יום רביעי, 18 במאי 2011

Elder of Ziyon Daily Digest

Elder of Ziyon Daily Digest

Iran is really paranoid about Jews taking over Azerbaijan

Posted: 17 May 2011 08:49 PM PDT

From Times.AM (Armenia):
The Zionist regime aims to strengthen its position in the region and what is why it develops multilateral relations with Azerbaijan, Iranian arannews.ir informs.

"Jews have fulfilled a wide project of the home-building in the center of Baku. And though the newly-built apartments are announced to be sold, they cost so much that nobody will buy them.

So, this process aims 7000 Jewish families to come and live in Baku," the Iranian source notes.
I found the article in Aram.ir, which emphasizes that Israelis feel close to Azerbaijan. It notes that the Jews want to use this real-estate ploy to drive Muslims out of Baku.

No pretense here of anti-Zionism - they are saying that Jews supposedly buying buildings is a bad thing.

And their graphic shows the object of their fear and hate quite well:

The entire Aran.ir site is obsessed with the idea of Israel taking over Azerbaijan, with articles about a telecommunications deal between the country and Israel, and a quote from a Muslim cleric saying that Muslims will not stand to see Azerbaijan being friendly to Zionists.

Not only that, but here is an article saying that since Jews are really Khazars, they have a special affinity to many former Soviet regions like Georgia. They Iranians obsessively count how many Jews live in the region and try to figure out Israel's and Jewish leaders' plans.

Here's how they illustrate that article:


Israel really needs to take advantage of this hilarious Iranian paranoia about being surrounded by evil, scheming Jews.

Details of the Bin Laden raid (Navy Times)

Posted: 17 May 2011 05:25 PM PDT

Fascinating:

Aboard two Black Hawk helicopters were 23 SEALs, an interpreter and a tracking dog named Cairo. Nineteen SEALs would enter the compound, and three of them would find bin Laden, one official said, providing the exact numbers for the first time.

Aboard the Chinooks were two dozen more SEALs, as backup.

The Black Hawks were specially engineered to muffle the tail rotor and engine sound, two officials said. The added weight of the stealth technology meant cargo was calculated to the ounce, with weather factored in. The night of the mission, it was hotter than expected.

The Black Hawks were to drop the SEALs and depart in less than two minutes, in hopes locals would assume they were Pakistani aircraft visiting the nearby military academy.

One Black Hawk was to hover above the compound, with SEALs sliding down ropes into the open courtyard.

The second was to hover above the roof to drop SEALs there, then land more SEALs outside — plus an interpreter and the dog, who would track anyone who tried to escape and to alert SEALs to any approaching Pakistani security forces.

If troops appeared, the plan was to hunker down in the compound, avoiding armed confrontation with the Pakistanis while officials in Washington negotiated their passage out.

The two SEAL teams inside would work toward each other, in a simultaneous attack from above and below, their weapons silenced, guaranteeing surprise, one of the officials said. They would have stormed the building in a matter of minutes, as they'd done time and again in two training models of the compound.

The plan unraveled as the first helicopter tried to hover over the compound. The Black Hawk skittered around uncontrollably in the heat-thinned air, forcing the pilot to land. As he did, the tail and rotor got caught on one of the compound's 12-foot walls. The pilot quickly buried the aircraft's nose in the dirt to keep it from tipping over, and the SEALs clambered out into an outer courtyard.

The other aircraft did not even attempt hovering, landing its SEALs outside the compound.

Now, the raiders were outside, and they'd lost the element of surprise.
Read the whole thing.

(h/t Watcher)

Poll: 70% of PalArabs expect a new intifada if peace talks fail

Posted: 17 May 2011 12:15 PM PDT

In the latest Palestinian Center for Public Opinion poll, we learn:

A plurality of Palestinian Arabs support resumption of peace talks with Israel without preconditions - 40.2% versus 25.2% who oppose them. This is at odds with PA policy.

Also a slight plurality believe that Israelis are interested in peace - 45.5% against 44.7%.

One question revealed more the biases of the pollster than the feelings of the people:

When asked " In case all efforts towards peace have collapsed, which of the following options are most probable to administer Palestinian affairs?" more than one-third  37.4% of Palestinians are for the dismantling the PA and holding the international community responsible for the legal vacuum that will arise, whereas 24.7% are in favor of declaring a Palestinian state and escalating resistance, 34.6% for keeping the " status quo" with developing new strategies to run Palestinian affairs, and 3.3% say "do not know".

To the pollster, unilateral declaration of a Palestinian Arab state is obviously going to be accompanied with increased "resistance," not with peace!

The most important result was that over 70% of the respondents expect a third intifada to break out if peace talks "stumble." Which probably means that the chances are very high for a new outbreak of violence if a Palestinian Arab state is declared unilaterally - since that shows that the peace talks have already failed.

Dopey soccer star supports a new intifada

Posted: 17 May 2011 10:24 AM PDT

A soccer (football) star from Real Madrid, Marcelo Vieira, put up this photo on his Facebook page on Sunday:

The caption is "My heart with Palestinian now as they fighting with Israel."

Nice to know that some haters of Israel haven't quite yet figured out that they are supposed to pretend to love peace while they advocate the destruction of the Jewish state.

So far, that comment has garnered some 3,300 "Likes."

Abbas' NYT editorial, rewritten to reflect the truth

Posted: 17 May 2011 09:12 AM PDT

What Mahmoud Abbas would have written had he told the truth:


SIXTY-THREE years ago, a 13-year-old Palestinian Arab boy left his home in the Galilean city of Safed and went with his family to Syria. His family left out of an vague fear of what a future in a Jewish state might be like, but not because they were in any danger. He never saw any Jewish troops. His family was not expelled. The child took up shelter in a canvas tent provided to all the arriving refugees. Though he and his family wished for decades to return to their home, they had chose the wrong side in the war. And although his family would happily have become Syrian citizens so they could live in honor and dignity, this right - that of citizenship - was denied. That child's story, like that of so many other Palestinians, is mine.

This month, however, as we commemorate another year of our free choice to leave our homes — which we cynically call the nakba, or catastrophe — the Palestinian people have a new gimmick to enable us to start a new stage in the eventual destruction of Israel and return to our ancestral homes that no longer exist: this September, at the United Nations General Assembly, we will request international recognition of the State of Palestine on the land that Jordan had illegally annexed and that Egypt had taken over in 1949; land that those Arab countries never considered to be "Palestine" and which Israel won in a war where combined Arab armies tried to destroy her. We want this state, which we rejected in 1938, 1947, 2001 and 2008, to be admitted as a full member of the United Nations - without us having to compromise on our demands to ethnically clean all Jews from the land.

Many are questioning what value there is to such recognition while the land is itself in dispute. Others have accused us of imperiling the peace process. We believe, however, that this UN stunt will enable us to get everythign we have been demanding without actually having to compromise with Israel, and without accepting her right to live in peace and security. This will allow us to do what we have been tryign to do the entire time - get 100% of our demands met without having to give up a thing.

It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Jews happily accepted this compromise, even though their land would have been indefensible and crazily shaped. The Jews accepted the plan even though it didn't include their own holiest cities. The Palestinian Arab leadership, however, rejected the compromise plan outright. Shortly thereafter, my people attacked their Jewish neighbors - people they had lived with for decades - in unspeakably brutal ways. Bus bombs, sniping, even knife attacks became the norm that Jews had to live with in their own homes. Only after months of incessant attacks by Arabs did the Zionist forces start an offensive that ultimately expanded the amount of land they controlled beyond the UN partition lines. Five Arab nations simultaneously attacked in May 1948, and Israel won again as my people fled in fear, often believing hugely exaggerated rumors of Zionist massacres.

Now we want to pretend that none of that happened and that we should not have to pay a price for consistently choosing terrorism over peace, war over compromise.

Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, the United States granted it recognition. Palestinian Arab leadership, however, happily accepted a Transjordanian plan where the West Bank would become part of what was to become Jordan. We never asked for a state while the Jordanians and Egyptians ruled us - except within Israel's 1949 armistice lines, lines that were never accepted by the international community as a border.

Palestine's admission to the United Nations would allow us to change the rules again, to rewrite history and pretend that we are not responsible at all for the problems of the past 63 years, most of which were inflicted by our own corrupt leadership and the very Arab leaders who continue to use us as pawns in their own political games against Israel. The Arabs and even Palestinian Arab leaders are the ones who kept us in camps, not Israel. Even today, under my rule and under Hamas rule, not a single "refugee" camps has been dismantled - because the misery the people are under comes in so politically useful to us.

