US tax dollars also funding #radical Leftist #Israeli #NGO’s like #Keshev and #BTselem

February 18, 2013

(Carl)And you thought that it was only European governments that were using taxpayer money to fund radical Israeli NGO’s. No. It turns out that the United States of Obama is also funding radical Leftist NGO’s in Israel. This is Caroline Glick.

According to the report, in accordance with the NGO Transparency Law which requires NGOs to report on donations received from foreign governments, three Israeli NGOs received funding from the US.
Keshev, a radical leftist “media watchdog” group run by some of Israel’s most outspoken, and radical journalists and writers received NIS 492,452 in direct aid from the US government. To understand how subversive Keshev is, it suffices to note that they criticized the Israeli media for rushing to judgment about Fatah’s unity deal with Hamas. That is, the group the US supports believes we should not criticize Fatah for joining forces with a genocidal jihadist movement committed to the obliteration of Israel that is in cahoots with the Iranians.
Through Catholic Relief Services,the US also gave NIS 220,304 to the anti-Israel pressure group B’Tselem. The money was used to fund B’Tselem’s video project. B’tselem’s video project involves the distribution of video cameras to Palestinians to film snuff films that portry Israelis as aggressive bullies who seek to harm the Palestinians for no reason.
Numerous examples have already been reported of how those film clips have falsely portrayed events.
Finally, the US government donated NIS 15,474 through the Foundation for Middle East Peace to the far left internet outlet Social TV. To a certain degree, Social TV can be — and has been — portrayed as the anti-Zionist answer to Latma, the Hebrew-language media criticism site that I run. But Latma is wholly funded by private contributors and foundations.
It would have never occurred to me to ask a foreign government to fund the project. It never would have occurred to me to ask a foreign government to get into the media watchdog game in Israel. But then, from reading the report it is clear that the aim of the US government is not, in fact to help Israeli media outlets do a better job reporting on events. Rather, the report indicates that the US government has decided to use radical Israeli NGOs to wage political warfare in Israel. The aim of this campaign is to convince the public that Israel is to blame for the absence of peace with our neighbors.

Dishonest. Benghazi spin is just the surface. Weapons and public relations going to terrorists. What is really going on is hostility. America and Israel are at each other’s throats. This is a cold war.


Lawfare Defeat for NGOs at ICC doesn’t make me feel safe at all

April 3, 2012

(h/t israpundit) Prosecutor’s Office rejects jurisdiction of “Palestine,” and echoes NGO Monitor’s legal brief
Media_httpuploadwikim_gtodjJERUSALEM – In a key defeat for NGO “lawfare” in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) today decided that it does not have jurisdiction to begin an investigation over cases related to the 2008-09 Gaza War because “Palestine” is not a state. In January 2009, the Palestinian Authority (PA) filed a letter with the Court, purporting to accept the ICC’s jurisdiction in order to bring war crimes cases against Israeli officials, notes Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor, which was involved in the case from the outset.

“Throughout this process, the ICC – created to punish the worst perpetrators of war crimes and mass murder – was exploited by several EU- and European-government funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which intensively lobbied the OTP as part of their campaign to attack the legitimacy of the State of Israel,” says Anne Herzberg, legal advisor for NGO Monitor. “The NGOs Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Al Haq, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l´Homme (FIDH), and Adalah campaigned at the ICC in support of the Palestinian Authority’s political goals. This clearly was contradictory to the spirit and substance of peace negotiations.”
On behalf of NGO Monitor, Herzberg submitted a legal brief on the case. The brief argued that the ICC’s jurisdiction is defined by the 1998 Rome Statute, which makes clear that only states can accept the Court’s jurisdiction. The Statute was adopted after years of careful diplomatic negotiations, and allowing the PA to fall under the Court’s jurisdiction would have essentially amounted to a re-writing of the Statute. In addition, the brief argued that, contrary to claims by NGO proponents of the PA initiative, the ICC was not established as a court of universal jurisdiction, and NGO attempts to transform it into such would be legally improper. The OTP used similar arguments to support its decision.
“The fact that the case even proceeded this far was clear legal overreaching, but it shows the strength of NGOs that lead the de-legitimization and demonization campaigns against Israel,” adds Herzberg. “The OTP’s decision today is a strong rebuke to these NGOs, their political agenda, and their campaign to isolate Israel from the international community,” notes Herzberg. “International arenas are routinely hijacked for political purposes, but today’s decision was markedly different.”

