Overblog
Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
6 août 2015 4 06 /08 /août /2015 23:02

France


- Polémique après un dessin de Plantu (Times of Israel) - "Le dessin réalisé par Plantu représente un soldat de l’armée israélienne, arme à la main visant des Palestiniens sans défense. Derrière le soldat, un juif religieux, bagages sous le bras et fusil à l’épaule demande : « Dites ! Vous ne pourriez pas tirer un peu plus vite ?… Je suis pressé d’emménager »." Voir ce dessin dégueulasse sur le site du Monde.fr, ici. On notera que les deux dessins précédents celui-ci (ici et ici) sont aussi anti-israéliens... ce qui dénote une certaine obsession de sa part.
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/plantu-revisite-la-realite-israelo-palestinienne/

- Université d'été de Civitas - Le petit Jésus en culotte de peau (Charlie Hebdo n°1202, 5 août 2015) - "Nous n'avons rien contre la race juive. Nous avons seulement un problème avec la domination juive."
http://charliehebdo.fr/
"L'institut Civitas, ce mouvement catholique traditionnaliste que l'Eglise elle-même qualifie de caricatural, tenait la semaine dernière son université d'été dans le huis clos glacial des salles de classe du pensionnat Saint-Jean-Bosco à Marlieux, dans l'Ain. Connu du grand public pour ses positions radicales lors du mariage homo (blâmant La Manif pour tous pour sa tiédeur sentimentaliste) et pour ses manifestations contre les spectacles blasphématoires, Civitas s'est focalisé sur l'importance d'un renouveau catholique en politique, à l'échelle des élections locales. Une école des cadres en vue de la cité de demain, entre messe en latin et veillée musicale médiévale, en prévision d'un potentiel "Etat catholique". Reportage d'une infiltration Charlie."
Extraits :
"- Jeudi, 17 heures ; Break salutaire en cuisine
Valentine, au service de ces messieurs, tout le temps en cuisine, conseille, citant l'abbé Beauvais : "La clef du couple réside dans la vaisselle que vous laverez ensemble tous les soirs, sans lave-vaisselle !" Lui, bonhomie rondouillarde et yeux exorbités, déboule dans la cuisine. S'ensuit une discussion sur la confession, où l'abbé s'emporte contre l'immoralité des prêtres modernistes qui répondent aux couples en concubinage que "s'il y a de l'amour, c'est le plus important".
De retour dans la salle, on croise le premier gamin de la journée, Louis-Marie. Il doit avoir 9 ans et se prépare pour un camp d'été, "la croisade". "C'est comme les scouts, en plus catholique", explique-t-il. Dans la salle, un vieux monsieur plaisante : "Vous savez, les pédés, en 39 aussi ils partaient en vacances, ils ne se doutaient pas de ce que le Maréchal leur préparait..." [...]
- Jeudi, 21h30 ; Soirée joueuse
Au cours d'une discussion avec les trois plus jeunes participants du week-end, la violence monte d'un cran, sur une mélodie de flûte à bec qui résonne depuis les étages. Emilien, un étudiant en droit habillé en hipster, regrette qu'il n'y ait pas plus de jeunes qui aient répondu présent, comme à la fête de Jeanne d'Arc, en mai dernier, où il avait trouvé "des skins très sympas, pas du tout comme on les imagine".
Henri, un rouquin aux traits émaciés et au regard dur, fustige le complot judéo-maçonnique dans chaque phrase. L'abbé Beauvais, qui rentre de sa balade digestive, acquiesce. "Nous n'avons rien contre la race juive. Nous avons seulement un problème avec la domination juive."
Assis, comme fasciné, Florent, 23 ans, raconte avoir refusé de passer le CAPES d'économie, auquel il s'était préparé pour devenir enseignant : "On me racontait trop de conneries sur l'économie, qui sont le fruit des médias et de la mainmise des francs-macs. La vérité, c'est que le socialisme d'aujourd'hui tend vers un communisme mondial." [...]
- Duo abbé Billecocq et abbé Beauvais
Abbé Billecocq : "Savez-vous qu'à Strasbourg les cloches sonnent aujourd'hui encore tous les soirs à 22 heures, comme elles sonnaient dans le temps pour faire sortir les juifs de la cité ?" (La mesure a été abrogée en 1791, après la Révolution, mais la cloche sonne toujours, ndlr.)
Abbé Beauvais : "Et donc ? Ils sortent encore aujourd'hui ?" [...]"

*************************************************

Israël

- Le tourisme israélien cherche comment sortir du marasme, Marie de Vergès (Le Monde) - "Depuis la guerre menée à Gaza, il y a un an, les indicateurs restent mauvais pour cette industrie qui représente 7 % du produit intérieur brut israélien" ; "Le vrai problème d’Israël, c’est le fossé entre l’image du pays et la réalité des faits".
http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2015/08/06/le-tourisme-israelien-cherche-comment-sortir-du-marasme_4713950_3234.html
"[...] Au premier trimestre, le nombre de séjours touristiques à Eilat a chuté de plus de 50 %. Pour renverser la tendance, le gouvernement israélien s’est engagé, en avril, à verser une prime de 45 euros par passager à toute compagnie aérienne qui desservirait la station via des liaisons directes.
Aux premiers jours de la saison estivale, le ministre du tourisme Yariv Levin disait vouloir tout mettre en œuvre « pour qu’Israël occupe enfin une autre place sur la carte du tourisme mondial ». Pour cause, les déboires d’Eilat ne sont que le reflet amplifié de la morosité qui frappe aujourd’hui l’ensemble du secteur.
Depuis la guerre menée à Gaza, il y a un an, les indicateurs restent mauvais pour cette industrie qui représente 7 % du produit intérieur brut israélien. En juin, le flux de touristes à destination de l’Etat hébreu était en baisse de 20 % sur un an, selon le Bureau central des statistiques. Sur les six premiers mois, le recul a été de plus de 17 %. Les dernières données disponibles indiquent que les recettes du secteur (hors billets d’avion) au premier trimestre ont été les plus faibles depuis cinq ans.
Les professionnels imputent d’abord cette atonie à l’onde de choc provoquée par l’opération militaire de l’été 2014. Quand bien même les grands centres touristiques que sont Jérusalem et Tel-Aviv ont été globalement épargnés, les images de ces 50 jours d’affrontements sanglants ont marqué les esprits des vacanciers étrangers. L’explosion d’une roquette à quelques kilomètres de l’aéroport international Ben-Gourion, le 21 juillet, n’a rien arrangé.
Si le marasme s’éternise, c’est que d’autres facteurs y contribuent. Guerre civile en Syrie, exactions de l’Etat islamique… Les conflits qui bouleversent le Proche-Orient ne laissent pas Israël indemne. Plus localement, l’Etat hébreu souffre de la désaffection des touristes russes, l’une de ses principales clientèles, affectée par la crise économique qui sévit en Russie.
Un classement publié en mai par le Forum économique mondial sur la compétitivité des voyages et du tourisme plaçait Israël au 72e rang sur 141. Selon cet indice, le pays souffre de son instabilité géopolitique mais aussi de ses prix très élevés. L’Etat hébreu se distingue même comme l’une des destinations les plus chères du monde, pointant à la 136e place du classement. Une nuit d’hôtel y est en moyenne plus onéreuse qu’au Japon, en Allemagne ou aux Etats-Unis. [...]
« La seule chose qui peut relancer la machine, c’est une énorme opération marketing à laquelle on allouerait des moyens financiers bien plus importants, juge Eli Gonen, le président de l’Association hôtelière israélienne. Le vrai problème d’Israël, c’est le fossé entre l’image du pays et la réalité des faits. Des campagnes de publicité doivent souligner que ce que nous avons à offrir aujourd’hui, c’est en fait le calme et une combinaison unique de sites religieux, culturels et balnéaires. »"

*************************************************

Gaza & Hamas

- Amnesty's Twitter obsession with Israel by the numbers (Elder of Ziyon) - "46 of @AmnestyOnline's last 100 tweets were about last year's Gaza war, overwhelming majority anti-Israel. Priorities".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/amnestys-twitter-obsession-with-israel.html

*************************************************

Judée-Samarie

- Cisjordanie : trois soldats israéliens blessés (AFP) - l'attentat à la voiture bélier visait d'abord des civils, mais ces soldats se sont interposés ; l'un d'eux est très gravement blessé.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/08/06/97001-20150806FILWWW00278-cisjordanie-trois-soldats-israeliens-blesses.php
"Trois soldats israéliens ont été blessées aujourd'hui dans une attaque à la voiture bélier en Cisjordanie, entre Ramallah et Naplouse, avant que les soldats présents sur les lieux n'ouvrent le feu et ne stoppent le véhicule, a indiqué l'armée israélienne. Deux des soldats ont été gravement blessés, a-t-elle précisé dans un communiqué. L'un d'eux est très grièvement atteint, a indiqué la radio militaire. L'une des victimes a été évacuée par l'armée israélienne par hélicoptère vers un hôpital de Jérusalem.
«Un véhicule a percuté un groupe de piétons. Des soldats se trouvant à proximité ont tiré et stoppé la voiture», a indiqué un porte-parole de l'armée, le colonel Peter Lerner. Le Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu a salué sur Twitter l'action des soldats israéliens «qui ont réagi rapidement et neutralisé le terroriste». On ignore l'identité du conducteur et son état mais le ministre de la Défense Moshé Yaalon a ouvertement parlé de «terrorisme palestinien» dans un communiqué, promettant «détermination et poigne de fer» contre «les terroristes et leurs commanditaires».
Au cours des derniers mois, des Palestiniens ont mené une série d'attaques isolées à la voiture bélier ou au couteau contre des soldats ou des civils israéliens en Cisjordanie et à Jérusalem. Le Hamas, le mouvement islamiste au pouvoir dans la bande de Gaza, a salué cette attaque comme «la réponse appropriée» à l'occupation israélienne et aux «crimes» des colons, selon les mots d'un porte-parole, Abdel Rahaman Shadid. [...]"
- Trois soldats blessés dans une attaque terroriste en Cisjordanie (Times of Israel) - "Les soldats de Tsahal ont tiré sur le terroriste sur le lieux de l’attaque. Il a été touché et s’est retrouvé pris au piège de sa voiture quand elle s’est retournée. Il serait également dans un état grave. Les troupes de Tsahal sur les lieux ont commencé à le soigner, une fois que les forces de sécurité ont établi que sa voiture n’avait pas été piégée".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/trois-blesses-dans-une-possible-attaque-terroriste-a-la-voiture-belier-en-cisjordanie/

*************************************************

"Processus de paix"

- What Society Says When Children Are Murdered, Shoshana Bryen (Gatestone Institute) - "Remember the names of the children, how they were mourned by their communities and how their murderers were treated in their own societies: Who became pariahs and who became heroes".
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6285/children-murdered
"It is almost ghoulish to compare the deaths of children in war. They were not responsible for the situation in which they found themselves, and they did not deserve their fate. In a healthy society, such deaths are mourned without regard for the children's nationality, or the politics and misdeeds of their parents.
Is there a difference between the infant Ali Saad Dawabshe, murdered in his house in the West Bank village of Duma, and Shalhevet Pass, murdered in her stroller by a sniper? Or between Mohammed Abu Khdeir (16), murdered in revenge for the killings of three Israeli teens, and the Fogel children, Yoav (11), Elad (4) and Hadas (3 months), murdered in their beds, along with their parents? Or Einat Haran (4), forced to watch her father killed before having her head smashed against a rock? Or the Schijveschurrder children, Ra'aya (14), Avraham Yitzhak (4) and Hemda (2), murdered in the Sbarro Pizza bombing along with their parents and ten other people, including two more children? Or Eyal Yifrah, Gilad Shaar, Naftali Fraenkel, murdered on their way home from school for Shabbat?
To the perpetrators, no.
To the societies from which the murderers came, the difference is a chasm. Not every Israeli or every Palestinian had the same reaction, but the differences in their leadership was striking.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) arrested trained sniper Mahmud Amru, a member of the Palestinian Tanzim -- an armed offshoot of Fatah, founded by Yasser Arafat -- for the murder of 10-month-old Shalhevet Pass, but released him. Arrested then by the Israelis, Amru was sentenced to three life terms. Voice of Palestine Radio later claimed the baby was killed by her mother.
Fatah and Hamas separately honored the Sbarro Pizza bombing perpetrator, Izz Al-Din Al-Masri. Official PA TV News reported that the murderer "gave his soul for the struggle of a nation that strives for freedom," and described the terrorist's funeral as his "wedding" to the "72 Virgins in Paradise, the great reward Islam promises to those who die as Martyrs for Allah."
Palestinian Authority-linked websites claimed the murderers of the Fogel children were "foreign workers" and not Palestinians. Two Palestinians teenagers were arrested, and reenacted the murder for Israeli police, saying, "We killed Israelis and Jews." Although they appear to have done the deed on their own initiative, they were affiliated with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and had received "considerable help" from family and friends before they were arrested. In a later indignity, gruesome images of the dead Fogel children appeared on the "Free Palestine" website, labeled as Palestinian children killed by Israel.
Samir Kuntar murdered Einat Haran and her father, but was released in a prisoner exchange and welcomed as a hero in Lebanon. In 2008, Kuntar received the Syrian Order of Merit, the highest award Syrian President Bashar Assad could bestow. [According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), 11,717 children have died thus far in the Syrian civil war.] In 2009, it was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's turn, and Kuntar received an award from him in Tehran. Kuntar was finally dispatched a last week.
Dalal Mughrabi, organizer of the Coastal Road Massacre that killed 37 Israelis, including four children under six (Erez Alfred, Ilan and Roi Homan, Liat Gal-On and Naama Hadani) had a public square named in her honor in the West Bank. "We are all Dalal Mughrabi," declared Tawfiq Tirawi, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, at the dedication.
The murderers of Yifrah, Shaar and Fraenkel were hidden by supporters in the West Bank for months, and the Palestinian Authority Facebook page featured a cartoon showing the three boys as rats on fishing hooks. During the search for the murderers:
"Palestinians walked near Jews waving three fingers, signifying the three kidnapped students; staged "reenactments" of the kidnapping with the boys portrayed as soldiers; and gave candy to their children to celebrate. Children from a Hamas summer camp were used as the vanguard of a mob that attacked a group of Jews on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. During that time, Palestinians were told to place multiple calls to the Israeli Police emergency number to stymie any real calls that might come in. When the Israeli government announced it had suspects, one suspect's mother said, "I will be proud of him until Judgment Day. If... it is true... My boys are all righteous, pious and pure. The goal of my children is the triumph of Islam"."
After the bodies of the boys were found, teenager Mohammed Abu Khdeir was murdered by three revenge-minded Jews. The admission unified Israelis in their revulsion to the act and to the perpetrators. One prominent religious Zionist rabbi called for the death penalty. (Israel has no death penalty, but Judaism does). There was unanimity from the prime minister to the defense minister to the leader of the nationalist Bayit Hayehudi Party, to the mother of one of the murdered Israeli teens, who denounced the revenge killing, to an uncle who paid a condolence call on Abu Khdeir's family.
This weekend in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, thousands of Israelis protested the murder of the baby Ali Saad Dawabshe (and the stabbings of six participants in Jerusalem's Gay Pride parade by a member of an Orthodox community). Saad Dawabshe, the uncle of Ali, participated in the Tel Aviv rally. The Prime Minister of Israel visited the family in the hospital.
Remember the names of the children, how they were mourned by their communities and how their murderers were treated in their own societies: Who became pariahs and who became heroes."

*************************************************

Monde arabe

- Saudi king blamed Mossad for 9/11 (JP) - "The former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia said in an interview this week that following 9/11, Saudi King Salman had insisted to him that the Mossad was responsible for the attacks".
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Saudi-king-blamed-Mossad-for-911-411119

- La guerre en Syrie a fait plus de 240 000 morts (France TV info) - "le nombre de morts dans les rangs des civils s'élève à près de 72 000, dont 12 000 enfants". Et en réalité ce n'est qu'un minimum.
http://www.francetvinfo.fr/monde/revolte-en-syrie/la-guerre-en-syrie-a-fait-plus-de-240-000-morts_1031663.html

- La pénurie de nourriture et de médicaments s’aggrave au Yémen, Louis Imbert (Le Monde) - "L’équipe de MSF y vit pour une large part cloîtrée dans un hôpital aux fenêtres protégées par des plaques de métal – des balles perdues sifflent encore quotidiennement".
http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2015/08/06/la-penurie-de-nourriture-et-de-medicaments-s-aggrave-au-yemen_4714190_3218.html
"La guerre au Yémen a déjà fait plus de 4 000 morts, en grande partie des civils. Environ 80 % de la population a besoin d’aide humanitaire, le pays compte 1,2 million de déplacés internes, selon le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés, et près de 100 000 personnes ont fui depuis le début du conflit, notamment en Somalie et à Djibouti.
Les violences, les difficultés d’approvisionnement en nourriture et en médicaments dues aux combats et au blocage des ports mis en place par l’Arabie saoudite, et renforcées après la résolution de l’ONU du 14 avril imposant un embargo sur les armes destinées aux milices houthistes, limitent à l’extrême le travail des organisations non gouvernementales.
Aden, le grand port du Sud, reste la zone la plus en difficulté, malgré le repli des houthistes et des forces loyales envers l’ex-président Ali Abdallah Saleh à la mi-juillet. « La ville est complètement détruite. Il n’y a plus de services publics, c’est un dépotoir à ciel ouvert », dit Thierry Goffeau, coordinateur de Médecins sans frontières (MSF) à Aden, sorti récemment de la ville. L’équipe de MSF y vit pour une large part cloîtrée dans un hôpital aux fenêtres protégées par des plaques de métal – des balles perdues sifflent encore quotidiennement. [...]
Comme dans l’ensemble du Yémen, la pénurie de fuel y est peut-être la plus grave. L’essence alimente les générateurs pour l’électricité, les pompes à eau et les transports. Les points de contrôle de toutes les forces en présence et les bombardements de la coalition menée par l’Arabie saoudite, qui touchent la plupart des axes du pays, contribuent également à vider les routes. [...]"

*************************************************

Iran

- Iran Already Sanitizing Nuclear Site, Intel Warns (Bloomberg) - "The U.S. intelligence community has informed Congress of evidence that Iran was sanitizing its suspected nuclear military site at Parchin, in broad daylight, days after agreeing to a nuclear deal with world powers. For senior lawmakers in both parties, the evidence calls into question Iran’s intention to fully account for the possible military dimensions of its current and past nuclear development".
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-05/iran-already-sanitizing-parchin-nuclear-site-intel-warns

- Le message d’Obama à Israël : vous êtes seuls, Raphael Ahren (Times of Israel) - "C’était une pique mordante pour souligner l’isolement d’Israël".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/le-message-dobama-a-israel-vous-etes-seuls/
"En mars 2013, le président Barack Obama s’est adressé au peuple israélien à Jérusalem, les réassurant que la seule superpuissance mondiale les soutiendrait devant les menaces de l’Iran et d’autres États au Moyen-Orient qui veulent sa destruction. « Ceux qui adhèrent à l’idéologie niant à Israël le droit d’exister, ils pourraient tout aussi bien rejeter la terre au dessus ou le ciel en dessous d’eux, parce qu’Israël ne compte aller nulle part », avait-il déclaré sous un tonnerre d’applaudissements. « Et aujourd’hui je dis, particulièrement aux jeunes, pour qu’il n’y ait pas d’erreur, tant qu’il y aura des Etats-Unis d’Amérique, Atem lo levad. You are not alone [vous n’êtes pas seuls] ».
Mercredi, lors d’un discours à l’Université Américain de Washington, Obama a envoyé le message inverse à Jérusalem : vous êtes vraiment seuls. Tandis qu’il a déclaré « partager profondément l’affinité sincère » du peuple américain pour Israël et reste engagé à maintenir « sa supériorité militaire qualitative », lorsqu’il s’agit de l’opposition féroce et « erronée » de votre gouvernement sur l’accord du nucléaire avec l’Iran, il a clairement dit : vous êtes seuls.
« Puisque c’est un accord si fort, chaque nation dans le monde qui a commenté publiquement, à l’exception du gouvernement israélien, a exprimé son soutien », a déclaré Obama. « Le Conseil de Sécurité des Nations Unies le soutient à l’unanimité. La majorité des experts en contrôle des armes et en non-prolifération a exprimé son soutien. Plus de 100 ambassadeurs qui ont servi sous des présidents républicains et démocrates le soutiennent ».
C’était une pique mordante pour souligner l’isolement d’Israël. Même si elle est formulée à travers des canaux diplomatiques discrets, l’appréhension des Etats arabes du Golfe sur l’accord du nucléaire est le secret le moins bien gardé du Moyen-Orient.
Obama est inquiet que les attaques incessantes du Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu sur l’accord n’aient commencé à faire changer d’avis le public américain et, de manière plus importante, certains législateurs américains qui peuvent encore rejeter l’accord. Il affirme donc directement qu’avec son opposition verbale, Israël se dresse contre le reste du monde.
Ce n’était pas la seule pique d’Obama contre Israël et son dirigeant. Il s’est moqué sans merci des opposants à l’accord et ce qu’il a caractérisé de slogans simplistes mais fallacieux. « Maintenant, la critique finale, une sorte de passe-partout que l’on peut entendre, est qu’il y avait un meilleur accord à obtenir. On le répète encore et encore », a-t-il déclaré. Il a ensuite légèrement modifié sa voix, imitant presque Netanyahu et a formulé la devise du dirigeant israélien : « C’est un mauvais accord, nous avons besoin d’un meilleur accord ». Le public de l’Université Américaine s’est mis à rire.
Obama a expliqué en détails pourquoi il croyait que l’accord était le meilleur, et bien sûr la seule option pour empêcher soit une guerre soit un Iran avec une arme nucléaire. Il a déclaré que l’opposition d’Israël était « compréhensible », reconnaissant que les Américains devraient tenir compte d’Israël lorsqu’il est inquiet de quelque chose. « Personne ne peut pas critiquer Israël d’être très sceptique sur n’importe quel accord avec un gouvernement comme celui d’Iran, qui comprend des dirigeants niant l’Holocauste, soutient une idéologie antisémite et facilite l’afflux de roquettes qui sont stockées aux frontières d’Israël », a-t-il souligné. Les Américains « doivent prendre au sérieux les préoccupations en Israël », a-t-il noté en mentionnant la volonté de l’administration d’augmenter l’aide militaire et la coopération en matière de renseignement « pour aider à répondre aux besoins sécuritaires urgent d’Israël ».
Obama a pourtant ensuite attaqué le point sensible avançant un argument difficile à contrer pour les Juifs américains, les soutiens d’Israël et d’autres opposants à l’accord. « Je crois que les faits soutiennent cet accord, a-t-il déclaré. Je crois qu’ils sont dans les intérêts de l’Amérique et dans les intérêts d’Israël, et en tant que président des Etats-Unis, cela serait un non respect de mon devoir constitutionnel d’agir contre le jugement que je considère le meilleur simplement parce qu’il entraîne une tension temporaire avec un ami et allié cher ». En d’autres termes, Obama laisse entendre que si le chef de l’armée choisit de poursuivre une certaine stratégie et ensuite s’y oppose sur la base du désaccord d’un autre pays, même un pays allié, il dépasse les limites.
Voilà pourquoi, un jour après que Netanyahu a fait une visioconférence avec des Juifs américains soulignant ses objections à l’accord, Obama a insisté sur le fait qu’Israël est seul à le rejeter. Il voulait signaler aux soutiens américains d’Israël et à d’autres opposants de l’accord qu’il n’y a pas de raison rationnelle de le combattre, si ce n’est une allégeance exagérée, et peut-être même problématique, à Israël."

- Nucléaire iranien : "de nombreux dirigeants européens opposés à l'accord", Tal Shalev (i24) - "Beaucoup d'entre eux pensent que c'est un mauvais accord mais malheureusement ils n'ont pas le courage de le dire à haute voix".
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/diplomatie-defense/81158-150806-israel-fait-face-a-une-realite-plus-menacante-responsable-militaire
"De nombreux dirigeants européens, dont des membres du 5+1, ont confié en privé être opposés à l’accord nucléaire iranien, a déclaré jeudi Malcolm Hoenlein, vice-président de la conférence des présidents, et l'une des figures les plus éminentes de la communauté juive américaine. "Beaucoup d'entre eux pensent que c'est un mauvais accord mais malheureusement ils n'ont pas le courage de le dire à haute voix", a-t-il ajouté, lors d'une rencontre avec des journalistes israéliens, selon la correspondante diplomatique d'i24news, Tal Shalev.
Hoenlein, qui entretient des contacts étroits avec de nombreux dirigeants d'Etats arabes sunnites modérés, a également insisté sur leur opposition. "Tout ce que vous entendez de Netanyahou n'est rien à côté de ce disent les dirigeants saoudiens et égyptiens derrières les portes closes", a-t-il précisé.
Par ailleurs, l’accord sur le nucléaire iranien conduira "nécessairement au recours à la force contre l’Iran, à un stade ou un autre, afin d’arrêter sa course vers l’arme nucléaire", a averti l’ancien conseiller à la sécurité nationale du Premier ministre israélien, le lieutenant général Yaakov Amidror. "Il est clair que l’accord a été signé dans le but de retarder le programme nucléaire militaire iranien, non d’y mettre fin (…) quand le problème refera surface, il sera autrement plus sérieux", a déclaré Amidror, dans un article détaillé publié par le centre Begin-Sadat de l’Université Bar Ilan.
L’ex-conseiller de Netanyahou nuance toutefois ses propos en expliquant que l’accord peut également être un moyen pour Israël de gagner du temps pour être mieux préparé au défi iranien. Cependant, dit-il, "la réalité est aujourd’hui plus menaçante qu’auparavant" pour Israël, comme pour le monde.
"L’accord de Vienne a rendu la situation plus complexe et dangereuse, et non l’inverse", selon Amidror qui réfute l’argument de Barack Obama selon lequel l’accord est imparfait mais bénéfique. L’expert militaire s’en prend ainsi aux Etats-Unis, dont la politique de départ a été "oubliée", estime-t-il. "La politique américaine était claire : démanteler les capacités nucléaires de l’Iran (…) mais à un certain point, les Américains ont décidé de reporter la capacité de l’Iran à obtenir l’arme atomique de 10 à 15 ans", indique-t-il pour expliquer ensuite que ce changement de politique a rendu impossible d’inclure Israël dans les négociations. [...]"

- Obama Puts Fear Before Facts on Iran (Bloomberg View) - "He had a case to make but chose not to make it. He decided instead to cast legitimate criticism of his pact as ignorant warmongering".
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-05/obama-puts-fear-before-facts-on-iran
"President Barack Obama took to the airwaves today, aiming to sell Congress and the American people on the wisdom of his nuclear deal with Iran. He had a case to make but chose not to make it. He decided instead to cast legitimate criticism of his pact as ignorant warmongering.
A few examples:
"We have achieved a detailed arrangement that permanently prohibits Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon." Actually, the deal's restrictions end abruptly after 15 years, with some of the constraints on uranium enrichment fading away after just 10. Late in the speech, Obama made the case that much can change in a decade and that the West could be in a stronger position then to continue to block Iran's nuclear desires. But the temporary nature of the deal remained disguised.
"Many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal." Certainly the Iraq war was sold on spurious grounds and had tragic results. Certainly Republicans and Democrats alike were far too credulous in accepting the Bush administration's rationale. But these facts have absolutely nothing to do with this agreement.
"Before the ink was even dry on this deal, before Congress even read it, a majority of Republicans declared their virulent opposition." That's true, but ignores that opponents had plenty of time to study the draft agreement reached last spring. The real problem is that Congress still hasn't read the entire accord, its side agreements and the inspections plan negotiated by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Even Secretary of State John Kerry says there are aspects of the deal he has never seen.
"If there is a reason for inspecting a suspicious undeclared site anywhere in Iran, inspectors will get that access even if Iran objects. This access can be with as little as 24 hours' notice." The key words here are "as little as." Iran can draw that process out for as long as 24 days if it so chooses. Foreign Minister Javad Zarif says some military sites will remain off-limits to IAEA personnel.
"If, as has also been suggested, we tried to maintain unilateral sanctions, beefen them up … we'd have to cut off countries like China from the American financial system. And since they happen to be major purchasers of our debt, such actions could trigger severe disruptions in our own economy, and, by way, raise questions internationally about the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency." Rejection by Congress could cause the sanctions regime to fray. Lawmakers should weigh this. The idea that it might cripple the U.S. economy is absurd.
"I've had to make a lot of tough calls as president, but whether or not this deal is good for American security is not one of those calls, it's not even close." Maybe this deal is the best chance to delay the mullahs' race to the bomb and keep the Middle East out of a nuclear arms race. But the case is anything but open-and-shut. It's hard to see what the president gains from denying this.
Well, perhaps one thing: Obama may hope that denigrating those who disagree with him will rally Democrats in Congress to support a veto of any measure of disapproval. Tactics aside, it would be far better to win this fight fairly. The pact is not a treaty: A future president and Congress might overturn it, arguing that it was sealed without proper consideration. And history often looks with disgust at causes built on fear, especially if they go awry. Obama wouldn't want to face the kind of scorn he heaped on George W. Bush today."

Partager cet article
Repost0
5 août 2015 3 05 /08 /août /2015 23:14

France


- Libération : Quand on se croit mandaté par le Bien, on ne s’embarrasse pas des détails techniques, Noémie Benchimol (Rootsisrael) - "il est impardonnable qu’un journal avec tant de crédibilité que Libération se laisse aller à publier des erreurs factuelles et des articles fleuves sans aucune prise sur la réalité". Une critique en règle et détaillée d'un article très biaisé de Libération.
http://rootsisrael.com/liberation-quand-on-se-croit-mandate-par-le-bien-on-ne-sembarrasse-pas-des-details-techniques/

***********************************************

Israël

- Breaking taboo, Jerusalem Palestinians seek Israeli citizenship, Maayan Lubell (Reuters) - "Palestinians who have applied do not like to talk about it. The loyalty oath is not an easy thing for them to sign up to and becoming a naturalized Israeli - joining the enemy - is taboo".
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/03/us-israel-palestinians-jerusalem-insight-idUSKCN0Q81HP20150803
""I declare I will be a loyal citizen of the state of Israel," reads the oath that must be sworn by all naturalized Israeli citizens. Increasingly, they are words being uttered by Palestinians.
In East Jerusalem, which Israel captured from Jordan during the 1967 Middle East war and later annexed, a move not recognized internationally, issues of Palestinian identity are layered with complexity. While Israel regards the east of the city as part of Israel, the estimated 300,000 Palestinians that live there do not. They are not Israeli citizens, instead holding Israeli-issued blue IDs that grant them permanent resident status. While they can seek citizenship if they wish, the vast majority reject it, not wanting to renounce their own history or be seen to buy into Israel's 48-year occupation.
And yet over the past decade, an increasing number of East Jerusalem Palestinians have gone through the lengthy process of becoming Israeli citizens, researchers and lawyers say. In part it reflects a loss of hope that an independent Palestinian state will ever emerge. But it also reflects a hard-headed pragmatism - an acknowledgement that having Israeli citizenship will make it easier to get or change jobs, buy or move house, travel abroad and receive access to services.
Israeli officials are reluctant to confirm figures, but data obtained by the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies indicates a jump over the past decade, rising from 114 applications in 2003 to between 800 and 1,000 a year now, around half of which are successful. On top of that, hundreds have made inquiries before the formal application process begins. Interior Ministry figures obtained by Reuters show there were 1,434 applications in 2012-13, of which 189 were approved, 1,061 are still being processed and 169 were rejected. The remainder are in limbo.
Palestinians who have applied do not like to talk about it. The loyalty oath is not an easy thing for them to sign up to and becoming a naturalized Israeli - joining the enemy - is taboo. "It felt bad, really bad," said a 46-year-old Palestinian teacher who took the oath a year ago. Despite her reservations, she knew it was right for stability and career prospects. "We just want to live our lives," she said. "At the end of the day, politics gets you nowhere." [...]
However, some other Palestinians fear their community's reaction to breaking the taboo, so keep their decision even from family and friends.
For many Palestinians, East Jerusalem feel likes a twilight zone. They pay Israeli municipal taxes and receive healthcare and insurance benefits, but are often neglected when it comes to basic city services - from trash collection to new playgrounds and resources in schools and clinics. The situation is particularly bad in places like Shuafat, a refugee camp a few minutes away from the Old City. Shuafat lies beyond the concrete barrier built by Israel in the mid-2000s, after a wave of Palestinian suicide bombings. [...]"
- More Jerusalem Arabs applying for Israeli citizenship (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/more-jerusalem-arabs-applying-for.html
"[...] The Jerusalem municipality can't do anything about Shuafat - if Israel dismantles a "refugee" camp the world would freak out. There have been UN resolutions condemning Israel for thinking about dismantling camps in Gaza when there was still an Israeli presence there. UNRWA agrees to provide services for that area. So Palestinian Arabs keep its residents as zoo animals to show off how bad things are for them - and Reuters uses it as an example of how Israel doesn't take care of its Arab residents of Jerusalem. In fact, Israeli ambulances that venture into Shuafat often get stoned.
Then comes this interesting fact [in Reuters' article]: "More Palestinians, albeit in small numbers, have also been moving into predominantly Jewish neighborhoods and even settlements on occupied land." You know, those "Jewish only" neighborhoods we hear so much about. [...]"

- When will NGOs complain about Israel's use of administrative detention against Jews? (Elder of Ziyon) - "There have been hundreds of articles decrying Israel's use of administrative detention against Arabs. [...] Will any of these organizations publicly call for these three Jews to be released or charged with a crime?"
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/when-will-ngos-complain-about-israels.html


***********************************************

Gaza & Hamas

- Israël assure à Abbas qu’il ne parle pas de trêve avec le Hamas, Avi Issacharoff (Times of Israel) - "Bien qu’Israël est conscient qu’un accord nuirait à l’Autorité palestinienne et renforcerait le Hamas, son refus de discuter d’une trêve a surtout à voir avec l’opposition de l’Egypte".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/israel-assure-abbas-quil-ne-parle-pas-de-treve-avec-le-hamas/
"Israël a envoyé un message à l’Autorité palestinienne l’assurant qu’il ne négocie en aucune manière avec le mouvement terroriste du Hamas un cessez-le-feu à long terme dans la bande de Gaza, ont confié des sources palestiniennes au Times of Israel. Le message est venu suite à des soupçons de l’AP que des représentants du gouvernement du Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu négocieraient avec le Hamas sur les termes d’une trêve de cinq ans dans le sillage de la guerre de l’été dernier dans la bande de Gaza. Le bureau du Premier ministre a refusé de commenter.
Au cours des pourparlers entre responsables israéliens et palestiniens au cours des dernières semaines en Israël, à Ramallah, et à l’étranger, les représentants de l’AP ont exprimé clairement leurs préoccupations concernant les implications qu’un tel développement pourrait avoir sur l’image de l’AP au sein du public palestinien. [...]
Bien qu’Israël est conscient qu’un accord nuirait à l’Autorité palestinienne et renforcerait le Hamas, son refus de discuter d’une trêve a surtout à voir avec l’opposition de l’Egypte. Le Caire se méfie d’un renforcement du Hamas parce que le groupe de Gaza est un proche allié des Frères musulmans, le principal adversaire du régime égyptien. [...]"

- UNRWA : un trou de 100 millions de dollars (AFP)
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/08/05/97001-20150805FILWWW00004-unrwa-un-trou-de-100-millions-de-dollars.php
"Le secrétaire général de l'ONU Ban Ki-moon a lancé hier [mardi] un appel pressant aux donateurs pour combler un trou de 100 millions de dollars dans le budget de l'agence de l'ONU qui aide les réfugiés palestiniens (UNRWA). Dans un communiqué, Ban Ki-Moon «exhorte tous les donateurs à faire que les 100 millions de dollars nécessaires soient versés à l'UNRWA dans les plus brefs délais afin que les enfants de Palestine puissent commencer leur année scolaire 2015-2016 sans retard». [...]"
- Hamas says it will force UNRWA not to delay school year (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/hamas-says-it-will-force-unrwa-not-to.html
"Palestine Press Agency reports that Hamas said it will take legal action against UNRWA to ensure it doesn't reduce services and postpone the beginning of the school year in the Gaza Strip as it has considered. Hamas MP Abdul Rahman Al-Jamal said that the UNRWA crisis is "fabricated" and aims to end the refugee issue altogetherm and that it has no financial crisis. He said the Legislative Council will not allow the school year to be postponed. [...]"

- A Taste of “Concentration Camp” Gaza: Blue Beach Resort, Aussie Dave (Israellycool) - "Inspired by the Gaza mall photos, I have featured on this blog various facilities from Gaza, with the aim of providing readers with a glimpse into the real Gaza, which is anything but a concentration camp as some claim. My point is not that there is no hardship in Gaza, but rather that the situation is a far cry from what is being presented by the Palestinians, their supporters and the mainstream media".
http://www.israellycool.com/2015/08/03/a-taste-of-concentration-camp-gaza-blue-beach-resort/

- Amnesty's deception of the day (Elder of Ziyon) - "Amnesty International's daily anti-Israel tweet"; "While Amnesty is attempting to paint Israel as guilty of war crimes, it is in fact adding every day more and more evidence that Amnesty in the Middle East is little more than an anti-Israel propaganda outlet masquerading as a human rights NGO".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/amnestys-deception-of-day.html

***********************************************

"Processus de paix"

- Most Palestinians want economic cooperation with Israel, poll shows (CAMERA) - “a majority (55 percent) in the West Bank, and nearly as many in Gaza (48 percent), also say they would ‘like to see Israeli companies offer more jobs inside’ those areas”; "Only 14 percent of Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and 24 percent of Gazans polled said that “working to establish a Palestinian state” was their top priority. In contrast, “making enough money to live” and “having a good family life” polled much higher in both areas". Mais 58% des habitants de Cisjordanie et 65% des Gazaouis déclarent que, même si un accord pour deux Etats était signé, "la lutte ne serait pas terminée et la résistance devrait se poursuivre jusqu'à ce que la totalité de la Palestine historique [c'est-à-dire Israël] soit libérée"... et 56% des habitants de Cisjordanie, ainsi que 84% des Gazaouis soutiennent les moyens violents pour cet objectif.
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2015/08/most_palestinians_want_economi.html

- The man the Palestinian Authority pays to lie (Elder of Ziyon) - "Stories of Jews uprooting olive trees and burning crops on Shabbat are part of his weekly routine, and no Arab media outlet is going to check on any of his preposterous lies. And he never, ever produces photos of his discoveries. Now, the episode in Duma is giving him a chance to show off more of his skills at creating lurid lies and incitement against Jews".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/the-man-palestinian-authority-pays-to.html


***********************************************

Iran

- Transcript of Bibi phone call on Iran deal (Elder of Ziyon) - Une très bonne et claire synthèse des arguments israéliens (qu'on les partage ou non) contre l'accord iranien.
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/transcript-of-bibi-phone-call-on-iran.html

- The Five Fatal Flaws in the Iran Deal, Rick Richman (Commentary)
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/08/04/iran-nuclear-deal-fatal-flaws/
"On Tuesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony from Amb. Robert G. Joseph, Ph.D, currently Senior Scholar at the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, and the person who in 2003 led the nuclear negotiations with Libya. He testified the Iran deal is a “bad agreement” with “five fatal flaws”:
1) it does not effectively detect cheating unless Iran decides to do it openly, and Iran is more likely to cheat at military bases where it has cheated in the past and has ruled out inspections in the future;
2) it leaves a large‐scale nuclear infrastructure in place that could be used to break out, or more likely “sneak‐out,” and then permits a significantly expanded program with a “virtually zero” breakout time;
3) it has “snap‐back” provisions that are illusory;
4) the purported 12-month breakout time is ineffective, since, unless Iran breaks out openly, we will not even know when the clock begins,and months will go by while the U.S. debates internally what to do;
5) Iran is permitted to continue work on long-range ballistic missiles that have no use other than eventual deployment of nuclear weapons.
His conclusion is stark: "[The deal] assumes that permitting Iran a large‐scale enrichment capability is compatible with the goal of denying Iran the ability to produce weapons‐grade fissile material; it assumes that the twelve month breakout time is meaningful; it assumes that the agreement will be effectively verifiable; and it assumes that the United States and the international community will respond to evidence of cheating before Iran can mate a nuclear weapon to a ballistic missile. None of these assumptions holds up under scrutiny. As a result, the threat to the U.S. homeland and to our NATO allies of an Iran armed with nuclear tipped ballistic missiles will increase not decrease under the anticipated agreement."
And that is even before considering the risks of proliferation in the region, the existential threat to Israel, seriously frayed relations with Arab allies, and the vastly increased resources for Iran and its allies to establish a game-changing hegemony in a vital strategic area of the world.
Amb. Joseph is not simply an independent expert but one with considerable real-world experience, not only with Libya but with the North Korean fiasco. He testified Tuesday that in 2003 the United States insisted upon and got “anytime, anywhere” inspections in Libya — to all sites, declared and undeclared. [...]"

- Pour Obama, « la seule option sera la guerre » si le Congrès américain bloque l’accord sur le nucléaire iranien, Gilles Paris (Le Monde.fr) - "Abordant longuement la question de l’opposition à l’accord du premier ministre israélien, Benyamin Nétanyahou, M. Obama a déclaré : « Je crois qu’il a tort. »" Il est assez amusant de voir Le Monde s'attarder longuement sur la réplique d'Obama à ses contradicteurs... sans jamais avoir véritablement restitué leurs arguments.
http://www.lemonde.fr/ameriques/article/2015/08/05/pour-obama-la-seule-option-sera-la-guerre-si-le-congres-americain-bloque-l-accord-sur-le-nucleaire-iranien_4713249_3222.html
"[...] Considérant que l’accord ne réglait pas tous les problèmes avec l’Iran mais précisément l’objectif qu’il s’était fixé, à savoir empêcher la République islamique d’obtenir l’arme nucléaire, le président s’en est pris avec virulence à ses critiques. « Leur rhétorique vous semble familière ? », a-t-il interrogé, « et pour cause, ce sont les mêmes qui argumentaient pour une guerre en Irak ». Cette guerre coûteuse, a-t-il dit, les États-Unis continuent d’en payer le prix, compte tenu de leur engagement contre les djihadistes de l’Etat islamique. « Le seul bénéficiaire de cette guerre », a-t-il ajouté, « a été la République islamique d’Iran. »
M. Obama s’est ensuite lancé dans un long plaidoyer sur la supériorité de la diplomatie sur les formules bellicistes de ses adversaires. « Les sanctions unilatérales américaines seules n’avaient rien produit », a-t-il rappelé, « cela a changé quand nous avons été capables de rassembler la communauté internationale » pour parvenir à un régime plus efficace même s’il avait un prix pour certains des alliés des États-Unis qui commerçaient avec l’Iran. M. Obama a ensuite énuméré les avantages de l’accord, rappelant que seul Israël s’y opposait publiquement.
Le président des États-Unis s’est attaqué à deux arguments de ses contradicteurs : le fait que l’Iran pourrait reprendre un programme interdit après dix ou quinze ans et qu’elle allait bénéficier d’importants revenus. Si l’accord n’est pas ratifié par le Congrès, a-t-il assuré, l’Iran reprendra immédiatement ses activités et parviendra rapidement à ses fins, précipitant l’escalade. Il a assuré par ailleurs que les sanctions par elles seules n’avaient jamais empêché Téhéran d’avancer dans la quête de la bombe, pas plus qu’elles ne l’avaient empêché de financer des groupes hostiles aux États-Unis et à leurs alliés dans la région.
M. Obama a estimé que camper sur une ligne intransigeante pour obtenir « un meilleur accord », formule qu’il s’est efforcé de tourner en ridicule, une reddition complète de l’Iran, provoquerait un réflexe d’unité du pays autour du régime tout en disloquant la coalition patiemment mise sur pied. « Ne nous attendons pas à ce que nos partenaires se plient à des diktats du Congrès américain », a-t-il prévenu, « notre objectif commun n’a jamais été un changement de régime » à Téhéran.
Dramatisant à dessein l’enjeu, le président des États-Unis a assuré que si le Congrès rejette l’accord, « la seule option sera la guerre », même si ce n’est pas immédiatement. « Certains de mes contradicteurs assument le prix de la guerre, assurent qu’une opération préventive permettra de régler le problème sans trop de conséquences », a assuré M. Obama, « mais a-t-on tiré les leçons du passé ? Les guerres au Proche-Orient peuvent-elles être simples ? »
Abordant longuement la question de l’opposition à l’accord du premier ministre israélien, Benyamin Nétanyahou, M. Obama a déclaré : « Je crois qu’il a tort. » « Je ne peux pas m’empêcher de prendre une décision au seul motif que cela froisse temporairement mon allié », a-t-il ajouté. « La paix n’est pas l’absence de conflit, c’est le moyen de faire face à des conflits par des moyens pacifiques », a ajouté le président, citant à dessein son prédécesseur républicain Ronald Reagan, capable de conclure comme John F. Kennedy des accords avec l’Union soviétique alors qu’elle constituait une « menace existentielle » pour les États-Unis [le parallèle avec Ronald Reagan, selon certains experts, n'est pas vraiment un bon argument pour défendre cet accord, au contraire...]. « Si le Congrès bloque l’accord », a-t-il conclu avant d’inviter les Américains à se faire entendre auprès de leurs élus, « nous perdrons quelque chose de bien plus précieux que l’accord lui-même : notre crédibilité »."

- Obama Plays Politics of Fear to Get His Iran Deal, Eli Lake (Bloomberg View) - "It discredits the deal's opponents before they can tarnish the deal themselves. But this tactic also counts as what Obama once called "the politics of fear"."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-03/obama-plays-politics-of-fear-to-get-his-iran-deal
"If you are a progressive activist, President Obama can tell you everything you need to know about the Iran deal in one word: NEOCONS!
I overstate, but only slightly. Since the U.S. and five other world powers agreed to terms last month intended to lift sanctions and check Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, a key pillar of the White House argument for the deal is to point out who is against it.
Consider Obama's message to progressive activists on Thursday. In a conference call where only the president spoke, Obama warned his supporters, "You will hear a lot of arguments out there about why this is a 'bad deal' from people who, frankly, would be opposed to any deal with Iran."
He went onto say that the arguments were bolstered by a $20 million ad campaign, a veiled reference to lobbying by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. He then said some of the campaign comprises "the same columnists and former elected, former administration officials that were responsible for us getting into the Iraq war and were making these exact same claims back in 2002, 2003, with respect to Iraq."
This kind of dog whistling from Obama does a disservice to his supporters. He's exploiting his base's deep fear of all things neoconservative. It's true that neocons in 2002 and 2003 supported and argued for the Iraq war. Some of them helped plan the war. But many Democrats also supported the Iraq war, including Obama's first secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. And yet in 2015 many prominent progressives still obsess about the out-of-power neocons, and darkly imply that they undermine the national interest on behalf of Israel.
For Obama's base, the neocons were not just policy intellectuals on the wrong side of an unpopular war, but were instead agents that pulled off a kind of coup d'etat and foisted a war on an unsuspecting public. Most serious people don't believe this anymore. But it's nonetheless a popular fable among the net-roots to this day. What a terrifying world! Every election brings with it the prospect that our republic will fall under the power of a bunch of disloyal bureaucrats eager to shed American blood for Israel.
Suggesting that another disastrous war in the Middle East is just a few op-ed columns away, the president can activate progressive bloggers, volunteers and activists who themselves should be disappointed by Obama's foreign policy. After all, Obama has yet to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Under Obama's leadership, the use of drone strikes has increased and become commonplace in countries like Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan -- countries where the U.S. is not formally at war. But if he reminds the base that he is the one fighting the neocons, it's 2008 all over again.
This Iran deal will be Obama's foreign policy legacy. It's clever of him to frame the agreement as a triumph over the mentality that got us into the Iraq War. It discredits the deal's opponents before they can tarnish the deal themselves. But this tactic also counts as what Obama once called "the politics of fear." No, Obama isn't warning activists that the other side isn't vigilant enough against terrorism. He's just saying his opponents seek war and only his policies can bring peace.
But the Iran deal is no peace treaty. It's an executive agreement that broadly ends an economic war against Iran in exchange for Iran's promise over the next 10 to 20 years to allow more transparency and place some limits on its nuclear program. Iran is not committed to ending its support for terrorists or proxies that have killed Americans. In fact, as the region prepares for Iran to rise, Obama has promised to sell more arms to U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel, who consider Iran to be at war with them.
The best that Obama can hope for in the aftermath of his deal is that over time Iran is deterred from continuing its aggression in the Middle East. But Iran isn't likely to pull back unless it sees a credible chance that war will be waged against it. Obama may even find himself having to threaten Iran for the sake of peace in the region. Just don't tell his base. They are frightened enough already."

