Love of the Land: Pallywood Returns: Palestinian Doctors and Human Rights Group B’Tselem Smear Israel with a Likely Faked X-Ray (PJM Exclusive)

Pallywood Returns: Palestinian Doctors and Human Rights Group B’Tselem Smear Israel with a Likely Faked X-Ray (PJM Exclusive)

They want an investigation, claiming the IDF fired real bullets into a crowd. Instead, the investigation should be of the accusers — the evidence is almost assuredly a fraud.


Bob Owens
Pajamasmedia.com
23 March '10

An Israeli human rights group is calling for an investigation into the deaths of two Palestinians who died as a results of wounds they sustained during a riot in Nablus. Israeli forces claim they fired rubber-coated bullets in an attempt to disperse a violent crowd. But B’Tselem claims that an X-ray of the skull of Osayed Qadus clearly shows a regular rifle bullet in his head. And a claim that live bullets were fired at Palestinian protesters is nothing more or less than an accusation of attempted murder.

Indeed, the image released to the media does seem to show what may be a bullet in what is purported to be the skull of Osayed Qadus. Unfortunately for B’Tselem and for the credibility of the Palestinian doctors at Nablus Specialty Hospital, the identity of who put the bullet in Qadus’ head is very much in doubt.

Almost certainly, the bullet depicted in the X-ray did not come from an Israeli rifle.

To understand the problem with B’Tselem’s claim, it helps to have an understanding of both the rubber-coated steel projectiles used as less-lethal weapons by Israel and the very deadly bullets used to kill by armed forces in both sides of the ongoing conflict.

(Read full story)

Love of the Land: Pallywood Returns: Palestinian Doctors and Human Rights Group B’Tselem Smear Israel with a Likely Faked X-Ray (PJM Exclusive)

Love of the Land: B'Tselem complains that Israel actually prosecuting Arab teenage rock throwers

B'Tselem complains that Israel actually prosecuting Arab teenage rock throwers

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
09 March '10

When I read this I could only conclude that attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem doesn't follow the news in Israel:

"These incidents constitute a most severe breach of minors' human rights," attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem wrote to Jerusalem District Commander Aharon Franco.

"A military-like crackdown in the middle of the night to interrogate 12- to 14-year-old children on suspicions of throwing stones runs contrary to all reason, and cannot be justified. It's hard to imagine the security forces taking such measures against Jewish minors," she wrote, accusing police of breaking the law governing treatment of youth.

#1. The arrests she is describing match exactly what the Israeli authorities have done numerous times in detaining Jewish kids in the "occupied territories" - and elsewhere when carrying out the arrests could be a problem.

#2. The arrests are carried out in the middle of the night to avoid a clash in the neighborhood. Would attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem prefer that every arrest carry with it the "cost" of a riot? Or would attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem argue then that it isn't worth the cost of a riot to prosecute the stone throwers.

Or perhaps, does attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem not think that stone throwing is something that should even be prosecuted? Maybe attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem thinks that stone throwing is simply another form of "nonviolent protest"?

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: B'Tselem complains that Israel actually prosecuting Arab teenage rock throwers

Love of the Land: On Free Speech and Informed Public Debate: An Open Letter to NIF and Affiliated NGOs

On Free Speech and Informed Public Debate: An Open Letter to NIF and Affiliated NGOs

Gerald Steinberg/NGO Monitor Staff
NGO Monitor
02 February '10

To ACRI, Bimkom, B’Tselem, Gisha, PCATI, Yesh Din, HaMoked, PHR-I, Rabbis for Human Rights, and New Israel Fund (NIF):

The recent attacks directed against NGO Monitor’s detailed research represent a dangerous attempt to prevent free speech and informed public debate on the political role of some NGOs. In particular, in your February 1, 2010 letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu, you tendentiously referred to NGO Monitor as an “extreme group” that “unleashed an unrestrained and inflammatory [attack],” and implied that we are the “rotten fruits” of Israeli democracy; B’Tselem’s US representative, Mitchell Plitnick, labeled us “extremists” and “right wing”; and, a few months ago, an NIF employee posted an indecent graphic on his blog (which was later removed) to illustrate his opinion of NGO Monitor’s publications.

These characterizations are inconsistent with claims to uphold the mantle of human rights and democracy in Israel. Contrary to the implications of your letter, NGO Monitor has never contested the right of civil society organizations to exist or to criticize. And if your rhetoric about upholding free speech in Israel were matched by your policies, you would uphold our right as an independent research organization, and the rights of NGOs that do not share your political views, to do the same.

(Read full letter)

Love of the Land: On Free Speech and Informed Public Debate: An Open Letter to NIF and Affiliated NGOs

Love of the Land: Rights Against Safety

Rights Against Safety

Yaacov Lozowick
Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
28 January "10

My first post this morning favorably compared Jessica Montell of B'tselem with the rank antisemites who congregate at Mondoweiss, CiF and elsewhere. Well, here's some balance: a demonstration of the weakness in the thinking of Israel's radicals - in this case, Hamoked, Center for the Protection of the Individual.

Hamoked is not a very important organization, but it does have some presence. It's thesis is that Israel is unjust to Palestinian individuals and this must be corrected - so far, so reasonable. When you note that they have no problem criticizing the Supreme Court (High Court of Justice, HCJ, which I have recently mentioned as Bagatz) you begin to see that they're well off the mainstream. Israelis criticize the High Court sometimes, but carefully. The Left, rarely. The far Left, however, don't feel inhibited.

The reason I'm mentioning Hamoked is an e-mail they've sent out. It wasn't meant for me, but e-mails have the habit of washing up at strange shores. This one is an attempt to recruit a writer for their website. They've got eight lines of necessary qualifications, most of them just what you'd expect (English and Hebrew writing abilities, legal background, that sort of thing). Yet it's the first qualification which is telling:

מחויבות מוצקה לנושא זכויות אדם, לרבות במצבים של התנגשות בין זכויות אדם לצרכי ביטחון
High commitment to human rights, especially in cases of conflicts between human rights and security issues (needs).

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Rights Against Safety

Love of the Land: Too Much to Bear

Too Much to Bear

Aussie Dave
Israellycool
25 January '10

While I waded in the filth that is Richard Silverstein’s blog, I noticed a post of his on an article about Israel’s rebuttal to the Goldstone Report (http://tinyurl.com/yec7g5a). In particular, this reaction:

On a final note, I was also astonished that B’Tselem allowed itself to become part of Bronner’s case that Israelis universally condemn Goldstone’s claim of a deliberate Israeli plan to destroy civilian infrastructure:

“I do not accept the Goldstone conclusion of a systematic attack on civilian infrastructure,” said Yael Stein, research director of B’Tselem. “It is not convincing.

This is too much to bear. Anyone who has visited Gaza or lives there can see with their own eyes that this is simply wrong. The schools, mosques, parliament, civilian ministries, factories, UNWRA food warehouse, everything it takes to make a society–virtually all of it was systematically destroyed. And Israeli generals during the war essentially conceded this point by claiming that every Gazan was presumed either a combatant or supporter of Hamas, and therefore a likely combatant. Israel soldiers themselves reported Gaza was a virtual free fire zone in which anything that moved whether civilian or not was considered a target. 1,100 of the 1,400 Gazans killed by the IDF were civilians, which further underscores either a willful campaign to target civilians or a strategy that accepted the decimation of the civilian population as a corollary of the approach.

I generally admire B’Tselem’s human rights work. But in this they have fallen down hard and deserve criticism.

This reaction speaks volumes about Silverstein and others like him. Notice how he is completely unwilling to accept a scenario in which Israel did not deliberately kill innocent people, even to the point of making the emotional statement “This is too much to bear.”

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Too Much to Bear

Love of the Land: How many Gaza civilians were killed by Hamas rockets?

How many Gaza civilians were killed by Hamas rockets?

Elder of Ziyon
18 January '10

Palestine Press Agency reports that the house of Ibrahim Naji Sumairi was damaged by a Qassam rocket that fell short in the southern Gaza town of Qarara, and that his family was saved from a "certain death" by sheer luck. The rocket sprayed shrapnel all around the home.

Which brings up a question that the PCHR and B'Tselem and Goldstone did not try to answer: How many of the civilians killed in Gaza were actually killed by fire from Palestinian Arab armed groups? In the days before Cast Lead, two girls were killed in Gaza, and others were injured in separate rocket attacks.

These were not isolated incidents. In fact, in the month before Cast Lead began about 6% of the rockets fired landed in Gaza itself. During Cast Lead, some 800 Qassams were fired towards Israel, and the percentage that landed in Gaza itself is unknown, but we can safely assume that the number would have been even greater than 6% as the people launching the rockets were in a greater hurry than usual.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: How many Gaza civilians were killed by Hamas rockets?

Love of the Land: You’re Not Going to Believe This, But…

You’re Not Going to Believe This, But…

Noah Pollak
Contentions/Commentary
12 January '10

Yet another “human rights” NGO has been caught trafficking in made-up statistics. As Yaacov Lozowick and Elder of Ziyon report, Addameer, a Palestinian “prisoners’ rights” NGO, has been inflating the number of Palestinians it claims have been arrested by Israel to a point of total absurdity:

For Addameer’s numbers to be accurate, Israel would be arresting some 10,000 people a month. Yet the PCHR [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights -- no PR operation for Israel by any stretch of the imagination] says that the number of arrests was 23 last week, 26 the previous week, 23 the week before and 17 the week before that – for a total of less than 100 people a month.

And B’Tselem says that “about 6,831 Palestinians were held in Israel as of the end of December ‘09.” How could only 6,800 Palestinians be held in Israel if the IDF is arresting 10,000 Palestinians per month?

Addameer not only made up the initial numbers but they keep grossly inflating them, confident that their anti-Israel audience will lap them up without question.

(Read complete post)

Love of the Land: You’re Not Going to Believe This, But…

Love of the Land: Why no 'Viva Somalia?'

Why no 'Viva Somalia?'

JPost Editorial
07 January '10

Posted before Shabbat

What could be worse than being forgotten in the rubble of war? As The New York Times reported this week, Gazans feel forsaken. The constant flow of humanitarian aid is staving off hunger and disease, but a pall of listlessness besets the Strip.

It is so dreary that B'Tselem, an Israeli-staffed organization that's funded mostly by European governments and American foundations, has distributed video cameras to 18 young people just to get them out and about.

They make really cool videos about all sorts of subjects - such as smuggling laundry detergent through tunnels between Gaza and Sinai; resisting the "occupation" by singing hip hop music; there's also one about a girls' soccer team.

The videos have found their way onto Ynet, a popular Hebrew news Web site.

THERE'S A revealing comparison to be made between the "siege" of Gaza and what is happening in Somalia, where the World Food Program this week was forced to abandon one million tormented people because Islamist gunmen have made it impossible for its staff to operate.

The al-Shabab accuses the WFP of being spies for the infidels and has murdered a number of aid workers. The extremists are enraged that the WFP will not pay protection money. Overall, 3 million Somalis depend on WFP relief, but the plight of 285,000 acutely malnourished children is especially heart-rending.

(Read full editorial)

Love of the Land: Why no 'Viva Somalia?'

Love of the Land: B’Tselem’s One-Way Looking Glass

B’Tselem’s One-Way Looking Glass

NGO Monitor
07 January '10

Following last year’s Gaza war, B’Tselem gave out video cameras to “young volunteers,” many of whom are studying communications or journalism, and asked them to document their everyday lives in Gaza. The results were publicized in the New York Times and on the home page of YNet, a leading online news source in Israel. NGO Monitor has the following observations on this project and the publicity it has received.

B’Tselem’s video project is a constructive step in opening up lines of communication between the two sides of the conflict, but by not distributing cameras to Israeli citizens, B’Tselem presents a totally one-sided picture. The absence of any images of the effects of Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli victims emphasizes the politicization of human rights in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and B’Tselem’s role in this.

The videos:

One video, “Into the light,” exploits Palestinian children to deliver a message that demonizes Israel – “we are the pioneers of Palestine, alive but not alive” – while omitting any reference to the children of southern Israel who have been injured and killed by Hamas rockets.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: B’Tselem’s One-Way Looking Glass

Love of the Land: NGOs claimed Nizar Rayan was a civilian

NGOs claimed Nizar Rayan was a civilian

NGO Monitor
01 January '10

Nizar Rayan, a senior Hamas military commander, and members of his family were killed in an IDF airstrike on January 1, 2009. Rayan was involved in the planning of many deadly suicide attacks on Israel and was an architect of the Hamas take-over of Gaza in 2007. He sent his own son out on a suicide bombing mission in 2001 that killed two and wounded many. Journalist Jeffrey Goldberg called Rayan, “one of the more bellicose Hamas leaders I have known”. Rayan told him in a 2007 interview that the “only reason to have a hudna is to prepare yourself for the final battle . . . Israel is an impossibility. It is an offense against God."

Rayan’s home was part of a complex that served as a weapons storage site and command center for Hamas. Prior to the attack, the IDF issued several alerts that the buildings would be targeted including specific telephone calls and warning shots “13 minutes and 9 minutes before the strike.” Other residents heeded the warnings, but Rayan and his family decided to stay. After the strike, secondary explosions were observed, confirming the presence of a weapons cache in Rayan’s home. It is not known whether the initial IDF attack or the secondary explosions caused the resulting casualties.

Despite Rayan’s status as a leader in Hamas’ Qassam brigades and the weapons stockpile in his building, the European-government funded Palestinian Center for Human Rights(PCHR) called Rayan’s death a “heinous crime” and that its “perpetrators and their military and political leaders must be prosecuted.”

As the logistical organizer for the Arab League’s Gaza “Fact Finding” mission, PCHR also facilitated an interview with two of Rayan’s sons, one of whom dubiously claimed, “My father couldn’t imagine he would be targeted like this.” Even the Guardian noted, however, that “Rayan appeared to believe himself invincible. He refused to leave or allow his enormous family to leave their home in the Jabalia camp.”

PCHR continues to list Rayan as a “civilian” and “university professor” in its casualty statistics from the war – calling further into question the organization’s credibility.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: NGOs claimed Nizar Rayan was a civilian

Love of the Land: Human Rights NGOs Need a Monitor

Human Rights NGOs Need a Monitor

Gerald M. Steinberg
The Forward
30 December 09

Most people prefer giving, rather than receiving, criticism. Leaders of powerful non-governmental organizations are no exception.

Human rights NGOs have long benefited from a “halo effect” that has protected them from scrutiny; reporters quote their research widely, assuming it is accurate. But in recent years, the protective coating has worn thin, and the heads of these organizations are finding themselves squirming uncomfortably in the spotlight.

Events of the past year have highlighted the vital need for accountability, transparency and informed debate on the activities of NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and B’Tselem. These NGOs have played a central role in charging Israel with “war crimes” and “collective punishment.” To the degree that these groups’ agendas and claims prove to be biased, unfounded or simply invented, their accusations against Israel also lose credibility.

Understandably, NGO Monitor’s research reports airing NGOs’ dirty linen often trigger intense counterattacks. There have been angry insults from HRW officials and crude accusations of “McCarthyism” from apologists for some of the groups that NGO Monitor has researched. (One such online attack was linked to prominently on the home page of the New Israel Fund.)

Then there are criticisms from more serious individuals, such as Forward columnist Yossi Alpher, author of the December 25 article “NGO Monitor Needs a Monitor.” To his credit, Alpher acknowledges the work that NGO Monitor has done exposing “the funding by European governments and reputable American philanthropies of NGOs that smear Israel with lies and classic antisemitic rhetoric.” He also affirms the validity of NGO Monitor’s complaints about Human Rights Watch. (Alpher doesn’t elaborate, but NGO Monitor has documented deep biases among the heads of HRW’s Middle East division, the dispatching of an obsessive Nazi-memorabilia collector to assess Israeli military actions and the group’s use of anti-Israel themes to raise funds in Saudi Arabia.)

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Human Rights NGOs Need a Monitor

Love of the Land: Who's afraid of NGO Monitor?

Who's afraid of NGO Monitor?

Naftali Balanson
Right of Reply/JPost
02 December 09

The primary role of civil society is to "give voice" to ordinary citizens and ensure that government officials hear from those most affected by their decisions. The ability of citizens to inform public policy is the hallmark of any democracy, including Israel. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can be at the vanguard of democracy and pluralism, promoting the values of free and open debate.

Therefore, it was striking that some of the most prominent Israeli NGOs boycotted the December 1st Knesset conference on "Foreign Government Funding for NGO Political Activity in Israel." The agenda included the political, diplomatic and legal issues raised by the phenomenon of NGOs which receive tens of millions of shekels from foreign governments, often without the knowledge of the Israeli government and public. Legislative proposals were also considered.

Minister Michael Eitan and MK Zeev Elkin invited officials from Israeli NGOs to speak at the conference, in order to include representation from groups that would be affected by future legislation. B'Tselem, the Association for Civil Right in Israel (ACRI), and Adalah receive millions in European government support. These NGOs have a vested interest in making their voices heard, and they were given an open platform.

But they refused to attend. Instead, NGOs and their allies initiated a campaign to delegitimize the conference and silence its organizers. They pressed MKs like Daniel Ben-Simon to cancel participation in the event, and wrote angry op-eds in The Jerusalem Post (David Newman) and Ha'aretz (Didi Remez). Reflecting the pervasive secrecy and lack of full disclosure, Remez did not reveal that he works for Ben-Or Communications. In this role, he has a direct and personal interest in many of the organizations he was defending: the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), Bimkom, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-I), and Yesh Din.

These over-the-top reactions and silencing of critics reflect the "democracy deficit" and secretive nature of human rights NGOs in general. This trend is more pronounced among Israeli groups that rely heavily on foreign government funding.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Who's afraid of NGO Monitor?

Love of the Land: Ha'aretz's Ode to an 'Apartheid Road'

Ha'aretz's Ode to an 'Apartheid Road'

CAMERA
24 November 09

“An oud to Nablus” is a fitting title in one sense for Noam Ben-Zeev’s Nov. 17 article in Ha’aretz about a classical music concert in that Palestinian city. It suggests creative invention. Unfortunately, though, the story isn't in the fiction section, but is supposedly a news article (in the Gallery, or culture, section) presenting facts. In the writer's fabricated landscape Nablus is an “encircled city” with no theater and few performances, reached by an “exemplary apartheid road – for Jews only.” Residents of this imaginary place nevertheless overcome the obstacles of occupation to produce an enchanting Arab music festival, replete with the “friendly charm” of Arab musician Simon Shaheen.

Noam Ben-Zeev’s pseudo-poetic portrait of Nablus begins with his journey from Tel Aviv to the Palestinian city, which he describes as follows:

Before you know it, you’re on the best road between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean – Route 505, well-lit and with the highest-quality asphalt, wide shoulders and clear signage. This road cuts east through the West Bank and reaches the Jordan Valley. The fences on either side, separating it from the lands of Palestinian villages in the area, make it an exemplary apartheid road – for Jews only. And you can fly along at 140 kilometers per hour, from one Jewish settlement to the next.

Route 505 – Open to Palestinians

Route 505, which Ben-Zeev describes as “an exemplary apartheid road -- for Jews only,” is not only open to Muslim and Christian Israelis, but is also open to Palestinian traffic, a fact confirmed by Palestinian sources. For instance, Table 3 of a November 1, 2009 report issued by the Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (ARIJ), a Palestinian outfit, states that an earth mound barrier was recently removed from Haris, thereby connecting that Palestinian town south of Nablus to Route 505.

An August 2009 B’Tselem spreadsheet about freedom of movement and checkpoints in the West Bank notes which checkpoints do not permit Palestinian passage and which roads are closed to Palestinians. The chart makes clear that 505 is open to Palestinian traffic. Referring to the Tapuach (Za’tara) checkpoint in the Nablus district, B’Tselem writes:

The checkpoint separates the northern section of the West Bank from the southern section. Open around the clock. Vehicles traveling south on Routes 60 and 505 are checked. Since mid-June 2009, the checks have been random, and delays at the checkppoint [sic] have not been especially long.

Likewise, B’Tselem refers to the ‘Aqraba/Majdal Bani Fadil-Migdalim checkpoint, stating: “located on Route 505, on the turn-off to ‘Aqraba, Majdal Bani Fadil. When staffed, checks are made randomly.”

While Palestinian traffic is permitted to travel freely on Route 505 in the West Bank, it is Israeli traffic which is prohibited for a 5.5 kilometer stretch from Elkana to Kiryat Netafim.

‘Encircled Nablus’

In a related fabrication, Ben-Zeev imagines that Nablus is an “encircled city” which residents may exit and enter only on weekends. He writes:

(Continue article)

Love of the Land: Ha'aretz's Ode to an 'Apartheid Road'

Love of the Land: B'Tselem Knocks Goldstone Report

B'Tselem Knocks Goldstone Report

CAMERA/Snapshot

30 September 09

Over the years, B'Tselem has hardly shown itself to be a beacon of accuracy and fair treatment of Israel (see here, here, here, and here). It is therefore notable that B'Tselem director Jessica Montell has come out critically against the Goldstone report. The Jerusalem Post reports:

The UN Human Rights Council and the Goldstone Report are either biased or mistaken in some of their fundamental accusations against Israel, according to B'Tselem human rights group director Jessica Montell.

She said the council was wrong in its gravest accusations against Israel. These include the claim that Israel intentionally targeted the civilian population rather than Hamas, and the "weak, hesitant way that the report mentions Hamas's strategy of using civilians [in combat]." . . .

"There's no question that the HRC, which mandated the Goldstone [fact-finding mission into the Gaza fighting], has an inappropriate, disproportionate fixation with Israel," she said.

She added that the council was "a political body made up of diplomats, not human rights experts, which means that the powerful states are never going to come under scrutiny the way the powerless will. So China, Russia and the US will never have commissions of inquiry, regardless of how their crimes rank relative to Israeli crimes."

But in her accusation that Israel has brought the report upon itself by failure to conduct internal investigations, Montell, like Goldstone and his team, ignores Israeli investigations that have been completed or are underway.

Love of the Land: B'Tselem Knocks Goldstone Report

Love of the Land: B'Tselem Jumps on the Bandwagon

B'Tselem Jumps on the Bandwagon

Snapshots/CAMERA

09 September 09

B'Tselem, an advocacy group known for its harsh but unreliable criticism of Israel, has jumped on the bandwagon with Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, issuing its own critique of Israel's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza . B'Tselem -- not to be outdone by the other groups -- comes up with the same conclusion -- that most of those killed in Israel's military operation were Palestinian civilians. Unsurprising, given that all three groups rely on the same sources - Palestinian NGOs operating under the thumb of Hamas in Gaza.

Just how reliable is B'tselem? The organization's track record does not exactly inspire confidence in its methodology, rigor and accuracy. CAMERA has repeatedly found that B'tselem's casualty reporting is undermined by its strange definitions of combatants and civilians. For example, many of those characterized in B'tselem reports as civilians were killed while they attacked Israelis, like opening fire at a bat mitzah celebration in Hadera, setting off bombs, infiltrating Israeli communities and killing or wounding residents. (For more on this, see here and here).

The Israeli government has released its own casualty figures disputing the claim that most of the fatalities were civilians. Several private research organizations, like theInternational Institute for Counter Terrorism and CAMERA examined casualty figures provided by these same Palestinian NGOs and showed that the majority of Palestinian dead were males of ages typical for combatants and uncovered numerous examples where those identified by the NGOs as "civilians" were identified and commemorated by Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups as fighters.

All this leads one to wonder...why do Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and now B'Tselem devote so much time and energy to producing report after report that repeats the same thing again and again?

Human Rights Watch's recent fundraising jaunt in Saudi Arabia might offer a clue as to the answer.

Love of the Land: B'Tselem Jumps on the Bandwagon