Yesterday Human Rights watch sharply criticized Hezbollah for it's deliberate rain of thousands of missiles on civilian targets in Israel during the war last summer. Many of the missiles were packed with ball bearings designed to kill or maim innocent people. HRW correctly termed this a "war crime". This follows on a Human Rights Watch report last October citing Hezbollah's use of cluster bombs.
Human Rights Watch deserves credit for finally deciding that a war crime is a war crime no matter which side commits the act. Of course both Hezbollah and the Lebanese government reacted with outrage and tried to silence the report.
There was a time I would have accused Human Rights Watch of anti-Israel bias but lately they have been remarkably balanced and fair in their reporting. Perhaps it's time they took a good long look at what the various and sundry Palestinian terrorist groups are doing. As I posted earlier another rocket landed near Sderot today. How many people have died from Qassam rocket fire aimed at the innocent civilians of Sderot? How many have fled their homes? How long has this been going on? Isn't it time Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the various other Palestinian groups who indiscriminately attack Israel civilians be held accountable?
Digg It!
Thursday, August 30, 2007
A 15 Year Old Suicide Bomber
IDF troops from the Golani Brigade arrested a 15 year old Palestinian boy in Gaza. The teenager had two large explosive devices strapped to his body. Thankfully soldiers convinced this would-be 15 year old suicide bomber to surrender and nobody died.
In 2005 Amnesty International did take up the issue of the constant use of child soldiers by virtually all of the Palestinian terrorist groups to little or no press coverage. If an Israeli soldier sneezes in the wrong direction it seems there is an international outcry. Why is there no outrage at this clear and repeated violation of international law? Why isn't the sending of Palestinian children to their death une cause célèbre?
Meanwhile, elsewhere in Gaza, Palestinian terrorists launched a Qassam rocket which landed near Sderot.
Digg It!
In 2005 Amnesty International did take up the issue of the constant use of child soldiers by virtually all of the Palestinian terrorist groups to little or no press coverage. If an Israeli soldier sneezes in the wrong direction it seems there is an international outcry. Why is there no outrage at this clear and repeated violation of international law? Why isn't the sending of Palestinian children to their death une cause célèbre?
Meanwhile, elsewhere in Gaza, Palestinian terrorists launched a Qassam rocket which landed near Sderot.
Digg It!
Thursday, August 23, 2007
CNN's Two Hour Attack On Israel
On Tuesday night CNN had a two hour "Special Investigations" piece called "G-d's Jewish Warriors" hosted by Christiane Amanpour. Rather than being a piece of investigative journalism it was, in fact, a smear campaign attacking Israel, American Jewish supporter of Israel, and Orthodox Judaism in general.
There is no doubt that Jewish extremism exists. It is, however, embraced by very few religious Jews and is unrepresentative of Judaism or Israel. You'd never know it from watching the piece. I would never complain about an objective or accurate report on Jewish extremists within the settler movement in Israel or anywhere else for that matter. There was nothing objective about this report.
Former President Jimmy Carter was trotted out and his now infamous book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" was touted. No mention was made of how many members of the Carter Center's Board of Directors resigned over that book was made. No other former President with different views appeared other than in old film of speeches opposing Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Gaza was rarely mentioned and Israel's unilateral withdrawals from Gaza and southern Lebanon were ignored. The terrorism that followed those withdrawals, the daily rocket fire on Sderot or Hibullah's rain of thousands of missiles on northern Israel last year wasn't mentioned either. Never mind that the fear of such attacks on Israel's main population centers from Judea and Samaria was the reason Prime Minister Olmert's plans to withdraw from the West Bank was scuttled. Watching the report one rather got the impression that all Israeli governments, including the current one, intended to hold onto all of Judea and Samaria forever.
Theodore Meron was trotted out to explain his view that settlements violate international law. Israel's view that the territories are "disputed" rather than "occupied" and that Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions don't apply since no prior Palestinian state ever existed was given exactly one dismissive sentence. The fact that borders have never been agreed by anyone was ignored. For the majority of the piece the idea that Israeli settlements, including any and all construction in east Jerusalem, are illegal was taken as an indisputable fact. It clearly is not. The fact that Kfar Etzion was Jewish before 1948 was mentioned as a reason for reestablishing the community was one of the very few bright spots in this abysmal program.
John Mearsheimer explained his view of how the American Jewish lobby unduly influences American foreign policy at length. No credible opposing view was given and the long list of distinguished academics who denounced the Mearsheimer-Walt report or claimed that it failed to meet any acadamic standards were not mentioned. The fact that Christopher Hitchens, a long time critic of Israel, claims that Mearsheimer and Walt overstated the influence of the pro-Israel lobby certainly wasn't worthy of inclusion. It didn't fit CNN's agenda. American Jewish support of Israel was shown to be support of settlements, and by extension, support of extremism or Kach or terrorism.
Every time someone was shown as an avid supporter of Israel or someone was shown moving into the territories a point was made of telling the viewer that they were Orthodox. The impression the CNN report gave was that Orthodox Jews were unanimous, or at least nearly so, in support of settlement activity. One also got the impression that all settlers are religious, probably fanatically so. No mention was made of the fact that religious Jews cover the entire political spectrum. No mention was made of the fact that many who bought homes in Judea and Samaria did so because housing was inexpensive there. There was certainly no coverage of large communities in Judea and Samaria like Ariel, with it's large Russian immigrant population that is overwhelmingly secular. You certainly would never know that most settlers are absolutely horrified by rare acts of Jewish terrorism just like everyone else from watching this program. Indeed, the report gave the impression that Jewish terrorism by settlers is common, widely supported, and a serious problem. After all, CNN is giving Jewish terrorism and Islamic terrorism equal coverage, aren't they?
In the latter part of the two hour report the attack shifted to "G-d's Christian Warriors" who support Israel. Christian Zionists were painted as extremists supporting other extremists. They too, it seems, have undo influence in Washington. Never mind that evangelical Christians make up somewhere around a quarter of the American population and are a truly huge voting bloc, unlike American Jews. Certainly no mention was made of the fact that a rather large majority of Americans, religious or not, support Israel according to every poll taken on the subject this century.
The program presented those who called President Carter or Dr. Mearsheimer antisemitic in a disparaging way. Yet, with it's broad attacks and generalizations not only about Israeli settlers, but about Israel as a whole, about the American Jewish community, and about Orthodox Judaism I couldn't help but feeling that the report was, indeed, truly antisemitic. This from someone who has never called President Carter or Dr. Mearsheimer antisemites.
I talked about "G-d's Jewish Warriors" with a friend this morning. Her response: "What did you expect?" Regarding Christiane Amanpour she added: "Her views are well known." Indeed. If you want a horribly biased report send a truly biased reporter.
I know the blogosphere, expecially Jewish bloggers, are writing extensively about the CNN attack on Israel. I haven't read any of it yet. I wanted this piece to be based solely on my own impressions of the program. I didn't want to be influenced by anyone else's views before I wrote this.
I guess I have to once again add CNN to the BBC as an organization hopelessly biased against Israel. This report was something I would have expected of Al Jazeera. I had hoped CNN had learned from it's past mistakes and repeated apologies and would have tried to really have given a balanced report. Silly me.
Digg it!
There is no doubt that Jewish extremism exists. It is, however, embraced by very few religious Jews and is unrepresentative of Judaism or Israel. You'd never know it from watching the piece. I would never complain about an objective or accurate report on Jewish extremists within the settler movement in Israel or anywhere else for that matter. There was nothing objective about this report.
Former President Jimmy Carter was trotted out and his now infamous book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" was touted. No mention was made of how many members of the Carter Center's Board of Directors resigned over that book was made. No other former President with different views appeared other than in old film of speeches opposing Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Gaza was rarely mentioned and Israel's unilateral withdrawals from Gaza and southern Lebanon were ignored. The terrorism that followed those withdrawals, the daily rocket fire on Sderot or Hibullah's rain of thousands of missiles on northern Israel last year wasn't mentioned either. Never mind that the fear of such attacks on Israel's main population centers from Judea and Samaria was the reason Prime Minister Olmert's plans to withdraw from the West Bank was scuttled. Watching the report one rather got the impression that all Israeli governments, including the current one, intended to hold onto all of Judea and Samaria forever.
Theodore Meron was trotted out to explain his view that settlements violate international law. Israel's view that the territories are "disputed" rather than "occupied" and that Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions don't apply since no prior Palestinian state ever existed was given exactly one dismissive sentence. The fact that borders have never been agreed by anyone was ignored. For the majority of the piece the idea that Israeli settlements, including any and all construction in east Jerusalem, are illegal was taken as an indisputable fact. It clearly is not. The fact that Kfar Etzion was Jewish before 1948 was mentioned as a reason for reestablishing the community was one of the very few bright spots in this abysmal program.
John Mearsheimer explained his view of how the American Jewish lobby unduly influences American foreign policy at length. No credible opposing view was given and the long list of distinguished academics who denounced the Mearsheimer-Walt report or claimed that it failed to meet any acadamic standards were not mentioned. The fact that Christopher Hitchens, a long time critic of Israel, claims that Mearsheimer and Walt overstated the influence of the pro-Israel lobby certainly wasn't worthy of inclusion. It didn't fit CNN's agenda. American Jewish support of Israel was shown to be support of settlements, and by extension, support of extremism or Kach or terrorism.
Every time someone was shown as an avid supporter of Israel or someone was shown moving into the territories a point was made of telling the viewer that they were Orthodox. The impression the CNN report gave was that Orthodox Jews were unanimous, or at least nearly so, in support of settlement activity. One also got the impression that all settlers are religious, probably fanatically so. No mention was made of the fact that religious Jews cover the entire political spectrum. No mention was made of the fact that many who bought homes in Judea and Samaria did so because housing was inexpensive there. There was certainly no coverage of large communities in Judea and Samaria like Ariel, with it's large Russian immigrant population that is overwhelmingly secular. You certainly would never know that most settlers are absolutely horrified by rare acts of Jewish terrorism just like everyone else from watching this program. Indeed, the report gave the impression that Jewish terrorism by settlers is common, widely supported, and a serious problem. After all, CNN is giving Jewish terrorism and Islamic terrorism equal coverage, aren't they?
