The Michael Lynk Era of Anti-Israeli Attacks Begins at the UN

Tweet

The leaves and berries of the plant are crushed and generico cialis on line icks.org applied externally to cure tumors and ulcers. In addition, buy cheapest viagra it affects your heart and lungs. Always look to finish the dose in proper way because sometimes it happens that you take the medicine in over amount and outcomes with adverse effects. viagra store in canada http://icks.org/n/data/ijks/2017FW-6.pdf Survival of the fittest http://icks.org/n/data/ijks/1482459755_add_file_1.pdf purchase viagra is the mantra of youth of today.
 

Palestinian terror in the last 24 hours

Israelis reported more than 30 Palestinian terror attacks on Saturday.

In Gush Etzion, a drive-by shooting targeted an Israeli family in a car; fortunately no one was physically wounded, but the terrorists escaped.

“Rocks” and Molotov cocktails were used in attacks at Bene Dekalim, Ras al-Amud, Abu Dihidim, Bassiwiya, Budrus, Bethany, just outside of Ariel, Beit El, Silwan, Hevron and 20 other places.

PM Netanyahu’s continued devolution into political correctness

As we reported yesterday, Palestinian vandals infiltrated an area near Mt. Hebron on Thursday and set fire to a memorial to two fallen IDF soldiers.

Yesterday, PM Netanyahu posted the following:

“Thursday Palestinians vandalized the Mt. Hebron monument in memory of Yoav Doron and Judah Ben Yosef of blessed memory. I hope that we can strengthen their families in the aftermath of this disgusting, reprehensible hate crime. At the very least, the terrorists should be condemned as are Jews who commit hate crimes. Police are investigating the incident, and we will track down the perpetrators and hold them to account.”

“Jews who commit hate crimes”? Of course, we all condemn any Jew who commits a hate crime, but why in the world did PM Netanyahu include that phrase in his condemnation?

It is just another example of how deeply our Prime Minister has fallen into the snare of political correctness–a political correctness that calls on Israelis to make moral equivalences and makes it impossible for us to condemn terrorists without condemning ourselves.

In your humble servant’s opinion, Netanyahu’s reference is dangerous and pathetic.

The time changes, and hours for Jews on the Temple Mount are reduced

Israel changed to “Fall time” last night with the clock being moved back one hour. Ordinarily this is no cause for discussion, but the following notice appeared in Jerusalem this morning announcing new “Fall” hours for Jews to visit the Temple Mount:

You don’t need to be able to read Hebrew to see that Jews will now be only allowed on the Mount between 7:30 am and 10:00 am, and between 12:30 pm and 1:30 pm–a total of 3 1/2 hours per day.

This is a one hour reduction in the time allowed for Jews to be on the Mount. Once again, Jews are being discriminated against by the Jordanian Islamic Wakf at the total collusion of our Israel government–a government that is supposed to have complete sovereignty over the holiest place in Judaism.

As an aside, stop and think about those hours for a moment. Can you believe that Jews can only visit the Mount for a maximum of 3.5 hours per day (and actually not everyday of the week at that)?

Can you understand now how our own government is contributing to the atmosphere that results in UNESCO decisions against Israel in general and the Temple Mount in particular?

Ask yourself: “who does the Temple Mount belong to?”

TODAY’S BLOG:

The Michael Lynk Era of Anti-Israeli Attacks Begins at the UN 

We knew what we were getting back on March 24th when the United Nations named Canadian Stanley Michael Lynk as the new “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.”

The appointment of Lynk, a fervent basher of Israel and professor of law at Canada’s Western University, was immediately criticized by numerous organizations including UN Watch, Friends of B’Nai Brith, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and the Canadian Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs all of which noted his rabid bias against Israel. Even the Director of Communication in the Canadian Foreign Minister’s Office decried Lynk’s bias.

In fact, it was a bias long known for not only being directed against Israel but also against the West. Just three days after 9/11 occurred, Lynk issued this statement:  “Yet, if we are going to be tough on terrorism, we also have to be tough on the causes of terrorism. Growing global inequalities, disregard by Western nations for the international rule of law, and inequitable regional alliances are serious problems that breed these kinds of acts.”

Nevertheless, Lynk was defended by some 40 of his colleagues who declared that Lynk’s writings on the Middle East  “present a balanced, principled, and responsible perspective, grounded in the scholarship of human rights and international law.”

Nothing in fact could be further from the truth.

One example from 2006 may suffice. In the article “The Wall and the Law: A Tale of Two Judgements” Lynk and his co-author, Susan Musarrat Akram (herself a pre-eminent Israel basher), compared an advisory ruling from the International Court of Justice concerning the separation fence (called the “Wall by the ICJ) with another ruling about the separation fence issued by the Israel Supreme Court.

In their article, Lynk and Akram harshly castigated the Israel Supreme Court for ruling that our separation fence was legal–a separation fence that successfully brought an end to the 160+ wave of suicide bombers that blew more than a thousand Israeli men, women and children to pieces between 1995 and 2006.

Here’s what the “balanced, principled, responsible” authors had to say:

Much less can be said about the . . . ruling of the Israeli Supreme Court. Working with many of the same legal instruments as the International Court of Justice, the Supreme Court produced a limp and submissive judgement that misapplied or ignored a number of the applicable legal principles on occupation and humanitarian requirements. While [it] curbed aspects of the very worst excesses of the Wall, it also endorsed a barrier that entrenches the occupation, solidifies the Israeli settlement project, intensifies the economic and social crises of the occupied population, and advances the demographic division of the land and its spoils for the benefit of the occupier.

The authors concluded with this call to arms:

“. . . it has become painfully clear that nothing short of comprehensive deterrent actions by the United Nations and its members – such as the threat or application of diplomatic isolation and economic sanctions – will compel Israel to take its legal obligations seriously.”

You get the idea.

No word about Palestinian responsibility for the fence.

No word about suicide bombers.

No word about Israelis slaughtered. 

And unqualified support for BDS. 

All of which brings me to this past Friday. Lynk called a press conference in New York in which he lambasted Israel for trying “to delegitimize the great work of human rights defenders”, namely B’Tselem and American Friends for Peace Now”–both of which appeared before the UN Security Council two weeks ago to fraudulently attack Israel.

The good news is that Danny Danon, Israel Ambassador to the UN, was quick to respond: “This UN Rapporteur stands at the head of a biased body; he is not credible, and we do not respect his authority.”

Well-said.

But that will not stop Lynk who can be expected to produce a mountainous parade of anti-Israel trash in the coming months and years.