Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Now 40, Islamic Republic Of Iran Secretly Looking Forward To Annual Prostate Exam (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Tehran, February 13 - It maintains a conservative, prim exterior, but this Islamic country harbors an intense desire to have a physician's fingers inserted up its backside, now that it has reached the recommended age after which to undergo such a procedure every year.

The Islamic Republic of Iran this week celebrated four decades since the revolution that created it, with the festivities including the requisite braggadocio and threats. Privately, however, close acquaintances of the regime report that it most relishes the prospect of having the inside of its rectum massaged on a regular basis, in keeping with medical sensibilities to foster early detection of one of the most common types of cancer.

"Between you and me, it's not the triumph of lasting this long and extending influence throughout the region," revealed neighbor Iraq. "That's gotta be gratifying, of course, but when no one else is around, Iran is most looking forward to a little digital anal penetration. That's not going to be the public line, obviously, what with the homosexual connotations of all that. But Iran is just like the rest of us, and we all have our little quirks and kinks."

Iran's physician confirmed the country had already made a prostate exam appointment three years in advance. "It's quite the responsible approach," he remarked. "At the annual checkup Iran has asked numerous times what the procedure entails, and never hesitates to delve into every detail. I seldom encounter patients with such intense interest in what most consider an awkward, uncomfortable feature of aging. Quite the breath of fresh air."

In the months leading up to the Islamic regime's fortieth birthday, Iran approached numerous older countries with discreet questions about their experiences with the prostate exam. "It was a little weird," admitted North Korea. "Personally, I'm inclined to avoid letting anyone get too close, so I haven't bothered with it in years. But Iran kept asking. I actually went as far as to use the word 'freak' when the subject came up again in our last conversation. Here I was trying to focus on arms cooperation, nuclear development, and undermining the West, and all I get is anal this and prostate that. Gave me the willies."

"Yeah, Iran asked me about that," disclosed Pakistan with a roll of the eyes. "Repeatedly. I will say no more."

Canada observed that it had suggested Iran avail itself of Israeli technology that has made the procedure less invasive and shorter, but the regime demurred, stammering something about not using "Zionist" things, yeah, that's why.

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.

Apparently, it ISN'T all about the Benjamins

I wrote this yesterday on Twitter, and it might as well be posted here too:

_________________________________________________

Aren't you sick and tired of all those articles about the South Korean lobby and their control over the US?

No?

That's funny, because they've spent about 60% more than the Israel lobby since 2017.

Japan spends more too.

I'm sure there's a good reason we ONLY hear about #3.

So all of you who are defending Omar by saying, well, yes, AIPAC's influence is something that is of major importance, why shouldn't we talk about it? - OK, please answer why we don't talk about Japan and South Korea's influence?

The hypocrisy from this event is off the charts.

The answer is always "Why SHOULDN'T we talk about Israel?'" That's fine, but when Israel is consistently the #1 topic for criticism in areas where it is not objectively #1 in reality, then there must be some other reason Israel is singled out, right?

What could it be?

Is Israel the one country in the world that should be boycotted, and not the scores of countries whose human rights records are abysmal?

Is Israel the one country that should be regularly tagged as "apartheid" even though so many countries discriminate in much worse ways?

Everyone is so keen on insisting that criticism of Israel isn't antisemitic, but what other reason can explain why the Jewish state is consistently singled out as the worst example of everything when it is not even close by any objective measure?

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.

02/13 Links Pt1: As Israel grieves a brutal murder, PA TV sings: “We have given them a taste of grief”; Senior Fatah official condemns Warsaw Conference: "There is an Israeli Auschwitz to massacre Palestinians"

From Ian:

PMW: As Israel grieves a brutal murder, PA TV sings: “We have given them a taste of grief”

Two days after the brutal murder of the 19-year-old Israeli woman Ori Ansbacher, official Palestinian Authority TV broadcast a song celebrating that Palestinians cause Israelis grief:
"A bone in the throat of the Zionists... We have given them a taste of grief"
[Official PA TV, Feb. 9, 2019]

The song tacitly promises 10 times more terror than Israel has suffered until now by promising there will be 10 times more Palestinian prisoners:
"We swear in the name of the prisoners In place of one [prisoner], here are ten"

While singing the words promising more prisoners, the singer points to a young child he is holding as if to say: This child is the future terrorist; this child is the future prisoner. The song's message is that today's children are the future terrorists and prisoners - those who will grow up to give "a taste of grief" and be "a bone in the throat of the Zionists."

"We are not afraid of the enemy - a bone in the throat of the Zionists
Palestinians - We are! We are!
The people of Jerusalem - We are! We are!
The people of Jenin - We are! We are! ...
O Al-Aqsa [Mosque], your wounds will heal
Victory is certain, it's inevitable
A rock thrown with expertise...
The people of Jaffa - We are! We are!
The people of Haifa - We are! We are!
The people of Lod - We are! We are!
The people of Ramle
The people of Acre - We are! We are!
The people of Nazareth - We are! We are! ...
We swear in the name of the prisoners
In place of one [prisoner], here are ten
We have given them [the Israelis] a taste of grief
We have given them a taste of grief - a bone in the throat of the Zionists"
[Official PA TV, Feb. 9, 2019; July 30 and Aug. 6, 2016]

The Palestinians incite to rape, too

In response to the horrifying rape and murder of Ori Ansbacher by a Palestinian terrorist, MK Aida Touma-Sliman, chairwoman of the Knesset Committee on the Status of Women and Gender Equality, claimed that "the crime should be called what it is: The rape and murder of Ori Ansbacher is a gender-based crime. The criminal being Palestinian doesn't make the crime less horrifying and it cannot be part of the struggle for [Palestinian] national liberation."

The Palestinians Knesset member and Israeli citizens, like her friends in the various Palestinian terrorist organizations, were prepared for a public relations battle to characterize the rape and murder of Ori as another woman being murdered. In other words, some nameless killer with a knife just raped her for the heck of it on a chilly morning, just because she was a woman – not because she was Jewish. Why did the Palestinian criminal arm himself with a knife, cross the security barrier, rape and fatally stab Ori, rather than some random Palestinian woman?

The reason is simple: Every Palestinian who is exposed to incitement in some mosque, on social media, or in speeches by Palestinian leaders, knows that the enemy's blood can be shed. But if he rapes a Palestinian woman (a gender crime) or even secretly has his way with her in private, he'll be slaughtered and his immediate family members will follow him to hell.

After all, Muslims have honor and they are permitted to commit murder to uphold it. So whom are they allowed to rape and murder on the basis of their gender? Jews and Christians, who are defined as weak and out of bounds of the Arab code of vengeance.

Ori's blood cries out to deaf ears

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say the lack of coverage was purposeful…a blanket wall-to-wall blackout.

But I do know better and I still call it a confederacy of silence, beginning at The New York Times.

They are all in it together. I cannot prove it; rather it’s for them to prove that they are not carriers of journalistic malpractice. I know that scoffers’ smell of theirs from my own years in the newsroom and travelling with them to Israel where they went, and came back, like the Spies, to curse the land.

I saw it firsthand, their scandals of playing hide and seek with the truth. It’s in this and this book. They won’t tell it; I did.

Yes, the topic is Ori Ansbacher, a beautiful 19-year-old daughter of Israel who was found in the Ein Yael forest in south Jerusalem, dead from a particularly horrific act of rape and murder.

Did you read about it in the Times, in the Post, or in any other major (even minor) newspaper? Neither did I? Zero.

Did you watch any of it from CNN, the BBC, ABC, NBC, CBS or any other network? Same here. Nada. Zilch.

Ori’s blood cries out to deaf ears. A nation is in distress, the world shrugs, the media yawns.

The Free Palestine Movement was behind the 2011 flotilla to Israel and styles itself as a progressive peace movement that is pro-Palestinian.

They said in a November newsletter that they will offer new members of Congress a trip to "Palestine" as a rebuttal to the AIPAC-sponsored trip most take, and it is possible that Rashida Tlaib, who announced in December that she wants to partner with pro-Palestinian groups on a similar trip, may be working with FPM on this initiative.

FPM just sent out an email urging members to visit and support a "Call for a Palestine Liberation Movement" webpage, that describes what they want to see as a solution to the Israel/Palestinian conflict.

Their solution, as the map here show - no Israel. It would be replaced with the "One Democratic State of Palestine."

The description of that state makes it pretty clear that most Jews would be forced to leave.

This can only be achieved by establishing One Democratic State of Palestine for its indigenous people, the refugees who we were forced out of the country and its current citizens. This is the key to a ‘fair and permanent solution of conflict’ in the region, and to a ‘just solution’ for the Palestinian cause. Failing this, war and mutual destruction will continue.

They say they have no problems with Jews, which means they would allow any Jews who were there in 1917 or 1880 or something like that to stay, but anyone else who arrived after the Zionist movement began would not be welcome.

In other words - ethnic cleansing of Jews.

Someone may want to ask Tlaib if she supports the goals of the Free Palestine Movement and the Palestine Liberation Movement, and if her vision of a one-state solution looks like this one.

As of this writing, only eight people signed up for this vision, but it is in fact very close to what Palestinian Arabs say they want their own final solution to be, and "two states" are just a stage in the way to a single Palestinian state where Jews are only tolerated as a tiny minority with no political rights.

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.

Barak Ravid has a phenomenal scoop, published in Axios:

On the last day of the 2014 Gaza War, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a secret meeting with a special envoy from the Saudi king. In the meeting, Saudi Arabia proposed a joint diplomatic initiative on re-launching Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, rebuilding Gaza and confronting Iran, three sources briefed on the effort told me.

Why it matters: This was an unprecedented move by the Saudis — who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel — that could have profoundly shifted the regional dynamic. More surprisingly still, the Saudis planned to present it in public with the Israelis.

The details of the Saudi proposal, according to the sources:

-Israel and Saudi Arabia would draft an updated version of the 2002 Arab peace initiative.
-Netanyahu and the Saudi foreign minister would then present the initiative together during the UN General Assembly.
-Israel and Saudi Arabia would announce a process to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians would be re-launched.
-Saudi Arabia would lead a regional push for the reconstruction of Gaza.

The backstory, according to the three sources:

In early September 2014, Netanyahu held a secret meeting with Saudi national security adviser, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan. The meeting took place in a third country.
Bandar told Netanyahu at the meeting that Saudi Arabia wanted to re-launch the peace process in order to be able to unite the region against Iran.
Netanyahu was enthusiastic, and after 10 hours of talks he and Prince Bandar agreed to start preparing for a summit at the UN.
In the next few weeks, meetings were held between Netanyahu's advisers and Bandar's aides to draft a joint document.
Israel presented a draft, and while the Saudis agreed to many of the points, they asked Israel to show flexibility. Netanyahu refused to go further and the talks collapsed, the sources told me.

Between the lines: The sources told me the Saudis felt they went out of their way towards Israel. They said the Saudis felt angry and humiliated, and held Netanyahu responsible.

The sources told me that Prince Bandar conveyed a message to Netanyahu two months later, with the bottom line being that he believed Netanyahu lied to him.

The big picture: The affair created a deep crisis between Israel and Saudi Arabia and communications between the parties almost stopped — even on the Iranian issue. The crisis ended only a year later, several months after the death of King Abdullah and the inauguration of King Salman.

Notice that Ravid is doing everything he can to make Netanyahu look like the bad guy here. His headline is "Israel rejected 2014 Saudi proposal on Palestinian peace talks." All Israeli media followed that headline, saying it was Netanyahu who rejected a Saudi peace proposal.

But the story shows that it was Israel that presented a detailed plan, and the Saudis are the ones who rejected it.

Without knowing the details we can't know whether it was Netanyahu's red lines or the Saudi red lines that are unreasonable, but the plain reading of the story is that the only rejection was from the Saudis.

The other thing this story - which provides no details on the plan itself - proves is that, unlike how he is portrayed in the media and by Israel haters or so-called "moderates" like J-Street, Netanyahu was enthusiastic to come up with a peace plan with Saudi Arabia, speaking to their foreign minister for ten hours about it. This is completely opposite to how Netanyahu is treated in the media, even in this article itself.

One is reminded of the other peace proposal that no one wants to talk about, from 2013 and 2014, that the US drafted, Israel accepted and Palestinians rejected. It is never listed as one of the failed peace initiatives that Palestinians rejected, unlike the ones from Israel's non-Likud prime ministers.

If it doesn't fit with the meme of Bibi being a right-wing warmonger, the story must not be told - or, like here, it must be spun to fit the meme.

This has consequences. The truth is that Israel is the party that wants real peace, and the rejectionists are always the Arabs. The refusal of the media to give Bibi any credit for wanting peace is a factor in the pressure Israel gets to always concede more, give more, compromise more - and the Arabs get a free pass.

In other words, if the media would treat Bibi with the deference they treat the late Yitzchak Rabin - who not once said that he supported a Palestinian state - then there would be a much greater chance of peace.

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.

The hypocrisy over Ilhan Omar continues (update)

The way that so many people continue to defend Ilhan Omar is stunningly hypocritical.

The most-often seen defense is that Omar wants to simply open up a conversation about how money can corrupt politics, and that there is nothing antisemitic about bringing it up.

Typical is a tweet from Omar's fellow member of Congress Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez where she says "I’m proud @IlhanMN raised the issue of lobbyist 💰 in politics & equally proud of her sensitivity to communities. Both are possible."

But lobbyist dollars are equally given out on the Left and the Right. Ocasio-Cortez accepted money from many left-wing PACs. Omar received some $60,000 from PACs, including from the Council of American Islamic Relations.

Singling out AIPAC - which isn't even a PAC! - when every single member of Congress receives PAC money is hypocritical.

But this is far worse.

The word "AIPAC" is a dog whistle for the "Jewish lobby." In left-wing and Muslim circles, it means Jewish control of Congress and of the US government.

Looking the actual numbers shows what a lie this is.

In terms of lobbying causes to Congress, the pro-Israel lobby comes in at number 50, with $15 million spent in 2018, a tiny percentage of what the top lobby spent - $400 million from the securities and investment industry.

(UPDATE): Even that number is deceptive, because for the purposes of these statistics, J-Street is considered part of the "pro-Israel" lobby - and their policies are against what the Israeli government wants in virtually every case. J-Street account for half of the "pro-Israel lobby" dollars listed!

Even if for some reason you believe that money to lobby for other countries is more insidious than the billions spent scores of domestic lobbies with their own agendas, the Israel lobby is still not the largest.

Those would be South Korea and Japan, whose foreign lobbies spent many millions more than Israeli lobbies registered under FARA.

Arab countries also outspend the Israel lobby.

AIPAC is influential, no doubt. However, the emphasis on AIPAC plays on antisemitic stereotypes of Jewish money, Jewish influence and a Jewish agenda that is at odds with what is best for America.

It doesn't get more antisemitic than that.

The people who are trying to excuse Omar as somehow ignorant of this, as well as those who are pretending that she somehow is only exposing the general influence of money in politics, are being disingenuous. The Israel lobby is not at or near the top of any metric in spending or influence among all the lobbies in Washington.

Choosing to only highlight AIPAC as the source of all Washington corruption is antisemitic. Ignoring that this is what Omar did, or pretending that she understands this now when she tries to pretend that she just randomly chose AIPAC as her example, is enabling and excusing antisemitism.

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.

Ori Ansbacher: light, freedom and Jewish sovereignty (Forest Rain)

Inspiration from Zion - by Forest Rain

My Facebook feed is full of Ori’s photo. She looks different in the different images but in each her radiant smile is the same.

Ori, “my light” in Hebrew, was obviously a fitting name for this sunny girl. The more we hear about Ori from friends, family and the people she volunteered with helping underprivileged youth, we learn about the light that was stolen from us - Ori was a role model, an inspiration, a light that pointed the way for many to a better and happier world.

Israel and the Jewish community around the world have paused in horror at the discovery of Ori’s brutal murder on February 7th.

The rest of the world, not so much.

Who cares about a dead Jewish girl? Women are raped and murdered all over the world. It’s nothing unusual. Sad, but not newsworthy. Certainly not on an international level.

From a distance, it is probably difficult to understand why this case is different.

It is not just that our nation is so small and every life is precious.

It is not just that Ori was lovely and innocent. It is not just the stark contrast between her sunniness and the viciousness with which her life was ripped from her, the darkness rising up to stomp out the light because it knows that even a small light can banish great darkness.

It is not just that cases of rape that ends in murder are rare in Israel. In Israel women in general don’t have to fear the random stranger but we too have our share of crime, even violent crime.
Rape tends to be date rape or cases of pedophilia (neither of which could be considered common but even a single case is too many). Murder of women has become an issue of concern in the country. At the same time, those are not random murders. They tend to be “honor killings” (which occur among the Arab population) or cases of deranged spurned husbands or boyfriends who in helpless rage somehow decide that murder (usually followed by their own suicide) is the only way out. No rape is acceptable. No murder is acceptable. At the same time, it is important to understand that this murder is different.

Arafat is a name with a legacy. Ori’s murderer is named after the terrorist-extraordinaire, visionary and possibly the greatest marketer of all time, who solidified the imaginary Palestinian “brand” into the mind of people worldwide as a nation with rights to the land of Israel. To the Western world he said that the “Palestinian people” would exist side by side with Israel. To the Arab world he explained that they would exist instead of Israel but needed to proceed in a step by step method. Arafat Irfayia, 29, a resident of Hebron didn’t wake up in the morning that day deciding he wanted to rape a girl. He didn’t believe he could destroy Israel or “Free Palestine” either. He chose a knife before he left his home and went for a walk in the Jerusalem woods, to see which unfortunate Jewish soul would come his way. He knew he could stomp out one Jewish life.

Ori's murderer smirks during his arraignment

Animals kill for food or self-defense. This man saw light walking freely in the land where she belonged and he wanted to erase her existence. In his culture rape steals a woman’s value. The brutality of the murder is testament to a desire to exterminate, not simply end a life.

Ori’s murder is different because it wasn’t just a horrific attack on her, it was an attack against our nation. It wasn’t an attack on a woman who happened to be a Jew, it was an attack on a Jew who happened to be a woman. It was an attempt to erase the Jew from Israel.

THIS is the hate directed at the Nation of Israel.

The darkness hates the light because even the smallest light can banish the darkness. The darkness attempts to smother the light but does not truly understand just how powerful the light is.

Ori is dead but her light is not. In fact, her light is growing at an exponential rate.

Ori’s friends are putting her poetry of hope to music, so that it will spread and inspire more people.

Ori loved Israel and nature. Her murder was designed to make us afraid to walk free in our land as she did. That’s why her friends and many others are responding by walking the land MORE, not less. Particularly on the hills of Jerusalem.

Instinctively Ori’s friends requested everyone go outside, experience Israel and post photos with the hashtag #להיות_עם_חופשי_בארצנו #AFreeNationInOurLand.

For 2000 years we dreamt of return to our land, to be a free nation in our land. No Arafat, will succeed in taking that away from us.

Jewish sovereignty and freedom are more than the legal and self-sufficient Nation State. They are dependent on the determination of the Jewish spirit. We are small in number but ours is a light that will not go out – and when the darkness threatens to overwhelm us, we respond by growing even brighter.

We are Ori.

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.

02/12 Links Pt2: We already know Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite. The question is, do Democrats care?; Pres. Trump calls for Omar's Resignation; Bar Kochba-era coin hailing ‘freedom of Israel’ unearthed

From Ian:

The Democratic Double Standard for Anti-Semitism

The problem for Democrats here is not only moral but political. Calling for Northam’s resignation was a low-cost engagement—at least, it was before it was learned that his potential successors have blackface and sexual assault controversies of their own. No one is calling for Omar’s resignation or even relieving her of her influential committee assignments so the people of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional district can “heal and move forward,” in part, because it wouldn’t end with Omar.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib invoked the noxious “dual loyalty” canard when she expressed her opposition to an anti-BDS bill before Congress by accusing Republicans of forgetting “what country they represent.”

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has never had to revisit her claim that the organizers of the Women’s March are the “suffragists of our time,” even though its organizers have since embraced the anti-Semitic Minister Louis Farrakhan and were accused of discriminating against its Jewish members. Indeed, when asked if she would condemn these formerly feted Democratic organizers, she declined to comment with any specifics. She did, however, offer a blanket denunciation of anti-Semitism.

The party has been unable to explain why some of its members vehemently denounce Farrakhan while others, including Reps. Andre Carson, Al Green, Danny Davis, and Maxine Waters, seem keen not only to embrace him but defend their association with the Nation of Islam.

To apply the Northam standard to casual acts of anti-Semitism would purge the Democratic caucus of many of its most valuable members. As such, it’s not really a standard at all. It’s more like a talking point.

Jonah Goldberg: Ilhan Omar’s Lazy and Anti-Semitic Tweets

Of course, it’s no surprise that Omar believes this garbage. It’s one of the lazier and most timeless talking points of a rogue’s gallery of cranks, Islamists, and, of course, anti-Semites of the Left and Right, as well as conspiracy theorists generally. Congress is “Israeli Occupied Territory” according to all the worst people.

Now a few points seem worth making. AIPAC isn’t a foreign lobby. It’s an American organization run by Americans. It spends remarkably little on lobbying and Israel spends virtually nothing on lobbying Congress. According to Open Secrets, the biggest political contributor of the “Pro-Israel” lobby in the 2018 cycle was . . . J Street, which spent nearly four times as much ($4,057,820) as the next biggest contributor NORPAC ($1,126,063). Planned Parenthood gave $5,734,048. In 2018, AIPAC did spend the most on lobbying — which is different than contributing. But again, its expenditures were relatively miniscule at 3.5 million. Lawyers spent nearly three times as much on lobbying ($15.4 million) and their contributions totaled over 217 million. The financial, insurance, and real-estate industries contributed nearly $883 million and another half-billion on lobbying.

Now, I’m not naïve. Of course, pro-Israel groups and individuals spend money on politics in other ways, direct and indirect. One need only look at Sheldon Adelson’s political giving to understand that.

But sometimes when people say “It’s not about the money” it’s actually not about the money. The best analogy is to the NRA. For many on the Left and in the media, it’s an article of faith that Republicans don’t cross the NRA because of all of the “blood money” the group lavishes on Congress. They find gun-rights arguments to be so outlandish on their face — in part because they live in gun-free blue bubbles — they immediately assume that bribery is at play. But, as I wrote here, the NRA gives remarkably little in terms of donations. The NRA’s — and the broader gun lobby’s — real power lies in the fact that it can mobilize voters.

Israel is popular with a number of important constituencies including many Jews (imagine that). But its real popularity resides among evangelical Christians and voters generally. And, despite its perfectly debatable flaws, real and alleged, it should be popular. It’s an ally. It’s democratic. It’s Western. And its enemies are largely our enemies. It’s no coincidence it’s listed as the “Little Satan” alongside the “Great Satan” that is America, by some of the most evil and backward regimes in the world.

Ben Shapiro: The Democratic Party Has Become The Party Of Anti-Semitism. Here's Why.

Anti-Semitism now thrives inside the Democratic Party. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) wrote a piece for Louis Farrakhan in 2006; she’s welcome in the party. Linda Sarsour continues to be an ally to the new Democratic Fresh Faces™ as well as more established names like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) (in November, Sarsour slammed “folks who masquerade as progressives but always choose their allegiance to Israel over their commitment to democracy and free speech”). Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) holds conference calls with vicious British anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn, to no serious blowback from the Democratic Party. Keith Ellison, now attorney general of Minnesota, was nearly made the head of the Democratic National Committee after engaging in blatant anti-Semitism for years.

How has the Democratic Party morphed into the party of anti-Semitism? By embracing the philosophy of intersectionality on the one hand, and by embracing the myth that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are completely separable on the other. The former provides the emotional impetus for nodding at Jew-hatred; the latter provides the intellectual framework for doing so.

The philosophy of intersectionality has othered Jews from the intersectional coalition. Because intersectionality is built on the premise that the prevailing Western system of thought has victimized various groups, and that those groups must band together in order to destroy that system, those who have thrived under the West must be excised from the intersectional agglomeration – being, as they are, representatives of the fact that Western thought is not, in fact, rooted in evil. The Jews are simply too financially, educationally, and politically successful to be seen as anything other than members of the power structure. Thus, slurs against them must be countenanced from more victimized groups.

This is only 7 minutes long. You will not forget it.

In 1939, 20,000 Americans rallied in New York’s Madison Square Garden to celebrate the rise of Nazism – an event largely forgotten from American history. A NIGHT AT THE GARDEN, made entirely from archival footage filmed that night, transports audiences to this chilling gathering and shines a light on the power of demagoguery and anti-Semitism in the United States.

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.

Dog whistle politics is defined as the use of certain code words or phrases that are designed to be understood by only a small section of the populace. Generally speaking, these are phrases that have special meaning to that subsection entirely independent of its meaning to others, and represent a particularly insidious use of loaded language.

In the wake of the Ilhan Omar tweet about AIPAC, I decided to make a list of antisemitic dog whistles. All of these words may be used legitimately, of course, but they also have special meanings to antisemites and in some contexts, to some audiences, they mean something far more hateful than the words or phrases themselves.

This list applies both to people on the left and the right, although they tend to use different dog-whistles, so some of these are surprising to some.

Adelson
AIPAC
Cultural Marxists
Dual loyalty
Elite
-Cultural Elite
-Hollywood Elite
Globalist
Hasbara
International bankers
Israel Lobby/Jewish Lobby
Likud
Neocon
New York values
Rothschilds
Settler
Shekels
Soros
Talmudic
White Jews
Zionist

Some people on Twitter think "Benjamins" qualifies, since it is a Jewish name as well as referring to a hundred dollar bill. I'm not convinced - although that could change as a result of Omar's tweet.

These is not to be mixed up with words like "goyim" or "Shlomos" which hardly ever have a double meaning when used nowadays. They aren't dog whistles - they are whistles.

Certainly words like "ZioNazi" and "kike" are not dog whistles, but pure antisemitism.

This list, though, seems a pretty good representation of words that can cause hate while hiding in plain sight. The responses in social media to when they are used, or looking up how they are used in antisemitic neo-Nazi websites, gives one a good idea that these words are not always innocent.

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.

02/12 Links Pt1: Kontorovich: For the ACLU, Antipathy to Israel Trumps Antidiscrimination; Ben-Dror Yemini: The occupation didn't kill Ori Ansbacher

From Ian:

Eugene Kontorovich (WSJ): For the ACLU, Antipathy to Israel Trumps Antidiscrimination

The ACLU has long argued that although private parties have the right to refuse to do business with people for ideological reasons, the government need not fund such conduct. “Taxpayer dollars must not fund discrimination” carried out by private parties, the ACLU states in its issue brief on government-funded discrimination. It has successfully pushed measures banning the federal government from contracting with companies that engage in certain boycotts. And it “strongly” supported legislation that would bar federal funds from being used by states in contracts with companies that engage in boycotts.

Identity politics is the key to understanding the ACLU’s apparent change of heart. The antiboycott laws the ACLU has defended are meant to protect gays and lesbians, an identity group they favor. The ACLU acknowledges that in many states it is “legal to fire or refuse to hire someone based on their sexual orientation,” but argues that companies that do so “must not be allowed to do so with taxpayer dollars.” It inexplicably ignores that the logic of those antiboycott laws applies equally to Israel.

The ACLU may think that refusing to do business with people because of their sexuality is immoral while refusing to do business with people connected with Israel is a blow for justice. That’s an intelligible political position, but it’s lousy First Amendment jurisprudence. First Amendment protections are the same regardless of what one thinks of the underlying conduct.

I played a role in developing the state anti-BDS laws, submitting testimony to legislatures and advising private groups that supported the measures. To avoid any constitutional doubts, I stuck to the model of antiboycott laws that the ACLU supports, comfortable in the knowledge that their constitutionality was unquestioned. I underestimated how much changes when sexual identity is replaced with Israeli identity.

There is more at stake here than hypocrisy. The ACLU’s enthusiasm for Israel boycotts has led it to take legal positions that threaten to undermine the antidiscrimination norms it has worked for decades to achieve. Now it is prepared to risk legal protections for sexual minorities for the sake of creating a constitutional right to boycott Jews. The ACLU probably hopes to have it both ways, arguing that boycotts of Israelis are “political” and boycotts of gays and lesbians are just mean. But courts won’t maintain one standard for boycotts of progressives’ favored targets and another standard for everyone else.

Read my new op-ed in @WSJ: "The ACLU opposes laws against boycotting Israel, even though the laws are patterned after those that protect gays and lesbians" https://t.co/PyOpRb4FJF via @WSJOpinion
— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) February 12, 2019

Minister Gamliel gets a platform in Newsweek

It is rare for mention of Jews of Arab countries to penetrate the mainstream international media, let alone for a voice in the maligned Israeli government to make itself heard. This piece in Newsweek by the minister of social equality, Gila Gamliel, bucks both trends. Gamliel recently launched a new app for uploading the stories of Jews from Arab countries to an oral history website, Seeing the Voices.

Gila Gamliel: story with us for good
Like most things, this history has its good and its bad periods; peaceful neighborly relations were followed by economic discrimination and then deadly violence as thousands of Jews were murdered in violent rioting caused by blood libels and false accusations.

My father Yosef escaped Yemen at the age of 10, and came to Israel as an orphan, where he was adopted by a Polish Jewish family. My mother Aliza came from Libya to Israel at the age of 6, the oldest of 12 brothers and sisters.
Aliza and Yosef were just two people among the 850,000 other Jews from Arab countries who were forced to leave their homes.

For seven decades, the story of the Jews from the Arab countries—both the good and the bad—was left largely untold both in Israel and around the world.
Now as a Minister in the Government of Israel, I am working to preserve the rich cultural history of our parents and grandparents from the Arab world.

We’ve just launched an app allowing Israeli citizens to document the testimony of family members and friends; we’ve promoted research on this history by academics and historians, we have marked an annual commemoration of the Jewish communities from the Arab countries; and we’ve made sure this history is in our classroom schoolbooks.

I can say with satisfaction that this important part of history is now with us for good.

It is a critical part of the story of the Jewish people who over centuries of steadfast determination managed to maintain their identity and religion, along with the dream of one day returning to the Holy Land.

Rivlin marks 70th anniversary of last Jewish camps in Cyprus

President Reuven Rivlin flew to Cyprus Tuesday to mark 70 years since the closure of British detention camps on the island for Jews trying to reach Palestine after World War II.

He was to visit a monument in Nicosia dedicated to the 2,200 children of Holocaust survivors who were born in British colonial camps there between 1946 and 1949.

Rivlin also held talks with Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades.

Cyprus and Israel aim to upgrade relations, “especially on energy, security, economy, tourism, research and innovation,” tweeted Anastasiades.

Rivlin said cooperation between Israel and Cyprus on intelligence, security and terror prevention has made the Mediterranean “much, much safer.”

After the talks Tuesday with Anastasiades, he said Israeli-Cypriot security ties “have never been better” with the two countries’ navies and commando units sharing “space, knowledge and experience.”

He added that the focus of the neighbors’ strategic partnership, which includes Greece, is developing the East Med gas pipeline that “could be one of the greatest underwater projects in the world.”

The envisioned pipeline would carry natural gas from deposits in the eastern Mediterranean to Europe via Greece and Italy.

When is an apology not an apology? (Eldertoons)

A cartoon I tweeted yesterday:

I also tweeted this from Wikipedia about the different types of fake apologies out there ("fauxpologies") that Ilhan Omar's apology fit the definitions of:

Tactical apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is rhetorical and strategic—and not necessarily heartfelt

Explanation apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is merely a gesture that is meant to counter an accusation of wrongdoing. In fact, it may be used to defend the actions of the accused

Formalistic apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology after being admonished to do so by an authority figure—who may also be the individual who suffered the wrongdoing

All of them can be seen in her "apology," as well as an additional one I would call the "Deflection Apology":

Deflection apology - when a person accused off wrongdoing offers an apology but tried to change the subject by saying that others do the same or are worse.

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.