web analytics
September 16, 2014 / 21 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Boston Globe’

Who Is Khader Adnan?

Sunday, February 19th, 2012

Much fanfare has surrounded Khader Adnan, a self-described leader of Islamic Jihad, currently on a hunger strike against his administrative detention in an Israeli prison. He has predictably become the newest pop-cause for the ‘blame Israel first’ movement by virtue of the simple fact that he is a Palestinian incarcerated in Israel; but his hunger-strike has turned him into a veritable celebrity. The Arab media has compared him to  Mohandas Gandhi; the who’s who of so-called human right organizations have offered their condemnations -  including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, as well as Israel’s own B’tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel; and solidarity marches for Adnan have been held in New York, Chicago, and Washington D.C. Adnan’s celebrity status was confirmed when British newspapers the Independent and the Guardian dedicated in-depth pieces to him, glorifying him as a political prisoner. And Catherine Ashton, EU foreign affairs chief, provided the stamp of official credibility by chiming in as well.

But who IS Khader Adnan? Although his ‘plight’ is well-documented, mainstream media articles have provided little in the way of his past, and the possible reasons for his incarceration in the first place, save for a few obligatory sentences providing context. To those that support Adnan, or more accurately – oppose Israel, what he did is essentially immaterial, and the mere fact that he is being detained by Israel is proof of his innocence and Israeli injustice.

Is Khader Adnan merely a baker and post-graduate student, or something more?

And so, it would probably not move these people to know that, contrary to the narrative engendered by his wife and picked up by the mainstream media, he is not an innocuous economics graduate who runs a bakery. Yes, he has tenure, but it is as a member of the Islamic Jihad, currently the most active and dedicated anti-Israel genocidal terrorist organization.

Despite his wife’s fierce denials of Adnan’s role in Islamic Jihad, or in any militant activities, his own statements flatly contradict this narrative. He is a self-described leader of Islamic Jihad, and has taken the initiative in calling for terror attacks against Israel. He has held this position for at least 6 years: on June 8, 2005, the Boston Globe identified Adnan as an “Islamic Jihad spokesman,” quoted him repudiating any sort of cease fire with Israel, and urging all Palestinian terror groups to resume fighting with Israel. In the same article he lambasted the PA, and said the period of calm negotiated by Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas “is now in its last days”; in a first person interview with al Jazeera in 2005 he said, “we, the PA and all the Palestinian people are in one trench, which is the resistance trench and targeting the Zionist enemy”; and to dispel any doubts that he may have reformed his ways, he was recently described by an Arab news source as “Sheikh Khadar Adnan, the political leader of Islamic Jihad movement in Palestine” (Uruknet, http://www.uruknet.info/?new=85772, 16/2/2012).

For those hailing him as a hero, the fact that Adnan has a lengthy rap sheet that transcends jurisdictional boundaries is a minor detail that need only be glossed over; besides the half-dozen times he has been detained by Israeli authorities for terror-related offenses, Adnan has also been arrested by the Palestinian Authority (as reported by Ma’an news agency and the BBC on September 30, 2010).

Not his first Hunger Strike

Moreover, this is not Adnan’s first hunger strike. He is apparently a skilled propagandist, with an established MO. His first hunger strike though, was not as successful, at least in garnering the international media attention that he and his ilk crave, and this is because it took place in a Palestinian Authority jail. Belying any sense of impartiality and revealing the politicized agenda of human rights groups and the mainstream media alike, no international outcry accompanied his hunger strike, and no international outrage was directed at the Palestinian leadership; not a word from Catherine Ashton, no solidarity marches across the globe, and no front-page exposure. The only protest was confined to a proverbial back page blurb: a condemnation by The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, which for some reason remained a kind of internal memo.

Suicide Protester

Despite his record and his declarations,  and despite the fact that Israel has detained him for threatening regional security, Adnan has been hailed as enduring the longest hunger strike in Palestinian history. Islamic Jihad, infamous for its bloody history of suicide bombings and unrelenting war on Israel, has managed to seize on the opportunity to activate its first suicide protester, promising to attack Israel if Adnan dies.

Only in an Israeli jail could Adnan’s myth be nurtured and his persona hailed as a perverse kind of celebrity, with an eager audience collaborating to transform a terrorist into a hero. Nevertheless, the chorus of self-righteous voices wailing indignantly against Israel cannot and should not drown out the legality and morality of Adnan’s detention. Who is Khadar Adnan? A ranking member of a terrorist organization that has encouraged and overseen the murder of Israelis, and he is now trying to divert attention and pervert justice with the help of the usual suspects.

More On Liberal Rage

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011
   Our column week before last, “No Hate Like Liberal Hate,” drew a number of interesting responses from readers, many of whom submitted their own favorite morsels of liberal hate speech. A few noted that for many years Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby devoted a column every December to the year’s most egregious examples of liberal hate.
One reader sent a link to Jacoby’s 2004 column (2004 was a particularly rewarding year for those interested in mining the depths of liberal rage, as the Monitor hopefully demonstrated two weeks ago).
Jacoby described 2004 as “another year in which liberals engaged in, and mostly got away with, grotesque slanders and slurs about conservatives – the kind of poisonous rhetoric that should be beyond the pale in a decent society.”
   That liberals are world-class haters is a fact of life that should be apparent to anyone with an IQ higher than that of a typical television anchorperson.
In his 2004 column, Jacoby observed that “Republicans were almost routinely associated with Nazi Germany.” Former vice president Al Gore characterized Republican activists as “brown shirts” while singer Linda Ronstadt, reflecting on the reelection of George W. Bush, lamented that “we’ve got a new bunch of Hitlers.”
Left-wing crank Bill Moyers, formerly Lyndon Johnson’s political hatchet man and easily one of the most overrated men in the history of television news, told viewers that if Democrat John Kerry were to defeat Bush by a narrow margin, “I think there’d be an effort to mount a coup, quite frankly…. The right wing is not going to accept it.”
And consider the lovely liberal sentiments voiced in an ad paid for by the St. Petersburg, Fla., Democratic Club that called for the assassination of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The ad read, “Then there’s Rumsfeld, who said of Iraq, ‘We have our good days and our bad days.’ We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say, ‘This is one of our bad days,’ and pull the trigger.”
Speaking of liberal bloodlust, in 2004 the prestigious publisher Alfred A. Knopf came out with a thinly plotted novel by Nicholson Baker in which a couple of Bush haters spend the entire book arguing the merits of killing President Bush.
It is inconceivable that a mainstream publishing house would even entertain the idea of putting its imprimatur on a novel that discussed in such graphic detail the planned killing of a Democratic president.
Tarring Republicans with the “Nazi” or “racist” label is, of course, old hat for liberal hatemongers. Here’s disgraced Harlem congressman Charles Rangel, one of the more accomplished name-callers in the recent history of Capitol Hill, responding in the mid-90′s to a Republican tax-cutting initiative:
“It’s about race and a certain costume change. Where once it was the sheets and hoods of the Klan, it’s now the black suits and red ties of conservative politicians. It’s not ‘spic’ or ‘nigger’ anymore. They say, ‘Let’s cut taxes.’ “
Here’s Rangel again, referring to the Republicans’ 1994 Contract With America: “When I compare this to what happened in Germany, I hope you see the similarities to what is happening to us.”
When George W. Bush chose John Ashcroft as his attorney general shortly before being inaugurated to his first term in January 2001, Representative William Clay, Democrat of Missouri, Ashcroft’s home state, said the choice reminded him of “the way Ku Klux Klan members worked to improve race relations; they, too, reached out to blacks with nooses and burning crosses.”
Some months after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the actress Sandra Bernhard, a proud and outspoken liberal, opined that “the real terrorist threats” to the nation “are George W. Bush and his band of brown-shirted thugs.”
            Liberals like Bernhard, Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Harry Belafonte, and others too numerous too mention have spent years impugning the motives, intelligence, integrity, patriotism and simple human decency of conservatives.
Black Republicans have come in for a particularly tough time at the hands of liberals, especially black liberals, who tend to portray black conservatives – actually, not just black conservatives but even moderate black Republicans like Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice – as Uncle Toms, Aunt Jemimas, slaves working on their masters’ plantations, and worse.

But if you believe the liberal media, it’s Republicans and conservatives and (shudder) Tea Party Neanderthals who threaten the country’s stability with intemperate statements, uncivil discourse, and hate-filled rants.

 

Jason Maoz can be contacted at jmaoz@jewishpress.com

Anti-Zionist Christians Use Jewish Voices To Defame Israel

Wednesday, August 25th, 2010

Speaking in the basement of Westminster Presbyterian Church (WPC) in Minneapolis on July 3, 2010, Jeff Halper, founder of the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions, offered a relentless denunciation of Israel to a group of Presbyterians.

During his talk, Halper expressed hope that efforts to brand Israel as an apartheid state will get more traction going forward partially as a result of the deaths resulting from the fighting on board the Mavi Marmara a few weeks earlier. For Halper, the deaths highlighted Israeli intransigence, not the hostile intentions of those on the vessel.

“I think we have turned a corner with Israel’s help,” he said.

Throughout his talk, Halper gave his audience advice on how to challenge those who defend Israel from attacks like his.

“What people are going to tell you all the time is you’re not being fair to Israel,” he said. “You’re not being balanced.” There is not a symmetry of power, Halper said, and as a result, there’s no reason for criticism to be balanced. “There’s only one occupying power,” he said. “The Palestinians are not occupying Tel Aviv.”

Halper’s advice on how to respond to efforts to defend Israeli policies as responses to security threats was particularly pointed.

“Say, ‘What about home demolitions?’ That will shut them up.” Advertisement

Halper’s commentary fit right in with the agenda of the Israel-Palestine Mission Network (IPMN) of the PC(USA), which sponsored the luncheon at which he was speaking. The luncheon was one of a number of events organized by the IPMN that assailed the legitimacy of the Jewish state during the PC(USA)’s 2010 General Assembly. Other events on the IPMN’s roster at the WPC included a review of Alan Hart’s recent book, Zionism: the Real Enemy of the Jews, a review of The Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand and personal testimony by Linda Ramsden, whose talk was titled “My Journey Away from Christian Zionism.”

Two days later, Halper testified in favor of an overture submitted to the PC(USA)’s General Assembly declaring Israel guilty of the crime of apartheid. Speaking before the committee charged with dealing with peacemaking overtures related to the Middle East, Halper argued that the PC(USA) should affirm the resolution to help “prevent the establishment of new apartheid regime in the world.”

During his testimony, Halper asked rhetorically what it was about South Africa’s apartheid regime that mobilized activists all over the world. “How did that affect us here in Minneapolis or in the United States or anywhere else?” He continued:

Because if you have a state based on racism that’s in our international family, it sullies all of us. This was a global issue, apartheid. It had to do with global morality, global politics and so we all spoke out against it. It’s the same in the case of Israel. Israel is a global issue. The Israel-Palestine conflict is as General Petraeus says, compromising American interests, but more than that, the South Africans mobilized the churches all over the world.

The churches are the moral voice. If the churches go away, if the churches simply go on with business as usual while apartheid regimes are established in front of our eyes, then where are we? So there’s a special responsibility of churches.

Israel is establishing an apartheid regime. There is no more occupation. The occupation has become a permanent bi-national reality and I ask you all to speak out while we can against a new apartheid.

With these utterances, Halper portrays Israel, out of all the countries in the Middle East, as uniquely worthy of contempt and criticism and Christian churches. In Halper’s worldview, Israel, which has regular elections and grants ethnic and religious minorities the right to vote and participate in governance, is condemned while truly racist regimes that murder their political opponents are ignored.

As harsh and unreasonable as this testimony is, he has said worse to other groups. Speaking at a Sabeel Conference held at Boston’s Old South Church in 2007, Halper suggested Israeli officials were contemplating a “final solution” in regards to the Palestinians. He told the audience that Israeli leaders “don’t believe that peace is possible” and that “the Israeli government has done the same thing that the Bush administration is trying to do – mystify the conflict, to depoliticize it so that there’s no solution – the problem is them. And if the problem is them, then of course to put it in very harsh terms then of course the only solution the final solution.”

Let’s Make Another List

Wednesday, May 21st, 2008

Last week the Monitor invited readers to send in the names of journalists who exhibit an unmistakable anti-Israel bias in their writing or on-air reporting. The results will appear in an upcoming Media Enemies List along the lines of something the Monitor did several years ago.

This week the Monitor is reviving another old favorite, the Media Friends List. Readers can e-mail the names of their favorite pro-Israel media types along with or separate from their nominations for the Media Enemies List. Back in 2002 the Media Friends List was limited to full-time journalists, which precluded the inclusion of academics, retired military personnel and think-tank staffers who write extensively on the Middle East from a pro-Israel perspective (Fouad Ajami, Frank Gaffney, Victor Davis Hanson, Daniel Pipes, Ralph Peters, etc.). That rule won’t apply this time around.

On successive weeks in late August and early September 2002, the Monitor listed first the top 25 vote getters, in alphabetical order, and then the top 10 in terms of votes received.

Some of the more prominent media types who just missed the top 25 were columnist Don Feder; columnist Fred Barnes; radio host Michael Medved; Brent Bozell of the Media Research Institute; Rich Lowry and Jay Nordlinger of National Review; R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. of The American Spectator; Martin Peretz of The New Republic; and David Horowitz of FrontPageMag.com.

The top 25 vote getters, in alphabetical order, were:

Zev Chafets – columnist Mona Charen – columnist Linda Chavez – columnist Joseph Farah – editor and CEO, WorldNetDaily.com Eric Fettmann – columnist Jonah Goldberg – columnist, editor Bob Grant – radio host Sean Hannity – radio host, co-host “Hannity and Colmes” (Fox News) Jeff Jacoby – columnist, Boston Globe Michael Kelly [deceased] – columnist, editor Alan Keyes – commentator, perennial political candidate Charles Krauthammer – columnist G. Gordon Liddy – radio host Rush Limbaugh – radio host Bill Maher – comedian Steve Malzberg – radio host John Podhoretz – columnist, editor Dennis Prager – radio host A.M. Rosenthal [deceased] – columnist, editor William Safire – columnist Michael Savage – radio host Curtis Sliwa – radio host Cal Thomas – columnist Jonathan Tobin – columnist, editor George Will – columnist

The top 10 vote getters:

1. George Will
2. Rush Limbaugh
3. Cal Thomas
4. William Safire
5. Sean Hannity
6. Joseph Farah
7. John Podhoretz
8. A.M. Rosenthal
9. Michael Kelly
10. Charles Krauthammer
An observation: The near-total absence of liberals from the list serves as one more indication that vigorous defense of Israel resides, in the media at least, almost exclusively in the precincts of the right.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/media-monitor/lets-make-another-list/2008/05/21/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: