(Too many people are prepared to make statements without checking their f acts. Newspaper journalists seem to be the worst. Below the New York Times article is just one example).
In an editorial on November 6th about
Israeli-US. relations, The New York Times states
as fact something that is simply false: “new settlements have been pursued so
aggressively by Mr. Netanyahu that the land available for a Palestinian state
may already be foreclosed.”
Secretary of State Kerry has made similar statements recently, and
it is quite remarkable that such a fact question can be gotten so wrong. First,
the term “new settlements” has a meaning: it does not mean expansion of
existing settlements, nor the creation of a hilltop outpost of a couple of
trailers. There has simply not been an aggressive creation of new settlements
under Mr. Netanyahu, and in fact there have been close to zero new
settlements.
Second, there has not even been an aggressive expansion of “old” or
existing settlements. Settler populations have grown steadily, on both sides of
the security fence, but the Netanyahu government has very clearly restrained
that growth. Settler protests, and the fact that many settlers vote for parties
other than Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud, attest to this, but more significantly so do
the statistics released annually by the government of Israel. Consulting those
statistical reports is apparently beyond the capacity of the Times.
Those who wish to oppose or criticize any growth in population in
the settlements have reason to complain, but the claim that new settlements are
quickly gobbling up all the land in the West Bank is a fantasy. It is false.
The “peace map” or “Google Earth map” of the West Bank shows very little change
during the Netanyahu years. It should not be too much to ask for accuracy on
such points when The New York Times writes yet another of its
endless and dreary attacks on the government of Israel.
A prominent Palestinian human rights activist
lamented on Monday night what he called the media’s unfair treatment
of the Jewish state.
At a pro-Israel gathering hosted by advocacy group
StandWithUs in New York City, Bassem Eid, a Jerusalemite, said the press,
which is “full of antisemitism” and “hatred,” is “much more interested in
fighting against Israel” than discovering the truth. So, he added, “Let us
[Palestinians] tell the world what we are really suffering from.”
Eid, a former director of the Palestinian Human
Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG), said Palestinians are “fed
up and hopeless,” and have lost trust in the Palestinian Authority
(PA). Meanwhile, he asserted, Israel is “the safest place” for
Palestinians in the Middle East.
He continued, “When Israeli Arabs complain about
Israel, I tell them, ‘So move to Syria, go to Yemen…’ And they can, but it’ll
be worse for them there.” He also cited a recent survey conducted by the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy which revealed that a majority of
east Jerusalem Arabs would prefer living under Israeli rule than
Palestinian.
Talking about the current wave of terrorism sweeping
Israel, Eid said, “When I watch TV and see a Palestinian youth — 13, 14 or
15 years old — holding a knife in his hand, running in the street and
wanting to stab and kill, I think it’s the most barbaric thing I’ve ever
seen. Will stabbing Jews solve my problems? Will killing a Jew
solve my problems? Look at Hamas — in the past nine years they’ve
been shooting rockets. What have we, as Palestinians, achieved? Let us be a
little bit realistic.”
He went on, “I [as a Palestinian] don’t want to be a
victim anymore… I want to be considered as a human being who has full
control of my own future and my children’s future.”
Eid also claimed that Jerusalem has become “a
victim” of several competing Palestinian political movements, including Fatah,
Hamas and even Islamic movements inside Israel, who, he said, are all “adding
oil to the flame.” He said Fatah’s only interest at the moment is to escalate
the violence in Israel, and that even if Abbas were to call on
Palestinians to calm tensions in east Jerusalem, “No one would listen
to him.”
This is one of many reasons Eid believes
that Palestinians will have to wait at least
another generation — “20-25 years” — for a solution to their
plight.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) will
continue to work against having cameras in the hope of preventing the
world from seeing what is really happening at the site and undermining
Jordan's "custodianship" over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem.
Another reason the Palestinians oppose King
Abdullah's idea is their fear that cameras would expose that Palestinians
have been smuggling stones, firebombs and pipe bombs into the Al-Aqsa
Mosque for the past two years.
The cameras are also likely to refute the
claim that Jews are "violently invading" Al-Aqsa Mosque and
holding prayers on the Temple Mount. The cameras will show that Jews do
not enter Al-Aqsa Mosque, as Palestinians have been claiming. Needless to
say, no Jewish visitors have been caught trying to smuggle weapons into
the holy site.
It remains to be seen how Secretary Kerry,
who brokered the camera deal between Israel and Jordan, will react to the
latest Palestinian Authority escalation of tensions. If Kerry fails to
pressure the PA to stop its incitement and attempts to exclude the
Jordanians from playing any positive role, the current wave of knife
attacks against Jews will continue.
Ahmed Meligi, Egyptian journalist and peace activist paid a heavy personal price for his activities, and hitting out at the global media against the way in which it reports on the situation in Israel in general, and in particular, terrorist attacks.
We Palestinians have failed to educate our people on the principles of tolerance and peace. Instead, we condone and applaud terrorism, especially when it is directed against Jews. We want the world to condemn terrorism only when it claims the lives of Palestinians.
Abbas's ambiguous, half-hearted condemnations of attacks by Palestinians against Israelis are only intended for public consumption and are primarily aimed at appeasing Western donors so that they will continue channeling funds to the Palestinian Authority. In addition, his condemnations seek to blame Israel for Palestinian terror attacks.
Netanyahu's strong and clear condemnation left me and other Palestinians wondering when was the last time we heard similar statements from our leaders. I cannot remember Abbas or any other Palestinian leader ever expressing shock and outrage over the killing of a Jew in a Palestinian terror attack, nor the last time a Palestinian official visited the Israeli victims of a Palestinian terror attack.
Each time Abbas reluctantly condemns a Palestinian terror attack, he faces a wave of criticism from many Palestinians. Unlike the Israeli public, many Palestinians often rush to justify, and even welcome, terror attacks against Jews. Has there ever been a Palestinian activist who dared to hold a rally in a Palestinian city to condemn suicide bombings or the murder of an entire Jewish family? The Israeli president has good reason to feel ashamed for the murder of the baby. But when will we Palestinians ever have a sense of shame over the way we react to the murder of Jews?
In accusing Israel of murdering terrorist Ahmad Manasra,
Abu Mazen was caught red-handed • This was one lie too many, and even the international
media could not remain indifferent • In an age of security cameras and videos
shot on mobile devices, the Palestinian Authority has been left behind, and its
famous propaganda machine has suffered a heavy blow
The PLO version of the Walking Dead: The "dead"
terrorist in an Israeli hospital. Photo: GPO, Flash90
It was a pretty embarrassing moment for MSNBC. It isn’t
every day that a journalist reporting from the field is reproached by a news
anchor during a live broadcast for distorting reality. But that’s exactly what
happened last week in connection with a stabbing attempt at Damascus Gate.
In case you haven’t seen the viral video, here is what
happened: Ayman Mohyeldin, an MSNBC reporter on the far left of the political
spectrum who formerly worked for Al Jazeera, was reporting from the field on an
incident unfolding before his very eyes. Mohyeldin described how Israeli police
shot a young unarmed Arab who was fleeing for no apparent reason. What he did
not know was that several seconds before his report a video of the incident,
shot on a mobile device, was shown on the broadcast, and it was clear from the video
that the Arab was holding a knife. Thus an anti-Israel libel, which would
certainly have been widely used for propaganda purposes, was immediately
refuted.
This incident, which may result in another reporter entering
the job market, clearly demonstrates how the current media battle is different
from previous rounds of Palestinian terror: This time, everything is happening
here, in our backyard, under the watchful eyes of a network of police and
mobile cameras. The Palestinians are suddenly discovering that cameras and
social networks make it very difficult for them to sell their narrative. Since
the sympathy they garner is largely a result of their well-oiled and effective
propaganda machine, the current violence may be an error with much greater significance
than at first appears.
Below are links to videos showing the events of the past few
days. We recommend that readers who prefer not to watch these difficult scenes
avoid clicking on the links.
The Walking Dead, the Violent Moderates, and the Innocent
Murderers
Abu Mazen, the Palestinian Authority president, discovered
the new situation the hard way. In a speech he gave several days ago, he
attempted to make Ahmad Manasra a new symbol of Palestinian resistance,
emphatically accusing Israel of the “execution of our children in cold blood.”
At the same time, Manasra was being depicted on Arab social networks as the new
Muhammad al-Dura, a boy Palestinians claim was shot by the IDF during the
second intifada in a gun battle with armed Palestinians.
But what you can do in Ramallah you can’t do in Jerusalem.
It wasn’t long before video clips were posted online showing 13-year-old
Palestinian terrorist Manasra with his 15-year-old cousin on a killing spree in
the streets of Jerusalem, attacking Israeli civilians with a knife, including a
Jewish youth who was hospitalized in critical condition. Furthermore, Israel
released photographs proving that Manasra was alive and receiving good
treatment at an Israeli hospital. An embarrassed Abu Mazen attempted to limit the
damage, and an English-language press release issued by his office referred to
“the shooting of our children in cold blood.” But even this allegation was
quickly exposed when the head of the hospital where Manasra is being treated
announced that there were no signs he had been shot.
Abu Mazen was caught red-handed, which did not escape the
international media’s notice. Even newspapers that are generally far from being
pro-Israel, such as theNew York Timesand theWashington Post, criticized
Abu Mazen for the lie of the “living dead.” TheWashington
Postwent even further, with itseditorialgently
hinting that Abu Mazen is not being truthful (“Mahmoud Abbas has adopted an
ambivalent position”) and calling him “irrelevant” in terms of control over the
Palestinian “street.” Even prominent Jewish journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, who is
firmly on the left, wrote harsh criticism inThe Atlanticof the
Palestinians’ murderous anti-Semitism, identifying it as the source of the
violence.
Jibril Rajoub, a member of the Fatah leadership and chairman
of the Palestinian Football Association, hadthisto say about the terrorists:
“These are their heroic deeds, the lone-wolf attacks are heroic acts. I am
proud of those who carry them out and I congratulate them.” Rajoub added that
since “the international community does not accept buses blowing up in Tel
Aviv,” it is better not to get dragged into this, but to continue with
individual attacks. He believes that the “will for the martyr,” posted on
Facebook by one of the terrorists, “should be studied in schools.” Other
officials on the PLO Central Committee, such as Azzam al-Ahmed, called for “an
expansion of the cycle of popular resistance,” and Abbas Zaki went so far as to
suggest that a “war room” be established to coordinate all terrorist activity.
Muhammad Dahlan, former head of the Preventive Security Force in Gaza, wrote
similar things on his Facebook page, while PLO Executive Committee member
Mahmoud Ismailcalledthe
murder of Eitam and Naama Henkin in front of their four small children “a
national duty.”
The Evidence Speaks for Itself
Saeb Erekat, like his boss, accused Israelat a press conference of
murdering children. When Erekat, who is head of the Palestinian negotiating
team, a member of the PLO Central Committee, and one of the most prominent
“partners” of the various peace initiatives, called on the UNto
immediately come to investigate the “kangaroo courts,” he was referring
specifically toFadi Alun, who stabbed a 15-year-old Jewish
boy and caused him moderate wounds, andMustafa al-Khatib, who attempted to stab a police
officer at the Lions’ Gate and was shot on the spot. In keeping with the
accepted practice in Palestinian diplomacy, Erekat added that the Palestinians
had begun to gather evidence in order to file a complaint at the Hague against
Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, and
the head of the Shin Bet.
But it appears that even in the Hague they would give
greater credence to concrete evidence in the form of bleeding, wounded Jews in
hospitals, many Israeli police officers, and civilians present at events while
they were taking place. This may be whyAl-Hayat
Al-Jadida, official newspaper of the
Palestinian Authority, was quickto claimthat
police planted the knife on al-Khatib to justify shooting (the police claimed
there were two knives). After all, it is common knowledge that Israeli police
are in the habit of shooting random Palestinians and carrying kitchen
knives—part of their official equipment—in order to incriminate them.
Violence for the Sake of Violence
Yhe profiles of some of the attackers, which
are revealed immediately on social media, show that reasons such as poverty,
discrimination, the occupation, or backwardness do not explain their violence.
The attackers themselves, in their authentic public statements, leave no room
for doubt that theirs is a murderous ideology and hatred that is essentially
religious and nationalist and is directed against Jews as Jews.
Who’s Really Violating the Status Quo?
While it’s true that the number of Jews ascending the Temple Mount hasincreasedin recent
years, the status quo restricts the behavior of Jews on the Temple Mount, not
their numbers. In any case, it’s worth noting that the numbers are small: While
there have been some 3.5 million Muslim visitors to the Temple Mount in recent
years and another 80,000 Christians, only 12,000 of the visitors have been
Jews—or in other words, only about 0.3 percent.
Anyone who has been on the Temple Mount in recent years
recognizes the phenomenon. When Jews approach the center of the Temple Mount
plaza, a regular commotion begins: dozens of activists, mainly female, gather
around the Jewish visitors, screaming loudly and threatening them. “Al-Aqsa is
in danger, Allahu Akbar,” they call out, loudly andrhythmically, in
order to interrupt the tour and the tour guide, and in some cases, as the
following video clips show, they have spit at the visitors and attempted to
attack them.
These violent groups, the Murabitun and Murabitat, are
funded by Hamas and the Islamic movement, and their function is to keep Jews
away from the Temple Mount. In an interview withChannel 2, one
of the activists said: “I am prepared to die for al-Aqsa and to commit suicide
and become a martyr for it.” Only last month, before the Jewish holidays, it
wasreportedthat
activists from these organizations stay overnight on the Temple Mount complex
in order to ”prevent the Jews from entering.”
Thus, the Jews enter the complex frightened, in small
groups, and with heavy police security. All of them are accompanied by waqf
officials, who monitor every movement by Jewish visitors and report to each
other using walkie talkies. Recently, the government decided to ban these
organizations and to work to dismantle their financial infrastructure. This
does not violate the status quo; it defends it.
