It's Almost Supernatural

Islamic Jihad Echo the Calls of Abbas?

Arlene from Israel comments on an uncomfortable link between Mahmoud Abbas' recent calls for Palestinian unity with those of Islamic Jihad after a suicide bomber killed three in Eilat.

Two weeks ago, at a rally for Fatah, PA president Mahmoud Abbas said, "Let a thousand flowers bloom, and let our rifles, all our rifles, all our rifles, be aimed at the Occupation." Yesterday, shortly after the suicide bombing in Eilat, a masked spokesman for Islamic Jihad, one of the groups that claimed credit for the attack, said, "Our rifles, all our rifles are being aimed at the enemy." Dr. Michael Widlanski, PA media expert and Arabist, does not believe this is a coincidence. Rather, it seems that "the attack was an attempt to move the Palestinians away from killing each other by moving them back to killing Israelis," which is what was suggested by Abbas in his speech.

The Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, an arm of Mahmoud Abbas' "moderate" Fatah party, also claimed responsibility for the attack.

ANC MP Cites Protocols of Zion as Credible Source

While we were away in December we missed this awful story in the M&G about an ANC MP who cited the Protocols of the Elders of Zion -- the infamous anti-Semitic forgery used by the Nazis -- as a credible document at an Iranian-sponsored academic seminar in Pretoria: Protocols rear their ugly head.

ANC MP Farida Mohamed asked a Jewish seminar delegate, Claudia Braude about the protocols.

Are the protocols still relevant to you in today’s time? How do we apply this balanced approach to reconciliation when we read them and they are totally the opposite?

Mohamed said she was unaware that the protocols had been exposed as a hoax. She said she had read the protocols on the internet but had not researched them.

Another delegate at the Pretoria seminar also questioned the authenticity of the Holocaust, citing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s dismissal of it as “a myth”. When the question of the Holocaust was put to our protocols peddling ANC MP she replied

“I don’t want to comment on something that I haven’t done research on. I wouldn’t want to be influenced by any scholar.”

Wow. I thought she doesn’t comment on things that she has not researched. Our MP readily accepts the reprehensibly anti-Semitic protocols as authentic but she won’t accept that the Holocaust occurred!

Mohamed is an ANC member of parliament. Is this the type of person that the ANC wants to have representing them?

With members who wont acknowledge that the Holocaust occurred but readily accept the legitimacy of the anti-Semitic protocols, you would have thought that last weeks UN resolution on Holocaust denial presented South Africa and the ANC with a perfect opportunity to set the record straight. But alas…

(Thanks Dan)

SABC Saga Continues...Perlman Resigns

Veteran SABC journalist John Perlman has resigned over the SABC blacklisting scandal. He has said that he will be addressing the media in the next 2 days.

Regular readers will recall that last year a furore erupted at the SABC when Perlman confronted SABC spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago on air over the banning of certain journalists by the national broadcaster. A commission of inquiry into this allegation was subsequently ordered. It found that SABC head of news Snuki Zikalala had instructed that certain commentators should not be used. Among those on the list was Jewish Middle East correspondent Paula Slier.

The SABC responded by accusing Perlman of bringing the organisation into disrepute and threatened that he would face a disciplinary hearing. SABC CEO Dali Mpofu briefing members of Parliament’s communications portfolio committee said that

The complaint against Perlman is simply what is commonly known as bringing an organisation into disrepute. You have to accept...that the issue does not turn around the veracity or otherwise of the statement made … I can’t be seen to be turning a blind eye to alleged transgression.

As yet (3 months later) no action has been taken against Zikalala, the person responsible for the blacklist. He is supposedly facing a disciplinary inquirer. But I am not going to hold my breath.

Related at IAS: Our contribution to the Honest Reporting 2006 awards: SABC Blacklisting Summary

Jewish and Israeli Blog Award Winners

We are delighted to announce that IAS has won the silver medal for the best group blog in the People’s Choice Jewish and Israeli Blogs Awards this year. We were also nominated for the category of best Israel advocacy blog.

A big thank you must go to Israelforum for running the awards this year. Jewish events are never without controversy and this event was unfortunately no exception. Despite the criticism, they have done an invaluable job in promoting Jewish and Israeli blogs.

We are also grateful for the tremendous support from our readers. Your comments and emails play a large part in making the blog the success it is.

Hopefully, this award will increase our effectiveness in combating anti-Israel bias in the South African media. We are committed to continue to provide an unofficial forum to debate the many challenges facing Israel and the Jewish people.

South Africa Fails to Back UN Resolution on Holocaust Denial

Continuing the tragic tale of South Africa’s voting hall of shame…

South Africa once again shamed themselves by failing to back a UN General Assembly resolution on Friday rejecting denial of the Holocaust.

This follows the recent UNSC vote where South Africa voted “no” on a resolution calling for the end of human rights abuses in Burma.

Iran was the only nation to formally disassociate itself from the resolution which was passed by consensus, but 22 other nations including South Africa, left their seats empty in the assembly hall.

So far the list of nations I know of that sheepishly left their seats vacant in a pathetic and cowardly stand against the resolution include: South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Cambodia and Zimbabwe.

Some reputable bloggers are reporting that China also abstained from backing the resolution but I have found no confirmation of this.

The resolution was co-sponsored by 100 nations, including the most recent victim of genocide, Rwanda.

Tomorrow will be the 62nd anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, a Nazi death camp where over 1 million people were murdered.

The General Assembly, i. Reaffirming its resolution A/60/7 of 1 November 2005, ii. Recalling that resolution A/60/7 observes that remembrance of the Holocaust is critical to preventing further acts of genocide, iii. Recalling further that, for this reason, resolution A/60/7 rejects efforts to deny the Holocaust, which by ignoring the historical fact of these terrible events increases the risk they will be repeated, iv. Noting that all people and States have a vital stake in a world free of genocide, v. Welcoming the establishment by the Secretary-General of a programme of outreach on the subject of the "Holocaust and the United Nations," and further welcoming the inclusion by Member States within their educational programmes of measures to confront attempts to deny or minimize the importance of the Holocaust, vi. Taking note that 27 January has been designated by the United Nations as an annual International Day of Commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust, 1. Condemns without any reservation any denial of the Holocaust; 2. Urges all Member States unreservedly to reject any denial of the Holocaust as a historical event, either in full or in part, or any activities to this end;

We will try to get comment from the department of foreign affairs regarding our no show in the GA. But don’t expect any rational explanations…

It is touching that this resolution was co-sponsored by Rwanda. I personally wish that more South Africans, Jews in particular, would learn more about and understand what Rwanda went through in 1994. Hopefully in 50 years time, a similar resolution won't be necessary regarding the Rwandan genocide.

(Thanks to Dave at Soccer Dad for notifying us.)

Update 2 @ 29/01/2007
The Anti-Defamation League had sent a letter to the uncommitted UN ambassadors, including the South African ambassador, urging them to add their support to the resolution on Holocaust denial: ADL to Uncommitted U.N. Ambassadors: Support Holocaust Denial Resolution

Update 3 @ 29/01/2007
Do you think this was just an administrative oversight? Or was it technical?

South Africa Explains Controversial UNSC Vote Supporting Human Rights Abuses in Burma

The Sunday Times has an interview with South Africa's ambassador to the UN on our controversial UN Security Council vote against a resolution calling for an end to human rights violations in Burma (Myanmar).

I realise that calling our vote a support for the human rights violations may seem somewhat hysterical, but I'm sure our cabinet would agree that nations that voted against resolutions calling for an end to apartheid in South Africa were in fact supporting and upholding apartheid.

You can read the entire interview here: South Africa’s ambassador to the United Nations, Dumisani Kumalo

Surely when the human rights situation is as bad as it is in Myanmar, it constitutes a threat to regional peace and stability? Well, that’s a matter of opinion. We go by how the [UN] charter defines a situation of peace and security. Myanmar is not threatening its neighbours. Unlike apartheid South Africa, it’s not bombing its neighbours, it’s not killing civilians in India or Malaysia or any of its neighbours ... Only its own people. We object to that, we oppose that. But, if you want to be frank, there are many countries where unfortunately that happens and they are not before the Security Council. But this one is. Don’t we have a duty to condemn what’s going on there? Our duty in the Security Council is to follow the charter of the United Nations, which says that non- permanent members of the Security Council will be elected with due regard being paid in the first instance to the contribution of members of the UN to the maintenance of international peace and security. That’s why you get elected to the Security Council. We were elected to the Human Rights Council to address issues of human rights. It’s very nice to say that wherever we are we should bring up any issue that is important to us. But, you know, you only go to church to pray, you don’t go to church to start selling clothes and opening a bazaar.

South Africa would do well to understand that nations that don't protect the rights of their own people, are even less inclined to care about the rights of people living in neighbouring states.

Reuters Stands Their Ground

Reuters have stood their ground against the standard Ahmadinejad apologist arguments claiming that he didn’t say that Israel must be destroyed: The good, the bad, and the ugly.

Iran president says Israel’s days are numbered “Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out,” he added. You continue to report that “Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be ‘wiped off the map’” even though many Mideast experts have stated that the interpretation of what Ahmadinejad actually said was that the “Zionist regime will not last.” In other words, rather than calling for ethnic cleansing, as your news stories imply, Iranian officials are calling for regime change—a common enough phrase these days. Are your reporters and editors deliberately misinforming the public? Jan

But Reuters have stood firm…

We actually had access to this speech, and heard the president’s words verbatim from our own TV footage. We stand behind our translation. In this case, he used the word “mahv,” which in Farsi means “wiped off”: Editor

Unfortunately nothing will be enough to stop the mad-man’s apologists (like Virginia Tilley in South Africa) from trying to rewrite history.

(Via LGF)

The Tragic Death of Idealism

Recommended reading: Rabbi Shmuley Boteach on The Iraq Tragedy And The Death Of Idealism.

It touches on the recent debate in Mike's post on outsourcing terror about whether or not people in third world countries yearn for freedom.

The failure of the noble American effort in Iraq marks the death of modern political idealism. Those of us who supported the war dared believe that our Arab brothers and sisters might finally have a better alternative to benevolent despotism, that Israel might finally have a long-term future in the Middle East based on the spread of human liberty and democracy, and that human nature might finally triumph in its eternal desire to live and breathe free. Sadly, all those conclusions have turned out to be uninformed wishful thinking. Now we're back to most people believing that Arabs are too primitive for democracy, Israel is the source of all conflict in the Middle East, and that the idea that people want to be free is an ignorant dream of discredited neocons.

For me going to Iraq was still the correct decision (although implemented with many tactical errors) but, as its plain to see, it has not brought upon the right outcome.

Could any decision achieve the right outcome or do 'we' actually have zero control?

South African Voting Hall of Shame Continues

Once again we have been let down by South Africa. Let down by a democratic government without any spine that in the halls of the UN regularly bows to the voting orders of our mentors in China, Russia and the Arab world. Let down by the way we preach morality through the same forked tongues that provide diplomatic cover for the pariah’s of the world. Let down by the way we repeatedly fall victim to the noxious powers of our anti-Western stance.

On Jan 12, in our first vote since securing our non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, South Africa voted against a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding an end to human rights abuses in Burma (Myanmar).

The vote in the Security Council on Jan. 12 was 9-3 in favor of the resolution, with three abstentions. However, China and Russia cast a rare double veto, which blocked the resolution's passage. South Africa does not have veto power.

The moral indifference is deafening. Burma is ruled by a military junta and their list of human rights violations is endless. The Telegraph recently reported on a Burmese plan to ‘wipe all of the Christians out.’

The military regime in Burma is intent on wiping out Christianity in the country, according to claims in a secret document believed to have been leaked from a government ministry. Entitled "Programme to destroy the Christian religion in Burma", the incendiary memo contains point by point instructions on how to drive Christians out of the state. The text, which opens with the line "There shall be no home where the Christian religion is practised", calls for anyone caught evangelising to be imprisoned. It advises: "The Christian religion is very gentle – identify and utilise its weakness." Its discovery follows widespread reports of religious persecution, with churches burnt to the ground, Christians forced to convert to the state religion, Buddhism, and their children barred from school.

So how could South Africa, champion of freedom and liberty, vote against this US led resolution? Once again, our minister of foreign affairs left it to her deputy to explain. And he gave a familiar sounding non-answer – “it was all technical” you see.

Deputy foreign affairs minister Aziz Pahad said in a statement that while South Africa was "deeply concerned at the situation in Myanmar," the country's vote against the resolution had been technical.

It reminds me of Pahad’s reply to the SA Jewish community when he was questioned about South Africa’s failure to condemn Iran’s calls to destroy Israel. Pahad at the time explained that our failure to comment was “an administrative oversight”.

So what was technical? Is it the fact that the resolution was proposed by the US and we are now slaves to our bullheaded anti-US stance? Or is it mechanical in nature, a product of us being merely a tiny coach in a locomotive powered by China?

Once again we hear the familiar “quiet diplomacy” excuses claiming that we are using our diplomatic relations with Burma to try and alleviate the situation.

The insincerity of our grotesque double standards stands out like an ugly wart on a beautiful princess when you contrast our quiet diplomacy regarding Zimbabwe, Iran and Burma, with our fog horn diplomacy regarding Israel. South Africa consistently supports every anti-Israel UN resolution proposed by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. Yet we also claim that quiet diplomacy can wield more influence than votes in favour of UN condemnations!

Our views are not consistent and are in opposition depending on who is in the dock. It is time for our selective condemnations to end in favour of an enlightened one-standard-for-all approach.

Once again South Africa has shown that we are not neutral, not impartial, and most unfortunately, not independent.

Outsourcing the War on Terror

On Christmas day, it seemed to many that a new political savior had been born. Ethiopian forces launched a pre-emptive war against the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), the Islamist occupation government of Somalia. And by all accounts it has been a stunning military success. Within days, almost all Islamist forces had either been killed or were on the run.

It seems that the ragtag Ethiopian army has fared far better in rooting out Islamist militants than their hi-tech Western counterparts (whether it be in Iraq, Afghanistan or Lebanon). This has led many commentators, particularly on the American right, to champion outsourcing the war on terror to third world proxies.

There is of course a successful historical precedent for such a strategy. After America’s embarrassing defeat in Vietnam, third world proxies from Unita in Angola, to the Contras in Nicaragua to even the jihadists in Afghanistan were used to fight the Communists. Outsourcing also has many advantages in today’s political climate. Western electorates are selfishly not fazed by casualties (civilian or military) in conflicts between Third World parties. Much of the fighting takes place out of sight from the prying eyes of international news outlets like CNN and without the hindrances of international law.

Nevertheless it would be foolish to advocate outsourcing as a panacea for winning the war on terror. Fighting terrorism requires much more than just a military approach. The rise of Islamism whether in Somalia or anywhere else did not occur in a vacuum. It is a response (however perverse) to the intolerable socio-political circumstances that many Muslims find themselves in. We may be able to defeat the ICU but if we do not address these socio-political circumstances another and perhaps more fierce Islamist movement will just rise up to take their place.

Outsourcing can even be detrimental to the war effort. Propping up ‘pro-Western’ dictators and tyrants across the developing world is a large part of what got us into this mess in the first place. The ethical compromises America was forced to make in the late years of the cold war (in Angola, Nicaragua, Afghanistan etc) have severely diminished it moral authority in the world. While this strategy may keep the Islamists militarily in check for a while, it affords them greater legitimacy and grassroots support in the Muslim world.

Building stable, free and representative governments in the Muslim world is the only way to win the war on terror. In this area, the success of the Christmas day war is far more uncertain. Peace keepers (preferably African and Muslim) are urgently required in Somalia. So far only Uganda has offered 1,500 troops (it is still unclear whether South Africa will commit troops.) Independent tribal militias need to be disbanded and their weapons decommissioned. One powerful warlord has recently begun to do so but others will need to follow. A strong national police force and army will need to be established in order to enforce the rule of law throughout Somalia. Infrastructure like roads and power stations will need to be built. And Somalia’s institutional capacity will need to be developed in order to provide basic services.

As we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan this is no easy task. Somalia may prove to be even more difficult. Outsourcing this job to the Ethiopian army and the feeble internationally recognized Somali government will surely not bring success. It will require a partnership between African, Muslim and Western nations: a partnership that involves much Western blood, sweat and treasure.