Western media | WarSclerotic | Page 2

Archive for the ‘Western media’ category

‘Media misleading by reporting that Iran implementing nuclear deal’

November 4, 2015

‘Media misleading by reporting that Iran implementing nuclear deal,’ Jerusalem Post, Ariel Ben Solomon, November 3, 2015

(The Emperor has no clothes is available here. — DM)

The mainstream media are misleading the world into believing that Iran has accepted and is implementing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that was agreed upon on July 14, a prominent Middle East expert who served in military intelligence and was an adviser to two prime ministers told The Jerusalem Post Tuesday.

“The recent phenomenon in the Western media saying that Iran has accepted the nuclear deal when it has not, shows that it has completely coddled to the line in defending the Iran deal,” Yigal Carmon, president of the Washington-based Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), told the Post.

“This is very dangerous,” he asserted.

In an article Carmon published on MEMRI’s website on Friday titled, “The emperor has no clothes,” he wrote: “With every passing day, Iran is more and more in violation of the JCPOA. But neither the Republicans nor the Democrats, nor the media, nor anyone else will acknowledge this, for the implications are too devastating.”

On Monday, Tehran’s atomic energy chief said during a visit to Tokyo: “We have already started to take our measures vis-a-vis the removal of the centrifuge machines – the extra centrifuge machines. We hope in two months time we are able to exhaust our commitment,” Ali Akbar Salehi told public broadcaster NHK.

In a separate development that appeared to confirm that Iran had begun implementing its side of the deal, 20 hardline conservative members of Iran’s parliament wrote to President Hassan Rouhani to complain about the deactivation of centrifuges at two enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow.

“Unfortunately, in the last two days, some contractors entered Fordow and started dismantling centrifuges… they said they could finish the job in two weeks,” Fars cited the lawmakers, among those loath to accept the nuclear deal, as saying.

However, MEMRI showed a recent report from the Iranian press that directly refuted such claims.

Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman for Iran’s atomic energy agency, addressed the concerns of several Majlis representatives and, according to a report on Tuesday by ISNA, he said: “We are also taking care of this matter. We will promote work in a way that follows the leader’s principles and guidelines.”

“The leader’s emphasis on the steps to be taken after the possible military dimensions dossier is closed was centered on the Arak reactor and the replacement of the uranium stockpiles,” he said.

“We are carrying out the leader’s orders meticulously and currently working on receiving the necessary guarantees on this matter.

“Indeed, we have taken several steps to implement the JCPOA so that we have more time when we wish to carry out matters in effect, but no centrifuge has been dismantled, and we are currently taking preparatory steps,” Iran’s nuclear spokesman continued.

“Regarding an official document on the rebuilding of the Arak reactor, all member-states of the P5+1 Group signed the document except for one, and we are currently waiting for the opinion of this country, which should arrive today or tomorrow,” Kamalvandi said.

Commenting on this previously unmentioned report, Carmon said, “Lo and behold, the only place you will find this report alongside the other one is in The Jerusalem Post, which sticks with the principles of journalism and doesn’t hide the reality when it doesn’t fit its beliefs, whatever they would be.

“The JCPOA, as concluded and celebrated on July 14, was never approved by Iran,” he said.

“They will never violate Khamenei’s conditions,” since even Iran’s leaders have already said they would adhere to them.

Conditions set out by Iran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei effectively give him the power to bypass the government and cancel the nuclear deal, Carmon and the head of MEMRI’s Iran desk, Ayelet Savyon, wrote in a report last month.

Khamenei published a letter of guidelines for President Hassan Rouhani, adding new conditions for Iran’s execution of the agreement.

“The set of conditions laid out by Khamenei creates a situation in which not only does the Iranian side refrain from approving the JCPOA but, with nearly every point, creates a separate obstacle such that executing the agreement is not possible,” they wrote.

Following the publication of the supreme leader’s letter, Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani and Rouhani fully accepted Khamenei’s stipulations, Savyon told the Post last month.

Some close to the leadership will declare progress to the press, explained Carmon, but in reality, according to their own nuclear official, “Not one centrifuge has been removed.”

For the Americans, the JCPOA has no time limitation for implementation.

“Implementation day will happen when it happens and when the IAEA reports that it happened,” Carmon added.

Asked about the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, which is due to issue a report by December 15 on whether Iran’s nuclear program ever had a military application, Carmon responded that the IAEA will not report about implementation if it does not occur.

Therefore, Carmon argued, this saga could take months, or even well beyond that, or it may not even happen at all.

Categories: Iran scam, Khamenei, Obama and Iran, Western media
Tags: Iran Scam, Khamenei, Obama and Iran, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

MEMRI: ‘The Emperor Has No Clothes’

October 30, 2015

MEMRI: ‘The Emperor Has No Clothes,’ Yigal Carmon, October 30, 2015

(Where are the media? In Obama’s pocket as usual. — DM)

25564

This MDB is dedicated to the memory of USAF pilot Captain (ret.) David Ganz, a man of honor and gallantry and a decorated officer, who passed away last week.

What Is The “Iran Nuclear Deal?”

What is mistakenly perceived as an agreement under the title of “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA), that was concluded on July 14 in Vienna, and celebrated by the White House as an “historic agreement,” is neither a contract nor even a real agreement between Iran and the P5+1. It is a set of understandings and disputes compiled into a single document.

For example, the JCPOA states that in the event of Iranian violations, sanctions will be re-imposed (snapback). However, the Iranian position, which rejects all sanctions, is incorporated in the same document. In outlining the snapback of the sanctions, Article 37 also stipulates: “Iran has stated that if sanctions are reinstated in whole or in part, Iran will treat that as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.”[1] This is not merely an Iranian reservation expressed outside of the negotiating room. It is incorporated into the text of this selfsame document – and one that completely contradicts preceding provisions that stipulate otherwise. Since the parties were unable to arrive at an understanding on this issue in two entire years of negotiations, they decided to resolve this major issue by incorporating this disagreement into the document itself.

The JCPOA is best characterized by bangs and whimpers – by bold prohibitions on Iran that peter out in qualifying terms such as “unless,” “except if,” and the like.

Why isn’t the JCPOA a contract? Because Iran would never have signed any contract with the U.S. – “the Great Satan” – whose demise it seeks. Likewise, it would not have signed any contract with any other party to the negotiations, since it views the sanctions imposed on it by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions and by EU and IAEA reports as grievous injustice. By signing such an agreement, it would retroactively legitimize these wrongs done to it.

As Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei frequently reiterates, Iran agreed to negotiations mainly to get the sanctions lifted. Therefore, as far as Iran is concerned, the only acceptable name for this enterprise is “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” – under which each party commits to particular action. It is a joint plan, not a contract.[2]

Has Iran Fulfilled Its Initial Obligation To Approve The July 14 Vienna JCPOA?

The JCPOA includes a timetable and obligations applying to both sides. Within this time frame, both parties had 90 days from July 14 to secure approval for the agreement from their respective national institutions. By “Adoption Day,” set for October 19, which has come and gone, the agreement was meant to have been approved by both sides. The EU was to have announced the lifting of its sanctions, while President Obama, on behalf of the U.S., was to have announced the lifting of the U.S. executive branch’s sanctions, along with waivers on sanctions imposed by the U.S. legislative branch – that is, suspension, because the president is not authorized to lift them.

Adoption Day was preceded by a farcical UNSC endorsement of the agreement/disagreement, as demanded by Iran. The U.S. volunteered to play errand boy for this undertaking. For its part, the UNSC eschewed discussion on the matter, and passed this historic resolution, No. 2231,[3] on such a weighty historic document in record time – under 30 minutes.

The Western side showed its consent long before October 19; the self-effacing EU member countries did not even bother to discuss the agreement in their national parliaments – and thus confirmed their true status as nonentities. And while the U.S Congress did discuss it seriously, the agreement was allowed to proceed, via a convoluted process that was nonetheless legal and binding.

In Iran, however, following discussion in both its Majlis and its Guardian Council, the JCPOA as concluded and announced on July 14 was not approved. The Majlis ratified something else – a set of recommendations to the government of Iran regarding how it should execute the JCPOA. This hardly constitutes approval of the original document. The Guardian Council, for its part, approved what the Majlis had done; Guardian Council secretary-general Ayatollah Jannati said, on Iranian TV, that his council had approved not the JCPOA but a plan for the government to secure Iran’s interests in executing it.[4] Majlis speaker Ali Larijani said the same thing.[5]

Was this a fulfillment of what Iran was obligated to do under the JCPOA? No! Did the U.S. administration insist that Iran approve the JCPOA, as concluded and announced in Vienna on July 14? No! Does the U.S. realize that Iran’s ultimate authority to approve laws rests with Supreme Leader Khamenei, and that he has not yet approved the JCPOA? NO! Nevertheless, the U.S. and Europe have chosen to regard what Iran has done as approval – so that the peace process will not be halted.

The U.S. and Europe then proceeded to the first post-Adoption Day phase in the JCPOA timetable: The EU announced that its sanctions would be terminated. President Obama announced that the U.S.’s executive sanctions would be lifted and its legislative sanctions waived; this announcement was not for immediate execution, but in fact advance notice that these measures would come into effect by December 15 – provided that the IAEA would report that Iran has fulfilled its obligations under the JCPOA.

