web analytics
January 22, 2017 / 24 Tevet, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘rightwing’

Rightwing Lawyers: Police Collaborated with Arabs to Entrap Jewish Teens

Wednesday, January 18th, 2017

Following the detention on Monday, January 16, of six Jewish youths on suspicion of assaulting Arabs who approached the community of Geulat Tzion in the Shilo Block in Mateh Binyamin Regional Council, legal aid society Honenu has leveled an accusation of provocation against police, saying the entire event had been staged.

Honenu issued a statement saying it is extremely likely that the Arabs were accompanied by either undercover policemen or Mistaravim (agents disguised as Arabs), and that police, with the cooperation of the Arabs, staged a provocation.

According to Honenu, on the morning of Monday, January 16, six youths were detained after a clash broke out near the Geulat Tzion outpost in the Shilo Bloc. Two of the youths were released after interrogation by the Central Unit of Judea and Samaria Police. Police claim that the youths, and other Jewish residents, assaulted Arab growers who came to the area between the community and the Arab village of Turmus Aya, accompanied by police forces.

In a hearing at the Jerusalem Magistrate Court on Tuesday, January 17, the police representative refused to give any specific information about the incident. He refused to tell Honenu Attorney Adi Keidar – who represented four of the detainees, three of whom are minors – whether or not the incident had involved security forces disguised as Arabs, in an attempt to harass the residents and provoke them into driving the “Arabs” away.

The detainees were held in remand overnight.

During the hearing, Keidar claimed that following the recent court ruling permitting Jewish residents to remain in Geulat Tzion, police decided to stage incidents in order to provoke the residents into clashes, resulting in their detention and eventually their removal from the area.

Police representatives asked the detainees be remanded for an additional four days, but the court only extended their remand by one day.

According to Honenu, the courts have harshly criticized the use of soldiers disguised as Arabs to provoke Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria. Honenu stated that Police have staged such incidents in Havat Gilad, Susiya, Havat Har Sinai, Givat Ronen, Bat Ayin, Kochav HaShahar, and Adei Ad, all in the Shilo Bloc region.


ADL Pres. Makes Bogus Claim Of (Right-Wing) Conspiracy To Discredit The Group

Thursday, December 8th, 2016

{Originally posted to the author’s blogsite, The Lid}

Last week an 800-word letter was sent to leading Anti-Defamation League activists by ADL President Jonathan Greenblatt. The letter was sent to counter what Greenblatt said was an “organized, concerted effort” to delegitimize the group.

Greenblatt listed the supposed myths/charges against the group, among them, that the ADL does not support Israel; that it no longer combats anti-Semitism; that it supports the movement to boycott Israel; and that Greenblatt is a Democratic operative. While Greenblatt didn’t state it, according to the JTA which broke the story, the ADL president’s purpose was to refute myths circulating in the right-wing Jewish blogosphere and on social media.

As someone who has been criticizing the organization for the past dozen years (and part of that right-wing Jewish blogosphere), I must disagree with the ADL President’s complaint. He is not comprehending the real complaint about the ADL. The vast majority of the complaints do not claim that the ADL has abandoned Israel, supports BDS, or no longer fights anti-Semitism. The majority of the attacks center around one serious charge against the group, a charge that was raised way before Greenblatt became the leader of the ADL. The charge is that the Anti-Defamation League prioritizes Democratic Party/ progressive political issues in front is stated mission, and when the two conflict, the ADL’s stated mission takes a back seat to party loyalty.

The ADL’s website describes its purpose:

“The Anti-Defamation League was founded in 1913 “to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.” Now the nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency, ADL fights anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defends democratic ideals and protects civil rights for all.”

During the term of Greenblatt’s predecessor Abe Foxman, the ADL shifted direction, making Democratic Party politics its primary concern.

In his book “Ally: My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide,”  Michael Oren wrote that at the very beginning of his administration, Obama met with his hand-picked members of Jewish leadership. Obama included the anti-Israel J Street which discarded the pro-Israel and actual part of Jewish leadership, the ZOA. As head of the ADL, Abe Foxman was part of that meeting.