In the latter part of the two hour report the attack shifted to "G-d's Christian Warriors" who support Israel. Christian Zionists were painted as extremists supporting other extremists. They too, it seems, have undo influence in Washington. Never mind that evangelical Christians make up somewhere around a quarter of the American population and are a truly huge voting bloc, unlike American Jews. Certainly no mention was made of the fact that a rather large majority of Americans, religious or not, support Israel according to every poll taken on the subject this century.
The program presented those who called President Carter or Dr. Mearsheimer antisemitic in a disparaging way. Yet, with it's broad attacks and generalizations not only about Israeli settlers, but about Israel as a whole, about the American Jewish community, and about Orthodox Judaism I couldn't help but feeling that the report was, indeed, truly antisemitic. This from someone who has never called President Carter or Dr. Mearsheimer antisemites.
I talked about "G-d's Jewish Warriors" with a friend this morning. Her response: "What did you expect?" Regarding Christiane Amanpour she added: "Her views are well known." Indeed. If you want a horribly biased report send a truly biased reporter.
I know the blogosphere, expecially Jewish bloggers, are writing extensively about the CNN attack on Israel. I haven't read any of it yet. I wanted this piece to be based solely on my own impressions of the program. I didn't want to be influenced by anyone else's views before I wrote this.
I guess I have to once again add CNN to the BBC as an organization hopelessly biased against Israel. This report was something I would have expected of Al Jazeera. I had hoped CNN had learned from it's past mistakes and repeated apologies and would have tried to really have given a balanced report. Silly me.
Digg it!
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Letting The Truth Out Into The Arab Media
What do you do when you are the General Manager of a popular Arabic satellite television channel if you understand the real reasons so many Palestinians live in misery? The station you manage, the popular weekly news magazine you once edited, indeed your entire career as a highly successful and respected journalist in the Arab world has been for organizations who featured blaming Israel for the plight of the Palestinians. Now it's time to tell the world, honestly and truthfully, that what the Arabs have done to their Palestinian brethren is far worse and that Israel's Palestinian-Arab minority actually fares pretty well. How do you do it?
I suppose this was the challenge facing Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, the Dubai-based General Manager of al-Arabiya. On June 9 he wrote an amazing piece in Asharq Al-Awsat, the news magazine where he was once Editor-in-Chief. The first paragraph is doctrinaire: praising the fairness of the Palestinian cause and condemning occupation. The rest of it, though, is a revelation considering the source and is very much part of the sea change in Arab thinking I have been blogging about. Here are some excerpts:What is happening in Lebanon's Nahr al Bared camp today is just one such example where battles have raised an overwhelming number of questions: who are these people? How long have they lived in the camp and how? What are their rights?
[...]
Some Arab countries “hosting” refugees ban them from leaving [camps], from occupying a large number of positions and deny them any other legal rights. Some of them have to jump over walls and sneak out to complete their chores or to breathe and experience the outside world. One can imagine these randomly and poorly built houses during the winter chill and sweltering heat of the summer among the sewage and insufficient services. It is a shame.
[...]
Our insistence to lock the Palestinians in camps and treat them like animals in the name of preserving the issue is far worse a crime than Israel stealing land and causing the displacement of people. The 60 year-old camps only signify our inhumanity and double standards. Israel can claim that it treats the Palestinians better than their Arab brothers do. It gives citizenship to the Palestinians of 1948 as well as the right to work and the right to lead a somewhat normal life OK, the bit about Israel "stealing land" is traditional Arab rhetoric without historical basis, but the rest, a stinging indictment of the Arab treatment of Palestinian refugees and the 60 year perpetuation of their refugee status for political reasons is right on the mark. It's something I would expect from an Israeli writer. It is tremendously powerful coming from Mr. Al-Rashed.
Digg it!
I suppose this was the challenge facing Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, the Dubai-based General Manager of al-Arabiya. On June 9 he wrote an amazing piece in Asharq Al-Awsat, the news magazine where he was once Editor-in-Chief. The first paragraph is doctrinaire: praising the fairness of the Palestinian cause and condemning occupation. The rest of it, though, is a revelation considering the source and is very much part of the sea change in Arab thinking I have been blogging about. Here are some excerpts:
[...]
Some Arab countries “hosting” refugees ban them from leaving [camps], from occupying a large number of positions and deny them any other legal rights. Some of them have to jump over walls and sneak out to complete their chores or to breathe and experience the outside world. One can imagine these randomly and poorly built houses during the winter chill and sweltering heat of the summer among the sewage and insufficient services. It is a shame.
[...]
Our insistence to lock the Palestinians in camps and treat them like animals in the name of preserving the issue is far worse a crime than Israel stealing land and causing the displacement of people. The 60 year-old camps only signify our inhumanity and double standards. Israel can claim that it treats the Palestinians better than their Arab brothers do. It gives citizenship to the Palestinians of 1948 as well as the right to work and the right to lead a somewhat normal life
Digg it!
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
A Lebanese-American Professor On The Plight of the Palestinians
Here are excerpts from an op-ed in yesterday's New York Times written by Dr. Fouad Ajami, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies:The Palestinian ruin was a long time in coming. No other national movement has had the indulgence granted the Palestinians over the last half-century, and the results can be seen in the bravado and the senseless violence, in the inability of a people to come to terms with their condition and their needs.
The life of a Palestinian is one of squalor and misery, yet his leaders play the international game as though they were powers. An accommodation with Israel is imperative — if only out of economic self-interest and political necessity...
...it was too much to ask of Mr. Arafat to return to his people with a decent and generous compromise, to bid farewell to the legend that the Palestinians could have it all “from the river to the sea.” It was safer for him to stay with the political myths of his people than to settle down for the more difficult work of statehood and political rescue.
For their part, the Arab states have only compounded the Palestinian misery. The Arab cavalry was always on the way, the Arab treasure was always a day away, and there was thus no need for the Palestinians to pay tribute to necessity. In recent years, the choice was starkly posed: it was either statehood or a starring role on Al Jazeera, and the young “boys of the stones” and their leaders opted for the latter.
[...]
For decades, Arab society granted the Palestinians everything and nothing at the same time. The Arab states built worlds of their own, had their own priorities, dreaded and loathed the Palestinians as outsiders and agitators, but left them to the illusion that Palestine was an all-consuming Arab concern.
Now the Palestinians should know better. The center of Arab politics has shifted from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, a great political windfall has come to the lands of the Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula, vast new wealth due to the recent rises in oil prices, while misery overwhelms the Palestinians. No Arabs wait for Palestine anymore; they have left the Palestinians to the ruin of their own history.
The rise of Hamas in Gaza should concentrate the minds of the custodians of power in the Arab world. Palestine, their old alibi, the cause with which they diverted the attention of their populations from troubles at home, has become a nightmare in its own right. An Arab debt is owed the Palestinians — the gift of truth and candor as well as material help.
Arab poets used to write reverential verse in praise of the boys of the stones and the suicide bombers. Now the poetry has subsided, replaced by a silent recognition of the malady that afflicts the Palestinians. Except among the most bigoted and willful of Arabs, there is growing acknowledgment of the depth of the Palestinian crisis. And aside from a handful of the most romantic of Israelis, there is a recognition in that society, as well, of the malignancy of the national movement a stone’s throw away.
The mainstream in Israel had made its way to a broad acceptance of Palestinian statehood... Dr. Ajami is nothing if not pessimistic. The U.S. and Prime Minister Olmert pin their hopes on Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whom Dr. Ajami calls "a decent man". Still, he sees far too little difference between Hamas and Fatah and sees Abbas as having far too little power to see any salvation for the Palestinian people.
I fear Dr. Ajami is right. However, as I said in my previous post quoting Saeb Erekat, I am seeing more and more Arab voices who are seeing the situation for what it really is. The only hope is for a change not only in Palestinian thinking but across the wider Arab world.
Digg It!
The life of a Palestinian is one of squalor and misery, yet his leaders play the international game as though they were powers. An accommodation with Israel is imperative — if only out of economic self-interest and political necessity...
...it was too much to ask of Mr. Arafat to return to his people with a decent and generous compromise, to bid farewell to the legend that the Palestinians could have it all “from the river to the sea.” It was safer for him to stay with the political myths of his people than to settle down for the more difficult work of statehood and political rescue.
For their part, the Arab states have only compounded the Palestinian misery. The Arab cavalry was always on the way, the Arab treasure was always a day away, and there was thus no need for the Palestinians to pay tribute to necessity. In recent years, the choice was starkly posed: it was either statehood or a starring role on Al Jazeera, and the young “boys of the stones” and their leaders opted for the latter.
[...]
For decades, Arab society granted the Palestinians everything and nothing at the same time. The Arab states built worlds of their own, had their own priorities, dreaded and loathed the Palestinians as outsiders and agitators, but left them to the illusion that Palestine was an all-consuming Arab concern.
Now the Palestinians should know better. The center of Arab politics has shifted from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, a great political windfall has come to the lands of the Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula, vast new wealth due to the recent rises in oil prices, while misery overwhelms the Palestinians. No Arabs wait for Palestine anymore; they have left the Palestinians to the ruin of their own history.
The rise of Hamas in Gaza should concentrate the minds of the custodians of power in the Arab world. Palestine, their old alibi, the cause with which they diverted the attention of their populations from troubles at home, has become a nightmare in its own right. An Arab debt is owed the Palestinians — the gift of truth and candor as well as material help.
Arab poets used to write reverential verse in praise of the boys of the stones and the suicide bombers. Now the poetry has subsided, replaced by a silent recognition of the malady that afflicts the Palestinians. Except among the most bigoted and willful of Arabs, there is growing acknowledgment of the depth of the Palestinian crisis. And aside from a handful of the most romantic of Israelis, there is a recognition in that society, as well, of the malignancy of the national movement a stone’s throw away.
The mainstream in Israel had made its way to a broad acceptance of Palestinian statehood...
I fear Dr. Ajami is right. However, as I said in my previous post quoting Saeb Erekat, I am seeing more and more Arab voices who are seeing the situation for what it really is. The only hope is for a change not only in Palestinian thinking but across the wider Arab world.
Digg It!
Palestinian Suffering: Putting the Blame Where It Belongs
Has anyone else noticed this? There is a real sea change in the discussion of Palestinian suffering in the wake of recent events in Lebanon and Gaza. Yes, I know the expression 'sea change' is grossly overused, but I do mean it in the way Shakespeare first used it: a truly profound change.
For years various Israeli and pro-Israel writers, myself included, have pointed out that the Palestinians could have had a prosperous, independent state years ago. We have pointed out that entirely for political reasons the Palestinian people have endured suffering and oppression not so much at Israel's hands but rather at the hands of their fellow Arabs and their own leadership. When Israeli actions have harmed the Palestinian populace they were almost always as a result of the need to protect Israeli citizens from Palestinian terrorist attacks.
What is truly new is the significant number of Arab and even Palestinian writers and commentators who are suddenly seeing Palestinian suffering in the same way or perhaps are finally publicly willing to admit that it really isn't all Israel's fault. I will be making quite a number of postings featuring Arab and Palestinian voices on the subject of the exploitation of the Palestinian people in coming days.
Let me begin with someone who is well known to most people who have followed the conflict in the region in recent years. Saeb Erekat was the Palestinian negotiator during past peace talks and is a prominent Fatah member. Here is part of an interview he gave to Wolf Blitzer on CNN's Late Edition on June 17:I will tell you something, Wolf. I think -- there is a saying in my mind that this region has never missed an opportunity to exploit Palestinians without exploiting them. I really believe that we are being exploited. I really believe that is what happening in Nahr el-Bared in northern Lebanon, it is part of what is happening in Gaza, what is happening in the bigger picture in this region.
Now, Wolf, do I have evidence to refer to this country or to this group or that? No, I don't. But I know when I see the streets of Gaza, when I see these gunmen, when I see these hundreds of millions of dollars at a time when President Abbas could not pay salaries for our police forces, when our police forces did not have bullets or guns to maintain the rule of law and public order, where did these hundreds of millions of dollars, where did these guns and arms and state-of-art machine guns and heavy equipment come from?
I don't have any evidence, and without evidence, I will not name anybody. But all I can tell you, Gaza is very -- the poorest area on Earth. Gaza doesn't have the means for these hundreds of millions of dollars and these weapons and equipment.
And I believe what is happening in this region is being now played in the streets of Gaza and the streets of Nahr el-Bared in my name, in the name of the Palestinians. We are being exploited again. I'll say what Mr. Erekat was unwilling to say: Iran and Syria, plus radical jihadists and Islamists, both home grown and foreign. That's who is exploiting and oppressing the Palestinians this time. Others in the Arab world have done the same when it was convenient for them with the Palestinians as the perpetual victims for nearly 60 years.
It is easy for Israel's detractors to dismiss me as a Zionist, as the daughter of an Israeli, as a biased voice. How do you dismiss Saeb Erekat, an ardent Palestinian nationalist who has argued the Palestinian cause for years, and others like him? I don't think you can.
The question that remains is whether or not this sort of change of Arab perspective will last. If not then we're back at square one. If so then this is a true sea change in Arab thinking . It offers the real possibility of Arabs and Israelis, specifically Palestinians and Israelis, finding common ground to stand together against a common enemy that threatens us both.
Am I dreaming? Maybe, but then again, maybe not. Only time will tell.
For years various Israeli and pro-Israel writers, myself included, have pointed out that the Palestinians could have had a prosperous, independent state years ago. We have pointed out that entirely for political reasons the Palestinian people have endured suffering and oppression not so much at Israel's hands but rather at the hands of their fellow Arabs and their own leadership. When Israeli actions have harmed the Palestinian populace they were almost always as a result of the need to protect Israeli citizens from Palestinian terrorist attacks.
What is truly new is the significant number of Arab and even Palestinian writers and commentators who are suddenly seeing Palestinian suffering in the same way or perhaps are finally publicly willing to admit that it really isn't all Israel's fault. I will be making quite a number of postings featuring Arab and Palestinian voices on the subject of the exploitation of the Palestinian people in coming days.
Let me begin with someone who is well known to most people who have followed the conflict in the region in recent years. Saeb Erekat was the Palestinian negotiator during past peace talks and is a prominent Fatah member. Here is part of an interview he gave to Wolf Blitzer on CNN's Late Edition on June 17:
Now, Wolf, do I have evidence to refer to this country or to this group or that? No, I don't. But I know when I see the streets of Gaza, when I see these gunmen, when I see these hundreds of millions of dollars at a time when President Abbas could not pay salaries for our police forces, when our police forces did not have bullets or guns to maintain the rule of law and public order, where did these hundreds of millions of dollars, where did these guns and arms and state-of-art machine guns and heavy equipment come from?
I don't have any evidence, and without evidence, I will not name anybody. But all I can tell you, Gaza is very -- the poorest area on Earth. Gaza doesn't have the means for these hundreds of millions of dollars and these weapons and equipment.
And I believe what is happening in this region is being now played in the streets of Gaza and the streets of Nahr el-Bared in my name, in the name of the Palestinians. We are being exploited again.
It is easy for Israel's detractors to dismiss me as a Zionist, as the daughter of an Israeli, as a biased voice. How do you dismiss Saeb Erekat, an ardent Palestinian nationalist who has argued the Palestinian cause for years, and others like him? I don't think you can.
The question that remains is whether or not this sort of change of Arab perspective will last. If not then we're back at square one. If so then this is a true sea change in Arab thinking . It offers the real possibility of Arabs and Israelis, specifically Palestinians and Israelis, finding common ground to stand together against a common enemy that threatens us both.
Am I dreaming? Maybe, but then again, maybe not. Only time will tell.
Monday, June 18, 2007
A Permanent Indictment
The U.N. is issuing a permanent indictment for human rights violations. Is this about genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan? Nope, genocide in Sudan is no big deal Child slavery in China? Nope, that's fine too. All the bloodshed in Somalia? Surely you jest. Nope, the one country being singled out is Israel according to U.N. Watch.
Reform at the U.N.? Absolutely! The U.N. will no longer say bad things about third world dictators. Cuba and Belarus will no longer be considered to be violating human rights at all. Soon such fine upstanding nations as Sudan, Congo, and Haiti will be exempt from criticism. The UN Watch article continues:At the same time, the proposal eliminates the experts charged with reporting on violations by Cuba and Belarus, despite the latest reports of massive violations by both regimes. As for the experts on other countries -- on Burundi, Cambodia, North Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Liberia, Burma, Somalia and Sudan -- all of these may soon be eliminated, as threatened by the Council majority comprised of dictatorships and other Third World countries, under a gradual "review" process. Pending their fate, all experts will be subjected to a new "Code of Conduct," submitted by Algeria in the name of the African group, designed to intimidate and restrict the independence of the human rights experts. Now that the U.N. is getting rid of those pesky human rights experts they can concentrate on villification of Israel full time. What reform! What progress!
Yael K., writing in her Step-by-Step blog describes the latest U.N. outrage as:...the latest biased and crazy and, to be quite honest, criminal behavior of the U.N. They are not condemning Darfur for genocide, they are removing Cuba and Belarus from censure despite their continued violations, and they are placing Israel under permanent indictment under a Special Agenda item. They have a special agenda, let me tell you. Why does anyone take the U.N. seriously? It is time to disband the organization and replace it with one limited to democratic nations that respect human rights. Israel would qualify easily. Most of the current members of the U.N. Human Rights Council would not.
Reform at the U.N.? Absolutely! The U.N. will no longer say bad things about third world dictators. Cuba and Belarus will no longer be considered to be violating human rights at all. Soon such fine upstanding nations as Sudan, Congo, and Haiti will be exempt from criticism. The UN Watch article continues:
Yael K., writing in her Step-by-Step blog describes the latest U.N. outrage as:
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Katyusha Rockets Land In Kiryat Shmona... Again
In an eerie reminder of last summer's Second Lebanon War katyusha rockets landed on a factory and on a car in Kiryat Shmona in northern Israel today. Most recent reports indicate three rockets were fired and a fourth, later found by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), failed to fire. A factory was lightly damaged and a car was more seriously damaged but thankfully nobody was hurt.
Unlike last summer when Hizbullah seemed to be proud of starting a war and firing over 4,000 rockets into Israel, today they were quick to deny any involvement. It could be that they are telling the truth. Both Israelis and Lebanese seem to be ready to blame some Palestinian terrorist group or another, either with ties to Hamas or al-Qaeda. On the other hand it could just be that Hizbullah isn't quite ready for another war just yet. One thing is clear: southern Lebanon, from which Israel withdrew unilaterally, is once again being used as a base for attacks on Israel and both UNIFIL (the U.N. peacekeeping force) and the LAF are either unwilling or unable to stop it.
Speaking of UNIFIL, they they called the attack a 'serious breach' of the cease-fire which ended last summer's war. I'm certain the usual prompt, decisive U.N. action will follow. You know, a little hand wringing and a few mealy mouthed words designed not to offend. Heck, there may even be an emergency Security Council meeting to find some way to blame Israel for being attacked.
UNIFIL also asked for all parties to show restraint. They were perfectly safe in doing this because an unnamed spokesman for Prime Minister Olmert had already promised Israeli restraint. The terrorists from some unnamed Palestinian group can't be expected to be restrained, can they? Since we don't know who they are they also can't be held to account either for today's attacks or any future lack of restraint, at least for now. As usual the only party that can be held accountable by the U.N. is Israel and I am sure that was calculated into their choice of words for the statement.
Despite my obvious cynicism I actually do think restraint is the right move, at least for the moment. Israel is correctly giving the LAF and UNIFIL a chance to act. The Winograd Commission interim report blamed Prime Minister Olmert and outgoing Defense Minister Peretz for rushing into Lebanon last summer without a plan. We all know how well that went. At least the Prime Minister isn't repeating his mistakes. The best thing to do for now is to watch, wait, see if the Lebanese government finds the will and ability to act, and allow Defense Minister Barak a chance to develop a plan of action in case there are further attacks. At least this time Prime Minister Olmert has a seasoned military man running the Defense Ministry.
I fear Israel is soon going to be forced fight another war against Iran, Syria, and/or their proxies in Lebanon and the territories. Israel needs to be ready for this eventuality but it doesn't need to precipitate full scale hostilities... at least not yet.
Unlike last summer when Hizbullah seemed to be proud of starting a war and firing over 4,000 rockets into Israel, today they were quick to deny any involvement. It could be that they are telling the truth. Both Israelis and Lebanese seem to be ready to blame some Palestinian terrorist group or another, either with ties to Hamas or al-Qaeda. On the other hand it could just be that Hizbullah isn't quite ready for another war just yet. One thing is clear: southern Lebanon, from which Israel withdrew unilaterally, is once again being used as a base for attacks on Israel and both UNIFIL (the U.N. peacekeeping force) and the LAF are either unwilling or unable to stop it.
Speaking of UNIFIL, they they called the attack a 'serious breach' of the cease-fire which ended last summer's war. I'm certain the usual prompt, decisive U.N. action will follow. You know, a little hand wringing and a few mealy mouthed words designed not to offend. Heck, there may even be an emergency Security Council meeting to find some way to blame Israel for being attacked.
UNIFIL also asked for all parties to show restraint. They were perfectly safe in doing this because an unnamed spokesman for Prime Minister Olmert had already promised Israeli restraint. The terrorists from some unnamed Palestinian group can't be expected to be restrained, can they? Since we don't know who they are they also can't be held to account either for today's attacks or any future lack of restraint, at least for now. As usual the only party that can be held accountable by the U.N. is Israel and I am sure that was calculated into their choice of words for the statement.
Despite my obvious cynicism I actually do think restraint is the right move, at least for the moment. Israel is correctly giving the LAF and UNIFIL a chance to act. The Winograd Commission interim report blamed Prime Minister Olmert and outgoing Defense Minister Peretz for rushing into Lebanon last summer without a plan. We all know how well that went. At least the Prime Minister isn't repeating his mistakes. The best thing to do for now is to watch, wait, see if the Lebanese government finds the will and ability to act, and allow Defense Minister Barak a chance to develop a plan of action in case there are further attacks. At least this time Prime Minister Olmert has a seasoned military man running the Defense Ministry.
I fear Israel is soon going to be forced fight another war against Iran, Syria, and/or their proxies in Lebanon and the territories. Israel needs to be ready for this eventuality but it doesn't need to precipitate full scale hostilities... at least not yet.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Help Keep IBA News On The Air
IBA News in English on both radio and TV is about to disappear. IBA is in financial trouble after years of budget cuts. According to The Jerusalem Post the Israeli state broadcaster may all but disappear. Only one Hebrew radio service, the profitable Reshet Bet, will remain, plus possibly an Arabic language newscast. The Jerusalem Post is asking that supporters of IBA News comment in the talkback section of their article as a form of online petition.
IBA News in English does far more than serve Israeli's small English but non-Hebrew speaking community. Kol Israel Radio's REKA network is also available on the web and their shortwave broadcasts are heard worldwide. NPR and community FM radio stations around the United States rebroadcast Kol Israel news in English. IBA News television broadcasts are offered by satellite and cable channels in the United States as well as on the web.
Link TV is a particularly interesting case in point. Their program Mosaic: World News From The Middle East was originally a collection of excerpts from Arab and Iranian news programs. Arabic and Farsi broadcasts are dubbed in English. Some time back the Jerusalem-born producer of the program, Jamal Dajani, to his great credit, added several minutes of IBA News in English to most programs. Here is a Palestinian journalist who decided to include an Israeli viewpoint into what previously was a broadcast exclusively of Arab/Muslim news with all the anti-Israel material that implies. I may not agree with what Mr. Dajani has to say on many of his Mosaic Intelligence Report commentaries, but I appreciate his efforts to be fair minded and to promote peace and stability in the Middle East. By adding IBA News to Mosaic Mr. Dajani insured that program viewers, many of whom are undoubtedly not sympathetic to Israel, get an opposing viewpoint.
If IBA News in English goes off the air what will replace it? The sad fact is that there isn't anything else that presents a genuine Israeli viewpoint in English. NPR will still broadcast the BBC with it's often strident anti-Israel bias but Israeli news will simply disappear from their stations. Will Jamal Dajani be able to find the resources to bring in a translator for Israeli Hebrew language broadcasts? Will he even have access to Israeli news for his program? I honestly don't know but I fear the answer may be "no". If I'm right about that Mosaic viewers will get all the Arab anti-Israel rhetoric and propaganda with the balancing Israeli viewpoint removed. That won't be Mr. Dajani's fault, will it?
IBA News is vital in that it is the only broadcaster bringing a genuine Israeli perspective to people all over the world. I urge everyone who reads this to click this link and sign the petition. As I write this we have probably no more than 30 hours to make a difference and less than 500 people have signed the petition so far. Please also share this with anyone who you think might be interested.
IBA News in English does far more than serve Israeli's small English but non-Hebrew speaking community. Kol Israel Radio's REKA network is also available on the web and their shortwave broadcasts are heard worldwide. NPR and community FM radio stations around the United States rebroadcast Kol Israel news in English. IBA News television broadcasts are offered by satellite and cable channels in the United States as well as on the web.
Link TV is a particularly interesting case in point. Their program Mosaic: World News From The Middle East was originally a collection of excerpts from Arab and Iranian news programs. Arabic and Farsi broadcasts are dubbed in English. Some time back the Jerusalem-born producer of the program, Jamal Dajani, to his great credit, added several minutes of IBA News in English to most programs. Here is a Palestinian journalist who decided to include an Israeli viewpoint into what previously was a broadcast exclusively of Arab/Muslim news with all the anti-Israel material that implies. I may not agree with what Mr. Dajani has to say on many of his Mosaic Intelligence Report commentaries, but I appreciate his efforts to be fair minded and to promote peace and stability in the Middle East. By adding IBA News to Mosaic Mr. Dajani insured that program viewers, many of whom are undoubtedly not sympathetic to Israel, get an opposing viewpoint.
If IBA News in English goes off the air what will replace it? The sad fact is that there isn't anything else that presents a genuine Israeli viewpoint in English. NPR will still broadcast the BBC with it's often strident anti-Israel bias but Israeli news will simply disappear from their stations. Will Jamal Dajani be able to find the resources to bring in a translator for Israeli Hebrew language broadcasts? Will he even have access to Israeli news for his program? I honestly don't know but I fear the answer may be "no". If I'm right about that Mosaic viewers will get all the Arab anti-Israel rhetoric and propaganda with the balancing Israeli viewpoint removed. That won't be Mr. Dajani's fault, will it?
IBA News is vital in that it is the only broadcaster bringing a genuine Israeli perspective to people all over the world. I urge everyone who reads this to click this link and sign the petition. As I write this we have probably no more than 30 hours to make a difference and less than 500 people have signed the petition so far. Please also share this with anyone who you think might be interested.
The BBC (British Bias Corp.) Strikes Again
The BBC has apologized for referring to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and has promised it won't do it again. Never mind that Jerusalem has been Israel's official capital since 1951. The Beeb can't let little things like facts get in the way of their usual anti-Israel bias, particularly if some Arabs are offended by those facts. Heck, news reporting doesn't really have to be factual, does it? How old fashioned of me to think that it does.
This apology was a response to complaints about a reference to Jerusalem as Israel's capital on, of all things, a BBC sports program back in March. Who complained? According to the BBC it was a joint complaint from Arab Media Watch, Muslim Public Affairs Committee, Friends of Al-Aksa and the Institute of Islamic Political Thought. According to the Jerusalem Post article:The Institute of Islamic Political Thought is run by Azzam Tamimi, a Hamas supporter and a member of the Muslim Association of Britain, part of the Muslim Brotherhood. So, Hamas and other violent, rejectionist, terrorist Palestinian groups get to decide BBC policy. Very nice. For those of you who have slept through the last few days Hamas just took over Gaza in a violent coup killing dozens of Palestinians in the process with nary a word of protest from the Arab or Muslim world.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev's comments hit the nail on the head:Jerusalem is Israel's capital. It is the right of every sovereign state to determine which city will be its capital. If this is not accepted by everyone today, I am confident it will be in the future. This is hardly the first time I've written about anti-Israeli bias at the BBC and sadly I'm sure it won't be the last. I guess this is par for the course in a nation that won't even teach the Holocaust in schools for fear of offending Holocaust deniers in general and anti-Semitic Arabs and Muslims in particular.
This apology was a response to complaints about a reference to Jerusalem as Israel's capital on, of all things, a BBC sports program back in March. Who complained? According to the BBC it was a joint complaint from Arab Media Watch, Muslim Public Affairs Committee, Friends of Al-Aksa and the Institute of Islamic Political Thought. According to the Jerusalem Post article:
Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev's comments hit the nail on the head:
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Palestinian Mythology: "Arab East Jerusalem"
With Jerusalem Day tomorrow I thought it was time to debunk the most commonly repeated bit of Palestinian mythology. The idea the eastern Jerusalem is an Arab city, or that Jerusalem as a whole was ever truly an Arab city, is a lie that has been repeated so many times that most of the world seems to believe it. Straight faced reporters on major networks all over the world will speak of "Arab East Jerusalem" as if it is an undisputed fact of history and of present circumstances. It isn't.
During Ottoman rule, from the late 15th through the early 20th century, Jerusalem had either a Jewish plurality or an outright Jewish majority. In 1854 Karl Marx was a reporter for the New York Daily Tribune. His article of 15 April 1854 reported the population as follows:...the sedentary population of Jerusalem numbers about 15,500 souls, of whom 4,000 are Mussulmans [Muslims] and 8,000 Jews. At the time Jerusalem was little more than the old, walled city. Jewish settlement outside the walls wasn't permitted by the Ottoman rulers until 1865. The entire Jewish population was in the old city. If we judge east and west from the 1949 armistice line (pre-1967 borders) then the entire Jewish population was in what is now referred to as "Arab East Jerusalem".
What made east Jerusalem Arab? 19 years of illegal Jordanian occupation ending in 1967. In 1948 when Jordan captured the old, walled city they destroyed 58 synagogues. 58! I somehow don't think Arabs were worshiping in those synagogues. Yep, in 1948 there were still lots of Jews in "Arab East Jerusalem".
Here is a description of how Jerusalem was divided until the Six Day War written by former Israeli President Chaim Herzog in his 1982 book The Arab-Israeli Wars:...Jerusalem had been divided between two warring elements: barbed wire in profusion, fortifications, trenches and battlements cut through the city...
Mount Scopus [was] an Israeli enclave on the site of Hebrew University and Hadassah Hospital; it had been completely surrounded in 1948, but held out against all Arab attacks. The second enclave was Government House, which had been the residence of the British High Commissioner of Palestine... So... there were Israeli and U.N. enclaves surrounded by Jordanian held territory in "Arab East Jerusalem" rather than a clean east-west, Jewish-Arab devision. Does this sound like workable, defensible borders as envisioned in UN Resolution 242? Not to me, it doesn't.
Yes, the majority of the eastern part of the city today is Arab. That's true, in part, because Jerusalem has grown and swallowed up several Arab villages and, in part, through natural population growth in the Arab community. There are also a number of Jewish neighborhoods in the eastern part of the city.
It may be possible, someday, after a period of peace, to separate Arab areas that aren't part of the historical city and place them under Arab rule. Right now, though, I don't see this is practical. I do not support dividing the city again and I do not accept the idea that any part of Jerusalem is intrinsically Arab and must be ceded.
If you, like I, support keeping Jerusalem united you may wish to visit OneJerusalem.org. Tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. To me, that is something to celebrate and cherish.
During Ottoman rule, from the late 15th through the early 20th century, Jerusalem had either a Jewish plurality or an outright Jewish majority. In 1854 Karl Marx was a reporter for the New York Daily Tribune. His article of 15 April 1854 reported the population as follows:
What made east Jerusalem Arab? 19 years of illegal Jordanian occupation ending in 1967. In 1948 when Jordan captured the old, walled city they destroyed 58 synagogues. 58! I somehow don't think Arabs were worshiping in those synagogues. Yep, in 1948 there were still lots of Jews in "Arab East Jerusalem".
Here is a description of how Jerusalem was divided until the Six Day War written by former Israeli President Chaim Herzog in his 1982 book The Arab-Israeli Wars:
Mount Scopus [was] an Israeli enclave on the site of Hebrew University and Hadassah Hospital; it had been completely surrounded in 1948, but held out against all Arab attacks. The second enclave was Government House, which had been the residence of the British High Commissioner of Palestine...
Yes, the majority of the eastern part of the city today is Arab. That's true, in part, because Jerusalem has grown and swallowed up several Arab villages and, in part, through natural population growth in the Arab community. There are also a number of Jewish neighborhoods in the eastern part of the city.
It may be possible, someday, after a period of peace, to separate Arab areas that aren't part of the historical city and place them under Arab rule. Right now, though, I don't see this is practical. I do not support dividing the city again and I do not accept the idea that any part of Jerusalem is intrinsically Arab and must be ceded.
If you, like I, support keeping Jerusalem united you may wish to visit OneJerusalem.org. Tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. To me, that is something to celebrate and cherish.
Hamas and the Daleks
Exterminate! Exterminate! Annihilate! Has anyone else noticed that Hamas sounds an awful lot like the Daleks lately? For those not familiar with the British science fiction television series Doctor Who, the Daleks are supposed to be the most evil creatures in the universe. They were introduced in the series' first season in 1963 and have appeared in almost every season since, including the 2006 season. The Daleks scream "Exterminate!" and on rare occasions "Annihilate!". The most frequently heard Dalek utterance: "You will be exterminated!" That's the same promise Hamas made to the Jewish people last month. The Dalek's goal: to commit genocide, killing everyone and everything that isn't a Dalek. Sounds a lot like Hamas, doesn't it?Hamas does have it over the fictional Daleks in one way: the Daleks never promised to drink their enemies' blood the way Hamas promised to drink Jewish blood. Maybe Hamas members are really the most evil creatures in the universe.
Friday, May 11, 2007
We Will Annihilate the Jews!
Last month Hamas called for the extermination of the Jewish people worldwide on their website. Now CNN has spent a great deal of time over the last two or three days discussing a children's program on Al-Aqsa Television which, of course, is run by Hamas and broadcasts to Palestinians in Gaza. It seems they have a big mouse named Farfur. He looks almost exactly like Mickey Mouse. His message, though, would horrify the people at Disney. Farfur tells young children "We will annihilate the Jews!" and adds "I will commit martyrdom." Al-Aqsa Television children's programming also shows very young children with machine guns and other weapons. The New York Daily News also expressed it's disgust.
Where is the international outcry at preaching hatred and genocide? Israelis, Jews, and American bloggers have been all over this but most of the rest of the world has been silent. Where is the condemnation of trying to convince very young children to become combatants in Hamas' terror war against Israel? Why are human rights groups almost always mute to Palestinian abuses?
When children are taught to hate and kill and taught that genocide is something to strive for what hope is there that there will ever be peace? In my view there is no such hope and that is the real tragedy of our times.
Where is the international outcry at preaching hatred and genocide? Israelis, Jews, and American bloggers have been all over this but most of the rest of the world has been silent. Where is the condemnation of trying to convince very young children to become combatants in Hamas' terror war against Israel? Why are human rights groups almost always mute to Palestinian abuses?
When children are taught to hate and kill and taught that genocide is something to strive for what hope is there that there will ever be peace? In my view there is no such hope and that is the real tragedy of our times.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Disturbing Increase In Anti-Semitism
Monday, April 16, was Yom HaShoah or Holocaust Remembrance Day. Germany's Deutsche Welle TV news program Journal had excellent coverage of the events of the day, ranging from observances in Israel to footage of the March of the Living at Auschwitz. They also had a truly disturbing report on the worldwide increase in anti-Semitic incidents worldwide. These incidents include not only desecrations and destruction of property but also a shocking increase of violence directed at Jewish people.
Where was the biggest increase? Not surprisingly it was in the U.K. where a recent report detailed that the Holocaust is no longer even being taught in many schools for fear of offending Holocaust deniers. Holocaust denial is particularly popular in the Britain's Muslim minority. Other countries which had large increases in anti-Semitic attacks according to the DW TV report include Australia, France, and Canada. German Jews were quoted as feeling they couldn't live normal lives due to the security measures now needed at schools, community centers, and synagogues.
Why is there such a rise in anti-Semitism? DW TV blamed it on the Arab-Israeli conflict and pointed out that the majority of such incidents are carried out by Arab immigrants to these countries. I guess it really is terrible that we Jews have the chutzpah to insist our country not be wiped out by hostile Arabs or Iranians. If we just let them kill all the Jews in Israel, my family included, there would be no problem, right? Pardon my dripping sarcasm but I am frustrated and fed up with all of it. Arab and leftist media continue to equate Jewish self-defense with Nazism. Funny, we Jews don't want to commit genocide. It's the very people making the accusation who do.
I keep reading over and over again that anti-Semitism is now at levels not seen since the years leading up to World War II and the Holocaust. If "Never again" is to mean anything then world Jewry needs a safe haven. This is why I am such an ardent Zionist and why having a strong Israel is so very important.
Where was the biggest increase? Not surprisingly it was in the U.K. where a recent report detailed that the Holocaust is no longer even being taught in many schools for fear of offending Holocaust deniers. Holocaust denial is particularly popular in the Britain's Muslim minority. Other countries which had large increases in anti-Semitic attacks according to the DW TV report include Australia, France, and Canada. German Jews were quoted as feeling they couldn't live normal lives due to the security measures now needed at schools, community centers, and synagogues.
Why is there such a rise in anti-Semitism? DW TV blamed it on the Arab-Israeli conflict and pointed out that the majority of such incidents are carried out by Arab immigrants to these countries. I guess it really is terrible that we Jews have the chutzpah to insist our country not be wiped out by hostile Arabs or Iranians. If we just let them kill all the Jews in Israel, my family included, there would be no problem, right? Pardon my dripping sarcasm but I am frustrated and fed up with all of it. Arab and leftist media continue to equate Jewish self-defense with Nazism. Funny, we Jews don't want to commit genocide. It's the very people making the accusation who do.
I keep reading over and over again that anti-Semitism is now at levels not seen since the years leading up to World War II and the Holocaust. If "Never again" is to mean anything then world Jewry needs a safe haven. This is why I am such an ardent Zionist and why having a strong Israel is so very important.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
What's Happening In Iraq Is All Israel's Fault
What's happening in Iraq, all the violence and the killing, is all Israel's fault. Really, it is. After all Lebanon's Future TV news wouldn't tell anything but the absolute truth, would they?
Future TV ran a news report a few weeks ago which was most enlightening. Do you remember the South Lebanon Army? They were a Lebanese Christian militia allied to Israel. When Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon 2500 members of the SLA found sanctuary in Israel as well. With Hizbullah firmly in control of southern Lebanon it was that or be killed. Anyway, Future TV reminded us of this militia and reminded us that their leader was sentenced to death in absentia.
Anyway, according to Future TV those 2500 SLA fighters are now in northern Iraq along with agents of the Mossad. They are working for the interests of Israel and the United States, of course. Best of all, it turns out that the SLA and Mossad are responsible for most of the violence in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq? Nah, not mentioned. The Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr? Those must be the good guys. The Badr Brigades? Baathists? Nope, it's all those evil Israelis and expatriate Lebanese Christians causing all the trouble.
In the west very few people believe any of this. OK, Cindy Sheehan claimed that her son died fighting for Israel in Iraq. I guess some on the far left do believe it. So does much of the Arab and wider Muslim world. Conspiracy theories are all the rage there, aren't they? Where will it all end? More anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism and conflict that won't be resolved anytime soon.
Future TV ran a news report a few weeks ago which was most enlightening. Do you remember the South Lebanon Army? They were a Lebanese Christian militia allied to Israel. When Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon 2500 members of the SLA found sanctuary in Israel as well. With Hizbullah firmly in control of southern Lebanon it was that or be killed. Anyway, Future TV reminded us of this militia and reminded us that their leader was sentenced to death in absentia.
Anyway, according to Future TV those 2500 SLA fighters are now in northern Iraq along with agents of the Mossad. They are working for the interests of Israel and the United States, of course. Best of all, it turns out that the SLA and Mossad are responsible for most of the violence in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq? Nah, not mentioned. The Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr? Those must be the good guys. The Badr Brigades? Baathists? Nope, it's all those evil Israelis and expatriate Lebanese Christians causing all the trouble.
In the west very few people believe any of this. OK, Cindy Sheehan claimed that her son died fighting for Israel in Iraq. I guess some on the far left do believe it. So does much of the Arab and wider Muslim world. Conspiracy theories are all the rage there, aren't they? Where will it all end? More anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism and conflict that won't be resolved anytime soon.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Perpetuating The Conflict
Satellite television and the Internet are wonderful things. They can give you a window on the world previously unavailable. They can also demonstrate clearly how telling half a story insures the continuation of conflict in the Middle East and makes, at best, a distant dream.
Last Wednesday during Passover al-Arabiya ran a story on how the closure of the territories caused needless hardship for the Palestinians. They interviewed Palestinian Arabs who were having difficulty visiting relatives due to the necessity of passing through Israeli checkpoints. The closure, they reported, was done on the "pretext" of a terror threat, a "pretext" Israel is charged with using at every holiday and occasion. They also showed footage of Palestinians crossing Israel's security fence or "separation wall" and reported that these poor, oppressed people are just trying to make a decent life for themselves with no thought for politics or time to even consider the conditions placed upon them by the international Quartet.
The part of the story al-Arabiya deliberately left out was told on IBA News. The IDF, operating near Qalqilya, recovered two bombs that day which were safely detonated under controlled conditions, thankfully without injury. Right wing website Arutz Sheva reported that the General Security Service averted a major Hamas terrorist attack in Tel Aviv over the Passover holiday, an attack also originating from Qalqilya. What al-Arabiya called a pretext was a real threat and Israel recovered at least some of the weapons intended to murder innocent Israelis during Passover.
Last Wednesday during Passover al-Arabiya ran a story on how the closure of the territories caused needless hardship for the Palestinians. They interviewed Palestinian Arabs who were having difficulty visiting relatives due to the necessity of passing through Israeli checkpoints. The closure, they reported, was done on the "pretext" of a terror threat, a "pretext" Israel is charged with using at every holiday and occasion. They also showed footage of Palestinians crossing Israel's security fence or "separation wall" and reported that these poor, oppressed people are just trying to make a decent life for themselves with no thought for politics or time to even consider the conditions placed upon them by the international Quartet.
The part of the story al-Arabiya deliberately left out was told on IBA News. The IDF, operating near Qalqilya, recovered two bombs that day which were safely detonated under controlled conditions, thankfully without injury. Right wing website Arutz Sheva reported that the General Security Service averted a major Hamas terrorist attack in Tel Aviv over the Passover holiday, an attack also originating from Qalqilya. What al-Arabiya called a pretext was a real threat and Israel recovered at least some of the weapons intended to murder innocent Israelis during Passover.
I have no doubt that the hardship that Palestinians endure as portrayed by al-Arabiya is very real. I also have no doubt that if there was no real threat of a terror attack there would have been no need for a closure of the territories. If there was no terror there would be no checkpoints, no need for a fence or wall, and all this hardship could be avoided. The conditions which al-Arabiya briefly mentioned are no more than Yasser Arafat agreed to at Oslo: recognition that Israel has a right to exist and a renunciation of violence. All the international community has asked is that the Palestinians agree to live up to the agreements they have already signed.
So long as Palestinians promise to kill Israelis at every opportunity and to continue to do so until Israel is destroyed what is Israel to do? At least the fence and the closure are non-lethal methods of stopping terrorism. At least innocent people on both sides didn't die that day.
The perpetual blaming of Israel for all the woes of the Arab world including all that the Palestinians endure must stop if there is ever to be peace. Sadly left-leaning media in the west tells the story as al-Arabiya does over and over again. Until the Palestinian leadership takes responsibility for the consequences of their own actions there is no hope for anything but more of the same. Until the mainstream media starts telling both sides of the story there is little hope that people will understand the reality of the conflict. All the media, both Arab and international, are doing with their propaganda disguised as news is perpetuating hatred which, in turn, perpetuates the conflict.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Britain No Longer Teaching About the Holocaust in Schools
Yael K., writing in her Aliyah Step-by-Step blog reports that the U.K. will no longer be teaching about the Holocaust in history classes:The Holocaust is out of schools because it might offend holocaust-deniers? Sorry, I find this simply shocking. Well, take a look at what is happening in schools in the UK according to a report by the British government. She quotes the report which says, in part:Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Government backed study has revealed.
It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.
[...]
The report said teachers feared confronting ‘anti-Semitic sentiment and Holocaust denial among some Muslim pupils’. I don't know if this is anti-Semitism among the teachers and school administrators as well or just political correctness gone mad. I suspect it's some of both. Personally, like Yael, I find this shocking. It is absolutely inexcusable. Shouldn't history be taught honestly with a full presentation of facts?
There have been numerous reports of anti-Semetic attacks in Britain as well. One on CNN some weeks back interviewd a teenage girl who was riding a public bus. She was asked if she is Jewish or English as if you can't be both. Then she was severely beaten and landed in hospital. Nobody raised a finger to help her.
Yael suggests it's time British Jewry leave en masse and make aliya. I hate to say it but I do think she is right.
It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.
[...]
The report said teachers feared confronting ‘anti-Semitic sentiment and Holocaust denial among some Muslim pupils’.
There have been numerous reports of anti-Semetic attacks in Britain as well. One on CNN some weeks back interviewd a teenage girl who was riding a public bus. She was asked if she is Jewish or English as if you can't be both. Then she was severely beaten and landed in hospital. Nobody raised a finger to help her.
Yael suggests it's time British Jewry leave en masse and make aliya. I hate to say it but I do think she is right.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Iran Is Immune To Diplomacy
We are now over a week into the British hostage crisis in Iran. Iran's government, both in official press releases and in statements by President Ahmadenijad, is calling the entire world community "arrogant" and is threatening to put the captured "British occupier forces" on trial. I guess he can't get enough out of propaganda statements made by his hostages under duress.
An Associated Press article quotes Iranian opposition groups claiming that Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered the capture of the British sailors as retaliation for U.N. sanctions. This seems entirely credible to me. It makes sense. In fact, in a way, it's brilliant. Let me explain.
The UN sanctions are in response to Iran's nuclear program. The five permanent members of the Security Council have agreed on further sanctions which are now under discussion at the U.N. Suddenly dealing with Iran's nuclear program is on the back burner as the hostage crisis takes center stage. At the same time Iran's enemies, the United States, Britain, and the European Union, suffer through a period of much higher oil prices. Finally, the oft reported planning for a supposed U.S. strike on Iran is undoubtedly on hold (if it exists at all) so as not to endanger the forces of America's most staunch and loyal ally. At least for the moment Iran benefits in every possible way. Meanwhile they buy time and continue their work to build nuclear weapons with the oft stated purpose of destroying first Israel and then the United States.
Think I'm crazy? I'm not the only one who sees it this way. I just found an article by Mario Loyola published yesterday in the admittedly right-wing National Review that says essentially the same thinge.
It is time the western world in general and the United States in particular stops worrying about being politically correct and starts recognizing that the regime in Teheran as an enemy and, unlike Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq, a truly dangerous enemy with an internationally verified nuclear program.
15 months ago I called for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by the United States. It needs to happen sooner rather than later. Yes, for the moment we should let the British take the lead and exhaust illusory diplomatic options. In reality there are no such options.
Soon President Bush needs to start explaining why an air strike on Iran is nothing like the invasion of Iraq. Then he needs to act. An American surgical strike is far less likely to set the entire Middle East aflame than an Israeli strike. Make no mistake, Israel will not sit around waiting to be nuked and, failing a real diplomatic option, it's either the U.S. or Israel that will act. I prefer the U.S. Less chance of a wider war. Less loss of innocent life. If neither nation acts quickly Israel will be destroyed and the United States will be facing nuclear blackmail.
An Associated Press article quotes Iranian opposition groups claiming that Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered the capture of the British sailors as retaliation for U.N. sanctions. This seems entirely credible to me. It makes sense. In fact, in a way, it's brilliant. Let me explain.
The UN sanctions are in response to Iran's nuclear program. The five permanent members of the Security Council have agreed on further sanctions which are now under discussion at the U.N. Suddenly dealing with Iran's nuclear program is on the back burner as the hostage crisis takes center stage. At the same time Iran's enemies, the United States, Britain, and the European Union, suffer through a period of much higher oil prices. Finally, the oft reported planning for a supposed U.S. strike on Iran is undoubtedly on hold (if it exists at all) so as not to endanger the forces of America's most staunch and loyal ally. At least for the moment Iran benefits in every possible way. Meanwhile they buy time and continue their work to build nuclear weapons with the oft stated purpose of destroying first Israel and then the United States.
Think I'm crazy? I'm not the only one who sees it this way. I just found an article by Mario Loyola published yesterday in the admittedly right-wing National Review that says essentially the same thinge.
It is time the western world in general and the United States in particular stops worrying about being politically correct and starts recognizing that the regime in Teheran as an enemy and, unlike Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq, a truly dangerous enemy with an internationally verified nuclear program.
15 months ago I called for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by the United States. It needs to happen sooner rather than later. Yes, for the moment we should let the British take the lead and exhaust illusory diplomatic options. In reality there are no such options.
Soon President Bush needs to start explaining why an air strike on Iran is nothing like the invasion of Iraq. Then he needs to act. An American surgical strike is far less likely to set the entire Middle East aflame than an Israeli strike. Make no mistake, Israel will not sit around waiting to be nuked and, failing a real diplomatic option, it's either the U.S. or Israel that will act. I prefer the U.S. Less chance of a wider war. Less loss of innocent life. If neither nation acts quickly Israel will be destroyed and the United States will be facing nuclear blackmail.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
All The News That's (un)Fit To Print
While I haven't had time to keep up on blogging this find by Ariel over on Blogs of Zion is a gem. The sad truth is that it's probably pretty close to accurate.
Lots more on the media war against Israel coming soon.
Lots more on the media war against Israel coming soon.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Iranian Malware Update
Despite The Register publishing an article claiming that Iranian President Ahmadenijad's does not spread malware, it turns out I have been able to confirm this. Actually, the Register article headline claims it's false but the actual text of the article says no such thing:
So, it could have been there and been removed from the site or else hidden in code she can't find from the U.K. Not a convincing argument that it's all a hoax, is it?
I have lots of family and friends in Israel, including one information security expert, so I did check it out. Yep, the code was there. Is it still there? Nope. Was this real? Yep. Was it removed once this story spread across the blogosphere? Yep. FWIW, I doubt the madman of Iran is computer savvy enough to have done it for himself.
FWIW, I am writing this from a computer running Ehad Linux and the Hebrew version of Firefox 1.5.0.6.
"The most likely explanation is that there is some scripting on the site that, although not malicious, triggers an alert from Symantec's firewall software," said Carole Theriault, senior security consultant at UK-based net security firm Sophos.
"It is possible that malicious content has once been on the site, but has since been removed. It is also theoretically possible, though very unlikely in our opinion, that the malicious content targeted visitors from an Israeli address," she added.
So, it could have been there and been removed from the site or else hidden in code she can't find from the U.K. Not a convincing argument that it's all a hoax, is it?
I have lots of family and friends in Israel, including one information security expert, so I did check it out. Yep, the code was there. Is it still there? Nope. Was this real? Yep. Was it removed once this story spread across the blogosphere? Yep. FWIW, I doubt the madman of Iran is computer savvy enough to have done it for himself.
FWIW, I am writing this from a computer running Ehad Linux and the Hebrew version of Firefox 1.5.0.6.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Ahmadenijad Blog Contains A Little Surprise For Israeli Readers Using Windows and Internet Explorer
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad now has his very own blog. That's fine. The content is entirely what you might expect with one notable exception. Several Israeli bloggers, including Yael K.'s Step By Step, which I read regularly, report that if you access the Ahmadenijad blog from an Israeli IP address the site sends you a little gift, a cyberattack in the form of a virus or trojan (reports vary) designed to exploit an Internet Explorer vulnerability.
To quote Yael:
In a word: yep. The attack is smart enough to mostly ignore IP addresses from anywhere other than Israel, though it has been reported to have been triggered from Spain as well.
My one little piece of advice for friends and readers in Israel: Ehad Linux, an Israeli Linux distribution based on Mandriva 2006, is really quite easy to install and use. (Yes, I plan to write a review.) Those of us who run Linux have been blissfully immune to all the security nonsense which routinely plagues Windows users.
No, installing Linux is not a security panacea. You still need to patch regularly and become educated about keeping your system secure. It is, however, a very good start.
[NOTE: This piece is a first. It appears not only in Blogs of Zion, but in the O'reilly Linux Dev Center blog as well.]
To quote Yael:
Does Iran now use the Internet to harass Israeli citizens? To take advantage of the increasing Iranian-Israeli dialog online?
In a word: yep. The attack is smart enough to mostly ignore IP addresses from anywhere other than Israel, though it has been reported to have been triggered from Spain as well.
My one little piece of advice for friends and readers in Israel: Ehad Linux, an Israeli Linux distribution based on Mandriva 2006, is really quite easy to install and use. (Yes, I plan to write a review.) Those of us who run Linux have been blissfully immune to all the security nonsense which routinely plagues Windows users.
No, installing Linux is not a security panacea. You still need to patch regularly and become educated about keeping your system secure. It is, however, a very good start.
[NOTE: This piece is a first. It appears not only in Blogs of Zion, but in the O'reilly Linux Dev Center blog as well.]
Wise Words
Unfortunately, there will be another round [in this war] because the government's just demands weren't met. The [kidnapped] soldiers weren't returned home, the Hizbullah was not disarmed. Right now, we are in an interim period between wars, and there is no one who will prevent our enemies from rearmed and preparing for the next round.
We were a responsible opposition. We aided in every way, including in the media war. Our public duty is to tell the truth, because unfortunately there will be another round.
We were living in a coma, and received an alarm warning telling us to return to reality as it is, and to return to ourselves and to those values that will secure our existence in the future.
These words are excerpted from former Prime Minister and opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu's speech to the Knesset plenum (in translation) as reported by The Jerusalem Post. Sadly, he is absolutely correct. Without the return of Israel's kidnapped soldiers, as called for in UN Resolution 1701, and without the disarming or Hizbullah, the acceptance of the resolution and the cease fire it called for were a major mistake. The United Nations has never, ever been trustworthy and has always sided with Israel's enemies. Why should anyone think this has changed?
[NOTE: This piece also appears in Blogs of Zion.]
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
The Latest Israeli Attack On Beirut?
Courtesy of the blog Esser Agoroth, here is a photo of the latest brutal Israeli attack on Beirut:
Hey, it's every bit as real as the stuff Reuters publishes which ends up in your local newspaper. Heck, if anything this piece of fauxtography is more creative than what Reuters used and every bit as believable.
OK, it's a fake. As other blogs have pointed out there is no Star of David on the Enterprise so it can't be real.
Hey, it's every bit as real as the stuff Reuters publishes which ends up in your local newspaper. Heck, if anything this piece of fauxtography is more creative than what Reuters used and every bit as believable.
OK, it's a fake. As other blogs have pointed out there is no Star of David on the Enterprise so it can't be real.
Photos Of the Destruction In Haifa
Photographer Lenny Maschkowski has been taking pictures all over the Haifa area right after every rocket attack, sending them out in PowerPoint presentations which circulate among Israelis all over the world. I've been receiving them from one of my cousins in Israel.
Now Bert at Dutchblog Israel has posted some of the photos of the destruction for all the world to see. To quote him:
Just to give you an idea of the devastation caused by the various rocket that have landed in and around Haifa, and of their deadly load. These are the kind of things that Israel should leave unanswered, if we are to believe many European leaders and officials.
I think not, and I think this illustrates perfectly well why Hizbullah must never be allowed to rearm and redeploy along the border no matter what anyone in the so-called world community or the media might say.
Meanwhile the Israeli daily Yediot Ahranot reports that Israeli casualties and losses often go unreported, especially in the British media. Their report is especially critical of The Guardian and the BBC. I guess those two were too busy fabricating stories about Israel massacring Lebanese civilians. No wonder so many people in the U.K. have such an incredibly distorted view of the Middle East.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
The Media and the Massacre That Wasn't
Yesterday it was widely reported that Israel deliberately massacred 40 innocent Lebanese civilians. Reuters, the BBC, and others falsely reported that the IAF hat targeted a funeral procession. Then it was 40 Lebanese killed in air strikes. The only place you'll still find that reported is in The Guardian. No other even vaguely reputable western media outlet still carries the story. Why? The total number of people actually killed in Lebanon by these attacks: just one. Even the BBC eventually corrected their story, with a small note at the bottom noting the previous error. Reuters published an apology. That won't undo the damage done but at least they don't maintain a blatant lie on their website the way The Guardian does.
Yael K., commenting on the BBC coverage, wrote in her blog:
The BBC is notorious for anti-Israel bias, but The Guardian wins today's "to hell with the truth" award, beating out CNN and The Washington Post for having the least regard for facts.
Yael K., commenting on the BBC coverage, wrote in her blog:
And how about those 40 people killed in a deliberate Israeli massacre yesterday, hmmm? Oh, ooops, you mean it was really only 1? And amazingly, from my own observation of the BBC yesterday to see how this would be handled since they had a screaming headline about the massacre of 40 civilians --it took them several hours after the ticker on Ha'Aretz was showing that the number had been revised to just one person for them to change it. And no, of course they didn't make it a headline: the 40 massacred headline got changed to Israel bombs...and in the text description beneath there was a little note that it was one person and not 40 as previously reported. Of course.
The BBC is notorious for anti-Israel bias, but The Guardian wins today's "to hell with the truth" award, beating out CNN and The Washington Post for having the least regard for facts.
The Latest Wild, Unsubstantiated Charge Against Israel (CNN, Washington Post)
When charges were made that Hizbullah was deliberately using civilian casualties for PR purposes at Qana the charge came from Lebanese sources and even from members of the Lebanese armed forces. That charge was backed up with lots and lots of evidence. Do mainstream media outlets like CNN and The Washington Post investigate these charges? Heck, no! They are too busy vilifying Israel to be bothered with something as petty and trivial as the truth.
Their response: make the same charge about Israel with no evidence whatsoever. First a CNN anchor claimed Israel could shoot down all of the 150-200 Katyusha rockets fired by Hizubullah each day. Now Washington Post reporter Thomas Ricks, appearing on CNN, claimed Israel is deliberately leaving Hizbullah rocket launchers intact to kill Israeli civilians for PR purposes. Video is available in this article, which is definitely recommended reading.
CAMERA's outrage is something I very much share:
How can anyone believe that CNN is a reputable news sources? It seems to me that their bias is now so extreme that they do little if anything to hide it. If Mr. Ricks remains a reporter with The Washington Post that would speak volumes about their regard, or lack thereof, for the truth.
[NOTE: I've also posted this piece on Blogs of Zion.]
Their response: make the same charge about Israel with no evidence whatsoever. First a CNN anchor claimed Israel could shoot down all of the 150-200 Katyusha rockets fired by Hizubullah each day. Now Washington Post reporter Thomas Ricks, appearing on CNN, claimed Israel is deliberately leaving Hizbullah rocket launchers intact to kill Israeli civilians for PR purposes. Video is available in this article, which is definitely recommended reading.
CAMERA's outrage is something I very much share:
One wonders who these "military analysts" are and why they have apparently not gone on the record. And why has Ricks so far not written the story in the Post? Can it be that his claims are too much even for the Washington Post to publish?
Whatever the reason, the fact is that a reporter who thinks that Israel would intentionally allow Hezbollah's Katyushas to rain down on Israeli civilians would believe anything about Israel, no matter how monstrous or unfounded. And any reporter who believes that reserve Israeli soldiers would follow orders to not attack rockets that are aimed at their children and wives, and that these soldiers would not immediately go to the Israeli media with the story, is an idiot. Furthermore, Israel encouraged its civilians to leave the danger zones, which is why thousands of Hezbollah rockets have killed relatively few civilians. If Israel cynically wants its civilians to die, why would Israel do all it could to get its civilians out of harm's way?
How can anyone believe that CNN is a reputable news sources? It seems to me that their bias is now so extreme that they do little if anything to hide it. If Mr. Ricks remains a reporter with The Washington Post that would speak volumes about their regard, or lack thereof, for the truth.
[NOTE: I've also posted this piece on Blogs of Zion.]
An Excellent Analysis By Binyamin Netanyahu
Vide of an excellent analysis of the current situation by former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sky News can be found here courtesy of Aharon on Blogs fo Zion. Well worth watching...
Monday, August 07, 2006
Counting Civilian Casualties
If you read, watch, or listen to news reports about casualties in Lebanon you always learn about innocent civilians killed. They are poor farmers or villagers. All the victims in the war seem to be civilians even though Israel only targets Hizbullah strongholds and sites were rocket fire originates.
Tell me this: how can you tell that all these people are civilians? Hizbullah fighters don't wear uniforms, do they? Of course they don't. They're not a regular army. So... some, possibly many of these "civilians", at least among the Shiite Muslims killed or injured, are actually Hizbullah.
Think about this: Where do these civilian casualty numbers come from? Local leaders, witnesses, or the Lebanese government are the sources. In other words, Hizbullah, at least in part, helps with the counting. Might the numbers of civilian casualties be rather inflated? Here is some evidence to indicate just that:
[NOTE: This piece is also posted at Blogs of Zion.]
Tell me this: how can you tell that all these people are civilians? Hizbullah fighters don't wear uniforms, do they? Of course they don't. They're not a regular army. So... some, possibly many of these "civilians", at least among the Shiite Muslims killed or injured, are actually Hizbullah.
Think about this: Where do these civilian casualty numbers come from? Local leaders, witnesses, or the Lebanese government are the sources. In other words, Hizbullah, at least in part, helps with the counting. Might the numbers of civilian casualties be rather inflated? Here is some evidence to indicate just that:
- Human Rights Watch, which routinely accuses Israel of war crimes while holding Hizbullah blameless, now puts the death toll at Qana at 28, not the 56 still being claimed by the Lebanese and Arab press. Some media outlets have reduced their casualty counts but most simply moved on. It seems that reporting that the original number killed was inflated is not newsworthy.
- The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), hardly a friend of Israel, has agreed to look into claims that Qana was staged by Hizbullah.
- Reuters has admitted using doctored photographs, both from Beirut and Qana.
- The German newspaper Bild Zeitung has also published an an article on staged photos and propaganda by Hizbullah at Qana. (Tip of the hat to Yael K. and her excellent blog for this one.)
[NOTE: This piece is also posted at Blogs of Zion.]
Saturday, August 05, 2006
War Crimes Committed At Qana
In today's Wall Street Journal, Orde F. Kittrie, professor of international law at Arizona State University, wrote an excellent article titled War Crime At Qana? [subscription required]. His argument is that, indeed, war crimes were committed. Here are some relevant excerpts:
It seems that there are two standards of international law among Israel's accusers at the U.N. and elsewhere: one for Israel and one for everyone else.
[NOTE: This piece also appears in Blogs of Zion.]
The Qana tragedy has intensified accusation that Israel's actions in Lebanon violate international law. . . . but there is no evidence Israel has committed any war crimes. In contrast, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria have clearly violated international law . . .
International law has three major prohibitions . . . one forbids deliberate attacks on civilians. Another prohibits hiding forces in civilian areas . . . A third prohibition, the proportionality
restriction . . . involves a complicated and controversial balancing test . . . governed by 'customary international law', it [hinges] on the intent of the combatant.
At Qana, . . . the aircraft did not deliberately target civilians; but Hezbollah rockets are targeted at civilians, a clear war crime. . . . If Hezbollah used Lebanese civilians in Qana as human shields, the Hezbollah not Israel, is legally responsible for their deaths. . . . Hezbollah and Iran--which provides this terrorist group with arms, direction and over $100 million a year--are in continual violation of international law. Their calls for Israel's destruction violate the international genocide treaty's prohibition of 'direct and public incitement to commit genocide.' . . .
Israel is acting in self-defense . . . the track record of many Israel's most powerful accusers--including China, Russia and the European Union--is not nearly as good at balancing civilian risk against military goals. . . . Compared with how China, Russia and the EU have dealt with non-existential threats . . .Israel's responses to the threats of its existence have been remarkably restrained rather than disproportionately violent.
It seems that there are two standards of international law among Israel's accusers at the U.N. and elsewhere: one for Israel and one for everyone else.
[NOTE: This piece also appears in Blogs of Zion.]
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Members of the Lebanese Forces Speak Out On Qana and Hizbullah (Part 2)
The first piece on The Ouwet Front (the Lebanese Forces blog) attacking Hizubullah was the strongest, a rant truly from the heart titled "The sad truth about Hezbollah tactics…" Here are some powerful excerpts:
The thing is that it didn't work for Hizbullah. Not at all. There is no cease fire and now the truth is coming out. This also strongly reinforces Alan Dershowitz' claim that Hizbullah actually wants massive Lebanese casualties for propaganda purposes.
Huge thanks to Yael K. who made me aware of this.
[NOTE: This piece also appears on Blogs of Zion.]
For the last two weeks, we have been screaming that HA are hiding amongst civilians to attack Israel…we posted on boards, we mass mailed, some wrote to news papers and major news channels…
[...]
Today, the proof is with you, in front of you and yet some of you refuse to see…you refuse to see that HUMAN BEINGS are being used as SHIELDS…yes HUMAN BEINGS…kids, women, infants…
[...]
You vowed Jihad on the Israelis…but the whole country has not…you vowed their destruction and care less if in the process you loose your life…but the whole country has not…
Lebanon and the Lebanese Mr. Nasrallah are people that want to live…we want peace…we do not want to be torn to pieces or suffocated by imploding bombs…
When those people stayed in Qana despite the warnings issued by the Israelis to evacuate, they did so because they had put their faith in the men of the resistance…they believed that those men would protect them, would keep them safe from the Israeli enemy…
Alas…they discovered, and it was too late when they did, they discovered that those men who were supposed to protect them, were in fact hiding behind them.
They discovered that those men were taunting the Israeli by firing at him from behind inhabited buildings, daring him to reply…your men, Mr. Nasrallah, were playing Russian roulette but with the gun aimed at the heads of the innocent victims instead of theirs…
[...]
Pray tell me, were you counting on the public outcry to force the Israelis into a cease fire and thus claim your victory??? Like what happened in April 1996??? Is this what you were aiming at when you fired rockets from the vicinity of the UN post not three days ago, causing a retaliation that killed four UN soldiers???
The outcry wasn’t strong enough…lets do a Qana II…it will have an impact for sure…it never fails…people are so gullible…we get the cease fire and come out as heroes…and in the way we cause Israel to suffer humiliation…
Some victory for Lebanon Mr. Nasrallah…
The thing is that it didn't work for Hizbullah. Not at all. There is no cease fire and now the truth is coming out. This also strongly reinforces Alan Dershowitz' claim that Hizbullah actually wants massive Lebanese casualties for propaganda purposes.
Huge thanks to Yael K. who made me aware of this.
[NOTE: This piece also appears on Blogs of Zion.]
Members of the Lebanese Forces Speak Out On Qana and Hizbullah (Part 1)
The Ouwet Front is a blog which describes itself as "Personal Views and Opinions of Lebanese Forces Members". They've had lots to say about Qana, and none of it is at all kind to Hizbullah. They, in fact, blame Hizbullah for the deaths at Qana rather directly.
In one post they echo the Israeli claim that Hizbullah was firing missiles from Qana, even linking Israeli military video showing the missiles being launched. In another post titled "How Hezbollah hides in civilian buildings" they add:
They once again provide a link to video proving their point.
These Lebanese servicemen also make an appeal:
I don't feel Israel has any choice when it comes to attacking Israel. I will be posting photographic evidence of why very shortly. In any case if Hizbullah had not attacked Israel in the first place and if they did not persist in these attacks right up until the present there wouldn't any need for Israeli military action in Lebanon.
[NOTE: This post also appears in Blogs of Zion.]
In one post they echo the Israeli claim that Hizbullah was firing missiles from Qana, even linking Israeli military video showing the missiles being launched. In another post titled "How Hezbollah hides in civilian buildings" they add:
May Hezbollah and Nasrallah rot in hell for what they are doing. If Israelis were war criminals, Hezbollah are ruthless killers.
They once again provide a link to video proving their point.
These Lebanese servicemen also make an appeal:
Anyone who has substancial info, eye witness accounts, pictures or any kind of proof of Hizbullah using and abusing civilians please mail them at :
freethesouth@gmail.com
We strongly condemn the Israeli attacks on Lebanon, we strongly condemn any invasion against our country or interference in our internal affairs BUT we cannot tolerate a LEBANESE party using innocent Lebanese civilians as human shields for purposes that only serve terrorist countries like Iran and Syria.
May the truth prevail.
I don't feel Israel has any choice when it comes to attacking Israel. I will be posting photographic evidence of why very shortly. In any case if Hizbullah had not attacked Israel in the first place and if they did not persist in these attacks right up until the present there wouldn't any need for Israeli military action in Lebanon.
[NOTE: This post also appears in Blogs of Zion.]
Who Is Really Responsible For the Carnage At Qana?
The Lebanese website Libanoscopie, which is anti-Syrian in its viewpoint, directly accuses Hizbullah of deliberately planning the Qana massacre, and of even deliberately bringing disabled children to the side to be killed, all for the benefit of the propaganda machine. The article, which is in French, says, in part:
For those who don't speak French, here is a translation courtesy of the Israeli daily Yediot Ahranot:
Ariel Beery's comments in Blogs of Zion pretty much sum up my thoughts:
Mais pourquoi une bavure pareille, une erreur ? Un massacre prémédité ? Une source généralement bien informée nous raconte sa version :
« Le Hezbollah, coincé par les 7 points proposés par le premier ministre Fouad Siniora, qui mettait un plan de déploiement de l’armée libanaise sur tout le territoire et essentiellement au Sud Liban, et donc le désarmement de la milice du parti de Dieu, a voulu faire échouer ces négociations. Il a mis en pace un plan machiavélique en créant un événement qui lui permettrait d’annuler ce projet. Sachant très bien qu’Israël n’aura pas d’état d’âme pour bombarder des cibles civiles, des militants du Hezbollah ont installé une base de lancement de roquettes sur le toit d’un immeuble à Cana et y ont entassé des enfants infirmes dans la ferme intention de voir une réplique de la part de l’aviation israélienne et créer une nouvelle situation, utilisant le massacre de ces innocents pour reprendre l’initiative des négociations. »
Ajoutant : « ils ont utilise Cana qui a déjà été un symbole d’un massacre d’innocents, ils ont fomenté un Cana 2 ».
For those who don't speak French, here is a translation courtesy of the Israeli daily Yediot Ahranot:
"We have it from a credible source that Hizbullah, alarmed by Siniora's plan, has concocted an incident that would help thwart the negotiations. Knowing full well that Israel will not hesitate to bombard civilian targets, Hizbullah gunmen placed a rocket launcher on the roof in Qana and brought disabled children inside, in a bid to provoke a response by the Israeli Air Force. In this way, they were planning to take advantage of the death of innocents and curtail the negotiation initiative," the site stated.
The site's editors also claimed that not only did Hizbullah stage the event, but that it also chose Qana for a specific reason: "They used Qana because the village had already turned into a symbol for massacring innocent civilians, and so they set up 'Qana 2'." Notably, the incident has indeed been dubbed "The second Qana massacre" by the Arab media.
Ariel Beery's comments in Blogs of Zion pretty much sum up my thoughts:
Shocking? Shouldn't be. Any one who is willing to strap bomb-vests upon their children and send them to their deaths is a true believer. And Qana was simply Martyrdom by other means.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)