Love of the Land: Israel's Right to Exist as a Jewish Homeland

Israel's Right to Exist as a Jewish Homeland

Salomon Benzimra
American Thinker
26 April '10

The U.S. regularly reiterates its support of Israel's security, but it says nothing about Israel's legal rights. These legal rights originated at the San Remo Conference, and the Resolution passed on April 25, 1920 is enshrined in international law. The commemoration of the ninetieth anniversary of this event will certainly open a new vista on the Middle East conflict.

Our calendars are strewn with special dates that link us to the past. In March we celebrated the two hundredth anniversary of Chopin's birth. Every Fourth of July, we celebrate Independence Day. Remembrance days are important, whether they pay homage to greatness or they unite people in national pride.

But there have been momentous events in recent history that remain unnoticed, if not entirely forgotten. One such event redrew the map of one of the most politically contentious regions of the planet, it shook the preexisting world order, it proclaimed the rebirth of a nation, and it marked the end of the longest foreign occupation in history. Yet few people have ever heard of it.

That event took place ninety years ago in the wake of World War One at the Italian resort town of San Remo. On April 25, 1920, after two days of intense discussions, prime ministers and high ranking diplomats of the victorious Allied powers signed the San Remo Resolution and sealed the destiny of the former Turkish possessions in the Middle East.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Israel's Right to Exist as a Jewish Homeland

Elder of Ziyon: Reuters caves to Hamas

Reuters caves to Hamas

I mentioned yesterday that Hamas was upset at an on-line ad that was seen at the Reuters Arabic service site, offering a $10 million reward for information on the whereabouts of Gilad Shalit. Reuters' response to the terrorist group is instructive. Palestine Today reports that Reuters responded to the criticism, saying that it was an automated ad placed there by Google Ads, and not - Allah forbid! - placed by any Reuters staffers. After all, an ad that seeks to free a prisoner illegally held in an unknown location without any access to the Red Cross would be thoroughly offensive to any Reuters employee, right? Reuters then cravenly added that they immediately acted to remove the ad, and "we are now taking steps to ensure non-recurrence of such things in the future." Reuters additionally wrote back to the offended terrorist organization that Reuters has a long history of covering the Middle East in a neutral and accurate manner, stressing that they are committed to continuing this approach, they wrote "We are clear and faithful to our principles of integrity, independence and distance from bias."

Elder of Ziyon: Reuters caves to Hamas

Elder of Ziyon: South Park getting lots of attention

South Park getting lots of attention

Ross Douthat writes in the New York Times: Two months before 9/11, Comedy Central aired an episode of “South Park” entitled “Super Best Friends,” in which the cartoon show’s foul-mouthed urchins sought assistance from an unusual team of superheroes. These particular superfriends were all religious figures: Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, Mormonism’s Joseph Smith, Taoism’s Lao-tse — and the Prophet Muhammad, depicted with a turban and a 5 o’clock shadow, and introduced as “the Muslim prophet with the powers of flame.” That was a more permissive time. You can’t portray Muhammad on American television anymore, as South Park’s creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, discovered in 2006, when they tried to parody the Danish cartoon controversy — in which unflattering caricatures of the prophet prompted worldwide riots — by scripting another animated appearance for Muhammad. The episode aired, but the cameo itself was blacked out, replaced by an announcement that Comedy Central had refused to show an image of the prophet. Two weeks ago, “South Park” brought back the “super best friends,” but this time Muhammad never showed his face. He “appeared” from inside a U-Haul trailer, and then from inside a mascot’s costume. These gimmicks then prompted a writer for the New York-based Web site revolutionmuslim.com to predict that Parker and Stone would end up like Theo van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker murdered in 2004 for his scathing critiques of Islam. This passive-aggressive death threat provoked a swift response from Comedy Central. In last week’s follow-up episode, the prophet’s non-appearance appearances were censored, and every single reference to Muhammad was bleeped out. The historical record was quickly scrubbed as well: The original “Super Best Friends” episode is no longer available on the Internet. [There's] a sense in which the “South Park” case is particularly illuminating. Not because it tells us anything new about the lines that writers and entertainers suddenly aren’t allowed to cross. But because it’s a reminder that Islam is just about the only place where we draw any lines at all. Across 14 on-air years, there’s no icon “South Park” hasn’t trampled, no vein of shock-comedy (sexual, scatalogical, blasphemous) it hasn’t mined....Our culture has few taboos that can’t be violated, and our establishment has largely given up on setting standards in the first place. Except where Islam is concerned. There, the standards are established under threat of violence, and accepted out of a mix of self-preservation and self-loathing. This is what decadence looks like: a frantic coarseness that “bravely” trashes its own values and traditions, and then knuckles under swiftly to totalitarianism and brute force. David Hazony adds: Something has gone terribly wrong. The core of liberal society is the belief that every new thought, every iconoclasm, every “dangerous” idea, can be uttered somewhere, by someone, as long as it doesn’t openly incite violence — and that every sacred cow is ultimately just a cow. No cultural institution in our world has embodied this right more than South Park. Aside from being very, very funny (my apologies to the dour souls who disagree), it is also often vile, filled with offensive ideas, language, images, and more. South Park has, until now, been the one place where every holy thing can be made fun of, every taboo broken — especially religion. Nobody has to watch it if they don’t like it. But it should be out there, somewhere. With the collapse of South Park’s credibility as the slayer of all cows, something has been lost, something very deep to the inner logic of liberty. We have caught a glimpse of a world where religion is, well, so sacred as to brook no humor whatsoever. It is a dark world that we escaped several centuries ago, a world where power and claims of ultimate truths fuse together to crush freedom, creativity, and the bold human endeavors that have given us our entire world of scientific and political advancement. In a flash, we moderns are now forced to contend with the myth of our own invincibility: are we so arrogant as to think that modernity can never be undone? I was aghast to see that Comedy Central had bleeped out every mention of Mohammed in the second episode, as well as the extended "beeps" at the end of the episode during the obligatory "lessons learned" section of the show. While I can understand that the company needs to protect its employees, let us hope that the West as a whole learns its own lessons about the dangers of censoring criticism of Islam.

Elder of Ziyon: South Park getting lots of attention

Elder of Ziyon: The BBC's endemic bias against Israel bias (Zvi)

The BBC's endemic bias against Israel bias (Zvi)

Zvi comments in response to my post on BBC bias yesterday: The BBC Mideast department has an extreme anti-Israel bias, which gets injected into every story that they write about Israel and which shows up strikingly in the headlines and story selection on their web page. I once did a a non-scientific study based on their headline word selection ("war crime", "massacre", etc.), active accusations against specific parties vs. passive voice headlines, and to an extent, story selection. Essentially, I was trying to determine whether the bias that I perceived was in fact a general bias against the region, or a specific bias against Israel. I assigned numerical values to headlines based on such criteria. After tracking the site for months, it was apparent that there was a strong, constant bias against Israel by the mideast dept. There were only a handful of positive headlines in all that time, and most were attached to stories that were apparently written by other departments (sports, science, medicine, for instance). There was a less extreme bias against Iran. There was distinct bias in favor of Saudi Arabia. Egypt was mostly mentioned in headlines only in the context of accidents. Iraq was a bloody mess at the time, but was usually portrayed as a victim. The Palestinians were nearly always shown in a positive light. If Hamas did something wrong, its actions were nearly always anonymized in the headlines, or the headlines talked about Israel's responses rather than the attacks that caused them. A much simpler selection bias that I've noted relates to THE BIG PICTURE image on the Mideast page. This one does not require a lot of effort to track, but of course it only provides one data point out of many. Following the BIG PICTURE images since their inception, the number that humanized Israeli Jews is vanishingly small. There are numerous pics that show Arabs, especially Palestinian kids. When Israel pictures are included, they seem to focus on either Israeli Arabs, Israeli soldiers or (bizarrely) animals in Israeli zoos. And you have only to read the BBC's Shalit FAQ to understand that there is a strong bias here against Israel - strong enough to ignore an unabashed war crime, strong enough to ignore the non-Palestinian roots of the Army of Islam and the fact that they kidnapped Alan Johnston and held him for ransom, strong enough to focus on bashing Israel rather than on the topic that the FAQ purportedly explains, strong enough to completely ignore the strong human elements of the Shalit story and claim that the situation is only important because "Israel is a highly militarized society" etc. The consistent pattern is that the BBC avoids humanizing Israeli victims. It only humanizes their attackers. It avoids humanizing Israeli soldiers, preferring to accuse them of war crimes. I would love to find out that the BBC has read this and, in order to prove me wrong, evened out the bias. But it won't happen. The BBC has hypocritically, and with extreme prejudice, prevented a report on its culture of anti-Israel bias from being read by the public who fund the BBC. The BBC Shalit FAQ is indeed remarkable, in that the entire medium-sized article is oriented to bashing Israel. It goes into some detail on supposed Israeli disproportionate reactions to Shalit's capture and not a word about the many violations of international law that Hamas has committed concerning Shalit: taking a hostage, not allowing the Red Cross to visit, using him for propaganda purposes, not allowing regular mail communication, and violating the right to know his location, to name a few. The fact that an article purportedly meant to be a definitive backgrounder about Shalit ignores his own human rights and the war crimes that the Gaza government has committed concerning him speaks volumes about how the BBC perceives the Middle East.

Elder of Ziyon: The BBC's endemic bias against Israel bias (Zvi)

Elder of Ziyon: Intimidation 101 - Massad at Columbia

Intimidation 101 - Massad at Columbia

A must read article from the Daniel Hertz at the Columbia Spectator: As an engineering student at Columbia, the issue of bias in the classroom has been, for the most part, nonexistent—unfortunately, this is, in my experience, not the case for a significant number of classes in the department of Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies (MESAAS, formerly MEALAC). Despite the constant reminders of professors’ one-sided agendas, I have always tried to take as many of these classes as possible. This semester, my curiosity for the subject led me to check out the class titled “Palestinian and Israeli Politics and Society,” taught by the renowned Joseph Massad. Although I entered the class with a hopeful outlook, it only took a handful of lectures for Massad to prove so many of his detractors right—he not only made his biases obvious but also embarrassed me in the process. After attending a few lectures, I was still unsure as to whether I wanted to register and remain in the class. While Massad’s reputation had preceded him for the most part, his statements were often tainted with a hue of partiality, making me, and several other students, extremely uncomfortable. With a skillfully crafted curriculum and required reading list filled to the brim with anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic sentiment, Massad had no intention of teaching history—he planned on rewriting it. The course began with an extremely “brief” introduction to the history of the land. Starting in the 16th century and briskly moving into in the 19th and 20th centuries, Massad had completely avoided the historical context that would nullify his own agenda. During these first few lectures, there was absolutely no mention of the 3,000-year-old Jewish presence in Israel, which is backed by an exhaustive amount of both written and archeological proof. In his subsequent description of the founding of Tel Aviv, Israel’s major economic hub and richest city, Massad once again turned history upside down. Through the use of disturbing anecdotes and baseless accusations, Massad claimed that Tel Aviv was built through a process of Arab labor and expulsions by Jews, disregarding the plethora of proof that discredits these allegations, including dozens of photographs before the city’s founding and endless official British documentation describing the city as built and inhabited by only Jews. Several weeks into the semester, Spectator interviewed me about Campus Media Watch, a Middle East watchdog group I founded at Columbia. After reading the article, I noticed I was incorrectly described as the sole contributor to one of the group’s innocuous blog posts regarding Massad. The following day, I attended class for what I thought would be a regular lesson. After a few minutes of friendly banter with Massad, I sat down as he brought order to the class. With the full attention of his students, Massad singled me out and asked several questions about my attendance. Although I tried to clarify that I was still unsure about registration, my explanation was useless­—Massad told me to leave his class immediately, explaining that I was in violation of school policy. Confused and embarrassed for being singled out in front of nearly 60 of my peers, I left the class with an uneasy feeling. Over the next few days, many of my former classmates approached me and described Massad’s disturbing reaction to the incident. Although I was not present at the time, I was told that Massad had gone on a “paranoid rant,” denouncing me as a “Jewish spy” for the same organization that “had tried to get him in trouble before.” After reviewing school policy, it turns out that Massad had the right to ask me to leave the classroom for not being registered. He did not, however, have the right to deliberately humiliate me in front of my peers. Massad’s claim that I was spying on his class is just as bizarre as it is baseless. During the times I attended his lectures, I sat in the front row, making my presence even more obvious with the handful of questions I asked each class. By not confronting me about registration during the time we talked before class began, Massad had the clear intention of making an example of me. I had entered the class with an optimistic mind-set—I had left it embarrassed and shocked by the unprofessional behavior of an instructor at Columbia University. Massad has since filed a grievance against me, which was thankfully resolved, in yet another attempt to stifle free speech and intimidate those who do not blindly follow his teachings. After four years at Columbia, a university known to encourage free speech and debate, I have never encountered a professor who has fought so diligently to vilify and silence a student who he believed had done nothing more than discuss his class on a blog, which leads me to ask a simple question—what does professor Massad have to hide? The author is a senior in the School of Engineering and Applied Science majoring in computer science. He is a campus fellow for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. I've discussed Massad a number of times before. Massad's reading list can be seen here.

Elder of Ziyon: Intimidation 101 - Massad at Columbia

Elder of Ziyon: Qatar gives up on Hamas/Fatah reconciliation

Qatar gives up on Hamas/Fatah reconciliation

Qatar, which had been a key third party in negotiations between Hamas and Fatah, is reported to have given up on trying to help unify the Palestinian Arabs. In an official letter to Egyptian mediators, Qatar said that it felt that the gap between the two sides was too wide to be bridged. After years of attempts to reach an agreement, no movement had been made. The Arab world gets more and more sick of the behavior of the Palestinian Arabs whose cause they had been championing for decades, even while the deluded West keeps on giving them increased support.

Elder of Ziyon: Qatar gives up on Hamas/Fatah reconciliation

Elder of Ziyon: Today's PalArab news (4/26/10) - updated

Today's PalArab news (4/26/10) - updated

The PA uncovered the largest Hamas weapons cache yet found in the West Bank, with hundreds of kilograms of weapons and explosives. It appears that Hamas was planning large scale terror attacks in the West Bank and in Israel. The IDF killed a senior Hamas terrorist in a shootout in Hebron. Even though he had a history of being behind shooting attacks, the AP describes him as an "activist." (Ap has since changed the story; I found the original at the Times of India site showing that the original story had AP repeatedly referring to him as an "activist.") Fatah accused Hamas of arresting 11 more Fatah members in Gaza. A Fatah spokesman mocked Hamas, saying that even though it talks tough it really accepts a two-state solution. This is yet another of many cases where Fatah's criticism of Hamas is not against its terrorism but against its seeming peacefulness. A student at Gaza's Al Azhar University was found with a hand grenade. A supposedly 117 year old woman died in Qalqiliya in the West Bank, leaving behind her 115-year old husband. If she really had been that old, she would have held the record for world's oldest person; if her husband is really that old, he would succeed her as the world's oldest person. The claims seem dubious at best. Kuwait did not allow Palestinian Arab disabled athletes to travel to Kuwait for the West Asia paralympic competition. Apparently, Kuwait doesn't recognize "Palestinian" passports.

Elder of Ziyon: Today's PalArab news (4/26/10) - updated

Elder of Ziyon: Pictures from the "world's largest prison"

Pictures from the "world's largest prison"

Yesterday was "Family Day" in Gaza, and here are some pictures of the celebrations: If you think that "Family Day" is a time-honored Palestinian Arab tradition, you would be wrong. Their holidays on which they hold celebrations and rallies are centered around being victims as well as important terror anniversaries. Rather, this celebration was sponsored by UNRWA.

Elder of Ziyon: Pictures from the "world's largest prison"

Elder of Ziyon: Fayyad the faker

Fayyad the faker

If there is any Palestinian Arab politician who is regarded as untouchable by the Western media, it is PA prime minister Salim Fayyad. Article after article praises him as an economic reformer who is untouched by terror and who is tirelessly working towards an independent Palestinian Arab state using Western and Gandhi-type methods. Avi Trengo in YNet bursts the Fayyad balloon, in a two-part article: Fayyad is not a military leader. He is building himself up as a political leader, yet there is no better way to judge his actions than to examine his deeds on the economic front, thereby exposing the immense gap between his words and intentions. Had his intention indeed been to be the Palestinian Ben-Gurion, he would have been acting for the sake of economic independence and the building of an infrastructure for the state in process. Instead, Fayyad dedicated the huge funds he’s been receiving from the world to paying salaries, in a bid to boost his support. He remembers well that the party he established years ago won less than 2% of the vote in the elections. Just like any politician, this is what truly interests him: building a support base. Recently, he started rewarding not only the 150,000 employees of the Palestinian Authority and its security arms. Fayyad established a fund (seemingly for development purposes) that hands over funds directly from donor states to salaries in more than 500 city halls and local councils established in the PA. In the past 16 years, these grew fivefold. The Palestinian prime minister boasts of being an economic reformer, yet in practice the growth we have seen under his leadership originates in greater international aid, which has been growing as result of a promise he has not delivered on: Minimizing Palestinian government bureaucracy. He also wants us to continue serving as his excuse for not investing the funds at his disposal in development – each report he submits to the World Bank is replete with excuses as to why the development funds had not been fully used. Would you like to guess who he blames? Had Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad possessed real plans for independence, he would already be starting to prepare an infrastructure for independent Palestinian currency. A state that wants to develop a private sector and the ability to reward exports cannot do it by a clinging to the shekel – the currency of a modern and highly developed economy like Israel’s. As an economist who worked for the International Monetary Fund, Fayyad knows well that the ability to carry out currency depreciation is the most important capacity demanded by the IMF from any independent state, yet this is apparently unfit for “Palestine.” This is clear proof that he does not intend to promote real independence. He wants to continue relying on us and remain in an undefined state of half-occupation and half “independence” until demography plays its part. What Hamas is trying to do militarily, and what Arafat attempted to do diplomatically, Fayyad seeks to do economically. Read the whole thing.

Elder of Ziyon: Fayyad the faker

Elder of Ziyon: The Elders make an appearance in Iran

The Elders make an appearance in Iran

Iran's English radio website has an 8-part article makes every major anti-semitic claim in one convenient package. It starts with the Zionist Jewish aims to take over the world, specifically Europe. It goes on to state that Zionism's goal is a state from the Nile to the Euphrates, that Ashkenazi Jews are all really Khazars, that Jews conspired with Nazis to facilitate immigration to Palestine, that there were no gas chambers, no crematoria and that the Holocaust is a myth altogether, that Jews ("Zionists") are trying to destroy Christianity as well as Islam. Finally, in chapter 8, we learn where the Islamic Republic got these ideas from: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which are then quoted! But Iran will keep telling you that they are only anti-Zionist, not anti-semitic. (h/t Judeopundit)

Elder of Ziyon: The Elders make an appearance in Iran

Elder of Ziyon: Hamas shuts down hip-hop concert

Hamas shuts down hip-hop concert

Either they really hate hip-hop or we have more evidence that Hamas is an autocratic, repressive, extremist theocracy: Hamas police have broken up the Gaza Strip's first major hip-hop concert. The B Boy Gaza group had just started a lively dance set late on Saturday in a crowded auditorium when police from the Islamist Hamas group that rules the Gaza Strip ended the performance with shouts of "the show is over", witnesses said. "I told one of the policemen that rap meant respect for all people, but he didn't seem to be listening. He said it was an immoral dance," one of the dancers said. PCHR adds: The policemen cancelled the show, expelled the audience, and arrested six of the show's organizers. The detainees were taken to al-Abbas police station in the center of Gaza City. The policemen confiscated the videotapes and cameras that were used in the show. According to the testimony of one of the organizers, the police forced two of the arrested ones to sign a pledge not to organize shows without obtaining permits from the Palestinian police.

Elder of Ziyon: Hamas shuts down hip-hop concert

Israel Matzav: Jones apologizes, post-racial White House not offended

Jones apologizes, post-racial White House not offended

National Security Adviser James Jones has apologized (Hat Tip: Memeorandum) for telling a joke about Jewish merchants during a talk at a Washington think tank last week.

I wish that I had not made this off the cuff joke at the top of my remarks, and I apologize to anyone who was offended by it. It also distracted from the larger message I carried that day: that the United States commitment to Israel's security is sacrosanct.

But one has to wonder what to make of this response from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Monday that the White House had "no intention to deceive" in leaving the remarks off a transcript off [I assume that should be "of." CiJ] the event, which he said were in fact the prepared text. He said the White House hadn't asked for Jones' apology which "rightly speaks for itself."

Does that mean that the post-racial White House didn't find the joke offensive?

Israel Matzav: Jones apologizes, post-racial White House not offended

Israel Matzav: The most pro-Israel country in the World

The most pro-Israel country in the World

The most pro-Israel country in the World is the United States India according to a study done by Israel's foreign ministry.

According to the study, which was unprecedented in scope and was undertaken by an international market research company, 58% of Indian respondents showed sympathy to the Jewish State. The United States came in second, with 56% of American respondents sympathizing with Israel.

The study was undertaken as part of the "Branding Israel" project and aimed at looking into Israel's international stature at what researchers characterized as the world's 13 most important countries, including the US, Canada, Britain, France, China, and Russia. A total of 5,215 people took part in the study.

Other countries that showed significant sympathy to Israel included Russia (52%) Mexico (52%) and China (50%). At the bottom of the list, the study ranked Britain (34%) France (27%) and Spain (23%) as the least sympathetic countries towards Israel.

I guess no one should be too surprised that the countries that like us the least are the countries of Western Europe. They'll be Muslim in another few years.

Israel Matzav: The most pro-Israel country in the World

Israel Matzav: 'Smart diplomacy': 60.9% of Israelis believe Obama trying to improve relations with Arabs at Israel's expense

'Smart diplomacy': 60.9% of Israelis believe Obama trying to improve relations with Arabs at Israel's expense

A Shvakim Panorama (which is a relatively neutral polling company) poll shows that Israelis overwhelmingly oppose a building freeze in Jerusalem, blame President Obama for the tensions between himself and Prime Minister Netanyahu, and believe he is trying to improve the United States' relations with Arab countries at Israel's expense.

Poll carried out by Shvakim Panorama for Israel Television Channel 1 of a representative sample of adult Israelis (apparently includes Israeli Arabs) broadcast on the evening of 23 April as published in Yisrael Hayom [on Sunday]:

What do you think of the American demand to freeze construction in Jerusalem?
Support 21.8% Oppose 71.6% Don’t know/refuse reply 6.6%

Who is responsible for the tension between the USA and Israel – Obama or Netanyahu?
Obama 58.6% Netanyahu 16.2% Both 17.6% Don’t know/refuse reply 7.6%

Is Obama interested in improving relations with the Arab states at the expense of Israel?
Yes 60.9% No 26.5% Don’t know/refuse reply 12.6%

For the record, if the number of 'Israeli Arabs' in the sample size is representative of the population (20%), you can assume that 20% of the 21.8% who support the freeze are 'Israeli Arabs,' 20% of the 33.8% who blame Netanyahu or both for the tension are 'Israeli Arabs' and 20% of the 26.5% of those who believe Obama is improving relations with the Arab states at Israel's expense are 'Israeli Arabs.'

I guess that PR blitz is going really well, isn't it? Heh.

Israel Matzav: 'Smart diplomacy': 60.9% of Israelis believe Obama trying to improve relations with Arabs at Israel's expense

Israel Matzav: Video: National Security Adviser tells anti-Semitic joke

Video: National Security Adviser tells anti-Semitic joke

Here's President Obama's National Security Adviser James Jones telling an anti-Semitic joke.

Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: Breitbart).



This is supposed to be one of our neutral negotiators. And he's telling jokes depicting Jews as greedy merchants.

Anyone wonder why no one in Israel trusts this administration?

What if Jones had told a joke like that about blacks? What do you think would have happened?

Israel Matzav: Video: National Security Adviser tells anti-Semitic joke

Israel Matzav: De facto construction freeze for Jews in 'eastern sector' of Jerusalem

De facto construction freeze for Jews in 'eastern sector' of Jerusalem

Arutz Sheva is reporting that Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama have reached a 'secret' agreement on a construction freeze in Jerusalem.

Reports in the Israeli press say that despite denials to the opposite, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barak Obama have reached a secret agreement on the issue of Jerusalem, whereby Israel will declare that it will continue construction in the Jewish capital, but in practice nothing will be allowed.

The reports also said that Netanyahu promised to stop the recently approved Ramat Shlomo project of 1,600 units.

Haaretz goes even further, reporting that 'Jerusalem officials' say that there is a de facto freeze in Jerusalem's 'eastern sector.'

Jerusalem Councilman Meir Margalit of the dovish Meretz Party said top Jerusalem officials intimately involved with construction projects told him that Netanyahu's office ordered a freeze after Washington expressed anger over the building plans.

The government ordered the Interior Ministry immediately after the Biden incident to not even talk about new construction for Jewish homes in East Jerusalem, Margalit said. It's not just that building has stopped: The committees that deal with this are not even meeting anymore.

He declined to identify the officials who informed him of the order because they had not approved the disclosure of their names. A Jerusalem municipal spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking interviews with the officials.

Another councilman, Meir Turujamen, who sits on the Interior Ministry committee that approves building plans, said his panel has not met since the Biden visit, after previously meeting once weekly.

"I wrote a letter about three weeks or a month ago asking [Interior Minister Eli] Yishai why the committee isn't convening," he said. "To this day I haven't received an answer."

Turujamen added that the last time his committee met was on March 9, when it made the provocative decision to approve the 1,600-apartment Ramat Shlomo project that riled the Americans.

He said he received no official word of a de facto freeze order, but based on the situation, those are the facts. We used to meet once a week, and now for several months we haven't met. It's clear there's an order.

Netanyahu denied that there is freeze in place in a meeting with Likud faction members on Monday.

And yes, of course this is plausible and even likely. What did you think - that Bibi didn't give anything to get the Obami to talk nicely to us?

Israel Matzav: De facto construction freeze for Jews in 'eastern sector' of Jerusalem

Israel Matzav: Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem a 'no-go' zone for police

Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem a 'no-go' zone for police

If you get caught in an Arab neighborhood in Jerusalem like Baruch Heller did, don't expect the Jerusalem police to come to your rescue.

While at the station, Heller said, he managed to get an officer to explain why police stand on the sidelines while Arabs attack Jewish motorists. Arabs attack cars in order to force police to enter their neighborhoods, so they can attack them, the officer explained.

For that reason, he said, police have been ordered not to be drawn into areas where there is frequent trouble.

Police may fear that clashes with Arabs would lead to casualties among the Arab rioters. In the past, violent riots in which Arabs were injured have led to inquiries into police behavior, such as the Or Commission that investigated police officers following Arab deaths in the October 2000 riots.

Heller and his friend have filed a complaint with police over the incident. In addition, they have written to the Jerusalem city council and to officials responsible for Arab neighborhoods in particular, explaining the problems they encountered when dealing with the police, and expressing hope that a policy that lets the police do their job of protecting innocent citizens will be formulated.

Read the whole thing.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem a 'no-go' zone for police

Israel Matzav: Obama's war on Israel

Obama's war on Israel

This audio from Howard Galganov is great. There's a little bit of music (the theme from Exodus) at the beginning and then there's a great audio and then the full theme at the end. Listen to it here (Hat Tip: Dani K).

Israel Matzav: Obama's war on Israel

Israel Matzav: New Jewish town in Judea for the first time since 1996?

New Jewish town in Judea for the first time since 1996?

The Israeli government told the Supreme Court on Sunday that it is considering legalizing an 'illegal outpost' in the Etzion bloc area whose construction was started before March 2001 if a new survey finds that the 'outpost' was built on state land and not on land privately owned by 'Palestinians.' The Sharon government promised the Bush administration that it would dismantle 26 'illegal outposts' whose construction began after March 2001. If in fact the 'outpost' is legalized, it may be the first new Jewish town allowed in Judea or Samaria since 1996.

In a response filed ahead of a High Court of Justice hearing scheduled for Monday, the state wrote that even though the entire Derech Ha’avot outpost, with its 17 permanent homes and 15 mobile homes, was built without a permit, the state is considering retroactively legalizing all of those structures that were not built on privately owned Palestinian land.

“The state has decided to order a survey of the lands in Derech Ha’avot,” the state’s representative, attorney Gilad Shirman, informed the court. “To the extent that the survey reveals that some or all of the houses are built on state land, the state will consider the possibility of legalizing the construction. Regarding buildings that are found to have been built on private land, the demolition orders will be applied in accordance with the [state’s] order of priorities.”

The state was responding to a petition filed by eight Palestinian farmers from the West Bank village of El Khader and Peace Now, charging that the land upon which the buildings of Derech Ha’avot stand belongs to the Palestinian petitioners.

They maintain that they owned the land and cultivated it until the outbreak of the second intifada, when they had to abandon it because of curfews and closures that forced them to remain at home.

In its initial response to the petition, the state acknowledged that all the construction was illegal and that the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria had issued demolition orders against all the structures. It did not confirm the petitioners’ allegation that the buildings were erected on private Palestinian land but said that since the land was not registered, it was unclear whether it was state- or privately-owned.

According to the government, Derech Ha’avot was established in February 2001, one month before the cut-off date established by the Israel and the US in the road map agreement. Then-prime minister Ariel Sharon promised to dismantle all outposts built after March 2001. Israel maintains that 26 were built after that date and, although the overwhelming majority of them still stand, they are slated, on paper at least, for demolition.

Derech Ha’avot is not one of them, according to Israel. However, the US has a different list of outposts built after March 2001, and it is possible that Derech Ha’avot is on the American list. Furthermore, Peace Now spokeswoman Hagit Ofran told The Jerusalem Post that her organization has aerial photos of the area showing that construction of Derech Ha’avot began only in May 2001.

Imagine that. The Jewish government may actually decide not to demolish the homes of 32 Jewish families built in the State of Israel (right next to - but apparently outside the boundaries of - another Jewish town called Elazar).

The traitors at Peace Now will have a fit. The Obama administration will spend all its time focusing on the ramshackle mobile homes rather than focusing on Iran. The world community will shake in anger.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: New Jewish town in Judea for the first time since 1996?

Israel Matzav: Video: The most powerful political ad evah....

Video: The most powerful political ad evah....

Well, actually, it is pretty good. I would have ended it with an Iranian nuclear explosion, but the focus of this ad is solely on domestic issues. So it's off topic for me, but let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: Stacy McCain).

Israel Matzav: Video: The most powerful political ad evah....

Israel Matzav: Britain ordered to pay $650 million to Iran over canceled arms deal

Britain ordered to pay $650 million to Iran over canceled arms deal

Here's another argument for Western countries not trusting multinational bodies.

The International Court of Justice in the Hague ordered the government of Britain on Sunday to pay Iran $650 million over an arms agreement that was signed in the 1970s but was never carried out. Reports in British media, the government accepted the ruling and the money is available.

The deal was for 1,500 Chieftan tanks and 250 other military vehicles. Britain cancelled the deal after the Islamic revolution ousted the Shah.

Please don't tell me that the Brits are actually going to pay this....

Israel Matzav: Britain ordered to pay $650 million to Iran over canceled arms deal

Israel Matzav: Hmmm....

Hmmm....

Kuwait's al-Rai newspaper is reporting that it was the United States (and specifically the Obama administration) that leaked the story about Syria delivering scud missiles to Hezbullah.

The Kuwaiti Al-Rai news has reported that officials in the US administration were the ones who leaked suspicions that Hezbollah had acquired Scud missiles from Syria, in order to "lay the groundwork for a proposal to the UN Security Council, to put together a resolution on the deployment of UN forces along the Syrian-Lebanese border".

The paper quoted Western diplomatic sources as saying that the aim of the deployment would be to stopper a supply route to Hezbollah, which allows it to hoard missiles in Lebanon.

Hmmm.

Maybe someone can ask Mr. Crowley about that at the State Department on Monday.

Israel Matzav: Hmmm....

Israel Matzav: Iranian nuclear scientist's home searched a day before he was killed

Iranian nuclear scientist's home searched a day before he was killed

In January, Iranian nuclear scientist Masoud Ali Mohammadi was killed when a bomb hidden in a motorcycle went off outside his home. At the time, the Iranian regime claimed that Mohammadi hasbeen killed by the United States and Israel, although it was already known that he was a supporter of opposition candidate Mir Houssein Mossavi.

A month later it came out that Mohammadi was an important cog in Iran's nuclear program, and it is possible that someone in the West wished him dead.

Now, as part of a much longer article about defenctions from Iran's nuclear program, the Washington Post discloses that Mohammadi's home was searched by Iranian intelligence agents the day before Mohammadi was killed, making it appear much more likely that the Ahmadinejad regime itself murdered Mohammadi.

Some observers say the Tehran government has been unnerved by the defections and point to the death of an Iranian physics professor more than three months ago as a sign that it has begun a crackdown designed to frighten would-be spies.

The professor, Masoud Ali Mohammadi, was killed Jan. 12 when a bomb planted on a motorcycle exploded as he passed nearby. Iranian officials accused Israeli and Western intelligence operatives in the killing, but news accounts indicated that Mohammadi had been sympathetic to the opposition movement and had attended anti-government demonstrations. The day before his death, Iranian intelligence agents had searched his home and confiscated documents and notes, according to a report by the NCRI [National Council of Resistance in Iran].

Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Iranian nuclear scientist's home searched a day before he was killed

Israel Matzav: Uh oh... Iran inspecting ships in the Strait of Hormuz?

Uh oh... Iran inspecting ships in the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran's Press TV reports that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards stopped two ships - one French and one Italian - in the Strait of Hormuz last week, on the pretext of inspecting them for compliance with environmental regulations.

The vessels were allowed to continue sailing after confirmation that they had not breached any regulations, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported.

...

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway between Iran and Oman, connects the Persian Gulf with the Sea of Oman. Nearly 40 percent of the world's crude oil passes through this waterway.

I searched in vain for confirmation by the French or the Italians that these events took place. Every source I found repeats the report (except for Stratfor, which notes that it cannot confirm the story at this time). J.E. Dyer explains why it matters what the Iranians are doing:

The names of the foreign ships were not provided; sketchy details make it difficult to be certain exactly where in the strait they were stopped. But European ships — even private yachts — rarely venture outside the recognized navigation corridors in the Strait of Hormuz. If this news report is valid, it almost certainly means that Iran detained ships that were transiting those corridors.

That, as our vice president might say, is a big effing deal. That’s not because Iran has committed an act of war by intercepting these ships, as some in the blogosphere are speculating. The intercepts were not acts of war. The purpose of verifying environmental compliance is one Iran can theoretically invoke on the basis of its maritime claims lodged with the UN in 1993. Ironically, however, Iran has never signed the Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS), the instrument by which the terms of its claims are defined. Many nations, of course, have yet to either sign or ratify UNCLOS, America being among them. In the meantime, world shipping has operated in the Strait of Hormuz for decades on the basis of UNCLOS’s definition of “transit passage,” which has customarily immunized ships in routine transit through straits against random intercept by the littoral navies (e.g., Iran’s or Oman’s).

Iran would be breaking with that custom by stopping ships for inspection in the recognized transit corridors. But this venue for a newly assertive Iranian profile is chosen well: stopping foreign ships that are conducting transit passage is uncollegial and inconvenient for commerce, but it is not clearly in breach of international law.

What it is, however, is an incipient challenge to the maritime regime enforced by the U.S., which includes the quiescent transit-passage custom on which global commerce relies. Mariners take care to observe the law as it is written, regardless of their nationality or national position on UNCLOS; but the guarantee of their unhindered passage isn’t international law, it’s the U.S. Navy. Demonstrations of force are required only rarely. Reagan put down revolutionary Iran’s only serious challenge to international maritime order back in 1988, in the final months of the Iran-Iraq War. Since then, Iran has refrained from unilateral action against shipping in the recognized transit corridors of the strait.

I've said before on this blog that the only way that sanctions could be enforced against Iran would be for the US and other civilized nations of the World to control the Persian Gulf. That would have to include controlling the Strait of Hormuz, and that, of course, is unlikely to happen without a significant war.

But Iran controlling the Strait of Hormuz is a nightmare scenario. It means that Iran could turn the oil spigot on and off as it pleases. Look at the map. While it's theoretically possible for Saudi oil to be diverted to the country's Western (Red Sea) coast, at the moment there is no pipeline. The other countries involved - Iraq, Kuwait, the UAE, and of course, Iran itself, cannot ship oil except through the Strait of Hormuz. That's why 40% of the World's oil goes through there. Take 40% of the World's crude off the markets and the price of oil will skyrocket.

Will Barack Obama send US warships to fight Iran in the Strait of Hormuz? Will he use US firepower against Iran? What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Uh oh... Iran inspecting ships in the Strait of Hormuz?

Israel Matzav: Syria simply explained

Syria simply explained

Noah Pollak explains that contrary to what we're hearing from Washington (where they are at a loss to explain Assad's motivation in supplying weapons to Hezbullah), Syria is quite easy to figure out.

Bashar is a promoter of a remarkable array of death and destruction in the Middle East: killing American soldiers in Iraq, murdering Lebanon’s pro-democracy community into submission, killing Israelis, arming Hezbollah, hosting Hamas, and so on. This is intended not only to make Syria into a bigger player than it would otherwise be, but allows Bashar to maintain his illegitimate police state of a regime by constantly invoking foreign threats. And it ensures that the United States and other western powers will continuously drag themselves to Syria to beg for cooperation. “The road to Damascus is a road to peace,” Nancy Pelosi famously declared on her visit in 2007. This is like saying that the road to a brothel is a road to virginity.

In the Obama administration, there are a few people, like Feltman, who understand Syria. But foreign policy is run from the top. The person who doesn’t get it is the president, who seems confused by the failure of the region’s dictators and terrorists to respond constructively to his sensitive reorientation of American foreign policy. Right now he is stuck between his ideological commitments and the reality of their failure, and in the meantime the Middle East’s rogues are not waiting around for The One to figure out what level of nuance he ultimately wishes to pursue. They see naivety and irresolution, and they capitalize.

Indeed (although I'm not sure why he thinks Feltman gets Syria).

Israel Matzav: Syria simply explained

Israel Matzav: Former Israel Airports security chief: 'Full body scanners are useless'

Former Israel Airports security chief: 'Full body scanners are useless'

Rafi Sela, the former security chief of the Israel Airports Authority, told the Transport Committee of Canada's House of Commons last week that full body scanners are useless.

He told the lawmakers, who were investigating the state of Canada's aviation safety, that the 44 imaging machines – each costing $250,000 – were a response that was too little and too late.

Sela, who helped design the security system at Ben-Gurion International Airport, has some 30 years' experience in the field. He warned the lawmakers, “You are reacting to incidents instead of being one step ahead of them” when the acquisition of the scanners was announced, days after a Nigerian national tried to blow up a U.S. airliner in December.

“I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines,” Sela commented. “I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747. That's why we haven't put them in our airport.”

...

Sela recommended instead that Canada use a “trusted traveller” system that sorted pre-approved, low-risk passengers, who could quickly be moved on with an expedited screening process, from those who might require more investigation. Such investigation would employ enhanced screening areas where automatic sniffing technology could be used to rule out explosives on a person's body or in baggage. He added that Canadians should also be using behavioral profiling.

Israeli security officials routinely use both.

Sorry Rafi, but behavioral profiling and trusting (inevitably non-Muslim) travelers is not PC.

Until the next terror attack....

Israel Matzav: Former Israel Airports security chief: 'Full body scanners are useless'

Israel Matzav: Rally for Israel in New York

Rally for Israel in New York

Well, it poured in New York on Sunday, but thousands of people came out anyway. Here's video from the rally.

Let's go to the videotape.



Pamela Geller has lots of pictures from the rally here.

Were you there?

Israel Matzav: Rally for Israel in New York

Israel Matzav: Dershowitz's challenge to J Street

Dershowitz's challenge to J Street

Alan Dershowitz challenges J Street's Jeremy Ben Ami:

Now it's my turn to answer Ben-Ami's direct question to me. Of course there is an American national interest in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Every country in the world has some national interest in bringing peace to that region. But I believe that the new emerging policy of the Obama Administration exaggerates the extent of our national interest in forcing a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that J Street has encouraged that exaggeration by claiming that it is "critical" to American strategic interests. I believe that very little will change in the Middle East, with regard to the major threats we face from Iran, Al Qaeda and Islamic extremism, by a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, desirable as that would be. And, of course, much depends on how the conflict is resolved--whether a resolution encourages or discourages further attacks against Israel, and whether it increases or decreases the likelihood of future wars. A "bad" peace that does not assure Israel's security will not serve either American or Israeli interests.

I do not believe, as Ben-Ami does that, "the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [is] a centerpiece of [extremists] recruitment." The centerpiece is Israel's very existence, as well as American presence on Muslim land. I do not believe that Israel is the reason for "the rising influence of Iran in the region and its quest for nuclear weapons." Nor do I believe that resolving it would help to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

This leads me to my final challenge to J Street: Do you believe that if America fails to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and if the Israeli government makes a considered decision that it must use military action, as a last resort, to prevent Iran from being able to deploy nuclear weapons, that Israel would have the right to engage in preventive self defense by attacking Iran's nuclear facilities? I am not asking whether Israel should or should not consider such attack, since I lack the military expertise to make that decision, as do you. I am asking whether Israel should have the right to make that decision. And I'm asking whether you believe the United States should seek to prevent Israel from acting on that decision as an absolute last resort?

Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Dershowitz's challenge to J Street

DoubleTapper: Who was Fred Monosson

Who was Fred Monosson

Fred Monosson was originally from Novgrudok, Belarus.

Fred is seated on the right

This picture is from here

He had a town named after him
Neve Monosson was founded in 1953 by a group of families supported by Fred (Efraim) Monosson, a wealthy raincoat manufacturer and a leading Zionist from Boston, Massachusetts.

About Fred


Independence Day in Israel


Fred Monoson's Footage of IDF

DoubleTapper: Who was Fred Monosson

Love of the Land: Obama's National Security Advisor's Joke

Obama's National Security Advisor's Joke

Jameel
The Muqata
26 April '10

President Obama's National Security Adviser, Jim Jones told the following joke, where he received lots of laughs from the audience...



Find this funny? Appropriate? Important point to note is that the audience in this case is the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Some of the posted comments posted on "The Muqata" page were questioning where this was said.

Click here for Jameel's post and follow-up comments.

Love of the Land: Obama's National Security Advisor's Joke

Love of the Land: The Palestine Peace Distraction

The Palestine Peace Distraction

Richard N. Haass
Wall Street Journal
26 April '10

President Obama recently said it was a "vital national security interest of the United States" to resolve the Middle East conflict. Last month, David Petraeus, the general who leads U.S. Central Command, testified before Congress that "enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests." He went on to say that "Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples . . . and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world."

To be sure, peace between Israelis and Palestinians would be of real value. It would constitute a major foreign-policy accomplishment for the United States. It would help ensure Israel's survival as a democratic, secure, prosperous, Jewish state. It would reduce Palestinian and Arab alienation, a source of anti-Americanism and radicalism. And it would dilute the appeal of Iran and its clients.

But it is easy to exaggerate how central the Israel-Palestinian issue is and how much the U.S. pays for the current state of affairs. There are times one could be forgiven for thinking that solving the Palestinian problem would take care of every global challenge from climate change to the flu. But would it? The short answer is no. It matters, but both less and in a different way than people tend to think.

Take Iraq, the biggest American investment in the Greater Middle East over the past decade. That country's Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are divided over the composition of the new government, how to share oil revenues, and where to draw the border between the Kurdish and Arab areas. The emergence of a Palestinian state would not affect any of these power struggles.

Soon to surpass Iraq as the largest U.S. involvement in the region is Afghanistan. Here the U.S. finds itself working against, as much as with, a weak and corrupt president who frustrates American efforts to build up a government that is both willing and able to take on the Taliban. Again, the emergence of a Palestinian state would have no effect on prospects for U.S. policy in Afghanistan or on Afghanistan itself.

What about Iran? The greatest concern is Iran's push for nuclear weapons. But what motivates this pursuit is less a desire to offset Israel's nuclear weapons than a fear of conventional military attack by the U.S. Iran's nuclear bid is also closely tied to its desire for regional primacy. Peace between Israel and the Palestinians would not weaken Iran's nuclear aspirations. It could even reinforce them. Iran and the groups it backs (notably Hamas and Hezbollah) would be sidelined by the region's embrace of a Palestinian state and acceptance of Israel, perhaps causing Tehran to look to nuclear weapons to compensate for its loss of standing and influence.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: The Palestine Peace Distraction

Love of the Land: One Thousand, Four Hundred Days

One Thousand, Four Hundred Days

Paula R. Stern
A Soldier's Mother
25 April '10

In the last one thousand, four hundred days...

We sold our house and

We moved to a new house, that we bought.

My oldest daughter got engaged and married, celebrated her first, her second, and her third wedding anniversary.

My oldest son entered the army, finished basic training, advanced training, a commander's course.

He served in several combat locations and went to war against terrorists who were firing hundreds of rockets into our cities.

He finished his national service, returned his weapon and uniform and came back home.

My second son finished high school, did a year and a half of pre-military learning, and just entered the army.

My third son finished elementary school, entered junior high school and celebrated his bar mitzvah.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: One Thousand, Four Hundred Days