Thursday, March 21, 2019

From Ian:

Meet some of the people the UN calls “civilians” killed in Gaza border clashes
Joe Truzman presented his findings, which are at odds with a UN Report, on the identity of many of those killed — they were military members of terrorist groups including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

We have extensively documented how the supposedly “peaceful protests” at the Gaza-Israel border fence are, in reality, Hamas and Islamic Jihad military terror operations using some civilians as cover, including women and children.

The so-called ‘Great March of Return’ is turned on and off by Hamas as its needs require.

Over 80% of the Gazans killed at the border have been military members of terrorist groups, the best evidence that these are not really civilian protests. Even some of the “children” involved, and who have been killed or injured, were teenage military members of terrorist groups.

Joe Truzman has been a leader in documenting the identity of the terrorists involved at the border, and the violent actions directed at Israel, as we noted in Meet Joe Truzman, our go-to source on Gaza and Palestinian terror groups.

Increasingly, Joe is being recognized for his work, including by UN Watch, which fights anti-Israel bias at the UN, including the UN Human Rights Council. UN Watch organized an alternative program on the day the UN Human Right Council was holding another on of its anti-Israel hatefests. This most recent hatefest included release of a biased report about the Gaza border protests and the death of Palestinians, portraying the events as civilian protests.
One-sided UNHRC report ignores Hamas' Aggression
Instead of condemning Hamas as the prime source of violence and instability in Gaza - the United Nations Human Right Council is blaming the victims of Hamas terrorism for acting in self-defence.

Any council member which holds peace dear must REJECT this resolution!


UK, Austria to oppose UN Human Rights Council condemnations of Israel
The United Kingdom said Thursday it will automatically oppose all proposals made to the United Nations Human Rights Council under a fixed item exclusively devoted to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

The announcement came as Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz declared that his country will vote against a key resolution lashing Israel, which is up for a vote this week.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the council’s so-called Agenda Item 7 “undermines the credibility of the world’s leading human rights forum” and “obstructs the quest for peace in the Middle East.”

As a permanent item on the agenda, Item 7 means no session of the Geneva-based council can be held without specifically discussing Israel.

The council was set to vote on four resolutions Friday condemning Israel for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

“Two years ago, the United Kingdom said that unless the situation changed, we would vote against all texts proposed under Item 7,” Hunt wrote in an op-ed published Thursday in the UK’s Jewish Chronicle weekly.

“Sadly, our concerns have not been heeded. So I have decided that we will do exactly what we said: Britain will now oppose every Item 7 resolution. On Friday we will vote against all four texts proposed in this way.”

Jeremy Hunt: The UN Human Rights Council ignored our concerns on its Israel approach. Now we must act
In some countries in the Middle East, the result of the next election is a foregone conclusion. Yet on April 9, millions of voters in Israel will decide the fate of their leaders – and no-one can predict the outcome.

A fair-minded observer would find it curious that, of all the situations in the world, only Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories are permanently on the agenda of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC).

The horrors of Syria’s civil war, the brutal detention camps in North Korea, the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Burma – all these human tragedies have been the subject of important HRC Resolutions, passed with Britain’s full support.

But amid such catastrophes, a dedicated place on the HRC agenda - known as Item 7 – is reserved solely for Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This means no session can take place without a specific discussion of this subject.

By any standard of fairness or proportion, elevating this dispute above all others cannot be sensible; indeed it is an unhelpful illusion to suppose that Israel’s conduct deserves special scrutiny.

When Item 7 was first introduced, Ban Ki-Moon, then UN Secretary General, voiced his disappointment “given the range and scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world”.

Far from serving any useful purpose, I fear that this dedicated place obstructs the quest for peace in the Middle East.


Jeremy Hunt's move today shows Britain has failed to reform the UN Human Rights Council from within
When the United States stormed out of the UN Human Rights Council over its treatment of Israel last summer, Britain’s then chief diplomat Boris Johnson vowed to stay put.

Washington’s view in June 2018 was that it was plainly unjust for Israel to be only country whose alleged human rights abuses are discussed at every regular meeting without fail.

“The world’s most inhumane regimes continue to escape scrutiny,” one American official said as her country ended its HRC membership 18 months early.

But the United Kingdom — which became a member at the same time at the US — said it would not be staging a walkout of its own.

Mr Johnson said the HRC had many failings and Israel’s permanent place on the agenda was one of them. A “disproportionate and damaging to the cause of peace”, he called it.

But, he went on, the world needed a forum where countries could talk to each other about human rights abuses.Thus the HRC was the “best tool available...to address impunity in an imperfect world and to advance many of our international goals.”

Continuing my re-captioning of single-panel cartoons....




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.
  • Thursday, March 21, 2019
  • Elder of Ziyon
California State University, of which San Francisco State University is a part, settled a lawsuit this week where they pretty much admitted that their campus was a hotbed of antisemitism.

As a settlement in a lawsuit brought by the Lawfare Project and another law firm, SFSU agreed to take Jewish student complaints seriously using an outside investigator, to hire a coordinator for Jewish life at the university, to fund viewpoints usually not allowed to be freely expressed at the university like Zionist perspectives, and a couple of other things to enhance the comfort of Jewish and Zionist students from the daily assaults they labored under.

Here's most of the press release:


SAN FRANCISCO, CA — The Lawfare Project and Winston & Strawn LLP today reached a landmark settlement in their lawsuits against the California State University (CSU) public university system.
The settlement in Volk v. Board of Trustees comes ahead of this month's scheduled trial for a lawsuit brought by two Jewish students who allege that San Francisco State University (SFSU) and the Board of Trustees of CSU discriminated against them.
As part of the settlement, SFSU agreed to:


  • Public statement: Issue a statement affirming that
    "it understands that, for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of their identity";
  • Coordinator of Jewish Student Life: "Hire a Coordinator of Jewish Student Life within the Division of Equity & Community Inclusion" and dedicate suitable office space for this position; 
  • External review of policies: "Retain an independent, external consultant to assess SFSU’s procedures for enforcement of applicable CSU system-wide anti-discrimination policies and student code of conduct";
  • Independent investigation of additional complaints: "SFSU will, for a period of 24 months, assign all complaints of religious discrimination under either E.O. 1096 or E.O. 1097 to an independent, outside investigator for investigation";
  • Funding viewpoint diversity: "SFSU will allocate an additional $200,000 to support educational outreach efforts to promote viewpoint diversity (including but not limited to pro-Israel or Zionist viewpoints) and inclusion and equity on the basis of religious identity (including but not limited to Jewish religious identity)"; and
  • Campus mural: Engage in the SFSU process to allocate "space on the SFSU campus for a mural to be installed under the oversight of the Division of Equity & Community Inclusion, paid for by the University, that will be designed by student groups of differing viewpoints on the issues that are the subject of this litigation to be agreed by the parties (including but not limited to Jewish, pro-Israel, and/or Zionist student groups, should such student groups elect to participate in the process)."
  • "California State University’s public recognition that Zionism is an integral part of Jewish identity represents a major victory for Jewish students at SFSU and across the country. Today, we have ensured that SFSU will put in place important protections for Jewish and Zionist students to prevent continued discrimination. We are confident that this will change the campus climate for the better," said Brooke Goldstein, Executive Director of The Lawfare Project. "The Lawfare Project was proud to play a role in securing justice for Jewish and Zionist students at SFSU. We commend the student plaintiffs who showed the courage to stand up and advocate for their civil rights." 
    "We are incredibly happy with this result," said Ross M. Kramer of Winston & Strawn LLP. "Our clients' goal was to bring about meaningful, lasting change at San Francisco State University and throughout the California State University system, and to make sure that the rights of all Jewish students are safeguarded now and into the future. That's what this settlement achieves."

    (h/t MtTB) 
    • Thursday, March 21, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon


    Recently, a fascinating study was published  in the British Journal of Psychology on what exposure to conspiracy theories does to people.

    The experiments, done in the UK, were divided into three parts. In the first, it was shown that exposure to conspiracy theories involving Muslim immigrants increased prejudice towards Muslim immigrants, which is not too surprising.

    The second part exposed people to anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. It went a little beyond the first to determine that after exposed to anti-Jewish conspiracy theories (Jews were responsible for 9/11) the subjects indicated that they are less likely to vote for any Jewish candidate, meaning that it not only affected their perceptions but also their actions.

    The third part is the most interesting. After the subjects were exposed to anti-Jewish conspiracy theories, their attitudes towards other unrelated groups became more prejudiced. In other words, what starts with Jews doesn't end with Jews.

    In Study 3, we provide the first evidence that exposure to conspiracy theories not only increases prejudice towards the outgroup implicated in the alleged conspiracy but also towards other, uninvolved outgroups. Specifically, our results point to an indirect effect, such that exposure to conspiracy theories relating to Jewish people increases prejudice towards secondary outgroups via increases in prejudice towards Jewish people. This spreading of prejudiced attitudes was apparent across a range of different outgroups including Americans, Arabs, the elderly, poor people, and people on benefits. Previous findings suggest that transfer effects emerge most strongly for groups that are perceived to be similar to the primary outgroup, and least strongly to dissimilar groups (Harwood et al., 2011). Interestingly, if we adopt a stereotype content model perspective (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) we can see that, generally, indirect effects were strongest for groups that, along with Jewish people, are classified as high in competence (e.g., Asians, Irish, Americans, Australians) as opposed to low competence groups (e.g., the elderly, poor people, people on benefits). Ultimately, however, findings suggest the consequences of exposure to conspiracy theories for intergroup relations may be much broader than originally conceived, and capable of reducing more widespread intergroup tolerance.
    If I may take these conclusions a bit further, it would indicate that conspiracy theories about Zionists or Israelis cannot but increase antisemitism, because Jews are the closest outgroup to Zionists. Indeed, AMCHA has found a correlation between BDS on campus and antisemitic activities on campus, and while that study did not center on conspiracy theories, it did indicate that the "outgroups" of Zionists and Jews are considered closely related by people and therefore the effects of hearing lies about one will affect attitudes towards the other.

    The relevance, of course, is that the idea that - for example - AIPAC controls Congress, which is a conspiracy theory, will inevitably increase prejudice against not only Zionists but towards Jews. This is instinctively felt by most Jews which is the reason for the outrage over Ilhan Omar's comments, but worse than that is the sober-sounding articles that followed the news story where the New York Times and other news outlets "confirmed" the conspiracy theory of a shadowy group of people controlling and manipulating the US government, ignoring the many other interest groups that are far more effective at lobbying than AIPAC.

    The long term effects of both that conspiracy theory as well as Omar's other charge that Zionists have dual loyalty will inevitably mainstream and increase antisemitism across the board in the US.

    Beyond that, this study shows that those who become prejudiced against one group as a result of exposure to conspiracy theories generally become prejudiced towards other groups as well. No matter what political party or philosophy you belong to, exposure to hate affects one's attitudes across the board.

    (h/t MtTB)



    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.
    • Thursday, March 21, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon



    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.

    Wednesday, March 20, 2019

    From Ian:

    The Strange Alliance between Progressives and Islamists
    While Islamists’ positions on homosexuality, the role of women, and religion would seem to place them on the American right, in fact politically involved American Muslims sympathetic to Islamism have tended to align themselves with the hard left. Sam Westrop explains:

    Prominent radical Muslim voices now argue for “intersectional feminism.” Groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)—just ten years ago named by federal prosecutors as part of an enormous terror-finance network—rally for Black Lives Matter and campaign for “social justice,” prison reform, and a minimum-wage hike. Leading Salafist clerics protest President Trump’s immigration policies at the border. And the prominent activist Linda Sarsour dreams of “a world free of anti-black racism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, ageism, sexism, and misogyny.” . . .

    [A] rising group of activists from Islamist circles genuinely seem to believe in a progressive-Islamist alliance. Branches of CAIR are increasingly staffed with young, hijab-wearing graduates of Muslim Student Associations, who appear to have reconciled working for an extremist-linked organization with publishing transgender-rights petitions on their social-media accounts. . . .

    Other Islamists who have embraced and adopted progressive rhetoric are clearly being duplicitous, however. The Texas-based cleric Omar Suleiman, for instance, has been vocal in protesting the Trump administration’s immigration policies. . . . And yet, speaking before an Islamist audience, Suleiman has warned Muslim girls that if they are “promiscuous,” they may face death at the hands of a family member. [Still] other Muslim thinkers have begun to regret their forays into progressive politics. . . .
    British Invasion
    The milieu Corbyn emerges from is embodied in the Stop the War Coalition, which he headed from 2011 until he became Labour leader. While the SWC actually is a merger of what the shah of Iran used to call “the Black and the Red,” Islamists and Communists, the support the SWC and its fellow travelers extend to Islamism has less to do with Islamism per se, and much more to do with the doctrines of new Left anti-Americanism.

    The opposition to labeling Hezbollah a terrorist group is, in the SWC mind, equivalent to opposing such a label for the African National Congress in its struggle against apartheid South Africa. The “anti-Zionism” promoted by the Soviet Union, which portrayed Israel as racist by nature and exercising tentacular control over American foreign policy, was imbibed at the source by most of the leaders of the SWC, and handed down to the newer cadres as an explanation for the Iraq War that galvanized many of them into politics.

    Corbyn’s voters are not uniformly, or even primarily, extremists and terrorist sympathizers. But the longer this vanguard remains in place at the top of the party, the wider its ideas will filter down. For the majority, who grew up under the post-Cold War liberal consensus, there is simply no memory or experience of socialism’s failure. Thus the common radical ideological thread that connects Labour and Democratic leadership to their followers and to each other.

    The rise of Omar, Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez, and others with radical associations and support for socialism was facilitated by well-organized, young, ground-level activists, who circumvent the traditional party structures. In the American case, social media has played the key role, allowing these junior figures to have an influence far beyond their positions and enabling, too, very much in the manner of Corbyn, something like a personality cult to develop, raising the cost for anyone who ventures a criticism.

    Beyond this, there are signs that the pillars of Corbynism, such as unworkable economics, anti-Americanism as the guiding principle of foreign policy, and anti-Semitism, are taking root. Let’s take each in turn.

    JCPA: A (Euro)vision for the Future
    • Israel’s cultural image is in dire need of improvement. The Best Countries Index shows that Israel scored a 1.4 out of 10 in terms of cultural influence in 2019.1
    • The Eurovision Song Contest (ESC), which is scheduled to take place in Tel Aviv in May 2019, allows Israel to enhance its cultural image through civil society initiatives centered around the arts.
    • The ESC is set to attract approximately 20,000 international tourists to the city. Most of these tourists will belong to the “millennial” generation. This generation does not view Israel as positively as other generations do. As such, Israel has a unique opportunity to directly engage with the millennials who will be attending the contest, and who are seen by many as trendsetters and influencers.
    • A successful image-building campaign can drastically increase the international public’s perception of Israel, as occurred with Azerbaijan when it hosted the ESC in 2012.
    • Some will accuse Israel of “pinkwashing” and promoting propaganda. They will claim Israel is exploiting the ESC to divert attention away from its alleged human rights violations. These accusations are totally false. Rarely has a country been accused of promoting propaganda simply because it exhibits its widely acknowledged expertise in a certain field. Israel should be held to the same standard as every other country.
    • Israel must emphasize that the ESC is an event meant to celebrate the diverse cultures of Europe. The ESC should avoid attempts by others to politicize it for their selfish gain.

    On March 14, Islamic Jihad fired rockets at Tel Aviv.

    The Islamic Jihad charter, it is important to note, calls for the ethnic cleansing of Jews in Israel, which it refers to as "Jihad against the Jewish existence in Palestine."
    This stated objective says nothing about Israel or Zionism. It speaks only of killing the Jews who insist on living in territory they want Judenrein. Territory that according to a reasonable reading of international standards is Jewish indigenous territory.
    The sole motivation for the attack on Tel Aviv, in other words, is pure antisemitism.
    On March 15, a white supremacist killed dozens of Muslims at prayer in two mosques in Christ Church, New Zealand. The Jews of Pittsburgh seemed to rise from their somnolence, from their indifference to their brethren in Tel Aviv, rushing to support the people they saw as their Muslim counterparts, victims of an atrocious xenophobic attack on people of a certain faith. The Jews shared memes on Facebook and set to raising funds.



    They probably didn’t even know about Tel Aviv. Or about all the nights my grandchildren have spent in a sealed room, waiting for the missiles to stop. They probably don’t know about the balloons that tempt my grandchildren with their bright colors, attached as they are to incendiary devices with the intent of maiming or better yet, murdering the smallest, most innocent Jews in Israel, who “occupy” only a fragment of land, and only because they live where their parents live.
    Two incidents, only one day apart. One incident a crime against Muslims, the other a crime against Jews.
    An outpouring of support for the one, silence in response to the other.


    In part, the Jews of America, of Pittsburgh, are not to blame. The media doesn’t care about the Jews of Israel except to demonize them. So the attacks on Tel Aviv, if they were covered at all, were not covered in the same sort of emotional language as the attacks on the Muslims in Christ Church.
    Then too, we could say that the attacks on Tel Aviv didn’t actually kill anyone. But there is damage, nonetheless. There always is. And it is collective, and cumulative. And we surely could use the support of the Jews of Pittsburgh, every bit as much as the Muslims of New Zealand.
    The thing is, the Tel Aviv attacks were a big deal here in Israel. It is rare for the city to be under attack. Also, Tel Aviv is the big city. It has a liberal zeitgeist. Tel Avivians see themselves as an island of normalcy. They see themselves as living on uncontested land. They aren’t settlers occupying someone else’s land, so they don’t expect, or as they might put it, deserve to be targeted.
    My son and his wife and children, on the other hand, live under fire in the town of Netivot, which is located in the “peripheria” as Southern Israel is known to Israelis. The people of the periphery are poorer. They receive fewer services. They are, in some respects, perceived as second class citizens even to their own people: the rest of the people of Israel.
    The periphery has seen many more attacks than Tel Aviv. But when Tel Aviv is hit, it makes the headlines.
    My daughter in-law wrote a poignant and sympathetic post in the aftermath the attacks on Tel Aviv. She wrote her post from the perspective of someone who lives in the periphery.


    A translation:

    Tonight's incidents made me understand that my friends from outside our area aren't always able to understand our lives. Therefore, with much support and a hug (whom other than us, knows how stressful an alarm in the middle of the flow in your life?), here are a few anecdotes from my life in the Gaza Envelope.

    Life here... It's a bit more than just alarms. 

    It’s hearing explosions all night, trying to figure out their source. At a certain point you can tell which ones are from Israel, and which are from Hamas. If you're a real expert you can differentiate between tank and fighter jet.

    It's going to sleep and not knowing what the coming day will bring.

    It's planning a house in which you leave the shelter unfurnished, so that the whole family can cram in.

    It's canceling work days because the Home Front Command decided so, and nobody has to compensate you.

    It's business owners who can't get businesses up and running, as even when times are quiet, one missile comes and destroys the work of many months.

    It's students who won't be going to school tomorrow, because the alarm in Tel Aviv made them anxious or afraid.

    It's a poor little girl, a student who was injured by a Qassam rocket that fell on her house without any advance warning alarm, and you want to support or demand and can never find the balance.

    It's knowing at all times where there's a shelter, including at the market, the playground, and in a car on the road. It's even choosing to drive close to shelters rather than taking a faster route.

    This is what I pray with all my heart will stop, and I hope it doesn't spread towards the center of Israel and further. I wish for quiet for everyone

    These attacks on ordinary people, whether in Netivot or Tel Aviv, Pittsburgh or Christ Church, stem from hatred. They come from xenophobia, from an inability to accept the other. This hatred has an effect far beyond the bloodshed. These insistent expressions of hatred makes life painful and difficult.
    Yes. It is the choice of Tel Avivians to live in Tel Aviv, the choice of the people of Netivot to live in Netivot, just as it is the choice of Pittsburgh Jews to be in Pittsburgh and Christ Church Muslims to be in Christ Church. In a society free of hate, people can coexist, and share spaces. Jews and Muslims, in a society free of hate, can live side by side, no matter who sits at the helm.
    But hatred makes living side by side impossible.
    This is our situation in Israel. We are the hated ones. We are hated by the PA, by Hamas, by Islamic Jihad, and those under their sway. The world supports this hate--in Europe, at the UN, in the media-- and tells us we have no right to exist.
    The world doesn’t distinguish between Netivot and Tel Aviv. It hates us just the same. We are hated by people from within and from without and they attack us on a daily basis whether with rockets or on websites. No part of the country is immune from the terror and the criticism, though some, for instance in Tel Aviv, live under the illusion that they are different, until the rockets hit.
    But here’s the thing, as a country under constant attack by murderous antisemites, we deserve, from the wider Jewish community, greater knowledge of our situation and support, too.
    We deserve your interest in our plight. At least as much interest as you extend to the plight of the Muslims in New Zealand.
    We deserve a more nuanced and intensive look at what is happening to us. We deserve an effort to educate yourselves beyond what the media is willing to show you. And more sympathy than the media is willing to show us.
    We deserve a modicum of recognition that the constant rockets, missiles, car rammings, petrol bombs, kidnappings, and stonings are born of antisemitism. Hatred is hatred, no matter where or how it rears its ugly head, and no matter how it is covered in the media. And we expect you to know that and to reach out and be a comfort to us in our travails.
    Just as you comforted New Zealand.

    h/t Yitzchak Epstein for translation help.

    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.
    Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory


    Check out their Facebook page.






    Holodomor memorial, Kiev (Pensées de Pascal via Wikimedia Commons)
    Holodomor memorial, Kiev (Pensées de Pascal via Wikimedia Commons)
    Washington, DC, March 20 - Millions of famine-related deaths in the largely-Christian Ukraine and Moldavia Republics of the Soviet Union that many scholars understand as an engineered policy by Stalin to destroy the Ukrainian nationalist movement has prompted Congressional Democrats to propose a sweeping condemnation of anti-Muslim bigotry.

    Collectivization of agriculture and a poor harvest in 1932-33 led to the death by starvation of anywhere from 3-12 million Ukrainians and Moldavians, the outcome of what numerous historians and critics of the Soviet Union have described as a genocide, targeting as it did a specific ethnic group. While other regions of the Soviet Union suffered hunger during that time amid poor harvests and incompetent management of resources, Moscow's treatment of Ukraine involved disproportionate harshness as Stalin sought to suppress independence movements from his regime. Senior Democratic Party in the Senate and House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senators Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders, responded to the horror with a resolution that denounces any manifestation of prejudice against Muslims.

    "The Holdomor demonstrates the dangers of Islamophobia," declared Schumer (D-NY), standing next to Pelosi and Sanders at a press conference. "Other Congresses may have been lax about the proper reaction to such developments, but that must not serve as a pretext for similar inaction in the face of a genocide of Ukrainians of all stripes. Islamophobia has no place in our world."

    The involvement of Senator Sanders (D-VT), a declared socialist, carries significance, observers note, in that the senator has seldom, if ever, chosen to criticize the Socialist paradise of the Soviet Union that he seeks to emulate. "Obviously in the hierarchy of groups with whom to show solidarity, Muslims rank higher than Stalin," remarked Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN), "as it should be, but I understand for Bernie it was a close-run thing. My only objection to the resolution in its current form is that it does not call out Israeli abuses against Palestinians." The Holodomor took place between two major Arab revolts against British administration in Palestine, both of which saw large-scale rioting and the targeting of Jews for violence and displacement from places they had lived for centuries, such as Hebron.

    Ukrainian nationalists were unavailable for comment, as they were occupied with trying to trade trinkets, religious icons, sexual favors, and any merchandise they could get their hands on for food to give to their starving children at Kiev's main train station where foreigners disembark.



    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:

    CAMERA Op-Ed: The Palestinian Authority has chosen terrorism over US foreign aid
    In March 2018, the U.S. Congress passed the Taylor Force Act, which proposed to halt American aid to the P.A. until it ceased sending money to terrorists and their families via the so-called Palestinian Authority’s Martyrs Fund. P.A. President Abbas responded in a July 2018 speech, swearing: “Even if we have only a penny left, we will give it to the martyrs, the prisoners and their families.” He added: “We view the prisoners and the martyrs as planets and stars in the skies of the Palestinian struggle, and they have priority in everything.”

    But those “stars” make for a pretty dim future. While journalists and analysts are right to highlight how the loss of aid can hinder social welfare projects, they should be contemplating what the Authority’s decision reveals.

    The P.A. refusal to quit paying terrorists for killing people is an outright violation of the 1990s Oslo peace process that created the P.A. in the first place. In exchange for committing the PLO to recognizing “the right of Israel to exist in peace and security” and renouncing “the use of terrorism and other acts of violence,” Palestinian leadership was allowed to return from Tunisia and given a base for limited self-rule in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Importantly, the P.A. also became a significant beneficiary of international aid — much of it from the United States, which sought to make the Authority a “peace partner” for Israel.

    But nearly a quarter century after the P.A.’s May 1994 creation, it’s apparent that Palestinian leadership has chosen a different path. The P.A. stands to lose much by choosing terror over U.S. aid. And both the Palestinian and Israeli people stand to lose even more.
    Muslim stands up for Israel at UN Human Rights Council
    Kasim Hafeez, a British Muslim and former Islamist who is now a proud Zionist who stands with Israel, spoke out at the United Nations Human Rights Council against their condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza.


    “As this body recently displayed by brazenly lying about Israel’s actions in Gaza, hatred towards the Jewish state persists,” Hafeez said. “This council has repeatedly demonized Israel while ignoring Palestinian terror attacks and the real victims of human rights abuses across the globe.”

    Referring to his own background, Hafeez mentioned that hatred was so ingrained in his identity “that in my early 20s I decided that terrorism, murdering civilians who did not see the world as I did in order to advance my agenda, was my calling.”

    A trip to Israel gave Hafeez a new perspective and showed him “that the media reports and international condemnations of the Jewish state were lies. Israel is a free and democratic state.”

    Last week, Hafeez took part in the #DigiTell, a gathering of 100 pro-Israel bloggers and social network managers from all over the world.

    Hafeez grew up being exposed to radical anti-Western, antisemitic and anti-Israel ideas on what he describes as a daily basis. During his teenage years, Hafeez embraced a radical Islamist ideology and became very active in the anti-Israel movement.

    But in the early 2000s, he came across Alan Dershowitz’s book, The Case for Israel.

    Melanie Phillips: The New Zealand mosque attacks
    Following the appalling New Zealand mosque massacres, I published here a blog post expressing my horror and unequivocal condemnation. Immediately I was plunged into a surreal storm of grotesque abuse, being held responsible for the atrocity (yes, really!) and blamed for hypocrisy. Why? Because over the years I have called out Islamist extremism for what it is, pointed out that Islamophobia is a term invented solely to silence criticism of the Islamic world and warned that the west was sleepwalking into Islamisation.

    I have also consistently drawn attention to the fact that most victims of radical Islam are Muslim, that many Muslims are not extreme and that we should do everything possible to protect, support and promote courageous Muslim reformers. No matter. It’s apparently not permissible to oppose both fanatical Islamist hatred and fanatical anti-Islamist hatred. So I became the object of a Twitter frenzy and, along with others, attacked and smeared in newspapers and even in parliament.

    I shall be writing about all this elsewhere in due course. For now, though, please join me below as I discuss with Avi Abelow of Israel Unwired the implications of both the mosque atrocity and the reaction.


    • Wednesday, March 20, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon
    The Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, known as SciencesPo, banned a BDS/Israel Apartheid Week event on its campus this week, driving the haters wild.

    Unfortunately I cannot find any official announcement from the university, but the haters found a non-university venue for their lies about colonialism or whatever.

    Apparently the university realized that Israel Apartheid Week violates the IHRA definition of antisemitism- because no other nation ever gets treated the way Israel does on campus.






    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.
    • Wednesday, March 20, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon
    Continuing on my never-ending series of posters for "Israel Apartheid Week..."



    (h/t Ibn Boutros)



    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.
    • Wednesday, March 20, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon
    Al-Majd, a Jordanian Nasserist newspaper, has placed an above-the-masthead headline about the heroism of the murderer of two Jews last Sunday.

     Par for the course.


    (h/t Tomer)



    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.
    • Wednesday, March 20, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon
    Wayne Messum was just elected to his second term as mayor of Miramar, Florida, and he immediately formed an exploratory committee to become a presidential candidate.

    And he then went on a trip to "Palestine" and Israel.

    True to progressive form, he visited the Western Wall - and then, he met with Saeb Erekat, Hanan Ashrawi and paid tribute to Yasir Arafat, the leading terrorist of the 20th century, responsible not only for the deaths of countless Israelis but Americans, too.




    It seems unlikely that he demanded justice for the Americans killed by Fatah and the PLO that Arafat headed, including some from his home state of Florida.

    His tweets make it obvious what side he is on, by saying that America must be an "honest broker" - a dog whistle for being pro-Palestinian -  to force Israel into doing what Palestinians demand.


    One of his endorsements for mayor came from a Muslim PAC, EMGAGE.







    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.
    In a headline-grabbing op-ed in the Washington Post, Democratic Representative for Minnesota, Ilhan Omar said of Israel, “We must acknowledge that this is also the historical homeland of Palestinians.” 

    It seems strange that anyone would let a woman accused of multiple instances of expressions of antisemitism tell the world what it must think. It seems even stranger that someone associated with the liberal left would tell the world what it must think. (How illiberal is the thought that all people “must” think a certain way, take a specific position, because someone in a position of leadership says so?)

    But finally, it seems strange that the Jews would accept as credible, the idea that the Palestinian Arabs share the Land of Israel as their “historic” homeland. Palestinians, after all, are a people who didn’t exist until thousands of years after the Jewish people were an established, sovereign entity in the Holy Land. The Jews were in Israel before Mohammed was a glimmer in his mama’s eye.

    Why would the Jewish people, of all people, accept this revisionist view of history from anyone at all, let alone from an expressed antisemite?



    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.
    • Wednesday, March 20, 2019
    • Elder of Ziyon
    The man who killed two Israelis om Sunday was killed by the IDF on Tuesday during a firefight.

    Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Facebook page mourned him as a martyr and said "Glory and immortality to the martyrs." (screenshot autotranslated)


    As of this writing, there are 125 comments, virtually all asking Allah to have mercy on the soul of this despicable murderer.




    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.

    Tuesday, March 19, 2019

    From Ian:

    David Collier: An industry of antisemitism denial. The American anti-Zionists of Palestine Live
    I have just spent several dark weeks back inside Palestine Live. Today I publish a new report that focuses on the activity of American anti-Zionists, many of them Jewish (download link below). It is impossible to do a 262-page report justice in a small blog. The catalyst was the unfolding events in the United States. Jewish life for American Jews is different to the experience of Jews in the UK. Yet there are also similarities. I read an interesting article by Jonathan S Tobin, editor in chief of JNS.org, that was titled ‘How progressives are destroying the Jewish ‘big tent‘.

    The subject matter will be familiar with Jewish people in the UK – Tobin discusses fringe organisations and where you draw the line when deciding which Jewish groups can be allowed in the ‘big tent’. Tobin had written the article because the week before, the Boston Jewish Community Relations Council voted to start a process to by which one of their constituent organizations might be booted out – why? Because they had indicated support for the Boycott movement, BDS.

    I see the daily news in the US and it reminds me of the UK a few years ago. There are signs they are on a similar divisive path. Antisemitism rises and Jewish anti-Zionists leap into action, claiming it is about ‘criticism of Israel’. Creating an industry of antisemitism denial that legitmises antisemites. They write articles, they sign petitions, they appear on TV. In the States they have vocal anti-Zionist Jewish activists running organisations such as JVP and Codepink. Did you see the way they ran to protect Ilhan Omar? They create an environment within which antisemitism is given protection. Just like the anti-Zionists of Jewish Voice for Labour did in the UK. Only in the US, both anti-Zionist Jews and antisemites are more numerous.

    News outlets such as Mondoweiss push their propaganda at an alarming rate. This air of legitimacy is attracting people. Yet I know the truth.
    The Criminalization of Zionism
    While anti-Zionist activists and leaders here in the USA continue to drum up anti-Semitic controversies, they are missing efforts taking place through diplomatic and grassroots channels to strengthen relations between Arabs and Jews in the Middle East. It’s been widely reported, that this past winter three delegations from Iraq visited Israel, and there are a growing number of progressive groups in the Arab world eager to re-establish relationships with diverse Jewish communities around the world – including those in Israel. This is not to mention a range of Jewish groups in the US, including JIMENA, who work closely with Arab partners both here and in the Middle East. Not all of the organizations involved in normalization efforts are led by groups on the far left. We come from a diversity of backgrounds and outlooks and it’s a total fallacy to believe that only those groups and leaders labeled as “progressive” are able to lead and engage in productive normalization efforts.

    Anti-Zionist leaders here in the USA could care less about diverse normalization efforts, because they are solely focused on mainstreaming the vilification of Israel and its supporters. Like Arab governments who criminalized Zionism as a means of persecuting Jews – anti-Zionist leaders here in the USA have proven time and again to center their activism more on the de-legitimization of Israel and the isolation of Jewish people, than the advancement of Palestinians. If “progressive” activists and politicians truly cared about finding equitable solutions for Palestinians, they would cross ideological barriers and work with diverse coalitions and groups on developing new strategies and solutions rather than continuing to promote failed ones like BDS.

    In order to be truly in integrity with progressive values, it’s important for American Jews and progressive politicians like Ihan Omar to pay close attention to both the threats of white supremacy and the current manifestation of anti-Semitism that come from the Middle East. By ignoring the very oppressive and violent anti-Zionism in Arab countries and Iran, we continue to sanction anti-Semitism in the Arab world and we further marginalize the one million Jews who fled or were ethnically cleansed from Arab countries and Iran. How helpful it would be if American Jewish leadership from all ideological orientations could unify at this critical time to build consensus and strategies of how to address the current manifestations of anti-Semitism we see growing every day – from both the right and the left.

    Remembering The Jew Who Died For Ilhan Omar.
    Rep. Ilhan Omar, a freshman Democrat from Minnesota, has become widely known for her attacks on supporters of Israel. Ms. Omar is a naturalized citizen whose Somali refugee family settled in the U.S. when she was a teenager. Tens of thousands of Somali refugees relocated to the U.S.—some 25,000 in the Minneapolis area—to escape the starvation, famine and civil war that turned Somalia into a lawless, failed state in the early 1990s.

    Another name is worth recognition and remembrance, especially among Somali refugees: Lawrence Freedman. In 1992, the year after Ms. Omar’s family left Somalia, the U.S. sent troops there as part of a joint United Nations humanitarian effort. The U.S. intervention, Operation Restore Hope, began with the landing of U.S. troops near Mogadishu on Dec. 9.

    Freedman was a U.S. Army veteran who earned two Bronze Stars in Vietnam. He was an original member of the Green Berets, reached the rank of sergeant major, and eventually became an instructor. He retired from the Army in 1990 and joined the Central Intelligence Agency. In 1992 the U.S. sent Freedman as part of an advance team to prepare the way for American troops in Somalia. On Dec. 23, two weeks after the troops had arrived, Freedman became the first American killed as part of the relief effort in Somalia.

    Any American casualty is noteworthy, but Freedman’s sacrifice stands out because he was Jewish.

    Thousands of Somali refugees who now live in Ms. Omar’s district had their freedom and security paid for with the blood of American soldiers—22 of them, including Freedman. (h/t MtTB)

    Continuing my re-captioning of single-panel cartoons....




    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.


    Imagine if not 26, but just one US state passed legislation condemning Israel using language similar to the slurs the boycotters routinely pack in their BDS resolutions.  Actually, let’s paint an even less-unlikely scenario.  Imagine if just one small town in rural Vermont passed such a measure.  Do you think we’d be having a debate over what such a vote might mean for free-speech?

    No!  For if the Israel-haters ever got their way by getting any government anywhere to parrot their views, they would be bazooka-ing the planet with bellows of triumph, insisting that such a vote was proof positive that Israel is as horrid as they claim and that they were a hair’s breadth away from total victory.

    Yet here we are several years into a bandwagon in which one state after another has passed legislation condemning BDS as a form of bigotry and telling those who practice it that they can kiss state contracts goodbye, with the federal government supporting the effort through legislation saying such state action is perfectly legal. 

    Unlike BDS votes that tend to take place in the dead of night, behind closed doors, state anti-BDS measures were passed by overwhelming bi-partisan majorities in the full light of day.  But, instead of talking about what it means when vast democratic majorities pass BDS votes against the BDSers, we are instead arguing over whether the very kinds of votes the boycotters have been lobbying people to pass for years represent assaults on free speech.

    The reason for this is that the boycotters are much much better at framing an issue than we are.  If we had more of their talent, we would incessantly communicate that every state anti BDS vote is proof positive that the majority of the nation agrees that BDS=bigotry, and demand our opponents answer our accusations (while ignoring theirs), rather than sitting on our lead and then acting surprised when enemies end up dictating how the story plays out in the media.

    Keep in mind that “America agrees that BDS = bigotry” and “anti-BDS legislation is a threat to free speech” are both tag lines that can agreed upon or be contested.  So why are ignoring one advantageous to us, while engaging with the enemy on the turf they want to fight on?  No self-respecting BDSer would ever tolerate being put on the defensive, and it’s not something we should tolerate either (especially from the moral midgets who demand we debate them solely on their terms). 

    Here is one way we can act like our enemies in order to progress our cause without selling our souls.  For the person who frames the debate tends to win it (or at least not lose it), which means picking a storyline beneficial to our cause, focusing on that storyline and nothing else, and insisting our opponents respond to us vs. vice-versa is a winning tactic, one we seem too insecure to use.
    There are other storylines we could also be advancing, beyond the one I’ve used to illustrate my point regarding the failure of Israel and her supporters to frame issues and news to our advantage.  Startup nation, for example, is a nice, elevating topic – one many friends of Israel like to embrace since it (alongside multiculturalism, tolerance for women and gays, and decent cuisine) seems uncontroversial.

    But how about pushing these positive narratives in a direction that might generate a little controversy? Israel’s economic success story is wonderful news, but bigger news is how a people at death’s door after World War II managed to not just bring themselves back to life, but bring back into existence their ancestral homeland, along with a reborn language, one ready to provide a home for Jews (including millions of refugees) from around the planet.

    If the Holocaust was the nadir of human history, the emergence of the state of Israel might represent history’s pinnacle achievement of justice.  How’s that for a truth that will set some people’s teeth on edge?

    Claims about the staggering success of our people need not be wrapped up in hubris or acclimations of “chosen-ness.” Rather, they can be presented with humility and generosity, pointing out – for example - that if a nearly murdered people could achieve such stunning success, anyone can do it.  All that is required is the readiness to create a society dedicated to the needs of its members, rather than wandering off into utopia (where no one cares for anyone since we’re all abstractions) or creating a people or nation that prioritizes wallowing in victimhood and revenge fantasies over improving the lives of actual human beings. 

    Positive messaging is often condemned by some Israel supporters who see it as an attempt to ward off assaults on the character of the Jewish state and Jewish people with dance performances and hummus parties.  These critics have a point, but one that highlights the ineffectiveness of focusing on surface manifestations of the miracle that is the Jewish state, rather than the miracle itself.


    If we instead embraced Zionism, rather than let others define it as a dirty word, as a model for every nation in the world that actually wants to see its people living in peace, happiness and prosperity, we would no doubt piss off people who already hate us.  But we might just inspire those who have not chosen a side to pick the “strong horse” that also happens to be the true embodiment of justice and morality.



    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:

    Lawfare Blog: Framing Israel: The UN Commission of Inquiry on the Spring 2018 Gaza Border Confrontations
    Unfortunately, loss of life became unavoidable even under these restrictive rules of engagement. However, the assumption that the vast majority of casualties resulted from unjustified and unlawful uses of force should be met with a great deal of skepticism. In this regard, it is certainly relevant that, contrary to COI findings, Israeli estimates indicate that at least 102 of those killed during operations were members of Hamas or other militant groups in Gaza. Indeed, even Hamas and other groups have admitted that at least 50 fatalities were their operatives. Furthermore, the IDF concluded most killings were unintentional, resulting from shots at legs ricocheting off the ground, targets bending over or shots missing their target among massed crowds. While some skepticism as to the accuracy of these accounts may be justified, such skepticism is equally applicable to the COI finding that only “2 to 3” deaths in this dangerous confrontation resulted from justified uses of force by the IDF.

    This can only be the case under the report’s assertion that the IDF was obligated to treat all participants as civilians immune from attack under the armed-conflict paradigm, even including belligerent members of Hamas and other organized armed groups assessed as taking direct part in hostilities. There is simply no basis for such an assertion. In the context of an ongoing armed conflict, members of the enemy belligerent forces are subject to lethal attack once identified as such unless they have surrendered or been incapacitated by wounds or sickness. The fact that both the IDF and Hamas have asserted that a substantial number of individuals subjected to lethal force in fact fell within this category requires assessment not of use of force directed at civilians, but whether the enemy belligerent determination was reasonable under the circumstances. That determination then prompts an additional question: whether death or injury to some of the civilians was a legally permissible collateral consequence of an otherwise lawful use of force. This would require consideration of the precautions implemented by IDF forces and their proportionality assessments. Unfortunately, the COI bypassed these complicated questions by simply adopting an arbitrary conclusion that the IDF should have treated even belligerent operatives as civilians.

    The COI’s biased and arbitrary framing is especially regrettable because an objective external inquiry into these complex security challenges could yield more effective policies, tactics and training to enhance security and mitigate risks to civilians. Instead of seizing this opportunity, the COI has produced a report that will only affirm ill-founded assumptions about the security operations conducted by the IDF last spring, and possibly spur fresh resort to dangerous confrontations by illicit actors such as Hamas.

    Cruz, Military Experts Slam U.N. Report Suggesting Israel Committed War Crimes Responding to Gaza Border Riots
    Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and experts in military affairs on Monday castigated a new United Nations report that suggests Israel committed war crimes while responding to violent Palestinian demonstrations at the Gaza Strip border last year.

    The report, produced by the U.N. Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Protests in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, alleges that Israel killed 189 Palestinians during the riots.

    "The Israeli security forces committed violations of international human rights and humanitarian law," said Commissioner Kaari Betty Murungi of Kenya. "Some of those violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, and must be immediately investigated by Israel."

    The Israel-based Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center found that about 80 percent of those killed in the riots were affiliated with Hamas, which controls Gaza, and other terrorist organizations. Israel says that Hamas has used the demonstrations as cover to launch operations to breach Israel's border fence and attack Israelis.

    Cruz said in a conference call that the U.N. report is a "dishonest" characterization of a more complicated situation in the Gaza Strip, citing reports that Hamas will often insert its fighters into crowds of protesters to incite violence and escape immediate detection from the Israeli military.

    "It is a repeated and deliberate strategy of Hamas to use human shields," said Cruz, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "The U.N. report ignores that reality."


    A Moment of Truth for Hamas
    The trouble for Hamas is there actually is grassroots anger in the Gaza Strip, but it is being directed at Hamas, not Israel.

    Since the rockets were fired last Thursday, there have been civilian demonstrations against Hamas—a very rare occurrence—protesting the harsh living conditions which only seem to deteriorate.

    One courageous middle-aged woman railed in a video circulating on social media, complaining that Hamas leaders and their children cruise around in luxury vehicles while her four sons are unemployed. “All of Gaza are unemployed because of Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar. These officials care nothing about the poor people’s necessities. We have the right to live.”

    The Hamas kleptocracy is in plain view, and the diversion of billions in aid and blood money into the terrorist and military infrastructure in the Strip has not gone unnoticed, it seems, by the oppressed populace.

    Throughout the weekend there were ongoing demonstrations in the Gaza Strip, including reports of seven journalists having been arrested and beaten by Hamas as well as videos circulating of brutal beatings of civilians. Early reports regarding the self-immolation of a 28-year-old man may have been misleading, with the video thought to have been several months old.

    It is doubtful that these protests will dislodge Hamas from power or change the way in which the theocratic despots rule. Only a serious and sustained financial rebuke from their main benefactors, Qatar and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, would accomplish that.

    Each for its own reasons is beholden to the principle of the Palestinian “right of return” to ancestral villages and towns in present-day Israel, a euphemism for the destruction of the Jewish state. Continued conflict and misery is the only certainty.



    Purim is a nice story. A feel-good, Jewish-people-saved-from-destruction win-in-the-end kind of story.

    Many Jews attend a Megillah reading. Even more of us focus on our kids, the costumes they will wear and “mishloach manot” given to celebrate the holiday. How many of us take a moment to actually contemplate the story and what it means? Is something that happened approximately in 357 BCE relevant today?

    Most of us think of the holiday as a nice folk-story, a fun holiday for kids. We put most of our effort into costume parties and food. Like many of the holidays, it’s easy to overlook the profound message of Purim.

    The stories of Israel are told for a purpose. Many serve as a reminder of events that occurred during the history of our People. All convey lessons that teach us principles and values that shape the identity of the Jewish tribe and do not diminish in relevancy over time.

    Purim is no different.

    The story tells of a failed attempt to exterminate the Jewish people, more than two thousand years ago – the Jewish people would not have survived to see the Holocaust had this ancient attempted genocide been successful.

    “In every generation, they rise up to exterminate us and every time, God saves us from their hands”



    Roy Klein saved the lives of his soldiers by throwing himself on a grenade, choosing their lives over his

    The Jewish experience of persecution and survival span the ages and bond between generations. Considered in this light, Purim has a much more profound significance than dressing up and making noise at Haman’s name, sending mishloach manot or even considering the philosophical/religious question of where God was during this event.

    Purim has a message very relevant for Jews today: Not to speak is to speak.

    Usually, this is a message we associate with the Holocaust and the famous poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

    “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

    But his message is not new. In fact, it appears centuries before, in the book of Esther when Mordechai tells Esther: “Do not imagine you will escape inside the king’s house, any more than the rest of the Jews. If you persist in saying nothing at this crisis relief and succor will appear from another quarter but you will perish, you and your family.”

    And she did. Although she was terribly afraid. Although, it was dangerous to be a Jew and speak for the Jewish people. She put her people above her own security, what was right above what was convenient.

    Does that sound familiar? Queen Esther was a regular Jewish woman who became Queen due to her beauty and charm. She became beloved by the King and had a convenient, comfortable life.
    She could have remained silent while her people were slaughtered. Her life would not have changed. She could have ensured the protection of her uncle without speaking for the rest of the Jewish people.

    But, instead, she listened to Mordechai and, although terrified, she revealed her Judaism and asked the King to save her people.

    After surviving a brutal terror attack, Kay Wilson became one of the most prominent spokespeople in the world against PA payments to terrorists that encourage them to murder Jews and has become a peacemaker – bringing together Jews and Arabs who desire to make peace


    She understood that not to speak was to speak. She understood that the survival of her people was more important than her own personal safety. Bravery does not mean a lack of fear. Bravery is understanding the consequences and choosing to act despite the fear.

    Queen Esther is celebrated for the choices she made. In hindsight, it is easy to say that she chose right over wrong but, imagine being in the moment – would you choose to put your life in danger for the good of your people? Would you endanger your family for the survival of Am Yisrael?

    In today’s world, few are willing to risk their convenience, not mention their lives and yet we wonder why so few spoke up during the Holocaust.

    For her bravery, we celebrate Queen Esther but are we following in her footsteps? Today we are not witnessing the Holocaust but there are world leaders who advocate for the elimination of the Jewish State. There are individuals who openly declare that the genocide of the Jewish people should have been completed. Antisemitism is again becoming something that is socially acceptable to express in public.

    The question is, when do we speak? And when do we need to listen better to what is really being said around us?


    In 2002, Haim Smadar, a guard at a supermarket (a simple minimum wage job) prevented a female suicide bomber from entering the supermarket telling her: “You are not coming in here. You and I will blow up here.” She did blow herself up, murdering Haim and 17-year-old Rachel Levy. In his heroism, he saved many lives.


    The Holocaust did not begin with concentration camps and gas chambers. It began with the indoctrination of individuals, enabling them to place the blame for their misfortune on the “other”, the Jew. It begins with small things that, taken individually may be disagreeable but are “not so bad”.

    Purim tells us about the power of one person to change the fate of our people. Esther is not described as particularly brilliant or talented. She is just a woman, with a big heart who, with courage and feminine intuition, changed the world.

    Purim tells us about a Jew living in the lap of luxury who chose her people over her own personal convenience.

    Purim provides us the example of the feminine heroism of Esther and the leadership of Mordechai. Both were necessary, one could not have saved the Jews without the other.

    In a world where Antisemitism is again becoming socially acceptable, where Jews are told that they cannot be both feminists and Zionists and many Jews are afraid to speak out about the injustices against our people – what message could be more relevant? When Jews are again forced to choose between silent comfort and standing alone against the danger, what could be more relevant?
    Purim teaches that the value of putting the good of our people ahead of our own personal safety and warns of the danger of silence.

    Purim teaches us the power of the individual – neither Esther nor Mordechai were prophets or people described as having special communication with God. The happy result of their actions was not promised them (unlike in other biblical stories where the protagonist simply needs to follow God’s instructions). They were regular people who knew that if they did not speak up, no one else would.

    Because Mordechai instructed Esther, we are here today.

    Because Esther chose her people over herself and spoke with the King, we are here today.

    Today, the circumstances are different but the choice is the same. Will you speak up?




    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.

    Printfriendly

    EoZTV Podcast

    Podcast URL

    Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
    addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

    search eoz

    comments

    Speaking

    Follow by Email

    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 14 years and 30,000 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

    Categories

    #PayForSlay Abbas liar Academic fraud administrivia al-Qaeda algeria Alice Walker American Jews AmericanZionism Amnesty analysis anti-semitism anti-Zionism antisemitism apartheid Arab antisemitism arab refugees Arafat archaeology Ari Fuld art Ashrawi ASHREI B'tselem bahrain Balfour bbc BDS BDSFail Bedouin Beitunia beoz Bernie Sanders Biden history Birthright book review Brant Rosen breaking the silence Campus antisemitism Cardozo cartoon of the day Chakindas Chanukah Christians circumcision Clark Kent coexistence Community Standards conspiracy theories COVID-19 Cyprus Daled Amos Daphne Anson David Applebaum Davis report DCI-P Divest This double standards Egypt Elder gets results ElderToons Electronic Intifada Embassy EoZ Trump symposium eoz-symposium EoZNews eoztv Erekat Erekat lung transplant EU Euro-Mid Observer European antisemitism Facebook Facebook jail Fake Civilians 2014 Fake Civilians 2019 Farrakhan Fatah featured Features fisking flotilla Forest Rain Forward free gaza freedom of press palestinian style future martyr Gary Spedding gaza Gaza Platform George Galloway George Soros German Jewry Ghassan Daghlas gideon levy gilad shalit gisha Goldstone Report Good news Grapel Guardian guest post gunness Haaretz Hadassah hamas Hamas war crimes Hananya Naftali hasbara Hasby 2014 Hasby 2016 Hasby 2018 hate speech Hebron helen thomas hezbollah history Hizballah Holocaust Holocaust denial honor killing HRW Human Rights Humanitarian crisis humor huor Hypocrisy ICRC IDF IfNotNow Ilan Pappe Ilhan Omar impossible peace incitement indigenous Indonesia international law interview intransigence iran Iraq Islamic Judeophobia Islamism Israel Loves America Israeli culture Israeli high-tech J Street jabalya James Zogby jeremy bowen Jerusalem jewish fiction Jewish Voice for Peace jihad jimmy carter Joe Biden John Kerry jokes jonathan cook Jordan Joseph Massad Juan Cole Judaism Judea-Samaria Judean Rose Judith Butler Kairos Karl Vick Keith Ellison ken roth khalid amayreh Khaybar Know How to Answer Lebanon leftists Linda Sarsour Linkdump lumish mahmoud zahar Mairav Zonszein Malaysia Marc Lamont Hill Marjorie Taylor Greene max blumenthal Mazen Adi McGraw-Hill media bias Methodist Michael Lynk Michael Ross Miftah Missionaries moderate Islam Mohammed Assaf Mondoweiss moonbats Morocco Mudar Zahran music Muslim Brotherhood Naftali Bennett Nakba Nan Greer Nation of Islam Natural gas Nazi Netanyahu News nftp NGO Nick Cannon NIF Noah Phillips norpac NSU Matrix NYT Occupation offbeat olive oil Omar Barghouti Only in Israel Opinion Opinon oxfam PA corruption PalArab lies Palestine Papers pallywood pchr PCUSA Peace Now Peter Beinart Petra MB philosophy poetry Poland poll Poster Preoccupied Prisoners propaganda Proud to be Zionist Puar Purim purimshpiel Putin Qaradawi Qassam calendar Quora Rafah Ray Hanania real liberals RealJerusalemStreets reference Reuters Richard Falk Richard Landes Richard Silverstein Right of return Rivkah Lambert Adler Robert Werdine rogel alpher roger cohen roger waters Rutgers Saeb Erekat Sarah Schulman Saudi Arabia saudi vice self-death self-death palestinians Seth Rogen settlements sex crimes SFSU shechita sheikh tamimi Shelly Yachimovich Shujaiyeh Simchat Torah Simona Sharoni SodaStream South Africa Sovereignty Speech stamps Superman Syria Tarabin Temple Mount Terrorism This is Zionism Thomas Friedman TOI Tomer Ilan Trump Trump Lame Duck Test Tunisia Turkey UAE Accord UCI UK UN UNDP unesco unhrc UNICEF United Arab Emirates Unity unrwa UNRWA hate unrwa reports UNRWA-USA unwra Varda Vic Rosenthal Washington wikileaks work accident X-washing Y. Ben-David Yemen YMikarov zahran Ziesel zionist attack zoo Zionophobia Ziophobia Zvi

    Blog Archive