In light of several Swedish teenagers becoming radicalized and traveling to Iraq and Syria to join ISIS, Swedish police recently distributed a list of terrorist logos to high school principals so they could be on the lookout for early signs of potential trouble among their student populations.
A controversy has erupted because one of the terror logos listed, that of the Abu Nidal Organization, uses the PLO flag as its logo.
Jonas Hysing, director of the National Tactical Council that shared the list with the schools, noted that it was not uncommon for terror organizations to use symbols that have been used in other ways, for example ISIS using Mohammed's creed.
Green Party member Niclas Persson is the mayor of Orebro, one of the towns that distributed the list to school principals. He said "It is important that this is accurate. The material is of course designed to warn us if an organization's symbol is being used. The biggest problem is linking the Palestinian freedom struggle with terrorism. It's very unfortunate."
Jonas Hysing said "It is possible that we add some text that the symbols are often used in multiple ways. But the symbol is used by a designated terrorist organization, and it is up to the Swedish police to inform their employees about it."
The list of logos came from the US National Counterterrorism Center. However, their list of logos are not comprehensive - they list 52 terror groups and only 40 logos.
Among all the hand-wringing over how unfortunate it is that the PLO flag is listed under Abu Nidal Organization, no one in Sweden seems to upset that two flags over is the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which Mahmoud Abbas apparently has no problem with even though they are part of the Fatah party that he heads. He claimed that it was dismantled years ago, but they are still alive and kicking and publicly walking around the West Bank with masks and weapons.
And the PLO flag, as well.
Palestinian Arabs don't blink when their flag is associated with terror groups. Which means that the inclusion of the Palestinian flag in a list of symbols for teachers and law enforcement to look out for as an indication of potential terror activity is quite appropriate, despite the politically correct crowd.
After all, when you see a PLO flag in Europe, 90% of the time it is meant to call for the destruction of Israel, not for any "pro-Palestinian" reason.
By now you have read the story about the shelved plan to force West Bank Arab workers to go back to their homes using buses that stop at checkpoints.
After criticism from the left and the right, much of which was misinformed by the original Haaretz story, Netanyahu himself said he would not implement the plan.
On one level at least, Israel proved that it is against discrimination in buses against Arabs, even Arabs who are not citizens.
That should make leftist groups that claim to be pro-Israel very happy, right? The democratically elected government chose not to implement this plan. Even though there were serious security issues that the plan was meant to address, the Government of Israel overrode the plan. Everyone should be happy.
But that isn't what happened.
J-Street sent out a fundraising email that tries to use this episode to paint Israel has a terribly racist society, and claiming that only pressure from American Jews can get Israel to be less racist, which it naturally is if it wasn't for the wonderful people at J-Street:
Last year, Israel's government considered a proposal that would have segregated key bus lines in the West Bank -- some for Jewish settlers, some for Palestinians. The American Jewish community spoke up, and with so many voices opposed, the proposal was cancelled.
Or so we thought.
Now, with Israel's new government, Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon is once again advocating rules that would result in segregation. He wants to separate Jewish Israelis and Palestinians as they go from Israel back into Occupied Territory.
Under Ya'alon's plan, Palestinian workers going home at the end of the day would have to travel through the same checkpoints they used to enter Israel, forcing many far out of their way and onto Palestinian-only bus routes. His proposal is currently on hold, but he and others in Israel's new government are pushing to reinstate it -- permanently. That's why we have to raise our voices once again.
Our values matter, and so do our voices. If we remain silent, the costs are high: further erosion of democracy, and even more international isolation. For Israel's sake, it's critical that the American Jewish community speak out again.
Add your voice and stand up for the Israel we believe in: one that supports our Jewish and democratic values.
Segregated buses? That's just not okay.
- Jeremy Ben-Ami>
Of course, Israeli Arabs could ride on these buses, just as in last year's plan. No Israeli citizen is being discriminated against. But because Jeremy Ben Ami wants to use this episode to cynically manipulate his audience, he consciously compares this story with segregated buses in the US in the 1950s.
That's just not OK. And it proves that Ben-Ami does not love Israel at all, but instead goes out of his way to paint it in as horrible a light as possible.
That's just not OK.
On Monday, I noticed that the murdered terrorist supporter Vittori Arrigoni's girlfriend worked for amnesty International but she seems to have had close relationships not only with Arrigoni but also with other rabid haters of Israel. I asked:
Isn't it interesting that Amnesty (and HRW's) activists are so much more friendly with people who want to destroy Israel than they are with people who love Israel?
A reader sent that link to Amnesty for a response. Their answer:
We reject absolutely any suggestion that our organisation has a bias against Israel. As you will see from reading our report (attached) on the Israeli attack on Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009, for example, we condemned the human rights violations and possible war crimes committed by Palestinian armed groups as well as by Israel. It is also worth noting that this is the only report prepared by human rights researchers who were on the ground in southern Israel and in Gaza during the fighting.
Indeed the first report from Amnesty International’s researchers was to expose extrajudicial killings carried out by Hamas under cover of the Israeli offensive. We have condemned on numerous occasions rocket attacks by Hamas and others against Israeli civilians targets in southern Israel and just last month profiled the case of Gilad Shalit as our prisoner of the month in a national newspaper (attached).
Our concern is solely the protection of human rights. We have condemned, and will continue to condemn, the Israeli state and its armed forces for repeated, gross violations of the human rights of Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories and in Israel. Likewise, we have condemned, and will continue to condemn Hamas, Fatah and other armed Palestinian groups for deliberate attacks on civilians and for failures to protect human rights in those areas of the Occupied Territories they are responsible. Protagonists on both sides would do well to examine what they are doing rather than assume any criticism of them is motivated by bias or prejudice.
