Lawyers, who are typically responsible for upholding the rule of law, are subverting it in Egypt.

The Assyrian International News Agency (AINA) provides the details in an article titled "300 Muslim Lawyers Storm Egyptian Court, Prevent Lawyers for Christian From Entering."

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Posted by dvz at 09:14 PM |  Comments (1)

Controversy at Tufts Daily Paper

A recent Leadership Statement published in the Tufts University student newspaper, The Tufts Daily, has upset some Tufts students, especially several members of Students for Justice in Palestine.

The statement, sponsored by the Tufts America Israel Alliance and the Tufts Friends of Israel, declared, "As a student leader at Tufts I support the U.S.-Israel Relationship." The statement included the names and organizations of the student-leader signatories.

Apparently, this degree of open expression was too much for some members of SJP, who, according to an article in the Daily, have protested against the ad on the basis that the inclusion of student senators as signatories violates a the Senate bylaw forbidding the Senate to advance a political position unless it is previously voted on.

This complaint comes despite the fact that the Statement features a prominent disclaimer, which specifically notes that the signatories do not represent their organizations: "The views expressed are my own and do not represent the positions of my stated leadership role or organization."

Recently, The Daily published a letter to the editor by a Tufts student, criticizing the paper's coverage of the controversy. The student cited the paper's use of biased quotes by the disgruntled SJP member as a staple of any article concerning Israel, pointing to the article about the Leadership Statement as an example of the paper's M.O.

Posted by srm at 05:18 PM |  Comments (2)

Where’s the Coverage? Egyptian Parliament Declares Israel Enemy #1

On March 12, 2012, the Arab Affairs Committee of the newly-elected Egyptian parliament issued a report declaring Israel Egypt’s “number one enemy.�?

According to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, the committee’s statement also called for Egypt to, among other things:

· “Reconsider its entire relationship and agreements with this enemy�?
· Expel the Israeli ambassador and recall the Egyptian ambassador from Israel
· Support the armed Palestinian struggle against Israel (remember, the Muslim Brotherhood is the parent of Hamas)
· Re-adopt the total Arab boycott of Israel

The house then voted unanimously to support the report. The Egyptian parliament is dominated by leftist parties, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (note the Orwellian terminology), and their even more reactionary allies, the Salafi party.

Last month, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified on Capitol Hill that the Muslim Brotherhood has "pursued social ends" and a "betterment of the political order," and added:

The term “Muslim Brotherhood�? … is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence…

Clapper later clarified that “he is well aware that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a secular organization.�? Is he also aware that they are not working to “pursue social ends�? or a “betterment of the political order�? and have not “eschewed violence�??

For now, Egyptian policy is set by the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, however the military has said it will hand over power after presidential elections scheduled for May 23-24. This does not bode well for the future of Egypt’s relationship with its #1 enemy, Israel, or for the U.S.-brokered Camp David Peace Accord.

Have you heard much about this in the U.S. press?
Has this been on the front page of the New York Times?
Where’s the coverage?

Posted by SC at 01:37 PM |  Comments (2)

March 13, 2012

J Street (Sort of) Explains False Claim of Civilian Casualties

In a Jerusalem Post story entitled "MK slams J Street for statement on Gaza," a J Street spokesperson attempts to explain her organization's false claim that Israel "killed over a dozen civilians" when in fact almost all the Gaza casualties were terrorists.

The story notes:

J Street subsequently revised the statement on their website by removing the reference to the “dozen Palestinian civilians.�? By Tuesday afternoon, the organization had also added a brief apology saying, “Please note the original statement misstated the number of civilian casualties. We regret the error.�?

On Tuesday night, a spokeswoman for J Street told The Jerusalem Post that the organization regrets the error and had misreported the number of civilian casualties “based on an unfounded report.�?

Mistakes happen. But the spokesperson apparently did not explain what "unfounded report" J Street president Jeremy Ben Ami deemed more reliable than Israeli assessments and reports from all the major news outlets.

Posted by at 06:43 PM |  Comments (5)

Nicky Larkin Sees Shades of Grey

Irish artist and film-maker Nicky Larkin - who in the past frequently assailed Israel - now sees shades of grey regarding the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

In his remarkable article, Larkin describes his change of heart and his interview with a former Palestinian government member, "the Palestinian mantra was one of 'non-violent resistance'".

Larkin continues:

Yet when I interviewed Hind Khoury, a former Palestinian government member, she sat forward angrily in her chair as she refused to condemn the actions of the suicide bombers. She was all aggression.

Read the article here.

Posted by at 03:12 PM |  Comments (2)

Bassam Eid's Journey

Bassam Eid, the founder of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, has become an outspoken critic of the Palestinian Authority. In an article appearing in the South African Jewish Report (March 9-16, 2012) he bluntly states, “There are no Palestinian leaders capable of conducting peace talks."

The article describes Eid as "a former anti-Israel activist turned critic of the violation of Palestinian human rights by his own leaders." He is a sharp critic of "the Palestinian Solidarity Committee around the world, for fomenting a hatred between Palestinians and Jews that does not exist in Israel or in the territories."

The article on Eid serves as a reminder that both Jewish and Arab communities in Israel and the Palestinian Authority territories are victimized by self-serving international activists.

Note: The link to the edition of the South African Jewish Report appears to be disabled. Please contact the editor of the South African Jewish Report directly to let him know that you would like a copy of the article and that he should fix the link.

A second more detailed piece ran in an article published by the Voice of the Cape.

Posted by SS at 11:29 AM |  Comments (2)

IHT Reports Discredited Palestinian Claim as Fact

Despite the fact that the AFP agrees with the Israeli army that an Israeli airstrike did not kill 15-year-old Nayef Qarmut in northern Gaza yesterday, the International Herald Tribune blames his death on Israel without any qualification.

The International Herald Tribune, published by the New York Times, nevertheless reports that Qarmut was killed in an Israeli airstrike. The Tribune's problematic coverage is particularly inexplicable given the Times' longer version of the very same story by Isabel Kershner details the AFP's confirmation of Israel's denial.

Thus, the Tribune's Kershner article reports today: "Israeli airstrikes killed five Palestinians on Monday, bringing the overall toll to 23, with 3 out of the 5 killed on Monday civilians."

Yet, the longer Times version of the very same piece details:

More than 150 rockets have fallen in Israeli territory since Friday, and Gaza officials said at least six Palestinians died on Monday, bringing the overall toll to 24. Though most of those killed have been militants, at least two of those who died in airstrikes on Monday were civilians.

A Gaza medical official and Gaza human rights groups said that one of the victims, Nayif Shaaban Qarmout, 14, was killed in an airstrike and that five other youths were wounded as they walked to school, but the Israeli military denied having carried out any attacks at that hour. An Agence France-Presse reporter at the scene confirmed that there was no sign of an airstrike.

Later, a missile killed Muhammad al-Hassumi, 65, and his daughter Fayza, 30, as they put out a fire on their land.

Israel disputes the Palestinian claim that Nayif Qarmout was killed by an Israeli airstrike, and an AFP reporter on the scene confirms Israel's claim, so why does the Tribune count him without question or qualification among those civilians killed by Israel?

Posted by TS at 08:19 AM |  Comments (1)

March 12, 2012

Second Update: Dr. Schirrmacher is Polite to His Hosts

March 13, 2012 Update: Dr. Schirrmacher has posted a response in the comments below stating his comments have either been misheard or misrepresented. In response, Snapshots respectfully asks the organizers of Christ at the Checkpoint to post the video from Dr. Schirrmacher's presentation on its website to clear up the confusion. If a correction is in order, one will be made. Alternatively, if Dr. Shirrmacher can make his recording available, that will help clear up the confusion as well.

One of the oddest moments of the Christ at the Checkpoint Conference that took place in Bethlehem last week came during a brief welcome offered by Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher from the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA).

Schirrmacher (pictured above), who serves as the executive chair of the Theological Commission of the WEA, appeared at the podium in a shirt and tie, but with no formal jacket on the opening night of the conference on Monday, March 5, 2012.

The reason he had no formal jacket, Shirrmacher explained, was that he had spent the day digging through a mound of dirt that had been excavated during construction near the Al Aqsa Mosque.

Because of this excursion, during which he got dirt on his shirt and trousers, he had no time to go back to the hotel to get his jacket before addressing the crowd.

Shirrmacher was a bit chagrined about his appearance, but he was clearly animated by the amateur archeological dig he was able to participate in. Schirrmacher was right to be animated, because in other instances, the Waqf has simply discarded the dirt from the Temple Mount, making a systematic investigation of the area’s archeology impossible.

So what did he find? Evidence of a Jewish presence on the Temple Mount? That’s not how he described it, but apparently so.

As he and his Muslim hosts dug through the dirt near the Al Aqsa Mosque, they found artifacts “from the beginning of monotheism,�? Schirrmacher reported.

They also found a number other artifacts including objects dating back to the Roman empire.

“After that we found an Israeli bullet,�? he said, which he was allowed to keep.

It’s a small thing, but Schirrmacher’s reference to artifacts “from the beginning of monotheism�? was a bit odd.

Exactly what did Schirrmacher mean by this imprecise phrase? Was he talking about the cult of Aten founded by Akhenaten in ancient Egypt?

Probably not. The geography doesn’t work out.

So if Shirrmacher was talking about the ancient Israelites and if so, why didn’t he say so? Why didn’t he just come out and say he found evidence of a Jewish presence on the Temple Mount?

Why not say that he, along with his Muslim hosts, found Jewish artifacts near the Al Aqsa mosque?

People, particularly those who wanted to assert that the Jewish people have no spiritual claim to the land of Israel, had no problem saying the word “Jew�? during the rest of the Christ at the Checkpoint conference, but here, when its use would affirm the historical connection to the Temple Mount, it was left unsaid.

Why?

Was Dr. Schirrmacher engaging in a bit of self-censorship so as not to offend Palestinian political leaders who were in the room and the Muslim clerics who were kind enough to let him dig through the dirt on the Temple Mount, or the Haram Al Shariff, as its called by Muslims?

