Co-Founder of Egyptian Salafist party met with Tzipi Livni
The co-founder of the Egyptian Salafist party, a group of extremist Muslims,
met with former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni at Harvard in April according to a report in Egyptian media (Hat Tip:
MFS - The Other News).
Alwaght- Egyptians were shocked when the Arabic
language newspaper, Youm7, revealed that the co-founder of Egypt’s
Salafist Nour Party has met with the Israeli Regime's former foreign
minister.
The influential daily revealed on the weekend that
extremist Nour Party's Nader Bakkar has hold secret meeting with
notorious Tzipi Livni in April at Harvard University.
The meeting that was reportedly held at Bakkar’s request has sparked a storm of controversy in Egyptian media.
...
Salafism is an ultra-conservative movement within Sunni
Islam that advocats a return to the traditions of the "devout
ancestors". The doctrine can be summed up as taking "a fundamentalist
approach to Islam".
The Nour Party's co-founder and deputy chairman, Bakkar,
Bakkar was awarded a scholarship to pursue a master’s in public
administration at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Muslim Brotherhood accused the aspiring young politician of
unjustly winning a fellowship to attend the prestigious Harvard
University in return for his party’s betrayal of former President Mohamed Morsi in 2013.
The Salafi party sided with the Armed Forces against the
Brotherhood during Morsi’s ouster, and since then has continued to
support President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s administration.
...
A few months before his graduation, however, Livni visited
Harvard on 16 April to give a lecture on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.
Sources reportedly told the Egyptian newspaper that after
finding out that Livni was coming to speak, Bakkar contacted the society
to arrange a closed meeting with Livni.
She agreed and the meeting took
place inside the university after her lecture.
According to Youm7, Nader Bakkar’s meeting with Tzipi
Livini lasted around 40 minutes, in which Bakkar talked about the
strength of the Nour Party and its popularity, that he was the main
reason for the (Muslim) Brotherhood’s success after the 25 January
revolution…
Livni- who has reportedly conducted sexual relations with
Arab officials during her years as a Mossad agent in an attempt to
entrap them- did not reveal the meeting at the time, but sources close
to her confirmed to the Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA) that the
meeting took place.
You gotta love Alwaght's style "Israeli Regime" and "Livni- who has reportedly conducted sexual relations with
Arab officials during her years as a Mossad agent in an attempt to
entrap them..." as if they were totally defenseless against her, even if you assume it's true (For many reasons, I don't believe Livni did this, and I won't allow comments discussing it).
And you thought Livni hated religious people... oh... wait... it's only
religious Jews she hates.
But yes, I do believe Livni met with Bakkar. I doubt anything came of it. Much ado about nothing.
Labels: Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt, Egyptian regime change, Egyptian Revolution, Harvard University, Mohammed Morsy, Mossad, Salafists, Tzipi Livni
Harvard students told Arafat's grave to be moved to Jerusalem
In an earlier post, I reported on a pilgrimage by Harvard University students to Yasser Arafat's grave, which was financed by the Boston Combined Jewish Philanthropies. A couple of the students have posted blogs about the trip, which make clear some of the things the students 'learned' in Ramallah. Here's the
first one (both blogs came from
Truth Revolt).
The Israel-Palestine conflict is urgent for my green-sweatered friend in
Ramallah whose house had been destroyed twice. Ambassador Dore Gold and
Col. (res) Dr. Eran Lerman spoke to us about security at the Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs. One map after another filled the screen in
front of us as our speakers turned geographic boundaries into calculated
threats, like the range of rockets, or the time needed to mobilize
troops from A to B. For them, Israel’s fight is urgent. The man who
spoke to us at Yasser Arafat’s grave emphasized the grave’s temporary
location, to be moved to Jerusalem when (not if) Palestine
reclaims the city. The conflict, for him, is urgent.
Here's the
second blog.
The amazing organizers of this trek are all Israelis. Five of them are
Jewish and one of the is Arab Israeli. Was it easy for them to see the
grave of Arafat, who is responsible of the death of so many Israeli
civilians, their beloved ones specifically? But does that dispute the
fact that the same person is also the founder of the PLO, hero of so
many Palestinians symbolizing their fight for independence?
It is not at all easy to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
That is exactly why we listened to speeches at Harvard by Ari Shavit,
the author of the book ‘The Triumph and Tragedy of My Promised Land’ and
Ami Ayalon, the former head of the Shin Bet, Israeli National Security
Agency, who was appointed to the position right after the assassination
of the Prime Minister Ytzhak Rabin. Then, during our tour in Israel, we
were lucky enough to hear from Jodi Rudoren, the editor in chief of New
York Times Jerusalem, Danny Siedemann, an attorney very much involved
with the negotiations process, Dore Gold, foreign policy advisor to the
Prime Minister Netanyahu, Nadav Tamir, senior policy advisor to the
President of Israel Simon Peres, Eran Lerman, Deputy National Security
Advisor for Foreign Policy and International Affairs, Dr. Rachel
Korazim, a Holocaust educator, a Rabbi from Jewish settlements in West
Bank and an Israel Defense Force officer along with those two
Palestinian leaders.
Actually, out of the named speakers, there are a lot more people of the Left than of the Right. I've added some links that explain why.
Was there an agenda here? Did the pilgrimage to Arafat's mausoleum fit in with that agenda? I leave that to the reader to decide.
Labels: Ami Ayalon, Ari Shavit, Dore Gold, Harvard University, Jewish Federations of North America, Jewish philanthropy, Jodi Rudoren, liberal Jews, Nadav Tamir, Palestinian incitement, Palestinians, Yasser Arafat
So what if he apologized?
I trust that many of you have been following the saga of the Harvard students who visited Yasser Arafat's grave, and had a smiley group picture taken there, as part of a trip to Israel funded by the Boston Combined Jewish Philanthropies (that's the picture above). For those who have not followed the story, a web site called Truth Revolt broke it
here. Barry Schrage, the President of the Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Boston, attacked Truth Revolt as a bunch of 'extreme' bloggers with an agenda, and as being on the 'fringes' of the pro-Israel community
here. When the issue wouldn't go away, Schrage apologized and said he was 'shocked' by the visit
here. Ronn Torossian says
that apology is not good enough.
Imagine if a black leader led a group of students in a trip
where they took a picture in front of the grave of a KKK leader who had
lynched African-Americans?
Instead, try to imagine
that an American Jewish leader (who is paid $482,000 by a Jewish
philanthropy) took a pilgrimage to the grave of Baruch Goldstein and
explained Goldstein’s “narrative.” When challenged, imagine said leader
defended his action.
Do you think in either scenario said leader would remain employed?
Now,
stop imagining. Barry Shrage, the president of the Combined Jewish
Philanthropies - Greater Boston's Jewish Federation - chose to defend a
visit by a group of Harvard students to pay tribute at Palestinian Arab
leader Yasser Arafat's grave. Arafat was an arch-terrorist, a mass
murderer - of course, much revered by the PA - and despite it, Shrage
apparently had no problem with participating in the glorification of his
memory, opting instead to attack those who called out the visit. Awful and despicable behavior.
...
The extremist is Shrage, whose actions and behavior are well beyond
the pale. Even those Jews and Israelis who support the peace process do
not believe that Arafat was someone whose grave they can visit, let
alone someone to admire.
While students blog on the Harvard College Israel Trek blog that “Our intention was not to honor Arafat, but rather to learn about the Palestinian narrative, of which Arafat is an important part,” donors
to the Federation and Hillel are paying for young people to smile in
front of the grave of a mass murderer. What, exactly, did they learn?
Just what Aunt Annie must have in mind when writing her annual check to
the UJA.
I'll go a step further. In the aftermath of Oslo, the Israeli government spent a fortune trying to teach Israelis to 'understand the 'Palestinian' viewpoint.' The 'Palestinians' spent zero on trying to teach 'Palestinians' to understand the Israeli viewpoint. Instead, the 'Palestinians' did just the opposite: They incited their population to believe that if they murdered Jews they would reach a paradise.
We don't have to go that far. But I don't believe that Jewish federation money ought to be spent on understand the 'Palestinian' viewpoint at all - let alone on visits to the grave of a mass murderer - at least until such time as aid money to the 'Palestinians' from the international community (and not just from Israel) is specifically earmarked and used for understanding the Jewish narrative - the bible, the Holocaust and everything in between. Until then, all we are doing is making ourselves vulnerable while strengthening our enemies. And yes, the 'Palestinians' are our enemies.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Boston, Harvard University, Jewish Federations of North America, Jewish philanthropy, liberal Jews, Palestinian incitement, Palestinians, Yasser Arafat
'Dozens' of American universities slam American Studies Association boycott
While only two universities have thus far withdrawn from membership in the American Studies Association as a result of its anti-Semitic boycott of Israel, '
dozens' of universities have issued statements slamming the boycott, and many of them are considering withdrawing from membership in the group.
Schools including Johns Hopkins, Harvard, Yale, Cornell, Princeton
and Boston universities and the Universities of Pennsylvania,
Connecticut and Texas at Austin and others have slammed the boycott,
issuing statements similar to one by Harvard President Drew Faust that
said that academic boycotts “subvert the academic freedoms and values
necessary to the free flow of ideas, which is the lifeblood of the
worldwide community of scholars.”
Penn State University at Harrisburg and Brandeis University have said
they are withdrawing their memberships from the American Studies
Association, and other schools are considering doing the same thing. In
addition, two major associations of institutions of higher education,
the Association of American Universities and the Association of American
University Professors, have issued statements rejecting the boycott.
At least three university Presidents have issued statements in response to the boycott. Here are two of them.
President Susan Herbst
University of Connecticut
The recent votes of two scholarly societies — the American Studies
Association and Association for Asian American Studies — to endorse the
Palestinian boycott of Israeli academic institutions is contrary to both
academic freedom and the international exchange of ideas. The
University of Connecticut joins the American Association of University
Professors in firmly opposing all such boycotts. Choosing one nation for
a boycott is patently unfair and represents a disturbing philosophy
among some segments of the academy.
...
Academic leaders at UConn will continue to visit Israel and Arab
nations, invite Israeli and Arab scholars to our campuses, encourage our
students and faculty to study in these nations, and pursue research
collaboration with the many outstanding Israeli universities. We do this
with pride and a productive focus on social justice, to forge the very
critical dialogues that will someday lead to the peace we all seek.
...
BOSTON UNIVERSITY
PRESIDENT ROBERT A. BROWN
I am disappointed and concerned that the American Studies
Association, invoking the principle of academic freedom, would vote to
boycott Israeli academic institutions. Research, teaching, and
scholarship flourish through robust exchange of ideas, across borders
and among institutions in different parts of the world. Universities and
their faculties can often transcend even profound political
differences. It is ill-advised to make academic institutions the
instrument with which to promote a political agenda by attempting to
isolate students and scholars. Boston University cannot support this
boycott.
I hope that there will be a serious discussion within our American
& New England Studies Program, which has an institutional membership
in the ASA that, obviously, is funded by the University. This
institutional membership does not come with a vote that is exercised by
either the program or the University. The poll taken by the ASA
represents the votes of individual members of the organization. We are
not prepared to suggest (implicitly or explicitly) to faculty members
who hold individual memberships (some of which are funded out of
professional funds allocated to individual faculty members) how they
should vote. That would lead us onto a slippery slope.
I do hope the faculty in the American & New England Studies
Program will consider whether or not continuing membership in the ASA
will create the opportunity for a temperate and thoughtful
reconsideration of the wisdom of the boycott.
Would a hemorrhage of members leaving cause them to reconsider? Or will they get funding from '
our friends the Saudis' instead?
Labels: academic boycott, Austin Texas, BDS, Boston University, Harvard University, Princeton University, Yale University
Palestine Solidarity Commitee PWNed at Harvard
Last Friday, I reported that Harvard University's Palestine Solidarity Committee had
distributed eviction notices to Jewish Freshmen and Sophomores. At least one Harvard student, Freshman Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld, is
fighting back.
Chua-Rubenfeld, whose father is Jewish and whose mother, Amy, thrust the family into the spotlight several years ago with a book that detailed the rigorous regimen she used to raise her two daughters, is currently a freshman at Harvard.
“Came home this morning to find this fake eviction notice from the
Palestinian Solidarity Committee on my door alerting me to the ‘Israeli
Apartheid’,” she wrote, continuing, “I find this sick, uninformed, and
deeply offensive to peoples who have actually been the victims of racial
oppression and genocide.”
“I really couldn’t care less about violations of international law,
because the majority of countries voting on international law are
anti-Semitic and would love to see Israel destroyed,” she added.
Taking a swing at the offending organization which posted the flyers
she continued, “And no, I certainly do not want to attend your film
screening, rally, or die-in, which is probably the most tasteless form
of protest I can even conceive of.”
“Anyways. Yeah,” she concluded, “keep protesting while Israel
cultivates discipline, education, and training, sounds like a great
strategy to me.”
I'm glad to hear that there are still students at Harvard who know how to think.
Labels: Harvard University, Israeli apartheid week
Outrageous: Harvard sends eviction notices to Jewish students
As you can see above, this isn't the first time it happened, but apparently, this time the culprit is the university itself. In honor of 'Israel apartheid week' Harvard University - the place that didn't admit my uncle as an undergrad because he was a Jew in the 1930's -
sent eviction notices to all undergraduate Jewish dormitory residents.
The campaign, organized by the Harvard Palestine Solidarity
Committee, distributed notices at the beginning of March which read, “We
regret to inform you that your suite is scheduled for demolition in the
next three days”, a reference to the group’s views regarding Israel’s
treatment of the Arab population.
The Anti Defamation League (ADL) expressed outrage over the
prestigious university’s latest attempts to daunt Jewish students and
demonize the state of Israel saying, “This tactic is designed to silence
and intimidate pro-Israel advocates at Harvard and campuses around the
country.”
“Free expression has a place on campus; however targeting the dorms
of Harvard students lends itself to creating tension, isolating students
and fomenting hostility,” said Robert Trestan, ADL Acting New England
Regional Director.
The organization also voiced its concern regarding the underlying
anti-Israel message being propagated by academic institutions of higher
education in the name of “intellectual pluralism,” and “free speech.”
“We recognize and support free speech, but condemn the anti-Israel
views expressed in the eviction notices as factually incorrect and
intolerant,” Trestan said. “This is an example of how anti-Israel
activism on campus can cross the line by causing supporters to feel
isolated and intimidated.”
“Efforts like these only seek to delegitimize Israel and prevent
opportunities for meaningful dialogue on campus,” said Jeffrey Robbins,
ADL New England Regional Board Chair. “It is morally disgraceful to
label Israel as an apartheid state because it constructed a security
barrier to keep innocent Israeli civilians from being targeted with
terrorism. This tactic of mock eviction notices is more calculated to
mislead and offend than to shed light.”
As to the apartheid charge, a new Miss Israel was named last week. She's a 21-year old black woman from Ethiopia. Some apartheid.
Shabbat Shalom.
Labels: Harvard University, Israeli apartheid week
Harvard: Jews need not apply
Harvard students woke up Friday morning to
find
the flyer pictured above under their doors. In case you can't read it... (Hat Tip:
MFS - The Other News).
A sealed envelope contained a flyer
inviting undergraduates to 'Harvard’s Newest Final Club' - one of the
university's 14 exclusive single-sex social groups.
This
new organization claimed to be called the Pigeon - two of the all-male
clubs, the Owl and the Phoenix, are named after birds. It proclaimed a
motto of 'Inclusion, Diversity, Love'. But each word was footnoted.
Inclusion
had 'Jews need not apply.' Diversity was 'Seriously, no f******g Jews.
Coloreds OK.' Love had 'Rophynol' - a misspelling of the date-rape drug
rohypnol.
...
Harvard Dean of Students Evelynn M.
Hammonds reacted to the pamphlets by saying: 'I find these flyers
offensive. They are not a reflection of the values of our community.
'Even if intended as satirical in
nature, they are hurtful and offensive to many students, faculty and
staff, and do not demonstrate the level of thoughtfulness and respect we
expect at Harvard when engaging difficult issues within our community.'
I wonder what the reaction would have been if the flyer had said 'Muslims need not apply.' I suspect that we would have had a much harsher reaction from the Dean of Students with a lot of threats of expulsion from school.
Labels: anti-Semitism, Harvard University
It starts: Harvard all over itself apologizing over Israeli food controversy
At Harvard University, they're falling all over themselves to
apologize to offended Muslims.
Harvard Business School is “deeply troubled” for having offended Arab
sensibilities due to the mischaracterization of various foods appearing on the
menu of the dining room’s Israeli Mezze Station, Brian Kenny, chief marketing
and communications officer of the school, was quoted by Al-Arabiya as saying
Friday.
The controversy over the Israeli food station arose after
Lebanese Harvard graduate Sara el-Yafi on October 28 posted to her Facebook page
a letter of protest to the university describing the Israeli buffet’s menu as an
affront to Arabs, as such foods as humous and couscous are not of Israeli
origin.
“That ‘Israeli Mezze Station” is the ultimate multicultural,
multireligious ‘f*** you’ in the face of ALL Arabs at once from North Africa to
the Levant,” el- Yafi wrote.
“Israel already has a hard time keeping face
in the Arab world for the way it has ‘appropriated’ its lands since 1948, don’t
make it worse for them by having them appropriate other peoples’ foods as well,”
she added.
El-Yafi also pointed out that haloumi cheese is in fact
“Cypriot,” and therefore “until Cyprus becomes another conquered Israeli
territory, haloumi is considered NOT Israeli.”
She concluded that at the
very least the buffet should be renamed “Mediterranean Mezze Station.”
In
response to el-Yafi’s Facebook protest, which as of Friday had garnered more
than 4,500 “likes,” Kenny reportedly said that “we are deeply troubled that we
offended anybody by doing this buffet item, particularly considering that our
reason for doing the international buffet each day is to celebrate cultural
diversity.”
Good grief.... Forget for a minute that yes, many foods enjoyed in Israel came from Israeli Jews whose grandparents immigrated here 60 years ago from the Arab countries that expelled them (I know, that can't be admitted because then the holy Arab Muslims would have to admit that they brought about Jewish refugees). But would anybody take offense if an American mezze station included pizza, spaghetti or
French Freedom fries?
When are university administrators going to stop kowtowing to these spoiled brats? (And yes, I know, she's alumna - how much money has she donated since graduation? And does that give her a right to tell them how to run the university?).
Labels: dhimmi, Harvard University
Charles Small's Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) is resuming activities this fall. As you might recall, Small's Yale Institute for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism was
shut down due to what was apparently
pressure on the university by Muslim donors. The new institute will be spread across several campuses, including Harvard, Fordham and McGill. You can learn more about it and about its fall programs
here.
Labels: anti-Semitism, Charles Asher Small, Harvard University, Islamic anti-Semitism, McGill University, Yale University
One-state conference at Harvard denies Jewish peoplehood
Over the weekend, a conference took place at Harvard, which advocates a 'one-state solution,' i.e. make one country out of Israel and the territories that it liberated in the Six Day War, allow anyone who claims to be a 'Palestinian refugee' in, and then let them vote the Jewish state out of existence.
What's that? You think I'm reading too much into it?
Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip:
Breitbart.com).
Labels: Harvard University, one-state solution
Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Tuesday, February 28.
1) Lara in wonderland
On February 26 and 27, there was an International Conference on Jerusalem in Doha Qatar. It featured participants from all over the Middle East.
Among those speaking was Mahmoud Abbas, the President of the Palestinian Authority and Israel's supposed peace partner. Elder of Ziyon analyzed his speech.
In 1967, the eastern part of Jerusalem was essentially a neglected slum. There was even a UNRWA refugee camp called Mascar in the old Jewish quarter that UNRWA closed - in 1965! - because conditions there were so horrendous and unsanitary.
Between 1948 and 1967, Jerusalem was a neglected backwater of the Arab world. There were essentially no Muslim pilgrims going there. And while thousands of Christians would indeed visit Jerusalem every Easter, that number increased dramatically after Israel regained possession of the holy city.
Abbas is pushing lies and incitement, and his speech is filled with hypocrisy about things like freedom of worship when he would ban (or, at best, severely restrict) Jews from ever visiting their holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Hebron and elsewhere if given half a chance.
This speech reveals the ugly face of Mahmoud Abbas and how he is not interested in peace or co-existence at all, let alone the truth.
Nadav Shragai wrote in Israel Hayom:
You can’t sink any lower than that. Abbas is apparently relying on the world’s short memory – so here is a reminder: The kind of freedom of religion that thrives in Jerusalem today is unprecedented. Before 1967, things were different. The Arabs had vowed in writing (Article 8 of the 1949 Armistice Agreement with Jordan) to allow the Jews access to holy sites beyond the border, but in practice they prevented the Jews from visiting the Western Wall, Rachel’s Tomb and the Mount of Olives.
...
Incidentally, Bethlehem, which, in contrast to Jerusalem, was handed over to the Palestinians, did in fact become “Muslim.” The Christian majority there was severely oppressed by the Palestinian Authority and eventually became a minority.
The myth that the “Al-Aqsa Mosque is in danger,” which Abbas and his followers repeat like a mantra, isn’t only a despicable lie, it is also the direct opposite of the truth. It is precisely with the Temple Mount that Israel made an unthinkable concession -- it essentially handed the Muslims the holiest Jewish site, even though it is only the third-holiest site in Islam. Archaeological excavations that supposedly attempt to “Judaize” Jerusalem have actually uncovered entire chapters of Muslim history alongside the Jewish and Christian findings. The archaeological park on the south side of the wall is just one example of this.
PM Netanyahu responded:
This is a harshly inflammatory speech from someone who claims that he is bent on peace. The time has come for the Palestinian leadership to stop denying the past and distorting reality. For thousands of years Jerusalem has been the eternal capital of the Jewish People. Jerusalem, under Israeli sovereignty, will continue to be open to believers of all faiths. There is freedom of worship for all and Israel will continue to carefully maintain the holy places of all religions.
Abu Mazen knows full well that there is no foundation to his contemptible remarks, including his baseless and irresponsible claims regarding the Al Aqsa Mosque. The State of Israel expects that one who supposedly champions peace would prepare his people for peace and coexistence and not disseminate lies and incitement. This is not how one makes peace.
Netanyahu's point about "denying the past," is especially important.
The Palestinian Authority committed itself to removing the sections of its charter that were inconsistent with the agreements it made with Israel. After one such session in which those sections were supposedly nullified, Yasser Arafat wrote:
We would like to put to rest these concerns. The Palestine National Council's resolution, in accordance with Article 33 of the Covenant, is a comprehensive amendment of the Covenant. All of the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the P.L.O. commitment to recognize and live in peace side by side with Israel are no longer in effect.
As a result, Articles 6-10,15, 19-23, and 30 have been nullified, and the parts in Articles 1-5, 11-14, 16-l8, 25-27 and 29 that are in consistent with the above mentioned commitments have also been nullified.
Included in the nullification is article 20, which reads:
The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
The denial of a historical Jewish connection to the land of Israel, is a blatant violation of the terms of Oslo Accords. Unlike the building of apartments in Jerusalem, no creative interpretation is necessary to reach this conclusion. Yet there's been precious little comment about this obstacle to peace declared by the "moderate" leader of the Palestinians.
One American who was at the conference, was Lara Friedman of Americans for Peace Now. Though she denies that she went as a representative of her organization, she is identified as being with APN on the list of participants. Her presence at this anti-Israel hatefest discredits her and her organization.
It was however an eyeopening experience for Dr. Friedman, as she wrote after the first day of the conference in Jerusalem isn't just for Arabs either:
If representatives of the organization that sponsored the Arab Peace Initiative cannot bring themselves to acknowledge the legitimacy of Jewish equities in Jerusalem, they should know that they discredit their own professed interest in peace. Their framing of the future of Jerusalem as a zero-sum game only makes it more likely that Israel will continue asserting its current power over East Jerusalem to hinder the vision of two states living in peace with a Jerusalem as a shared capital.
All throughout the day, it was unfortunately the same story. Participants talked about Jerusalem as if Jewish history did not exist or was a fraud — as if all Jewish claims in the city were just a tactic to dispossess Palestinians. Here I do need to acknowledged the one person the entire day who I heard speak in a serious, credible way on this matter: veteran Palestinian diplomat Afif Safieh. In closing one of the afternoon sessions, Safieh emphasized the international consensus around the idea that in Jerusalem it is necessary to reconcile two national narratives — Israeli and Palestinian — and three religious narratives, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian. Safieh made clear that he thought this was still possible with a two state solution with two capitals in Jerusalem, an Israeli capital in the west and a Palestinian capital in the east.
It is my hope that the rest of the conference will deal more honestly and more constructively with the reality that Afif described and that I, as a Zionist who knows that the two-state solution is vital to Israel’s survival as a democracy and a Jewish state, believe is critical to any meaningful discussion of Jerusalem. I regret that the conference so far has not taken the issues related to Jerusalem more seriously, and I am proud that I am here representing a truly pro-peace — and thus be definition pro-Israel — perspective. Much of the discourse here thus far has been personally objectionable and even painful to me, but I believe my presence here is important for the cause of peace.
What Lara Friedman heard at the International Conference on Jerusalem is nothing new. The commitment of the Arab League and the Palestinian Authority to peace is dubious, as evidenced by statements they continue to make eighteen years after Oslo. If Friedman cared to know about them, she would. But her career as a "Zionist" is marked by holding Israel mostly (if not completely) to blame for the failure of peace despite the many concessions even the most "right-wing" governments of Israel have made.
Will this serve as a wake up call to Friedman? It hardly seems likely. Her response to the hatred and denial she heard was disappointment not outrage. No doubt she will return to the United States and continue finding fault first with Israel.
What will Americans for Peace Now do? Will it disassociate itself from Friedman? Or will it continue functioning without apologizing for the actions of its officer.
2) Why the Sorbonne is better than Harvard
Did you know that Harvard is sponsoring a one state solution (Imagine there's no Israel) conference?
Did you know that the Sorbonne is refusing to host an Israel Apartheid week event? (h/t Israel Daily News Stream)
Labels: Harvard University, Israeli apartheid week, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Middle East Media Sampler, Paris, Peace Now, Soccer Dad
Hitler's Mufti, Abbas' Mufti, Harvard and the New York Times
Charles Jacobs
refutes 'Palestinian' Mufti Muhammad Hussein's claim that he didn't mean to
encourage killing all the Jews. This is from the first link.
The Palestinians' spin control offers as many lessons as the murder decree. The mufti denied he was inciting violence, claiming his words were taken out of context. He told the Associated Press that he was only "speaking about the final signs of the day of resurrection. ... I did not incite, and I did not call for killing. We are not, at present, at the end of days." (Which is when, presumably, the order to kill the Jews would be religiously more appropriate.)
He tried to lay the blame at the feet of the holy Islamic text itself. "The Hadith says [it]. I am not responsible for the Hadith. The Hadith is in the book. The Hadith is a noble Hadith," he said. "It's not my Hadith."
The PA's Minister of Religious Affairs, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, agreed. "This is not incitement to kill Jews. We cannot change the historical religious writings, and we don't want to change them. However, we are talking now about the reality. The reality is that we want to achieve a just peace." So why, one could ask, bring up - at a rally to mark the birth of an Arab armed resistance group - this holy injunction to kill the Jews?
PMW posted the entirety of Hussein's sermon in order to refute such duplicitous denials. Hussein began with a discussion of the 47 years of the Palestinian revolution and then recited the Hadith - to explain the path the Palestinians were taking. He ended this homily by saying that the Israelis are planting those Jew-loving Gharqad trees around their settlements - "suggesting that Israel is preparing for when the Muslims fulfill their Hadith and come to kill them," according to PMW founder Itamar Marcus. Clearly, the mufti was explicitly relating the Hadith about the killing of Jews to the present.
Moreover, the mufti - who proclaims now to seek peace - did not see fit to condemn the moderator of the event, whose introductory remarks described the Jews as "the descendants of the apes and pigs" and called for a religious war against them.
Abbas appointed Hussein in 2006, noting his "ability to avoid controversies." Soon after becoming mufti, he defended killing Jews: "It is the Palestinian people's right to engage in resistance until the occupation ends. As long as the resistance is legitimate, everything related to it is also legitimate." Suicide bombing "is legitimate, of course, as long as it plays a role in the resistance," Hussein preached.
In 2010, PMW released a video showing Hussein using standard Islamic anti-Jewish memes: Jews are the "enemies of Allah"; they want to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque; they "have violated all faith and religious laws, and even deviated from their humanity."
Jacobs also adds this tidbit about how the 'intellectuals' at Harvard reacted to being confronted with 'Palestinian' incitement.
Even liberals would find it hard to keep their peace hopes intact after watching a Marcus multimedia presentation. And that's part of the problem: I brought Marcus to Harvard several years back. After watching an hour of children being instructed to kill Jews, teens yearning to blow themselves up for Allah, mourning mothers expressing pride at having raised murderers, the auditorium was sullen. I'd personally invited a Boston Globe editor; afterward, he told me the presentation was "unhelpful," that it would make people demand less of Israel. He expressed no outrage at the indoctrination of children to racist hate and murder. He expressed no concern for poisoning of Palestinian children's minds and souls. For him, to expose this ugliness was only to attack the "peace process." The New York Times, the Globe's parent, treated this current episode of Islamic Jew-hatred in the same manner: In a Jan 24 column, Isabel Kershner worried more about how Israel's investigation of the sheik's incitement would affect the "peace process" than about the Sheik citing Mohammed's call to destroy Jews as a description of just what the Palestinians were up to. Nothing new here: for years the Times has shamefully covered up Palestinian anti-Semitism, likely because reporting it would be "unhelpful" to "peace."
I guess Harvard hasn't changed much since the days when Joe Kennedy (the father of John, Bobby and Ted, and a notorious anti-Semite) ruled the campus and they had a quota on the number of Jews who could be admitted. And the Times hasn't changed much since Stephen Wise and the Sulzberger's pretended the Holocaust wasn't happening.
Read it all.
Labels: Harvard University, Muslim Jew hatred, New York Times, Palestinian incitement
Harvard hosting conference to promote Israel's destruction
On March 3 and 4, Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government is hosting a conference on the 'one-state solution.' That would be the state that makes the 'Palestinians' of Judea, Samaria and Gaza into
Israeli '
Palestinian' citizens, allows millions of descendants of 'refugees' to return and then calls a plebiscite to negate the idea of Jewish self-determination. The conference, which is an officially sanctioned event at Harvard,
does not have a single pro-Israel speaker on any of its seven panels. So much for academic integrity.
According to the working definition of anti-Semitism developed by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), and recognized by the United States Department of State, the One State Conference, in implicitly “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination,” is an exercise in anti-Semitism.
...
The One State Conference website boasts the logo of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and has been in the planning for a year. According to The Jewish Advocate, Kennedy School Dean David T. Ellwood released a statement, saying:I want to emphasize once again that Harvard University and the Harvard Kennedy School in no way endorses or supports the apparent position of these student organizers or any participants they include. We hope that the final shape of the conference will be significantly more balanced.
Furthermore, the university is quoted saying that the event is being at least partially underwritten by “modest” funds set aside for student activities. According to Melodie Jackson, Associate Dean for Communications, also quoted in The Jewish Advocate: “Generally administrators try to be supportive of student ideas for events that they are planning.”
Increasingly, assaults on Israel's legitimacy and survival are promoted by academics, including at the nation's most prestigious universities.
Read the whole thing.
I guess they don't teach students to think anymore at Harvard. After all, if they could think, they could be entrusted to hear two sides of a story and to choose the right one.
Labels: Harvard University, liberal academia, one-state solution
Anti-Israel agenda at Harvard's Middle East Center
This should come as no surprise. Harvard's Middle East Studies Center is
run by a BDS'er and has an agenda that fits his profile.
The detailed report, published by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) highlights the Center’s Director Paul Beran’s longtime activism in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel. In 2004 it says, he participated in the Presbyterian Church’s BDS campaign and claimed that he formed an alliance with an extreme anti-Israel group in order to counter criticism from “Zionists and their ilk.” The report details how following the failure of a similar BDS petition in Somerville, MA, Beran accused the town mayor, pension-fund manager and elected state representatives who voted against it of being “recruited by pro-Israel groups” and urged divestment activists to counter “Zionist backlash.”
The report mentions that in 2007 Beran protested the enrollment of former Israeli Chief of Staff Dan Halutz into a Harvard Business School course, calling him “a noted war criminal,” although the General was never tried or found guilty of any war crimes.
Reached on the phone by the Algemeiner, Beran declined to comment.
The report finds that the Center’s speakers, recommended resources and course syllabi (some of which are available online) similarly reflect a one-sided focus. Recommended readings heavily favor anti-Zionist writings, including works by deceased professor Edward Said, a Palestinian advocate, and former Israeli professor Ilan Pappé, the driving force behind academic boycotts of Israel. (CAMERA points out that Pappé’s scholarship is now under critical scrutiny as he is charged with fabricating a quote that alleges to show how Israel planned to expel Arabs in an article published in the Journal of Palestine Studies and in his 2006 book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. He was also harshly criticized for promoting a graduate thesis centered on a bogus claim of an Israeli massacre of Palestinians that was formally recanted in a libel case). Also mentioned in the report is the Center’s recommendation of the propaganda film, Occupation 101, featuring such well-known defamers of Israel as Noam Chomsky and Richard Falk.
Read the whole thing.
And you thought Veritas meant "truth," didn't you?
Labels: Harvard University, liberal academia
Mr. Moral Equivalence
Who could make the Itamar terror attack look like it was Israel's fault? Why Stephen Walt, of course.
To say that I am appalled by the brutal murder of an Israeli family in the West Bank settlement of Itamar (near Nablus) is an understatement. Israel's occupation of the West Bank is universally recognized as a violation of international law and depends on force, intimidation, and violence, but there is no justification for anyone to take the lives of an entire family in this way. No good can possibly come from such a senseless act -- not for Palestinians, not for Israelis, and not for anyone else -- and it should be universally condemned.
But while we are at it, we should not spare the other parties who have helped create and perpetuate the circumstances where such crimes are likely to occur.
Let us therefore condemn every Israeli government since 1967, for actively promoting the illegal effort to colonize these lands.
Note that in the first sentence, he condemns the attack, in the second sentences, he says it's Israel's fault, and in the third sentence he says it's not good for the 'Palestinians' (not that it's wrong, but that it doesn't help the cause). In the next paragraph, he goes on to blame Israel.
By the way, 'international law' does not say the 'settlements' are illegal, for reasons I have shown many times, most recently
here.
Later, he goes on to mouth baseless accusations about Israeli 'war crimes,' the 'occupation' (conveniently forgetting how we got to be in this situation), and 'squandering the opportunity of Oslo,' again conveniently forgetting who squandered it.
The name "Fogel" never appears in the article. They are dehumanized. They are just 'evil settlers' in Walt's book.
Stephen Walt is a rank anti-Semite and Harvard is to be condemned and ostracized for continuing to employ him.
Labels: anti-Semitism, Fogel family massacre, Harvard University, Itamar, Palestinian terror, Stephen Walt