What are these obligations that Iran has to fulfill between Adoption Day and December 15 in order to merit this sanctions relief? The Arms Control Association, which supports Iran and the JCPOA, listed them on its website:[6]

*reducing the centrifuges at Natanz from over 16,000 to 5,060 IR-1 machines, which will enrich uranium to 3.67 percent, and removing the associated infrastructure;

*reducing the number of IR-1 machines centrifuges at Fordow to 1,000 (328 will operate) and converting the facility for radioisotope production;

*wrapping up testing on advanced centrifuges machines and removing all advanced centrifuges except one IR-4, IR-5, IR-6, and IR-8 machine for testing with uranium;

*storing all dismantled centrifuges under IAEA seal;

*reducing the stockpile of enriched uranium to less than 300 kilograms;

*removing the core of the Arak reactor and disabling it; and

*instituting the necessary transparency and monitoring mechanisms to implement Iran’s additional protocol and the continuous surveillance of key facilities.

Did Iran hasten to meet these obligations? No! The explanation follows below.

Why Has No One Said A Word About Iran’s Noncompliance?

Since Adoption Day, no one in the West – not the media, not Capitol Hill, not Israel – has spoken up about the fraud of Iran’s alleged “approval” of the JCPOA. Western intelligence agencies and think tanks have also held their tongues. Everyone swallowed the lie, in a spirit of goodwill, in order to allow the JCPOA to proceed, for “peace in our time.”

The Republicans should have remembered their revered leader, Abraham Lincoln, invoked by Barack Obama in 2007 when he announced his presidential candidacy at the spot where Lincoln had done so over 150 years previously. After all, it was Lincoln who said, “You cannot fool all the people all the time.”

The pro-JCPOA political media have, of course, misled the public by reporting that Iran approved the JCPOA. But even the anti-JCPOA media have failed to rebut this lie. Why? Ignorance, unprofessionalism, and hatred for President Obama blinded them. Here is what they likely are thinking: Obama gave in to Iran on everything. Obviously, Iran is going to approve this piece of “absolute Western capitulation.”

However, Iran did not get absolutely everything it demanded, and Obama did not give it absolutely everything it demanded – he held out for a tiny scrap of the U.S.’s initial position, as will be detailed below. That is why Iran would not approve the JCPOA – to Iran, anything less than 100% of what it wants is an injustice.

Why Isn’t Iran Rushing To Fulfill Its Obligations And Get Sanctions Relief By December 15?

At this stage, events have taken an absurd turn. Iran has started dragging its feet. Instead of rushing to carry out all the steps to meet its obligations under the JCPOA, it is idling in neutral. It has little time and much to do by December 15. It must dismantle thousands of centrifuges and transfer them to storage monitored by IAEA cameras. It must ship out 9,000 kg of its enriched uranium to a third country, retaining only 300 kg. It must dismantle and pour cement into the core of the Arak plutonium reactor, and transform the facility into a heavy water reactor. It must notify the IAEA of its voluntary acceptance of the NPT Additional Protocol. And more.

But senior Iranian officials are shifting responsibility for initiating fulfillment of these obligations to one another, sometimes with comical effect. For example, President Hassan Rohani sent a letter to Iranian Atomic Energy Organization head Ali Akbar Salehi instructing him to begin to take the appropriate steps. Salehi confirmed that he had received Rohani’s message, but said that it had not stated when he should start doing so. No one wanted to budge without explicit permission from Supreme Leader Khamenei.[7]

Khamenei Issues Nine New Conditions, Blocks Execution Of JCPOA

Now the big secret is out. Khamenei has not approved the JCPOA. And those who pretend that it has been approved – President Rohani, Foreign Minister and negotiator Javad Zarif, and their associates – have been on borrowed time. While they could lie to the West, to President Obama, to Secretary of State Kerry, and to the EU foreign ministers that they can move ahead, they always knew that Khamenei opposed the JCPOA. Now, at the moment of truth, they feared to proceed.

Indeed, it was logical for Khamenei to allow the Iranian negotiators to play along with the P5+1, to see what they could get at no cost to Iran – since it was well known that President Obama was dying for an agreement. But once Khamenei knew that President Obama is standing firm on the last fragment of the original U.S. position, either unwilling or unable to capitulate any further, Khamenei broke his silence. Stepping in in the final act, Khamenei, deus-ex-machina style, dictated, in a letter to President Rohani, nine new conditions for the JCPOA,and declared that if these were not met Iran would stop the agreement.[8]

Actually, Khamenei had issued an early warning in a September 3 speech,[9] in which he said that all the sanctions must be lifted, not suspended, and that if not, there would either be no agreement or Iran would also only “suspend” its obligations. But President Obama did not yield. He cannot override congressional sanctions; he can only issue a suspension via waiver. Politically too, it might be too far for him to go to break his promise of the JCPOA’s built-in security mechanism – snapback of the sanctions. Obviously, snapback is possible only if the sanctions remain in place under suspension. Therefore, Khamenei, realizing that the sanctions would remain, also kept his promise and blocked the agreement with new conditions, one of which – i.e. the lifting of sanctions rather than suspension – he knows for sure cannot be met.

How Did The American Media Describe Khamenei’s Nine New Conditions?

Khamenei’s letter to Rohani with his conditions for the execution of the JCPOA – the publication of which coincided with the days of the Ashura that are of vital religious and national significance in Iran and symbolize steadfastness against the forces of evil – was explicitly termed “conditional approval.” It was labeled thus in red letters, as posted on Khamenei’s website in Persian, tweeted from his Twitter account and posted on his Facebook page in English, and also published in English by the official Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting authority IRIB.

25565

But instead of reporting that at this stage, and at present, Khamenei’s approval is not given unless Khamenei’s conditions are met, the American media said that Khamenei had approved the JCPOA. Would these members of the media also consider a purchase concluded if they had not paid for it? The entire American media, without exception, left, right, and center – as well as, apparently, all the U.S. intelligence agencies and think tanks – claimed that Khamenei had approved the agreement. Only two newspapers in the West wondered about the emperor’s new clothes – but even they did not shout “But he hasn’t any clothes on at all!” They said only that he was missing a couple of accessories.

Khamenei had spoken, banning outright any implementation of the JCPOA by Iran until his new conditions are met. The entire Iranian political system is hewing to this line – including President Rohani, Foreign Minister Zarif, Majlis Speaker Larijani, a majority of Majlis members (166), and more (for a full list to date, see Appendix I).

Everyone, that is, except for Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Khamenei’s political rival and head of Iran’s pragmatic camp, who in an interview published this week by MEMRI openly challenged Khamenei and said that Iran should abide by what it undertook in the JCPOA.[10]

But this cannot happen. Khamenei holds the reins.

Did the media report on Rafsanjani’s interview? No! But the media in Iran did (see Appendix II). This, however, did not stop the editor of the Israeli daily Haaretz from writing that the interview was faked.

25566

This is a well-known human reaction: When people stand before the complete collapse of what they believe in, they enter a state of denial.

So What Now?

And what is President Obama to do, as everything he has stood for in the Iran deal collapses so ignominiously? On the right, they say he will continue to capitulate. In their ignorance, and in their hatred of him, they fail to realize that he can simply surrender no farther. OK, they say, so the IAEA will provide Obama with the necessary confirmation by December 15 that the Iranians have done their part. But that is impossible as well. What is demanded of Iran is gargantuan in scale, and it would be far more difficult for the IAEA to fake confirmation when the Iranians themselves are declaring loudly that they are not going to do it.

With every passing day, Iran is more and more in violation of the JCPOA. But neither the Republicans nor the Democrats, nor the media, nor anyone else will acknowledge this, for the implications are too devastating. The agreement is no longer in effect. Its clock has stopped.

But the weeks will pass, and the media and politicians will be forced to admit that this is the case. And the last thing they will be willing to do is to force Iran to meet its obligations. Thus, it appears that President Obama’s only option, shameful as it is, is to restart the negotiations with the Iranians and talk with them about their leaders’ new conditions. As is well-known, this administration advocates diplomacy – guaranteeing that there will be no breakthrough any time soon.

This is precisely what will serve President Obama best. All he needs to do is play for time and reach the end of his term with an agreement in hand – albeit virtual – and negotiations in progress – albeit unending. He will pass this situation on to the next administration. The success will be all his, and the failure will be all theirs. The media will zealously guard Obama’s legacy, and his successor, Republican or Democrat, will be too uninformed to protect him or herself from this historic maneuver. And it will serve them right.

Appendix I: Senior Iranian Officials Declare Their Acceptance Of Khamenei’s Instructions On Implementing The JCPOA

On October 10, 2015, Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani said at a conference on war and peace in Syria: “…The commands of the leader [Khamenei], the decision of the Majlis and the Supreme National Security Council will illuminate the government representatives’ path on implementing the JCPOA… I thank the leader with all my heart.”[11]

President Rohani, responding to the directives letter by the Supreme Leader on carrying out the JCPOA (October 22, 2015): “Your historic letter of October 21, 2015 regarding the approval of decision number 634 of the Supreme National Security Council caused joy within the great Iranian people and warmed the hearts of the public servants in government… The government will obey your criticisms and obligations [that you imposed] and with good intentions will take measures relating to the full implementation of the Supreme National Security Council and the Majlis. We will be fully alert to the performance of the other side’s obligations and in the Supreme National Security Council we will take the necessary decisions to provide a fitting response.”[12]

On October 26, 2015, Foreign Minister Zarif referred in the Majlis to the supreme leader’s letter on carrying out the JCPOA and noted: “I am grateful to the leader for his path-illuminating letter on setting policy in the JCPOA’s implementation. His opinion always lighted the path to the nuclear negotiations team at the foreign ministry. Henceforward, we must make an effort to implement the JCPOA documents in the right way and following the leader’s guidelines.”[13]

