan have never been worse. Indeed, Israel’s informal ties with Saudi Arabia today are arguably better than its formal ties with Jordan. So what is going on? Is Israel doing something wrong? What does it get out of its ties with Jordan to begin with?

The most important advantage Israel gains from its ties with Jordan is a long peaceful eastern frontier. But that peaceful border, which is a function of Israel’s control of the Jordan Valley on the one hand and to Jordan’s actions to secure its border with Israel on the other, predates the peace treaty by more than 20 years. Moreover, given the downward trajectory of bilateral ties, it’s hard to know how long Jordan will remain committed to securing the border. From week to week, Jordan’s growing hostility towards Israel become more difficult to countenance or explain away.

Consider events of the past three weeks.

Who would've thought? Over 50% of British anti-Zionists also agree with anti-Jewish stereotypes - by Elder of Ziyon

...But the 54% of those who claim they are simply "anti-Israel" who also hold traditional antisemitic opinions should (but won't) be a clear indication that the problem on the Left is not simply "anti-Zionism" but also the old fashioned Nazi-style Jew-hatred.

Elder of Ziyon..
04 December '19..

One of the more fascinating parts of the Antisemitism Barometer recently released by the Campaign Against Antisemitism (UK) was that it previously only asked people whether they agreed with stereotypical statements against Jews, but this time also asked questions as to whether they agreed with lies about Israel.

When analyzing the answers to the to sets of questions, there was a significant correlation between the two, even though the people mostly on the Left who have anti-Zionist positions insist that they do not harbor any bit of antisemitism.

There was a large overlap between people who agreed with at least one antisemitic statement and those who agreed with at least one ant-Zionist statement.

The more interesting statistic is that "54% of those respondents who held one or more anti-Zionist antisemitic views also held one or more Judeophobic antisemitic views, and 63% of those respondents who held one or more Judeophobic antisemitic views also held one or more anti-Zionist antisemitic views. "

(Continue to Full Post)

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. 

.

Justice? No. Admitting that Palestinian "return" is meant to destroy Israel? Yes - by Elder of Ziyon

Massad is not interested in justice or mercy. He just wants to see the Jewish state destroyed, and keeping Palestinians in misery is the way he wants to see it done.

Elder of Ziyon..
04 December '19..

Joseph Massad is professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History in the Department of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies at Columbia University.

Even though he has written articles that are so antisemitic as to be indistinguishable from neo-Nazi literature, and even though he is a homophobe who accuses gay activists of colonialism and imperialism, he still gets respect. Which makes one wonder if it is possible for an Arab academic to ever say anything to outrageous for the Left to cheer him.

He just wrote an article for Middle East Eye where he uses his normal antisemitic rhetoric, claiming that Israel's Law of Return is illegal and that Palestinian "right of return" is international law.

The irony is not one that Israel does not recognise the right of refugees to return to their homeland; rather, Israel recognises only the right of Jews - whom it claims, based on its religious and colonial myths, were refugees from Palestine who had lived in exile for 2,000 years - to “return”, while it denies that right to Palestinians, whom it recognises as having been displaced from Palestine.

Of course, no one claims that Jews returning to Israel is based on international law. It is based on Israel's right to create its own immigration policy, as every other country has.

(Continue to Full Post)

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. 

.

Surprised That Palestinian Leaders Sabotage Palestinians' Interests? - by Abu Khaled Toameh

The next time anyone talks about the harsh conditions in the Gaza Strip, the world needs to realize that those who are trying to block aid to their people are the Palestinian leaders.

Abu Khaled Toameh..
Gatestone Institute..
03 December '19..

As Israel continues to study ways of improving the living conditions of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, the leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) continue to sabotage the interests of their own people.

These leaders are opposed to the construction of a new hospital in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. They are also opposed to an Israeli initiative to construct an artificial port off the coast of the Gaza Strip. The PA, in other words, is opposed to any move aimed at alleviating the suffering of its people.

Why? Because the PA hates its rivals in Hamas to the point that it is prepared to punish the Palestinians by imposing economic sanctions on the Gaza Strip. These include cutting off payments to thousands of public employees and needy families.

Another reason: the PA is strongly opposed to any plan in which Israel and the US are involved to help the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip. As far as the PA is concerned, anything good coming from Israel or the US is actually bad, simply part of a larger "conspiracy" against the Palestinians.

The new field hospital in the Gaza Strip is currently being built with the help of Friendship, a US NGO, as well as partial funding from Qatar. The hospital, which is being constructed near the Gaza-Israel border, will provide medical services to thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The construction of the hospital is believed to be in the result of ceasefire understandings reached between Israel and Hamas earlier this year under the auspices of Egypt and the United Nations.

The PA, however, has come out against the construction of the new hospital. Some of its leaders claim that it is part of an Israeli-US "conspiracy" to have the Palestinians pass President Donald J. Trump's yet-to-be-announced plan for peace in the Middle East, also known as the Deal of the Century. Needless to say, the PA is not offering any alternative to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, who are desperate for decent medical care.

(Continue to Full Post)

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. 

.

Palestinian Children: Kill and Be Killed - by Eli E. Hertz

Protecting our children is a universal trait that unites the Family of Man. But in Palestinian society, that standard has been turned on its head.

Eli E. Hertz..
mythsandfacts.org..
02 December '19..

What kind of society consciously and purposely sacrifices its own youth for political gain and tactical advantage?

Today the overwhelming majority of Palestinian Arabs nurture a blind hatred of Israel. They have created a cultural milieu of vengeance and violence – preparing their children to be sacrifices in a death cult.

Palestinian Arabs are killing their youth because they make effective delivery systems for killing Israelis. This tactic encourages Palestinians to enlarge the role of their children by using them as human shields, direct combatants and suicide bombers – glorifying, rather than mourning their deaths.

The death of Arab children on the front lines – extolled as shahids or martyrs – has become a cynical weapon in the arsenal of Arab leaders. They have learned that when their children are killed, they gain world sympathy, as the death of any child is considered a tragedy and consequently portrayed as such in the media, regardless of circumstance.

Israeli winery Psagot and its challenge to Europe’s labeling regime - by Gabriel Groisman

The days when the Jewish people chose to do nothing in the face of discrimination are over. We must fight—even if some in Israel don’t want to.

Gabriel Groisman..
JNS.org..
01 December '19..

After years of European statements, resolutions and directives against the Jewish people’s right to live in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”), eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, on Nov. 12 the European Court of Justice continued the trend, confirming that under longstanding European Union consumer protection law, food and wine from those territories may not be labeled “Made in Israel.” Instead, ruled the court, their labels must indicate that they come from an “occupied territory,” an “Israeli settlement” or the like.

The court reasoned that European consumers must be able to “make informed choices” and that product labels must include “health, economic, environmental, social and ethical considerations, including respect for international law.” The court explained that the term “settlement” must be used “since it refers to a population of foreign origin,” going on to state that the “West Bank” is the territory of “the Palestinian people” and that they “enjoy the right to self-determination” in that territory.

And of course, although E.U. law and the ECJ decision do not relate only to Israel, in practice the only “social and ethical” consideration for which the E.U. is specifically mandating such labeling is the dispute over the pre-1967 territories in Israel.

The underlying case was initiated by Psagot Winery, based in the Binyamin region just minutes outside of Jerusalem. I am a member of the multi-national legal team advising Psagot on this matter. Psagot had challenged the legality of France’s application of these very labeling requirements, which it argued were discriminatory. The French court, in turn, filed an action with the ECJ to seek guidance on the matter.

(Continue to Full Column)

Gabriel Groisman is an attorney at Groisman Law, PLLC based in Miami, Florida, and also serves as the mayor of Bal Harbour, Florida. Groisman is a legal adviser to Psagot Winery and a leading voice in the global fight against anti-Semitism.

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. 

.

York University: Campus Anti-Zionism Seen Through the Eyes of a Syrian Refugee - By Aboud Dandachi

I was about to find out that Canadian students at a top school like York University could hold protests just as serious and menacing as those I had seen in the Middle East

Aboud Dandachi..
Tablet Magazine..
25 November '19..

