Thursday news roundup

Posted on 08/12/2010 by Meryl Yourish

The AP notices that Palestinians have more rights in Israel than in Lebanon: It’s a profile of the Lebanese debate about whether to give Palestinians the right to work in the country where they’ve lived (in many cases) all their lives. Although the article does point out that one of the reasons the Palestinians are persona non grata is the launching of terror attacks from Lebanon into Israel, causing retaliation. Oh, and there’s that trying to set up a state-within-a-state thing. Once again, I must point out that an equal number of Jews fled or were driven from Arab and Muslim nations post-1948. Israel accepted them as citizens, and now half of all Israelis are Sephardic or of Sephardic ancestry.

What’s wrong with this analysis? Well, let’s see. There’s the part where Fred Kaplan seems to think that peace with the Palestinians will stop the Iranian drive towards nukes. Because the other Arab nations will help Israel, or something. Then there’s the part where he mentions politicians with daddy issues based on Jeffrey Goldberg’s conclusion that Netanyahu will not make peace with the Palestinians until after his father is gone. Kaplan complains about politicians with daddy issues, and jumps immediately to G. W. Bush. And yet, the man in office currently—the one who wrote “Dreams of My Father”? Not a mention. Pot. Kettle. Double standard.

Oh, look. More Palestinian glorification of terrorists as “heroes”: Funny how the Obama administration, the State Department, the media, and everyone who calls out Israel on settlement building as an obstacle to peace never seem to notice that the glorifying of terrorists is a regular part of the Palestinian Authority’s daily business. No, it’s not really funny. Not noticing that the Palestinians are not keeping the obligations of the Road Map while accusing the Israelis of the same is simply Israeli Double Standard Time which, as you know, occurs only on days that end with a “y.”

The Syrian/Iranian victory over Lebanon is complete: Saad Hariri is calling for an investigation into Israel’s role in his father’s death. The fact that the UN panel is about to name Hezbollah as behind the murder is going to be slammed as a Zionist plot. How sad is it that the Lebanese March 14 movement has fallen so far, so fast, when a few years ago they managed to drive Syria out of their country and started to take back their own? Since then, of course, Iran’s sponsorship of its Hezbollah proxies and takeover of the Lebanese army have all but crushed the democratic movement. And what does the world do? Why, it sends money to the Lebanese army even after Hezbollah was made part of the government, indirectly causing the ambush on Israeli soldiers last week.

How much does it have to suck to be him right now? Forced to work with his father’s murderers in blaming someone else for the murder, for fear of his own life, and for that of his country falling into civil war?

If ever there was a case for the EU and the Obama administration to get involved in a Middle Eastern country’s internal politics, it’s here. But no. They have to keep on slamming Likud and Netanyahu. Because if Israel would only make peace with the Palestinians, Iran’s proxy army wouldn’t be assassinating Lebanese democrats.

Posted in Iran, Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time, Lebanon, palestinian politics | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

The Point of No Return

Posted on 08/11/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Jeffrey Goldberg has a long piece in the Atlantic on whether or not Israel is going to attack Iran’s nukes. Here’s a hint: He thinks it’s going to be in the coming spring. The main question was, is, and continues to be: Will the aftereffects of bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities be worth the mission?

When the Israelis begin to bomb the uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz, the formerly secret enrichment site at Qom, the nuclear-research center at Esfahan, and possibly even the Bushehr reactor, along with the other main sites of the Iranian nuclear program, a short while after they depart en masse from their bases across Israel—regardless of whether they succeed in destroying Iran’s centrifuges and warhead and missile plants, or whether they fail miserably to even make a dent in Iran’s nuclear program—they stand a good chance of changing the Middle East forever; of sparking lethal reprisals, and even a full-blown regional war that could lead to the deaths of thousands of Israelis and Iranians, and possibly Arabs and Americans as well; of creating a crisis for Barack Obama that will dwarf Afghanistan in significance and complexity; of rupturing relations between Jerusalem and Washington, which is Israel’s only meaningful ally; of inadvertently solidifying the somewhat tenuous rule of the mullahs in Tehran; of causing the price of oil to spike to cataclysmic highs, launching the world economy into a period of turbulence not experienced since the autumn of 2008, or possibly since the oil shock of 1973; of placing communities across the Jewish diaspora in mortal danger, by making them targets of Iranian-sponsored terror attacks, as they have been in the past, in a limited though already lethal way; and of accelerating Israel’s conversion from a once-admired refuge for a persecuted people into a leper among nations.

I think that Goldberg is wrong about Israel ever having been admired; the expiration date on that was, oh, 1948. But I do think this is both an existential question and an existential battle for Israel. I also think that the mad mullahs of Iran most certainly would use nuclear weapons on Israel. They have stated quite plainly that they want to see a world without “Zionists,” and they absolutely mean the Jews of Israel (and probably the rest of us as well; Hassan Nasrallah once famously said that if all the Jews in the world gathered in Israel, that would save Hezbollah the effort of hunting them down to kill them).

I have also written about my worst-case scenario if Iran does get nuclear weapons and uses them on Israel, and Israel retaliates. Besides the millions dead in Iran and Israel, we will see worldwide attacks on Jewish communities, even here in America. Europe has a terrible record on protecting Jews from attacks. Hezbollah has been preparing sleeper cells for years, maybe for decades.

But what will we see if Israel bombs Iranian nuclear sites? Probably exactly what Goldberg details in the article, and also attacks on Jews in America, more deadly and widespread than we’ve ever seen.

This is a lose-lose situation. My only hope is that sanctions are beginning to bite, and perhaps the world is beginning to realize that time is running out.

Posted in Iran, Israel | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Wednesday sniefs

Posted on 08/11/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Please don’t attack the country we’re selling weapons to: The French stopped Israel from launching a large-scale attack to teach Lebanon that there is a price to pay for ambushing and murdering Israeli soldiers. Oh, and the Obama administration sent Hillary to up the pressure. Result: The Lebanese army now thinks it can get away with ambushing the IDF. And France says it has to keep arming them, because it has contracts it can’t break. Money is far more important to the French than, say, Jewish lives.

UN betrays Israel, and Bibi is surprised? Please. He cannot possibly be naive enough to think that any UN-Israel cooperation would actually be rewarded. Of course Ban Ki-Moon says there was no agreement not to interrogate Israeli soldiers. Israel gets screwed by the UN, always. That’s written into its charter, I think. Like I said last week: No way this ends well.

Even the Lebanese aren’t buying Nasrallah’s “Israel did it!” excuse: Now this is interesting. Lebanese politicians are mocking Chipmunk Cheeks’ “evidence” that Israel assassinated Rafik Hariri. Maybe they haven’t all been terrorized, after all.

Now we’re paying Rauf to fundraise: The State Department is sending the imam behind the World Trade Islamic center to the middle east on a “religious outreach” trip. Good to know that our State Department thinks that the Constitution calls for paying clerics to talk to coreligionists. That’s not an issue about the separation of church and state and all. And gee, while he’s there, watch him knock around funding issues for the Cordoba initiative.

Posted in Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, United Nations | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

The AP: Back to its normal anti-Israel bias

Posted on 08/10/2010 by Meryl Yourish

The AP bias returns: In this article about Lebanon attempting to “reassure” Congress that Hezbullah has nothing at all to do with its army, the AP describes the Lebanese ambush on the IDF as follows:

The Congressman Berman said his concerns about Hezbollah’s influence over the Lebanese armed forces were reinforced a day after he suspended the aid when Israeli and Lebanese army forces clashed along their common border.

Hezbollah and the Lebanese army both insisted the militant group did not take part in the clash, and the State Department said Monday there was no evidence American-supplied equipment had been used by Lebanese soldiers. It said it was not yet clear whether the soldiers involved had received U.S. military training.

The fighting was the worst since 2006 in the area, killing two Lebanese soldiers, a Lebanese journalist and an Israeli officer. It underlined how easily tensions can re-ignite along the frontier where Israel and Hezbollah fought a war four years ago.

This, in spite of the fact that the Lebanese army itself declared that it fired first, admitting that its troops ambushed the Israelis. Ynet managed to find this quote by Congressman Berman, but the AP article elided the quote to the words in bold:

Berman continued, “I strongly condemn the unprovoked attacked by the Lebanese Army that resulted in the death of an Israeli officer. Until we know more about this incident and the nature of Hizballah influence on the LAF — and can assure that the LAF is a responsible actor — I cannot in good conscience allow the United States to continue sending weapons to Lebanon.”

There, in a nutshell, is how you bias an article. Remove any reference to the Lebanese responsibility for the attack on Israeli troops. Don’t mention the presence of a television crew sent by Hassan Nasrallah to film the ambush. Don’t mention the extraordinary number of journalists present at a regular tree pruning. But do pretend that it was a battle caused by both sides, when in fact, it was an ambush that was responded to with force.

Yep. The AP is back to normal. I expect they fired the editor of the unbiased pieces.

Posted in AP Media Bias, Israel, Lebanon | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Nasrallah’s “revelations” of Zionist crimes

Posted on 08/10/2010 by SnoopyTheGoon

The trailer to this thriller was published a week ago:

The leader of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah has accused Israel of being behind the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. In a fiery speech, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said he would prove the claim at a press conference next week.

Of course, the brave new world was predicted as well*:

We blame the Israeli enemy for the assassination, and the figures I will reveal will open new horizons in the investigation that will lead to the identity of the true murderer.

Seeing as how all the fingers that matter point ar Hezbollah, the public was waiting with bated breath for the unveiling of the new and crashing evidence. The date was set (Monday, August 9), the microphones were ready and the pens were poised. And here it comes…

The BBC headline is worthy of a special mention:

Nasrallah reveals Hariri murder ‘evidence’

You too have noticed the quotation marks, I guess. Anyhow, without going into the details, it was beyond pathetic. Of course, any Nasrallah’s speeches are taken as a gospel by the converted. But even at the low standard the converted are used to it was exceptionally pitiable.

He showed footage which he said was from Israeli spy planes, shot at different times from the 1990s to 2005.

Sheikh Nasrallah also revealed the name of a Lebanese man allegedly spying for Israel, who, he said, was at the site of the killing the day before the assassination. The man, however, fled before authorities could detain him, he said.

Nasrallah also showed footage of a man he called Ahmed Nasrallah, whom he claimed is of no relation to himself, saying he had served as a spy for Israel. The other Nasrallah, who was arrested by Hezbollah, was shown telling the camera that he had informed Hariri the group intended to carry out an attack against him and his family using a car bomb, after numerous failed attempts on his life.

That’s it, ladies and gentlemen. It may be interesting to notice that there was a moment of weakness (or was it a rare moment of truth?):

“I don’t claim this is conclusive proof,” Sheikh Nasrallah said during his news conference.

Indeed. But in any case even this “inconclusive proof” will not be of use to anyone:

Sheikh Nasrallah said he would not hand the evidence to the international tribunal investigating Mr Hariri’s death, because he did not trust it.

Uhu… but we should take another good look at this picture:

It seems to be a recent one, and the pallor of that face doesn’t point to a healthy way of life. And how could it, after four years in a bunker? Obviously this unhealthy regime has an impact on the Sheikh’s mental abilities, his power of judgment is visibly waning as this wretched “revelation” is witness.

Somebody has to persuade him to go to the beach or something…

(*) That August 2 speech included a bit of retrospection too:

Regarding the Second Lebanon War, Nasrallah accused the international community of “showing, for the most part, support for the Israeli enemy, whose plan was to crush us until we hand over our arms. Prof. Noam Chomsky also believes that the war was an American decision executed by Israel.”

Yep, it’s always a pleasure to have one of these “Noam and I” flashbacks, ain’t it?

Cross-posted on SimplyJews

Posted in Lebanon, Terrorism | 1 Comment

Two more balanced AP pieces on Israel? Seriously?

Posted on 08/09/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Seriously. Though it comes at the very end of this article on the mysterious case of the arrest of an Israeli who was photographing Jewish sites in Libya, it still tells the truth about why a Jew from another country had to take photos of the former Jewish sections of Tripoli.

Libya, like many other Arab countries, was home to a large Jewish community until the middle of the 20th century, when Jews fled mob violence and state persecution linked to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Of course, that information really belonged right here, in the middle of the story with this paragraph:

Israeli officials said the efforts to free him involved Italy, which has close ties to Libya and is home to a Libyan Jewish exile community, as well as France, the U.S. and Tunisia.

But we’ll take whatever crumbs we can get.

Further balance in the lead of the latest Gaza flotilla article:

The Israeli commission is looking into the government’s decision-making leading up to the decision to send naval commandos to board the ship on May 31 and steer it to an Israeli port. The United Nations has also announced its own inquiry.

The commandos met with violent resistance on board the Mavi Marmara and opened fire, killing nine Turkish activists, including one with U.S. citizenship. The bloodshed drew an international outcry that eventually forced Israel to ease its blockade of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. Both the pro-Palestinian activists on board the vessel and the Israeli soldiers have accused each other of provoking the violence.

Too bad the AP can’t do an investigative article on the IHH “activists”. Now that would be real balance. But still—this is better than I’ve seen in quite some time. Three fairly balanced pieces in the last few days. This is a very good thing.

Posted in AP Media Bias, Gaza, Israel | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

You’re one of the destructive ones Tom

Posted on 08/08/2010 by Soccerdad

I’m happy today that Thomas Friedman appreciates the difference between “constructive” and “destructive” critics of Israel.

I write about this now because there is something foul in the air. It is a trend, both deliberate and inadvertent, to delegitimize Israel — to turn it into a pariah state, particularly in the wake of the Gaza war. You hear the director Oliver Stone saying crazy things about how Hitler killed more Russians than Jews, but the Jews got all the attention because they dominate the news media and their lobby controls Washington. You hear Britain’s prime minister describing Gaza as a big Israeli “prison camp” and Turkey’s prime minister telling Israel’s president, “When it comes to killing, you know very well how to kill.” You see singers canceling concerts in Tel Aviv. If you just landed from Mars, you might think that Israel is the only country that has killed civilians in war — never Hamas, never Hezbollah, never Turkey, never Iran, never Syria, never America.

I’m not here to defend Israel’s bad behavior. Just the opposite. I’ve long argued that Israel’s colonial settlements in the West Bank are suicidal for Israel as a Jewish democracy. I don’t think Israel’s friends can make that point often enough or loud enough.

But there are two kinds of criticism. Constructive criticism starts by making clear: “I know what world you are living in.” I know the Middle East is a place where Sunnis massacre Shiites in Iraq, Iran kills its own voters, Syria allegedly kills the prime minister next door, Turkey hammers the Kurds, and Hamas engages in indiscriminate shelling and refuses to recognize Israel. I know all of that. But Israel’s behavior, at times, only makes matters worse — for Palestinians and Israelis. If you convey to Israelis that you understand the world they’re living in, and then criticize, they’ll listen.

However, the record shows that despite his claims to the contrary, Thomas Friedman is a destructive critic.

A few weeks ago he wrote a column, War, Timeout, War, Time …, which compared Israel’s limited wars against Hamas and Hezbollah to the Syrian massacre in Hama. I criticized the comparison at the time, as did others.

Or just consider two simple searches. One is a search on Friedman’s name with the words “Israel” and “apartheid.” You get 19 results. Now see how many times he wrote about thte Goldstone report. None.

The Goldstone report was the result of an effort to delegitimize Israel and effectively prevent it from defending itself. Friedman had no words to defend Israel. But he was willing, nearly 20 times, to warn that Israel was heading towards apartheid. Maybe he understands the difference between constructive and destructive critics of Israel, but Friedman belongs in the latter group.

In the next to last paragraph Friedman writes:

Destructive criticism closes Israeli ears. It says to Israelis: There is no context that could explain your behavior, and your wrongs are so uniquely wrong that they overshadow all others. Destructive critics dismiss Gaza as an Israeli prison, without ever mentioning that had Hamas decided — after Israel unilaterally left Gaza — to turn it into Dubai rather than Tehran, Israel would have behaved differently, too. Destructive criticism only empowers the most destructive elements in Israel to argue that nothing Israel does matters, so why change?

The effort to delegitimize Israel comes from the Arab world. The world Friedman claimed not so long ago was seeking to make real peace with Israel. He (and they) of course ignored the many tangible concessions Israel made to that point. Friedman has failed to take the Arab world to taks for this. It is as if Israel exists in a vacuum and that only Israel can make peace if only Israel …. But of course, peace is not at hand.

One point that Friedman fails to acknowledge was that many of the points made by Israel’s “destructive elements” were correct: don’t trust Arafat, withdrawing from southern Lebanon and Gaza would be risky.

Even today’s column isn’t a full defense of Israel, but an ambiguous one.

If Friedman really wants to be a constructive critic of Israel he really needs to find another party in the Middle East to blame first.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome | Tagged | 2 Comments

Briefs

Posted on 08/08/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Tony Judt won’t be criticizing Israel any more: Tony Judt’s ALS killed him. If you plan on celebrating his death in my comments, don’t. My father died of ALS. It’s a horrible disease, and the man suffered immensely in the last two years. Imagine being imprisoned in your own body. Now imagine being imprisoned in your own body for nearly two years. If you still intend to say something about anyone deserving this because you disagree with his opinion on Israel, you will be banned forever from commenting on this blog.

The Iranian Axis of Evil: Iran reiterated its support for Lebanon and Syria. I’m so surprised to hear this. But sure, go ahead, world, keep on blaming the lack of a Palestinian state for the unrest in the Middle East. Because it’s not like Iran isn’t stoking the flames of war every chance it gets.

No way this ends well: UN Secretary General Ima Dumbass, I mean, Ban Ki-Moon, has approved the makeup of the panel that will investigate the Gaza flotilla incident. Here’s what the Turkish member of the panel thinks needs to be done:

Sanberk, for his part, has told the Turkish Zaman that his country must insist the committee be granted authority to investigate the “embargo” on the Gaza Strip. “The question is whether the committee will also probe the siege on Gaza and its humanitarian outcomes,” he said.

Oh, yeah. Because that’s what we need to investigate: Why there’s a blockade in the first place. Eight thousand rockets from Hamas aren’t an appropriate reason, apparently.

Posted in Gaza, Iran, Israel | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Briefs

Pigs are flying: A Gaza story that doesn’t mention Israel

Posted on 08/07/2010 by Meryl Yourish

I’m in shock.

The AP reported on Gaza power outages truthfully. There isn’t a single word blaming Israel for the Palestinian-caused shortage. Hamas and the PA are fighting over who has to pay for the fuel, and the poorer Gazans pay the price of their squabble. And this article absolutely does not blame Israel.

Engineers shut down Gaza City’s sole power plant on Saturday because of a lack of fuel, switching off electricity to some half a million people in the midst of a heat wave.

The fuel for the plant is supplied by the rival Palestinian government in the West Bank, which says it has reduced shipments because the Gaza’s Hamas government is behind on payments.

Okay, someone check to see if we somehow slipped into an alternate universe while we were sleeping. Did your sons turn into daughters? Are we in Bizarro World?

Yep. I’m in shock.

Posted in AP Media Bias, Gaza, palestinian politics | Tagged , | 4 Comments

The trouble beneath the surface

Posted on 08/06/2010 by Soccerdad

Meryl wrote:

But the early stories that came out heavily supported Lebanon’s claim that Israeli forces were over the border. Oh, the next graf almost always issued the Israeli denial, but that’s how journalism works: When you want someone to think your subject is lying, have the paragraph immediately following rebut your subject’s claim. This is what they call “balance.”

In the meantime, as Snoopy pointed out, Lieutenant-Colonel Dov Harari is dead. And Hezbullah got its propaganda story of the month.

More and more information filters out showing to the degree that this was pre-planned.

From Now, Lebanon:

On Thursday evening, al-Manar television quoted an unnamed Lebanese army source involved in Wednesday night’s meeting between UNIFIL and the Israel and Lebanese armies as saying that the order to open fire in Tuesday’s border skirmish had “come directly from the [army] command.”

Amb. Michael Oren in today’s Washington Post:

Although the maintenance work was fully coordinated with the U.N. peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon, and the fatal shot was fired by the nominally independent Lebanese Armed Forces, Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, sent a television crew to film the ambush. He applauded the murder as a “heroic confrontation” and threatened to “cut off the arm” of Lebanon’s enemies, ostensibly by firing his Iranian- and Syrian-supplied arsenal of more than 42,000 rockets at Israeli cities and towns.

(A number of bloggers observed that there were plenty of photographers available. Now we know their source.)

My guess is that the ambassador used the op-ed to include a piece of information that didn’t get reported elsewhere.

The Sydney Morning Herald: (h/t Daled Amos)

Senior Lebanese army commanders planned and authorised the cross-border shooting on Tuesday that killed an Israel Defence Forces colonel who was supervising the removal of a tree within Israeli territory, the Lebanese press has reported.
The acknowledgement came at a United Nations-brokered meeting between Major-General Abdul Rahman Chehaitly of the Lebanese army and a senior Israeli officer on Wednesday.
The Lebanese newspaper As-Safir reported that General Chehaitly told the meeting the shooting was the result of a command decision and could be repeated.
“The soldiers received clear orders to open fire. The responsibility is that of the Israeli army which crossed the border,” General Chehaitly said.

Amos Harel: (via Daily Alert blog)

In the last few months, there has been increasing friction between the Lebanese army and the IDF over the entire length of the border, as the Lebanese forces – especially Division 9, most of whose commanders are Shiite Muslim – take an aggressive stance against what they are calling Israeli provocations. On the other hand, the fact that we’re talking about an incident with the Lebanese army and not with the militia Hezbollah, which operates in southern Lebanon, is likely to help calm tensions, because the government in Beirut has no interest in a confrontation with Israel.

New York Jewish Week (via Daily Alert blog)

Daniel Kurtzer, the former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt and Israel, reports in a comprehensive “contingency planning memorandum” for the Council on Foreign Relations, “Hizbullah’s arsenal is more potent in quantity and quality today than it was in 2006.” In addition, he notes, Hizbullah has stepped up its anti-Israel rhetoric. Kurtzer points out that American efforts to prevent another war in Lebanon are limited, recognizing Israel’s right and need for self-defense and Washington’s lack of relations with Hizbullah and its supporter, Iran.

He concludes that the U.S. should increase its intelligence in the area; proclaim its support for Israel’s right to defend itself and make known its worries over Hizbullah’s rearmament; resurrect an international monitoring system; increase diplomatic pressure on Syria; prepare for war and seek an outcome that weakens Hizbullah; and prepare for postwar diplomacy.

While I’m reading in a number of places that the confrontation was likely orchestrated by Hezbollah to divert attention from the finding that its members were involved in killing Rafiq Hariri, it’s also believed that Tuesday’s incident was a one time thing, not likely to escalate.

On the other hand it serves as a reminder that no matter how calm things are one the surface, there’s a lot of trouble for Israel below the surface in Lebanon. I’m glad that Kurtzer says that the United States must support Israel’s right to defend itself. But this shows, once again, the ineffectiveness of the UN when it comes to confronting real rogues.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Friday morning open thread

Posted on 08/06/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Busy with work and other things. If you have a link you want me to check out, post it in the comments. Or just say hello to one another.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Friday morning open thread

It wasn’t 800 years it was 436, and it was peaceful if you consider a “convert or die” ultimatum peaceful

Posted on 08/05/2010 by Soccerdad

A recent Washington Post editorial about the “Ground Zero mosque” observed:

It’s fine that Imam Rauf decided to call his organization the Cordoba Initiative; Cordova, Spain is an important place of history that merits study and draws tourists to Spain. But any serious statement on Cordova would at least recognize the obvious fact — that relations among the religions in Cordova were not equal, and that the Muslims at that time considered non-Muslims “dhimmi,” meaning second class citizens. Instead,Imam Rauf’s reference chose to omit this, declaring instead that that era was marked with “tolerance, inclusiveness and respect.” and that Muslims “..honored knowledge and fostered intellectual pursuits.” The words “subjugation” and “threats” do not appear.

Well, actually the Post’s editorial on the topic said nothing about the misuse of the name Cordoba to show tolerance. What I “quoted” above was paraphrased from an editorial rightly criticizing Gov. McDonnell of Virginia for his declaration of Confederate History month and omitting any reference to slavery.

Rather, the Post’s editorial A vote for religious freedom: N.Y. panel clears way for mosque near Ground Zero asserts:

The $100 million Cordoba House takes its name from the medieval Spanish city where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in peace for 800 years. The developers promise to act in that spirit by bringing people together in peace, healing and collaboration at a center that would include a 500-seat auditorium, art exhibition space, a swimming pool and retail space. It would also include a mosque. This sparked vocal opposition not only in New York but throughout the country.

First of all the Jewish (and Christian) presence in Cordova ended in 1147 century C.E. You see the previous Muslim rulers at that time were replaced by the Almohads from northern Africa. Rather than tolerating non-Muslims, the Almohads offered them a choice “convert or die.” So many Jews – including the family of the Rambam (Maimonides) – left.

Second of all, while Jews (and Christians) were tolerated before then, their presence didn’t exactly demonstrate Western enlightenment. (h/t to Robert Avrech for pointing this out)

A Cordoba House in Canada offers the same whitewashed version of history that Imam Rauf wishes to peddle and that the editors of the Washington Post gullibly swallow:

The Muslims that governed southern Spain developed an inclusive administrative culture, and the face of public life was diverse. Christians served as administrators, governors and advisors to the Caliphs. Both Jews and Christians were able to practice their faiths with complete freedom and were granted the right to administer separate courts to uphold their biblical traditions and laws. The atmosphere of tolerance, inclusiveness and respect witnessed in Cordoba inspired erudition in the multiple religious traditions in Cordoba. Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars gathered to translate and subsequently to revive the traditions of the classic Greek philosophers at a time when the rest of the world lay stagnate in feudalistic traditions and overpowering monarchies. Cordoba became the centre of Jewish intellectual endeavors, being home to some of the most influential poets and commentators of the middle ages, such as Judah Halevi, and Maimonides.

In truth, Jewish (and presumably Christian) life in Cordova was a little less romantic:

The occupation of Iberia by the Moors was a welcome occurrence for a well pummeled and remaining Jewish population. Of course the Muslims were not completely tolerant, but they were more tolerant than the rulers of the previous administration. Under the ruling Caliph (the descendant of Mohammed–the prophet of G-d on earth), the Jews were able to preserve their rites and traditions. Peaceful coexistence led to their economic and social expansion. Their status was that of Dhimmis, non-Muslims living in a land governed by Muslims. The Jews had limited autonomy, but full rights to practice their religion, as well as full protection by their Muslim rulers; but this did not occur for free. There was a specific tax called the jizya that Dhimmis had to pay to receive these benefits. Having its origin in the Qur’an, it states Dhimmis who did not pay this tax, should either convert to Islam, or face the death penalty (Qur’an 9, 29). This tax, higher than the tax Muslims had to pay, was in several occasions one of the most important sources of income for the kingdom. The jizya was not only a tax, but also a symbolic expression of subordination (Lewis 14).

So yes, things were better for Jews in southern Spain under Islamic rule, but it was hardly the model of tolerance and understanding that the editors of the Post advertise. If one takes the proper lesson from the name of “Cordoba,” it is that Islam wishes to subjugate non-Muslims. It’s a shame that the Post’s editors, in their attempt to justify the building of the Islamic Center, fail to hold Imam Rauf to the same standard that they held Governor McDonnell.

Tolerance is a two way street.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in American Scene | Tagged | 1 Comment

Correcting the Israel-Lebanon media narrative

Posted on 08/05/2010 by Meryl Yourish

The world media have grudgingly released the news that UNIFIL actually backs Israel’s versions of the ambush of IDF soldiers by Lebanese snipers. But the narrative is still that it’s a volatile border, and Israel’s extremely hostile act of pruning the vegetation in Israeli territory caused the entire incident. Clearly, it did not. Let’s take the order of events.

Israel contacts UNIFIL to tell them that they will be doing their weekly bush clearing on the border. UNIFIL asked the IDF to delay the pruning for several hours. The IDF complied. At the appointed time, UNIFIL asked for another delay. The IDF complied again. Then the IDF sent down the crane. The soldier began trimming the trees. What happened next is detailed in an email sent to the Elder of Ziyon by an IDF source:

At this point, the Lebanese Armed Forces opened fire with snipers towards Israel. It must be noted, however, that such fire was not aimed at the soldiers located by the fence, but rather directly aimed at IDF officers who were standing in a separate area, on higher ground. These officers were wearing helmets and flack jackets. The officer who was killed by this fire was shot in the head, despite the armour he was wearing. This demonstrates the premeditated, planned and deliberate nature of the Lebanese attack.

The soldier on the crane was not the target, and yet, the Lebanese shouted to the world that he stepped across the border. Then they shot his commanding officer, who was clearly not over the border, in the head, in a deliberate, unprovoked attack. And even the Lebaneseadmit that they shot first. So how does the AP present its analysis of the event?

It took no more than cutting down a tree to shatter four years of calm on the Israel-Lebanon border.

[…] The clash started after an Israeli soldier on a crane dangled over a fence near the border early Tuesday to trim a tree that could provide cover for infiltrators. The Israelis said they clear such underbrush at least once a week and coordinate their actions with UNIFIL, the peacekeeping force that has been in the area for more than 30 years.

This time the tree trimming was followed by gunfire from the Lebanese army, apparently aimed not at the soldier hanging over the fence, but at a base some distance away, where a senior officer was killed by a shot to the head. Another officer was wounded. Israel responded with gunfire and shelling, killing two Lebanese soldiers and a journalist.

The onus in the lead, of course, is on Israel, even though the Lebanese clearly shot first, unprovoked. But you have to dig through half the AP article before finding those facts.

Even so, Lebanon still considers the tree-trimming a provocation, saying its soldiers fired warning shots after the Israelis ignored requests from UNIFIL to stop cutting the tree, and Israel retaliated.

Information Minister Tarek Mitri said Lebanon respects the border but still contests part of it, insisting that the fateful cypress tree, while on the Israeli side of the border, “is Lebanese territory.”

Israel was having none of that, charging that the attack was unprovoked aggression.

That would be because it was. But the early stories that came out heavily supported Lebanon’s claim that Israeli forces were over the border. Oh, the next graf almost always issued the Israeli denial, but that’s how journalism works: When you want someone to think your subject is lying, have the paragraph immediately following rebut your subject’s claim. This is what they call “balance.”

In the meantime, as Snoopy pointed out, Lieutenant-Colonel Dov Harari is dead. And Hezbullah got its propaganda story of the month.

But it wasn’t because of a tree. It was because of a planned, deadly attack by anti-Israel forces in Lebanon.

Posted in Israel, Lebanon, Media Bias | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

More fallout from the Lebanese border incident

Posted on 08/05/2010 by SnoopyTheGoon

Most of the info in this post comes from Army radio, some of it, not necessarily in that order or one place, could be found on the Internet.

Yesterday a meeting as held in Nakura between UNIFIL commander in the area, IDF and LAF representatives. UNIFIL confirmed its earlier statement that the maintenance operation, used as a pretext for opening fire by Lebanese sniper, is located on the Israeli part of the international border (While many anti-Israeli sources and some of mass media present the picture of a crane carrying an IDF soldier over the fence as proof of the border being crossed, this only serves the willing. The fence, at least in this region, is located south of the border, leaving quite a sizable enclave that belongs to Israel – see, for example, the last paragraph with the satellite shot in this Lebanese article).

The response of Lebanese general was, nevertheless, one of complete disregard of this fact, continuing the aggressive and uncompromising line taken by the Lebanese officials in general. According to him, IDF was in breach of the relevant UN resolution and thus the aggressor, and would be repealed in the same way in the future.

At this point the Lebanese general added something worthy of attention. The LAF armed “response”, according to him, was not a singular occurrence, but an act that was approved on the LAF staff level as a matter of policy. This statement, as some commentators see it, comes to disprove a common sentiment, shared by many analysts that see the shooting as a local initiative of a low rank Lebanese officer, Hezbollah “activist” or sympathizer, in place.

The response of the Israeli representative was hard. According to some (Lebanese?) source, IDF stance currently is that if a single shot is directed at Israel from Lebanese side, IDF will raze all Lebanese army positions along the whole border. As a side remark – I hope it will impress the Lebanese sufficiently…

As for the possible outcome of the affair: most of the pundits interviewed yesterday and today agree that the shooting was a singular incident and that it wouldn’t be repeated nor would it cause a conflagration between Israel and Lebanon. And re the militant speeches by various Lebanese VIPs: all agree that these are for internal consumption – to mute the unfavorable conclusion by UNIFIL and other criticism from abroad. Be interesting to know whether Mr Nasrallah in his infinite underground wisdom agrees with these predictions.

Meryl and Soccer Dad has done a great roundup of sometimes truly ridiculous coverage of the incident in mass media, so I would recommend it to all of you as time saver. I, for one, would like to contribute only a honorable mention of a thoroughly dishonorable Gideon Levy with his article Only we’re allowed. This character continues to amaze me by his single-minded endless vituperative railing about his country. “My country – wrong or wrong” should become his motto. Mr Levy could have shut his prodigious trap (for a day, at least) in a situation when even UNIFIL, the normally anti-Israeli outfit, considers Israel to be in the right and, lo and behold, says so publicly. But no, Mr Levy cannot control his self-destructive habit that just has to be fed by a daily dose of an anti-Israeli outburst.

And meanwhile lieutenant-colonel Dov Harari, RIP, is still dead…

Cross-posted on SimplyJews

Posted in Israel, Lebanon, Politics | 1 Comment

The Cordoba House and the Caliphate

Posted on 08/04/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Disregarding all the arguments about the cultural center/mosque to be known as the Cordoba House wants to build at Ground Zero, I was struck by one thing in particular: The name of the cultural center.

What, I wondered, was the significance of the city of Cordoba?

The Caliphate of Córdoba (Arabic: خلافة قرطبة Khilāfat Qurṭuba) ruled the Iberian peninsula (Al-Andalus) and North Africa from the city of Córdoba, from 929 to 1031.

Oh.

So an organization that bills itself as a moderate Islamic society that wants to build bridges between Islam and the West chooses to name the center after—the capital of the Islamic Caliphate.

Because that simply screams “moderate” to me.

Posted in Religion | Tagged , , | 6 Comments