Saturday, December 27, 2014


Ben Cohen 23/12/2014

A new report from Israeli watchdog NGO Monitor has exposed disturbing levels of anti-Israel hatred in the Christmas messages and appeals promoted by radical Christian groups dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“Come All Ye Haters: NGO Exploitation of Religious Themes to Demonize Israel”reveals that “at the height of the holiday season, NGOs, well-known charities, and church groups once again are exploiting Christmas to conduct political warfare against Israel.”
According to NGO Monitor – which tracks both the statements and activities of NGOs working in the area as well as their funding by foreign governments and charities – “In some instances, the rhetoric used reflects antisemitic theology and sentiments such as comparing Israel to First Century Romans, portraying Israel as inherently oppressive, and referring to the ‘tribal god’ of Judaism.”
Among the several examples cited in the report is the annual “Christmas Alert” booklet produced by Kairos Palestine, an organization rooted in the 2009 Kairos Declaration on Palestine, a document authored by the Palestinian Christian activist Naim Ateek and other church figures, which denies the historic connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel while asserting that, in contrast, “Christian and Muslim Palestinians” are “deeply rooted in the history and geography of this land.”
In its 2014 booklet, Kairos quotes Father Jamal Khader of the Latin Patriarch Seminary in Beit Jala describing the “Israeli occupation” as the “greatest evil” – the abuse of Christians elsewhere in the Middle East, including the genocidal campaign waged against them by Islamic State terrorists in Iraq, is not even acknowledged.
Meanwhile, another article in the booklet presents Israel as an inherently illegitimate state, claiming that “since 1948 (the year of Israel’s creation,) Israel developed a regime that combines occupation, apartheid and colonization which acts as the root cause of the ongoing forced population transfer of the Palestinian people.”
“During the current holiday season, NGOs exploit religious sources and biblical verses as part of their political warfare against Israel,” the NGO Monitor report observed. “The traditional Christian themes are introduced into a simplistic, one-sided narrative of the conflict that omits terrorism, Hamas control of Gaza, and Israel’s basic security needs to protect its civilian population.”
Wi’am, described by NGO Monitor as “a ‘grassroots organization’ that is involved in BDS,” declared in its Christmas message that “Christ was born in Bethlehem under the Roman Occupation. This story is not strange for us…The new Herods are instilling fear in whole communities, using religion to depict a god of vengeance, a tribal god of retaliation.”
This same theme was echoed in a Christmas message distributed by Rev. Kate Taber, the representative in the “Holy Land” of the Presbyterian Church USA. “As we celebrate the birth of the Christ child this season, it is impossible for me not to imagine what his life would have been like, or Mary’s as his mother, had he been born in Bethlehem today,” Taber wrote.
Much of the funding for these and similar organizations comes from European and American church groups who are in turn recipients of taxpayer funds. “As funders, these governments are enablers and share the moral responsibility for the actions of the NGOs,” NGO Monitor concluded.

Monday, December 22, 2014


Jonathan S. Tobin 19/12/2014
For the full article go to:  

Five months ago Hamas rained down rockets on Israeli cities and attempted to use a tunnel network to infiltrate into the Jewish state and kidnap and kill as many Jews as they could. But predictably most of the world’s attention was focused on Israeli counter-attacks to suppress the missile fire and take out the tunnels and it came under severe criticism, even from its American ally, for the toll of civilian deaths that were caused by Hamas using the population of Gaza as human shields. But those who deplored the 50-day war as a tragedy for the Palestinian people now need to ask themselves whether they are really interested in watching another such round of fighting in the future. The same international community that blasted Israel for having the temerity to defend itself now needs to address the fact that the aid that is pouring into the strip for the purpose of rebuilding homes destroyed in the fighting, is actually being used to rebuild the terror tunnels. If they don’t, they’ll have no right to criticize Israel when it is once again forced to act to defend itself.

As the Times of Israel writes, the Israel media is reporting that:

Some of the cement and other materials being delivered to the coastal Palestinian territory, as part of an international rebuilding effort, has been diverted to the tunnels.
The story goes on to detail some things that can’t come as a surprise. 

Even as it rebuilds its terror tunnels, Hamas is replenishing its supply of missiles and rockets. Given that the group has just kissed and made up with Iran, the flow of money and munitions into the strip by one means or another is bound to increase.

Though expected, this does increase Hamas’s leverage over the Palestinian Authority, which isn’t interested in making peace with Israel but will certainly never do so while it remains under threat from its erstwhile unity partner. Though many in Israel and elsewhere assumed Hamas would emerge weakened from a war in which Gaza was flattened and little material damage was done to the Jewish state, it is more popular than ever (especially in the West Bank which did not suffer much from the terror group’s murderous policies) and may soon be as much of a threat to Israel as it was before the fighting started. Indeed, if, as reports indicate, Hamas is working on ways to defeat Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system succeed, the danger will be far worse the next time the terrorists decide they wish to try their luck.

That is a daunting prospect for Israelis and poses difficult questions for Prime Minister Netanyahu who is now criticized for his handling of the war even if most of his critics would not have supported a bloody campaign to evict Hamas from Gaza and thus eliminate the threat for the future.

But it should also pose serious questions for those countries like the United States and its European allies that were so quick to bash Israel for its efforts to silence the missile fire and demolish the tunnels.

This week, both American and European diplomats wasted their time negotiating over the text of a United Nations Security Council resolution that would recognize Palestinian independence proposed by the PA. The proposal was a non-starter that in the end even the Obama administration had to oppose, but the talk about Palestinian independence ignored the fact that there is already an independent Palestinian state in all but name in Gaza that is using its autonomy to continue its never-ending war to destroy Israel.

By acquiescing to a situation in which a criminal terrorist group not only continues to rule over a captive population and threaten war against a neighboring sovereign state but also standing by silently as Hamas creates the conditions for another terror war, the West is demonstrating its moral bankruptcy on the Middle East. Those who talk about helping the Palestinians cannot ignore the fact that what Hamas is doing is preparing to set in motion a chain of events that will lead to more bloodshed and suffering. By their silence and, even worse, refusal to halt the flow of material that is being used by Hamas to prepare for another war, they are morally responsible for every drop of Arab or Israeli blood that will be shed.

Tuesday, December 16, 2014


By Tovah Lazaroff 12.12.2014

For the full article:

Europe should apply a double standard to Israel when judging its actions compared to other Middle Eastern nations, Danish Ambassador Jesper Vahr said on Thursday, causing sparks to fly at the Jerusalem Post Diplomatic Conference in the capital.

“Israel should insist that we discriminate, that we apply double standards, this is because you are one of us,” Vahr said during a panel discussion on relations between Israel and Europe.

Israelis sometimes ask why Europe applies a different standard to its neighboring countries, such as Syria, Vahr said. “Those are not the standards that you are being judged by. It is not the standards that Israel would want to be judged by,” he said. Israel should want to be held to European standards, not Middle Eastern ones, he said.

“So I think you have the right to insist that we apply double standards and put you to the same standards as all the rest of the countries in the European context.”

The Jerusalem Post’s diplomatic correspondent, Herb Keinon, who moderated the panel, asked Vahr if his statement couldn’t be seen as “patronizing” to the Palestinians.

Vahr responded: “I am not sure it is,” particularly given that Israel is the stronger party in the conflict and the Palestinians are the weaker one. It is “natural,” Vahr said, to engage differently with Israel, a country with whom Europe, including Denmark, has an extensive cooperative relationship with in trade and cultural affairs.

Vahr’s comments angered Caroline B. Glick, the Post’s senior contributing editor, who retorted that they were a “statement of contempt for our intelligence.”

“I consider Europe’s keen interest in the Middle East, specifically Israel, to be an obsession,” she said. “It is an obsession that Jews have seen from Europeans from the time of Jesus.”

Glick was particularly struck by Vahr’s reference to a common culture between Israel and Europe. “We have this whole common culture, I mean really? We respect international law. You guys make it up,” she said.

In 2001, the United Nations Security Council approved a binding resolution that bars UN member states from funding or supporting terrorist organizations, Glick said. That resolution, she said, has not stopped Europe from “funneling billions of euros into rebuilding terrorist-controlled Gaza.“This is in contravention of binding international law that you signed onto,” she charged.

But when it comes to Israel, Europe simply invents international law, Glick said. Europe acts as if it is required by law to sanction Israel for activity over the pre-1967 lines in West Bank settlements and Jerusalem, even though there is no such binding international legislation, she said.

“There is no such binding law. You guys are funding settlements in Western Sahara.You are funding them directly,” she said. “This is not a double standard. This is a singular standard for Israel. This is not about international law. It is about an obsessive, compulsive need to constantly pick at the Jewish state,” she said.

After receiving applause from the audience, Glick continued: “No, I do not want to be proud that you are looking at us in a different standard from our neighbors because you are not looking at our neighbors as human beings. “What you are saying is that they are objects. The only actor in this entire region are the people they are trying to annihilate.

“The only people who are supposed to be judged for our actions, and always poorly, are the people who are doing everything possible – more than Europe, more than the US, more than anyone – in order to protect the lives of the Palestinians,” she said.

For the video go to:

Editor’s Note:- We have been unable to get the video of the Danish Ambassador’s right of reply to Glick but will send it on to you, our readers, if we do succeed to get a copy.

From someone attending the conference, we have been informed that in his right to reply to Glick, the Danish Ambassador did not address the points raised by Glick but materially diverted the conversation to criticize Glick’s recent book.

Thursday, December 11, 2014


Tom Wilson 10.12.2014
For the full article go to:

The campaign to boycott Israel–the BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement–is undoubtedly a fringe campaign. But where this small band of anti-Israel extremists have experienced some traction is among those whom they have been able to convince that BDS is only against settlements. The argument goes that a boycott of Israeli settler produce will somehow persuade the Israelis to abandon their security concerns and bring an end to their so-called occupation of the West Bank. Yet one only has to look to how BDS conducts its campaigns in practice to see that this alleged concern with the “occupation” is just one of many disingenuous claims from what is, at its heart, an entirely disingenuous movement.
Listening to the words of BDS leaders such as Omar Barghouti you soon realize that the end goal of BDS is nothing less than the total elimination of the Jewish state. But unlike Barghouti, most of the BDS movement has the common sense not to state this so publicly. As such, BDS efforts have been ostensibly focused around boycotting settlements; although in practice this still allows campaigners to attack most Israeli companies by making flimsy arguments about guilt by association. So for instance the Israeli national theater company Habima was targeted on the grounds that it had previously performed in settlements. In Europe this argument is beginning to take hold. Supermarket chains, churches, city councils, and now EU diplomats are all coming round to the idea that boycotting the Jewish state outright may be going too far, but boycotting Jews who dare to live on the “wrong side” of a defunct armistice line is perfectly acceptable.

For BDS, SodaStream was the ideal target. This high-profile company, with its popular products and Super Bowl commercials featuring Scarlett Johansson, had one of its factories just to the east of Jerusalem in the West Bank. The fact that SodaStream boasted of being the largest commercial employer of Palestinians in the world did nothing to dissuade BDS from its efforts. Indeed, just a few months back when it was announced that SodaStream would relocate its factory from the West Bank to the Israeli Negev, BDS expressed no remorse for the Palestinian workers losing their jobs, but only exuberance at their own apparent victory.
Still, now that SodaStream is relocating from the West Bank BDS will be dropping the boycott, right? Wrong! As if proof was needed that fleeing the settlements will do nothing to appease those who simply hate the Jewish state in its entirety, BDSniks have said that they will continue to boycott SodaStream. Now the pretext for boycotting isthe allegation that the new factory will be based “close to” a town being built to provide local Bedouin with housing. And supposedly this renders SodaStream “implicated in the displacement of Palestinians.” One can scarcely believe that the movement’s leaders believe such claims, but then these are the feeble excuses of bigots trying to hide and justify their unacceptable agenda.

The true character of BDS is becoming increasingly apparent as the boycotters shift their attention toward targets that even they can’t bracket in with settlements and “stolen land,” except of course for the fact that BDS clearly considers all of Israel stolen land and any Jewish enterprise on that land to be a pollution. Israeli-Arabs are of course exempt from boycotts. Because at its core BDS is a movement that makes ethnicity the dividing line that determines who is to be boycotted and who isn’t. As such, it comes as no surprise that BDS activists in the UK have launched action against Sabon, an Israeli cosmetics company that has always been based within Israel’s pre-1967 borders.
Sabon opened its first luxury cosmetics store in London at the beginning of November and BDSers were demonstrating outside within just four days of its arrival. Over the weekend activists staged a particularly aggressive gathering, in which one of the ringleaders was heard employing the most shameless blood libel language, barking coldly down the megaphone: “you don’t want to be going into this shop, buying beautiful smelling lotions to smear over your body, because if you do you will be smearing yourself in the blood of Palestinians.” And yet this particular Saturday morning protest appears to have been spearheaded by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, the extremist fringe of an already extremist sect.

As can be seen in the video, the activists are few in number and their efforts have consistently failed to persuade consumers to reject Israeli products. Yet by standing in front of the entrance of Israeli owned stores, intimidating shoppers from stepping inside, it only takes a handful dedicated fanatics to get a stranglehold on a small store. Just a few streets over from the new Sabon outlet is the storefront that was once home to London’s Ahava Dead Sea spa. But in 2011 BDS activists succeeded in hounding Ahava out, not by persuading customers with their arguments, but rather by creating so much noise and disturbance on the salubrious Covent Garden street that–under pressure from surrounding businesses–the building owner eventually discontinued Ahava’s lease. The protesters now seek to do the same to Sabon simply because it, like Ahava and SodaStream, is owned by Israeli Jews.

A few years ago the fierce critic of Israel Norman Finkelstein attacked some on his own side, calling BDS “a cult.” It is a cult, but more than that, it’s also a fundamentally racist movement, and that is what the world needs to be hearing about BDS.

Monday, December 8, 2014


By David Bernstein 2/12/2014
For the full article see;  

Former AP journalist Matti Friedman wrote an article this past Summerabout how the media frames the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians for an online magazine called Tablet. To his surprise, it went viral, with almost one hundred thousand Facebook shares. It was recommended at the VC by David Post and me. Many people think it’s the single best article ever written on the topic, in part because it provides a rare insider perspective, from someone who actually worked for a major media company’s Jerusalem bureau.
Friedman is back with an even longer and, I think, even more revealing article on the same topic, this time in The Atlantic. Among other things, he ruminates about how many Israel correspondents act not as objective journalists, but as part of class of mostly foreign elites who live in Israel or the territories and have taken up the Palestinian cause. This class includes the employees of international organizations based in the Palestinians territories, and several left-wing Israeli NGOs.
Friedman points out that these highly influential organizations are almost never subjected to any real scrutiny by the reporters who rely on them as objective sources. And indeed, the Associated Press, according to Friedman, actually banned its journalists from interviewing Gerald Steinberg, an American-Israeli professor who runs the watchdog organization NGO Monitor out of Jerusalem. Here’s the relevant paragraph:
Around this time, a Jerusalem-based group called NGO Monitor was battling the international organizations condemning Israel after the Gaza conflict, and though the group was very much a pro-Israel outfit and by no means an objective observer, it could have offered some partisan counterpoint in our articles to charges by NGOs that Israel had committed “war crimes.” But the bureau’s explicit orders to reporters were to never quote the group or its director, an American-raised professor named Gerald Steinberg. In my time as an AP writer moving through the local conflict, with its myriad lunatics, bigots, and killers, the only person I ever saw subjected to an interview ban was this professor.
Long-time readers will recall that I’ve relied on NGO Monitor’s work in the past. Indeed, one of the most consequential “scoops” I’ve had as a blogger, that Human Rights Watch Middle East director Sarah Leah Whitson fundraised among rich Saudi Arabians with a pledge to use the money to counter pro-Israel forces in the West, came from NGO Monitor. My blog post on this, reprinted at the Wall Street Journal’s website, set off a controversy about HRW’s anti-Israel bias that has yet to fully recede (and assuredly won’t until someone less maniacally anti-Israel than Whitson and her boss Kenneth Roth is in charge).

Tuesday, December 2, 2014


by Isi Leibler
December 1, 2014

I have just read Ambassador Ron Prosor’s tour de force address to the United Nations a couple of days ago.  It is one of the most exemplary speeches I have ever read.  It not only eruditely reiterates the Jewish case but forthrightly exposes the cynicism and double standards of the international community in relation to Israel.  It is a speech that is unlikely to persuade our shameless  adversaries to change their policies, , but it should give great pride to every Jew.

I am substituting it for my regular column and would urge you to read / listen to it, distribute it and retain it for future reference.
Ambassador Prosor, to my mind, is the best Ambassador Israel has had at the United Nations.  It is regrettable that his term is coming to a close.

Mr. President,
I stand before the world as a proud representative of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. I stand tall before you knowing that truth and morality are on my side.  And yet, I stand here knowing that today in this Assembly, truth will be turned on its head and morality cast aside.
The fact of the matter is that when members of the international community speak about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a fog descends to cloud all logic and moral clarity.  The result isn’t realpolitik, its surreal politik.

The world’s unrelenting focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an injustice to tens of millions of victims of tyranny and terrorism in the Middle East. As we speak, Yazidis, Bahai, Kurds, Christians and Muslims are being executed and expelled by radical extremists at a rate of 1,000 people per month.

How many resolutions did you pass last week to address this crisis?  And how many special sessions did you call for? The answer is zero. What does this say about international concern for human life?  Not much, but it speaks volumes about the hypocrisy of the international community.

I stand before you to speak the truth.  Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, less than half a percent are truly free - and they are all citizens of Israel.

Israeli Arabs are some of the most educated Arabs in the world. They are our leading physicians and surgeons, they are elected to our parliament, and they serve as judges on our Supreme Court.  Millions of men and women in the Middle East would welcome these opportunities and freedoms.

Nonetheless, nation after nation, will stand at this podium today and criticize Israel – the small island of democracy in a region plagued by tyranny and oppression.

Sunday, November 30, 2014


By Isi Leibler 26/11/2014

The time has come to openly confront the international community and above all, Obama, for having mollycoddled Abbas and failing to exert pressure on him to bring an end to this murderous incitement.
The horror that engulfed the entire nation in the wake of the barbaric murder of Jews engaged in prayer in a Jerusalem synagogue remains palpable.

Although there have been other devastating acts of terror against innocent civilians, this time it was clearly religiously motivated. It was undoubtedly inspired by the incitement and despicable lies repeatedly broadcast by our purported peace partner, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who created frenzy among Muslims by alleging that Israelis would “contaminate” the Temple Mount by praying there and then invade and destroy Al Aksa mosque. Such outbursts are reminiscent of the Arab riots in the 1930s.

Abbas also sent his condolences to the family of a terrorist slain while attempting to murder a Jew the previous week, hailing him as a “martyr” who “rose to heaven while defending our people’s rights and holy places.” This was followed by false allegations that Israelis had murdered a Jerusalem Arab bus driver, even though a Palestinian coroner confirmed that it was a suicide. To top it off, the day following King Abdullah’s meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jordan in order to ease tensions, Abbas called on his people to launch “a day of rage” against Israelis.

This latest escalation of incitement is yet another extension of the traditional hatred against Jews inculcated among the Arabs but which accelerated after the Oslo accords. Yasser Arafat and then Abbas have effectively brainwashed generations of Arabs – from kindergarten age – into fanatically hating Jews and sanctifying as “martyrs” those willing to sacrifice their lives and gain paradise by killing them.

The Palestinians have, in fact, been molded into a criminal society adopting a culture of death comparable only to the Nazis who, once in power, also brainwashed Germans into committing barbaric crimes. And those, including Jews, who morally equate this monstrous society with Israel because the Jewish state like any country also includes deviants and degenerates, are making obscene analogies.

Every level of Israeli society, from the leadership to the media and down to the man in the street, reacts with shock, horror, disgust and condemnation against our deviants. Contrast this to the public display, not merely in Gaza but also in Ramallah, Bethlehem and Nablus, as Palestinians celebrated the most recent horror their “martyrs” had inflicted on Jews praying in a synagogue.

It is noteworthy that our “peace partner” Abbas had to be cajoled twice by US Secretary of State John Kerry (who subsequently thanked him profusely) for condemning this latest act of terror. Yet even when he did, he had the chutzpah to blame Israel for inciting Muslims, repeating his lies that Israel is attacking Al Aksa mosque. His Fatah spokesmen immediately stressed that he was forced to make the statement for “diplomatic” reasons.

Furthermore, Sultan Abu al-Einein, his senior adviser and member of the Fatah Central Committee, praised those who carried out the synagogue massacre, stating, “Blessed be your quality weapons, the wheels of your cars, your axes and kitchen knives because [they are being used] according to Allah’s will. We are the soldiers of Allah.”

These murders, some of which were committed by Arab Israelis who worked and interfaced with Israelis, have had a devastating impact on good relationships between Israeli Jews and Arabs. Understandably, many Jews now feel uncomfortable and suspicious of their Arab neighbors.

The majority of Israeli Arabs are law-abiding and wish to live in peace with us, but major efforts are required to convince Jews to regain their trust in those Arabs living and working among them.

This will require more than government and media appeals calling for tolerance. Much will depend on whether there are moderate, responsible Arabs willing to speak out, condemn the terrorists and take active steps to effectively excommunicate the minority of fanatics in their midst – including their Knesset representatives who currently openly identify with the terrorists and praise their vile acts.

The outrageous public celebrations by the Arab residents of the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Jabel Mukaber are an example of what must no longer be tolerated. This village was an incubator of dozens of terrorist attacks, including the recent synagogue massacre, the murder of the eight Merkaz Harav students in 2008 and many others. The family of the murderers publicly proclaimed: “We are proud of what they did ... They are heroic martyrs.” Paradoxically, the village pleaded with the High Court to remain on the Israeli side of the separation barrier.

We must adopt tough measures if we are to avoid a breakdown between Israeli Jews and the Arab minority. The first step must be for the government to reinforce security, including in Arab areas that had until now been unsupervised. This is an awesome challenge and requires punitive measures for those engaged in anti-state or antisocial activities such as stone throwing, destruction of private property and incitement against the state. The homes of the terrorists’ families should be destroyed and the residence status of convicted terrorists and their families revoked, as this will serve as a major deterrent even to those willing to die in order to kill Jews.

Should the international community condemn this as an infraction of human rights or the US again complain that such steps “harm the interests of peace,” we should remind them that it is our lives that are at stake and that they should not interfere.

Beyond that, we should now repudiate the misplaced displays of goodwill we have made over the years in order to placate the international community.

These have been counterproductive and only served to camouflage the Palestinians’ criminal society and culture of death. It is one thing to demonstrate our high moral standards to bleeding hearts abroad by providing the top medical facilities to relatives of Hamas leaders calling for our destruction and applauding barbaric acts. But while Hamas leaders continue to behave in this outrageous manner, we should cease providing electricity and services to Hamastan. The prime minister should state that if those in control of Gaza are going to continue publicly calling on their people to murder us, we will simply terminate all contact.

The situation with the PA is different, because unlike Hamas, it does not have total authority in the region under its jurisdiction. Abbas remains in office despite the absence of elections since 2006. But he is party to the violation of civil rights among his own people, the rampant corruption and the rabid incitement against Israel. Yet his PA maintains order in the West Bank, not merely in order to retain his “moderate” image with the US, but more so to prevent the upheavals that would eventuate if a full intifada broke out, which could enable Hamas to assume control. Thus Abbas directs his terror incitement to Jerusalem and creates religious hysteria about Israelis destroying Al Aksa mosque.

Abbas has been emboldened and encouraged in the knowledge that US President Barack Obama and his administration will continue to stand by him. The US criticisms against Israel, before, during and after the Gaza war, together with the repeated categorical whitewashing of Abbas and the PA , have paved the way for the current situation.

In contrast to previous occasions, Kerry unequivocally condemned the synagogue massacre, but Obama, appallingly, again felt impelled to employ moral equivalence by bracketing the attack in the context of “innocent” Palestinians who had also been killed.

The time has come to openly confront the international community and above all, Obama, for having mollycoddled Abbas and failing to exert pressure on him to bring an end to this murderous incitement.

The government must initiate a campaign in conjunction with friends of Israel throughout the world, to highlight the criminality of Palestinian society and explain why it would be an act of suicide under the prevailing circumstances to create a new terrorist rogue state.

We should appeal to our friends among the American people and Congress and, if necessary, challenge the president’s moral equivalence and betrayal of a loyal ally. The silent American Jewish establishment must now also speak out. They should take their cue from the Zionist Organization of America, which condemned Obama for linking his condemnation with the deaths of “innocent” Palestinians, and Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, who called on the US and EU to suspend PA funding until such time as they cease their incitement to murder Jews.

It is time for the US and the international community to recognize that Hamas and other Arab extremists are not nationalists but birds of a feather with Islamic State. We would have greater success conveying this message if our political leaders felt accountable to the public, which overwhelmingly yearns for a unity government during these difficult times. Alas, in our current dysfunctional political system, that is highly unlikely.

We must therefore gird ourselves to confront our adversaries, confident in the knowledge that we can and will defend ourselves and will not allow Jerusalem to be transformed into a Belfast or enable the international community to appease the extremists by offering us as a sacrificial lamb.

Tuesday, November 25, 2014


by Khaled Abu Toameh 24.11. 2014
The only option Hamas faces, therefore, is to attack Israel again as a way of ridding itself of the severe crisis in the Gaza Strip and the growing frustration among the Palestinians living there. Hamas's biggest fear is that this frustration will be translated into disillusionment with its regime. That is why Hamas is now seeking to direct the anger on the Palestinian street toward Israel.
Hamas is also hoping that another war will further increase anti-Israel sentiment around the world and earn the Palestinians even more sympathy.
Hamas's threats should be taken seriously.

A destroyed building in Gaza.
 (Image source: UNRWA/Shareef Sarhan)

Hamas is also angry with the Egyptians for closing the Rafah border crossing after a terror attack in Sinai in which 32 Egyptian soldiers were killed.

Moreover, Hamas has rejected the United Nations plan to reconstruct the Gaza Strip on the pretext that it "sidelines" the Islamist movement and allows Israel to decide who would benefit from the work. "The UN plan is unacceptable and ineffective," said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri.

Hamas is opposed to the UN plan mainly because it denies the Islamist organization any role in the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Hamas is also worried that the involvement of the Palestinian Authority in the reconstruction effort would undermine Hamas's control over the Gaza Strip, and allow Abbas and his Fatah faction to take credit for helping the Palestinians living there.

Last month, a donor conference in Cairo pledged $5.4 billion for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip.

However, Hamas maintains that since then, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have not seen any of the promised funds. Hamas has also strongly denied claims by some PA officials that it had asked for 20% of the funds for itself.

Rising tensions between Hamas and Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority are the real reason why the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip has still not started. These tensions reached their peak with the recent bombings that targeted the homes and vehicles of 15 senior Abbas loyalists in the Gaza Strip. Abbas has held Hamas responsible for the attacks -- a charge that the Islamist movement has strongly denied. Although Hamas has openly accused the PA, UN and Egypt of obstructing the reconstruction scheme, it is now threatening to resume its terror attacks on Israel.

Hamas cannot launch terror attacks against the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank thanks to the presence of the Israel Defense Forces [IDF] there. Hamas will also refrain from doing so to avoid being accused by Palestinians of "destroying national unity." Hamas does not want to be held responsible for Palestinian civil war.

Hamas is not going to initiate a crisis with the UN out of fear that such a move would rally the world against the movement and end the international organizations' services and relief work in the Gaza Strip.

The only option Hamas faces, therefore, is to attack Israel again as a way of ridding itself of the severe crisis in the Gaza Strip and the growing frustration among Palestinians living there.

Hamas's biggest fear is that this frustration will be translated into disillusionment with its regime. That is why Hamas is now seeking to direct the anger on the Palestinian street toward Israel.

Hamas's threats against Israel should be taken seriously, especially in light of reports that the movement is continuing to prepare for another war. Hamas not only continues to dig tunnels under the border with Israel; it has also been test-firing rockets into the Mediterranean Sea.

Hamas does not have much left to lose in another military confrontation with Israel.

The killing of a few hundred more Palestinians in the Gaza Strip will allow Hamas to shift attention from its failure to rebuild the Gaza Strip to blaming Israel for "waging another war" on the Palestinians. Hamas is also hoping that another war will further increase anti-Israel sentiment around the world and earn the Palestinians even more sympathy.

Abbas also stands to benefit from another war in the Gaza Strip. Renewed fighting would absolve him of his responsibility toward the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Additionally, of course, there is always the possibility that Israel would "do the job for him" and get rid of Hamas. And like Hamas, Abbas too would seek to take advantage of the fighting to wage another campaign of incitement against Israel in the international arena.

Tuesday, November 18, 2014


'Guardian' deletes reference to Palestinians, CNN labels synagogue 'mosque'

World media coverage of Jerusalem terror attack raises eyebrows in Israel.
Ben Wedeman11/18/2014
For the full article see:

From mistaking the Har Nof synagogue where Tuesday's terror attack took place for a mosque, to deleting references to Palestinian perpetrators, some of the international media continued to report on the events in Israel in an eyebrow-raising manner on Tuesday.

The website of British newspaper The Guardian ran a story about the attack from Reuters. The wire dispatch the agency sent included the headline 'Palestinians kill four in Jerusalem synagogue attack' and led with the sentence:  ''Two Palestinians armed with a meat cleaver and a gun killed four people in a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday before being shot dead by police…."

However The Guardian changed their headline to "Four worshippers killed in attack on Jerusalem synagogue" and in their lead, they also excised any reference to Palestinians, publishing:  "Two men armed with axes, knives and a pistol have killed four Israelis and wounded several others in a Jerusalem synagogue …"

In another questionable slant on its coverage, CBC headline their report on the attack with: "Jerusalem police fatally shoot 2 after apparent synagogue attack."

In a reporting gaffe, CNN superimposed their preliminary coverage of the terror attack with the headline: "Deadly attack on Jerusalem mosque."


As the victims of this morning's massacre at a Jerusalem synagogue are laid to rest, more details emerge of the horrific killing-spree.

By Ari Soffer 11/18/2014
For the full article see;
Worshipers were cut down as they prayed
Israeli Government Press Office

As the four victims of this morning's massacre at the Kehillat Bnai Torah Yeshiva Synagogue in Jerusalem's Har Nof neighborhood were laid to rest Tuesday afternoon, Israelis are still in shock at the depravity of the attack on unarmed worshipers as they prayed.

The four victims - Rabbi Moshe Twersky, Rabbi Kalman Levine, Aryeh Kupinsky, and Avraham Shmuel Goldberg, hy"d - leave behind grieving widows and 24 orphans between them.

Terrorists Ghassan and Uday Jamal stormed the synagogue early Tuesday morning armed with knives, a meat cleaver and a pistol, inflicting horrific wounds on their victims, which also included eight injured - four of them seriously.

The terrorists were finally killed in a shootout with police.
Terrorists' Families Celebrate, Pass out Candies in Jerusalem
Family of murderers call attack 'normal thing for every man belonging to Islam,' residents promise more attacks;
police seal neighborhood.

By Ari Yashar 11/18/2014
For full article see:
Celebrations (illustration)
Emad Nassar/Flash 90

The families of cousins Uday and Rassan Abu Jamal in Jerusalem's Jabel Mukabar celebrated wildly on Tuesday, after learning that the two had murdered four Jews and wounded eight others with hatchets, knives and guns in a synagogue in the Har Nof neighborhood.

"We responded with shouts of joy when we received the news about their deaths," Ala'a Abu Jamal said of his cousins to Yedioth Aharonoth. "People here distributed candies to guests who visited us, and there was joy for the martyrs."

Trying to justify the horrific attack using the situation on the Temple Mount, where Jews are forbidden from praying and Muslim visitors riot on a near daily basis, he continued by calling the attack "a normal thing that can be expected from every man who has courage and a feeling of belonging to his people and to Islam."

"The attack was a surprise for us, we didn't expect that it would occur," claimed Ala'a Abu Jamal. "The two killed (terrorists - ed.) were regular workers and weren't associated with any organization. One of them was married with three children. Thank Allah, someone who dies as a martyr, that's a great thing."

Friday, November 14, 2014



By Alan Dershowitz 2.11.2014
Dershowitz challenges Ed Milliband to criticize Great British troops for “the killing of innocent... civilians” in their wars against terrorists.

Ed Milliband, who is the leader of Great Britain’s Labor Party, wants to become prime minister following the next general election. But recent statements he has made about Israel’s incursion into Gaza raise serious questions about his capacity to govern, and especially about his ability and willingness to protect the citizens of Great Britain against the threats posed by Islamic State (IS) and other Islamic terrorist groups.

Milliband strongly criticized British Prime Minister David Cameron, arguing that he was “wrong not to have opposed Israel’s incursion into Gaza.”

It’s not clear whether this ill-advised statement was merely a political cheap shot or whether it reflects Milliband’s actual views regarding a nation’s need to defend its citizens against terrorism.

Recall that Israel’s “incursion” into Gaza occurred only after Hamas had sent death squads into Israeli territory using its network of close to 40 sophisticated tunnels illegally dug under the Gaza-Israeli border.

According to Israeli intelligence sources, Israel concluded that unless it shut down these tunnels of death Hamas was planning to send hundreds of terrorists into Israel to kill and kidnap civilians and soldiers.

I was in one of those tunnels just before Israel’s incursion into Gaza. A Beduin tracker who worked for the Israel Defense Forces discovered an air hole which led Israeli soldiers to finding the hidden exit to the tunnel, which was in close proximity to an Israeli kindergarten attended by over 50 children.

The purpose of this tunnel was to kill and/or kidnap as many of these children as possible.

As soon as I entered the sophisticated tunnel, with railroad tracks, communications equipment and places to store explosives, it became clear to me that Israel would have to send troops into Gaza to find the entrances to such tunnels and destroy them.

Israel knew where some of the entrances were because its satellites could track the removal of large amounts of dirt. But even Israel’s most sophisticated devices could not track the direction of the tunnels or their numerous secret exit points.

Some of the tunnels had several entrance and exit points – offshoots of the main underground shaft between Gaza and Israel. These tunnels could not be destroyed from the air. Nor could their exit points be found. The only two options were allowing them to continue to exist, thus endangering thousands of Israelis; or ordering an incursion into Gaza, designed to locate and destroy the tunnels from their entrance points.

Israel did not send troops into Gaza in order to stop the thousands of rockets Hamas was firing at its cities, towns and airport. It relied instead on its Iron Dome, which was only 85 percent effective, on its network of shelters located in and around every populated area, and its GPS-guided missile attacks against the rocket launchers. It was the discovery of so large a network of tunnels and the reality that Israel had no technology comparable to Iron Dome to prevent them from being used against its citizens that led Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finally to order the ground incursion.

My challenge to Ed Milliband: What would you have done if you were the prime minister of a country that faced comparable threats? It is easy to criticize the British prime minister for not having opposed Israel’s incursion into Gaza but, as The New York Times reported (10/23/14), Milliband “did not outline an alternative security response.”

Now he must. Would he have waited for dozens of death squads with hundreds of terrorists to enter Israel and wreak havoc on cities, towns and kibbutzim near the Gaza border? Would he have tried to attack the tunnel entrances from the air, despite the fact that many of them were located in mosques, schools, hospitals, private homes and densely populated civilian areas? The question British voters should ask is: What would prime minister Ed Milliband have done? What would he do if Britain were faced with comparable threats? His country, unlike tiny Israel, is an island separated from its traditional enemies by bodies of water. But one can imagine Scottish independent radicals digging tunnels into northeastern England. Or Irish radicals firing rockets into English cities on the West Coast? As opposition leader would Milliband criticize the current prime minister for trying to stop these attacks against British civilians? As prime minister would he do nothing and simply call for a cease-fire and the resumption of talks, as he did with regard to the Israeli-Hamas conflict?

Milliband also rebuked Cameron for his “silence on the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians caused by Israel’s military action.” But Milliband himself has remained silent on Hamas’ deliberate use of human shields that has been the main cause for why Palestinian civilians were killed. As British military expert Richard Kemp said, “No army in the world acts with as much discretion and great care as the IDF in order to minimize damage. The US and the UK are careful, but not as much as Israel.”

Kemp then provided specific ratios: “Israel’s ratio of military casualties in Operation Protective Edge was only one-fourth of the average in warfare around the world. During the operation, there was approximately one civilian casualty for every terrorist killed by the IDF, whereas the average in the world is four civilians for every combatant, and that, when taking into consideration Hamas’s use of human shields, this shows how careful the IDF is.”

I challenge Ed Milliband to criticize Great British troops for “the killing of innocent... civilians” in their wars against terrorists.

I await answers from the man who would be Great Britain’s next prime minister – answers that assure British voters that he is neither a hypocrite nor a leader unwilling to do what has to be done to protect his countrymen from terrorism.