No Pain = All Gain

In a very astute blog post on the Times of Israel, Marc Goldberg analyzes the pros and cons of Israel having a right or left wing government, pointing out the significant fact that “When Likud is in power fewer Israelis die... [because] there is less chance of war when Likud is running the show.”

This may seem contrary to the left leaning MSM, who relish portraying Netanyahu as an extreme right wing hawkish warmonger – but the fact is there have been no wars under Netanyahu.

Goldberg explains:

“Likudniks aren’t interested in rocking the boat by changing anything. They will approve more settlements — more than the left would like to see and less than their own partners in government want. They will not try to make peace with anyone — they won’t even sit down with the Palestinians — and in the meantime, everyone, on both sides of the wall and in Gaza, will get on with their lives, firm in the knowledge that their daily routine won’t come under threat…It is when the left is in power and politicians attempt to actually make things better in the long run that the attacks begin.”

Goldberg is correct but he misses out one thing: in August 2010 (the same month Abbas made statements that he’d support a war on Israel if other Arab countries joined in, and eulogized one of the terrorists behind the Munich Olympics massacre), Netanyahu and Abbas agreed to begin direct peace talks together – however this resulted in Palestinian extremists responding with a campaign of terror attacks on Israeli citizens. It would have been understandable if Israel had pulled out of the talks then, but Netanyahu didn’t. The talks petered out when Abbas refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, in return for a settlement freeze. Attempted terror attacks also decreased.

So whilst under Likud the situation could remain relatively calm (as in not engaged in an actual war), according to Goldberg “In the long term, the left may offer the eventual possibility of normalization of relations with the rest of the Middle East, a state of Palestine alongside ours, and a corresponding improvement of our standing in the international community. But in the short term, that spells nothing but more hardship.”

Call me a cynic/psychic/crazy religious Jew, but Mashiach will come before that scenario plays out – and I don’t just mean that as a figure of speech! 

It doesn’t seem worth it to take the risks for an impossible solution, just to see if it will make people like us better. Elder of Ziyon has written a great piece explaining why the status quo is not actually as ‘unsustainable’ as people think:

“A genuine peace is one where Israel's neighbours do not even fantasize about attacking Israel. Not one where they are coerced into not attacking by an ephemeral government, not one where they do not attack because of the military consequences - but one where they simply have no desire to...”

Currently the Palestinians have not demonstrated why this would be possible, with no serious efforts made to end incitement to hatred and terrorism, and the brainwashing of children with this.

“The best we can ever hope for realistically is a detente where the weaker party has no desire to stir things up, even if it covets everything owned by the other” - because the repercussions outweigh the benefits. “This means that the best that Israel can hope for is a "Palestine" that keeps a short leash on its terrorists out of fear. Not love, not friendship, but fear. And this is exactly the status quo today... Anything that upsets this status quo will inevitably increase the danger to Israel's citizens.”

Responding To Terrorism

I should probably just change the title of my whole blog to ‘Better Late Than Never’, but here goes anyway.

A month ago on Friday 9^th March, Israel decided it’d had enough of the continuous yet intermittent rocket fire from Gaza (50 over the last two months), and responded to the two rockets launched that morning.

As well as targetting Palestinian terrorists about to fire more rockets into Israel, the IDF killed the leader of the PRC Zuhir al-Qaisi, and another member, who were involved in the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. The IDF had intelligence that al-Qaisi was planning a terror attack along the Israel-Gaza border, similar to one the PRC had carried out last August along Israel’s border with Egypt. In that multiple-stage attack, eight Israelis were killed when Palestinian terrorists attacked them in their cars and buses with guns, missiles and a suicide-bombing. In the days following, two more Israelis were killed by rocket fire.

After Israel killed the PRC leader last month, terrorists bombarded Southern Israel with over 300 rockets in the space of just four days. Myself and friends and family would flock to Facebook to find updates from friends and family in South Israel on their status, inbetween them flocking to their bomb shelters. In response the IDF targetted weapons depots, manufacturing facilities and rocket launching sites in Gaza. 24 Palestinians were killed, 20 of whom were terrorists, most whilst actually in the process of preparing to launch more rockets.

At the funeral of one of the terrorists, Palestinian gunmen fired into the air, with one bullet striking an eight year old boy in the head. This was of course blamed on Israel, although Palestinians later revealed the truth. Two days later the child died, and the day after that two more Palestinian teenagers died from trigger-happy Palestinians’ gunfire at another terrorist’s funeral.

A picture of a young Palestinian girl was circulated online, originally tweeted by Khulood Badawi, who claimed it was “another child killed by Israel”. It was discovered that the picture was from 2006, and the girl had died in an accident. Meanwhile it transpired that Badawi works for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs as an ‘Information and Media Coordinator’, with Honest Reporting calling for her dismissal:

“it is absolutely unacceptable that a UN employee working specifically on dissemination of information to the media and public tweets malicious and false information to libel Israel... [when it] is trying desperately to defend more than 1 million of its civilians from the incessant murderous rain of Gazan rocket terror”.

Ron Prosor, Israel’s ambassador to the UN also called for her dismissal, pointing out that she was “actively engaged in the demonization of Israel, a member state of the United Nations. Such actions contribute to incitement, conflict and, ultimately, violence.”

A week later in an indescribably horrific terrorist attack at a Jewish school in France, an Islamist fanatic rode up on a motorbike and murdered a Rabbi, Jonathan Sandler, his 3 and 6 year old sons Gabriel and Arieh, and 8 year old Miriam Monsonego, the daughter of the school principle.