According to Oren, Obama told the Jewish leadership that one of his goals was to put some distance between the US and Israel to make America look better to the Arab countries. “When there is no daylight,” the president told American Jewish leaders in 2009, “Israel just sits on the sidelines and that erodes our credibility with the Arabs.”

Obama followed through and by the middle of his first term he became possibly the most anti-Israel president in the history of Modern Israel. Despite the Obama policy (that Foxman and the supposed Jewish Leaders kept silent about), in 2011, Foxman’s ADL and the AJC led an effort asking Jews not to criticize Barack Obama’s anti-Israel policies. They asked Jews to pledge not to make Israel a wedge issue in the 2012 campaign.

The Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee have joined together in an effort to encourage other national organizations, elected officials, religious leaders, community groups and individuals to rally around bipartisan support for Israel while preventing the Jewish State from becoming a wedge issue in the upcoming campaign season. Join the ADL and AJC in taking the “National Pledge for Unity on Israel” — and sign our pledge.

The message was clear, even though Israel had ceased being a bi-partisan issue, they wanted the Jewish vote to continue to support Obama. The real purpose of their effort was to isolate Jewish groups who pointed out the failings of President Barack Obama’s anti-Israel policies. They wanted Jews to continue supporting the Democratic party because the ADL (and especially Foxman) had a vested interest in ensuring that the Jews continue to vote Democratic and re-elect this president, and the ADL’s leader feared losing access to the White House.

There is no better evidence of the ADL putting party before its mission than that the group remained silent about the Democratic Party, keeping three pro-Israel planks out of its platform in 2012, the Israeli flag burning, and other anti-Israel protests at the 2016 Democratic convention.


Under Foxman the ADL began to address issue that had nothing to do with its mission.

In 2007 they joined the Democratic Party in criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the laws against partial birth abortion. The issue in this case is not whether or not one supports abortion, especially partial birth abortion, but whether or not it is an issue for ADL.

At the end of 2010 President Obama was trying to sell the much criticized “Start Treaty.” At the time, John Podhoretz said the proposed treaty creates “a parallelism between American strength and Russian strength that is a very, very bad precedent in terms of how we ourselves think about American power.” Many others criticized the treaty as one-sided in favor of Russia, but the ADL stepped outside its mission. In a letter sent to all members of the Senate, the ADL urged Senators to put aside reservations about the treaty or its protocol in the interest of the greater goal of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. No Kidding he wanted the senate to believe that the Start Treaty would prevent Iran from developing nukes. Heck the P5+1 nuclear treaty Obama approved last year didn’t even do that. The real reason for the Start treaty was Mr. Foxman and the ADL were trying prove that they were the real leaders of the progressive/Democratic party movement.

In 2009 ADL issued a “White Paper” promoting the progressive’s negative PR spin against the Tea Party Movement, calling it part of the “New Rage in America” (which wasn’t true). That same Anti-Defamation League refused to recognize the blatant anti-Semitism present in Democratic Party-approved Occupy Wall Street, until a campaign by Joel Pollak in Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com embarrassed them into making a statement.

When Bibi Netanyahu scheduled his March 2015 speech to Congress, Abe Foxman speaking for the ADL, took the Democratic Party position, telling The Jewish Daily Forward that the controversy over Netanyahu’s speech was unhelpful. He added that Netanyahu should stay home. “One needs to restart, and it needs a mature adult statement that this was not what we intended,” Foxman said in an interview. “It has been hijacked by politics. Now is a time to recalibrate, restart and find a new platform and new timing to take away the distractions.” Foxman was right when he said the speech had been hijacked by politics, but rather than call out those who were making it political (the White House and Democratic Party leadership), Foxman protected his position in the progressive movement and told the Israeli Premier to cancel his speech.

When Barack Obama tried to sell his Iran deal with words that William Daroff Senior Vice President for Public Policy and Director of the Washington office of The Jewish Federations of North America said echoed the false anti-Semitic canard that Jews pushed America into the Iraq War, the ADL was silent.

During his presidency, Obama has allied himself with Al Sharpton, who fomented the anti-Semitic pogrom in Crown Heights and incited the anti-Semitic fire-bombing of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem. Not only did the ADL fail to criticize the president for partnering with the unrepentant anti-Semite, but as Sharpton became important in Democratic Party politics, the ADL embraced Sharpton as well.

In 2016 Obama’s State Department condemned Israel for allowing people to build houses on the western side of the Jordan River. The land was legally purchased in 2009 by Dr. Irving and Cherna Moskowitz from US Presbyterian Church. It wasn’t the building of houses that the Obama administration objected to. If Christians or Muslims were to live in them, Obama wouldn’t have objected. As it is with so many other things, the Obama administration objected to the fact that Jews were going to live in those buildings. This wasn’t a statement about Israel “taking Palestinian land and building settlements,” the Obama administration was saying that Jews are not allowed to purchase land from Christians and build homes on the parcels, clearly an anti-Semitic position. Not wanting to criticize a Democratic Party president, the ADL was silent.

Then there are the two most recent examples: the ADL’s false charges of antisemitism against Steven Bannon, and their protection of Keith Ellison against valid charges that he is anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. The ADL criticized the Republican Bannon who has a history of supporting Jewish causes, and protected the Democrat who has a history of Antisemitism, associating with terrorist Muslim Brotherhood organizations and opposing the Jewish State. Mr. Greenblatt backed off both positions after he received overwhelming criticism.

Whether or not the reason behind the ADL’s initial stance on the Democrat Ellison, or Republican Bannon, has anything to do with their party affiliation cannot be proven. However, as pointed out by the examples above, those stances do follow a long-time ADL trend.

In his letter to supporters, Mr. Greenblatt, said the “attacks” on the ADL is part of the divisiveness in America today:

“Much of this campaign reflects wider trends of our time: the dangerous polarization in the US, Israel and within our community fed by the dogma that if you are not 100 percent with me you are the enemy as well as the phenomenon of ‘fake news’ where agenda-driven half-truths are presented as fact, reinforcing these hardened positions,” said the email, one of whose recipients posted the contents on Facebook.”

ADL President Jonathan Greenblatt is acting like the Republican and Democratic party establishments, who didn’t understand (or try to understand) the reasons for the candidacies of Bernie Sanders and President-Elect Donald Trump. Despite what Greenblatt believes, the criticism of the ADL has nothing to do with the polarization of America, nor can it be blamed on “fake news.”

The attacks on the ADL are based on false promises. The organization says its mission is fighting “anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defend[ing] democratic ideals and protect[ing] civil rights for all.” What that mission hid was that the organization doesn’t defend “democratic ideals” but “Democratic Party” ideals. The organization isn’t anti-Israel, nor have they stopped fighting anti-Semitism, it’s just that their priority is to be a one-sided political organization.

Jeff Dunetz

PM Kicks Out Habayit Hayehudi MK for Saying Netanyahu Isn’t Rightwing

Sunday, December 4th, 2016

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday night banned Habayit Hayehudi MK Bezalel Smotrich from a debate over the evacuation of the Amona community in Samaria because of things Smotrich said about the PM in a major interview he had given the Ha’aretz weekend supplement, Army Radio reported Sunday.

Speaking to Ha’aretz reporter Ravit Hecht, MK Smotrich said, “Unfortunately, Netanyahu is not a rightwinger,” and added that “Apparently, had Netanyahu been in charge instead of Ben Gurion, we would not have had a state. Ben Gurion had courage, he established a state against all odds.”

The meeting included Prime Minister Netanyahu, Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, and AG Avichai Mandelblit, and focused on the Amona issue and the Arrangement Act which will be submitted for a Knesset vote Monday. The meeting ended without concrete results and the participants agreed to meet again on Sunday.