A refugee from a war-torn country is used to seeing all parts of their homeland become a battleground. Streets. Apartments. Football fields. Even the historic Krak de Chaveliers castle near my native Homs in Syria was fought over by opposing sides in the Syrian civil war. After landing in Canada, however, I hadn’t expected my new country’s universities to be arenas for ideological mobs to shout down and denounce their opponents.

When I made my way up to York University this month on the evening of the 20th, I was blissfully unaware of the university’s status as a hotbed of “anti-Zionist” activism.” I had only arrived in Canada in two years ago through the Refugee Resettlement Program and, still eager to explore, was taking my first trip up to York. I planned to attend an event being held by Herut Canada, who were hosting five members of the Israeli NGO “Reservists on Duty” an organization of Israeli military veterans who travel the world and hold talks and events to “counter the BDS movement and new forms of anti-Semitism erupting on US college campuses.”

I was looking forward to meeting with the Israeli veterans. Such meetings were frowned upon back in Syria—as in, land one in jail kind of frowned upon. Canada was the one truly safe place I had ever lived where a Syrian might meet Israelis without suffering any consequences.

Poor, naïve me.

As I soon learned, York University in Toronto has for some time earned its reputation as a place that is hostile to people holding Zionist and pro-Israeli political standings. A mural currently exhibited at the York University Student Centre garnered headlines for its depiction of a Palestinian with his back turned, face covered in a kafiya, a map of “Palestine” completely erasing Israel, clutching two rocks behind his back while gazing at a construction site. One does not have to be Jewish or Israeli to consider it a menacing piece.

Such sentiments may not be unique to York. Earlier in the week at another of the city’s major academic institutions, the University of Toronto, an official in the Graduate Student Union rejected a request from Hillel to support bringing more kosher food onto the campus, on the grounds that it would be taken as pro-Israel and might run contrary to the “will of the membership,” who had voted to support the BDS movement against Israel.

Back at York, in October Lauren Isaacs, a student at the school and director of the Toronto chapter of Herut Canada, an organization that describes itself as “a Zionist movement dedicated to social justice, the unity of the Jewish people and the territorial integrity of the Land of Israel”, set up an exhibition at York with a sign saying “I’m a Zionist, ask me why.” The reaction from some students was pure, unadulterated rage. Lauren has described on her Facebook page how she was insulted, spat on, called a Zionist-Nazi.

When I arrived at the campus Wednesday night, York’s Vari Hall appeared like what I imagined any Canadian faculty building to look like, with students lounging about with their laptops and headsets. Someone was dancing quite expertly to the sounds of a stereo player.

I decided, with time to kill before listening to speakers that the Syrian Mukhabarat would have had my neck just for meeting, that I would explore the student cafeteria. My refined Middle Eastern palate was unimpressed by the offerings available to the unfortunate York students at the cafeteria, although I did find the diversity of the student body quite impressive.

That was the last moment I would have any positive feelings toward York University.

(Continue to Full Article)

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. 

.

Occupation? There are no Jewish settlers on the West Bank - by Jason D. Hill

If there are occupiers in Judea and Samaria, then we may ostensibly point to them as the war settlers who are the Jordanian-Palestinians. They are the real occupiers and improper settlers of the land.

Jason D. Hill..
JNS.org..
27 November '19..

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced that America would no longer consider civilian settlements in the occupied territories of the West Bank as a violation of international law. Many Israelis have warmly embraced this move as a great moral victory for the Jewish state. And to be sure, Pompeo’s declaration reversed a 40-decade-old policy that regarded the settlements as a violation of international law.

The only proper response to Pompeo’s announcement is that it’s a long time coming. And, along with the U.S. announcement, moral citizens of the world must begin a radical reversal of certain anti-Israeli and anti-Jewry references to the so-called “settlers” of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and what has been mistakenly referred to as “Occupied Territory.”

To begin with, the Israeli Jews are not settlers in Judea and Samaria. From here on, they should be referred to as “heroic pioneers” on re-founded land in Holy Israel.

(Continue to Full Column)

Jason D. Hill is professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago and a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. His areas of specialization include ethics, social and political philosophy, American foreign policy and American politics. He is the author of several books, including “We Have Overcome: An Immigrant’s Letter to the American People.”

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. 

.

It says $5 million for information leading to her arrest or conviction! When do I get my money? - by Dexter Van Zile

And so there you have it. Ahlam Tamimi, a woman who has bragged of murdering Jewish children, lives as a hero, out in the open, in her native Jordan.The $5 million reward for information leading to her arrest doesn’t mean a damn thing. Everyone knows what she did. Everyone knows where she lives. And unless somebody decides to cancel the Jew Exception, Tamimi will evade prosecution for her role in the murder of US citizens.

Dexter Van Zile..
Algemeiner..
27 November '19..

I am going to need a financial adviser.

In a few months I’m going to get a check from the US government for $5 million.

Here’s how it’s going to work. Right after I submit this article to The Algemeiner, I’m going to call the local FBI office and tell whoever picks up the phone that one of their most wanted terrorists, Ahlam Tamimi, is living in Jordan — a country which, conveniently enough, has an extradition treaty with the United States.

“I saw the wanted poster for Tamimi on the Internet,” I’ll tell them. “It says $5 million for information leading to her arrest or conviction! When do I get my money? Do you need my routing number for my bank account?”

Once paperwork is completed and the FBI is alerted to Tamimi’s location, the agency will put a call in to the US State Department which will contact King Abdullah II of Jordan, a moderate opposed to terrorism. And for sure, King Abdullah will do the right thing and put her on a plane to the US. A few days later, I’ll get my money and call my newfound financial advisor who will tell me where to invest so I will never have to work again.

We’re talking inter-generational wealth here!

I just hope that Tamimi’s neighbors in Jordan haven’t called the US Embassy in Amman to try and collect the money! It’s a real possibility. Not only did the FBI produce wanted posters in English, they printed them in Arabic as well. Maybe one of Tamimi’s neighbors in Jordan will turn her in and deprive me of my reward!

Get real.

(Continue to Full Column)

Dexter Van Zile is Christian Media Analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis.

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. 

.

Why this sweeping acceptance of King Abdullah's terror-abetting conduct? - by Frimet Roth

My husband and I, for whom Malki's murder remains the source of deep pain, are utterly baffled by this sweeping acceptance of King Abdullah's terror-abetting conduct. But we will never cease our struggle to arouse national leaders and news industry magnates. After all, like every other murder victim, Malki deserves justice.

Frimet Roth..
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly..
26 November '19..

Here I was, convinced that one of the basic tenets of American democracy is the rejection of monarchic rule. But it seems I erred.

These days, the Jordanian ruler, King Abdullah II, enjoys the fulsome adulation and praise one would expect for a selfless hero who has rescued a dozen children from a blazing building.

He is feted repeatedly at the White House. Bi-partisan delegations from the US Congress fly to his Amman palace to honor him. Leaders of major Jewish organizations attend his conferences and breakfasts. Numerous international media outlets extol his virtue and wisdom.

And last week, the esteemed US think tank the Washington Institute for Near Policy handed him its Scholar Statesman Award.

All of this, in itself, is puzzling.

But what makes it infuriating is that the recipient of that adulation is a dictator - yes, that's what an unelected ruler is, king or not - who has defied the U.S. Department of Justice.

He refuses to extradite one of the FBI's Most Wanted terrorists.

He denies the validity of a treaty of extradition signed and ratified by his father, King Hussein, with the US - a treaty which the US State Department says unequivocally is in force.

Add to that mix the fact that the terrorist whom Abdullah is embracing is the mass murderer and Hamas operative, Ahlam Tamimi, who has boasted numerous times of her evil "achievement" to her admirers on TV broadcasts.

The terror bombing she orchestrated slaughtered sixteen innocents, including eight children. One of those, my precious Malki, was 15 years old when this monster took her from us. Malki was a citizen of the United States.

(Continue to Full Post)

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. 

.

Surprise? Terror group Hamas fully supports Human Rights Watch. (The feeling is mutual.) - by Elder

What's the difference between putting military targets in a civilian neighborhood or in a wedding procession? Yet HRW consistently DEFENDED Hamas for placing arms in civilian neighborhoods. Then, the news came out that Hamas actually instructed civilians to ignore Israeli warnings to evacuate to safer places.