Strangely, the EU Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the European Commission, Catherine Ashton appeared to compare the attack to “what is happening in Gaza”.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the French-Algerian terrorist Mohammed Merah, who was a member of Al Qaeda, claimed that his actions, which also included the murder of three unarmed French soldiers was to “avenge Palestinian children”. He was killed after a 32 hour siege on his apartment, in which he injured several French police officers, preventing him not only committing further attacks but also from spewing any more excuses for his barbaric, evil acts. Possibly the best response to Merah’s comment about Palestinians came from the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad, who stated:

"This terrorist crime is condemned in the strongest terms by the Palestinian people and their children... No Palestinian child can accept a crime that targets innocent people. It is time for these criminals to stop marketing their terrorist acts in the name of Palestine and to stop pretending to stand up for the rights of Palestinian children who only ask for a decent life”.

In any case which Palestinian children was Merah referring to? Which children in Gaza was Baroness Ashton talking about? The ones brainwashed into wasting their lives by becoming terrorists? The ones oppressed by their own government? The children killed when they’re exploited by terrorists and used as human shields, who launch rockets into Israel from civilian areas? Or the ones killed in accidents because they’re surrounded by militants building weapons or ‘symbolically’ firing guns at terrorists’ funerals?

It has been pointed out again and again by pro-Israel activists that the actions of most supposedly ‘pro-Palestinian’ activists do nothing to help the Palestinians, in fact do the opposite. There seems to be a link; and somewhere between all these incidents there are lies, distortions and exaggerations about Israel’s actions that far from helping solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict simply trigger cycles of violence, not only manifested in antisemitism against Jews and Israel but with the much wider target of ‘the West’.

Our battle for support for Israel and the truth may sometimes seem unwinnable, but there are constant reminders of successes and the importance of this battle, and who knows the effect that each of these instances can have. So whether it’s blogging or tweeting or demonstrating, we have to keep spreading the truth.

Most importantly, everyone should see the words of Eva Sandler, who lost her husband Rabbi Jonathan and her two young sons Gabriel and Ariel in the France school shooting. In a heart-wrenching article on the Chabad website, she referred to Pesach, which Jews worldwide are currently celebrating, and wrote:

“Along with our tearful remembrance of our trials in Egypt so many years ago, we still tell how ‘in each and every generation, they have stood against us to destroy us.’ We all will announce in a loud and clear voice: ‘G-d saves us from their hands.’…  The spirit of the Jewish people can never be extinguished; its connection with Torah and its commandments can never be destroyed.”

Yachad's Search For Themselves

The left-wing, supposedly "pro-Israel, pro-peace" group Yachad have professed a disclaimer on their blog that "the views of the bloggers do not necessarily represent the views of the organisation", presumably hoping that with all the criticism they have had so far, at least they won't have to take responsibility for the content of their blog.

Regardless, the last two blog posts very accurately do reflect Yachad's confused, contradictory viewpoint. Which is fair enough, it's their blog. 

Darren Cohen starts off by mocking the "3 Ds", delegitimisation, double standards, and demonisation "that have become the archetypal regurgitation of many within the higher echelons of many Zionist institutions". Then, after acknowledging "the hypocrisy of much of the criticism and indeed hatred Israel receives", he compares the treatment of Israel by its enemies to Yachad's plight, applying the 3 Ds to Yachad, as though no criticism of them can be legitimate!

Cohen states that: 

"To safeguard the future of Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State, it needs to act urgently to ensure that a viable two state solution is actualized and that the dream of peace can become a reality. This line of thought is now widely accepted by the mainstream and is nothing new. In spite of this, Hannah [Weisfeld] and the organisation she represents are still demonised as naïve at best and anti-Zionists at worse."  

Despite what Cohen may think, Yachad's critics are not anti-peace, or against the two state solution. We're just against what Yachad thinks is the right way to achieve this. Cohen has very shrewdly observed our concerns about Yachad - are they naive or are they anti-Zionist? It's hard to tell, and similar to the question we ask of a lot of Israel-bashers: are they ignorant, or are they antisemitic? There's another possibility, which I think applies to many Jewish critics of Israel - cowardice. Understandably many Jews are overcome by a need to fit in with society's majority to avoid being a target, and if that means having to be critical of Israel, so be it.

Cohen is offended by the accusation of 972 Magazine (who are strongly endorsed by Yachad) being pro-Hamas, "a slanderous and unsupported accusation", but he's obviously not done his research. 

On 972, Palestinian Aziz Abu Sarah wrote that Hamas’ “decision to reconcile with Fatah indicates their support of the PLO’s new approach [the bid for statehood]. Hamas has no better ideas to offer the Palestinian people on how to end the occupation. It had to make a choice between the status quo or actively working with Fatah and the other Palestinian factions on creating a Palestinian state.” Then he criticised that “The Israeli government ignored that Hamas had been giving clear signs of its willingness to accept to the two-state solution.” Israeli-American writer Mairav Zonszein, seemingly forgetting that Hamas is a genocidal terrorist organisation found it "perplexing" that they would condemn the killing of Osama Bin Laden, and wondered why they didn’t suggest instead that he should have been tried. (as though they privilege their own people with trials!) And it’s not only Hamas they support. Another writer, Roee Ruttenberg expressed support for last year’s flotilla, and the Turkish ‘charity’ who backed it, the IHH, who have links to terror.

Cohen then makes an extraordinarily absurd statement, that the double standards of Yachad’s critics were:

“highlighted by the fact that a leading member of the American Zionist Organisation wrote a piece criticising Israel’s government for allowing the Gilad Shalit prison exchange and yet no one bat an eye lid. Apparently, it is unacceptable to criticise Israel for being too ‘right-wing’, but to criticise the government for a ‘left-wing’ deal that the vast majority of Israelis supported is deemed acceptable.”

Gilad Shalit’s release was one of the most jubilant yet painful, emotionally charged events in Israel’s recent history. I have never in my life felt so torn in my emotions, so unbelievably relieved and happy that an Israeli soldier’s life was saved after five years of torture, but at the same time so grief-stricken for the families of terror victims who had to relive their horror all over again, sickened at the celebrations of terrorists with no remorse for their actions, and fearful for the future, for the safety of Israel’s citizens and soldiers, my family and friends in Israel, from Haifa to Jerusalem to Be’er Sheva. So I can understand those who were against the deal, even though, as I’ve explained, I supported it. I don’t look at it as a matter of politics, left or right wing; to me it was simply about taking the opportunity to save a life.

As for Yachad having “proven over and over again that it is a vociferous pro-Israel voice” and that “it is not acting to demonise or attack Israel”… where have they proven that? Because if I was ignorant of the conflict and got all my links from their Facebook and Twitter, I’d be worse than ignorant - I’d only know one half of the story.

Cohen’s second blog post again mentions the 3 DS, this time in describing how the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is harmful and counterproductive.  Despite this, he commends boycotts as “non-violent resistance to oppression”. Yachad’s official line is that they do not support boycotts, but they were also very much opposed to Israel’s proposed anti-boycott law.

Yachad would do well to clear up their own confusion and contradictions, and save their critics the trouble. 

Gilad Shalit To Be Freed At Last

Israel has agreed a deal with Hamas to release over 1000 Palestinian prisoners/terrorists, in return for the release of Gilad Shalit, who has been held captive for over five years, in unknown conditions, with barely any contact between him and the outside world.

Anything can still happen, and even now it's not clear what condition Gilad is in, physically and mentally, but I am overwhelmed with joy at the thought of him finally returning to his family. At the same time, though, Israel is paying a high price for his freedom.

As if it's not bad enough that Israel is having to release hundreds of Palestinian terrorists, the Guardian readers can voice only concern for these terrorists, and their portrayal in the media, sympathising with the:

"thousand nameless, faceless Palestinians without identities, histories, or grieving families... where is the coverage of the Palestinian prisoners rotting in Israeli jails... inhuman treatment at Israel's hands".

..."William Hague reckons Shalit’s captivity was 'utterly unjustified'. How else would 1,000 Palestinians have obtained their freedom? When are Palestinians going to get some recognition as people, every bit as important as Israelis?"

Again we're faced with that question: are these people just ignorant, or are they antisemitic? If the Guardian did give these terrorists the coverage that they deserve, the details into what they did, the reasons why they're in jail, then would the Guardian readers reconsider whether these murderers deserve to "obtain their freedom" by holding an innocent boy hostage for five years, and whether they should be viewed "as important as Israelis"? Or would they still have sympathy for the murderers of innocent civilians? I fear it's the latter, but since they wondered about these "nameless Palestinians' identities", here are a few of those who will be released:

• Abdel Hadi Ghanem, an Islamic Jihad terrorist responsible for the 1989 hijacking of Egged bus 405, driving it over a cliff edge, killing 16 Israelis.
• Fahad Schludi, a terror operative who took part in the 1993 abduction and murder of IDF soldier Yaron Chen.
• Bassam Abu Sneina and Riyad Asila, who are serving a life sentence for the 1998 murder of yeshiva student Haim Kerman.
• Nael al-Barghouthi, the longest-serving Palestinian prisoner, who was sentenced to life in prison in 1978, for murdering an Israeli security officer.
• Yehiya As-Sinwar, who was one of the founders of Hamas’ security forces in Gaza and was involved in the abduction and murder of IDF soldier Nachshon Wachsman. He is also the brother of one of the terrorists involved in Gilad Shalit’s kidnapping.
• Jihad Yarmur, who was convicted of Nachshon Wachsman’s murder.
• Ahmed Najar, former head of the Silwad terror cell, which killed 3 Israelis in six shooting attacks during the al-Aqsa Intifada.
• Mohammed Hamada, who was convicted of planning a rocket attack on Teddy Stadium in Jerusalem.
• Ruhi Musteha, a senior operative with Hamas’ military wing.
• Husam Badran, the former head of Hamas’ military wing in the West Bank, who orchestrated the deadly terror attacks at the Tel Aviv Dolphinarium in 2001, at the Park Hotel in Netanya in 2002 (which killed 30) and at the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem in 2001 (which killed 15).
• Muhammad Duglas, who was implicated in the Sbarro attack, and is serving 15 consecutive life sentences for the murder of 19 Israelis.
• Amina Mona, a young woman who lured a lovestruck Israeli teenage boy by the name of Ophir Rahum to a Palestinian city over the Internet, only to have him killed by waiting terrorists.
• Update: Some more terrorists who shouldn't be released: Walid Anajas, from Ramallah, a commander of Hamas' armed wing, the Qassam Brigades. He was given 36 life terms in 2002 for his involvement in a number of suicide bombings, including that of a Jerusalem cafe in 2002, in which 12 people lost their lives.
• Nasser Yataima, who planned a suicide bombing which killed 30 people as they were about to celebrate the Passover festival at a hotel in March 2002, was sentenced to 29 life terms.
• Khamis Zaki Aqel, a member of the Qassam Brigades, which carried out a string of suicide bombings and other attacks, was arrested in 1992 and sentenced to 21 life terms. It was not immediately clear for which crime he was sentenced.
• Majdi Muhammed Amr, arrested in 1993, is serving 19 life sentences after being found guilty of coordinating the work of suicide bombers, including one who blew up a bus in the northern city of Haifa in March 2003, killing 17 people. [He also murdered David Cohen in a drive-by shooting in July 2001.]
• Maedh Abu Sharakh was also sentenced to 19 life terms for his role in planning the Haifa bus bombing.

