Doc's Talk: Inexcusable:The New York Times spits in Israel's eye on its 60th

Thursday, May 08, 2008

Inexcusable:The New York Times spits in Israel's eye on its 60th

In "After 60 Years, Arabs in Israel Are Outsiders," by Ethan Bronner, the New Duranty Times (thanks to Michael) laments the plight of the Arabs displaced from Israel in 1948.

Not mentioned, unsurprisingly:

1. The fact that most of the Arabs left because they were told to do so by their leaders, with the promise that they would return soon, after the Arab states had obliterated Israel. 2. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Jews were expelled from Muslim countries at the same time.

3. The fact that refugee problems in Europe and India in the wake of World War II were settled within a few years, but that the Palestinian refugee problem has been artificially kept alive by the Arab states as a stick with which they could beat Israel -- no Arab state offered the Palestinians citizenship after 1948 except Jordan.

4. The fact that Jews in an Islamic state ruled by Islamic law would be relegated to second-class dhimmi status.

And on and on. Par for the course, really.

CAMERA responded to this article and we should pay attention:
Mistrust: Israeli Arabs Involved in Terror Against Israel

Bronner notes that the Israeli army prepares for the possibility that Israeli Arab citizens may one day fight against Israel. Bronner also states that support is rising among Israelis for the idea of transferring Arabs out of Israel as part of a two state solution. Bronner includes the following by way of explanation:

"Antagonism runs both ways. Many Israeli Arabs express solidarity with their Palestinian brethren under occupation, while others praise Hezbollah, the anti-Israel group in Lebanon, and some Arabs in Parliament routinely accuse Israel of Nazism."

"For many Israelis, the challenge posed by the Arabs cannot be separated from what they see as the risks in the region - the increased influence of Iran, the growth of Islamic radicalism, the concern that another war in Lebanon or Gaza is not far away."

While the above statements are true, Bronner fails to explain that Israeli Arabs have not just "express[ed] solidarity," some have actually participated in terror attacks against Israeli civilians. And writing "others praise Hezbollah," doesn't quite capture the spectacle of Israeli Arabs proclaiming support for Hezbollah during the 2006 Hezbollah-Israel War, even as Hezbollah missiles were landing in Israel, killing civilians (Jewish and Arab Israelis) and sending half a million Israelis fleeing into bomb shelters or away from their towns entirely. Surely that information should have been provided to help explain changes in attitudes among Israeli Jews toward Israeli Arabs.

According to Ynetnews.com, "More than 50 Israeli Arabs have been arrested over the past three years on suspicion of being involved in terror. Nearly half of them are Palestinians who have received a permit to stay in Israel and an Israeli identity card on the backdrop of their marriage to an Israeli Arab, and terror groups seek to recruit them due to their access to Israeli targets."

Here is just a small sample of Israeli Arabs involved in terror attacks against fellow Israelis:

* August 4, 2003: 2 Israeli Arabs arrested for aiding suicide bombers who blew up bus #6 at French Hill in Jerusalem on May 18, 2003 and bus #14 near the Klal Building in Jerusalem on June 11, 2003 to the attack sites. Twenty-three Israeli civilians and one foreign national were murdered and 125 civilians were injured in the two terror attacks. Samr Ahmed Atresh admitted that he had been recruited by Hamas and that it was his responsibility to gather information on highly populated areas, and to purchase clothes to disguise the suicide bomber. Atresh brought the Palestinian bomber to his home, attached the explosive belt to him, disguised him as an observant Jew, and drove him to French Hill to catch and blow up the bus and its riders. Furthermore, Atresh admitted that he was planning to exploit his catering job by poisoning food, placing an explosive, or bringing a suicide bomber to an events hall. Omar Salah Muhammad Sharif was detained for transporting a Palestinian bomber to Jerusalem, where he blew up a #14 bus, killing 17 people and wounding 105. Sharif further admitted that he had been planning to kidnap Israelis after making contact with them through the Internet. Sharif added that he had planned a long list of possible terror attacks including a car bomb on the Tel Aviv promenade, and bombing a cafeteria at Hebrew University's Givat Ram campus where he worked.

* The Freedom Brigades of the Galilee is a terrorist group comprised of Arabs with Israeli citizenship. Established in 2003, it is associated with the Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade. The group has taken responsibility for the following attacks, among others:

- The August 10, 2007 attack in the Old City of Jerusalem in which nine people were wounded..
- July 21, 2003 Soldier Oleg Shaichat was picked up while hitchhiking to his home in Upper Nazareth and strangled to death. His body was dumped in the trunk of the car, his clothing burned and his M16 rifle taken. The Freedom Brigades claimed responsibility and Mohammed Khatib and Muhammad Anabtawi were found guilty of the murder.

- June 2007 Michael Ronkin was killed outside his Upper Nazareth home.

- This group also initially claimed responsibility for the March 6, 2008 massacre of 8 students at Mercaz Harav, a Jerusalem yeshiva, according to Hizballah's Al Manar television station.
Bronner writes: "Meanwhile, several right-wing rabbis have forbidden Jews from renting apartments to Arabs or employing them." Perhaps if the article had pointed out that it is not unknown for an Arab employee to kill his Israeli Jewish boss, and that Israeli Arabs have admitted to planning a terrorist attack in their own workplace (see above examples in bold), such views might have been more understandable.

Gaps

Bronner writes: "Still, it is not hard to detail the gap between Arabs and Jews in nearly every area - health, education, employment - and in government spending. Three times as many Arab families are below the poverty line as Jewish ones..."

It doesn't make sense to use poverty rates to measure for potential discrimination unless one compares demographically similar populations. Arab Israelis do tend to be poorer than Jewish Israelis in general, but their poverty rates are similar to ultra-Orthodox Jews, who also have large families.

Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Jews are almost demographically identical to Israeli Arabs - in family size, age, educational level, number of parents working outside of the home, military service, etc. Their poverty rates equal or exceed that of Israeli Arabs. Thus in Bene Beraq, a large ultra-Orthodox city near Tel-Aviv, 33.5 percent of families and 41.9 percent of individuals are below the official poverty level (Tel-Aviv Statistical Yearbook, 1998, page 340).

20.9 percent of Arab households have six or more children, as compared to just 8.5 percent of Jewish households. Young families with large numbers of young children will rarely have the standard of living enjoyed by older families with few if any young children, or yuppie couples with two wage-earners and one child.

Furthermore, according to Haifa University economist, Professor Steven Plaut, if there are inferior municipal services in the Arab sector, this should be seen in the context of the Arabs' own choices and conduct. According to Plaut, "while in the Jewish sector the average percentage of residents who pay their property taxes per town approximates 80%, with property tax exemptions going mostly to the elderly and the poor," in the Arab city of Umm el-Fahm, for example, 72.9% do not pay property taxes. Even owners of the many large, luxury homes proliferating in Arab towns may pay negligible property taxes.

Regarding funding for Arab schools, improvement is underway. Under a new funding system put into effect by the government last September, funding to Arab schools will be greatly increased. "Each school will be allocated a basic budget according to its enrollment figures, without reference to its students' background...Most of the resources that will be distributed [in a second stage of the new program] will go to the less advantaged schools, including many in the non-Jewish sector...At the end of the process, a lot of money will be directed toward schools with students from families with low education and income levels, mainly in the Arab sector."

* The Times article also contains insufficient context about land issues. This will be addressed in a CAMERA article on our website in the near future.

thanks to both Dhimmi watch and to CAMERA

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk