Monday, September 18, 2017

  • Monday, September 18, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon

Omar Suleiman is a young Palestinian-American imam who counts Linda Sarsour among his many ardent admirers. According to one flattering profile, Suleiman is “a new kind of American imam” with “a wildly popular social-media presence:” his Facebook page has more than 1.2 million “Likes” and followers, and his YouTube sermons have garnered tens of millions of views. Another article explains that due to “his charismatic sermons and message of inclusiveness,” Suleiman “has gained a national following” and has become a leader “of Dallas’ social justice movement.” As far as Linda Sarsour is concerned, Omar Suleiman makes her “more proud to be a Muslim and a Palestinian.”



All this praise prompted me to try to learn a bit more about Suleiman. Of course, I was particularly interested in finding out what Suleiman thinks about Israel and Jews. As I documented in two recent articles published by The Algemeiner, the results of my research were rather depressing: Suleiman quite obviously thinks the world’s only Jewish state should be replaced by yet another Arab-Muslim majority state, and despite his efforts to present himself as a deeply spiritual and tolerant preacher, he can’t quite hide his intense theological anti-Judaism.

As I argued in The Algemeiner, one example that reveals Suleiman’s hostile views regarding Jews and Judaism is a lecture he gave in January 2016 on “Masjid Al-Aqsa: The occupied sanctuary.” The advertisement noted that Suleiman’s “passion for this topic comes naturally” because he is “the son of Palestinian parents.” In a short promotional clip for the lecture, Suleiman denounced the “brutal occupation” of Al-Aqsa and claimed that “religious rights” of Muslims were being “taken away,” noting dismissively that the site was “being called ‘Temple Mount’ all of a sudden.”
This is truly breathtaking hypocrisy for a preacher who is supposedly “a new kind of American imam:” while claiming that the “religious rights” of Muslims were being “taken away,” Suleiman brazenly denies the Jewish connection to Judaism’s holiest site.

Yet, since Suleiman himself is telling a revealing story about the victorious Caliph Umar in his lecture, there can be no doubt that he knows full well that Jerusalem’s Muslim conquerors built Islamic shrines over the ruined Jewish Temple.

The story takes place after the Christian Patriarch Sophronius surrendered Jerusalem in April 637. Umar supposedly went to clean up what Suleiman calls “masjid Al-Aqsa,”i.e. the Temple Mount, which had become a dumping ground. Suleiman reminds his audience (1:05) that “[in] the middle of masjid Al-Aqsa, there is this rock, this rocky area, … and it’s right in the center, and that’s believed where Suleiman [i.e. Solomon] … established the Temple.”

When the area was cleaned up, Umar and his companions supposedly asked a former Jewish rabbi who had converted to Islam where to pray and where the mosque should be built — a question that obviously shows that there was no trace of any mosque, which should indicate to any thinking person that the tall tale about Muhammad’s supposed night journey to “the farthest mosque” – a story Suleiman also tells in his lecture – cannot refer to Jerusalem and the then obviously non-existent Al-Aqsa mosque. The convert responded to Umar’s question about where to pray: “We should pray behind the rock.” As Suleiman explained to his audience:

“Umar sensed from that that he [i.e. the convert] felt a reverence towards this rock. So Umar [Arabic blessing] said that must be your Jewish influence speaking. He says we’re gonna pray in front of the rock, haha, we’re not gonna honor this rock, we’re gonna pray in front of it, there’s nothing special about this rock.”

So much for Islam’s supposed respect for other religions. Yet, completely oblivious to his own hypocrisy, Suleiman claims shortly after telling the story of the triumphant Umar: “It’s proven that other religions only flourished in Jerusalem under Muslim rule. It never happens any other way.” According to Suleiman, it is therefore terribly unfair that Muslims have the “reputation” that they “want to turn Jerusalem into some sort of blood bath.” Suleiman rejects such suspicions: “No, we recognize the sanctity of that place, we love that masjid, we love that land, we know what that land is. No one wants to do anything with that land except restore it to the way that it was.”

But as far as Suleiman is concerned, “the way that it was” means that there never was a Temple Mount – indeed, his long lecture about Al-Aqsa is a determined effort to Islamicize Jerusalem’s entire history.

Right at the beginning of his lecture, Suleiman announces that he wants to talk about “the history” of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. It is noteworthy that he says “history” and not “myth” or “legend,” or even “religious tradition” — because what follows is simply mind-boggling. Unfortunately, the narrative he presents clearly reflects some mainstream Muslim beliefs that are obviously a major factor in the widespread Muslim hatred for Israel.

Suleiman notes early on in his lecture that people “might think that Al-Aqsa was built maybe by a prophet of Bani Israel, maybe it’s something that arose from the time of Solomon […] or Jacob.” Then he turns to Muslim tradition to answer the question “What mosque was constructed on the face of the earth first?” According to Suleiman, the answer is that the first mosque was built in Mecca, and that 40 years later, the Al-Aqsa Mosque was built.

Suleiman then goes on to explain that Muslim scholars believe that Adam built the Kaaba in Mecca, and that he or maybe his son Seth then built the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem – which obviously means that Muslims are supposed to believe that many centuries, if not millennia before the rise of Islam, there were people building mosques. Later on, Suleiman repeats the claim that Abraham and his son Isaac “raised the pillars” of the Kaaba in Mecca, and that they “did the same” at Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa, which had both been “constructed” and “made a sanctuary” by Adam. Suleiman then emphasizes again that Abraham and his son built “two of the holiest masjids [mosques] in the world.”
The bizarre assertion that the mosque in Mecca and the Al-Aqsa Mosque go back to the time of Adam and were then built up by Abraham and his son long before Muhammad introduced Islam is obviously intended to claim these sites and their builders as part of Muslim heritage. Islamic supersessionism, i.e the notion that Islam replaces and invalidates previous religions, notably Judaism and Christianity, is apparently supposed to operate even retroactively. In the case of Jerusalem, the claim that the Al-Aqsa Mosque was founded by the biblical Adam and built up by Abraham serves to delegitimize all Jewish claims to the Temple Mount — which is exactly what Suleiman is trying to do.

Thus, Suleiman tells his audience (from 18:00 of the speech) that “Solomon is the most important king in the history of Jerusalem. Why? You always hear of the Temple of Solomon.” While that sounds like an acknowledgement of Jewish history, Suleiman immediately adds that Solomon “built about 40 masjids [mosques],” including “Masjid Al-Aqsa.” He then proceeds to spell out this vile effort to Islamicize Jewish history in some more detail:

“And as he [Solomon] builds Masjid Al-Aqsa — and I want you guys to realize, so I’m just going to clear that from now, Masjid Al-Aqsa is that entire rectangle, that entire sanctuary, it is humongous, that is actually all Masjid Al-Aqsa; the Dome of the Rock is at the center of it, so that entire compound is Masjid Al-Aqsa. So Solomon builds that all out, the original Temple of Solomon, what’s known as the Temple of Solomon, right, the first time that Masjid Al-Aqsa would be built in that caliber, right, he built it throughout. The Old Testament has a lot of detail about how lavish and how elaborate the masjid was when Suleiman [sic] built it, but we don’t know if it’s actually true or not.”

So according to Suleiman, we may not know “how lavish and how elaborate” Solomon’s buildings really were, but we do know that he didn’t really build a Jewish Temple because he built “Masjid Al-Aqsa.” This is a particularly pernicious form of Temple denial: following the bizarre “logic” of Suleiman’s narrative — which apparently reflects mainstream Muslim myths — there couldn’t be a legitimate Jewish Temple at the site that Muslim imagine to have been “Masjid Al-Aqsa” since the time of Adam.

When I listened to Suleiman’s lecture I couldn’t help wondering if Muslims don’t feel it is rather undignified to project the sway of their faith back in time in order to claim an ancient holy site of followers of another religion as their own. Does Suleiman’s ardent admirer and friend Linda Sarsour support his pathetic claims that “Masjid Al-Aqsa” was built at the time of Adam, and that Solomon’s Temple was merely a perhaps particularly elaborate addition to what was a mosque compound since time immemorial? Or is the “progressive” Sarsour appalled by this vile example of cultural appropriation? And how does a “progressive” like Sarsour feel about the denial of the historic Jewish attachment to the site where Muslim conquerors built Islamic shrines in order to prevent a rebuilding of the destroyed Jewish Temple and to demonstrate the splendor of their imperial power? Surely this should be completely unacceptable for anti-imperialist progressives who champion the rights of indigenous people?

In any case, it seems that some Muslims haven’t yet understood that imams like Omar Suleiman expect them to insist that all of the Temple Mount is the Al-Aqsa mosque. At the end of July, Suleiman posted a photo (that was at least a year old) of the Dome of the Rock surrounded by thousands of Muslim worshippers with the text: “Breathtaking shot of worshippers at #alaqsa in prostration/protest. Wow.” When several people noted that the photo didn’t show the Al-Aqsa mosque, Suleiman responded on his Facebook page: “For those saying it’s not Al Aqsa, the entire compound is Al Aqsa. Yes, Masjid Al Qibaly [i.e. the Al-Aqsa mosque] is not in this photo.”




I can’t say I’m particularly astonished that Omar Suleiman makes Linda Sarsour “more proud to be a Muslim and a Palestinian.” But decent people who think Suleiman should be praised as “a new kind of American imam” are sorely mistaken: Suleiman has only contempt for the Jews (e.g. he claims they are to blame for the fact that food rots), and he loves to depict Christian crusaders as beasts while presenting the Muslim conquerors of a vast empire as admirable and benevolent rulers of the people they ruthlessly subjugated. Suleiman probably regrets that he once publicly showed support [archived] for the Muslim Brotherhood, but given what he preaches, it seems clear that he would find a lot of common ground with Islamists. 







We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
From Ian:

PMW: Fatah Spokesman: Fatah will never recognize Israel
Fatah and Hamas announced yesterday that they are moving ahead towards Palestinian reconciliation and possible national elections. While the international community is waiting to see the final terms of a Palestinian unity agreement, the fundamental messages of non-recognition of Israel and support for the use of terror against Israel are principles that Fatah and Hamas already agree upon.

Speaking last month on Fatah-run Awdah TV, Fatah spokesman Osama Al-Qawasmi forcefully told Hamas that it should not recognize Israel, since Fatah itself does not recognize and will never recognize Israel.

Fatah-run Awdah TV host: "Has the Fatah Movement recognized Israel in its political platform until now?
Fatah Spokesman Osama Al-Qawasmi: "Certainly not. This is not required, and we will not recognize Israel... I declare this clearly and in a satellite channel broadcast: ‘My friends, Hamas, you should not recognize Israel, you are not required to. The PLO, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, sent a letter of mutual recognition of the State of Israel, on Sept. 12, 1993. You are not required to.'"
[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Aug. 23, 2017]

It should be noted, that Mahmoud Abbas the chairman of the Palestinian Authority is also the chairman of Fatah and the PLO. The Palestinian leadership employs double messages depending on who it is speaking to. Palestinian Media Watch has documented that Fatah regularly reminds Palestinians that it does not recognize Israel's existence or right to exist. Fatah and the PA regularly teach Palestinian children to see all Israeli cities such as Jaffa and Haifa as "occupied" Palestinian cities that will eventually be under Palestinian sovereignty. When speaking to the international community, however, Abbas focuses not on Fatah's non-recognition of Israel but on the PLO's one letter of recognition of Israel, written in 1993.


Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians Imprison Journalists for Exposing Corruption
Hajer Harb, a courageous Palestinian journalist, has been found guilty by Hamas of exposing corruption in the health system in the Gaza Strip. On September 13, a Hamas court sentenced her to six months in prison and a fine. It was the first sentence of its kind to be passed on a female journalist in the Gaza Strip.

Harb, however, is unlikely to serve her prison term in the near future; she recently left the Gaza Strip to Jordan, where she is receiving medical treatment after being diagnosed with cancer.

Her illness, however, did not stop Hamas from pursuing legal measures against her for her role in exposing corruption in the Palestinian health system. Instead of suspending the legal proceedings against her, the Hamas court chose to sentence her to prison in absentia.

If and when she recovers from her illness and returns to the Gaza Strip, Harb will be arrested and sent to prison for six months. She will also be required to pay the 1000 shekel ($250) fine that was imposed on her by the Hamas court.

Harb's ordeal began in June 2016, when she published an investigative report that disclosed how Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were using medical care to blackmail Palestinian patients. Her report exposed how some physicians and Hamas and PA officials were demanding bribes in return for issuing permits to patients to leave the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel, the West Bank and some Arab and Western countries. Those who cannot afford to pay the bribes are left to die in understaffed and under-equipped Palestinian hospitals, the report revealed.
Elliott Abrams: “Like-Minded” Dictatorships and the United Nations
The United Nations General Assembly is about to open, with the traditional lead-off speech by the president of Brazil followed by the president of the United States. The speeches and activities this year will, as usual, be a mix of the interesting and the dull, the consequential and the useless, the honest and the hypocritical.

Whatever the speeches say, why can’t the UN get more done to promote freedom? The Preamble to the UN Charter says the organization’s purpose is “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights” but the organization has at best a very mixed record on doing so.

The answer is clear: so many member states are themselves dictatorships that engage in horrible human rights violations—and they stick together. The latter point is key: the worst countries are far more united in protecting human rights abuses than the democracies are in protecting human rights.

One important mechanism for this protection of human rights abuses is the so-called “Like-Minded Group,” consisting usually of Algeria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bhutan, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Russia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. As a superb new Human Rights Watch report on China’s own abuses of the UN system, entitled The Costs of International Advocacy, states:

These countries have demonstrated political solidarity in the [Security] Council and have worked together to weaken the universality of human rights standards and resist the Council’s ability to adopt country-specific approaches. They have shielded repressive governments from scrutiny by filling speakers’ lists with promoters of these countries’ human rights records during Universal Periodic Reviews, and giving uncritical statements from friendly governments and Government-Organized NGOs (GONGOs).



Fair Fight

I’ve talked a number of times about how unfair the fight is between Israel and her defamers. 
Those defamers, after all, have a militant goal: the elimination of the Jewish state.  With that goal as their North Star, strategies to weaken that state or make its destruction appear noble and just become clear, as do tactics to achieve those strategic aims (such as BDS).  In addition, the sociopathic nature of Israel’s enemies gives them the power to manipulate others while feeling no guilt over their own destructive, ruthless behavior.

In contrast, nearly all Israelis and friends of Israel do not want to see enemies eliminated.  In fact, our greatest dream (i.e., our goal) is not to see Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims destroyed, but rather to live at peace with them (or at least be left in peace by them).  With such non-militant goals driving our enterprise, it’s no surprise that we cannot gin up the kind of hatred needed to drive decades-long hostile counter-campaigns.  And our unwillingness to use others as means to an end means we are not ready to manipulate neutrals in order to use them as weapons in our political campaigns. 

While I still hold to this analysis, some recent events also got me thinking of another way to look at “the fight,” one in which the odds can seem stacked in Israel’s favor.

The first event was the opening of the Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute in New York, a two-billion dollar facility that anchors Cornell’s Tech education and research initiative.  This mammoth joint effort won out in fierce competition between some of the most prestigious science and engineering schools in the country.  And the success of Cornell’s bid was largely in recognition of the value of that school’s partnership with one of the world’s most successful schools of scientific learning: Israel’s Technion Institute. 

Given that decades of harassment by academic boycotters has led to little more than marginal professors occasionally engaging in cowardly furtive boycotts and sputtering on Twitter, the opening of Cornell-Technion – remarkable in itself – sends an important message to the world: that linking arms with Israel brings success and progress, while shunning the Jewish state leads nowhere.
Speaking of going nowhere (as well as sputtering on Twitter) the event I’d like to use as a contrast to the opening of Technion-Cornell took place in Dublin last week where Israel haters from around that nation gathered to say the same things they and others have said at Israel-hating events for more than half a century.  And their star attraction was that failed academic whose Twitter id rivals that of America’s president: Steven Salaita.

Mr. Salaita’s been on a roller coaster ride since being hired to join the faculty of the Native American Studies department at University of Illinois (despite having no qualifications for the job), followed by his u  n-hiring by school leaders unwilling to give lifelong employment to someone advocating violence on Twitter, followed by a lawsuit and boycott of the university (which, among other things, destroyed the department he was going to join), followed by his decamping to American University of Beirut in Lebanon, followed by his being let go from that university as well. 

And who is to blame for this string of disasters that have left him academically homeless (although not bereft of speaking gigs, it appears): the evil Jews (whoops!  I mean “Zionists”) whose power apparently extends to academic institutions in nations at war with the Jewish state.

For all his attempts to make his story come off like an epic struggle of right against might, the Salaita tale is ultimately about someone who never grew out of adolescence now demanding rewards (like tenure) he doesn’t deserve, someone ready to whine and blame/punish others for his failings. 
While there might be a market for such self-pity within marginal groups (like the lame boycotters of the American Studies Association – another field Salaita announced himself an expert in), I can’t imagine that the professors staffing the new Technion-Cornell Institute got to their positions by behaving in such a manner.  In fact, the string of achievements on both campuses would indicate that they have much better things to do than bitch that no one is offering them a paid perch to spout politics that can’t be taken away.

Every few years, our Temple is blessed by a visit from young Israeli soldiers traveling through Boston, and I’ve always been stunned by the seriousness and maturity of kids not much older than my recent high-school graduate.  And it is these serious young men and women who then go on to university and from there become the next generation of Technion professors, business leaders, or successes in a thousand other fields (all the while continuing to contribute to the defense of their homeland).


In a contest between such serious people and freaks and weirdos like Steven Salaita, who has the upper hand?



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Monday, September 18, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon


This article in the Davis (CA) Vanguard describes quite well the arguments made about Imam Ammar Shahin's antisemitic statements last July - as well as his "apology" - at a City Council meeting last week.

Rabbi Yitzhak Haberstein (sic - Alderstein is his name) , representing the Simon Wiesenthal Center, spoke on Tuesday.  He said that tomorrow night in Los Angeles they are co-hosting a dinner for the first ruler of an Arab Country who will sign a major declaration on religious tolerance and against religious extremism.

“We’re no stranger to interfaith activity,” he said.   “This city is no stranger to social justice issues.  It has a well-deserved reputation for being at the forefront of good progressivism.  That said, there is something that happened here a number of weeks ago that’s important enough for us to want to come up here and make a statement.”

He said that any other religious leader in America who would get up in front of their congregation and “label another group fifth and call for their annihilation – all hell would break loose.   There would be no easy way out.”  He said, “There has been an unfortunate kind of double standard that has come from this community.  It shouldn’t be.

“When you consider the importance of the preachings of Jihadist movement in mosques across the world, the bloody trail that it’s left behind,” he said.  “These are not influences that can be poo-pooed or simply wished away.”

The Rabbi called it “an apology that was no apology.  It did not take back the basis for the statement.  The call through religious tradition, to call, three times repeated, we ask Allah that we should be part of this in word and in deed.”

Professor Emeritus Alex Groth, a retired Political Science Professor at UC Davis and a Holocaust survivor, spoke as well.  He is a 54-year resident of the city of Davis.  He said he is one of the few former inmates of the Warsaw Ghetto.

“I have seen words of hate translated into mass murder in World War II Europe,” he said.  He said he has spoken about this subject in numerous community forums and in academic publications.  “In all of my time here in Davis, I never thought even once that a time would come, when a religious leader in our city would publicly call for the destruction of the Jews with the apparent tacit consent and approval of most if not all of his congregation.

“To the best of my knowledge, the purveyor of the killing message delivered in July is still at the helm of the Davis Mosque and this is happening 72 years after the conclusion of the Second World War and 72 years after the conclusion of the Holocaust,” he said.

Jonathan Zachariou, Pastor at Davis Christian Assembly for the last 26 years, said he is not looking to suppress free speech.  And he noted that the freedom of religion is mentioned before even that of speech in the First Amendment.

“I am not looking to suppress anything with regards to the freedom of religio[n], but I am here to call on this city council to formally distance themselves or to categorically say that the message that was brought by this Imam has nothing to do with the Davis community at all,” he said.

Pastor Zachariou said, “I do not doubt the Imam’s credentials.”  He noted that he teaches at the university in Medina.  He also teaches at UC Davis.  “He knows the Quran.  He knows what he’s talking about.  So when he expresses the things he expressed, he’s talking about what the Quran is talking about.  He did not make a mistake in his message.  His message is true.

“Some Muslims will disagree with his interpretation,” he said.  “But he has credentials which he’s backing up his hate speech.”

Edward Rabin, a longtime resident of Davis, said, “I want to emphasize the enormity of what has happened in the last month or two.”  He made the point, “No anti-Semite in the history of this country has ever said anything remotely like what this Imam said twice to his congregation and then posted on the internet.”

He said not David Duke, not the KKK, not Father Caughlin or “any other of the reprehensible bigots that we’ve had to put up with.”  In fact, he made the point that even Hitler himself was not so brazen as to openly talk about such plans.

David Kadosh, Executive Director of the Zionist Organization of America in the Western Region, said it was founded by former Supreme Court Justice Luis Brandeis 120 years ago.  Much of his work has been to identify anti-Semitism in schools and university.

He said that we have seen time and again how hatred has fueled atrocities and “this evil is happening here, across the street from the university.”  He read from the sermon which called on the destruction of the Jews, one by one, and not sparing a single one.  “Notice how Imam Shahin prays for the death of Jews.  We Jews have heard this both.  The same rhetoric calling for our extermination was used by the Nazis 70 years ago.”

“The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it,” Gail Rubin said, quoting Albert Einstein.  She said she is a Jew and an 18-year resident of Davis.  “A mile away from my house, someone wants me and my family dead.

“Just 16 years after 9/11 we continue to hear the call and see the acts of Jihad,” she said.  “Words can kill,” she argued.  “Just imagine if ‘kill every Jew’ were replaced by kill every Muslim or kill every black.  Would we be so quiescent in talking only about hurt feelings?”

She said that, following the statement, “[t]he Imam said sorry for hurt feelings but he did not retract his radical ideology.  Did any Mosque board member or congregant denounce Shahin or walk out?  No.”

She argued, “This is not just a local issue.  The incitement to Genocide is illegal under state law.”  She asked for law enforcement to all take action.

She concluded, “The sorry is simply not enough.  I no longer feel safe in Davis.  After 18 years here, I am moving away.”
More here.

By the way, the dinner that Rabbi Haberstein referred to was for the King of Bahrain, who is now under fire for his statements at that dinner where he denounced the Arab boycott of Israel.






We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
  • Monday, September 18, 2017
  • Elder of Ziyon
After my story on Friday showing that despite worldwide headlines, Israel sells practically no weapons to Myanmar, I looked at the SIPRI database to learn more about who Israel does sell weapons to.

Here are the top countries to receive Israeli arms since 2000:

Two of the top ten recipients of Israeli arms are Muslim nations.

The full list:

Country Israeli arms imports, in millions, 2000-2016
India 2800
Turkey 854
United States 840
Singapore 528
Azerbaijan 453
Colombia 362
Sri Lanka 312
South Korea 304
United Kingdom 241
Mexico 235
Brazil 229
Italy 196
Romania 168
Germany (FRG) 154
Chile 153
Australia 152
Spain 143
Viet Nam 134
Greece 120
Netherlands 119
Equatorial Guinea 82
Poland 80
Myanmar 73
Unknown recipient(s) 72
China 55
Finland 51
Jordan 48
Venezuela 44
Kazakhstan 40
Morocco 40
Portugal 34
Dominican Republic 33
Ecuador 33
Belgium 32
Uganda 29
Nigeria 25
Thailand 23
Rwanda 18
France 17
Peru 16
South Africa 16
Czech Republic 15
New Zealand 15
Sweden 14
Georgia 13
Honduras 13
Angola 12
Paraguay 12
Cameroon 11
Denmark 11
Philippines 11
Canada 9
Ethiopia 9
United Nations** 9
Austria 8
Taiwan (ROC) 8
Senegal 7
Argentina 5
Hungary 5
Mauritius 5
Bulgaria 4
Chad 4
Croatia 4
El Salvador 4
Russia 4
Seychelles 3
Switzerland 3
Cyprus 1
Guinea 1
Indonesia 1
Lesotho 1
Cote d'Ivoire 0
Lithuania 0
Turkmenistan 0

Here is more detailed data on who Israel has sold arms to over the past 6 years:

TIV of arms exports from Israel, 2011-2016
Figures are SIPRI Trend Indicator Values (TIVs) expressed in millions.
Figures may not add up due to the conventions of rounding.
A '0' indicates that the value of deliveries is less than 0.5m
For more information, see http://www.sipri.org/databases/armstransfers/sources-and-methods/
Source: SIPRI Arms Transfers Database
Generated: 18 September 2017
 201120122013201420152016Total
Austria222   6
Azerbaijan592521121248428
Belgium44417 19
Brazil191821271716118
Cameroon   12 3
Chile1839   30
Colombia55 81924 106
Czech Republic 88   15
Denmark  10   10
Dominican Republic12     12
Equatorial Guinea70     70
Ethiopia  13339
Germany (FRG)6151515152490
Honduras   13  13
India1561611191572765991466
Indonesia 1    1
Italy211610202037122
Jordan    48 48
Lithuania    0 0
Mauritius     33
Mexico    42529
Myanmar1     1
Netherlands12     12
New Zealand3553  15
Nigeria6 12   18
Paraguay66    12
Peru     11
Philippines    6410
Poland11119   30
Portugal93    11
Russia  21  3
Rwanda  13   13
Senegal   1437
Seychelles  3   3
Singapore745715 1343201
South Africa35    8
South Korea 3528244058185
Spain1827234  71
Sri Lanka11     11
Thailand0  35 8
Turkey229 1715 63
Turkmenistan     00
United Kingdom113120202434141
United Nations**     99
United States152535354055205
Unknown recipient(s)5 13333154
Viet Nam  2614768116
Total57244943239969412603805



You can even find out specifically what weapons were sold to whom. The UN leased a drone from Israel for use in Mali; Israel gave Jordan 16 second-hand  AH-1F Cobra combat helicopters as a gift in 2015 to help fight ISIS.

Oh, and the weapons Israel did sell to Myanmar? A patrol boat and a second-hand naval gun. Not exactly weapons that are useful to kill the local Muslim population. But that doesn't stop the Independent and Haaretz from pretending that Israel is the major supplier of weapons to enable genocide.

Here is yet another example of how the media simply ignores real facts.



We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive