Displaying posts categorized under

ISRAEL

The UN’s Obsession against Israel by Pierre Rehov

Israel is thus the only country on the planet to benefit from the doubtful privilege of being scrutinized on the least of its actions, through an agenda decided by its enemies.

There is also no need to go back to 1976, to remember the infamous UN Resolution 3379, “Zionism is a form of Racism,” under the Secretary-Generalship of a former Nazi, Kurt Waldheim, a week after Uganda’s brutal Idi Amin received a triumphant reception at the UN headquarters.

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) met once again on March 20 to debate “Agenda Item 7,” a mandatory subject of debate since June 2006, the only one whose goal is systematically to condemn the Israeli democracy for crimes the existence of which remain to be proven.

The agenda, officially designed to assess the humanitarian situation in the Palestinian territories, in the light of the reports submitted by Fatah, the PLO and various NGOs, is part of a wider campaign, carried out by countries such as Libya, Algeria, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Sudan and Yemen. Israel is thus the only country on the planet to benefit from the doubtful privilege of being scrutinized on the least of its actions, through an agenda decided by its enemies.

If it were only a question of expressing this obsession, born out of an old habit for the Arab-Muslim dictatorships to turn the Hebrew state into their scapegoat, responsible for all the misfortunes plaguing their societies, Agenda Item 7 would be a mere oddity, especially since the session is regularly boycotted by a majority of Western countries, and systematically by the United States.

Unfortunately, this Israelphobia has been spreading throughout the United Nations. In 1948, when Israel, after being officially recognized as a sovereign state by virtually all Western democracies, had just repelled the genocidal aggression of five neighboring countries, and hundreds of thousands of Jews were fleeing the oppression of Arab dictatorships, the UN gave birth to UNRWA, an organization designed to help Palestinian refugees exclusively. This was despite there already being a program for refugees at the UN, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

The next failed peace talks : Ruthie Blum

As part of U.S. President Donald Trump’s trip to Israel and the Palestinian Authority on May 22-23, he will meet with PA President Mahmoud Abbas in Bethlehem. It will be the second time this month that the two leaders will have sat down to discuss the impasse in the peace process; the first took place at the White House just over a week ago.

During their chat in Washington, Abbas fed Trump his usual lies. Among these was the claim that Palestinian children are raised to be tolerant and peace-loving. That the U.S. president did not burst out laughing at this absurdity is more a function of his being new on the job than having good manners. It is also probably due to his belief that he will be able to apply the “art of the deal” to the Israeli-Palestinian context and broker a successful agreement.

Trump will soon learn, however, that his methods will not work. Even a business deal cannot be forged when the true aim of one side is failure. Indeed, it is precisely the lack of Palestinian statehood that has been Abbas’ meal ticket internationally — and the only thing that has kept him the least bit relevant at home. Well, that and cultivating, honoring and paying the salaries of terrorists.

In fact, as Palestinian Media Watch revealed on Wednesday, while Abbas was sitting in the Oval Office, his Fatah faction was openly lauding suicide bombers and other murderers of Jews.

On its official Facebook page on May 3, Abbas’ faction Fatah sent “blessings” to 12 of the “heroic prisoners” currently staging an open-ended hunger strike in a number of Israeli prisons. According to PMW, these included Abbas Al-Sayid, mastermind of the infamous suicide bombing at a Passover Seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya, and Marwan Barghouti, who is serving five life sentences for orchestrating several deadly attacks. Incidentally, being incarcerated did not prevent Barghouti from being re-elected to the PA parliament from jail. On the contrary, it made him even more popular.

There is nothing novel about the glorification of terrorists in the PA or about the hypocrisy of killers like Barghouti. Nor is it new for an American administration to fantasize about finding the magic formula for striking peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But it is interesting that Abbas reportedly requested of Trump that the starting point of any new talks be based on the parameters of his negotiations with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2008. He also was said to have presented the U.S. president with maps and other documents related to Olmert’s offer, which involved a nearly complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and east Jerusalem. It was an offer — as Abbas acknowledged for the first time in an interview with Israel’s Channel 10 in 2015 — which he then flatly refused.

During the interview, which appeared in a three-part series about the peace talks between PLO chief Yasser Arafat and Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 2000 and those between Abbas and Olmert eight years later, Abbas made the preposterous statement that one of the reasons he rejected the deal was because he didn’t understand Olmert’s map. Apparently, he has been boning up on his cartography ahead of the next round of bad-faith negotiations that will be marked by and culminate in Palestinian violence.

The PLO’s most powerful lobbyists: Caroline Glick

In private conversations over the past week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has complained bitterly about American Jewish billionaire Ronald Lauder. According to media reports, Lauder played a key role in convincing US President Donald Trump that he can reach “the ultimate deal” with the PLO and Israel.

Netanyahu is surely right that Lauder shouldn’t be acting like he knows what’s good for Israel better than the Israeli government does. He doesn’t know better than Israel’s leaders. And no one elected him.

But Netanyahu is wrong about Lauder’s responsibility for the president’s sudden decision to start singing from Barack Obama’s hymnal on everything related to Israel and the PLO .

Lauder is far from the only member of the PLO ’s booster club.

First of all, there is the American foreign policy establishment.

After 23 years of successive administrations upholding the fantasy that all the Middle East’s problems will be resolved the minute Israel hands over Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria to the PLO, it’s hard to find any establishment types who aren’t completely committed to the delusion that the PLO is the answer to America’s prayers.

Then there is the Israeli establishment. To understand its power, we need to consider the status of the Taylor Force Act.

The Taylor Force Act is a popular pro-Israel bill now being deliberated in Congress. If it passes, the US will be barred from transferring funds to the PLO-controlled Palestinian Authority so long as the PA pays salaries to convicted terrorists sitting in Israeli prisons and pays pensions to the families of terrorists killed while committing terrorist acts.

The bill, named for Taylor Force, a former US military officer murdered by a Palestinian terrorists in Tel Aviv in 2015, enjoys majority support in both houses. Nonetheless, it has hit an iceberg.

On Wednesday The Jerusalem Post reported that neither AIPAC nor the Israeli government support it.

AIPAC reportedly won’t lobby for the bill because it lacks support from Democratic lawmakers. This claim is ridiculous on its face.

If AIPAC can’t get Democrats to support a bill ending US funding of terrorism, then AIPAC might as well close its doors right now.

As for the government, it is far from clear how the government could be more supportive. Netanyahu has spoken publicly in favor of the bill.

So if Netanyahu supports it, which Israeli government opposes it?

Criticizing Israel: An Obsession of Hatred Alex Grobman, PhD

There is no shortage of critics of Israel. Some are antisemites who conspire to destroy the Jewish state. Others have legitimate concerns about particular Israeli government policies. When does criticism or condemnation of Israel become antisemitic? At what point does the condemnation of Israel cross the boundary into antisemitism?

Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS)

Omar Barghouti, founding member of The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) that initiated BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), and a graduate of Tel Aviv University, claims that “Israel and its lobby groups often invoke the smear of anti-Semitism, despite the unequivocal, consistent position of the movement against all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism. This unfounded allegation is intended to intimidate into silence those who criticize Israel and to conflate such criticism with anti-Jewish racism.”1

After hearing Barghouthi speak at UCLA, Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, the long-time executive director of UCLA Hillel and a renowned left-wing activist, said “BDS is poison and Omar Barghouti [a co-founder of the BDS movement] is a classic anti-Semite.” He found “no articulated aspiration for peace, only a negative desire to destroy the very foundation of the State of Israel. This is just recycled Palestinian rhetoric about the pursuit of justice in the mouth of a sophisticated, smart, Israeli-educated and wily ideologue.” When he uses the term “Justice,” it is merely “a political code word for no compromise. And everyone knows that any peaceful outcome is contingent on mutual compromise.”

Seidler-Feller considered Barghouti’s denial of Jewish peoplehood particularly egregious. Usurping the right of Jews to define who they are “is an aggressive act of denying Jews the fundamental right of self-definition. It constitutes a delegitimization of my being and of my identity as a Jew.” 2

A Unique Challenge

Nathan Sharansky, once a dissident in the former Soviet Union, sees these new attacks against Israel as posing a special challenge. Traditional antisemitism threatened the Jewish people or the Jewish religion. Individual Jews were denied the right “to live as equal members in a society. The new anti-Jewishness denies the right of Jewish people to live as equal members in the family of nations…. All that has happened is that we’ve moved from discrimination against the Jews as individuals to the discrimination against the Jews as a people.” Antisemitism, directed at the Jewish state, hides behind a façade of legitimate criticism that is more difficult to expose. 3

Definition of Antisemitism

The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Antisemitism and Racism at Tel-Aviv University suggests several criteria to distinguish between reasonable condemnation of Israel and antisemitic assaults.

THE CONGRESSIONAL ISRAEL VICTORY CAUCUS….ALL REPUBLICAN

Congressional Israel Victory Caucus’ launch by Republicans reinforces support for Israel
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/27/congressional-israel-victory-caucus-launch-by-repu/
By Valerie Richardson – The Washington Times – Thursday, April 27, 2017

Republicans fortified their growing bond with Israel by launching Thursday the Congressional Israel Victory Caucus, a coalition aimed at promoting widespread recognition of the Jewish state’s right to exist as a predicate to peace.

“We founded this caucus primarily on one single irrefutable principle, and that is first and foremost, Israel has a fundamental right to exist and defend herself. And that is not negotiable,” said Rep. Bill Johnson, Ohio Republican, who chairs the caucus with Rep. Ron DeSantis, Florida Republican.

No Democratic lawmaker spoke at the press conference to unveil the caucus, which comes with President Trump championing Israel after eight years of strained relations under the Obama administration.

Mr. DeSantis is the chairman of the House subcommittee on national security, which oversees U.S. embassies. He cited reports that Mr. Trump is in discussions to visit Israel on May 22, and predicted that the president at that time would announce the relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. (Palestinians have claimed Jerusalem as the capital of their future state.)

Mr. DeSantis, who toured in March possible relocation sites for the U.S. Embassy in Israel, noted that such a trip would coincide with the 50th anniversary of Jerusalem Day, which marks the reunification of the city after the Six-Day War in 1967.

“I think it will send a powerful signal not only about the U.S.-Israel relationship — that we’re back and stronger than ever — but I think that will send a signal to other countries in the rest of the world that America is back, we’re going to stand by our allies, and that we’re not going to let folks cow us into not doing the right thing,” Mr. DeSantis said.

New Caucus Hoping Trump Announces Embassy Move on Israel Trip By Nicholas Ballasy

WASHINGTON – Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), co-chairman of the new Congressional Israel Victory Caucus, called for the White House to follow through on President Trump’s campaign pledge to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“We’re looking at it very, very strongly. We’re looking at it with great care, great care, believe me,” Trump said in February alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), co-chairman of the caucus, hopes Trump might announce the relocation of the U.S. Embassy during his planned trip to Israel on May 22-23.

“We founded this caucus on one single irrefutable principle and that is, first and foremost, Israel has a fundamental right to exist and defend herself, and that is not negotiable. Israel has been at war with its immediate neighbors over its right to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people for nearly 70 years, and we believe Israel has been victorious in this war, and that this reality must be recognized in order for any peace to be achieved between Israel and its Palestinian neighbors,” Johnson said during the launch of the caucus at a recent Middle East Forum event on Capitol Hill.

“After eight years of the Obama administration creating uncertainty as to America’s support for our closest ally in the Middle East, I believe it’s important the nation of Israel know she has strong allies both in Congress and now, once again, in the White House,” he added.

Johnson also said the U.S. should send a “strong message” to the Palestinian Authority so they “give up” their goal of “destroying Israel” and “accept its right to exist as the Jewish State.” He also urged the Trump administration to reverse United Nations resolutions that are harmful to Israel and denounce the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

Johnson applauded UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, saying she is doing an “exceptional job in reassuring Israel and declaring to the world that America will not stand for one-sided resolutions against our closest friend and ally in the Middle East.”

Israel, according to the Washington Post By Michael Berenhaus

Should the Washington Post recuse itself on Israel?
In “Confident Trump says he wants to ‘prove them wrong’ and get a Mideast peace deal” (5/3/17), The Washington Post refers to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as leader of the “moderate” Palestinian government in the West Bank. This government has on its payroll Palestinians who are in Israeli prisons for murdering women and children. Does the Washington Post think that these terrorists are “moderate”? This so-called “moderate” Abbas government also name squares and schools after suicide bombers and inculcates its youth with Israel-hatred and more specifically Jew-hatred. It’s part of the Palestinian curriculum to not even name Israel as Israel — it names it “Occupied Palestine.”

Interestingly the Post refers to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party as “hard-line.” However, when broaching the subject of the Palestinian political group Hamas, which controls Gaza, the Post passes on a description at all and instead refers to them as a terrorist group according to Israel and the United States. Not according to Post. They just can’t get themselves to calling Hamas, “the terrorist group Hamas.”

So why is it that Post refers to Israel as having a “hard-line” government and refers to Palestinian governments as either “moderate” or with no description at all? If Post can’t see this blatant bias, how are they supposed to be objective when reporting on this conflict? It is high time for the Post to recuse themselves from reporting on Israel since they can’t apparently see through their own one-sidedness.

David Singer: United Nations Web of Deceit snares International Court of Justice

The United Nations publication The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem 1917-1988 (“Study”) has falsely misrepresented that the Mandate for Palestine was a class A Mandate – deceiving the International Court of Justice and many other reputable sources.

The Study has been published by the Division for Palestinian Rights of the United Nations Secretariat for, and under the guidance of, the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.

The Study falsely asserts without substantiation:

“All the mandates over Arab countries, including Palestine, were treated as class ‘A’ Mandates, applicable to territories whose independence had been provisionally recognized in the Covenant of the League of Nations”.

The Study then erroneously concludes:

“Only in the case of Palestine did the Mandate, with its inherent contradictions, lead not to the independence provisionally recognized in the Covenant, but towards conflict that was to continue six decades later.”

However the 1937 Peel Commission Report comprehensively debunks the Study’s concocted claims

“The Mandate [for Palestine] is of a different type from the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon and the draft Mandate for Iraq. These latter, which were called for convenience “A” Mandates, accorded with the fourth paragraph of Article 22. Thus the Syrian Mandate provided that the government should be based on an organic law which should take into account the rights, interests and wishes of all the inhabitants, and that measures should be enacted ‘to facilitate the progressive development of Syria and the Lebanon as independent States.’ The corresponding sentences of the draft Mandate for Iraq were the same. In compliance with them National Legislatures were established in due course on an elective basis. Article 1 of the Palestine Mandate, on the other hand, vests ‘full powers of legislation and of administration,’ within the limits of the Mandate, in the Mandatory.”

The Study for reasons unknown completely ignores this detailed Peel Commission rebuttal.

The Study’s unchallenged statements – seemingly authentic bearing United Nations imprimatur – appear on many websites including:

In Desperate Search for “Apartheid” in Israel The purveyors of “Israel Apartheid Week” haven’t seen the Israel I saw. Joseph Puder

Spring is usually when the enemies of the Jewish state hold their hate fest known as “Israel Apartheid Week” on college campuses across America. Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and their allies perform various acts that allege discrimination committed by the Jewish state against Arabs. The irony is that these performers of alleged “Apartheid” have not been to Israel, nor have they witnessed everyday life in Israel that this reporter has. Israel may not encompass human perfection, but it certainly exhibits freedom, opportunity and tolerance seen nowhere in this region of the Middle East and beyond.

On a sunny April afternoon, one among many such days throughout the year in Israel, I walked the Tel Aviv Boardwalk in what is known here as the “Namal” or “the Port of Tel Aviv.” In restaurants that abound on this shorefront of the Mediterranean Sea, families and couples were enjoying expensive meals, others were strolling along the boardwalk. In the restaurants, Arab women in head scarfs and their boyfriends were loudly conversing in Arabic. Passing by outside were Arab families with their children mingled with Israeli children, enjoying the playground. None of the Arab families appeared hesitant or uncomfortable in the setting…in fact they seemed totally nonchalant, as if saying “this belongs to me, too.”

In Israel, you won’t find the kind of “banilieues” you can encounter in France or Sweden, where local police won’t enter, and native citizens dare not set foot. There are however Arab, Druze, and Circassian villages in northern (The Galilee and Golan) Israel, and Bedouin-Arab villages in the Negev (southern Israel). In the cities, such as Jerusalem, Haifa, and Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Arab-Israelis and Jews intermingle without distinction. Were it not for the occasional and specific head cover worn by Arab women, one would never know who is who or which is which.

Go to a Super-Pharm store in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or Beth-Shemesh, and invariably you will find an Arab pharmacist helping you. At Rambam hospital in Haifa or Kaplan hospital in Rehovot, you are bound to find Arab doctors and nurses, not to mention the Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem. Christian and Muslim Arabs are involved in virtually all trades and professions in Israel, including 13 members in the Israeli Knesset (Israeli Parliament), a Supreme Court Justice, military officers, teachers, etc.

This reporter had personally experienced the comfortable, if not perfect integration of Arabs in Israeli society. As the sun was setting, driving down from the Golan Heights, my friend Avi (a former paratrooper and currently a tour guide) and I stopped at a fish restaurant in Kibbutz Ein Gev on the Sea of Galilee. After dinner, as we set out to drive back to Beth-Shemesh, it did not take long to discover that our head-lights and brake-lights on our rental car were burnt out and inoperable. Passing drivers honked to alert us of the problem. We slowly made our way to a shopping strip in Tzemach, 12 kilometers from Tiberias. We called the 24 hour emergency road service, and a few hours later a service van appeared. George, an Arab-Israeli from a central Galilee village showed up to help us. He was truly a life saver. While waiting for him to show up, we had coffee at Aroma, a national chain of Israeli restaurants. Next to us were three young Arab couples, loudly laughing and conversing in Arabic. They were all dressed in chic styles, and clearly flaunting their identity.

The National Security Council’s New Pro-Hamas Israel Advisor The swamp strikes back against Israel and Trump Daniel Greenfield

Kris Bauman, the National Security Council’s new point man on Israel, believes that the “Israel Lobby” is a threat, that Israel should be pressured into making concessions to Islamic terrorists and that “the Obama Administration must find creative (but legal) ways to include Hamas in a solution.”

Yael Lempert, Bauman’s predecessor, had been one of the Obama holdovers that conservatives had fought to pry out of the swamp. Lempert had been described as “Obama’s point person in the White House orchestrating his war against Israel.”

Lee Smith wrote that, “Lempert, one former Clinton official told me, ‘is considered one of the harshest critics of Israel on the foreign policy far left. From her position on the Obama NSC, she helped manufacture crisis after crisis in a relentless effort to portray Israel negatively.’”

Lempert’s mother, Lesly Lempert, had been an anti-Israel activist with the misleadingly named American Israeli Civil Liberties Coalition. Yael had carried on her mother’s work. Her departure should have been a victory for conservatives. Instead the swamp was replaced with more swamp.

Kris Bauman had been part of the failed “peace” efforts in the Obama years working for Hillary ally, General Allen. His views on Israel, the PLO and Hamas were those of the Obama-Kerry team. Bauman believes that Israel is at fault for the failure of previous peace efforts and that peace can only be achieved when the United States applies enough pressure on Israel.

It’s like Yael Lempert never left.

Once McMaster took over as National Security Adviser, the swamp was back. McMaster has warned Trump against talking about Islamic terrorism. He had tried to force out Ezra Cohen-Watnick, who played a crucial role in exposing the Obama eavesdropping, and replace him with Linda Weissgold, the director of the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis, who had helped draft the Benghazi talking points which blamed the Islamic terror attack on “protests”.

President Trump overruled McMaster. Just as he had overruled Mattis’ plot to bring in Michele Flournoy, Hillary Clinton’s likely Secretary of Defense, and move Anne Patterson, the Muslim Brotherhood’s favorite State Department hack, in as undersecretary for policy at the Pentagon.

But not every tidal flow of the swamp can be stopped.