Saturday, November 16, 2024
Facebook Linkedin RSS Twitter

Two Sides of Sesame Street

By
David Bedein
-

The April 1 front page story that ran in the Philadelphia Inquirer concerning Jewish-Arab cooperation in the production of a sesame-street style production on a private Palestinian TV station was not an April fool’s joke.

It was very real.

Dauod Kuttab, the Palestinian Arab journalist who takes appropriate credit for the initiative, represents a grass roots Palestinian desire for cooperation between peoples on all levels. However, the official “Sesame Street” that runs on the Palestine Authority’s official Palestine Broadcasting Corporation, funded by US AID and administered directly under the supervision of Palestine Authority chairman Yassir Arafat, also known as the “children’s workshop” runs a program which takes an different view of Jewish-Arab cooperation.

Imagine this: On this past Tuesday, March 31, the morning that Yassir Arafat made a surprise visit at the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam, the museum which has become a symbol of the one and a half million Jewish children who were slaughterer by the Nazis.

On that same day, the PBC TV program modelled after “Sesame Street,” with children (some as young as 4 years old, most about 8 or 9) seated in a semi-circle around a group leader, dressed in costumes and party clothes, with cartoon characters decorate the walls. >From among the group a little boy stands up and, with the nursery school teacher holding the mike he says that “I will grow up to kill every Jew that I meet” On an earlier program, a young girl stands up, raises her fist and cries: “When I wander into the entrance of Jerusalem, I will turn into a suicide warrior in battledress! In battledress!”

In both cases, The leader of the official Palestinian “Sesame Street”cheers:

“Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!”

On yet another segment, a beautiful, dark haired young girl who looks to be about 6 years old sings the following words, barely a blinking of her eyes: “Each and every part of your soil I have drenched with all my blood. And we shall march as warriors of Jihad. Oh, my exalted martyr, you are my example. Oh, my companion, you are beside me. Oh, my sister, sing constantly about my life as a suicidewarrior, how we remain steadfast. Oh, my country, you are my soul. Oh, my dawn, you are my heartbeat.”

Samplings of the official PBC children’s workskop were aired at the March 11 hearing held at the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee special session that was convened to deal with some of the issues of the middle east peace process.

The clips were prepared by the Jerusalem-based “peace for generations” monitoring group and presented to the Senate by Dr. Daniel Pipes, editor of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Quarterly.

So there you have it. Dissonant messages from Palestinian TV shows.

From my daily contact with Palestinian Arabs in Jerusalem and the west bank, I can attest to the fact that Daoud Kuttab and the spirit behind him represent the dominant Palestinian mood that favors peace, reconciliation and dialogue with Israel and with the Jewish people.

However, Daoud Kuttab is not in power at the Palestine Authority.

Indeed, Kuttab was jailed by the PA for telecasting debates in the Palestinian parliament that Arafat was not interested in publicizing.

And while Israel Educational Television is considering the purchase of Kuttab’s programs that promote reconciliation, the Palestine Broadcasting Corporation has rejected any such possibility.

PBC head Radwan Abu Ayash was asked in a videotaped interview as to when he will have programs that promote peace on PBC TV.

Ayash responded matter of factly that he is not allowed to feature stories that “promote peace with the Israelis”.

It should be recalled that on Sept. 7, 1997, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that “the PBC network was nurtured with about $500,000 in equipment and training from the U.S. Agency for International Development,” and cited as its source the network’s chairman, Raddwan Abu Ayyash.

PBC policies did not begin with the election of Netanyahu as the prime minister of Israel in May, 1996. Since its inception in 1994, the PBC TV and PBC Radio have adopted a policy of promoting speeches, interview programs and children’s shows that only exacerbate war rather than promote peace.

There are two sides of Sesame Street in Palestine. One, from the Palestinian people, that desires peace. The other, dictated from the Palestine Authority, that is made up of people who came from PLO headquarters in Tunis back in 1993, that promotes war and continued conflict.

PBC shows such as the official PBC “The Children’s Club” reveal how thoroughly committed Arafat and his authority are to the idea that their struggle against Israel is a jihad – a holy war – against Israel.

In the Oslo peace accords and later agreements, the Palestine Authority agreed in no uncertain terms to take all necessary steps to prevent violence, or the incitement of violence, against Israel.

The Clinton Administration is not ignorant of the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation’s programming. At the US Senate subcommittee hearing in March, Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk actually watched footage from “The Children’s Club.” Indyk knows full well that the incitement to violence is in violation of the Declaration of Principles signed by Israel and the PLO.

Yet when the U.S. government makes demands for concessions, it makes specific requests of Israel, and generalized demands of Arafat.

The question remains: why does the US not make a specific request of Arafat that the message conveyed to Palestinian children on his TV station emanate from Daoud Kuttab and not from Radwan Abu Ayash?

Har Homa Monitoring Committee

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Yerushalim Shelanu (Our Jerusalem) has established a Har Homa monitoring Committee. Monitors, in a car with Israeli flags flying from it will travel to Har Homa regularly and issue reports about the pace of building at Har Homa.

In announcing the Monitoring Committee, Jonathan Levy, spokesman stated, “With all of the world focusing on Har Homa, it is important that someone report on what is actually taking place there. We intend to provide a service to journalists and tourists who want to see and understand what is actually, on the grond taking place at Har Homa.”

Additionally, with the increase of tourists and foreign media visiting Israel for Passover and the 50th Anniversary of the State of Israel, increased tours of Eastern Jerusalem, including stops at Har Homa, Ras al Amud, (Har Ha Zetim), Orient House, and the Jerusalem Tunnels will be offered.

For more information, or to arrange a tour of Eastern Jerusalem, contact Ronn Torossian at ourjrlm@netvision.net.il, or call (972-53) 510-214 [(053) 510-214 from Israel].

After Sharif

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Even if the Hamas leadership in Gaza tries to respond to the Palestinian Authority’s request to avoid attacks, it is doubtful if it has the power to influence the leaders of its military wing in the West Bank.

There were those among the leaders of the Palestinian Authority last week who accepted the Israeli version, as explained to Yasser Arafat by GSS Director Ami Ayalon, that Muhi a-Din Sharif was not killed by Israeli agents. This was also hinted by the fact that the official Palestinian announcement published yesterday avoided allocating responsibility for Sharif’s death. But the Palestinian leaders found it difficult to withstand the crowd’s rage in Gaza and the West Bank, which is convinced that Israel was responsible for another assassination, this time of the man called by the Palestinian street the ‘Engineer no. 2’.

Recent Hamas announcements and leaflets (whose authenticity is not always clear) say that revenge for Sharif’s murder will be harsher than for Yehiye Ayash. The connection between the two cases was demonstrated by Hamas activists who invited Ayash’s father to stand beside Sharif’s father during the large funeral held last Thursday in Ramallah.

The possibility that they will launch revenge attacks in Israel also arouses concern among Arafat and his aides. There are preliminary signs of economic revitalization in the territories due to the easing of the closure. Crossing the roadblocks from the West Bank into Israeli territory is nearly frictionless, the soldiers rarely stop to check anyone and raids on workplaces to catch unregistered Palestinian workers within Israel itself have stopped. Many vehicles with Palestinian license plates can be seen on Israel’s roads, and the Liaison Office in Gaza permits more workers and merchants to enter Israel. Trucks from Gaza, too, loaded with goods, travel in organized convoys to the ports of Ashdod and Haifa, and eastward to Jordan, in greater regularity and numbers than in the past. A terrorist attack could put a stop to all this.

In order to try and stop imminent revenge attacks, the Palestinian Authority has taken an unusual step. Its representatives, headed by Authority Director-General a-Taib Abd al-Rahim, last Thursday summoned Hamas’ political wing in Gaza, headed by Sheikh Abd al-Aziz al- Rantisi, to an urgent meeting. Hamas activists were offered participation in a joint investigation on Sharif’s death.

Although the Palestinian police have collected all the evidence of the explosion, they have no information on Sharif’s movements in the final hours and days prior to his death. If it was indeed an Israeli operation, as Hamas agents believe, it was carried out in cooperation with Palestinian forces (as happened in the case of Ayash), and the only way to find them and their Israeli handlers, if any, is to check the people with whom Sharif recently met. Anyone who knew of the warehouse, or laboratory, where the explosion took place, where Sharif was before arriving at the location, whom he met with, who brought him there and other classified details which only Hamas activists, Sharif’s colleagues, know about. It is hard to imagine that Hamas military activists would agree to hand over classified information on their agents to Arafat’s security apparatus. They know that Palestinian security officials give information to the Israeli GSS and suspect that they hand Hamas agents over to Israel.

Arafat’s messengers also asked the Hamas leaders in Gaza to restrain and not react with attacks at this time, because such a response could cause severe damage to Palestinian interests. There could be political damage besides any economic harm. Arafat now expects the American proposals regarding the continued Israeli withdrawal to be announced at any time, and it is clear that a terrorist attack would help Netanyahu’s government to reject any such proposal.

But even if the Hamas leadership in Gaza were to try to act on the Palestinian Authority’s request, it is not clear if it has the power to influence the leaders of the organization’s military wing in the West Bank. The questions: When do the leaders of the Hamas cells decide to carry out an attack; who among them takes orders and religious and political instruction and what considerations motivate the decision makers, have for years not only worried Israeli intelligence, but also the leaders of the Palestinian Authority, and no-one has any clear answers.

Israeli intelligence sources, for example, point to the fact that “Izz a-Din al-Qassam” brigade commanders (Hamas cells) in the West Bank are connected to the Hamas leadership in Jordan more than they are to the leadership in Gaza. According to (Israeli) suspicions, the men who transfer instructions and funds from Jordan to the cells in the West Bank are Khaled Masha’al and Imad al-Alami, who reside in Amman, as well as other known political activists such as Mahmoud Nizal and Ibrahim Rousha. It is also known that Hamas leaders residing abroad generally support the hard line — of terrorist attacks — more than the leadership in Gaza and the West Bank do. The reason for this is that the leaders abroad are not subject to the persistent pressures of the Palestinian Authority, and no-one from the street comes up to them to complain that their sources of income in Israel are blocked due to the attacks.

Because of the differences in the positions between the Hamas leadership scattered in Israel and abroad, Hamas leaders tend to periodically call coordination meetings, where important decisions are made. In the past, Mussa Abu Marzook, who is known to be the head of Hamas’ political wing, and Mustapha Lindawi, considered to be the Hamas leader in Lebanon, as well as other activists from Jordan and Egypt used to come to these meetings (usually held in Cairo or Khartoum). There have been cases when the Israeli government granted permission to Hamas leaders in Israel to travel abroad, hoping that they would bring moderate positions to these meetings. There have also been occasions where Israel prevented them from leaving. Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was recently permitted to leave for medical treatment in Saudi Arabia.

A large group of senior Hamas leaders asked to accompany him. Israel thought that the Hamas leadership in the country and abroad intended to convene another senior leadership meeting, this time in Saudi Arabia, and decided not to allow them to go.

It is further known that the leadership of Hamas’ military wing has a considerable degree of freedom. They have the authority to decide on all matters regarding the operational side and timing of attacks. But they need the political-religious authority and permission on all matters regarding the act of carrying out attacks. Following the assassination of Yehiye Ayash in January 1996, Hamas activists waited nearly two months before before carrying out their revenge attacks. No-one can prophesy what will happen now. Meanwhile people in the West Bank and Gaza are preparing to celebrate Id el-Adkha, which begins this week; on the streets of eastern Jerusalem, Palestinians could be heard saying that the quiet will last at least until the holiday is over.

US Consulate: US Never Cited Palestinian Violation

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

IMRA spoke with Amjad Hidmi, an Information Specialist at the United States Information Service at the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem, in English, on March 3:

IMRA: I have been going through the data bases I have and I am trying to find an instance that the United State explicitly stated that there was a Palestinian violation of anything in the Oslo Agreement and I can’t find it. I was hoping that you might be able to help me out.

HIDMI: Violation of what?

IMRA: The Oslo Agreement. I have found such phrases as “we are not happy” or “more could be done” but I have not succeeded in finding even one instance that the U.S. actually called something an out and out violation. I looked back at the compliance reports which the State Department sent to the Senate, for example, and in every case they certified that the Palestinians were complying.

Has the US ever stated explicitly that the Palestinians violated anything?

HIDMI: Your question is difficult. We can help you find answers for what the US position is on Jerusalem, for example. We can find a text on that.

IMRA: Is there a text where the United States Government stated that the Palestinians made any violations?

HIDMI: I am not sure. There might be. But to look for it would be difficult. I will check with the Consul. I don’t think that he will be able to help you out on this because the information you are looking for is difficult to track.

IMRA: I guess what puzzles me is that I checked the reports and I figured that the State Department reports submitted to the Senate on compliance – since that was their explicit purpose – to report if the Palestinians were violating. So I thought that if there was going to be a statement about Palestinian noncompliance anywhere that it would be there. And they never say in those reports that there were any Palestinian violations.

HIDMI: That’s right. There might have been statements by the State Department Spokesman in the past but its going to be difficult to look or them. I am sure there might be statements.

IMRA: But in terms of reports themselves.

HIDMI: You’ve got to look at the human rights report.

IMRA: I am not talking about the human rights reports, I am talking about Palestinian compliance.

HIDMI: If its not there its going to be difficult to track. Let me check.

IMRA: The first thing I thought of was the compliance reports but in the compliance reports the United States always says that they comply. There is never any citation of noncompliance.

HIDMI: Yes. yes. I am going to try and find out if there is any other report bedsides the Compliance Act report and Human Rights report.

IMRA: Human rights is a different issue. I am only talking about violations of the Oslo agreements.

HIDMI: I doubt that you can find any. Because I monitor the Washington file which is the daily news service from Washington, which includes the Spokesman’s remarks and I don’t think that he has ever said that the PLO or the Palestinian Authority has violated the Oslo Accords. There might have been criticisms but I don’t think that you are going to find the wording ‘violations” there. I will get back to you.

Dr. Aaron Lerner,
Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
P.O.BOX 982 Kfar Sava
Tel: (+972-9) 760-4719
Fax: (+972-9) 741-1645
imra@netvision.net.il

Egypt: Copts, Terrorism, Press Freedom

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

The following are excerpts from articles which appeared in the Egyptian English weekly, “Al-Ahram” of Al-Ahram Weekly 26th March – 1st April 1998

“Coptic MP Slams Expats”
by Gamal Essam El-Din

[Heading:] A Coptic MP has taken expatriate Copts to task for attempting to interfere in the domestic affairs of Christians

Edward Ghali El-Dahabi, a prominent lawyer and a member of the People’s Assembly, has accused Coptic expatriates living in the United States of attempting to interfere in the internal affairs of Egyptian Christians and impose their will on them, reports Gamal Essam El Din. Rejecting a move by a group of expatriates to organise a campaign against the alleged persecution of Copts, El-Dahabi said that Egyptians, both Muslims and Christians, are bound by ” strong national unity that knows no discrimination.”

In a statement delivered before the Assembly on Monday, El-Dahabi affirmed that “those who are trying to incite foreigners to interfere in Egypt’s internal affairs are, in fact, stabbing Copts in the heart.”

El-Dahabi drew the assembly’s attention to press reports that the US Congress planned to debate a new law opposing the religious persecution of minorities throughout the world. The law, he said, is expected to gain Congressional approval next month.

“I want to emphasis that what saddens Copts are these attempts to interfere in their affairs and being described as a minority,” he said. “Egyptian Copts are ready to talk to those who wish to talk to them. If they have some demands, or face some problems, they have to raise them, but only within the framework of national unity.”

… El-Dahabi also quoted Pope Shenoudah III, head of the Coptic Orthodox Church, as saying, “We are Egyptians, forming a part of the people of Egypt. We neither call ourselves a minority nor do we like others to call us a minority.”

Police Unfazed by Minya Attacks”
by Omayma Abdel-Latif

[Heading:] Acting possibly out of desperation, Islamist militants staged their first attacks in southern Egypt since Luxor

After a lull of several months, Islamist militants went on the offensive again in southern Egypt, staging twin attacks last Sunday in Minya province that left four policemen killed and 13 citizens injured.

… A security source said Sunday’s attacks were the militants’ response to the killing of eight of their number in two clashes with police during the previous two weeks. The attacks, he said, are a desperate attempt by the militants to prove that they still exist.

Despite Sunday’s attack, there were obvious signs that the momentum of daily life had picked up again in Mallawi, previously a hotbed of terrorism. The town’s main thoroughfare bustled with commercial activity and security measures were not as visible as in the past. A local lawyer said: “Until a few months ago our good morning salute was to enquire who was killed the previous night and where the sound of bullets came from. But now the tension has eased a lot.”

“Soapbox — Democracy’s Armies”
by Amir Salem,
Lawyer and Director of the Legal Research and Resource Centre for Human Rights

Despite many rumours that a new law on civil associations is under preparation, the government remains silent. Such a law would be a true litmus test of the government’s intentions towards democratisation in the country and the degree to which it is willing to uphold its commitments to international human rights standards and, indeed, the Egyptian Constitution. The current law governing civil associations, Law 32 of 1964, was always intended as an instrument for tightening state control over civil society and abrogating freedoms of association and organisation. Law 32 gives the government, and in particular the Ministry of Social Affairs, sweeping and arbitrary powers over every form of civic association in the country. Government bodies have the right to dissolve associations, merge them, confiscate their funds and/or allocate them to other associations, dissolve their governing boards and appoint new ones…

… Ultimately, the real question is participatory democracy. Democracy is an indivisible process. Defective democracy only encourages military or religious alternatives. Only through democracy are people empowered to protect themselves, provided they are aware and organised. It is only through true democracy that political and religious extremism can be contained, and the possibility of chaos deterred.

“Reflections”
What We Paid For
by Hani Shukrallah,
Managing Editor

I have very little knowledge of the intricacies of law, and more specifically, where the law draws the line between the free expression of opinion, criticism and debate, on the one hand, and slander or libel, on the other. Nevertheless, I find it very difficult to imagine a country achieving any kind of progress in its political life, sciences, art or literature, if that country’s citizens do not enjoy a “sacred” right to describe each other, and each other’s ideas, as foolish, ignorant or any similar epithet, whether fairly or unfairly. Yet, two Cairo courts, one of them a Court of Appeal, have found such designations sufficient reason to consign Gamal Fahmi, a journalist, in prison for six months.

Thus, in the space of less than a month we have three journalists in prison, serving sentences ranging from six to 12 months, for libel offenses. In statements to Al-Ahram Weekly… Press Syndicate Chairman Makram Mohamed Ahmed remarked with bitter sarcasm that he hoped the prison ward accorded to journalists “is large enough”, since there are some 60 cases currently before the courts in which journalists are charged in connection with libel offenses.

The total absurdity of the libel laws in Egypt stands exposed. And so do the limits of our own democratic resolve and convictions. Just two years ago journalists were basking in the glory of their “heroic” battle for press-freedom. For a full year they fought against the “infamous” Law 93 and won. Or did they?

… The imprisonment of three journalists for libel offenses exposes the limits of the journalists’ “victory” in defending democratic liberties and press freedom two years ago. And so does the host of measures recently adopted in the clamp-down on “yellow journalism”. But both expose the limits of the journalists’ commitment to democratic principles. We pay for what we get.

Urgent Memo to Israel Government Cabinet Secretary, Dani Naveh, From Jonathan Pollard

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Israel Minister of Infrastructure Ariel Sharon charged at the Cabinet meeting today (April 5) that Israel has mismanaged the Pollard Affair from the start and that the time has come for Israel to take full responsibility for Pollard’s actions as an agent for Israel. Sharon was prompted to make these remarks after a draft of a letter to President Clinton to be signed by the government and opposition and Knesset was read.The letter lacks any acknowledgement on the part of Israel for its role in the affair and does not take responsibilty for Pollard or for the operation. The draft included the particularly damaging statement that “We do not have any claims as regards the legal measures taken against him [Pollard], in light of the serious actions for which he was convicted, and for which Jonathan Pollard has expressed his deep sorrow and repentance.”

In a letter and follow-up memo written to Cabinet Secretary Dani Naveh, Jonathan Pollard explains why the exclusion of any sign of Israel taking responsibilty for him as an agent and for his operation would make the letter appear to the Americans as a cheap publicity stunt for domestic Israeli consumption. Such a letter, Pollard warns, would worsen rather than help Pollard’s situation.

The following is the complete text of the memo:

Urgent Memo – April 5, 1998
To: Dani Naveh
From: Jonathan Pollard

Dear Mr. Naveh

It is urgent that you call an immediate halt to the letter to Mr. Clinton, until the text is substantially corrected. The text of the letter as it stands now will do more harm than good.

It is more important that the text of the letter be constructive and be signed only by the Prime Minister and Mr. Barak than it is that the whole world sign it.

To that end, I would prefer that only the two leaders sign a text similar to the one I just sent you in my last letter than to have everyone sign a text that hands the Americans the opportunity to keep me here and bury me alive for a long time to come – which is exactly what the current text does.

The critical element missing from the letter is Israel’s acknowledging responsibility for me and for the operation.

There has been a lot of publicity in America around the Bagatz and around Israel’s offer to recognize me in a backhanded and disingenuous way. All our Washington sources tell me that the Administration is waiting for a definitive sign from the government of Israel to see if the Government is indeed serious this time. The sign that they are waiting for is for Israel to unequivocally acknowledge me as its agent and to admit that this was a sanctioned operation. Unless and until such elements appear in the letter, then it is preferable that no letter be written.

What is also critical is for Israel to repeat in this letter that I have expressed my unqualified remorse on numerous occasions, and to repeat that Israel has apologized for the operation in the past and now does so again, while assuring the United States that steps have been taken so that there will never again be a reoccurrence. Moreover, the letter should state that “Mr. Pollard does not pose a security threat to the United States, and that the State of Israel would see to it that any conditions imposed upon the release of Mr. Pollard would be honored to the letter.”

I am relieved that Yuli Edelstein was able to help you understand how damaging the current letter is not only because of the critical element that is lacking but also because it justifies the Draconian punishment I received and paints me black in order to keep Israel white. Evidence of Israel’s involvement in the operation up to the highest levels of the government is overwhelming so these kinds of statements just anger the Americans because Israel is still trying to play them for fools. This just makes them more determined to keep me here to spite Israel.

If Israel is sincere about bringing me home, the sine qua non of my liberation is Israel’s unequivocal acknowledgment of me as her agent.

Especially at this late date, and after all the publicity, the United States will not take seriously any request that omits this admission.

As per my last letter to you, I repeat, that once Israel makes the request in these terms, the United State would finally be in the position to accede to Israel’s request.

Yours Truly

Jonathan Pollard

P.S. For your convenience, here is a reprise of the text suggested in my previous letter. The elements suggested above regarding remorse, Israel’s apology repeated, and Israel’s guarantees for my conduct can be added to this basic text.

Allow me to suggest a formulation along the following lines:

Mr. President,

Jonathan Pollard, who served the State of Israel as an agent in a sanctioned operation, has now served more than twice as long in prison as any agent in the history of the United States for a similar offense. He is an Israeli citizen, and the Government of Israel accepts full responsibility for him. The government and the People of Israel would deeply appreciate your granting clemency to Mr. Pollard at this time, so that he may be returned to Israel in a humanitarian gesture for Israel’s 50th anniversary. The Government and the People of Israel look forward to greeting Vice President Al Gore at the Israeli Independence Day Celebrations. It would be an important confidence-building gesture if Mr. Pollard were to be returned home in time for Independence Day.

Should This be an Accepted Norm for Young Women – or Should We Fight It?

By
David Bedein
-

In early March, 1998, Diane Sawyer at CBS ran an investigative news item that exposed widespread prostitution in Israel.

Sawyer focused on women who are being lured into the “profession” to Israel from the former Soviet Union, conveying the impression that the only prostitutes in Israel are those who are “imported” from abroad – no one knows how many. And the recent few news stories that have appeared in Israel on prostitution have also focused on women “imported” from abroad

However, yet another worrisome phenomenon concerns the increasing number of homegrown native Israeli women and adolescent girls who are lured into the trade.

A 1970 study on Israeli prostitution, The Mark of Cain, by the respected Israeli criminologist, Shlomo Shoham, explored how young women and girls in Israeli development town girls had used the profession to “advance themselves in society” and to work themselves “out of the rut of development town life”. Israeli social service professionals in Israel’s three dozen outlying development towns continue to report that the “export” of development town prostitutes to Israel’s big cities and to Arab villages in the Galilee region continues to this day on a wide scale.

Most recently, a social work professional walked me through a ten block area in the heart of Tel Aviv, passing by embassies, luxury hotels, coffee shops and businesses. My colleague pointed out more than thirty places where prostitutes now run their business. She confirmed that, yes, while there were some immigrants involved in the trade, the vast majority of Tel Aviv brothels employed hundreds of native Sabras, which involves the widespread corruption of minors, the increased spread of sex-related diseases and narcotics use, the acceleration of organized crime.

Israeli prostitution has become an integral part of a “cottage industry”, with an interlocking network of those who stand to earn something – hotel clerks, coffeeshop owners, waitresses, building contractors of foreign workers & tour operators who seek women to provide customers with “perks”. Who ever said that crime does not pay?

Young Israeli teenagers who are enticed by the promise of instant wealth to modeling schools and cosmetics parlors. Today, ads appear in discos and areas frequented by teenagers of 16, 17, and 18 are “encouraged” to join the “escort services” throughout the country.

The option of joining a local “escort service” for a handsome remuneration seems quite tempting. Some of these “services” advertise for students from Tel Aviv University to ” work their way through college” with an easy job on the side. Pimping is a sophisticated industry in a country where there is just too much cash flow, when people can sell hovels in any major Israeli city for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And even though illegal pimping and prostitution occur in broad daylight, the Israeli police seem to be turning a blind eye to the subject.

And whenever there is a crackdown, police tend to focus more on the immigrants – and so so does the press.

Most people in Israel are not aware of the extent of the problem. The subject is hardly mentioned on the news, nor on any of the dozen investigative news features that dominate the Israeli print and electronic media.

Part of the reason that the Israeli media are not “hopping” on the issue lies in the fact that major owners of the Israeli media have placed themselves in a situation of conflict of interest that prevents them from covering the subject in any depth. How has that happened?

You see, the major Israeli media have joined this cottage industry.

Each of the major news syndicates in Israel carry hundreds of ads each day that openly advertise prostitution services throughout the country.

Even HaAretz, which prides itself as being a “clean” publication, runs a Tel Aviv weekend supplement, known as “HaIr”, which runs prostitution ads with an additional feature nude pictures of the young women seeking business. HaAretz does not ask its readers whether they want to read HaIr – It gives it out for free every week. Most recently, the Israeli edition of THE International Herald Tribune also began to include HaIR wrapped up in its Friday edition, again, without asking its readers.

The three major families who own the major media in Israel, including a controlling interest in Israel Commercial and cable TV networks, prefer to advertise for prostitution rather than cover the subject.

The two daily Israeli tabloids run as many as 100 prostitution ads a day. Each tabloid demands upfront payment for such advertisements. A policy that sounds appropriate for the “profession”?

That means that each major Israeli paper grosses $10,000 a day in cash receipts this source of advertising revenue alone. At a time when the Israeli small businesses are in a slump, logic would that you do not you “bite the gland that feeds you”?

And in the late-’90’s atmosphere in Israel that lavishes in neuvau riche freedom conspicuous consumption No politician, civil rights organization, or “women’s organization seems to have courage to fight Israel’s media moguls. Instead, the left-wing Meretz/Peace Now political faction in Jerusalem’s city council suggested that the Israeli police protect prostitution, not stop it.

At this point in time, the entire matter of prostitution and pornography are often portrayed by the Israeli media as an obsession of Orthodox Jews.

Perhaps the time has come to coordinate a new coalition who could influence the police to do their job. This new group could be compromised of anyone who cares about the issue.

One legal action in the Israel High Court of Justice would be enough to order the Israel State Prosecutor to take criminal action against anyone who promotes or advertises for prostitutes.

Yes, coalitions on moral issues can work in Israel.

An encouraging precedent About ten years ago, a certain Israeli media mogul tried to “pioneer” an Israeli version of Penthouse, which she promised would be on every newsstand and in every corner of society. A creative community organizer colleague of mine raised the funds to hire a staffer who organized a unique coalition of traditional Orthodox Jews and Israeli feminists to threaten a consumer boycott of selected Penthouse advertisers. Israel’s first national porno rag never made it past two issues.

Yet one need not be a feminist or an Orthodox Jew to get involved. Nor do you have to be a social work professional. I guess that some of my passion for this subject has to do with being the proud father of three daughters (and two boys). As a responsible parent, can I sit back without challenging a norm in Israeli society that suddenly and sanctions and encourages prostitution?

I find it ironic that the first letter of concern that I received from my grandmother when I first came to Israel as a student in 1970 was about her worry over prostitution in Israel. She had seen something about it in the Jewish Advocate of Boston. “You should fight such a thing in Jewish country”, she wrote me. She was right.

A Battle, Not A Massacre

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

NEW YORK– A pro-Arab lobby group which has always claimed that 254 Arabs died during the 1948 battle of Deir Yassin has quietly changed its story, and now admits that about 100, not 254, were killed. The change comes just weeks after the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) released a study showing that the number of Arabs killed in Deir Yassin was less than half of what has been claimed, and that they were not massacred.

The “Deir Yassin Remembered” group, which is headed by Daniel McGowan of Hobart & William Smith Colleges (NY), had repeatedly claimed that 254 Arabs died at Deir Yassin. For example, in the April 1996 issue of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, McGowan wrote of “254 innocent men, women and children who were systematically slaughtered.” A February 1998 posting on the group’s web site, the “Deir Yassin Remember Online Information Center,” claimed that “In all, 254 men, women, and children were systematically slaughtered.”

But during the past week, the “Deir Yassin Remembered Group” has twice revised the death toll downwards. In a press release on March 22, 1998, McGowan wrote that “an estimated 100-250 Arab villagers were slaughtered.” Then, in a listing of forthcoming activities, released on March 25, 1998, McGowan reported that “over 100 Palestinian men, women and children were killed.”

The changes in the death toll count come in the wake of the ZOA’s publication of a new study, Deir Yassin History of a Lie, a 32-page analysis (with 156 footnotes) by ZOA National President Morton A. Klein. (For a free copy, please call (212) 481-1500.)

Among other things, the ZOA study shows that the original claim of 254 dead was not based on any actual body count. The number was invented by Mordechai Ra’anan, leader of the Jewish soldiers who fought in Deir Yassin. He later admitted that the figure was a deliberate exaggeration in order to undermine the morale of the Arab forces, which had launched a war against the Jews in Mandate Palestine to prevent the establishment of Israel. Other eyewitnesses to the battle estimated that about 100 Arabs had died. Despite Ra’anan’s admission, the figure 254 was circulated by Palestinian Arab leader Hussein Khalidi. His claims about Deir Yassin were the basis for an article in the New York Times claiming a massacre took place–an article that has been widely reprinted and cited as “proof” of the massacre throughout the past 50 years.

The ZOA study describes how in 1987, researchers from Bir Zeit University, an Arab university in Palestinian Authority territory, interviewed every Arab survivor of the battle and concluded that the number of civilians who died in Deir Yassin could not have been more than 120. Despite the study, the “Deir Yassin Remembered” group continued using the figure of 254 dead.

ZOA president Klein said “Now that the ZOA has publicized the Bir Zeit University findings and proven that far fewer Arabs died than was always claimed, the pro-Arab propagandists have been forced to quietly change their story. Our booklet proves not only that the death toll was falsely inflated, it also proves there was no massacre, rape, or mutilation.”

Meanwhile, Dr. Hussein Khalidi is at the center of a startling new report, in which several Arab eyewitnesses to the Deir Yassin battle admitted that some of their original claims about Jewish atrocities were fabricated. The latest issue of the Jerusalem Report (April 2, 1998) reveals that in a forthcoming BBC television program, Hazem Nusseibeh, an editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service’s Arabic news in 1948, admits that he was told by Hussein Khalidi to fabricate claims of atrocities at Deir Yassin in order to encourage Arab regimes to invade the Jewish state-to-be.

According to the Jerusalem Report, Nusseibeh “describes an encounter at the Jaffa Gate of Jerusalem’s Old City with Deir Yassin survivors and Palestinian leaders, including Hussein Khalidi… ‘I asked Dr. Khalidi how we should cover the story,’ recalled Nusseibeh. ‘He said, “We must make the most of this.” So we wrote a press release stating that at Deir Yassin children were murdered, pregnant women were raped. All sorts of atrocities.'”

The BBC program then shows a recent interview with Abu Mahmud, who was a Deir Yassin resident in 1948, who says that the villagers protested against the atrocity claims “‘We said, “There was no rape.” [Khalidi] said, “We have to say this, so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews.'”

Nusseibeh, who is a member of one of Jerusalem’s most prominent Arab families and presently lives in Amman, told the BBC that the fabricated atrocity stories about Deir Yassin were “our biggest mistake,” because “Palestinians fled in terror” and left the country in huge numbers after hearing the atrocity claims.

In 1948, Labor Zionist leaders initially claimed there was a massacre, in order to score points against the rival Irgun Zvai Leumi and Stern Group, the fighters who conquered Deir Yassin. But Israel’s Labor-led governments have, over the years, gradually rescinded the massacre accusation. A little-known 1952 Defense Ministry judicial court ruled that Deir Yassin was a legitimate military target. Official Israeli government statements about Deir Yassin, in 1960 and 1969 (under Foreign Ministers Golda Meir and Abba Eban), formally rebuked the Labor Zionist officials who had made the false massacre accusation in 1948, describing the “massacre” charge as a “fairy tale” and a “big lie.”

Meanwhile, the “Deir Yassin Remembered” group intends to hold a “50th Anniversary Memorial Conference” at the Hakawati theater in Jerusalem on April 9, 1998. On the same day, in Los Angeles, Arab activists intend to hold a “vigil” outside the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Museum of Tolerance, which commemorates the Holocaust. They will also be holding a vigil at the University of California at Davis, and a rally in Washington, D.C. on May 15, 1998, the 50th anniversary of the establishment of Israel.

International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism Website

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

The International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Herzliya, today (Sunday), 29.3.98, announces the opening of its new website at www.ict.org.il.

The site consists of a database on issues of terrorism, including terrorist organizations in the Middle East and the world, attacks, countries supporting terrorism, connections between terrorism and crime, the use of non- conventional weapons and counter-terrorism measures taken by Israel and other countries. The site is available to all interested parties.

For further details, please contact the institute at (+972-9) 952-7277 or fax (+972-9) 951-3073.

No Deal Without Return of ’48 Refugees

By
​Center for Near East Policy Research
-

Jamal Shati Al-Hindi is a Fatah Jenin representative in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) where he is Chairman of the PLC Refugee and Diaspora Committee.

IMRA: interviewed Al-Hindi in Hebrew on March 24, 1998

IMRA: I understand that you say that Israel should allow the 1948 refugees to return to their homes inside Israel.

Al-Hindi: Yes. In Israel.

IMRA: The Left in Israel which supports the Palestinian cause – Yossi Sarid, Shulamit Aloni, etc. say that if you allow the refugees to return to their homes then there will be a situation that there may be more Palestinians than Jews in the Knesset. That this will be a problem because if Israel is a democracy then there won’t be a Jewish majority in Israel so the whole effort was for naught. How do you react to this – that even among the Israeli Left the view is that allowing the right of return wrecks the whole exercise.

Al-Hindi: This is a right of the Palestinian people for two thousand years. They lived in the land and lived in their homes. Why shouldn’t they return to their homes?

There is also UN Resolution 194 calling for them to return to their homes.

The UN allowed Israel membership so that it could fulfill 194 and Israel can’t take this away.

IMRA: All Israelis – I am not talking about Netanyahu – the Israeli Left including Yossi Sarid oppose this. Even if they were in power they would not allow the refugees to return within Israel.

Al-Hindi: Why wouldn’t the Left say that all the refugees should return to their homes. There are Palestinians living within Israel but not in their original homes. Why shouldn’t they be permitted to return to their homes.

IMRA: When I ask the Israeli Left they tell me that the Palestinian demand for the right of return is for negotiations. That in the end they will accept a compromise. Is this really just an opening position?

Al-Hindi: This is the right of the Palestinian refugees and they do not have to say yes now. There is time. A hundred years.

IMRA: What does that mean?

Al-Hindi: It may take much time for us to return to our homes. We want to live in our villages.

IMRA: So there can’t be peace without this?

Al-Hindi: Maybe there will be peace if the Palestinians get the right of return.

IMRA: And if they don’t?

Al-Hindi: Then there won’t. There are four million Palestinian refugees who want to return.

IMRA: Israelis may say that they are willing to have a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza but only if the Palestinians give up on the right of return of the refugees to Israel. Don’t give up on the right of return and the negotiations fall apart. Are you ready to have the negotiations fail just because of the right of return?

Al-Hindi: Israel didn’t give us houses in Israel. They are Palestinian houses. Why can’t we return to our homes. Would the Jews agree to the Arabs getting their homes?

IMRA: I am asking a practical question. If there is a way for you to get now a Palestinian state it is at the price of giving up on the right of return. Are you willing to pay this price?

Al-Hindi No. I won’t agree to this. Nor will all the Palestinian refugees.

Dr. Aaron Lerner,
Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
P.O.BOX 982 Kfar Sava
Tel: (+972-9) 760-4719
Fax: (+972-9) 741-1645
imra@netvision.net.il

1...1,1791,1801,181...1,200Page 1,180 of 1,200

Column from the Director

David Bedein
David Bedein
2477 POSTS6 COMMENTS
Michael Kuttner
Michael Kuttner
430 POSTS0 COMMENTS
Rochel Grosz
Rochel Grosz
1 POSTS1 COMMENTS
daniel
daniel
0 POSTS0 COMMENTS
© A WEBstationONE.com production, partially funded by the Internet Development Fund and the IDF Link technology.

© 2003-2020 All rights reserved. Articles and Special Reports on IsraelBehindTheNews.com are copyrighted. Every reader is welcome to reprint any and all articles, and with citation.