We don't want our quest for recognition as a state to be seen as the stunt it is, even though we have lost many of our men and women in similar political theater - for example, when we rejected the Camp David proposals for peace. We go to the United Nations now because we don't want to compromise, because we always viewed the "peace process" as a means to gain everything we want without having to give up anything, because we want to distract the world from the simple fact that Israel has been the only party to compromise since (in my own words) 1988. We want to pretend that we have given up on wanting to destroy Israel, but in reality we continue to insist on a "right to return" thathas no basis in international law and whose entire purpose is to destroy Israel demographically. We have been negotiating with the State of Israel for 20 years without coming any closer to realizing a state of our own because we have not given up on one inch of land we consider ours - land that we explicitly said we have no claim on in 1964, when Jordan controlled it.

We have rejected negotiations for about two years now, even under identical conditions that we used to negotiate regularly with Israel. We are using "settlements" as an excuse, but also the world's bias against the Likud, to pressure Israel to give up even more - even after they have given up Area A to our control, as well as Gaza. Now we have made a conscious decision to embrace Hamas, a recognized terror group, and to reject the peace process with Israel.

We are demanding statehood even though we do not fulfill the criteria of statehood listed in the Montevideo Convention, the 1933 treaty that sets out the rights and duties of states. We have no defined territory, and in fact there never was an independent country named Palestine. Our land cannot be considered legally "occupied" because there was no accepted state there beforehand - because of our own rejection of the 1947 Partition Plan made by the same UN that we now embrace. The permanent population of our land is supposedly the Palestinian people, yet we do not want them to move from their camps into our nation, but into Israel instead. Our cynicism is extraordinary, yet we have world sympathy on our side.

Our economy is completely dependent on our enemy, Israel. The only reason things have been getting better for us is because Israel has wanted real peace while we have been using them to chip away at the territory controlled by the hated Zionists. Our security cooperation has been to please the United States, not out of any desire for real peace.

The State of Palestine will include Hamas in its government. As soon as we get our recognition, Hamas and Fatah can resume their Intrafada and their squabbles as we have in the past. The chances for real democracy and real freedom in the state of Palestine is extraordinarily small. But that's fine, because since 1948, our real goal has never been to establish a state but to destroy one. Once admitted to the United Nations, we believe that the world will back us on all of our demands. In fact, our declaration of a state will lead to perpetual war and misery for the people I pretend to love.

A key focus of negotiations will be reaching a just solution for Palestinian refugees based on our purposeful misinterpretation of Resolution 194, which the General Assembly passed in 1948. Of course, that resolution is not binding; it says that Jerusalem (as far as Bethlehem) would be an international city, and the very phrase that we pretend means we can overrun Israel with millions of Arabs can also be interpreted to mean that Jews can live in the West Bank where they lived before 1948. However, we have see the International Court of Justice ignore international law in our favor in the past, as well as the UN becoming a tool that the Arab League can control vis a vis Middle East issues, so we will rely on this continuing.

"Palestine" would be negotiating from the position of one United Nations member whose territory is militarily occupied by another, however, and not as a vanquished people ready to accept whatever terms are put in front of us. The fact that Palestinian Arabs have consistently backed tyrants and dictators like Nasser, Arafat, and Saddam Hussein should not impact our political strength. We just ask the world to forget our history of embracing terror and choosing war instead of peace.

We call on all friendly, peace-loving nations to believe our lies and our revisionist history. We want them to believe that somehow a unilateral move will lead to peace, even though it will do the opposite. We want the international community to forget that we tore up the idea of compromise so many times and instead tell them that they "promised" us a state six decades ago - a state we rejected while that Jews embraced it. Only if we get this combined scheme of an independent "Palestine" and a push to move millions of Arabs into Israel, destroying the Jewish state, will we have fulfilled the wishes that our first leader and my personal hero, the Mufti of Jerusalem, made so clear - to ethnically cleanse all Jews from the Middle East.

(original op-ed here, h/t idea by RB)

UPDATE: Israel Matzav did the same thing, upon the same person's idea.)

Local PA elections delayed - to October

Posted: 17 May 2011 08:34 AM PDT

The local elections that were to be held in July in the Palestinian Arab territories have been postponed, officially so that they can be set up in Gaza as well.

By sheer coincidence, the new date for these elections happens to be October 22 - after September.

I wonder why?

Muslim teens in Brussels are 4x more antisemitic than their peers

Posted: 17 May 2011 07:44 AM PDT

From Islam in Europe:

Half of the Muslim students in Brussels are antisemitic, according to a study 'Jong in Brussel' by the Youth Research Platform. The chapter on antisemitism was written by sociologist Mark Elchardus of the VUB. The study was conducted by the universities of Ghent, Leuven and the Dutch-speaking VUB. It polled 2,837 students in 32 Dutch-speaking high schools in Brussels.

About half of the Muslim respondents in the survey agreed with the following statements:

  1. Jews want to dominate everything (total: 31.4%, Muslims: 56.8%, Non-Muslims: 10.5%)
  2. Most Jews think they're better than others (total: 29.9%, Muslims: 47.1%, Non-Muslims: 12.9%)
  3. If you do business with Jews, you should be extra careful (total: 28.6%, Muslims: 47.5%, Non-Muslims: 12.9%)
  4. Jews incite to war and blame others (total: 28.4%, Muslims: 53.7%, Non-Muslims: 7.7%)


Mark Elchardus says that the non-Muslim/ethnic Belgians responses in this study are comparable to similar polls in Flanders. "What is alarming is that you can describe half of the Muslim students as antisemitic, which is very high. What's worse is that those anti-Jewish feelings have nothing to do with a low educational level or social disadvantage, which is the case by racist Belgians. The antisemitism is theologically inspired and there's a direct link between being Muslim and having antisemitic feelings."

Catholics and Protestants were also more anti-Jewish than secular students, but not as much as Muslims. Religious and practicing Christians scored on average 12 points more than the secular students. Religious Muslims scored 28 points higher. However, while very religious Christians were much more antisemitic than less religious Christians, there was no such difference among Muslims.

One of the Dutch articles on the study is here.

(h/t jzaik)

Anti-semitic cartoon on Iranian TV

Posted: 17 May 2011 06:54 AM PDT



The laugh-track is a nice touch.

Video: 92-year old Arab fondly remembers her father massacring Jews

Posted: 17 May 2011 05:54 AM PDT

From MEMRI via pi-news, broadcast on Hamas TV last week:









(h/t Ian)

Morning snippets and links

Posted: 17 May 2011 03:27 AM PDT

From Barry Rubin's "A Brief Guide to Why 1948 Was a Palestinian Arab and Arab Disaster:"
And so a Palestinian Arab army, whose three chief commanders had all fought for the Nazis during World War Two, went to war against the Jews using Nazi-supplied weapons (provided for the Palestinian Arab revolt in 1939 and for an Egyptian revolt that never happened in 1942). They lost.

Then the armies of the Arab states invaded Israel. They largely lost...

Everything that happened afterward was due to Arab decisions to reject both a two-state solution and Israel's creation.

That's the bottom line. So the disaster was due first and foremost to the Palestinian Arab leadership and secondly to the Arab states and publics.

Dealing with the "nakba" would then require that the Palestinian Arabs and the Arabic-speaking world generally would recognize that the disaster resulted from their refusal to accept Israel's existence and to seek a genuine, compromise two-state solution.

But, instead, in the name of the 1948 disaster they are repeating the same policies that brought it about! Indeed, they are the same policies that led to the self-inflicted disasters of 1967, 2000, and others since then.
From Norway, Israel and the Jews:

An art project is teaching young delinquents how to express themselves by spray-painting "Free Palestine" on the walls of the subway station.




The picture above is from today's Aftenposten, with the article heading saying "Spray fantasies on the subway" with the subtitle saying "Meet the wall in a creative way". The title refers to how the youths in the project are being taught how to spray-paint the walls in the subway station with messages of their own choice. That's right, they are receiving expert tuition, from a Berlin-based Norwegian artist, on how to best get their message across.
From Khaled Abu Toameh in Hudson-NY:
At the same time that Mashaal and Yousef are talking in English about accepting the two-state solution, most of Hamas's other leaders are vowing in Arabic that their movement would never recognize Israel's right to exist.

Following the signing of the Egyptian-sponsored reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas, the Islamist movement's representatives in Syria, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip reassured Palestinians and Arabs that their movement has not abandoned its goal of "liberating all of Palestine."

Also in Arabic, Hamas leaders have pledged that their charter would not be changed despite the rapprochement with Fatah.

If one really wants to know what Hamas thinks, one should listen to what Hamas leaders tell their supporters in mosques and public rallies in the Gaza Strip, not what they write in the New York Times or the Guardian.

From the Jerusalem Post:
The Iranian government is moving forward with the construction of rocket launch bases in Venezuela, the German daily Die Welt wrote in its Friday edition.

Iran is building intermediate- range missile launch pads on the Paraguaná Peninsula, and engineers from a construction firm – Khatam al-Anbia – owned by the Revolutionary Guards visited Paraguaná in February. Amir al-Hadschisadeh, the head of the Guard's Air Force, participated in the visit, according to the report. Die Welt cited information from "Western security insiders."

The rocket bases are to include measures to prevent air attacks on Venezuela as well as commando and control stations.

From RIA Novosti:
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has launched a large-scale conscription campaign to enroll women and children for service in his army, the pan-Arab Asharq Alawsat paper reported on Tuesday.

"We are expecting a NATO ground invasion in Libya and we are currently preparing for any possible situation. In line with these preparations we've started conscripting women and children," a senior Libyan official, who wanted to remain unnamed, told the paper.

Several Western news outlets have reported that Gaddafi's soldiers were using women and children as human shields to protect themselves from attacks in the besieged city of Misrata.


From Reuven Berko, Yisrael HaYom (Hebrew):
Three colors in modern history represent the three major violent forces who have tried to take power on the world: the black swastika represented the Nazi uniforms, red represented communism, and the green represents the Islamic radicalism which seeks to impose Islam on mankind.


Also:

Yemen shoots and kills demonstrators

Secret execution of Jewish-Armenian couple in Iran

Rift appears over UN flotilla report

(h/t Joel, Tundra Tabloids)

When Abbas lies about basic history, how can you trust him to make peace? (updated)

Posted: 17 May 2011 12:50 AM PDT

We know that Palestinian leaders routinely fabricate their history, but that doesn't mean that they should get a pass when they write op-eds for the New York Times.

Here's Mahmoud Abbas' revisionism:

It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened.
A complete and utter lie. Within mere hours after the partition vote, Arabs started murdering Jews:



That entire week the rampages continued.

Arab leaders fled throughout the month of December 1947. Generally the richest ones, those who could afford to wait out the coming war in relative comfort in Beirut and Cairo, left. This was perhaps the biggest factor in influencing the Arab masses to flee - and most of them did flee without being exposed to any fighting.

The partition plan would have left a decisive Jewish majority in the Jewish State envisioned in the plan. If Arabs hadn't attacked, there could have been two states declared in May 1948. Only a couple of months after the vote and after suffering withering attacks on their women and children by the Arabs, way before the declaration of the state, did the Jews finally go on the offensive - to survive.

Abbas' account is so outrageously false that it should have been rejected from being in the New York Times editorial just on that basis. An op-ed does not give the writer carte blanche to make up history. The facts are documented quite well. Abbas is a liar.

The Arab armies that invaded in May 1948 didn't "intervene" to protect Arabs of Palestine. They went in to massacre all the Jews of Palestine.

So it is not surprising that an established liar can write:
Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, the United States granted it recognition. Our Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled.
That "promise" was roundly rejected by not only the entire Arab world but by every Palestinian Arab leader themselves. Abbas is arrogantly trying to pretend that he deserves a state when his forebears, and he himself, have rejected just such a state numerous times.

This dishonesty doesn't merely reflect Arab honor, lying in order to save face. It reflects Abbas' very personality. It proves, more than anything else, that it is impossible to make peace with him - the supposed "moderate."

After all, if you cannot believe a word he says in front of an audience of millions who read the New York Times, how can you trust him to adhere to any agreement?

(h/t Omri)

Update: See also Daled Amos' masterful fisking of this piece - using Abbas' own words!

Also Jeffrey Goldberg on the same theme.
פורסם על ידי zoom ב- 0:09

אין תגובות:

הוסף רשומת תגובה

הירשם ל- תגובות לפרסום (Atom)