Elder of Ziyon..
25 November '19..

After Israel decided not to renew the work permit of Omar Shakir of Human Rights Watch because of his support for boycotts of Israel, Hamas decided to issue a statement of full support for Shakir and HRW.

Hamas condemns the Israeli occupation’s deportation of the director of Human Rights Watch (HRW) in Palestine Omar Shaker as an act against humanitarian work and human rights. Indeed, the Israeli occupation is unable to see its crimes and violations being documented by such organisations.

This Israeli demeanor aims to block reality and hide its daily violations, including killing and targeting Palestinians, in order to evade accountability.

The Israeli practices should prompt the international community to defend the rights of the Palestinian people and hold the Israeli occupation accountable for the crimes committed against Palestinians.

Hamas spokesperson

Fawzi Barhoum

It's a two way street. Hamas supports HRW because HRW excuses Hamas war crimes.

From a thread I wrote on Twitter on Monday:

It is worth reminding everyone that @HRW doesn't only have a bizarre obsession with demonizing Israel, but that its obsession spills over into excusing Hamas war crimes.

(Continue to Full Post)

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. 

.

The State of Israel continues to survive because we defeated those who sought our annihilation - by Nave Dromi

The Jewish refugees from the Middle East know the truth: Only a sovereign people seen as invincible and indestructible are secure in this region.

Nave Dromi..
JNS.org..
24 November '19..

Ever since the Muslim conquest, occupation and colonization of the Middle East and North Africa in the 7th century, the region’s Jews, among others, lived under a dhimmi status. While the Arabic term “dhimmi” has been translated as “tolerated,” the actual meaning is far more sinister.

Under Islamic law, Jews were less than second-class citizens. They were a brutally oppressed minority, forced to pay special taxes called jizya, frequently forced to place distinctive signs on their houses and clothing and sometimes brutally humiliated in other ways.

The Egyptian-born British author Bat Ye’or wrote that the dhimmi status was a “relationship between conqueror and conquered” and that “the dhimmi peoples bore the role of victim, vanquished by force; and indeed, it is after a war, a jihad, and after a defeat, that a nation becomes a dhimmi people.”

The Jewish people had lived in the region for millennia before being expelled and forced to flee by Arab leaders in the 20th century. Almost a million Jews had lived in the Middle East and North Africa before their status turned from perilous to entirely unwanted around the middle of the past century, most fleeing to the nascent State of Israel.

On Nov. 30, we will remember them on the Day of Commemoration for the Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries and Iran. We will remember their history, culture and tradition, maintained under difficult circumstances, and also their ethnic cleansing.

However, there are also lessons we need to learn.

Those of us whose origins are in lands now known as Arab countries and whose families were dhimmis understand well this history of defeat.

(Continue to Full Column)

Nave Dromi is the director of the Middle East Forum in Israel. She previously served as the manager of the Blue and White Human Rights movement, founded by the Institute for Zionist Strategies. She holds a B.A in Political Science and Middle Eastern studies from Ben-Gurion University and a masters degree from the Ruderman Program for Israel and American Jewish Studies.

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. 

.

Question - Does Jewish morality require Israel to leave the West Bank? - by Evelyn Gordon

So is conditional Zionism anti-Semitic? That depends on the conditions. But nowadays, the key condition usually involves suicidal Israeli concessions to the Palestinians. Thus today’s conditional Zionists require one nation, of all the nations in the world, to destroy itself for another’s sake. And yes, that’s anti-Semitic.

Evelyn Gordon..
Analysis from Israel..
20 November '19..
Link: http://evelyncgordon.com/does-jewish-morality-require-israel-to-leave-the-west-bank/

Zionism seems like a binary proposition: You’re either for or against the existence of a Jewish state. But a third option has become increasingly popular, one I would call conditional Zionism. It holds that a Jewish state has a right to exist, but only if it meets certain conditions.

This position is spreading rapidly among liberal American Jews. In an essay in Haaretz in August, for instance, Abe Silberstein argued that Israel must be coerced into creating a Palestinian state because otherwise, the only alternatives are perpetuating the status quo or a one-state solution—and any moral Jew would have to deem the latter “infinitely preferable,” even though it would probably end Jewish statehood. In other words, the Jewish state’s right to exist depends on satisfying Palestinian (and American Jewish) demands.

This position is also common among non-Jews. For instance, in a September essay for Mosaic on whether a Catholic equivalent to Protestant Zionism was possible, Gavin D’Costa concluded, “If the Israel-Palestinian dispute were to be resolved tomorrow, with the full agreement of both parties and with international support, I believe official Catholic Zionism would emerge quite quickly.” In other words, the Church might someday accept a Jewish state, but only if Israel satisfies Palestinian (and Western) demands.

Ostensibly, such positions could be dismissed as simple anti-Semitism based on Natan Sharansky’s famous 3D test (demonization, delegitimization and double standards). The relevant criterion here is double standards since no other country’s existence is deemed conditional on its behavior, even when said behavior is far worse than Israel’s. For instance, China has occupied Tibet for almost 70 years and currently holds a million Uighurs in detention camps, and many people want these policies stopped. But nobody says a Chinese state has no right to exist without such changes.

Nevertheless, dismissing conditional Zionism as anti-Semitic poses one obvious problem: Any rationale for a Jewish state, whether religious or secular, rests on the Jews’ claim to be a distinct people with a distinct religion, language and culture. And that very heritage deems the Jewish people’s right to remain in its land conditional on its moral behavior. This isn’t a minor detail; it’s a core element of Jewish theology.

The attempted war of extermination against Israelis is more than a land dispute up for negotiation - by Melanie Phillips

The only way to end what is essentially an Arab war of extermination against Israel is to call out the Palestinians on their fundamental lies and to treat them not as statesmen-in-waiting, but as international pariahs.

Melanie Phillips..
JNS.org..
21 November '19..

The statement by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that Israel’s settlements “are not inconsistent with international law” has been predictably greeted with adulation by Israel’s defenders and denunciation by its enemies.

Both sides, however, are once again missing the elephant in the room—as the Trump administration itself is also doing.

In its own terms, the statement certainly should be warmly welcomed. It is a remarkable stand for the truth against the unanimous endorsement by the Western world of the big lie about Israel that has done so much to demonize and delegitimize it: the claim that its occupation of Palestinian territories and Israeli settlements there are illegal.

Every part of that claim—that Israel is in “occupation,” that the land it is “occupying” is “Palestinian territory,” and that Israel is acting illegally—is false.

Israel isn’t occupying the disputed territories because, under international law, only land that belongs to a sovereign state can ever be “occupied,” and the territory in question has never belonged to any sovereign country.

It has never been “Palestinian” territory because it has never belonged to the Palestinians—for the very good reason that there never was a Palestinian nation to which it could have belonged. Palestine was merely the name contemptuously given by the Romans to Judea when they conquered it and tried to erase its Jewish identity.

(Continue to Full Column)

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. 

.

Israel’s Rights in Judea-Samaria Under International Law - by Amb. Alan Baker

Understanding law and justice in the world’s most disputed territories

Amb. Alan Baker..
Tablet Magazine..
18 November '19..

The issue of Israel’s rights in the West Bank under international law, as simple as it sounds, conceals a complex and extensive web of historic, legal, military and political issues that, for many years, have engaged and continue to engage the parties to the conflict, as well as the international community as a whole.

This article will briefly analyze the three major elements defining Israel’s rights in the West Bank.

Firstly, and underscoring all other considerations, are the international legal rights emanating from the indigenous and historic claims of the Jewish people in the area as a whole, virtually from time immemorial. These rights were acknowledged in 1917 by the Balfour Declaration’s promise of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, and subsequently recognized internationally and encapsulated into international law through a series of international instruments.

Secondly, Israel’s legal rights following the 1967 Six-Day War, as the power administering the West Bank areas of Judea and Samaria (so described in the U.N. 1947 Partition Resolution 181), and the concomitant, unique sui genesis status of the area.

Thirdly, Israel’s rights under international law following the 1993-1995 Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO, and especially the 1995 Interim Agreement, (commonly known as Oslo 2) which established a unique territorial arrangement as a form of lex specialis, that divided the control and governance of the West Bank areas between a Palestinian Authority established for that purpose, and Israel.

***

(Continue to Full Article)

Alan Baker currently directs the international law program at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He served as the legal counsel of Israel’s foreign ministry and Israel’s ambassador to Canada. He was involved in all the negotiations on the various agreements between Israel and its neighbors.

The mistaken partisanship of seeing Israel in the context of American politics, not Middle Eastern reality - by Jonathan S. Tobin

Reaction to Trump’s latest decision once again proves that liberal Jewish groups see Israel in the context of American politics, not Middle Eastern reality.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
19 November '19..

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced this week that the United States no longer considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank to be in violation of international law, most Israelis were clearly pleased. But a good portion of American Jews weren’t. This tells us more about American Jewish priorities and indifference to what Israelis think than it does about what’s good for the Jewish state or arguments about international law.

As was the case with the Trump administration’s moves on Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, the Iran nuclear deal and accountability for the Palestinian Authority’s support of terrorism, all the major Israeli political parties greeted the announcement with support. Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his leading rival, Blue and White Party leader Benny Gantz, agreed that America was right to scrap its old insistence that Jews had no right to live outside the 1949 armistice lines.

That latter point is crucial to understanding a basic fact about Israeli political reality. Gantz, who remains locked in a standoff with Netanyahu and his allies over the composition of the next Israeli government, actually received a heads up about Pompeo’s impending statement before it was issued.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman called Gantz and informed him of the decision. Had Gantz expressed opposition or had he asked that the Americans delay their announcement, a State Department source told the press that the administration would have complied with the request. To the contrary, after Pompeo spoke, Gantz approved of his move, saying explicitly that the fate of the “settlements and the residents of Judea and Samaria should be determined by agreements that meet security requirements and that can promote a peace that will serve both sides while reflecting the reality on the ground.”

(Continue to Full Column)

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. 

.

US Secretary of State Pompeo’s statement on Israeli settlements is truly a diplomatic turning point - by Caroline Glick

President Trump's extraordinary gesture of support for Israel and the rights of the Jewish people was evident in the historic statement. The US has rightly concluded that falsely calling settlements illegal is not helpful for peace.

Caroline Glick..
Israel Hayom..
18 November '19..
Link: https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/pompeos-statement-on-israeli-settlements-is-a-diplomatic-turning-point/

Monday will long be remembered as a turning point in Middle East history. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s statement Monday that Israeli settlements are not illegal per se is the most significant shift in US Middle East policy in the past generation. Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital has been a matter of US law since 1996.

There was little interest in Washington in recent years in pressuring Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights. But the issue of the legality of Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), has been the defining issue of much of the international discourse on Israel for a generation.

In the vast majority of cases, the discourse has revolved around the widely held allegation – with no basis in actual law – that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria are illegal.

This allegation has served as the justification for a continuous barrage of condemnations of Israel in the international arena and for anti-Israel legal verdicts in international courts including the International Court of Justice at the Hague in 2004 and the European Court of Justice last week.

The unsupported allegation that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria are illegal was also the basis for UN Security Council Resolution 2334 from 2016 and is a basis of the International Criminal Court’s ongoing probes of Israelis.

Pompeo made two revolutionary assertions in his statement. First, he said that “after carefully studying all sides of the legal debate,” like the Reagan administration before it, the Trump administration has concluded, “The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.”

Second, Pompeo noted, the near ubiquitousness of the false assertion that settlements are illegal has not advanced the prospects for peace. To the contrary, it has harmed the chances of getting to peace.

In his words, “calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law has not advanced the cause of peace.”

And of course, it hasn’t. Placing a lie in the center of the discourse on the Palestinian conflict with Israel is no way to promote understanding and coexistence.

In the interest of promoting peace, Pompeo instead told the truth. Not only are Israeli settlements not illegal. Pompeo noted that they are arguably more justified than civilian settlements built in other disputed territories.


In his words, the administration’s determination “is based on the unique facts, history, and circumstances presented by the establishment of civilian settlements in the West Bank.” That is, it is based on the historic ties of the Jewish people to Judea and Samaria. These ties lay at the heart of Jewish history and religion.

Let's be clear about the anti-Israel organizations in Europe that support the BDS movement - by Itai Reuveni

We must ask, are assisting and funding boycott campaigns against Israel, harming Palestinian employment, discriminating on the basis of nationality and seeking to return the Golan Heights to terrorist groups in control of what was once Syria – also technical matters and part of the EU's consumer culture?

Itai Reuveni..
Israel Hayom..
17 November '19..
Link: https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/paving-the-way-to-total-boycott/

The European Union's supreme court, which now requires all 28 member states to label Israeli products manufactured in Judea and Samaria, yet again bared its peculiar list of priorities in the areas of human rights and international law for all the world to see.

The Europeans and the organizations they fund have never labeled products from any of the world's other disputed areas, such as northern Cyprus, Western Sahara and dozens others, while EU member states even transfer money to and invest in these places. Every inquiry into other conflicts, unlike the Arab-Israeli conflict, has ended in the rejection of the idea to mark certain products.

This is because the European Court of Justice has direct links to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel. This is more than a "classification" – all boycotts begin by singling out those designated to be ostracized. Proof of this can be found in the series of measures that have been implemented by EU-funded organizations, which have always argued that marking goods is merely the start of an evolving boycott campaign – with clear and intended ramifications for the Israeli economy inside the Green Line.

A study conducted by Israeli group NGO monitor points to a broad coalition of rights groups working to carry out an ideology of boycotting through product labeling. As early as 2012, for example, the Interchurch Organization for Development Cooperation asked for EU funding to "precisely mark settlement products as a first step," and suggested intensifying the sanctions until "the complete prohibition of settlement imports… and the prohibition of money transfers to settlements and related activities." The code-speak "related activities," incidentally, also includes Israeli and international business initiatives that have nothing to do with the settlements.

Thirteen years later, firing Qassam rockets at a civilian population is still a war crime

For many years the State of Israel and its security forces have found themselves in a constant battle with the NGO B'Tselem, concerning the protecting of Israeli citizens from terrorism and terrorist entities. The widely held belief that B'Tselem's approach endangers the lives of both Israeli civilians as well its security personnel is held by many, so even in the best of cases B'Tselem's opinions are quite often rejected out of hand. However, this piece written in 2006, does clearly raise and address the rocket fire from Gaza, and label it for what it is. Interesting sidepoint that back in 2006 the Palestinian Authority was considered to be the entity to be held accountable. Today, this would include Hamas or any other terrorist entities that proudly proclaim responsibility for rocket launches.

Firing Qassam rockets at a civilian population is a war crime

B'Tselem
17 April 2006
Link: https://www.btselem.org/israeli_civilians/20060417_qassam_missiles

From June 2004 to the end of March 2006, thirteen civilians, five of them minors, were killed by Qassam rockets that Palestinians fired into Israel and at Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. Eight of the victims were Israeli, four were Palestinian, and one a Chinese national. The rocket attacks also caused substantial property damage.

The Palestinian organizations responsible for the rocket-fire state openly that one of their aims is to kill Israeli civilians. Deliberate attacks on civilians are both immoral and illegal. The willful killing of civilians is classified as a grave breach in the Fourth Geneva Convention and as a war crime that is unjustifiable under any circumstances. Furthermore, Qassam rockets are themselves illegal, even when aimed at military objects, because the rockets are so imprecise, and thus endanger civilians situated in the area in which the rockets are fired or where they land. Therefore, the persons involved in firing the rockets violate the requirements of distinction and proportionality, which are fundamental principles of international humanitarian law.

To aggravate matters, many of the rockets are fired from, or near, areas in which civilians live. International humanitarian law prohibits attacks from inside or near the homes of civilians, and from using civilians as human shields. IHL's objective is to reduce to a minimum injury to civilians during an anticipated military response by the other side. The Palestinian organizations that carry out the attacks against Israel from within or near a populated area breach this rule; in doing so, the organizations show their indifference to the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives.