Tuesday, 27 October 2009

Goldstone Wordle

Goldstone Wordle

Elder of Ziyon, who has been doing an extraordnary job of fact-checking the Goldstone Report, has a real cute - or perhaps, deadly serious - intellectual teaser for you. He has made a graphc representation of the 250 most common words in the report... and he wonders if you can find the word "Hamas".

I really recommend you check it out. 24 hours from now I'll be posting the answer here, if you haven't found it on your own by then.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Israel Matzav: Another 'peaceful' Iranian weapons ship caught

Another 'peaceful' Iranian weapons ship caught

Another 'peaceful' Iranian ship with 'peaceful' Iranian weapons has been caught. This time it was caught off Yemen and apparently was not headed for Israel (Hat Tip: Jihad Watch).

The security sources believed that the ship was in its way to unload its weapon shipment, which includes anti-armour missiles, somewhere close to Haradh where it could be hidden in a farm before Al Houthi rebels collected them.

The Haradh area is only tens of kilometers from the western frontline of Al Malahaid.

Earlier on Monday, the independent paper Al Ahali said that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards train Al Houthi rebels in training camps in neighboring Eritrea. The paper also said that the Iranian revolutionary guards transport the weapons through the Eritrean harbour of Asab, from where it is transported to Yemen's Midi Harbour.

Abdullah Al Mahdoon, one rebel leader, who surrendered himself to the army earlier this month, said in previous statements, that Al Houthi rebels receive unlimited support from the Iranian revolutionary guards, and experts from the Lebanese Hezbullah....

Israel is just the canary in the coal mine. Once they (God forbid) get us out of the way, they have bigger plans.

The picture is from another Iranian weapons ship, the Karine A, which was intercepted by Israel in January 2002.

Israel Matzav: Another 'peaceful' Iranian weapons ship caught

Israel Matzav: What else is Iran hiding?

What else is Iran hiding?

The disclosure of the Qom nuclear facility (pictured) has of course led to speculation that Iran has other, undeclared nuclear facilities. What is the basis for that speculation? Newsweek explains.

U.S. arms-control experts say that Qum is probably one of at least a half-dozen undeclared sites in Iran's "nuclear archipelago." At its present rate of production, Qum's estimated 3,000 antiquated IR-1 centrifuges would take two years to churn out enough highly enriched uranium for a single bomb, according to Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control. If Iran had another secret site, its parallel fuel cycle would cut down the waiting time to a year.

Furthermore, because Iran went to the trouble of hiding Qum, it's likely hiding other key components of a weapons program too. Take the conversion plant at Isfahan, which provides the uranium that goes into an enrichment facility--in this case, the site at Natanz. Both sites are being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The amount of uranium needed at Qum, some 7 to 16 percent of Isfahan's stockpile, would be too great a diversion to go unnoticed, says Andreas Persbo, an arms-control analyst at the U.K.-based Ploughshares Fund.

The existence of Qum's secret enrichment facility thus implies a corresponding conversion plant, as well as mines to extract uranium ore, labs to turn the enriched fuel into a metal, and workshops to produce firing circuits and high-explosive ­lenses. Indeed, The New York Times recently reported that classified portions of the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate listed some dozen additional suspected nuclear sites in Iran. As the black sites multiply, chances are that Western intelligence agencies will not be able to keep tabs on all of them. It's a game of hide-and-seek that the West can't afford to lose.

Unfortunately, it's a game of hide and seek that the West apparently is unwilling to go all out to win.

Israel Matzav: What else is Iran hiding?

Israel Matzav: France isn't really favoring Israel

France isn't really favoring Israel

In international relations, there are no friends, only interests. And lest we Israelis get all excited about France's seeming tilt in our favor recently, Time Magazine reports that even with Sarkozy in power, the French don't love us any more than they did under DeGaulle.

Whereas French presidents since Charles de Gaulle have tilted towards the Arab states and demanded more of Israel in the search for peace, Sarkozy has embraced Israel as an ally and has put its security on a par with Palestinian rights. Sarkozy's warmth toward Israel should not be mistaken for a strategic shift. French national interests have been defined to include close relations with Arab states, after all, and those ties have actually been quietly deepened even as Sarkozy has reached out to Israel.

"Apart from his dealings with Israel and his very radical stand against Iran, Sarkozy's Middle East policy has been very similar to those of his predecessors — only with more activist engagement," explains Jean-François Daguzan, a Middle East expert at the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris. "Sarkozy has shown he wants France to play a much larger, active role in the region than it has in the past, and to do that it has to have stronger ties to Israel, but without alarming its traditional Arab allies."

Indeed, there is plenty of evidence of Sarkozy strengthening ties in the Arab world during his tenure. He brought Syria out from international isolation, for starters, and then sought to use Paris' privileged position with Damascus to create political stability in Lebanon. Earlier this year, Sarkozy similarly enlisted Syria and Egypt to help his drive to halt the violence in Gaza. Sarkozy has also upped France's ability to project power in the region — and sent yet another warning in Iran's direction — with this year's inauguration of a new permanent French military naval and air compound in Abu Dhabi.

"Sarkozy has also improved his relations with leaders in Iraq with an eye toward reconstruction there," Daguzan notes with a chuckle. "That may be the only move that Americans might take issue with, since the rest of what he'd done his largely been moving in the same direction as U.S."

The single most important explanation for Sarkozy's activism in search of a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is, of course, a simple one: He's trying to succeed where, until now, the U.S. has failed.

I'm so relieved. I was beginning to think they might actually have decided that they like us or something.

Israel Matzav: France isn't really favoring Israel

Israel Matzav: Hamas says what Goldstone wants to hear

Hamas says what Goldstone wants to hear

New America Foundation Foreign Policy Programs Director Steve Clemons interviews Hamas leader Khaled Meshal for 'The Palestine Note' on 17 October, 2009. Clemons also publishes 'The Washington Note'.

Let's go to the videotape. I'll have more afterward.

Haaretz adds:

"When Hamas deals seriously with the Goldstone report, with some reservations on it, this is evidence that Hamas respects the international law and is ready to cooperate with this law," Khaled Meshal told the Web site Palestine Note in an interview from his base in Damascus.

"If the report or any other side has any reservations on Hamas' actions, we are ready to explain them and we will form an honest and neutral investigative committee in Gaza to give Goldstone and its committee and the international community the facts."


Meshal rejected the claim that Hamas had deliberately targeted Israeli civilians during the fighting, when thousands of rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip - which it controls - into Israeli communities.

"Hamas does not aim to kill civilians. Hamas does not want to target the civilians," he said. "Hamas defends itself, but because it has simple abilities and its rockets are inaccurate in targeting, so it reaches the civilians, but we do not intend to do that."

Meshaal also said that Hamas would accept a deal based on the 1967 borders. What's not mentioned is that his organization would not recognize Israel or agree to an end-of-conflict provision as part of that 'deal.'

In the last segment, notice how Meshaal assumes that Israel will have to be 'forced' into an agreement. The idea that two parties could actually willingly reach a compromise is unheard of for these savages.

It's amazing watching how the world trips over each other to suck up to this unreformed terrorist.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Hamas says what Goldstone wants to hear

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Katyusha near Kiryat Shmona

Breaking: Katyusha near Kiryat Shmona

A Katyusha rocket has landed near Kiryat Shmona on Tuesday evening, causing a fire. No one was hurt, there was no property damage and no one has taken responsibility yet.

Police sappers were at the impact site, and the IDF also launched an investigation.

Army Radio reported that the rocket landed near the northern town of Kiryat Shmona, and that a fire broke out in the impact site.

Many nearby residents also reported hearing a loud sound, according to Israel Radio.
Let me guess: Either it was shot off by an unknown group over which neither Hezbullah nor the Lebanese army has control, or it accidentally flew out of someone's garage in southern Lebanon.

What could go wrong?
Israel Matzav: Breaking: Katyusha near Kiryat Shmona

Israel Matzav: Can you hear me Mr. Jones?

Israel Matzav: Can you hear me Mr. Jones?

Israel Matzav: 'Negotiations' with the 'Palestinians' less likely than ever

'Negotiations' with the 'Palestinians' less likely than ever

A senior aide to 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen is now denying a Channel 10 news report from Monday night that claimed that Abu Mazen would resign because he sees no chance of 'advancing' the 'peace process' with Binyamin Netanyahu in power. Still, reports JPost's Herb Keinon, with 'Palestinian' elections now scheduled for January 24, a breakthrough that would permit 'negotiations' to resume seems most unlikely.

Over the last few weeks, there has been concern in Jerusalem that as the election process nears, it will not be a time of great "creativity" and "flexibility" on the Palestinian side. Rather, as the US tries to put together a framework for Palestinian-Israeli talks, the concern is that an Abbas playing to the Palestinian electorate will lead to a "hardening of positions."

The impact of the elections has for the last few weeks been a factor Jerusalem has taken into consideration when trying to explain the difficulty the Americans are having in putting together a framework acceptable to both sides. While Abbas only announced the elections on Friday, the likelihood of a vote has been in the air for weeks.

The Palestinians have said that there must be a complete settlement freeze before negotiations can be restarted, and - according to the Israeli account of the pre-negotiations taking place - have shown no flexibility at all on the matter, something now attributed by some in Jerusalem to domestic Palestinian electoral considerations.

What happens if Hamas wins again?

What happens if someone in Fatah runs against Abu Mazen and wins?

Israel Matzav: 'Negotiations' with the 'Palestinians' less likely than ever

Love of the Land: The end of the road for Amnesty’s reputation? New report accuses Israel of “denying water to Palestinians”.

The end of the road for Amnesty’s reputation? New report accuses Israel of “denying water to Palestinians”.

Summer relaxation in Ramallah

Robin Shepherd
Think Tank Blog
27 October 09

Amnesty International has today released yet another blatantly one-sided attack on Israel, this time alleging that the Jewish state is “denying water to Palestinians”. Last week, I alerted readers to the fact that the UK branch of Amnesty plans to roadshow its latest report at a meeting on October 28 featuring the militantly anti-Zionist Ben White as its guest speaker. Amnesty is promoting White’s recently published book, “Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide” on its website.

Since Amnesty is now implicitly endorsing the notion of Israel as an apartheid state, it should come as no surprise that the report adopts the Palestinian narrative of the wider conflict in its entirety.

Amnesty’s allegations centre on the amount of water available to Palestinians on the West Bank as compared to settlers. According to the Jerusalem Post, Amnesty did not even take the trouble to consult the Israeli Water Authority, something which in itself gives a clear impression of the agenda that underlies the latest report.

But impressions and suppositions are no longer necessary with Amnesty International, as the wording of the statement flagging up the report makes clear:

“Over more than 40 years of occupation, restrictions imposed by Israel on the Palestinians’ access to water have prevented the development of water infrastructure and facilities in the OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories], consequently denying hundreds of thousands of Palestinians the right to live a normal life, to have adequate food, housing, or health, and to economic development.”

Just a second. No one denies that the Palestinians live in conditions of economc backwardness. It would be no surprise, therefore, if their consumption of water were less than for the relatively wealthier Israelis. This is a sociological reality which applies globally. Try comparing American water consumption per capita with Mexico’s — (I haven’t seen the figures but I’d bet my wallet that the disparity is enormous). But even leaving that aside, note how Amnesty effortlessly and unashamedly apportions blame to the “more than 40 years of occupation”.

Now, just for the sake of argument, let us say that that the Amnesty view is one reasonable way of characterising the situation. It is certainly the way that the Palestinians would characterise it. But if we accept that as one way of characterising the situation let us also consider the following as another:

“There have been more than 60 years of rejectionism and terrorism by Palestinian and Arab leaders. This has had the derivative effects of both reducing their capacity to consume water at first world levels and of depriving them of the kind of statehood (offered on several occasions by Israel) which would allow them to take greater control of their own water resources in particular and their economic development in general”.

Being as objective as one possibly could be, I put it to readers that there are two narratives to contend with here. Personally, I believe there is overwhelming evidence to support the second of those two narratives. But that is not the point.

Amnesty International is bound by its constitution to be impartial. Yet in this instance, as in so many others where Israel is concerned, it has adopted hook, line and sinker one of of the two available narratives and simply erased the other from consideration.

That is not a sign of an organisation whose main priority is to promote an unbiased appraisal of an undoubtedly important humanitarian problem. It is a sign of an organisation whose underlying agenda is avowedly political and avowedly anti-Israeli.

I challenge anyone to provide an evidence-based counter-argument to my contention that that conclusion is now beyond all reasonable doubt.

Postscript: The Mid East media analyst Tom Gross (see link to his website below) has contacted me to say that BBC World Service TV has been running this story at the top of the hour every hour all morning. They’re never ones to miss an opportunity like this, are they?

To read the Amnesty report, click here:


To see Tom Gross’s website, click here:


Related: NGO Monitor: Amnesty’s Water Report Timed to Support Latest Israel Boycott Campaign

Love of the Land: The end of the road for Amnesty’s reputation? New report accuses Israel of “denying water to Palestinians”.

Love of the Land: “Pro-Israel” No More

“Pro-Israel” No More

Jennifer Rubin
27 October 09

There has been a debate as to whether J Street is “pro-Israel.” Well, one branch of J Street now says it isn’t or at least doesn’t want to say it is anymore. Because that’s a bad thing, and people might take offense. This report explains:

J Street’s university arm has dropped the “pro-Israel” part of the left-wing US lobby’s “pro-Israel, pro-peace” slogan to avoid alienating students. That decision was part of the message conveyed to young activists who attended a special weekend program for students ahead of J Street’s first annual conference, which began on Sunday. … We don’t want to isolate people because they don’t feel quite so comfortable with ‘pro-Israel,’ so we say ‘pro-peace,’” said American University junior Lauren Barr of the “J Street U” slogan, “but behind that is ‘pro-Israel.’”

Way behind. It seems that a basic component of supporting Israel is not being ashamed or embarrassed to support Israel. And J Street’s head, Jeremy Ben-Ami, in perfect live-and-let-live-who-are-we-to-tell-kids-what-to-think mode offers this mind-numbing explanation:

Ben-Ami described himself as “concerned but realistic” about the students’ choice to leave out the pro-Israel piece of J Street’s slogan. He added, “Some in the community might not want to hear that this is where a lot of young people have come to, but we have to deal with people where they’re at and address their concerns.” …

It is our goal to change traditional conversations when it comes to Israel and to broaden the notion that there is only one way to express love and concern for it,” Ben-Ami said to applause. “We are here to redefine and expand the very concept of being pro-Israel. No longer should this ‘pro-’ require an ‘anti-.’”

Pro-Israel, anti-Israel. Whatever. It’s enough to give moral equivalency a bad name.

But clarity is good and it’s nice to know J Street doesn’t mind dropping “pro-Israel” from its self-designation. If only it had told all those congressmen and senators it had lured into hosting an event for a “pro-Israel” group.

Love of the Land: “Pro-Israel” No More

Love of the Land: The Goldstone Report - Using Terminology in Service of Deception

The Goldstone Report - Using Terminology in Service of Deception

Eli E. Hertz
Hudson New York
27 October 09

Justice Richard Goldstone and the United Nations Human Rights Council, sought to rewrite history by labeling Judea and Samaria (Known as the West Bank) "Occupied Palestinian Territories" [Paragraph 11], calling Israeli Arabs "Palestinian citizens of Israel" [Paragraph 111], referring to Israeli Arab villages as "Palestinian Israeli communities" [Paragraph 110] and calling Arab inhabitants of Gaza "Palestinian People in the Gaza strip" [Paragraph 1859]. Essentially Goldstone is endowing Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza with an aura of bogus peoplehood and statehood, as well as a false history as if title or ownership could be assigned out of thin air.

No legal binding authority has empowered Goldstone or any UN organ, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the Human Rights Council to decide that the territories of the West Bank, known as Judea and Samaria, and Gaza could be transformed into "Occupied Palestinian Territories" or "Palestine." Goldstone's use of these dishonest, loaded terms empowers terrorism and the Palestinians with the right to use all measures to expel Israel.

Palestine is a Geographical Area, Not a Nationality

Arabs, the UN and its organs, and lately the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as well, have repeatedly claimed that the Palestinians are a native people - so much so that almost everyone takes it for granted. The problem is that a stateless Palestinian People is a fabrication. The word Palestine is not even Arabic.

Palestine was never an independent state belonging to any people, nor did a Palestinian People distinct from other Arabs appear during 1,300 years of Muslim hegemony in Palestine under Arab and Ottoman rule. During that rule, local Arabs were actually considered part of, and subject to, the authority of Greater Syria (Suriyya al-Kubra).

Historically, before the Arabs fabricated the concept of Palestinian peoplehood as an exclusively Arab phenomenon, no such group existed. This is substantiated in countless official British Mandate-vintage documents that speak of the Jews and the Arabs of Palestine - not Jews and Palestinians.

In fact, before local Jews began calling themselves Israelis in 1948 (when the name "Israel" was chosen for the newly-established Jewish State), the term "Palestine" applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before the state's independence.

Some examples include:

· The Jerusalem Post, founded in 1932, was called The Palestine Post until 1948.

· Bank Leumi L'Israel, incorporated in 1902, was called the "Anglo-Palestine Company" until 1948.

· The Jewish Agency - an arm of the Zionist movement engaged in Jewish settlement since 1929 - was initially called the Jewish Agency for Palestine.

· Today's Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, founded in 1936 by German Jewish refugees who fled Nazi Germany, was originally called the "Palestine Symphony Orchestra," composed of some 70 Palestinian Jews.

· The United Jewish Appeal (UJA) was established in 1939 as a merger of the United Palestine Appeal and the fundraising arm of the Joint Distribution Committee.

There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arabs who never established a Palestinian state or advocated one prior to the Six-Day War in 1967.

Only twice in Jerusalem's history has it served as a national capital. The first time was as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. The second time is in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish "an Arab and a Jewish state" (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

So much for facts and accuracy.

Love of the Land: The Goldstone Report - Using Terminology in Service of Deception

Love of the Land: Rambam Day in Hebron

Rambam Day in Hebron

David Wilder
The Wilder Way
9 Chesvan 5770/27 October 09

In 1165 Moshe ben Maimon, known as Maimonides or the Rambam, visited Eretz Yisrael. In the preface to his commentary on the Talmudic tractate of Rosh Hashana he writes of his visit to Hebron.

"And on the first day of the week, the ninth day of the month of MarCheshvan, I left Jerusalem for Hebron to kiss the graves of my forefathers in the Cave of Machpela. And on that very day I stood in the Cave and I prayed, praised be G-d for everything. And these two days, the sixth (when he prayed on Temple Mount in Jerusalem) and the ninth of Mar-Cheshvan I vowed to make as a special holiday and in which I will rejoice with prayer, food and drink. May the Lord help me to keep my vows…At the edge of the field is the house of Abraham, And it is forbidden to build a home there, in respect to Abraham."

Eight hundred and forty four years ago today, one of Judaism's greatest scholars arrived in Hebron, following his visit to Jerusalem. One can only imagine his excitement, standing next to the caves of Machpela, worshiping adjacent to the graves of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs. Perhaps we can sense a little of his exhilaration through his words, by vowing to mark his visit to Temple Mount in Jerusalem, and Ma'arat HaMachpela in Hebron, as an eternal, personal holiday.

Reading the Rambam's account, and feeling some of his awe, I ask myself, do people today, eight and half centuries later, still experience the same wonder when visiting such holy sites such as Temple Mount and Ma'arat HaMachpela.

A couple of weeks ago a friend of mine told me the following story:
Several years ago a famous Rabbi visited Hebron with many of his disciples. Upon arriving, he told his Hebron host, "I almost didn't come." When asked why, what was the problem, the Rabbi answered: "When the famous holy Rabbi Chaim ben Atar (known as the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh) traveled to the city of Meron (in the Galil) to the tomb of Rashbi (Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, renowned Jewish scholar and mystic who lived during the Talmudic era, author of the Zohar), he first imposed upon himself many hardships and suffering, by fasting, by rolling in the snow, and other physical afflictions, in order to purify himself before approaching the holy Rashbi's cave. Then, when he reached Meron, he crawled on his hands and legs to the site itself, out of fear and awe."
The Rabbi continued: Knowing this, how could I dare allow myself to visit the caves of Machpela, the tomb of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs?!"
His host looked at him and asked, "but you are here – you came anyhow."
The Rabbi answered, "Yes, I did come. I decided that it is permissible to visit your father and mother, even if your clothes are stained and dirty."

A poignant story, but with a very profound message. Ma'arat HaMachpela - Hebron, is not only the home the founders of our people, the roots of Judaism and all monotheism, the beginning of modern 'civilized' civilization. Hebron is the home of our mothers and fathers, Mom and Dad, Grandma and Grandpa – that simple, that deep. Mommy and Daddy will always welcome their children home, notwithstanding anything!

I have the honor and privilege to work with many different people and groups, Jews and gentiles, youth and the elderly, people from all over the globe. My tours are fairly standard; I try to express the same values and information to everyone; it makes little difference to me who they are or what the represent. The material to be imparted is not only 'information' – it is much more that that – it is the essence of our very existence.

There are those people have heard some of it before. Others know almost nothing. But when they leave, almost undoubtedly, their lives have changed.
(Full Article)

Love of the Land: Rambam Day in Hebron

RubinReports: Where does Terrorism Come from In Iraq: Hundreds killed but there's no mystery

Where does Terrorism Come from In Iraq: Hundreds killed but there's no mystery

[Please subscribe for facts and analysis you won't see elsewhere.]

By Barry Rubin

You know that two car bombs hit three government buildings in Baghdad on October 25 and killed 132 people. You probably know that this was a devastating hit against the effort to stabilize the country, which in turn is a precondition for U.S. withdrawal. Many analysts viewed this as an attemt to discredit the January election and to pull the rug from under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who has staked his job on reducing violence to a minimum.

But here's what you don't know: Where did the bombs come from? Where did the terrorists come from? Where did the orders to stage a very politically focused attack come from.

The Iraqi government has now answered these questions with one word: Syria.

Remember that the Iraqi government has been warning about this for months, blaming Damascus for specific attacks based on evidence and interrogations. When this last happened in September, the U.S. government refused to take Baghdad's side. Nor was there any break in the move to engage Syria. Nor was there any interruption--in fact, the exact opposite--in the European move to make a partnership agreement which would pump more money into Syria.

Nothing. No denunciation. No UN resolution. No international investigation. No U.S. efforts to punish those responsible.

Just as with the 241 American soldiers killed in Beirut in 1983 through similar means.

So what is the result of Syria being involved in sponsoring, financing, organizing, and facilitating terrorist attacks on Iraq without any cost?

More attacks on Iraq. U.S. policy unintentionally sent Damascus a signal: you can do whatever you want and not fear retribution from the United States or its European allies. Naturally, the Syrians stepped up attacks.

This has happened before, notably in 1990, when a soft U.S. stand in defending Kuwait convinced Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein that he could invade and take over that country without the United States reacting.

Iraq was wrong in 1990--the George Bush administration did fight back and defeat Iraq--but Syria might well get away with aggression in 2009, and of course what Damascus is doing now is more subtle and thus easier for Washington to ignore.

True, the Obama Administration has declared the "war on terror" to be over and stated that only al-Qaida and its allies would be the target of American wrath.

But wait a minute! Isn't al-Qaida the group that is being based in Syria and carrying out many of these attacks? Doesn't that make Syria an ally of al-Qaida?

When one of my readers raised the issue in a university class on the Middle East, his professor said, no, not so, it is very complicated.

Well, how complex can it be? Al-Qaida terrorists operate in Syria with the government's approval. They get money, arms and training there. They cross the border into Iraq to launch attacks and at times cross back into Syria.

Can anyone refute that? Why then is Syria getting away with murder at no cost, not even verbal denunciation?

More people die; U.S. efforts are destabilized. There's a very serious mistake being made here. American soldiers and Iraqi civilians are paying the price. Think about that when you hear news coverage about these attacks and all the attacks to come.

RubinReports: Where does Terrorism Come from In Iraq: Hundreds killed but there's no mystery

Israel Matzav: Israel Water Authority blasts Amnesty report

Israel Water Authority blasts Amnesty report

On Saturday night, I did a post reporting that Amnesty International would issue a report this week that would claim that the 'Palestinian Authority' was not competent to enter into contracts when it signed agreements relating to water with Israel in 1993. That report has now been issued, and on Monday Israel's Water Authority blasted it.

The Water Authority slammed Amnesty International on Monday for failing to allow it to make any sort of presentation to Amnesty's researchers or react to the organization's findings on water allocation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority before the publication of its new critical report on Tuesday morning.

The authority also called into question some of the basic facts presented in the report.


The report also cites a vast difference in daily water use for the two parties. Amnesty cites 400 liters per day for Israelis, and just 70 for Palestinians. That figure puts the Palestinians below the World Health Organization recommendation of 100 liters per day.

However, the Water Authority hotly disputed those figures. According to the authority, while Israelis use 408 liters per day of fresh water from natural sources, Palestinians use 200 liters per day. While acknowledging the difference between these two amounts, the authority stressed that it was nowhere near as drastic as Amnesty had portrayed it.

The Foreign Ministry also refuted the report on Tuesday, stating that according to the existing water agreement, the Palestinians are allocated 23.6 million cubic meters of water per year, but "in actual effect, they have access to twice as much water."

In its statement, the Foreign Ministry said that Israel has "extensively surpassed the obligatory quantity" of water supplied to the Palestinians, while the Palestinians have "significantly violated their commitments under the water agreement" by neglecting the construction of sewage treatment plants despite "foreign funding earmarked for this purpose," as well as drilling over 250 unauthorized wells.

Indeed. The unauthorized wells, which have been a problem since Day One under the Oslo accords, have polluted the underground aquifers to the point that in many places they cannot be used. That combined with below average rainfall for the last five consecutive years has exacerbated our water shortage.

Israeli offers to supply the Palestinians with desalinated water were rejected due to political concerns, said the statement, adding that "Israel has reduced significantly its use of fresh natural water since 1967, consistently closing the gap between Israeli and Palestinian consumption."

In other words, the 'Palestinians' have not spent money they were supposed to spend on sewage treatment plants - using it to buy weapons instead - and have refused to accept anything other than 'holy Palestinian' fresh water.

[A]ccording to the Water Authority, while Israeli access to water before 1967 came out to about 500 cubic meters per person per year, nowadays it is just 149 cu.m. per year, a drop of 70%. In contrast, from a pre-1967 86 cu.m. per person per year, Palestinian consumption has risen to 105 cu.m.

The Water Authority also stressed that it routinely provided the PA with more water per year than the amounts stipulated in the Oslo Accords. It also said Palestinians routinely dug illegal wells and refused to purify and reuse their sewage for agriculture. Instead, they dumped their sewage into the streams in the West Bank, causing massive pollution.

But of course, Amnesty ignores all that, instead calling on Israel to 'stop' violating the 'Palestinians' water rights and to lift the blockade of Gaza so that materials may be brought in to rebuild water cisterns make more rockets.

Read the whole thing.

In August, the JPost reported that Israel had given the 'Palestinians' a piece of beach land near Hadera (which is not in Judea or Samaria) on which to build a desalination plant. A year later, the 'Palestinians' have done nothing with that land.

In April, the foreign ministry responded to a similar report by the World Bank.

The Israel-Palestinian water policy is based on an interim agreement between the two parties, particularly on Article 40 of Annex III to the agreement, which relates to the question of water and sewage. According to the agreement, 23.6 million cubic meters of water will be allocated to the Palestinians annually. In actual effect, they have access to twice as much water.

Israel has fulfilled all its obligations under the water agreement regarding the supply of additional quantities of water to the Palestinians, and has even extensively surpassed the obligatory quantity. The Palestinians, on the other hand, have significantly violated their commitments under the water agreement, specifically regarding important issues such as illegal drilling (they have drilled over 250 wells without the authorization of the joint water commission) and handling of sewage (The Palestinians are not constructing sewage treatment plants, despite their obligation to do so. Rather, they allow the sewage to flow unheeded into streams, polluting both the environment and groundwater).

The authors of the report met with MFA officials, and were briefed on all the factual details. They were also presented with the Israeli position paper on the subject, which contained verifiable facts that contradict all the objections presented in the bank's report.

Significantly, the authors chose to ignore the MFA position, and declined to take the facts presented to them into consideration in the published report. They rely totally on unsubstantiated information supplied by the Palestinian Authority, which raises a serious question mark over the credibility of the report and the intentions of its authors.

It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

The picture at the top is a Gaza cesspool that collapsed in 2007 because the 'Palestinians' had used money that was supposed to maintain it to buy weapons instead.

The 'international community's boorishness on this issue can only be a message to us from Heaven.

Israel Matzav: Israel Water Authority blasts Amnesty report

Israel Matzav: EU lawyers draw up arrest lists of IDF officers

EU lawyers draw up arrest lists of IDF officers

If you're an IDF officer, please think twice about traveling anywhere in Europe. If you do travel to Europe, there may be a lawyer waiting with an arrest warrant for you.

Lawyers in Britain and other European countries have been collecting testimonies of Palestinians and other data from Gaza since January, which they maintain proves that war crimes were committed by the IDF during the offensive. The evidence is linked to IDF officers holding ranks of battalion commander and higher, who were in command during various stages of Cast Lead.

The other nations who have lawyers collecting information on the matter include the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and Norway, whose laws, as well as Britain's, allow the issuance of arrest warrants against foreign citizens suspected of war crimes.

Attorney Daniel Makover [pictured. CiJ] from London is coordinating the efforts in Britain. One of his colleagues visited the Gaza Strip several weeks after the fighting in order to collect testimonies. Palestinians civilians also gave the legal assistant their approval, and asked that he file the suits in their name, in line with British law.

Speaking to Haaretz, Makover refused to offer details on the identity of the IDF officers or how many were listed, but said that much depends on the specific details of each case. Makover said that anyone who was involved in an incident may face criminal charges. The attorney added that there are officers who are obviously candidates for charges, and others who are less obvious, but emphasized that it depends on the facts collected on the ground.

Makover said that the Goldstone report on the fighting in the Gaza Strip will bolster the efforts of the activists, and said that some of the instances mentioned in the report were already known to the attorneys. Makover is part of an unofficial network of attorneys operating in various countries in Europe, exchanging and sharing information so that suspected officers may be arrested in those countries.

I had trouble finding details about 'Makover' is that his name is actually spelled Machover. Here's a Wikipedia biography.

Daniel Machover is a British lawyer. He is the head of civil litigation for Hickman & Rose Solicitors and was the co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights in 1988. His father, Professor Moshé Machover, was one of the founders of the Israeli socialist group Matzpen.

According to an interview in The Independent, "Close observations of his parents' treatment at the hands of the Israeli authorities - including the strip-searching of his mother - heightened Machover's awareness of the potential for those in uniform to abuse their powers". [1].

Let's say I have my doubts that his mother was strip-searched without cause. Here are some more details about this former Israeli:

Daniel Machover, a London lawyer, is (2005) a spokesman and founder-member of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights. He works in Hickman & Rose, a solicitors’ firm in Islington where he works as a partner, handling judicial review work and actions against the Home Office for assaults on prisoners and deaths in custody.

Machover's parents (his father is Moshe Machover) were Sabras, born in Palestine to a family of Zionists on both sides of his parents’ marriage. His Polish grandmother had arrived in the 1920s and then established several kibbutzes. After the 1967 war, his parents were among a group of Israeli Jews who opposed Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. They put their names to an advertisement in an Israeli newspaper, along with many others who felt the same, urging the State of Israel to withdraw behind the 1967 borders. The family received death threats and the atmosphere became unpleasant. Finally, the family left for the United Kingdom. They had intended to return – but ended up staying in the UK.

His law firm biography is here.

Machover was also behind the 2005 attempt to arrest IDF general Doron Almog when Almog did not deplane from an El Al flight to London.

The real question is why this guy has not gotten Mordechai Vanunu treatment. He's an Israeli citizen and treason is still a crime in Israel. Where is Cheryl Bentov when we need her?

Israel Matzav: EU lawyers draw up arrest lists of IDF officers

Israel Matzav: J Street bloggers mock Elie Wiesel

J Street bloggers mock Elie Wiesel

Michael Goldfarb reports from the J Street conference that 'film maker' Max Blumenthal mocked Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel (pictured) at the 'independent blogger' session at the J Street conference.

Blumenthal went on to trash Elie Wiesel for speaking this past weekend at the Christians United for Israel conference in San Antonio. After mocking Pastor John Hagee, the founder of CUFI, Blumenthal said "the last time Elie Wiesel trusted someone so much it was Bernie Madoff." Wiesel admitted earlier this year that he lost "everything" he had in Madoff's ponzi scheme. The audience erupted with laughter at Blumenthal's tasteless joke.

Read the whole thing.

Warning: You will need to shower afterward. I don't know how Michael Goldfarb can sit through this.

Israel Matzav: J Street bloggers mock Elie Wiesel

Israel Matzav: Vote against J Street in a Guardian poll

Vote against J Street in a Guardian poll

Britain's Guardian is conducting a poll to determine whether J Street, the 'pro-Israel' 'pro-peace, 'pro-Palestinian' organization is a valuable voice that is a roadmap, or a muddying voice that is a roadblock.

More details about the poll (including how to vote) here.

Right now, the vote is far more in favor of Israel than the post I just linked indicates. But go vote and let's make sure we win.

Israel Matzav: Vote against J Street in a Guardian poll

Israel Matzav: Ayalon to BBC: 'If we conduct any investigation, it's not because of Goldstone'

Ayalon to BBC: 'If we conduct any investigation, it's not because of Goldstone'

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was interviewed by the BBC on Monday. Here's a transcript distributed by Israel's foreign ministry.

26 Oct 2009

If we conduct any investigation it's not because of the Goldstone report.

MS. HOCKINGS: Welcome back to World News Today. I'm Lucy Hockings. There have been reports from Israel that say the Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has ordered a review of the internal military inquiries which cleared Israeli troops of serious wrongdoing during their offensive in Gaza last winter. A recent UN investigation concluded that both Israel and the Palestinian Hamas movement had committed war crimes during the conflict in which nearly 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed.

Well, joining me here in the studio is Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon. Thank you very much for joining us.

DFM AYALON: I'm pleased to be here.

MS. HOCKINGS: Can you confirm these reports about the inquiry?

DFM AYALON: Well, there is ongoing debate in Israel because we also want to know for ourselves what happened, although the IDF started already on day one of the operation and we launched an independent report. And here, I think, it is important to say that in our military system, the military advocate general is a completely independent entity.

MS. HOCKINGS: Mr. Goldstone, though, states it's insufficient for the military to investigate itself. It is calling, in the Goldstone report, for an independent review to be set up in the next six months. Is that going to happen?

DFM AYALON: It may very well. After the Second Lebanon War in 2006, we decided of our own accord to do it because it seemed very important to us. But, you know, things like that take a long time. Just here in Britain it took almost eight years to conduct such an investigation.

MS. HOCKINGS: But to not do it looks like you've got something to hide.

DFM AYALON: And we do not. So this is one of the main reasons why we may go for it.

MS. HOCKINGS: If you don't do it, are you willing to then face these consequences which may be a war crimes proceedings at the International Criminal Court? That's what the UN Security Council may refer as well for you.

DFM AYALON: No, I don't think this is the case because I think the decent countries in the world, you know, Britain, France, the United States and many others who actually share with us the same values of democracy, free press and everything else, will not let it happen. If we conduct any investigation, Lucy, it's not because of the Goldstone report. We don't approve of the Goldstone report.

MS. HOCKINGS: Are there any elements of the Goldstone report you accept?

DFM AYALON: Not quite; I'll tell you why: because it was a prejudgment before it even started. And the Goldstone report is also very politicized. Who decided on the Goldstone report? It wasn't even in the U.S. It was countries like Cuba and Libya and Iran and Saudi Arabia, which have nothing to do with human rights. So it was very, very political.

MS. HOCKINGS: Can we take a look at the situation at the moment? We had these clashes yesterday at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound. The Palestinian Authority says that Israel is looking for an escape clause to avoid meaningful negotiations. How do you respond to that?

DFM AYALON: Not at all. If you look really objectively, Israel has wanted peace and has done a lot in terms of giving away territories, in essence, for peace. We made peace with Egypt. We returned to Egypt the entire Sinai; the same with Jordan. We evacuated Gaza completely back in 2005 before this terrorism.

MS. HOCKINGS: But that's interesting you say that, because your boss recently, Mr. Lieberman, the Foreign Minister, said that there is no prospect of a peace agreement with the Palestinians any time soon.

DFM AYALON: He said it in a very, very sad tone, and he said he was just looking objectively and benefiting from the experience of the last 16 years, from the Oslo Accords in 1993 until now, where we tried everything - incremental, all the way - to no avail. But that does not mean that he is not saying: I will be the first one to be happy to be proven wrong. So we will try anyway. But the Palestinians have to come to the table clean-handed as well and without preconditions. This is what we are calling for. Let's sit and talk.

MS. HOCKINGS: Danny Ayalon, thank you very much for your time.

DFM AYALON: Thank you.

Note the part that I highlighted. Could the Israeli investigation be a stalling tactic? Hmmmm.

Israel Matzav: Ayalon to BBC: 'If we conduct any investigation, it's not because of Goldstone'

Israel Matzav: Reform leader speaks to J Street

Reform leader speaks to J Street

Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, President of the Union for Reform Judaism, spoke at the J Street convention on Monday. He was booed.

The full text of Rabbi Yoffie's remarks is here. I have a lot to criticize about his remarks, but I want to focus on what he had to say about the Goldstone Report, because that's what drew the catcalls:

This is not the time for a full discussion of the Goldstone report, which in my view was fatally flawed. There are many questions that one might legitimately ask about Israel's conduct of the war: Why was it necessary for Israeli forces to use so much firepower? How do you carry out a war against a terrorist organization that attacks your citizens and hides amid a civilian population? What risks are Israeli soldiers obligated to take, beyond those inherent in combat, to prevent harm to civilians? The Israelis that I know are asking these questions; it is right for them to do so, and it is right for the government of Israel to deal with these issues.

But the Goldstone report chose not to focus on these questions. Its central assertion is that Israel targeted Palestinian civilians, intentionally causing their deaths. This is a stunning and outrageous charge. I reject it, the people of Israel reject it, and - most important - it is not supported by the facts. This is not a thoughtful judicial report attempting to make difficult moral judgments. It is a political report based largely on unverifiable Palestinian claims that is meant to be used as a sledgehammer to bludgeon Israel.

If you doubt this, read the report. Its reasoning is shaky in some places and more often absurd. The accusations against Palestinians are expressed in language that is understated and restrained, while the accusations against Israel are expressed in wording that is sweeping, bold, and absolute. And upon closer inspection, many of these charges include phrases such as "it seems that," "it would appear," and "we have no definite proof but..." In an interview in the Forward, Goldstone acknowledged that nothing in the report could be used as proof in a court of law and that it contained no actual "evidence" of wrongdoing by Israel. Among the public that heard about this report and the diplomatic community that seized upon it, I doubt if one person in a hundred is aware of what we are now told is the report's limited scope. Didn't Justice Goldstone have an obligation to make this clear from the beginning? And this too: you cannot be a moral agent if you serve an immoral master, and Richard Goldstone should be ashamed of himself for working under the auspices of the U.N. Human Rights Council.

It will be important for Israel to continue with the investigations that it has already begun. Still, I suspect and I fear that the damage has already been done. This report, no matter how compelling the refutations that follow, will become a staple of U.N. gatherings and international meetings. It will be used to incite against Israel and to portray every Israeli leader connected with the military as a war criminal. It will become an instrument to inflame Palestinian extremism. And it will be invoked every time that Israel defends itself against attacks on its civilian centers. In short, it has made the work of peace much harder than it already was.

I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but I thought that with the exception of his opening questions (the answers to which seem too obvious to me), his critique of Goldstone was spot-on. Many of those present at the J Street convention disagreed:

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of the Union of Reform Judaism and one of the most prominent doves in the country, blasted J Street earlier this year for "drawing a moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel." Yoffie spoke at the J Street conference today and was booed by the audience for criticizing Goldstone. J Street is trying to find the space between its hard left, anti-Zionist base and the larger community of liberal, pro-Israel Jews. It's not clear they'll succeed.

What's important about this speech is what it tells us about J Street and not what it tells us about Rabbi Yoffie or Goldstone. In the wee hours of Tuesday morning, I reported that J Street's university division has removed 'pro-Israel' from its calling card in order to be 'more inclusive' and perhaps admitting that critics who said that J Street was not pro-Israel are correct (by the way, that story was the banner headline in Tuesday's JPost print edition). The catcalls for Rabbi Yoffie show that what has now been proven about the university division is also true about the organization as a whole. J Street is not pro-Israel. It's time to tell the truth.

Israel Matzav: Reform leader speaks to J Street

Israel Matzav: Israeli doctor: 'Dear Goldstone, they cheated you, you're wrong'

Israeli doctor: 'Dear Goldstone, they cheated you, you're wrong'

I edited the Google translation of this Maariv article to make it more readable. The original Hebrew article is here.

Dr. David Tzengen fought in Jenin during Operation Defensive Shield, and then he fought to clear his name and those his colleagues and exposed the lies about the "slaughter." Now he enlists again and writes to judge Richard Goldstone: "You allowed yourself to be deceived by the terrorists fabrications". He calls to: "Check again."

Dear Judge Goldstone,

My name is Dr. David Tzengen, I work in pediatric endocrinology and diabetes at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem. More than half of my patients are Palestinians from Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. I speak Arabic, and I established the first training program for Palestinian doctors in the field of pediatric endocrinology. The doctors whom we train are highly valued, and they are included as authors in studies that we have published in leading journals.

I was also chief medical officer of my division during the operation in Jenin in 2002. I was responsible for the medical care of our soldiers, and I was also responsible to facilitate full medical services by the hospital in Jenin for the civilian population, and I was personally involved in countless medical treatments that Palestinians (including combatants) received from Israeli doctors.

During and after the operation, the hospital director in Jenin was the source of what was falsely called the "massacre in Jenin, which killed 5,000 people." That same person, Dr. Abu - Ghali, also argued that part of the hospital in Jenin was destroyed by Israeli tank missiles.

You know, honorable judge, that these statements were proven and documented to be shameless lies, not only by Israeli sources, but also by "Human Rights Watch" and by UN organizations. Only 52 deaths were counted on the Palestinian side (and 23 on the Israeli side). These organizations and photographs of the hospital in Jenin after the operation showed no evidence of any destruction Israel caused to the hospital.

Immoral behavior by Palestinian physicians is not new

This Dr. Abu - Ghali, the hospital director, a doctor, lies and incites in the martyrs' service. It is hard to believe that the director of the hospital can give such transparently false testimony. I cannot understand it and you cannot understand it, but unfortunately, that's what happened .

Tragically, the immoral behavior of physicians in the Palestinian Authority is not new. Pediatrician George Habash sent his terrorists to kill Israeli children in schools, and so also the leader of Hamas, Dr. Rantisi, and so also pediatrician Dr. Mahmoud a - Zahar encourages firing missiles from Gaza on Israeli children's schools.

Please, Judge Goldstone, you should really be careful when such liars serve as the basis for your report. I am sure you mean well but as an eyewitness to events in Jenin and and to the distorted reports in the media and by the UN thereafter, I understand what happened to you. How a man with such standing and integrity can be made into a linked report so wrong.

See, Judge Goldstone, your report on the case of "Al Fakura" on January 5-6 (paragraphs 688-651 in the report). You are reporting how Israel was accused of directly bombing the UNRWA school. It took two weeks to withdraw this accusation, but you, distinguished judge, went to collect your evidence only from those people who spread the blood libel.

Judges are expected to look for evidence

Furthermore, when you analyzed the arena, you claimed that you could not verify the numbers, 24 dead and 40 wounded, but that these numbers are not considered exaggerated. At the end, in the part dealing with factual findings, you already determine that 24 people were killed and 40 injured.

Have you by some chance tried to verify any part of these invented and inciteful figures? Have you watched the al-Jazeera or BBC reports from that date regarding the incident? Did you at least try to verify your "factual findings" through the records of emergency rooms that referred people to the trauma department that day? Did you review the identity cards of the "dead" or the cemetery in which they were purportedly buried?

Well, no you did not do it.

Since you are a Judge, I must be convinced that you did not mean to harm Israel, I am trying to believe you have reached Gaza without prejudice, but judges are expected to at least look for a little evidence (the media, emergency room records, burial places, etc.) relating to evidence and not to accept impossible "facts".

We advocate peace

But you allowed yourself to be mislead by fabrications from terrorists, or even from doctors like Dr. Abu Ghali from Jenin. My colleagues in Israel and I are proud of the medical services that are given to everyone equally, regardless of their origin. We're also proud to belong to a nation identified as having higher moral values than others.

I call upon you, Judge Goldstone, to take the al-Fakura incident, examine the media coverage of the same date, to see the events in this context, to try to live for one day with responsibility for the existence of a small nation of six million Jews who are constantly threatened by 300 million Muslims. I call upon you to try not to draw conclusions from those lies and deceptive witnesses, even if they are supposedly professionals.

In the modern world, propaganda and lies are definitely part of war, and as a judge it is forbidden for you to serve as a tool to strengthen hate and confrontations. We are advocates for peace, we are lovers of peace, and we try our best to fight for our right to exist while maintaining the highest moral standards, even at the cost of our lives.

As I was finishing translating this, I got an email saying that the article was originally written in English and that the English will be provided. If I like the original better, I will substitute it (or add it) for my translation.


There's actually more to this letter than what Maariv published. Here's the original letter in English, complete with what Maariv omitted (I got this via email):

Dear Judge Goldstone,

My name is Dr. David Zangen, I am a consultant in Pediatric Endocrinology and diabetes at Hadassah University Hospital in Jerusalem. Over 50% of my patient population is Palestinian from Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. I speak Arabic and initiated the first training program for Palestinian physicians in the field of Pediatric Endocrinology. The trained physicians were fully respected and were included as first authors on our studies that are published in world leading professional journals.

But, at the same time I happened to be the chief medical officer of my brigade during the Defensive Shield Operation in Jenin 2002. I was responsible for the medical treatment of our soldiers but also for enabling the hospital in Jenin to provide full medical services to the civilian population and I was personally involved in numerous medical treatments that Palestinians (including warriors) received from Israeli physicians.

During and after the operation the director of Jenin hospital was a source to what has been falsely called the "Massacre in Jenin where 5000 people were massacred" this same person Dr. Abu Rali has also claimed that one part of the Jenin hospital was destroyed by Israeli tank missiles "12 tank rockets were shot at the hospital …" etc

You should know, honored Judge that these statements have been proved and documented as straight lies not only by Israeli sources but also by the Human Rights Watch and the UN organizations counting only 52 dead people on the Palestinian side (23 on the Israeli side). These organizations and photographs of Jenin hospital following the operation showed no evidence for any destruction at the hospital buildings etc.
This Dr. Abu Rali a director of a hospital, a physician, lies and incites in the service of the Shahids. It is hard to believe that a director of a hospital can give such an obvious false testimony. I can't understand it and you can't understand it but unfortunately this is what has happened. Even persons who would usually be considered reliable sources become advocates of straight lies. Tragically, moral misbehavior of doctors in the Palestinian Authority is not new. The Pediatrician George Habash sent his terrorists to kill children in Israeli schools and so did the Hamas leader the pediatrician Dr. Rantisi…and so continues to do the Pediatrician encouraging the sending of rockets from Gaza on innocent Israeli schools Dr Mahmud Zaher.

Please judge Goldstone, you should really be careful when such straight liars serve as the basis for your report. I am sure that you mean well but being an eye witness both to the events in Jenin and to the subsequent media and initial false UN reporting I do understand what happened to you. How a person of such stature and integrity could become associated with such a faulted report.

Look Judge Goldstone at your report on the Al Fakhura event on January 5-6th 2009 (paragraphs 651-688). You do report how Israel was accused for directly bombing the UNRWA school. It took 2 weeks to withdraw from this accusation but you, honored Judge, went back to get your testimony only from the same people who spread the blood libel of bombing the school. Moreover when analyzing the scene you claim that you could not verify the numbers of 24 dead and 40 wounded but these numbers are not considered exaggerated. Finally in the Factual findings part you already determine that 24 people were killed and 40 injured!

Did you by any chance try to validate any of these invented and inciting details? Did you look at the Al Jazeera or BBC reports from the same very date of the event? Did you try to validate your "factual findings" conclusions by getting at least Emergency Room charts on the people admitted to their trauma department on this very day? Did you go over the I.D.'s of the "dead" people and the place or cemetery where they were supposedly buried?

Well you didn't!

In all the scene of "40 dead and 40 wounded" filmed by Al Jazeera and other channels reporters and screened at the same day all over the world you could not see bodies or blood spots in the streets beside two or three casualties and one footage of a single wall damaged by a bomb. As a physician who was at terrible suicide events with smaller number of casualties I can testify how it looks like for hours following the event….The media documentation of the Al Fakhura event does not verify and definitely does not go along with the fantasy and lies of your witnesses.

As a judge I must be sure that you did not mean to hurt Israel, I try to believe that you came to Gaza without prejudice…but a judge is expected to look at least for some evidence and verification (media, ER registration, burial places etc….) of the testimonies and not accept impossible "facts". You have let yourself to be misled by fabrications made by either terrorists or even doctors such as Dr. Abu Rali from Jenin.

I and my colleagues in Israel are proud of the medical service that is given equally to every human being regardless of his origin; we are also proud to belong to a nation that has the imprint of having higher moral standards than others.
The price that we pay for this status is very high. The Palestinians and other Muslims around the world, either common people or even respected doctors, use straight lies as part of the war against us. The Western world media criticizes us and tries to find where we were not behaving up to the extremely high moral standards that we made ourselves.

I call on you Judge Goldstone take this Al Fakhura event, look at the media coverage from the very same date…see the events in the context…try to live one day with the responsibility for the existence of this small nation of 6 million Jews threatened constantly by 300 million Muslims. I call on you to try and not draw conclusions from such lies and misleading witnesses even if they come from so-called professionals. In the modern world propaganda and lies are definitely a part of the war and as a judge you should not serve as a tool for augmenting hatred and conflicts.

We look for peace, we love peace and we do try our very best to fight for our right to exist in the highest possible moral standards even at the cost of our lives.

Zeir gut gezogt (very well said).

Israel Matzav: Israeli doctor: 'Dear Goldstone, they cheated you, you're wrong'

Israel Matzav: Video: Ahmed and Salim

Video: Ahmed and Salim

And now for today's comic relief, meet Ahmad and Salim (Hat Tip: NY Nana).

Let's go to the videotape.

This was episode 1. More about the cartoon and episode 2 here.


Israel Matzav: Video: Ahmed and Salim

Israel Matzav: National Lawyers' Guild: Working hand in hand with terror organizations for Israel's destruction

National Lawyers' Guild: Working hand in hand with terror organizations for Israel's destruction

As I believe I have mentioned on more than one occasion, I went to law school at uber-liberal NYU. NYU had an active chapter of the National Lawyers' Guild, which was known even then (the 1980's) for being strongly anti-Israel.

In the 21st century, we find the National Lawyers' Guild (NLG) cooperating with terror supporters like the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, in which the latter organization was convicted for raising money for a terror organization (Hamas).

There are two other things that are striking about this article. One is that every person who is mentioned by name as being affiliated with NLG, ISM or CAIR has an obviously Jewish last name. The other striking thing is that the author of the article wrote under a pen name, because she is, "a conservative in a liberal-dominated line of work." (May I guess that she is a lawyer?) Welcome to the Age of Obama. Here is a brief excerpt.

In fact, the NLG has cooperated closely with the ISM, one of whose "Free Gaza" board members "has been an active member of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) for 25 years"; and the NLG has advised activists from the student Group Viva Palestina, which the University of California-Irvine has asked the FBI to investigate because of its alleged material support of Hamas, about how to avoid questions from the Israeli authorities during their visits to Gaza.

What is more, there are close ties between the NLG and CAIR, which has recently been implicated in a plot to fund Hamas. For example, one board member of CAIR-Chicago "has been committed to working with the National Lawyers Guild" while another currently "is active in the National Lawyers Guild Middle East Committee."

And we now learn that the NLG is actively providing legal support to the "US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation," of which its own NLG International Committee is a member organization. Consider this email from Katherine Fuchs, National Organizer of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, which she sent to her colleagues and friends on October 22:

In other words, they are advising on how to comply with the Arab boycott.

Read the whole thing.

And to think that in my day, NLG was mainly a bunch of Leftists fighting racism, sexism, etc. and not yet a group of terror supporters advising how to circumvent the law.

But would they consider joining J Street?

Israel Matzav: National Lawyers' Guild: Working hand in hand with terror organizations for Israel's destruction

Israel Matzav: J Street's 'distractions'

J Street's 'distractions'

Ami Isseroff has a great quip in the middle of an article on why Michael Oren was right to skip the J Street conference this week (a decision that is looking smarter by the minute):

J Street spokespersons have demonized and trivialized anyone who dares to disagree with their positions as superannuated Yiddish speakers or neoconservative reactionaries. This is the organization that endorsed the showing of the anti-Semitic play, "Seven Jewish Children" by Theater J, which is also participating in the J Street conference. Poet Josh Healey was excluded from the conference, but only because he likened Guantanamo prison to Auschwitz, not because he wrote that Israelis, no JEWS ("the chosen people") are doing what the Nazis did to Jews. It did not occur to J Street leaders that such sentiments are not appropriate to a conference of a Jewish organization, let alone an organization that is pro-Israel. Rather, J Street guru Jeremy Ben-Ami noted that:

We are sorry for any distraction that this issue may cause for those interested in working with us to advance the cause of peace and security for Israel and the Middle East.

Presumably, Ben-Ami would consider Mein Kampf to be only a "distraction" for those interested in working to better German - Jewish relations in the 1930s.

Heh. That last line is priceless.

By the way, that's Michael Oren at the top of this post.

Israel Matzav: J Street's 'distractions'

Israel Matzav: Human Rights Watch's 'finite resources'

Human Rights Watch's 'finite resources'

It seems that 'Human Rights Watch' is having a little trouble finding Mauritania on the map.

The Islamic Republic of Mauritania is quite notorious, however for human rights violations. The government only criminalized slavery in 2007 and the enslavement of the black African population there remains rampant (estimates put the number around 600,000). A cached version of what appears to have been at one time HRW’s “Mauritania” page only lists two publications– one from 2003 and one from 2001 – and neither of these address slavery. Its only report documenting the repression of Mauritania’s black population by white “Moor” rulers dates back to 1994 – FIFTEEN YEARS ago. Even Amnesty International has several reports from 2008 on the systematic torture that is routine in the country.

Hmmm….Twenty Eight statements (and counting) in six months lobbying for the Goldstone mission and Zero reports on slavery in Mauritania in fifteen years? I guess the slaves of Mauritania will continue to suffer because as Ken Roth admitted in an interview in the Tablet, “’Why are we more concerned about the [Gaza] war rather than on other rights abuses?’ Well, we’ve got to pick and choose-we’ve got finite resources.”

I wonder why they can't get the Saudis to give them more resources. Maybe because the Saudis are only interested in having them probe Israel.


Israel Matzav: Human Rights Watch's 'finite resources'
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...