it should of never come down to a technicality like this. Jews have a right to protect themselves even if it were a state. Shortly it will be the Muslim Brotherhood running things in Egypt. If Israel defends it’s civilians from rocket fire it is their right to do so. Technically speaking… the rules of this court are obscene. During the Holocaust the Jews did not have a state. Is the court saying that this technicality could of been used to protect Nazis if the legal precedent of today existed during World War II? It’s a little obtuse. People that initiate violence through terror… should be responded to as Israel did, regardless of the civilians they hide behind.


Palestinian Leadership: It Is Forbidden to Normalize Relations with Israel

December 16, 2011
Israeli and Palestinian peace activists who planned to hold a conference in Jerusalem and Bethlehem this week were forced to cancel the event after receiving threats from Palestinians.

The conference was organized by the Israeli Palestinian Confederation, a group that seeks to promote peace and coexistence between the two peoples.
The organizers of the conference were hoping to hold elections for a new “parliament” that would consist of Israelis and Palestinians and that would offer itself as a third government to the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority.
The first conference, which was supposed to take place at the Ambassador Hotel in Jerusalem, was cancelled at the last minute after angry Palestinian protesters demonstrated in front of the hotel. The protesters shouted slogans denouncing the event “because it promotes the culture of peace” and is designed to “normalize” relations between Israelis and Palestinians.
The demonstrators also shouted slogans strongly condemning Al Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh, who was supposed to be one of the main speakers at the conference. Because of the protest and out of fear for his safety, Nusseibeh decided not to come to the hotel.
The Palestinian protesters later stormed the conference hall, forcing the frightened Israeli representatives to leave the hotel.
The following day, a similar “anti-normalization” demonstration forced the Israeli and Palestinian peace activists to cancel an event that was scheduled to take place in the town of Bet Jalla near Bethlehem.
The protesters later explained that their move was in line with the Palestinian Authority’s policy of banning any form of normalization with Israel. This is the same authority that signed the Oslo Accords with Israel and whose senior leaders carry Israeli-issued VIP cards that enable them to move around freely – a privilege denied to most ordinary Palestinians.
Some Palestinians said that the demonstrations were in fact initiated by top Palestinian officials in Ramallah who do not want to see Israeli and Palestinian representatives working together to promote peace and coexistence.
By banning such public gatherings, the Palestinian Authority leadership is further radicalizing Palestinians.
This was not the first time that the Palestinian Authority or some NGOs had come out against activities that supposedly promote normalization between Israelis and Palestinians. Over the past few years, they have cancelled many events of this type under the charge that it is forbidden to normalize relations with Israel.
The Palestinian Authority and these NGOs are also coordinating their activities with other “anti-normalization” groups in the Arab world, specifically Jordan and Egypt.
At the end of the day, it is such activities that drive Arabs into the open arms of Muslim fundamentalists. The “anti-normalization” campaign also serves to undermine the minority of moderate Arabs who still believe in coexistence and peace.
The Palestinian leadership in the West Bank is shooting itself in the foot. In the future, its representatives will be afraid to return to the negotiating table or conduct dialogue with any Israel out of fear for their lives. If Palestinian academics such as Nusseibeh are afraid to appear in public with Israelis such as Uri Avineri, Ruth Dayan and Shlomo Ben-Ami, this speaks volumes about where Palestinian society is headed.


Prof. Gerald Steinberg, IBA English News, Shalit and Failure of Human Rights NGOs – YouTube

October 18, 2011

Shalit Agreement Shows Moral Failure of International Human Rights Frameworks

October 12, 2011

(NGO Monitor) JERUSALEM – While welcoming the agreement to release kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit as an important humanitarian act, Professor Gerald M. Steinberg, president of human rights watchdog NGO Monitor, noted that this episode further exposes the moral bankruptcy of international human rights mechanisms.
“Throughout the five years of Shalit’s captivity in Gaza, during which every human rights obligation was blatantly violated, organizations such as the UN Human Rights Council, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), Gisha, and the International Red Cross demonstrated very little interest,” Steinberg stated. “Similarly, the report of the UN Fact-Finding Commission on the Gaza War, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, downplayed Shalit’s captivity in blatant violation of international law. This moral stain will never be erased.”
In addition, NGO Monitor noted that the agreement to release hundreds of terrorists, responsible for heinous crimes, and tried and convicted according to due process of law, highlights the continued erosion of international legal principles. Instead of serving their time for these convictions, the murderers have been freed under extreme duress and compulsion, adding to the incentives for similar actions in the future. Organizations dedicated to human rights have an obligation to condemn such immoral extortion.

Gilad Shalit. It was worth it! 1000 terrorists that Israelis humanely have to pay for versus one hostage that the NGO community was ignoring and was abused is completely worth it. further it allows the Israelis to now shoot those they had to care for before. There is no loss here. Had Bibi waited a month there would of been no Egypt as we know it to negotiate with. It is a hard pill to swallow, but think of the outrageous torture Gilad would of endured that Amnesty International and the Red Cross would of ignored. it’s another example of how comparing the numbers is irrelevant. If we were to compare numbers there would be no Israel at all. We can only compare numbers when we make the assumption that the enemy captives are treated like Israeli captives. This would be a prime example of denying the correlative.


NGO Monitor: NIF Network’s Campaign on September Protests

September 13, 2011
Naomi Chazan
This NIF seems to go to a lot of trouble to claim they are not involved with things. They left a comment on my blog and it isn’t like I’m a big fish. They must have a huge social media campaign financed by who knows? What I do know is that it costs a lot of money to go to supposedly Conservative blogs, which is something I really am not (can’t you tell by the raunchy offensive jokes?), but the NIF assumes I am because I support Israel and think totalitarianism is a nightmare.
B’Tselem’s report on Nabi Saleh a pretense to discuss September JERUSALEM (Daled Amos)
In advance of the Palestinian “September initiatives” at the United Nations, the New Israel Fund (NIF) network of organizations are conducting a coordinated campaign that accuses Israel of “infringing” on the “right to demonstrate” and ignores Israel’s legal obligations to maintain public order. As a pretense to promote this agenda and pre-judge Israeli responses to predicted mass demonstrations, B’Tselem today published a politically motivated “report” on “Weekly Demonstrations in a-Nabi Saleh,” according to Jerusalem-based research institute NGO Monitor. “The timing of the B’Tselem report suggests that the objective is to undermine the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel,” noted Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor. “Along with Adalah, Mossawa, Yesh Din, CWP, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), and other members of the NIF network, B’Tselem is perpetuating the myth that these protests are non-violent.” In its report, B’Tselem alleges that “security forces denied the residents their right to protest the infringement of their rights, and completely prohibited them from demonstrating…even in the absence of any violent act by the demonstrators.” To match its political aims, this NGO also claimed that “forces made excessive use of crowd control measures.” NGO Monitor notes that, in addition to this B’Tselem publication, ACRI sent an open letter (to generate publicity) in August to Defense Minister Ehud Barak alleging that “military legislation governing protests and demonstrations in the West Bank denies Palestinian residents the right to demonstrate.” Similarly, ACRI and Adalah pubished a joint letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Minister of Internal Security, and the Chief of Police entitled “Police Preparation for the Expected September Demonstrations” (August 28). And, in June 2011, Mossawa released an inflammatory statement condemning Israel for preparing for possible violence in September, satirically entitled “Mossawa Center calls [on Israel] not to send security forces to train in Daraa [Syria] and Tripoli.” The comparison between Israel and the regimes of Assad and Qaddafi is particularly odious. In addition, Yesh Din, Adalah, Physicians for Human Rights – Israel, Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP), and the Public Committee against Torture in Israel (PCATI) are hosting a “Lawyers workshop for representing arrested demonstrators” on September 15, 2011. This workshop, run by NIF-funded groups, is being held in order to counter an alleged policy of “police repression of demonstrators.” “The aim of these statements and activities is to constrain the Israeli government, and distort the legitimate responses to violence, by painting these actions as non-violent. In actuality, extensive evidence shows that many of these confrontations, such as in Bilin, Nilin, and Nabi Saleh, include significant acts of violence by protesters,” continued Steinberg. “If the planned demonstrations include or exceed these levels of violence , or that of the ‘Nakba’ and ‘Naksa’ riots of earlier this year, Israeli security services are required to act to protect civilians from injury.” “NGOs claiming to promote human rights and the rule of law are wrong to erase the very real threats to public safety and human life,” said Steinberg. “In media campaigns pre-condemning the Israeli response, the NIF network is attempting to handcuff Israeli security forces.” Examples of this campaign: * On September 12, 2011 B’Tselem published a report titled “Show of Force Israeli Military Conduct in Weekly Demonstrations in a-Nabi Saleh.” * ACRI sent a letter to defense Minister Ehud Barak titled “The Proper Security Forces Preparation for Expected Palestinian Protests and Rallies in September” (August 8, 2011). * ACRI and Adalah sent a joint letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the minister of interior security and the chief of police titled “Police Preparation for the Expected September Demonstrations” (August 28, 2011). * Yesh Din, Adalah, Physicians for Human Rights – Israel, Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP), and the Public Committee against Torture in Israel (PCATI) are hosting a “Lawyers workshop for representing arrested demonstrators” on September 15, 2011. * “Mossawa Center calls [on Israel] not to send security forces to train in Daraa and Tripoli” (June 14, 2011).

New Israel Fund Continues to Fund BDS Groups

August 2, 2011

NGO Monitor

  • In July 2011, New Israel Fund (NIF) published its 2010 Financial Statement. This document details NIF funding for Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP) in 2010, and indicates that funds were also earmarked for 2011. (CWP is a leader of anti-Israel BDS campaigns.)
  • The statement reveals that in 2010, NIF authorized an additional $20,130 for CWP, and disbursed $36,503, including $16,373 authorized in previous years that had not been transferred. (NGO Monitor reports show that NIF provided approximately $300,000 to CWP in previous years.)
  • On May 12, 2011, an official NIF statement declared that “NIF provided its last direct grant to CWP in 2008” and subsequent transfers were “donor advised.” NIF’s financial statements do not distinguish between direct and donor advised grants, making NIF’s claim unverifiable.  Nevertheless, under U.S. tax law, and as reflected in NIF’s 2009 and 2010 financial documents, “donor advised” grants are within the sole discretion of the NIF Board of Directors.  No money may be distributed to any grantee without the approval of the NIF board, and donors are notified in advance that disbursements require that approval. NIF has full responsibility – morally, legally, and financially  for the 2010 $36,503 disbursement to CWP.
  • NIF’s May 12, 2011 press release was headlined: “NGO Monitor attacks New Israel Fund based on information it knew to be wrong.” NIF’s release of its 2010 funding information unequivocally reaffirms the accuracy of NGO Monitor’s reports. (NIF has not apologized.) 
  • In a May 20, 2011 statement, NIF-Australia head Robin Margo declared that CWP “has received no further funding from NIF since 2009” and criticized Dr. Ron Weiser (Zionist Council of New South Wales, Australia) for “suggesting publically… that funding may have continued into 2010.”
  • According to the NIF financial statement, $6,000 remained to be granted to CWP in 2011. This is consistent with CWP’s statement that NIF continued to provide funds in 2011. (NIF later claimed that “Due to a clerical error, $100 was processed to CWP in May.” NIF did not relate to the $6,000 amount.)