Pages

▼

Saturday, November 16, 2024

11/16 Links: Israel Is Fighting a Different War Now; Trump 2.0 means the end of ambivalence about Israel; Yoseph Haddad: Taking pride in being Arab Israeli

From Ian:

Safety Is a Choice
So where does this leave American Jews who want to make themselves safer? They need to focus on reinforcing the most important potential choice: the option to be a public Zionist in America. It’s that simple. And this requires demanding and forcing the chessboard back into position.

Jews will be choiceless as long as they can be demonized and harassed while a top-down anti-Semitic establishment gives cover to “anti-Zionists” to renounce dialogue, reason, and civility. And this, for many Jews, will mean, ultimately, being deprived of the choice of safely wearing a Jewish star or yarmulke while walking through campus or strolling past a protest. Ultimately, this condition means living with a physical threat that’s always present, just below the surface.

This work has to be a Jewish grassroots endeavor because it is often hard for even well-intentioned non-Jews to recognize this aspect of Jewish safety. As a former NYPD detective admits, for many cops and campus-security officers, the attitude is: “Who gives a shit if someone is yelling ‘river to the sea,’ or if they’re saying you’re a baby killer when you’re not.”

Sidestepping useless institutional leadership, Mike mentioned some successful work by an international group called Students Supporting Israel. He described how its members recently helped Columbia students organize an event at which two IDF reservists came to campus, sat at a table, and chatted with whomever wanted to engage. It mostly went well. “Chances are somebody got in their face,” Mike observes, “but [the IDF soldiers] don’t give a f—k. They feel they are fighting for Western civilization.”

All the steps Jews are taking to feel and be safer are worthwhile. But whether it’s through displaying symbols of Zionism, or reporting anti-Zionist incidents of anti-Semitism, or lobbying institutions and governmental bodies to codify anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism, Jews of all stripes and political orientations should put pressure, time, and capital toward ensuring that Zionism is incorporated into institutional, governmental, and legal definitions of anti-Semitism. And they should call out the intellectual bankruptcy and cowardice of refusing to engage on the topic of Israel, naming and pressuring leaders who enable this silencing of dialogue.

Because identity itself is not a choice. And if Jews don’t demand the space to defend their core Zionist identity in public discourse, we will find that choice has been made for us.
Just after Kristallnacht, Gandhi said Jews should die with joy. What would he say now?
Zionism and the struggle to defend the Jewish State
Kallenbach, however, did try to convert Gandhi — to Zionism.

After witnessing with horror the Nazi rise to power, Kallenbach had become a devout Zionist and was even enlisted by the leaders of the Zionist movement in an unsuccessful attempt to convince Gandhi to follow suit. In fact, Gandhi’s opposition to Zionism had a longstanding impact, with India not adopting a warm stance toward Israel until as late as the 1990s.

The precise reasons for his opposition to Zionism remain a subject of debate. Some have pointed to the practical reasons why Gandhi — a champion of Indian inter-religious unity and independence — would certainly not have helped his cause by championing one so maligned by many of the world’s Muslims, including, of course, those in his homeland. Dr. Gangeya Mukherji, author of ‘Gandhi and Tagore: Politics, Truth and Conscience.’ (Courtesy)

“Gandhi recognized that as long as India remained unified and the Muslim League was part of its political landscape, it would be impossible for the country to take any position opposed to the Palestinians,” says Devji. “Yet, the Muslim League had itself advised Palestinians to accept the partition of the country that was proposed by the UN, which was after all what they wanted for India as well. In this sense, India’s Muslims, as a minority population like Jews, identified with the latter in many ways even as they supported the Palestinians.”

Mukherji, however, dismisses any connection outright. “Hindu-Muslim unity had no bearing on the question of Zionism,” he says. “This linkage of Gandhi’s position on the Zionist question to that of Hindu-Muslim unity is a more recent phenomenon, emerging from the notion of Gandhi’s ‘appeasement’ of Muslims. It is similar to the Arab denial of the terrible vastness of the Holocaust by describing it as an act of anti-German sentiment.”

Rajmohan Gandhi, himself deeply involved in decades-long reconciliation efforts, thinks that his grandfather’s “lifelong desire and effort for friendship and partnership between India’s Hindus and Muslims would surely have influenced his views on the Jewish-Arab question,” yet does not think that “his opposition to Zionism was strongly influenced by the desire for Hindu-Muslim friendship” but rather “intimately linked to his problem with colonialism.”

“He said that as long as the Zionists relied on British power to stake a claim on Palestine he could not sympathize with them, for he saw the same thing happening in India with the Muslim League in place of the Zionists,” says Devji. “He thought that only by appealing to and convincing the Palestinians to share the land would Zionism become a legitimate movement. India and Palestine thus mirrored each other in his eyes.”

Even if Gandhi was never converted to Zionism, it seems clear that he would have abhorred the terror onslaught of October 7, 2023, which saw thousands of Hamas-led terrorists invade southern Israel, killing 1,200 men, women, and children and kidnapping 251 to the Gaza Strip.

Yet what would he have suggested Israel’s response be?
“He would certainly not have approved a military response, but he would have equally condemned the [Hamas] attacks,” says Mukherji, elaborating that “he would not have supported the policy of Israel to expand, fortify, and settle areas in quest of safeguarding its sovereignty.”

While agreeing that Gandhi would certainly have deplored the violence from all sides, Devji thinks that the Indian leader would indeed have supported Israel forcefully driving out the terrorists, after which he “might have seen the October 7 attacks as an opportunity for Israel to take the moral high ground… declaring a unilateral peace process to resolve the conflict.” Mahatma Gandhi, center, confers with leaders of the All-India Congress Party, August 1942, location unknown. With him are Maulana Aboul Kalan Azad, right, the party’s president, and J.B. Kripalani, general secretary. This picture is from the film ‘India At War.’ (AP Photo)

“He was a great believer in the spectacle of moral action, and the attack offered Israel just such an opportunity to completely change the tenor of political debate globally and to its eternal credit,” Devji says. “But of course, elected politicians don’t always have the luxury to make such statements, depending as they do not only on their constituents but partners as well. In this case, the very weakness of a coalition government seems to have pushed it into a very predictable response.”

Citing his grandfather’s support of dispatching armed soldiers to counter Pakistani-aided militants in Kashmir in 1947, Rajhmohan Gandhi emphatically agrees that the father of modern India “would surely have mobilized and mounted resistance to the attacks.”

“At times a practitioner of nonviolence, at some other times he was a professor or teacher of nonviolence but a supporter of violent resistance. This is what actual history says,” Rajhmohan Gandhi says. “No matter what form Gandhi’s resistance to October 7 would have taken, it would have definitely involved Israel’s Arabs as well. A starting premise with Gandhi would be that Jews and Arabs share the land as siblings, have to live next to one another together no matter the past, no matter who ‘started’ which conflict, or who merely ‘reacted.’”
Gates of Hell
Review of 'The Gates of Gaza' by Amir Tibon by Michael M. Rosen
Terrorists hunted down Roi Rutberg, a 21-year-old farmer in Nahal Oz, an Israeli kibbutz on the Gaza frontier. They carefully planned their assault, crossed the border into Israel, advanced through an agricultural field, brutally murder-ed Roi, and dragged his corpse to Gaza, where frenetic crowds mutilated it.

October 7, 2023? No. The Rutberg slaying took place in April 1956. But as Amir Tibon observes in his new book, The Gates of Gaza, it presaged Hamas’s barbarous attack and reflects how profoundly and persistently intractable the enclave has been. Gaza is truly a problem from hell.

A diplomatic correspondent for Haaretz, Tibon provides a propulsive and poignant recounting of his own ordeal in Nahal Oz, where he, his wife, and their two young daughters sheltered for 10 hours in their safe room as Islamist terrorists rampaged across their community.

Seamlessly blending a history of Gaza with the harrowing events of October 7, Tibon highlights how, for more than 100 years, the Strip has destabilized the region and warped both Israeli and Palestinian society.

Long before any Israeli “occupation” of Gaza, Arab terrorists called fedayeen used it as a launching pad to infiltrate Israel and slaughter Jews. “The newly created Israel-Gaza border,” Tibon writes, of the period following the Jewish state’s establishment in 1948, “knew very few days of peace.”

Following Rutberg’s murder, the Israeli general Moshe Dayan visited the kibbutz, where he delivered a dark but realistic pronouncement. “Beyond the furrow of the border,” he intoned, “a sea of hatred and desire for revenge is swelling, awaiting the day when serenity will dull our path.” Decades of low-grade violence emanated from the enclave.

Even so, vibrant communities developed in the so-called Gaza Envelope, and the vast majority of them harbored hopes for peace with their Arab neighbors, even ferrying them to Israeli hospitals. Dani Rachamim arrived at Nahal Oz in 1975, eight years after Israel had taken the strip from Egypt, and developed close enough friendships with Palestinians across the border to invite them to his wedding on the kibbutz. “It felt totally natural for them to be there and dance with us,” he tells Tibon. “We were neighbors.” The community even hosted a Festival of Peace in 1994, amid the early euphoria of the Oslo Accords, welcoming dozens of Palestinian families. “Peace with the people of Gaza was now within reach,” Rachamim and his fellow kibbutzniks thought.

But that euphoria quickly gave way to despair, as Yasir Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization rejected further peace proposals and went on to arm Palestinian groups—including a newly formed Islamist faction called Hamas, whose establishment Israel tacitly blessed as a counterweight to the PLO—that launched a campaign of violent attacks, most prominently including suicide bombings that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israeli innocents. By the early 2000s, Gazan terrorists had begun developing the mortars and rockets that would figure prominently in the 10/7 onslaught.
Israel Is Fighting a Different War Now
Israel is now fighting a different kind of war, which has elicited a different Israeli mindset. “We’re no longer afraid of casualties,” a hard-bitten colonel told me. “I lost 10 guys, and nothing stopped. We don’t go to the funerals; we’ll visit after the war.” This is a fundamental change from the Israel of October 6, 2023. Israel is girding itself for the daunting prospect of a long war against Iran, even as its immediate conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah cannot be swiftly and decisively wrapped up, no matter what American and European leaders might wish.

The IDF has always been a military focused on short-term fixes, on tactical and technical innovation, on agility and adaptability. As an Israeli strategic planner ruefully put it, “We only talk about strategy in English.” That will be a problem in the next phase of this war. Israel does not wish to put Gaza under military government during its reconstruction—but it has also failed to devise any plausible alternative, despite floating ideas such as an international police force or a return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza. Lots of humanitarian aid goes into Gaza—I saw the long lines of trucks—but much of it is immediately hijacked by Hamas gunmen, who control the distribution of relief, and with it the population. Hezbollah is still reeling from its hammering over the past two months, but it survives in the shape of small cells. Israeli and American hopes that the Lebanese armed forces can contain it have always proved to be pipe dreams. The long-range strikes by Iran against Israel will surely continue.

The Israelis will persevere, and things may break their way—if, for example, Iran’s internal politics are shaken up by the passing of the supreme leader, by ferocious American sanctions, or by overt and covert punishment for the attempted assassination of President-elect Donald Trump. In any event, the Israelis grimly believe, and with reason, that they have no choice but to continue fighting.

Yet the changes in Israeli society are noticeable. The reserve army that has fought these wars is tired. Many soldiers and airmen have spent most of the past year in battle, and their families have felt the strain. The national-religious component of Israeli society—what would translate in American terms into modern Orthodox Jews—has particularly borne the load. Because of Israel’s reserve system, many of the fallen are middle-aged men, and many leave behind fatherless children. “Ten dead. Fifty-six orphans,” one friend bitterly remarked. The national-religious disproportionately volunteer for frontline combat units. Their antipathy toward the ultra-Orthodox, who are draft-exempt and have been draining government budgets at the expense of subsidies for soldiers whose families and careers have been upended by war, is fierce. “Cowards,” spat out one mild-mannered friend, who now despises a population whose behavior she might once have excused.

As ever, Israel is a complicated and changing place. Yossi Klein Halevi, one of Israel’s shrewdest observers, once said, “Everything you can say about Israel is true. So is the opposite.” And thus it remains. Israel includes alienated secularists and patriotic Arab citizens (increasing numbers of whom quietly join the military); it has liberals and reactionaries, men and women of all skin colors, gay-pride marches and obscurantist religious seminaries. But one thing is certain: It is engaged in an existential war of a kind that most of us in the West cannot appreciate unless we go there, observe, and listen.

Israel is now fighting a different kind of war, which has elicited a different Israeli mindset. “We’re no longer afraid of casualties,” a hard-bitten colonel told me. “I lost 10 guys, and nothing stopped. We don’t go to the funerals; we’ll visit after the war.” This is a fundamental change from the Israel of October 6, 2023. Israel is girding itself for the daunting prospect of a long war against Iran, even as its immediate conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah cannot be swiftly and decisively wrapped up, no matter what American and European leaders might wish.

The IDF has always been a military focused on short-term fixes, on tactical and technical innovation, on agility and adaptability. As an Israeli strategic planner ruefully put it, “We only talk about strategy in English.” That will be a problem in the next phase of this war. Israel does not wish to put Gaza under military government during its reconstruction—but it has also failed to devise any plausible alternative, despite floating ideas such as an international police force or a return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza. Lots of humanitarian aid goes into Gaza—I saw the long lines of trucks—but much of it is immediately hijacked by Hamas gunmen, who control the distribution of relief, and with it the population. Hezbollah is still reeling from its hammering over the past two months, but it survives in the shape of small cells. Israeli and American hopes that the Lebanese armed forces can contain it have always proved to be pipe dreams. The long-range strikes by Iran against Israel will surely continue.

The Israelis will persevere, and things may break their way—if, for example, Iran’s internal politics are shaken up by the passing of the supreme leader, by ferocious American sanctions, or by overt and covert punishment for the attempted assassination of President-elect Donald Trump. In any event, the Israelis grimly believe, and with reason, that they have no choice but to continue fighting.

Yet the changes in Israeli society are noticeable. The reserve army that has fought these wars is tired. Many soldiers and airmen have spent most of the past year in battle, and their families have felt the strain. The national-religious component of Israeli society—what would translate in American terms into modern Orthodox Jews—has particularly borne the load. Because of Israel’s reserve system, many of the fallen are middle-aged men, and many leave behind fatherless children. “Ten dead. Fifty-six orphans,” one friend bitterly remarked. The national-religious disproportionately volunteer for frontline combat units. Their antipathy toward the ultra-Orthodox, who are draft-exempt and have been draining government budgets at the expense of subsidies for soldiers whose families and careers have been upended by war, is fierce. “Cowards,” spat out one mild-mannered friend, who now despises a population whose behavior she might once have excused.

As ever, Israel is a complicated and changing place. Yossi Klein Halevi, one of Israel’s shrewdest observers, once said, “Everything you can say about Israel is true. So is the opposite.” And thus it remains. Israel includes alienated secularists and patriotic Arab citizens (increasing numbers of whom quietly join the military); it has liberals and reactionaries, men and women of all skin colors, gay-pride marches and obscurantist religious seminaries. But one thing is certain: It is engaged in an existential war of a kind that most of us in the West cannot appreciate unless we go there, observe, and listen.


Yoseph Haddad: Taking pride in being Arab Israeli
Yoseph Haddad says that he feels grateful to his grandfather for staying put in northern Israel during the War of Independence.

“I say, ‘Thank you, Grandpa.’ Because with a mouth like this, if I was in any Arab country, I’d probably be dead by now,” he said in a recent interview.

If you’re interested in Israel at all, especially this year, and if you’re on social media, you know Haddad.

The Arab Israeli who is one of Israel’s most vocal supporters, both at home and abroad, addresses three constituencies, each in their own language: Arab Israelis, Jewish Israelis, and English speakers around the world.

What he says varies, and he addresses many subjects, but the basic message is always the same: He is proud to be Arab and proud to be Israeli, and that there is no contradiction between these two identities; that Israel should fight hard against its enemies; and that Arab Israelis should support their country, and Israeli Jews should embrace Arab Israeli citizens.

He is a regular guest on some of Israel’s top-rated television shows, including popular news programs on Channel 12 and Channel 13, where he sometimes breaks into Arabic (which he then translates into Hebrew) to make his points.

He posts many times a day on social media, including TikTok, X, Instagram, and YouTube, and he has a combined following of close to two million on these platforms. He has established a nonprofit foundation, Together Vouch for Each Other, which encourages Arab Israelis to connect to and feel part of Israeli society, volunteer for the IDF or National Service, and help solve problems in Arab society in Israel.

He often speaks abroad. He is currently on a speaking tour of the US, where his appearances have drawn both admirers and groups of protesters. For example, in Chicago protesters tried to stop people from attending his talk last week and gave out flyers saying he was “wanted for normalizing occupation, apartheid, settler colonialism, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.”

But love him or hate him, people listen to him. And to say that this approach has been effective is an understatement. In Israel, he’s a virtual rock star.


Jonathan Tobin: Trump 2.0 means the end of ambivalence about Israel
The American people just returned the most pro-Israel president since the founding of the modern Jewish state to the White House. And he has chosen a foreign policy team that indicates that his second term will be at least as unabashedly pro-Israel and opposed to the forces seeking the Jewish state’s destruction as his first was. What’s the response from some liberal American Jews and the groups that claim to represent them? No, thank you.

There were, of course, reasons for voters—both Jewish and non-Jewish—to oppose Trump. Differences over domestic issues as well as partisan loyalties have relegated Israel’s security and even the fight against antisemitism to a secondary priority for many Jewish voters. But the vocal dismay of left-wing Jews about the picks he has made for his next administration is indicative of the split not just between liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans. It is a gulf between those who think Americans have the right and even the duty to override the verdicts of Israeli democracy and save the Jewish state “from itself” and those who believe Israelis have the right to decide the issues of war and peace for themselves.

That’s the upshot of comments coming from some Jewish groups in response to the president-elect’s naming of people like former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee as U.S. ambassador to Israel, real estate mogul Steven Witkoff as special envoy to the Middle East, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) as ambassador to the United Nations and Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) as national security advisor.

Saving Israel from itself?

A New York Times article, which highlighted the angry and derisive comments of Jewish critics of Israel, made clear that “liberal Jewish voters” have “ample reason to fear the naming of pro-settlement, pro-Netanyahu officials to top foreign policy posts in the new administration.”

Part of this is an extension of the debate about just how much or how little Jewish voters moved to the right in the 2024 presidential election—a question about which both sides of the argument are operating with sketchy evidence. But the crux of it is a continued attempt by some on the Jewish left to revive a dispute about the Middle East peace process that has been rendered irrelevant by the last quarter century of history, and conclusively shelved by the events of Oct. 7, 2023 and its aftermath.

Israeli Jews were once almost evenly split about the merits of “land for peace” and two-state solution proposals for ending the conflict with the Palestinian Arabs during the 1990s period of post-Oslo Accords euphoria. But since the terrorist war of attrition, known as the Second Intifada, literally and metaphorically blew up hopes for peace, the creation of a Hamas terrorist state in Gaza after the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from that territory and then the barbarism of Oct. 7, the constituency for such schemes has shrunk to political insignificance.

Israelis, even many of those on the political left, have finally accepted that the Palestinians have no interest in peace if it means accepting the legitimacy of a Jewish state, no matter where its borders might be drawn.

Palestinians who are undaunted by the destruction and death brought to their people by Hamas’s decision to launch a war on Oct. 7 and buoyed by the growth of the worldwide movement dedicated to destroying Israel in its wake, have rendered the chances of a two-state solution in the foreseeable future to approximately zero. Even if the government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were to be replaced by one led by his political opponents, their policies toward the terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah as well as their Iranian paymasters would be no different than that of the current coalition.
Here's the Significant Support Trump Earned From Jewish Voters This Election
As we highlighted in a deep dive VIP last week, even where Trump didn't wrack up wins against Harris in the Electoral College, he still came close or at least performed much better than he had in 2020. While Harris did win New York, she only won the state by about 11.8 percentage points, which is a far cry from how President Joe Biden won the state by 23 percentage points in 2020.

New York, like Florida, has a large Jewish population, and that didn't go unnoticed during post-election analysis for the Empire State. Earlier this week, Fox 5 put out an analysis of Trump's victory, with a piece examining "Who voted for President-elect Trump? AP VoteCast shows boost in these demographics."

