… is this info-packed and well-organized and portal page provided by Xinhua. Notice the tabs across the top, then scroll down to where the contents of these categories are also helpfully listed and linked to, in two asymmetrical columns, in reverse-chrono order.
The offerings include breaking news stories as well as some informative Backgrounders and News Analysis.
This Backgrounder, published January 4, presented some really pertinent and useful information about the extreme lethality of Israel’s various military ops against Gaza since the “withdrawal” in September 2005. Including that,
- More than 400 Palestinians, many of them civilians, were killed during operations Summer Rains and Autumn Clouds.
From Feb. 27 to March 3, 2008, Israel launched Operation Hot Winter in Gaza, during which over 120 Palestinians were killed.
I didn’t see helpful background info like that made available in any US newspapers in recent months– or ever. There, the major meme that has been endlessly propagated has been that the siege of Gaza was the “only” hostile act Israel has undertaken against Gaza since it “generously” withdrew its forces and settlers from the Strip in 2005… And that then it was those “congenitally violence-prone” Palestinians who quite gratuitously started launching lethal rockets against southern Israel…
(Of course, the siege has itself also been responsible for hundreds of Palestinian deaths, and considerable amounts of other suffering. But the US MSM seldom mention that, either.)
This piece of news analysis on the whole Fayyad/PA-PM question, written for Xinhua by by Saud Abu Ramadan and published on the site today, is particularly informative and helpful.
He writes,
- Palestinian sources close to the dialogue said there are three candidates for the post of prime minister. They are the famous business man Monib el-Masri, the Hamas-supported independent lawmaker Jamal al-Khodari and resigning prime minister of the caretaker government Salam Fayyad.
I’ve been intrigued in recent months to see the considerable upgrading of Xinhua’s Middle East offerings in general. An increasing number of their stories seem to be directly reported by their own reporters, though they will also (as nearly everyone does) repackage significant stories from elsewhere. But either way, it looks to me that Xinhua is now establishing itself as a major player in the information-provision business in the Middle east.
What this also indicates is that the Chinese powers that be have devoted considerable budget, forethought and human resources to upgrading their country’s information-gathering capacities in the Middle East. Xinhua is a news agency, sure. But it a state-owned news agency, whose operations require real resources. So the involvement of the Chinese state/CCP in launching this info-gathering operation– which may well be running in parallel with other kinds of info-gathering operation– seems to signify a real commitment by Beijing to becoming, over time, a significant and above all sure-footed actor in the Middle East, who is no longer reliant on the information and analysis of other info-providers who are not so directly under their own supervision and standards of quality control.
Interesting…
But one further plea to the colleagues at Xinhua: Please, could you attach an RSS feed to your great Palestine-Israel page???
Palestinian women: Israel’s demographic nightmare
No condolences to apartheid Israel; yes, it has killed 1,300 Palestinians in Gaza because its fears are of a demographic nature, its army never cared what age or gender it killed, Israel’s machine was harvesting Palestinians of all ages and sizes, young and old, disabled and healthy, pregnant women and young girls, the ones resisting the occupation and the ones who are still too young to understand such expressions.
Israel’s nightmare is of a demographic scale, it is frightened to be outnumbered, so the answer was to starve people to death, stop them from receiving medication so that they would die of ‘natural causes’ then bar the media from investigating that and then knit a freshly made lie to suit its new tailored fib. Israel’s actions mean there was a terrorist in every cradle, there were tunnels turning bread to arms.
This brings us back to Israel’s devious methods of trying to kill women who are considered as factories of men, without being blamed directly for that by its policies of blockades, and checkpoints where sick women or women about to give birth suffer for not being able to reach hospitals, by denying them the right to travel or import foods and medicines, by bombing their infrastructure leaving them with no water to drink or use for hygiene, by depriving them of fuel leading to total arrest of the sewage system refineries, by spraying them with chemicals from above and burning them with white phosphorus, and by killing them indirectly out of sorrow and deep grief after losing their family members especially their young ones.
I wonder how many Jewish people there are in the world today who hate Germans? Are there people who have inherited a hatred of Germans of today, a hatred born of pain suffered indirectly through their own dead progenitors, tormented at the hands of the dead progenitors of today’s Germans? I think there will be at least several generations of Palestinians who will hate Israelis after that fashion. Several generations born after the Israelis finally are brought under control, under self-control hopefully, under world control if must be. But that day seems a long way off right now. And the clock won’t even start start ticking, the half-life of hatred will not even begin to run down until the actual holocaust itself is ended.
Let us do all we can to convince our friends who say they love Israel to show that love, to stop those they profess to love from purusing their own suicide with such an unholy vengeance. Things cannot start to heal until the demonic process of injury itself has stopped.
John,
It would help your case if you did not base it on propaganda. A clue that you are dealing with propaganda might come from noting that the article you cite refers to “harvesting” of people.
Actually, this is important N. Friedman.
It wouldn’t help if John Francis Lee didn’t reference what you call propaganda. You’re sympathetic to the Israeli cause, and to Israeli efforts – regardless of their cost to Palestinians, other Arabs and others – to ensure the long-term survival of a Jewish state.
John isn’t going to convince you otherwise, and I doubt he’s trying to convince you otherwise. If he’s writing for anyone’s benefit it is for people who are not as emotionally invested in the Zionist side as you are.
I’m not sure you realize this, but there are people, even people who don’t hate Jews, who are not as emotionally invested in support for Zionism as you are, and who find argument’s like John’s persuasive even while you (of course) see them as “propaganda”.
Hi Arnold,
Well, in fact, Arnold, articles which discuss the harvesting of Palestinian Arabs by Israelis are, in fact, propaganda. And, that is true regardless of whether one sympathizes with Israelis, Palestinian Arabs or both. And, I am open to actual arguments, having changed my mind on lots of things in my life – including Israel’s related to Israel and the Palestinian Arabs.
In fact, before I began examining the dispute carefully, I had a great deal of sympathy for the Arab side – or, at least more than I have now. However, my view remains that, while one can support the Arab side of the dispute in good faith, the vast majority of the arguments made for Arabs are either historically unsustainable and/or, in fact, only pretend to be sympathetic to Arabs in order to advance a cause that, in fact, has nothing at all to do with helping any actual Arabs.
As to the second type of argument, your position comes to mind. Arabs merely fit in nicely with your anti-Colonialist position although, even there, you confuse migration to a place where refuge is available with colonialism.
In any event, there is no harvesting of Palestinian Arabs by Israelis and any argument premised on that argument is propaganda. And, that is a polite way of saying that the allegation is a bald faced LIE.
Surely, if you have a serious argument, you would not want it based on a bald faced LIE. Or, are you one of those who says that facts should not get in the way of a good story?
N., you really are a hoot!
Articles that discuss the harvesting of Palestinians by Israelis are by definition propaganda, no matter what facts they contain.
Articles that have the made-up non-word dhimmitude in their titles, that smear Palestinian Christians, and have no actual basis in fact are not propaganda at all, of course.
And by the way, one notes with interest that you did not make any attempt at all to dispute any of the facts in the article John cited.
Shirin,
Dr. Bostom is a well known scholar who has written very serious books that were well received by major scholars in the US and elsewhere. He defines dhimmitude both positively and negatively, meaning that it is his word for the entirety of civilization lived by non-Muslims under Muslim rule, both the good and the bad. It includes, in his express definition of the word, the idea of tolerance, which is a part but not the entirety of the experience of non-Muslims under Muslim rule. So, his articles are not propaganda. In any event, I did not cite his article as truth but, instead, as I wrote, as a negative opinion.
The article cited above by John, cited as if it were factual, is instead a modern day re-working of the infamous Damascus blood libel from the 19th Century. Jews do not harvest Palestinian Arabs and did not do so during the 19th Century when they were accused of such things.
That’s true N. Friedman. You go guy! Those 1300 Palestinians in Gaza were not, not!, “harvested”(which is a made-up non-word anyway). Due to the generosity of Israel they were, uh, ‘translated into heaven!’ That’s it! Keep those letters coming, N.!
Robert H. Consoli
LOL! I am acquainted with “well-konwn scholar Dr. Bostom and his “serious books”. Yes, Dr. Andrew Bostom MD, the well-known “Islamic scholar” whose education is in medicine, and who does not speak, read, or write Arabic. I am also acquainted with his “serious” works, and his affiliation with anti-Islamic hate sites such as jihadwatch, and dhimmi.
