Via JCPA:

* Between 1920 and 1970, 900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and other Muslim countries. The 1940s were a turning point in this tragedy; of those expelled, 600,000 settled in the new state of Israel, and 300,000 in France and the United States. Today, they and their descendents form the majority of the French Jewish community and a large part of Israel’s population.

*In the countries that expelled Jews, a combination of six legal, economic, and political measures aimed at isolating Jews in society was instituted: denationalization; legal discrimination; isolation and sequestration; economic despoilment; socioeconomic discrimination; and pogroms or similar acts.

*It is the custom to say that Zionism was responsible for this development. However, the region’s anti-Semitism would have developed even without the rise of the state of Israel because of Arab-Islamic nationalism, which resulted in xenophobia.

*The fact that these events have been obscured has served in the campaign to delegitimize Israel, and therefore to a large extent, the same population that suffered this oppression. The fate of Palestinian refugees, their proclaimed innocence, and the injustice they endured form the main thrust of this delegitimization. The Jewish refugees have suffered more than the Palestinian refugees and undergone greater spoliations. However, they became citizens of the countries of refuge, especially Israel and France, while Palestinians were ostracized from the Arab nations.

Via NY Jewish Week:

# When the Palestinians say the resumption of talks requires Israeli action, this is where we disagree. The only action needed by both sides to come to the negotiating table is a short car ride. Both sides have their concerns. Solutions to these concerns can only be made when Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas are in the same room.

# Israel’s settlement freeze was a one-time confidence-building measure to facilitate the Palestinians entering into direct talks. The Palestinians were livid with the freeze, calling it unacceptable. Apparently, the settlement freeze has magically gained importance right when it can be used as a political football.

# Despite the constant headlines of “settlements as obstacles to peace,” history presents a pretty strong rebuttal. Peace was achieved with Egypt and Jordan, and the Oslo Accords were signed with the Palestinians, without a moratorium on settlement construction.

# We essentially extended the olive branch, and for nine months, rather than grasping it, the Palestinians have sharpened that branch so they can accuse us of pointing a spear at them.

# If the Palestinians do believe that settlements are the key obstacle to peace, they need to sit with us and discuss what we need to do, together. As our prime minister said, the resolution of any and all issues, whether they are settlements, borders or water, will be decided as a result of peace talks, not imposed as a precondition.

# Since the 2003 Roadmap Agreement, no new Jewish settlements have been constructed. The narrative that Israelis are engaged in “manifest destiny” on the West Bank is bogus.

Where’s the outrage at Egypt? Aren’t palestinians supposedly starving in spite of the dearth of photographs portraying bloated bellies and sunken eye sockets? You see, there is no outrage because the world is afflicted with palestinianphilia.  And it seems to be incurable. Via Jordan Times:

The Jordanian Professional Associations Council on Thursday said Egypt has refused to allow their Gaza-bound humanitarian aid convoy to enter its territory. Activists had originally intended to travel from Aqaba to the Egyptian port of Nuweibeh before heading by land to the Rafah border crossing with Gaza to express their solidarity with Gazans. The convoy of 150 activists and 25 trucks left Amman on Tuesday.

I don’t recall Madrid’s gay organizations condemning any Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens in their cafes, buses, kindergartens, or synagogues, do you? Via GuardianUK:

A delegation of gay residents of Tel Aviv has been banned from joining a gay pride march in Madrid because authorities in the Israeli city have not condemned the recent attack on the Gaza flotilla.”After what has happened, and as human rights campaigners, it seemed barbaric to us to have them taking part,” explained Antonio Poveda, of Spain’s Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transexuals and Bisexuals. “We don’t just defend out own little patch.”

In this pathetic world we live in, only the Jews are to be despised, and Muslims are to be exalted.  Shame on Scotland and the reprehensible brown-noser Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill for releasing a mass murderer.  Yet another example of how the UK has lost its moral will.  Via AP:

The Scottish government says it will release Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds to allow him to return to Libya to die.

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill said Thursday that there had been a significant deterioration in the health of al-Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

MacAskill says he is conscious that there “were deeply held feelings and that many may disagree.”

Al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001 of taking part in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 on Dec. 21, 1988. He was sentenced to life in prison.