As that piece mentioned [Emphasis added]:
Approximately 30% of Jewish voters supported Trump, a figure similar to 2020, despite Biden’s larger share. The shift in support was noted by both Jewish advocacy groups, with some welcoming Trump’s policies on Israel and security, while others voiced concern over his rhetoric.

The New York Post, as the election results ere looking better and better for Trump early on Wednesday morning, also highlighted how "Trump sees 50% boost in New York’s Jewish vote compared to 2020." The Jewish News Syndicate went with a similar headline, "Trump surges among Jewish voters in NY, doubling 2020 support." Last Thursday, Moment detailed how "Exit Polls Hint at Trump Gains with Jewish Voters."

Analysis from NBC News also made note of how Trump's support from Jewish voters may be more than exit polls capture. Writing about Rockland County, New York, which went from Biden +2 in 2020 to Trump +12 in 2024, the analysis mentioned that "given that the Jewish vote is so small and difficult to measure nationally, Rockland’s result raises the possibility that Trump may have had more success with this group than the exit poll captured."

There's plenty of evidence that Trump received more support from Jewish voters than has been put out there beyond what the polls are saying.

But, such support isn't exactly a surprise. On the October 7 anniversary, Trump received the endorsement of former Democratic Rep. Peter Deutsch from Florida's 20th Congressional District. Not long after the anniversary, Rabbi Moshe B. Parnes previewed gains for Trump with Jewish voters as well in his column for Townhall, "Understanding the Dramatic Jewish Shift Towards President Trump and the Republican Party."

Late last month, the Associated Press also put out an article on how "Some Jewish voters in presidential swing states reconsider their longtime devotion to Democrats," which featured undecided voters. Harris was also confronted with undecided Jewish voters raising concerns about the hostages being held by Hamas following that October 7 attack during a CNN town hall event last month. Her responses on Israel were so terrible, especially since she focused on trashing Trump the entire time and never even mentioned her own supposed support for Israel, that even David Axelrod criticized her.

Meanwhile, Democrats don't appear to be taking it too well that Trump would make such gains. Matthew Brooks, the CEO of the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) made sure to set the record straight.
Trump Foreign Policy Picks Are ‘Dream Team’ For Israel
Donald Trump named more than half dozen pro-Israel hawks to key foreign policy roles this week, reassuring Israelis that the president-elect’s incoming administration will be as supportive as his first.

Trump’s picks largely ended talk in Israel that MAGA isolationism could weaken U.S. backing of the Jewish state. Israeli commentators hailed the roster—led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) for secretary and state and Fox News host Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense—as a “dream team.”




Trump admin. plans to bankrupt Iran with 'maximum pressure' policies
US President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is preparing to reinstate its "maximum pressure" strategy against Iran, targeting Tehran’s economic stability and its ability to support militant proxies and nuclear development, The Financial Times reported on Saturday, citing sources close to the transition team.

The sources revealed that the administration plans to impose stricter sanctions, particularly on Iran’s oil exports, which serve as a critical revenue source.

The anticipated sanctions could drastically reduce Iranian oil exports, which currently exceed 1.5 million barrels per day, up from a low of 400,000 barrels per day in 2020. Experts suggest that these measures would severely impact Iran’s economy. Bob McNally, an energy consultant and former US presidential adviser, indicated that reducing exports to a fraction of current levels would leave Iran in a far worse economic position than during Trump’s first term, Financial Times reported.

According to the report, the renewed strategy aims to bring Iran back to the negotiating table for a comprehensive nuclear deal. According to Trump’s transition team, the approach involves crippling Iran’s financial resources to push its leadership into talks.

However, experts cited in the report expressed skepticism, noting that Tehran is unlikely to agree to what are expected to be stringent US terms. The Financial Times highlighted Trump’s campaign statement regarding Iran in September, saying, “We have to make a deal because the consequences are impossible.”
‘Musk-Iranian envoy meeting in New York initiated by Tehran’
A meeting between entrepreneur Elon Musk and the Iranian ambassador to the U.N. held in a secret location in New York last week was reportedly initiated by Tehran.

A U.S. official briefed on the matter by a foreign colleague, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the two men discussed various subjects, with Iran’s nuclear program high up on the list, ABC News reported on Saturday.

He went on to say that the session concluded with no immediate decisions made by either party.

Musk, commissioner-designate of the soon-to-be-established U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, convened with Iranian Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani for more than an hour on Monday, with the goal to reduce tensions between Tehran and Washington, The New York Times reported, citing two Iranian officials.

One of them said that it was Musk who had requested the session and that the Iranian diplomat chose the location. The Iranian sources portrayed the meeting as “positive” and “good news.”

Trump’s communications director Steven Cheung did not confirm or deny the meeting.

“We do not comment on reports of private meetings that did or did not occur,” he said.

Asked about the diplomatic session, a spokesperson for the Trump transition, White House Press Secretary-designate Karoline Leavitt, replied vaguely in a statement: “The American people reelected President Trump because they trust him to lead our country and restore peace through strength around the world. When he returns to the White House, he will take the necessary action to do just that.”

Musk did not respond to a request for comment.

