BDS and the Human Shields of the New Anti-Semitism - by Prof. Asa Kasher

The human shields of the terrorists are not terrorists but nor are they harmless civilians, from the standpoint of the struggle against terror. Ultimately, there is no choice but to act against the voluntary human shields, even with military means, to defend oneself as necessary against the terrorists. The human shields of the new anti-Semitism are not anti-Semites but nor are they harmless civilians, from the standpoint of the struggle against the new anti-Semitism. Ultimately, there is no choice but to act against them, with diplomatic, legal, and economic means, to defend oneself as necessary against the new anti-Semitism.

Prof. Asa Kasher.. 

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.. 

27 June '19..

I understand the mindset of the Israelis who came to the defense of the BDS movement in response to Germany’s anti-BDS resolution.1 They remind me of the Palestinians in Gaza who come to the defense of the terrorists of Hamas in response to Israeli activity against them. Although there are important differences between the two, the similarity in mindset is profound and clearly evident.

Those who stand on the roof of a building in Gaza, seeking to hamper Israel’s efforts to defend itself against the terrorists operating within the building, are not terrorists. They are not there to kill Israelis themselves. They are there to express a basic identification with the terrorists, with their goals, and with the violent, terrorist means that they employ. When they are there, they hamper the struggle against terror and thereby strengthen terror, and they become participants in the danger that terror creates for the soldiers and civilians of Israel.

Those who come to the defense of the BDS movement in response to Germany’s resolution are not anti-Semites. They do not do so to discriminate against Jews, whether in Europe or the United States. They do so to express a basic identification with a movement that is sullied by anti-Semitism, with its goals and with the malevolent, anti-Semitic means that it employs. When they take a stand there, they hamper the struggle against the new anti-Semitism and thereby strengthen it, and they become participants in the danger that anti-Semitism creates for Jews and for all aspects of their lives.

Identification with the BDS movement is immoral. It is not part of a general struggle against various instances in which one nation-state’s forces are present in the territory of a different nation. This movement has no interest in what happens in Tibet. It has no interest in what happens in the Crimean Peninsula. It has no interest in what happens in Western Sahara. It is interested solely in the presence of the nation-state of the Jewish people in a disputed territory. To take an operative interest in a single situation while fundamentally and perpetually ignoring all the comparable situations is a form of racism. A racist mindset toward Jews is called anti-Semitism. The racist mindset toward Israel is the new anti-Semitism. Those who stand against Germany’s resolution are standing up for it.

(Continue to Full Article)

Prof. Asa Kasher is the Laura Schwarz-Kipp Professor Emeritus of Professional Ethics and Philosophy of Practice and Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University in Israel. In 2000, Professor Kasher was awarded the Israel Prize for his work in philosophy and ethics. Prof. Kasher is author of the IDF's Code of Ethics.

(B'Hatzlacha!) Rome and Jerusalem: A farewell column - by Dror Eydar

At age 16, I marked in the book "A Nation that Lives Alone" the words "Something historic has happened, there is a change." Now, as I leave for Rome, I will take with me the prisoners of Judea and Jerusalem, the ancient Jewish communities of Italy, and also my late parents.

Dror Eydar..
Israel Hayom..
28 June '19..
Link: https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/06/28/rome-and-jerusalem-a-farewell-column/

1. The summer of 1982 was steamy and hot. At the end of the Hebrew month of Sivan the IDF had already flooded into Lebanon and was fighting on the Beirut-Damascus road. In Israel, the internal war over the goals of the war and whether or not it was justified still hadn't started. For us, the 9th graders at Kiryat Yaakov Herzog, the junior high school attached to Midreshiyat Noam – including myself – were planning graduation festivities. Three years had passed since I had left my childhood cocoon for a place where I didn't know anybody. It was a special school, for elite religious Zionist students, with English discipline and a Spartan attitude. Some of the teachers were also university professors. We had three phys ed instructors: one for ball games, one for track and field, and one for gym training, which - by the way - included written exams. Parent-teacher meetings were presented as a day of judgment, accompanied by apocalyptic descriptions of the sorrow we would cause our parents if we failed to meet our classroom and educational goals.

I arrived, curious, imagining the special boarding schools I had read about in the English children's literature I swallowed up. My innocent idealism broke down as I missed home, where almost nothing was demanded of me. Day after day, we were handed a page of Talmud to pore over, with commentaries in the tradition of the great yeshivas. I was spitting blood by the time I understood the Talmudic-style letters, sentences, and style, assets that have stayed with me all my life. I always had a hard time with frameworks. We were destined for the famous Midreshiyat Noam in Pardes Hanna, a place that stayed burned in the soul of everyone who passed through it more than any other educational institute or place of work, or even their army service. Meet any Midreshiyat Noam graduate anywhere, and tell him you went there, too, and immediately doors will open, even the doors of people's souls.

In the meantime, our graduation celebrations were dialed back out of respect for the war's fallen soldiers. We marked the end of junior high with a modest event. The administration surprised me. In my first two years, I had been labeled a troublemaker and was occasionally suspended. Now, at the end of my third year, they found it hard to say goodbye, and presented me with an award for excellence: a book inscribed with wishes for my future success.

The book was "A Nation that Lives Alone" by Yaakov Herzog, whom my school was named after. Herzog was born in Dublin, Ireland, the son of Rabbi Yitzhak Herzog, who would become the second chief rabbi of Israel. As the son of a great Torah scholar, he studied with one of the elder rabbis and was ordained as a rabbi and a dayan [a rabbinical court judge]. After that, he completed a doctorate in international law in Canada. He became a diplomat, a diplomatic advisor to David Ben-Gurion, and Israel's ambassador to Canada. But more than anything else, he was a shining spokesman for the state of Israel and the Jewish people. He was known for a debate he held with British historian Professor Arnold Toynbee, who declared that the Jewish people had no right to claim the Land of Israel because it was nothing more than a historic "fossil." He also claimed that in the War of Independence, the Jews had done things to the Arabs that were similar to what the Nazis had done to them during World War II. Herzog tore Toynbee's claims apart. Later, Toynbee would admit that he had misunderstood the Jewish people.

Another Anti-Israel Biased UN Body? - World Health Organization (WHO) Backgrounder - by Ricki Hollander

Were the WHO really interested in improving Palestinian healthcare, it would examine all the factors involved in regulating healthcare. But like the Hamas Health Ministry, the WHO seems more concerned with spreading anti-Israel propaganda than in seeking improvement to Palestinian healthcare.

Ricki Hollander..
CAMERA..
 26 June '19..

 The World Health Organization (WHO) is the United Nations agency responsible for international health. Like other UN bodies, the WHO singles out Israel for denunciation. At its annual meeting at the end of May, the WHO passed a resolution condemning Israel for “health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan.” Of the 21 items on the meeting’s agenda only one focused on a single country—Israel. There was no mention of healthcare catastrophes in Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, or sub-Saharan Africa.

 One must be familiar with the source of biased reports and resolutions that bear the stamp of the WHO, a globally respected international organization focused on healthcare improvement. These reports are issued by a regional division of the WHO that is hostile to Israel, and extend beyond healthcare to take on a political tone blaming Israel for any inadequacies in the healthcare of Palestinians.

(Continue to Full Article)

Ricki Hollander is a senior media analyst at CAMERA. Her analyses, commentary and letters about the Arab-Israeli conflict and its media coverage have appeared in such publications as the National Review, Middle East Quarterly, Newsweek, Spectator, Chicago Sun Times, Algemeiner and Times of Israel. She has lectured across North America and in Israel about the topic. Hollander is co-author of the monograph "Indicting Israel: New York Times Coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict."

The actual reality behind the Guardian’s fantasy about root causes of Palestinian suffering - by Adam Levick

Though economic problems facing Gaza and the West Bank are different, the editorial’s reflexive dismissal of the US plan and myopic diagnosis of the territories’ challenges have one common – and characteristically Guardian – thread: the failure to hold Palestinians even minimally responsible for their fate.

Adam Levick..
UK Media Watch..
26 June '19..

In an official editorial (“The Guardian view on Trump and Israel-Palestine: the reality behind Kushner’s fantasy”) published on June 25, the Guardian predictably lambasted the new US peace plan, particularly its economy-first approach of promoting Palestinian prosperity as a path to a permanent resolution.

Whilst there was little in the editorial that was uprising, one sentence in particular caught our eye, because it says so much about how little the Guardian understands the root causes of Palestinian economic woes.

Many of these initiatives have been proposed before – in some cases, more than a decade ago – and are unachievable under current conditions. The report advocates them nonetheless because it simply refuses to recognise that the biggest obstacle to economic development is the West Bank’s occupation and the blockade of Gaza.

On the same day, the Guardian published another analysis by Mid-East correspondent Martin Chulov which similarly opined that “a central factor in the slow growth of the Palestinian economy has been the Israeli occupation”.

First, the suggestion that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is the biggest obstacle to the territory’s economic development grossly misunderstands the basic causality.  The blockade is not a cause, but the natural result of Hamas’s decision to prioritise terror, and their goal of annihilating Israel, over the well-being of their citizens.  No country in the world would allow the unimpeded flow of weapons to a territory on its border ruled by a government that has launched thousands of rockets at its civilians.  If there wasn’t a fanatical, Islamist terror group controlling Gaza, there would be no blockade. 

(Continue to Full Post)

Adam Levick has served as Managing Editor of UK Media Watch – a CAMERA affiliate – since 2010. Previously he worked as a researcher at NGO Monitor and, prior to that, worked in the Civil Rights Division of the Anti-Defamation League. Adam has published detailed reports on progressive antisemitism for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

What the Trump peace plan cannot accomplish - by Jonathan Tobin

The economic vision for the Palestinians isn’t new and won’t work. But the problem isn’t the plan. It’s that its intended beneficiaries have other priorities. 

Jonathan Tobin..
JNS.org..
24 June '19..

When the Trump administration released the economic portion of its Middle East peace plan last week, the avalanche of criticism was immediate and harsh. Even though the president’s foreign-policy team couched the plan as a “vision” of peace rather than an intricate blueprint, its critics weren’t wrong in pointing out that there was little in it that was new, and that its chances of success were nil.

Yet in analyzing the effort, it’s important to note that there’s a difference saying that the plan won’t succeed and saying that putting it forth was the wrong thing to do. That’s because the problem with it isn’t the content, but the context. An effort to shift the focus from a push on Israeli concessions, which are never enough to satisfy the Palestinians, to one in which Palestinian society could be transformed—economically and hopefully peaceably—was long overdue. But as long as the intended beneficiaries aren’t interested in such programs, the “ultimate deal” is simply not going to happen under any circumstances.

(Continue to Full Column)

Jonathan S. Tobin is the Editor-in-Chief of JNS — Jewish News Syndicate. He is also a contributing writer for National Review and a columnist for the New York Post, Haaretz and other publications.

Not A Problem: Take the Palestinians’ ‘No’ for an Answer - by Eugene Kontorovich

They’ve rejected every peace initiative. Their no-show this week in Bahrain should be the last.

Eugene Kontorovich..
Wall Street Journal..
23 June '19..
Link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/take-the-palestinians-no-for-an-answer-11561316980

 This week’s U.S.-led Peace to Prosperity conference in Bahrain on the Palestinian economy will likely be attended by seven Arab states—a clear rebuke to foreign-policy experts who said that recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the Golan Heights as Israeli territory would alienate the Arab world. Sunni Arab states are lending legitimacy to the Trump administration’s plan, making it all the more notable that the Palestinian Authority itself refuses to participate.

 The conference’s only agenda is improving the Palestinian economy. It isn’t tied to any diplomatic package, and the plan’s 40-page overview contains nothing at odds with the Palestinian’s purported diplomatic goals. Some aspects are even politically uncomfortable for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Given all that, the Palestinian Authority’s unwillingness to discuss economic opportunities for its own people, even with the Arab states, shows how far it is from discussing the concessions necessary for a diplomatic settlement. Instead it seeks to deepen Palestinian misfortune and use it as a cudgel against Israel in the theater of international opinion.

 This isn’t the first time the Palestinians have said no. At a summit brokered by President Clinton in 2000, Israel offered them full statehood on territory that included roughly 92% of the West Bank and all of Gaza, along with a capital in Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority rejected that offer, leading Israel to up it to 97% of the West Bank in 2001. Again, the answer was no. An even further-reaching offer in 2008 was rejected out of hand. And when President Obama pressured Israel into a 10-month settlement freeze in 2009 to renew negotiations, the Palestinians refused to come to the table.

 After so many rejections, one might conclude that the Palestinian Authority’s leaders simply aren’t interested in peace. Had they accepted any of the peace offers, they would have immediately received the rarest of all geopolitical prizes: a new country, with full international recognition. To be sure, in each proposal they found something not quite to their liking. But the Palestinians are perhaps the only national independence movement in the modern era that has ever rejected a genuine offer of internationally recognized statehood, even if it falls short of all the territory the movement had sought.

The Israeli Community of Ramat Trump: War, Peace and Thousands of Years of History - by Daniel Greenfield

The Heights are crowded with thousands of years of history, with the sounds of falling shells and screaming men, but also with a vastness of sky and earth that open the human heart to wonder. There are strange megalithic monuments that have never been explained, unexpected springs bounding from the earth, and massive waterfalls. And in the air is that intangible taste of a timeless eternity.

Daniel Greenfield..
Frontpagemag.com..
20 June '19..

 At an elevation of over 2,000 feet, the road to Ramat Trump or Trump Heights at times appears to be climbing into the sky. The Golan Heights with its scrub and brush, the vast Mediterranean vistas, nature reserves and artsy cottages, interrupted by secluded villages with more livestock than people, could easily be mistaken for some rural part of California. But occasionally there is the distant sound of artillery or the sonic booms of Israeli or Russian jets reminding everyone that this is a war zone. 

On the other side of the wineries and ranches isn’t California, but a murderous struggle between Sunni and Shiite Islamic terrorists battling each other and themselves for control of Syria. Factions on the other side include Iran, Al Qaeda, ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood. Ever since Trump won, the struggle has been dying down. ISIS has mostly been crushed. But the cows up here can’t count on the quiet.

The announcement that Israel would be naming a town after Trump, in appreciation of his recognition of the Golan Heights, was met with jeers and media cries that it would be an “illegal settlement”. 

There’s plenty of history behind dismissing the notion of “illegal settlements” on land where Jews had lived for thousands of years. Ramat Trump will be under the authority of the Golan Regional Council based out of Katzrin, a Jewish village with an ancient synagogue dating back to at least the 4th century built by refugees fleeing the might of Rome, only for it and other small Jewish villages built on the Heights to encounter the Islamic invaders claiming the land not for the emperor, but for the caliph.

(Continue to Full Post) 

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

When rights collide in Jerusalem - by Gidon Ben-Zvi

Does naming streets in eastern Jerusalem after rabbis violate the rights of the neighborhood’s overwhelmingly Arab population? Of course not.

Gidon Ben-Zvi..
JNS.org..
20 June '19..

This week, the Jerusalem Municipality authorized the naming of five alleyways and narrow streets in the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood of Silwan after rabbis. Currently, 12 Jewish families and hundreds of Palestinian families live in this eastern Jerusalem neighborhood.

In response, one of the two naming committee members who opposed the new street names, councilman Yossi Havilio, stated that such a move will provoke residents and inflame the neighborhood.

Did the city of Jerusalem violate the rights of residents by assigning Jewish street names in an overwhelmingly Arab neighborhood?

First, let’s clarify their rights. The overwhelming majority of the 300,000 Palestinians living in eastern Jerusalem aren’t Israeli citizens. They’re permanent residents who nonetheless have many of the rights of full-fledged citizens, such as the right to vote in municipal elections, access to social security compensation, membership in one of Israel’s health funds and employment in virtually any profession.

What’s preventing these residents from enjoying full citizenship rights? Simply put—they are. After the 1967 Six-Day War, residents of eastern Jerusalem rejected the possibility of receiving Israeli citizenship as a protest against newly established Israeli sovereignty.

(Continue to Full Column)

Gidon Ben-Zvi contributes to “The Algemeiner,” “The Times of Israel,” “The Jerusalem Post,” CiF Watch and blogs at Jerusalem State of Mind.

New York Times Asks Israel: 'Have You Stopped Beating Your Wife?' - by Gilead Ini

In the New York Times’s framing, no answer to the question about Israel’s human rights record exculpates the Jewish state. No means no — Israel doesn’t meet international standards, and candidates are willing to say so. But yes also means no. Israel is guilty, but cowardly Democrats are simply “unwilling” to criticize the country. 


Gilead Ini..
CAMERA..
19 June '19..

“Have you stopped beating your wife?”

It’s the classic example used to illustrate how a loaded question can be an insidious rhetorical technique. Baked into this particular loaded question is the assumption that the one being queried had previously been guilty of domestic abuse. The New York Times offers its own version of a loaded question in a set of interviews with Democratic presidential candidates that the paper published and publicized today.

We tracked down the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates and asked them the same set of 18 questions.

21 of them sat down with us on camera and gave us their thoughts on topics ranging from the political to the personal.https://t.co/IkNeyd8IpO

— NYT Graphics (@nytgraphics) June 19, 2019

On its own, the newspaper’s prompt about Israel doesn’t explicitly assume guilt. Candidates were asked, “Do you think Israel meets international standards of human rights?” Yes, it is curious that Israel is the one foreign country whose policies were deemed worthy of scrutiny in the 18 questions posed by the New York Times. The moral records of Afghanistan, the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance funding; China, America’s largest trading partner; and Mexico, the country’s southern neighbor were unquestioned. There was nothing about Egypt, whose former president just died in a courtroom while on trial; Saudi Arabia, the top purchaser of U.S. arms; Turkey, our putative NATO ally; or the Palestinians. Only Israel.

(Continue to Full Column)

Gilead Ini is a Senior Research Analyst at CAMERA. His commentary has appeared in numerous publications, including the Jerusalem Post, Christian Science Monitor, Columbia Journalism Review and National Review, and has been featured on national and international radio programs. He has lectured widely on media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Israel Need Not Fear the Fake Time-Bomb of Palestinian Demographics - by Ken Cohen

There may be valid reasons for Israel to desire disengagement from the disputed territories, but the demographic threat of an Arab majority isn’t one of them.

Ken Cohen..
The Flame..
18 June '19..

The urgency for Israel to resolve the problem of the Palestinian Arab territories is in large part predicated on a commonly theorized demographic time-bomb that will supposedly create an Arab majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea within just a few years. This would presumably destroy Jewish self-determination—and with it the Jewish state.

This nonsensical commonplace—most frequently purveyed by Americans and Israelis of the left/progressive persuasion—is predicated on a fraudulent 1997 census administered by the Palestinian Authority. In 2017, a less rigorous count of the Palestinian Arabs living in the disputed territories used the 1997 census as a base, and multiplied the fraud.

Here's how the "Demographic Time-Bomb" argument works:

The 1997 population reported for the territories, 3.8 million, combined with the 1.2 million Arabs living in Israel proper, yielded a 1997 total of 5 million Arabs, from the River to the Sea.

With a projected Palestinian population growth rate of nearly five percent per year, the scary prediction was that the combined Arab population between the River and the Sea would surpass the Jewish population of roughly 5.8 million in about two decades.

Sure enough, the 2017 "count" showed an Arab population of 4.7 million in the disputed territories. The 2019 Israeli census found 1.9 million Arab Israelis, so the River to the Sea total of Arabs would seem to be 6.6 million. This is quite close to the 2019 Jewish population of Israel, which totaled 6.7 million. According to the more gullible demographers, these numbers prove that anIsraeli annexation of Judea, Samaria and Gaza will imminently yield an Arab voting majority in the expanded nation.

Even omitting Gaza and its alleged 1.9 million Palestinian Arabs, the theorists warn, will only spare Israel a Palestinian Arab majority for a decade or so, given the inexorable march of demographic destiny.

For this reason alone, Israel has no choice, it is argued, than to give the Palestinian Arabs their own state, if only to ensure that Israel retains both its Jewishness and its democracy.

The only teensy fly in this ointment, however, is that the census and projections that the PA provided were utter fictions. The PA's census numbers were far higher than the best Israeli government estimates—breathtakingly so. As Israeli demographers, such as Yoram Ettinger, looked into the details of the PA census, it quickly became clear that the census' methodology was fatally flawed. There were double-counts of many people, ludicrous birth and death statistics, immigration assumptions that bore no relationship to reality, violations of international census standards, and direct conflicts with publicly available data from other PA agencies and world bodies.

Here are just a few of the 1997 fraud's elements:

June '67, the Six-Day War and the Israeli Dream - by Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen

...At the end of the 1956 Sinai Campaign, the prime minister said: “This is the messianic vision that has pulsed for thousands of years in the heart of the Jewish People, and it is my deep belief that this is what has brought us this far, and that only if we remain faithful to it all our lives will our historical hope be fully realized.”

Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen..
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,199..
13 June '19..
Link: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/six-day-war-israeli-dream/ 

Every year, the anniversary of the Six-Day War runs up against the rocks of a perennial Israeli debate: Who deviated from the Zionist path?

Each side in the debate is convinced that its opponent is the one who deviated. “It all started with the victory in 1967,” the charge sheet begins. “Religious Zionism espoused new dreams. Religious people suddenly became messianic, and right-wingers became ultranationalist.” The Israeli discourse on the war veers back and forth between, on the one hand, prayers of thanks for the great victory and the desire to extend Israel’s control over the patrimony; and on the other, a longing for the “good years” that preceded the war and a hope for an end to the “occupation.”

The war was indeed a turning point that ushered in major change. But the endeavor of building Israeli communities on the West Bank and the messianic aspects of the Zionist enterprise were only a continuation, if accelerated, of processes that had been spearheaded by the pioneering workers’ parties and the Herut movement.

Naomi Shemer’s song “Jerusalem of Gold,” as performed by Shuli Natan at Jerusalem’s International Convention Center on Independence Day in 1967, less than a month before the Six Day War, gave open expression to a mood of longing among Israelis. The song immediately stirred powerful, unanticipated emotion. When Natan went down to the dressing room, she was summoned back for a repeat performance by Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek. The words of the song touched chords of deep public feeling that emerged at that moment with surprising force.

Without context, it is difficult to explain the way the war was conducted. Without the surge of yearning for the parts of the ancestral homeland that, at the end of the War of Independence, remained beyond the border, it is hard to account for why, after the Arab air forces had largely been destroyed, and after victory had effectively been achieved on the Sinai front within the first 24 hours, the Israeli offensive continued on the Jordanian and Syrian fronts. The explanation is not a mystery. Defense Minister Moshe Dayan expressed it very clearly. At the conquest of Jerusalem, he said: “We have returned to our holiest places. We have returned in order never to part from them. To our Arab neighbors we also extend at this hour, all the more so at this hour, a hand of peace.”

The transition to a proactive approach

Actually, the Presbyterian Church’s Stance on Israel and Hezbollah Isn’t Very Funny - by Dexter Van Zile

Maybe something good will come from this. With Lueckert holding such a prominent position within the PCUSA, the denomination’s elected officials and staffers might feel obligated to hold the line against crazy anti-Israelism from the church’s so-called “peace activists.”

Dexter Van Zile..
Algemeiner..
13 June '19..

 You simply can’t make this stuff up; it’s like something out of a Mel Brooks movie. Fifteen years after the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) fired its number three official after she met with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the denomination has hired her to serve as president of the corporation charged with managing the church’s real estate and finances.

The PCUSA made the announcement on June 11 that Kathy Lueckert had been asked to serve as president of the church’s “A Corporation.” The decision to hire Lueckert, made by the corporation’s board of directors, will be confirmed by the denomination’s next General Assembly, scheduled to take place in 2020.

“God sure has a good sense of humor,” Lueckert said after learning of her appointment.

 (Continue to Full Column)

Dexter Van Zile is the Christian Media Analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA).