Why FIFA's president will never get the PLO to compromise

From Sky News, Tuesday:

FIFA President Sepp Blatter has held crisis talks in Jerusalem aimed at averting a Palestinian bid to have Israel suspended from international football.

The Palestinian Football Association is preparing to push a motion calling for Israel's suspension at the FIFA annual congress later this month.

Mr Blatter emerged "very hopeful" from talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Mr Blatter did reveal that Mr Netanyahu had agreed to a "match of peace" between the national teams of Israel and Palestine, though no date has yet been put forward.

Last week FIFA issued a statement on behalf of Mr Blatter stating "any member association that is fulfilling its statutory duties should not be suspended. This would apply to the Israeli Football Association as long as they fulfil such duties".

But the head of the Palestinian FA, Jibril Rajoub, has outlined a number of complaints which he says demonstrate violations of FIFA's standards and ethics.

What Blatter doesn't realize is that Jibril Rajoub has no intention of compromise. The entire reason he heads the Palestine Football Association is political - he cares nothing about sports.

How do I know? Besides reading his own statements, there is lots about him in the Tuvia Tenenbom book "Catch the Jew":

Rajoub knows that sports stories make headlines and he wants to make Israel look like South Africa.

So I could have told Blatter that he was wasting his time trying to get the PLO to drop the threats against Israel. But Rajoub beat me to it:

The Palestinian Football Association will not drop its bid to have its Israeli counterpart suspended from FIFA, the organisation's chief said Wednesday after talks with the head of the world footballing body.

"We will keep the proposal on the agenda (of the upcoming FIFA Congress) for sincere and open discussions by the 208 FIFA member associations," Jibril Rajoub said at a joint press conference with FIFA chief Sepp Blatter.

"There will be no compromising on free movement of our athletes and officials."

Rajoub also welcomed the idea of an Israel-Palestine "match for peace" but said conditions were not yet ready for such a game.

"Yesterday, you raised a very great idea ... It's a creative idea, I like it," he told FIFA president Sepp Blatter at the press conference.

"But we have to pave the road for that, we have to prepare the environment. But this should be an endgame, this should be a purpose for you and I urge you not to give up," he said.

Oh, by the way, when Rajoub tells Blatter that he welcomes the idea of a "peace match," he is lying through his teeth. Because last year he said (in Arabic, naturally) that a friendly match between Palestinian arab and Jewish children was a "crime against humanity."

The entire issue is political, and has nothing to do with sports. FIFA should understand this and see Jibril Rajoub for what he is doing - cynically using football as a weapon.

---

By the way, Rajoub in 2005 said that after Israel's disengagement from Gaza, Gaza would become a model for a Palestinian state.

He got that right, but not the way he intended.

Palestinian Arabs are Al Qaeda's most loyal supporters

From Pew Global Research:

In the months leading up to Osama bin Laden’s death, a survey of Muslim publics around the world found little support for the al Qaeda leader. Among the six predominantly Muslim nations recently surveyed by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, bin Laden received his highest level of support among Muslims in the Palestinian territories – although even there only 34% said they had confidence in the terrorist leader to do the right thing in world affairs. Minorities of Muslims in Indonesia (26%), Egypt (22%) and Jordan (13%) expressed confidence in bin Laden, while he has almost no support among Turkish (3%) or Lebanese Muslims (1%).

Al Qaeda also received largely negative ratings among Muslim publics in the 2011 survey. Only 2% of Muslims in Lebanon and 5% in Turkey expressed favorable views of al Qaeda. In Jordan, 15% had a positive opinion of al Qaeda, while about one-in-five in Indonesia (22%) and Egypt (21%) shared this view. Palestinian Muslims offered somewhat more positive opinions (28% favorable), but about two-thirds (68%) viewed bin Laden’s organization unfavorably.

It is true that Bin Laden's popularity has waned dramatically in the Arab world, and among the Palestinian Arabs as well. But you will be hard pressed to find a Western media outlet pointing out that over a quarter of Palestinian Arabs still view Al Qaeda favorably or that over  one third had confidence that Osama Bin Laden was a good Arab leader.

I know - let's reward Bin Laden's biggest fans with a state - one that is ethnically cleansed of Jews!



(h/t Ha'aretz)

Survey shows European Muslims are much more antisemitic than non-Muslims (update)

A new paper was released by ISGAP, "Antisemitic Attitudes among Muslims in Europe: A Survey Review" by Günther Jikeli.

It proves that European Muslims are more antisemitic than any other group, even extreme rightists. .

Most of the data comes from a comprehensive survey in France, although other data indicates that the attitudes are the same throughout Europe.

The other major finding was that the more religious Muslims are, the more antisemitic they are:

Muslims were also far more likely to believe more antisemitic statements than non-Muslims, even on the political fringes:

It isn't only France:

In Brussels, 2,837 students in 32 Dutch-speaking high schools were polled. About half of the Muslim respondents agreed with the following statements:

• (1) “Jews want to dominate everything” (total, 31.4 percent; Muslims, 56.8 percent; non-Muslims, 10.5 percent). 
• (2) “Most Jews think they are better than others” (total, 29.9 percent; Muslims, 47.1 percent; non-Muslims, 12.9 percent). 
• (3) “If you do business with Jews, you should be extra careful” (total, 28.6 percent; Muslims, 47.5 percent; non-Muslims, 12.9 percent). 
• (4) “Jews incite to war and blame others” (total, 28.4 percent; Muslims, 53.7 percent; non-Muslims, 7.7 percent). 

The antisemitic attitudes were unrelated to low educational level or social disadvantage.
Mark Elchardus confirmed the findings two years later in 2013 with a study of 863 students from Ghent and Antwerp, including 346 Muslim students. While 45 to 50 percent of Muslim students revealed antisemitic attitudes, “only” about 10 percent of non-Muslims did so.

So many in the West want to claim that Muslims only hate Jews because of Israel. These surveys indicate that the opposite is the case: they hate Israel because they hate Jews.

And yet none of the "human rights" activists are considering going into Muslim communities to be more tolerant of Jews. Because Muslims are expected to be haters, and the "progressives" don't expect them to act any differently.


Here is a video of the author talking about the study:

Muslim woman in Playboy causes fury

From The Sun:

A MUSLIM actress has caused a storm by posing naked for Playboy.

Click to see cover (NSFW)

Sila Sahin has been branded a "whore" and a "western slut" after appearing topless on the cover of the German edition of the men's magazine.

And Islamic fanatics have posted threatening internet messages.

Sila, raised in Germany by conservative Turkish parents, says she fears being "spat at" and "shamed".

Her parents are said to have reacted with "horror" at the 12-page coverage, and her mother has apparently cut off all contact.

Sila, 25 - star of German soap Good Times, Bad Times - claimed the shoot was a reaction to the "slavery" of her youth.

She added: "What I want to say with these photos is, 'Girls, we don't have to live according to the rules imposed upon us'.

"For years I subordinated myself to various societal constraints. The Playboy photo shoot was a total act of liberation."

But Islamic internet sites are being monitored by the BND - the German intelligence agency - after threats were posted about her "shaming Muslim womanhood" and "prostituting herself for money".

A kebab shop owner, asked on German TV what he would do if Sila were his daughter, replied: "I would kill her. I really mean that. That doesn't fit with my culture."

Tolerance!

(h/t DavidG)

Vowing revenge for Bin Laden in Jerusalem, Gaza (videos)

Here is a video of a preacher at Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem calling for the death of Obama and Bush for killing Bin Laden:

(original uncut video was uploaded by the preacher himself on Monday. YNet story here.)

Here is Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh condemning the assassination and calling Bin Laden a holy warrior.


He is now part of the Palestinian Arab government.


(h/t Joel)

Who oversees US aid to Palestinian Arabs? (Joffe)

A very important article by Alexander Joffe in Hudson-NY:

In Palestinian economics, where all the money goes is unclear -- but where does all the money come from? Which U.S. programs give how much and who has legislative oversight? Now that Palestinian Authority (PA) prime minister Salaam Fayyad has announced a plan for September for unilateral Palestinian statehood, which includes a request for $5 billion over three years -- and presumes that the newly announced Fatah-Hamas rapprochement does not scuttle all American aid -- the problem of oversight is all the more pressing.

...Economic Support Funds provided by USAID can not go directly to the Palestinian Authority without a waiver to the Appropriations Committee from the U.S. president saying that it is in the interest of U.S. national security to provide them, and and a certification from the Secretary of State regarding the PA's treasury, payroll and civil service – all according to section 2106 of chapter 2 of title II of Public Law 109-13, a 2005 emergency supplemental defense and relief bill (and Public Law 108-199 of 2004 before it).

Public Law 109-13, for example, requires, among other things, that the President certify that Palestinian security services have purged their ranks of terrorists, that the Palestinian Authority stop incitement against Israel, and that it cooperate with the US. in investigations of Yassir Arafat's finances. These waivers have been provided annually despite the fact that Palestinian incitement continues, Palestinian security forces are still laden with terrorists, and Yassir Arafat's money is still missing.

...In fact, the legislative system of appropriations and oversight matters very little when it comes to U.S. aid to the Palestinians: the system of foreign aid permits the president to independently "certify" or "waive" requirements introduced by Congress. It demonstrates the extent to which U.S. aid to the Palestinians is an instrument of Executive policy rather than an altruistic enterprise authorized by the Legislative branch.

....Legislation proposed in Congress to limit or condition funds to the Palestinian Authority or UNRWA are largely meaningless in this light. The "UNRWA Humanitarian Accountability Act," for example, offered by Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in 2010, demanded that UNRWA not be used by or support Palestinian terrorists. But like the appropriations bills described above, it offers the Executive branch an out by requiring only "a written determination by the Secretary of State, based on all information available after diligent inquiry, and transmitted to the appropriate congressional committees along with a detailed description of the factual basis therefore." Such a statement is a foregone conclusion. The mechanisms for Congress to review results independently, hearings, reports from Congressional staff, the Congressional Research Service, and the Government Accountability Office, have no weight except in the politics of the next appropriations cycle.

Aid the Palestinians is a microcosm of the larger question of how U.S. foreign aid works. Now that Hamas will evidently join Fatah in a Palestinian Authority poised to declare statehood and request vast additional support, creating genuine Congressional oversight -- with teeth -- should be addressed once again.

Read the whole thing.

Turkey's president lays a turkey of an op-ed

A laughable op-ed from Turkey's president Abdullah Gul in yesterday's NYT:

THE wave of uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa is of historic significance equal to that of the revolutions of 1848 and 1989 in Europe. The peoples of the region, without exception, revolted not only in the name of universal values but also to regain their long-suppressed national pride and dignity. But whether these uprisings lead to democracy and peace or to tyranny and conflict will depend on forging a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a broader Israeli-Arab peace.

Really? Even though the Tunisians and Egyptians and Yemenis and Bahrainis and Syrians and Moroccans and Iranians who are protesting are barely saying a word about Israel, the key to their countries turning democratic is based on Israeli policy? How so?

The plight of the Palestinians has been a root cause of unrest and conflict in the region and is being used as a pretext for extremism in other corners of the world.

Now, this is funny. Arab and Islamic regimes - the ones being protested against - are the ones who have claimed that they cannot reform because of Israel's existence. They are the ones who have used Israel as an excuse to repress their own people. Yet the president of one of those repressive regimes is now pretending that the protesters are the ones pushing the Palestinian Arab agenda - even though one would be hard pressed to find a single sign in the protests that mention Israel or "Palestine."

Israel, more than any other country, will need to adapt to the new political climate in the region.

More than the Arab and Muslim countries who will have to become democracies?

In these times of turmoil, two forces will shape the future: the people’s yearning for democracy and the region’s changing demographics. Sooner or later, the Middle East will become democratic, and by definition a democratic government should reflect the true wishes of its people. Such a government cannot afford to pursue foreign policies that are perceived as unjust, undignified and humiliating by the public. For years, most governments in the region did not consider the wishes of their people when conducting foreign policy. History has repeatedly shown that a true, fair and lasting peace can only be made between peoples, not ruling elites.

In these times of turmoil, and the previous six decades of turmoil, Israel has been trying to make peace with its Arab neighbors. This reflected the wishes of Israel's Jewish majority. I don't quite get how this is considered humiliating or unjust to anyone except the Arab masses who are quick to respond to government-initiated incitement against Israel. They are the ones who scream about "dignity."

Just like Gul.

Here's where he tries some sleight-of-hand:

I call upon the leaders of Israel to approach the peace process with a strategic mindset, rather than resorting to short-sighted tactical maneuvers. This will require seriously considering the Arab League’s 2002 peace initiative, which proposed a return to Israel’s pre-1967 borders and fully normalized diplomatic relations with Arab states.

Sticking to the unsustainable status quo will only place Israel in greater danger. History has taught us that demographics is the most decisive factor in determining the fate of nations. In the coming 50 years, Arabs will constitute the overwhelming majority of people between the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea. The new generation of Arabs is much more conscious of democracy, freedom and national dignity.

However, every peace plan that Israel has proposed - and that Palestinian Arabs and the Arab League has rejected - included making a Palestinian Arab state in the vast majority of the territories, thus solving that demographic problem (and also solving the supposedly overriding concern of Palestinian Arabs to have a state!) Why must Israel choose the Arab League plan which does not specifically solve the "refugee" problem and which would involve the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes? Why is the supposed "dignity" of the Arab and Muslim people more important than the lives of so many who legally and voluntarily chose to live in the heartland of their ancestors?

More to the point, if Gul is so concerned about democracy and a solution to the "Palestine" problem, why is he not telling Abbas to accept Israel's peace proposals and move on? Wouldn't a Palestinian Arab state on 96% of the territories fulfill every one of the criteria he lists in this op-ed?

No, this op-ed is not about peace. It is about forcing Israel to accede to Arab blackmail and to harden the Palestinian Arab rejectionist position towards compromise.

(h/t Samson)

UPDATE: Meanwhile, Turkey's leadership probably needs to learn other lessons from the upheavals. (h/t Serious Black)

The fruits of "unity:" Hamas terror TV being broadcast in West Bank

Palestine Today reports that in the wake of the Hamas/Fatah agreement, Hamas' "Al Aqsa TV" is now resuming broadcasts from Ramallah.

That station is known for showing blatantly anti-semitic shows as well as the famous "Pioneers of Tomorrow" children's show inciting hate against Israel. I once made a humorous video about that show:


Here's MEMRI's page for the station you you can see the fine quality of Hamas Terror TV for yourself.

Mahmoud Abbas is responsible for thousands of Syrian Palestinian deaths

The Action Group for Palestinians in Syria now count 2,771 Palestinians killed since the start of the Syrian civil war. 100 were killed in March alone.

Many of them could have been saved if it wasn't for the deep desire by Arabs to destroy Israel - and a conscious decision by "leader" Mahmoud Abbas.

In January 2013, Mahmoud Abbas bragged that he chose to let the Palestinians die rather than enter his territories.

Abbas told a group of Egyptian journalists in Cairo late Wednesday that Ban contacted Israel on his behalf.

Abbas said Ban was told Israel "agreed to the return of those refugees to Gaza and the West Bank, but on condition that each refugee ... sign a statement that he doesn't have the right of return (to Israel)."

"So we rejected that and said it's better they die in Syria than give up their right of return," Abbas told the group.

Abbas said this in Arabic, without any shame. Because his audience knows that the real purpose of the "right to return" is to destroy the Jewish state, and has nothing to do with "Palestinian rights."

Since the Yarmouk crisis escalated in recent weeks with ISIS taking over part of the camp, the Arab world and the media have shone a small spotlight on the area where so many Palestinian Arabs have been living. But they won't say anything about how Abbas had the chance to save them, and probably still can.

The Action Group for Palestinians in Syria is an offshoot of the Palestinian Return Centre. The major NGO dedicated to helping Palestinians subscrines to the same twisted, sickening philosophy that Mahmoud Abbas does - they only want to save them if they remain useful pawns to destroy Israel.

We have heard nothing negative about this outrageous statement by Mahmoud Abbas from Amnesty International, Oxfam or Human Rights Watch.  In fact, those groups purposefully misinterpret international law to justify Abbas' contention that there is a legal "right to return" for Palestinians - and their own antipathy towards Israel ensure that they will not disagree with Abbas' perverted morality that it is better for Palestinians to die than to give up a "right" that is literally nonexistent and that was created for the sole purpose of destroying Israel. (UN resolution 194 deliberately does not call it a "right" and the UN itself interpreted the resolution far more narrowly than Israel haters do today.)

It is scandalous that Mahmoud Abbas has not been called out for his despicable words that sealed the death sentence for thousands. And the silence from "human rights" organizations speaks volumes about their real desire to save lives when their pet Palestinians literally and explicitly prefer to see their people die.

Egyptian Waqf cleric says Jews jealous of how peaceful Muslims are

Sheikh Abdul Khaliq Oteify, of the Egyptian Waqf, says Jews are jealous of Muslims.

The reason?

Because Muslims "spread peace among themselves."

The learned sheikh spoke on an Egyptian satellite channel about how the Prophet Mohammed asked all Muslims to love each other. Jews, he said, are jealous at such an idea that no other people ever thought of before.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)