[Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News] 04/01 Links Pt1: Prosor: The U.N.'s War on Israel; Palestinian Authority incites religious hatred ~ EoZ

From Ian:

The United Nations is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year. It was intended to be a temple of peace, but this once great global body has been overrun by the repressive regimes that violate human rights and undermine international security.
In 1949, when the United Nations admitted Israel as a member state, it had 58 member countries and about half had a democratic orientation. Today, the landscape of the organization has changed drastically. From 51 member states at its founding in 1945, the institution has grown to 193 members — fewer than half of which are democracies.
The very nations that deny democratic rights to their people abuse the United Nations’ democratic forums to advance their interests. The largest of these groups comprises members from the 120-member-strong bloc known as the Non-Aligned Movement. Since 2012, the bloc has been chaired by Iran, which has used its position to bolster its allies and marginalize Israel.
In March, the United Nations closed the annual meeting of its Commission on the Status of Women by publishing a report that effectively singled out just one country for condemnation: Israel. The commission apparently had nothing to say about the Sudanese girls who are subjected to female genital mutilation. It also had nothing to say about the Iranian women who have been punished for crimes of “adultery” by stoning. These oversights may have something to do with the fact that both Iran and Sudan sit on the 45-member commission.

PMW: Palestinian Authority incites religious hatred

The Palestinian Authority continues to incite religious hatred, spreading the libel that Israel is in the process of destroying the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
The text on the above image is supposed to instill fear and hatred in Palestinians that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is in danger, threatened by Israel:
"What are you waiting for?
Are you waiting for them to destroy this? (Visual of the Al-Aqsa Mosque -Ed.)
In order to build this?" (Visual of the Temple -Ed.)
[Al-Asima, Feb. 25, 2015]
The charge that the Mosque will be destroyed unless Palestinians take active steps to prevent it, was published alongside an article in Al-Asima, a bi-weekly distributed with the official PA daily, which repeated the libel that Israel seeks to destroy the Mosque in order to build the third Temple in its place:
"It is no secret that the 'Israeli' aspiration since the occupation of East Jerusalem in the war of 1967 has been to first divide the Al-Aqsa Mosque and perhaps even to destroy it, in order to build, eventually, their alleged Temple."
[Al-Asima, distributed with official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015]
These PA libels that incite fear and hatred of Israelis are widely believed by Palestinians. A poll conducted four months ago found that 56% of Palestinians believe that "Israel intends to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque" and 86% of Palestinians believe that "Al-Haram Al-Sharif (i.e., the Temple Mount) is in grave danger."

Hamas Chief Haniyeh Calls for Palestinian Unity for West Bank Intifada

Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh called on Palestinian factions, including the Palestinian Authority, to unite and wage war on Israel with an intifada and armed resistance in the West Bank, Israel’s NRG reported on Tuesday.
Haniyeh also addressed the results of Israel’s elections earlier this month, saying that the “re-election of Netanyahu and the reinforcement of the Likud Party have revealed the true face of the occupation.” He then stressed the need to move on to a real strategy of Palestinian unity against the “occupation.”
Mohammad Al-Hindi, a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s political bureau also commented on the Israeli elections, claiming that they showed there was really no difference between Israel’s political parties. “We have been in negotiation for 20 years, and have been led astray after the minor political differences [between Israel's political parties.] Israel continuously announces that it is building new settlements, and says very clearly that there is no reason for negotiation, yet the Palestinian Authority continues to shout ‘two states!’ Netanyahu said that there will not be two states, and we are crying and begging the world.”
Al-Hindi said there was no point in waiting for a change in the world’s opinion. “How does the Authority intend to resume negotiations with Netanyahu, when he declares that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel only?”

Elliott Abrams: Yemen and Gaza: Why the different reactions?

So, taking fire from a civilian area in which shooters were hiding, the Saudis struck back. When Israel does that in Gaza, where it is the common practice of Hamas to hide in and shoot from civilian areas, and to store weapons in schools and hospitals (including those run by the United Nations), what happens? Israel is universally condemned. U.N. investigation commissions are appointed, and reports such as the egregious Goldstone report (officially, the "The United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict") are issued. The U.N. Security Council holds special sessions, and the U.N. Human Rights Council adds additional "hate Israel" meetings to its usual list.
I cannot recall an incident where Israel struck at a refugee camp and killed 40 people all at once, also injuring 200 others, but I am willing to bet on the world reaction to this Saudi attack: zero. No meetings, commissions, no reports.
What are the lessons to be drawn? That the Arab group and the Islamic nations have more votes in the U.N. than Israel, which of course has but one. That there is an indefensible double standard when it comes to evaluating Israel. And, that hiding behind civilians is a widespread crime. Nothing new here.

Michael Lumish: Barack Obama: The Most Dangerous Man in the World

The problem is not merely that Obama does not like Israel - and he doesn't - it is that by enabling an Iranian bomb he is laying the ground for a nuclear arms race, if not a nuclear holocaust, in that part of the world.
The dispassion with which so many Obama supporters follow this story is disquieting. The impression that one gets in reading the western-left press is that they honestly do not care one whit whether Iran gets the bomb or not.
Many would argue that it is only fair that if the US has the bomb and Israel has the bomb and these other countries have the bomb, why should not Iran get it, as well? Others would suggest, rightfully so, that if we were Iran we would want the bomb as a defensive measure and I have no doubt that when the Iranian government considers its strategic-military place in the world a nuclear shield looks mighty attractive.
While it may very well be in Iran's national interest to gain nuclear weaponry, it is most definitely in the national interest of both the United States and Israel (not to mention Europe and the entire rest of the planet) to prevent Iran from gaining that technology.
Unfortunately, Barack Obama seems to disagree.

Obama's Iran Adviser Worked for Pro-Tehran Regime Lobby?

The White House released a list of the top National Security Council (NSC) officials who held a video conference with Obama late Tuesday to update him on the talks with Iran in Switzerland's Lausanne.
On the list, which was published by The Daily Beast, the name Sahar Nowrouzzadeh stands out alongside the title "NSC Director for Iran."
A picture of Nowrouzzadeh with US Secretary of State John Kerry, in which she is seen explaining Iranian traditions, was posted on March 20 to the Twitter account of US Envoy for the anti-Islamic State (ISIS) coalition Brett McGurk.
Breitbart News media site decided to take a closer look at Nowrouzzadeh, and in an investigative exposé found that she appears to have previously worked for the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), an organization that is accused of lobbying for the Iranian regime.
The site documented how a person with the same name was credited with authoring a number of publications for NIAC.

Support for Palestinian state hits two-decade low in U.S.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that the idea of establishing a new Palestinian state alongside Israel in the Middle East is more divisive than at any point in the past 20 years, as a long period of generally bipartisan support for the concept has passed.
The idea is still slightly above water, with 39 percent in support and 36 percent in opposition. But that's a far cry from past Gallup polling in which a majority of Americans supported the idea (as many as 58 percent in 2003).
The 39 percent who support the idea is the lowest that number has been in WaPo-ABC and Gallup polling since 1998, and the three-point gap between support and opposition is the smallest in at least two decades — though not statistically significant relative to other recent polls from Gallup.

France preparing draft for UN resolution on Palestine

France sees a window of opportunity after Israel’s elections to get the United States on board with a new push for Mideast peace, and is preparing a draft UN Security Council resolution in about 12 days, according to French diplomatic officials.
The draft would define the pre-1967 frontier as a reference point for border talks but allow room for exchanges of territory, designate Jerusalem as capital of both Israel and a Palestinian state and call for a fair solution for Palestinian refugees, one official told The Associated Press on Tuesday.
While the substance of the French draft may not differ much from past failed efforts to revive Mideast peace talks, France is hoping this time to avoid a US veto at the UN because of increasing American frustration with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The French official described a possible “backdoor” for negotiations now, and said “all actors including the Americans now realize that all other ways have been explored, without success.”

Should Israel Fear the UN?

Many countries cast their votes not on the basis of what is right or wrong, of what is just or unjust, but rather according to their narrow interests, their fear of Arab oil suppliers, or their Marxist principles.
That’s why just last month, the UN Commission on the Status of Women voted 27 to two to condemn Israel for “occupying” Palestinian women, 98% of whom are actually live under the rule of the Palestinian Authority. The accusers included well-known deniers of women’s rights such as Iran, Sudan, and, yes, the Palestinian Authority itself.
A UN Security Council resolution on Palestinian statehood would likewise be a moral farce. Those who vote in favor will not be considering whether such a state would be a democracy or a dictatorship; whether or not “Palestine” would endanger Israel; or what the Palestinian Authority’s track record reveals about how a Palestinian state would behave.
Such real-world considerations have no place in the absurd, upside down fantasy world in which the United Nations dwells. That’s why whenever someone threatens to pass some nasty resolution at the UN, Israel and its friends should recall the simple wisdom of Ben-Gurion: “Oom, shmoom!”

Israeli Peace Gestures Not Only Don’t Work. They Make Things Worse.

The same dynamic applies to Netanyahu’s gestures. It was he who endorsed a two-state solution and then backed up his statement with a settlement freeze in the West Bank for ten months. But Netanyahu got no credit for this or any concessions in return from the Palestinians.
Netanyahu would do well to lower the tone of his rhetoric. A cautious leader, he has been rightly accused of carrying a small stick while speaking very loudly. But the expectation that settlement freezes or similar gestures will ease tensions with President Obama is a pipe dream. Even worse, along with Obama’s hostility, these moves may only encourage Hamas to see it, as they have always viewed such gestures, as weakness and an invitation to another round of violence such as the one that led to thousands of rockets being launched from Gaza at Israeli cities.
The diplomatic isolation of Israel that Obama is contemplating is a serious problem. But Israelis have had enough of futile unilateral gestures and rightly so. They have accomplished nothing in the past. Nor will they ameliorate the animosity for Israel in the Muslim and Arab worlds as well as Europe that is rooted more in anti-Semitism than in complaints about the location of the borders of the Jewish state. Until a sea change occurs in Palestinian political culture, Israel’s leaders would be wise to make no more concessions that will only whet the appetite of the terrorists for more Jewish blood. Nor should Netanyahu be under the illusion that President Obama will react with any more generosity toward Israel in the next two years than he has in the previous six. Far from staving off destruction as Ross and his friends think, their advice will likely lead to more diplomatic problems as well as more violence. Just as doctors are advised by their Hippocratic oaths to do no harm, so, too, should Israel’s prime minister be wise enough to eschew a repetition of the mistakes that he and his predecessors have made in the not-so-distant past.

Khaled Abu Toameh: Senior Palestinian official: Oslo accords are dead

The Oslo Accords are dead and the Palestinian Authority leadership is about to ask the UN Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 lines, a senior Fatah official said on Tuesday.
Othman Abu Gharbieh, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, told the Palestinian daily Al-Quds there would be no return to the previous peace process with Israel, especially in view of the results of the Israeli election.
“The Oslo Accords are dead, although a death certificate has yet to be issued,” Abu Gharbieh said. “We will resort to international boycotts and sanctions and popular resistance [against Israel].”
The Palestinians would also proceed with their intention to suspend security coordination with Israel, he said.

Palestinians join International Criminal Court

The Palestinian Authority became a member of the International Criminal Court in Wednesday and was marking the occasion with a low-key ceremony at the court’s headquarters.
Palestinians signed the court’s founding treaty in January and their membership came into force Wednesday, an event welcomed by activists who see it as an opportunity to bring accountability to years of conflict between Palestinians and Israel.
Israel is not a member of the ICC, but the country’s military and civilian leaders could now face charges if they are believed to have committed crimes on Palestinian territory.
The court’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, opened a preliminary investigation in mid-January after the Palestinians formally accepted the court’s jurisdiction dating back to just before last year’s Israel-Hamas conflict.

Palestinians join international court to fight Israel

Palestinian officials have stressed that the ICC will not end the almost 50-year Israeli military occupation or lead to a state. The ICC prosecutes individuals, not nations.
If the ICC prosecutor concludes the facts lead her to open a formal investigation, a pre-trial chamber of ICC judges will rule whether to go forward or not. A trial may then follow.
ICC prosecutors have examined allegations of war crimes in 20 countries but opened investigations in only eight. The court has concluded three trials, winning two convictions.
Eugene Kontorovich of Northwestern University School of Law said that it is possible the judges at the ICC will ultimately decide that the Palestinians do not have standing at the court or that the Israelis should not be subject to an investigation, for example, because they carry out their own inquires.
Kontorovich said the court has only operated for a dozen years and that there has not been enough case law to predict what may happen next.

PA Denies Deal Was Made to Halt ICC Bid in Exchange for Unfreezing Tax Revenues

The Palestinian Authority has denied that an Israeli move to unfreeze the PA’s tax revenues was part of a deal to get the Palestinians to halt their bid to have Israel prosecuted at the International Criminal Court (ICC) Ha’aretz reported yesterday. The report cited an anonymous senior Palestinian official.
“We continue to seek membership of the International Criminal Court and we expect the ICC to open an investigation into Israeli settlements, as well as the recent war in Gaza,” the official said.
“The reports in the Israeli newspapers are nothing more than spin from Netanyahu’s bureau; there was no such agreement. The money that Netanyahu transferred is Palestinian money and he isn’t doing us any favors.” …

An Unconscionable Smear: Israel, Race, and the American Left

If the steady, but manageable flow of ignorant commentary on Israel of late has turned into a flood, it’s because of a particular tactic of the left employed in abundance since the Israeli elections. A surefire way to misunderstand Israeli politics is to view it through the stable lens of America’s two-party system. And one meme that has gained traction on the left during Benjamin Netanyahu’s premiership is the lazy, obtuse narrative that he acts as some sort of representative of the Republican Party rather than his own party and country. Such self-refuting nonsense doesn’t generally need to be dignified with attention. But the latest version represents a despicable smear that demands a response.
Juan Williams’s column in The Hill changes the attack in two ways. The first is that he joins some of his more doltish peers in the new belief that congressional Republicans are now responsible for Netanyahu’s words and actions. This is merely an escalation of the Democrats’ recent campaign to turn Israel into a partisan issue and demand the left break with Israel to show appropriate loyalty to Barack Obama. In doing so Williams and others are now pawning Israel off on the Republicans: they don’t even want to deal with the Jewish state except to periodically upbraid it.
This is toxic, but it pales in comparison to Williams’s next trick. Once he’s assigned Republicans blame for Bibi, he then transfers the left’s racial grievances to Netanyahu as well. And he thereby threatens not only to rewrite recent Israeli history but to do so in a way that attacks the history of black-Jewish relations in the U.S. and agitates for the crumbling of African-American support for Israel in the future, all in a deeply dishonest way.

Obama’s Two State Tantrum

Israel isn’t the barrier to a Palestinian state. The PLO and Hamas can’t even get along long enough to form a state or hold an election. Blaming Netanyahu for actually addressing these facts is the height of cynicism from an administration that until recently avoided investing its energies in peace negotiations because it knew that was a dead end.
Obama doesn’t really believe in a Palestinian state. He’s throwing a two state tantrum because it gives him a convenient angle of attack against Netanyahu. The Israeli election was about either forcing out Netanyahu or isolating him. Having failed at the first, Obama is defaulting back to the second.
This isn’t about peace. It’s about fighting and winning a political war against Netanyahu in order to free Obama to secure his nuclear deal with Iran.
Obama claims that Netanyahu has shown that he is untrustworthy when it comes to peace. Instead he urges us to trust our lives to an Ayatollah who calls for “Death to America”, but doesn’t ‘really’ mean it.

Netanyahu voices outrage that nuclear talks go on while Iran vows to destroy Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday excoriated world powers over their dogged pursuit of a nuclear deal with Iran, pointing to recent statements by officials in Tehran — notably their calls to eliminate Israel — as evidence of the Islamic Republic’s unwillingness to compromise on its nuclear ambitions and campaign of “terror, subjugation and conquest.”
In tones of moral outrage, he issued a brief, infuriated statement to camera, protesting that the talks were continuing in Lausanne even as Iran reiterated its insistent goal of destroying the Jewish state.
“Yesterday an Iranian general brazenly declared, and I quote, ‘Israel’s destruction is nonnegotiable,'” Netanyahu began, referring to a statement by Mohammad Reza Naqd, the commander of the Basij militia of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards.
“But evidently, giving Iran’s murderous regime a clear path to the bomb is negotiable,” he said. “This is unconscionable.”

Statement by PM Netanyahu on Lausanne Talks

Netanyahu: Deal will leave Iran ‘less than a year’ from bomb

Netanyahu said that while “I greatly appreciate the brave covenant” between Israel and the US, the two countries disagree over how to thwart Iran. “When it comes to an existential threat, Israel must stand up for itself,” he said.
“The land all around us is trembling,” he said, alluding to the growing unrest in the Middle East. “The greatest threat to our future and our security is and will remain Iran’s attempt to arm itself with nuclear weapons.”
The time Iran will need to break out to a nuclear weapon, if it signs a deal with world powers in Lausanne, “will be reduced to less than a year, and possibly a lot less than that,” the prime minister warned. Such a deal, whose emerging terms have been the subject of many reports, would “pave the way” to a nuclear weapon.
The Obama administration says any deal will stretch the time Iran needs to make a nuclear weapon from the present two to three months to at least a year. But critics object that it would keep Tehran’s nuclear technology intact.

Ex-intel chief: If Iran’s uranium isn’t exported, US will have failed with deal

A former head of the IDF’s military intelligence branch said Tuesday morning that the emerging nuclear agreement with Iran would be a “bad deal,” if it is indeed finalized around the terms that have been made public.
However, said Amos Yadlin in an interview to Israel Radio, three “core technical issues” are still not agreed upon by Tehran and the P5+1 powers – research and development, the military aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, and the shipping out of fissile material to a third-party country.
“Without the export of the 7-8 tons of low-enriched uranium, the Americans do not have the goal they set” of keeping Iran a year away from enough fuel for a nuclear weapon, said Yadlin, the Zionist Union’s pick for defense minister during the recent elections, who currently runs the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv.

The Capitulationist: Obama’s Diplomatic Surrender to Iran

Obama’s promised over and over, even in State of the Union addresses, that his goal was to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Now, even members of his own party acknowledge what they’re negotiating for is to extend Iran’s nuclear break-out time to one year.
“The clock is ticking,” Obama said sternly during his foreign policy presidential debate with Mitt Romney. “We’re not going to allow Iran to perpetually engage in negotiations that lead nowhere.”
Those words look more and more hollow with each new meaningless deadline. The Washington Examiner reports the State Department has admitted there really weren’t any ramifications if a final deal wasn’t reached March 31. After all, there weren’t when one wasn’t reached in November, either. Or last May.

The Capitulator: Obama's Nuclear Surrenders to Iran

Dennis Ross: Deal or No, Iran Will Remain a Nuclear Threat

Assuming an agreement is finalized by June 30, the administration may well be right that this was the best one possible—and that it is better than the other alternatives. That, of course, does not make it a good agreement. Even a bad agreement might be better than the available alternatives, but if the administration wants to prove that the eventual agreement is acceptable, it will need to show that it has produced the bare minimum of the outcome that we once hoped for: that there will be a breakout time of at least one year; that the Iranians cannot deny inspectors access to any site, including those on military or Revolutionary Guard facilities; and that it has anticipated a full range of different Iranian violations and won’t wait for others to respond to them. In reality, if we are to deter Iranian violations, they must know in advance what the consequences are and that they will be high.
Skepticism about an agreement based on constraining Iranian capabilities, and not on demonstrating a shift in Iranian intentions, is understandable. Rather than questioning the motivations of the skeptics, the administration would be wise to demonstrate that it has compelling answers to their concerns about the possible vulnerabilities of the deal. It might just convince some of the skeptics that the agreement is acceptable.

Mixed messages from Iran talks as high-level meeting adjourned

Russia and Iran’s foreign ministers claimed in the early hours of Wednesday a breakthrough in talks, but the US said not all issues had been agreed upon.
“One can say with relative certainty that we at the minister level have reached an agreement in principle on all key aspects of the final settlement of this issue,” Russian media quoted Sergey Lavrov as saying at talks in Switzerland.
This came after Russia’s top diplomat and the foreign ministers of five other major powers and Iran missed a midnight (2200 GMT) deadline to agree the main outlines of what they hope will be an historic accord but continued working through the night.
The powers hope this final agreement, due to be finalized by June 30, will see Iran scale down its nuclear program in order to prevent Tehran developing nuclear weapons under the guise of its civilian program.
The stakes are high, with fears that failure to reach a deal may set the United States and Israel on a road to military action to thwart Iran’s nuclear drive, which Tehran says is purely peaceful.

US threatens to ‘walk away’ from Iran talks as deadline extended

As the world powers were negotiating on a sixth day of talks in Switzerland aimed at laying the groundwork for a deal that they hope will prevent Iran developing nuclear weapons under the guise of its civilian program, the White House indicated that should a deal for a political framework not be reached, the US would leave the talks ahead of the final deadline in late June.
“If we’re not able to reach a political agreement, then we’re not going to wait … until June 30 to walk away,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Tuesday.
Meanwhile the US has denied that Iran was given an ultimatum late Tuesday to decide whether to accept the deal offered by the P5+1 lest its representatives leave Switzerland by dawn.
According to Reuters, two European diplomats said that the major powers “did not want to continue negotiating beyond the early morning on Wednesday.”
A US official told the news agency that the report was “false.”

Saudi Defense Minister to Congress: ‘Iran Can’t Be Trusted’

Saudi Arabia’s newly installed defense minister told members of Congress on a recent trip to the oil-rich nation that “Iran can’t be trusted,” according to a readout of the meeting provided by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R., Fla.).
Buchanan, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, participated in a meeting with Saudi Arabia’s defense minister, Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is the son of the newly crowned King Salman, to discuss regional issues and Iranian aggression.
When asked by Buchanan and other lawmakers present at the sit-down about the current talks with Iran—which have now passed their March 31 deadline—Salman called the tentative agreement disastrous for the region.
Salman “said Iran can’t be trusted,” according to a readout provided by Buchanan following the hour-long meeting in Riyadh. “He questioned why we would be negotiating with the Iranians when they are responsible for growing tension in the Middle East.”

Senator Urges US to 'Walk Away' from Iran Talks

Responding to the US State Department decision to extend Iran nuclear talks into Wednesday, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) urged Congress to "act immediately" while demanding that the US walk away from the talks in Lausanne, Switzerland.
"The best solution is walk away from the nuclear negotiations now and return to a position of strength," Cotton said in a statement released shortly before the end of the Tuesday deadline for reaching a nuclear deal outline.
The senator called to "reinstate existing sanctions suspended under the Joint Plan of Action, and Congress should act immediately to impose new sanctions. It’s time for the United States to regain the upper hand and quit negotiating out of weakness."
After two previous deadlines came and went, Cotton said the decision to extend the talks yet again "in the face of Iranian intransigence and duplicity proves once again Iran is calling the shots."

As Dem Leader, Schumer Can’t Protect Both Israel and Obama

Throughout his 16 years in the Senate, Chuck Schumer has comfortably built a reputation as a fierce Democratic partisan while also being an ardent support of Israel. But in his new status as the leader-in-waiting of Senate Democrats after Harry Reid exits the stage in January 2017, Schumer is about to find out that, as the old Yiddish proverb tells us, you can’t dance at two weddings with one behind. Though, as a Politico article reports, he may think he can strike a balance between his pro-Israel stands and his job as the putative leader of his party’s caucus, so long as Barack Obama is in the White House that isn’t going to be possible. As the administration prepares to sell a disastrous nuclear deal with Iran while also exerting pressure on Israel’s government and threatening to isolate the Jewish state, Schumer isn’t going to be able to push back against the president’s policies at a time when he will be at the same time expected to keep the Democratic caucus united behind them.
Schumer likes to tell Jewish audiences that his name derives from the Hebrew word shomer, or guardian, and that he will always act to protect Israel. Though in recent years that promise has been tested, the senator’s impressive political skills have enabled him to hold onto that image while also being one of President Obama’s Senate foot soldiers. The same can be said of his close relationship with Wall Street figures whose fundraising help has been the foundation of his long and now apparently successful campaign to become the Democrats’ Senate leader.
As far as Israel or Iran was concerned, Schumer never took on the role of administration antagonist, as did his Democratic colleague Robert Menendez. Menendez repeatedly and publicly called out President Obama for his opposition to sanctions on Iran and for his unwillingness to support more pressure on a regime with which he was bent on fostering détente. Not so Schumer, who, despite his pledge to be Israel’s guardian, chose not to confront the president in public. Instead, we have heard tales, often recounted in friendly media coverage of the senator, about private conversations in which Schumer scolded administration figures or offered them advice in which he sought to persuade them to stop picking needless and counterproductive fights with Israel on Iran and the conflict with the Palestinians.

Report: US officials fear top Iranian commanders not in full control of local forces

An Iranian aircraft "buzzed" a US helicopter in the Persian Gulf recently, leading American officials to question the level of control that Iranian military commanders have over local forces, CNN reported on Wednesday.
According to the report, US military officials believe that the dangerous maneuver, which could have potentially set off an international incident, may have been ordered at the local level, and not by Iran's top military brass.
The incident occurred in March while talks between Iran and world powers were ongoing in Switzerland and was not in keeping with the professional manner in which Iran has conducted military exercises recently, CNN quoted officials as saying.

Elders of Zion Admit They’re Having Second Thoughts Over Allowing Obama’s Election (satire)

Following President Obama’s increasingly hostile rhetoric towards Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, several members of the Elders of Zion privately told The Israeli Daily that they were having second thoughts about their decision to allow him to be elected to the world’s most powerful office.
“We were a little apprehensive about letting a guy with the middle name ‘Hussein’ run our most important country, but we figured we’d give him a shot,” said one member of the Elders, the secret Jewish organization that makes all the world’s significant political and financial decisions. “Now, some of us are thinking we should have just gone with the Mormon instead.”
Elders complained that President Obama, in calling for a reevaluation of the U.S.-Israel relationship, has violated their secret agreement that obligated him to advance their Zionist agenda in exchange for the presidency. Still, they acknowledged, they were in no rush to force Obama out of office.

Kerry Touts Iranian Agreement Never to Nuke Israel on a Monday, Wednesday, or a Sunday (satire)

As proof that his negotiating acumen has succeeded in ‘serious concessions’ from Iran on behalf of Israeli security, Secretary of State John Kerry today revealed the mullahs agreement never to nuke the Jewish state on a Monday, Wednesday or Sunday. “John Kerry understands the serious security concerns of the Israeli people,” Kerry explained, as he spoke about himself in the third person. “Well with this agreement we’ve done just that. By our reckoning we’ve made Israel 43% safer.”
Prime Minister Netanyahu was quick to declare the agreement insufficient. “It is obscene! At the very least Kerry should have been able to get an agreement on four or five days. But just three? What are we supposed to do with that?!”
In Washington, the Republican Jewish Coalition quickly announced that this agreement was just more proof of the anti-Semitism they see as dominating the Obama White House. “If the President took Jews seriously, he would have gotten the Iranians to agree not to wipe out the Jewish State on Saturday.”

Likud MK lies to lefty NGO in attempt to discredit it

Freshman Likud party MK Oren Hazan was accused Wednesday of attempting to embarrass an Israeli left-wing NGO by providing it with false testimony detailing fictitious human rights abuses committed by IDF soldiers in the Gaza Strip.
Hazan apparently acted in hope that the fake attestation would be published and thus cast serious doubt on the organization’s credibility.
According to Breaking The Silence, an organization dedicated to collecting testimonies from current and former IDF soldiers about their military service in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, a routine fact-checking procedure revealed numerous inconsistencies in an account submitted several months ago by a man calling himself Asaf Hazan, who claimed to be a reservist who fought during last summer’s 50-day war between Israel and Hamas.
Given the problematic nature of the testimony, the NGO decided not to publish it.

IDF destroys 4 structures in W. Bank settler outpost erected to honor 3 slain teens

The Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria destroyed four temporary structures Tuesday morning in an outpost that was erected last summer in honor of the three teens kidnapped and murdered by Hamas.
One of the structures served as a synagogue, and another to offer soldiers a warm resting spot in the area.
The bodies of teenagers Naftali Fraenkel, Gil-Ad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah were found at the end of June near Hebron, just a short distance away from the Karmei Tzur settlement. Its residents immediately left their settlement to protest the killing and erected the outpost there, which they called Givat Shorek.
Non-governmental group Rabbis for Human Rights then petitioned the High Court of Justice on behalf of Palestinian landowners who claimed ownership of the property.
The group’s spokesman Yariv Mohar said that the construction was an attempt by the Karmei Tzur settlers to expand the boundaries of their community illegally.

Hezbollah Could Fire Up to 1,500 Rockets Per Day, Israeli Authorities Say

The Lebanese terror group Hezbollah could fire between 1,000 and 1,500 rockets per day in its next full-scale conflict against Israel, according to the latest estimates from the Israeli Home Front Command.
The estimate is part of updated information provided by the Home Front Command in order to assist local authorities to prepare them for a war.
“The scenario we are looking at is not a prediction of what will be. It spells out what we are building up our capabilities against. We believe we can stand up to the challenge,” a source from the Home Front Command said, the Jerusalem Post reported.
The Home Front Command said northern Israeli towns such as Kiryat Bialik could expect hundreds of civilian injuries, some deaths, and extensive damage to homes and businesses resulting from the rocket assault.
Last summer’s Gaza war saw about 4,500 rockets and other projectiles hit Israel in roughly 50 days of fighting. The Home Front command source noted that Hezbollah has been rapidly upgrading its rocket arsenal for more accurate rockets that can target both military installations and civilian areas.

ISIS takes over large parts of Palestinian refugee camp in southern Damascus

The hardline Islamic State group took control of large parts of a besieged Palestinian refugee camp in southern Damascus on Wednesday, witnesses and a monitoring group said.
The Yarmouk camp, home to up to 18,000 people, has been caught between government forces and Syrian insurgent groups including Islamic State's rivals such as al Qaeda's Nusra Front.
"They pushed from the Hajar Aswad area and Nusra fighters have joined them, they have pledged loyalty to Daesh," one witness said, using an Arabic term for Islamic State.

Gaza man ‘duped’ into selling valuable Banksy mural for $175

A 33-year-old Gaza man says he has been duped into selling a valuable work by British graffiti artist Banksy for less than $200 to a local artist.
Banksy is believed to have sneaked into Gaza earlier this year, leaving behind four murals, including one drawn on a metal door that depicted the Greek goddess Niobe cowering against the rubble of a destroyed house. The painting, titled “Bomb Damage,” was drawn on a door, the last remaining part of a two-story house belonging to the Dardouna family in northern Gaza.
Unaware of the work’s value, Rabie Dardouna said Tuesday he was tricked into selling the door to an eager local artist for just 700 shekels, or about $175. Banksy’s works have been valued as high as hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“I did not know that it was this valuable. I heard it can be sold for millions,” Dardouna said. “Now I want the door back.”

--
Posted By Ian to Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News at 4/01/2015 12:00:00 PM