I have also read that other terrorists being released are those who with their bare hands lynched and murdered two Israeli soldiers in Ramallah in 2000, an incident so horrific, that leaves me feeling as sick and shaken by the memory of it as I felt when I watched the tv footage all those years ago, as well as desperately wanting never to have to remember or acknowledge it, that I could barely bring myself to type this paragraph. If anyone doesn't remember or know about that attack, if you have the stomach for it, please google it, it's probably even on youtube, but I can't and won't look for links.

Probably most of those being released feel no regret, and why would they when they're rewarded so much for their actions by their leaders - the Palestinian leaders who the world thinks Israel should reward for their incitement with land and a state.

But despite all of this, I still believe Israel is making the right decision. After all, there is no other choice. Perhaps mistakes were made in the past and opportunities wasted, but at this moment, we have to simply take whatever we can get, do whatever we can to free Gilad and not leave him languishing any longer.

As a plus side, some top Palestinian terrorists, who Hamas campaigned for in previous talks, are not being released:

• Marwan Barghouti who was sentenced to five life sentences for his role in the murders of Israelis during the al-Aksa intifada
• Abdullah Barghouti who is serving out 67 consecutive life terms for building the bombs that murdered 66 people
• Ahmed Saadat who headed the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and was responsible for the assassination of Israeli minister Rehavam Ze'evi
• Hassan Salama, a Hamas leader who was convicted of murdering 67 Israeli citizens
• Abbas a-Sayed, mastermind of the Park Hotel suicide bombing in which 30 Israelis were killed on the eve of Passover 2002
• Ibrahim Hamed, who was found guilty of involvement in terrorist attacks that led to the death of 82 Israelis

It hardly even feels a victory, looking back at all the carnage and trauma they caused.

This is the most miserable, bittersweet I've ever felt writing a post, and it's not even over yet. Please G-d Gilad should be home with his family soon, alive and well, and every terrorist who ever caused pain and suffering to innocent people should feel a thousand times more what their victims felt.

On The Palestinians' Bid For A Terror-State

In a speech filled with lies, hatred for Israel, and a refusal to accept any responsibility whatsoever for the Palestinians' part in the conflict, Abbas on Friday made his bid to the UN for a Palestinian state, without negotiations, and without Palestinian concessions. 

It is interesting to note who is for and who is against the bid. Against includes The Times and J Street, because although obviously both are pro a 2 state solution, J Street explain “we do not believe that, in the current context, it [the bid for statehood without negotiations] will advance peace, enhance security and improve conditions on the ground.” Which sums up why most rational people are against it.

Meanwhile the UK version of J Street (but evidently a lot more stupid naive), the questionably “pro-Israel, pro-peace” group Yachad are for it, because they “believe it represents a historic opportunity to advance and expedite the peace process... to be recognised as a state will require the Palestinian leadership to take on the obligations of behaving like a state.” The Guardian of course, is also for it, as they appear not to want the Palestinians to have to make any concessions at all, whether engaging in land swaps, recognising Israel as the Jewish state, or tearing up their agreement with Hamas - you know, the antisemitic, genocidal terror organisation.

So let’s have a look at just some of the reasons why the Palestinian state Abbas asked for is, to put it lightly, a bad idea.

Robin Shepherd observes that:

“There is one party to this dispute that most emphatically does not support a Palestinian state, if that means long-term acceptance of the State of Israel: the Palestinians themselves… opinion polls have consistently shown that the Palestinians only support the idea of a Palestinian state sitting side by side with Israel as a stepping stone to a future one state solution in which they rule over the Jews (assuming they are ruled over and not slaughtered or “driven into the sea” as they are wont to say)… a comprehensive poll by the Israel Project in November 2010 showed 60 percent of Palestinians agreeing with the proposition that: ‘The real goal should be to start with two states but then move to it all being one Palestinian state’”.

On the day of the bid, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, Abbas Zaki, told Al Jazeera that regarding Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ bid for 2 states, “Abbas understands... everybody knows that the greater goal cannot be accomplished in one go. If Israel withdraws from Jerusalem, evacuates the 650,000 settlers, and dismantles the wall – what will become of Israel? It will come to an end. If we say that we want to wipe Israel out... It's not [acceptable] policy to say so. Don't say these things to the world. Keep it to yourself.” This might seem like a stupid thing to say to an internationally aired news channel, but the truth is the mainstream media either don't make the effort to know, or don't care about the difference between what Palestinian officials say in Arabic and what they say in English.

Palestinians often depict a map of the whole of Israel as representing “Palestine”, whether in newspaper cartoons, or Fatah’s own logo, which was on Abbas' official document to the UN. 

Abbas himself, speaking for the Palestinians, will not recognise Israel as the Jewish state, as he has said numerous time, including on 27^th August to the PLO Central Council: “Present to us something sensible, don’t present to us ‘The Jewish State’, we will never accept it... The Quartet cannot force upon us the character of the state [of Israel], or that we should recognize the nature of the Israeli state”.

And he didn’t change his mind between then and 22^rd September, the day before the bid, when he told 200 representatives of American Arabs of Palestinian descent “we will not recognise the Jewish state...  we will only accept that Palestine be free of settlers and soldiers [i.e. Jews]”.

Which is what the PLO’s ambassador to the US, Maen Areikat, said on 13^th September, that any future Palestinian state it seeks with help from the United Nations and the United States should be free of Jews. He later explained he meant settlers and soldiers (so, still Jews then), but last year he made a similar statement during an interview with Tablet magazine. Asked whether “Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave”, he responded “absolutely”.

Let’s not forget that Abbas is a Holocaust denier, he denies the Jewish historical connection to Israel, rewrites the history of the conflict, and is responsible for his government’s incitement of hatred and violence towards Israelis and Jews, through Palestinian childrens’ tv programmes, honouring and glorifying terrorists with processions, video tributes, naming streets, schools, town squares and youth groups after them; and rewarding the families ofterrorists with payment. 

About a year ago, the PA Minister of Prisoners’ affairs Issa Karake honoured a Palestinian woman, Latifa Abu Hmeid, with a plaque inscribed with the names of four of her sons who are serving sentences in Israeli prisons, all of them for their involvement in the murder of Israeli civilians in numerous terror attacks. Karake stated: “The Palestinian mother is a central partner in the struggle... It is she who gave birth to the fighters, and she deserves that we bow to her in salute and in honour.”

Two weeks ago, Karake stated that "The recognition of the [Palestinian] state means... that the struggles of the prisoners [i.e. terrorists] are legitimized and legal according to UN Resolutions”.

So it isn’t surprising that last week the Palestinians’ statehood campaign began with Abu Hmeid, the mother honoured for giving birth to murderers, leading the procession to the UN offices in Ramallah, where she handed over a letter to the representative there of UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon calling for the UN to recognise a Palestinian state.

Probably the most obvious reason why the statehood bid is a bad idea, yet people still need to be reminded of it, is that Israel left Gaza in 2005, uprooting thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes there. Hamas then took over, throwing out Fatah and firing over 10,000 rockets on Israeli civilians. Israel would need to ensure that the West Bank would be under the control of moderates, and that weapons would not be smuggled in, which would mean that practically every city in Israel would be in range.

Why could Abbas possibly object to negotiations with Netanyahu that would address these problems? And why would people, people who call themselves pro-peace and pro-Israel, support Abbas in this?

Abbas Goes More Hamas

The Fatah-Hamas reconciliation is not good for anyone who wants peace, as it just means Fatah siding with Hamas, who still want Israel's destruction and refuse to negotiate*. It's not surprising then that the Guardian is fully behind the reconciliation, especially considering that when they released the Palestine Papers in February, they demonstrated that they were actively against the very idea of the Palestinians making any concessions for peace - what the Guardian actually called weakness - and they legitimised Hamas.

But Hamas are not the only problem. In the New York Times op-ed this week, Fatah's leader Abbas wrote an outrageously distorted op-ed, rewriting the history of Israel, and, apart from all Fatah's incitement to terrorism*, the op-ed suddenly makes it so clear why Abbas hasn't negotiated: he's not only in denial about the history of Israel, he lies about his own history.

He wrote that in 1947, after it was proposed that Israel be divided into two states, "Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs... and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued... Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, the United States granted it recognition. Out Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled."

Of course he wouldn't mention that the Palestinians rejected the proposal, and that the armies of Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan invaded Israel with the sole intention of killing all the Jews, to get us out of the way. Really, the Nakba is just mourning the failure of finishing the Holocaust.

He claims "we have been negotiating with the State of Israel for 20 years without coming any closer to realizing a state of our own... Negotiations remain our first option".

Again, Abbas ignores the facts - that over the years the Palestinians have refused a 2 state solution seven times, including Abbas himself only in 2008.

Whilst Hamas may be the terrorists, Abbas sure isn't interested in peace either. His issue is with the very existence of Israel, not settlements. He couldn't be more clear about that than if he joined Hamas. Oh, wait.

UPDATE:

* And who reiterated that they will never recognise Israel in response to Obama's Middle East speech

* And a new Fatah law granting terrorists in Israeli prisons a monthly salary.

Terrorism On Nakba Day

Nakba Day, when the Palestinians mourn the establishment of the State of Israel, kicked off yesterday morning with a terror attack in Tel Aviv. An Arab truck driver deliberately crashed into several cars, shouting "Allahu Akbar". He injured 17 and killed one, a 29 year old recently engaged man, Aviv Morag.

In another incident, in East Jerusalem two Israeli policeman were deliberately run over by a car at a checkpoint.

Two terrorists were arrested as they were caught trying to enter a Jewish settlement, armed with knives, no doubt wanting to carry out an attack similar to that on the Fogel family in March.

Later, thousands of Syrians and Lebanese broke through the borders into Israel and violently rioted against the IDF, injuring some of them. When tear gas and other riot dispersal methods didn't work, the IDF fired warning shots but were finally forced to open fire. About 12 "protestors" were killed overall, some by Lebanese forces, some by mines on their own side of the border.

In other riots around the country, hundreds of Palestinians threw rocks, molotov cocktails, flares, firebombs, burnt tires, damaged the Gaza border and other property, and hid behind ambulances as they launched their attacks.

It is highly likely that Syrian President Assad actively encouraged the invasion to divert attention from his forces' killing of 800 Syrian protestors. Ironically, some of those who entered Israel weren't protesting but were fleeing the danger in Syria. One said:

"I'm tired of living in Syria, we'd rather die than see more bloodshed. We've crossed the border in order to stay with our families, away from all the killing in Syria. We ask the powers that be in Israel to help us stay and not send us back."

Surely there's got to be a smarter option than illegally breaking into a country along with a violent mob of hundreds.

The protests weren't just about commemorating Nakba day though; a while ago hundreds of thousands joined a Facebook group calling for a third intifada - and for Arabs from the surrounding countries to march into Israel, which is exactly what they did.

Around the world, Palestinian supporters held demonstrations in support of a third intifada, including in London where there was also a counter-demo, a pro-Israel, pro-peace rally.

The third intifada demonstration was supported by the "peaceful" BDS, but at the demo itself there was no pretence of peaceful aims. The pro-Palis chanted "victory for the intifada", called for jihad against Israel and for Israel's destruction, waved the flag of the terrorist organisation Hezbollah, and chanted "khyber al-Yahud", which means "slaughter the Jews". Well, at least they were honest!



UPDATE: One Syrian confessed that he was shot in the legs in the Nakba Day protests after he tried to kidnap an Israeli soldier. There were probably other similar incidents. Either way, for only 12 of the hundreds who swarmed into Israel to be killed, whilst attacking soldiers, or by mistakes from their own side,  reflects the extraordinary restraint taken by the IDF.

Fatah And Hamas Disagree On Bin Laden

US forces have finally found and killed the world's most wanted terrorist Osama Bin Laden, who was behind 9/11.

Naturally most of the world is rejoicing, but Bin Laden's death seems to be the first surprising hurdle for the potential joint Hamas-Fatah government that was announced last week, who of course can't agree on a joint reaction to this.

A Fatah spokesman said "Getting rid of Bin Laden is good for the cause of peace worldwide", but Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh mourned Bin Laden, saying "We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior... We regard this as a continuation of the American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood."

Um, again... we're supposed to try and make peace with the people who want Israel's destruction and worship the terrorist who caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people all over the world?

Honest Reporting point out two things you need to know about Bin Laden and Israel. First, that he hated the West more than he hated Israel, it was not America's support for Israel that drove him.Second, that, Al Qaida like recognition for their actions, and according to Bin Laden's former bodyguard, blaming the Mossad for Al Qaida's terror attacks is "nonsense and an attempt to cast doubt on the ability of the Muslims to do something of this sort."

Jew Murdered In Terror Attack By Palestinian "Policeman"

A 24 year old Jewish father of four from Jerusalem, Ben Yosef Livnat was murdered this morning, and four others injured, when they were shot in their car after visiting Joseph's Tomb to pray, by Palestinian terrorists (who were also policemen), screaming "Allahu Akbar". 

Baruch Dayan HaEmet, may his loved ones be comforted.

Following the terror attack, Palestinians set fire to Joseph's Tomb. 

Chas Newkey-Burden writes:

"Contrast the situation there with the Old City of Jerusalem, where the Israeli authorities painstakingly protect the rights of all faiths to visit and pray at their places of worship in dignity and comfort...

Israel deserves enormous credit for the way it governs the Old City of Jerusalem, allowing all faiths to enjoy their holy sites. Were Israel to behave how the Palestinians did in Nablus today, one can only imagine the global outrage. Imagine for a moment that some Arabs were shot by Israelis as they left the site of the Dome of the Rock. Imagine that following this, some Israeli youths set fire to the Dome of the Rock. We would be talking about global outrage, possibly even talk of World War Three breaking out.

Yet when that chain of events happened in Nablus this morning it merited little coverage, condemnation or even reflection...

I hope that one day, Israel is given due credit for the way it so beautifully governs the Old City of Jerusalem, proving itself once more a moral example to the world."

And people wonder why Israel is reluctant to give the Palestinians control over land where the lives of Jews, if they dared visit, would be in the hands of Palestinians with guns.

Boy In Hamas Schoolbus Attack Dies Of Wounds

The Israeli boy injured in the Hamas rocket attack on his schoolbus has died of his wounds.
May his loved ones be comforted. Baruch Dayan HaEmet.

Meanwhile two of the Palestinians arrested over the murder of the Fogels have been found guilty.

Anti-Israel Activist Murdered In Gaza

Islamic fanatics kidnapped and then murdered yesterday an Italian journalist and anti-Israel activist in Gaza.

Bizarrely, before they killed Vittorio Arrigoni, they tried to negotiate a prisoner swap with Hamas for his release; Hamas have condemned the murder.

Just Journalism highlight that the BBC claims that "Hamas had been credited with eliminating the threat of kidnapping in Gaza until his abduction", and the Financial Times claims that "Gaza has been widely regarded as a safe destination for foreign journalists, aid workers and diplomats since then." But JJ point out instances of Hamas violence against journalists in Gaza, including only last month when they stormed Reuters' office, threatened the journalists with guns, attacked one with a metal bar and threatened to throw another out the window. JJ also point out that the media are also ignoring that Israeli intelligence is frequently warning Israelis against kidnap threats, and, of course, that Hamas have been holding Gilad Shalit hostage in Gaza, his condition unknown, for the last four years.

Arrigoni was a member of the International Solidarity Movement, an extremely anti-Israel group. Incidentally Rachel Corrie, killed while standing in front of an Israeli bulldozer from which the driver couldn't see her, was also a member of ISM, but the fact that Arrigoni was killed by Palestinians and not by Israelis means he won't become an icon like Corrie did.

EoZ explains why Arrigoni was not a peact activist, or human rights activist, or even a pro-Palestinian activist, as the media have referred to him. None of his actions reflect love or care for the Palestinians, only hate for Israel: "He never had anything bad to say about Hamas. He never campaigned for Arab countries to stop their discrimination against Palestinian Arabs. He never spoke a word demanding that 'refugee camps' in Gaza be dismantled and real homes built."

Just as is evident from the murder of the Israeil anti-Israel activist and actor Juliano Mer-Khamis a couple of weeks ago, "The anti-Israel left might consider themselves 'Palestinian', but clearly some Palestinian Arabs don't."

And despite this, these murders, "done by the people they supposedly love - will not make a dent in far leftist 'support' for PalArabs, because they don't support them in any real way."

All the confirmation you need for this is the nonsensical Tweet by ISM that, just like the world did in their mourning for Mer-Khamis, completely ignores who is responsible for the murder as they refuse to address that the Palestinians' own worst enemy is themselves and not Israel: "While we mourn Vittorio, let’s remember that he died resisting the Israel Occupation."




UPDATE: Hamas have blamed the murder on Israel (of course), claiming that it was to dissuade other foreign activists from heading to Gaza on another flotilla. I didn't even think of it from that angle!

Hamas Fire 80 Rockets Into Israel in 24 Hours

Hamas fired 80 rockets into Israel over Shabbat, with residents of Southern Israel having to spend Friday night in their bomb shelters.

One of the terrorists killed by Israel's retaliation was physically involved in the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit.

Hamas have, absurdly, defended their attack on an Israeli schoolbus, saying "It was not known that the bus targeted on the outskirts of Gaza carried schoolchildren". Oh, so they only meant to target a regular bus. And there I was thinking they had no morals! 

Hamas Breaks "Ceasefire" After 12 Hours: New Record?

Hamas fired 16 shells into Israel this morning, breaking their own ceasefire which they called for yesterday, after they deliberately targetted a schoolbus, injuring one child, and then fired 50 rockets into Israel.


UPDATE: A few days ago one of the candidates for Egyptian presidency has said that if Israel attacks Gaza he will open the Egypt-Gaza border. Israel Matzav suggests that Hamas are now looking to start a war with Israel so that they can fight alongside Egypt.

Hamas Strike Israeli School Bus, Fire 50 Rockets, Then Call For Ceasefire

Today Hamas fired an anti-tank guided missile deliberately at an Israeli school-bus - minutes after most of the children had got off. A 13 year old boy was critically injured, who Hamas called a 'settler'. People are asked to pray for Daniel Aryah ben Tamar.

After the attack, Hamas fired 50 rockets into Israel, and then called for a ceasefire, like they did a couple of weeks ago after they fired rockets, and before they fired some more.

On Monday, an Israeli actor and pro-Palestinian activist was shot dead in the West Bank by Palestinian terrorists. The Palestinian charged with the murder is Hamas but was previously in Fatah's terrorist group Al Aqsa Martyrs.

Meanwhile, it turns out Hamas were responsible for the pipe bomb in Jerusalem that injured one Israeli, two weeks before the bus-station bomb.

This is the boy injured today:

 

Goldstone should be feeling particularly uncomfortable with all this, considering his retraction of his retraction - that despite his confession that the report on Cast Lead is full of lies against Israel that have no basis in fact, he doesn't want it nullified.

So Hamas can continue to fire rockets onto Israeli schoolchildren safe in the knowledge that there will be no Goldstone report into their war crimes, that only Israel's response will be condemned.

Judge Goldstone's Guilt

Two years after the Goldstone report accused Israel of committing war crimes in a “deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorise a civilian population”, Goldstone has confessed that his conclusions were wrong.

Of course, all of his accusations against Israel were disproved both at that time and even before his investigation, by research undertaken by Israel supporters and truth-seekers all over.

The report was widely accepted, and used to further delegitimise Israel and deny its right to self-defence. I look forward to Robert Fisk’s reaction to this, as at the time he referred to Goldstone as “the eminent lawyer who so bravely… inspires…” etc. The self-hating Jews will also be quite upset about Goldstone’s retraction.

Significantly, The Times had observed that it was imbalanced for equating Israel and Hamas and not acknowledging Israel’s right to self-defence, and that the UN, who facilitated the investigation, is undeniably biased against Israel.

As Michael Weiss points out in the Telegraph, the report didn’t acknowledge Hamas’ use of civilians as human shields, and storage of weapons in schools, mosques and hospitals, when even last week the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights criticised Hamas for violating international law by continuing to “store explosives or to treat such explosives in locations close to populated areas” (not for firing them at Israeli civilians though).

Now Goldstone acknowledges that: “The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion”, and that Israel’s investigations into 400 alleged incidents of misconduct “indicate[s] that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”.

He admits, “If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document”, but then blames this on Israel’s “lack of cooperation”. Bizarrely, he expresses disappointment that Hamas never investigated their own war crimes, even though he acknowledges that it is their “policy to destroy the state of Israel”.

Goldstone’s admission is brave but he demonstrates cowardice as well because instead of taking responsibility, he is blaming Israel for withholding information. But that evidence was available at the time for anyone who looked for it – either Goldstone is very stupid, or he deliberately chose to ignore the evidence and has only now realized how absurdly untruthful and damaging his report is.

It was not very difficult for supporters of Israel to learn the truth about everything that happened, so it is beyond me why so-called “amateur” bloggers like the great Elder of Ziyon and others are seen as irrelevant, whilst people like Goldstone who choose to ignore the facts receive worldwide recognition for their work. We are not detectives, but I and ever other pro-Israel blogger out there are more qualified than Goldstone to comment on the truth about Cast Lead and the general situation in Israel and the territories.

The reason why Goldstone wrote his retraction is evident from this quote: “the Human Rights Council should condemn the inexcusable and cold-blooded recent slaughter of a young Israeli couple and three of their small children in their beds.”

Recently Interior minister Eli Yishai wrote to Goldstone telling him to condemn Palestinian attacks on Israelis, because his report on Cast Lead legitimises the attacks by not holding the terrorists accountable and instead condemning Israel for acting in self-defence.

When Goldstone sees all the attacks on Israelis, and the absurd restraint Israel shows in its retaliations, and then hears and sees how the world still demonizes Israel, it would be impossible for him not to feel guilty. Yishai’s letter would merely have been the trigger for the article, written out of the guilt that Goldstone already feels.

Hamas Fire Rockets, Call For Ceasefire, Fire More Rockets

Hamas have offered Israel a ceasefire, but claim that if they wouldn't "respond" to Israeli force, then they "would not have the right to exist".

And Hamas' 50 rockets last week were in response to what? In the past week Israel has been targetting only militants and rocket launching sites (which sadly are often civilian areas), striking terrorists who have or were about to fire rockets into Israel.

This morning, a Hamas rocket hit a family's home in Southern Israel. I'm still waiting for Hamas' explanation as to what made the family a legitimate target.

UPDATE: Sunday morning the IDF struck terrorists in Gaza who were about to fire more rockets, killing two.

Look Up, Rockets Are Falling

Well, probably not where you are.

Palestinian terrorists in Gaza fired at least eight rockets, grads and mortars into Southern Israel today, landing in Sderot, Ashkelon and Ashdod - the furthest so far. This month's tally has reached about 100.

The woman who was killed in the Jerusalem bombing yesterday was Mary Gardner, a British Christian in her late 50s who was in Israel studying Hebrew for her work translating the Bible. Very, very sad. RIP.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai wrote to Goldstone telling him to condemn the Palestinian attacks on Israelis, saying that his report on Cast Lead legitimises the attacks by not holding the terrorists accountable and instead condemning Israel for acting in self-defence.

Nu, Goldstone?

Terror Attack In Jerusalem (Not "Terror Attack")

One woman has been killed and 40 injured in a bombing in central Jerusalem today. The bomb was reportedly left in a bag on the street just outside the bus station.

When the shock began to wear off, I wondered how the media would try and twist this to belittle and justify Palestinian attacks on Israelis. After all, if "illegal settlers" aren't the victims, you'd have to be very creative to find another way to blame Israel for this.

Two patterns have emerged in the coverage. The first, predictably, is to avoid the word "terror" and even "attack". Most likely as well as other media outlets, The Independent, Reuters, and CNN all had this to say: "Police described the explosion as a 'terrorist attack' - Israel's term for a Palestinian strike", as though it was a military exercise.

Which is a funny thing to say considering that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's statement on the bombing was "I harshly condemn this act of terror".

The second pattern is to portray the bombing as part of a "cycle of violence", and I'm pretty sure most of the media have done this. For example the Guardian completely twisted the events of the last few days, not explaining that the reason civilians died in Israel's strikes on Gaza was because they were used as human shields by terrorists; and calling Hamas' firing of 50 rockets into Israel in the space of a couple of hours "sporadic".

A BBC interviewer asked Jerusalem Post Editor-in-Chief David Horowitz if the bombing would have been a response to the strikes on Gaza. Horowitz had to explain that the murder of the Fogels was followed by rocket attacks on Israel which was followed by Israel striking legitimate terror targets, unintentionally killing some civilians who were on the site where rockets had been fired from.

Melanie Phillips points out that with this huge upsurge in violence from the Palestinians,

"It therefore takes a particular degree of bone-headed malevolence to view this latest attack instead as a ‘tit-for-tat' response to Israeli violence. But then, the BBC and other British and western media have all but ignored the rocket attacks, and minimised the Fogel massacre. As usual, Israeli victimisation is thus denied in an obscene moral equivalence – which invariably turns Israel from a victim attempting to defend itself into the aggressor."

Incidentally, only two weeks ago there was another explosion in Jerusalem in which one Israeli was wounded.

Shortly after today's bomb, terrorists in Gaza fired another barrage of rockets into Israel.

Meanwhile, Israel sent into Gaza over 200 trucks of aid.

I pray for the speedy recovery of all the victims.