June 2021 ~ Elder Of Ziyon

Wednesday, June 30, 2021

Identity and Reality (Vic Rosenthal)

Weekly column by Vic Rosenthal

This morning I picked up a book from my philosophy student days, “Identity and Reality,” by Emile Meyerson. It’s a book about the metaphysical foundations of science, but the title inspired me.

Everyone has an identity in the sense of their answer to the question “what are you?” Almost everyone has a need to find, adopt, or construct an answer. Often it’s a list of things: a mother, a Jew, a football fan, a plumber, and so on. Recently “gender identity” has been added.

There is no national identity with a longer pedigree than that of the Jewish people. For millennia Jews have had a unique language and religion, and a tradition that connects them to the Land of Israel, which (according to that tradition) was given to them by Hashem. Religious Jews explicitly remind themselves of this three times a day.

This makes “Jewish” a very desirable identity. As Jimmy Durante said (about something else), “everybody wants to get into the act,” despite the anti-Jewish attitudes that Jews have to deal with. Jewish identity is so sought-after, that one of the popular themes of antisemites is to claim that they are the “real Jews” and we are Khazars or just fakers. If a Jew chooses to live in the Land of Israel, they have additional prejudices against them. Recently a European “anti-fascist” said that as an Israeli Jew, I was “stealing the very air I breathe.”

But still, the Jewish identity is attractive because – here is the connection to the book I picked up – it is solidly grounded in reality. Lots of people hate Jews and even want to kill them, but no identity is better documented. Indeed, one of the most important parts of the cognitive warfare that is being waged against the Jewish people by its enemies is the effort to break down that identity; in particular, to disconnect us from the Land of Israel. So, for example, Palestinian Arabs go out of their way to destroy archaeological evidence of ancient Jewish provenance in the land, as they have done at the Temple Mount and numerous other sites.

Mahmoud Abbas has always insisted that “Jewish” refers only to a religion, not to a people, because a people can have ties to a particular land, and if there were a Jewish people, this would be their land. This is why he objected so strongly to the condition that he recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, although he claims to recognize Israel’s existence. This is why the PLO has never agreed to the formulation “two states for two peoples,” although it claims to support a “two state solution.”

Tribal identities are important to Arabs, but attempts to forge a pan-Arab identity among Arabic speakers haven’t been particularly successful, because, for example, North Africans, Egyptians, and Syrians have little in common. A great deal of energy is put into the attempt to establish that there is a historical “Palestinian” identity, but the people who identify as “Palestinians” today have diverse origins, with many of them relatively recent (after 1830) migrants to the area. There is very little that is specifically Palestinian in their culture (as opposed to tribal, Arab, or Muslim), other than elements that developed in opposition to Israel. They didn’t even self-identify as “Palestinian” until the 1960s. That is not to say that there cannot be a “Palestinian people” – give them another 3000 years, and if they still remember the Nakba, they may become as well-established as the Jewish people.

The Palestinian argument is that we, the Jews, appeared from Europe in the 20^th century and “colonized” a long-established indigenous “Palestinian people,” ultimately taking their land by force, driving most of them out of their homes and not allowing them to return. The Jews, according to this story, are not even a people, just a bunch of Europeans whose made-up religious myth connects them to what is actually the Palestinians’ homeland (I am not sure how they account for the more than 50% of Israelis who previously lived in various Arab countries).

Like all “Europeans,” the story continues, the Jews are white racists who exploit black and brown indigenous peoples like the Palestinians. Justice therefore requires that the Jews should give up control of the land to its “rightful owners,” the millions of descendants of the Arab refugees of 1948.

The Palestinian story is wildly wrong on several points. First, there were several ancient Jewish commonwealths in the Land of Israel, and some Jews always were present during the millennia in which the land was under the control of various outside powers. Doubtless some of today’s Palestinians are also descended from ancient residents of the land, but the great bulk of Palestinian families arrived much later. So the claim that Arabs are “more indigenous” than Jews is false. Arab families with names like “al Musri” (Egyptian) or “al Haurani” (Syrian) and numerous others testify to their origins.

Second, when the Zionists arrived and began developing what would become the Jewish state, it was not in the possession of the Palestinian Arabs – there was never a sovereign Palestinian entity in the land – but was a colony of the Ottoman Empire. Most private land belonged to absentee owners. Shortly thereafter the British Mandate was established, and the Arabs, led by Amin al-Husseini, who later cast his lot with Hitler, violently tried to prevent the advent of Jewish sovereignty. When the British were forced out, the Jews defeated the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab nations that invaded (who were interested in grabbing territory and kicking the Jews out, not in setting up a Palestinian state). The Jews did not “colonize” Palestine – they decolonized it, by ejecting the British.

Third, by the time the British left and the Arab nations invaded, the Palestinian Arabs had been fighting with the Jews for several months (with the connivance of the British, who preferred that the land come under Arab control). Much of the Arab elite fled early in order to avoid the conflict (some went to summer homes in Lebanon). The poorer Arabs fled for various reasons, including fear induced by propaganda about Jewish atrocities – which was not difficult for them to believe, since their own leaders planned to do the same to the Jews if they got the upper hand. Some Arabs were expelled (Lod or Lydda) because their towns or villages fought on the side of the Arab armies. Some 500-700 thousand Arabs left for various reasons, but there was no overall plan to expel them. In some cases (Haifa) Jewish authorities asked non-belligerent Arabs to stay.

After the war, only a few were allowed to return. The new state simply could not take the risk of allowing hostile Arabs to return and reignite the war. This was a classic ethnic conflict over land, and the usual result of these is either that the weaker side becomes refugees, or the winner massacres the losers. The leaders of the Arab nations did not hide their intention to massacre the Jews if they won. The 800,000 Jews kicked out of Arab countries at about the same time suffered a similar fate to the Palestinian Arabs.

Fourth, and finally, the whole “racism” theme is nonsense. Only a minority of Israelis ever lived in Europe. They range in color from black Ethiopians to white Europeans with red hair and freckles. Most are various shades of brown, as are Palestinians, who also include the descendants of black slaves and – if you remember her – Ahed Tamimi, who earned the nickname “Shirley Temper” for kicking and hitting Israeli soldiers, with her pale skin and blonde hair. The conflict is best described as national and religious, not racial.

