Tuesday, June 30, 2020

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.

  • Tuesday, June 30, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

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.

  • Tuesday, June 30, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

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.

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.

  • Tuesday, June 30, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

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!

  • Tuesday, June 30, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon


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.

  • Tuesday, June 30, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon



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.



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


(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Monday, June 29, 2020

  • Monday, June 29, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon


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.

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.”

Spectator PodCast: The creepy doctrines of Black Lives Matter
With Professor Richard Landes, an expert on millennial or apocalyptic movements.

  • Monday, June 29, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

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:

In Jaffa, Israel:

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:
39 Holocaust survivors
97 children of survivors
112 grandchildren
13 great-grandchildren
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 de๏ฌning 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.
From Ian:

David Singer: Jewish People Reclaiming Sovereignty in Biblical Heartland after 3000 Years
The United Nations is disgracefully trying to prevent a miracle happening 100 years after the world first gave its historic imprimatur to an impossible dream becoming a possible reality: The restoration of Jewish sovereignty in 1697km² [square kilometres] of the Jewish People’s biblical heartland in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).

The defeat of the 400 years-old Ottoman Empire in World War One revived the Jewish People’s 3000-years-old dream of regaining nationhood in their ancient homeland – which had extended across both banks of the River Jordan where the twelve tribes of Israel had finally settled 40 years after their exodus from Egypt.

The San Remo Resolution signed by Great Britain, France, Japan and Italy on 25 April 1920 promised the Jews real hope.

The Treaty of Sevres involving the international community quickly followed on 10 August 1920.
The British Empire, France, Italy and Japan (“Principal Allied Powers”) were joined by Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland Portugal, Roumania, the Serb-Croat Slovene State and Czecho-Slovakia (“Allied Powers”) in this peace treaty signed with Turkey.

Signatories for the British Empire were representatives of:
His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
The Dominion of Canada
The Commonwealth of Australia
The Dominion of New Zealand
The Union of South Africa

Article 95 provided that Palestine – within such boundaries as might be determined by the Principal Allied Powers – be administered by a Mandatory to be selected by them. The Mandatory was to be responsible for putting into effect the Balfour Declaration made on 2 November 1917, by the British Government – and adopted by the Allied Powers – in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people – it being clearly understood that nothing would be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine – or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The League of Nations' 51 member states unanimously appointed Britain as Mandatory and approved the terms of the Mandate for Palestine on 24 July 1922.

UN: Any Israeli annexation plan is illegal, whether limited or unlimited
Any Israeli West Bank annexation plan is illegal irrespective of whether it includes all or only some of the settlements, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michele Bachelet clarified on Monday.

“Annexation is illegal. Period,” Bachelet said.

She spoke out amid reports that Israel weighed assuaging international and Palestinian objections to annexation by moving forward with a partial plan.

This would likely include the application of sovereignty over areas of high settler-population density, known as the blocs, rather than advancing an initiative that would annex the entire 30% of the West Bank as outlined under US President Donald Trump's peace plan.

Yamina MK and former justice minister Ayelet Shaked told Army Radio earlier in the day that the Jordan Valley would be excluded from Israel’s annexation plans.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “has given up on the Jordan Valley” because of the opposition from the Arab world, she said.

Shaked charged that the sovereignty map included in Trump’s peace plan had been drawn up by Netanyahu. “He worked for three years for this plan, and he can make changes to it, as long as his coalition agrees,” she said.

In Geneva, Bachelet said that the objection to annexation is not related to the size of the territory, but is an illegal act whether it includes “30% of the West Bank, or 5%."

“The precise consequences of annexation cannot be predicted,” Bachelet said, “but they are likely to be disastrous for the Palestinians, for Israel itself, and for the wider region."
'Arabs, not Jews, founded and built Jerusalem'
A Jordanian institute presented a new spin on regional history over the weekend, claiming that it was the Arabs – not the Jews – who founded Jerusalem in biblical times.

According to Saudi daily Arab News, a position paper by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, an Amman-based think tank, asserted that Arabs were the first inhabitants of Jerusalem and have lived there for at least 5,000 years.

Jerusalem is home to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam's third holiest site after Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.

According to the report, the institute is an Islamic NGO headed by Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, who has been serving as a special adviser to Jordan's King Abdullah since 2000.

The institute states in the paper that it "seeks to correct the misperception that Arabs are newcomers to Jerusalem" using unpublished documents, archaeological discoveries, and the Biblical record to assert its claims.

Among its many references, the paper sites the Amarna Correspondence, a series of diplomatic letters between Canaanite kings and Egyptian overlords dating back to the 14th century BCE, which mention Jerusalem.

"The Arabs founded and built it [Jerusalem] in the first place – and have been there ever since," the paper states, noting that Islam has been dominant in Jerusalem for 1,210 out of the last 1,388 years.

Moreover, the 108-page paper argues that the Old Testament itself "shows that the Arabs, Hamites, Canaanites, and Jebusites were the original inhabitants of the land of Palestine, including the area of Jerusalem," thus allegedly proving that "Jerusalem was always an Arab city."

"The Palestinian Arabs of today are largely the direct descendants of the indigenous Canaanite Arabs who were there over 5,000 years ago. Modern-day Arab Muslim and Christian Palestinian families are the oldest inhabitants of the land," the paper argued.



Hear me out. I know some of the things you will read will be hard for you to believe because you have been preprogrammed for so long to believe the opposite. But bear with me. There is no such thing as anti-Zionism, well at least not as you know it. There once was an intellectual movement called anti-Zionism, but that doesn't exist any more. In the days long before the founding of the State of Israel, when Jews were suffering terrible persecution, a modern school of thought emerged that believed the way to solve the anti-Semitism problem was for Jews to have their own land where they could live as Jew without being at the antisemitic whims of their hosts who persecute us, and the only just and acceptable place for that is in the Jewish homeland long taken from them but never forgotten. This movement became what we know of as political Zionism (and now simply Zionism). Almost as soon as Zionism emerged as a formidable political movement, anti-Zionism arose. Anti-Zionists believed that Jews did not need to have their own country to overcome anti-Semitism. There were two schools of intellectual anti-Zionism1. The first was the anti-Zionist Jewish Labour Bund, a Jewish socialist movement, which believed that it was the class system that created anti-Semitism and that by aligning with non-Jewish socialist movements they could eliminate the class system and end anti-Semitism. The other were the Assimilationists. They believed that anti-Semitism came about because the Jews set themselves apart from their hosts. For example, If Jews talked like Germans (instead of the peasant Yiddish) and dressed like Germans (instead of like hasids), they would be accepted by the Germans.

The two schools of Zionism vs anti-Zionism existed at the same time on an intellectual level. No one knew who was right or wrong and because of that both sides could promote their viewpoint as the true one. But once the state of Israel was established, and a viable Jewish homeland realized, anti-Zionism ceased to exist. It is a world of difference going from "there shouldn’t be a homeland for the Jews because it will not solve anti-Semitism" to "I want to see the destruction of the homeland of the Jews." The first statement is anti-Zionism, but you can’t make that argument anymore. There is now a homeland for the Jews. Israel exists whether you like it or not. The second statement is not anti-Zionism. So while Zionism continued, and still continues, shifting from a theoretical, intellectual idea to a practical movement, anti-Zionism ceased to exist. Look at it another way. During the renaissance, there were two schools of thought that pondered our solar system, the geocentrist that thought the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth, and the heliocentrists who thought the Earth and the other planets revolved around the Sun. Until it could be proven, it was simple two opposing intellectual theories. The prevailing theory was geocentrism. But once Copernicus proved heliocentrism, it was no longer an intellectual battle. Sure some people still opposed it rejecting scientific reason (some still do) but it was really not up for debate. The Earth revolving around the sun was successfully proven. Heliocentrism won. In the same light, Zionism was proven to be correct. Zionism won. It did not solve antisemitism around the world, but it did solve it for those Jews that moved to Israel. Sure, they have people surrounding them that hate them for being Jews and want them dead, but inside of Israel they mostly live in blissful ignorance of the anti-Semitism Jews still experience in the diaspora. It is not uncommon for me to meet a young Israeli traveling outside of Israel for the first time who will find the concept of anti-Semitism foreign to them in that they have never personally experienced it themselves. It is amazing. Few Jews in the diaspora can say the same. It is the triumph of Zionism. To live as a free people in our own land not at the mercy of the antisemitic whims of others. Jews have never been safer, even with the constant threats of attack and the rockets and the terrorism, than they are today in the State of Israel. Zionism continued after the founding of the Jewish home, not as an intellectual concept but as a practical movement. How do we build the country, how do we defend the country, how do we feed the country? The viability of the country is no longer in question. It was a success. Zionism won. Not only was intellectual Zionism proven right, but intellectual anti-Zionism was proven false.

Of the the two main branches of intellectual anti-Zionism, the Bund system and the Assimilationist, both failed. The Jewish Bund folded around 1920 after the Bolshevik revolution. Many of the Jewish Bundists that remained in Russia and Eastern Europe joined the Soviet revolution. The revolution triumphed, but Jews did not. Antisemitism continued and eventually the Jews in positions of power or prestige in the Soviet Union were purged by Stalin in the 1930s. A remnant of the Bund survived in different places for a while but did nothing to eliminate anti-Semitism. The socialist system failed the Jews of the Soviet Union. The promise of ending anti-Semitism turned into the nightmare of increased anti-Semitism for Soviet Jews. One only need look at the disaster that was the Autonomous Jewish Oblast in Birobidzhan and the fate of its founders. Socialist intellectual anti-Zionism was proven false. Socialism did function on some levels for the Jews, but only in the Jewish homeland and only under the auspice of Zionism.

The other branch of anti-Zionists were the Assimilationists. They wanted to integrate fully into European society. They believed full integration was enough to end Zionism and a homeland wasn’t need. The Jews in Western Europe began to dress like Europeans, spoke like Europeans, acted like Europeans, and some ever stopped identifying with Judaism altogether. But they were never accepted as Europeans, even the ones who abandoned Judaism and identified only as members of their host country. The promise of the enlightenment failed the Jews of Europe, or at least skipped over them. Assimilation did nothing to allay the hatred of Jews in Europe. If anything, it made it worse. Theodor Herzl started as an Assimilationist but eventually discovered that is was a failed ideology and became a Zionists. Even with assimilation, anti-Semitism grew and grew and grew, culminating in the tragedy of the Holocaust, where renouncing Judaism did not save you and even having as little as 1/4 Jewish blood may have condemned you to death. Assimilationist anti-Zionism was proven false.

If Zionism is no longer an intellectual concept but a practical one, and if intellectual anti-Zionism no longer exists (because the Jewish home exists and is an overwhelming success) then what is left over? Is it practical anti-Zionism? Well, let's think about what practical anti-Zionism means. Practical anti-Zionism means the dismantling of the homeland of the Jews, a project that succeeded beyond its wildest imaginations, which achieve it's prime objectives. It means taking the Jews from a position of safety and self determination and putting them back where they were over 100 years ago, a nation without a land at the whims of an antisemitic host. In the diaspora we see antisemitism every day. Jews attacked, synagogues shot up, graves vandalize, students discriminated against, Jews accused of being responsible for creating and spreading diseases, the Jew as body politic unjustly demonized. The same lies, the same hatred of Jews that has existed since antiquity persists in the diaspora to this day, but not inside Israel. Reversing everything the Jews accomplished and setting Jews back 100 years isn't practical anti-Zionism. There is no relationship between saying “a Jewish homeland will not protect the Jews” and saying “Israel must be destroyed”. No one today can honestly say, “I am an anti-Zionist because a Jewish homeland will not protect the Jews” because that has been proven false. Not only is it not practical anti-Zionism , but it isn’t practical, period. Knowing now what Jews didn’t know prior, Jews will not accept returning to a time of hopelessness. Practical anti-Zionism doesn't exist. Intellectual anti-Zionism no longer exist. Anti-Zionism is a myth. What people call anti-Zionism today is really obfuscated anti-Semitism. You cannot have an intellectual conversation about anti-Zionism today any more than you can have one about geocentrism. Practical anti-Zionism would mean the reversal of something that has been proven to protect the Jews and benefitted the Jews more than any other event in modern history. What do you call that if not anti-Semitism? I’m not saying Israel is perfect. Far from it. Israel is flawed like every other nation. And that is good. That is the point. That is another triumph of Zionism, that the Jews can ba people like any other people in the world free to be flawed and not required to be perfect.

There is one form of intellectual anti-Zionism that does still exists, albeit with imperfections, and that is religious anti-Zionism. I'm not talking about the cult that carries signs and are the poster children for every Jew hater on the planet, that is anti-Semitism, but the real anti-Zionist ultra orthodox sects who oppose Zionism by interpreting sacred texts. They know deep down that Jews are safer in Israel but they oppose it on religious grounds. However, many members of those sects internally support Israel and almost all of them support their fellow Jews. Furthermore, what is often overlooked is that many ultra Orthodox groups support Israel for exactly the same reason, on religious grounds. They find the justification for Jews possessing the land of Israel in the same exact passages and texts as the other side uses justify Jews being prohibited from possessing the land. It is not a cut and dry issue. Incidentally, the ultra Orthodox sects that claim to be anti-Zionists are actually Zionists, it’s only an issue of timing. They believe when the Messiah comes all Jews will return to Zion. I'm not saying that religious anti-Zionism is correct, it is not, only that it is the only remaining viable anti-Zionism that exists.

You might be reading this and say "I don't want to see the Jews killed. I don't want them driven from the land. I am an anti-Zionist because I want every barrier to come down and to have one country with everyone together." The problem with that is two fold. First, again you are asking to undo everything that Jews have accomplished in the last 100 plus years and for the Jews, a historically oppressed minority, to go back to being at the whims of others. There have been areas where Jews were relatively autonomous, like the Pale of Settlements. But it was not true autonomy. Without their own land with their own defense and their self determination, they were constantly under attack and suffered terrible tragedies. Anything short of a Jewish homeland, one place in the world where Jews are not a minority and can defend themselves, is a danger to Jews. Second, and more importantly, this solution ignores hundreds of years of history that has shown that the two people can not live together as one. The British tried to build the Mandate as an area for both Arabs and Jews. Every street sign, every dollar, every government document had the language of both the Jews and the Arabs. Every government agency was made up of Arabs and Jews. The result was nobody was happy. The Arabs and the Jews fought worse than ever. It's like taking a married couple that is separated because they fought all the time, they continue to fight while separated, it is clear that they are not meant for one another, and telling them that the solution to all their problems is not to get a divorce, but to move in together. The only thing this solution would accomplish is a long civil war and eventually the end of any real presence of Jews in their homeland. If you still support this position, you are entitled to it, but don't kid yourself, that is not anti-Zionism, that's anti-Semitism.

For people that call themselves anti-Zionists because of any of the following "Jews are not from the Middle East", "You aren't the real or original Jews", "You are converts from Khazar", "It isn't your homeland", “It is against your Torah”, "You are conquerors, colonists, colonialists, supremacists, etc", "Israel has no right to exist because of Netanyahu, the government, policies, treatment of the Palestinians, you sterilize women, you sold babies, you steal organs, etc" and use that as a pretext to call for the destruction of Israel, well not only is that anti-Semitism, but you are an anti-Semite.

Now if you say, "Israel has a right to exists, but I also support a two state solution and for Palestinians to also have a country" that isn't anti-Semitism. But that also isn't anti-Zionism, so stop calling yourself an anti-Zionist and lets talk.


1There were other Zionist and anti-Zionist sub-movements. It is a complicated topic beyond the scope of this article. Even within sub-movements there were variations.

  • Monday, June 29, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon




The words “human rights” means something much different to Palestinians than to the rest of the world.

For years, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza Legal Aid department has worked with Israeli authorities to facilitate medical treatment of Gazans in Israel, the West Bank or abroad. According to the group, it has helped transfer some 700 patients in 2019 alone.

On May 19, the Palestinian Authority decided to stop all coordination with Israel, including cooperation on transferring patients to Israeli and foreign hospitals. Mahmoud Abbas has made the supremely cynical decision that this political act is more important than Palestinian lives. As a result, at least two babies have died so far because they could not travel outside Gaza, even though Israeli authorities are trying to help.

Israel, which does not want to see Gaza patients die, has been looking for alternative ways to help these patients. Israeli human rights groups are scrambling to find ways to coordinate patient transfers.

Someone in Israel suggested that the PCHR would be a good choice to take over the PA’s role in facilitating life-saving transfers, since they already know the system and they have been helping patients work with Israeli authorities on the legal front.

One would think that a human rights group would welcome such an opportunity to save human lives. But that isn’t what happened.

The PCHR published an angry press release:

PCHR condemns without reservation and in the strongest terms the Israeli occupation authorities’ political propaganda to undermine the PA by promoting the Centre as an alternative. PCHR categorically refuses such insinuations and holds the Israeli occupation fully responsible for the lives of Palestinian patients in the Gaza Strip who are in dire need for medical treatment abroad and face imminent death as a result of denying them access to basic medical services that are unavailable in the Gaza Strip.

  1. …It was inconceivable that the Israeli occupation authorities would reach this far, politically exploiting patients’ need for treatment, fronting PCHR as if it were a substitute for the PA or to circumvent the Palestinian leadership’s decisions to end security coordination.

In view of this development, PCHR has decided to discontinue all legal aid services it offers patients. PCHR regrets having to take such a decision and holds Israeli authorities fully responsible for its consequences. PCHR affirms its absolute rejection of attempts to circumvent the Palestinian leadership’s decisions in any way, shape or form.

Because of an unverified  Israeli media report, the PCHR is not only refusing to step in and help where the PA is abdicating its responsibility to save the lives of its citizens. It is actively choosing to stop the assistance it was already giving!

In other words, if Abbas wants Gazans to die, PCHR will allow them to die – and then PCHR will blame Israel. Given a choice of human lives or politics, PCHR chooses politics, seemingly hoping that dead Gazans will make Israel look bad, which makes their deaths worthwhile.

When the PA and PCHR – which is closely associate d with the PFLP terror group – say that this is fully Israel’s responsibility, they are saying something quite fantastical. Israel would have to invade and re-occupy Gaza and take over all governmental functions from security to healthcare to sanitation in order to fulfil what they say are Israel’s legal obligations as the “occupying power.” (The fact that Israel does not and cannot run all those institutions today is proof that Israel isn’t the “occupying power!”)

I’m not exaggerating. PLO Executive Committee Secretary Saeb Erekat said this weekend, “Netanyahu will be responsible for collecting garbage in Rafah, Jerusalem, and Hebron, and he will bear his full responsibility as an occupying power."

Obviously, it makes no sense to invade and re-occupy Gaza, a war that would kill thousands, in order to save a few dozen patients a year.  Just as obviously Hamas would not cooperate in Israel taking over governmental functions. But this is what the PA and PCHR are saying is Israel’s responsibility.

In reality, they have the ability to save the lives of sick Gazans and they are choosing to let them die rather than cooperate with Israel as they have in the past.

How much more evidence is needed that Palestinians – even Palestinian human rights groups – prefer to use sick and dying Palestinians as pawns rather than doing everything they can to save their lives? Their message to Israel is “submit to our demands to allow Gazans, including terrorists, to freely enter Israel without permits, or else we will allow our people to die and blame you.”

It is an astonishingly cynical message from the PA, but doubly so from a supposed human rights group.

  • Monday, June 29, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

Fox Soul TV, a new streaming service aimed at black people, is featuring antisemite Louis Farrakhan for a July 4th speech.



Would the normally right-wing Fox News allow a far-right KKK leader to give an hour long speech to the nation? Of course not. 

So why on Earth is it okay to feature America's most prominent antisemite on a national platform  - and give a plug to his webpage, where people can buy his books filled with Jew-hatred?

If the Fox Corporation is saying that Fox Soul has latitude that other Fox networks don’t have because it is geared towards blacks, then Fox is saying that Nation of Islam antisemitism is OK for blacks to listen to – presumably because blacks aren’t sensitive towards antisemitism as most whites are.

This  means that Fox is treating blacks as if they are simply expected to be sympathetic to Farrakhan's messages of hate towards Jews.

Which is racist. 

While there is a definite problem with black antisemitism, the large majority of blacks are not antisemitic according to national surveys. By pandering to some sort of idea that NOI-style Jew hate is perfectly OK to broadcast to blacks, or that Farrakhan's antisemitism is not offensive to blacks, Fox is treating blacks like they are not as socially advanced or sophisticated as whites.

This is racism. But it is the type of racism that seems to be acceptable to a great number of people, both on the right and the left. 

Blacks are expected to condone antisemitism. It is inconceivable that a black person would be  “canceled” for Jew hate the way white people are “canceled” for racism. If you don't think that Farrakhan's noxious views are worse than Mel Gibson's, then you are looking at the color of his skin rather than the content of his words.

People who expect less morality, less sophistication, less intelligence and more antisemitism from blacks are racists. This is exactly what Fox Soul is doing.

UPDATE: FoxSoul.TV has deleted the tweet, and I don't see Fox mentioned in the Nation of Islam page where they say to watch the speech on their website only. It appears Fox did the right thing.

Sunday, June 28, 2020

  • Sunday, June 28, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

From The Palestine Bulletin, June 29, 1930:




A small example of that famed Arab tolerance of Jews before 1948 that we keep hearing about.

  • Sunday, June 28, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon


Lots of topics covered here in a fun conversation covering nearly 3000 years. Check it out!

From Ian:

Jonathan S. Tobin: Anti-Semitism gets you fired by Labour, but hired by NYT
It turns out The New York Times has lower standards when it comes to those who spread anti-Semitic canards than even Britain's controversial Labour Party. Tweeting an anti-Semitic blood libel about Israel being responsible for teaching American cops the tactics that led to the killing of 46-year-old George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer led to the firing of a member of parliament from the opposition party's leadership. Yet tweeting a similar lie about Israel training American cops to commit human-rights abuses was no bar to a journalist being hired this month to be one of the American newspaper's top editors.

The fate of the two figures in question – Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey and Charlotte Greensit, the NYT new managing editor of its Opinion section – does indicate that Britain's opposition party may be serious about wanting to change course after becoming a home to Jew-hatred under its former leader, Jeremy Corbyn. But it also shows that the NYT, which has a lamentable history when it comes to Jewish issues, is heading down a path in which it is being bullied into taking radical stands that are antithetical to liberal values.

Long-Bailey got into hot water this week when she retweeted an article about Maxine Peake, a British actress who is also a fervent opponent of Israel, as well as being one of Corbyn's biggest fans. Peake is a respected actress, best known for roles in British films and television series like "Silk." In her youth, she was a member of the Communist Party. In recent years, she has been a vocal public supporter of Corbyn, the leftist anti-Semite who led Labour to a catastrophic election defeat in December.

In an interview with Britain's Independent newspaper, Peake, who says that she was "in Palestine, liaising with activists" before having to go home because of the coronavirus pandemic, claimed that "the tactics used by the police in America, kneeling on George Floyd's neck, that was learnt from seminars with Israeli secret services."
The notion that Israelis teach Americans tactics used to kill blacks is a big lie that has been championed in recent years by BDS supporters like Jewish Voice for Peace and other anti-Semites. American cops and first responders get training in Israel that teaches them better community policing tactics, as well as how best to deal with medical emergencies, natural disasters and terrorist attacks – not how to kill people.