Finally, if I could say this. It is absolutely legitimate to raise questions about Amnesty International's policies and priorities, indeed we welcome it as a valuable contribution to our own thinking. However, I think the site you link to is acting in a deplorable manner by using the tragic death of Mr Arrigoni to personally target his girlfriend, a woman who is right now coping with the loss of a loved one in unbelievably tragic circumstances. I realise it is not your site and you merely wished to raise a legitimate point, to which I am happy to respond, but I wished to place that on the record.
Yours,
Justin Moran
Communications Co-ordinator
Amnesty International Ireland
E-Mail: jmoran@amnesty.ie
Tel: 01 863 8300 Ext. 8334
Mob: 085 814 8986
www.amnesty.ie
Of course, Mr. Moran did not address the main thrust of my question: why do so-called "human rights" organizations' members seem to have closer relationships with activists whose focus is to destroy Israel than with anyone who could be remotely described as Zionist?
Arrigoni was not, as I have written, a human rights activist nor a peace activist by any definition of the term. Obviously Amnesty's employees can have relationships with whomever they want. But Arrigoni was a supporter of Hamas and an avowed anti-Zionist. Are any Amnesty employees friends with members of Likud, or with Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria?
Somehow, I doubt it.
In fact, Amnesty itself has no problem partnering with organizations that are explicitly dedicated to Israel's destruction. If Amnesty accepts ab initio that the destruction of the Jewish state is a legitimate position, it is difficult to accept their argument that they are not biased against Israel. There s no real difference between organizations that advocate replacing Israel with another de-facto Arab state and those who want to ethnically clean the Middle East of all Jews, no matter what word games they play with liberal-sounding concepts like "one state for all people."
If Amnesty supports the existence of Israel as a Jewish state, let them say so explicitly. If they do that, they'd lose a lot of their "friends" very, very quickly.
(As far as my acting "deplorably," I had never heard of Claudia Milani until Monday, and I simply looked at her history once I saw her name. I would have done the same had I known about her while Arrigoni was alive. I see no reason why her previous activities should be off-limits once she becomes a public personality, just because she is grieving over the death of her Hamas-loving boyfriend. Amnesty being more concerned over my blog post than over the relationships their employees have with people who want to see Israel wiped off the map seems a bit misplaced.)
UPDATE: Harry's Place notices Arrigoni's relationship with Milani as well, and acts equally "deplorably." (h/t habibi)
Mike Lumish has decided to put his weekly column on hold, saying it is on hiatus.
From Ian:
Caroline Glick: Siding with the victims of aggression
There is a third, more general reason that we recoil from the thought of blaming rape victims for their suffering. One of the foundations of liberal societies has always been that victims of aggression are not to blame for their attackers’ behavior.
Over the past few days, we have witnessed a dangerous erosion of this principle among American elites.
Last Sunday two Islamic terrorists armed with assault rifles tried to massacre participants at a Muhammed cartoon drawing contest in Garland, Texas.
The goal of the contest was self-evident. The organizers wished to defend the freedom of speech – and the right to life – of critics of Islamic totalitarianism.
Rather than standing with the contest’s organizers and participants, the US media from MSNBC to Fox News attacked Pamela Geller, the event’s main organizer and accused her of responsibility for the attack.
Sarah Honig: Salami slices some salami
Who says history has no sense of humor? Just as US President Barack Obama seeks to hide away the salami slices shaved off his deal with Iran, an Iranian named Salami exposes an extra-thick and very telling slice.
Without much ado, the Deputy Commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Brigadier General Hossein Salami, gave the lie to one of Obama’s most significant contentions about the deal that America’s Commander in Chief is cooking up with the nuke-craving ayatollah regime.
Significantly, Salami didn’t whisper off the record. He didn’t speculate about hearsay in a back room. He didn’t impart hints given to conflicting interpretations. Salami said his piece openly on state TV. He announced out loud that, contrary to American claims, there would be no foreign inspections of Iranian military sites. Period. End of. No quibbling.
Inspections, railed Salami, would be “selling out.” To hear him, “a tour of military facilities by foreign inspectors is to be equated with the occupation of a country. Iran will not become a paradise for spies. We will not roll out the red carpet for the enemy… They will not even be permitted to inspect the most normal military site in their dreams.”
JPost Editorial: Palestinian elections
A “government of war which will be against peace and stability in our region” was the way chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat chose to describe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s newly formed narrow coalition.
This was hardly an auspicious start to renewing relations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Erekat does not surprise with his criticism, made to an AFP reporter Thursday, but he does open himself up to painful comparisons with his Palestinian government.
Disparage it as you will, our incoming government came into being through a fair, democratic process; it represents the will of the majority of Israeli voters; and it is a legitimate political leadership.
The same cannot be said about Erekat and his political cronies in the PA.
Take Mahmoud Abbas, for instance. Among the hats he wears, which include chairman of the PLO and president of the Palestinian Authority, Abbas also calls himself the second president of the “State of Palestine,” taking over from the late Yasser Arafat.
He was sworn in as president of the “State of Palestine” on May 8, 2005 – exactly 10 years ago. But what was supposed to be a four-year term has stretched to a full decade.
Majority in hand, Cameron promises to govern as PM of ‘one United Kingdom’
The Conservative Party swept to power Friday in Britain’s Parliamentary elections, winning an unexpected and resounding victory that returns Prime Minister David Cameron to 10 Downing Street in a stronger position than before. The win led Labour Party leader Ed Miliband to announce his resignation as party head.
Cameron went to Buckingham Palace on Friday afternoon to tell Queen Elizabeth II that he has enough support to form a government.
Shortly after meeting the Queen, Cameron spoke to the media, signaling a conciliatory tone by congratulating former coalition partner Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg and opposition leader Ed Miliband. He promised to govern as the party of “one nation, one United Kingdom.”
Friday’s results bring the election to a much quicker than expected conclusion. Polls ahead of Election Day showed Conservatives locked in a tight race with the opposition Labour Party, raising the possibility of days or weeks of negotiations to form a government.
Anti-Israel firebrand Galloway loses seat in UK vote
The far-left politician nicknamed “Gorgeous George” Galloway is a firebrand campaigner known for his championing of pro-Palestinian issues — to the point of declaring his city of Bradford off limits to Israelis. He was for years an outspoken supporter of Syrian president Bashar Assad and a critic of Western military interventions in the Middle East.
Galloway lost his seat to a candidate of the center-left Labour Party.
A stony-faced Galloway glowered from under a trilby hat as Labour rival Naz Shah won by 19,977 votes to his 8,557 in the northern English constituency of Bradford West.
“There will be others who are already celebrating: the venal, the vile, the racists and the Zionists will all be celebrating,” Galloway said in his defeat speech. “The hyena can bounce on the lion’s grave but it can never be a lion and in any case, I’m not in my grave. As a matter of fact I’m going off now to plan the next campaign.”
Anti-Israel politician loses UK parliament seat in election
The newly ex-politico is in hot water for a number of reasons, including recent allegations that he misused government funds, such as for his private charity Viva Palestina, which was recently frozen by the UK's Charity Commission.
His former parliamentary assistant Aisha Ali-Khan lodged a legal complaint against Galloway, filed on her behalf by Asserson Law Offices, over allegations that she was paid during her work hours to organize Viva Palestina's fundraising events, organize its media coverage, organize and promote a "Women's Convoy" to Gaza, recruite Viva Palestina volunteers and prepare promotional material.
"During her employment, Ms Ali-Khan was instructed to carry out a number of activities which were clearly not parliamentary and some of which were expressly prohibited...except when on leave," according to the legal statement. Ali-Khan also alleged in the statement that she was charged with helping to plan Galloway's wedding and assisting his soon-to-be bride.
In the six months that she worked as Galloway's assistant, she claims that 75 percent of her work time was spent on non-Parliamentary matters. British law puts the onus on parliament members for making sure that funds, such as salaries for assistants, are used only in relation to governmental matters.
Respect leader George Galloway 'broke election law'
He is said to have retweeted his party's own exit poll before voting ended.
Bradford Council's returning officer made the report to police, according to BBC Radio Leeds.
Mr Galloway lost his seat to Labour candidate Naz Shah, who said his campaign "demeaned democracy".
It is against the law to discuss voting while polls are open, under section 66 of the Representation of the People's Act.
A spokesman for Mr Galloway told the BBC: "The returning officer is wasting police time. It's a storm in a thimble."
West Yorkshire Police said it would be reviewing the matter.
Virulent Anti-Israel MPs Ousted in UK Election
Another anti-Israeli MP lost his post as well, with David Ward of the Liberal Democrat party falling in Bradford East.
Imran Hussain of Labor ousted him with 19,312 votes, as opposed to Ward's 12,228, and Iftikhar Ahmed of the Conservative party trailed with 4,682.
Ward's Liberal Democrat party was soundly routed in the elections, only winning a total of eight seats out of a total of 650 seats according to late vote counts on Friday morning ahead of the announcement of final results.
"Jew-baiting doesn't pay"
Arutz Sheva English Managing Editor Ari Soffer, who is British-born, dissected the results, saying "defeats for Galloway and Ward are very important in showing that Jew-baiting doesn't pay off as a political strategy. The results reflect well on the British people."
"It's true there are plenty of other anti-Israel MPs out there, but these two in particular often crossed the line by openly flirting with anti-Semitism. Their defeat is important at a time of anxiety for British Jewry, who are facing a worrying rise in anti-Semitism," noted Soffer.
David Ward absent as he loses seat by over 7000 votes
The defeat marks the end of a controversial five years in Parliament for Ward, who was suspended by the Lib Dems in 2013 after he refused to apologise for questioning Israel’s right to exist.
His suspension was just one of a number of notorious incidents in a stint as MP marked by incendiary rhetoric on Jews and Israel.
Holocaust Educational Trust chief executive Karen Pollock accused him of “deliberately abusing the memory of the Holocaust” with “sickening” comments he made about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians on Holocaust Memorial Day 2013.
He courted further controversy in July 2014 by suggesting that he would fire rockets at Israel if he lived in Gaza, and in January was criticised for making “a disgraceful attempt to delegitimise Israel” by ambassador Daniel Taub.
Ward had tweeted ‘Je suis #Palestinian’ in the aftermath of an attack on a kosher supermarket in Paris.
Cartoons, Muslim Anguish, and Modernity
Today's New York Times editorial on the Garland, Texas affair protests a bit too much.
One might expect liberal journalists to express solidarity with their murdered colleagues at Charlie Hebdo. Instead, the Times offers outright condemnation:
Some of those who draw cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad may earnestly believe that they are striking a blow for freedom of expression, though it is hard to see how that goal is advanced by inflicting deliberate anguish on millions of devout Muslims who have nothing to do with terrorism. As for the Garland event, to pretend that it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.
Not to quibble, but a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, like the 2005 Mohammed caricatures in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and the 2014 Charlie Hebdo depictions, only reached a large Muslim audience because Muslim organizations chose to make an issue of images that appeared in obscure publications with a small circulation. The cartoonists did not cause the anguish of millions of Muslims: Muslim authorities of various sorts elicited the anguish of their constituents by denouncing them. If Muslim leaders had ignored the cartoons, the millions of devout Muslims cited by the New York Times would have gone about their daily lives suffering anguish from another source: the cruel and inevitable encroachment of modernity on traditional life. (h/t Think of England)
New York Times: Nothing Can Ever Justify Provocations of Islam
If the topic were rape, domestic violence, or even the intentionally provocative “slutwalks” that were popular a few years ago, no one at the Times would countenance this logic. Anyone suggesting slutwalk attendees had achieved their goal when a pair of men tried to rape them would, at best, be seen as intentionally obtuse.
The concept of slutwalking was premised on the idea that victims were being blamed for their own sexual abuse. Incredibly, the Times says there is nothing — not 9/11 and not even ISIS’ violence — that can justify Geller making her point.
Those two men were would-be murderers. But their thwarted attack, or the murderous rampage of the Charlie Hebdo killers, or even the greater threat posed by the barbaric killers of the Islamic State or Al Qaeda, cannot justify blatantly Islamophobic provocations like the Garland event.
As it happens, that’s exactly what the would-be assassins thought.
The Press Love Freedom of Speech, Right?
The Media Research Center has released another devastating video today, showing just exactly how much the mainstream press in America love free speech. Hint: not that much. Not your free speech, anyway.
One talking head after another pays lip service to the notion of free speech for the first half of the video, BUT ...
In the United States, we have always understood, philosophically and as a matter of law, that freedom of speech is vital to the functioning of our democratic republic, that it is a critical underpinning that ensures every other freedom we enjoy. There is a reason it is the First Amendment. As such, it is every American's duty to defend it. Not just in word, but in deed. That is the truth about the contest in Garland, Texas. That is the truth about America.
The Media Love Freedom Of Speech... But
AP Slams Pam Geller as Having 'No Regrets' That Two Terrorists Died in TX
The Associated Press appears to be siding against free speech with its latest tweet attacking free speech advocate Pamela Geller by knocking her as unapologetic that two terrorists were killed during her weekend event.
To flog its latest story on Geller, the AP’s tweet pointedly notes that Geller has “no regrets” over the death of the two Islamists.
The article the tweet links to is no better with its title: “Activist: No Regrets About Cartoon Contest Ended by Gunfire.”
Note that the AP seems to be more worried about the deaths of the terrorists than in free speech, here. All the negative focus is on Geller somehow being uncaring that the Islamists were killed.
“Does Pamela Geller regret organizing the Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in gunfire?” the AP tsk tsks in its very first sentence.
FBI Warned Local Police Gunmen Had Interest in Texas Cartoon Event
The Federal Bureau of Investigation warned police in Garland, Texas, about three hours before a shooting at an exhibit of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad that a gunman who launched a failed attack was interested in the event, FBI Director James Comey said on Thursday.
The FBI issued a bulletin to the police department saying Elton Simpson had an interest in the event held in the Dallas suburb but gave no indication that he planned an attack, Comey told reporters in Washington, according to an FBI spokesman.
Garland police were not immediately available for comment.
Authorities said roommates Simpson and Nadir Soofi of Phoenix were fatally shot by a police officer when they opened fire with assault rifles outside the cartoon event organized by a group that had sponsored anti-Islamic campaigns.
Texas Attackers Honored as Martyrs in Pakistan
Some 100 Pakistanis gathered for a memorial service this week to honor the two Islamic terrorists who attacked a "Draw Mohammed" event in Texas.
The two were killed by an alert traffic policemen armed only with a pistol, whose police car they first shot at. Within 15 seconds, they were both dead – still wearing their body armor, and with their assault rifles lying nearby.
The two terrorists were attempting to get past the policemen in order to attack participants at the event, which they felt was unbearably "anti-Muslim." None of the 200 people at the event was hurt.
Islamic State (ISIS) sources took credit for the attempted attack against the "Draw Mohammed" event.
A Muslim cleric delivered a eulogy at the ceremony in the city of Peshawar, saying, “the exhibition of the blasphemous caricatures was unbearable for Muslims. It was shocking, sad, tragic and intolerable. We have gathered here to pay tribute and to carry out the Islamic rites for the Muslims who tried to stop it and sacrificed their lives, and they will now be called ‘Martyrs for the prophet’s honor.’”
The immorality of the two-state principle
A keen awareness of the futility and moral bankruptcy of the two-state paradigm has led me to propose what I call the “Humanitarian Paradigm” for the resolution (or rather dissolution) of the conflict with the Palestinian- Arabs, involving the generous funding of their voluntary relocation and rehabilitation in third-party countries.
I have been excoriated for daring to raise such a “monstrously unethical” initiative. But in light of the forgoing discussion, who really has the moral high ground? Those who promote the establishment of (yet another) Muslim-majority tyranny, with all the attendant detriments and dangers described above? Or those who advocate providing non-belligerent Palestinian individuals the opportunity to build a better life for themselves elsewhere, out of harm’s way, free from the cycles of death, destruction and destitution that have been brought down on them by the cruel, corrupt cliques that have them astray for decades.
After all, if proponents of the two-state principle find no moral blemish in advocating the funded evacuation of Jews to facilitate the establishment of an entity that would, in all likelihood, become a bastion of radical Islamist terrorism, what moral principle would cause them to shrink in horror at the suggestion of funded evacuation of Arabs from their homes, to obviate the establishment of such an entity? I leave the readers to ponder the question.
New E. J’lem homes ‘damaging, disappointing,’ US says
Washington on Thursday called Israel’s approval of building 900 apartment units in a Jewish neighborhood of East Jerusalem “damaging and inconsistent” with its commitment to a two-state solution.
The condemnation of the move by the State Department came less than a day after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the formation of a new governing coalition.
“This is a disappointing development, and we’re concerned about it just as a new Israeli government has been announced,” US State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke said at a press briefing. “Israel’s leaders have asserted that they remain committed to a two-state solution, and we need to see that commitment in the actions of… the Israeli government.”
Rathke said that the US government would “continue to make our position clear that we view this as illegitimate.”
Elliott Abrams: Reminders about Iran
During the three-month period between April 2 and June 30, Iran and the P5+1 are supposed to negotiate a comprehensive agreement about Iran's nuclear program. The United States has been careful not to exacerbate relations with Iran, with the Obama administration trying hard not to upset any apple carts. The theory seems to be that there are hardliners in Iran (who are just like our own hardliners, the administration appears to believe) and we mustn't annoy them.
So it is interesting to see how Iran is conducting itself during this period. The answer is clear: It is practicing no restraint whatsoever. The best example of this may be its seizure of the cargo ship Maersk Tigris, which was plying the waters of the Gulf. This seizure has forced the United States to provide naval escorts to some American and British ships, and it served notice on the world that Iran would use military force when it pleased, negotiations or no negotiations.
A second example is the espionage charge against the imprisoned Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. He has been in an Iranian jail since July, 2014, and the ludicrous espionage charge is not simply a reminder of the nature of Iran's "legal" system; it is also a slap to the face of President Barack Obama. There was really no reason for Iran to charge an American journalist with espionage during these three months except to show Americans and their president how little they think of us -- and how confident they are that nothing, nothing at all, will lead Obama to back away from this nuclear deal.
US Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Bill Giving Congress Oversight of Iran Deal
The U.S. Senate on Thursday overwhelmingly passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, which would give Congress a 30-day period to review a final nuclear deal between Iran and world powers, in a 98-1 vote.
The only senator to vote against the bill was U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who objected on the grounds that the legislation does not require a final nuclear agreement to be submitted as a treaty requiring Senate approval. U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer was absent for the vote.
President Barack Obama is expected to approve the bill, which is authored by U.S. Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Robert Menendez (D.N.J.), after initially vowing to veto a version of the legislation that gave Congress twice as long—60 days—to review a nuclear deal.
As part of a bipartisan compromise with U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Corker had also agreed to modify the bill’s language on terrorism. The legislation originally called for the president to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran was not involved in terrorism against Americans, with sanctions being re-imposed if Iran was found complicit in terror. Under the new language, the president would need to send Congress periodic reports on Iran’s involvement in terrorism and on its ballistic missile program, but the details of those reports would not set off the renewal of sanctions that were lifted under the nuclear deal.
Iranian general: War with the US would be ‘no big deal’
Two top Iranian generals on Thursday taunted the United States, saying the much-discussed military option to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities is “ridiculous,” that Washington knows it can’t be done, and that their country “welcomes war with the US.”
The saber rattling came as Western powers prepared to sit down for another round of negotiations with Iran to reach an agreement on putting curbs on Iran’s nuclear program.
Brigadier General Hossein Salami, the deputy commander of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, said in an interview on state-run television that a battle with the US would only serve to highlight Iran’s strengths.
“We welcome war with the US as we do believe that it will be the scene for our success to display the real potentials of our power,” he said, according to a report by the semi-official Fars news agency. “We have prepared ourselves for the most dangerous scenarios and this is no big deal.”
Salami threatened that Iran would strike any airbase used as a launch-pad for a strike on his country.
Saudi Advisors: If Iran Goes Nuclear, Saudis Will Too
The terms of the emerging nuclear deal with Iran is causing so much concern in Saudi Arabia that influential advisors in the kingdom are growing increasingly vocal about their desire to create a nuclear deterrent of their own, The Wall Street Journal reported today.
While Saudi Arabia has long advocated a nuclear-free Middle East, its leaders are doubtful that the completed accord on limiting Tehran’s nuclear program will stop Iran from becoming a threshold nuclear-weapons power when proposed restrictions on is number of centrifuges and uranium stockpiles expire in 10 years. They also aren’t willing to bet that the regime in Tehran will somehow become more moderate and responsible by then, a hope entertained by many in the West.
“Our leaders will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon while we don’t,” added Ibrahim al-Marie, a retired Saudi colonel and a security analyst in Riyadh. “If Iran declares a nuclear weapon, we can’t afford to wait 30 years more for our own—we should be able to declare ours within a week.”
In addition to the future nuclear threat presented by Iran, the Saudis have increased fears about aggression from Iran and its proxies, which will be fueled by the freeing up of billions of frozen Iranian assets.
IDF Ordered: Avoid Killing Roadside Terrorists
IDF soldiers have been instructed by their commanders to avoid killing terrorists, even if they spot them as they are about to throw a firebomb or rock at a car, reports Yohai Ofer in Makor Rishon. The only time soldiers may shoot to kill are when there is “real danger of loss of life” – but the parameters of this situation are not clearly defined.
The newspaper cited S., a combat soldier who was stationed near Ramallah a few weeks ago, as saying that rocks are not necessarily defined as life-threatening weapons in IDF orders. If the rocks are being thrown at Israeli cars on a main road, soldiers may fire at the legs of the terrorists, and only with the approval of a company commander. In other cases, the company commander is only allowed to authorize firing rubber-coated bullets.
"They want us to hit a knee or two, to achieve deterrence,” S. summed up.
R., another warrior who was recently stationed in the Binyamin area, told the paper that in briefings by commanders at the outset of his battalion's stint, the soldiers were told that the commander of the Regional Regiment, Col. Yisrael Shomer, thinks that an Arab who is killed becomes a martyr, whereas one who is wounded returns home and serves as a warning to others not to engage in terrorism.
These instructions are usually spoken and not written, explains the journalist Ofer.
Human rights group accuses PA of silencing student dissent
A leading international rights group voiced concerns Thursday that the Palestinian Authority, which rules the West Bank, was increasingly clamping down on freedom of expression by arresting students for political affiliations or comments made on Facebook.
Human Rights Watch said dozens of students have been arrested by PA security forces in the territory for criticizing PA President Mahmoud Abbas, or for expressing support for the terrorist Hamas group, which runs the Gaza Strip.
The New York-based watchdog said it was "deeply worrying" that students were detained by Palestinian forces for their views.
Palestinian police arrested two students over their Facebook posts, it said. One student was detained for 30 days for criticizing an official on social media.
HRW quoted journalism student Ayman Mahariq from West Bank's Al Quds University as saying that plainclothes policemen asked him to come to a police station, where they beat him and showed him a printout of his Facebook posts. He said he has since deleted the posts, including those calling for an end to "military rule."
Pope Francis to Canonize First 'Palestinian Saints'
Pope Francis is set to canonize two Arab nuns who lived in Israel during the Ottoman empire as Catholic saints, making them the first "Palestinian saints."
According to a report on Wednesday by the Lebanese LBCI News, the Marie Alphonsine Ghattas of Jerusalem and Mariam Bawardy of the Galilee will be canonized at the Vatican on May 17.
The two lived during the 19th century CE, when Israel was under Ottoman Turkish rule and was considered part of greater Syria by the empire. Despite claims to the contrary, historical records definitively show that a state of "Palestine" never existed in the region, the name being applied later in the British Mandate when the Ottoman rule was overthrown in World War One.
The Lebanese news channel showed footage of an announcement regarding the canonization later this month being made at the Christian Media Center based in Jerusalem.
ISIS-linked group claims responsibility for attack on Hamas base in Gaza
A jihadist group with Islamic State ties claimed responsibility for a Friday mortar attack at a Hamas base in the Gaza Strip.
According to AFP, witnesses at the scene said they heard explosions at the base, close to Khan Yunis. Information of any damage or injuries was not reported.
The group, which calls itself "Supporters of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria in Jerusalem," said in an online statement that the rockets it fired were aimed at a base occupied by Hamas’s armed wing, Izzadin Kassam
The attack comes amid mounting tensions between Hamas and Islamic State supporters in the Gaza Strip. Hamas arrested dozens of Salafi-jihadists who are affiliated with Islamic State, sources in the Gaza Strip said on Thursday. They said the arrests came following a series of bombings, which were reportedly carried out by the Salafi-jihadists in recent weeks.
Earlier this week, Hamas demolished a mosque frequented by Islamic State supporters in Deir el-Balah.
Mordechai Kedar: The Last Battle?
The Kalamon mountains range from Mount Hermon northwards for tens of kilometers, overlooking the Lebanon Valley to the west. The official boundary between Lebanon and Syria runs along the crest of the mountain range, with the western slopes of the mountains part of Lebanon and the eastern slopes part of Syria. The Beirut-Damascus highway serves as the northern edge.
The location of the range has strategic importance, because whoever controls it controls what lies to the east – and can exercise that control with firearms or binoculars – as well as the roads that connect Damascus with central and northern Syria, enabling him to cut off Damascus from the rest of the country. Westwards, he who controls the mountains controls the southern Beqaa vally and its populace, most of them Shiites.
The Kalamon mountains, like Mount Hermon at their southern end, are covered with snow in the winter. That prevents most wide-ranging or significant military activity involving the transportion of soldiers and either heavy or medium sized weapons. Infantry, however, carrying light arms, can move around the area fairly easily. As a result, a double massing of forces has occurred there in the past few weeks: from the east, from inside Syria, fighters sent by various Sunni organizations, Jabhat el Nusra being the first, have appeared on the scene in order to built fortifications, take positions and prepare for a westward offensive push into Lebanon. From the west, Hezbollah has been streaming forces to the area in order to block the rebels and force them out of Lebanon.
Saudi Arabian Airlines Denies Plane Landed in Ben Gurion Airport Despite Claims by Israeli Officials
Saudi Arabian Airlines on Thursday denied reports that one of its jets landed in Tel Aviv’s Ben-Gurion International Airport despite contrary claims by Israeli officials, Al Jazeera reported.
The airline claimed on its official Twitter account that “None of Saudi Arabian aircrafts [sic] landed in the airport mentioned in the viral tweets,” referring to Ben-Gurion Airport. “We are currently investigating whether any of the contracted companies violated their contract with Saudi Arabian Airlines.”
The company continued: “Contracts of leased aircrafts [sic] prevent them from landing or transiting in countries that do not have relations with the Saudi Kingdom.”
The airline issued the denial after David Dadonn, Israeli ambassador in the Foreign Ministry’s Middle East Department, tweeted on Wednesday a photo of what he said was a Saudi Arabian Airlines passenger jet taxiing on the tarmac at Ben Gurion. Dadonn said that the aircraft landed for technical repairs.
PreOccupied Territory: Zionist-Controlled Media Somehow Unable To Control Israel Coverage (satire)
Analysts at the United Nations held a meeting today to discuss the curious phenomenon of the Zionist-controlled international media somehow being unable to prevent the media from indulging in nearly continuous criticism of Israel.
A team of experts met at the UN headquarters in New York this morning (Friday) to share information and analysis regarding an industry proven to be thoroughly under the boot of Jewish moguls. Jewish control of the media, which has been documented for more than a century – notably in he groundbreaking Russian work The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion – has been spectacularly unsuccessful at the one task a Jewish-controlled global media should be expected to focus on: silencing exposure and criticism of its flagship enterprise, Zionism. In fact Israel attracts such a disproportionate amount of opprobrium in the Jewish-controlled media that an observer might conclude no such control exists at all.
In fact, say experts, in the Middle East, the one region where the Zionist-controlled global media should be most necessary and effective, there appears to be no effort at all to counter the blatantly anti-Israel, and often antisemitic, tropes that are a staple in Arabic and Farsi media. “It’s quite surprising to note the frequency and intensity of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish ideas and sentiments in Arab media – I would never have assumed the Jewish media overlords would permit such things to happen. But here we are,” said UN adviser Richard Falk.
Al Masry al Youm reported last month:
The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has announced that its annual assitance program in Egypt, sheduled to be implemented in mid 2011, should satisfy the direct needs of Egypt in the fields of employment, economic development and combating poverty.
USAID allocated a significant portion of its assistance over the past years to bolstering democracy in Egypt.
In a statement, USAID said the program will be implemented with the help of NGOs, Egyptian, American or international, and the private sector.
USAID also said it is seeking to respond to the needs specified by the Egyptian community in the field of democratic development.
Indeed, the USAID Egypt site says:
The U.S. Government through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has made significant contributions over the past 30 years to help improve the quality of life of all Egyptians. Nationwide programs in health, education, trade facilitation, small and micro-enterprise, tourism, and infrastructure development have benefited Egyptians acrosscountry, especially those in under-served areas. US economic assistance to Egypt through the United States Agency for International Development has totaled more than $28.6 billion since 1975.
The Egyptian government has formally rejected this aid - saying that it included too many conditions.
From Ikhwanweb (there are a number of Egyptian newspapers in Arabic reporting the same thing):
Egypt has officially rejected conditional US aid worth USD 150 million in light of US economic support to Egypt, helping it overcome its economic woes and support the process of democratization in the post-January 25 revolution.
The US embassy in Cairo has received a formal letter from the Egyptian Foreign Minister that the Egyptian government rejects US conditions on aid and unilateral coercive economic measures by the US Agency for International Development.
Egyptian minister of planning and international cooperation Fayza Aboulnaga and Finance Minister Samir Radwan visited Washington last month, asking the US to cancel a debt amounting to about $3.6 billion to help the country's new government restore growth and create jobs for young people, but Washington refused.
The cabinet says the US aid is unnecessary and rejects US unilateral resolutions with regard to the US direct funding assistance mainly to the Egyptian private sector, Civil Society Organizations (CSO) and NGOs, arguing social justice is one of the more prominent roles that the country and businessmen should be committed to.
So far, no word from USAID about this.
This week, Israel severely restricted Palestinian Arabs from crossing the Green Line for Passover, as it does every year. The chance for terror attacks increases greatly during Jewish holidays, as we had seen in the Park Hotel Passover massacre of 2002 that killed 30, 21 of whom were over 70 years old.
Anti-Israel sites are keen on pointing out how horrible Israel is for doing this, and how especially delicious the irony that Israel seems to celebrate its holiday celebrating freedom by restricting the freedom of Palestinian Arabs.
It just so happens that the Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza has been closed since last night and will continue to be closed from now through Tuesday. It is also closing it for a national holiday.
Not one English-language news source is mentioning this story.
And what holiday is Egypt celebrating?
"Sinai Liberation Day", April 25th, is the anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from Sinai in 1982.
I guess that irony that Gazans are imprisoned during Sinai Liberation Day (and the days before and afterwards) is not the right kind of irony.
I had mentioned that the draft text of the Hamas/Fatah unity agreement was extremely vague so as to ensure that any substantive decisions are pushed off as long as possible, probably until at least September.
Here it is in its entirely, in English, so you can see how Hamas and Fatah studiously avoided agreeing on anything real:
1. Elections
A. Election Committee:
Both Fatah and Hamas agree to identify the names of the members of the Central Election Commission in agreement with the Palestinian factions. This list will then be submitted to the Palestinian President who will issue a decree of the reformation of the committee.
B. Electoral Court:
Both Fatah and Hamas agree on the nomination of no more than twelve judges to be members of the Electoral Court. This list will then be submitted to the Palestinian President in order to take the necessary legal actions to form the Electoral Court in agreement with the Palestinian factions.
C. Timing of Elections:
The Legislative, Presidential, and the Palestinian National Council elections will be conducted at the same time exactly one year after the signing of the Palestinian National Reconciliation Agreement.
2. Palestine Liberation Organization
The political parties of both Fatah and Hamas agree that the tasks and decisions of the provisional interim leadership cannot be hindered or obstructed, but in a manner that is not conflicting with the authorities of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
3. Security
It was emphasized that the formation of the Higher Security Committee which will be formed by a decree of the Palestinian President and will consist of professional officers in consensus.
4.Government
A. Formation of the Government:
Both Fatah and Hamas agree to form a Palestinian government and to appoint the Prime Minister and Ministers in consensus between them.
B. Functions of the Government:
1. Preparation of necessary condition for the conduction of Presidential, Legislative and the Palestinian National Council elections.
2. Supervising and addressing the prevalent issues regarding the internal Palestinian reconciliation resulting from the state of division.
3. Follow-up of the reconstruction operations in the Gaza Strip and the efforts to end the siege and blockade that is imposed on it.
4. Continuation of the implementation of the provisions of the Palestinian National Accord.
5. To resolve the civil and administrative problems that resulted from the division.
6. Unification of the Palestinian National Authority institutions in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem.
7. To fix the status of the associations, Non-Governmental Organizations and charities.
5. Legislative Council:
Both Fatah and Hamas agree to reactivate the Palestinian Legislative Council in accordance to the Basic Law.
It took three years for Egypt to convince Hamas to sign this wishy-washy document.
Not only that, but some of the smaller factions that signed the document did it with reservations on some of its contents.
The entire exercise in "unity" is a scam meant to fool the West long enough to get the issue of statehood in front of the UN.
Paragraph 2 is part of the scam. It is meant to placate the West by saying that the PLO, which runs the PA, is not bound by any Hamas decisions not to recognize Israel. However, as I have pointed out, as soon as "Palestine" is declared, the PLO will disappear and Hamas can fully participate in foreign affairs.
Security is the main sticking point between the parties, as they derive their power from their security forces. Yet only one sentence talks about this topic, and that sentence is pretty much "to be defined later."
As anyone can see, there's no "there" there. This unity government legitimizes terror but keeps its intentions fuzzy so that the US, UN and EU won't notice it.
The Arabs are counting on one basic fact, one that has rarely let them down:
Western leaders tend to be eternally optimistic, they have short memories, and they are mesmerized by such nice sounding words as "unity."
(h/t Zach, source: Rafah Today.)
UPDATE: Here is the list of groups that signed the agreement:
— Fatah
— Hamas
— Islamic Jihad
— Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
— Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine
— Palestinian People’s Party
— Palestinian Popular Struggle Front
— Palestinian Liberation Front
— Arab Liberation Front
— Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command
— Dzb Baath Arab Socialist Party (Syria)
— Palestinian Arab Front
— Popular Resistance Committees
— Palestinian Democratic Union (FIDA)
(h/t George Hale)
Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar has an article by Majed Kayali that is highly unusual in the Arab world.
While it of course blames Israel for the "nakba" in 1948, this is the first time I've seen an Arab columnist admit that Arabs must take some responsibility for the Palestinian Arab situation today.
Excerpts:
Since the beginning we have regarded the Nakba as the product of a Zionist colonial act, and this is true, but it is not the whole story, or does not explain the truth of what happened.
In particular, the Nakba didn't happen suddenly, but it came within the framework of a series of events and developments, related to the establishment of the Zionist movement, and directing Jewish immigration to Palestine, and the establishment of the nuclei of political, military and economic and educational entities to Israel, before 1948.
The talk about the Nakba raises the question year after year, as to how the Arab reality not only could not do anything for the Palestinians, but for that very reason the Nakba continues. With all due respect to talk about the centrality of the question of Palestine, the love of Palestine, this has not translated in a practical way that makes it easier for the Palestinians, who have been the subject of all kinds of discrimination and extortion and being used in the Arab world.
In addition to all the above, the Arab system is responsible for preventing Palestinians from statehood. Arabs aborted the "All-Palestine Government" [puppet government in Gaza in the 1950s], and they annexed their land, which did not fall under Israeli control, namely the West Bank and Gaza.
Under the Arab system, Palestinian refugees have no rights, no power, under the pretext of maintaining their unity.
So you can not talk about the Nakba without a critical review of history, because history is written recounted a particular story, focused on the creation of Israel, and history is withholding of stories on the responsibility of Arab nations for the Nakba, within which they facilitated the migration of Jews from Arab countries to Palestine / Israel to the extent that this State doubled its population within three years, and 80 percent of Jewish immigrants came from Arab countries.
From Al-Quds al Arabi (Arabic), discussing the Hamas/Fatah unification ceremony in Cairo:
Notably, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas did not sign the agreement, as expected, and neither did Mr. Khaled Meshaal of the Islamic Resistance Movement 'Hamas'...
It may be possible that I am interpreting the autotranslation incorrectly, but I don't think so. The writer goes on to mention the other disagreements Abbas and Meshal had as far as protocol, seating, speaking and so forth.
I know that representatives from Hamas and Fatah signed the agreement a few days ago.
I cannot find any photos or videos showing Abbas or Hamas leaders actually signing anything, at a ceremony that was specifically meant to celebrate exactly that!
There's a story here.
UPDATE: ChallahHuAkbar tweeted George Hale from Ma'an this question after my blog entry (so did NGO Monitor), and he answered:
According to this report, no. It says assistants signed on behalf of both officials.
So why didn't Abbas sign....and why is no one asking him about this?