The airliner — which was carrying mostly American passengers to New York — blew up as it flew over Scotland. All 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground died when the aircraft crashed into the town of Lockerbie.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi is a former Libyan intelligence officer, head of security for Libyan Arab Airlines, and director of the Centre for Strategic Studies in Tripoli, Libya. On 31 January 2001, he was convicted, by a panel of Scottish Judges sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, of 270 counts of murder for his part in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, on 21 December 1988.

Megrahi was sentenced to life imprisonment. Suffering from terminal prostate cancer, with less than three months to live, he was freed on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Government on 20 August 2009.

His release was met with controversy. His co-accused, Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah was found not guilty and was acquitted.

Statement of Director Robert S. Mueller, III, Federal Bureau of Investigatio:

We are deeply disappointed over the decision to release Abdel Basset Mohamed al-Megrahi from prison. Mr. Megrahi’s guilt was firmly established by the court. His conviction resulted in a life sentence for his part in the loss of 270 innocent lives, including 189 Americans. He never admitted to his role in this act of terrorism, nor did he or the government of Libya disclose the names or roles of others who were responsible.

In a case of mass murder over Lockerbie, Mr. Megrahi served less than 14 days per victim. Our thoughts are with the families and friends of those victims today, for the ongoing pain and loss caused by this horrific attack.

If there had been no Hamas war crimes, there would have been no need for an Israeli response. Via JPost:

The issue is not whether Israel must respect human rights, but that the human rights of Israel and its people have not been respected. The discrimination emerges not from suggesting that human rights standards should be applied to Israel – which they must be – but from the fact that these standards have not been applied equally to anyone else.

It was Hamas that fired deliberately on Israeli civilians.

It was Hamas that boasted – only days before the conflict exploded in December – that Israel was “hopeless and desperate” when faced with its attacks.

It was Hamas that painted Israel and Jews as the sons of apes and pigs and that called for their murder in its charter and publicly incited to their genocide.

Once the war began, it was Hamas that continued to target Israeli civilians as part of a systematic, widespread attack.

It was Hamas that chose to position its fighters in Palestinian civilian areas.

It was Hamas that misused ambulances to transport fighters to launch attacks.

It was Hamas that recruited children into armed conflict.

These are all indisputable war crimes. Yet they do not find their way into the resolution establishing the Goldstone Commission.

Simply put, if there had been no Hamas war crimes, there would have been no need for an Israeli response.

The double-standard of liberalism:  silence when Muslims kill non-Muslims, vocal outrage when Israel defends itself against those same Muslims.  Via RightBias.com:

The World Yawns

Taliban Buying Children For Suicide Bombers

Pakistan’s top Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets. Washington Times

Read through this post to see how Muslims are licking their chops, waiting for Durban II to commence so that they can demonize Israel and pretend that their taqqiyas and burqas will shield them from the truth about their fraudulent unholy death god that they mistakenly pray to. And Hillel Neuer, you’re brilliant.  Via UN Watch:

UN Watch Blasts Sudan on ‘Racist Murder’, Iran on Persecuting Gays

YouTube video of debate now available: click here (3 mins.)

Summary of Recent Debate at U.N. Human Rights Council
on Durban Review Conference and Racism

UNHRC 10 Session, March 2009

Libya: “We are proud of chairing the preparatory working group. The scourge of racism and xenophobia had not been eliminated yet. Some were turning a blind eye to the worst kind of crimes that affected innocent women and children…  People of the world are eagerly awaiting the results of the Durban Review Conference. We call on all countries to show a sense of responsibility on constructively drafting an outcome document…”

Iran: “We welcome the ongoing process of the Durban Review Conference… The world today witnesses racism, defamation of religions, religious intolerance, racial profiling and the intellectual legitimisation of racism. This form of racism was disseminated in large proportion in the media, including the Internet. The failures in the struggle against racism, inter alia, the contemporary forms of racism had led to persisting manifestations of racism and intolerance including racial and religious profiling and the rise in Islamophobic incidents in the world. Iran had contributed $40,000 to the Durban Review Conference for facilitating the realization of a better participative conference by all stakeholders.”

Kuwait: “Kuwait will allocate $100,000, and agrees that efforts needed to be stepped up in order to achieve the objectives and to ensure the success of the final document.”

Cuba for Non-Aligned Movement: “The effective implementation of the Durban agreements was not only essential in the fight against racism; it was also a debt owed to millions of victims of these abominable practices through history.”

China: “The Durban Review Conference provided the international community with an opportunity for the future, to promote human rights, eliminate differences, promote solidarity, encourage effective participation, and take effective measures against racism.”

Syria: “The Durban Declaration was a landmark in the struggle against racism.. That was why Syria was convinced of the need for everyone to pull together for the follow-up. Foreign occupation seriously increased the risk of racism, said the report of the High Commissioner. As to racial profiling in the media, Syria supported the legitimate position of the Arab countries…”

Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference: “The Organization of the Islamic Conference attaches the highest importance to the subject of racism… The outcome of the Durban Review Conference must provide a comprehensive protection mechanism to all victims, including those who had suffered the war on terror in terms of racio-religious profiling and its concomitant incitement to racial or religious discrimination, hatred and violence. The Organization of the Islamic Conference welcomed the successful holding of the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards.” [Ed. note: This Algerian-chaired U.N. committee is seeking to rewrite international human rights law by definining any criticism of Islamic dogma as a human rights violation, and is endorsed by Art. 30 of the current Durban II draft; see UN Watch speech below.]

UN WATCH RESPONDS

The Myths of Durban II
Testimony by Hillel Neuer

Thank you, Mr. President.

Racism is evil. How can we truly fight it?

For starters, by clearing up three myths about next month’s conference.

Myth Number One: that the new draft removes all pernicious provisions.

The truth is that many were removed—thanks only to the credible threat of an E.U. walk-out—but red lines continue to be breached:

• Articles 10, 30 and 132 encourage the Islamic states’ campaign to ban any criticism of religion.
• Articles 60 to 62 demonize the West, addressing only its sins of slavery, yet saying nothing of the massive Arab trade in African slaves, thereby politicizing that which should never be politicized.
• Article 1 breaches President Obama’s red line by reaffirming what his government called the quote, “flawed 2001 Durban Declaration”, a text that stigmatized Israel with false accusations.

Myth Number Two: that going to the conference means dialogue.

In truth, we’ve been negotiating non-stop since August 2007. Going to the conference means endorsing a particular text, and risks legitimizing the greatest perpetrators of racism.

Ironically, many who now claim to support dialogue, are Mideast states belonging to the Arab Boycott Office in Damascus, or radical left campaigners who call for equally bigoted boycotts in the West.

Myth Number Three: that Durban 2 will help millions of victims.

But can anyone name a single victim of racism who was helped by the 2001 conference and countless follow-up committees?

Did Durban help a single victim of Sudan’s racist campaign of mass killing, rape and displacement against millions in Darfur?

Did it help the women of Saudi Arabia subjected to systematic discrimination?

Did it help gays executed by Iran, even as President Ahmadinejad says there are no gays in Iran?

Did it help the 2 million black African migrants in Libya, who, as we read in last week’s International Herald Tribune, say they are treated like slaves and animals?

To truly fight racism, we need to hold perpetrators to account. Tragically, Durban 2 does the opposite.

Thank you, Mr. President.

* * *

Click here for New York Times video documenting racist treatment of 2 million black African migrants by Libyan government of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi, chair of Durban II conference planning committee.

To link to this briefing: http://www.unwatch.org/cms.asp?id=730172&campaign_id=63111

Via EyeOnTheUN:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Announces He Will Attend Durban II

EYEontheUN has learned that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced his intention to attend the Durban II “anti-racism” conference. Durban II is billed by the UN as an occasion to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. But Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust, has advocated genocide and openly seeks the annihilation of the state of Israel. In providing a hatemonger with a global platform – under the banner of an anti-racism conference – the United Nations has become an enabler of genocide.

Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN urged: “It is time for every decent self-respecting democratic state to withdraw immediately from Durban II – the platform for genocide.”

The Iranian President had every reason to expect a warm reception from the UN. The UN Human Rights Council elected Iran as a Vice-Chair of the Preparatory Committee of Durban II. Iran has been the single most active participant in this week’s preparatory sessions going on in Geneva. Iran has succeeded in denying a Jewish non-governmental organization accreditation to preparations for Durban II. At yesterday’s negotiating sessions for a final document to be adopted formally at Durban II, the Iranian representative proposed sweeping limitations on freedom of expression and protection for “cultural diversity” as a vehicle for justifying Iranian laws that permit the stoning of women, the murder of homosexuals, and the torture of dissidents.

When Ahmadinejad spoke to the UN General Assembly last September he said:

The dignity, integrity and rights of the European and American people are being played with by a small but deceitful number of people called Zionists. Although they are miniscule minority, they have been dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers of some European countries and the U.S. in a deceitful, complex and furtive manner…This means that the great people of America and various nations of Europe need to obey the demands and wishes of a small number of acquisitive and invasive people…Today, the Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse, and there is no way for it to get out of the cesspool created by itself and its supporters.

Ahmadinejad’s hateful speech was greeted by applause from the assembled UN member states.

As Bayefsky points out, “it can be expected that Ahmadinejad will use the opportunity of the UN Durban II global megaphone to continue his genocidal campaign. After all, the current draft text of the Durban II final declaration continues to single out Israel and condemn it as racist by reaffirming the words of the 2001 Durban Declaration.”

Will the European Union, Australia, and the United States sit in their seats at Durban II and listen to the hatemongering and anticipated applause?

“Democratic states, having delayed a decision about participation until the final hour,” said Bayefsky, “have encouraged Ahmadinejad to believe he has one more opportunity to spread antisemitism and demonize the Jewish state. It is long past the deadline for democracies to pull the plug on Durban II and stop legitimizing a racist anti-racism conference.”

For a complete source of information on Durban II
see www.EYEontheUN.org/durban.

The NY Times gives a Muslim Jew-hater a sounding board to mouth off on the double-standard that only Muslims have a right to self-determination, that the territory knows as Gaza remains “occupied” even though Israel disengaged in 2005, and that Israel – a sovereign and legitimate nation – doesn’t have the right to defend itself against Arabs in spite of the fact that Arabs have been slaughtering Jews for the past 100 years.    h/t DailyAlert.  Via Verdict: Israel Not Guilty:

* George Bisharat is a Palestinian-American law professor who has made a career out of defaming Israel. On April 4 the New York Times donated space on its op-ed page for his latest screed, titled “Israel On Trial.” It begins: “Chilling testimony by Israeli soldiers substantiates charges that Israel’s Gaza Strip assault entailed grave violations of international law.” He fails to mention that the “chilling testimony” turned out to be untrue.

* Bisharat states: “Despite Israel’s 2005 ‘disengagement’ from Gaza, the territory remains occupied.” The statement is simply false. It is because Israel withdrew from Gaza that Hamas was able to take control and launch thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel over a period of years.

* He accuses Israel of “imposing collective punishment in the form of a blockade, in violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.” Israel had a perfect right to prevent military supplies from being shipped or smuggled into Gaza so that more rockets could be launched.

* He accuses Israel of “willfully killing civilians without military justification.” Hamas’ principal military strategy is the employment of human shields. Those who want to avoid civilian casualties in Gaza should stop firing rockets from there. There is no evidence, however, that Israel’s military killed any civilians in Gaza otherwise than by accident in the course of operations undertaken for self-defense.

* He accuses Israel of “deliberately employing disproportionate force.” The “proportionate force” theory is beloved by Israel-bashers. In fact, however, no such principle exists in international law. It was invented for the occasion and has never been used as a club against any nation except Israel. No sane country, when attacked, responds “proportionally.” Nazi Germany never did attack the United States. Was the fire-bombing of Dresden proportionate?

* A sane country, when attacked, reacts with all of the force at its command in order to win the war that was started by its enemy. Has anyone ever questioned this fundamental right of self-defense, except as applied to Israel?

See also He Forgot about the Poisoned Wells – Noah Pollak

Israel’s Gaza blockade may be an ineffective policy, but it is not a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Why do people like Bisharat never condemn Egypt for its involvement in the blockade?

Israel was “deliberately attacking civilian targets”? Hamas conspicuously used civilian infrastructure for terrorist purposes. Rockets were fired from schools, mosques were used as weapons depots, and the Islamic University of Gaza was used as an explosives production facility and rocket storehouse. (Commentary)

See also International Law and the Fighting in Gaza – Justus Reid Weiner and Avi Bell (Global Law Forum)

See also Israel on Trial – George Bisharat (New York Times)