Anti-Semitic Comment of the Day

Here's yet another user that is merely critical of Israel's policies:

Just another classy, upstanding member of the Huffington Post community.

The original link.

Another Spun HuffPo Headline Leads To Hate

Check out the headline of this recent Huffington Post article:

And contrast it with the actual headline of the actual Associated Press article:

If this doesn't seem like a particularly big difference, I ask that you look closely. The Huffington Post headline is more direct and aggressive, like Israel is telling Hollywood what to do. The Associated Press headline is closer to the straight up truth. And naturally the Huffington Posters reacted to this aggressively sounding headline with a parade of hatred, dozens of posters all saying pretty much the same thing. Click to zoom in:

Another day on the Huffington Post.

CotD: Don't Let Truth Get in the Way of Propaganda

Here's one HPer that isn't going to let reality get in the way of his talking points:

So apparently, what the evil Zionists have been saying all along is true, there really is no such thing as the Palestinians! They are just a bunch of Israelis, despite the fact they never lived in Israel per se, held Israeli citizenship and oh yeah, consider themselves to be Israelis. But those stupid Palestinians, they don't know anything! Better let enlightened Westerners like "Richard Pearce" here redefine who you are to make his arguments more convenient.

The original link.

Chris Gunness And His Impeccable Logic

Chris Gunness has written an article shilling the joys of UNRWA, and zealously defends himself in the comments section. Here is one amusing example:

Yes, that's right. Anything you hear about UNRWA, except from UNRWA itself, isn't true. Why? Because UNRWA says so. What else do you need to know?

Blatantly Anti-Semitic Comment of the Day

Yeah I don't know how the Huffington Post moderators missed that one.

The original link.

Anti-UDI Voices Continue

A new article at Electronic Intifada is against the UDI because it might mean that the Palestinians trap themselves:

"But it’s no exaggeration to propose that this idea, although well-meant by some, raises the clearest danger to the Palestinian national movement in its entire history, threatening to wall Palestinian aspirations into a political cul-de-sac from which it may never emerge. The irony is indeed that, through this maneuver, the PA is seizing — even declaring as a right — precisely the same dead-end formula that the African National Congress (ANC) fought so bitterly for decades because the ANC leadership rightly saw it as disastrous. That formula can be summed up in one word: Bantustan."

The author even believes that Israel might be fighting so hard against the UDI so that the Palestinians will be even more dedicated to pursuing it. Then when the Palestinians declare statehood, Israel traps them in a "bantustan," but this time no one can complain because it's what the Palestinians themselves want!

I'm not sure whether this scenario is realistic or not, but we should continue to push this point of view, as it further fans the flame of division on this. Who knows, maybe in a couple of weeks we'll see Palestinian supporters protesting against each other! Wouldn't that be nice.

HPW User Profile: Fred Ricardo

Fred Ricardo is very much a footsoldier in the anti-Zionist brigade. He won't distinguish himself in any way, he won't get into long drawn out conversations with people, but he's always around, pushing his propaganda. A user finally convinced me to get a profile of him, especially after his comment of the day, so here are some comments collected, though I may have missed some.

Also what's notable about Fred is that he sometimes acts like a smart anti-Zionist, in that he tries to make it seem like it's only Israel's "neocon" government with which he takes issue:

Link

“I guess I have been here long enough that I am Grandfathe­red in... I try to get the truth out the best I can. I want Israel to succeed, it is the NEOCON in Israel I oppose as much as the NEOCONS in America.”

But that mask drops almost instantaneously:

 Link 

“When Israel missiles and shells kill woman, children and people who are not Terrorists­. when did Israel become judge, jury and executione­r?Israel is the Terrorist state.”

Link

Poor little Israel. No one is buying that you are the victim anymore.Israel is an oppressive apartheid fascist state, worse than South Africa in the '60 or Hitler's Germany.Get out of the West Bank NOW. [This often spammed as well]

Another typically dishonest anti-Zionist. But we're just getting started, click below to read the rest, especially how he calls American Jews a "fifth column."

Sharmine Narwani Chants "America Go Home"

Sharmine "Dignity Rockets" Narwani is back yet again, this time to tout her anti-Western credentials to her leftist and Middle East dwelling readership. This time she teaches us a new phrase "Irhal Amreeka," which means "America Go Home" and proceeds to repeat it throughout her column, also while referring to America as "we." For example:"

"And we should shut up too. So much of the Middle East's political discourse is infested with language created in Washington, that it is hard to separate truth from our fictions sometimes:
Ask yourself why we blindly followed a 20-year peace "process" which by its very nature suggests something that is ongoing, instead of a peace "solution?" Ask why we think it is kosher to financially and militarily support a colonial-settler state like Israel whose very existence is dependent on the elimination of indigenous peoples? Why did we start calling the Libyans "rebels" while they were still only "protesting" in the streets?"

Yeah, so what's this "we" bullshit? Does she think we've forgotten her background already? How does a Lebanese woman living in England get to call herself an American and (based on her other work) a Middle Eastern Arab at the same time. Pretty neat trick. Let's take a look at the article a little more in depth. Obviously the paragraph above is nothing new, delegitimizing Israel is Narwani's self-professed singular goal. And really her complaints about American foreign policy is just a retread of what she said here, that for the West to pursue its own goals in the Middle East is somehow horrible, even though for the Arabs to do so is just fine. But even more informative, we see the racist "helpless Arab" fallacy coming out in force:

"Nurturing and establishing an elite class/regime to administer US interests. There is no better recent example of this than the creation of the Palestinian Authority, but one could just as well look to the regimes of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to understand why we are still stuck repeating the Washington-born narratives that characterizes these nations as the "Moderate Arab States.""

This might be what I like to call "the dictator two step." When it comes to a dictator (in the Middle East or elsewhere) the USA has two options: Engage with the dictator or isolate him. When they engage with him, people like Sharmine Narwani shriek about how they are "propping him up" against the will of the people. An example of this is Egypt. But when they try to isolate him, people like Sharmine Narwani shriek about how they didn't try to take him down soon enough (Libya) or more likely shriek about how they are only doing so because he is against US interests.

This is almost a perfect repeat of what these same people were saying to Israel vis a vis making peace. When Israel makes peace with Egypt, they were complaining that Israel engaged with a dictator who kept his people oppressed. But they also complain that Israel doesn't deal with Assad to make peace with Syria, because Israel loves war or something. No doubt if we lived in some parallel universe where Israel did make peace with Syria through Assad, people like Narwani would be saying the exact same thing about Assad and Israel that they did about Mubarak and Israel. It's how they roll.

Oh, and one other thing. Only when it comes to US-Arab relations does "pursuing American interests" somehow become a bad thing. People like MJ Rosenberg and Narwani make a living off accusing American Jews Zionists of "putting a foreign countries' interests ahead of their own," yet somehow Narwani also expects Americans to go against American interests just on her say so. Don't expect anyone to accuse her of treason though.

Comment of the Day

Pretty standard stuff for this guy:

The original link.

HonestReporting's New Video

In Wake of Terror Attack, HuffPosters Try to Justify

As Matt already pointed out, there was yet another terror attack in Israel today, in which a knife wielding Palestinian attacked a group of Israeli teenagers. The Huffington Post did cover it, and the usual suspects were out in force to defend it (though not all of them):

Now in fairness, the vast majority of posters on that thread condemned the attack explicitly (even some anti-Zionists). But the pattern of Palestinians killing/HuffPosters justifying remains unbroken.

Palestinian Terrorism Is Not Due to Occupation

[Also from the HuffPo, this time HuffPoUK. Is balance on its way?]

The latest terror attacks on Israeli civilians should provide food for thought when it comes to considering whether to support the forthcoming prospect of statehood for the Palestinians.

These terrorist attacks, just like so many others before them, did not stem from a lack of the state of Palestine, nor were they due to the occupation -- an often-cited excuse for terrorism against Israelis. The attacks stem from a basic intolerance of Israel's right to exist. If anyone is serious about creating a true peace this is the issue that needs to be tackled.

After Egypt committed to peace instead of war, there was a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. The same is true for Jordan. And hopefully one day, the same will happen between the Palestinians and Israel. However, this day will only come when the Palestinians grow sincere about stopping terrorism. The creation of Palestine in the absence of a commitment to stop terror against Israelis will not bring peace. It will deteriorate an already bad situation for all parties concerned. The last thing the world needs is a dysfunctional state dedicated to terrorism.

Hypocritical Comment of the Day

Check out this comment, and especially the last sentence:

 

Last sentence: "It is sad to think that in this day and age some people think that a so-called 'democratic nation' should define citizenship and civil rights based on 'religion'."

This user bears the flag of "Palestine" as his avatar, so either he's including himself among the "some people" he refers to, or he is being an incredible hypocrite, as both the PLO and Hamas have made it very clear Palestine will be an Arab Muslim state. As usual, if the Palestinians do it, it's not wrong.

The original link.

Terror Attack in Tel Aviv, Will the HP Cover It?

Last night there was a terror attack in Tel Aviv, in which a terrorist attacked a nightclub and wounded 8 Israelis. At the moment on the HP, there is no coverage of this incident. It has been over 8 hours since the incident occurred. Time will tell when and if the HP covers it, if it does, we will update this post.

Update: They did.

David Harris' Latest

[From the HuffPo, a David Harris article that they actually chose to publish this time.]

Once again, the Palestinians, with the help of their international enablers, are about to shoot themselves in the foot -- or worse.

Barring unforeseen circumstances, the Palestinian leadership will soon turn to the UN to seek support for unilateral recognition of statehood.

Since Washington has indicated it will veto any effort in the Security Council, the Palestinians will look to the General Assembly (GA).

The GA cannot admit a new state to the UN, but can elevate the Palestinians' current status to non-member observer state. It can also offer symbolic support, by majority vote, for a Palestinian state along the 1967 lines, with the eastern part of Jerusalem as its capital.

For those interested in a two-state outcome, the Palestinian gambit should be opposed. The strategy is self-defeating. And the sooner the Palestinians get the message, especially from key democratic countries whose support they crave, the more likely they are to reconsider.

First, it does an end-run around face-to-face talks. Responsible political leaders should be encouraging the Palestinians to return to the table with Israel, not undermining the prospect of direct negotiations. No lasting peace can emerge by trying to force Israel's hand through GA resolutions.

And speaking of hands, Israel's has been extended in peace, through successive governments, yet the Palestinians have always managed to spurn it, while counting on their supporters to embrace unthinkingly every imaginable excuse.

Second, if a Palestinian state is recognized along the 1967 lines (in point of fact, nothing more than the 1949 armistice lines), this undermines UN Security Council Resolution 242 and 338 and the Camp David Accords, which call for a negotiated outcome and do not predetermine final boundaries.

Indeed, think about it. Once the GA endorses a Palestinian state's borders, then, in the real world, how will the Palestinians ever climb down from that tree to accept the territorial adjustments diplomats know will be required to address the minimum needs of both sides -- not just one party -- to reach a deal?

Third, countries that support the Palestinian strategy may well contribute to a resurgence of violence.

After all, when Palestinians on the street realize that no UN General Assembly vote will actually produce a state, how long will it be before disappointment turns to protests and more? And when they grasp that annual U.S. aid of about $500 million may come to a screeching halt, as Congress has already indicated, what then?

Why feed false expectations?

Fourth, to be a state entails certain criteria, including control of defined borders.

Can PA President Abbas legitimately claim control over the West Bank, where unresolved issues with Israel remain, and Gaza?

If he says yes to the latter, for instance, he acknowledges a partnership with Hamas, the governing authority in Gaza. But Hamas is a terrorist organization that has not met any of the three conditions for engagement set by the Quartet, including, notably, the UN.

If he says no, then he seeks to include Gaza in his envisioned state, but has no actual control over it, which is, in fact, currently the case.

Even if the GA vote is largely symbolic, countries should consider carefully if "Palestine" today has the necessary elements of statehood. And they should do it for a larger reason as well - they may be creating a precedent that could come back to haunt them.

After all, this is not the only case of disputed territory. If every secessionist, insurgent, or so-called independence group felt it might get validation from the UN General Assembly, regardless of actual conditions on the ground, all hell could break loose. Some affected countries smugly feel they can avoid the outcome through deft - read strong-arm - diplomacy. Perhaps yes, perhaps no. We'll see.

And fifth, a GA vote would send precisely the wrong message to Israel. It would say we are prepared to: (a) ignore your vital interests in the process, (b) overlook your determined efforts to reach a negotiated two-state agreement, (c) hand over, among other land, Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter and sacred Western Wall to Palestinian control, and (d) reinforce your long-held distrust of the world body, whose automatic majority today won't give Israel a fair hearing.

At the end of the day, of course, that majority will support whatever the Palestinians decide to do. It's simply the way the UN works. The Arab League (22 members), Organization of the Islamic Conference (56 members), and Non-Aligned Movement (118 members) have the numbers. With rare exceptions, they robotically go along with every Palestinian whim, however counter-factual or counter-productive.

Still, the Palestinians don't simply want the vote of the likes of Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. Rather, they seek the endorsement of democratic countries, especially the 27-member European Union. A few EU states, including Italy, Germany, Netherlands, and Romania, have declared their opposition, but, disturbingly, most are playing their cards close to the vest.

To support the Palestinians at the UN offers the path of least diplomatic resistance, some nations conclude. If we vote against Israel, as a practical matter, nothing will happen to us. But if we stand with Israel, the price can be high. Look at Canada, they say, which lost its bid last year for a Security Council seat because it voted with Israel rather than succumb to the herd mentality.

Even if we are not keen on the Palestinian strategy, as many top officials from Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America have told visiting AJC groups behind closed doors, do we really want to have the automatic majority block our aspirations in the UN system? And could there also be bilateral consequences (energy, investments, trade, etc.) for taking a principled stand on such a vote? In actuality, Israel's foes at the UN don't play according to Hoyle.

We'll know soon enough how countries line up.

And then we'll have a pretty good sense of what democratic nations have the courage to embrace principle in the pursuit of Israeli-Palestinian peace, and what countries are ready to throw it to the wind.

News the HP Doesn't Cover: PA Refuses to Recognize Jewish State

Proving definitively (again) this conflict is not over borders or settlements or occupation or injustice, it's about Israel's existence, PA President Abbas (the "moderate") has refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

The Palestinian Authority will not be recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said Saturday, adopting a belligerent tone ahead of his planned statehood bid in September.

The Palestinian leader also criticized demands made by the International Quartet of his Authority, urging the international community to back off.
The Palestinian leader also criticized demands made by the International Quartet of his Authority, urging the international community to back off. "Don't order us to recognize a Jewish state," Abbas said. "We won't accept it."

But remember, they're the suffering victims.

Another HuffPo Spun Headline

Unfortunately, I am yet again forced into the position where I need to make Glenn Beck look better than he is. But this really isn't about the Beckster, it's about the Huffington Post, as he may be the first target of their misleading headlines, but he won't be the last:

Um, okay. That sounds like a pretty dick thing to say. Did he actually say it?

"Beck also said he had been overwhelmed by one aspect of his trip. "I love the Israelis, he said. "I love the Jewish people. But they drive me out of my mind when they talk over each other. They're constantly talking!"Beck compared being around Jews in Israel to a family that had eight children. "Eating dinner at their house was like having dinner in Israel," he said. "Everybody is just talking at the same time, you can't even think!""

The headline basically implies that Beck said the opposite of what he actually meant. I suppose if you dislike Beck (as the HuffPo clearly does) then this story might appeal to you, but no matter what your feelings on him it sure seems pretty dishonest to me.

Feelings on Statehood Start to Change

While we haven't been looking, there have been quite a few editorial writers who are starting to realize that maybe a Palestinian state the UN isn't such a great idea after all. There are of course, Israelis who believe this:

"The UN cannot deliver a state. It can change neither the facts on the ground, nor Palestinian behavior. The Palestinians had two historic opportunities to build a state, in 1948 and again in 1993, but both opportunities were squandered by failed leadership."

But what I hadn't realized was that there are quite a few Palestinians and Palestine-supporters who don't agree with the plan, albeit for different reasons. Including Ali Abunimah:

"Of course in reality this “state” would not represent anyone since it would have absolutely no control of the territory on which it purports to exist and its “government” – what is now the Palestinian Authority – would remain subject to the blackmail and pressure of its financiers and external political sponsors."

And the BDS Movement:

"States that offer recognition of Palestinian statehood and continue business as usual with Israel are beyond hypocritical; they betray their own basic legal and political obligations to end Israel’s grave and persistent violations of international law and Palestinian rights."

And the American Task Force On Palestine:

"But all parties must seriously evaluate the consequences of any action that could damage the real prospects for Palestinian statehood in the near term; further degrade relations with the United States and possibly lead to a cutoff in American aid; and yield no improvements in Palestinian living conditions under occupation."

So it is true that all of these people have their own reasons for holding their views: In the case of the BDSers, it's because the PA plan distracts people from their real goal of restoring Palestinians "rights" to wipe out Israel. But the point is that voices against the PA plan are beginning to be heard...but not on the Huffington Post, of course. If they publish anything about it, it's in favor, with one exception buried in HuffPoUK, but most of the time they prefer to stick with safe topics. Like complaining about AIPAC!

Anti-Semitic Comment of the Day

On a thread about the Saudi Arabia/Delta scandal:

If you're so inclined, click the original link and see how he tries to defend himself from attack. Here's a spoiler: Not very well.

Friday Evening X-Men

Another Jewish/X-Men comparison video to take us into the weekend. Hope everyone stays dry!

This Week's Holocaust Cynicism

The Huffington Post (like it always does) has published a story about an elderly person, this time the founder of IKEA, with possible connections to the Nazis. So the Huffington Posters (like they always do) responded with comparisons to Israel/Zionists, accusing the Jews of "not getting over it," and generally grinding their collective axes. Here is but a sample, click to zoom in:

Just another day on the HuffPo.

More Border Violence, More HP Photo Bias

Zach wrote about this picture earlier but I thought I would go into more detail. Violence continues between Israel and Gaza with air strikes and rockets fired. The Huffington Post covered the story and do you remember the photo they use to illustrate it?:

So this story is supposed to be even handed. There is violence on both sides, etc. etc. The death depicted in the picture is Ismael al-Ismar, according to the caption. Who is al-Ismar? Oh, he just happens to be a leader in the Al-Quds Brigade, something that neither the caption nor the article itself bothers to mention. Much better just to show a bunch of mourning Palestinians and let the readership assume the worst.

By the way, the day this article was published (August 24th), a 62 year old Israeli woman succumbed to injuries sustained by rocket fire. Still waiting for the Huffington Post to cover that story, to say nothing about showing Israelis at her funeral.

HPW User Profile: JennaBean

JennaBean is an interesting character. Most of her posts that I have seen have been emotionally and enthusiastic, to the point of chewing out people who disagreed with her, but I never found them to be too offensive. But then a reader alerted me to a couple of her comments, which probed me to dig further. What I found was quite a lot of pro-peace, pro-humanity comments, which were very encouraging. But I also found quite a lot of rants about "the chosen people" and comparisons to Nazis. So maybe you can judge for yourself. These are collected from her most recent 300 comments, so there may be more I didn't notice.

Link
the irony of you calling someone else a hypocrìte.­..
Why don't you move to Gaza, lets see how Zìonist you are when you've lived in that shìthole for a few years.

Link
“don't fret, alot of people don't b4 blindly posting, especially if it involves the CHOSEN people”

Link
“I see you weren't able to follow his guidelines for answering the question dear chosen one.”

Link
“Now you know how Palestinia­ns feel. Should they just move on?
Lemme guess, that's "different­" right?” [Click for context, Holocaust comparison]

Link
“None of what the Jews went through justifies them doing nearly the same to another people, sorry.”

Link
“I agree with you 100%. This post was an example of the many ridiculous reasons why the "chosen people" to justify their actions b/c to them they were promised real estate in some dusty old book.”

Comment of the Day

Now this might be sarcasm, but based on his other comments in the thread, I'm not so sure.

The original link.

News the HP Doesn't Cover: PA Arrests Professor

In a special sneak peek of the kind of state the future state of Palestine will be, the PA arrested a professor for criticizing them.

A prominent Palestinian professor who wrote an article criticizing the university administration where he works was arrested on Thursday by Palestinian Authority security forces in the West Bank.

Palestinian sources said that Abdel Sattar Qassem, who works at An-Najah University in Nablus, was ordered to be held in custody for 48 hours following a complaint from the university president, Rami Hamdallah.

Qassem is a well-known critic of the PA leadership. In the past he declared his intention to run in the presidential election in the Palestinian territories.

Because of his public criticism of the PA, Qassem was targeted in the past by PA security forces. At one point he was shot and wounded shortly after launching a scathing verbal attack on PA chairman Yasser Arafat.

Qassem’s son, Faisal, said that the PA Prosecutor-General’s Office phoned his father on Wednesday night and asked him to report for questioning the following day.

The son said that when Qassem arrived at the offices of the PA security forces in Nablus, he was informed of the decision to detain him for 48 hours for allegedly slandering the university by publishing a critical article.

In the article, Qassem criticized the university administration for refusing to comply with a court order rescinding its decision to expel four students.

“The university administration refused to carry out the court order although its president, who is also a member of the Palestinian central election committee, knows the importance of respecting the law,” he wrote. “This refusal [to comply with the court order] harms the university and its reputation.”

 But please, all you pro-human rights, pro-democracy folks, keep focusing exclusively on Israel. Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain.

Chris Gunness Defends UNRWA on the Huffington Post

Look who showed up:

So Chris, working hard or hardly working? And don't you have someone you can pay to do that instead?

Haggai Carmon on Palestinian Refugees

[Crossposted from the HuffPo]

Come September, the UN General Assembly will consider the Palestinian Authority's request to be admitted as a member. Historically, the UN has played a major role in the Palestinian refugees' problem; it could now bring to its resolution.

Fact: According to the UN, there are five million Palestinians, mostly members of the third, fourth and fifth generations of former residents of areas which are now within the State of Israel. Nonetheless, they meet UNRWA's (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East definition of "a refugee." However, according to the UN, "more than 1.4 million refugees, around one third of the total, live in 58 recognized camps, and UNRWA's services are located in or near these areas," in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.

Fact: These 1.4 million Palestinians live in squalid conditions in the camps. There is no question that they should not continue living under these poor living conditions, which drive many to terror and crime. Israel claims they escaped in 1948 after their leaders urged them to temporarily leave until the Arab countries armies will clean Palestine from the Jews, throw them to the sea, so that the returning Palestinians could seize Jewish properties. The Palestinians claim that they were forcibly exiled. Historians have their own, also conflicting theories of what really happened.

But the Palestinians or the world cannot wait. Finger pointing is unproductive, and a forward looking solution must be found. The question as to who is responsible for their genuine misery is secondary to the question as to how to resolve the problem. A 10-year-old Palestinian boy or girl in a refugee camp should not be asked to pay the price of a historic mistake made by his or her great-grandparents who listened to the irresponsible fantasies and unrealistic promises made by their now long dead and forgotten leaders. The same rule should apply to the offspring of Palestinians who were forcibly exiled from their homes by Israeli forces during Israel's 1948 Independence War. The solution should include all.

After the War of Independence in 1948 ended, Israel was faced with a refugee problem of its own: millions of Jews who fled the Holocaust and those who, like my father-in-law, who fled persecution in their native Arab countries. They came to Israel with only the shirts on their backs. Israel treated them as new immigrants, not refugees, and soon they were absorbed into the general population.

Israel cannot agree to the Palestinian demands for their "right of return" -- a laundered call for the elimination of the only Jewish State in the world. A repatriation of all the descendants of the original Palestinian refugees to Israel would immediately turn the Jewish majority (80%) to a minority of 45%. Soon enough the Arab majority would democratically wipe out all Jewish identity and laws.

The United Nations, surprisingly enough, has perpetuated the Palestinian refugee problem for the past 61 years. Not many are aware that the U.N has two refugee relief agencies, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ("UNHCR") and United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East ("UNRWA.")

Why two? UNHCR's goal is to provide help to all of the world's refugees. It helps to protect the basic rights of refugees by finding them refuge in another country with an option to voluntarily return to their homelands, resettle in the country of their refuge or to immigrate to a third country. UNHCR employs approximately 6,300 employees in 130 countries and has an annual budget of $81 million.

The other agency, UNRWA provides assistance, protection and advocacy for Palestine refugees in the Middle East and its services include education, health care, relief, camp infrastructure and improvement, community support, microfinance and emergency response, including in times of armed conflict. UNRWA is the UN's largest organization and employs 28,000 employees, 99% of them local Palestinians.

The difference between the two agencies also happens to be the single most important explanation for the current Palestinian refugee problem. According to UNRWA "UNRWA's services are available... [also] to [T]he descendants of the original Palestine refugees...When the Agency started working in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services."

Would the UN also offer such forever help to the descendants of the Jews who were exiled from Spain in 1492 or to the millions of Europeans forcibly exiled from their homes during World War II? Applying the UNRWA principle, then the UN should.

The UN member countries should demand that as a precondition to the admission of the Palestinian Authority, it would absorb together with Jordan, Lebanon and Syria the remaining Palestinians still living in camps. The UNHCR principle of helping only actual refugees and their immediate accompanying families to resettle, should apply to the Palestinians receiving assistance from UNRWA; otherwise it will continue to perpetuate the problem. Many countries will happily contribute significant funds to help with this project. Jobs will be created, and a new development momentum will give the Palestinians in the camps a new future. The timing is right: The Arab countries have insisted during the past 63 years that the Palestinian problem is the root to all the problems in the Middle East and the region's instability, and therefore demanded that Israel recognize their right of return. The recent uprising in many Arab countries and the resulting destabilization of the region proved the Arab countries wrong.

For centuries, scientists dreamed about inventing perpetuum mobile, machines that once started would operate or produce useful work indefinitely without needing additional energy. The creators of UNWRA have created such perpetuity, offering help forever to individuals that could be generations distant from their forefathers who were residents of areas in present day Israel. The UN member countries can stop that perpetuity, thereby helping to resolve rather than perpetuate the problem. Can welfare recipients in the U.S in the 1940s' pass along their benefits to their off springs born 50 years later? Why should the Palestinians be treated differently? Is there any reason, other than cynical politics of some interested countries, to let perpetuum mobile keep on spinning, spending more than a billion dollar a year, with no end in sight.

HuffPoUK's Headline Spin

If you read most Zionist bloggers, then you probably read his coverage of a University of St. Andrew's student who was expelled for soiling the Israeli flag and calling an Israeli student a Nazi, among other things. If you want to read the whole sordid details (as well as some informative reactions of the students' supporters) check it out at Elder. But as you might expect, when HuffPoUK got their hands on the story, the spin was clear and strong. Here is the outside headline:

And here is the inside headline:

If this doesn't seem like that big of a deal, let me remind you that there is a huge difference between "insults" and "abuse." Insulting a child will make him cry. Abusing a child sends you to federal prison. The way the outside headline makes it sound, this student was sentenced for simply saying "Israel sucks!" which in turn makes it a free speech issue. And of course, there were Huffington Posters who drew exactly the conclusion that the editors wanted:

One of the Huffington Posters also said that Donnachie urinated in the Israeli students' wastebasket, but that hasn't been confirmed.

Comments of the Day

Perhaps a blood libel? In the context of Iran's nuclear program:

The original link. An example of "dog whistling:"

The original link.

MJR Gives Us a Shout Out

Huffington Post blogger MJ Rosenberg paid a visit to our humble corner of the Internet earlier and gave us a shoutout on Twitter. Check out what he had to say!

I don't normally like getting into flame wars (not that I ever expect Mr. Rosenberg to be back), but I have 4 quick easily palatable points I'd like to share about these tweets.

1. Thanks for the free publicity, Michael!
2. Apparently, because we disagree with Rosenberg about Israel we are automatically "Israel firsters." Say what you will about Mr. Rosenberg but when he has a philosophy he sticks to it.
3. You can read the bottom article Rosenberg links to here. There is simply NO WAY to make the case the article states the deaths of "Jews & Palestinians" aren't morally equivalent. The article clearly states there is no moral equivalence between the death of a terrorist and the death of a civilian. The fact that Rosenberg not only lies about it but proudly links to it is extremely illuminating.
4. I would tell all of these things to Mr. Rosenberg himself, but he blocked our Twitter feed, demonstrating his values of freedom of speech and engaging in spirited debate.

Important New Video

MJ Rosenberg's Moral Equivalence

In the wake of eight dead Israelis slain last week, MJ Rosenberg was only one of many bloggers to throw in their two cents. Nor was he the first to try and establish a moral equivalence between the Palestinian targeting of civilian buses and Israeli counterstrikes on rocket launchers. I didn't particularly want to write a response to his latest article, but it needs to be done. We'll begin:

"First, let me put all my cards on the table. I believe that the intentional killing of civilians whether by Palestinian terrorists on the ground or by the Israeli Air Force from the sky is a war crime. As far as killing kids, I will paraphrase what Lincoln said about slavery: if killing a child, any child, is not wrong then nothing is wrong."

First of all, I wonder if this also applies to child soldiers, a common Palestinian tactic that I'm sure Rosenberg would be happier pretending didn't exist. And of course the IAF has never intentionally killed any civilian, the historical record on that is very clear. So already Rosenberg is establishing a nonexistent moral equivalence between those who intentionally kill civilians and fail and those who don't intentionally kill civilians yet do so anyway. Which we have been over a million times already. But anyway, now that he tries to sound evenhanded, let's see if he can keep it up:

"Nonetheless, Israel and the Palestinians resumed the cycle of violence again this week and, if not stopped, it will spiral into mass civilian carnage. Both sides are responsible. But I do not hold a bunch of rag tag terrorist thugs to the same standards I apply to a powerful state. So, yes, I do expect more from Israel."

Point 1: It is a straight up lie to imply that both of these groups "resumed the cycle of violence." Israel was existing normally (with all the grievances implied within that) when the Palestinians launched a premeditated, elaborate attack involving four different units. To which Israel responded. So no, there's no equivalence here. No Palestinian attack, no Israeli response. If Rosenberg can't see that, there's not much that can help him.
Point 2: These same "rag tag terrorist thugs" not only won Palestinian elections but are necessary for peace and should be part of a coalition government...at least according to Rosenberg. How is it that Rosenberg can marginalize Hamas as insignificant and small and yet at the same time encourage Israel to negotiate with them? The representation two step is back yet again, and Rosenberg doesn't dance it very well. Big surprise.

Today's Bloody Shirt Waving

The latest Israel-Gaza conflict headline and picture:

Again the bias here is not so much the picture in isolation but when contrasted with the pictures in stories involving dead Israelis. My ongoing challenge to find a Huffington Post story with an Israeli funeral still stands.

Threats of the Day

Here's a post sent to us by a pro-Israel HPer of a threat directed at another Zionist voice:

Note that this comment remains undeleted despite being up for days. This must be an example of that famous dedication to freedom of expression on the Huffington Post I've heard so much about.

The original link.

And here is another from the same user while we're at it:

Today's HuffPo Headline Spin

This story slipped through the cracks slightly last week, as it appeared just before the terror attacks near Eilat. Check out the "outside" headline:

Now when you read that, you might immediate assume that it was Israel or Egypt that stopped these students from leaving Gaza, since they are the ones that control the access points. But no, that's not the case. If you click the link, you will find that:

 Hm. So why did the headline switch from the passive to the active voice once the user has clicked on it? Is this another case of the Huffington Post trying to save Internet ink? Or are they merely fishing for clicks yet again? Fortunately the readers didn't fall prey to this trap for once and (with some exceptions) held Hamas responsible for this injustice. Shocking I know.

Justifying Terror Comment of the Day

Here's another enlightened liberal HPer defending violent, racist Palestinian policy:

I wonder if this user would make that argument for Arabs "invading" America or Europe. My guess is probably not.

The original link.

News the HP Doesn't Cover: Gaza Middle Class Thrives

From Ynet:

A budding middle class in the impoverished Gaza Strip is flaunting its wealth, sipping coffee at gleaming new cafes, shopping for shoes at the new tiny shopping malls, and fueling perhaps the most acrimonious grass roots resentment yet toward the ruling Hamas movement.

This middle class, which has become visible at the same time as a mini-construction boom in this blockaded territory, is celebrating its weddings in opulent halls and vacationing in newly built beach bungalows. That level of consumption may be modest by Western standards, but it's in startling contrast to the grinding poverty of most Gazans, who rely on UN food handouts to get by.

Some of the well-off are Hamas loyalists. That rankles many Gaza residents because the conservative Islamic movement gained popularity by tending to the poor — through charitable aid, education and medical care — along with its armed struggle against Israel.

"Hamas has become rich at the expense of the people," fumed a 22-year-old seamstress, Nisrine, as she stitched decorative appliqué onto a dress. She wouldn't disclose her family name, not wanting to be seen criticizing the militant group.

Gaza's Hamas government denies its loyalists have gotten wealthy since the group came to power.
Corruption "doesn't touch us," said Hamas official Yusef Rizka

Surely some pro-Palestinian Westerners can come in and demand Hamas redistribute the wealth.

Today's Anti-Israel Propaganda

In the recent days the Huffington Post has either gotten more blatant in its anti-Israel spin, or has become lazier. I say this because they have introduced a new Huffington Post blogger named Michael Berg. What are his qualifications for writing, you ask?

"Michael Berg is a member of the St. Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee and Jewish Voice for Peace. He is a baker in St. Louis, Mo."

Wow. They couldn't even get the President of the PSC or JVP? Or even the vice president? They had to make do with a mere "member?" He's also a proud member of the "flytilla," and one of the few who didn't get deported. I guess Mr. Berg's presence proves what we've always known: That to write for the Huffington Post, you don't need to actually be qualified, you just need to say the right things. And Berg certainly does. Not all of his article is necessarily worth quoting, since it's pretty much the same thing we have heard before. But I did find it informative how many claims he made without sourcing. For example:

"I witnessed a Palestinian farmer coming under fire from projectiles merely for trying to farm his own land. The excuse? His land is too close to a Jewish-only settlement."

Projectiles? What kind of "projectiles?" Rocks thrown by settlers? Bullets fired from soldiers? Or something else entirely? This might seem like a nitpick but the phrasing here is certainly odd: why the use of a nonspecific noun like "projectiles," as well as no mention of where they were coming from. As if the "projectiles" fired themselves. Maybe Mr. Berg wasn't a witness after all, or else he'd have a little more specific information for us. Next:

"A European with me did not leave the vicinity as quickly as Israeli soldiers wanted and had his face smashed into the ground. He was detained for approximately one week and then deported." 

So again, this story could be true, but then it might not be. Since Mr. Berg doesn't provide a link, we are expected to take him at his unbiased and objective word. What is more likely, I'd wager, is that this "European" got in a fight with an Israeli soldier, got hit, and then deported. But of course we'll never know one way or the other.

Comment of the Day

Nice.

The original link.

Today's Attacks on A HuffPo Blogger

In the main August 18th attack thread, which gained over three thousand comments, Huffington Post blogger Shay Brog weighed in. Check out some of the responses, as always click to zoom in:

If this doesn't seem particularly aggressive, just imagine what would have happened if they were directed at...Sharmine "Dignity Rockets" Narwani for instance.

"The Jewish People Come to Own Words"

What kind of comments gets you eleven favorites on the Huffington Post? This kind:

Fighting in the war on anti-Semitism, and accusing the Jews of exploiting the Holocaust all in one post. Classy, and typically Huffington Post. Still, at least he didn't insult our intelligence and say "Zionists."

Bradley Burston's "Israelis Are People Too"

[This article by Bradley Burston appeared in Ha'aretz but not in the Huffington Post, even though he is a blogger there. Why? Can't say. But we're reproducing it here. Update: They eventually did cover it.]

In the aftermath of a terror operation in which gunmen attacked several fronts in southern Israel, killing eight people and wounding dozens more, try this sentence on for size: "Israelis are people, too."

What’s your first reaction? If you've been around this block before, it may well be something akin to suspicion. It is, after all, a sentence with an ax to grind. Why else would anyone need to say something like that at all?

Here's one reason: You can bet that terrible things are about to happen, with Gaza being the imminent target of Israeli retaliation. The next step will be a ritual bifurcation of sympathy, either exclusively for Israeli victims of the Thursday attacks, or exclusively for the Gazans to follow.

There will even be scorn for those who suggest that innocent victims are innocent victims no matter who they are – an observation which will quickly be written off by some (at the bottom of this article) as mendacious moral equivalence, or willful ignorance of the obvious malice and evildoing of one side – take your pick – toward the other.

Which brings us back to that statement, simpleminded as it may sound, alleging that Israelis are people, too. It came to mind because at the time I heard about the attacks, I happened to be reading anarticle on racism in Israel by Palestinian author and activist Omar Barghouti, a driving force behind the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.

Referring to a Hebrew University professor's study of racist attitudes in Israeli education, to be published in Britain this month, Barghouti wrote: "This insightful research by respected Israeli scholar Nurit Peled-Elhanan will confirm what Palestinian researchers have always known: Israel's prevailing culture of racism, fundamentalism, support for war crimes, and apartheid against Palestinians is mainly a product of an educational system that indoctrinates Jewish-Israeli students with militant colonial values and extreme racism that turn them into 'monsters' once in uniform."

Barghouti concludes that "more BDS is needed to end Israeli occupation, colonialism and apartheid. Other than the obvious benefits to indigenous Palestinians," he writes on Mondoweiss.net, "an end to this system of oppression may well transform most Israelis from colonial 'monsters' into normal humans."

Barghouti's use of the word monster, taken from remarks by Peled-Elchanan quoted in The Guardian ("People ask how can these nice Jewish boys and girls become monsters once they put on a uniform.") sheds light on a question which bears further examination. 

All but obscured in the endless debate over whether criticism of Israel constitutes anti-Semitism – a debate now tearing a hole in the leadership of the American Jewish Committee – is a little-discussed but no less significant companion issue: When opposition to Israeli policies crosses the line into hatred and dark stereotyping of Israelis as a whole, does this not constitute racism?

Do those who hate Israel and what it does, which is certainly their right, also enjoy a moral exemption that allows bigotry against Israelis as Israelis?

It seems to me that people who justly fight racism have a responsibility not to practice it. It is all too natural a matter, especially in this part of the world, for anger over hated policies to boil over into racism against an entire people.

We've seen what that does. We've seen what that enables. We're about to see it again. By the time these words see print, more innocent people are going to die. They are not the enemy, faceless, merciless, heartless and monstrous.

They are people, too.