BDS groups plan anti-annexation ‘Day of Rage’ across the US
Pro-Palestinian organizations across the US plan to hold demonstrations against Israel on Wednesday, the earliest date that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could bring to a cabinet vote the extension of Israeli sovereignty to parts of the West Bank.

The demonstrations are set to take place in Chicago, San Diego, Brooklyn, Los Angeles and San Francisco, as well as in Toronto, Madrid and Valencia. Among the groups organizing the events are Students for Justice in Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace, and American Muslims for Palestine.

The Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, one of the organizers, called for "direct actions and popular mobilizations in [Palestinian] refugee camps, cities and villages," and professed "loyalty to the martyrs" – euphemisms for terrorists and terrorism – on its call to organize events.

Another, Al-Awda - The Palestinian Right to Return Coalition, accused Israel of "72 years of genocide, ethnic cleansing and dispossession," and peppered the site with works by the antisemitic cartoonist Carlos Latuff, a second-place prize winner in Iran's Holocaust Cartoon Competition.

Al-Awda also tied their demonstrations to the protests against anti-Black racism in the US and beyond.

"We demand the defunding and dismantling of US police alongside the defunding and dismantling of Zionist colonialism and racist Israeli apartheid," the group's website reads.
JCPA: The Battle over BDS – Trends, Lessons, and Future Trajectories
Download pdf
Executive Summary

For the first 10 to 15 years after the crystallization of the modern BDS movement at the turn of the 21st century, the global BDS campaign enjoyed a comfortable operating environment. While the counter-BDS community’s response to specific challenges was, at times, successful, it largely failed to disrupt the BDS momentum. During this period, and especially following the Goldstone Report and the Mavi Marmara flotilla incident in 2009- 2010, the counter-BDS community developed its capacities, built its network, and learned by trial and error.

This capacity-building process is coming to fruition. On the one hand, the BDS movement continues to be highly-active, even managing to make headway in certain areas. Yet, it is becoming increasingly clear that the counter-BDS network is succeeding in disrupting BDS momentum and forcing the BDS movement out of its comfort zone.

Increasingly, the BDS movement finds itself on the defensive. It faces exposure of its terror-links, credible accusations of anti-Semitism, and national and municipal legislation and resolutions that attack its legitimacy. The BDS campaign is finding it increasingly difficult to achieve major victories, and even those it achieves are often reversed.

Nevertheless, it would be a grave mistake to assume that the battle over BDS is over. The BDS movement has shown itself to be highly adept at pivoting to new strategies, building influential alliances, and identifying emerging There continue to be numerous arenas in which it faces little effective resistance.

Furthermore, the international environment in which BDS operates has the potential to shift dramatically within a relatively short period toward the creation of more favorable conditions for BDS.

Therefore, the counter-BDS campaign must continue to develop the capacities and synergies necessary to meet new and evolving BDS strategies. At the same time, it must increase its efforts to put BDS on the defensive and to distance it from mainstream audiences, including those critical of Israel.

  • Sunday, June 28, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon


From Arab News:

A Lebanese judge on Saturday tried to ban media from reporting criticism of Hezbollah supporters by US ambassador Dorothy Shea.

Judge Muhammad Mazieh issued an order in Tyre on Saturday banning all media from publishing the ambassador’s comments for a year after a recent interview in which she criticized the powerful Hezbollah group seditious and a threat to social peace.

“Counterterrorism sanctions apply not only to Hezbollah but to those who provide them with material support,” Shea said in an interview with Saudi-owned news channel Al-Hadath.

She said the US was still evaluating whether the government of Prime Minister Hassan Diab was “an independent government of technocrats not beholden to Hezbollah.”

The US “has not yet seen what we hoped for from this government in the way of concrete steps to implement the reforms the economy so desperately needs,” Shea said

Mazieh said Shea’s comments incited sectarian strife and threatened social peace. The judge said while he can’t ban the ambassador from speaking, he can bar the media from interviewing her for a year.

The funny thing is that now the liberal Lebanese media are falling over themselves to speak to Ambassador Shea.

She told LBCI (Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation International) that the ruling carried an “element of defensiveness,” describing it as “unhelpful and unnecessary.”

This is all proof that Hezbollah pretty much controls Lebanon, although Shea now says that the Lebanese government has apologized to her.

Naharnet adds:

The court decision reflected the rising tension between the U.S. and Hizbullah. It also revealed a widening rift among groups in Lebanon, which is facing the worst economic crisis in its modern history.

Information Minister Manal Abdul Samad wrote on Twitter the judiciary may be reacting to the interference of some diplomats in the country's affairs. However, "no one has the right to prevent the media from covering news or undermine press freedoms," she wrote.

Any issue pertaining to the media should pass through the information ministry and official judicial channels, she said.

Local broadcaster LBCI said it would not abide by the ruling, calling it a "non-binding and unenforceable" decision that violates freedom of press.

It said it would challenge the ruling in court.

And as critics of Hizbullah called it politicized, others hailed the ban as "brave" on social media, saying Shea had crossed a line by "interfering" in Lebanon's internal affairs.

  • Sunday, June 28, 2020
  • Elder of Ziyon

For years now, the socialist Left – led by “Jewish Voice for Peace” – has been pushing the idea that US police learn to be racist from Israeli police, because a couple hundred US police have gone to Israel to learn counter-terrorism techniques over the last 20 years or so.

We reported on this in 2015 with idiotic articles by Rania Khalek and Dave Zirin that blamed Israel for police killing black people in the US.



Then in 2018, Jewish Voice for Peace issued a highly biased report filled with half-truths that tried to specifically blame Israel for US police brutality and racist methodology. The copious evidence from the very articles they link to that disprove their thesis were ignored.

Meanwhile, the concept that somehow US police are hypnotized by the ever powerful Israelis to attack black people has been the subject of thousands of tweets from JVP and their friends.




It’s bad enough that the claims about what US cops learn in Israel are complete and total lies. But the claim that somehow Israelis are responsible for how US cops act is fundamentally antisemitic – it is the trope that Jews have “hypnotized the world,” as Ilhan Omar put it, and US police are helpless robots who must do what their Jewish masters tell them.

Suddenly and quietly, Jewish Voice for Peace has changed gears and admitted themselves that the idea that Israel is responsible for US police violence – the trope that they have pushed for years -  is antisemitic! In a June 5 press release, they write:

Highlighting these police exchange programs without enough context or depth can end up harming our movements for justice. Suggesting that Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism shifts the blame from the United States to Israel. This obscures the fundamental responsibility and nature of the U.S., and harms Black people and Black-led struggle. It also furthers an antisemitic ideology. White supremacists look for any opportunity to glorify and advance American anti-Black racism, and any chance to frame Jews as secretly controlling and manipulating the world. Taking police exchanges out of context provides fodder for those racist and antisemitic tropes.

Now they are talking about context? The 57-page “Deadly Exchange” report didn’t put any context in its introduction:



it is also amusing how they claim that white supremacists are the ones who are reading antisemitic messages in the “Deadly Exchange” libel. The Jersey City murderers, admirers of the Black Hebrews sect, echoed the Deadly Exchange claim of Jews controlling the police as well as Louis Farrakhan’s “Synagogue of Satan” characterization of Jews. Roger Waters, hardly a white supremacist, also used “Deadly Exchange” as his source for his antisemitic rant on Hamas TV.

Now JVP is backtracking and pretending not to be responsible for the hate – and deaths – that they have encouraged for years.

Why? Not because they are suddenly concerned about the antisemitic conspiracy theories that they have been pushing for years. It is because it “can end up harming our movements for justice.” There is nothing moral about this about-face – it is to distance themselves from the antisemitism that they are responsible for, because they might lose members or funding.

(h/t Daniel Sugarman – who for some reason blocks me.)


EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"


EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz





For $18 donation

Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years


Elder of Ziyon - ุญู€ูƒู€ูŠู€ู… ุตู€ู‡ู€ูŠู€ูˆู†

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


Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options

One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive