All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss 2

[Sixties Fan]

[Britain.....against Israel??????.....NEVER. !!!!!!]

Palestinian thugs who beat and torture critics of PA President Mahmoud Abba’s regime are trained by the British army at taxpayer’s expense, The Jewish Chronicle (JC) has revealed.

According to the expose by JC journalist David Rose, published Thursday, 14 members of the PA’s Preventive Security Organization (PSO) were caught on CCTV abducting Palestinian human rights activist Nizar Banat in June 2021. Footage obtained by the JC shows the PSO pushing Banat into a car and later carrying him – only partially clothed – into their security headquarters.

In June, Banat, a Palestinian critic of the PA with over 300,000 followers, died after being arrested by Palestinian security services.

Lacking an Israeli Angle​

According to the JC report, Britain has been training and supporting Abbas’s security services since 2011 at a cost of more than £65 million (appr. $7 million). Palestinian human rights activists say Whitehall has chosed to overlook the systematic use of torture and widespread human rights abuse in the PA-administered areas of Judea and Samaria.

-----
Diala Ayesh, a human rights lawyer and friend of Banat, told the JC, “You [British] say you support human rights, but when I see the atrocities the PA is creating, I say you must stop paying your money. This isn’t just on my country. It’s on yours.”

Ayesh speaks from experience, having herself suffered beatings as well as sexual abuse by PA thugs.

(full article online)

Bombshell: Britain Funding Palestinian Authority Human Rights Abuse | United with Israel

According to the JC, Britain has been training and supporting Abbas’s security services since 2011 at a cost of more than £65 million (appr. $7 million).

unitedwithisrael.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

I have noted before that Peter Beinart is a master propagandist. He carefully frames his arguments in ways that sound reasonable unless you understand the facts as well as his methodology.

Today he writes in the New York Times that those who accuse Israel bashers of antisemitism are wrong.

Let's look at his arguments:

----------
Again, Beinart is hiding the truth. No one is supporting Saudi or Emirati human rights violations, and to claim that Zionists do is nothing short of slander. His main lie is that last sentence - that they are as intolerant as ever.

The fact that there is a rabbi in Saudi Arabia and synagogues in the UAE prove that the truth is the opposite. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE, for all their many faults - and not to minimize those faults - have changed course dramatically in recent years as far as tolerance goes.

And Israel is accelerating their slow march towards a more Western-oriented position, where human rights is a factor in their decision making.

Are they free societies? Not at all. But to disparage their positive changes is not a pro-human rights position.

Beinart's premise is wrong, his examples are cherry-picked and deceptive, and his framing and methodology is nothing less than that of the best antisemitic propagandists in history.

(full article online)

Fisking Peter Beinart's propaganda, again

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

All of this "defense" for a country that has not been invaded since 1812.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Well, this was inevitable.

Palestinian and Hezbollah media are claiming that Israel's plan to allow Palestinians to use Ramon Airport in the Negev is really part of a sinister plot.

In an article that's been published in multiple news sites, Arab "experts" claim that Israel's allowing Palestinian from the West Bank to travel via Ramon Airport is only the first stage towards forcing Arab Israelis to use the same airport, to leave Ben Gurion airport for Jews only.

Ameer Makhoul, an Arab Christian from Haifa who can use Ben Gurion anytime he wants, insists that Ramon Airport will become a nightmare crossing, adding hours to Palestinian travel times that Israeli checkpoints supposedly do. He compares Palestinians using Ramon Airport to South African apartheid.

Arab Member of the Knesset Mazen Ghanem echoes this theory, saying, "It is clear that Israel, with political malice, is turning the airport into a place of suffering to deport Palestinians who wish to travel from the West Bank." He adds that the airport will be a place of "suffering that will be worse than what is happening to the Palestinians at the Erez checkpoint and the Rafah crossing, which are known for the endless journeys of Palestinians through them torment and tragedy."

This is all insane. If Ramon Airport becomes a terrible place to travel to, then the Palestinians can still travel through Jordan as they have been, right? No one is forcing them to use Ramon Airport - are they?

According to this Knesset member, the Palestinians will have no choice but to go through Ramon. He doesn't exactly describe how, but he emphasizes that for the Palestinians who do use Ramon, no one should blame them because they have no choice.

This is all a crazed fever dream.

But meanwhile, there is another benefit to Palestinians from even the possibility of Ramon Airport opening for them.

While Jordan has been strenuously protesting the airport as an attack, because of the potential loss of revenue of captive Palestinian customers for their Amman airport, politicians and some media realize that the nightmare of travel though the Allenby Bridge and to the airport is the main reason Palestinians would choose Ramon to begin with.


Jordanian MP Khalil Attia publicly asked 20 questions to the Jordanian prime minister, asking why the Palestinian experience in traveling through Amman is so lengthy and expensive. Palestinians from Jerusalem without Jordanian citizenship need to purchase a temporary Jordanian passport every few years, at a cost of $300, for example; there are other fees at the Jordan River crossings. Palestinians have to go through a gauntlet of lines and checkpoints, even on the Jordanian side, in order to travel. Jordan's waiting areas for Palestinians don't even have air conditioning. Palestinians cannot have their bags checked normally; after security checks the luggage is piled into a room where people have to find their own luggage which can take hours. There is no mechanism for Palestinian complaints about the Jordanian procedures.

Attia also listed no less than 15 different procedures with lines that Palestinians traveling to Amman's airport must go through.

In order to remain competitive with Ramon, Jordan will need to improve their own policies regarding Palestinian travelers, whom they have up until now treated like cattle.

It looks likely that even for Palestinians who refuse to use Ramon Airport, Jordan is being pressured to improve their travel experience.

Amazing what a little competition can do.

Here come the Ramon Airport conspiracy theories

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

It has been two years since the Abraham Accords were signed. Trade between Israel and the UAE is booming - over $1.4 billion so far this year, more than all of 2021.

However, it isn't only Israel and the UAE that are benefitting. Palestinian businesses are gaining as well.

DANA describes itself as "an Abu Dhabi based venture builder and investment platform that supports women-led startups in desert tech, including sectors of agritech, water solutions, food security, waste management, and renewable energy through regional collaboration, innovation mentorship, impact community, and funding."

They currently support "six startups from different countries including the UAE, Israel, Palestine, and KSA, all of which are led by at least one female founder, focusing on sustainability in the desert climate, that address pertinent pain points in the region’s most significant industries. "

The three women who founded DANA include a Jewish American, an Arab Israeli and a Jewish Israeli.

Majd Mashharawi, founder of Gaza's SunBox

Currently, companies that are being nurtured by DANA include BioCloud, an Israeli company that makes herbal pesticides; Sunbox, a Gaza-based solar power startup which is now reliably powering water treatment facilities; Eco-Bricks, which converts polluting stone slurry water from quarrying into quality bricks for construction; and The Food Engineer, a UAE-based vertical farming firm that created a misting technique that uses 95% less water than standard farms.

While the media has taken note of the skyrocketing increase in trade between Israel and the UAE in the wake of the Abraham Accords, one sees very few articles on how the normalization is helping Palestinian firms. They are getting know-how and funding as well as access to world-class expertise that simply would not have been possible before the Accords.

Moreover, DANA fosters women-owned businesses in the notoriously patriarchal Palestinian society.

Israel haters deride the idea of "economic peace" as a basis for a stable Middle East, but this is how real peace can take root and grow. The UAE is an ideal bridge that allows Palestinian businesses to work with Israelis while bypassing the stigma of direct "normalization."

The peace between Israel and the UAE is also creating unforeseen benefits for Palestinians, especially Palestinian women, and this is something to be applauded.

The Abraham Accords are helping Palestinian businesses

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Last Thursday, while the 15-member UN Security Council held its regular monthly debate on the Palestinian-Israel conflict, the head of the United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees declared that the agency faces an “existential” threat due to the drop in funding. UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini issued his stark warning ahead of the renewal of UNRWA’s mandate in the fall.


But let’s step back and consider the framework in which he was speaking: The monthly UNSC debate. Despite the critical refugee problems taking place around the world as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, and the Ethiopian-Tigray conflict – to give just a few examples – only the Palestinians merit an ongoing UNSC monthly spotlight, alongside other mandated debates in other UN bodies.


This is because the UN has given the Palestinians the unique status of “perpetual refugees,” which can be handed down from one generation to the next, and appointed UNRWA to care for their needs and their needs alone, while all other refugees in the world are cared for by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Inherent paradox​

Compounding the absurdity, on the same day, Palestinian AuthorityAmbassador to the UN Riad Mansour told reporters that the PA is renewing its push for full membership in the world body, instead of the non-member state status it enjoys today. This would unilaterally grant the Palestinians full international recognition of statehood, without negotiating any agreement with Israel over borders, security, and other critical issues. Mansour expressed “cautious optimism.”

The two declarations show the inherent paradox. Under the UN’s definition and Palestinian ideology, the same people would be considered refugees even if they lived in their own fully recognized state. Today, Palestinian “refugees” living anywhere in the world, uniquely retain their refugee status even when they have citizenship and can vote.


Back to Lazzarini’s plea for funds for UNRWA: As The Jerusalem Post’s Tovah Lazaroff reported, UNRWA currently serves 5.6 million refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, east Jerusalem, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. It has a $1.6 billion budget for 2022, of which $817 million is for core programming. To date, the organization has received $838m.


Lazzarini blamed the chronic lack of funds in part on what he called “coordinated campaigns to delegitimize UNRWA.” But let’s just consider for a minute the real reasons that the need for UNRWA is being questioned and why the Palestinian topic does not have the priority it once enjoyed – despite all the mandated UN discussions.

More than 70 years of UNRWA activity​

UNRWA was founded in 1949 to provide what was meant to be a temporary solution until the “Palestinian refugee problem” could be resolved. At the time, there were approximately 726,000 Arabs (according to UN figures) who came under UNRWA’s auspices. Today, the figure of “Palestinian refugees” in UNRWA’s care stands at more than 5.5 million. Incredibly, over the past seven decades, the number has grown by millions. UNRWA has not helped a single Palestinian refugee solve their official refugee status, on the contrary.

Other reasons for the drop in funding follow the reports which show where the money is going. Various NGOs researching the textbooks and education system in UNRWA-run schools found evidence of support of terrorism and the cult of martyrdom. There have also been acknowledged cases of Hamas creating terror tunnels and weapons stores under UNRWA schools in Gaza.

It has been more than 70 years since the Palestinian refugee crisis was ostensibly created when the Arab world rejected Palestinian statehood alongside the State of Israel. Several Arab countries have since signed peace agreements with the Jewish state, but the Palestinians still hope they will both gain international recognition as an independent state and keep international aid as perpetual refugees.

Far from transforming Palestinian refugees into self-sufficient individuals, UNRWA has fostered dependency and a culture of entitlement; given the Palestinians no motivation to return to the negotiating table in good faith; and furthered false dreams of a “right of return,” to destroy Israel, instead of building lives based on peace and economic security alongside the Jewish state.

UNRWA doesn’t deserve more funding without undergoing a dramatic reform to ensure that it is alleviating the Palestinian refugee situation and not perpetuating it.

UNRWA needs restructuring before it gets more funding - editorial

UNRWA doesn’t deserve more funding without undergoing a dramatic reform to ensure that it is alleviating the Palestinian refugee situation and not perpetuating it.

www.jpost.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

It has been more than 70 years since the Palestinian refugee crisis was ostensibly created when the Arab world rejected Palestinian statehood alongside the State of Israel.

What a load of crap. That is not what happened.

 

[Hollie]

What a load of crap. That is not what happened.

That is what happened.

You need more Pom Poms.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Former United Arab Emirates official Ahmed Obaid Al Mansoori said on Monday that it is critical to peace for young people in the Middle East to learn about Israel, Judaism and Zionism.

Al Mansoori, a former member of the UAE Federal National Council and founder of the Crossroads of Civilization Museum in Dubai, as well as of the first Holocaust memorial gallery in the Arab world, spoke on stage at a gala event in Basel, Switzerland marking the 125th anniversary of the First Zionist Congress.

“It is of utmost importance that the young generations of the Middle East will learn about Judaism, Zionism and Israel—this will strengthen peace, not only between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, but between the entire region,” he said

(full article online)

Young Arabs Must Learn About Israel, Says Former UAE Official | United with Israel

'It is of utmost importance that the young generations of the Middle East will learn about Judaism, Zionism and Israel,' said Ahmed Obaid Al Mansoori.

unitedwithisrael.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

CAMERA has prompted correction at MSNBC after Ayman Mohyeldin falsely blamed Israeli bombings in Gaza earlier this month for all 49 Palestinian fatalities in Gaza. In his Aug. 21 broadcast, Mohyeldin ignored the fact that many of the Palestinians were killed by errant Islamic Jihad rockets: “We’re just coming off of Israel’s bombing offensive in Gaza that killed at least 49 Palestinians, including 17 children, according to Gaza’s health ministry.”

In response to communication from CAMERA, Mohyeldin yesterday tweeted the following correction:

In this segment, we reported 49 Palestinians were killed during Israel’s bombing offensive; while Israel takes responsibility for some of those deaths, we should have also noted AP reported evidence that 14 of those were killed by errant rockets fired from the Palestinian side.

(full article online)

MSNBC's Ayman Moyheldin Corrects: Misfired Islamic Jihad Rockets Killed Many Gazans

After falsely reporting that Israeli airstrikes were responsible for all reported 49 casualties in Gaza earlier this month, MSNBC's Ayman Mohyeldin acknowledges: 'e should

www.camera.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

Where is "Home" for a Jew? And Why the Double Standard for Arabs Still Living in the British Mandate for Palestine? (Judean Rose)

Where is home for a Jew? And If an Arab is born in Amman, isn't he already home?

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

The New Arab reports:

Lebanese ministers were filmed hurling rocks across the country's border with Israel during a visit to Lebanon's southern border on Tuesday.

A report broadcast by Lebanon's Al Jadeed TV showed Minister of Energy Walid Fayyad and Minister of Social Affairs Dr. Hector Hajjar throwing several rocks across the Blue Line, which marks the country's southern frontier with Israel.

The ministers were accompanied by several other members of Lebanon's cabinet.

Video of the event was widely shared - and widely mocked by Lebanese.

(vide video online)

Abu Ali Express translated some of their comments:

1. "It's so sad... They are literally throwing my future away..."
2. "Before finding the time to throw stones, how about you work on providing me with electricity."
3. "[The ministers] prevent us from ever progressing out of the Stone Age..."
4. "(Dear) Minister of Energy, you can't even turn on a light bulb, and you want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth by throwing a stone (at it)?"
5. "They took a group of idiots and made them ministers..."
6. "Echoes of explosions of laughter heard yesterday coming from the Israeli settlements..."
7. "How do you want us to have electricity when the "Minister of Darkness" is an idiot, and the "Minister of Diapers" is even more idiotic than him?
8. The Minister of Energy and the Minister of Social Affairs threw stones at Israel. One cannot guarantee an hour of electricity, and the other is responsible for having 80% of Lebanon below the poverty line.

Others say the Energy Minister is trying to cut off electricity to Israel since he has experience in that area, or that the ministers are bombing Lebanon with the newest missiles.

Lebanese mock ministers who lobbed stones towards Israel

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

In a recent opinion piece for The Washington Post, noted Israeli activist and journalist Gershom Gorenberg referred numerous times to the Green Line as “Israel’s border.” Gorenberg is far from being the only one to refer to the line that separated Israel from its Arab neighbors between 1948 and 1967 as a “border” (see here and here). Even the European Union, in determining which Israeli entities are eligible for EU funds, refers to Israel’s “pre-1967 borders.”

However, the term “border” is a misnomer, connoting an agreed-upon permanent demarcation between two sovereign entities.

In actuality, the Green Line came about as the result of an armistice agreement between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Arab armies at the conclusion of the 1948 War of Independence.

In this piece, we will take a look at the history of the Green Line, its status after the Six Day War in 1967, and what it means for any future peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA).
-----------
The reason Israel was not obligated to withdraw to the Green Line was that, keeping in line with resolution 242, these armistice lines would not make for “secure borders.” If Israel were to return to the Green Line, the vast majority of its civilian centers would be under the direct threat of fire from both the West Bank and Gaza.

At its narrowest, Israel would only be 9 miles wide between the Mediterranean Sea and its easternmost boundary.

The indefensibility of these armistice lines, which have been colloquially referred to as the “Auschwitz lines,” was noted by US President Lyndon Johnson in June 1967, when he said that an Israeli withdrawal to the Green Line would be a prescription for “renewed hostilities.”

Johnson’s comments were affirmed by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff in a telegramthat stated: “From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders.”

The Green Line in Future Negotiations​

Even though it has been defunct since 1967, some believe that the Green Line will be the basis for a future negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

As was noted earlier, a peace plan that would make the Green Line Israel’s permanent border would leave the Jewish state virtually indefensible.

It is for this reason that Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin stated in 1995 that “The border of the State of Israel…will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War.”

Even during his 2000 negotiations with Yasser Arafat that saw far-reaching concessions on Israel’s part, Prime Minister Ehud Barak never intended for a full Israeli withdrawal back to the Green Line.

Similarly, in a 2004 letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, US President George W. Bush stated: “It is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.”

This letter was later affirmed by the US House of Representatives in resolution 460, with the Senate concurring.

Lastly, when Israel began constructing the security barrier in order to reduce the number of Palestinian terror attacks against Israeli civilians during the Second Intifada, Ariel Sharon made it clear that even though it was based largely on the Green Line (although some of it extended both east and west of the armistice line), the security barrier did not reflect any political reality, it was solely meant to provide protection for Israeli civilians.

As can be seen from the above analysis, the Green Line was never intended to be a permanent border between Israel and its neighbors. Rather, it was only meant to temporarily demarcate the positions of the IDF and the other militaries that had been involved in Israel’s War of Independence.

Due to its indefensibility, a variety of international legal scholars, diplomats and Israeli leaders have maintained that the Green Line cannot be the basis for a permanent border as it would place nearly all citizens of the Jewish state in harm’s way.

Contrary to the narrative peddled by major media outlets such as The Washington Post, the Green Line was never a permanent border.

And no Israeli government, wherever it may fall on the political spectrum, will allow what was once a ceasefire line to become a permanent border.

(full article online)

A Ceasefire Line Is Not a Border for a Palestinian State: Debunking the Green Line Myth | Honest Reporting

In a recent opinion piece for The Washington Post, noted Israeli activist and journalist Gershom Gorenberg referred numerous times to the Green Line as

honestreporting.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

The same report was aired multiple times on BBC World News TV (and on the American station PBS) throughout that day and on the evening of August 29th, an audio version was aired on BBC World Service radio’s ‘Newshour’ programme (from 14:06 here) and on BBC Radio 4’s ‘The World Tonight’ (from 35:22 here).

In the introductions given to both those audio reports as well as in the filmed version, BBC audiences are misled regarding the sequence and timing of events. [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added].

Newshour, Tim Franks: “More than a thousand Palestinians fear that Israel’s army will soon force them to leave their homes in the occupied West Bank. In May the Israeli High Court sanctioned plans to expel them to make way for Israeli military training in an area known as Masafer Yatta. If the mass eviction goes ahead, it could be the biggest in the region in decades. UN expertshave warned Israel it could also amount to a war crime.”

The World Tonight, Julian Worricker: “More than a thousand Palestinians fear that Israel’s army will soon force them to leave their homes in the occupied West Bank. In May the Israeli High Court sanctioned plans to expel them to make way for Israeli military training in an area known as Masafer Yatta in the south of the occupied Palestinian territory. If the mass eviction goes ahead, it could be the biggest in the region in decades.”

Filmed report [02:49]: “Hundreds of Palestinians face eviction from this area after an Israeli court ruled it should be an army training area.”

In fact, as noted in the relevant High Court ruling, the area concerned was designated as a military zone over forty years ago and the unauthorised construction of buildings and structures by Palestinians, who failed to prove any legal claim to the land, took place after that.

The BBC, however, inverted the sequence of events in all its reports, thereby materially misleading audiences on multiple platforms.
-----
Knell made no effort to clarify either at that point or elsewhere in her reports that the Palestinians currently located in Masafer Yatta had failed to prove ownership of the land concerned throughout twenty years of court cases. Neither did she bother to explain that the location is sited in Area C and hence “is under full Israeli control” because it was categorised as such (pending final status negotiations) in the Oslo Accords signed by the PLO representatives of the Palestinians. The fact that the area from which she reports was previously illegally occupied by Jordan and designated part of the Jewish homeland by the League of Nations did not prompt Knell to provide the necessary qualifications concerning her interviewee’s claims concerning “my land” and “our land as Palestinians”.

In her filmed report Knell likewise ignored BBC editorial guidelines on ‘contributors’ affiliations’ when she gave an unchallenged platform to the advocacy director of the political NGO ‘Breaking the Silence’.

Notably, neither of Knell’s reports includes an interview with any Israeli representative. Viewers of the filmed item are told that “The IDF didn’t answer our request for an interview” while in the audio version Knell states “The Israeli military doesn’t agree to an interview”.

Clearly insufficient effort was made to provide viewers or listeners with the objective facts behind this story (including the foreign intervention by the EUand others which includes illegal construction) or to present a balanced report that includes the Israeli point of view. Instead, BBC audiences around the world got yet another example of BBC ‘journavism’: the blatant amplification of political campaigning by anti-Israel NGOs and activists under the guise of reporting, at the expense of the corporation’s obligatory public purposes.

(full article online)

BBC Jerusalem bureau ‘journavism’ goes to Masafer Yatta

Back in May, BBC World Service radio presented its listeners around the globe with an entirely one-sided view of the long-running story of Masafer Yatta: BBC

camera-uk.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

Guardian columnist Arwa Mahdawi, who’s half Palestinian, wrote a piececelebrating a new Netflix special featuring the Palestinian-American comic Mo Amer, a show she praises as both funny and “groundbreaking”. Mahdawi, however, ignores the fact that, last year, Netflix announced a new Palestinian collection, titled “Palestinian Stories”, which consists of 32 award-winning films that are either directed by Palestinian filmmakers or tell Palestinian stories.

But, Mahdawi devotes most of her column (“For anyone with Palestinian roots like me, Netflix’s sitcom Mo is groundbreaking TV”, Aug. 30) complaining about what she characterises as a dearth of positive depictions of Palestianins in pouplar culure and the media. For instance, she writes:

You can’t even say the P-word without it causing problems: an anchor on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation once had to apologise for using the word Palestine (instead of “Palestinian territories”), for God’s sake.

The CBC of course apologised becase Palestine is NOT a country. That’s an uncontroversial fact.

Mahdawi then further complained about the putative ‘erasure’ of Palestinains by certain “voices”.

Being Palestinian means constantly being told you don’t exist or being accused by certain pro-Israel voices of being antisemitic simply because you assert that you do exist.

This is a smear, plain an simple. Mahdawi doesn’t provide even one example of “pro-Israel” voices assusing Palestinians of antisemitism for asserting that they “exist”. A competent Guardian editor would have called her out on this baseless accusation – one she used in a previous column – which is consistent with the Corbynista narrative that accusations of antisemitism are cynically used by Jews and others in order to silence Palestinains.

In fact, the Equality and Human Rights Commission report on antisemitism in the Labour Party denounced as racist a version of that very tactic used by former London Mayor Ken Livingstone.

Finally, someone should remind the intrepid columnist that she works at a global media company called the Guardian, arguably the MSM’s English language home of pro-Palestinian commentary and news, where she has a forum to publish her views.

Mahdawi isn’t being silenced – by “pro-Israel voices”, or anyone else.

Guardian writer hurls baseless smear at "pro-Israel voices"

Guardian columnist Arwa Mahdawi, who's half Palestinian, wrote a piece celebrating a new Netflix special featuring the Palestinian-American comic Mo Amer, a

camera-uk.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

In actuality, the Green Line came about as the result of an armistice agreement between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Arab armies at the conclusion of the 1948 War of Independence.

And now there is the "blue line" because Israel has no border with Lebanon.