Iran’s foreign ministry denied on Saturday that the meeting took place, according to the Iranian state-run IRNA.
Some at ICC said to question integrity of UN inquiry into top prosecutor
Questions have been raised as to the integrity of the International Criminal Court’s probe into sexual misconduct accusations against its top prosecutor, Karim Khan, The Guardian reported Saturday, citing his ties to the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), the UN body tasked with the investigation.

The British paper quoted unnamed ICC staff as saying links between the prosecutor and the UN watchdog body could jeopardize the impartiality of the investigation into claims he tried to coerce a female aide into a sexual relationship.

Staff are also said to be upset that Khan did not temporarily step aside during the inquiry against him. The Guardian cited a source as saying that “staff are boiling that he has unilaterally decided to stay on.”

The report said that several court officials have “raised concerns” about Khan’s ties to the OIOS, and are worried about conflict of interest in the investigation.

The report names two key OIOS figures, one current and one former, as having particularly close ties to the ICC prosecutor.

The first figure is Khan’s wife, Dato Shyamala Alagendra, who worked as an investigator at the OIOS from 2019 to 2020, specifically in the office’s sexual harassment and abuse department. Alagendra, originally from Malaysia, is a well-known human rights lawyer who specializes in women’s rights and investigating gender-based violence.

The report said senior UN officials are concerned that Alagendra’s “deep connections” with the OIOS could jeopardize the integrity of the inquiry against her husband.

The report also claimed that Alagendra contacted the alleged victim after the case was brought to her attention in May, citing multiple UN sources. She ostensibly suggested that she and the victim should meet the following day.

The report said, citing UN sources, that the alleged victim told coworkers that she was “alarmed” by the contact and that she was contacted two additional times.

The sources also claimed that Khan’s wife contacted a senior ICC staff member who had reported the allegations to the court’s internal review team.


How South Africa uses anti-Israel rhetoric in the ICJ
South Africa has become a hub for terror financing, according to the ISGAP report. Hamas and Hezbollah receive funneled money from South Africa, often with the approval of local officials. This is in addition to a growing presence of Islamic Militant groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah, in South Africa, the ISGAP report asserts, citing a 1998 South African intelligence document. The report claims that terrorist organizations use South Africa as a hub for military training, fundraising, and other media operations.

The ISGAP report highlights that South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola attended Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian's inauguration this summer in Tehran. Lamola met with Iranian officials during his July visit, such as acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri, who “highlighted the high capacities for cooperation between the two countries in international political and judicial fields by adopting multilateral mechanisms to counter unilateral approaches and the illegitimate restrictions imposed by some Western countries," according to the report.

Bagheri also "hailed Lamola for his outstanding role as an undaunted and innovative diplomat in pursuing the case of the Zionist regime’s crimes at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the special efforts by the South African government to denounce the regime’s crimes in international legal and judicial circles."

Additionally, the report goes over the strategic relationships between Iran, Qatar, and South Africa. South Africa has been instrumental in helping Iran gain political legitimacy and influential economic access by facilitating its involvement in the BRICS nations group. Qatar has invested heavily in South African energy projects, and the two nations have worked together on several international political issues, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A Hamas official further claims that the terrorist organization's mediation caused Qatar and South Africa to strengthen ties.

ISGAP's report further details the several flaws present in South Africa's case, namely the fact that the plaintiffs did not mention Hamas's war crimes. It also mentions how the case left out parts of the Hamas charter that call for the total annihilation of Israel and of Jews around the world; doubly interesting when some of the legal team had links to anti-Israel organizations or participated in organizations with ties to organizations like the Popular Conference for Palestinians abroad.

The report also asserted that 45 of the 574 references in South Africa's ICJ submission were sourced from harshly anti-Israel organizations, raising questions about the credibility of the claims. Al-Haq, an Israeli-classified terrorist organization, is cited, though it is not recognized by the US.

All in all, ISGAP's report further puts into question South Africa's motivations for submitting the ICJ case against Israel as well as the overall integrity of the legal proceedings.


The controversial actions of Doctors Without Borders
Hamas embedding in civilian populations
This June, MSF posted on X mourning the death of their “physiotherapist” Fadi Al-Wadiya in an Israeli strike on Gaza. Subseqeuntly, the IDF revealed that he had been an operative in Islamic Jihad’s rocket division – a terrorist involved in missile development, serving as a specialized resource in electronics and chemistry.

The IDF spokesman commented: “This is yet another case of terrorists in Gaza using civilians as human shields.”

In the French newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche, an article highlighted other controversial MSF members, such as Dr. Ghassan Abu Sitta, a physician who publicly called on Palestinians “to fight and die as martyrs.” Germany has added Abu Sitta to their list of terrorism-supporting radicals and barred him from entry into the Schengen Area.

MSF, blinded to the atrocities committed by subhuman entities, brazenly lectures the world’s most humane nation on how to treat ruthless murderers who have no regard for life, even as the Jewish people wage a battle for survival against Hamas and Iran.

Israel seeks peace with all neighboring countries and extends a hand even to the Iranian people, whose leadership repeatedly declares its desire to annihilate Israel. Recently, NBC News reported the arrest of two Iranian terrorists in Brooklyn, preparing to assassinate president-elect Donald Trump. Explosives, machine guns, and pistols were found in their hideout.

Iran is rattled. Israel has proven to the Islamic regime that it are vulnerable and that Israel can severely harm its economy and leadership. Indeed, there is concern in Israel about a potential Iranian attack that could ignite a regional war. However, this would also be the ayatollah’s greatest mistake and an economic disaster, potentially leading to the fall of the murderous regime that threatens the free world.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad confirms two terror leaders killed in Damascus strike
Palestinian Islamic Jihad confirmed on Saturday that two of the terror group's leaders were killed in an Israeli airstrike on Damascus on Thursday, Army Radio reported.

One of the leaders was a member of the organization's leadership, and the other was the official responsible for foreign relations.

A spokesperson for the terrorist organization named the terrorists as head of foreign relations Rasmi Abu Issa and member of the Political Bureau Abd Alaziz al-Minawi, according to AFP.

Striking PIJ in Damascus
Israel continued to target PIJ headquarters in Damacus on Friday. IAF fighter jets struck commander centers and terrorist infrastructure belonging to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror group in Syria's Damascus, the military confirmed on Thursday afternoon.

Fifteen people were killed and 16 injured in Israeli attacks on a number of residential buildings in suburbs of the Syrian capital Damascus on Thursday, according to state news agency SANA, citing a Syrian military source.


IDF announces fallen soldier Sergeant Ori Nisanovich killed in southern Lebanon
The IDF announced on Saturday the death of Sergeant Ori Nisanovich, 21, from Jerusalem, who fell in combat in southern Lebanon.

Nisanovich served in the IDF's 13th Battalion in the Golani Brigade.

His family has been notified of his death, the IDF said. He was promoted from the rank of Corporal to Sergeant after his death.

Recent reports of the Golani Brigade
The brigade that he served in, Golani, has made headlines due to several reports of the brigade losing soldiers. On Wednesday, six Golani soldiers also fell in combat in southern Lebanon, but from its 51st Battalion.

However, other reports have shown soldiers from the brigade eliminating Hezbollah terrorists and seizing weapons.


Hamas are Islamists – the police investigated me for saying just that
It isn’t just journalists like Allison Pearson who have been investigated by the police for comments on social media.

I also fell foul of the thought police for tweeting about the Middle East, just as Pearson suspects she did as she was told it dates back to a year ago, when she was tweeting about the Hamas atrocities on October 7.

Back in February I ridiculed UNRWA’s claim that it had not known about the Hamas operations centre underneath their offices in Gaza, saying: “Everyone, better safe than sorry: before you go to bed, nip down and check you haven’t inadvertently got a death cult of Islamist murderers and rapists running their operations downstairs. It’s easily done.”

Political opponents and extremists deliberately misinterpreted my joke, claimed my use of the word Islamists was Islamophobic or racist and caused a torrent of abuse and threats.

I suppose that was to be expected, but I was shocked and appalled when the police became involved.

Late one evening a few days later I received a call from West Midlands police asking about my whereabouts and safety. I assumed this was because of the threats.

How naïve that was. It was actually because they had received complaints about my tweet, had carried out an investigation but decided not to take action. They would, I was told by a senior police officer, have recorded it as a “non-crime hate incident” had the rules not been changed to raise the threshold.

They said it was because I had used the word “Islamist” and asked whether I had seen what people had said on LinkedIn. I explained that Islamist is used 17 times on the Government’s list of proscribed organisations. It was coined to distinguish between decent law-abiding Muslims and extremists and is used by governments, academics, expert think-tanks, and the world’s leading media organisations.

I was furious and think the public would be livid to find out the police are wasting time on rubbish like this when a tiny proportion of rapes or burglaries result in some someone being charged. Most police officers think this is crazy too. They think their job to investigate actual crimes with real victims.

This madness must stop.
Dave Rich: The violence in Amsterdam showed just how polarising – and radicalising – the Middle East conflict has been
Some have described the events in Amsterdam as a pogrom. The sight of Jews in a European city being asked for their papers before getting beaten to the ground, in the city of Anne Frank, no less, sends the chill of history down the spine. Holocaust survivors are fewer in number, but their children and grandchildren, now adults themselves, live in the shadow of what happened to their own families.

You may think this is an overreaction. In the most notorious pogrom of all, in Kishinev in 1903, 49 Jews were killed, more than 500 injured and about 2,000 left homeless. The violence in Amsterdam was on such a lesser scale that calling it a pogrom feels misleading, as if it diminishes the horror of that older history; but I wonder whether focusing on such detail risks missing the wood for the trees. Amsterdam carried a whiff of those times, as if the spirit of the pogrom is stirring deep in the soul of Europe. There is genuine alarm among European Jews who have been battered by more than a year of violent and rhetorical attacks on their communities, and soaring online hate. In the past decade Jews have been murdered in France, Denmark and Belgium, so this is no idle fear.

Debate over whether the violence towards the Maccabi fans in Amsterdam was antisemitic or “merely” anti-Israel is of no practical consequence, given how readily those categories are blended by the people leading the assault on European Jewish life. The rioters in Amsterdam described their victims variously as Jews, Zionists and Israelis as they attacked them, as if to remind us all that violent mobs care little for academic distinctions. Meanwhile, the far-right politician Geert Wilders was quick as ever to exploit the incident as a platform for his own divisive, anti-Muslim views, to the benefit of neither Jews nor Muslims.