Dr. Bostom is a serious scholar on Islam and Muslims in exactly the same way David Duke is a serious scholar on Judaism and Jews.
As for the made-up non-word dhimmitude, it was invented as an anti-Islam propaganda term, and that is its sole function.
“The article cited above by John, cited as if it were factual…”
We are still waiting eagerly, yet in vain, for you to actually dispute any of the facts cited in the article. Is there a reason you have not even tried?
“I did not cite his article as truth but, instead, as I wrote, as a negative opinion.”
LOOOOOOOOL! Backpedal much, N.?
I’m sorry, Helena, for participating in this nonsense, but I keep spotting little gems like this among the dung. I’ll try to stop now.
Saud Abu Ramadan neglects to mention the unity government of 2006, also brokered by Egypt, which fell apart when Hamas tunnelled into Israel itself; killed two Israeli soldiers on Israeli soil, and kidnapped Gilad Shalit.
I wonder if the new right wing government in Israel will have much interest in the survival of the PA? If Hamas took over the West Bank, the US would have no leverage whatsoever to make Israel dismantle the settlement outposts and freeze the other settlements?
This might be why Obama/Clinton/Mitchell are concerned to see Fayyad remain as prime minister.
Personally my money is on Hamas. Their tactics since 2006 (and in fact since 1994) have been quite brilliant in the service of their overall long term strategy which is to prevent the two state solution and take over and rule WB and Gaza as an Islamic state religiously committed to Israel’s destruction.
Since 1993 their tactic was always to nullify the Israeli and Palestinian left and keep Israel and Palestine in a state of perpetual tension. Judging by Helena’s accounts during this trip, they have succeeded.
Shirin,
No backpedaling by me. I stated, with reference to Dr. Bostom, that his article asserted a negative view. Bostom’s books consist mainly of translations of articles by famous Muslims (e.g. portions of Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi’s book The Jews in the Qur’an in which he asserts on such authority the eternal perfidy of Jews) and translations of Hadiths and Muslim theological texts and articles by first rate scholars. As for reviews, the ones I read are stellar.
As for the article cited by Mr. Lee, I reiterate that there was no harvesting, which is a slur intended to restate, in modern guise, the Damascus blood libel.
So far as the rest of the article, I contest most of the facts. For now, I note that it is a bald faced lie when the article indicates that the Gaza war related to demographics. It is a bald faced lie that Israel does not care who is killed. It is a bald faced lie that Gazans are starving to death.
Mr. Consoli,
“Harvested” is a dictionary word.
N., we continue to wait for you to make at least some attempt to dispute the facts cited in the article. So far, despite engaging in a moderate amount of irrelevant blather, you have not done so.
To N Friedman and following Arnold Evan’s post,
There are more and more Jews feeling uncomfortable with the way the Israelian right wing government is dealing with the Palestinians, especially after Gaza. They realize that the Israelian attitude will be counterproductive in the long term for Israel and they begin to voice their doubts concerning the way the Israelian state is developping. Here are for instance two recent occasions where another jewish opinion was clearly heard :
1) The call issued by Israelians, Swiss, Austrian,…(etc), academicians against the way the actual Israelian goverment is treating the Palestinians.
2) The Russell Tribunal on Palestine
which is presided by Hessel a half Jewish/half evangelist French man.
Shirin,
I did contest specific facts. Read what I wrote in my post of March 10, 2009 at 10:35 PM. Specifically see the last paragraph that I directed to you.
Christiane,
Jews outside of Israel tend to support a two state solution. And, support for that cause has been overwhelming over the course of decades. On the other hand, there has been, since 2000, a vocal minority among the pro-Israel group which believes it to be an unlikelihood.
Support for Israel by Jews outside of Israel is in the 90% to 95+% range, and has been for a long time. Further, support for the war in Gaza among American Jews was overwhelming. In all likelihood, support for Israel is growing among Jews, due to the uptick in Antisemitism around the world and Hamas.
What has clearly occurred in recent years is that the minority which opposes Israel has become more vocal. That has led to speculation – not really supported by polling data – that there is a growing split among Jews. More likely, the split is not between those who support Israel and those who do not but, rather, between those who think a two state solution is possible in the relative near term and those who think that such is not.
Polling data show the following about the views of American Jews: “63% support the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza while 32% oppose. On the question of who is doing more to bring peace to the region, Israel or the Palestinians, 91% said Israel and 4% said the Palestinians.” Note the figure directed to perceptions of Arab thinking, which suggests that sympathy for the Arab side is, if anything, declining. The noted poll was conducted January 13-19, 2009.
N Friedman,
1) Before anything else, please stop implying that criticizing Israel is a case of antisemitism. Criticizing the misdeeds of a government breaching Human Rights Laws has nothing to do with racism. BTW, I don’t see an uptick of antisemitism in the world, only mounting criticism at the way the Israelian government is treating the Palestinian. The last propaganda machine imagined by the Israelians and their supporters is to stigmatize a so-called leftist and progressive antisemitism, which is supposed to encompass all those daring to criticize the Israelian government for the way it treats the Palestinians. This is just a way to smear those who dare tell the truth and among whom there are also Jews.
2) The persons, who signed that call to the Israelian government, asked it to stop the breaching of the Human Rights of the Palestinians. That’s all. It shows that they are not at ease witht the way the Israelian government acts. But it doesn’t tell us anything concerning what they think of the two states solution, whether they support it or not. They may not even share a common position on this.
It looks as if you were just trying to displace the question. What about your pollings ? did they ask the American Jews whether they were agreeing with the bombing of UN schools and the killing of children and women ? How many do you think would feel comfortable and still support the war crimes committed by the Israelians in Gaza if they got a chance to see by themselves ?
3) The main point is that the Israelian government has shot himself in the foot by the Gaza aggression. It is loosing sympathy both among Jews and Non Jews, who now see them for what they are. The perpetrators of war crimes. Who will be judged both by the Spanish justice system and by the Russel Tribunal on Palestine.
4) Personnally, I think that given the way Israel has dealt with the Oslo accords have made the two state solution impossible and thus has made the two states solution impossible, so signing its fate as a Jewish state.
Christiane,
In the hope of not angering our kind host Helena, I shall attempt to answer your charges.
My comment about Antisemitism was about the perception by Jews of what is occurring.
As to the reality, Antisemitism has typically been associated with supposed lofty causes that are perceived to be blocked by Jews. Such has typically led to violence. Such causes have included, among others, Christianity, anti-clericalism (e.g. associated with Voltaire), nationalism, socialism and anti-Dreyfusardism. In all the above and most other instances – Nazism being the rare exception -, the Antisemite denies any hatred of Jews but, instead, asserts that Jews merely hold some odious view.
Today’s opposition to Israel is entirely consistent with the historical norm. And, as with efforts in Britain to prevent Jewish refuge in Britain from Nazi Germany, the diaries and private correspondence will eventually show that today’s denial of hatred is a lie.
Second, Israel should, as you say, comply with the human rights standards–but such standards should not be a suicide pact, as some of Israel’s critics demand. The actual dispute is between a group which accepts such standards in theory (i.e. Israel) and Hamas, which rejects such standards on principle. Were the Palestinian Arabs to be held by the Left to remotely the same standards you demand of Israel, then your point would be taken more seriously.
Third, polling of Jews does not show a loss of support.
Lastly, Israel did help undermine Oslo. However, so did the Arab side. One might consider President Clinton’s words on the topic after he left office, in which he indicated that one should never, ever trust Arafat. The same view was expressed by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, who blamed Arafat for the failure to settle the dispute and called him a liar.
“I did contest specific facts. Read what I wrote in my post of March 10, 2009 at 10:35 PM. Specifically see the last paragraph that I directed to you.”
LOOOOOOL! Really, N., where on earth did you learn to argue? And how old are you? I have met ten year olds who are more sophisticated and convincing in their arguments than you are. This is not even entertaining.
Stating that you “contest most of the facts” is not even an argument. Neither is calling something a “bald faced lie” an argument.
So no, you have not even remotely contested any of the facts.
“My comment about Antisemitism was about the perception by Jews of what is occurring.”
Backpedaling again, I see, N. You very clearly referred to “the uptick in Antisemitism around the world and Hamas” as a fact, not a perception.
And now, after claiming that you were referring to the perception of Jews you refute your own claim by going on and on and on about the “reality” of anti-Semitism. You really are bad at this.
“Second, Israel should, as you say, comply with the human rights standards–but such standards should not be a suicide pact, as some of Israel’s critics demand.”
You have memorized some of the standard talking points well, N., I do have to give you that. The problem is that they were rubbish when they were dreamed up, and they don’t stop being rubbish by repetition.
Shirin,
You say I did not contest any facts. Do you know what the word “contest” means? Here is a clue: “To call into question and take an active stand against; dispute or challenge.” That is exactly what I did.
You say that I was not talking about the perception of Jews with reference to Antisemitism. That is untrue. I wrote: “In all likelihood, support for Israel is growing among Jews, due to the uptick in Antisemitism around the world and Hamas.” That is a comment about how Jews perceive the facts.
As for your comment regarding holding Palestinian Arabs to basic human rights convention, surely you do not argue that shooting rockets into civilian neighbors – as Hamas has done and continues to do – is legal. Or, is the human rights thing only a propaganda weapon for you?
Perhaps N. hasn’t responded by contesting any of the “facts” presented in the “article” because it is not an “article” but rather an essay, and that Iqbal Tamimi is not a scholar who has researched the “facts”, but rather an intellectual who is trying present a “narrative” (which may be intellectual-speak for propaganda).
As far as I can see, there are precious few “facts” in the essay. First that Israel was responsible for the deaths of 1,300 Palestinians is pretty much unquestioned. The composition of these and, more to the point, the Israeli reasoning behind it that Tamimi presents (and I really think that if one looks at the numbers, her “demographic fear” argument is rediculous), are certainly not “facts” that she has proven. She simply makes statements.
The other “facts” are the comparative fertility rates of Palestinian vs. Israeli women (this was the paragraph left out by John Lee):
At a time the average fertility in Israel is 2.6 babies per woman, Gaza is considered one of the most fertile in the whole wide world with an average of 6 babies per woman. Israel suffers a high percentage of senior citizens [ed: Interesting phrasing, particularly as a wannabe “senior citizen”.] while Gaza has an abundance of youngsters and according to UNICEF’s report on the 3rd of March 2009 the total number of children in Gaza is approximately 793,520, or 56 per cent of the population (PCBS). This was one of the main reasons that forced Israel to stop its military incursions, for there are 4,170 humans per every square Kilometre in Gaza, to imagine how densely populated Gaza is, one should know that Lebanon is 29 times the area of Gaza.
So, if the Palestinian population is growing at more than twice the rate as the Israeli Jewish population, then how do the deaths of a “mere” 1,300 solve that demographic problem? Well, this is all conjecture on Tamimi’s part, and certainly not supported by “facts”. That’s where she speaks of the “happy counting [of] 1,300 massacred Palestinians in cold blood” and that the Israeli “army never cared what age or gender it killed, Israel’s machine was harvesting Palestinians….” Particularly when Tamimi informs us that Palestinian women “retaliated” during that same timeframe by giving birth to nearly three times that number.
Finally, I would point out to Shirin that she simply cannot write off recognized scholars (e.g. Efraim Karsh – who does speak and read Arabic) with a dismissive wave, or argue that neologisms are “non-words”, particularly when their origins (in the case of “dhimmitude”: Bat Ye’or as credited to Bachir Gamayal) are native Arabic speakers. I’d advise you to stick to criticisms of Israeli accents and transliterations from Arabic.
“You say I did not contest any facts.”
Because you did not. What you did was to shout liar, liar pants on fire.
“Do you know what the word “contest” means?”
Yes, I do know, and it does not mean shouting liar, liar pants on fire.
“Here is a clue: “To call into question and take an active stand against; dispute or challenge.” That is exactly what I did.”
It means to engage in an argument, debate, or discussion about something. It does not mean to announce that you contest it, nor, as I said before, does it mean to shout liar, liar pants on fire.
“You say that I was not talking about the perception of Jews with reference to Antisemitism. That is untrue. I wrote: “In all likelihood, support for Israel is growing among Jews, due to the uptick in Antisemitism around the world and Hamas.” That is a comment about how Jews perceive the facts.”
You prove my point by quoting your own words – good job! Clearly you are stating as a fact that there has been an “uptick” in antisemitism since there is absolutely nothing in this statement that suggests you are talking about perception and not reality. You really gave yourself no out at all on this one. And then, to make matters worse for yourself, you followed up your backpedaling claim that you were merely talking about perceptions by going on and on and on about how, in reality, everything from Christianity to socialism to – I don’t know, organic gardening? – is anti-Semitic. You just didn’t know when to stop talking, did you?
“As for your comment regarding holding Palestinian Arabs to basic human rights convention…”
I made no such comment.
Shirin,
With due respect, to call something a lie is to contest it. What you mean to say is that I did not present facts or arguments – which is correct. By the way, I quoted the dictionary and it seems to agree with my understanding of the word “contest.” Again: Contest means, among other things, “To call into question and take an active stand against; dispute or challenge.” I think I took an active stand and disputed and called into question the “facts” in the article. Calling them lies is a pretty active assertion of dispute.
Regarding Jewish perceptions and Antisemitism, I correlated Antisemitism with a rise in a support for Israel. That is a statement about perceptions whether you think so or not.
You claim you made no comment regarding holding Palestinian Arabs to basic human rights conventions. Perhaps I misread your comment. I do not think so.
In any event, my impression, since I have never seen you acknowledge any wrongdoing by Palestinian Arabs, is that you do not believe that Palestinian Arabs have any obligation to abide by human rights standards. Am I mistaken? For the record, do you oppose shooting rockets from Gaza into Israeli cities?
OK, then, N., I’ll see your “liar, liar, pants on fire”, and raise you one “is so”, one “did not” and a “yo’ mama”.
I eagerly await your rejoinder.
Shirin,
For the record, do you oppose shooting rockets from Gaza into Israeli cities?
“Perhaps I misread your comment. I do not think so.”
No, you did not misread my comment because I made no such comment.
I am hereby invoking the liar, liar, pants on fire argument.
Shirin,
For the record, do you oppose shooting rockets from Gaza into Israeli cities?
A simple yes or no will do. Silence, however, pretty much would confirm for all readers here that you do not oppose massacring civilians.
How old did you say you were, Noah?
Unfortunately for you, “all readers here” are much too grown up to be impressed by your stunningly childish attempts at bullying.
Now go play with kids your own age.
Shirin,
Stop changing the topic and, instead, answer the question.
For the record, do you oppose shooting rockets from Gaza into Israeli cities?
Noah, you are enough to put the sheep to sleep!
This is the 5th attempt to receive an answer to the below question from Shirin:
Noah, NOBODY CARES.
Shirin,
In other words, you believe in massacring Israelis. If nobody cares here, that says it all.
massacring Israelis
Israelis are not being massacred; there’s no danger of that. However, Palestinians have been recently massacred in large numbers. Stick to the truth Friedman.
Alex, you clearly have not figured out Noah’s Rules of Mature Intelligent Discourse. The correct response to Noah’s latest comment is “liar, liar, pants on fire”, to which he responds “are not”, you respond “are so”, and so on until an adult comes out and tells you it’s time to do your homework.
Alternatively, you could issue the always-effective rejoinder “you are a big ol’ liar”, followed by the standard “are not, are so” argument.
Get with the program, Alex! If nothing else you can have the pleasure of reliving your childhood.
Alex,
Since 2000, more than a thousand Israelis have been massacred by or on behalf of Palestinian Arabs. That includes entire families being wiped out. What stops further Israelis from being killed are all those little things that are complained of on this website.
The firing of rockets at civilians has, thus far, only killed comparatively few Israelis – among those being killed are Bedouin Arabs -, presumably because the Israelis have prevented Hamas from obtaining better rocketry and also because the Israelis have an excellent civil defense regimen.
Frankly, anyone who shoots a rocket intentionally into a civilian neighborhood in order to kill civilians – which is Hamas’ intention – is attempting to commit a massacre. Among the places that rockets have fallen have been elementary schools. Do you support that?
Noah, you are extremely ill advised to attempt to engage in a bloody shirt contest because you will always lose spectacularly. We’ll see your one thousand in nine years and raise you 1.4 thousand in 22 days, and add that about 1/3 of the 1.4 thousand were children.
Shirin,
I engage in no contests here. And, since you do not deny supporting the massacre of Israelis, it is rather rich of you to claim the moral high ground.