Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, July 01, 2020

“Annexation”/extending sovereignty scorecard: Everyone loses

It’s July 1, the day that Benjamin Netanyahu has been touting. The day that the Palestinian Arabs and their fans have declared a “Day of Rage.” The day that has been causing great angst in Western Europe. The day that countless articles and op-eds have been declaring the end of Israeli democracy. The day the UN said will witness a massive violation of international law.

And from all appearances, nothing will happen today.

The main reason seems to be that the Trump administration has not agreed to any change in the status quo, and possibly that it wanted Israel to make more concessions to Palestinians in concert with the move.

While I think Israel extending sovereignty on areas that it insists on keeping in any possible peace agreement is a good move that can contribute to peace, this entire affair was handled poorly and amateurly.

Here’s a scorecard:

Bibi is the biggest loser. His unfulfilled promise, especially one with a deadline, is a major blow to his credibility which has already been hit hard with his legal troubles and his insistence that he deserves tax breaks when the economy is in trouble.

Beyond that, Netanyahu didn’t plan for the day that sovereignty was to be extended. Israeli media was filled with stories about how no maps were prepared, no one who needed to know the details from the army to local mayors were kept in the loop. It was simply a fiasco. Major details like whether Palestinians in the newly sovereign territories would be offered citizenship were never clarified, allowing Israel’s haters to define the terms of the argument.

Bibi is normally a master strategist, but this was bungled from the start, and the lack of a contingency plan in case Trump didn’t approve is a huge rookie mistake.

Israel is a major loser. The plan generated lots of animosity towards Israel – and Israel doesn’t yet get any of the benefits. Furthermore, this fiasco has been a major speedbump in Israel’s improving relations with Gulf countries. It has damaged Israel’s relations with much of Europe. No one in the world has defended the plan. And Israelis themselves have not generally supported the plan; it was heavily criticized from the left and the right.

American Jewry and American Zionists have lost. This aborted plan has caused big splits in the community as organizations were forced to take positions they weren’t altogether comfortable with, with insufficient information as to the extent of the plan. Jewish unity towards Israel has already been battered by Obama and by Trump, but now it was done by the prime minister of Israel who never properly explained what extending sovereignty meant and the benefits it would have for everyone.

The Palestinian Authority has lost. Their attempts to inflame anger among their people has failed. No one cares. They cannot even claim victory, because Bibi might end up slowly extending sovereignty over some settlement blocs, and a single square millimeter would be considered a major loss to them.

Israel’s haters have won, but not because their tweets had any effect. They’ve won because Israel has lost credibility and its friendship with many countries has been hurt. They’ve won because they have had months of opportunities to slander Israel without Israel being able to answer because the plan was never solidified.

Possibly worst of all, this fiasco isn’t over. If Netanyahu decides to extend sovereignty over bits and pieces of Judea and Samaria, every single move will generate more anger, more negative media and more denunciations from world leaders who are otherwise sympathetic with Israel. Instead of weathering the world’s opprobrium all at once, it will be spread out over months or longer.

If Bibi abandons the plan altogether, it makes Israel look weak in a Middle East where only strength is respected.

This has been a debacle on every level.

06/30 Links Pt2: The ADL’s Disgrace; Fox Channel Scraps Live Broadcast of Speech by Louis Farrakhan Following Outcry; 2,500-year-old seals may show Jews rebuilding Jerusalem after 1st Temple exile

From Ian:

The ADL’s Disgrace

It’s hard to think of a more prominent anti-Semite in American public life over the last 30 years than the Rev. Al Sharpton. Louis Farrakhan may give him a run for his money, but the leader of the so called Nation of Islam remains a pariah—Barack Obama was photographed with him once, in 2005, and never made that mistake again.

Sharpton is a different story. He has never apologized for leading a pogrom against the Jews of Brooklyn that marked the worst outburst of anti-Semitic violence in modern American history, but despite all that, or perhaps because of it, has laundered himself into an elder statesman and star television host whose endorsement ambitious Democratic politicians must now seek.

Look no further than MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who personally introduced a resolution condemning Sharpton’s "racist and anti-Semitic views" in his previous life as a Republican congressman. In his present life as a Trump-hating MSNBC host who has toyed with a presidential run, Scarborough celebrates Sharpton’s moral clarity about Facebook.

We never thought we’d see Sharpton embraced by Jews, but that’s what’s transpiring now as the Anti-Defamation League strays onto the Reverend’s turf—leading a boycott campaign against one of the most successful Jewish-owned businesses in the world. Its CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, has tapped Sharpton as a partner in a political project to police objectionable speech that both are trying to cast as a modern civil rights issue.

Sharpton has come a long way. So has the ADL.

As Crown Heights burned, the organization had no trouble identifying Sharpton as an enemy of the Jewish people. "Anti-Semitism is all over the place in Crown Heights," the ADL’s then-director, Abraham Foxman, told the New York Times in August 1991. "It is ugly, it is crude, it is classical and it is deadly. And the fact that it is American and it is black should not make it invisible or tolerable."

New Fox Streaming Channel Scraps Scheduled Live Broadcast of Speech by Louis Farrakhan Following Outcry

A new Fox Broadcasting Company streaming channel canceled on Monday a scheduled live feed of an address by antisemitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan after facing a torrent of criticism.

Fox Soul — which is geared toward African Americans — advertised the July 4 speech under the title “The Criterion: The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan Speaks Live,” but soon after removed the ad from Twitter.

Following the widespread outcry, Fox Soul tweeted later on Monday that the Farrakhan speech would not be aired.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center had called for the broadcast to be scrapped, recalling, “Since the 1980s, Louis Farrakhan has denigrated the Jewish people, Judaism, and the Jewish State, members of the LGBT community, the United States of America, and entertainment leaders from Hollywood.”

It called Farrakhan “a demagogue and divider at a time when all Americans need to hear messages of unity and hope.”

“We urge Fox Television Network to cancel the speech by a person who has spent his adult life spitting on everything July 4th stands for,” they concluded.

Sanders signs AOC letter calling for aid cuts if Israel annexes in West Bank

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders joined four House Democrats on Tuesday in calling for the United States to cut or withhold aid from Israel if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu carries out his plan to annex parts of the West Bank or enacts policies to facilitate an eventual annexation, according to a source familiar with the matter.

A new letter to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urges the reductions to the $3.8 billion in annual American assistance to Israel if Jerusalem moves to unilaterally extend its sovereignty to West Bank territory.

The letter was orchestrated by the progressive powerhouse Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and has thus far also been signed by Michigan Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, Washington state Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal and Minnesota Congresseoman Betty McCollum.

Sanders’s signature adds new weight to the missive as Ocasio-Cortez continues to circulate it among liberal lawmakers on Capitol Hill, in an effort to gain more supporters.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, left, testifies before the House Oversight Committee on July 12, 2019 (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

“Should the Israeli government move forward with the planned annexation with this administration’s acquiescence, we will work to ensure non-recognition as well as pursue conditions on the $3.8 billion in U.S. military funding to Israel, including human rights conditions and withholding funds for the off-shore procurement of Israeli weapons equal to or exceeding the amount the Israeli government spends annually to fund settlements, as well as the policies and practices that sustain and enable them,” a draft of the letter says, according to a copy obtained by Jewish Insider.

The current level of US military assistance to the Jewish state was solidified in a 2016 memorandum of understanding between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government — roughly $38 billion over 10 years.

Posters for tomorrow’s Day of Rage (including in the US)

In Gaza, it will be “massive.”

In Madrid, they helpfully point out that they aren’t just against “annexation” but Zionism and Israel altogether.

In Los Angeles, the Jewish community is nervous that the protest will spread into rioting through the Jewish community. Notice it says “Zionist consulate.”

In Chicago, one of the sponsors is the Palestinian American Council, whose webpages do not have that logo.

Looking at that logo closer, it shows Israel not existing and “Palestine” is the flagpole for an American flag. The implication is that the destruction of Israel is a patriotic act.

Because we know how pro-America Palestinians are.

I somehow don’t think that the Palestinian American Council was upset when Abbas didn’t accept a phone call from the US vice president – or when Palestinians burn American flags.

More DAYS of RAGE coming!

I wrote last night that Wednesday is supposed to be a “Day of Rage” for Palestinians as a response to Israel extending its laws over parts of Judea and Samaria.

Now the Islamic Movement in Jordan is calling for another “Day of Rage” on Friday for Muslims worldwide.

In Gaza yesterday, there was a demonstration against the so-called “annexation” sponsored by Fatah. The turnout was a bit underwhelming.

The Arab street – and even the Palestinian street - really doesn’t give a damn about the issue.

06/30 Links Pt1: Willful Blindness and the Mistake of Underestimation: The Oslo Gamble; Nikki Haley: IMF is angling to undermine US sanctions against Iran

From Ian:

Willful Blindness and the Mistake of Underestimation: The Oslo Gamble

During the last half-century, several reputable scholars and defense professionals have devoted careful attention to the world view and aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs. Working independently, these researchers described the strategic goals of the Palestine Liberation Organization and exposed the widespread denial of their importance.

The PLO program has never been a secret. The destruction of the State of Israel and the pursuit of the "armed struggle" has been its main goal since its founding in 1964. Despite having adopted a facade which has lent them a veneer of respectability, terror and violence have constantly remained a part of their program. Proof of this may be found in the well-publicized program of the PA to subsidize terrorists who have committed violent crimes against civilians. No Jewish (and Israeli) civilians can be innocent and they are considered legitimate targets.

Beyond the failure of the Oslo process to bring peace, there is a broader cultural dimension: how the Israelis view themselves and their place in the world and how official Israel understands its relationship with the Palestinian Arabs.

A settler’s unexpected reason to extend sovereignty

One of the most surprising aspects of the sovereignty debate (or as some prefer, annexing parts of the West Bank) is the opposition shown by many settlers and Israel’s closest friends. While opposition was expected from the left and Israel’s opponents (no, they’re not the same), opposition wasn’t expected from right-wing settlers, centrist scholars, and Israel’s friends in Congress. Settlers fear a Palestinian state that the Trump plan promises, scholars fear the impact of annexation on the war for Israel’s legitimacy, and Israel’s friends in Congress fear, “Unilateral annexation would likely jeopardize Israel’s significant progress on normalization with Arab states at a time when closer cooperation can contribute to countering shared threats, insecurity in Jordan, and that unilateral annexation could create serious problems for Israel with its European friends and other partners around the world.”

When asked why they believe Israel should extend sovereignty, most proponents explain that to build in Judea and Samaria Israelis need permission of the land authority, an extra step of bureaucracy Israelis on the west side of the Green Line don’t suffer. Other proponents say that after 50 years without an Eastern border, it’s time to declare one, and that after years of the two-state solution going nowhere, Israeli and Palestinian leaders unable to even negotiate, it’s time to move in a different direction to end the conflict.

I’m not a representative of the “settler movement,” I’m just one man living in Mitzpe Yericho, with a slightly above-average familiarity with the issues of the conflict and an affinity for truth and justice. I maintain that Israel should extend sovereignty according to the terms of the Trump Plan. Israel should extend its laws to Judea and Samaria because doing so aligns with truth and justice. We’re often too scared to say it, but an honest look at history demonstrates that Judea and Samaria is the heartland of the historic homeland of the Jewish people. This isn’t “just” a religious belief. It is historic fact that Jews lived in these lands, only left because they were forcefully exiled, and yearned to return for 2,000 years.
There is a confusing duality to the Jewish people. We are ancient people who embrace modernity. Our embracing of modernity often confuses people into thinking we aren’t connected to our past. Israeli Zionists are the descendants of the ancient Jews who lived in these lands. We might wear suits and lab coats today, but we used to look just like the Bedouins who are my neighbors today. Progressives dedicated to everyone’s truth but that of the Jews, tend to restart the clock a few hundred years ago and declare that the “West Bank” is Palestinian land. Only moral gymnastics and historical revisionism can stand by that claim. Liberals who stand for human rights should be standing with the Jewish people’s just claim to these lands. Ease of building, setting forth a realistic future by determining final borders and instituting civil law for both Israelis and Palestinians are good reasons to extend sovereignty. But truth and justice of returning the land to its ancestral people is the ultimate reason that Israeli sovereignty should be extended to Judea and Samaria.

Look who is kneeling on a suspect’s neck

For at least the past five years, Palestinian media have been using this photo as a generic image to illustrate a story about someone being arrested by Palestinian police:

I just saw an example this morning, but there are hundreds of uses of this photo across Palestinian Arabic news media.

Meaning that placing a knee on a suspect’s neck is considered normal behavior for Palestinian police.

And the image is being used post-George Floyd, which means that Palestinians don’ treally think there is anything wrong with this.

In fact, using the exact logic that the Israel haters have been using, we can say that since US cops have met with their Palestinian counterparts, then they probably learned the knee-on-neck technique from Palestinian police!

Asher Fredman just published a book (free online) where he goes into great detail about the BDS movement’s methods and what has worked against them.

I found one chapter to be particularly important. It showed that whenever BDS targets give the Israel-haters the tiniest amount of attention, this emboldens the BDSers to increase pressure on that company.

Meeting with them will make them increase their pressure. Partial concessions will increase it more. Even when they cave to BDS demands completely, the BDSers don’t leave them alone – they keep demanding more and more in terms of “reparations” for previous damage.

If a company shows the BDS movement that it is vulnerable to pressure by giving in to some BDS demands or engaging with BDS activists, this will increase the chances that the BDS campaign against the company will intensify.

CEMEX, the Mexican building materials company, is a good example of this BDS tactic. In 2015, CEMEX gave in to one BDS demand by selling its holdings in an Israeli quarry located in the West Bank. It has since refused to give in to other BDS demands and continues to operate three concrete mixing plants in Israeli-controlled industrial zones in the West Bank (in which, it should be noted, the majority of workers are Palestinian). …

However, despite Cemex’s declaration that it does not intend to give in to further BDS demands, the BDS movement, seeing that the company once showed itself vulnerable, continues to prioritize it as a target.

This principle applies not only to companies that surrender to BDS demands but even to those that merely attempt to engage BDS activists in serious dialogue. While it is understandable why companies may believe that engagement is a good policy and that the activists might be open to hearing the company’s point of view, in practice, such a policy only serves to intensify BDS campaigns. BDS activists interpret such attempts as a sign of pressure and an invitation to push harder. Companies that consistently ignore BDS pressure are more likely to see the campaign against them decrease, as the BDS movement chooses to look for softer targets.

The case of HSBC is a good example of this principle. Following the launch of a BDS campaign against the bank, HSBC attempted to engage British BDS groups in dialogue. This willingness was interpreted by BDS groups as a sign that the company was under pressure and could be pressed into accepting their demands. As described by the organization, “War on Want,” a key member of the British BDS campaign:

In summer 2017, we launched our campaign to pressure HSBC to cut all ties with companies selling weapons and security services to Israel’s repressive regime. Activists held pickets at HSBC branches in over 20 locations in the UK, and over 10,000 people emailed HSBC demanding divestment.

HSBC responded by asking for a meeting. In September 2017, and again in March 2018, we met with bank executives to reiterate that HSBC must immediately divest from companies selling arms to Israel.

We took one clear message away from our meetings with the bank’s executives: HSBC is nervous about the public response to its business complicity. And to us, that means one thing: time to increase the pressure on HSBC. (emphasis added [in book])

Likewise, the G4S security company discovered that each time it attempted to engage BDS groups involved in the campaign against it that began in 2010, or to respond to BDS accusations, the campaign not only intensified but broadened the scope of its demands.

Similarly, if one company in a particular sector has given in or engaged with BDS, this increases the probability that other companies in the same sector will be targeted. The BDS movement reasons that if one company can be successfully pressured, other companies in the same industry may prove vulnerable as well.

This is demonstrated by the intensified focus on the tourism and travel companies, Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, and TripAdvisor. This focus is a result of Airbnb’s November 2018 decision to delist approximately 200 Jewish-owned properties in the West Bank (following a BDS campaign against the company). After extensive public and legal backlash, Airbnb reversed its decision in April 2019. However, although Airbnb reversed its decision, and although the company from the outset repeatedly denied that it supported BDS, and insisted that it remained committed to investment in Israel, major BDS groups “smelled blood.” The BDS movement, therefore, continues to focus on travel companies, with the hope that the initial success against Airbnb can be replicated.

If a company has shown that it can be pressured into giving in to BDS demands, then even after it has capitulated, and the BDS movement has declared victory, the BDS movement is still unwilling to end the campaign. As long as the BDS campaign has hope that a few more drops of “victory” can be squeezed out of the vulnerable company (and given that in most cases, extensive resources have already been invested in creating and disseminating the campaign), the campaign will continue.

For example, in October 2014, even as BDS celebrated as a “major success” SodaStream’s announcement that it would be closing down its production plant in the Mishor Adumim industrial area located in the West Bank, and moving its plant to Israel’s southern Negev region,88 the BNC’s spokesperson declared, “SodaStream will remain a focus of boycott campaigning.” While it is undeniable that the Negev is within the Green Line, the BDS used, as an excuse for its continued campaign, the land disputes between the state and the semi-nomadic Bedouin citizens of Israel living in the area. Given that SodaStream had shown itself vulnerable to BDS pressure,91 and given that extensive resources had already been invested in disseminating the anti-SodaStream campaign worldwide, the BNC had no interest in ending the campaign. This, despite the fact that the company moved entirely to within the lines of pre-1967 Israel.

In 2018, it was announced that SodaStream would be acquired by PepsiCo for 3.2 billion dollars. Following news of the sale, BDS leader Omar Barghouti affirmed that “SodaStream is still subject to boycott by the global, Palestinian-led BDS movement for Palestinian rights.”

Another tactic used by the BDS movement, which serves both as an excuse to continue BDS campaigns against vulnerable companies even after “victory,” and as a potential method for financial gain, is the demand for “reparations.” A company that fully complies with BDS demands implicitly recognizes the validity of the accusations made by the BDS movement against it. It will, therefore, likely become subject to BDS demands and legal actions seeking reparations.

For example, in September 2015, the BNC celebrated the French corporation Veolia’s full capitulation to the demands of the BDS movement. It declared “The sale of [Veolia’s] stake in the Jerusalem Light Rail project ends all of Veolia’s involvement in the Israeli market, including all projects that violate international law and the human rights of the Palestinian people.”93 BNC Coordinator Mahmoud Nawajaa stated that “Veolia's withdrawal from Israel sets an example to all companies that are complicit in Israel’s human rights violations.”

However, Nawajaa added: “We call for legal action, by specialized organizations, against Veolia to compel it to pay reparations to the Palestinian communities adversely affected by its infringements of international law.”

A June 2017 announcement by the BNC shows that this demand for reparations was not just a one-time statement made in the exuberance of a BDS victory, but an ongoing effort. The announcement, regarding a BDS campaign in the Netherlands against an Israeli transport company, noted:

Veolia and Connexxion [a Veolia-owned transport company] have ended their complicity with Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights, but have yet to pay reparations to the Palestinian communities they harmed, and campaigners are still demanding that they do so.

What would happen if a company is so scared that they actually pay “reparations?” I imagine BDS would demand s public statement of contrition and apology plus a demand that the company funds further BDS projects and gives a percentage of its profits to Palestinian “civil society” forever.

Modern jizya tax.

The only policy that corporations can and must take when BDS targets them is to state clearly that they will not give in to blackmail – and then ignore the haters forever more afterwards.

106529203_673290803519772_5089326512089687364_n

Hezbollah and its allies are getting more and more confident in attacking Lebanon’s liberal traditions.

A very amusing example came rom the Facebook page of Shiite cleric Abbas Hoteit, who posted on Sunday photos of bikini-clad women from a Sidon newspaper “Ya Sour.”

Ten photos.

He apologized profusely for being forced to show his followers such filth – ten times – but felt he had to let his followers know exactly how terrible things are in Tyre, where the beaches now resemble those of Europe and Israel.

I apologize to the believing brothers and sisters and all those who guard their honor, be they of any religion, for me presenting these pictures, which were presented today on the "Ya Sur" site, about the state of the beaches of Sidon in Jabal Amil today. But the ignominy of staying silent about this social tragedy in this region – which was the pride of the Shi'ism of Ali and the chastity of Fatima, and a center of the Hawzas of the Levant – is many times (worse) than the ignominy of presenting them on my (Facebook) page.

Just to make sure that the point got across, he posted the same pictures a second time today.

Some people are making fun of his hypocrisy of spreading what he considers filth in the name of fighting filth.

A couple of weeks ago, there was a similar controversy when Shiite fundamentalists attacked photos of young people swimming and drinking beer by a beautiful stream in southern Lebanon, saying “their personal freedom contradicts our customs and norms especially in this land that the Mujahideen have tread upon and watered with the blood of the martyrs.”

One of the beach photos ironically shows how tolerant Lebanon still is – for now.

106300863_674233966758789_602158149734378066_n

Apparently, posting bikini photos is halal when they are used as clickbait.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Wednesday is a Palestinian “Day of Rage.” Whatever shall we do?

On Sunday, a bunch of terror groups got together in the Gaza Strip and declared Wednesday to be a “day of rage.”

The various factions, who usually don’t agree on anything, agreed that a “day of rage” would be a wonderful display of unity.

It is unclear how this Wednesday will be distinguishable from any other Wednesday.

06/29 Links Pt2: Stephen Harper: BDS movement brings anti-Semitism into the mainstream; Simon Wiesenthal Center: Cancel Louis Farrakhan's July 4 speech on Fox

From Ian:

Former Canadian PM Stephen Harper: BDS movement brings anti-Semitism into the mainstream

Former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper addressed a virtual conference of the Christians United For Israel (CUFI) organization Sunday evening, accusing the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement of bringing anti-Semitism ‘into polite society’.

Anti-Semitism is on “the rise, often in the guise of opposition to the State of Israel,” said Harper.

“Never forget that. And never forget that that is what the BDS movement is all about. It is nothing more than taking the old hatred of anti-Semitism and translating it into acceptable language for use in polite society.”

“People who would never say that they hate and blame the Jews for their own failings and for all the problems of the world, instead declare their hatred for Israel and blame the Jewish state for all the problems of the world.”

Earlier today I appeared on Sky News, Australia to discuss the madness that is washing across all of our societies. https://t.co/5Sm0f6myIz
— Douglas Murray (@DouglasKMurray) June 28, 2020

Spectator PodCast: The creepy doctrines of Black Lives Matter

With Professor Richard Landes, an expert on millennial or apocalyptic movements.

99.9% of the negative things about Israel on social media are fake. Please watch this very important video & then retweet.

I do this for free. It is very tiring. All I ask is people to share. Not enough do.

H/T to @kweansmom who cared enough to question and ask me about it. 🙏🏽 pic.twitter.com/s95iI3b0Uv
— AZ עם ישראל חי (@americanzionism) June 28, 2020

Maajid Nawaz accused online platforms of hypocrisy for banning people like Katie Hopkins, but ignoring hatred and anti-semitism from "black and brown" extremists like Louis Farrakhan.@MaajidNawaz https://t.co/7yQvtZmwYi
— LBC (@LBC) June 28, 2020

Muslims threatening Jews in public in Brussels–and Jaffa

Here are two places this past weekend where Muslims loudly and proudly threatened Jews with the chant,

They are chanting Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yahood Jaish Muhammad saya'ud. Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jews The Army of Mohammed will return Of course, Khaybar is where Mohammed slaughtered Jews.

They aren't saying "Zionists." They are saying "Jews."

In Brussels:

The slogan "Jews, the army of Muhammad will return" was chanted by the demonstrators in the heart of Brussels this Sunday. @ITCTofficial @dahrinoor2 @elderofziyon pic.twitter.com/dC6w7EiTVs
— Parisian Girl(Amy) #DefundTheBBC (@ParisianGirlAmy) June 29, 2020

In Jaffa, Israel:

שוק הפשפשים יום שישי בצהריים
תושבי יפו צועדים וצועקים:
"ח'ייבר ח'ייבר יא יהוד, ג'ייש מוחמד סא-יעוד":
כמו שטבח ביהודים בחייבר, צבא מוחמד עוד ישוב
מישהו שמע?
מישהו ראה?
מישהו דיווח?
שיהיה לכולנו המון בהצלחה
אמן pic.twitter.com/ApPyPpM4pj
— ינון מגל (@YinonMagal) June 28, 2020

The Collapsing of the American Mind (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

In August 2005, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd invoked a mother's moral authority against President Bush on the issue of the Iraq War.

Cindy Sheehan's son had been killed in Iraq the previous year and insisted on camping outside the Bush ranch until the president agreed to speak to her. Bush had already spoken to her, but she insisted on speaking to him again, so she could tell him why the war was wrong and the US should pull out its forces. Dowd attacked Bush's failure to meet with her, proclaiming that regardless of his own justifications for the war

his humanitarianism will remain inhumane as long as he fails to understand that the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute.

Putting aside the moral authority of parents whose children were killed in the war yet agreed with the reasons for it -- the fact remains that the idea of this kind of moral authority resonates.

For example, in 2014 the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network announced on its website:

Over 300 Survivors and Descendants of Survivors of Victims of the Nazi Genocide Condemn Israel’s Assault on Gaza

313 Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide have signed this letter written in response to Elie Wiesel’s manipulation of the Nazi Genocide to attempt to justify the attacks on Gaza.

The 'letter' neglects to link to or even quote what Wiesel said. But it does make clear that it opposed the "ongoing genocide" of the ever-increasing Palestinian Arab population.

Looking through the 312 signatures -- and the moral authority they represent -- the breakdown is that the letter was signed by:

o 39 Holocaust survivors
o 97 children of survivors
o 112 grandchildren
o 13 great-grandchildren
o 51 other relatives

The underlying assumption is that not only does the respect due to Holocaust survivors extend to how Israel should defend itself against the genocidal intentions of Palestinian terrorists, but that this 'authority' is somehow hereditary and passed down to all descendants.

Part of the problem is that the definition of moral authority, which Dowd took for granted, may not be what these people think it means.

Wikipedia, while by no means authoritative on the issue, defines Moral Authority as

authority premised on principles, or fundamental truths, which are independent of written, or positive, laws...the authoritativeness or force of moral authority is applied to the conscience of each individual, who is free to act according to or against its dictates.

This definition of the relativeness of moral truth to each individual may explain why Dowd helpfully declared that Sheehan had absolute moral truth -- and that it should apply broadly.

Fast forward to today.

With the current wave of riots following the police killing of George Floyd, we have been subjected to a different kind of authority -- a collectivist moral authority -- one in which not everyone has a say, but which we are expected to abide by nevertheless, lest one suffers from the kind of collective demonization that was prevalent in Soviet Russia.

Writing about The American Soviet Mentality, Izabella Tabarovsky notes a change in social media reminiscent of Soviet Russia:

Twitter has been used as a platform for exercises in unanimous condemnation for as long as it has existed. Countless careers and lives have been ruined as outraged mobs have descended on people whose social media gaffes or old teenage behavior were held up to public scorn and judged to be deplorable and unforgivable. But it wasn’t until the past couple of weeks that the similarity of our current culture with the Soviet practice of collective hounding presented itself to me with such stark clarity.

Here in the US, we are subject to the punitive authority of a mob that has draped itself in the guise of moral superiority. After all, who can (dare) argue against the idea that Black Lives Matter?

Yet these mobs are different from the ones back in the day of the Soviet Union:

The mobs that perform the unanimous condemnation rituals of today do not follow orders from above. But that does not diminish their power to exert pressure on those under their influence.

This has resulted in a cancel culture that attacks more than just statues to be torn down.

Ira Stoll has been maintaining a List of People Canceled in Post-George-Floyd Antiracism Purges. Starting with James Bennet, who lost his job over the backlash to the Tom Cotton op-ed, the list includes editors, CEOs, and employees at universities and media -- over 20 people so far.

To take an example of the 'moral authority' at the university level -- we have gone way beyond the usual mob harassment and intimidation of invited speakers that we have been used to talking about, where the students harass and the university sits idly by and allows it to happen.

Instead, at UMass Amherst, University Targets Its Own Student for ‘White Supremacy’

Campus professors, administrators, and graduate student instructors publicly smeared UMass Amherst student Louis Shenker as a dangerous racist and falsely charged him with hate crimes to get him expelled from school, claiming that his “views are not the kind we want to cultivate at the University.”

In December 2018, Shenker -- a "Jewish, a conservative, an outspoken Zionist, and a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump" -- attended a protest against racism and white supremacy while wearing a MAGA cap and carrying a sign supporting Trump. He was harassed by students, who blocked him from displaying his sign, calling him a “Nazi” and a “fascist."

That is when a graduate student who teaches undergraduate students grabbed his hat and screamed curses at him. The campus police determined that Shenker was "the victim of larceny and assault and battery motivated by anti-white and anti-Jewish bias."

The university did nothing.

Then things got worse.

On October 13, 2019, two faculty members and an assistant dean exchanged emails formulating a harassment and defamation plan to force Louis to leave the university. In possession of the emails, Louis’s attorneys confirmed that Professor Maryann Barakso wrote, “We need to talk about Louis. He is becoming a major problem…. As you know he is Jewish, so we have to be very careful and smart in how we deal with this problem.” Professor Lauren McCarthy responded, “We’ve dealt with other problem students in the past successfully and you know nobody likes a racist so we can handle it.” [emphasis added]

In other words, as Shenker's lawyer put it in a letter to the university, "They formulated a plan to terminate Louis’s contractual relationship with the university by defaming him as a racist."

The article goes on to describe how the university staff put their premeditate plan into action:

On campus, their graduate student sympathizers disseminated hundreds of flyers depicting Louis’s face with big block letters: “ALERT! WHITE SUPREMACIST LOUIS SHENKER.” The flyer went viral on UMass-connected social media where Louis was called a Nazi and threatened with physical violence.

Beth Peller is a long-time militant activist. She proselytizes her students with stories about her past radical escapades including Occupy Oakland and writing articles from Lebanon defending Hezbollah in its 2006 war against Israel. Peller knows how to work the system. She filed a series of false charges against Louis with the municipal police, alleging that he was a white supremacist who was threatening her. These legal actions were vacated by Louis’s counsel for lack of evidence, but not before Louis spent two nights in jail.

Peller then orchestrated an online petition calling on the university administration to expel the dangerous white supremacist Shenker. Hundreds of professors from across the country, including Cornel West, Judith Butler, Mark Bray, Johnny Williams, and professors from Louis’s own university signed on to this slander.

The petition was published by the Campus Anti-Fascist Network (CAN), an Antifa-associated group founded by Stanford Professor David Palumbo-Liu, a virulently anti-Israel academic, and Purdue Professor William Mullen, who wrote “we need to de-Zionize our campuses.” Mullen claims CAN’s purpose is “to drive racists off campuses.” He asserts that his group includes a large number of students and faculty and has been endorsed by several university departments. CAN was eager to help with the malicious campaign, given that the organization’s goal is to silence anybody with whom it disagrees, especially Trump supporters and conservative speakers. [emphasis added]

Fearing for his safety, Shenker was forced to flee the campus.

One of the ominous elements of this account is how easily professors across the country -- hundreds of them -- were mobilized into attacking, slandering and endangering the life of Louis Shenker. University professors may not be noted as moral authority figures, but historically, professors and "intellectuals" are generally recognized as authority figures and historically such people are looked up to for guidance and inspiration.

Those days are apparently gone.
These days, when the media covers for violent riots as peaceful protests, it seems that anyone can lay claim to the mantle of being an "intellectual."

According to the article, one of those who signed on to the attack on Shenker was Cornel West -- a supporter of BDS who also makes excuses for Palestinian terrorism, writing that the actions of Hamas “pale in the face of the US-supported Israeli slaughter of innocent civilians.” West once accused President Obama of being “most comfortable with upper middle-class white and Jewish men who consider themselves very smart, very savvy and very effective in getting what they want.”

Another of those mentioned in the article is Judith Butler, who believes that "understanding Hamas-Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important."

Note the applause Butler receives to this comment.

This is the same Judith Butler, as Elder of Ziyon notes, who is impressed by Edward Said's thesis that

Moses, an Egyptian, is the founder of the Jewish people, which means that Judaism is not possible without this deﬁning implication in what is Arab.’

In other words, neither Said nor Butler are aware that the early Egyptians were not Arabs.

Mark Bray is a college professor and author of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook. Bray is a big fan of Antifa:

Bray argues that “fascism cannot be defeated through speech” and that the lessons of history suggest that Neo-Nazis and white supremacists have to be shut down before they become too powerful or normalized.

...For Bray, violence is not simply a question of kicking a fascist if a fascist kicks you but of “preemptively” shutting down “fascist organizing efforts . . . before they turn deadly.”

It is not surprising that he would jump right in to smear someone without checking the facts -- or perhaps the fact that Shenker wore a MAGA cap was all the proof he needed.

Antifa also is "anti-Zionist"

Bray said that while anti-Zionism is not a focus of antifa, many members tend to be anti-Zionist as part of their far-left activism. Anti-Racist Action groups, he said, had taken part in anti-Zionist events in the past.

[Jewish antifa member] Sieradski said, however, that Jews play a significant role in the movement because “we’re fighting Nazis and anti-Semitism is the prime ideological viewpoint of Nazis.”

The last "intellectual" mentioned above as participating in the smear attack on Shenker is Johnny Williams, who wrote an opinion piece in 2014 in the West Hartford News, Another view: Academics remaining silent about the perils of Zionism is not an option. Yes, that's right, Williams wants you to know that

In academia, most scholars shun speaking and writing about the state of Israel’s siege and wars in Palestine.

If only.

In a response, Rob Monyak writes Another view: Academics are expressing anti-Israel 'invective'

Given what has taken place in academic discourse regarding Israel in the last 20 years, I find this to be a truly outrageous contention and makes me wonder whether Mr. Williams has been living under a rock

Apparently, Williams found time to come out from under that rock to join in an attack on a student.

Monyak concludes

Mr. Williams advocates “critical and untampered public debate” and erroneously concludes that he and his cohort “unnerve people because we go beyond the commonly accepted or officially defined version of human events.” That’s not it at all. The unnerving takes place because their primary interest is not in debate, but in flinging as much populist muck as he can at Israel without regard for intellectual accuracy or conceptual clarity. [emphasis added]

Mr. Williams's attack on a student is apparently consistent with his past mudslinging.

All in all, such is the level of heroism we can expect these days from our role models in academia, as it becomes difficult to distinguish them from the unruly mobs -- with nary a word from the media.

Allan Bloom wrote about The Closing of the American Mind.

These days we may well be witnessing The Collapse of the American Mind.