Speaking to Army Radio Sunday morning, Smotrich confirmed his removal from the meeting, adding, “If the prime minister’s feelings were hurt I’m prepared to apologize.”

Smotrich relates how he had driven for an hour and a half from home Saturday night to get to the meeting. “The prime minister refused to let me into the room. He asked that I not come in. I was led to believe that he didn’t love some of the things I said in my Ha’aretz interview.”

In his own defense, Smotrich said, “I didn’t initiate public criticism of the prime minister, I merely answered truthfully the questions I was asked and didn’t blur our disputes with him.”

Smotrich clarified that he feels “a great deal of respect for the prime minister,” adding, “I’m a young man in the system and he is an older man with a great del of experience, and he is the prime minister of all of us.” Nevertheless, Smotrich reiterated, “it’s no secret we have ideological disagreements with him.”

As to his comparison between Netanyahu and Ben Gurion, Smotrich stated he was ready to apologize, but commenting that “if anyone who has a disagreement with the prime minister loses the ability to work with him in a useful manner, I believe we have a big problem.”


Rightwing Paper Crowns Shooting Medic Azaria ‘Man of the Year’

Friday, September 30th, 2016

On Wednesday, Hagai Segal, editor of the right-leaning Makor Rishon, directed at the National Religious public, revealed on Twitter the Friday cover page of his newspaper’s Shabbat supplement Dyokan (Portrait) dedicated to their pick of Man of the Year 5776, with a flattering image of Sgt. Elor Azaria, the medic whose shot that killed a terrorist on the ground at a Hebron check post last Purim Day also appears to have killed a long-held belief that the IDF’s values and priorities were synonymous with those of the Jewish nation in Israel.

“The court will rule on the severity of his action,” says the subheadline on the same cover, “but there’s no doubt that the single bullet he shot at the terrorist ignited the stormiest debate in Israel’s society this year.”

Many readers confuse the meaning of a publication’s Man of the Year pick with an endorsement, even praise of his actions. Segal’s team made certain to convey that they picked Azaria not because they necessarily agree with his shooting of an already “neutralized” terrorist, but because of his strong influence on Israelis — the majority of whom rebelled publicly and in no uncertain terms against a confused military and political leadership that actually considered charging an IDF soldier with murder of an Arab terrorist who had already stabbed another soldier in the neck.

The military prosecution finally gave in to the tide of public rage and settled for a manslaughter indictment, which did not make it or the man at the helm of the defense apparatus, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon (Likud), more popular in the least. In the end, Ya’alon was ousted, replaced by Avigdor Liberman (Yisrael Beiteinu), allowing Prime Minister Netanyahu to kill two birds with one convenient stone, getting rid of an increasingly unpopular (and preachy) defense minister, and adding a crucial coalition partner to give him a safer edge in the Knesset.

Despite the fact that Israelis were preoccupied with the passing of the late Shimon Peres this week, the Segal tweet received its share of boos and applause, much of it revolving around the difference between picking the MOY because he was influential vs. being praiseworthy.

Former Peace Now chief Yariv Oppenheimer tweeted back that he’d pick Hagai Klein, the man who was shot by an Arab terrorist gunman at the Sarona Market in Tel Aviv, and despite his injury managed to tackle the shooter with his bare hands. Obviously, a brave man worthy of a medal, but few Israelis would recognize his name without Googling it.

There was one tweet suggesting the man of the year award should be given to the B’Tselem cameraman who captured the shooting — which makes sense in a big bang theory kind of way.

Meretz Chairwoman MK Zehava Galon attacked the choice on it’s merit: “Enough already,” she wrote. “Azaria didn’t ignite a debate. He shot the head of a neutralized terrorist.” She then rebuked Segal’s choice, saying that “choosing him as man of the year sends a clear message to anyone who understands it.” Meaning, obviously, that Azaria wasn’t only influential, he was also right in the eyes of many Israelis, and that in itself is dangerous.

It so happens that another Israeli newspaper, Ma’ariv, which hovers around the center-right political zone, on Friday published a column by journalist Ben Kaspit who also picked Azaria as his choice for man of the year. “One shot from Elor Azaria, a simple soldier from the Kfir Brigade, woke up all the sleeping demons in Israel’s society,” Kaspit wrote, adding, “Like it or not, Elor Aazaria was the most influential man of the year 5776.”

We will be revealing our choice for Man of the Year Saturday night. Here’s a hint: she’s not a man. Unless, of course we’ll have one of those editorial brawls today and come up with someone else. Stay tuned.


Leftwing J Street Going After Pro-Israel Regavim’s US Tax-Exempt Status

Friday, September 9th, 2016

Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of leftwing, anti-Netanyahu group J Street, sent an email to his group’s supporters announcing that he is pressuring the Obama Administration to revoke the US tax-exempt status of the Israeli (and pro-Israel) NGO Regavim in response to their supposed activity against the two-state solution.

The urgent need to harm Regavim’s US donations resulted from the effective work the group has done in forcing the Israeli authorities to apply Supreme Court rulings on demolishing illegal Arab construction in Area C of Judea and Samaria. One of the recent focal points of the Regavim efforts has been the squatter camp outside the Jewish community of Susiya, which the US and the EU insist must stay put despite the fact that its existence violates every signed agreement between Israel and the PA.

Ben-Ami wrote his followers that he was shocked to discover that the “settler movements” aiming to destroy Susiya are partially funded by donations from the US — including Regavim which has systematically mapped out the Susiya shacks and lean-tos, pointing Israeli police at the precise location of structures that violate the law. Ben-Ami sees this well-organized campaign to enforce the law as a threat to a future Palestinian State, which, he believes, must some day be handed the entire area.

Ben-Ami attributes to his organization’s work behind the scenes with the US State Dept. the fact that Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Liberman have responded to international pressure and postponed the evacuation of the illegal Arab squatters until November 15.

The president of J Street shared in his email how enraged he is by the fact that groups that work against “the future of the State of Israel” and in direct defiance of US foreign policy and “perhaps” even US law, enjoy a tax-exempt status in the US, which is why J Street will continue to pressure the US government to revoke Regavim’s special status.

Should Ben-Ami be interested in learning what happened the last time the IRS has taken on a pro-Israel group, he should Google “Z Street,” a feisty organization headed by Jewish Press Online reporter Lori Lowenthal Marcus. As Lowenthal Marcus and others have reported over the past seven or so years, the IRS was “slow-rolling” discovery in lawsuits about how it slow-rolled applications by conservative non-profits in general and Z Street in particular.

In 2009, Z Street filed for 501(c)(3) status and was caught in the net of IRS targeting for groups that opposed Administration policy.

An IRS agent confirmed on the phone that Z Street’s application had been sent for special screening for groups connected with Israel. Z Street sued the IRS in 2010 for political discrimination that violated the First Amendment, and IRS Exempt Organizations Determinations Group manager Jon Waddell actually said in a December 2010 sworn declaration in federal court that the IRS flagged Z Street because “Israel is one of many Middle Eastern countries that have a ‘higher risk of terrorism.’”

“That’s hilarious,” wrote the Wall Street Journal last August, “since Z Street supports a country targeted by terrorism. But it also is untrue, which the Administration apparently knew before Mr. Waddell gave his statement to the court. In an October 25, 2010 internal IRS memo on the Z Street case produced in discovery, the IRS acknowledged that when Z Street’s application was being scrutinized Israel wasn’t on the list of terrorist countries, and that an agent may have been using an outdated list.”

If Jeremy Ben-Ami believes the Obama Administration is prepared to go after the tax-exempt status of yet another Zionist group — he should probably check with someone in the State Dept. Perhaps President Hillary Clinton would be inclined to alienate her Jewish voters and Israel by using the IRS for political purposes. It’s quite clear President Donald Trump won’t.

As to the self-congratulations of Ben-Ami on how he and J Street got the US and the EU to condemn Israel’s legal activities in Susiya — it stands to reason they knew all about it on their own. Why, the EU has been building illegal structures in Area C (which Regavim has successfully gotten demolished) without any help from J Street.


Sharp Rightwing Criticism of Supreme Court Ruling on Demolishing Gush Etzion Homes

Friday, September 2nd, 2016

Following a Supreme Court Ruling Thursday ordering the evacuation and demolition of 17 structures in the Netiv Ha’Avot outpost in Gush Etzion, rightwing politicians called for a Regulation Act that would set out to legalize thousands of Judea and Samaria properties about which there are now or may be future claims. The general outline of the proposed regulatory legislation will authorize the Israeli government to compel proven claimants to receive market-value compensations, in comparable land or in money. A coalition move back in July to start work on the Regulation Act was thwarted by the AG Avihay Mandelblitt, who said the law is not constitutional and would be knocked down by the high court on appeal.

Thursday’s ruling, by a three-judge panel, evoked sharp criticism on the right, with Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett condemning the ruling, saying extreme leftwing elements who have given up on their ability to ever persuade the people to accept a Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria are bypassing the public and usurping the legal system to force their policies on the majority. “When the Supreme Court collaborates with them this erodes the public trust in the court,” Bennett warned.

Minister Zeev Elkin (Likud), who is a resident of Gush Etzion, said the high court’s “scandalous decision” constitutes the crossing of red lines, revealing the court’s utter disconnection from common sense and from the historic values and the legacy of the nation of Israel. Elkin called on Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) to lead a far-reaching reform to regain the public’s trust in the Supreme Court.

Thursday’s ruling was an uncompromising order to destroy homes that “were built illegally on private lands.” Considering the fact that the ruling required forcing residents out of their homes, and the large number of homes in question, Court President Justice Miriam Naor gave government and the residents 18 months to prepare for the evacuation/demolition.

Naor wrote that the court ignored on principle the fact that the outpost had been established with government endorsement and support, saying government does not enjoy a special status when it comes to standing before the high court. “In the judicial process government is equal to other litigants,” Naor emphasized, adding that the fact that government had been aiding in a long-term illegal enterprise does not make it kosher.

According to the petition by Peace Now, which dug up the Arabs who are now claiming to be the original owners of Netiv Ha’Avot, the lands of the Al-Khader village near Bethlehem and Gush Etzion, in Judea, had been undergoing regulation by the Jordanian government at the time the IDF conquered the land in June 1967. The Israeli court opted not to rule whether or not the Jordanian government had the legal authority to carve up and hand out the land to local Arabs, land it had acquired through an act of war, invading the “West Bank,” including Jewish Gush Etzion, in 1948.

Davidi Pearl, who heads the Gush Etzion Regional Council, responded to the High Court’s decision saying the court had opted to belittle the government which had presented a vast array of legal alternatives that had been confirmed by the AG. Pearl called on the government to act immediately to enact a law to protect the honor of the Israeli government and the Judea and Samaria residents who had acted in good faith with the government’s encouragement.


Rightwing NGO Complains, IDF Confiscates Illegal Construction Machinery

Thursday, September 1st, 2016

An alert by the Regavim movement on Wednesday has led to the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) confiscating machinery which was about to be used to expand illegal Arab construction near the Jewish archaeological site of Sussya in the southern Judea Mountains.

Regavim said in a statement that the action sent “a clear message that if you are about to break the law, you will be stopped.”

“The Civil Administration must continue to enforce the law, including court orders on illegal construction,” the statement continued, suggesting that “at the same time our government leaders should not succumb to international pressure and when asked to issue their opinion on matters, they should side with court decisions and uphold the law.”

David Israel

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/rightwing-ngo-complains-idf-confiscates-illegal-construction-machinery/2016/09/01/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: