Saudi Arabia and Israel Move Closer Together

Billionaire Saudi prince al-Waleed bin Talal: will side with Israel if there is a new Palestinian uprising; Saudi Arabia has reached political maturity and can make a durable alliance with the Jewish nation

Poll: 24% of Saudi people see Israel as an ally against Iran

 

The Saudi strategic position has become tenuous in the last couple of years. The Iranian Nuclear deal has been signed paving the way for Iran as a nuclear power; the Saudis are involved in a military coalition in support of the legitimate Sunni Yemeni government against Shi'ite Houthi rebels; and the US is fast becoming self-sufficient in energy, and less inclined to put boots on the ground for Saudia Arabia. Thus, Saudi Arabia has been casting around for allies in what promises to be a long and drawn-out strategic and tactical battle against nuclear-ambitious Iran's push for Middle East domination. This week there were some noteworthy developments.

According to Kuwaiti Al Qabas Arabic daily, October 27, Saudi Prince and entrepreneur, al-Waleed bin Talal, has stated that his country must reconsider its regional commitments and devise a new strategy to combat Iran's increasing influence in the Gulf States.  Prince  al-Waleed bin Talal believes that Riyadh and Tel Aviv should form a defense pact to deter possible Iranian moves considering developments in Syria and Moscow's military intervention.

The Kuwaiti News Agency (KUNA) quoted the Saudi Prince:

The whole Middle-East dispute is tantamount to a matter of life and death for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from my vantage point, and I know that  the Iranians seek to unseat the Saudi regime by playing the Palestinian card. Hence, to foil their plots Saudi Arabia and Israel must bolster their relations and form a united front to stymie Tehran's ambitious agenda.

The Prince added that Riyadh and Tel Aviv must achieve a modus vivendi, because Saudi policy in regard to the Arab-Israeli crisis is no longer tenable. The Prince continued that Iran seeks to buttress its presence in the Mediterranean by supporting the Assad regime in Syria,  and to the chagrin of Riyadh and its sister Gulf sheikdoms, Putin's Russia has become a real co-belligerent force in the Syrian 4-year-old civil war by attacking CIA-trained rebels.

Thus, it is of paramount importance that a Saudi-Israeli nexus frustrate the developing Russia-Iran-Hezbollah axis. The Prince said:

I will side with the Jewish nation and its democratic aspirations in case of outbreak of a Palestinian Intifada (uprising) and  I shall exert all my influence to break any ominous Arab initiatives set to condemn Tel Aviv, because I deem the Arab-Israeli entente and future friendship necessary to impede the Iranian dangerous encroachment.

It is very significant that the Prince is talking about siding with the Jewish nation not some amorphous 'Israeli political entity.' The Prince also stated that Iranian influence in Bahrain, which has a US Sixth Fleet base, affects Saudi vital interests and is worrying.

The interview with the Prince was not the only good news for Israel. A new survey reveals rarely seen aspects of public political opinion inside Saudi Arabia.

The Institute for Policy and Strategy (IPS) at IDC Herzliya and University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee conducted a random poll in Arabic in Saudi Arabia from the end of May and into June. It was controlled for gender, cell phone/land line numbers and urban/rural areas. The poll and its results achieved extensive media coverage in leading media organizations around the world and in Israel, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, Fox News, ABC News, Channel 2 News and others.  

Among the key findings:

• Only 18.4% of Saudis consider Israel as the biggest threat to Saudi Arabia
• 23.7% believe Saudi Arabia should fight Iran alongside Israel.

 Other findings were:

• 85.5% support the Saudi-Arab Peace Initiative
• 53% of those polled believe Iran is the biggest threat to Saudi Arabia; ISIS polled second at 22.1%; as mentioned, only 18.4% of Saudis consider Israel to be Saudi Arabia's biggest threat
• 52.6% believe Saudi Arabia needs to acquire a nuclear weapon if Iran does
• 70.9% believe Iran is a threat to Saudi sovereignty

Growing common interests of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Emirates increase the possibility of forcing the Palestinians to the negotiation table and their finally recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and making an agreement that will include ending the conflict and renouncing all their claims against Israel.

What is Sweden Coming To?

Sweden's anti-Israel attitude shows the same misguided mindset and blinker vision as its attitude toward its own domestic racism.

When I was in Sweden many years ago it was delightful. The people were wonderful. I thought that I had stumbled into paradise. I was just another disheveled trekker back then. I had all my possessions in a backpack, I was a little dirty and could not shower regularly. But people in suits patiently stopped to give me directions; people smiled at me and were polite.

But I don't think that I would like living in Sweden nowadays.

Ingrid Carlqvist informs us that in Sweden racist acts are considered racism only if the victims are not white.

On Thursday, October 22, Sweden was shocked by yet another act of madness apparently connected to multiculturalism. Anton Lundin Pettersson, 21, dressed in a black coat and Darth Vader helmet, and armed with a sword and a knife, entered the Kronan school in Trollhättan and started killing. By the time the police shot him down, he had killed one person and wounded three others severely. One of the wounded later died in the hospital.

The newscasts and television debates were devoted to the attack and focused on the racist motive. Ingrid Carlqvist continues:

In many respects, the attack [at the Kronan school] was similar to the one in the Västerås IKEA on August 10 -- random people killed because of the color of their skin. In IKEA, whites were killed by a black assailant; at the school, blacks were killed by a white assailant.The reaction, however, was completely different.

After IKEA, there was dead silence. But this school attack is all over the news. A white perpetrator killing black victims is apparently considered far worse than a black perpetrator killing white victims.

Ingrid Carlqvist notes that after the double murders at IKEA, there were no such discussions about racist motivation. No one condemned the racist motive of the IKEA murderer, Abraham Ukbagabir, who, when questioned by the police, said that he had chosen his victims because they "looked Swedish."

Carlqvist says that Sweden's Prime Minister Löfven condemns all violence from Swedes but ignores violence perpetrated by immigrants such as the burning of six housing facilities for asylum seekers.

Sweden's anti-Israel attitude is manifest and shows the same misguided mindset and blinker vision as its attitude toward its own domestic racism.

The Swedish government, which was the first European state to recognize officially the Palestinian state, has not issued a condemnation of Palestinian attacks on Israelis in the current terrorism wave. Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs Margot Wallstrom has talked about violence on both sides in general terms. Her comments were neutral and vague, not mentioning who perpetrated the terror attacks. This attitude is reminiscent of the way that the Swedish Government is handling internal racial violence (as described above).

Additionally, Scandinavian Airlines, the national airline, initially announced that it will no longer be flying to Israel due to poor profits and "political(!) instability in the region". The airlines have since backtracked since there was push-back from Israel.

Israeli representatives in Sweden have observed that there is currently an anti-Israel consensus in the country and that politicians are not publicly willing to defend Israel. It seems that Swedish silence is due partly to political motives: The Swedes are interested in obtaining UN Security Council seat, so they are avoiding angering Arab nations by condemning Palestinian terrorism. This diplomatic consideration alone, however, is not sufficient to explain the widespread anti-Israel attitude throughout Swedish society and Swedish institutions.

Ongoing anti-Israel coverage in Swedish media ignores Palestinian terrorism against Israelis. In the Swedish media, these attacks are at most perpetrated by "Palestinian militants," not terrorists acting against unarmed, innocent civilians (even if we disregard, for the sake of argument, attacks on soldiers). Thus, in the beginning of October, the Swedish news agency TT reported the stabbing murder of Nahmia Lavi and Aharon Bennett as "Palestinian shot in Jerusalem." The Palestinian in question was 19-year-old terrorist Mohand Halabi, who had killed the two people.

An anti-Semitic Swedish film, The Dead Still Have a Name, produced by a Swedish organization that organizes flotillas to Gaza, draws comparisons between Israel's actions toward Palestinians and the Holocaust. The city of Gothenburg has decided to include this politically-motivated film as part of its school curriculum. So far, it has not been broadcast on television but only screened privately.

Finally, the Swedish church systematically works against Israel. The church's Swedish Theological Institute operates in Jerusalem, but instead of dealing with relations between Judaism and Christianity – as its mission statement dictates – it is increasingly becoming involved in politics and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The institute hosts Swedish anti-Israel activists, who come to the Palestinian territories to report on cases of so-called Palestinian abuse.

Remembering Yitzhak Rabin (1922-1995)

October 26, 2015 marks the twentieth anniversary of the murder of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a lone Jewish assassin.

I first encountered Yitzhak Rabin when I was a student at the University of Minnesota, which had an enrollment of over 40,000 students and was the biggest single campus in the USA at the time. Yitzhak Rabin served as Israel's ambassador to the United States from 1968–1973, during years that I was living in Minneapolis. Although I was not sufficiently well-versed in Israeli politics to know this, it was clear that the ambassadorship was a high-profile perk that was awarded to Rabin, a successful general and rising star in the dominant Israeli Labor Party. Rabin viewed the ambassadorship as a stepping stone to something bigger (as do all successful Israeli generals who go into politics), and Rabin would go on to lead his Labor Party to victory in the 1973 elections and become Prime Minister of Israel (1973-1977). In 1992, he again led the Labor Party to victory and served as Prime Minister till he was shot and killed in 1995.

Traditionally, one of the functions of an ambassador was touring American college campuses, expounding official Israeli policy, with the intention, of course, of increasing support for the State of Israel and inspiring pride within the American-Jewish community. When Rabin arrived at the University of Minnesota, he still had the glow, for proud Jews like me, of a successful and charismatic leader. For someone brought up on the eloquence of Abba Eban (1915-2002), Israeli ambassador to the US and UN, I anticipated a real treat. I still remember the advertisements for his upcoming speech in the University of Minnesota Hillel building and in the Minnesota Daily, the university-wide student newspaper, having a circulation in the tens-of-thousands. I marked going to his lecture as a 'must do' activity in my schedule. There was, of course, offsetting Arab propaganda, but it was nothing like the aggressive and violent activities of Palestinian and BDS anti-Israel demonstrations nowadays. 

And so, the big day arrived. A very large campus hall had been reserved that could seat hundreds of people. I arrived early and seated myself somewhere in the middle of the hall and off to one side. The turn out, however, was disappointing. Perhaps a few dozen people were scattered throughout the big room. 

Yitzhak Rabin, other dignitaries and a university representative entered, and sat on a stage at the front of the hall. Yitzhak Rabin was introduced and came to the podium. I leaned forward in my chair expectantly. Then, he began to speak. In his very heavy Israeli accent and characteristic monotone, he droned on and on. His English was almost incomprehensible. What a disappointment! Could this be the famous Yitzhak Rabin, the war hero, the new Abba Eban? I really don't think he managed to inspire anyone that day, and I doubt whether anything he said was intelligible. The audience was polite, of course, and he finished with a round of applause. I was disappointed and sad and embarrassed. I felt that a great opportunity for Israel at the University of Minnesota had been wasted that day. I was glad that I had not asked any of my non-Jewish friends to accompany me. In retrospect, this was Israeli 'hasbara' in action (public diplomacy).

Fast forward. Year – 1995; the place – Wingate Institute. My family decided to spend the day at the Americans and Canadians in Israel (AACI) annual picnic, where my children would be able to meet and talk with other English speakers. So, I drove south from the city of Karmiel with my wife and two small children, stopping off at Netanya to see my wife's relatives, and then continued on to the picnic grounds a short distance away. In the late afternoon, with all family members starting to get tired, we considered leaving. I noticed that security personnel had been significantly augmented, and there was now an obvious presence of security vehicles. When I inquired, I was told that Yitzhak Rabin would be visiting the AACI picnic as part of his campaign in the upcoming, already acrimonious, national election. We considered whether to stay, but decided that it would be better not to wait around, anticipating a long trip with two young, tired children. 

In the evening, we watched the news on TV and saw Rabin at the picnic and how a lone protester had raced through the loose ring of guards around him, almost reaching him. Even I, as an ordinary citizen, was shocked at how close an unwanted person could get to the Prime Minister, and how poorly guarded he was. Indeed, it was ominous. 

We now know that the security establishment's mistaken 'conception' was that harm to the Prime Minster would not come from another Jew. How wrong they were! We hope that they have learned important lessons since then, will take nothing for granted, and be more creative in protecting our leaders in the future. We must consistently be vigilant and think 'out of the box' and that applies not only to protecting our Prime Minister.

Dov Lipman on Jews Stabbing Arabs: What's Really the Message?

In his article in the Jerusalem Post today, Dov Lipman has indeed expounded a learned essay. We are treated to excerpts and references to Babylonian Talmud Tractate Sanhedrin 39, last week’s Torah portion, the Passover Seder, the Hallel prayer, Commentaries, Kaf HaChayim Orach Chayim 685:29, High Holiday prayers, and Proverbs 24:17. From all this, Lipman concludes that attacking people simply because they are Arab or look like Arabs is foreign to Judaism. Hmm. No argument here.

But is this really Dov Lipman's message to us in these agonizing times? But wait! There is more to come. Lipman writes:

I conclude with the words penned by MK Yair Lapid after a Jew took revenge for the recent stabbings by stabbing random, innocent Arabs in Dimona last week.

“Whoever does this doesn’t understand what Judaism is, and what it means to be a Jew. Whoever does this damages Jews, damages the state, and damages our security. Because there is one principle which we have always guarded, even in the most difficult of times: We will not be like them.

We will not be like the terrorists. We will not adopt their disgusting and murderous values.”

Ah, I think that I am getting the message now. This eloquent statement by that eminent Judaic scholar, Yair Lapid, on the essence of Judaism has convinced me. Yes! I definitely should vote for Yair Lapid for Prime Minster in the coming election.

Hey, Dov, have I figured it out?

Palestinian Distortion of Stabbings Finally Gets Israeli Mainstream Media Attention

In my last posts, I have been focusing on how the Palestinians media perceive the stabbings of Jews by Palestinians. I devoted two posts to the Afula attempted stabbing by an Arab woman, who was unsuccessful in her stabbing attempt and was shot in the legs by security personnel to neutralize her. I also devoted one post to the explosion of a car carrying gas canisters and incendiary materials driven by an Arab woman. It is true that these were small incidents (and involved no fatalities) in the current large wave of Palestinian Terror that is sweeping Israel in which Jews (including innocent women and children) are being targeted by Palestinian terrorists;  my intention is to show how the blatantly terrorist event is perceived by the Palestinian propaganda machine and how it is explained to Palestinians and the world media.

I have purposely taken micro events because they are more manageable for a blog such as this. We have seen that the Palestinian media and Arab Members of the Knesset invert the facts so that the 'victim' is the Palestinian knifer/terrorist and the Jewish victim becomes 'the aggressor'. Ahmed Tibi persistently shouts 'we are the victims'. He knows that the media is the message; the victim and underdog automatically generates sympathy.

Thus, Israeli Arab members of Knesset and Palestinians call shooting a stabber in the legs murder, even though no one was killed. A policeman who was doing his job (he stopped the car because there was a traffic violation; he didn't know it was being driven by an Arab) and was a good Samaritan and wanted to put out the fire in the Arab woman's car (he didn't know she was a terrorist intending to blow up her car) is described as preventing the woman from getting out of the car with her child (there was no child). The Palestinian news agency Ma'an had no problem printing the detailed account of an anonymous Palestinian 'witness'. (How are you going to argue with someone that's anonymous?).

In the Palestinian propaganda war, facts have only marginal importance and a picture that can be 'interpreted' for their own propaganda and political purposes is the primary exhibit of their so-called 'truth'.

I was happy to see that Ynet is finally beginning to pay some attention to how Palestinian propaganda is distorting the facts. The truth is the mainstream media coverage of this important issue for Israel is rather thin. If you are interested in detailed examples of distorted and malicious Palestinian propaganda, see Palestine Media Watch here.

Palestinians Say Wounding Afula Female Terrorist is 'Murder' - Follow-up

On October 9, Assara Zidan, a single mom who studies at a local college and is separated from her husband, entered the Central Bus Station of Afula, a major town in Israel's Jezreel Valley region, and near one of the bus platforms, screamed and drew a knife on a soldier. Security personnel shot her in the legs to bring her down when she refused to drop her knife.
After the video was uploaded to the Internet, the pro-Palestinian talkbackers 'interpreted' the video as showing the lady holding her hands up trying to surrender, and the cruel Israelis shooting her.
Well, sorry dear talkbackers, even the Israeli Palestinian leadership doesn't buy the 'holding up her hands, trying to surrender' business (see below).
The Palestinian leadership, however, does indeed claim that it was a 'cold-blooded shooting' with intent to 'murder' (see my earlier post).
On October 11, journalist Attila Somfalvi interviewed Dr Basel Ghattas a member of Balad party and currently serving as a member of the Israeli Knesset for the Arab Joint List alliance.
Consider the following exchange (edited because of shouting and simultaneous overtalk). You can listen to the original here):

Dr Basel Ghattas: Whoever shoots with intent to kill ... police officers shot a young woman in Afula, even if she has a knife in her hand ... shot to kill ...
Attila Somfalvi: They shot her in her feet. She held a knife in her hand and tried to stab a soldier.
Dr. Basel Ghattas: For this you have to kill her.
Attila Somfalvi: She was not killed. She is being treated in a hospital.

Masud Ghnaim and Ahmed Tibi are also part of this chorus, as are others.

And so the lies are propagated, morphing relentlessly into a Palestinian 'narrative' that bears little resemblance to what actually happened and magnifying a distorted bogeyman of Israel and Jews as an object of hatred and rage.

Palestinians Starting to Recruit Their Women to Kill Jews?

The Palestinians made a valiant effort to describe the moderate wounding of an knife-wielding Arab women terrorist in Afula as a 'cold-blooded shooting' and 'murder'. Palestinian leaders and Internet responses raged about how 'tough' Israeli soldiers had shot a defenseless woman, who could have been disarmed by other means. The Palestinian 'narrative' of this event was not very convincing, since it contradicted the basic evidence. Not only that, the Palestinian 'narrative' disregarded the long history of women suicide bombers, of which Israeli security personnel were obviously aware when they decided to disarm the woman knife-wielder by wounding her.

At this point in time, an argument could be made that this woman was in fact a 'lone wolf terrorist' and, as such, does not indicate any particular trend in the current wave of Palestinian Terrorism. The actual details of how this woman came to be a terrorist will be revealed after she is interrogated, because she has lived to tell the tale.

Nonetheless, the Palestinian Terrorism trend now seems to be to recruit women to do the dirty business of terrorist work.

Thus, this morning, October 11, Ynet reports that a woman driving a vehicle detonated an explosive device when she was stopped near a checkpoint leading into Jerusalem.  The terrorist, a 31-year-old resident of the A-Tur neighborhood in East Jerusalem, married to a Palestinian but with no children, was severely wounded. Police said she also had gas canisters in her car (which did not explode) and was on her way to Jerusalem to carry out a bombing. The Judea and Samaria District Police said that a traffic officer noticed the vehicle driving in the bus lane on route 437, which connects Ma'ale Adumim and a-Zaim checkpoint. He signaled her to stop by the side of the road. This is what the officer said happened next:

I stepped over to her car, thankfully wearing a kevlar vest, and told her: 'Lady, you committed a traffic felony, She didn't seem to know what was going on, so I started speaking to her in Arabic, at which point she started shouting 'Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar! and I noticed smoke coming out of the car, I thought her car was on fire, so I ran to get an extinguisher, and then I heard a blast.

The wounded officer was evacuated to Shaare Zedek Medical Center with reported burns to his face. The woman is in critical condition in Hadassah Hospital.

In contrast, the Palestinian Ma'an News agency provides the account of a nameless witness, who gives a rather detailed technical explanation: i.e., that it was not a terrorist attack, but rather the woman driver panicked after an electrical failure caused a fire, which exploded the car's airbag. No explanation is given for the gas canisters. Also, the anonymous witness also claims that the lady had a child in the car, but no mention of a child is made by police sources and the lady is even reported to have no children.

In the afternoon, the Israeli police stated that handwritten documents supporting Jihad were found on the terrorist after a search and that the terrorist said she had ignited a gas canister. It should be noted that car bombs usually use detonators to explode additional explosive material such as gas canisters. This is may have been what happened in this case.

Unlike the 'lone wolf' knife terrorist, car bombs driven by women require an infrastructure, additional personnel and technical knowledge (and usually funding). The lady did not wake up one morning and decide to do this. This incident has all the telltale signs of a female suicide car bomber. A troubling and more dangerous development in the current wave of Palestinian Terrorism may be brewing.

Palestinians: Wounding Afula Female Terrorist is 'Murder'

Have you read the title of this post correctly? Can it be? Read on and follow this breaking story.

Ynet reported that on October 9, Assara Zidan, a single mom who studies at a local college and is separated from her husband, entered the Central Bus Station of Afula, a major town in Israel's Jezreel Valley region, and near one of the bus platforms, drew a knife on a soldier and began to scream. Luckily, there were security personnel nearby who saw the knife in her hand. As it turns out, there is actually a video of part of this event. From the video, it seems clear that the woman in traditional Muslim garb still has the knife raised in her hand. Furthermore, the police are calling to her probably to drop the weapon and lie down, which she does not do. She is kept at bay for a while by soldiers, till a policeman arrives, and she is shot several times in her lower body. She was taken to the hospital in 'moderate' condition. In situations where it is possible to neutralize a terrorist without shooting to kill, it is commendable that Israeli security forces routinely do so. On the British Independent newspaper site, the pro-Palestinian talkback interpretation is that she had her hands up, but I think its clear that she was wielding a knife and did not want to put it down. Finally, Israel Today informs us that the family claims that she had mental problems.

So, what was the reaction of Israeli Palestinians to this act of terrorism?

Her friends said, "This is a cold-blooded shooting, They [the Israelis] want to force us into becoming terrorists."

Another source in the Arab sector said: "The Government has given the green light to murder Arabs."

'Cold-blooded shooting'? 'Murder Arabs''? I ask you, dear reader, does this response, in tone or substance, bear any relation to the events that actually occurred. Is not a knife in the hand of a screaming terrorist who attempted to attack a solder and refuses to disarm a sufficient pretext to shoot to neutralize that person? Was anybody actually murdered here?

Well, for Palestinians, if they can't get their terrorist dead, at least they can shout 'murder'.

On October 10, at a large demonstration of Israeli Arabs in Nazareth, this so-called 'unprovoked' shooting of Assara was protested. So, I suppose this perversion of truth will join the already crowded list of Palestinian myths and lies intended to defame the good name of Israel, the only viable, true democracy in the Middle East.

By the way, it is well known that in Arab society a single woman with a child is considered an outcast. In the past, some of these women have committed terrorist acts to regain their status and redeem themselves. Female terrorists with this profile have in the past murdered many people in a single terrorist act by blowing themselves up in a crowded public place. There have also been many cases of stabbings and other terrorist acts committed by such female Palestinians.

Hamas Wants to Increase the Number of Dead Palestinians

There was some speculation on Thursday, October 8 that the current wave of Palestinian Terror was drifting toward an end. The considered opinion was that the tone would be set after prayers on Friday, October 9.

Apprehensive that the current terror wave might peter out, Hamas decided, on Oct 9, to send hundreds of people to the border fence that separates Gaza from Israel. There is a 300m buffer zone in front of the fence, and 100m in front of the fence is considered a 'closed military area'. The crowd entered the 100m zone with burning tires and throwing rocks, so this act was a clear provocation of Hamas. No innocent Palestinian civilians and bystanders here.

At this point, the Israeli Army fired warning shots in the air, but the crowd continued to advance. The Israeli Army could not allow the fence to be breached, with masses of violent Gazans breaking through and entering Israel. (By the way, Hamas has used this tactic before.) At 50m shots were fired at the legs of the advancing crowd, especially at the main instigators. The result of melee, as of today, October 10, is seven dead Palestinians plus the injured at the several hot spots along the border.

Hamas achieved its objective, fueling the fire of hate and violence against innocent Israelis with the fodder of more dead Palestinians that it, knowingly and purposefully, sent to their death. Thus, the current terror wave continues.

But don't worry about the bereaved families of the dead Gazans. They will not have any financial problems from now on. As the family of a martyr of Islam (shahid), they will be subsidized by Hamas. Hamas will get the money from the United Nations, who will get it from rich countries like the USA, who will get it from their taxpayers, i.e., you and me. Furthermore, the families of the shahids are likely to achieve stardom and get a street named after them, hopefully a bustling thoroughfare in Gaza.

By the way, the family was likely receiving a UNRWA subsidy; in Gaza, there are 1.76 million people, including 1.26 million Palestine 'refugees'. In other words, you were probably supporting them up to now anyway, including the shahid, who learned his hatred in a UNRWA-subsidized school.

And what about the shahids themselves? Well, they will be celebrating happily after being rewarded by marrying 72 dark-eyed virgins in Paradise.

Yair Lapid and the Media: Martin Sherman vs Dov Lipman

A media tiff has developed in the Jerusalem Post between two veteran, high-profile personalities: anti-Lapid Martin Sherman and pro-Lapid Dov Lipman. I am not going to delve into the specific arguments of either side. I am more interested in Lapid's handling of the media, a topic with which I have already dealt with in this blog and will deal with again. This topic is of great interest because the print media clout has declined and the digital media have risen to prominence. The rules have changed.

The following are the Sherman vs Lipman developments up to now.

On September 25, 2015, veteran opinion columnist Martin Sherman, authored an anti-Lapid article in the Jerusalem Post. One would have thought that it wouldn't have created much of a ripple, after all we are still so far away from even any talk of elections. Not so.

Anti-Sherman letters to the editor were received at the Jerusalem Post. With regard to these letters to the editor, the Jerusalem Post said the following:

The letters editor responds: Six letters directly referring to the September 25 column were received by press time on September 29. All were piercing, and all were negative. There was no indication of an organized letter-writing campaign, so it was clear that Martin Sherman had struck a nerve. To reflect this, four of the letters were chosen for publication. The two positive letters that arrived (this and the one above it) came solely in response to the negative letters. Please be assured that I view the letters section as the readers’ soapbox.

I bow to no pressure, political or otherwise, and try to present letters in a way that reflects the tone and balance of the material that arrives.

Furthermore, Sherman tells us that Lapid's office approached the Jerusalem Post and demanded a public disassociation from Sherman's article. Obviously, the JP could not and would not do that. They cannot produce a disclaimer for every opinion that annoys someone.
Finally, on October 2, two pro-Sherman letters to the editor appeared.
In that same issue was a follow-up article by Sherman (in response to the pro-Lapid letters), and on the same page, a rebuttal by Lipman, speaking for the Lapid camp, of the original Sherman article.
So what can we learn from all this.

1. Lapid is very conscious of his public image because he is trying to position himself as the front-runner in the campaign for Prime Minster in the next election. Anything anti-Lapid will be swiftly dealt with by flaming or an intensive campaign to swamp the anti-Lapid 'view'.
2. It is quite clear that some of the pro-Lapid letters were consciously generated by the Lapid camp itself; they have the telltale signs (here I differ with the JP Letters Editor). See the letters here. The formula is:
   Say something (against someone, preferably against Netanyahu or for Lapid) + say Lapid for Prime Minster or Lapid is a leader/has leadership qualities.
   We saw this in the responses to Lapid's Iceland letter (you can see this formula in action in the talk-backs on Lapid's site. By constantly repeating the theme 'Lapid for Prime Minister' (or some variation thereof), you penetrate the consciousness of the public and accustom it to the idea's plausibility. Remember, the 'media is the message'.
3. Lapid's anti-Sherman letters were partly successful. After all, it was unusual to print four anti-Sherman letters in one issue (even though the JP resisted printing a disclaimer). Indeed, the intensity of the pro-Lapid letters would certainly require the letters to be reflected in the letters column, as the JP editor states.
4.  Lapid's camp did succeed in getting Lipman's rebuttal in the newspaper as counterweight, in addition to the pro-Lapid letters to the editor.

In previous posts, I have addressed Lapid's media strategy. See my posts on Lipman and on Lapid's Reykjavik boycott letter. Also see Lapid and the Media: A Micro Case Study.

Stay tuned for more analysis of Lapid's media strategy.

Palestinian Fabrication of Settler Child Shooting Not Corrected by Palestinian News Agency

The Palestinian Ma'an news agency reported today (12.40 p.m.) the story of a child shot  by an Israeli settler in the so-called occupied territories near Kalkilya. The Palestinian 'narrative' was that a settler car stopped near the six-year-old boy, shot him and drove away. The older brother saw that the car had Israeli license plates. Other media also picked up and printed the story.
The Ma'an agency 'updated' the story at 17.50 p.m. to show that the report was 'single source', relying only on the 'family's' version. It also reported that the IDF was investigating.
The truth came out this afternoon even before the Ma'an 'update'.
About 16.00 Haaretz and Ynet both reported the results of the IDF investigation. It turns out that the child shot himself while playing with the gun of his brother, who serves in the Palestinian Authority police.
The boy's family fabricated the story (you can also say lied) to prevent the older brother from getting into trouble and to get an added Palestinian Authority stipend as an unfortunate 'terror victim' of Israeli settlers.
When I posted this at 7:35 pm on October 3, Ma'an has still not added the results of the IDF investigation that it had reported was being conducted.
The child is reportedly currently in stable but still serious condition and on life support.
When I checked back this morning, I saw that Ma'an left the original story was still intact, but it had a link that 'challenges' that version in a different article at 10.59 pm, Israeli army rejects involvement of Israelis in Qalqiliya shooting, even though the original story had already been preempted. Finally, they do admit in the challenge that:

Palestinian Authority security sources said that they were following up on the child's death after initial reports from relatives appeared to be false.

The Israel Today print edition, on Oct 4, 2015, reports that "Palestinian sources" are furious with the family for lying and for the older son's negligence with his police weapon.
So much for 'timely and objective' news reporting by this Palestine-based news source. Of course, the false story still exists on the Ma'an site and is reverberating on the internet, which is, of course, what the Palestinian media are really interested in. The token link to the IDF challenge exists to keep up the appearances of perfunctory objectivity.
The real story of violence on October 3 was the murder of two Israelis and injury of two more in Jerusalem.

Netanyahu's 2015 Speech at the United Nations - Impressions

Netanyahu speech was devoted mostly to the Iran nuclear deal, and it's good that he is continuing to pound away at that theme -- enforcing meaningful inspection is especially important, even if the agreement cannot be stopped for now.

What I think is really interesting and important, however, is something to which he devoted only a couple of sentences, i.e., that Israel is working with its Arab peace partners (Egypt, Jordan) and others in the region, perhaps a reference to Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, based on their common interest to oppose Shiite and Islamic State extremism.

This is a direct continuation of Netanyahu's vision ​(and hard work) ​for a rapproch​e​ment ​with more ​Arab st​a​tes​, and which el-Sissi also mentioned recently​. This is what we should watch in the future.

​Finally, I took a look at an Israeli site to see what kind of talkbacks the speech generated. I noted that the anyone-but-Bibi crowd is out in force. Too bad these people don't talk content rather than clever negativism and cynicism.