On October 27, 2015, Zarif said that the modifications to the nuclear reactor in Arak must be performed after the PMD file has been closed at the IAEA and explained: “we calculated the details of re-planning the reactor following the leader’s guidelines, the decision of the Supreme National Security Council and the Majlis… We will coordinate everything necessary for swapping the uranium stockpiles and this matter will be performed precisely in the way that the leader elaborated and was previously agreed at the Supreme National Security Council and the Majlis nuclear committee.”[14]

In the Majlis, 166 members, constituting a majority, expressed on October 26, 2015 their admiration for the leader for his historic letter in implementing the JCPOA. The letter’s contents read “… For a certainty, the Majlis representatives will act as your stout arms and collaborate with all the supervisory organizations and with the Supreme National Security Council and invest efforts to ensure that after the JCPOA, the enemy will not be able to penetrate our Islamic country even minutely and we will supervise that all violation of promises by the 5+1 group will not remain unanswered.”[15]

Iran’s Judiciary Chief Sadeq Amoli Larijani at an October 26, 2015 conference of senior judicial branch officials said that the letter of conditions that Khamenei published on JCPOA implementation should put an end to debates on the issue. He added: “All groups [within Iran] should treat the leader’s letter as ‘self-explanatory’ and as the axis of unity and from now no they will make progress and think moderately about the future and the next stages of the JCPOA.”[16]

The leader’s representative in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Ali Saidi said on Wednesday, October 21, 2015: “… The leader is effectively managing the country according to the Koran and custom, the leader sets policy and the others execute it.”[17]

At an October 27, 2015 press conference, the leader’s advisor and the head of the Center for Strategic ResearchAli Akbar Velayati, said: “In the last letter we saw that he criticized the defects and shortcomings in carrying out the JCPOA. I hope that the agreement will be carried out flawlessly in the future. The continued support of the leader for the JCPOA is contingent on the response to the letter that Khamenei wrote the president [Rohani].”[18]

The head of the Majlis nuclear committee, Ebrahim Karkhanehei, referring to the leader’s letter on the JCPOA, said: “This letter produced social calm because in addition to leader the people as well demanded the things that were included in the letter. The most important issue in the letter is the issue of lifting sanctions and the government must seriously handle the matter of lifting the sanctions. In addition to the letter, the leader emphasized many times that if the sanctions are not lifted then there will be no agreement and therefore the US and the EU must fully lift the sanctions.

“The letter from the EU and the American president are not considered a [sufficiently] strong guarantee on the lifting of the sanctions. The Majlis will not be negligent about any clause in the leader’s letter and the government must seriously oversee and handle the sanctions-lifting issue.

“The leader demanded that a professional and wise team should supervise the sound implementation of the JCPOA and therefore this team must be comprised of at least five people specializing in the legal, nuclear technical political, economic and the sanctions structure issues as well as an expert on security and defense matters.”[19]

An October 25, 2015 Kayhan editorial titled “Giving Interpretations Is Impermissible” wrote: “The leader’s order and the setting of numerous terms for the JCPOA’s implementation is self-explanatory and elaborated a clear path for all arguments and worries, according to religious jurisprudence, the law and the professional perspective. It is obligatory and essential to obey it.. as opposed to some of the impressions, the leader approved the JCPOA’s implementation only following obedience to the terms that may not be damaged and on principle, the leader did not express general approval on the matter.”[20]

Appendix II: Iranian Websites Covering Rafsanjani’s Interview In Inhnews.ir

*IRNA

*ILNA

*Hashemirafsanjani.ir.fa

*Etemaad

*ISNA

*Fars

*Tnews.ir

*Shomaokhabar

*Farsi-news

*Shafaf.ir

*Y. Carmon is president and founder of MEMRI.

Endnotes:

[1] For the complete text of the JCPOA see Eeas.europa.eu/statements-eeas/docs/iran_agreement/iran_joint-comprehensive-plan-of-action_en.pdf

[2] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6151, Khamenei Declares That He Will Not Honor The Agreement If Sanctions Are Merely Suspended And Not Lifted, September 4, 2015; and MEMRI TV Clip #5067 – Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei: The Americans Must Lift the Sanctions, Not Suspend Them, September 3, 2015.

[3] Unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2231.

[4] See MEMRI TV Clip #5114 – Iranian Guardian Council Secretary-General Ahmad Jannati: Khamenei Has Not Approved or Signed the JCPOA, October 16, 2015; and MEMRI TV Clip #5117 – Iranian Guardian Council Spokesman Nejatollah Ebrahimian: The JCPOA Was Not Approved by the Majlis or the Guardian Council, October 18, 2015.

[5] Tasnim (Iran), October 18, 2015.

[6] http://www.armscontrol.org/blog/ArmsControlNow/2015-10-15/The-P5-1-and-Iran-Nuclear-Deal-Alert-October-15

[7] ISNA (Iran), October 18, 2015.

[8] On Khamenei’s nine demands, see MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No. 1196, Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei’s Letter Of Guidelines To President Rohani On JCPOA Sets Nine Conditions Nullifying Original Agreement Announced July 14, 2015, October 22, 2015.

[9] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6151, Khamenei Declares That He Will Not Honor The Agreement If Sanctions Are Merely Suspended And Not Lifted , September 4, 2015.

[10] MEMRI Special Report No.43, Breaking Report: Challenging Khamenei, Rafsanjani Demands That Iran Fulfill Its Obligations Under The JCPOA, And Reveals: We Had Nuclear Option In Iran-Iraq War, October 28, 2015.

[11] Mehrnews.com, October 23, 2015.

[12] President.ir/fa/90172

[13] Isna (Iran), October 26, 2015.

[14] Isna (Iran), October 27, 2015.

[15] Mehrnews.com, October 26, 2015.

[16] Nasimonline.(Iran), October 26, 2015.

[17] Snn.(Iran), October 22, 2015.

[18] Isna (Iran), October 27, 2015.

[19] Mehrnews.com, October 26, 2015.

[20] Kayhan (Iran), October 25, 2015.

Categories: Iran scam, Khamenei, Obama's America, Obama's foreign failures, Obama's legacy, P5+1, Western media
Tags: Iran Scam, Khamenei, Obama's America, Obama's foreign failures, Obama's legacy, P5+1, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Palestinian Jihad: Lies, Lies and More Lies

October 24, 2015

The Palestinian Jihad: Lies, Lies and More Lies, Gatestone Institute, Bassam Tawil, October 24, 2015

First, we are not seeing anything “popular.” We are not seeing, as before, thousands of Palestinians participating in the violence or protests.
It is just another wave of terrorism: targeting Jews for being Jews. The terrorists and their apologists do not distinguish between a Jew living in the city of Beersheba, and a Jew from a West Bank settlement. For the Palestinian leaders and media, these Jews are all “settlers” living in “occupied territories.”
The appropriate term for the current wave of terrorism is “jihad”. The attacks on Jews in Israel and the West Bank are part of the global jihad that has been waged for many years against Jews in particular, non-Muslims in general, and even against other Muslims who might not agree with a differing version of Islam.
This jihad is not aimed at “ending occupation” or protesting against misery and checkpoints. The terrorists do not see a difference between a “left wing Jew” and a “right wing Jew.” They do not ask their victims about their political affiliation before knifing them.
In a grotesque rewrite of history, UNESCO declared that two Jewish holy sites, Rachel’s Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs, were Muslim holy sites.
This is a wave of terrorism based on lies. Palestinian leaders, including Abbas his officials in the Palestinian Authority and his Fatah faction, have been lying to us for months. They told Palestinians that the Jews are “invading” and “desecrating” Islamic holy sites with the purpose of destroying them. Abbas and his officials are urging Muslims to join the jihad against the Jews.
The leaders are now telling us that most of the terrorists were, in fact, innocent civilians who were shot dead by Israelis while on their way to buy food or going to work. Lying has become an integral part of the jihad against Jews. The campaign of lies, distortion and fabrications is not less serious than the terror attacks.
This is yet another phase of the worldwide jihad against all the “infidels” and “enemies of Islam.” Those who are murdering Jews today do not hesitate to murder other non-Muslims tomorrow, especially those who are seen as Israel’s friends, such as the U.S.

Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are calling it a “peaceful popular resistance.” They are referring, of course, to the latest wave of stabbings, shootings and vehicular attacks against the Jews in Israel.

In the view of our leaders — and, unfortunately, many in the international community — this is a “peaceful popular resistance,” an uprising, or an “intifada,” like two previous uprisings we had in 1987 and 2000.

What is happening these days in the Palestinian territories and Israel, however, is anything but a “peaceful popular resistance.” First, we are not seeing anything “popular.” We are not seeing, as before, thousands of Palestinians participating in the violence or protests. These attacks are not protests launched by villagers, residents of refugee camps and members of professional unions in the Palestinian territories.

What we are seeing are pure terrorist attacks carried out mostly by impressionable young men and women whose hearts and minds have been poisoned by the inflammatory rhetoric and incitement of Palestinian leaders, mosques, the media, Facebook and other social media. The terrorists who carry knives or firearms to murder Jews are usually, it seems, disturbed youngsters, who have been fired up by the pervasive atmosphere of hate poured over them daily by their leaders and these leaders’ media outlets. The current terrorists are not part of an armed group such as the Tanzim or the Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, nor a “popular resistance,” a street gang, or any organized movement.

Contrary to what Palestinian leaders have been telling us, not to mention the rest of the world, these terrorists do not believe in any form of “peaceful and popular resistance” against Israel. After all, there is nothing peaceful or popular about stabbing or shooting Jews waiting at a bus stop or driving their cars on their way to work or back home. Surely, there is nothing peaceful about murdering a Jewish couple in front of their four children, or stabbing and seriously wounding a 13-year-old boy riding his bicycle on the streets of Jerusalem.

This is, bluntly, just another wave of terrorism: targeting Jews for being Jews. The terrorists and their apologists do not distinguish between a Jew living in the city of Beersheba, and a Jew from a settlement in the West Bank. In the eyes of the Palestinian leaders and media, these Jews are all “settlers” living in “occupied territories.” To many of them, and as they repeatedly tell us, all of Israel is “occupied territory.”

Official Palestinian maps continue to present Palestine as occupying all of Israel. And there are continual attempts erase history Jewish presence. Last July, Rachel’s Tomb, the burial site of a Jewish Matriarch was attacked by explosives launched from slingshots. And just last week Joseph’s Tomb, the burial site of a Jewish Patriarch, was torched. These are the same methods al-Qaeda and Da’esh (ISIS) have been using in Bamiyan and Palmyra to try to obliterate any evidence of a pre-Islamic presence other ancient sites. These attack were accompanied by requests from six Arab states — Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Tunisia, Morocco ad the United Arab Emirates — to have UNESCO declare the Rachel’s Tomb, and Western Wall — a retaining wall and all that is left of the Jews’ Second Temple that the Romans destroyed in 70 CE — part of the Muslim Temple Mount under Palestinian control. The last request was removed before the vote, but in a grotesque rewrite of history, UNESCO did declare that two other Jewish holy sites, Rachel’s Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs, were Muslim holy sites.

In addition, the official media of the Western-funded Palestinian Authority have been referring to the Jewish victims of the current wave of terrorism as “settlers.” A 73-year-old woman who lives in the Western part of the city and who was stabbed at Jerusalem’s central bus station two weeks ago was described as a “settler.” Similarly, two Jews who were stabbed and wounded in the city of Ra’anana, on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, were also described by Abbas’s media outlets as “settlers.” Their city, Ra’anana, well within the “1967 line,” has also been described by most Palestinian media outlets and journalists as a “settlement.”

What does all this show? The answer is very simple: Most Palestinians continue to see Israel as one big settlement that needs to be uprooted and destroyed. It also shows that these Palestinians do not draw a distinction between a Jew living a West Bank settlement and a Jew living in an Israeli city inside Israel. The Jewish victims of this wave of terrorism are all “settlers” and “colonialists” who deserved what happened to them because they are “living on stolen land.” This is the message that the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and other Palestinian groups are sending to the Palestinians and the rest of the world: that “settlers” are “legitimate” targets that deserve to be slaughtered and shot dead by a people fighting for “independence and freedom.”

The appropriate term for the current wave of terrorism is “jihad” (holy war). The attacks on Jews in Israel and the West Bank are part of the global jihad that has been waging for many years against Jews in particular, non-Muslims in general and even against other Muslims who might not agree with a differing version of Islam.

Almost all the terrorists involved in these recent attacks are affiliated with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, two jihadi groups whose main goal is to destroy Israel by murdering and intimidating Jews. Like Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, the two Palestinian groups are also seeking to create an Islamic caliphate governed by Islamic sharia law.

This jihad is not aimed at “ending occupation” or protesting against misery and checkpoints. Rather, it is a jihad designed to drive the Jews out of the region. Period. The terrorists and their sponsors do not see a difference between an Israeli soldier and an Israeli baby. They do not see a difference between a “left wing Jew” and a “right wing Jew.” The terrorists do not ask their victims about their political affiliation before sticking a knife into them.

This is a wave of terrorism based on lies, lies and more lies. Palestinian leaders, including Abbas and his Fatah faction, have been lying to us for months about the nature of the visits of Jews to the Haram al-Sharif, or Temple Mount. They told Palestinians that the Jews are “invading” and “desecrating” Islamic holy sites with the purpose of destroying them. By doing so, Abbas and his officials in the Palestinian Authority and Fatah have actually been urging Muslims to join the jihad against the Jews.

1280 (1)

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (right) ignited competition among radical groups as to which faction could incite the most violence. Left: official PA media incite Palestinians, from a young age, to murder Jews.

After the wave of terrorism began, the Palestinian leaders continued to lie about the circumstances surrounding the death of the terrorists. The leaders are now telling us that most of the terrorists were, in fact, innocent civilians who were shot dead by Israel while they were on their way to buy food for their families or going to work. The Palestinian leaders are lying when they tell us that the terrorists were killed as part of a new Israeli policy of “field executions” against young Palestinian men and women. Lying and distorting the truth has become an integral part of the jihad against Jews. The campaign of lies, distortion and fabrications is not less serious than the terror attacks. There is no difference between a Palestinian leader who incites and lies, and a terrorist who grabs a knife and takes to the street to murder a Jew.

It is time for us to open our eyes and see the reality as it is: this is yet another phase of the worldwide jihad against all the “infidels” and “enemies of Islam.” Those who are murdering Jews today do not hesitate to murder other non-Muslims tomorrow, especially those who are seen as Israel’s friends such as the U.S. and most nations in the West. So let us put things in context and start calling the wave of terrorism by its real name, not an “intifada” or a “peaceful popular resistance.” It is a jihad.

Categories: Abbas, Fatah, Gaza, Hamas, Intifada, Islamic jihad, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, UNESCO, West Bank, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Fatah, Gaza, Hamas, intifada, Islamic Jihad, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, UNESCO, West Bank, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

Murder as politics

October 24, 2015

Murder as politics, The Washington Times, Louis Rene Beres, October 22, 2015

Even as growing numbers of Palestinian terrorists stab madly at Israeli men, women, and children, much of the world still endorses creation of “Palestine.” Such mindless support continues, moreover, despite the fact that the Palestinians themselves reject any sort of two-state solution. Indeed, the latest such poll (September 2015), conducted by Palestinian research organizations, concluded that almost half the resident Arabs strongly favor the use of armed force and generalized violence against Israeli noncombatants.

For the most part, western news reports notwithstanding, knife wielding attackers are not “lone wolves.” Rather, they have been conspicuously spurred on by vitriolic PA incitements, and by carefully synchronized calls from the mosques to murder “The Jews.”

The Palestinian Authority shares with Hamas the irredentist vision of a one-state solution. There is nothing hidden or ambiguous about this true plan for Israel’s disappearance. It is plainly codified on the official maps of both factions, where Israel is identified only as “Occupied Palestine.”

For virtually all Arab forces in the Middle East, the conflict with Israel is never about land. It is about God, and about always-related promises of personal immortality. It is about power over death.

For the Palestinians, their carefully sanitized public rhetoric notwithstanding, the enemy is not the Israelis (that term is just subterfuge, for the media), but “The Jews.” The screaming young Palestinian, who strikes indiscriminately with his serrated blade, fully expects to become a “martyr.” He only risks “death” in order not to die.

There is more. A Palestinian state — any Palestinian state — would rapidly be taken over by ISIS, or by related jihadi adversaries. Already, ISIS is operating in parts of Syria that could bring it to the critical borders of Israel’s Golan Heights. Significantly, it has also set recognizable operational sights on Jordan and West Bank (Judea/Samaria).

Over the next several months, and even while the Palestinian Authority continues to orchestrate more “Third Intifada” attacks on Israelis, ISIS will commence its fated march westward, across Jordan, ending up at the eastern boundaries of West Bank. These boundaries, of course, would represent the territorial margins of what PA/Fatah both already affirm as the geographic heart of “Palestine.”

Palestinian forces, primarily Fatah, would then yield to ISIS, and to its local proxies. Fatah would then have to choose between pleading with the Jewish State to become an ally against a now-common foe, or abandoning all its residual military operations to the IsraelDefense Forces directly. Arguably, without IDF assistance in such desperate circumstances, “Palestine” wouldn’t stand a chance.

One additional irony ought to be noted. In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long made acceptance of any Palestinian state contingent upon prior Palestinian “demilitarization.” Should the Palestinian Authority and Hamas somehow accede to this problematic expectation, it could make ISIS’ predictable destructions in the area much easier to carry out. Paradoxically, a “Palestine” that had properly stood by its pre-state legal concessions to Israel, could effectively increase the overall danger posed to both Palestinians and Israelis.

What about Jordan? Under pertinent international law, the Hashemite Kingdom has incurred certain binding obligations regarding joint cooperation with Israel against terrorism. These obligations, as reinforcing complements to more generally binding legal rules, are expressly codified at the 1994 Treaty of Peace Between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

Could this treaty still have any palpable effect upon Jordan’s capacity to militarily block anticipated ISIS advances?

Not at all. The more generic problem of enforcing treaties had already been identified back in the 17th century, by Thomas Hobbes. Said the English philosopher, in his “Leviathan,” a work well known to America’s founding fathers: “Covenants, without the Sword, are but words …”

From the 17th century onward, the world political system has been anarchic, or, in Hobbesian terms, a “state of nature.” In the anarchic Middle East, especially, considerations of raw power routinely trump international law. Here, too, truth here may be counter-intuitive. On those endlessly perplexing matters concerning Palestinian statehood, for example, it is finally time to understand that “Palestine‘s” true enemy in the region is not Israel, but rather a hideously sordid amalgam of Islamist Arab forces. Going forward, any further Palestinian advances toward statehood would likely be solely to the longer-term tactical advantage of ISIS.

Is this the sort of statehood cause that should be enthusiastically supported in Washington, and in most European capitals? It is, but only if we should first want to see an expansion of “Third Intifada” terror to the homeland. Not likely.

If you like Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, you’ll love “Palestine.”

Categories: Death to Israel, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic State, Israel, Jordan, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians, Two state solution, Western media
Tags: Death to Israel, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic State, Israel, Jordan, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians, Two state solution, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

Blood in the Headlines

October 24, 2015

Blood in the Headlines, American Thinker, Celeste Marcus, October 23, 2015

Arabs are stabbing Jews again. This is another in a series of tactics utilized by the Arabs to push the Jews out of the region. Since Israel’s founding Arabs have been attempting to wipe the Jews out of the Middle East. The stabbings now taking place are a strategy employed to both demoralize Israel on the ground, and delegitmize Israel on the world stage. The Western Media is a coconspirator in this delegitimization effort.

Scenario: a teenager stabs a thirteen-year old on a bicycle in front of you. If you don’t try to defend the victim, you are a bystander. But if you actively, loudly, publicly condemn the police for shooting the attacker you are no longer a bystander. You are now a participant. The mainstream media has consistently misrepresented the situation in the Middle East. These journalists are not mere bystanders; they are key participants in a war.

Israel has undergone a transformation over the past few weeks. On October 1st, four children watched from the backseat of a car as their parents were shot dead. That was the first in a series of similar horrors. The Israeli Defense Force website provides this accounting:

October 1: Eitam and Naama Henkin killed in front of their four children in shooting attack near Nablus. Assailants apprehended
October 3: 2 Israelis killed, 2 injured in stabbing attack in Jerusalem
October 4: Israeli teenager stabbed in Jerusalem. Assailant shot on site.
October 7: Israeli civilian stabbed in Jerusalem. IDF soldier stabbed in Kiryat Gat. Israeli civilian stabbed in Petah Tikva. Attempted car ramming in Jerusalem.
October 8: 4 Israelis injured in screwdriver stabbing attack in Tel Aviv.Israeli stabbed in Kiryat Arba. Israeli stabbed in Afula.
October 9: 6 Israelis stabbed 5 Israelis injured.
October 10: 7 Israelis injured
October 11: 7 Israelis injured in various attacks
October 12: 2Attempted stabbings. 4 succesful stabbings.
·October 13: 3 Israelis killed 13 injured
October 15: 1Israeli Injured. Joseph’s tomb burnt.
October 17: 3 Israelis stabbed
October 18·: 1 soldier killed, 10 Israelis attacked

If you’re a typical American teenager you did not know about these attacks. If you don’t have family in Israel you did not spend the study breaks of the last two weeks scanning Israeli media’s reports of victims for the names of your friends. News updates from the mainstream media may have alerted you to the fact that something out of the ordinary was going on in Israel. You don’t know that Israeli children are afraid to go to school. You don’t know that mothers and fathers sleep with guns next to their beds, just in case.

A slim collection of journalists with a sweet spot for honest reporting have begun rebuking the mainstream media for failing to bear witness to this spillage of Jewish blood. This rebuke, though apt, is incomplete. It casts the media as mere bystanders rather than active participants. It ignores the culpability of the journalists and reporters providing their readers with a biased anti-Israel conception of the streets in which Israeli children are being stabbed. Here is an example of such condemnable reporting: “Palestinian shot dead after Jerusalem attack kills two” – BBC News, October 3rd

This headline fails to identify the Palestinian as the attacker. Odd.

This is not silence. This is not unbiased journalism. This is vilification; specifically the vilification of a country for defending its citizens from lethal harm. It is also precisely what the attackers are hoping for. That teenagers were killed is a tragedy, but that the media blames those who were defending themselves rather than those who were instructing mere children to stab Jews is not an example of silence. It is a dangerous, shameful trend.

The following headlines, to pick a few from countless examples, are further examples of this same failing:

“Two Palestinian Teenagers Killed, Two Injured by Israeli Police” – The Wall Street Journal, October 12th

“Two Palestinians aged 12 and 15 have been shot dead and two knife attacks have left five Israelis wounded” – The Guardian, October 10th

“6 Palestinian teens die amid Mideast unrest” – Los Angeles Times, October 11th

These consistent misrepresentations are not accidental. The chasmic difference between the blood on the street and the blood in the headlines is far too great and far too uniform to be unintentional. The media has consciously sided with the wrong side, and they are therefore guilty of contributing directly to the problem. They are guilty of legitimizing a regime that systematically incites its citizens to terror. That is what portraying terrorist as victim accomplishes.

This legitimation has consequences beyond the trajectory of dinner time conversation. In a free country people read the newspaper, and people also vote in elections. Two weeks before the first attack in October, Mahmoud Abbas, acting leader of the Palestinian Authority, stated, “we bless every drop of blood that has been spilled in Jerusalem.” This is one of countless examples of the catalysis of violence by Abbas against Jews. Don’t look for that quote in the BBC or the NY Times — you won’t find it. What you will find is reports that Secretary of State John Kerry is meeting with Abbas to discuss peace negotiations.

Abbas wrote his PhD dissertation arguing against the historicity of the Holocaust. He was part of the leadership that engineered the Munich Massacre, the Coastal Road Massacre, the murder of diplomats in the Sudan. His resume is riddled with American and Jewish corpses. That he is constantly portrayed by the media, and consequently by our government, as a legitimate partner in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East is absurd. That U.S. aid money is given as payment to the family members of those martyred at the behest of their government, while murdering Israelis is absurd. That the United Nations has issued more condemnations of Israel than any other country in the world, including Syria and Iran and North Korea, is absurd. These absurdities are linked; they are the manifestations of a febrile virus with which the mainstream media is infecting its readers.

This is not silence. This is not passive communication. This is legitimizing terror. This noxious reporting is equally responsible for the blood of the Palestinian teenagers as it is the Israeli victims.

If the media were only guilty of silence, that would be a gross dereliction of journalistic responsibility. It would be cowardly. But they are not only guilty of silence, they are guilty of participation. They are complicit.

Categories: Abbas, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

Crazy like a fox

October 23, 2015

Crazy like a fox, Front Page Magazine, Caroline Glick, October 23, 2015

benjamin-netanyahu

Due to his “gaffe,” every Western media outlet reported on Husseini’s actions. Some even mentioned that in his PhD dissertation, current Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said the Holocaust was both a myth and a joint Zionist-Nazi project. For most Westerners, this is the first they’ve heard of the fact that the Palestinian’s George Washington was a Nazi war criminal.

************************

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is crazy like a fox.

Netanyahu’s assertion on Tuesday before the World Zionist Congress that the founder of the Palestinian people, Haj Amin al-Husseini, convinced Adolf Hitler to eradicate rather than expel the Jews of Europe was an overstatement of Husseini’s role.

No, the Holocaust was not Husseini’s idea.

But he was a partner in perpetrating and promoting it. He also made it inevitable.

As I detailed in my book The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, during the course of Husseini’s meeting with Hitler in Berlin in November 1941, Hitler told the Arab leader of his plan to eradicate European Jewry.

Husseini told Hitler that he would support the Nazis, and rally the Arab world to their side, if Hitler agreed to two conditions: that Hitler support his bid to rule over a postwar Arab state comprised of present-day Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel; and that Hitler support the genocide of Middle Eastern Jewry.

As both the official Nazi record and Husseini’s summary of the meeting in his diary report, Hitler accepted Husseini’s demands.

And it makes sense that he did.

Husseini proved his loyalty to the Nazis long before he arrived in Berlin. His romance with them began with Hitler’s election victory in 1933. From then on, Husseini’s followers in Mandatory Palestine greeted one another with the Nazi salute. Swastikas festooned their towns. The Nazis began directly funding Husseini’s terror war against the Jews of Israel and British Mandatory officials in 1937.

In 1937, the British forced Husseini to flee the country. In 1941, he organized and incited a pro-Nazi military coup in Iraq. The British were forced to invade Iraq in response to the coup.

Husseini then fled to Rome where he met with Mussolini and went on the Berlin, where he remained for the duration of the war.

As the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Husseini invented and shaped the Palestinian national ethos in a manner that aligned with his pathological hatred of the Jews. Rather than providing the Palestinian Arabs with a positive vision of a future state that would safeguard and cultivate them as a distinct Arab nation, he shaped Palestinian society as a wholly negative phenomenon. It was seeded in a hybrid hatred of Jews that fused Koranic hostility to Jews with racism-based annihilationist European anti-Semitism rooted in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which Husseini translated and published in Arabic.

The goal of Husseini’s nationalist drive was not to form a Palestinian Arab state, but to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state and to annihilate all aspects of the Jewish national liberation movement through a campaign a terror and political warfare.

Husseini’s goal of leading an Arab state that encompassed Iraq and the entire Levant shows that the founding father of the Palestinian national project did not view “Palestine” as a distinct territorial entity.

After Hitler agreed to both of Husseini’s conditions, Husseini began his active collaboration in the Nazi war effort. He participated in the Holocaust directly. In 1943, he formed the SS Handschar Division comprised of Bosnian Muslims. His troops exterminated 90 percent of Bosnia’s 14,000-member Jewish community.

Husseini used his position as well to scuttle British attempts to trade German prisoners of war for Jews. In one such documented episode, in 1943 Husseini appealed to SS commander Heinrich Himmler to cancel a deal to exchange 4,500 Jewish children and 500 Jewish adults from Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria to cancel the deal and send the Jews to Auschwitz.

Himmler bowed to his appeal. The Jews were sent to the gas chambers.

Husseini contributed to the Holocaust indirectly.

Beginning shortly after his meeting with Hitler and extending through the end of the war, Husseini broadcast regular programs to the Arab world on Nazi short wave radio in Arabic. In those broadcasts he engendered support for the Nazis and the extermination of world Jewry. Using the mix of Islamic Jew-hatred and European annihilationist anti-Semitism he had developed in Jerusalem, Husseini cultivated a culture of support for the annihilation of Jews and the destruction of the Jewish (then nascent) state in the Land of Israel. That culture, bred through those broadcasts heard regularly by millions throughout the entire Arab world, still holds today.

Husseini was indicted as a war criminal in Nuremberg. Rather than try him, the allies allowed him to flee to Egypt in 1946. There he was greeted as a war hero by King Farouk.

It is true that Hitler didn’t need Husseini to convince him to annihilate European Jewry. By the time Husseini arrived in Germany, the Nazis had already murdered a million Jews.

But Netanyahu’s claim that Husseini made it impossible for Hitler to suffice with expelling the Jews from Europe is true. The only place that wanted the Jews of Europe was the nascent Jewish state in the Land of Israel.

Through his terror war against the Jews and the British Mandatory authorities, and through his incitement of pro-Nazi sentiment in Egypt, Iraq and the Levant, Husseini convinced the British to betray their legal obligation to allow free Jewish immigration to the Land of Israel and so closed off the Jews’ last avenue of escape from Nazi-dominated Europe.

As Netanyahu said, Husseini is revered and glorified by the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat claimed that he was Husseini’s political heir and blood relative as a means of legitimizing his claim to leadership over the Palestinians.

Hamas as well has invoked Husseini as its ideological founding father.

History in hand, it is time to return to Netanyahu, and his overstatement of Husseini’s role in the Holocaust.

From the time of Husseini till today, propaganda and terror have been the Palestinians’ weapons of choice in their war against the Jews. Internally lies are spread of nonexistent Jewish plots and imaginary acts of aggression, to incite and solicit the murder of Jews. Propaganda and lies are then used to glorify the murderers as heroes and martyrs.

Externally, the Palestinians spread lies about Palestinian victimhood at the hands of bloodthirsty Jewish settlers and security forces who seek to drive the Arabs from their homes. By casting themselves as victims to the outside world, the Palestinians ensure that Israeli responses to their acts of aggression are perceived as acts of aggression, which they are fully justified in attempting to defy through murderous rampages against Jews.

The Palestinians recognize that for their terror to be acceptable to the West, they must portray themselves as guileless victims. Hence, they repeatedly insist the absurd claim that terrorists who deliberately kill Jews by running them over, are really merely victims involved in traffic accidents. The Palestinian teenage girl who this week sought to infiltrate the community of Yitzhar with a carving knife, suffers from “sleepwalking.”

These ridiculous lies are only credible in a world devoid of any historical knowledge of the Palestinians’ 95-year history of aggression against the Jews. And so the Palestinians have invented a false history of their war against Israel in which thousands of years of Jewish history is blotted out, and thousands of years of Palestinian history have been invented out of whole cloth.

In this revised version of events, Husseini has been erased from history. His role in the Holocaust has been deleted. The fact that the goal of the Palestinian national movement from its inception has been to annihilate the Jewish state and that the annihilation of Israel remains its goal still today has similarly been washed out of the history books and the news pages.

To maintain this fictional account of current and historical events, the Palestinians depend on the collaboration of the Western media.

And with each passing year, that collaboration has grown more open, expansive and shameless.

Western reporting on the events of the day now are almost entirely devoid of any relationship to reality.

Consider just a few recent examples. CNN’s report of the Palestinian arson assault on Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus on October 16 contained no mention of the fact that the fire at the holy Jewish site was set by Palestinians. In the same report, the network stated, “In the past month, eight Israelis died in 30 attacks involving knives and other weapons.”

As if fires set themselves and angry knives wander the streets.

MSNBC’s reporter Ayman Mohyeldin was caught lying two weeks ago as he claimed that the knife-wielding Palestinian terrorist in the Old City of Jerusalem who was lunging toward security personnel as they killed him, was an unarmed, innocent bystander. As Mohyeldin spewed his lies, the video of the assault that clearly showed the terrorist wielding a knife was being broadcast to his viewers.

That embarrassment didn’t stop MSNBC from maintaining the myth of Israeli aggression, however.

The next week, the network posted a graphic of British Mandatory Palestine from 1946 which it claimed was the State of Palestine in 1946. The graphic them purported to show how the Jews stole ever more Palestinian land in the years that followed. Although the network was forced to broadcast a retraction, the lie that Palestine once existed had already been told.

Then of course there was The New York Times with its stunning “background” piece purporting to provide its readers with historical context regarding the competing Israeli and Palestinian claims regarding the Temple Mount. The Times reported as fact the false claim that there is a debate among respected academics regarding whether the Jewish temples were actually located on the Temple Mount.

In other words, the Times unabashedly participated in the Palestinian project of rewriting history in a manner that erases Jewish history from the Jewish homeland.

Netanyahu recognizes that the media have sided with the Palestinians in their war to destroy Israel through a mix of terror and propaganda.

He knows that the only stories they will report on are stories with an anti-Israel angle. It is reasonable then to assume that he decided to use their embrace of every possible angle of attack as a means to get the truth out about the nature of the war.

By exaggerating Husseini’s importance in the Holocaust, Netanyahu gave the media a means of attacking him. But by doing so, he forced the Times to report on the Palestinians’ founding father’s role in destroying European Jewry and his desire to carry out the Final Solution in the Middle East. They would have ignored the issue if Netanyahu had not exaggerated his actual role.

Due to his “gaffe,” every Western media outlet reported on Husseini’s actions. Some even mentioned that in his PhD dissertation, current Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said the Holocaust was both a myth and a joint Zionist-Nazi project. For most Westerners, this is the first they’ve heard of the fact that the Palestinian’s George Washington was a Nazi war criminal.

Like I said, crazy as a fox.

Categories: Abbas, Al-Aqsa Mosque, Arafat, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Islam's war on Jews, Israel, Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority, Palestinians and Jews, Temple Mount, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Al-Aqsa Mosque, Arafat, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Islam's war on Jews, Israel, Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority, Palestinians and Jews, Temple Mount, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

Cartoons of the day

October 22, 2015

H/t The Jewish Press

holocaust-denial

Foreign-press-reports-on-terror-e1445449566860

Categories: Abbas, Holocaust, Humor, Netanyahu, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Holocaust, Humor, Netanyahu

Comments: Be the first to comment

Coverage of Palestinian “Stabbing Intifada” Sets New Lows

October 22, 2015

Coverage of Palestinian “Stabbing Intifada” Sets New Lows, Investigative Project on Terrorism, October 22, 2015

1250 (2)

IDF graphic

Imagine if social media lit up with Israeli memes justifying or endorsing the vigilante violence; “When in doubt, take them out.” Imagine public rallies featuring Israeli children brandishing symbols of this violence.

Would reporters write stories explaining the roots of this attitude? Would they try to balance their reports by explaining the Israeli anger and frustration? Would news outlets issue misleading headlines, minimizing the attackers’ responsibility for the violence? Would the State Department advise “both sides” to tone down their rhetoric?

More likely, a chorus of global condemnation would rain down on Israel, with demands that such reckless incitement halt immediately. And that would be justified.

*********************************

Israelis have a new cause for horror.

In addition to the fear and anger stemming from a wave of wanton stabbing and vehicle attacks on Israelis during the past month – and there were at least two more Thursday, including two Palestinians armed with knives who tried to board a bus full of children – they now are dealing with the horror and shame of realizing an innocent Eritrean migrant fell victim Monday to panic and rage.

When an Arab killed a soldier at a Be’er Sheva bus station, grabbed his victim’s gun and opened fire, a security guard mistook 29-year-old Haftum Zarhom for a second attacker and shot him. Some bystanders, believing he was a terrorist, then beat the wounded Zarhom, who later died from the gunshot.

Israeli leaders reacted swiftly, announcing Monday twin IDF and national police investigations to identify the perpetrators and indict them.

In an attack, people “should evacuate the area and let the emergency services do their job,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. “No one will take the law into his own hands. That’s the first rule.”

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon called for the perpetrators to be arrested.

“We must bring the attackers to justice,” Yaalon said. “No one should behave this way, even when there is great anger and sadness.”

By late Wednesday, four suspects were in custody.

This does not reduce the tragedy of Zarhom’s death, but it does reinforce a message to Israeli society that mob violence is wrong and will not be tolerated. But is a message with which most Israelis already wholeheartedly agree, and they have expressed their deep revulsion and anger at previous acts of lawless violence and terrorist acts by Jewish terrorists against Arabs in years past—from Baruch Goldstein’s massacre in a Hebron mosque to the horrific killing of the 18-month-old Ali Dawabsheh and subsequent death of his mother in a firebombing of their home in the West bank three months ago. Newspaper editorials and politicians from left to right uniformly expressed outrage at such despicable actions. Watching the Israeli news one can see the deep sense of shame that the Israeli public feels.

Just for a moment, imagine if Israeli leaders had reacted differently. What if they tried to rationalize the death, saying the people who set on Zarhom were striking a blow for their people and merely acting out of understandable anger and frustration? They’ve been living under siege for a long time, subjected to the prospect that they could be attacked at any time, on virtually any street in their homeland.

1251

Imagine if social media lit up with Israeli memes justifying or endorsing the vigilante violence; “When in doubt, take them out.” Imagine public rallies featuring Israeli children brandishing symbols of this violence.

Would reporters write stories explaining the roots of this attitude? Would they try to balance their reports by explaining the Israeli anger and frustration? Would news outlets issue misleading headlines, minimizing the attackers’ responsibility for the violence? Would the State Department advise “both sides” to tone down their rhetoric?

More likely, a chorus of global condemnation would rain down on Israel, with demands that such reckless incitement halt immediately. And that would be justified.

Yet journalists and government officials are engaging in all these exercises in reacting to the wanton acts of slaughter Palestinians are carrying out daily. Palestinian society – from the PA leadership to U.S.-subsidized education ministries to nearly the entire Palestinian media have engaged for decades in horrific incitement to terrorism and the demonization of Jews similar to the way Nazis demonized Jews. But yet, a review of Washington Post stories since 2013 finds none which focused primarily or explored the depth of this incitement that drives this latest outbreak of violence.

The State Department continues to walk back comments by Secretary of State John Kerry and his chief spokesman, John Kirby, in which they falsely connected the violence to Israeli settlements and also gave life to the lie that really sparked the attacks. Palestinians, led by Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, have stoked passions for weeks by claiming Israel was changing the “status quo” at Muslim holy sites above Jerusalem’s Temple Mount and diminishing Muslim access.

In fact, the Israelis have not changed the status quo one iota on the Temple Mount since they captured the Eastern part of Jerusalem in the defensive Six Day War. From 1948-67, Jews and Christians were denied any access to the Christians sites in Old Jerusalem and the Jews were denied access to the most holy site in their religion, the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple built by King Herod and destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. When General Moshe Dayan captured the Old City in June 1967, he handed over administration of the Temple Mount with the two great mosques, revered by Muslims around the world, to the Waqf, a religious trust that included Jordanian officials and Palestinians. Jews were not allowed to pray on the Temple Mount but could visit as tourists. To this day, successive Israeli administrations have scrupulously upheld this status quo.

But many Palestinian leaders began to fabricate incendiary allegations that Israel was changing the status quo, even alleging plots to raze the two mosques in order to build the Third Temple. While a crazy handful of Jewish fanatics promote this idea, they are a fringe of a fringe enjoying no credibility. Figures just released by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs show that nearly 4 million Muslims visited Haram Al Sharif in the past year, compared to about 200,000 Christians and 12,000 Jews.

But the rhetoric from Abbas makes it sound like the area is under assault, and that violence against Israelis is justified to protect holy sites.

“The Al-Aqsa [Mosque] is ours… and they have no right to defile it with their filthy feet,” Abbas said in a speech last month on PA TV, and translated by Palestinian Media Watch. “We will not allow them to, and we will do everything in our power to protect Jerusalem… We bless every drop of blood that has been spilled for Jerusalem, which is clean and pure blood, blood spilled for Allah, Allah willing. Every martyr (Shahid) will reach Paradise, and everyone wounded will be rewarded by Allah.”

He reinforced that message during his speech at the United Nations, accusing Israel of trying to seize control of the area from an Islamic trust that has been in place since before Israel controlled Jerusalem in 1967. “The Palestinian people will not allow the implementation of this illegal scheme,” Abbas said. Israel’s actions are aggravating “the sensitivities of Palestinians and Muslims everywhere.”

Last week, Abbas falsely claimed that Israel was executing “our children in cold blood” after video emerged of a young Palestinian lying wounded in the street. The boy isn’t dead, he was released from an Israeli hospital Sunday, and Abbas failed to mention that his injuries came after he stabbed a 13-year-old boy moments earlier, critically wounding him.

Abbas’ Fatah party, meanwhile, extols its “martyrs” on social media. “We are a nation that dies a Martyrdom-death with a smile on its face,” an Oct. 14 on the Rafah Fatah party Facebook page said.

A children’s program on Palestinian television last week hailed those attacking people on Israel’s streets as “the young heroes who have sacrificed their lives for Jerusalem, and who carried out all those great heroic acts. We love them and kiss their hands, because they are true heroes,” a Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) report shows.

Any restrictions on Muslim access to the holy sites have come in response to violence by Palestinians, or out of concern violence might erupt. The issue, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg recently explained, is rooted in a Palestinian rejection of Jews’ rights to be at their most sacred site, or even to be in the land at all.

The New York Times fed into this incitement bypublishing a story which erroneously called into question the very foundation of Judaism’s claim on Jerusalem. A correction followed after the article triggered immediate criticism on social media and elsewhere.

On Monday, State Department spokesman Mark Toner finally gave a clear statement that this “status quo” has not been altered. “Israel has made it clear that they do not intend to and have not changed the status quo” at the Temple Mount, Toner said. “And I think perhaps what we’re talking about is just clarity on all sides, and that includes the Palestinian side, that there is no change in the status quo, that all sides need to recognize that, make every effort possible to reduce tensions…”

Despite this statement, Hanan Ashrawi, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s executive committee, repeated the canard. “We know that Israel is changing the status quo in Haram al-Sharif,” she said. “They say no, they’re not.”

During the peak of the bloodshed, Ashrawi chose to stoke anger.

Some news stories may refer to isolated examples of the inflammatory rhetoric coming from Palestinian leaders and media, but major U.S. news outlets thus far have failed to devote a story to the depth and consistency of Palestinian incitement.

Meanwhile, headlines and stories about Palestinian attacks repeatedly are phrased in ways that minimize the fact that Palestinians are attacking Israelis, often elderly Israelis, at will. When Palestinian casualty figures are cited, often there is no distinction to show how many were killed or injured carrying out an attack, said Gilead Ini, a senior research analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA).

He blames an entrenched media narrative that holds Israel responsible, no matter what is taking place on the ground. “It’s worse than ever, or as bad as ever,” he said.

New examples seem to emerge almost every day. Among them:

MSNBC reporter Ayman Mohyeldin was corrected on air after witnessing security forces shoot a Palestinian as he raced toward the Damascus Gate intent on attacking. Mohyeldin told viewers the man was unarmed, when even the anchor could see the man’s knife. MSNBC then had to apologize for airing maps purportedly showing the loss of Palestinian land to Israel since 1946. The network acknowledged that the maps were “completely wrong.”

When a Palestinian mob torched Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus, CNN’s original headline merely reported that the site “Catches Fire” with no one responsible.

An example Ini believes epitomizes the news media’s consistent minimizing of Palestinian culpability in violence is this Sept. 14 New York Times story by Diaa Hadid. Israeli citizen Alexander Levlovich, 64, was killed when his car was struck by a hail of stones thrown by young Palestinians and crashed. The Times story, however, says the youth were throwing stones at “the road he was driving on,” as if the road was the target and Levlovich’s death an unfortunate accident.

There’s a tendency among some journalists to avoid directly ascribing blame to Palestinians, even in clear acts of violence like this, Ini said. “Journalists are supposed to scrutinize. In this case, I believe they are doing the exact opposite of their jobs: they are protecting Palestinians from scrutiny.”

Commensurate acts of violence by Israelis against Palestinians are relatively few and far between, Ini said. But when they do occur, such as the recent arson attack against a Palestinian home that killed a woman and her baby, they trigger a series of stories about Israeli society and whether it is growing more intolerant.

“We are not seeing the same” stories about racist statements and incitement by Palestinian leaders, he said, and that “warps the world’s view of the conflict.” In addition, journalists go out of their way to “understand roots of anger that drives violence against Israelis.” But in the few instances in which Israelis attack Palestinians, a double standard applies and that same attempts at perspective never materialize.

Besides journalists failing to hold Palestinians accountable for their actions via a deliberate refusal to report on their incitement, there is another byproduct of this one-sided affair. Palestinians end up being rewarded for incitement, terrorism and rampant bloodshed.

France proposed sending an international force to quell tensions on the Temple Mount. UNESCO proposed a resolution making the Western Wall, among Judaism’s most significant sites, to be part of the Al Aqsa mosque. The Palestinian Authority is demanding full control over Jews who visit the Temple Mount.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian narrative receives massive media coverage despite this uprising’s roots in a manifestly fabricated conspiracy. There is no international penalty, no moral condemnation. This all but guarantees that the current wave of stabbings, terrorism and vicious anti-Semitic incitement against Israelis will continue.

Categories: Abbas, Hamas, Islam's war on Jews, Multiculturalism, Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians, Palestinians and Jews, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Hamas, Islam's war on Jews, Multiculturalism, Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians, Palestinians and Jews, Western media

Comments: 1 Comment

An Open Letter to The Guardian About Netanyahu’s Comments on the Mufti and Hitler

October 22, 2015

An Open Letter to The Guardian About Netanyahu’s Comments on the Mufti and Hitler, Algemeiner, Maurice Ostroff, October 21, 2015

I believe you owe your readers an explanation for referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement about the Mufti as “incendiary,” while barely noticing Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ truly incendiary statements praising the murderers of Jewish civilians, including children, and his use of hateful rhetoric, including calling for Jews “with their filthy feet” to be banned from entering the Temple Mount.

While Netanyahu’s statement may have been unnecessary and undiplomatic, it was not as absurd as the Guardian and other mainstream media make out. Editors are supposed to check their facts before rushing to publish.

There is no excuse for the Guardian to be ignorant of the Madagascar Plan, which confirms the PM’s assertion that Hitler initially wanted to expel, not exterminate, the Jews.

In 1938, the notorious Adolf Eichmann prepared a report advocating an evacuation plan for 4 million Jews to be shipped to Madagascar. In his paper, “Madagascar Plan,” Christopher Browning quotes Heinrich Himmler in May 1940 stating: “However cruel and tragic each individual case may be, this method is still the mildest and best, if one rejects the Bolshevik method of physical extermination of a people out of inner conviction as un-German and impossible.”

The plan was endorsed by the Third Reich in August 1940.

Damming evidence of the Mufti’s exhortations to exterminate the Jews was presented at the Nurenberg trials by none other than senior Nazi official Dieter Wisliczeny. On September 15, 1947, Drew Pearson, one of the best-known American columnists of his day, quoted Wisliczeny’s evidence in his column, “Washington Merry-Go-Round,” as follows:

In my opinion, the grand mufti, who has been in Berlin since 1941 played a role in the decision of the German government to exterminate the European Jews, the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he had been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution to the Palestinian problem. In is messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.

Categories: Abbas, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Islam's war on Jews, Israel, Netanyahu, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews, Western media
Tags: Abbas, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Islam's war on Jews, Israel, Netanyahu, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

CNN: Jewish holy site somehow “catches fire” After Muslim attack

October 16, 2015

CNN: Jewish holy site somehow “catches fire” After Muslim attack, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, October 16, 2015

josephs_tomb

Setting Joseph’s Tomb on fire is some sort of national Muslim sport. It happens so often that I don’t think anyone has even collected all the incidents together.

If Jews were constantly setting a Muslim holy site on fire, there would be so many UN resolutions they would provide toilet paper for UN HQ for a year. But Jewish holy sites don’t matter. Jewish lives don’t matter.

****************************

The media is really doubling down on passive voice Muslim terrorism. Israel “actively” does things all the time. But terror attacks on Jews just seem to “happen”. Jewish holy sites just “catch on fire.”

Ask CNN. “Joseph’s Tomb site catches fire in wave of Palestinian-Israeli violence”

It caught fire from the wave of violence? The wave of violence was just sweeping around the place and ignited Joseph’s Tomb?

Even the New York Times headlined its story as, “Palestinians Set Fire to Joseph’s Tomb in West Bank”. The Washington Post called it, “Palestinian protesters set fire to a Jewish holy shrine in West Bank”.

The technical term for people who set things on fire is arsonist, not protester, but at least the Washington Post got “Jewish holy site” in the headline which no one else seems to have managed to do.

(But don’t give the Post too many bonus points yet. Here’s their headline describing a Muslim terrorist who stabbed an Israeli soldier and was shot. “Palestinian with ‘press’ logo on shirt shot dead in stabbing”.)

Let’s do a little thought experiment here.

Suppose a bunch of angry Jews stormed onto the Temple Mount and set the Islamic Al Aqsa Victory Mosque, planted by the Muslim invaders on the holiest site in Judaism, on fire. Would the headline read, “Al Aqsa Mosque catches fire in wave of Palestinian-Israeli violence.”

Or would it read, “Jewish Extremist Mob Torches Muslim Holy Site”?

Here’s a CNN headline from 2009. “Jewish Settlers Blamed over Mosque Attack”. Note how the mosque didn’t spontaneously “catch on fire”. It was attacked. The first words name Jews as the perpetrators because CNN believes it’s a priority to communicate blame in that instance to readers. Here its a priority for CNN to whitewash what happened. There’s no mysterious wave of violence that somehow relates to buildings catching on fire.

This isn’t just a headline issue. Ben Brumfield’s disgusting piece starts off, “Fire broke out overnight at the compound housing Joseph’s Tomb”.

The fire didn’t “break out”. There was no spontaneous combustion. It was set. But Ben Brumfield somehow takes 5 paragraphs to tell you that and to hint at who set it.

Some Palestinians had started a barricade to prevent Israeli troops from entering Nablus to destroy Palestinian homes when a smaller group tried to set fire to the tomb, a Palestinian official told CNN under condition of anonymity. Part of the compound burned, but the tomb remained intact, the official said.

So to summarize, Ben Brumfield’s warped spin here.

The Muslims were trying to protect themselves from Israeli soldiers… so naturally they set a Jewish holy site on fire. Or, as he puts it, they “tried to set fire to the tomb”. All those flames suggest that they succeeded insofar as there was a fire. Even if the tomb wasn’t destroyed.

For example, if CNN headquarters were set on fire by “Palestinian protesters” looking to defend themselves, the news network would still report that it had been set on fire, even if the building remained standing.

CNN follows that up with a lot of “context” and anti-Israel spin, none of which mentions how often Muslims attack Joseph’s Tomb. There was a Muslim arson attempt on the Tomb just this August. Then a Muslim terror cell plotted a bombing and shooting attack on the Tomb… also in August.

The plan of the four arrested terrorists was to set off explosives at Joseph’s Tomb and machine-gun the Jewish worshippers there.

Or, as Ben Brumfield might have reported it, “Explosives Were Set Off in a Wave of Palestinian-Israeli Violence.”

Setting Joseph’s Tomb on fire is some sort of national Muslim sport. It happens so often that I don’t think anyone has even collected all the incidents together.

Muslims vandals have defaced Joseph’s Tomb in yet another instance of Muslims attacking Jewish holy sites. The Muslims hooligans destroyed furniture, desecrated holy Jewish books, sprayed anti-semitic graffiti throughout the tomb’s grounds. There was also evidence that they had attempted to destroy Joseph’s Tomb by fire.

According to Samaria Council Chairman Gershon Mesika, “Only barbarians are capable of doing terrible things like this, destroying a holy place. The State of Israel must reclaim the Tomb of Yosef, as described in the Oslo Accords.”

That one was two years ago. But destroying other people’s holy places is how Muslim holy places are created.

Unfortunately, this was not the first time that Muslims have attacked Joseph’s Tomb. In 2011, a nephew of Science and Culture Minister Limor Livnat, Ben-Joseph Livnat, was murdered by Palestinian Authority security forces while visiting Joseph’s Tomb and four other Israelis were wounded. At his funeral, Limor Livnat stated, “He was murdered simply because he was Jewish.”

Muslims then proceeded to set Joseph’s Tomb on fire and they also attacked the funeral procession of Ben Joseph Livnat with rocks.

Let’s give these lovely people a state.

Furthermore, in 2008, 16 burning tires were thrown at Joseph’s Tomb and in other instances Joseph’s Tomb has been vandalized with swastikas and other anti-semitic graffiti. In 2000, the Palestinian Authority stormed Joseph’s Tomb, killed an IDF soldier, demolished Joseph’s Tomb, and desecrated Jewish holy books at the Jewish holy site. A Palestinian flag was raised over the Jewish holy site. Afterwards, the Palestinians attempted to transform Joseph’s Tomb into a mosque. Indeed, Palestinians to date claim that Joseph was a Muslim, yet this supposed claim holds no validity; otherwise, the Palestinians would treat Joseph’s Tomb more respectfully than they historically have.

Here’s a brief Wiki summary of the incredibly respectful treatment Joseph’s Tomb has received from Muslims over the last decade or so.

In the early days of the al-Aqsa Intifada, on the morning of October 7, 2000, Israel withdrew the small contingent of IDF border policemen who had been guarding the site of the Tomb of the Patriarch Joseph and its Yeshiva. The holy site was located in Shechem in Samaria, the town the Arabs call “Nablus”. Over the preceeding days, the Tomb had been attacked with gunfire, stones, and firebombs. The IDF defenders in the compound withstood the attacks and stopped several attempts by armed Palestinians to break in. An IDF border policemen was wounded, and the heavy rioting prevented his evacuation for treatment in time to save his life.

The PA also pledged to prevent any vandalism and to return the Tomb to its original state after the violence settled down.

The PA pledge was brazenly violated about two hours after the Israeli evacuation, when a Palestinian Arab mob entered the Tomb compound and began to systematically destroy everything in sight, including all remnants of the Yeshiva. The furniture and books that were left behind were burned by the mob. The Palestinian police stood by, failing to prevent any of these violent activities, despite their commitment to guard the Tomb. Within hours, Joseph’s Tomb was reduced to a smoldering heap of rubble. Within two days, as an Associated Press dispatch reported, “the dome of the tomb was painted green and bulldozers were seen clearing the surrounding area,” as the Palestinian Arabs sought to transform the biblical Joseph’s resting place into a Moslem holy site.

Minister Natan Sharansky wanted the foreign ministry to publicize photos of the desecrated site, which is in the Palestinian Authority-controlled town of Nablus, the biblical Shechem.

“If we would have razed the gravesite of one of the founders of Islam, billions of Muslims would have taken to the streets,” Sharansky said. “It’s inconceivable that the world should not know about this travesty.”

Nablus mayor Ghassan Shakaa promised to repair the site to its pre-1967 state, and repairs were carried out; however, workers painted the exterior of the shrine’s dome green (the color of Islam), fuelling speculation that the Palestinians intended to build a mosque on the site. After some world outcry, the dome was repainted a neutral colour.

On February 23, 2003 the carved stone covering the grave was destroyed.

In February 2003 it was reported in the Jerusalem Post that the grave had been pounded with hammers and that the tree at its entrance had been broken; car parts and trash littered the tomb which had a “huge hole in its dome.”

In 2007, it was discovered that the tomb had been vandalised, and filled with burning garbage.

In early 2008, a group of MKs wrote a letter to the Prime Minister asking that the tomb be renovated: “The tombstone is completely shattered, and the holy site is desecrated in an appalling manner, the likes of which we have not seen in Israel or anywhere else in the world.”

In February, it was reported that Israel would officially ask the Palestinian Authority to carry out repairs at the tomb, but in response, vandals set tires on fire inside the tomb.

In December 2008, Jewish workers funded by anonymous donors painted the blackened walls and re-built the shattered stone marker covering the grave.

In late April 2009, a group of Jewish worshipers found the headstone smashed and swastikas painted on the walls, as well as boot prints on the grave itself

If Jews were constantly setting a Muslim holy site on fire, there would be so many UN resolutions they would provide toilet paper for UN HQ for a year. But Jewish holy sites don’t matter. Jewish lives don’t matter.

Categories: Intifada, Islam's war on Jews, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Temple Mount, Western media
Tags: intifada, Islam's war on Jews, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Temple Mount, Western media

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives