Before.

A convoy of bulldozers arrived on Tuesday morning at the outskirts of the Arab village Al-Mofkra near the town of Avigail and demolished a mosque that had been built illegally. The mosque was built by the villagers, members of the Hamada clan, in violation of a court settlement and as a challenge against legal construction in Avigail, Jewish Voice reports.

The mosque demolition followed a Regavim movement’s appeal to the Supreme Court, after the movement’s field coordinator, Oved Arad, had determined that the Arabs built the mosque illegally. These same Arab villagers had gone even further and continued to build and pave the mosque despite the explicit prohibition by the judges.

At the hearing on the petition a month ago, the Supreme Court justices urged the Civil Administration to demolish the mosque as soon as possible. President of the Supreme Court Justice Grunis even gained some notoriety at the time, when he joked that illegal structures in Judea and Samaria should be “killed when they’re young.”

The Regavim movement released a statement saying “the law should be kept regarding the Palestinians, too. The demolition of the mosque is a warning to the residents of Al-Mofkra and the entire South Hebron Hills, that they must obey the law and build only in designated areas.”

Regavim officials said they “will continue to document Palestinian delinquency, and each illegal construction will be handled in the judicial and public arenas.”

A miracle of sorts took place today at the Israeli Supreme court, which could be the sign of good things to come. It was during part of an ongoing discussion of Illegal Arab construction in Judea and Samaria, and this time the issue at hand was a mosque built illegally in Al-Mofkra (Regavim), on the southern slope of Mt. Hebron.

According to The Jewish Voice, the panel of judges headed by Supreme Court President Supreme Court President Grunis, with Justices Miriam Naor and Edna Arbel, opened the discussion by saying that illegal construction cannot be allowed to go on at all, especially in Judea and Samaria. The panel added that enforcement activity should be performed efficiently.

In this context, Justice Grunis said that “we must kill them when they’re young” (the literal translation from Hebrew would be “We must destroy them when they’re little”). The quip was made in front of representatives of the State Attorney’s Office, who told the court they intend to destroy the illegal mosque in the coming weeks.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Asher Gronis. Photo: Yoav Ari Dudkevitch/Flash 90

The reason this can be considered a minor miracle is that both of Grunis’s predecessors, chief justices Aharon Barak and Dorit Beinish, would not have been caught dead saying something so un-PC about a Muslim house of worship. The fact that Justice Grunis was able to joke about it – and then do the right thing and force the state to take down the ugly thing – is very much a step in the right direction for the court.

Following an appeal by the Regavim movement, the Attorney General made a commitment to destroy the mosque once it was determined to be illegal. But while the civil administration was dragging its feet and not getting around to demolishing the mosque, the Regavim movement reported that mosque owner, one Mahmud Hamemda, continued to live there and had said that no matter how many times the mosque is destroyed, he would keep rebuilding it.

Following the Attorney General’s commitment to give a high priority to destroying the mosque, Attorney Boaz Arzi, representing Regavim, expressed his satisfaction. “Given the fact that the justices accepted our appeal, and gave us the relief we asked for, our petition has become moot and there is no reason not to delete it,” he stated, adding that,”if the civil administration does not do its job and we’ll see the mosque was not destroyed, we’ll have no problem submitting another appeal, until justice is done.”

The Regavim movement announced that the decision to demolish the illegal mosque should serve as a warning to the Palestinians in Al-Mofkra village. “Every illegal construction will be documented and an appeal will be submitted to the Supreme court as needed,” a movement spokesperson said. “The state’s decision to demolish the illegal mosque is proof that nearby structure are equally illegal and their fate will be the same.”

There is an oped in Haaretz (where else?) by the head of the ICRC delegation in Israel arguing that

…contrary to what is claimed in the Levy report, it is manifestly clear that the West Bank is occupied by Israel…Furthermore, concerning the settlements in the West Bank, it has to be emphasized that Article 49 (6 ) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits a state from transferring parts of its own civilian population to territory it occupies, does not merely prohibit the occupying state from forcefully transferring parts of its population; it also prohibits any action by the occupier which facilitates such transfer.  The ICRC commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention makes clear that Article 49 (6 ), like the convention as a whole, aims to protect the local population in the occupied territory and not the population of the occupying state. Furthermore, international humanitarian law prohibits any action by an occupying power aimed at altering the intrinsic characteristics of the occupied territory, including any measures that affect its demographic, cultural or social composition.

My comment left there:

This is a stupid article.  Of course a territory can be occupied, but legally or illegally is the question.  I am at the present occupying the chair I am seated in.  So what?  What Schaerer is trying to prove, that Israel is engaged in “illegality”, is a flop.  Without referring to the history of the claims to sovereignty, one would never know that what happened in 1939, i.e., the illegal move by Gt. Britian to alter the terms of the Mandate by the League of Nations, followed by the Arab rejection of Partition, to the annexation of Judea & Samaria by Jordan, the ongoing terror since 1947 and the threat of war in 1967, which all lead to a legal justification for Israel to occupy Judea and Samaria, to facilitated “close Jewish settlement” therein, including the use of “state and waste lands”.  There is no crime of “settlement” involved and the defensive war Israel was required to wage gives Israel all rights to be in the area.  The throw-in of “transferring” is ridiculous as Jews lived in the areas of Judea, Samaria and Gaza for centuries prior to 1947-49 and it was only because of a policy of ethnic cleansing practiced by Arabs during the Mandate and the War of Independence – Schaerer knows of those illegal  acts, does he not? – that Jews were not there in 1967.

We Jews are returning, not transferring oursleves or being transferred.

I think the Red Cross should be red-faced after this travesty of law and history.

Visit My Right Word.

Israel deported 15 international protesters arrested for trying to infiltrate an Israeli security zone set up around Gaza with their flotilla, Estelle.

Infiltrators hailed from Greece, Norway, Sweden, Spain, and Canada.

Israeli naval commandos boarded Estelle on October 20.  Estelle is Swedish-owned, Finnish-flagged.

The attempt follows in the wake of the Mavi Marmara, a ship carrying pro-Palestinian activists who claimed to be carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza in May 2010.  When Israeli commandos boarded the illegal vessel, they were attacked by the activists who stabbed several and beat others with pipes and sticks.  Defending themselves against the attackers, soldiers killed nine Turkish activists before quelling the attack.

If any single business lobby—yes, business lobby—stands as an obstacle to entitlement reform, it is the American Association of Retired People [AARP]. There is nothing wrong with being a successful business, and the AARP should be credited for being just that. But there is something unsavory, at least, about being in the business of duping the elderly. Dissimulating—even to the elderly—is not illegal, nor should it be. A government powerful enough to prevent the AARP from duping old people is a more powerful government than any of us should want. There is no evidence that the AARP is technically breaking the law. But what they are doing is exploiting the elderly for a fast buck while lobbying—consistently—for the massive expansions of the federal government.

Let’s start with this statement from the AARP’s website:

Barry Rand is chief executive officer (CEO) of AARP, the world’s largest nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization dedicated to social change and helping people 50 and over to improve the quality of their lives. Mr. Rand is a dynamic leader and change agent who brings to AARP a proven track record of leading both multibillion-dollar businesses and smaller, private equity-driven businesses. He has served as chairman and chief executive officer of Avis Group Holdings, CEO of Equitant Ltd., and executive vice president, Worldwide Operations, at Xerox Corporation. He serves as chairman of the Board of Trustees of Howard University.

That’s a a heavy-hitting resume for the head of “a non-profit, non-partisan nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps people 50 and over improve the quality of their lives,” isn’t it? It should be a clue. It is. Barry Rand is the CEO not only of a non-profit organization, but a very profitable organization that is also called the AARP.

The AARP, in principle, is a 501(c)(4) tax-exempt non-profit association. The (c)(4) designation is reserved for “Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees;” the key constraint upon its operation is that its net earnings must be devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.

What is poorly understood—particularly by the elderly—is that there are eight entities linked to the AARP label, of which five are taxable, for-profit companies: AARP Insurance, AARP Services, Inc., AARP Global Network LLC, AARP Properties LLC, and AARP Financial, Inc. The profit-making and non-profit AARP entities are not only linked by their name—there is a great deal of overlap among boards of directors.

This is not illegal, but it is clearly unethical, in so far as these companies are using AARP’s reputation as a neutral advocate for the elderly to sell stuff to the elderly. Given that only the Catholic Church has a larger American membership, the AARP’s endorsement is to the old-people market as a Papal indulgence is to sinners.

To put it crudely, the non-profit part of the AARP is a front. The non-profit arm, as advertised, “provides a wide range of unique benefits, special products, and services for our members.” If you join the AARP for a low annual membership fee, you get discounts on hotels and cruises, and lots of magazines and newsletters about graying gracefully and staying spry. You can even listen to AARP radio and watch AARP TV—in Spanish, too!

But the media organs are the loss leaders: The revenue comes from the massive mailing list and the AARP name, which it licenses to for-profit companies—health insurers, in particular. In other words, it uses advocacy for the elderly as a sales tool. And indeed, AARP does conduct useful research and provide useful services to the elderly. But this is not its primary function. Its primary function is to sell stuff to old people via AARP Services Inc., which is not only a profit-making company, but a very profitable one: supplemental health insurance, discounts on prescription drugs, entertainment and travel packages, long-term care insurance, and automobile, home and life insurance, anything old people like—that’s what AARP sells. If you want to speak to the elderly, sell anything to the elderly, or get the elderly to vote for you, the AARP is the gatekeeper. This gives AARP an almost unrivaled power to blackmail Congress—which it does.

The profit and non-profit parts of AARP combined amount to an organization that in 2009 enjoyed gross receipts of $2.2 billion. The NRA—the second-largest officially non-profit advocacy group—is only one-eighth this size, financially speaking. The highest-spending lobbyists in Washington are, in descending order, the US Chamber of Commerce, General Electric, the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, and the AARP. They are all business lobbies, whether or not they claim non-profit status. Only the AARP, however, has managed to persuade the public that it is not.

There can be no entitlement reform unless a barrier is placed between the AARP and the legislative process, and so far, no politician has figured out how to do this without looking as if he is throwing granny under a bus. This is an immensely difficult problem: The elderly cannot be disenfranchised, nor can the AARP be deprived of its First Amendment rights.

There is only one realistic solution to this. Parents have a responsibility to protect their children. They also have a responsibility to protect their parents. Just as it is up to parents to protect their kids from exploitation by industries that are fundamentally unconcerned with their welfare, it is up to parents to protect their parents from exploitation by the AARP. It is even more difficult to persuade stubborn, aging parents to listen than it is to get through to recalcitrant teenagers. But it must be done. How? I suggest they follow the AARP’s advice. In its eldercare literature, it advises children to:

* Talk to your parents about scams that target the elderly.
* Educate yourself on current scams.
* Warn your older family members not to sign any forms or documents without reviewing the materials with another family member or attorney.
* Contact the media and the police about any fraudulent activity.
* Close any bank or credit card accounts that were involved in a scam.
* It is also important to remember not to blame your parent or older relative for falling victim to financial fraud. Be sure to explain to them what happened and the steps they can take to prevent against future scams.

Originally published at the Gatestone Institute.

Is this discriminatory?

Women in Science Hall of Fame 2013 Program
Deadline for Applications:  October 10, 2012

Description:
The American Consulate General in Jerusalem is seeking outstanding female Palestinian scientists to honor in the 2013 Women in Science Hall of Fame program.

The U.S. Department of State created the annual Arab Women in Science Hall of Fame program in 2010 to honor accomplished scientists in disparate disciplines ranging from marine science to nuclear physics. For the last two years, U.S. Embassies and Consulates in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have identified and honored outstanding Arab women involved in medicine, science, engineering, technology, math, and other fields. These role models have served to inspire girls across the region to study science and pursue scientific careers.

The selected honoree will have her biography and photo posted along with other MENA region scientists on the web sites of U.S. Embassies and Consulates in the MENA region, including the web page of the American Consulate General in Jerusalem.  She will also be featured in a 2013 calendar and have opportunities to promote the program in the media, mentor other Palestinian women and girls, and participate in a trip to the United States to network with other MENA scientists and learn about the contribution of American women  to scientific innovation,
education, leadership, and public policy formation.

Eligibility Requirements:
This program is open to Palestinian women working in any scientific, medical, technological, engineering, or mathematical disciplines.

Candidates must:
 Be fluent in English, but not hold U.S. citizenship or be a U.S. legal permanent resident.
 Be willing to participate in exchange programs and welcome opportunities to mentor
women and girls.
 Be a citizen and resident of West Bank, Gaza, or Jerusalem at the time of application and while participating in the program.

Why? Because it is only for women? Of course not. Because of English language fluency? Actually, why must English fluency be a requirement? Is it because one cannot be an American citizen or legal permanent resident?

I don’t think so, although can you be an illegal resident of the US?

Because it disallows the “Palestinian diaspora”?  Naw.

But what really puzzles me is how can one be a “Palestinian citizen“? A citizen usually is understood to be a member of a state. Is the United States State Department creating, again, a Palestinian state, when there is none existing?

Visit My Right Word.

First let me state the obvious. I am not a Christian. I do not believe in Christian theology. I am a Torah-observant Jew with a Torah-observant theology. So the idea of a Trinity is anathema to me and I certainly do not believe in the divinity of Jesus.

That said, I am absolutely appalled at what has happened to a church in Israel recently. The expression of hatred towards Christian beliefs and institutions rivals that of pre-Holocuast Germany of the mid 30s. Anti-Christian graffiti on the walls of a church and the recent public tearing up of the Christian bible by a Knesset member [MK Michal Ben-Ari -Ed.] are acts reminiscent of the anti-Semitic graffiti seen on the walls synagogues and Jewish owned businesses in Germany.

Unfortunately, I can all too well understand why this is happening. It is a culture of hatred of the goy (non-Jew) that permeates certain circles. And a history of anti-Semitism perpetrated against our parents, grandparents and great grandparents going back for centuries in Europe – pre-dating the Reformation.

The Church had always had it in for the Jews back then. Persecutions were often sourced in what the Church saw as heresy on our part for denying the divinity of Jesus. They either wanted to convert us or destroy us. That finally came to a head during the Holocaust where Christian Germany with centuries of hatred imbedded in their souls – ingrained in them by previous generations underpinned the Nazi determination to annihilate us. Even though the expressed hatred was entirely racial, not religious.

So it is not a surprise that certain Jews react reflexively to non-Jews by hating them. Nor is it surprising why that hatred produced this kind of activity. When hatred is ingrained in this historical way we cannot expect tolerance. I am reminded of a tape I once heard by a Chasidic Rav saying that even though we must have good relations with gentiles, we must hate them!

That is incorrect. There is no mitzvah to hate non-Jews. There is a mitzvah to treat all of humankind with the dignity they deserve as God’s creations, created in His image! There is instead a mitzvah to enlighten the nations with the morality, values, and ethics of the Torah. In fact according to one source I saw, the reason for our lengthy exile is precisely for that purpose – to get the rest of the world to believe in God and to appreciate the truth of the Torah.

Why doesn’t the segment that fosters the kind of hatred displayed in the above mentioned acts abide by any of this? In certain cases historical experiences combined with an insular lifestyle and lack of education prevents them from seeing reality.

In other cases, it is simple fanaticism as seems to be the case here. Some of the graffiti indicates that this was done by fanatic settlers of Ramat Migron and Maoz Esther as a ‘price tag’ operation for the police closing down two structures in Migron.

This is an outrage! No matter how justified these illegal settlers feel they are in building illegal settlements, and no matter how angry they are at the Israeli government for doing it, they have no right to retaliate. Certainly not against innocent Christians!

They probably think this is a Mitzvah. But they are wrong. This is a completely immoral act that is inexcusable!

The Christian world of today does not hate us. Many of them, such as the Evangelical community embrace us. And since Vatican Two, Catholics no longer believe in the doctrine that blames us for the crucifixion. We are now considered their ‘older brother’ religion. These new attitudes are clearly and constantly expressed in tangible ways. Relations have never been better. While there still may be pockets of Christian anti Semitism – they are relatively few in number and in any case non violent. (With the obvious exceptions of fringe groups like the neo-Nazis and the KKK.)

But the people who do this kind of thing either don’t know any of that, or don’t care. They will say that all this ‘love’ is false. Or that is it just a ruse to convert us. Most of them will not however be stupid enough to act on it – especially as an act of revenge against the government! But you only need a few who do. And that is what seems to have happened here.

For the first time in years, more illegal aliens left Israel than came in. Only 199 illegal aliens entered Israel in August 2012, while 549 left or were expelled.

Just a year before, in August of 2011, some 2000 illegal aliens entered Israel.