Wednesday, October 29, 2008
What peace process? The PLO confirms it is still at war with Israel - so what exactly did the Israeli politicians "buy" with all those concessions?
by Daniel Pipes Hudson Institute October 28, 2008
Yasir Arafat may have shook Yitzhak Rabin's hand in 1993 and signed solemn
declarations about ending the war to eliminate Israel, but late last
in a New York City courtroom, the Palestine Liberation Organization
confirmed that it still sees terrorism against Israelis as legitimate acts
The lawsuit, Sokolow v The Palestine Liberation Organization, brought by
intrepid David Strachman, alleges that the PLO carried out two machine-gun
and five bombing attacks in the Jerusalem area between January 2001 and
February 2004. The plaintiffs allege, in the words of U.S. District Judge
George Daniels, that the PLO did so "intending to terrorize, intimidate,
coerce the civilian population of Israel into acquiescing to defendants'
political goals and demands, and to influence the policy of the United
and Israeli governments in favor of accepting defendants' political goals
demands." The attacks killed 33 and wounded many more, some of them U.S.
citizens; the victims and their families are seeking up to US$3 billion in
damages from the PLO.
To this, the PLO, represented in part by none other than the appalling
Clark (who in a distant age, 1967-69, was attorney general of the United
States), replied that the attacks were acts of war rather than terrorism.
Daniels summarizes the PLO argument: "defendants argue that subject matter
jurisdiction is lacking because this action is premised on acts of war,
is barred under the ATA [Antiterrorism Act of 1991], and further is based
conduct which does not meet the statutory definition of .international
This response is noteworthy for two reasons: (1) Fifteen years after Oslo
supposedly ended the state of war, four years after Mahmoud Abbas took
and supposedly improved on Arafat's abysmal record, the PLO publicly
maintains it remains at war with Israel. (2) The PLO argues, even in the
context of an American law court, that blatant, cruel, inhumane, and
atrocious acts of murder constitute legitimate acts of warfare.
Judge Daniels rightly slammed the PLO's argument: "the Court finds that
attacks, as alleged to have occurred in the amended complaint, do not
constitute acts of war nor do they, as a matter of law, fall outside the
statutory definition of .international terrorism'." He went on to point
that civilians, not soldiers were the intended victims of these assaults:
There has been no showing that the situs of the attacks were in any combat
militarized zone, or were otherwise targeted at military or governmental
personnel or interests. Rather, plaintiffs allege that the attacks were
intentionally targeted at the civilian population. They were purportedly
carried out at locations where non-combatants citizens would be known to
congregate, such as in the cafeteria on the Hebrew University campus and
commercial passenger bus.
Daniels went on, rising to an eloquence not frequently heard in district
Additionally, the use of bombs, under such circumstances, is indicative of
intent to cause far-reaching devastation upon the masses. The "benefit" of
such weaponry is its merciless capability of indiscriminately killing and
maiming untold numbers in heavily populated civilian areas. Such claimed
violent attacks upon non-combatant civilians, who were allegedly simply
about their everyday lives, do not constitute acts of war.
That the PLO justifies "merciless capability of indiscriminately killing
maiming untold numbers" suggests it remains the terrorist organization it
always been since its founding in 1964.
When will the diplomatic bright lights in Jerusalem and Washington figure
2. Speaking of the wisdom of Joe the Plumber:
3. Olmert's last-minute attempt to destroy Israel to avenge his being
4. So how come Israel does not deal with soldier killing the same way?
5. Over the past few weeks the Israeli leftist media have been having
conniptions because the army's chief rabbi dared to teach Judaism to
imprisoned rightwing radicals and also expresses occasionally his own
political ideas. But the real story that the Israeli mainstream media are
suppressing is the LEFTIST political bias in the army's own radio station:
see this http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/128121
Media Analysis: Army Radio's Left-Wing Agenda
29 Tishrei 5769, 28 October 08 07:10
by Hillel Fendel
(IsraelNN.com) Last week, popular broadcaster Dudu Alharar accused Army
Radio (Galei Tzahal) of left-wing extremism, and this week, writer Chani
Luz brings proof.
Alharar, who is also a musician, actor and producer, was fired from his
long-time Army Radio show last month; most observers agree that it was
because of the right-wing views he presented. Alharar responded by saying,
"This is political persecution and a silencing of mouths... It is
perfectly obvious that Army Radio is a left-wing station, which will just
continue to destroy the country."
More recently, he said that Army Radio is a "greenhouse for the
'Wants to Balance All of Israel Media'
In response, Army Radio director Yitzchak Tunik, who fired Alharar, all
but admitted the reason for the firing. Noting for the record that the
show ran for an entire year under his command, Tunik said, "Alharar sees
his mission in life as balancing not only the shows on Army Radio, but all
of the broadcasters in Israeli media."
Luz Takes on Razi Barkai
This week, veteran media watchdog Chani Luz documents how Army Radio's
Razi Barkai - one of Israel's most listened-to talk show hosts - slants
his program to promote what she calls his anti-settler, left-wing agenda.
In an article for the Omedia Hebrew-language website, Luz writes, "Barkai
adjusts the flames of Israeli media, raising the flames (against settlers)
at will, and lowering them (against the Arab sector) at will."
"How does a media personality create identification with a subject?" Luz
asks. "By bringing a personal story and intensifying its pain and emotion.
How is a lack of identification created? By impersonalizing the issue, by
generalizing and applying negative group labels, by not allotting
air-time, and by blowing up marginal incidents. De-humanization creates
demonization, and this sums up Barkai's work with regard to the settlers
[Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria]."
Luz provides three recent examples: Barkai's coverage of last month's
terrorist attacks in Yitzhar and the Jews' reactions; the destruction of
the Federmans' home in Kiryat Arba this week; and anti-Israel marches by
Arabs in Jaffa and the Galilee earlier this year.
In the first case, Luz notes that Barkai's show dedicated no more than a
half-minute to the voice of Elisheva Federman, who experienced the brunt
of what some have called a pogrom in her home by Israeli security forces.
Neither was the condemnation by the local mayor - an elected official - of
the farm's destruction heard on Barkai's show.
On the other hand, the voice of the Kiryat Arba man who cursed the
soldiers who perpetrated the act was broadcast repeatedly, with emphasis
provided by Barkai. The show host spoke derisively of "the settlers" - a
population of close to 300,000 people - several times.
Terror Attack - No; Jewish Reaction - Yes
Luz also cites Barkai's coverage of the events in Yitzhar. A few weeks
earlier, early on Sabbath morning, a Palestinian Authority terrorist
entered the Jewish town of Yitzhar in Samaria, attempted to stab and hurl
a Jewish boy to his death, and burnt down a house. Local Jews responded by
descending on the nearby Arab town where the terrorist had escaped, and
they threw rocks and shot in the air.
The next morning, Barkai interviewed no one from Yitzhar or from the boy's
family, but he did ask Yesha Council Danny Dayan some questions. When
Dayan tried to speak about the terrorist attack, Barkai said, "There is no
need to discuss that, it has already been reported." Dayan talked about it
anyway, but Barkai finally interrupted and said again that it need not be
Barkai then devoted nearly three minutes of air-time to a friendly chat on
the issue with Gen. (res.) Shlomo Gazit, who once revealed his feelings
about religious-nationalists when he said that skullcaps on IDF soldiers
remind him of swastikas.
A week later in Yitzhar, the same terrorist attempted once again to
infiltrate the town; this time, soldiers shot and killed him. Barkai did
not even mention the item. "He certainly did not bring in any army experts
to explain how it happened that an attempted murderer was allowed to run
free for a week until he succeeded in reaching the scene of his crime for
a second try," Luz laments.
"Barkai can claim that this is part of his agenda against threats and
violence," Luz writes. "But what happens when it's Arabs who are
threatening Jews? Oh, that's different."
Six months ago, Israeli-Arabs marched in the Galilee, waving PLO flags and
chanting, "We want a terrorist attack." They also marched in Jaffa, with
Peace Now members, calling out the Arab slogan, "In spirit and blood we
will redeem you, Jaffa!"
"Following those incidents," Luz notes, "Barkai acted to put down the
flames of incitement. He did not broadcast the calls of incitement again
and again, and did not incite listeners against the Arab public, but
rather worked to lower the flames. In an interview with two members of an
Israeli-Arab co-existence organization, the 'isolated' and 'separatist'
nature of the incitement was emphasized, and everyone spoke of peace and
appeasement. When he wants, he incites, and when he wants, he appeases;
this is not journalism, but rather the promotion of an agenda."
Army Radio is a Left-Wing Occupied Station
"It is time to tell the truth," Luz concludes. "Army Radio is an occupied
[conquered] radio station. Strongly left-wing personalities, headed by
Razi Barkai, have taken over key positions there, and they are leading a
campaign of smearing and de-legitimizing the Jewish settlement enterprise
in Judea and Samaria... If Army Radio wants to be considered a free and
democratic radio station, it must institute immediate balance and employ
talk show hosts with clear right-wing stances to offset Barkai and his
6. From Isracampus.org.il:
Ben Gurion University's Israel-Hater of the week:
His competitor, from the Hebrew University:
And the competitor from Bar-Ilan:
Competitor for Haifa University:
7. Israeli pseudo-academic celebrating suicide bombings:
8. On which Jewish holiday did Yossi Beilin retire once and for all from
Israeli politics, having devoted his career to seeing Israel exterminated
by its enemies?
Answer: Any day Yossi Beilin retires from politics is a Jewish holiday,
but it turned out to be on Rosh Hodesh.