As most Snapshots readers know, acknowledging the Jewish presence on the Temple Mount is a rather difficult task for Palestinian political and religious leaders.

Is an official from the WEA conforming his speech to this agenda of “Temple Denial�??

Posted by dvz at 02:38 PM |  Comments (4)

NPR’s On Point Unfair to Israel Again

NPR's syndicated program, On Point, with Tom Ashbrook continues its tradition of tolerating at least one egregious anti-Israel distortion per Middle East segment (examples -- here, here, here, here, here and here). The panel for the March 6, 2012 show (click here to listen) “Weighing The Iranian Threat�? included David Sanger (chief Washington correspondent for the New York Times), Michael Makovsky (Bipartisan Policy Center) and Graham Allison (Professor of Government at Harvard University).

The inflammatory charge of the day was called in about half-way through the broadcast:

Iran is their [Israel’s] problem because they [Israel] are committing ethnic cleansing in the occupied territories and Iran will not stand for that and I don’t think we should either.

It elicited only a mild response by Ashbrook:

I appreciate your call – and your calling Israel’s relation – or handling of Palestinians as ethnic cleansing – I’m sure that many in Israel would disagree with that.

But the charge was an outright falsehood that remained uncorrected. In fact, the Muslim Arab population of Jerusalem has been growing faster than the Jewish population for decades. According to the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, Jerusalem was 25.8 percent Arab in 1967. By 2009, the city's Arab population increased to 35.7 percent.

As for Christian Arabs, A Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) report, indicates that the central cause of the flight of Christians from Arab dominated areas is a growing Islamic fundamentalism, including Muslim intimidation of Christian Arabs. This includes assaults by Muslim men upon Christian women, demands for “protection�? money and illegitimate land seizures. The Christian population of Israel is, in fact, on the increase (in absolute numbers).

Comments can be submitted to Ashbrook and On Point via: e-mail to [email protected], Twitter at https://twitter.com/#!/OnPointRadio, Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/OnPointRadio, phone 617-353-0909,
mail: On Point Radio, 890 Commonwealth Avenue, 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02215.

Posted by MK at 01:04 PM |  Comments (0)

AFP Confirms: Israel Not Responsible for Teen's Death

The AFP reports:

The Israeli army on Monday denied it had carried out an air strike on northern Gaza which killed a teenager, with an AFP correspondent confirming there was no sign of an air raid.

Fifteen-year-old Nayef Qarmut was killed and six other teenagers injured as they were on their way to school near the northern town of Beit Lahiya, with a spokesman for the Palestinian medical services blaming an Israeli drone strike.

"A drone strike hit a group of students who were walking by empty land on their way to school," said spokesman Adham Abu Selmiya, describing an incident which occurred at around 9:30am (0730 GMT).

But the Israeli military, after looking into the claim, denied it had conducted any air strikes in northern Gaza then, saying the last time it had struck the area was in the early hours of Monday.

"From an initial check, there were no air strikes in the northern Gaza Strip since the early hours of the morning," a military spokesman told AFP.

According to an AFP correspondent at the scene, there were no signs of any impact on the ground which could have been caused by a missile, with the most likely cause of his death being some kind of explosive device he was carrying.

Will media outlets that dutifully reported the false charge against Israel follow up with Israel's denial, backed by the AFP fact-checking?

(Hat tip: Elder of Ziyon)

Posted by TS at 09:09 AM |  Comments (0)

NYT Rewrites Obama's AIPAC Speech

President Obama's address last week to AIPAC is available online, as is a word for word transcript, but still, the New York Times, misreported its contents. Helene Cooper reported March 4:

Mr. Obama, who has often lamented the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003, made reference to European and American intelligence assessments that have found no evidence that Iran has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon.

A March 6 page-one story by Mark Landler in the International Herald Tribune made the same claim (in virtually the same words). And, yet, you can watch or read the speech until Ahmadinejad is a Zionist and still you will not find a single reference to European or American intelligence assessments that have found no evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon.

March 13 Update: The New York Times commendably corrects.

Posted by TS at 06:13 AM |  Comments (1)

PCHR Fabricates Killing of Innocent 'Child'

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) is up to its old tricks -- claiming that a slain Palestinian combatant was not involved in hostilities.

A PCHR statement yesterday ("IOF Kill Palestinian Child and Arrest Another One South of Hebron") reads:

According to investigations conducted by PCHR, at approximately 14:30 on Thursday, 08 March 2012, IOF, backed by 4 military vehicles and an armored personnel carrier, moved into al-Mazraa crossroads area in the center of Yatta town, south of Hebron. They raided the house of Khaled Musa al-Makhamra, who was released from Israeli prisons in the recent prisoners swap, and nearby houses belonging to his brothers. They forced al-Makhamra's wife and children to go out and held some of them in the outdoors. I n the meanwhile, a number of the locals gathered near al-Makhamra's house. At approximately 15:35, IOF opened fire at Mohammed Omar Awwad al-Jundi, 17, who was a few meters away from IOF. Al-Jundi was wounded by a bullet to the right side. He suffered acute bleeding and parts of his bowels were out. IOF then opened fire indiscriminately at the Palestinians. As a result, Zakareya Jamal Mohammed Musa Abu 'Arram, 16, was wounded by a bullet to the head. The bullet penetrated the head near the left eye and exited from the left temple. A part of the skull was smashed as a result and Abu 'Arram died immediately.

And yet, as reported widely in the international media, the slain Palestinian in Yatta was neither a child nor was he standing idly by when he was shot. Nor did the soldiers fire "indiscriminately." As reported, for instance, by the AFP:

A Palestinian was shot dead by Israeli troops on Thursday after the stabbing of an Israeli soldier in Yatta village in the southern West Bank, the Israeli military told AFP.

"Palestinians attacked soldiers during an IDF (army) operation in Yatta to arrest suspects," an Israeli military source said on condition of anonymity.

"One soldier was injured after being stabbed in the neck and the soldiers then opened fire on the Palestinians. One Palestinian was killed and another was injured."

An Israeli military spokesman confirmed the incident, near the city of Hebron.

"During routine activity in Yatta, a Palestinian man stabbed and injured an IDF soldier who responded by firing at the assailant, injuring him and killing a second Palestinian who accompanied the assailant," he said.

A source at the Abu Hassan al-Qassim hospital in Yatta confirmed the death of one Palestinian, whom he identified as Zacharia Abu Aram, adding that two others were injured.

"The body of a youth in his twenties arrived at the hospital," the source told AFP. "He died from a gunshot wound directly to the head."

At least this puts J Street, which also just labeled Palestinian combatants as "civilians," in good company.

Posted by TS at 04:05 AM |  Comments (0)

March 11, 2012

UPDATED: J Street Calls Palestinian Rocket Squads "Civilian"

Update: After being widely criticized for its anti-Israel "error," J Street has removed the fallacious reference to "civilians."

J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami released a statement today describing all or most of the Palestinians killed during the fighting between Palestinian militants in Gaza and Israel as "civilians." In fact, nearly all were fighters, and many were killed while trying to fire rockets indiscriminately into Israeli cities.

The J Street statement reads:

J Street is deeply concerned about the most recent spate of violence between the Israel Defense Forces and militants in Gaza, which, in three days, has already resulted in over one hundred rockets fired on Israeli cities and towns and airstrikes on Gaza that have killed over a dozen Palestinian civilians.

But Voice of America reports that "Sixteen Palestinian militants and two civilians have been killed since violence began on Friday, while Israel has been battered by more than 120 rockets."

Yesterday, AP reported that all of the 15 Palestinian casualties at the time were militants:

Israel pounded Gaza for the second day in a row Saturday, trading airstrikes and rocket fire with Palestinian militants and killing 15 of them as the deadliest Gaza violence in over a year showed no signs of abating.

Also yesterday, the New York Times reported that "Up to 15 Palestinian fighters have died in the airstrikes. At least 10 of the dead belonged to the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, the group said in a statement."

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland termed the Gazan attackers "terrorists." As reported in the Jerusalem Post , among other places, her characterization of the violence was clear:

"We condemn in the strongest terms the rocket fire from Gaza by terrorists into southern Israel in recent days, which has dramatically and dangerously escalated in the past day" Nuland said via a written statement, adding that the US calls "on those responsible to take immediate action to stop these cowardly acts."

Does J Street have better sources than the State Department? Or is the group intentionally misleading the public?

(You can see photos of some of the "civilians" here.)

Posted by at 01:17 PM |  Comments (4)

March 10, 2012

AFP Reports False Accusation, Conceals True Facts

Agence France Presse is dutifully reporting on the Arab League's charge that Israel is engaged in a "massacre."

"The Arab League on Saturday condemned Israeli air strikes on Gaza that killed 15 Palestinians, calling it a "massacre" and urging an international tough stance against the Jewish state."

Would you think the AFP reporter or editor would consider it relevant to the story that most, or perhaps all, of the Palestinians killed were members of terrorist groups, and some were in the process of firing rockets into Israeli towns?

Think again. The AFP report, as retrieved on 3pm on Saturday, only points out that one of the dead was a fighter.

Posted by at 02:45 PM |  Comments (1)

March 09, 2012

Being There at the Harvard Hate-Fest

It can't have been easy for anyone concerned with facts, history, reason, scholarship, moral clarity and so on to spend a weekend listening to anti-Israel agitprop at Harvard's One-State Conference. Janet Tassel's mordant review of the gathering in today's American Thinker offers insights into the speakers' views on dissolution of the Jewish state and their speculation on the fate of its Jewish inhabitants.

One possibility for the newly disempowered Israeli Jews, said Leila Farsakh, associate professor in political science at the University of Massachusetts at Boston, would be to "reconnect with their Arabism." Indeed, the term "Arab Jew" became ubiquitous toward the end of the conference. Or, as Marc Ellis, director of the Center for Jewish Studies at Baylor University, himself a Jew, said, "Becoming un-Jewish is the first step." After that would come, in his words, "revolutionary forgiveness."