***********************************************

USA

- US Airstrikes on ISIS Kill 459 Civilians, Show Double Standard on Israel, Benyamin Korn (Algemeiner) - "Somehow I doubt that Obama’s bombers have been going as far as the Israelis did in Gaza last year, to avoid harm to civilians. Are U.S. military personnel telephoning civilians in the area of planned anti-ISIS bombing raids, urging them to evacuate? Are U.S. planes dropping warning leaflets in areas they are planning to hit?"; "Now here’s where things get really sticky. During the Gaza war, the Obama Administration repeatedly chastised Israel over Palestinian civilian casualties. The Administration complained that Israel’s response to Hamas rocket terror was “disproportionate,” and that Israel should “do more” to avoid harm".
http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/08/05/us-airstrikes-on-isis-kill-459-civilians-show-double-standard-on-israel/
"Four hundred and fifty-nine innocent civilians have been killed by U.S.-led air strikes on ISIS targets in Syria and Iraq over the past year, according to a new report. It will be interesting to see how the international community reacts.
The new figures were released on August 3 by Airwars, an independent monitoring group that tracks and reports on air strikes against ISIS. Airwars says that it verifies its information by using “two or more generally credible sources, often with biographical, photographic or other evidence.”
The Obama Administration, however, has acknowledged only two civilian deaths from its air strikes. That’s a pretty significant discrepancy – 459 versus two. One wonders how the news media will treat that anomaly. When Arabs accuse Israel of killing large numbers of civilians, and the Israelis say that only a small number were killed, the Israeli position is routinely met with scoffing and derision from reporters.
Whether the number is 459 or 2, reasonable people would agree that the Obama Administration is surely doing everything it can to avoid civilian casualties, so whatever the number, it must be an inevitable byproduct of war, not the result of American recklessness.
Somehow I doubt that Obama’s bombers have been going as far as the Israelis did in Gaza last year, to avoid harm to civilians. Are U.S. military personnel telephoning civilians in the area of planned anti-ISIS bombing raids, urging them to evacuate? Are U.S. planes dropping warning leaflets in areas they are planning to hit? Not likely. Because doing so would mean giving up the military’s advantage of surprise – something the Israelis did, but I doubt President Obama is demanding. [...]
Now here’s where things get really sticky. During the Gaza war, the Obama Administration repeatedly chastised Israel over Palestinian civilian casualties. The Administration complained that Israel’s response to Hamas rocket terror was “disproportionate,” and that Israel should “do more” to avoid harm. [...]"

***********************************************

Europe

- Where's the Coverage: Jewish Athletes Threatened in Berlin (CAMERA) - "The European Maccabi Games—a Jewish sporting event held every four years and also open to non-Jews—took place this July in Berlin, Germany. Jewish athletes were faced with threats and intimidation that went widely unreported in most major media outlets"; "Jewish athletes were warned about traveling in large groups in Neukolln [district with a large Muslim population] and told not to wear “visibly Jewish items,” such as Stars of David and kippahs. It was also recommended that Jews travel in taxis and avoid “sensitive areas of Berlin”; those with high Muslim populations often hostile to Jewish people".
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2015/08/wheres_the_coverage_jewish_ath.html

Partager cet article
Repost0
4 août 2015 2 04 /08 /août /2015 22:11

France


- Un Français blessé sur l'Esplanade des Mosquées (AFP) - voir une image du touriste battu par des musulmans ici.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/08/04/97001-20150804FILWWW00090-un-francais-blesse-sur-l-esplanade-des-mosquees.php
"Un touriste français chrétien a été rudoyé et légèrement blessé par des Palestiniens ce matin quand il a déployé un drapeau israélien sur l'esplanade des Mosquées [et Mont du Temple...], haut lieu de l'islam [et du judaïsme...] à Jérusalem-Est, a indiqué la police israélienne. Cet homme a été légèrement blessé à la tête et devait recevoir des soins et ensuite être placé en détention, a indiqué une porte-parole de la police. La police n'a pas précisé les motivations de cet homme d'une trentaine d'années, qui encourt des poursuites selon la porte-parole. Les quatre hommes soupçonnés d'avoir pris part aux violences contre lui ont également été placés en détention, a dit la porte-parole. [...]
La police autorise les juifs à se rendre sur l'esplanade [et Mont du Temple...] mais leur interdit d'y prier ou d'y brandir des symboles nationaux pour éviter des heurts avec les musulmans."
- How a French tourist turned into an "Israeli settler extremist" on the Temple Mount (Elder of Ziyon) - "It is far from clear that he "waved" the Israeli flag. My guess is that he simply was carrying a souvenir flag that he had bought; there is no video of his waving it or of the crowd ripping it up so for all we know it was a lapel pin".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/how-french-tourist-turned-into-israeli.html

- Air France wipes Israel off of the map...literally (JP)
http://www.jpost.com/International/Air-France-wipes-Israel-off-of-the-mapliterally-410999
"An Air France in-flight map omits Israel, according to a passenger who sent a photo to the Facebook page of the pro-Israel organization Stand With Us. In the photo of the map [voir image sur le site de l'article], there were only indicators of where the West Bank and the Gaza strip are. Since posting that photo, other members of the Facebook page have started posting their own photos, taken on Air France flights, of the in-flight maps sans Israel.
In a letter to Air France chairman and CEO, Frédéric Gagey, the Simon Wiesenthal Center director for international Relations, Dr. Shimon Samuels, noted that, “French members of our center have sent us reportedly captured shots from the English and French language of an Air France flight-path, taken last week between New York and Paris, and the locations ‘Israel’ and ‘Tel Aviv’ are glaringly absent.” The letter noted that, “We are asked whether Air France has succumbed to the BDS [Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions] campaign to delegitimize the Jewish State by literally wiping it off the map?”
Air France issued an apology, saying they “deeply regret this incident, due to a map scale and display problem which is currently being resolved.” In 2009, British Midland International Airlines, a subset of British Airways, apologized for omitting Israel from their in-flight maps, also attributed to a technical error."

- In AFP Captions, Only Palestinians Are Peace Activists (CAMERA) - "On Sunday, an Israeli peace group organized an event drawing together Israelis and Palestinians who stood together against violence and for peace. Why did Agence France-Presse call only the Palestinians "peace activists" while referring to the Israeli participants as "Jewish settlers"? [...] CAMERA has asked AFP: Are the Israelis demonstrating against violence and in favor of peace not "peace activists?" Why the partial and inconsistent terminology?"
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2015/08/in_afp_captions_only_palestini.html

****************************************

Attentat de Duma

- Israël : un deuxième extrémiste juif arrêté (AFP)
http://www.liberation.fr/monde/2015/08/04/israel-un-deuxieme-extremiste-juif-arrete_1358882
"Un deuxième extrémiste juif a été arrêté mardi à la suite de l’incendie criminel qui a coûté la vie vendredi à un bébé palestinien en Cisjordanie, a annoncé le Shin Beth, le service de sécurité intérieure israélien. «Un deuxième individu, Eviatar Slonim, a été arrêté pour appartenance à une organisation extrémiste», a affirmé une porte-parole sans donner d’autres précisions sur les soupçons pesant sur lui.
Selon la radio militaire, cet homme était interdit par les autorités israéliennes d’entrer en Cisjordanie et à Jérusalem en raison de ses activités extrémistes, comme Meïr Ettinger, une figure de l’extrémisme juif, arrêté lundi et dont la garde à vue a été prolongée mardi. Ces deux arrestations sont présentées [autrement dit méfiez-vous, semble suggérer l'AFP...] comme la preuve de la détermination des autorités à combattre les groupes de la droite la plus extrême.
La deuxième chaîne de télévision israélienne a par ailleurs indiqué que le bureau du procureur général Yéhuda Weinstein avait donné mardi son feu vert au placement en détention administrative de trois extrémistes juifs. Pour être appliquée, cette mesure doit encore validée par le ministre de la Défense Moshé Yaalon, a ajouté la télévision. [...]"

- Netanyahu: I'm waiting for world to condemn terror against Jews (JP)
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Netanyahu-Im-waiting-for-international-community-condemnation-of-terror-against-Jews-411100
"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who visited a Jewish woman who was injured by a firebomb attack in Jerusalem on Monday said he was waiting for the international community to condemn the attack as it had previously condemned the arson attack in the West Bank that claimed the life of a Palestinian toddler, Ali Dawabsha.
"A few days ago I visited the injured brother of the baby Ali who died in a terror attack that targeted Arabs. Today I visited Inbar [Inbar Azrak], a young woman who was injured from a firebomb by terrorists targeting Jews. Ali's brother is four-years-old, Inbar is a young mother of three, ages, two, three and four," Netanyahu said. "Terrorism is terrorism is terrorism. Our policy is zero-tolerance for terrorism regardless of background. We condemn it and fight it in equal measure," he added.
Netanyahu said he was waiting for the international community to join him in condemning the attack against the Jewish woman. "Days ago the international community joined me in condemning the terrorist attack that targeted Arabs and I expect it now to join me in condemning terror targeting Jews." "I'm still waiting," Netanyahu said.
On Monday night, Azrak and her husband were injured in a firebomb attack near the Beit Hanina intersection in the capital. The incident occurred when a Molotov cocktail was thrown at their moving vehicle. Azrak, 27, was evacuated to Hadassah Ein Kerem Medical Center in stable condition with burns to her body. Her husband was unharmed, although the car was completely burnt."

- Palestinians: The Difference between Us and Them, Bassam Tawil (Gatestone Institute) - "The wall-to-wall Israeli condemnation of this crime has left me and other Palestinians not only ashamed, but also embarrassed -- because this is not how we Palestinians have been reacting to terror attacks against Jews -- even the despicable murder of Jewish children"; "I cannot remember ever hearing Abbas or any other Palestinian leader express shock and outrage over the killing of a Jew in a Palestinian terror attack. Nor can I remember the last time we heard of a Palestinian official visiting the Israeli victims of a Palestinian terror attack"; "When will we stop glorifying terrorists, and naming streets and public squares after them, instead of strongly denouncing them and expelling them from our society?"
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6281/palestinians-israel-terror-shame
"I cannot count the number of times that I heard from Israeli Jews the phrases "I'm ashamed" and "I'm sorry" in response to the horrific crime that claimed the life of Palestinian toddler Ali Dawabsha in the West Bank village of Duma last week.
The strong response of the Israeli public and leaders to the arson attack is, truthfully, somewhat comforting. The wall-to-wall Israeli condemnation of this crime has left me and other Palestinians not only ashamed, but also embarrassed -- because this is not how we Palestinians have been reacting to terror attacks against Jews -- even the despicable murder of Jewish children.
Our response has, in fact, brought feelings of disgrace and dishonor. While the Israeli prime minister, president and other officials were quick strongly to condemn the murder of Dawabsha, our leaders rarely denounce terror attacks against Jews. And when a Palestinian leader such as Mahmoud Abbas does issue a condemnation, it is often vague and equivocal.
Take, for example, what happened after last year's kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers by Palestinians in the West Bank. It not only took President Abbas four days to issue a statement condemning the terror attack, but even then, the condemnation was at best a tentative: "The Palestinian presidency... condemns the series of events that happened last week, beginning with the kidnapping of three Israeli youths." Abbas then went on to denounce Israel for arresting dozens of Hamas members after the abduction and murder of the three youths.
Later in 2014, when Abbas did condemn a Palestinian terror attack that killed five Israelis in a Jerusalem synagogue, Fatah official Najat Abu Baker, a few days later, explained that Abbas's condemnation was made "within a diplomatic context... [he] is forced to speak this way to the world."
Abbas's condemnation of the attack at the synagogue in Jerusalem's Har Nof neighborhood apparently came only under pressure from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who telephoned the Palestinian leader twice to demand that he speak out against the killings. Abbas's statement said that the Palestinian leadership condemns the "killing of worshippers in a synagogue and all acts of violence, regardless of their source." His statement then also called for an end to "incursions and provocations by settlers against the Aqsa Mosque."
Abbas's ambiguous, half-hearted condemnations of attacks by Palestinians against Israelis are only intended for public consumption and are primarily aimed at appeasing Western donors, so that they will continue channeling funds to the Palestinian Authority (PA). In addition, his condemnations almost always seek to blame Israel for the Palestinian terror attacks -- presumably an attempt to justify the killing of Jews at the hands of Palestinian terrorists.
In contrast, Israeli leaders who condemned the murder of the Palestinian toddler sound firm and unambiguous. Here is what Prime Minister Netanyahu said after visiting the murdered baby's parents and brother, who were wounded in the arson attack and are receiving medical treatment in Israeli hospitals: "When you stand next to the bed of this small child, and his infant brother has been so brutally murdered, we are shocked, we are outraged. We condemn this. There is zero tolerance for terrorism wherever it comes from, whatever side of the fence it comes from."
Netanyahu's strong and clear condemnation left me and other Palestinians wondering when was the last time we heard similar statements from our leaders. I cannot remember ever hearing Abbas or any other Palestinian leader express shock and outrage over the killing of a Jew in a Palestinian terror attack. Nor can I remember the last time we heard of a Palestinian official visiting the Israeli victims of a Palestinian terror attack.
The Israeli leaders' condemnation of the baby's murder is a sincere voice that reflects the views of the overwhelming majority of the Israeli public. In contrast, the Palestinian leaders' denunciations of terror attacks do not reflect the general feeling on the Palestinian street. Each time Abbas reluctantly condemns a Palestinian terror attack, he faces a wave of criticism from many Palestinians.
Unlike the Israeli public, many Palestinians often rush to justify, and even welcome, terror attacks against Jews. This was the situation just a few weeks ago, when an Israeli man was shot dead near Ramallah. Several Palestinian factions and military groups applauded the murder, calling it a "natural response to Israeli crimes."
This is the huge difference between the way Israelis and Palestinians react to terrorism. The murder of Dawabsha saw thousands of Israelis hold anti-violence rallies to condemn the horrible crime. But has anyone ever heard of a similar rally on the Palestinian side whenever terrorists kill innocent Jewish civilians? Is there one top Palestinian official or prominent figure who dares to speak out in public against the murder of Jews, at a rally in the center of Ramallah or Gaza City? Has there ever been a Palestinian activist who dared to hold a rally in a Palestinian city to condemn suicide bombings or the murder of an entire Jewish family?
While Israelis have been holding rallies to condemn terror attacks against our people, we have been celebrating the killing of Jews. How many times have we taken to the streets to hand out sweets and candies in jubilation over the killing of Jews? Such sickening scenes of men and women celebrating terror attacks against Jews on the streets of the West Bank and Gaza Strip have never been condemned by our leaders. These scenes have become commonplace each time Palestinian terrorists carry out an attack against Jews.
These scenes stand in sharp contrast to the public statements and rallies in Israel in response to terror attacks against Palestinians. Our leaders need to learn from Israel's President, Reuven Rivlin, who said he was "ashamed" and "in pain" for the murder of the Palestinian toddler. When was the last time a Palestinian leader used such rhetoric to condemn the murder of Jews? The laconic statements issued by Abbas's office in response to anti-Jewish terror attacks never talked about shame or pain.
We have failed to educate our people on the principles of tolerance and peace. Instead, we continue to condone and applaud terrorism, especially when it is directed against Jews. We want the whole world to condemn terrorism only when it claims the lives of Palestinians. We have reached a point where many of us are either afraid to speak out against terrorism or simply accept it when it claims the lives of Jews.
The Israeli president has good reason to be ashamed for the murder of the baby. But when will we Palestinians ever have a sense of shame over the way we are reacting to the murder of Jews? When will we stop glorifying terrorists, and naming streets and public squares after them, instead of strongly denouncing them and expelling them from our society? We still have a lot to learn from Israeli leaders and the Israeli public."

****************************************

Gaza & Hamas

- Amnesty lies again about Rafah school incident (Elder of Ziyon) - "Amnesty International, that respected human rights organization, continues its practice of daily anti-Israel lies. The missile didn't hit the school. It hit a motorcycle on the road outside the school"; "Amnesty is lying in tweeting that Israel shot at and hit the school. Yes, in this case there was a tragic miscalculation, but that is because Islamic Jihad terrorists were traveling next to the school, not because of IDF war crimes, as Amnesty wants the world to believe".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/amnesty-lies-again-about-rafah-school.html

****************************************

Monde arabe

- Yémen : un système sanitaire dévasté (AFP) - les hôpitaux "sont régulièrement visés, des plaques de métal ont été placées sur les fenêtres". MSF : "La population fait face à des pénuries de nourriture, le système de santé est en voie d'écroulement. Je n'ai jamais vu un tel niveau de violence". Et pourtant, nos médias couvrent-ils ce désastre ne serait-ce qu'un dixième du temps qu'ils avaient consacré (et consacrent encore) pour couvrir la situation dans la Bande de Gaza ?
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/08/04/97001-20150804FILWWW00194-yemen-un-systeme-sanitaire-devaste.php
"Pénuries de médicaments, de personnel, hôpitaux visés par des tirs : de retour d'une mission de dix semaines à Aden au Yémen, une équipe de Médecins sans frontières (MSF) a décrit aujourd'hui un système de santé dévasté par quatre mois de combats.
"La population fait face à des pénuries de nourriture, le système de santé est en voie d'écroulement. Je n'ai jamais vu un tel niveau de violence", a déploré Thierry Goffeau, coordinateur des projets à Aden pour Médecins sans frontières, lors d'une conférence de presse aujourd'hui à Paris. "Il est très difficile d'avoir accès aux populations et aux populations d'avoir accès aux hôpitaux du fait des bombardements et des combats", a ajouté Xavier Guinotte, directeur-adjoint des opérations.
La coalition arabe a lancé le 26 mars une campagne de raids aériens pour soutenir le président en exil Abd Rabbo Mansour Hadi, réfugié en Arabie saoudite, contre les rebelles chiites Houthis soutenus par l'Iran qui avaient conquis l'an dernier de larges pans du territoire. La guerre au Yémen a fait près de 4.000 morts en quatre mois selon l'ONU. [...]
La pénurie de fioul, l'insécurité et les bombardements quasi-quotidiens ont complètement désorganisé les transports, privant la population des soins les plus élémentaires. Résultat : "Des femmes nécessitant une césarienne meurent parce qu'elles n'arrivent pas à temps" à l'hôpital, a décrit Thierry Goffeau. Il n'y a plus de combats à Aden mais il reste "quelques snipers" et les hôpitaux "sont régulièrement visés, des plaques de métal ont été placées sur les fenêtres", a-t-il raconté. [...]"

- Can Jewish refugees claim billions from Arab states?, Dr. Adam Reuter (Ynet) - "More than 700,000 Jews fled from Arab countries by the mid 1960s, most of them immigrating to Israel. The property they left behind is estimated at billions of dollars, but the disintegration process most of these countries are going through doesn’t leave Mizrahi Jews much hope for compensation".
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4686648,00.html

****************************************

Europe

- Schools teaching 'pro-Palestinian extremist agenda’, Camilla Turner (The Telegraph)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11779570/Schools-teaching-pro-Palestinian-extremist-agenda.html
"An “extremist agenda” is being taught to children as young as three, it has been claimed, with the National Union of Teachers accused of “spreading political propaganda” in classrooms by promoting Palestinian “resistance”.
The NUT has designed and promoted a teaching resources pack, under a partnership with Edukid, a children’s education charity, which asks teachers to explore themes of Palestinian “occupation, freedom and resistance”. The resource pack, titled “My Name is Saleh” [voir image sur le site de l'article], and a video were launched at the NUT annual conference in April. Writing in the pack’s foreword, Christine Blower, the NUT general secretary, explains the project was “inspired by a union delegation visit [to the Palestinian territories] in 2013”.
However, concerns have been raised that the resource pack gives a “one sided” and “divisive” view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Images in the pack’s appendix feature a Palestinian child who has been “assaulted by settlers” and the video contains a reference to “Jews” as opposed to “Israelis”.
Tom Wilson, from the Henry Jackson Society, a think-tank, called the project “overtly agenda driven” and warned: "We need to be more vigilant about the politicisation of British classrooms”. The resource pack’s accompanying video contains references to “Jews” as opposed to “Israelis” was described as “extremely troubling” by Mr Wilson, who added that it carries a risk of “inciting tensions between faith communities in the UK”. “It is a particularly shameless example of political activism masquerading as a legitimate form of education,” he said. “When dealing with a subject as complex as the Israeli Palestinian conflict, it is so important to avoid giving young people a distorted or one sided account."
Sam Westrop, the director of Stand for Peace, a counter-extremism think-tank, said that by teaching school children that Palestinian “resistance” against Israel was a worthy cause, the “NUT’s political propaganda and misrepresentation serves the extremist agenda”. The Charities Commission said it would contact Edukid to assess whether regulations had been breached. [...]"

Partager cet article
Repost0
3 août 2015 1 03 /08 /août /2015 22:16
Image du 3 août

- By the way, Arabs throw firebombs at Jews every day (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/by-way-arabs-throw-firebombs-at-jews.html
"According to Shin Bet, in June there were 98 firebombs thrown by Arabs in June, 50 of them in Jerusalem. This was lower than the 129 Molotov cocktails hurled in May.
I don't know how many were aimed at residential buildings and how many at other objects like cars, but one can find plenty of photos and videos of Arabs throwing Molotov cocktails at houses. Luckily, no one was burned to death in these cases that happen multiple times every day, [vidéos sur le site]
These stories often don't even make the Israeli news. But the people who throw these firebombs intend exactly as much harm as the presumed Jewish terrorists who threw the firebomb at the house in Duma."

Partager cet article
Repost0
3 août 2015 1 03 /08 /août /2015 22:15

France


- Dany Boon : "Pour moi, le rire a toujours été une forme de réparation" (JDD) - "J'ai compris que ma conversion [au judaïsme] était réussie quand j'ai été inondé d'insultes et de menaces anonymes. C'était il y a treize ans, et ça continue encore aujourd'hui".
http://www.lejdd.fr/Culture/Cinema/Dany-Boon-Pour-moi-le-rire-a-toujours-ete-une-forme-de-reparation-744784
"- JDD : Vous jouez dans l'un des cinq sketches du prochain film d'Yvan Attal. Quel est votre rôle ?
- Dany Boon : J'incarne un Juif banlieusard totalement fauché. Et il finit par se convaincre que non, il ne peut pas être juif tellement il est dans la lose. Du coup, il a décidé de renier son identité, il en vient même à forcer sa fille à manger du jambon. Il refuse d'avoir les inconvénients, sans les avantages supposés, à savoir l'argent, le pouvoir… Ce sont des choses que j'ai moi-même pu entendre, notamment au moment de ma conversion au judaïsme. Un journaliste m'avait balancé : "Maintenant, que vous êtes juif, vous êtes riche." Je l'ai immédiatement rassuré : "J'étais riche quand j'étais catholique et il existe aussi des juifs pauvres." J'ai compris que ma conversion était réussie quand j'ai été inondé d'insultes et de menaces anonymes. C'était il y a treize ans, et ça continue encore aujourd'hui.
- Et vous le vivez comment ?
- Je suis rodé en matière de racisme. Dès mon enfance, j'ai connu le rejet avec un père kabyle musulman laïc et une mère catholique. J'ai vu le racisme contre les Kabyles de la part des Algériens, mais aussi l'exclusion de ma famille maternelle qui prenait mon père pour un Arabe. J'étais une minorité dans ma propre famille, où l'on vivait une forme d'exil intérieur. Comme mon père était boxeur, on ne l'emmerdait pas trop. J'étais moins costaud, donc j'ai opté pour l'humour. Je voulais comprendre pourquoi on me rejetait. La meilleure façon de se faire accepter est d'aller vers l'autre pour le faire marrer. Pour moi, le rire a toujours été une forme de réparation. [...]" (suite payante)

********************************************

Attentat de Duma

- La presse israélienne s’inquiète du « cancer » de l’extrémisme religieux (Le Monde.fr)
http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2015/08/03/la-presse-israelienne-prend-position-contre-l-extremisme-religieux_4709955_3218.html
"[...] Pour le quotidien The Jerusalem Post, « ces derniers jours comptent parmi les plus difficiles dans la courte histoire de l’Etat. » Et le coupable est tout trouvé : « Le fil rouge entre ces terribles incidents est l’extrémisme religieux », écrit le quotidien. Depuis des années, des extrémistes juifs agressent, au nom du « prix à payer », des Palestiniens et des Arabes israéliens. Ils vandalisent des lieux de culte musulmans et chrétiens ou s’en prennent même à l’armée israélienne. [...]
Le site israélien Ynetnews se dit ainsi préoccupé par l’émergence d’un « fanatisme juif nouveau et extrêmement dangereux ». Selon le quotidien, les services de sécurité intérieure d’Israël doivent faire face « à un nouveau type de cancer, violent et répugnant ». « Il s’agit d’un groupe de jeunes juifs qui a adopté un dénominateur idéologique commun, antisioniste, fanatique et anarchique qui cherche à détruire Israël pour établir un royaume saint. (...) Une organisation terroriste qui remet violemment en cause tous les fondements de la société israélienne ». Dans cette perspective, le meurtre du bébé palestinien de Duma « caractérise l’idéologie de ce groupe et leur manière de faire. Il ne s’agissait pas d’un acte de vengeance mais bien d’un crime fait pour attiser les braises d’un conflit civil », écrit le quotidien.
Du côté du quotidien Haaretz, qui prend régulièrement position contre la politique du premier ministre Benyamin Nétanyahou, le problème de l’extrémisme religieux va au-delà d’un petit groupe circonscrit et a gangréné la société israélienne. « Les événements de ces derniers jours sont le fruit de cette ambiance délétère qui a été créée récemment », écrit l’éditiorialiste Uzi Baram. [...]
Que faire dès lors pour éviter que ce « cancer » ne se généralise ? Dans une analyse datée du 3 août, le journaliste du Jerusalem Post Yaakov Lappin appelle ainsi à modifier les lois « laxistes » en vigueur concernant la répression des violences des extrémistes juifs. « Lorsque des assaillants lancent un coktail Molotov contre une maison palestinienne qui s’avère vide, ils s’en tirent, selon les lois actuelles, avec des poursuites pour atteintes à la propriété et finissent avec du sursis », explique-t-il. « Ils devraient pourtant être poursuivis pour tentative de meurtre », affirme le journaliste. [...]
Plus lapidaire, le quotidien Yediot Aharonot appelle pour sa part à une réponse autoritaire des autorités israéliennes « pour affronter les terroristes juifs » : « Cette fois-ci, on ne pourra pas se cacher. Nous devons retourner chaque pierre, les arrêter, les persécuter et détruire leurs maisons. Sans une décision courageuse, une fois pour toutes, cette affaire ne se calmera pas. (...) Ils doivent payer. » Car, pour le tabloïd connu pour ses prises de position conservatrices dans le domaine de la sécurité [???], la mort du bébé palestinien représente « un test pour l’ensemble d’entre nous »."

- Israël autorise les interrogatoires sévères pour les extrémistes juifs présumés (i24)
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/international/moyen-orient/80774-150803-israel-autorise-les-interrogatoires-severes-pour-les-extremistes-juifs-presumes
"[...] Le ministre de la Sécurité Intérieure, Gilad Erdan a déclaré que le cabinet de sécurité qui a approuvé les mesures de détention dimanche avait également autorisé les interrogatoires sévères, y compris les formes de "violence" qui consistent à secouer les suspects s'ils ne s'expriment pas. "Le cabinet de sécurité a affirmé aux services de protection hier, que toute méthode est 'casher'," a déclaré Erdan à Radio Israël. "Le fait de secouer le suspect s'il ne veut pas parler pendant l'interrogatoire sera autorisé, tout ce qu l'on fait aux terroristes palestiniens, sera valable pour les terroristes israéliens", a t-il ajouté. [...]"

- Arrestation d'un chef de file juif extrémiste israélien (AFP)
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/mort-dun-b%C3%A9b%C3%A9-cisjordanie-chef-file-juif-extr%C3%A9miste-182710148.html
"Les services de sécurité israéliens ont annoncé avoir arrêté lundi un chef de file juif extrémiste, Meïr Ettinger, premier individu arrêté après l'incendie criminel qui a coûté vendredi la vie à un bébé palestinien en Cisjordanie occupée. "Meïr Ettinger a été arrêté à Safed (dans le nord d'Israël) en raison de ses activités au sein d'une organisation juive extrémiste", a indiqué à l'AFP un porte-parole du Shin Beth, le service de sécurité intérieure.
Agé d'une vingtaine d'années, Meïr Ettinger, a été arrêté "pour des crimes nationalistes", a affirmé une porte-parole de la police à l'AFP sans préciser s'il était soupçonné d'être directement impliqué dans l'incendie de vendredi ou s'il était inquiété pour sa participation à d'autres violences racistes. Il doit être présenté devant un tribunal mardi pour la prolongation de sa garde à vue, a indiqué la police.
Selon les médias israéliens, il serait notamment soupçonné d'être le cerveau d'un groupuscule responsable de l'incendie le 18 juin de l'église de la Multiplication de pains sur les bords du lac de Tibériade, un des hauts lieux du christianisme.
Meïr Etttinger est le petit-fils de Meïr Kahane, un rabbin fondateur du mouvement raciste anti-arabe Kach, assassiné en 1990 à New-York. Il avait été interdit de séjour au début de l'année pour une période d'un an en Cisjordanie et à Jérusalem "en raison de ses activités", a précisé un porte-parole du Shin Beth. [...]"

- Les Palestiniens ont rapporté à la CPI l’incendie criminel de Duma (Times of Israel) - "La Jordanie et l’Autorité palestinienne ont également accepté de rédiger un appel commun destiné au Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU exigeant « une protection internationale pour le peuple palestinien et la fin de l’occupation israélienne » en réponse au décès de l’enfant de 18 mois".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/les-palestiniens-ont-rapporte-a-la-cpi-lincendie-criminel-de-duma/

- Settlers gather for interfaith vigil, but find few Palestinian takers (Times of Israel) - "The event was billed as a prayer vigil for settlers and Palestinians, but only three Palestinians attended".
http://www.timesofisrael.com/settlers-gather-for-interfaith-vigil-but-find-few-palestinian-takers/

********************************************

Israël

- Trois personnes blessées par un cocktail Molotov à Jérusalem (i24) - "Trois personnes ont été blessées par un cocktail Molotov lundi soir à Jérusalem-Est. Le cocktail Molotov visait une voiture israélienne. La conductrice, 27 ans, a été blessé modérément, a été emmenée à l’hôpital Shaarei Tsedek à Jérusalem. En perdant le contrôle de son véhicule, elle a blessé deux autres personnes légèrement".
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/international/moyen-orient/80774-150803-israel-autorise-les-interrogatoires-severes-pour-les-extremistes-juifs-presumes

- Sheikh at Al-Aqsa: Jews of Israel will be annihilated by Muslims, according to Allah's decree (Vidéo 3mn50) - "Sheikh Khaled Al-Mughrabi teaches Islam twice a week in the Al-Aqsa Mosque ‎Mosque in Jerusalem". Un extrait de son dernier prêche : "Your return and your presence in this land [Israël] is a ‎violation of Allah's command. Allah will inflict a painful and terrible punishment for this ‎violation - there will be destruction. Allah destroyed the people of Noah, 'Ad, Thamud ‎and the People of the Well (i.e., nations that sinned), and so He will destroy the ‎Children of Israel. It will be soon... Our piece of advice that we gave to the Children of ‎Israel - leave this holy land".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he2oIxnfJXo

- Les Palestiniens de Jérusalem-est veulent adopter la citoyenneté israélienne (i24) - "S’ils peuvent adopter la nationalité israélienne, l’énorme majorité la rejette, ne voulant pas renoncer à leur histoire et leur héritage historique. Pourtant, au cours des dix dernières années, un nombre important de Palestiniens de Jérusalem-Est ont complété la longue procédure afin de devenir citoyens israéliens".
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/societe/80813-150803-les-palestiniens-de-jerusalem-veulent-adopter-la-citoyennete-israelienne

********************************************

Judée-Samarie

- L’armée rase deux avant-postes illégaux sous des jets de pierre (Times of Israel) - "Les forces de sécurité ont démoli dans la nuit de dimanche à lundi quatre maisons dans deux implantations illégales en Cisjordanie, en essuyant le jet de pierres lancées par des manifestants juifs. Les forces ont rasé les bâtiments dans l’avant-poste Geulat Zion sur une colline près de l’implantation de Shiloh et dans l’avant-poste Oz Zion près de l’implantation de Beit El, au nord de Ramallah".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/larmee-rase-deux-avant-postes-illegaux-sous-des-jets-de-pierre/

********************************************

Monde

- Des centaines de civils victimes collatérales des bombardements aériens contre l’Etat islamique (Le Monde.fr) - On a pu identifier "57 incidents vérifiés où des civils ont été tués par les bombardements de la coalition, entre le 8 août 2014 et le 30 juin 2015. Ceux-ci auraient fait entre 459 et 591 morts parmi les civils en Irak et en Syrie, et entre 111 et 185 morts au sein des forces alliées à la coalition, comme les milices chiites en Irak". Et c'est un minimum, car cela ne concerne que les civils identifiés comme tels (c'est-à-dire vraisemblablement une minorité des civils tués). Pourtant, les médias parlent très peu (pour ne pas dire jamais) de ces civils tués par des frappes occidentales. L'argument habituel justifiant l'obsession anti-israélienne ("on s'intéresse à tout civil tué par l'Etat juif car c'est une démocratie proche de nous, à la différence de la Syrie") s'effondre donc... encore une fois.
http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2015/08/03/des-centaines-de-civils-victimes-collaterales-des-bombardements-aeriens-contre-l-etat-islamique_4710090_3218.html

Partager cet article
Repost0
2 août 2015 7 02 /08 /août /2015 23:11
Image du 2 août

- Vile antisemitic cartoon causes anger in Arab world - but not because of antisemitism (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/vile-antisemitic-cartoon-causes-anger.html
"This cartoon, showing a Jew raping a Palestinian Arab woman while murdering her two infants, is making some Arabs very angry. No, the vile and naked Jew-hatred isn't the problem. That's actually taken for granted. The reason this cartoon is making so many angry is because a Hamas-affiliated news outlet published it, and it is charging the Palestinian Authority with not caring as Jews rape and massacre woman and children in the West Bank.
The masked man behind the fence represents Gaza, and he says to the woman representing the West Bank, "Rise, oh (West) Bank, defend your honor and your children." She answers "By Allah, I would do it, but I [need] a permit [to work inside Israel.]" The man on the left is a PA security officer ignoring the crime. The representation of West Bank Arabs as being willing to be humiliated by Jews is the controversy, not the theme that Jews routinely rape and murder Arabs. [...]"

Partager cet article
Repost0
2 août 2015 7 02 /08 /août /2015 23:10

Attentat de Duma


- Des milliers de manifestants en Israël dénoncent la violence (Reuters)
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/des-milliers-manifestants-en-isra%C3%ABl-d%C3%A9noncent-la-violence-092753294.html
"Plusieurs milliers d'Israéliens ont manifesté samedi contre la violence, deux jours après l'agression à l'arme blanche de six personnes par un juif ultra-orthodoxe lors de la gay pride à Jérusalem et au lendemain de la mort d'un bébé palestinien. D'importants rassemblements ont été organisés à Jérusalem et à Tel Aviv et des manifestations plus modestes ont eu lieu dans tout le pays.
Cette agression, a dit le Premier ministre, Benjamin Netanyahu, à propos de la gay pride dans un message vidéo préenregistré à destination des manifestants, visait "tous nos enfants". "Ce qui s'est passé à Jérusalem va à l'encontre de l'esprit (du peuple) juif. (...) Il y a des extrêmes, des éléments meurtriers dans toute société et, c'est malheureusement vrai même parmi nous, mais une société et son Etat sont jugés sur la façon d'agir du public en général et de ses dirigeants (...) Nous continuerons à diriger notre pays contre la haine et l'homophobie", a déclaré le chef du gouvernement. [...]"
- Israël choqué après le meurtre d’un bébé palestinien (Tribune de Genève)
http://www.tdg.ch/monde/israel-choque-meurtre-bebe-palestinien/story/17342804
"Une onde de choc a traversé Israël à l’annonce de l’incendie criminel perpétré vendredi par des colons extrémistes juifs dans le village palestinien de Douma, en Cisjordanie occupée, qui a coûté la vie à Ali Dawabcheh, 18 mois, et très grièvement blessé ses parents ainsi que son frère âgé de 4 ans.
Parmi les premiers à réagir en direct à la radio publique, le chanteur populaire Yoram Gaon s’est écrié : «Tu ne tueras pas. Dieu a créé l’homme à son image ! […] J’ai honte !» C’est aussi ce qu’a déclaré Shimon Peres, ex-chef de l’Etat et Prix Nobel de la paix, samedi soir devant des milliers de manifestants rassemblés à Tel-Aviv pour scander «Non à la violence !» «Oui à la tolérance !» au surlendemain d’un sanglant attentat au poignard commis cette fois par un zélote juif orthodoxe durant la «Gay Pride» de Jérusalem et qui a coûté la vie à une adolescente. [...]"
- La société civile israélienne se rassemble contre les extrémistes juifs (iTélé, Vidéo 1mn16)
http://www.itele.fr/monde/video/la-societe-civile-israelienne-se-rassemble-contre-les-extremistes-juifs-132934
"La société civile israélienne a appelé au rassemblement samedi soir dans plusieurs grandes villes du pays. Plusieurs ONG seront présentes ainsi que des personnalités politiques, telles que le président Reuven Rivlin, à Jérusalem ou Shimon Peres à Tel Aviv. La manifestation était originalement prévue pour dénoncer l'attaque perpétrée jeudi par un juif ultra-orthodoxe lors de la gay-pride à Jérusalem qui a blessé six personnes. Mais le motif de ce rassemblement s'est élargi après le décès d'un bébé palestinien lors de l'incendie de sa maison [...]"
- Les hommages aux familles Banki et Dawabsha se multiplient (Times of Israel) - "Le leader du parti Yesh Atid, Yair Lapid, est arrivé en Cisjordanie pour prier pour la famille Dawabsha, victime d’une attaque terroriste près de Naplouse. Environ 200 Palestiniens et Israéliens sont présents. « Aucun Dieu ne veut la mort d’un bébé » a-t-il déclaré".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/les-hommages-aux-familles-banki-et-dawabsha-se-multiplient/

- Israël veut durcir la répression contre les extrémistes juifs (AFP)
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/isra%C3%ABl-veut-durcir-r%C3%A9pression-contre-extr%C3%A9mistes-juifs-084229763.html
"Le ministre israélien de la Défense Moshé Yaalon a autorisé dimanche la détention administrative, mesure habituellement réservée aux Palestiniens, contre des extrémistes juifs, après l'incendie criminel qui a coûté vendredi la vie à un bébé palestinien. [...]
Pour tenter d'arrêter les auteurs de cet incendie, M. Yaalon a ordonné le recours à des détentions administratives, selon un porte-parole de la Défense. D'après les médias israéliens, cela pourrait donner aux enquêteurs le temps nécessaire pour réunir des preuves suffisantes afin de traduire en justice les suspects. [...]
"Le terrorisme juif doit être traité avec les mêmes moyens que le terrorisme arabe, y compris en utilisant les méthodes d'interrogatoire appropriées et des détentions administratives", a déclaré M. Yaalon, selon le porte-parole de la Défense. Il fait visiblement allusion à ce que les les autorités israéliennes appellent des "pressions physiques modérées", une méthode d'interrogatoire validée par la justice israélienne. [...]
La radio publique israélienne, citant des responsables de la sécurité, a affirmé qu'il était difficile d'infiltrer les petits groupes qui agissent sous le couvert du "prix à payer" car ils n'utilisent pas de téléphone cellulaire et restent muets durant leurs interrogatoires. [...]"
- Terrorisme juif : le cabinet israélien approuve la détention administrative (i24)
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/diplomatie-defense/80600-150802-israel-craint-une-escalade-de-la-violence-suite-aux-actes-terroristes-juifs

- Netanyahu critique Abbas après l’incendie à Duma (Times of Israel) - « Nous déplorons et condamnons ces meurtriers. Nous allons les poursuivre jusqu’à la fin. Eux, ils nomment des places aux noms d’assassins d’enfants. Cette distinction ne peut être floue ni dissimulée ».
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-critique-abbas-apres-lincendie-a-duma/
"S’exprimant à la suite de l’incendie criminel en Cisjordanie dans lequel a péri un bébé palestinien, le Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu a fustigé dimanche Mahmoud Abbas, accusant le président de l’Autorité palestinienne de ne pas condamner les actes de terrorisme palestiniens.
En ouvrant la réunion hebdomadaire du cabinet, Netanyahu a comparé la condamnation rapide des responsables israéliens de l’attaque à ce qu’il a défini comme une réponse insuffisante de la part des responsables de l’AP après que des terroristes palestiniens ciblent des civils israéliens. « Nous déplorons et condamnons ces meurtriers. Nous allons les poursuivre jusqu’à la fin », a-t-il déclaré. « Eux, ils nomment des places aux noms d’assassins d’enfants. Cette distinction ne peut être floue ni dissimulée ». « Il est important de le dire même si nous formulons nos condamnations et sommes unis contre les criminels qui sont au sein de notre peuple », a ajouté Netanyahu.
Le Premier ministre a également déclaré qu’il y aurait une politique de «tolérance zéro» à l’égard de tels crimes en Israël, et a promis de punir les auteurs à la pleine mesure de la loi. « Nous avons récemment assisté à deux crimes odieux. Notre politique à l’égard de ces crimes est la tolérance zéro », a-t-il dit, se référant à la fois à la mort de l’enfant palestinien qu’à l’attaque au couteau lors de la Gay pride jeudi à Jérusalem. [...]"

- Analyse : "Prix à payer", les Israéliens vont en payer le prix, Ruti Sinai (i24)
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/opinions/80488-150801-analyse-prix-a-payer-les-israeliens-vont-en-payer-le-prix
"La vision d’un Premier ministre israélien entouré de gardes du corps entrer dans une unité des soins intensifs d’un hôpital est rarissime. Voir Benyamin Netanyahou au chevet d’un enfant palestinien brûlé est sans précédent. La visite du Premier ministre israélien à l’hôpital Sheba proche de Tel Aviv, quelques heures avant le début du Shabbat, reflète la profonde inquiétude de la droite israélienne au pouvoir suite à l’incendie criminel commis par des Juifs extrémistes qui a tué un bébé âgé de 18 mois en Cisjordanie et blessé gravement sa mère, son père et son frère.
“Je reviens à l’instant du chevet d’Ahmen Saed (Dawabcha) âgé de 4 ans”, a déclaré Netanyahou visiblement ébranlé, qui a transmis à la famille le numéro d’une personne à appeler si elle avait besoin de quoi que ce soit. “60% de son corps est brûlé. Nous faisons tout ce que nous pouvons pour sauver ce jeune garçon.” “Il s’agit d’une attaque terroriste à tous égards”, a affirmé le Premier ministre.
La nomenklatura israélienne qualifie rarement les attaques juives contre les Palestiniens d’actes de terrorisme. Ce terme est presque exclusivement utilisé pour les attaques de Palestiniens contre des Israéliens. Pourtant, cette fois-ci, l’armée s’est empressée d’utiliser ce terme, marquant le ton pour le reste de la classe dirigeante.
“C’est un crime, et nous le qualifions d’attaque terroriste”, a confirmé le porte-parole de l’armée israélienne, le général de brigade Moti Almoz dans un communiqué. “Le terrorisme c’est le terrorisme”, a reconnu Naftali Bennett, le chef du parti de la droite nationaliste religieuse (Foyer juif). “Mettre le feu à une maison et tuer un bébé est un acte terroriste choquant et incompréhensible.”
Il ne fait aucun doute que la colère authentique et les condamnations de la droite israélienne sont sincères. Toutefois, ces réactions expriment également une peur des conséquences que cette attaque peut avoir pour Israël en général et pour les 300.000 habitants des implantations en Cisjordanie en particulier.
Etant donné les nombreuses attaques de Palestiniens contre des Juifs, les habitants des implantations et leurs représentants politiques, tels que Bennett et son parti, ont l’habitude d’utiliser le terrain moral. Ils sont en général les victimes, la partie lésée, les enfants, les femmes, les maris et les frères sont ceux qui sont tués et blessés. Cette fois-ci, ils l‘admettent eux-mêmes, ce sont les Juifs qui sont les terroristes. Leur propre chair, leur propre sang.
Cette réalité appelle la droite israélienne à un travail d’introspection. Le président israélien Reuven Rivlin, lui-même ténor du Likoud et favorable aux implantations juives en Cisjordanie, l’a déclaré clairement : “face à cette vague de terreur contre des innocents, à la perte de vies, à l’abandon des lois et de l’ordre, l’Etat d’Israël doit sérieusement se remettre en question”, a déclaré Rivlin qui, comme Netanyahou, s’est rendu au chevet du garçon palestinien hospitalisé.
Cet appel à rendre des comptes au niveau moral a reçu l’écho par un des jeunes lions du Likoud, le ministre chargé de la sécurité publique Gilad Erdan. “Une nation dont les enfants ont été brûlés pendant la Shoah doit se poser des questions importantes si elle engendre des personnes capables de brûler d’autres êtres humains”, a affirmé Gilad Erdan. [...]
“A ma grande tristesse, il s’avère que nous avons été trop laxistes concernant le phénomène du terrorisme juif”, a admis le président Rivlin. “Peut-être n’avons-nous pas intégré que nous faisons face à un groupe idéologique déterminé et dangereux dont le but est la destruction des ponts fragiles que nous tentons de bâtir inlassablement”, a -t-il ajouté.
Outre les les conséquences internes, les réactions politiques à cet horrible incendie volontaire reflètent également les graves inquiétudes quant à ses répercussions à l’étranger. [...]"

- Un jour honteux pour Israël, David Horovitz (Times of Israel) - "Il devrait être inutile de dire que le crime odieux qui s’est produit, s’il a bien été commis par des Juifs, nous entache tous".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/un-jour-honteux-pour-israel/
"Si, comme cela semble très probablement être le cas, ce sont des terroristes juifs qui ont brûlé la maison de Dawabsha à Duma, tuant le petit Ali, âgé de 18 mois, et laissant le reste de sa famille au seuil de la mort, alors l’attaque place Israël à la croisée des chemins.
Peu de choses, dans cette région sanglante, disposent encore du pouvoir de choquer. Pas quand de larges foules en Iran demandent la Mort d’Israël et la Mort de l’Amérique, pas quand l’Etat islamique décapite ses adversaires. Pas quand Israël est confronté à des décennies de guerre conventionnelle, de massaces terroristes et de tirs de barrages de roquettes continus. Et pas quand nous avons connu des actes terribles de terrorisme juif, y compris le massacre par Baruch Goldstein de Palestiniens en prière à la Cave de Hébron des Patriarches en 1994, le meurtre l’été dernier du jeune de 16 ans de Jérusalem-Est Muhammed Abu Khdeir brûlé vif.
Mais s’il s’agit bien de terrorisme juif qui a frappé, et les graffiti en hébreu sur la scène de cet horrible crime semblent ne laisser que peu de place au doute, alors nous les Juifs israéliens avons certainement besoin d’être choqués. Choqués par notre relative indifférence face à l’accumulation de crimes de haine, commis par des terroristes vengeurs pro implantations qui ne s’arrêtent évidemment devant rien et ne respectent aucune loi.
« Nous avons été laxistes pour traiter le terrorisme juif », a déclaré vendredi le président Reuven Rivlin, et il avait raison. Des attaques, des crimes de hainte, des actes de terrorisme juif, appelez-les comme vous voudrez, les autorités d’Israël ont échoué à les empêcher, et ont largement échoué à appréhender ceux qui en étaient responsables. Une condamnation à travers tout l’éventail politique n’est pas suffisante. Israël a besoin d’agir, d’attraper ceux qui ont lancé le cocktail Molotov sur la maison de la famille Dawabsha et les groupes qui ont commis des dizaines d’autres attaques, et travailler beaucoup plus dur pour empêcher de tels crimes à l’avenir. [...]
Cela nécessite une réponse dépassant la simple question du droit, une réponse de la part des dirigeants spirituels, des dirigeants éducatifs, dans le monde d’où ces extrémistes émergent. Les extrémistes pervertissant le judaïsme, préférant la terre à la vie, choisissant le racisme, la haine et la violence, doivent être traités d’un point de vue pratique et idéologique.
A nouveau, une condamnation, même si elle est sincère, n’est tout simplement pas suffisante. La condamnation ne va pas empêcher la prochaine attaque. La condamnation ne va pas arrêter le développement d’un mode de pensée et d’action vicieux et intenable. Il devrait être inutile de dire que le crime odieux qui s’est produit, s’il a bien été commis par des Juifs, nous entache tous. C’est une insulte à notre foi. Cela encourage aussi nos ennemis.
Cela dérange, embarrasse et finit par éloigner nos amis. Cela fait du tort à nos liens historiques au foyer juif, à notre droit à nous épanouir comme un Etat juif qui se construit autour d’un judaïsme humain et méritant le respect et le soutien. Tout cela devrait être inutile à dire, mais visiblement, alors qu’Ali Dawabsha est enterré, et que les docteurs d’Israël essaient de sauver le reste de la famille, c’est vraiment nécessaire de le dire. Nous devrions être choqués aujourd’hui par la dernière preuve écoeurant de la brutalité en nous. Pourtant, alors que le choc se propage, nous ferions mieux de nous assurer que nous agissons pour empêcher ce type d’attaques et pire.
A son crédit, l’homme en charge de la Sécurité publique d’Israël, Gilad Erdan, a exprimé très clairement les choses vendredi. « Une nation dont les enfants ont été brûlés dans l’Holocauste a beaucoup de leçons à apprendre », a déclaré le ministre vendredi matin alors qu’une majorité de notre nation était plongée dans la nausée et le désespoir en apprenant la nouvelle au réveil. « Les signes indiquent que cette attaque a été menée par des Juifs. Une nation dont les enfants ont été brûlés dans l’Holocauste doit faire beaucoup d’introspection si elle a élevé des gens qui brûlent d’autres êtres humains ».
Mais pas seulement des leçons et de l’introspection. De l’action."

- UNICEF is selective in its condemnation of murders (Elder of Ziyon) - "UNICEF never condemned the murder of Yehuda Shoham, a five month old American-Israeli murdered by a Palestinian Arab throwing a stone that smashed through a car windshield and crushed his skull. UNICEF never condemned the murder of Shalhevet Pass, a ten-month old girl who was murdered by a sniper who aimed at her as she was sitting in her stroller. UNICEF never condemned the murder of Hadas Fogel, a three month old who was decapitated by depraved Palestinian Arabs who also murdered her 11-year old and 4-year old brothers and their parents. As horrific as the incident last week was, there is no evidence that the arsonist intended to kill. But in these cases, and countless others, Israeli infants were murdered in cold blood".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/unicef-is-selective-in-its-condemnation.html

- Recent Jewish Fatalities from Arab Terror: Hello, Mainstream Media?, Rachel Molschky (Jews Down Under) - "This attack is horrific. There is no denying it. The issue here is the double standard. Why so much news on this attack and nothing on Arab attacks against Jews?"
http://jewsdownunder.com/2015/08/01/recent-jewish-fatalities-from-arab-terror-hello-mainstream-media/
"Jewish terrorism is practically nonexistent. It is so rare, that if it happens it’s difficult to believe. Supposedly Jewish “extremists” have attacked an Arab house, resulting in the death of a toddler, and it’s made headline news all over the mainstream media. Naturally, Jews everywhere are condemning the attack because unlike Palestinian Authority and Hamas leaders who applaud the murder of Jews, handing out candy, naming schools, streets and plazas after terrorists, justifying the savagery, actually paying terrorists and inciting more violence, Jews do not condone terrorism.
This attack is horrific. There is no denying it.
The issue here is the double standard. Why so much news on this attack and nothing on Arab attacks against Jews?
So far, four Israelis have died this year due to Arab terrorism. These are four deaths in addition to the countless wounded in various attacks. Does the world know this? It is information you have to search for. Sure, Israeli newspapers and Jewish sites reported on their deaths, but where was the mainstream media? I saw no coverage of any of these attacks in the regular American news sites I visit. If they won’t report on them, I will. [...]"

*********************************************

Israël

- Nouveaux heurts à Jérusalem (AFP) - "Ce [dimanche] matin, des dizaines de musulmans brandissant du photos du bébé mort, dont de nombreuses femmes, se pressaient devant plusieurs portes de l'esplanade des Mosquées, derrière des barrières installées par la police israélienne qui les empêchait d'y entrer. La police a évoqué "des jeunes masqués retranchés dans la mosquée al-Aqsa", située sur l'esplanade, jetant "des pierres sur les policiers", mais a assuré qu'elle était parvenue à mettre fin aux heurts".
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/08/02/97001-20150802FILWWW00038-nouveaux-heurts-a-jerusalem.php

- Jewish doctors “manufacture and spread diseases” according to Islamic lesson in Al-Aqsa Mosque (PMW) - vidéo ici.
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=15353
"Sheikh Khaled Al-Mughrabi, who teaches Islam twice a week in the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the temple Mount in Jerusalem, taught in his most recent class that Jews own 95% of the pharmaceutical industry and therefore train doctors to create new diseases in order to increase profits for the industry: “Many diseases were created in labs - viruses created by doctors who were bought, trained and taught by the Rothschild family, the Freemasons, the Zionists, or the Jews to create and spread disease so they will be able to sell medicine for it.” He also claimed that the world's wealth is controlled by the Jews, specifically the Rothschild family who he claims own 50% of the world’s wealth as well as the entire World Bank. [...]"

*********************************************

Gaza & Hamas

- Israël : 2 roquettes tirées depuis Gaza explosent près de la frontière (i24) - "Deux roquettes tirées depuis la bande de Gaza samedi soir ont explosé en Israël près de la barrière de sécurité, ne faisant aucun blessé ni dommage".
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/diplomatie-defense/80583-150802-israel-2-roquettes-lancees-a-partir-de-gaza-atterrissent-pres-de-la-frontiere

*********************************************

Judée-Samarie

- Dozens of West Bank settlers treated for smoke inhalation after suspected arson by Palestinians (JP)
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Dozens-of-West-Bank-settlers-treated-for-smoke-inhalation-after-suspected-arson-by-Palestinians-410771
"Israeli settlers in Judea and Samaria are reporting a number of cases of violent disturbances and suspected arson on Friday as the region endures the tense aftermath of what authorities are calling a terrorist attack against a Palestinian family that left a toddler dead.
Dozens of settlers in the southern Hebron Hills community of Beit Hagai were evacuated from their homes after suffering from smoke inhalation sustained as a result of a brush fire that is believed to have been set by local Palestinians. In total, 30 people were given treatment. Fire crews worked to bring the blaze, which crept up dangerously close to the settlers' homes, under control. Three people were evacuated by an ambulance, while the other victims, including a Palestinian passerby who sought to help douse the blaze, suffered light injuries.
Israelis living in the settlement of Yitzhar also reported on Friday that suspected Palestinian arsonists set fire to the southern slopes of the hilltop outpost. Jewish motorists throughout the West Bank are also reporting rock-throwing by Palestinians."

*********************************************

"Processus de paix"

- Palestinians try to hijack refugee conference for their own purposes (Elder of Ziyon) - "Millions of real refugees in danger of starvation, urgently asking the world for money to help feed them, while the UNHCR tries to feed and resettle them. And then came the Palestinian Arabs asking for handouts for their fake refugees"; "The world cannot pay the $14 per person per month for food for real refugees in Jordan, and the Palestinian Arabs come in and demand money for schools for Jordanian kids, with Jordanian citizenship, that are utterly unnecessary because the children can and should attend Jordanian schools - but UNRWA insists on keeping its "refugee camps" and schools in Jordan for people who are not refugees by any sane definition".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/08/palestinians-try-to-hijack-refugee.html


*********************************************

Monde arabe

- Yémen : La guerre a fait près de 4 000 morts en quatre mois (iTélé) - "En quatre mois, la guerre a fait près de 4 000 morts, dont la moitié sont des civils, et plus d'un demi-million de déplacés. Les Nations Unies qualifient la situation humanitaire de "catastrophique" mais les négociations sont au point mort". C'est environ deux fois le bilan du conflit à Gaza de l'été dernier. Et la situation humanitaire yéménite est bien pire.
http://www.itele.fr/live/yemen-la-guerre-a-fait-pres-de-4-000-morts-en-quatre-mois-172

*********************************************

Iran

- Iran : le Guide suprême publie un livre appelant à la destruction d'Israël (i24)
http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/international/moyen-orient/80683-150802-iran-le-guide-supreme-publie-un-livre-appelant-a-la-destruction-d-israel
"Selon un article publié samedi par le New York Post, l'ayatollah Ali Khamenei, guide suprême de la République islamique d'Iran explique dans son nouveau livre "Palestine" pourquoi Israël doit être effacé et de quelle manière. "La solution est un seul Etat", affirme-t-il, et "cet Etat s'appelle la Palestine".
Il écrit que ce "mécanisme pratique et logique" permettrait d'avoir Israël sous la loi islamique avec certains Juifs autorisés à rester en tant que "minorité protégée", mais seulement après avoir prouvé des "racines authentiques". Il prône un apartheid strict contre les Juifs, précisant qu'ils ne seraient pas autorisés à voter dans un futur Etat musulman alors que les Arabes jouiraient de pleins droits. Khamenei insiste que ce plan favoriserait l'"hégémonie de l'Iran" tout en éliminant "l'hégémonie occidentale" du Moyen-Orient.
Khamenei, qui est décrit dans le livre comme "le porte-drapeau du djihad pour libérer Jérusalem", écrit que ses idées ne sont pas antisémites, mais islamiques et fondées sur des "principes islamiques bien établis". Pour Khamenei Israël comme un Adou [ennemi], doshman [l'ennemi] et une "tumeur cancéreuse" pour plusieurs raisons, dont la première est d'être un "allié du Grand Satan américain". Israël est aussi un ennemi car il "occupe" Jérusalem qu'il appelle la "troisième ville sainte de l'Islam". [...]"
- The Ayatollah's Plan for Israel and Palestine, Amir Taheri (Gatestone Institute) - "Khamenei describes Israel as "a cancerous tumor" whose elimination would mean that "the West's hegemony and threats will be discredited" in the Middle East. In its place, he boasts, "the hegemony of Iran will be promoted"."
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6263/khamenei-israel-palestine
""The flagbearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem." This is how the blurb of "Palestine," a new book, published by Islamic Revolution Editions last week in Tehran, identifies the author. The author is "Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Husseini Khamenei," the "Supreme Guide" of the Islamic Republic in Iran, a man whose fatwa has been recognized by U.S. President Barack Obama as having the force of law. Edited by Saeed Solh-Mirzai, the 416-page book has received approval from Khamenei's office and is thus the most authoritative document regarding his position on the issue.
Khamenei makes his position clear from the start: Israel has no right to exist as a state. He uses three words. One is "nabudi" which means "annihilation". The other is "imha" which means "fading out," and, finally, there is "zaval" meaning "effacement."
Khamenei claims that his strategy for the destruction of Israel is not based on anti-Semitism, which he describes as a European phenomenon. His position is based on "well-established Islamic principles", he claims. One such is that a land that falls under Muslim rule, even briefly, can never again be ceded to non-Muslims. What matters in Islam is control of a land's government, even if the majority of inhabitants are non-Muslims.
Khomeinists are not alone in this belief. Dozens of maps circulate in the Muslim world, showing the extent of Muslim territories lost to the infidel that must be recovered. These include large parts of Russia and Europe, almost a third of China, the whole of India and parts of the Philippines and Thailand.
However, according to Khamenei, Israel, which he labels as "adou" and "doshman," meaning "enemy" and "foe," is a special case for three reasons. The first is that it is a loyal "ally of the American Great Satan" and a key element in its "evil scheme" to dominate "the heartland of the Ummah." The second reason is that Israel has waged war on Muslims on a number of occasions, thus becoming a "hostile infidel" ("kaffir al-harbi"). Finally, Israel is a special case because it occupies Jerusalem, which Khamenei describes as "Islam's third Holy City." He intimates that one of his "most cherished wishes" is to one day pray in Jerusalem.
Khamenei insist that he is not recommending "classical wars" to wipe Israel off the map. Nor does he want to "massacre the Jews." What he recommends is a long period of low-intensity warfare designed to make life unpleasant if not impossible for a majority of Israeli Jews so that they leave the country. His calculation is based on the assumption that large numbers of Israelis have dual-nationality and would prefer emigration to the United States or Europe to daily threats of death.
Khamenei makes no reference to Iran's nuclear program. But the subtext is that a nuclear-armed Iran would make Israel think twice before trying to counter Khamenei's strategy by taking military action against the Islamic Republic. In Khamenei's analysis, once the cost of staying in Israel has become too high for many Jews, Western powers, notably the U.S., which has supported the Jewish state for decades, might decide that the cost of doing so is higher than possible benefits. [...]
Khamenei counts on what he sees as "Israel fatigue." The international community would start looking for what he calls "a practical and logical mechanism" to end the old conflict. Khamenei's "practical and logical mechanism" excludes the two-state formula in any form. "The solution is a one-state formula," he declares. That state, to be called Palestine, would be under Muslim rule but would allow non-Muslims, including some Israeli Jews who could prove "genuine roots" in the region, to stay as "protected minorities."
Under Khamenei's scheme, Israel plus the West Bank and Gaza would revert to the United Nations' mandate for a brief period during which a referendum would be held to create the new state of Palestine. All Palestinians and their descendants, wherever they are, would be able to vote, while Jews "who have come from other places" would be excluded.
Khamenei does not mention any figures for possible voters in his dream referendum. But studies by the Foreign Ministry in Tehran suggest that at least eight million Palestinians across the globe would be able to vote, against 2.2 million Jews "acceptable" as future second-class citizens of the new Palestine. Thus, the "Supreme Guide" is certain of the results of his proposed referendum. He does not make clear whether the Kingdom of Jordan, which is located in 80 percent of historic Palestine, would be included in his one-state scheme. However, a majority of Jordanians, who are of Palestinian extraction, would be able to vote in the referendum and, logically, become citizens of the new Palestine.
Khamenei boasts about the success of his plans to make life impossible for Israelis through terror attacks from Lebanon and Gaza. His latest scheme is to recruit "fighters" in the West Bank to set-up Hezbollah-style units. "We have intervened in anti-Israel matters, and it brought victory in the 33-day war by Hezbollah against Israel in 2006 and in the 22-day war between Hamas and Israel in the Gaza Strip," he boasts.
Khamenei describes Israel as "a cancerous tumor" whose elimination would mean that "the West's hegemony and threats will be discredited" in the Middle East. In its place, he boasts, "the hegemony of Iran will be promoted."
Khamenei's book also deals with the Holocaust, which he regards either as "a propaganda ploy" or a disputed claim. "If there was such a thing," he writes, "we don't know why it happened and how." Khamenei has been in contact with professional Holocaust deniers since the 1990s. In 2000, he invited Swiss Holocaust-denier Jürgen Graf to Tehran and received him in private audiences. French Holocaust-denier Roger Garaudy, a Stalinist who converted to Islam, was also feted in Tehran as "Europe's' greatest living philosopher." It was with Khamenei's support that former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad set up a "Holocaust-research center" led by Muhammad-Ali Ramin, an Iranian functionary with links to German neo-Nazis who also organized annual "End of Israel" seminars.
Despite efforts to disguise his hatred of Israel in Islamic terms, the book makes it clear that Khamenei is more influenced by Western-style anti-Semitism than by classical Islam's checkered relations with Jews. His argument about territories becoming "irrevocably Islamic" does not wash, if only because of its inconsistency. He has nothing to say about vast chunks of former Islamic territory, including some that belonged to Iran for millennia, now under Russian rule. Nor is he ready to embark on Jihad to drive the Chinese out of Xinjiang, a Muslim khanate until the late 1940s. Israel, which in terms of territory accounts for one per cent of Saudi Arabia, is a very small fry. [...]"

- Iran says it will ban US experts from UN nuclear inspections (Times of Israel) - "“American and Canadian inspectors cannot be sent to Iran,” said Araghchi. “It is mentioned in the deal that inspectors should be from countries that have diplomatic relations with Islamic republic of Iran.” He also said inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency will not have access to “sensitive and military documents”."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-says-it-will-ban-us-experts-from-un-nuclear-inspections/

- The ‘Truth’ About The Iran Deal, Aaron David Miller (vice president of the Woodrow Wilson Center, a former U.S. Middle East negotiator) - "make no mistake, Iran got the better part of the deal. In exchange for a nuclear weapon Iran doesn’t even possess, Tehran will reap billions in sanctions relief, new-found legitimacy in the international community and still be able to maintain a large enough nuclear infrastructure to remain a nuclear weapons threshold state".
http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial-opinion/opinion/truth-about-iran-deal
"One thing that critics and defenders of the Iran nuclear agreement seem to have in common is the certainty, conviction and authority with which they present their views. It’s an historic breakthrough; no, it’s an historic catastrophe; it’s this agreement or war; and my favorite — this deal sucks; negotiations, more sanctions or threat of military force could have produced an infinitely superior one. The latter is simply unknowable. Indeed, it’s at times like these that I’m reminded of Tennyson’s wonderful quip that “there lives more faith in honest doubt, believe me, than in half the creeds.” Here are five supposed verities that, well, may or not be true.
- The deal will stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
No it won’t. At best it’s an arms control agreement not a disarmament accord. And over time, some of its most important restrictions on core issues, such as advanced research on centrifuges and enrichment capacity, will end. The fact is Iran is already a nuclear weapons threshold state. And this accord will leave Tehran with an industrial-size nuclear infrastructure and the option to break out or even weaponize should it choose to do so. Will its leaders go that route? The decision that both U.S. and Israeli intelligence say they haven’t yet made is anyone’s guess.
- The U.S. got fleeced.
Yes and no. That was Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker’s colorful way of describing how the U.S. fared in the Iran talks. Iran clearly didn’t get everything it wanted, including immediate sanctions relief. And the Iranian nuclear program will be slower, smaller and more easily monitored for at least a decade. And that’s really no small accomplishment given where the Iranian nuclear program appeared to be headed. But make no mistake, Iran got the better part of the deal. In exchange for a nuclear weapon Iran doesn’t even possess, Tehran will reap billions in sanctions relief, new-found legitimacy in the international community and still be able to maintain a large enough nuclear infrastructure to remain a nuclear weapons threshold state. Mick Jagger was wrong. You really can get what you want. The U.S. got what it needed; Iran actually did get what it wanted.
- War was the only alternative to a deal.
Not so fast. Even if Congress should override a presidential veto, there’s no inexorable march to war. The United Nations Security Council resolution that the U.S. voted on could still be implemented even if U.S. oil and banking sanctions couldn’t be lifted. And Iran would reap significant political and economic benefits in such a move — blaming the U.S. and splitting the P5 + 1 (China, Russia, Britain, France, Germany). The Germans already have sent a trade delegation to Tehran. Nor is it a forgone conclusion that Iran would try to break out or sneak out to a bomb right now. What’s the point of inviting an Israeli or American attack? Better for Tehran to weigh its options and to see what it could gain by playing the political game.
- The agreement will over time produce a kinder and gentler Iran.
How much time do you have? Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, didn’t endorse this accord because he saw it as a way of compromising the Iranian revolution; on the contrary it was done to preserve it and maintain control. The Iranian public wanted economic relief, and unhappy, alienated and restless people are dangerous forces for authoritarian powers. China, the former Soviet Union and Vietnam are examples of states that could open up economically and still maintain tight control. Cuba may prove to be the same way. And that’s most likely the path Iran will follow too. Don’t expect an internal Persian spring in terms of loosening up on freedoms and respect for individual rights anytime soon. And that’s also the case for Iran’s support for its bad actor friends like Assad in Syria, Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias.
- There was a realistic and better alternative to this agreement.
We’ll simply never know for sure. Perhaps had a credible use of force been put on the table sooner and the Obama administration really challenged Iran’s regional policies in Syria and Lebanon, the Iranians would have been more pliant. But that would have required a much more risk-ready president when it came to the use of force and coalition partners who were also on board. At best both the Russians and the Chinese never saw the Iranian nuclear program in as dire terms as the U.S. did. And the Germans were eager to resume their trade ties with Iran as well. Israel was reluctant to use force on its own. And the Iranian regime would have continued on its resistance economy — pain notwithstanding — unless it could justify a good deal for itself. In a galaxy far away, a better deal might have been possible, but not here on planet Earth and not under these circumstances."

- How to Make Iran Keep its Word, Dennis Ross (Politico) - "While some may question whether we will act militarily, no one doubts that the Israelis will do so if the Iranians move toward a weapon. By transferring the MOP [massive ordinance penetrator] and the means to carry it during the life of the deal we would also signal we would support Israeli action if need be"; "we should not allow Iran to change the regional balance of power. We should begin contingency planning now with key Arab states and Israel to develop options to respond to a surge in Iranian material support for Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and others".
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/iran-deal-enforcement-120786.html
"Dennis B. Ross (born November 26, 1948) is an American diplomat and author. He has served as the Director of Policy Planning in the State Department under President George H. W. Bush, the special Middle East coordinator under President Bill Clinton, and was a special adviser for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia (which includes Iran) to the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton" (Wikipedia)
"[...] No agreement that permits the Iranians after fifteen years to produce highly enriched uranium (HEU) and build as large a nuclear infrastructure as they want should leave us feeling comfortable. Yes, the agreement buys us fifteen years but, should Iran begin to produce HEU, the time needed to produce weapons grade fissile material would be reduced to nearly zero.
That vulnerability is undeniable. It could be addressed if our focus became one of deterring the Iranians from cheating. President Obama emphasizes that the agreement is based on verification not trust. But our catching Iran cheating is less important than the price they know they will pay if we catch them. Deterrence needs to apply not just for the life of the deal. It becomes even more important afterwards, because Iran will be a threshold nuclear state and potentially capable of confronting the world with a nuclear weapons fait accompli.
At that point, the price must be prohibitive to deter the Iranians from crossing that threshold. They must believe that a move toward weapons once they are a threshold state will trigger the use of force against them—anything less, is unlikely to deter them. They might well be prepared to pay the economic price, believing the world will gradually adjust to the reality of their having nuclear weapons and ease the sanctions over time.
Producing deterrence in fifteen years requires conditioning Iranians and the world to the reality that we will use force if they try to move from threshold to weapons status. It means establishing a pattern of behavior that convinces the Iranians that we mean what we say and will prevent any Iranian move toward a nuclear bomb.
Recall that the Iranians commit in the agreement not to “seek, develop, or acquire any nuclear weapons.” There is every reason for President Obama to declare that Iran live up to this commitment. Should it not, and we find it moving toward a weapon, we would take whatever means are necessary, including the use of force, to stop them from doing so. It is not enough to say all options are on the table. It is essential to say we will not permit Iran to become a nuclear weapon state and that if the agreement designed to prevent it fails to do so, we will act militarily to destroy the Iranian nuclear infrastructure.
To give our words greater credibility, we should transfer to Israel, at some point before year fifteen, the massive ordinance penetrator—the MOP—and the airplanes to carry it. Israel can’t set back the entirety of Iran’s nuclear program without the MOP, a mountain-buster designed to destroy Iran’s underground nuclear facility in Fordow. While some may question whether we will act militarily, no one doubts that the Israelis will do so if the Iranians move toward a weapon. By transferring the MOP and the means to carry it during the life of the deal we would also signal we would support Israeli action if need be.
In his testimony, Secretary of Energy Moniz stated that if the Iranians were to be “enriching to ninety percent, every alarm bell in the world would go off because there is no reason to do that.” President Obama should declare that he would regard producing highly enriched uranium as a trigger for the use of force and is confident that his successors will as well. Congress could then adopt a resolution or legislation endorsing this position.
Second, again with an eye toward enhancing deterrence, we should not allow Iran to change the regional balance of power. We should begin contingency planning now with key Arab states and Israel to develop options to respond to a surge in Iranian material support for Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and others. President Obama has acknowledged Iran’s de-stabilizing behavior in the region and rightly asked critics of the deal to imagine how much worse it would be if it had nuclear weapons. The same logic applies to the lifting of the sanctions: If the Iranians can cause this much havoc in the region when they are under sanctions, imagine how much more they can do when they gain sanctions relief and have dramatically more resources available. The Iranians should know that a surge in spending on the Shiite militias will produce targeted sanctions on their de-stabilizing non-nuclear behavior. Congress could certainly produce legislation to this effect.
Third, Iran must know they will pay a price for any violations of the agreement, no matter how small. The deal cleverly uses snap-back sanctions, meaning that, if there is a significant breach, an affirmative vote in the UN Security Council is required to continue the suspension of sanctions. The US could veto that vote, and the sanctions would automatically resume. While the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] permits us to snap back only parts of the sanctions for lesser violations, the Iranians have declared in the same paragraph of the agreement that they would no longer implement their obligations if we acted on this provision. Are we really likely to do so if it promises to bring the whole agreement down?
I am told by those in the administration that President Obama recognized this potential problem and directed the Treasury Department to prepare lesser penalties for violations along the margins we might apply unilaterally. That makes great sense, but presently these have not been shared with the Europeans or the Iranians or the Congress. They should be to illustrate our determination to ensure that no matter how small the transgression, there will be a price. That will also help deterrence to take hold over time.
So long as we have no reason to believe that Iran’s behavior or fundamental aims are going to change, the JCPOA should be seen for what it is—an agreement that does, in fact, require Iran to defer its nuclear weapons option but not give it up. For proponents of the agreement, buying fifteen years is worth it and represents a dramatically better outcome than any available alternative. Their argument would be far more persuasive if the administration would take the steps—in word and deed—that would minimize the vulnerabilities of the deal."

Partager cet article
Repost0
31 juillet 2015 5 31 /07 /juillet /2015 22:04
Image du 31 juillet

- Financial Times perpetuates the myth of “sealed off” Gaza (UK Media Watch) - "here’s the latest daily stats by COGAT (Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories), from July 28th, the day before the Financial Times published their report".
http://ukmediawatch.org/2015/07/30/financial-times-perpetuates-the-myth-of-sealed-off-gaza/
"[...] it’s less than clear how precisely Reed defines the word “trickle” or the term “sealed off”.
- 115,000 Gazans crossed the Erez Crossing for medical treatment in Israel and abroad in 2014.
- On any given day in 2015, over 1,000 Gazans cross into Israel, including hundreds of merchants.
- Hundreds of trucks carrying thousands of tons of humanitarian, construction and consumer goods enter Gaza every month. [...]
Additionally, as we noted previously, Gregg Carlstrom, a Jerusalem based journalist who contributes to Times of London, has explained that “the restrictions imposed by Gaza’s other land neighbour, Egypt, are far more severe” than Israel’s “partial” blockade.
Reed’s claims – that Gaza is “sealed off” and that only “a trickle” of Palestinians leave the territory – erase important context and are, at best, extremely misleading."

Partager cet article
Repost0
31 juillet 2015 5 31 /07 /juillet /2015 22:03

Israël


- En Israël, 70 % de l’eau consommée par les ménages vient de la mer, Marie de Vergès (Le Monde) - "Le dessalement est l’une des recettes ayant permis à Israël de surmonter le stress hydrique auquel semblait le condamner son climat semi-désertique. Sous l’impulsion du gouvernement, quatre usines ont été ouvertes durant la dernière décennie. Une cinquième doit être mise en service d’ici à la fin 2015. Ensemble, elles produiront 70 % de l’eau consommée par les ménages israéliens" ; "Israël a aussi mis l’accent sur le recyclage et la réutilisation des eaux usées. Une pratique dont il est le leader mondial incontesté : aujourd’hui, 86 % de ses effluents sont traités contre 19 % en Espagne, qui arrive en deuxième position. L’eau sortie des stations d’épuration couvre les deux tiers des besoins des agriculteurs" ; "Pour certains, l’avance israélienne sera vraiment un succès si elle permet de changer la donne géostratégique dans un Moyen-Orient miné par le déficit d’eau".
http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2015/07/29/en-israel-70-de-l-eau-consommee-vient-de-la-mer_4702964_3244.html

- Why is Muslim harassment of Jews on the Temple Mount increasing? (JP) - "wait times for Jews to ascend via Mugrabi Gate have grown exponentially, while non-Jewish visitors enjoy speedy service"; “You cannot be a Jew at Judaism’s holiest site. You must be an unidentified tourist.”
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Why-is-Muslim-harassment-of-Jews-on-the-Temple-Mount-increasing-410555
"The problem of intimidation of Jews at the holiest site to Jews has reached a critical stage in the last several years, Arnon Segal, secretary of the Temple Mount Faithful group, said on Wednesday.
“Over the past two to three years, we saw men first sitting in circles studying the Koran, and then, sooner than later, they sat on pathways designated for Jewish visitors, so they couldn’t walk,” he said. “Then the women got up and followed us around, screaming and yelling ‘Allahu akbar!’ The police will not push and shove them like they will the men, which is why women frequently lead the mobs.”
The Jordanian government pays between 300 and 500 Muslim women and unemployed men to harass Jews, Segal claimed. The Islamic Movement’s northern branch, based in Umm el-Fahm, compensates 150 additional provocateurs, he said. While Segal acknowledged that several Muslims with long histories of stirring trouble on the Mount have been barred from entering it for up to three months, he said that harassment of Jews there has continued to grow.
“What happens now is that when we exit the Chain Gate, they follow us out, screaming and yelling,” he said. “Last Thursday’s yelling at the woman who was later arrested for saying ‘Muhammad is a pig’ was not on the Temple Mount, but in the Muslim Quarter. So, not only are they on the Temple Mount, but they are following Jews outside to the Muslim Quarter as well,” he said.
Segal said the most practical solution, an idea he raised nine months ago at a meeting with the Knesset’s Internal Affairs and Environment Committee, is for police to enforce a policy that restricts Muslim mobs from coming within 20 meters of Jewish visitors to the Mount. “You want to protest against Jews?” he asked. “Fine, [but] do so at a safe distance.”
The central problem, Segal asserted, is that while Jews are told by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu that there is a status quo – and that it cannot be altered – facts on the ground tell a different story. “The Arabs are altering that status quo from month to month, and year to year,” he said. “More and more, Jewish visitation is being limited during Ramadan, as well as additional closings due to security threats.”
Segal said that wait times for Jews to ascend via Mugrabi Gate have grown exponentially, while non-Jewish visitors enjoy speedy service. “The best solution is to give them [non-Jews] 90 percent of the place for visits. I’d be satisfied with 90 minutes to two hours a day in a far corner to pray and be a Jew,” he said. “You cannot be a Jew at Judaism’s holiest site. You must be an unidentified tourist,” he said. [...]"

***************************************

Gaza & Hamas

- Guerre de Gaza : Amnesty accuse Israël de "crimes de guerre" (AFP) - "Le rapport "Black Friday : carnage à Rafah" se fonde sur "des centaines de photos et de vidéos, des images satellite et les témoignages de personnes ayant assisté aux événements", qui retracent le cours des attaques qui ont débuté le 1er août à Rafah" ; "De nouvelles preuves montrent que les forces israéliennes ont perpétré des crimes de guerre en représailles à la capture d'un soldat (...) Le caractère systématique et apparemment délibéré des attaques aériennes et terrestres sur Rafah qui ont tué au moins 135 civils [chiffres fantaisistes, même Breaking the Silence ne dit pas cela] pourraient également constituer un crime contre l'humanité", accuse l'ONG dans un rapport publié avec l'équipe de recherche londonienne Forensic Architecture".
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/guerre-gaza-amnesty-accuse-isra%C3%ABl-crimes-guerre-092029637.html

- Israël réagit au rapport d’Amnesty International (Times of Israel) - "Une fois de plus, Amnesty a montré son obsession invétérée envers Israël".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/israel-reagit-au-rapport-damnesty-international/
"[...] « Quand on lit le rapport, on a l’impression que l’armée israélienne se battait contre elle-même – puisqu il n’y a pratiquement aucune mention des actions militaires du Hamas et d’autres organisations terroristes palestiniennes. Malgré tous les liens et les vidéos, Amnesty ne décrit nulle part la stratégie odieuse de ces organisations terroristes d’incruster leurs opérations militaires au sein de l’environnement civil, et de tirer sur l’armée israélienne et sur la population civile d’Israël derrière la population civile.
En outre, Amnesty construit un récit faux – affirmant que quatre jours d’opérations militaires menées par l’armée israélienne étaient en réaction directe à l’enlèvement et à l’assassinatd’un soldat de Tsahal. Il semble qu’Amnesty ait oublié qu’il y avait un conflit en cours – au cours duquel l’armée israélienne œuvrait pour arrêter les tirs de roquettes et pour neutraliser les tunnels d’assaut transfrontaliers, et les organisations terroristes palestiniennes étaient activement engagées dans un conflit intense contre Tsahal au milieu d’un environnement civil. Un combat intensif a eu lieu à Rafah tout au long du conflit, et les dates sur lesquelles Amnesty se concentre ne font pas exception.
La méthodologie sur laquelle le rapport est basé est aussi fondamentalement viciée, et met sérieusement en question les normes professionnelles d’Amnesty. Des accusations entières sont basées sur les témoignages non corroborés de Palestiniens et de travailleurs « de terrain » non identifiés, sans tenir compte des biais potentiels ou de la contrainte par les autorités du Hamas, ou tout simplement du fait que des individus pris au milieu des combats sont limités dans leur capacité à en connaître les raisons, les méthodologies et les intentions des parties belligérantes.
En revanche, un rapport officiel rédigé et publié par le gouvernement d’Israël concernant le conflit de Gaza en 2014 (www.protectiveedge.gov.il) n’est mentionné qu’en passant, et ne pèse pas du tout dans les conclusions d’Amnesty International concernant le comportement de l’armée israélienne.
Le rapport met également en évidence qu’Amnesty a une mauvaise compréhension du droit international. Amnesty prétend que l’armée israélienne a pour politique de recourir à la force aveugle et disproportionnée, une conclusion qu’il base sur les résultats tragiques de victimes civiles. Pourtant, une telle conclusion ne se fonde pas sur le droit international et reflète simplement le parti pris politique d’Amnesty envers Israël.
En outre, Amnesty renforce ses allégations sur la base de présumés comptes-rendus anonymes de soldats de bas rang de Tsahal – comptes-rendus qui peuvent difficilement être utilisés pour tirer des conclusions sur la politique de l’armée israélienne.
Contrairement aux affirmations d’Amnesty, l’armée israélienne – en tant qu’armée d’un Etat démocratique attaché à la primauté du droit – mène toutes ses activités conformément au droit international. Là où des allégations de mauvais comportement se posent, l’armée israélienne maintient un mécanisme robuste, efficace et approfondi pour les traiter. Les incidents survenus à Rafah au cours de la période couverte par le rapport sont en cours d’examen par le Mécanisme d’Evaluation des Faits de l’état-major de Tsahal, et leurs conclusions seront utilisées par le parquet militaire pour décider s’il y a lieu d’ouvrir une enquête criminelle.
Une fois de plus, Amnesty a montré son obsession invétérée envers Israël, en ressassant des allégations et des plaintes déjà existantes dans un site web maniant la poudre aux yeux », peut-on lire dans un communiqué du minisy§re des Affaires étrangères."

- Amnesty's new report takes soldiers' quotes out of context (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/07/amnestys-new-report-takes-soldiers.html
"Amnesty International today is releasing yet another report that tries to prove Israel committed war crimes in last year's Gaza war, this time regarding the events surrounding the kidnapping of Lt. Hadar Goldin in Rafah - who was abducted during a ceasefire.
Just like the Gaza Platform, the upcoming report uses the services of the anti-Zionist "Forensics Architecture" team to take one-sided evidence and twist it to make it look like an impartial investigation.
At the moment, only the executive summary is available. Yet even its use of sources proves its bias.
It quotes two IDF soldiers who were interviewed by "Breaking the Silence" to prove purposeful Israeli fire into civilian areas. "An Israeli infantry officer described to Israeli NGO Breaking the Silence the events that ensued after the Hannibal Directive was announced on the radio: “The minute ‘Hannibal Directive’ is declared on the radio, there are consequences. There’s a fire procedure called the ‘Hannibal fire procedure’ – you fire at every suspicious place that merges with a central route. You don’t spare any means”."
Here's the entire testimony: "So I heard that the reconnaissance platoon got into a confrontation, and that it looked like we were talking about two [IDF soldiers] dead and one captured. That’s when the mess got started. The minute ‘Hannibal Directive’ is declared on the radio, there are consequences. There’s a fire procedure called the ‘Hannibal fire procedure’ – you fire at every suspicious place that merges with a central route. You don’t spare any means. A thousand shells were fired that Friday morning, at all the central intersections. The entire Tancher [Route] (the continuation of Highway 4 in Gaza) was bombed. The air force attacked places inside Rafah City, places in which we knew there were Hamas militants. Was there collateral damage to houses? I’m sure there was. It was very intense, that incident. After the area was hit by 1,000 shells that Friday morning, I saw Tancher in ruins. Everything totally wrecked." Even the BtS soldier says that there was no intent to hurt civilians and that no civilian structures were directly targeted.
Here's Amnesty's second quote: "An artillery soldier said his battery was “firing at a maximum fire rate” right into inhabited areas."
The full testimony:
"- During occasions when there was a significant amount of fire [directed at our forces], or during the ground incursion to Gaza – to Shuja’iyya – I know my unit fired a lot. One of the senior officers in my unit talked about how we had fired [at targets] that were in very close proximity to our forces, how we had really saved them. He said it was an important mission and that apparently during it we had also killed a number of civilians. They said that tragically, some uninvolved civilians were apparently hit, but that it was a situation where it would either be our troops or civilians [being harmed]. He said that it wasn’t even a question, that it was obvious that our troops [came first]. They emphasized the fact that that was obviously not done on purpose.
- Did he say what the mission itself was, what the role of the [artillery] battery was?
- To assist them with artillery fire. If they need flare shells, or if they need smoke to conceal themselves, or, of course, if they need explosive shells to evacuate [forces from the field]. The battery fired 900 shells [that night], and the battalion fired about 1,200 or 1,500, I think. There were certain stages during which we were firing at a maximum fire rate – after Goldin was kidnapped, (an IDF soldier captured near Rafah) and in Shuja’iyya."
K
eep in mind that breaking the Silence itself cherry picks IDF soldiers' testimonies already to make the IDF look as bad as possible. Amnesty is further taking the BtS quotes out of context as evidence of war crimes.
It is not a war crime, or a violation of international law, to prioritize soldier's lives higher than unintended civilian casualties. On the contrary - it is what a normal military commander is supposed to do in every army on Earth. But Amnesty does not like to tell its readers what actual international law is.
Other quotes that Amnesty supposedly claims as evidence of "war crimes" are not directly quoted in the executive summary - we just have to trust Amnesty that these quotes exist and mean what they claim they mean:
"Public statements by Israeli army commanders and soldiers after the conflict provide compelling reasons to conclude that some attacks that killed civilians and destroyed homes and property were intentionally carried out and motivated by a desire for revenge – to teach a lesson to, or punish, the population of Rafah for the capture of Lieutenant Goldin. There is consequently strong evidence that many such attacks in Rafah between 1 and 4 August were serious violations of international humanitarian law and constituted grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention or other war crimes." If they have quotes like that, why not use them in this summary? Because the quotes are not nearly as clear-cut as Amnesty wants the world to believe, and they know that reporters will trust their analysis of the quotes rather than evaluate them directly.
Interestingly, the executive summary doesn't mention the number of civilians killed in this operation. BtS said "between 41-150 Palestinians were killed, many of them civilians." That is a very imprecise number. It will be interesting to see if the Forensics Architecture team, supposedly committed to unbiased research, bothered during the past year to determine exactly how many civilians were actually killed during these three days of unbridled firepower in an urban battlefield where Hamas is purposefully hiding among civilians.
Civilians were killed in Rafah. It was tragic. Amnesty wants the world to believe that it was deliberate and they are willing to spend lots of money and effort to twist the truth to reach their pre-determined conclusions.
UPDATE: The final report does not contain a single quote that indicates that IDF soldiers intended to "take revenge." The only quote from a soldier that mentions "revenge" says the exact opposite: '“Anyone who abducts should know that he will pay a price. This was not revenge." Amnesty is lying."

- How Amnesty lies and twists the truth (Elder of Ziyon)
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/07/how-amnesty-lies-and-rwists-truth.html
"Right after I posted my last article on Amnesty's latest report based on its executive summary, the actual Amnesty report about the fighting in Rafah last year was released. It took me about two minutes to identify the first lie.
"An engineer corps soldier who took part in the incursion told Breaking the Silence that his orders were “to make a big boom before the ceasefire”, without being given any specific targets". The Breaking the Silence quote shows that this soldier was not in Rafah to begin with! He was talking about a completely different battle in northern Gaza. And even his testimony shows the exact opposite of Amnesty's thesis of a bloodthirsty, vengeful IDF:
"Before the first ceasefire they told us we were going in [to the Gaza Strip] to take down a house. We went down quick and got the gear we needed ready and then we asked, “Which house are we taking down?” And they said, “We want to make a big boom before the ceasefire.” Like that, those were the words the officer used, and it made everyone mad. I mean, whose house? They hadn’t picked a specific one – just ‘a’ house. That’s when everyone got uneasy. At that moment we decided pretty unanimously that we would go speak with the team commander and tell him we simply aren’t going to do it, that we aren’t willing to put ourselves at risk for no reason. He chose the most inappropriate words to describe to us what we were being asked to do. I guess that’s how it was conveyed to him. “We’re not willing to do it,” we told him. It was a very difficult conversation. Him being an officer, he said, “First of all, so it’s clear to everyone, we will be carrying this thing out tonight, and second, I’m going to go find out more details about the mission for you.” He returned a few hours later and said, “It’s an ‘active house' (being used by combatants for military purposes) and it’s necessary you take it down, and not someone else, because we can’t do it with jets – that would endanger other houses in the area, and that’s why you’re needed.” In the end the mission was miraculously transferred to a battalion with which we were supposed to go in, and we were let off the hook. After the ceasefire a bulldozer and emulsion trucks (transporting the explosive liquid) and the driller (a drilling system for identifying tunnels) came to our area, and work started on the tunnels in our zone."
All Amnesty wants you to get out of this is that some IDF officer said he wanted to make a big boom on a random house, and it is clear that this was not the mission at all. And the very idea of such a mission is so anomalous and disgusting to IDF soldiers that even when they think their commander is ordering them to do so, they refuse! Amnesty, of course, has no problem lying and claiming that this is proof of Israeli war crimes miles away.
Meanwhile, I am looking in the full report for quotes to support Amnesty's claim in their executive summary that "Public statements by Israeli army commanders and soldiers after the conflict provide compelling reasons to conclude that some attacks that killed civilians and destroyed homes and property were intentionally carried out and motivated by a desire for revenge – to teach a lesson to, or punish, the population of Rafah for the capture of Lieutenant Goldin."
What public statements support that conclusion? Amnesty's full report supplies exactly one that does no such thing: "Israeli army spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Peter Lerner said Israel’s assaults were mostly aimed at convincing Hamas never to try it again: “When they come out of their bunkers and they look around, they are going to have to make a serious estimation of whether what they have done was worth it.” These statements indicate an intention to generate material damage as a deterrent."
Lerner's statement does not in any way indicate that the IDF intended to inflict damage as a deterrent. He was talking about damage that occurs during the course of a war where Hamas chooses to hide among civilians, necessitating the destruction of civilian buildings that Hamas turned into military targets. Amnesty has no shred of evidence that the IDF chose a single target for non-military reasons.
And this is the quote that Amnesty is using as proof of Israeli war crimes. It betrays not only their willingness to twist the facts to reach their pre-conceived notions, but also a willful ignorance of how modern armies make their decisions.
Amnesty chooses to anthropomorphize the IDF as a vindictive person, not as an organization with multiple layers of checks and balances - and there is plenty of documentation that shows every step that goes into IDF decision making that contradicts Amnesty's blanket statements. The organization is beneath contempt."

***************************************

Judée-Samarie

- Un petit Palestinien tué par des extrémistes juifs présumés (Reuters)
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/un-enfant-palestinien-tu%C3%A9-par-des-extr%C3%A9mistes-juifs-051141781.html
"Un petit Palestinien de 18 mois a péri et plusieurs autres membres de sa famille ont été grièvement blessés, vendredi en Cisjordanie [...], dans un incendie allumé par des extrémistes juifs présumés, rapporte la police israélienne. La maison, située à Kafr Douma, une localité proche de la ville de Naplouse, a été incendiée aux premières heures de la matinée, alors que la famille dormait. Le mot "Vengeance", en hébreu, a été retrouvé sur les murs de la maison incendiée, ont rapporté la police et des témoins.
Le Premier ministre israélien, Benjamin Netanyahu, s'est déclaré choqué par cette agression. "C'est un acte terroriste. Israël agit avec fermeté contre le terrorisme, quels qu'en soient les auteurs", a-t-il déclaré en ajoutant que "tous les moyens" seraient employés pour traduire les agresseurs devant la justice. Une enquête a été ouverte, a déclaré le lieutenant-colonel Peter Lerner, porte-parole de l'armée israélienne, pour qui il s'agit de "rien de moins qu'un acte de terrorisme barbare". [...]
"Nous pensons que cette attaque a des motivations nationalistes", a dit de son côté Luba Samri, porte-parole de la police israélienne. Les autorités israéliennes ont démantelé mercredi deux implantations sauvages dans la colonie de Beit El, près de Ramallah, et expulsé plusieurs dizaines personnes d'une autre implantation près de Naplouse, ce qui a provoqué des manifestations de protestation."

- Bébé palestinien brûlé : «un acte de terrorisme» pour Netanyahu (AFP) - "«C'est un acte de terrorisme en tout point», a affirmé Benjamin Netanyahu dans un communiqué en soulignant qu'il avait donné ordre aux «forces de sécurité d'utiliser tous les moyens à leur disposition pour arrêter les meurtriers et les traduire en justice»."
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/07/31/97001-20150731FILWWW00047-bebe-bruleun-acte-de-terrorisme-netanyahu.php
- Netanyahu condamne l’incendie criminel où a péri un bébé palestinien (Times of Israel)
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/un-bebe-palestinien-tue-dans-ce-qui-semble-etre-un-incendie-criminel-juif/
"[...] « Je suis choqué par cet acte horrible, odieux », a déclaré le Premier ministre dans un communiqué. « Il s’agit d’une attaque terroriste à tous égards. L’Etat d’Israël traite fermement de la terreur, peu importe qui sont les auteurs ». Le premier ministre a affirmé qu’il avait chargé les forces de sécurité à « utiliser toutes les ressources à leur disposition pour capturer les assassins et les traduire en justice dès que possible. » Netanyahu a présenté ses condoléances et souhaité un prompt rétablissement aux membres de la famille Dawabsha, et a déclaré que le gouvernement israélien était « uni dans son opposition farouche à ces actes terribles. » [...]"
- Bébé palestinien brûlé vif : Netanyahu appelle Abbas (AFP)
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/b%C3%A9b%C3%A9-palestinien-br%C3%BBl%C3%A9-vif-netanyahu-appelle-abbas-143210549.html
"[...] Lors de cette conversation téléphonique, M. Netanyahu a affirmé au président palestinien avoir visité la mère, Riham Dawabcheh, 26 ans, et le frère, Ahmed, quatre ans, du petit Ali, 18 mois, mort brûlé vif dans le nord de la Cisjordanie occupée, dans un hôpital de Tel-Aviv où le président israélien Reuven Rivlin doit également se rendre. "Tout le monde en Israël est choqué par l'acte terroriste condamnable qui a visé la famille Dawabcheh", a affirmé M. Netanyahu au président Abbas, selon son bureau. [...]"
- Bébé palestinien brûlé vif : Moshé Yaalon dénonce un "acte terroriste" (AFP) - ""Le meurtre du bébé palestinien est un acte terroriste (...) nous ne permettrons pas à des terroristes de porter atteinte à la vie de Palestiniens", a ajouté le ministre [israélien de la Défense] après l'incendie d'une maison dans le village de Doma près de Naplouse".
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/b%C3%A9b%C3%A9-palestinien-br%C3%BBl%C3%A9-vif-mosh%C3%A9-yaalon-d%C3%A9nonce-acte-053916542.html
- Un bébé palestinien brûlé vif dans une attaque d'extrémistes israéliens (AFP) - "l'attaque de vendredi a suscité une émotion particulièrement vive avec des appels israéliens sur les réseaux sociaux à manifester samedi contre la violence. Le ministre israélien de la Défense Moshé Yaalon a même qualifié les assaillants de "terroristes juifs"."
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/b%C3%A9b%C3%A9-palestinien-br%C3%BBl%C3%A9-vif-attaque-dextr%C3%A9mistes-isra%C3%A9liens-144403303.html

- Cisjordanie : Mahmoud Abbas va s'adresser à la CPI après la mort du bébé palestinien brûlé vif (AFP) - "« Nous préparons immédiatement le dossier qui sera soumis à la CPI et rien ne nous arrêtera dans notre volonté de porter plainte », a affirmé Mahmoud Abbas depuis le siège de la présidence à Ramallah, en Cisjordanie, tout en dénonçant « les crimes de guerre et les crimes contre l’Humanité commis chaque jour par des Israéliens contre le peuple palestinien »."
http://www.20minutes.fr/monde/1660499-20150731-cisjordanie-mahmoud-abbas-va-adresser-cpi-apres-mort-bebe-palestinien-brule-vif

- Manifestations et affrontements en Cisjordanie après la mort d'un bébé palestinien (France TV info)
http://www.francetvinfo.fr/monde/proche-orient/israel-palestine/video-manifestations-et-affrontements-en-cisjordanie-apres-la-mort-d-un-bebe-palestinien_1023207.html
"Plusieurs milliers de Palestiniens ont manifesté en Cisjordanie et dans la bande de Gaza, vendredi 31 juillet [...] Des petits groupes d'adolescents palestiniens masqués ont commencé à jeter des pierres sur les soldats israélien à Hébron, indique AP. Les soldats ont répondu par des tirs "de grenades lacrymogènes et assourdissantes", précise l'AFP. [...]"

- Hamas: 'Every Israeli is now a legitimate target' following Duma terror attack (JP)
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Hamas-Every-Israeli-is-now-a-legitimate-target-following-Duma-terror-attack-410746
"Hamas said Friday that every Israeli is now a legitimate target following the deadly terror attack in the village of Duma in which a Palestinian toddler was killed, Israel Radio reported. In an official message to the public, Hamas also called for a "day of rage" to protest the deadly terror attack and "in order to protect al-Aksa mosque." [...]"

- Le Hamas appelle à la sédition [contre l'Autorité palestinienne] en Cisjordanie (AFP)
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/07/29/97001-20150729FILWWW00226-le-hamas-appelle-a-la-sedition-en-cisjordanie.php
"Les députés du Hamas à Gaza ont de nouveau appelé ce mercredi à un «soulèvement» en Cisjordanie [...] après des dizaines d'arrestations d'islamistes par l'Autorité palestinienne accusée d'être le supplétif d'Israël.
Le mouvement islamiste, au pouvoir à Gaza, et l'Autorité du président Mahmoud Abbas qui administre les zones autonomes en Cisjordanie, sont à couteaux tirés depuis des années et leurs relations sont aujourd'hui au plus bas. Le Hamas appelle désormais régulièrement à la rébellion contre le pouvoir de Mahmoud Abbas, qu'il accuse de se compromettre avec Israël en maintenant une coopération sécuritaire.
Dans un nouveau geste de défi à l'Autorité palestinienne, les députés du Hamas se sont réunis dans le bâtiment du Parlement à Gaza alors que cette assemblée ne siège officiellement plus depuis 2007 et la prise du pouvoir par la force du Hamas dans l'enclave. Ils ont appelé à "un soulèvement et une rébellion contre les arrestations politiques" et exhorté tous les mouvements palestiniens à adopter "une position ferme face aux crimes de l'Autorité contre la résistance et ses membres", selon un communiqué.
Les députés ont dénoncé la coopération sécuritaire avec Israël comme "une haute trahison", a ajouté le texte. Le député Khalil al-Haya y a vu la preuve que "la sécurité de l'Autorité est désormais une branche de la sécurité sioniste". Cette coopération est la pierre angulaire des Accords sur l'autonomie signés en 1993 à Oslo et qui prévoient une coordination entre forces israéliennes et palestiniennes [...]"

***************************************

"Processus de paix"

- Left presents new outlook: 2 states without uprooting Jews, Shlomo Cesana (Israel Hayom)
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=27175
"Is Israel's Left revamping its diplomatic vision? On Monday, Zionist Union MK Hilik Bar presented a new outline for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and, afterward, Zionist Union leader Isaac Herzog said Bar's proposal was worthy of "in-depth consideration."
Bar's plan includes the establishment of a Palestinian state with borders based on the 1949 armistice lines. The main settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria would remain part of Israel and there would be land swaps to compensate the Palestinians for these areas.
Also, Bar envisions letting Jews who live in areas that become part of the Palestinian state remain in their homes as residents of the new country. Bar said these Jews could become a "flourishing minority" in the Palestinian state, like the contemporary Jewish communities in London and Berlin.
Herzog called Bar's ideas "stimulating." "I'm not afraid to put these things on the table and examine them," Herzog said."

- Terrorist who led killing of 37 is ‎"the Bride of Palestine” - Host on Fatah-run TV (Fatah-run Awdah TV, Vidéo 2mn13) - "No one has forgotten Dalal Mughrabi since her Martyrdom in ‎‎1978. Her name is engraved on the hearts of all Palestinians, male and female. ‎Therefore we [Fatah’s committee] are proud to be named after Dalal Mughrabi, the hero ‎of Palestine, the Bride of Palestine, and the Martyr of Palestine".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mZvRg85R_0

- PA Minister: Israel has "evil plan to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque and establish the alleged Temple” (Vidéo 1mn) - "Every month there are invasions"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCWVx7BLklU

***************************************

Monde arabe

- Yémen : le blocus "tue autant" les civils que la guerre (AFP) - "Le blocus imposé par la coalition arabe conduite par l'Arabie saoudite au Yémen "tue" des civils autant que la guerre qui y fait rage, a déploré jeudi le chef de Médecins sans frontières (MSF)". Mais la couverture médiatique de ce blocus drastique et redoutable ne représentera jamais un dixième de la couverture du blocus maritime de Gaza, autrement moins dévastateur, quoi qu'on en dise.
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/y%C3%A9men-blocus-tue-autant-civils-guerre-msf-122656299.html
"Le blocus imposé par la coalition arabe conduite par l'Arabie saoudite au Yémen "tue" des civils autant que la guerre qui y fait rage, a déploré jeudi le chef de Médecins sans frontières (MSF), en visite dans le pays. En empêchant l'arrivée de l'aide humanitaire aux populations affectées par la guerre au Yémen, le blocus "tue autant que le conflit" armé, a déclaré Joanne Liu, interrogée par l'AFP au téléphone à Sanaa.
Elle tire ainsi la sonnette d'alarme sur la situation humanitaire au Yémen, jugée "catastrophique" par des ONG, plus de quatre mois après le lancement le 26 mars par une coalition arabe d'une campagne de raids aériens contre les rebelles chiites pro-iraniens. [...] Après quatre mois d'intenses combats, l'ONU avait demandé que Ryad allège le blocus naval qu'il impose aux ports yéménites afin de laisser davantage de navires commerciaux ravitailler le pays, qui dépend à 90% des importations pour son carburant et sa nourriture. [...]"

***************************************

Iran

- François Heisbourg : « L’Iran demeurera une puissance hostile à l’existence même d’Israël » (Actualité Juive) - "l’Iran peut décider d’utiliser cet argent [issu de la levée des sanctions] pour renforcer ses missiles qui, en dehors des fusées, remontent aux années 1970. Je ne doute pas personnellement qu’il y aura une forte pression des Pasdaran et des militaires pour engager ce type d’investissements. Cela va poser de sérieux problèmes aux pays voisins, en particulier à Israël et à l’Arabie Saoudite".
http://www.actuj.com/2015-07/moyen-orient/2185-francois-heisbourg-l-iran-demeurera-une-puissance-hostile-a-l-existence-meme-d-israel
"- Actualité Juive : L’accord de Vienne est-il historique ?
- François Heisbourg (président de l’International Institute for Strategic Studies et conseiller spécial à la Fondation pour la recherche stratégique) : Au niveau de la région, la réponse est probablement non. L’Iran continuera à poser des problèmes en matière d’hégémonie régionale et maintiendra son activisme anti-israélien. Le régime demeurera ce qu’il est. En ce qui concerne la lutte contre la prolifération nucléaire au Moyen-Orient et dans le monde, oui l’accord est historique. Les engagements iraniens tels qu’ils ont été formulés et encadrés par le P5+1 et l’AIEA, forment un dispositif qui est de mon point de vue sans précédent et à vrai dire inespéré.
- A.J. : Ce compromis peut-il être prolongé par une entente américano-iranienne sur les principaux conflits de la région, sur le front irako-syrien en particulier ?
- F. H. : C’est la grande question et elle était présente dans l’intervention de François Hollande, le 14 juillet, lorsqu’il a évoqué les conséquences éventuelles de l’accord en Syrie. Il y a sans doute des gens tentés par cette possibilité. Mais je pense qu’ils seront déçus car l’Iran ne va pas changer de nature. Il demeurera une puissance hostile aux Etats sunnites de la région et à l’existence même d’Israël. Cet Iran sera rendu économiquement plus puissant par la levée des sanctions. Mais cette puissance sera économique et politique, mais ne sera pas nucléaire. Cela crée une sérieuse différence de mon point de vue. [...]
- A.J. : Les dirigeants iraniens pourraient-ils profiter des délais assez longs prévus dans le texte en cas de contestation des demandes d'inspection des sites impliqués dans le programme nucléaire pour tenter de cacher certaines de leurs activités nucléaires ?
- F. H. : Je suis convaincu depuis quelques années que les Iraniens s’emploient à ce genre de travail. Le contraire serait étonnant. Mais cela m’étonnerait qu’ils puissent faire cela dans les années à venir. Je ne pense pas d’ailleurs que les accords de Vienne jouent un rôle quelconque en la matière. A partir du moment où les Iraniens ont repris les négociations après l’élection d’Hassan Rohani à la présidence en 2013, il y a certainement des membres du régime qui ont eu tout intérêt à essayer d’effacer les traces de la « dimension potentiellement militaire » (DMI) du programme nucléaire iranien. Les Iraniens ne sont pas des enfants de chœur… [...]
- A.J.: A quoi servira la manne financière dont va bénéficier l’Iran grâce à l’accord ?
- F. H. : C’est une autre question majeure. En théorie, l’Iran devrait utiliser cet argent pour moderniser son appareil de production. Ses gisements pétroliers ont été laissés à l’abandon depuis une dizaine d’années, très peu d’investissements ont été menés pour moderniser les anciens champs gaziers ou pour en mettre en service de nouveaux. L’Iran possède la deuxième réserve gazière mondiale, mais n’est toujours pas exportateur net de gaz !
Mais l’Iran peut également décider d’utiliser cet argent pour renforcer ses missiles qui, en dehors des fusées, remontent aux années 1970. Je ne doute pas personnellement qu’il y aura une forte pression des Pasdaran et des militaires pour engager ce type d’investissements. Cela va poser de sérieux problèmes aux pays voisins, en particulier à Israël et à l’Arabie Saoudite."

- Obama’s Racial Blind Spot, Ruth R. Wisse (Professor of Yiddish Literature and Professor of Comparative Literature at Harvard University) - "This is the first time the U.S. will have deliberately entered into a pact with a country committed to annihilating another people—a pact that doesn’t even require formal repudiation of the country’s genocidal aims".
http://www.wsj.com/articles/obamas-racial-blind-spot-1438301157
"Barack Obama’s election to the presidency represented to many Americans this country’s final triumph over racism. Reversing the record of slavery and institutionalized discrimination, his victory was hailed as a redemptive moment for America and potentially for humankind. How grotesque that the president should now douse that hope by fueling racism on an global scale. [...]
The Iranian regime is currently the world’s leading exponent of anti-Jewish racism. Comparisons to Nazi Germany are always a last resort, since even with all the evidence before us it is hard to fathom the evil the Nazis perpetrated. Yet Iran’s frank genocidal ambition dwarfs its predecessor’s. Whereas Adolf Hitler and Reinhard Heydrich had to plot the “Final Solution” in secrecy, using euphemisms for their intended annihilation of the Jews of Europe, Iran’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweets that Israel “has no cure but to be annihilated.” Iran’s leaders, relishing how small Israel is, call it a “one bomb state,” and until the time arrives to deliver that bomb, they sponsor anti-Israel terrorism through Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other militias. [...]
Yet when it comes to the world’s most widespread and ideologically driven racism, President Obama seems to have a blind spot, initiating a nuclear deal with the fanatical anti-Jewish regime in Tehran, despite what he calls Iran’s “bad behavior.” The euphemism this time is his, not that of the perpetrators, and it camouflages their intentions even if they won’t. [...] This is the first time the U.S. will have deliberately entered into a pact with a country committed to annihilating another people—a pact that doesn’t even require formal repudiation of the country’s genocidal aims."

- Khamenei: The worst thing about World Wars was Israel's creation (Elder of Ziyon) - "This series of tweets from Ayatollah Khamenei shows how deranged he is".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/07/khamenei-worst-thing-about-world-wars.html

***************************************

Europe

- Reem Sahwil : J’espère qu’Israël disparaîtra (Times of Israel) - "Reem Sahwil avait fait la Une des journaux suite à un débat télévisé avec la chancelière allemande au cours duquel celle-ci a fondu en larmes".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/reem-sahwil-jespere-quisrael-disparaitra/
- I hope Israel disappears, says Palestinian teen Merkel brought to tears (Times of Israel) - “My hope is that one day it [Israel] won’t be there anymore, but only Palestine.”
http://www.timesofisrael.com/i-hope-israel-disappears-says-palestinian-teen-merkel-brought-to-tears/
"In an interview Sunday with the German weekly Die Welt, Reem Sahwil said she hoped to return to live in her ancestral homeland — free of Israel. “My hope is that one day it [Israel] won’t be there anymore, but only Palestine,” she said.
Reem, who was born in a refugee camp in Lebanon and currently lives in the eastern German city of Rostock, said she does not consider Germany to be her home. “No, Palestine is my home,” she said. Although she had never visited, she said, she intended to live there “one day.”
When asked what she considered to be Palestine, Reem answered “everything.” “The country should not be called Israel, but Palestine,” she said.
The interviewer asked her if she was aware of the special relationship between Israel and Germany, and the strict laws against anti-Semitism in her adopted home. “Yes, but there is freedom of speech here, and I am allowed to say that,” Reem answered. “My parents tell me that Israel expelled us from Palestine. That’s true, isn’t it?”
Reem garnered international media attention earlier this month after an awkward encounter with the German leader, during a televised discussion of the country’s asylum policies, left the teenager in tears. After telling the Reem that she could not stop her family’s possible deportation, a video clip of Merkel attempting to comfort the sobbing 14-year-old went viral. [...]"

- Is It Good for the Jews?: Anti-Semitism and the New Europe, Dave Rich (World Affairs Journal) - "These outbreaks of anti-Semitism are most acute during times of conflict [in the Middle East], but their background hum has a more permanent feel for many Jews".
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/it-good-jews-anti-semitism-and-new-europe
"There are lots of different ways to talk, and think, about European anti-Semitism, and most of them have been heard at one time or another over the past year.
You can look at the jihadist murders of Jews in Brussels, Paris, and the Danish capital of Copenhagen over the past 12 months, and in Toulouse, in southern France, three years ago, and at the murder of Ilan Halimi in Paris in 2006, and conclude that Europe generally, and France in particular, has a problem with homicidal anti-Semitism.
You can look at the thousands of Jews who have left France in recent years, traumatized by successive anti-Semitic murders and wearied by the weekly grind of anti-Semitic abuse, threats, and violence that rarely makes the international news, and wonder if Jews have a future in Europe at all.
You can look at the electoral success of the neo-fascist Jobbik in Hungary, and the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn in Greece, and the far-right National Front in France, and worry that Europe has forgotten the destruction wrought on the continent by fascism and Nazism, with all their attendant anti-Semitism, during the last century, and is destined to repeat the errors of its own history.
Or you can listen to the heartfelt and compelling support for European Jewry expressed recently by French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and British Prime Minister David Cameron, the leaders of the three most powerful states in the European Union, and feel reassured that Jews, despite the attacks they suffer and dangers they face, are nonetheless valued and protected in the new Europe.
You can look at National Front leader Marine Le Pen, who regularly tries to appear philosemitic and to distance herself from the party’s fascist past, even at the cost of breaking from her own father, and—whether she is sincere or not, whether this is cosmetic or not—you can wonder what it means, that in order to be electable she feels compelled to reach out to French Jews.
And you can look at a city like London, where new Jewish schools and community centers thrive, where Jews play a full role in a diverse, multicultural city, and where the prospect of the United Kingdom electing its first Jewish Prime Minister (Ed Miliband) since Queen Victoria sat on the throne was barely discussed (outside Jewish circles, of course) during the recent election, and imagine that anti-Semitism is something in the margins, an unfortunate relic of outdated prejudice that only rarely intrudes upon the daily lives of ordinary Jews.
Or, most confusing of all, you can imagine that all of these things are true, and accurate, and are happening simultaneously in today’s Europe, and that the good and bad stories about anti-Semitism and Jewish life in Europe do not even contradict each other. And you would be right to do so. [...]
Whenever Israel fights its periodic conflicts with Hamas or Hezbollah, Jews in Europe will feel the backlash. In July and August 2014, as the bombs and rockets began to fly between Gaza and southern Israel, anti-Semitism started its predictable rise in European cities. In France, riot police were needed to protect synagogues and Jewish shops were burnt out. In Britain, the highest-ever number of anti-Semitic incidents was recorded. In Germany, chants of “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas” were heard coming from anti-Israel demonstrators.
These outbreaks of anti-Semitism are most acute during times of conflict, but their background hum has a more permanent feel for many Jews. In 2013, before the most recent Gaza war and before the Paris and Copenhagen and Brussels attacks, 60 percent of Swedish Jews told opinion pollsters that they always or frequently avoided wearing or carrying anything in public that might identify them as Jewish. Forty-nine percent of French Jews and 45 percent of Belgian Jews said the same. These figures were lower in other parts of Europe, but Jews in those places look to France and Belgium and wonder if that is where their own societies are heading. Such fears are not compatible with what European Jewish Congress President Moshe Kantor calls a “normative Jewish life.” [...]
Last summer, when European anti-Semitism began to rise in response to the conflict in Gaza and southern Israel, it was Muslim anger that gave it energy and focus. This was seen in France, where riot police were needed to protect synagogues and where Jewish shops were burnt out. It was also seen in Britain, where the highest-ever number of anti-Semitic incidents was recorded and the proportion of anti-Semitic hate crime offenders described as South Asian or Arab rose significantly. Not all anti-Semitic hate crime is perpetrated by Muslims, but enough of it is for Jews, and others, to connect it to wider issues of extremism and cohesion that can sometimes feel as if they undermine the very basis of society itself. [...]
Ensuring that European Jews have confidence in their communities’ futures is an essential task for Europe’s political leaders, but only as part of ensuring that those European societies have a cohesive, safe, and prosperous future. This will be easier in some places than in others, just as some Jewish communities are under extreme pressure and others are thriving. The short-term need is to provide sufficient physical security to protect Jewish communities from jihadists. In the longer term, Europe needs to rediscover its own secular liberal values and assert them in a positive and inclusive way. Building societies that are diverse and cohesive, that promote an easy and relaxed multiculturalism while celebrating a core identity that everyone feels is their own, is no easy task. But this is the task facing Europe’s leaders today, and success in the struggle against anti-Semitism depends on it."

- Au moins 4 civils tués dans l'est de l'Ukraine (AFP) - "Le conflit opposant l'armée ukrainienne aux rebelles prorusses a fait plus de 6.800 morts en quinze mois". Pour rappel, c'est plus de trois fois le bilan du dernier conflit dans la bande de Gaza.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/07/30/97001-20150730FILWWW00070-au-moins-4-civils-tues-dans-l-est-de-l-ukraine.php

***************************************

Histoire

- Questioning the banality of evil, S. Alexander Haslam and Stephen D. Reicher (The Psychologist) - "studies of the Nazi regime reveal that its functionaries engaged actively and creatively with their tasks"; "meticulous examination of Eichmann’s life and crimes have suggested that Arendt’s analysis was, at best, naive"; "A spate of books have made similar arguments about the psychology of Nazi functionaries in general"; "In short, the true horror of Eichmann and his like is not that their actions were blind. On the contrary, it is that they saw clearly what they did, and believed it to be the right thing to do".
https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-21/edition-1/questioning-banality-evil
"There is a widespread consensus amongst psychologists that tyranny triumphs either because ordinary people blindly follow orders or else because they mindlessly conform to powerful roles. However, recent evidence concerning historical events challenges these views. In particular, studies of the Nazi regime reveal that its functionaries engaged actively and creatively with their tasks. Re-examination of classic social psychological studies points to the same dynamics at work. This article summarises these developments and lays out the case for an updated social psychology of tyranny that explains both the influence of tyrannical leaders and the active contributions of their followers. [...]
Until recently, there has been a clear consensus amongst social psychologists, historians and philosophers that everyone succumbs to the power of the group and hence no one can resist evil once in its midst. But now, suddenly, things don’t seem quite so certain. On the historical side, a number of new studies – notably David Cesarani’s (2004) meticulous examination of Eichmann’s life and crimes – have suggested that Arendt’s analysis was, at best, naive. Not least, this was because she only attended the start of his trial. In this, Eichmann worked hard to undermine the charge that he was a dangerous fanatic by presenting himself as an inoffensive pen-pusher. Arendt then left. Had she stayed, though, she (and we) would have discovered a very different Eichmann: a man who identified strongly with anti-semitism and Nazi ideology; a man who did not simply follow orders but who pioneered creative new policies; a man who was well aware of what he was doing and was proud of his murderous ‘achievements’.
A spate of books have made similar arguments about the psychology of Nazi functionaries in general (see Haslam & Reicher, 2007a, for a review). They all suggest that very few Nazis could be seen as ‘simply following orders’ – not least because the orders issued by the Nazi hierarchy were typically very vague. As
a result, individuals needed to display imagination and initiative in order to interpret the commands they were given and to act upon them. As Ian Kershaw notes, Nazis didn’t obey Hitler, they worked towards him, seeking to surpass each other in their efforts. But by the same token, they also had a large degree of discretion. Indeed, as Laurence Rees (2005) notes in his recent book on Auschwitz and the ‘final solution’, it was this that made the Nazi system so dynamic. Even in the most brutal of circumstances, people did not have to kill and only some chose to do so. So, far from simply ‘finding themselves’ in inhumane situations or inhumane groups, the murderers actively committed themselves to such groups. They actively created inhumane situations and placed themselves at their epicentre. This was true even of concentration camp regimes:
"Individuals demonstrated commitment by acting, on their own initiative, with greater brutality than their orders called for. Thus excess did not spring from mechanical obedience. On the contrary; its matrix was a group structure where it was expected that members exceed the limits of normal violence." (Sofsky, 1993, p.228)
In short, the true horror of Eichmann and his like is not that their actions were blind. On the contrary, it is that they saw clearly what they did, and believed it to be the right thing to do.
[...] from Stanford, as from the obedience studies, it is not valid to conclude that people mindlessly and helplessly succumb to brutality. Rather both studies (and also the historical evidence) suggest that brutality occurs when people identify strongly with groups that have a brutal ideology. This leads them to advance that ideology knowingly, creatively and even proudly. [...]
Until recently, psychologists and historians have agreed that ordinary people commit evil when, under the influence of leaders and groups, they become blind to the consequences of their actions. This consensus has become so strong that it is repeated, almost as a mantra, in psychology textbooks and in society at large. However critical scrutiny of both historical and psychological evidence – along with a number of new studies, e.g. Krueger (in press); Staub (in press) – has produced a radically different picture. People do great wrong, not because they are unaware of what they are doing but because they consider it to be right. This is possible because they actively identify with groups whose ideology justifies and condones the oppression and destruction of others. [...]
Our complaint against the old consensus is that, for far too long, it has asked the wrong questions and led us to seek the key to human malevolence in the wrong place. Cesarini’s study of Eichmann led him to conclude that: ‘the notion of the banality of evil, combined with Milgram’s theses on the predilection for obedience to authority, straitjacketed research for two decades’ (2004, p.15). We agree. As John Turner (2006) argues, "it is time to escape our theoretical prisons." [...]"

- Contes sordides de l’antisémitisme, Marc Semo (Libération) - "L’anthropologue polonaise Joanna Tokarska-Bakir dissèque les rumeurs attribuant aux juifs des meurtres rituels, légendes qui se sont répandues en Europe dès le Moyen Age".
http://www.liberation.fr/livres/2015/07/29/contes-sordides-de-l-antisemitisme_1355873
"Au fil des siècles, ces récits sont toujours restés les mêmes, évoquant des profanations d’hosties qui se mettent à saigner, ou plus tardivement des meurtres rituels d’enfants chrétiens, dont le sang doit servir pour le pain azyme. Dans ces monstrueuses légendes, on retrouve toujours la même figure, le juif avide, et les mêmes objets, le couteau de la circoncision ou le tonneau à clous que l’on roule pour faire saigner l’enfant chrétien qui y a été enfermé. Ces rumeurs de sang ont essaimé dans toute l’Europe à partir du XIIIe siècle, notamment dans les..." (suite payante)

Partager cet article
Repost0
28 juillet 2015 2 28 /07 /juillet /2015 23:25

Israël


- Des émeutiers palestiniens attaquent la police sur le mont du Temple (Times of Israel) - "les manifestants avaient stocké des explosifs artisanaux, des pétards et des planches de bois à l’intérieur de la mosquée Al-Aqsa, avec l’intention d’attaquer des milliers de fidèles juifs réunis à proximité pour prier au mur Occidental pour Tisha Beav, un jour de jeûne et de deuil qui commémore initialement la destruction des premier et second Temples juifs".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/des-emeutiers-palestiniens-attaquent-la-police-sur-le-mont-du-temple/

- Le cheikh de Jérusalem explique aux enfants la gloire du martyre (Times of Israel)
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/le-cheikh-de-jerusalem-explique-aux-enfants-la-gloire-du-martyre/
"[...] Dans une vidéo de quatre minutes mise en ligne par l’institut de veille Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), le cheikh Khaled al-Maghrabi est en train d’enseigner à un groupe d’enfants, dont les plus âgés sont à peine des adolescents, que « le martyre est absous avec la première goutte de son sang ». Les enfants prenaient part à un soi-disant camp d’été de la mosquée Al-Aqsa, selon MEMRI. Le chef religieux a expliqué au groupe de petits garçons et de petites filles que « le martyre serait marié à deux vierges au paradis ». Au jour du jugement, le cheikh a ajouté, une personne qui décède en étant engagée dans le ribat – le concept musulman de défendre la foi, nommé d’après une structure ressemblant à une forteresse – serait capable de sauver 70 membres de sa famille. [...]"
- 70 virgins for Martyrs, preached to kids at Al-Aqsa Mosque summer camp (Vidéo 2mn)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqmkw-l46so

***************************************************

Judée-Samarie

- The UN lies about international law. What a surprise (Elder of Ziyon) - "In a normal world, this would be scandalous. But in the bizarre world where anything anti-Israel is OK and anything Israel does is defined as illegal before any legal analysis is done, this is par for the course". La suite de l'affaire "Sussiya"...
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/07/the-un-lies-about-international-law.html


***************************************************

"Processus de paix"

- Lessons from Gaza (Jerusalem Post editorial) - "This has informed Israel’s insistence on maintaining control over the Jordan Valley as a condition for granting Palestinians more territorial autonomy on the West Bank. Israel does not want a rerun of South Lebanon, Gaza, or Sinai on the West Bank".
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Lessons-from-Gaza-410336
"Ten years after Israel evacuated the Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip and parts of northern Samaria, very few – whether on the Right or on the Left or in the Center – are willing to stand wholeheartedly behind what is referred to as “the disengagement.”
Opposition leader Isaac Herzog recently referred to the pullout as a “mistake,” as did Shimon Peres some time ago. And although Benjamin Netanyahu voted in favor of the disengagement plan on October 26, 2004, he resigned in protest on August 8, 2005, shortly before it was implemented, and has been a leading critic ever since.
Public opinion has shifted significantly over the past decade. If in the months leading up to the pullout polls consistently showed a strong majority in favor, at least one recent survey shows that the situation has changed. According to a poll conducted in July for the Begin-Sadat Center of Strategic Studies, 63 percent of respondents claimed they were against the evacuation at the time, while 51% said Israelis should move back to Gaza Strip. Clearly, some respondents lied about their past support for the pullout out of a feeling of regret.
It would be unfair, however, to claim that the disengagement brought only damage upon Israel.
From a demographic perspective, Israel ceased to be responsible for more than a million Palestinians in Gaza. Any discussion today of the “demographic time bomb” – the strongest argument against annexation or a one-state solution – leaves out of the equation Gaza’s Palestinians.
And though critics claim the pullout unleashed rocket and mortar fire, the reality is that Jewish towns both inside Gaza and in the surrounding areas came under attack repeatedly before the disengagement. The first Kassam missile was fired from Gaza in 2001. Much higher casualties – civilian and military – were sustained before the disengagement than after. Fewer than 9,000 Jews lived in the midsts of over a million Palestinians who violently opposed their very existence. Expecting the IDF to protect them over time was unreasonable.
Israel also reaped some diplomatic gains from the pullout. Perhaps the most significant was then-US president George Bush’s 2004 letter, endorsed by overwhelming majorities by both houses of Congress. Large settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria would remain an integral part of Israel in any two-state solution and Palestinian refugees would be settled in a future Palestinian state, not in Israel. The letter marked a major shift in American policy that had traditionally seen settlements as an obstacle to peace.
But perhaps the biggest lesson to learn from the disengagement is also its biggest flaw: the pullout proved once and for all the utter folly of unilateral territorial concessions. The scenario played out following the IDF’s 2000 unilateral pullout from South Lebanon brought about the rise of Hezbollah, which repeated itself in Gaza. Less than two years after Israel evacuated the Strip, Hamas, in a bloody coup, ousted Fatah and seized control.
This is in large part because the pullout was seen, at least in the eyes of Palestinians, as the result of the success of Hamas’s terrorism and rocket fire. Where negotiations had failed to achieve territorial concessions, argued Hamas supporters convincingly, violent struggle had succeeded.
Hamas’s success in smuggling into Gaza larger and more deadly rockets, with increasingly longer range, taught Israel the importance of maintaining control over borders in any future territorial concession to Palestinians. The same lesson can be learned from the Sinai Peninsula – returned to Egypt as part of the Camp David Accords – which has under Egyptian control deteriorated into anarchy and been overrun by violent Beduin tribes and groups connected with al-Qaeda and Islamic State.
This has informed Israel’s insistence on maintaining control over the Jordan Valley as a condition for granting Palestinians more territorial autonomy on the West Bank. Israel does not want a rerun of South Lebanon, Gaza, or Sinai on the West Bank.
Though public opinion has shifted over the past decade since the 2005 pullout from Gaza and northern Samaria, it is wrong to claim that the disengagement was a complete failure. But perhaps the most important lesson to be learned from the disengagement is the potential danger of territorial concessions. Any future two-state solution must be reached through direct negotiations with the Palestinians and must include iron-clad security arrangements. We must keep this in mind as we mark a decade since the disengagement."

- PA: Jerusalem never had a Jewish Temple (PMW) - "Today, on Tisha B'Av, Jews mourn the destruction of the first and second Temples in Jerusalem (586 BCE and 70 CE). However, the Palestinian Authority denies that there ever was a Temple, consistently referring to Solomon's Temple as "the alleged Temple." Moreover, the PA also teaches its people that there was never a Jewish history in Jerusalem".
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=15297

- Arabs fear UNRWA might actually help refugees because of its budget shortfall (Elder of Ziyon) - "If you read between the lines, this unnamed official is saying that Palestinian Arabs have no right to attempt to become citizens of their host countries, since their leaders fear the idea that they may be resettled elsewhere and therefore cannot be used as excuses to vilify Israel for coming generations"; "In short: Palestinian Arab leaders continue to actively work to keep millions of people stateless. And they are afraid that UNRWA might revert to its original mandate to reduce the number of refugees, not perpetuate them".
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.fr/2015/07/arabs-fear-unrwa-might-actually-help.html

***************************************************

Egypte

- Egypte : 18 policiers blessés par une bombe dans le Sinaï (AFP) - "L’attaque s’est produite aux abords de la ville d’Al-Arich, chef lieu du Nord-Sinaï, ont indiqué des responsables de sécurité, précisant que 18 hommes avaient été blessés dans l’explosion de la bombe, déclenchée à distance au passage d’un bus les transportant en vacances".
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/egypte-18-policiers-blesses-par-une-bombe-dans-le-sinai/

***************************************************

Liban, Syrie & Hezbollah

- Syrie : cinq enfants tués par un tir des rebelles à Alep (AFP) - "Les quatre petits frères, ainsi que leur cousine, avaient tous moins de 14 ans" ; "La roquette lancée par les insurgés s'est abattue sur leur maison dans le quartier de Chahba al-Jadida".
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/syrie-cinq-enfants-tu%C3%A9s-tir-rebelles-%C3%A0-alep-085559959.html

- Nasrallah : « La tumeur cancéreuse » d’Israël sera effacée (Times of Israel)
http://fr.timesofisrael.com/nasrallah-la-tumeur-cancereuse-disrael-sera-effacee/
"Le chef du Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, a declaré qu’« Israël, la tumeur cancéreuse, doit être anéanti. » Selon al-Manar, Nasrallah a dit qu’Israël tirait partie des troubles dans la région pour renforcer les liens avec les Etats arabes modérés. « L’entité sioniste profite des événements qui se déroulent dans notre région dans le but de normaliser ses relations avec plusieurs pays arabes, » a-t-il affirmé. [...]"

***************************************************

Yémen

- Yémen : une ONG dénonce «un crime de guerre» (AFP) - la coalition arabe a tué au moins 65 civils (dont dix enfants) en un seul raid aérien, et on n'en parle quasiment nulle part dans nos médias. A comparer avec la couverture médiatique très importante, même un an après les faits, des quatre enfants tués involontairement par Tsahal sur une plage de Gaza.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/07/28/97001-20150728FILWWW00058-yemen-une-ong-denonce-un-crime-de-guerre.php
"Human Rights Watch (HRW) a estimé aujourd'hui que le raid aérien de la coalition conduite par l'Arabie saoudite qui avait fait vendredi 65 morts parmi les civils à Mokha, dans le sud-ouest du Yémen, s'apparentait à un «crime de guerre». «Avec l'absence évidente d'objectif militaire, cette attaque s'apparente à un crime de guerre», écrit dans un communiqué Ole Solvang, responsable de HRW pour les cas d'urgence. HRW a indiqué avoir visité le site de l'attaque un jour et demi après le raid et n'avoir constaté la présence d'aucune position militaire proche.
Le raid a visé un quartier résidentiel réservé aux employés d'une centrale électrique. Des sources médicales yéménites avaient fait état de 35 civils tués, tandis que les médias des rebelles chiites Houthis avaient affirmé deux jours après le raid que le bilan était de quelque 70 morts parmi les civils. HRW a indiqué avoir obtenu du directeur de la centrale électrique, Bagil Jafar Qasim, une liste de 65 civils tués dans l'attaque, dont 10 enfants. L'organisation de défense des droits de l'Homme basée à New York a déploré que la coalition n'ait pas mené d'enquête à la suite de ce raid et d'autres attaques ayant fait des victimes parmi les civils au Yémen. [...]"
- Une nouvelle trêve humanitaire vole en éclats au Yémen (AFP) - "Au moins 1.895 civils figurent parmi 3.984 personnes tuées en quatre mois de conflit, selon les estimations de l'ONU. Environ 80% de la population -soit 21 millions de personnes- ont besoin d'aide ou de protection, et plus de 10 millions ont du mal à se nourrir ou à trouver de l'eau".
https://fr.news.yahoo.com/nouvelle-tr%C3%AAve-humanitaire-vole-%C3%A9clats-au-y%C3%A9men-140945007.html

***************************************************

Iran

- Obama presents a false dichotomy on Iran, Frederick W. Kagan (director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute) - "Opposing the current deal is thus not in any way equivalent to favoring war. It is not a rejection of the idea of a peaceful resolution of this conflict, nor is it a refusal to negotiate with Iran".
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-false-dichotomy/2015/07/23/c0fce57a-2fda-11e5-8f36-18d1d501920d_story.html
"President Obama and his supporters have done a terrific job of framing the debate over the Iran nuclear agreement as a choice between taking the deal or opting for war. They continually challenge critics to articulate an alternative to the deal, claiming that there isn’t one. This is a superb debating technique, and it has put critics on the defensive. But it is a false dichotomy. The choice might conceivably be between a deal and war, although that is by no means certain — the Cold War, after all, ended with neither a deal nor war. But the choice at hand is between accepting this deal now or continuing to press and negotiate for a better deal later. Many critics of this particular agreement, including me, believe that it would be far preferable to sign a good deal with Iran than to go to war with Iran — but also believe that this is a very bad deal indeed.
There is historical precedent for thinking about the issue in this way. The Nixon administration signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I) in 1972, and the Senate ratified it. The agreement did not have the desired effect. The Soviet nuclear stockpile expanded dramatically in subsequent years, and the period of detente supposedly ushered in by that agreement ended with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. That invasion came five months after the conclusion of another poor nuclear arms deal from the U.S. standpoint, SALT II. The Senate refused to ratify SALT II, ending the SALT process.
But war between the United States and the Soviet Union did not ensue. Both Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan instead increased the pressure on the Soviet Union dramatically, including with enhanced economic sanctions and significant increases to the defense budget — begun by Carter — that forced the Soviet Union to spend more on its own military. Within a few years, Soviet leaders came to the conclusion that major internal reform was necessary and that a thaw in relations with the United States was desirable.
Moreover, the end of the SALT process was not the end of negotiations. NATO adopted a “dual-track” approach of deploying U.S. intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Europe and simultaneously trying to negotiate the elimination of all such weapons, including the Soviets’, from the continent in November 1979. Negotiations began in 1980, and formal talks started the next year. These talks were difficult, and the Soviets walked out in 1983 and 1984 as the United States followed through with the deployment of missiles to Europe and the development of Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, to which the Kremlin was violently opposed.
Yet negotiations began again in 1985, now including not only intermediate-range ballistic missiles but also a more comprehensive discussion about reducing — rather than limiting — strategic weapons. Reagan had announced his desire to pursue a Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) in 1982, but the Soviets only took it up three years later, after Mikhail Gorbachev took power. Reagan and Gorbachev announced a basic agreement regarding intermediate-range missiles at the Reykjavik Summit in 1986, and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty was signed the next year. That agreement paved the way for additional negotiations that culminated with the signing of the START pact itself in 1991. These treaties, taken together, dramatically reduced the size of nuclear arsenals on both sides and accomplished far more than either of the SALT treaties to eliminate nuclear weapons and delivery systems.
Historical analogies are always perilous, and supporters of the deal with Iran have been quick to argue that Iran has not lost a war and so cannot be expected to sign too disadvantageous an agreement. It is true that Iran has not been defeated in war, but neither had the Soviet Union when Gorbachev signed the INF Treaty. Iran, moreover, has never had the military power the Soviet Union possessed even in 1991 as it collapsed — which included the ability to obliterate the United States and NATO with nuclear weapons. The lesson of Cold War arms reduction negotiations is not that good deals require defeating an enemy in war but rather that walking away from bad deals does not inevitably lead either to war or to the end of negotiations.
Opposing the current deal is thus not in any way equivalent to favoring war. It is not a rejection of the idea of a peaceful resolution of this conflict, nor is it a refusal to negotiate with Iran. One can quite rationally oppose this deal without opposing any deal. Given how bad this deal is, in fact, that is the only rational position to take."

- The Iran Deal and the Rut of History, Leon Wieseltier (The Atlantic) - "We need to despise the [iranian] regime loudly and regularly, and damage its international position as fiercely and imaginatively as we can, for its desire to exterminate Israel".
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/07/iran-deal-history/399644/
"“The president said many times he’s willing to step out of the rut of history.” In this way Ben Rhodes of the White House, who over the years has broken new ground in the grandiosity of presidential apologetics, described the courage of Barack Obama in concluding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the Islamic Republic of Iran, otherwise known as the Iran deal. Once again Rhodes has, perhaps inadvertently, exposed the president’s premises more clearly than the president likes to do. The rut of history: It is a phrase worth pondering. It expresses a deep scorn for the past, a zeal for newness and rupture, an arrogance about old struggles and old accomplishments, a hastiness with inherited precedents and circumstances, a superstition about the magical powers of the present. It expresses also a generational view of history, which, like the view of history in terms of decades and centuries, is one of the shallowest views of all.
This is nothing other than the mentality of disruption applied to foreign policy. In the realm of technology, innovation justifies itself; but in the realm of diplomacy and security, innovation must be justified, and it cannot be justified merely by an appetite for change. Tedium does not count against a principled alliance or a grand strategy. Indeed, a continuity of policy may in some cases—the Korean peninsula, for example: a rut if ever there was one—represent a significant achievement. But for the president, it appears, the tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. Certainly it did in the case of Cuba, where the feeling that it was time to move on (that great euphemism for American impatience and inconstancy) eclipsed any scruple about political liberty as a condition for movement; and it did with Iran, where, as Rhodes admits, the president was tired of things staying the same, and was enduring history as a rut. And in the 21st century, when all human affairs are to begin again!
Obama’s restlessness about American policy toward Iran was apparent long before the question of Iran’s nuclear capability focused the mind of the world. In his first inaugural address, he famously offered an extended hand in exchange for an unclenched fist. Obama seems to believe that the United States owes Iran some sort of expiation. As he explained to Thomas Friedman the day after the nuclear agreement was reached, “we had some involvement with overthrowing a democratically elected regime in Iran” in 1953. Six years ago, when the streets of Iran exploded in a democratic rebellion and the White House stood by as it was put down by the government with savage force against ordinary citizens, memories of Mohammad Mosaddegh were in the air around the administration, as if to explain that the United States was morally disqualified by a prior sin of intervention from intervening in any way in support of the dissidents. The guilt of 1953 trumped the duty of 2009. The Iranian fist, in the event, stayed clenched. Or to put it in Rhodes-spin, our Iran policy remained in a rut.
But it is important to recognize that the rut—or the persistence of the adversarial relationship between Iran and the United States—was not a blind fate, or an accident of historical inertia, or a failure of diplomatic imagination. It was a choice. On the Iranian side, the choice was based upon a worldview that was founded in large measure on a fiery, theological anti-Americanism, an officially sanctioned and officially disseminated view of Americanism as satanism. On the American side, the choice was based upon an opposition to the tyranny and the terror that the Islamic Republic represented and proliferated. It is true that in the years prior to the Khomeini revolution the United States tolerated vicious abuses of human rights in Iran; but then our enmity toward the ayatollahs’ autocracy may be regarded as a moral correction. (A correction is an admirable kind of hypocrisy.) The adversarial relationship between America and the regime in Tehran has been based on the fact that we are proper adversaries. We should be adversaries. What democrat, what pluralist, what liberal, what conservative, what believer, what non-believer, would want this Iran for a friend?
When one speaks about an unfree country, one may refer either to its people or to its regime. One cannot refer at once to both, because they are not on the same side. Obama likes to think, when he speaks of Iran, that he speaks of its people, but in practice he has extended his hand to its regime. With his talk about reintegrating Iran into the international community, about the Islamic Republic becoming “a very successful regional power” and so on, he has legitimated a regime that was more and more lacking in legitimacy. (There was something grotesque about the chumminess, the jolly camaraderie, of the American negotiators and the Iranian negotiators. Why is Mohammad Javad Zarif laughing?) The text of the agreement states that the signatories will submit a resolution to the UN Security Council “expressing its desire to build a new relationship with Iran.” Not a relationship with a new Iran, but a new relationship with this Iran, as it is presently—that is to say, theocratically, oppressively, xenophobically, aggressively, anti-Semitically, misogynistically, homophobically—constituted. When the president speaks about the people of Iran, he reveals a bizarre refusal to recognize the character of life in a dictatorship. In his recent Nowruz message, for example, he exhorted the “people of Iran … to speak up for the future [they] seek.” To speak up! Does he think Iran is Iowa? The last time the people of Iran spoke up to their government, they left their blood on the streets. “Whether the Iranian people have sufficient influence to shift how their leaders think about these issues,” Obama told Friedman, “time will tell.” There he is again, the most powerful man in the world, backing off and bearing witness.
If I could believe that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action marked the end of Iran’s quest for a nuclear weapon—that it is, in the president’s unambiguous declaration, “the most definitive path by which Iran will not get a nuclear weapon” because “every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off”—I would support it. I do not support it because it is none of those things. It is only a deferral and a delay. Every pathway is not cut off, not at all. The accord provides for a respite of 15 years, but 15 years is just a young person’s idea of a long time. Time, to borrow the president’s words, will tell. Even though the text of the agreement twice states that “Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop, or acquire any nuclear weapons,” there is no evidence that the Iranian regime has made a strategic decision to turn away from the possibility of the militarization of nuclear power. Its strategic objective has been, rather, to escape the sanctions and their economic and social severities. In this, it has succeeded. If even a fraction of the returned revenues are allocated to Iran’s vile adventures beyond its borders, the United States will have subsidized an expansion of its own nightmares.
But what is the alternative? This is the question that is supposed to silence all objections. It is, for a start, a demagogic question. This agreement was designed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. If it does not prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons—and it seems uncontroversial to suggest that it does not guarantee such an outcome—then it does not solve the problem that it was designed to solve. And if it does not solve the problem that it was designed to solve, then it is itself not an alternative, is it? The status is still quo. Or should we prefer the sweetness of illusion to the nastiness of reality? For as long as Iran does not agree to retire its infrastructure so that the manufacture of a nuclear weapon becomes not improbable but impossible, the United States will not have transformed the reality that worries it. We will only have mitigated it and prettified it. We will have found relief from the crisis, but not a resolution of it.
The administration’s apocalyptic rhetoric about the deal is absurd: The temporary diminishments of Iran’s enrichment activities are not what stand between the Islamic Republic and a bomb. The same people who assure us that Iran has admirably renounced its aspiration to a nuclear arsenal now warn direly that a failure to ratify the accord will send Iranian centrifuges spinning madly again. They ridicule the call for more stringent sanctions against Iran because the sanctions already in place are “leaky” and crumbling, and then they promise us that these same failing measures can be speedily and reliably reconstituted in a nifty mechanism called “snapback.” And how self-fulfilling was the administration’s belief that no better deal was possible? On what grounds was its limited sense of possibility determined? Surely there is nothing utopian about the demand for a larger degree of confidence in this matter: The stakes are unimaginably high. It is worth noting also that the greater certainty demanded by the skeptics does not involve, as the president says, “eliminating the presence of knowledge inside of Iran,” which cannot be done. Many countries possess the science but do not pose the threat. The Iranian will, not the Iranian mind, is the issue.
The period of negotiations that has just come to a close was a twisted moment in American foreign policy. We were inhibited by the talks and they were not. The United States was reluctant to offend its interlocutors by offering any decisive challenge to their many aggressions in the region and beyond; we chose instead to inhibit ourselves. This has been an activist era in Iranian foreign policy and a passivist era in American foreign policy. (Even our refusal to offer significant assistance to Ukraine in its genuinely noble struggle against Russian intimidation and invasion was owed in part to our solicitude for the Russian standpoint on Iran.) I expect that the administration will prevail, alas, over the opposition to the Iran deal. The can will be kicked down the road, which is Obama’s characteristic method of arranging his “legacy” in foreign affairs. Our dread of an Iranian bomb will not have been dispelled; we will still need to keep “all options on the table”; we will continue to ponder anxiously the question of whether a military response to an Iranian breakout will ever be required; we will again be living by our nerves. All this does not constitute a diplomatic triumph. As a consequence of the accord, moreover, the mullahs in Tehran, and the fascist Revolutionary Guards that enforce their rule and profit wildly from it, will certainly not loosen their grip on their society or open it up. This “linkage” is a tired fiction. The sanctions were not what cast Iran into its political darkness.
This accord will strengthen a contemptible regime. And so I propose—futilely, I know—that now, in the aftermath of the accord, America proceed to weaken it. The conclusion of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action should be accompanied by a resumption of our hostility to the Iranian regime and its various forces. Diplomats like to say that you talk with your enemies. They are right. And we have talked with them. But they are still our enemies. This is the hour not for a fresh start but for a renovation of principle. We need to restore democratization to its pride of place among the priorities of our foreign policy and oppress the theocrats in Tehran everywhere with expressions, in word and in deed, of our implacable hostility to their war on their own people. We need to support the dissidents in any way we can, not least so that they do not feel abandoned and alone, and tiresomely demand the release of Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi from the house arrest in which they have been sealed since the crackdown in 2009. (And how in good conscience could we have proceeded with the negotiations while the American journalist Jason Rezaian was a captive in an Iranian jail? Many years ago, when I studied the Dreyfus affair, I learned that there are times when an injustice to only one man deserves to bring things to a halt.) We need to despise the regime loudly and regularly, and damage its international position as fiercely and imaginatively as we can, for its desire to exterminate Israel. We need to arm the enemies of Iran in Syria and Iraq, and for many reasons. (In Syria, we have so far prepared 60 fighters: America is back!) We need to explore, with diplomatic daring, an American-sponsored alliance between Israel and the Sunni states, which are now experiencing an unprecedented convergence of interests.
But we will do none of this. We will instead persist in letting the fire spread and letting time tell, which we call realism. Wanting not to fight wars, we refuse to join struggles. Sometimes, I guess, history really is a rut."

***************************************************

Point de vue

- Short of a conspiracy theory? You can always blame the Jews, David Baddiel (The Guardian) - "for the conspiracy theorists, even the most appalling political and military machinations of Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israel Defence Forces – of Israel itself – are far less important than the creation of what David Aaronovitch, in Voodoo Histories, describes as a new kind of super-Jew: the Zionist".
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/22/conspiracy-theory-jews-david-cameron-antisemitism-extremism
"Conspiracy theory, I said in my last standup show, is how idiots get to feel like intellectuals. I still believe this: conspiracy theory is primarily a way for people, mainly men, to appear in the know, to use their collection of assumptions, generalisations, straw men and false inferences to say, effectively: ah, the wool may have been pulled over your eyes, my friend, but not mine.
But there are other reasons why it’s so popular these days. It provides lonely men with an online community of like-minded lonely men. It’s comforting; it’s reassuring. It provides order in a disordered universe to imagine that shadowy forces organise horrific events, rather than to have to confront the terrible truth that death and destruction happen, all the time, apparently at random. And, as David Cameron pointed out this week in his speech on extremism, it creates a way into something else that’s becoming increasingly popular these days: antisemitism.
Why do so many conspiracy theories boil down to: it’s the Jews wot done it?
One simple reason is that Jews are quite hard to spot, compared with most minorities. This allows them to be unmasked, and unmasking – to be able to say, “I and no one else (apart from all my mates on abovetopsecret.com) have spotted something hidden” – is the principal drive of the conspiracy theorist. But more importantly, within racial stereotyping Jews occupy a somewhat unique position, with a two-pronged status – both low and high.
Although they can be described as stinking and dirty and vermin, and all the other unlovely appellations ascribed by racists to every ethnicity outside the mainstream, they are the only minority who are also secretly in control, pulling the strings behind the scenes, forever conspiring to promote their own hidden global agenda.
This doublethink, which has existed more or less since we made the silly mistake of preferring Barabbas, has in our own time been turbocharged by the existence of the state of Israel. Those who have always felt that Jews were powerful, controlling and out to destroy the world can now point in the direction of the Middle East and say: there you are.
But for the conspiracy theorists, even the most appalling political and military machinations of Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israel Defence Forces – of Israel itself – are far less important than the creation of what David Aaronovitch, in Voodoo Histories, describes as a new kind of super-Jew: the Zionist. This is not, for the conspiracy theorist, the straightforward hate figure of the left. Rather, it is a character, or more importantly a group, to which all western governments are secretly in hock: unbelievably rich and powerful, and dedicated unswervingly to its own project, which is nothing less than the complete control of the world. Yes: Zionists are basically Spectre.
Which makes the conspiracy theorist, to some extent, James Bond. So many conspiracy theories end up in some way to do with these particular imagined super-villains – even ones such as the “murder” of Princess Diana, which seem to have very little apparent benefit to the Zionists – that it’s clear some kind of antisemitism, even if unconsciously, is going on here. But that’s obscured by the self-image of the conspiracy theorist, who is, of course, the good guy, the lone hero, unmasking the secret powers of evil – even if unmasking the secret powers of evil in so many cases seems to involve saying: it’s the Jews.
If the conspiracy theorist is the good guy, this cannot be bad; therefore it cannot be racist. So we come to a position whereby for a lot of people, pointing at one small ethnic group and saying they’re responsible for all the worst things in the world is no longer racist. It’s fighting the good fight.
I’m talking mainly about how things are among the slightly absurd men on social media trading reasons for why the moon landings were actually faked (by the Zionists, I assume: Stanley Kubrick was Jewish – he probably filmed it). In the Middle East and much of east Asia, beliefs such as the idea that 4,000 notified-by-Israel Jews didn’t turn up for work in the World Trade Center on 9/11 (a fallacy: 9.25% of people who died in the Twin Towers were Jewish, roughly in proportion to the Jewish population of New York City) are, for many people, facts.
Our culture moves very fast now. When complicated and troubling events happen, easy answers are quickly sought and provided. There is an American standup I once saw whose first line went: I blame the Jews – it’s quicker that way.
Having said this, I have no idea how, without intense curbs on free speech (which won’t work – conspiracy theorists love the martyrdom of being muzzled), David Cameron will change anything. And frankly, if he tried to convince me that the world wasn’t actually controlled by a rich and powerful network operating on behalf of their own secret political and economic interests, I wouldn’t believe him either."

Partager cet article
Repost0

Présentation

  • : La Boucle d'Occam
  • : Chaque jour, une Boucle reprend l'actualité de France et du Moyen-Orient autour des thèmes d'Israël et de l'antisémitisme.
  • Contact

Recherche

Pages