But unlike other similar conflicts, the losers managed to persuade the world of the justice of their cause, with the help of the Soviet KGB, the Arab oil weapon, the liberal application of terrorism, and the exploitation of the always-present antisemitism of the west. Which is why my European anti-fascist acquaintance thinks I’m an oxygen bandit.

06/30 Links Pt2: Black, Jewish and bullied into quitting – SCBWI and the April Powers story; Ilhan Omar Knows What She’s Doing; Omar Claims Jewish Colleagues ‘Haven’t Been Partners in Justice’

From Ian:

Not in Kansas Anymore: Academic Freedom in Palestinian Universities

Academic freedom is the liberty which academics have, within the confines of the law, to question and test generally-held beliefs, and to put forward different, sometimes unorthodox, maybe unpopular, alternative views without being at risk of losing their jobs or being silenced at their work. A complaint sometimes made against Israel is that it culpably suppresses academic freedom in Palestinian universities. This complaint is sometimes deployed by critics of Israel defending themselves against the charge that they focus too exclusively on Israel’s misdeeds at the expense of paying attention to other and worse political horrors elsewhere. Their reply is that academic freedom is a value especially in the care of academics everywhere, and so they have special reason to focus on Israel, since it’s illegitimately eroding academic freedom in vulnerable institutions, while purporting to be a liberal democracy which values academic freedom and free speech.

Cary Nelson’s new book: Not in Kansas Anymore: Academic Freedom in Palestinian Universities,[1] addresses this whole issue with exceptional thoroughness. He examines the state of academic freedom in Palestinian universities, and comments on the implications of this for the criticisms levelled by some Western academics, especially in the United States, against Israel’s handling of this matter. His central thesis is that academic freedom in Palestinian universities is indeed very badly eroded and in certain respects non-existent. It is true that Israeli measures are sometimes responsible for aspects of this erosion, where Israel has acted without sufficient justification and in ways that would have been better avoided; however Israeli interventions are greatly outweighed in their effect on academic freedom by measures taken by Palestinian students, academics, and wider political forces. These measures, often deployed by students though sometimes by faculty, involve intimidation and physical violence. They receive wide social support, have done so for many years, are very resistant to change, and are largely ignored by Western critics of Israel.

In Nelson’s view this singular focus on Israel’s impact on academic freedom in Palestinian universities is misplaced in three main ways: it fails to acknowledge the security context within which Israel has to operate; it fails to recognise Palestinian violence; and it fails to consider regimes, in the area and beyond, whose treatment of academic freedom is far, far worse. His book has useful and pertinent things to say about the first and third points, but it’s the second, central, one for which Nelson provides the fullest and most detailed examination, and the one on which I’ll focus here.

The book opens with an account of violent attacks on two senior academics in different Palestinian universities. One of these academics took some students to visit Auschwitz. In his absence, other students denounced him as a traitor, trashed his university secretary’s office, and threatened to kill him if he returned to the university. His academic union cancelled his membership; his university did not defend him (they eventually accepted his resignation); and he was the target of an assassination attempt. Academic freedom did not protect him. The second (unconnected) case involved a different academic, one who was opposed to reconciliation with Israel and was certainly not opposed to violence. Nonetheless when he criticised the Palestinian authorities, accusing them of corruption, he was arrested and imprisoned. Academic freedom did not protect him either.

David Collier: Black, Jewish and bullied into quitting – SCBWI and the April Powers story

SCBWI bow to the haters
Until now, we have a normal everyday occurrence on social media. An organisation or well-known public figure stands in solidarity with Jewish people – and for this, they are attacked. We cannot know exactly what went on behind closed doors, between SCBWI and the author of the post – their black, Jewish, Chief Equity & Inclusion Officer, April Powers – but what followed was disgraceful appeasement, abandonment of principles, and proof positive that SCBWI doesn’t really stand up to antisemitism at all.

Eventually, SCBWI actually issued a public apology for making the statement on antisemitism. And whatever did go on behind closed doors, left April Powers feeling so isolated that she felt the need to resign. In the end, the victim of the SCBWI statement on antisemitism – the person who paid the price and was bullied out of her job – was the black Jewish woman.

The SCBWI apology was written by their Executive Director, Lin Oliver. The statement says that they have accepted the resignation of April Powers and that they apologise for absolutely everything. SCBWI bowed before the haters, stripped down and publicly flagellated themselves.

They even specifically apologise to the very person who had been harassing them with the ‘all lives matter’ argument – Razan Abdin-Adnani:

SCBWI apology
It is important to understand who SCBWI apologised to. Razan Abdin-Adnani is not some innocent, peace-loving and misunderstood victim, but rather a hard-core, and rather extreme activist. The tweet below not only spreads lies about co-existence (Jews were never more than vulnerable second-class citizens under Ottoman rule) – but also suggests that millions of Israelis should be forcibly removed and sent to Poland or Russia.

Make no mistake about how racist this is. If this were a post about black people or Muslims in the US, needing to be forcibly sent away to wherever people believed their ancestors came from – the author would rightfully be called a neo-Nazi. There is no difference here. This person has no tolerance, no understanding of human rights and no knowledge of actual history. It is clear that her issue with the SCBWI post was not that it didn’t mention Muslims, but that it was written at all. Razan Abdin Adnani picked a cheap fight with SCBWI and boy, did she win easily.

Prominent children’s literature organization apologizes to antisemite for condemning antisemitism

On June 22, Abdin-Adnani wrote a 31 post Twitter thread/manifesto retconning the events that had transpired and included her thoughts about being dismayed when SCBWI released a powerful statement in support of the Jewish community. Abdin-Adnani claimed "I left an affirmative and polite comment on SCBWI’s Twitter," but at no point does she admit that this comment was followed by dozens more, including antisemitic statements, on the original SCBWI statements condemning anti-Semitism.

In response, SCBWI asked their Chief Equity and Inclusion Officer, who is black and Jewish, to resign, then posted the following statement apologizing to Abdin-Adnani by name and joined the writer in "all lives mattering" the situation.

"I would like to apologize to everyone in the Palestinian community who felt unrepresented, silenced, or marginalized. SCBWI acknowledges the pain our actions have caused to our Muslim and Palestinian members and hope that we can heal from this moment."

SCBWI executive director Lin Oliver also apologized to a the antisemitic writer and stated that Abdin-Adnani had been unblocked from the group’s feed.

Abdin-Adnani did not accept the apology and has called for a boycott of SCBWI. The activist also demanded an investigation into how supportive SCBWI is of the Jewish state.

Had SCBWI researched Abdin-Adnani before apologizing to her, they would have discovered tweets from as recently as June 2 from the activist that said, "Zionists need to go back to Europe and Brooklyn," and "I hear Germany and Poland are quite nice these days."

Razan Abdin-Adnani regularly trolls denunciations of antisemitism and tells Jews to go back to Poland.

She trolled a post condemning hate crimes on Jews, got abusive, & blocked by a Black Jew - who was then forced out of her job.

Stop protecting antisemites instead of Jews. https://t.co/cZtjkUmJes pic.twitter.com/AlAY0d5JH2
— Hen Mazzig (@HenMazzig) June 29, 2021

Antisemitism can be subtle: a threat not-a-threat. In which case, it can be darned hard to know how to respond. That was the upshot of a recent thread on a Jewish mommies group on Facebook.

The thread begins with a long story, a kind of plea for help. A Jewish woman living with her family in a townhouse reports feeling intimidated by the behavior of a man living across from her who works for the management of her building complex. This man appears to be spying on her family and acts in a strange and vaguely threatening manner. She notes that one of her children is black.

But there's not enough about this vague threat, about this man, to bring to the police. The man's suspicious conduct is amorphous: not specific enough to pin down as such, or to report.

In the comments section, our Jewish mom reveals that she is actually afraid to go to the police. She fears that if she does report the man to the police on so little evidence, not only will there not be enough to bring him in or do anything about him, but he might find out that she went to the police. He might retaliate.

All of these issue would be true of a restraining order, as well. On what basis would she request such a measure? The man hasn’t done anything overtly threatening. He hasn’t burned swastikas into her lawn, yelled “Kike,” or thrown feces at her. Reporting the man (she calls him “The Nazi”) or taking out a restraining order may not effect anything other than to anger him. And what if the man is mentally unbalanced? How will he react to a Jewish woman taking measures against him to protect her family?

The women responding to this nightmare tale of woe were full of goodwill and advice, most of it along the lines of: Get a camera, gather evidence, go to the police, get a restraining order. Don’t wait.

None of this was helpful. Our Jewish mom lives in an America where the police are being defunded—where cops think twice before responding. How can she be sure she’ll find a policeman who is sympathetic and helpful? How can she control any fallout generated by the neighbor finding out that she cast suspicion on him (hint: she cannot). What good will photographic evidence or recorded conversations do if they chance to fall on blind eyes, deaf ears, or loose lips?

There are just too many variables.

Antisemitism is a funny thing and at times can be subjective: what seems blatant antisemitism to you, may be dismissed by someone else and even by the police, the IHRA definition of antisemitism notwithstanding. So there’s this insecure feeling about pointing out antisemitism when we see it. We wonder if we're being oversensitive. Maybe we imagined it.

We’re not sure. So we put our heads down. We retreat, and tread carefully.

At other times, we're sure, because the antisemitism is by all accounts blatant and rearing its head, as it is now. Our leaders speak out, some hands get slapped, which sometimes drives the antisemitism temporarily underground. It's still there—we just don’t see it.

This can’t be a good thing. Because when you drive antisemitism underground, you don't know how many antisemites there are, who they are, or what they are thinking and planning. That's why some believe it’s better to let the fountain flow, to not to stop the antisemitic tweets, utterings, and writings. It’s better to know what and with whom you are dealing, than to render the danger invisible, hence anonymous.

How can one defend against an unknown, unseen enemy? The simple answer: you can’t.

This week, I had an unpleasant confrontation with an American Jew on Twitter, a so-called “Zionist” who told me in public on social media—as opposed to by direct message—that Israel is not doing enough to combat the exploding U.S. antisemitism that most people directly connect to Israel’s Operation Guardian of the Wall. I got the message loud and clear. He thinks it’s Israel’s fault that American Jews are now experiencing antisemitism.

This man implied that he did all this stuff for us, for instance he has a Zionist Facebook group with thousands of members (big flip) and now we’re not doing anything for him/them, American Jewry at large.

What is the connection between these two stories? The shadowed, frightened Jewish mother, and the Zionist who feels he’s not getting his money’s worth from Israel? It’s that many Americans don’t know what to do with antisemitism.

They’d heard of it anecdotally, of course. They know about the Inquisition, the Dreyfus Trial, and the Holocaust. But all that stuff that happened TO OTHER PEOPLE, a long, long time ago. What do they do when antisemitism comes for them NOW? Wall yourself off while mumbling “Never Again” like a mantra from behind the closed curtains of your living room?

For my part, I told Mr. Zionist that he was a jerk (and no Zionist) for publicly criticizing Israel for not doing enough about antisemites being antisemitic.

With the Jewish Mommy, on the other hand, I took pains to offer useful advice. First, I found the ADL website and its report form. Then I thought nah. Jonathan Greenblatt is on the wrong side of things and I don’t trust him, see, for instance: A Member of the Anti-Defamation League’s Diversity Council is Embroiled in an Anti-Semitism Scandal. The Anti-Semitism Watchdog Has Nothing to Say About It.

So instead I went to the internet and dug up the report page (https://www.stopantisemitism.org/report-an-incident) on the Stop Antisemitism website. There, I actually know someone, Liora Rez, so I know it’s a reputable place. I told Jewish Mommy to fill out the report form right away, and not to be concerned about any possible backlash from the neighbor. The people at Stop Antisemitism are experts: people who already know whom to contact and what to do about even subtle antisemitic activity.

I knew that they would know what words to say to the right sympathetic ears in the security sector.

It was the smart thing to do.

I was upset about the Jewish Mommy all that day, and it disturbs me still, when I think of her story. I have continued to monitor the thread, but other than “liking” my comments, she doesn’t seem to have acted on my advice.

I can’t blame her for that. She doesn’t know me from Adam. Why should she trust that I am giving her good advice, or directing her to the right place?

In the meantime, I worry about her and her family. I’m afraid I’ll see them in the news—that they’ll be splashed on the front pages of the New York Times. (Though I shouldn’t be. After all, why would they be on the front page of the New York Times? They’re not “oppressed Palestinians.” They’re JEWISH. So not news.)

I worry that some Americans, at least some that I have witnessed, don’t know how to respond to subtle antisemitism: the kind of antisemitism that lurks around the edges, ever coming closer, as you remain too afraid to do anything at all about it.

And the truth is, there’s not all that much to do about antisemitism, whether expressed or repressed. Haters gonna hate. It’s always going to be the Jews for themselves—but don’t count on that, either, considering people like Greenblatt, Ken Roth, or Peter Beinart, who hope that the crocodile will eat them last.

One thing all of us can do about antisemitism, no matter where we live, is to hold our heads high and our shoulders back, proud to be Jews and proud to love Israel, our indigenous land. Because being meek is definitely not the way to go.

Haters look for weak spots. Being meek marks you as weak and turns you into prey. That means that if you’re not really sure how you feel about being Jewish, or whether you really, really love Israel and are unafraid to claim EVERY PART OF IT as your indigenous territory, you’ve created a weak spot and turned yourself into prey. And this is contagious. It's something you transfer it to your children, this weakness, this fear.

It’s the meekness that turns you into prey. (That and being whiny, like the dude on Twitter who threatened to tell on me to his thousands of followers on his “Zionist” Facebook group.) So buck up. Own it. Be in your face Jewish.

Let me be clear, I’m not advising anyone to take to the streets to face down anyone who is terrorizing you or your family. (Seriously. Don’t do that.) But don’t let them smell the fear on you, either. Be proud to be Jewish. It’s about a communal attitude that may make a difference over time, for you and for your children.

We reported yesterday that Mahmoud Abbas sponsored a supposedly "scientific" conference aimed at coming up with ways to combat the facts of Jewish history by promoting academic papers that supposedly refute it.

The conference at Open Al Quds University concluded today, featuring a speech by PA's minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research Mahmoud Abu Mowais, where he said "we need the papers of this conference and a committee emanating from this conference to help us achieve the strategy of higher education and scientific research and the practical steps taken by the ministry in this field. Universities have a key role in analyzing and refuting the [Israeli] narrative, and we focused on three religious axes and legends made them claim that Palestine is their land. "

"The Zionist narrative of the Holocaust brought them thousands of immigrants, while the current criminal holocaust of the Israelis against the Palestinians must be confronted," he said.

Besides the antisemitism of comparing the Palestinian issue with the Holocaust, note that he didn't say that the Holocaust itself brought Jews to Palestine - it was the "Zionist narrative of the Holocaust."

Somehow the Zionists convinced the Jews in Europe that their relatives were slaughtered.

Mowais added that "all the decisions and curricula of the occupation are focused on the fact that the Jew is the zenith of civilization, that the Arabs are a primitive people, and that the Palestinian does not exist on Earth. We have developed a plan of action to combat these allegations by relying on universities as centers of scientific and intellectual production based on learning, and focusing on archaeological research to refute the narrative. And to encourage students to communicate our story to the world, and to bring students from European countries to Palestinian universities to see the situation as it is."

These are the people who claim tat Israel plants fake artifacts all over the land to pretend that there was Jewish history there and that there is no evidence of Jewish Temples in Jerusalem. They are the ones who want to create university courses to teach Europeans their version of history.

Chances are, this strategy will work. What student will question what a professor tells them, especially when they passionately explain that all of Jewish history is a lie made up by the hated Zionists?

06/30 Links Pt1: Nikki Haley: A Better Blueprint for International Organizations; The NYTs Relies on Amnesty and HRW Sources in Misleading Gaza Video; When will Mahmoud Abbas step down?

From Ian:

Amb. Nikki R. Haley and Richard Goldberg: A Better Blueprint for International Organizations

The United States must call out China’s attempts to co-opt the United Nations and its agencies. We should rally other countries to oppose China’s influence. As ambassador, I lost track of how many countries expressed their fear of China’s bullying. They are counting on us to have their backs – and to push back, hard.

The WHO’s struggles illustrate another sad reality: Many UN agencies are broken. The United States should try to fix them where possible. Yet we cannot fall into the trap of mistaking process for progress. Some parts of the United Nations just cannot be salvaged. Sometimes we are better off leaving them behind.

An obvious example is the UN Human Rights Council, which is a cesspool of human rights violators – from Cuba to China to Venezuela to Russia. I pressed our allies and partners to demand reforms, but they were content with the status quo. So I led the effort to withdraw the United States from the council. We care too much about human rights and individual freedom to be part of a group that undermines both. Our principles are too important to get lost in the endless and pointless process that UN bureaucrats prefer.

We also withdrew from the Human Rights Council because the United States stands with our friends. The council spent the vast majority of its time condemning Israel – a free and democratic country. It has a standing agenda item devoted to Israel. It has passed 10 times as many resolutions condemning Israel as it has for China, North Korea, Iran, and Cuba combined. Friends do not sit still while their friends get attacked, so we walked away. We stopped funding the UN Relief and Works Agency for similar reasons. That agency does more to foster hatred toward Israel than it does to support actual Palestinian refugees. So much of the United Nations has an insane fixation on Israel. In fact, when it comes to Israel, there is no clearer sign of the United Nations’ profound shortcomings.

It was my privilege to tackle those shortcomings as ambassador. We made headway in many areas. But I have no illusions that we can solve all the United Nations’ problems. We should make progress where we can, walk away when we cannot, and hold the line when we must.

Amb. Dore Gold: Prime Minister Bennett Should Nail Down Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights with President Biden

Israel captured the Golan Heights in 1967 as a result of the Six-Day War. According to UN Security Council Resolution 242, Israel was expected to withdraw from territories – but not all the territories – so that at the end of the day it would be left with “secure and recognized boundaries.” The most important U.S. statement on policy with respect to the Golan Heights was contained in the 1975 letter from President Gerald Ford to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin which stated that “the U.S. has not developed a final position on the borders. Should it do so, it will give great weight to Israel’s position that any peace agreement with Syria must be predicated on Israel remaining on the Golan Heights.”

What made the Ford letter so significant was that it provided the basis for the formulation of U.S. policy by subsequent administrations. Thus, right before the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, Secretary of State James Baker wrote a letter to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, stating: “You expressed a special concern about the Golan Heights. In this context, the United States continues to stand behind the assurance given by President Ford to Prime Minister Rabin on September 1, 1975.” A second American letter reconfirming the Ford letter was written in 1996 by Secretary of State Warren Christopher to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well. American assurances on the Golan Heights were bipartisan and in many respects set the stage for finally recognizing Israeli sovereignty on March 25, 2019.

The new U.S. approach to the Golan Heights was not formally locked in by means of a bilateral treaty. Thus, theoretically, the Biden administration would be within its legal right to modify this policy. These kinds of changes unfortunately happen. For example, Israel received a letter from President George W. Bush in 2004 recognizing Israel’s right to “defensible borders.” The letter was even backed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of the U.S. Congress. Nonetheless, the Obama administration disavowed the Bush letter. President Biden and Secretary of State Blinken have not renounced Trump’s recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, but they haven’t accepted it either.

Clearly, further diplomacy is required between Jerusalem and Washington. Perhaps the issue can be settled before the first summit meeting between President Biden and Prime Minister Bennett. Remember, Iran is seeking to encircle Israel with its Shiite militias, in Lebanon, in new bases within Syria, and eventually in Jordan. If U.S. policy over the Golan Heights is interpreted as changing, that might even invite a conflict that neither the U.S. nor Israel is seeking.

“Palestinians” Don’t Exist – but when they do, it’s to annihilate Israel.

First and foremost, Jews and Israelis must stop caring about world opinions. The fact that Israel is the only Democracy in the Middle East, where people of every religion and creed thrive, is inconsequential to a world who views us as “occupiers”. We appear to be so for two simple reasons; The refusal of some to apply sovereignty and to destroy the “Palestinian” myth. That is the core of the issue.

Jews have absolute legal rights to rebuild and settle in Israel, according to the 1922 Mandate for Palestine: “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country”. According to attorney Howard Grief, international law advisor and legal expert on Jewish rights to Israel, “the UN did not have the legal authority to partition the country in favour of the Arabs of Palestine who were not the national beneficiary of the Mandate entitled to self-determination”.

Furthermore, “Article 80 of the UN Charter [the Jewish People’s clause] preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine… The UN is still committed by Article 80 to uphold [the Mandate and] not alter it”. Jewish settlement is fully protected by Article 80, and the UN has no power to give Jewish territory to any entity to create a state. Those who claim “annexation” may be a hurdle do not realise that one cannot annex one’s own land. We have full rights to sovereignty and must apply it, with many options to do so.

I posit, however, that it is not enough. There still remains the giant, KGB circus elephant in the room, the “Palestinian” hoax. Should we continue to use the false designation, the lie will perpetuate; We will still be viewed as the “occupiers” and any means used against us, no matter how violent, will be pronounced appropriate. The argument I often hear from Jews and Israelis is that “Palestinians” have a right to call themselves by that title because they “identify” as such.

By this logic, I, a non-indigenous American, can “identify” myself as a Native American and demand the tiny reservation they own. If they don’t hock it over, I can create the Native American Liberation Front and then barrage them with missiles while the UN backs my cause.

There is no imaginable reason to allow the appropriation of our historical title to continue. Such a belligerent level of cultural theft has not existed since the Germans fancied themselves “Aryans”, yet the Allied forces were not calling the Nazis by their chosen identity so as to avoid hurt feelings.

Each time we use the term “Palestinian”, we assist in legitimising the false narrative, and then battle the ensuing propaganda and terrorism that are a consequence of the hoax. It’s the story of Frankenstein’s monster. Give the monster life, then fight it off, in a continual cycle. Many Jews hold the same view of the situation, but we have yet to take action. It’s time to stop the Nazi protégé, made in the USSR, Iran-funded terror group once and for all. Negotiations with terrorists and land-for-peace must end, their leadership must be dissolved, and Jews and our allies must immediately rename “Palestinians” to “Arab migrants to Israel”, or any suitable, accurate title, and only address them as such from henceforth.

To achieve lasting peace for Jews and all Israelis, it can only come with G-d’s help and with our effort to return to truth and strength.

Two years ago, the House of Representatives had a unique opportunity.

As the Associated Press summarized the situation at the time under the headline House Democrats fail to condemn anti-Semitism, don’t rebuke Rep. Ilhan Omar:

Ms. Omar has on multiple occasions questioned the support shown for Israel by most members of Congress. At one point she suggested it was because they were bought off by Jewish money and more recently she suggested Israel-backers had dual-allegiances both classic anti-Semitic tropes.

The expectation was that the House was going to condemn antisemitism -- and rebuke Omar in particular.

That did not happen.

Among the excuses for not condemning Omar, the Democrats claimed:

o "Ms. Omar has faced unconscionable attacks as one of two Muslim women in Congress"

o “This woman has death threats”

o “The question was maybe she needs security because of the kind of wrath that she has been facing. That is really unacceptable.”

So in the end, Omar was not condemned at all.

And neither was antisemitism -- at least not in the way that had been expected:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants were rewriting the resolution to include other forms of hate speech, and they postponed a vote that had been expected to occur Wednesday.

“People do feel if we’re going to condemn one form of bigotry that we make sure we also condemn other forms of bigotry,” said Rep. Pramilla Jayapal, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Instead, legitimacy was given to the attitude that "if we’re going to condemn one form of bigotry that we make sure we also condemn other forms of bigotry."

We saw that attitude again, later that year.

In response to an antisemitic attack on a kosher supermarket in Jersey City that left 3 people dead, the chancellor of Rutgers University–New Brunswick, Christopher J. Molloy posted a letter on the Rutgers website addressing what happened:

One week ago today, we learned about the brutal acts that took place in Jersey City. As the details unfolded in the days that followed, we learned more about the victims and the intention behind the attack.

The events that took place right in our backyard were motivated by hatred and narrow-mindedness and once again, we find ourselves consoling one another as we denounce intolerance and violence.

(h/t EOZ)

There was no mention of Jews.
There was no mention of antisemitism.
And there was no complaint about the letter itself

Fast-forward to 2021.

On May 29, Chancellor Molloy posted another letter, this time in response to the rise in antisemitic attacks on Jews following the war that broke out after the Hamas rocket attack on Israel. In a letter entitled Speaking Out Against Acts of Anti-Semitism, Molloy wrote:

We are saddened by and greatly concerned about the sharp rise in hostile sentiments and anti-Semitic violence in the United States. Recent incidents of hate directed toward Jewish members of our community again remind us of what history has to teach us. Tragically, in the last century alone, acts of prejudice and hatred left unaddressed have served as the foundation for many atrocities against targeted groups around the world.

He went on to generalize his condemnation to include "all forms of bigotry, prejudice, discrimination, xenophobia, and oppression, in whatever ways they may be expressed."

That may be a watering down of his opening condemnation of antisemitism. But in any case, his condemnation of antisemitism was condemned.

Greg Price, of the Daily Caller, tweeted excerpts of a Students for Justice in Palestine post on Instagram, objecting to the chancellor's letter:

o The post directly ties Jews with Israel, demanding that any condemnation of attacks on Jews in the US must also make mention of Palestinian Arabs in the Middle East.
o  It proclaims the need for "a safe learning environment inclusive of difference," though attacks on Jews in the US have increased at a time that there have been no similar uptick in attacks on Arabs or Muslims.
o  The post closes with more linkage, this time between Jews and Palestinian Arabs in the US, implying that any mention of antisemitism against Jews requires a mention of alleged wrongdoing against Palestinian Arabs, whose "voices" and "visibility" are allegedly being dismissed.
o  It closes with not only with a demand for an apology for condemning only antisemitism, but also with the claim that respect for those "voices" of Palestinian Arabs in Rutgers require condemnation of Israel.

This follows the model established by Pelosi and the Democrats in the House, that condemnation of antisemitism cannot exist on its own -- it must be accompanied with other condemnations of other forms of bias.

This model of refusing to condemn antisemitism on its own was further emphasized in May by progressive Democrats:

o Bernie Sanders: “We’ve recently seen disturbing antisemitic attacks and a troubling rise in Islamophobia”
o Rep. Cori Bush: “The work of dismantling antisemitism, anti-Blackness, Islamophobia, anti-Palestinian racism, and every other form of hate is OUR work”
o Rep. Jamaal Bowman: “We’ve seen an increase in antisemitic and Islamophobic hate, in NYC and nationwide — hateful words, hate crimes, and other forms of violence.”
o Rep. Ayanna Pressley: “I strongly condemn the rise in anti-Semitism and islamophobia we’re seeing across the country.”
o Sen. Elizabeth Warren: “Antisemitism has no place in our country or world. Neither does Islamophobia,”

SJP merely takes advantage of this trend of linkage and goes even further, demanding that condemnations of antisemitism must require condemnations of Israel as well.

In response, the chancellor apologized on May 27:

...while the intent of our message was to affirm that Rutgers–New Brunswick is a place where all identities can feel validated and supported, the impact of the message fell short of that intention. In hindsight, it is clear to us that the message failed to communicate support for our Palestinian community members. We sincerely apologize for the hurt that this message has caused...

But 2 days later, the university president deni ed that any apology was given, claiming, "Rutgers deplores hatred and bigotry in all forms. We have not, nor would we ever, apologize for standing against anti-Semitism."

In order to support their denial of apology, the original URL (https://newbrunswick.rutgers.edu/chancellor/apology) now goes directly to the page that denies that any apology was ever made (https://newbrunswick.rutgers.edu/chancellor/on-hatred-and-bigotry)

So now, not only are Jews not allowed to define antisemitism, now it is not even politically correct to condemn it.

That was the message this week, in the reaction to another condemnation of antisemitism. On June 10, a condemnation of rising antisemitism was posted by April Powers, the SCBWI Chief Equity and Inclusion Officer, on the Facebook page of the Society of Children's Book Writers and Illustrators (SCBWI):

Although the statement specified "speaking out against all forms of hate," that was not enough and SCBWI was pressured to apologize for condemning antisemitism.

As far as what kind of feedback to the post forced the apology, Powers notes "I removed both anti-Palestinian and anti-Israeli posts" and at least one Palestinian writer was blocked and had her comments removed.

The executive director of SCBWI, Lin Oliver, posted the apology:

On behalf of SCBWI, I would like to apologize to everyone in the Palestinian community who felt unrepresented, silenced, or marginalized. SCBWI acknowledges the pain our actions have caused to our Muslim and Palestinian members and hope that we can heal from this moment.

First among the changes she listed, Oliver noted the resignation of Powers.

It is a sign of the world we live in that, while at Google their head of diversity is forced to leave his post (but not resign from the company) for making antisemtic comments, at SCBWI the Chief Equity and Inclusion Officer is forced to resign for actually condemning antisemitism.

Oliver claims:

I can assure you that this painful week has been a crucial learning experience for SCBWI.

For SCBWI -- perhaps.
But for antisemites, it was a glorious reaffirmation that they are in control.

The excuse for not condemning Ilhan Omar -- the potential violence and danger she might face -- is very one-sided. It does not apply to condemning antisemitism, despite the actual violence and danger that Jews now face.

Today, UNRWA's advisory committee will meet to address yet another deficit in its budget.

UNRWA has warned that by August its deficit will hit $30 million and that its annual deficit is at $150 million.

All of this is despite the US resuming aid to UNRWA to the tune of $150 million a year and an additional $33 million to help rebuild Gaza.

This happens every year - war or no war, COVID or no COVID. UNRWA cries that it is running out of money and that it won't be able to fulfil its outdated and bigoted mandate, and the nations of the world give millions to bail it out and look like humanitarians.

No one steps back and asks - why do Palestinians get schools funded by the world when no real refugee population does? Why do they get a completely separate medical infrastructure when no real refugees do? What gives fake Palestinian "refugees" a higher priority than the tens of millions of real refugees?

Why fund an agency whose entire purpose is to perpetuate the problem it is supposedly meant to fix? The number of people it has to feed and house and educate according to its mandate will continue to grow year after year according to its skewed definition of "refugee" where even full citizens of other countries and their descendants remain "refugees" forever.

The entire purpose of UNRWA nowadays is to keep alive the idea that millions of Palestinians will "return" to and therefore destroy Israel. It will use the language of human rights to cover the fact that its unstated goal is the destruction of the Jewish state. The agency has been hijacked by the people it supposedly serves - as we saw last month with the dismissal of the Gaza UNRWA head, if anyone actually says the truth they will be punished.

The other truth about UNRWA in Gaza is that it is controlled by a terror group. The UNRWA union is essentially Hamas. Hamas says what is allowed in the school curricula. Hamas uses UNRWA schools to shield tunnels and to store rockets. UNRWA cannot so anything without Hamas permission.

UNRWA is not a solution for Palestinians - it is the problem. Because UNRWA exists, Arab states have had an excuse not to absorb and naturalize their Palestinian "guests." It also has contributed to hate of Palestinians by other Arabs - Arabs in Jordan and Syria are jealous that Palestinians get services they cannot get themselves.

The free services that UNRWA provides has also contributed to a Palestinian subculture of lazy, entitled people with no incentive to find work or build businesses.

Instead of attacking the real problem head-on, the West is happy to pay hundreds of millions annually to avoid the issue - and the problem grows.

Everyone knows his but no national leader (with the significant exception of Donald Trump) has had the guts to say it out loud.

Recently, an Egyptian fatwa was issued that allows women to wear light perfume outside the home, as long as their intent is not to attract men.

According to what was reported by Al-Youm Al-Sabaa newspaper, Dr. Ahmed Mamdouh, Director of the Sharia Research Department and Secretary of Fatwa at the Egyptian Dar Al-Iftaa, confirmed that there is nothing wrong with women putting on perfume if it is not put on too heavily and as long as the woman does not intend it "to stir instincts or win the hearts of men."

The fatwa does not seem to distinguish between married or single women.

Sheikh Mamdouh pointed out that the hadith that says “Any woman who puts on perfume and then goes out and meets people so that they can smell her scent is an adulteress,” is true.

The Grand Mufti of the Egyptian Republic, Shawki Allam, confirmed that perfume for men and women is part of hygiene - perhaps he is referring to deodorant - and he also stressed the need for women to use perfume in an unobtrusive manner.

The Dar al-Iftaa has a similar fatwa for women's makeup, saying it is OK to put on light eyeshadow or the like.

Initial report from Meir Amit ITIC names 112 terrorists killed, 21 killed by rocket fire, 31 human shields for terrorists

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center issued its analysis of the names of the people killed in Gaza.

They have identified 234 killed in attacks by Israel of which 112 (48%) were positively identified as terrorists. 63 belonged to Hamas, 20 to the PIJ, 25 to Fatah, two to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), one to the Mujahedeen Brigades and one to the Popular Resistance Committees.

11 more men may have been targeted as terrorists but the ITIC could not identify any affiliation for them.

An additional 21 were identified as being killed by Gaza rockets.

I count 31 people killed because they were in the same house as a terrorist target, effectively human shields for terrorists. Most of the other civilians were killed from Israel targeting other valid military targets.

I believe that 3 others were likely killed by Gaza rockets, (Hamad Ayad Mansour al-Dabari, Buthaina

Mahmoud Issa Obeid, Dima Saad Ali Asaliya) although the report only considers one of them as a possibility. In general, the report is very cautious before identifying terrorists or likely victims of rocket fire.

Two of the identified terrorists were under 18 years of age; a third which the ITIC said was 20 had been identified as a child by the New York Times and as a 12th grader by the Palestinian Ministry of Education.

06/29 Links Pt2: Pro-Palestinian Jew-Hate in Europe; Yale Student Government Condemns Israel for ‘Genocide’; The Three Best Books on Antisemitism

From Ian:

The Three Best Books on Antisemitism, recommended by Dave Rich

There are so many books about antisemitism that it seems foolhardy to try to summarise the full scope of literature on the subject, never mind choosing just three to recommend. Some books cover the vast expanse of antisemitism throughout history; others focus on a particular country, period, episode or trope. Holocaust-related literature alone provides an endless choice of ground-breaking research alongside fascinating and disturbing stories. Each new outbreak of antisemitism generates a new round of publications: for example, the past decade alone has seen several new books that try to explain the recent surge of antisemitism within radical, progressive politics. Even books that are not about antisemitism can still illuminate so brightly that they are become essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the subject (Vasily Grossman’s Life And Fate comes to mind).

Consequently, this is very much a personal choice of mine and the absence of so many wonderful books from this short list is in no way a slight on any of them. I have chosen one book about antisemitism; one book about how Jews think about, or relate to, antisemitism; and one book about how non-Jews think (or rather, don’t think) about antisemitism.

David Nirenberg – Anti-Judaism: The Western Tradition
There are so many different manifestations of antisemitism throughout history, in different epochs, societies and systems of thought and belief, that it ought to resist neat explanation via a single unifying theory, yet this is what David Nirenberg achieves in his phenomenal piece of scholarship. Nirenberg’s compelling argument is that, since the earliest days of Christianity (and even beforehand), people have used Jews and Judaism as concepts and reference points through which to interpret and understand the world. This is not so much about real Jews or Judaism, but rather their deployment as labels through which ideas, products and behaviours are categorised as the antithesis of what is valued or good in that particular society and time. As Nirenberg puts it when discussing the conflation of Jews and capitalism by some leading nineteenth century socialists, there are ‘long habits of thought that understood human life and history in terms of the struggle to achieve the proper relation between law and love, thing and person, letter and spirit, and called the failure to achieve that ideal “Judaism.”’ Hence money or property can be ‘Jewish’, as could the French revolutionaries, or early Christian fathers, or anyone or anything else that is not actually Jewish, but can have the characteristics of ‘Judaism’ thrust upon them as a way of assigning and explaining their (usually negative) place in the world. This is what gives antisemitism its unique character that differentiates it from other racisms and bigotries. Nirenberg’s theory also provides a framework for understanding new expressions of this idea, such as the otherwise inexplicable phenomenon of non-Jewish Labour MPs who have no connection to Israel being called ‘Zionists’ by supporters of the previous Corbyn leadership. If I could only recommend one book on antisemitism rather than three, this would be my choice.

Emily Schrader: Facebook’s policy inconsistency puts Israelis at risk

Ironically, El Kurd, presumably angry over her pro-terrorism content being removed, has begun pushing back against Facebook by promoting a social media campaign dramatically named “End Digital Execution” which claims Palestinians are being “censored” by Facebook. The irony, of course, is that this is the opposite of the truth. Despite multiple posts that clearly violate Facebook’s policies by its own admission, El Kurd is very active on the platform on a near daily basis. So who exactly is censoring her?

In contrast, consider content from Israeli social activist Yoseph Haddad, which called out The New York Times for using a photo of a Hamas terrorist and listing him as a child who was killed by the IDF. This post was removed without any explanation whatsoever.

In May, a pro-Israel Facebook page with 77 million followers was removed completely due to violating “spam” policies, after anti-Israel activists left hundreds of thousands of antisemitic comments. Yes – you read that correctly. Facebook removed a pro-Israel page due to the actions of antisemites targeting the page. Similarly, dozens of pro-Israel activists have found themselves with content randomly removed and accounts suspended over generically pro-Israel content.

IF PRO-ISRAEL or anti-Israel activists are posting content that violates Facebook’s policies, they should be dealt with accordingly, but the double standards in enforcement cannot continue, especially when activists like El Kurd are not simply repeating falsehoods about Israel at a time of rising antisemitism, but are also actively glorifying terrorists to her more than one million followers.

Make no mistake – these double standards put Israelis at risk.

It is utterly unacceptable that accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers are permitted to have pro-terror content for days, even after it’s been reported to Facebook. Facebook has a responsibility to act swiftly and consistently with issues of incitement to violence, and glorifying terrorists in the Middle East certainly qualifies as such.

Additionally, Facebook must be more transparent about what its policies are and how it is enforcing them, equally.

The status quo is insufficient. Facebook, do better.

Pro-Palestinian Jew-Hate in Europe

Violent anti-Semitic eruptions in Europe following the outburst of hostilities between the Gaza-based Hamas terrorists and Israel have become common and repeated occurrences. The European governments have done little to prevent the largely Muslim and some local anti-Semites from initiating violence against European Jews. It is particularly true of the German government and its leader, Angela Merkel. Chancellor Merkel invited over a million migrants into Germany, mostly Muslims from the Middle East and Africa. Their inculcated hatred for Israel and Jews has resulted in the desecration of Jewish cemeteries, Holocaust memorials, and attacks on synagogues. To assuage Jewish concerns, Merkel and the German government pay lip-service to the unacceptability of anti-Semitism in Germany due to Germany’s role in perpetrating the Holocaust in which Six Million Jews were murdered by Nazi Germany. In reality, few of the perpetrators are punished, and certainly not with long prison terms or deportation.

The New York Times reported (May 19, 2021) that rocks were thrown at doors of a Synagogue in Bonn. Israeli flags were burned outside a synagogue in Munster. Pro-Palestinian rallies took place in Berlin, Cologne, Dusseldorf, Hamburg, and Leipzig. “In Germany, where historical memory runs especially deep because of the Holocaust, pro-Palestinian rallies have been held in cities across the west of the country and in the capital, Berlin. Several have descended into violence, including anti-Semitic chants, calls for violence against Israel, desecration of memorials to Holocaust victims, and attacks on at least two synagogues.”

The German Interior Minister Horst Seehoffer threatened to crackdown on anti-Semitism at pro-Palestinian protests. He stated, “We will not tolerate the burning of Israeli flags on German soil and attacks on Jewish facilities.” He added, “Anyone who spreads anti-Semitic hatred will feel the full force of the law.” We have heard these immaterialized threats before, but then, political correctness appears to cause German officials to fold rather than deal forcibly with violent Muslims, many of them new migrants. European White Guilt, particularly toward Third World people, accompanied by the loss of national pride, and the will to defend its own traditional values, is allowing a violent minority to perpetuate anti-Semitic violence.

Disallowing anti-Semitic rallies, especially in Germany, isn’t only a matter of decency and morality, considering what preceded the latest Guardian of the Walls operation. The unprovoked Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) massive rocket attacks on Israel’s capital, and civilian population centers in the south and center of Israel, should be reason enough for Germany (and other European governments) to aggressively prevent these hate-filled riots. Moreover, the Israeli government was trying hard to reach an agreement with Hamas, whereby Israel would advance humanitarian gestures to Gaza in exchange for calm. The German nation, more than any other, should consider the fact that Hamas and the PIJ have committed themselves to the destruction of the Jewish state, just as Hitler committed Germany to the destruction of the European Jewry. And yet, Merkel’s Germany is doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has declared its intention to “wipe Israel off the map.” German fear to alienate Muslim anti-Semites has found recourse in blaming native German right-wingers for most of the hatred and anti-Semitism in Germany rather than the radical Muslims.

A former Iranian intelligence minister has said all Iranian officials are at risk of being killed by the Mossad.

Ali Younesi, who served under reformist President Mohammad Khatami from December 2000 to August 2005, blamed Iranian intelligence for negligence.

Speaking in an interview with reformist Jamaran news website published on Tuesday, Younesi said rivalries between the Intelligence Ministry, the Intelligence Organization of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), and other security services had led to weaknesses. "Parallel organizations are busy fighting insiders rather than monitoring and confronting infiltrators," Younesi argued.

He explained that "the Israeli Mossad was able to launch several strikes in Iran, to the extent that it has become a clear and explicit threat to Iranian officials."

He pointed out that the priority of the Iranian security services today is to "fight critics at home, not the Israeli security incursion."

Egypt seems mesmerized by the saga of "Burkini Girl."

Dina Hisham went to a swimming pool in a hotel with a burkini and was told that she was not allowed to swim there. She tearfully posted about her experience on Instagram, and as sometimes happens, the video went viral, starting a fierce debate in Egypt.

There have been news segments dedicated to the issue last night, where people debated the merits of the burkini - swimwear that covers up the women wearing it. A "medical expert" said that the swimsuit was dangerous because it covers up any skin disease that the person might have, presumably putting other swimmers at risk.

By that logic, everyone really should swim nude. Who knows what skin condition is under the covered parts?

The funny part is that in Israel, no one cares if Muslim women wear full coverings or not in public pools and beaches.

The Jewish state is more tolerant of Muslims than Muslim countries often are.