Among the Harvard faculty to appear were the notorious Stephen Walt in addition to less well-known figures like

Timothy McCarthy, a lecturer at the Kennedy School, who dissolved into tears when he recalled [a six-city LGBT trip to Israel that met with] groups like Palestinian Queers for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions... Although he described himself as "a fierce queen" who "steps right up to bullies," he brimmingly lamented that he found "violence all over Israel"

It's probably too much to hope the many scholars at the university who care about the truth and the many concerned trustees who care about the reputation of the institution and the many brilliant students who know hate-mongering doesn't belong at the Kennedy School will all use this as an opportunity to investigate what's gone so wrong.

Posted by AL at 06:47 PM |  Comments (5)

Christ the Checkpoint – A Preliminary Response

For the past five days, a group of approximately 600 Evangelical Protestants have attended a conference in Bethlehem titled “Christ at the Checkpoint.�?

This conference, organized by the Bethlehem Bible College, a well-known evangelical institution located on the West Bank, has generated a significant amount of attention, controversy, and concern in Israel and in Jewish communities throughout the world for one simple reason: The words that come out of Christian mouths have had a huge impact on the safety and well being of the Jewish people for most of the past 2,000 years. The sad reality is that Christianity’s message of peace has oftentimes been intertwined with horrific expressions of hostility toward the Jewish people and their institutions. This hostility has had real-world impacts.

The possibility that this conference would be the scene of anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish polemic was not one that could be easily discounted given the impact of another institution, Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center has had on how mainline Protestant churches in the United States and Europe addressed issues related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In response to these concerns, CAMERA sent a researcher to monitor the proceedings who has been gratified by the graciousness with which the conference organizers and the participants have welcomed him. He has had a number of conversations with attendees who have graciously listened to and acknowledged his concerns about the conference. The atmosphere of the conference is markedly different than that of other so-called peacemaking conferences and gatherings that this researcher has attended. This is due in large part to the leadership of the Palestinian Christian leaders who organized the conference. There were some missteps on this score, which will be addressed in a future article, but their commentary was overall more responsible than that of Sabeel.

At the outset, it must be acknowledged that the debate at Christ at the Checkpoint was centered on Christian Zionism as a theology. While debate on this subject has clear and undeniable implications for the Jewish people and Israel, it is a largely internal Christian debate.

This conference has demonstrated that there is a growing number of people who believe that Christian Zionism has real-world impacts on a number of issues of great concern to evangelicals. A number of evangelicals simply do not want to be associated with eschatologies that they believe increase the prospect of violence in the Middle East.

They are also bothered by the possibility that Christian Zionism hinders their ability to evangelize to Muslims in the Middle East and in other parts of the world – an enterprise which appears to be gaining support in the Evangelical community.

One of the ongoing problems with this internal debate, however, is the manner in which opponents of Christian Zionism have become part of what Christian theologian James Parkes has called “the literature of attack�? against Jews. Simply put, there are times when opponents of Christian Zionism descend into troubling rhetoric about the Jews and the state of Israel.

This is evident in name of the conference itself (“Christ at the Checkpoint�?), which encourages Christians to use their doctrines to interrogate Israeli security measures in a discriminatory manner, without using Christian teachings to highlight and judge Palestinian, Arab or Muslim violence with the same energy and focus. This has been a persistent problem of Christian peacemaking activism over the years and needs to be addressed by Bethlehem Bible College in future manifestations of the event.

CAMERA is not the only organization that remarked on this problem, which was exacerbated by the visual rhetoric of the conference itself. As the photo at the top of this entry reveals, every speaker addressed the audience standing in front of a banner that showed a Christian church and cross standing in opposition to a concrete section of the security barrier. This banner, which seemed styled on the anti-Israel graffiti and painting posted on the security barrier, served as the visual frame for the conference and this frame did not include any reference to Israeli fear.

To his credit, Pastor Tony Campolo addressed Israeli fears during his talk, which on the last afternoon of the conference, after attendees had been exposed to the banner for the past four days. In light of Christianity’s tendency to use negative depictions of Judaism as a negative backdrop for the superiority of the Christian faith, this is very troubling.

The conference’s tendency to scrutinize Zionism, Israel and Jewish identity was also particularly evident in the discussion about Christian Zionism, which as stated above, is an internal debate. Still, sometimes it got a bit ugly, particularly during Rev. Dr. Gary Burge’s discussion about the topic. During his presentation, he regaled the audience with stories of how he confronted Orthodox Jews about their claim to the land of Israel by virtue of being descendants of Abraham. One confrontation took place in the Old City of Jerusalem and another took place at the Kotel or Western Wall.

His description of these confrontations, which elicited laughter from the audience, made it clear that he has more than a disagreement with Christian Zionist support for Israel, but Jewish self-understanding and how Jews relate to the land.

Would he challenge Muslims in the same manner about their territorial claims based on their religious beliefs? This is simply not an issue Dr. Burge has addressed in his writings about the Arab-Israeli conflict. On this score, asserting that it was not part of the frame of the conference would be more of an admission of guilt than it is an effective talking point in defense of the conference.

The issue of Muslim hostility toward Israel, Jews (and Christians) was addressed at the conference by Colin Chapman, a long time critic of Israel, but it was given short shrift and was done in such a manner so as to hinder any real discussion of the subject. At one point, Chapman responded rather brusquely to questions about Muslim violence against Christians in the Middle East by saying the questions themselves indicated that the questioners hadn’t put themselves in the shoes of Muslims in the Middle East.

While the conference organizers proclaimed that different viewpoints were presented during the program, the range of discussion was rather limited. To be sure, this is due in part to the topic of the debate, which was not merely about Christian Zionism, but how Christians should relate to the Jews in general. The participation of Messianic Jewish leaders, (ethnic Jews who have embraced Jesus Christ) such as Wayne Hildsen was proffered as evidence of diversity. But there is at least one assumption that Messianic Jews have about their fellow Jews who have not accepted Jesus Christ that have troubling implications on any discussion about the Jewish state.

In particular, the belief that Jews who do not accept Jesus are disobedient and reprobate casts a troublesome shadow on any Christian discussion about the modern state of Israel, particularly in the presence of some hostile critics of Israel. Not every Christian has this belief, but many do, even some Christian Zionists as do many Messianic Jews.

Clearly, Hildsen and other Messianic Jews are supportive of Israel as a nation state, but the logical conclusion of their belief that Israeli Jews as disobedient because of their refusal to accept Jesus is that the modern state of Israel is providing for the safety and security of a reprobate people who by virtue of the rejection of Jesus, are enemies of God. They may be beloved enemies, but they are enemies nonetheless. If this is the case, whatever suffering caused by this state is a double sin, somehow more worthy of contempt.

This highlights an underling problem with the “Christ at the Checkpoint�? Conference. Two discussions were taking place at this conference. The first conversation centered around how Christians should respond to the Jewish rejection of Christ. The second was centered on how they should respond to the Palestinian suffering caused by the Jewish state.

Anyone who does not see the dangers of having these parallel discussions taking place at a conference where there is no real effort to address Muslim anti-Semitism and the threats Israel faces is simply being obtuse.

Posted by dvz at 12:05 PM |  Comments (3)

March 08, 2012

NY Times: Creating News Where There is None

The preferred story at the New York Times

One of the underlying themes of New York Times coverage of the Middle East is blaming Israel for the Arab-Israeli conflict while removing Palestinian responsibility for the situation there. According to the Times' preferred story, Israel is the perennial aggressor while the Palestinians are the perennial victims. And if there happens to be no particular Palestinian grievance to play up on a given day, the New York Times will make sure to do so anyway: by recycling an older picture or creating a grievance of its own. Needless to say, stories that reveal the real situation, like the one about Palestinian leader Abbas demonizing Israel with false, inflammatory accusations at the recent Doha conference, are concealed.

Let's take as an example the front page of today's New York Times.

The above-fold, full color picture has nothing whatsoever to do with any breaking news from the region. Instead, the Times dredged up an older photo of soldiers with balls of fire at the tips of their guns with the caption:

Israeli soldiers fired at Palestinian stone throwers in the West Bank town of al Ram, near East Jerusalem, last month.

Actually, the masked Palestinians were throwing both rocks and firebombs -- not exactly peaceful, and yes, this was last month, at about the same time President Abbas was demonizing Israel at the Doha conference, that went unmentioned in the Times.

Not only did a non-news photo take front page placement, but the front page story was a manufactured one about Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the U.S. pushing news about Palestinian grievances off the front page.

"For decades, as autocrats ruled their neighbors, the Palestinians were at the center of Middle Eastern politics, their struggle with Israeli occupation embodying the Arab longing for post-colonial freedom and dignity," lamented Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner. "But when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel visited Washington this week, the conversation was dominated by Iran, not peace talks or occupation."

Indeed, it seems that the New York Times is becoming a parody of its own anti-Israel obsession.

Posted by rh at 08:58 AM |  Comments (2)

March 07, 2012

Jimmy Carter Snipes at Israel Again

Israelis, former president Jimmy Carter worries, seem inclined to "resume" war with their neighbors. But he trusts that Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood -- its leaders having "assured me personally" -- will keep their country's peace treaty with Israel.

So the one-term chief executive (1977 - 1981) told "America's Morning News," the radio affiliate of The Washington Times ("Carter: Netanyahu seems too eager for war on Iran," March 7). Of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Carter said "I don't think that's [war with Iran] his first preference, but I think he's much more eager to go to war with Iran than President Obama (is). And I was glad to see President Obama discourage that immediate resumption of hostilities between Israel and its neighbors that the Israelis seem to be inclined to do."

Carter, who as president suggested Americans had an inordinate fear of communism, then professed to being shocked by the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, said "I think the economic sanctions would be adequate. ... War with Iran can and should be avoided."

He was equally sanguine about the Muslim Brotherhood, which -- with the even more fundamentalist Salafist party -- holds two-thirds of the seats in Egypt's influential lower house of parliament. Carter said he recently met with Brotherhood leaders and "they know it's very important to Egypt to maintain peace with Israel. They assured me personally ... that they will honor the peace treaty that I helped to negotiate back in 1979 ... and I don't have any doubt they will carry out their promise to me."

Leave aside Carter's chronic narcissim. Forget his past apologia for Hamas after meeting its leaders and gaining another 15 minutes in the spotlight. His faith in the Brotherhood, which has expelled moderates and sounds more anti-American on its Arabic Web site than on its English language version, recalls his ineffectuality in dealing with the Islamic revolutionaries who overthrew the Shah of Iran, seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held more than 50 American diplomats captive for 444 days.

The Washington Times article notes that "Carter's use of the word 'apartheid'" in the title of his 2006 book Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid "prompted rebukes and criticism of varying degrees, most notably from former President Bill Clinton and then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and an unwanted endorsement from Osama bin Laden."

CAMERA's 2007 monograph, Bearing False Witness: Jimmy Carter's Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, exposed more than 20 major errors of fact in the ex-president's anti-Israel polemic, none of which he corrected.

Imply that Israel is eager for war with Iran. Don't focus on the issue -- Iran's covert pursuit of nuclear weapons combined with its overt threats to destroy the Jewish state. Apparently Jimmy Carter can't help himself; when his animus toward Israel begins to itch, he must scratch, especially when doing so will make a headline or two.

Posted by ER at 04:28 PM |  Comments (8)

March 06, 2012

Gideon Levy, Favorite of the Western Press Corps

In two days, fringe Israeli journalist Gideon Levy is quoted two times in major American newspapers, once again underscoring his overseas influence, which is a stark contrast to his discredited standing in Israel.

Posted by TS at 04:31 AM |  Comments (0)

NY Times: Salim Joubran, Palestinian

In the New York Times and International Herald Tribune, outgoing Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner writes:

Internationally, the criticism of Israel focuses on its treatment of the four million Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza. They are not Israeli citizens, but their territory and lives remain under Israeli control and strictures. But there are also 1.5 million Palestinians who are Israeli citizens, about 20 percent of the country’s population, and Justice Joubran is a member of that group.

Two things:

1) The Gaza Strip territory and the population's lives do not remain under Israeli "control and strictures" anymore than they remain under Egyptian "control and strictures." Israel controls its border with Gaza and enforces a legal sea blockade while allowing the import of all goods aside from weapons over land. Egypt likewise controls its border with Gaza.

2) Until now, the New York Times has generally referred to Arab citizens of Israel as "Israeli Arabs." Why now, as Bronner is on the way out, does he refer to Israeli Arabs as Palestinians, a designation favored only by some Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews on the far-left? Would Justice Salim Joubran consider himself a Palestinian? Would those Israeli Arabs who prefer to live in Israel over a future Palestine consider themselves Palestinian?

Posted by TS at 01:37 AM |  Comments (0)

March 02, 2012

The C-SPAN Way: Allow Propagandist Repeat Callers to Drone on and on Unchallenged

Inept call-handling by C-SPAN’s Washington Journal hosts, especially anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-U.S. foreign policy callers, was on display yet again in the Feb. 24, 2012 broadcast in which two repeat callers were allowed monologues of several minutes each.

Host Susan Swain (C-SPAN President and Co-CEO) and guest Russ Feingold (former U.S. Senator, D-Wisc.) fielded calls from repeat phoners “Tyrone from Baton Rouge, Louisiana�? and “Mary from Bellbrook, Ohio."

Caller “Tyrone�? (click here to listen) unrealistically dismissed the Iranian nuclear threat as mainly pertaining only to Israel (a point challenged by guest Feingold) and falsely asserted that Israel is a drain on the American economy (a point not challenged by either host or guest).

It doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect either the president of C-SPAN or a former U.S. senator to point out that total American foreign aid is a small percentage of the federal budget and a tiny proportion of the gross domestic product. Likewise, the comparatively small amount of the foreign aid budget going to Israel is hardly a drain on the American economy. Most of the approximately $3 billion per year in U.S. aid to Israel is used to acquire military materials, most of which are purchased in the United States.

Also unmentioned, though relevant given the caller's critical focus on aid to Israel, are reciprocal advantages to the United States; benefits return to the United States in the form of technology, including for improved unmanned aircraft, anti-missile defenses, battlefield medical techniques and intelligence on anti-U.S. as well as anti-Israeli Arab and Islamic radicals. And neither guest nor host mentioned the oft-reported facts that U.S. federal deficits and overall debt problems stem primarily from growing, unfunded domestic obligations, beginning with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The figures involved are infinitely greater than annual U.S. foreign aid spending.

Caller “Mary�? (click here to listen), unchallenged by either guest Feingold or host Swain, falsely claimed that “our military bases [are there] on their [Middle East] land to access the oil in that region�? and cites as authoritative, without challenge, distortions and falsehoods of Michael Scheuer whose tenure as head of the CIA bin Laden unit did not result in the location, capture or death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Likewise, both host Swain and guest Feingold seemed either unaware of or were uninterested in pointing out the falsity of Mary’s assertion, “Iran has never threatened the U.S. and comments from Ahmadinejad have been misrepresented [about Israel]...�? The annihilationist intention of Iran's leaders, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, toward Israel have been documented repeatedly.

Ahmadinejad, a religious fanatic who apparently believes world conflict will hasten the return of Shi'ite Islam's messianic “Twelfth Imam,�? has frequently advocated the destruction of Israel. For example, on Oct. 26, 2005, in a speech to a "World Without Zionism" conference in Tehran, he vowed that "Israel must be wiped off the map." The Iranian president called for Israel to be "uprooted" in a press conference with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on Feb. 25, 2010, one of a number of more recent such statements.

Iran's hostile attitude toward the United States – since the country's violent takeover by the Muslim fundamentalist regime in 1979 – has been demonstrated by its occupation of the American embassy in Tehran that same year and seizure of American diplomats, and its strong continuing support of terrorist entities hostile to American interests such as Hamas and especially Hezbollah, whose 1983 truck bombing killed 241 American Marines at the multinational force barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. Iran was linked to the bombing of U.S. military housing in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in 1996, in which several dozen Americans were murdered and many more wounded and more recently to arming anti-American insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran reportedly was behind the recent plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C. C-SPAN hosts repeatedly allow, as in this case, anti-Israel callers to paint a revisionist portrait of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Republic without interruption or factual contradiction.

Typically indulged by C-SPAN, deceptive repeat caller “Mary,�? also calling herself “Rebecca,�? “Kathleen,�? “Patricia,�? “Jackie,�? “Ann,�? “Kay,�? “Kate,�? usually condemns Israel and rails against American foreign policy in each of her numerous calls.

Note to C-SPAN hosts: Given that Washington Journal ostensibly has a "one-call-per-30-days" rule, become familiar with the distinctive voice you permit to repeatedly violate the non-repeat rule. This deceptive caller has phoned in recently as Rebecca, Jan. 15, 2012 (click here to listen); Kathleen, Jan. 13, 2012 (click here to listen); and Jackie, Jan. 9, 2012 (click here to listen).

According to C-SPAN’s Web site, an estimated 28,500,000 viewers tune in each week – making it an information source of potential significance. Among its most popular programs is Washington Journal. Contact C-SPAN at (202) 737-3220, [email protected], [email protected].

Posted by MK at 06:50 PM |  Comments (0)

Islamists in Libya Destroy Graves of Christians and Jews

Several U.S. servicemen have been killed in Afghanistan by terrorists enraged over the burning of Korans that had been mistakenly burned by American soldiers. U.S. President Barack Obama has apologized, but that has not been enough to quell the anger, which apparently has erupted in Libya as well where a mob of Islamists desecrated the graves of British soldiers who died in North Africa during World War II.

Footage of the rampage can be seen below.

Posted by dvz at 03:47 PM |  Comments (1)

March 01, 2012

Updated: Prep-Work for a Pogrom in Turkey?

March 2, 2012: This post has been updated. See added information below.

Are would-be murderers marking their targets for an upcoming pogrom in Turkey, a repeat of one that took place in 1978?

That’s a reasonable question to ask in light of a report published today in the Turkish website, Vatan (“Homeland�?), which bills itself as the “Internets fastest rising newspaper (or journal).�? The article (translated here) reports that 45 homes in the province of Adiyaman have been marked with crosses.

The homes all belong to Alevis, an religious community in Turkey that adheres to an offshoot of Shia Islam that is regarded as a syncretic heresy by its Muslim critics.

Why would someone put crosses -- a Christian sign -- on the homes of non-Christians in Turkey?

Another article, this one published by Hurriyet (“Liberty�?) Daily News provides some ominous background: “The same method was used to mark the houses of Alevis prior to the Maraş Massacre of 1978, in which 105 people were killed.�?

Update March 2, 2012:

Another article, this one published in Today' Zayman, indicates that the graffiti in question was drawn by children. The paper reports:

Following the marking of houses believed to belong to Alevis with red marker pen in the southeastern province of Adıyaman, concern has simmered in the Alevi community after the interior minister late on Thursday said a police investigation into the incident had revealed that children were the instigators.

Interior Minister İdris Naim Şahin stated in remarks to journalists during a visit to the quake-stricken eastern province of Van’s Erciş district that three children had marked not only Alevi houses but also Sunni houses with red markers. He said the children are thought to have randomly selected houses and that three Sunni houses in the same street had also been marked, noting that the height of the marks on the walls indicate they were made by children. He added, however, that the investigation was still under way and that an official explanation for the marks will be made at a later date. He also noted there is nothing to speculate over regarding the various reports in the media.

....

The incident that fueled concern among the Alevis as history has been witness to similar examples of this that led to violence. For example, the recent incident recalled the Maraş incidents, in which hundreds of Alevis were killed in intra-communal clashes in 1978. Houses of Alevis were marked red before the clashes erupted, according to the claims of the families of the victims.

To address people’s fears and uncertainty, many state officials and Alevi group leaders visited the Karapınar neighborhood, where the incident took place.

This article, published yesterday (March 1, 2012) is contradicted however, by a columnist in the same paper, Emre Uslu who reports that similar markings appeared in the province of Hatay which borders on Syria. He suggests that the ultimate responsibility for the marks resides with Bashar Al Assad who is trying to provoke the Alevis into aligning with the Kurds in Turkey. He provides other scenarios as well.

Posted by dvz at 12:04 PM |  Comments (0)