Zionist Conspiracy

Our World: From Tel Aviv to Teheran, with love
Nov. 10, 2008
Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST
Two weeks ago, the Palestinians and their anti-Zionist Israeli and
international partners finally produced a smoking gun. They had a
videotape of evil settlers brutally attacking poor, defenseless
Palestinians as they innocently picked olives with their enlightened
supporters in a grove by the Tel Rumeida neighborhood in Hebron.
The local media went into a feeding frenzy. The footage led the television
news broadcasts. Photos taken from the video were plastered across the
front pages of the newspapers. Radio talk show hosts denounced the
criminal settlers and celebrated the guileless Palestinians and their
heroic Israeli supporters. The Olmert-Livni-Barak government was quick to
weigh in, promising stiff punishment for the Jewish fascists involved and
a curtailment of their supporters' civil rights.
In the weeks that have followed, and with elections looming, Foreign
Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have stepped up their
attacks on the evil right-wing extremists. At Saturday night's memorial
ceremony/political rally for slain prime minister Yitzhak Rabin in Tel
Aviv, Barak called right-wing activists "cancers." He claimed that they
are a "threat to democracy." And he pledged, "We will uproot this evil
from within us."
The crowd loved Barak's statement. The few audience members who might have
booed him had already been beaten and arrested by police for disturbing
the peace. A handful of anti-leftist activists from the student group Im
Tirtzu came to Kikar Rabin carrying signs decrying leftist demonization of
the Right. The police beat them and carted them off before the rally
began.
If it were true that settlers are marauding around Judea and Samaria
beating innocent Palestinians, perhaps it would be possible to understand
this assault against the Right. But as it works out, the videotape that
was supposed to be the definitive proof that settlers are violent
criminals was a fabrication. It was simply the latest anti-Israel snuff
film brought to us by our friends at Pallywood Productions. These are the
same creative filmmakers whose previous credits include the fabricated IDF
shooting of Muhammad al-Dura, the Jenin massacre that wasn't, the Kafr
Kana massacre that wasn't and a host of other notable blood libels.
The inconvenient truth that these activists remain liars was exposed at
the remand hearings of the settlers accused of beating the Palestinian
olive harvesters. As the NFC news Web site reported exclusively on Sunday,
the Palestinians showed their film as evidence against the arrested
offenders in two separate hearings before two different judges at the
Jerusalem Magistrate's Court. And at each hearing, after viewing the film
the judges concluded that through heavy editing, the video had inverted
reality. Both stated that it was impossible to know who began the fight -
the Palestinians and their Israeli and foreign supporters who beat the
settlers, or the settlers who walked to the grove on Shabbat carrying
nothing but their prayer shawls and hit them back.
The judges also noted that one of the Palestinians threw a large rock at
the back of one of the settlers after he and his friends had disengaged
from the fight. The judges expressed anger and amazement at the police for
failing to arrest the Palestinian who had clearly attacked the Jewish
defendant without provocation.
IT GOES without saying that the local media have chosen to ignore the
court's exposure of the latest hoax. The truth doesn't fit their
anti-right-wing narrative and so it isn't being covered.
What the local media and politicians such as Barak and Livni who seek to
criminalize the Right for political gain refuse to acknowledge is that
their embrace of these lies not only harms the settlers, it harms the
country as a whole.
Although from the rap they've gotten from the political Left and its
supporters in the media, it seems like right-wing extremists are both
numerous and powerful, the fact of the matter is that the number of
right-wingers who reject the authority of the state or would take the law
into their own hands is tiny. And they are politically isolated both at
home and abroad and have no money.
In stark contrast, the anti-Zionist, Israeli Left is an integral part of a
well-funded international movement actively engaged in waging political
warfare not against the settlers, but against Israel as a whole. The end
of this political war is Israel's destruction. The anti-Zionist Israeli
Left advances this destruction both by directly assisting terror groups
and by indirectly assisting terror groups through activities aimed at
delegitimizing Israel's right to defend itself.
The clear collusion between both Israeli and international anti-Israel
leftist activists with terrorist groups like Hamas is nowhere more evident
than in the terror-supporting International Solidarity Movement's newest
spin-off, the Free Gaza campaign. On Saturday, this group broke the IDF's
sea blockade of the Hamas-controlled Gazan coast for the third time in
recent months by sailing a ship filled with rabidly pro-jihadist and
anti-Israel European politicians from Cyprus to Gaza.
According to a credible source with close ties to the operation, the Free
Gaza campaign works closely with Israeli far-left groups including
Anarchists against the Wall, Gush Shalom, Gisha, Machsom Watch, New
Profile and Women in Black. These organizations are generously funded by
the US-based New Israel Fund, by European governments and by anti-Israel
church groups like the Quakers. The Free Gaza campaign's first ship, which
arrived in Gaza in late August, was led by Israeli anti-Zionist activist
and former lecturer at Ben-Gurion University Jeff Halper.
The Free Gaza campaign is a clear assault on Israel's national security.
Under the banner of "human rights," this new ferry service between Cyprus
and Gaza is meant to compromise the country's ability to combat terror
operations and to provide political support for Hamas. Crew members and
passengers on board these boats meet with Hamas terror commanders in Gaza
and coordinate future missions.
Their newest campaign is to prevent the navy from interdicting fishing
boats. Hamas and other terror groups make wide use of fishing boats to
import weapons and transport terror personnel from abroad into Gaza. By
demonizing the navy for interdicting fishing boats, and in open collusion
with Hamas, the activists provide political cover for weapons transfers
and jihadist maritime traffic into and out of Gaza.
To date, Israel has chosen not to intercept the Free Gaza campaign's boats
out of concern that taking such necessary action will prove a public
relations disaster both at home and abroad. And this concern is
reasonable. But by taking no diplomatic or military steps to prevent this
terror-supporting traffic from continuing and expanding, the government
allows these Israeli and European terror supporters to strengthen Hamas's
war machine and legitimize Hamas's objective of destroying Israel.
Official Israel's failure to act against this breach of its security is
directly related to its support of Israeli anti-Zionist groups when they
direct their guns at the Israeli Right - rather than Israel as a whole. As
a practical matter, it is difficult for the government to show that the
Free Gaza campaign actively supports the war against Israel when it
willingly embraces the bona fides of the Free Gaza campaign's supporters
when they attack settlers, or when the government adopts these
organizations' false assertion that the Right is the greatest threat to
the country.
By the same token, it is difficult for the government to discredit films
purporting to demonstrate the human rights plight of Gazans as Pallywood
propaganda flicks when the government accepts these films as accurate when
their culprits are right-wing activists.
BUT WHILE the domestic Left sees a distinction between its right-wing
opponents and the country as a whole, the international community sees no
distinction between the two. Indeed, the international community has used
the cover that official Israel provides anti-Zionist activists for their
settler vilifying activities in order to advance the cause of
criminalizing Israel as a whole.
Case in point is what has become known as the Durban II conference in
Geneva. Durban I, it will be recalled, was the UN's 2001 "anti-racism"
conference in Durban, South Africa. The conference, which took place the
week before the jihadist attacks on the US, was an anti-Semitic hate-fest.
The American and Israeli delegations walked out as Israel and the Jewish
people were castigated as the greatest human rights abusers, genocide
committers, apartheid propagators and general all purpose bad guys in the
entire world.
The Nazi-like propaganda emanating from the conference led to violent
attacks against Jews all over the world. Durban I's resolutions also
provided the policy blueprint for much of political warfare that has been
waged against Israel by so-called human rights groups ever since. These
include the violent demonstrations against the security fence organized by
anti-Zionist Israeli groups, the Free Gaza campaign they support and the
international boycotts against Israeli exports and academics they
advocate.
Today, the UN is busily organizing its follow-up conference that will be
held next year in Geneva. As the watchdog group Eye on the UN reported
over the weekend, the conference's organizing committee just met and
approved most of the resolutions it is set to adopt at Geneva. These
resolutions again castigate Israel as the chief violator of human rights
in the world. Israel is accused of committing genocide, crimes against
humanity and being an apartheid state. It is also condemned as the most
serious threat to international peace and security.
But of course, what starts with Israel doesn't end with Israel. The
conference organizers have used the basic unanimity about Israel's
criminal nature to launch an assault against the foundations of Western
civilization. In addition to the numerous and repetitious attacks against
Israel and Jews, the conference organizers passed multiple resolutions
calling for the abrogation of freedom of expression and the
criminalization of political speech in order to outlaw discussion of
Islamic terrorism and block counterterror efforts in the West.
Among the conference's chief organizers are Iran, Libya, Egypt and Cuba.
Iran is the vice-chairman of the executive committee responsible for
planning Durban II. Much of the language in the proposed resolutions is
taken directly from resolutions passed at a planning session last year in
Teheran.
Israel had no hand in organizing this conference, which, following Canada,
it announced it will boycott. But over the years, it could have taken
actions that might have tempered or weakened the international coalition
arrayed against it.
If the government had outlawed anti-Israel groups like Machsom Watch, New
Profile, Gisha, Gush Shalom, Women in Black and Anarchists against the
Wall, rather than tolerate them on account of their activities against
settlers, it could at least have weakened their efforts. Had they been
disbanded, they would have had less capacity to legitimize and assist
Palestinians and Europeans who engage in political warfare against Israel
on the ground.
By refusing to recognize the international consequences of their domestic
battle against their political opponents on the Right, the
Olmert-Livni-Barak government and the local media have strengthened
Israel's enemies in their battle to destroy the country.
caroline@carolineglick.com

. 2. From the WSJ: GLOBAL VIEW
. NOVEMBER 11, 2008
'Tolerance' Is Not the Lesson of Kristallnacht
. By BRET STEPHENS

Sunday was the 70th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the night of broken
glass. With some notable exceptions, Europe has opted to mark the occasion
by missing its point.
"We must not be silent," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel at a
memorial ceremony in Berlin's renovated Rykestrasse synagogue, one of the
few that was not burned down that night by the Nazis -- though 2,200
others were, as crowds of German or Austrian citizens looked on. "There
can be no tolerance, for example, if the safety of the state of Israel is
threatened by Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran." Well said. Maybe the chancellor
will turn next to the issue of the 2,000 German companies that still do
business with Tehran, whose exports are up more than 14% this year.
Less well said is a "white paper on tolerance," which, along with a draft
of a "European Framework Convention on Promoting Tolerance and Combating
Intolerance," was presented yesterday at a conference at the European
Parliament in Brussels. The meeting is generating interest in part because
of the participation of representatives from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other
Muslim states -- none of which are especially known for their solicitude
toward Jews.
Maybe they've had a change of heart. Alternatively, they might have
figured out that the banner of "tolerance" -- a word that means nothing --
can serve their purposes as well as the "peace" movement once served the
Soviet Union.
To be sure, neither the white paper nor the framework convention is short
on references to anti-Semitism and its "current increase . . . in many
European countries." But the drafters of the convention also claim to be
"profoundly convinced that combating anti-Semitism, while requiring a
specific type of action, is an integral and intrinsic component of the
fight against racism."
With this premise, the convention proposes various legal penalties for the
"dissemination of any ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred," as
well as policies to promote "special positive measures to further equal
social development and ensure the civil, political, economic, social and
cultural rights of all victims" of discrimination.
But if that sounds relatively anodyne, consider the ways in which radical
Islamists in Europe have been using hate-speech codes to their advantage.
In 2005, the Times of London reported that the radical Islamist group Hizb
ut-Tahrir -- proscribed in Germany for distributing anti-Semitic
literature -- had launched a recruiting drive on college campuses under
the aegis of a "Stop Islamophobia" campaign. In Belgium, the leader for
several years of the Arab European League, which claimed to defend
Antwerp's Muslim immigrant Moroccan community against police harassment,
was Dyab Abou Jahjah, himself a Lebanese member of Hezbollah.
Then there is the instructive, albeit complex, case of the Cologne mosque
project. An enormous structure designed to accommodate 4,000 worshippers,
it was approved by city hall and sponsored by the Turkish-Islamic Union
(or DITIB), an umbrella group considered to be relatively moderate. Given
that 12% of Cologne's population is Muslim, it seems a reasonable
accommodation.
Yet the sheer scale of the project aroused widespread unease. In
September, a group called "pro-Cologne" -- some, though by no means all,
of whose members had ties to anti-immigrant parties such as the Flemish
Vlaams Belang -- attempted to hold an anti-Islamification Congress. They
were thwarted by an estimated 40,000 protestors throwing paint bombs and
chanting "No K.lsch [beer] for Nazis."
Superficially, at least, the protestors seemed to have achieved a worthy
objective against some unsavory characters. Yet as John Rosenthal of the
invaluable WorldPoliticsReview Web site points out, Germany's actual Nazis
took a different view.
"Inasmuch as it is a determined opponent of the western-plutocratic
one-world policy, we regard Islam, globally considered, as an ally against
the mammonistic dominance of the American east coast" went a statement
published by the neo-Nazi North German Action Office, using the words
"American east coast" as a euphemism for Jews. "'Pro-Cologne's'
superficial populism against Islam sends a completely wrong signal, about
which only pro-Israel circles could be happy."
This isn't to say that the Cologne protestors are closet neo-Nazis. Nor is
DITIB a radical group, at least compared to Hizb ut-Tahrir. Yet DITIB
refuses to distinguish between Islam (a religion) and Islamism (a
political idea) and accuses anyone who has an unkind word to say about the
latter of being a "racist."
Much the same goes for other "mainstream" Islamic groups in Europe, who
would find in the proposed "framework convention" a useful tool through
which to shut down serious and legitimate concerns about the rise of
Islamism -- along with its usual cargo of Israel- and Jew-hatred -- in
Europe. One perverse result is that these groups will now be in a position
to dictate the terms of what constitutes acceptable speech. Also perverse,
and a process that's already in train, is that European moderates will
increasingly find themselves marching into the arms of parties like the
Vlaams Belang.
So here we are, 70 years after Kristallnacht, as good an example as any of
what happens when the evil of the few (or, perhaps, not-so-few) takes
advantage of the cowardice of the many. If there's a lesson here, it's in
the need not for "tolerance," but for moral courage. Now as before, Europe
finds it in short supply.

3. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3620289,00.html
I wish to remember Rabin too
Yitzhak Rabin.s memory should not be exclusive privilege of leftist camp
Reuven Rivlin

4. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3620638,00.html
Obama, please neglect us
Bush.s, Clinton.s involvement in Israeli affairs only brought negative
results
Elyakim Haetzni

5. I spoke too fast . Arutz7 did run some infantile conspiracist
manure endorsing Chamishism. Here is my response:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/1#3135

# posted by Steven Plaut : 12:37 AM