Tag Archives: Israel

Israel bashers’ phony contrition

Dr. Richard Horton, the editor of the English medical journal The Lancet, was not transformed by his visit to Israel last week.

Horton came to Israel last week the guest of Rambam Medical Center in a bid to dig himself out of the hole he dug himself into. On August 19 Horton published a 1,600-word letter criminalizing Israel. In it, Israel was accused of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. The authors called for a boycott of Israel, including Israeli academia. Since its publication on Lancet’s website, the letter has garnered 20,000 signatures.

The letter made no mention of the fact that the war this summer was initiated by Hamas through its illegal missile, mortar and rocket offensive against Israeli population centers. The esteemed medical professionals who wrote the letter failed to mention that Hamas’s operational headquarters was located in Shifa hospital in Gaza. And of course, they ignored the underlying fact that Hamas’s entire campaign against Israel was a crime against humanity.

Immediately following its publication, Prof. Gerald Steinberg, the head of NGO Monitor, exposed that the letter’s principal authors are frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Semites. Dr. Paola Manduca and Dr. Swee Ang disseminated a video entitled, CNN, Goldman Sachs & the Zio Matrix. It was produced by the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan David Duke.

As Britain’s Telegraph reported, in disseminating the video, Ang exhorted her audience to understand that the Jewish threat outlined in the video is a threat to humanity. In her words, it “is not about Palestine – it is about all of us!” For her part, as the Telegraph reported, Manduca has accused Israel of responsibility for the Boston Marathon bombing. And she disseminated an article comparing Israel to a “strangler fig,” which as the Telegraph explained, “grows around other trees and takes their sunlight, often resulting in the deaths of the original trees.”

Steinberg cataloged Horton’s long record of publishing anti-Israel slanders under the guise of a scientific research. Horton responded with indignation to the initial criticisms of his decision to publish the defamatory letter. He told the Telegraph that the anti-Semitic views of letter authors were “utterly irrelevant.” He called criticism of his decision to publish the letter, “a smear campaign.”

Horton then pledged not to retract the letter – which is still posted on Lancet’s website – “even if [criticism of the authors] was found to be substantiated.”

Yet as the outrage mounted against him, and the stench of the Jew hatred of his colleagues grew stronger, Horton began to feel the heat. So after refusing to publish a letter from Israeli doctors from Rambam rejecting the libelous attacks against Israel, Horton accepted Rambam’s invitation to come to Israel last week and learn firsthand how none of his allegations were true.

At the end of his three-day visit, Horton gave a lecture at Rambam where he condemned the Cossack-style Jew hatred of his colleagues Ang and Manduca. But despite his seeming contrition, Horton did not disavow their letter. He did not agree to remove the slander from The Lancet’s website.

Horton’s selective contrition was an expression of contempt for Israel, for his Israeli hosts and for their Herculean efforts over three days to demonstrate to him that Israel is good, not evil. Yet, instead of calling him on his obnoxious behavior, the heads of Rambam and other critics embraced him and praised his transformation.

As Dr. Anthony Luder, the director of pediatrics at Ziv Medical Center in Safed, wrote in a letter to The Jerusalem Post published Monday, “In what looks like an academic version of the Stockholm Syndrome, my esteemed colleagues at Rambam Medical Center have only succeeded in throwing sand in the face of the medical community by providing legitimization for a hateful hypocrite and terrible scientist.”

Horton’s behavior is very much in keeping with what has become standard operating procedure throughout much of Europe today. First, attack Israel. If you get called on it, issue a clarification or a clearing-of-the-throat apology that does not contain any retraction of your falsehoods. For your willingness to rhetorically temper your mendacious allegations, you can expect to be forgiven by Israel and those who care about truth in your country.

CONSIDER THE new Swedish government’s behavior.

During his inaugural speech last Friday, the new Social Democrat Swedish prime minister, Stefen Lofven, announced that his government will recognize the non-existent State of Palestine.

Israel rightly responded angrily to his statement, noting that the reason no peace accord has been signed between Israel and the Palestinians is because the Palestinians have scuttled and prevented negotiations for the past five years.

In the face of Israel’s angry rebuke of Lofven’s statement, the Swedish Embassy in Tel Aviv issued a clarification saying that Sweden supports a negotiated settlement and values its ties with Israel. Ambassador Carl Magnus Nesser told Army Radio that the remark was simply made to jump-start peace talks.

Lofven’s statement was not notable because he revealed himself as a fan of Palestinian terrorists who refuse to recognize Israel’s right to exist. That’s been Sweden’s policy for decades.

What was notable about Lofven’s statement is that he made it in his inaugural address to the Swedish Parliament.

What this means is that in Sweden, supporting the Palestinians against Israel is not a foreign policy issue. It is a domestic policy issue.

As Benjamin Weinthal documented in Monday’s Post, Swedish Social Democrat politicians with no connection to foreign policy have long records of vilifying Israel and condemning Jews that insist on supporting the Jewish state. Lofven’s government reflects this anti-Israel, and frankly anti-Semitic trend.

Lofven appointed Turkish-born Green Party politician Mehmet Kaplan to serve as urban planning and environment minister in his government. Three years ago Kaplan participated in the illegal, pro-Hamas Turkish flotilla to Gaza as a passenger aboard the Mavi Marmara terrorist ship. In a rally over the summer, he used jihadist language and called for the “liberation of Jerusalem,” and the “liberation of Palestine.” Kaplan has likened Swedish jihadists who travel to Iraq and Syria to fight for Islamic State to Swedish freedom fighters who fought against the Soviets in Finland during World War II.

Other leading politicians in the Social Democratic Party have traveled to Israel and participated in riots against IDF forces.

In other words, Swedish politicians have identified anti-Israel activism as a potent tool for garnering domestic support. This is why Lofven spent so much more time discussing it in his inaugural address than he spent discussing the killing fields in Syria and Iraq, for instance.

But just as Horton wasn’t willing to be lumped together with his Ku Klux Klan-supporting comrades, so the Swedes aren’t willing to admit that their hostility towards Israel owes to domestic considerations that have nothing to do with what Israel does.

Horton’s phony contrition and the Swedish embassy’s “clarification” flow from the same source. And they tell us something about what is happening in Europe and how we need to deal with Europe as it transforms itself before our eyes.

Europe is abandoning the ideals of the Enlightenment, and embracing authoritarianism and irrationality.

But it isn’t willing to admit what it is doing. As a consequence, it is possible to harken to those ideals to shame Europeans for their irrational bigotry and so slow the process down.

Horton will no doubt revert to open defamation of Israel in due time. The Swedish government will similarly attack us in due course.

But forcing them to slow down is important.

Whether or not Europe’s downward spiral is unstoppable is irrelevant for Israel because what is clear enough is that if Europe decides to abandon its current path, it won’t be because of anything Israel does.

Facing this situation, Israel must be guided by two goals as it confronts Europe. It needs to stop caring about what Europeans think of it, and it needs to reduce as much as possible its exposure to the European market.

On the latter issue, unless something fundamental changes, it is undeniable that at some point in the next 10 to 15 years, Europe will join the Arab League’s boycott of Israel. Israel needs time to develop alternative markets for its exports.

On the former issue, Europe’s main non-economic weapon against Israel today is the fact that the Israeli public and particularly Israel’s elites still care what Europe thinks of us. Israelis need time to understand that European hatred for Israel has nothing whatsoever to do with anything Israel does.

Bibi Diagnoses the Malignancy of Jihad

In a time when politicians willing to tell the truth are in short supply, it was refreshing to hear a foreign leader telling an American audience what our own are exceedingly reluctant to admit.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu provided such a bracing reality check in an interview on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday. He warned that there are “great events changing our world” and that “between East and West…there is a malignancy of militant Islam.” And it is “growing and spreading.”

Bibi Netanyahu added that the greatest threat facing his people and ours is that these jihadists will “marry their mad ideologies to weapons of mass death.”

Sadly, our leaders seem determined to allow an exemplar of this malignancy, Iran, to obtain the ultimate weapon of mass death: the nuclear bomb.

How Hamas Can Claim Victory After Operation Protective Edge

Last month, following a 50-day war, Israel and the terrorist group Hamas reached a truce. Even though the Palestinians in Gaza claimed a death toll of over 2,100 people, nearly 500,000 displaced persons and rubble lining the streets where buildings used to be, Palestinians are filling the streets of Gaza; in celebration as Hamas leaders are declaring victory over Israel.

With so much death and destruction, how is it possible that Hamas can claim victory?

It is actually quite simple. Hamas can declare victory because they do not care about the death and suffering of Palestinians.

During the war, Palestinians fired over 3,600 rockets and mortars into Israel. Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system shot down 735 of those rockets. With such an advanced protection system, Israel suffered a much smaller death toll of 70 deaths, 64 of whom were soldiers.

The Palestinians are claiming a death toll much higher than that of Israel. However, to Hamas, the death toll is almost completely irrelevant. Hamas has often repeated their desire for more death and destruction. In an announcement on Al-Aqsa TV, Hamas Chief of Staff Muhammad Deif stated, “[w]e love death like our enemies love life.” To Hamas, the death of Palestinians is only important when it can be used as a PR tool.

Hamas regularly places civilians in harm’s way and inflates their casualty numbers. Being able to cite a casualty rate 30 times higher than Israel’s was nothing more than fodder for Hamas to use when screaming to the international community that Israel is going beyond mere self-defense.

Hamas is not a responsible government. That is, they have no responsibility to respond to the needs of the people under their charge. Hamas uses private homes, schools, hospitals, and mosques to fire rockets with the expectation that Israel would respond by destroying those locations. The more destruction and suffering this caused the Palestinians, the better the PR fodder for Hamas.

Once you eliminate the idea that Hamas actually cares about the lives and suffering of Palestinians the easier it is to see how they can claim victory. Hamas used the fighting to gain in several strategic areas.

The cease-fire agreement reached between Israel and Hamas includes the extension of Gaza coastal water usage, opening the Erez and Kerem Shalom crossings, and narrowing the security buffer along the Gaza border. While the broadening of access to and from Gaza is for humanitarian purposes, Hamas has a history of utilizing goods, intended for humanitarian purposes, to aid in the construction of terror tunnels used to stockpile weapons and equipment, with the purpose to conduct assaults on Israeli civilians.

Additionally, Hamas has gained a level of international recognition, including from the United States. Palestinian activists lined streets of major U.S. cities chanting, “We are Hamas!” A de facto recognition started after the Obama Administration chose not to eliminate funding to the Palestinian government after Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas swore in a new unity government that incorporates Hamas appointed ministers. In an op-ed for Foreign Policy, former President Jimmy Carter went so far as to write that the key to ending the conflict is “recognizing Hamas as a legitimate political actor.”

Hamas is an openly anti-Semitic terrorist group, founded under a platform that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and of Jews around the world. The stated goal of Operation Protective Edge was to remove Hamas’ terror infrastructure. Many Israeli officials were calling for the organizations complete destruction. Yet, part of the cease-fire agreement was a pledge by Israel to cease the targeted killings of Hamas leaders. This concession, is in effect, recognition by the Israeli government that Hamas can continue to exist.

Starting with nothing, Hamas was able to kill Israeli’s, gain concessions that broaden access to Gaza, and gain international recognition. While many people cite death tolls as a proof that Hamas did not win this recent war, Hamas does not factor the death of Palestinians into the equation when calculating their victory. While Hamas may not have won the military victory, the fact that they still exist is a sign that Israel lost.

President Sisi’s gift

Something extraordinary has happened.

On August 31, PLO chief and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told an audience of Fatah members that Egypt had offered to give the PA some 1,600 kilometers of land in Sinai adjacent to Gaza, thus quintupling the size of the Gaza Strip. Egypt even offered to allow all the so-called “Palestinian refugees” to settle in the expanded Gaza Strip.

Then Abbas told his Fatah followers that he rejected the Egyptian offer.

On Monday Army Radio substantiated Abbas’s claim.

According to Army Radio, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi proposed that the Palestinians establish their state in the expanded Gaza Strip and accept limited autonomy over parts of Judea and Samaria.

In exchange for this state, the Palestinians would give up their demand that Israel shrink into the indefensible 1949 armistice lines, surrendering Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. Sisi argued that the land Egypt is offering in Sinai would more than compensate for the territory that Abbas would concede.

In his speech to Fatah members, Abbas said, “They [the Egyptians] are prepared to receive all the refugees, [and are saying] ‘Let’s end the refugee story.’” “But,” he insisted, “It’s illogical for the problem to be solved at Egypt’s expense. We won’t have it.”

In other words, Sisi offered Abbas a way to end the Palestinians’ suffering and grant them political independence. And Abbas said, “No, forget statehood. Let them suffer.”

Generations of Israeli leaders and strategists have insisted that Israel does not have the ability to satisfy the Palestinian demands by itself without signing its own death warrant. To satisfy the Palestinian demand for statehood, Israel’s neighbors in Egypt and Jordan would have to get involved.

Until Sisi made his proposal, no Arab leader ever seriously considered actually doing what must be done. Indeed, the rejection of this self-evident Israeli claim has been so overwhelming that in recent years, every Israeli suggestion to this effect was met with raised eyebrows and dismissal by Israelis and foreigners alike.

So what is driving Sisi? How do we account for this dramatic shift? In offering the Palestinians a large swathe of the Sinai, Sisi is not acting out of altruism. He is acting out of necessity. From his perspective, and from the perspective of his non-jihadist Sunni allies in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinian campaign against Israel is dangerous.

Facing the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, and the rise of jihadist forces from al-Qaida to the Islamic State to the Muslim Brotherhood, the non-jihadist Sunnis no longer believe that the prolongation of the Palestinian jihad against Israel is in their interest.

Egypt and Jordan have already experienced the spillover of the Palestinian jihad. Hamas has carried out attacks in Egypt. The Palestinian jihad nearly destroyed Lebanon and Jordan. Egypt and Saudi Arabia now view Israel as a vital ally in their war against the Sunni jihadists and their struggle against Iran and its hegemonic ambitions. They recognize that Israeli action against Sunni and Shi’ite jihadists in Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran serves the interests of non-jihadi Sunnis. And, especially after the recent conflict in Gaza, they realize that the incessant Palestinian campaign against Israel ultimately strengthens the jihadist enemies of Egypt and Saudi Arabia like Hamas.

Apparently, Sisi’s offer to Abbas is an attempt to help the Palestinian people and take the Palestinian issue out of the hands of Palestinian jihadists.

Unfortunately for Sisi and his fellow non-jihadist Sunnis, Abbas is having none of this.

In rejecting Sisi’s offer Abbas stood true to his own record, to the legacies of every Palestinian leader since Nazi agent Haj Amin el-Husseini, and to the declared strategic goal of his own Fatah party and his coalition partners in Hamas. Since Husseini invented the Palestinians in the late 1920s, their leaders’ primary goals have never been the establishment of a Palestinian state or improving the lives of Palestinians. Their singular goal has always been the destruction of the Jewish state, (or state-in-themaking before 1948).

Sisi offered to end Palestinian suffering and provide the Palestinians with the land they require to establish a demilitarized state. Abbas rejected it because he is only interested hurting Israel. If Israel is not weakened by their good fortune, then the Palestinians should continue to suffer.

For Israel, Sisi’s proposal is a windfall.

First of all, it indicates that the Egyptian-Saudi- UAE decision to back Israel against Hamas in Operation Protective Edge was not a fluke. It was part of an epic shift in their strategic assessments.

And if their regimes survive, their assessments are unlikely to change so long as Iran and the Sunni jihadists continue to threaten them.

This means that for the first time since Israel allied with Britain and France against Egypt in 1956, Israel can make strategic plans as part of a coalition.

Second, Sisi’s plan is good for Israel on its merits.

The only way to stabilize the situation in Gaza and comprehensively defeat Hamas and the rest of the terrorist armies there is by expanding Gaza.

If, as Sisi offered, the Palestinians of Judea and Samaria accept limited autonomy, Israel will no longer be demographically challenged. As a consequence Israel could apply its laws to Area C, ensuring its long-term security requirements and safeguarding the civil rights of all of its citizens.

Sisi’s plan is a boon for Israel as well because it calls Abbas’s bluff.

Abbas is genuflected to by the US and the EU who insist that he is a moderate. The Israeli Left insists that he is the only thing that stands between Israel and destruction.

Yet here we see him openly acknowledging that from a strategic perspective, he is no different from the last of the jihadists. He prefers to see his people wallow in misery and poverty, without a state to call their own, than to see Israel benefit in any way.

Abbas’s rejection of Sisi’s offer demonstrates yet again that he and his Fatah comrades are the problem, not the solution. Continued faith in the PLO as a partner in peace and moderation is foolish and dangerous. He would rather see Hamas and Iran flourish than share a peaceful future with Israel.

The only reason that Abbas is able to continuously reject all offers of statehood and an end to Palestinian suffering, while expanding his diplomatic war against Israel and supporting his coalition partner’s terror war, is because the US and Europe continue to blindly support him.

The final way that Sisi’s offer helps Israel is by showing the futility of the West’s strategy of supporting Abbas.

According to Army Radio’s report, both Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the Obama administration have been briefed on the Egyptian plan. The Americans reportedly support it.

Netanyahu’s position on the Egyptian proposal was not reported. But his recent statements indicate that he views the Egyptian proposal as a sea change that may facilitate a diplomatic breakthrough.

During his press conference following the conclusion of the cease-fire in Gaza a week and a half ago, Netanyahu was asked about the prospect of renewing the peace process with Abbas.

Netanyahu responded vaguely that prospects of the peace process are better now, in light of regional shifts. With the Egyptian proposal now out in the open, and assuming that this is what Netanyahu was referring to, his remarks were accurate.

Sisi’s offer, even with Abbas’s rejection of it is a gift to Israel. And Israel’s challenge in the weeks and months ahead is to make the most of it.

If the Americans force Abbas to accept Sisi’s offer, Israel and the Palestinian people will benefit.

And if Abbas successfully scuttles it, Sisi’s offer will show that Israel is correct that it cannot satisfy Palestinian demands on its own, and indeed, it demonstrates how unreasonable those demands are.

Sisi’s offer demonstrates that for non-jihadist Sunnis, not only is Israel not the problem in the Middle East, a strong Israel is a prerequisite for solving the region’s troubles. Here is a major Arab leader willing to stand with Israel even if it means discrediting the PLO .

As a consequence, Sisi’s offer is a challenge to the US and Europe.

Sisi’s offer shows Washington and Brussels that to solve the Palestinian conflict with Israel, they need to stand with Israel, even if this means abandoning Abbas.

If they do so, they can take credit for achieving their beloved two-state solution. If they fail to do so, they will signal that their primary goal is not peace, but something far less constructive.

Command and Control: The International Union of Muslim Scholars, The Muslim Brotherhood, and The Call for Global Intifada During Operation Protective Edge

Starting with the launch of Operation Brother’s Keeper by the IDF after the kidnapping of three Israeli teens by Hamas operatives, and well into Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, the International Union of Muslim Scholars’, (IUMS) Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi – a leading Islamic jurist whose pronouncements the Muslim Brotherhood consider authoritative – has been issuing calls on the Islamic and Arabic umma and all of the free peoples of the world to rise up in support of Palestine.

In multiple statements on the IUMS website, Qaradawi and the Union’s Secretary General Qaradaghi have issued these international calls to Muslims, Arabs and their supporters to aid in Gaza’s victory over the “Zionist enemy.” Qaradawi repeatedly couched his call in religious language, stating that all Muslims had a shariah obligation to support their brothers in Palestine, and condemned Arab and Islamic governments and scholars who were remaining silent or supporting the Israelis as traitors.

In an interview on Al-Jazeera, Qaradawi emphasized that no permanent peace deal could be sealed with Israel and that it was the Islamic Umma’s obligation to rise up for its central cause, the cause of Palestine. Citing his worldwide call to rise up for the Prophet Mohammad’s honor after satirical Danish cartoons were published and the response worldwide Qaradawi expressed the belief that he and his organization, maintained the ability to arise the Umma into action on behalf of such important causes.

The protests that arose as a response to Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip suggests that Qaradawi’s ability to call such protests deserve examination. While protests were not exclusively Islamist in character, the presence of Hamas flags carried by protesters was ubiquitous. Additionally black flags and white flags emblazoned with the Shahada, popular among those supportive of jihadist causes, were seen in almost every rally worldwide.

Command_and_Control_08-21-14_12.50pm

Hostility Against Israel In Latin America: What Does It Really Mean?

During the recent “Operation Protecting Edge” held by Israel in response to attacks by Hamas against Israeli civilians, most Latin American countries took a prejudiced and intentionally political attitude against the State of Israel.

Indeed, before any hard evidence was registered with regard to the circumstances under which this war is being fought, several Latin American countries reached conclusions. Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, Ecuador and Peru temporarily withdrew their ambassadors from Tel Aviv in protest at what they considered “a disproportionate Israeli action that caused deaths of innocent Palestinians”. Mercosur, the main South American trade bloc, called on the United Nations to probe Israeli “war crimes”, echoing the discourse of the infamous United Nations Human Rights Council.

Marco Aurelio Garcia, ideologue and architect of Brazil’s foreign policy, described Israel’s actions as “genocide”. No word was said about Hamas’ aggression.

What’s more, the Brazilian government cited the death toll based on Palestinian sources that often lack sufficient credibility. Although figures are not yet clear, Israel has stated that at least half of the fallen were Palestinian Hamas terrorists or members of the Islamic Jihad.

Chile followed in the footsteps of Brazil on behalf of their interpretation of international law, ignoring that Israel’s war against Hamas is completely legitimate and legal. Also, overlooked by both Brazil and Chile was the fact that Hamas attacked Israel, threatened to kill its’ people, violated multiple ceasefires, and cynically used their own citizens as human shields. The use of their own people to be used as human shields was part of their strategy as was discovered in their written manuals. This is not to mention that, in addition, Hamas has effectively obstructed the peace process in Oslo, intimidated and weakend the Palestinian Authority and demanded the elimination of the State of Israel and the Jewish majority that inhabits it.

The Uruguayan government, without removing its ambassador described the Israeli action as “genocide”. Furthermore, the Uruguayan foreign minister Luis Almagro criticized the Jewish community for its support of Israel, declaring that Jews should be the first to condemn Israel because of their own experience with genocide. According to a leader in the Uruguayan Jewish community, the foreign minister later admitted that this Uruguayan declaration was issued under pressure from Brazil and Venezuela.

In Argentina, Kirchner deputies rushed to condemn the killing of innocent civilians in Gaza without condemning Hamas. The official or semiofficial media interviewed Israeli citizens and tried to encourage them to make negative generalizations and unfounded accusations against Israeli civil society and its institutions, “confirming” that the Israelis are the “villains” of this film.

Of course, it is important to point out that the government in Venezuela, whose official and semi-official bodies have been openly anti-Semitic, urged the Jewish community to speak out against Israel, which led to the Wiesenthal Center appealing to the Organization of American States (OAS) to defend the rights of Jewish citizens. ALL of this reflects the illiberal character that Venezuela and other countries exercise over their own citizens. it also confirms the poor human rights record of Venezuela that the U. S. is still so hesitant to recognize despite the hard evidence on the ground.

Then, there is Bolivia, a country dominated by a totalitarian ideology orchestrated from above. Bolivia defined Israel as a “terrorist state” and changed visa procedures for Israelis willing to visit the country.

Finally, Daniel Ortega, president of Nicaragua and ruthless violator of human rights, declared that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is possessed by the devil and urged Pope Francis “to remove the demons from the Prime Minister’s head”. Furthermore, at the upcoming meeting of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), which will take place on August 21 and 22, a wide condemnation of Israel is expected. The language used is not clear as yet, but it is clear that the focus will be on Israel’s military response and death of civilians. No condemnation of Hamas should be expected and there is no chance that any of these countries would recognize that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Curiously enough, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has invested much time and money in lobbying the left-wing governments in Latin America. In fact, as cease-fire negotiations move along, the PA presented its strategic plan. Among the seven clauses of the Palestinian strategy six of them deal with the future of Gaza in pragmatic terms. One clause among the six reads “The PA Foreign Ministry signs bilateral agreements and conducts diplomatic trips to Latin America”. There are no details on this clause.

What is interesting is that current negotiations with Israel empower the Palestinian Authority to exercise more control on Gaza and at the same time it slowly eases up restrictions on Gaza as all the Palestinians factions promise to stop attacking Israel and build tunnels. In fact, relations between Israel and the PA on the ground improve.

Why would Latin American countries move to join condemnations of Israel at a time when not even one Arab country was willing to do so? The reason is that it provides them with another ideological tool to ingratiate themselves with third world countries and confront the United States face to face and send the message that the U.S. is no longer “the boss” in the region.

The fact that Brazil joins hands with Venezuela is not new since I already stated it multiple times that Brazil has been and is the most valuable political ally of Venezuela.

But the fact that Brazil and Venezuela continue to join hands on international politics is not coincidental and ultimately may have deeper consequences for the geo-politics of the region and for human rights.

The region, under the leadership of Brazil, has searched for South-South cooperation, not only for economic reasons. Latin America seeks a second independence, this time from the United States. Brazil often has great influence over the political thinking and foreign policies of other Latin American counties as it practices an ideological and autonomous foreign policy. So solidarity with the third world is encouraged and making common cause with other regions in the Arab world and Africa, which are also considered “victims of colonialism and exploitation by the developed world” makes sense.

This has already led Brazil and much of the rest of the Latin American countries to support the “Brasilia Declaration” of May 2005, which called for eliminating American sanctions on Syria; commended and defended Sudan at a time it was committing acts of genocide in Darfur; and; adopted an apologetic attitude towards terrorism by calling to investigate the causes of terrorism. Likewise, Brazil never condemned the genocide in Syria or the persecutions of Christians in Iraq.

In other words, Brazil is not concerned about genocides or human rights, as has been demonstrated time and time again.

This is why the emergence of Brazil at the international level will be harmful because it has not demonstrated a moral criterion for judging right.

Brazil, which aspires to a permanent seat on the Security Council of the United Nations is trying to get the sympathy of those members of the United Nations to form a majority consistently hostile towards Israel. In this case, Brazil would be no different from China and Russia, two apologists of rogue states and terrorist groups. It is crucial to stand up to Brazil’s international ambition. Brazil’s place in the Security Council must be denied and its regional influence must be stopped and counterbalanced until Brazil’s government is able to demonstrate good moral criteria, concern for human rights, and distances itself from the distorted world view of the non-aligned countries.

Is CAIR Lying about a Rally for Hamas?

A “Stop the Bloodshed in Gaza” rally in downtown Miami on July 20 featured aggressive Islamist chants typical of anti-Israel events. In English, the demonstrators yelled “We are Hamas!” and “We are Jihad!” (as can be seen and heard here). In Hebrew, a Hamas partisan screamed at an Israel-supporter, “Son of a bitch” and “Go to Hell!” and made an obscene arm gesture. In Arabic, the crowd chanted the infamous “Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jew, Muhammad’s army will return” (a reference to a massacre of Jews under the auspices of Islam’s prophet in A.D. 629).

As I say, just a typical anti-Israel demonstration, and far from the worst. Typical – except that some of its sponsors desperately seek respectability.

In a July 23 report on the demonstration, investigative researcher Danielle Avel posted a scan of a glossy paperflier advertising the event, listing its seven sponsors:

American Muslim Association of North America (AMANA), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Florida, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Syrian American Council of South Florida (SAC), American Muslims for Emergency & Relief (AMER), and American Muslims Foundation.

648
649

The event’s Facebook page lists a coalition of eight organizations, some of which overlap with those on the flier:

Join us & spread the word! In coordination with our coalition: Al-Awda Coalition, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)-FL, POWIR, Broward Green Party, CAIR, National Lawyers Guild (South Florida), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) – FAU, and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) – FIU.

650

Two groups in particular, CAIR and ICNA, caught Avel’s eye because they aspire to invitations to the White House, appearances on network television and at leading universities, and other signs of public acceptance. What took place in Miami, she correctly noted, reveals their true extremism.

Six days later, on July 29, CAIR’s Florida chapter responded with a denial:

CAIR-Florida was not part of, did not plan, did not sponsor, did not participate in, and had absolutely nothing to do with the July 20 rally. If any document lists CAIR-Florida as a sponsor of the event, that listing was included without CAIR-Florida’s permission.

651

I doubt the veracity of this denial for several reasons.

  • CAIR’s mendacity is so widespread that I have an entire bibliography of my writings exposing the reasons not to trust it.
  • The flier, of which I have a copy, twice states that Sofian Zakkout organized the rally. Zakkout is so close to CAIR, he’s effectively a staff volunteer: he coordinates with it, is quoted by it, seeks help from it, and is listed as a contact by it. (For more on Zakkout, see Avel’s exposé.) A year earlier, he listed CAIR’s Florida branch on another rally flier. It beggars the imagination that he would list CAIR without authorization.
  • The Facebook page still lists CAIR as a sponsor, two weeks after CAIR’s statement of denial.
  • Perhaps CAIR seeks to conceal the truth through semantics. Both the national organization (on the Facebook page) and the Florida chapter (on the flier) are listed as sponsors. The July 29 statement only denies permission from the latter, not the former. It is more than credible that CAIR national gave its permission to be listed as a sponsor while CAIR’s Florida chapter did not.

Given these facts, I disbelieve CAIR’s statement.

I do believe it sponsored the vile event in Miami; that its denial of that sponsorship is false; and that the despicable words at the Miami rally revealed the true face of CAIR.

CAIR must not be validated by invitations and appearances. It should be treated as a marginal and despised group like the Ku Klux Klan or the Nation of Islam.

Why Israel is losing the information war

For most Israelis, the international discourse on Gaza is unintelligible.

Here we were going along, minding our own business.

Then on a clear night in June, apropos of nothing, Palestinian terrorists stole, murdered and hid the bodies of three of our children as they made their way home from school.

Before we could catch our breath from that atrocity, they began shelling our major population centers with thousands of rockets, missiles and mortars, and infiltrated our communities along the border with Gaza through underground tunnels to kidnap and murder us.

And as the Palestinians did all of these things, they used their civilian population and the foreign press corps as human sandbags. They ordered their own people not to evacuate their homes from which Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad terrorists launched their missiles, rockets and mortars at Israel. And they launched missiles at Israeli cities from outside the hotel where the foreign reporters were staying.

It doesn’t take a PhD to understand what the game is. And Israelis – even many with PhDs – understand what is happening.

This is why so many Israelis are up in arms about our government’s failure to impact the wall of lies that comprises the discourse on Israel in the Western world.

The knee-jerk reaction of many Israelis to the sight of UN officials, CNN anchors and New York Times reporters accusing us of committing war crimes is to blame ourselves.

Our hasbara (public diplomacy) is a catastrophe, our defenders are incompetent idiots, we moan and scream.

But the truth is not so simple. Our speakers have gotten much better over the past several years. Some, like ambassadors Ron Dermer and Ron Prosor and IDF Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, are excellent.

Israel’s public diplomacy efforts have been unsuccessful in penetrating, let alone dismantling the edifice of lies that constitutes the Western narrative about the Palestinian war against us because our underlying strategy for contending with it is directed at the wrong goal.

Our PR gurus defined our hasbara goal as getting our story out effectively. To do so, Israel has operated on two parallel tracks. First, we have tried to adjust our policies to adhere to what we perceive as the West’s demands.

We have employed measures unprecedented in military history to protect the Palestinians from their elected leaders who use them as fodder in their propaganda war against Israel.

There is no precedent in the history of warfare to Israel’s practice of warning Palestinians when it is about to attack civilian installations that Hamas has unlawfully used to attack Israel.

Moreover, Israel has accepted interpretations of the laws of war – such as the specious assertion that Israel is required to provide free electricity to Gaza – that have no relationship whatsoever to international law.

The second component of getting out our story has been developing the sort of glitzy, media-friendly PR apparatus that everybody who is everybody says is the be all and end all of a successful media strategy. There is no foreign press corps more coddled than the foreign press corps in Israel. No government is more active on social media sites than Israel.

And yet, for all of our efforts, the UN Human Rights Committee appointed an open hater of Israel who doesn’t have a problem with Hamas to run a phony investigation of the IDF’s imaginary war crimes.

For all our efforts, The New York Times, MSNBC, the European media, CNN and all the rest demonize our soldiers and leaders. They ignore the fact that everything Hamas and its allies in Fatah and Islamic Jihad do is a war crime – from calling for the annihilation of Israel to shooting rockets at civilian population centers, to shooting rockets at civilian population centers from hospitals and from outside the hotel where their reporters are staying in Gaza.

So desperate are we for any truth in reporting that we seize as a major victory the fact that a Wall Street Journal reporter was nice enough to Tweet the fact that he interviewed a Hamas leader in Shifa hospital.

A casual glance at the mountain of distorted and simply false stories reported about Israel and its enemies makes clear that at a minimum, most of the Western media don’t care about the truth. The fact that they sent reporters to Israel and Gaza doesn’t mean they wanted those reporters to publish what is going on.

The reporters knew what they were supposed to say before they even got on a plane to Israel. True, Hamas has openly acknowledged that it prohibited the foreign press from filming its terrorists and their war crimes. But with rare exceptions, the media had no problem with Hamas’s rules.

So too, the UN Human Rights Council didn’t decide to form a commission of inquiry to criminalize Israel because we weren’t good enough at showing the lengths we go to protect Gazans from their elected leaders. And the UNHRC didn’t appoint William Schabas, who has called for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to be tried for war crimes, to lead its star chamber because it didn’t get the press release proving that Israel acts in compliance with international law.

The media, the US State Department and the UN attack Israel for crimes that Hamas commits because they are wedded to a narrative in which Israel is to blame for its enemies’ desire to destroy it.

As the UN, The New York Times and President Barack Obama see it, Israel is to blame because it is inherently guilty by its nature.

The White House and State Department can accuse Israel of conducting a “totally indefensible” and “disgraceful” strike against an UNRWA school, when no such strike occurred, and if it had occurred it would have been totally defensible, because as far as they are concerned, as Martin Indyk claimed in May, Israel’s right to exist is conditional on our willingness to accept their belief that we are inherently morally deformed and in need of direction by our betters.

Netanyahu is Schabas’s “favorite [to be placed] in the dock of the International Criminal Court,” because Netanyahu is the elected leader of the morally deformed Jewish state.

Given this situation, it is clear that Israel’s public diplomacy efforts are directed toward the wrong goal.

The goal of hasbara cannot be to educate the likes of TheNew York Times’ bureau chief Jodi Rudoren about the truth because the problem isn’t one of ignorance. The problem is that they consider the truth an impediment to their goal of reporting the narrative of Israeli criminality.

Rather than striving to educate, we must work to manipulate the Rudorens of the world into covering the truth.

For instance, there is no reason to provide reporters clearly dedicated to hiding the truth with access to national leaders and military commanders. Let them find their own sources. Israel is a free country. There is no reason for The New York Times to be invited to a press briefing by IDF commanders.

Another critical element of a strategy for forcing hostile media and international agencies to contend with the truth is to create events that they can’t ignore.

For instance, the chief military prosecutor together with the state prosecution should indict Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah leaders on war crimes charges and the relevant Israeli courts should begin adjudicating the cases.

The Knesset should begin deliberations on a bill to strip UNRWA of its legal immunity as a first step towards bringing its personnel up on charges of providing material support for terrorism.

True, such actions will be met with howls of condemnation and hysterical reproaches from all the usual suspects.

But at least they will be talking about Palestinian war crimes. At least they will be forced to acknowledge that UNRWA is a force of destabilization and radicalization, not of stabilization and moderation in the Arab conflict with Israel.

Our leaders and spokespeople cannot win the information war by devoting themselves to pointing out the West’s hypocrisy and double standards, or the rank mendaciousness and bigotry that stands at the core of their approach to Israel. No one ever won a war by only playing defense. And we won’t win this one by explaining why we aren’t war criminals.

We will only begin to make progress when we define the goal of our hasbara as forcing an unwilling media and international community to discuss the truth by taking deliberate actions that will make it impossible for them to ignore it.

Stop mowing the grass

A rickety cease-fire has been reached in Gaza and Egyptian officials are despairingly attempting to broker a long-term comprehensive truce between Israel and Hamas. Discussion regarding a truce centered on various security arrangements in exchange for trade access to the Gaza Strip. Israel hoped to ensure that Hamas would be unable to rebuild its rocket arsenal and military capabilities, while Hamas wants the Israeli blockade of goods and people into Gaza lifted.

However, we have seen this same song and dance several times before. Every few years since Israel’s unilateral withdrawal in 2005, Israel is goaded into an incursion against Hamas, only to back off after a few weeks when international pressure mounts.

In 2006, Israel launched Operation Summer Rains in response to numerous rocket attacks and the abduction of Corporal Gilad Schalit by Palestinian militants. In both 2008 and 2012, Israel launched operations into Gaza to stop increased rocket attacks by Hamas and to eliminate smuggling routes used by Palestinian militants.

Operation Protective Edge was launched to quell Hamas’s rocket attacks and destroy its tunnel networks.

Once truces are reached and Israel withdraws, Hamas uses the calm to rebuild its terrorist infrastructure and launches further attacks into Israel, forcing Israel to respond with more large-scale incursions. This routine has become so regular, Israeli officials have even come to refer to this practice as “mowing the grass.”

Many Israelis believe that they will never completely eliminate their enemies, so mowing the grass is seen as necessary to degrade Hamas’ abilities to launch attacks and to keep it off-balance.

However, judging by history, every time Hamas rebuilds its infrastructure, it’s stronger than it was previously.

The blockade on Gaza was imposed after the openly anti-Semitic terrorist organization Hamas – founded solely for the purpose of destroying Israel and killing Jews – was democratically elected to take over governance of the region in 2006. Hamas utilized tunnels to smuggle weapons, equipment and information into the region, in order to attack Israelis. Interest in eliminating the smuggling tunnels led to the various incursions. However, each incursion became more difficult than the last.

Tunnel systems have been growing more complex, weapons have become more advanced, and Hamas fighters are becoming more battle hardened.

When the 2012 cease-fire was brokered by then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton, one of the concessions in the cease-fire agreement involved the easing of a blockade on building materials and other dual-use goods that Israel had place on Gaza.

Clinton’s interest in a speedy cessation of the violence, as well as a quick “win” for the administration, led her to foolishly take Hamas leaders at their word as they pledged to use the building materials for schools and homes. Instead, Hamas lied and the materials were used to build a complex labyrinth of tunnels, including one with an exit just outside Kibbutz Nir Am.

The US administration’s interest in a hasty end to the violence led to a situation that disregarded Israel’s security needs. This recent incursion has surprised Israel. The size, quantity and complex nature of the tunnels, as well as the discovery of large stockpiles of rockets, explosive devices and the equipment needed to kidnap scores of Israelis was reportedly far beyond its intelligence estimates.

Hamas is not interested in helping the Palestinians better their lives. Hamas is a terrorist entity with absolutely no interest in anything other than fulfilling its goal of destroying Israel – a goal it will gladly pursue on the backs of dead Palestinians.

With a new cease-fire agreement, especially one calling for lifted blockades, we will only see more terror tunnels and future incursions into Gaza.

The stated goal of Israel’s incursion is the elimination of Hamas’ terror infrastructure, allowing Israeli residents in the area to live in safety without constant, indiscriminate terrorist attacks. If Israel does not stop Hamas now, the next time Israel launches an incursion into Gaza it will most likely be as a response to a terrorist attack like the one planned for Kibbutz Nir Am.

Additionally, now is the best time to quash Hamas, as it is currently isolated. The Egyptian government is no longer a friend to Hamas after the Egyptian military overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood government. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has destabilized the Middle East and has left Hamas’ allies unable to come to their aid.

Operation Protective Edge has allowed Israel to eliminate a large portion of Hamas’s tunnels and seize scores of weapons caches. Along with a lack of assistance from its allies, Hamas is now at its most vulnerable. It is imperative that Israel continue its incursion and reject any long-term truce that does not involve the complete elimination of Hamas and its infrastructure.

Of Pallywood and Human Drama

Two stories from yesterday, which highlight the moral, and policy confusion currently affecting the United States under the current administration.

The first was a story from the website Truth Revolt, which showed how the claim that Israel had “shelled a UN school” may very well be false, and that Hamas operatives appear to have moved the bodies of terrorists killed by an Israeli missile into school, and then placed the corpses of young children beside them in order to create the impression that a civilian target was hit by Israel. Despite that the history of Palestinian terror groups creating false narratives like this one is so common they coined  word for it (“Pallywood”), that didn’t stop the Obama Administration’s rush to judgement, calling the attack “disgraceful.” As ex-Naval Intelligence analyst J.E. Dyer noted:

It’s not actually funny that hardly a word of this communication is valid or pertinent. It’s horrifying, because it came from the government of the United States.
There was no shelling; the number of displaced persons housed at the school is irrelevant (and seems to have been included for rhetorical effect), given that the school was not hit, nor was it likely to be; the exceptional care taken by the IDF is what ensured that the school would not be hit, even though Hamas was putting the area around the school in danger; and the suspicion (in this case, the knowledge) that “militants” are operating nearby does, precisely and emphatically, justify strikes, which is why it is a war crime to hide military activities behind civilians and/or protected sites.

Meanwhile in Northern Iraq between 10,000 and 40,000 members of the ancient  religious community known as the Yazidis are trapped on an isolated mountain top, suffering from famine and dehydration.  Those who have not fled to the mountains face being hunted down and execute by ISIS jihadists.  Those not killed face being sold into slavery.

Yazidi Iraqi Parliamentarian Vian Dakhil issued a heart-rending cry for intervention which is spreading rapidly through social media. Yet the same administration which rushed to condemn U.S. ally Israel over an incident which may not have happened at all, is completely absent as Jihadists perpetuate genocide. Are the Yazidis, and the Iraqi Christians, who are likewise facing extermination at the hands of ISIS, not worth so much as a hashtag from this administration?

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdIEm1s6yhY]

It may be the case that there are few “good” options remaining for U.S. action in Iraq, thanks largely to the Obama administration policy of retreat and the terrible vacuum that policy has created. But consider, that had a Kurdish Peshmerga counteroffensive not been rebuffed by ISIS, due reportedly to Kurdish forces running out of ammunition, this current slaughter may have been prevented. As noted by Bloomberg News:

When asked about arming the Kurds, U.S. officials talk instead of their efforts to “coordinate” between Kurdish leaders and the government in Baghdad. They rely on legalisms to explain why they still prevent the Kurds from financing the war effort by selling oil on the world market. But Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki refuses to share weapons with the Kurds. And tankers carrying Kurdish oil are stranded from the Gulf of Mexico to Singapore because the government in Baghdad insists on its right to sell all of Iraq’s oil.

Perpetuating the false narratives of “Israeli war crimes” constructed by Hamas and their supporters abroad carries with it a moral consequence greater then just the spreading of falsehoods and the hamstringing of U.S. ally Israel.

It also distracts from the genuinely monumental and historical crimes of Hamas’ ideological compatriots, ISIS.