Some pro-Palestinian voices have preferred to focus on the racist thuggery of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans, as if this negates any need to acknowledge the antisemitism that emanates from parts of their own movement. Social media posts and YouTube videos push a narrative of equivocation, of they-had-it-coming, of what did you expect to happen when racist genocidal Israelis come to Europe? Naturally they do not extend the same dubious understanding in the opposite direction. Only a fool or a knave would truly believe that the racism of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans, or the violence of their assailants, justifies or excuses the other.

It’s a reminder that this issue has greater polarising, and radicalising, potency than any other. It should be possible to campaign for Palestinian freedom, condemn racist Israeli football fans, and still show genuine, unequivocal solidarity with European Jews who are once more being squeezed out of public life. If antisemitism is a sign of a deeper malaise then red lights are flashing all over Europe, but it seems that after more than a year of death and destruction in the Middle East, too many people have closed their eyes to what is happening within our own lands.


Here I Am With Shai Davidai: "#Jews are not in the oppression business, there's no money in it!" | EP 17 Elon Gold
Welcome to the 17th episode of "Here I Am with Shai Davidai," a podcast that delves into the rising tide of antisemitism through insightful discussions with top Jewish advocates.

In this engaging episode, Shai welcomes comedian Elon Gold, known for his stand-up specials and appearances on shows like "Curb Your Enthusiasm." The conversation kicks off with humor as Elon discusses the challenges of being a comedian and an Orthodox Jew, sharing anecdotes about balancing religious observance with his career. He humorously recounts being fired from a TV show for refusing to work on Shabbat.

The discussion transitions to more serious topics, including the power of social media and fame in activism. Elon reflects on a viral moment where he stood up against injustice, emphasizing the importance of using newfound fame to amplify important messages.

Elon and Shai delve into the complexities of Jewish identity, anti-Semitism, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They explore the double standards faced by Jews and the challenges of addressing stereotypes and misinformation. Elon shares personal experiences of anti-Semitism, including a disturbing encounter in Los Angeles, and discusses the broader implications of these incidents.

Throughout the episode, Elon balances humor with poignant insights, highlighting the role of comedy in addressing serious issues. He emphasizes the importance of laughter as a form of healing and resilience, especially in times of crisis.

The episode concludes with a reflection on the power of words and the responsibility of comedians and public figures to use their platforms wisely. Elon Gold's unique blend of humor and advocacy offers a thought-provoking perspective on the intersection of comedy, identity, and activism.




Police refused to investigate academic who said Starmer works for ‘genocidal Jewish supremacists’
Essex Police refused to investigate an academic who claimed Sir Keir Starmer worked for “genocidal Jewish supremacists”, The Telegraph can reveal.

The force is currently investigating columnist Allison Pearson over a year-old deleted tweet.

While The Telegraph writer has not been told which specific tweet is at the centre of the allegations, she wrote posts about Hamas attacks on Israel and antisemitic signs around this time last year.

Suzanne, a teacher who did not want her second name published, told The Telegraph how she reported a tweet posted by Prof David Miller, a former Bristol University academic, to Essex Police in October.

The tweet, which made reference to the Prime Minister confirming that the UK stood with Israel following Iran’s missile attack on the nation, read: “Do you understand now? Do you see what the last decade has been about? Your Prime Minister does not work for you. He works for a handful of genocidal Jewish supremacists.”

Prof Miller, who has 79,000 followers, added: “He’s their errand boy and he will send your sons to die for ‘Israel’.”

Suzanne, 41, who is Jewish, was sent the tweet by a friend and reported it to Essex Police in early October.

Suzanne told The Telegraph: “To be honest it is pretty terrifying to be Jewish and see something like that – because while I know someone like David Miller isn’t going to go and beat up Jewish people, there are people that think that Jews deserve to be attacked.

“We saw an example of that in Amsterdam recently – so it is pretty scary, because as Jewish people we are all being blamed for everything that Israel does.”

However, Suzanne, from Essex, went on to receive a response from Essex Police that confirmed it was closing the case.
Police protect Durham University students holding Gaza debate
Students at Durham University were forced to rely on protection from police and security guards to hold a debate on the Gaza conflict.

A previous attempt by Durham Union Society to debate the Palestinian leadership’s responsibility for the bloodshed was cancelled after pro-Palestinian protesters blockaded the venue in June.

The debate eventually went ahead last Friday, but only after what were described as “strenuous efforts” by the university authorities.

The rescheduled debate was met with renewed protests from around 70 pro-Palestinian activists, including Durham students and others who had travelled from nearby Newcastle Upon Tyne.

Police officers stood alongside security staff at the entrance to the Pemberton Buildings, with others positioned at side entrances. A police van was placed close to the main entrance.

The protests forced the Union Society to switch the venue for the debate, with those attending escorted by security staff to the new location at the Elvet Riverside building. It is understood those lined up to speak from the platform were led through a tunnel to avoid the demonstrators.

Once inside students discussed the motion “This house believes Palestinian leadership is the biggest barrier to peace”, with those in favour winning by 92 votes to 59.

The successful staging of the debate was hailed as a triumph for free speech.

Opponents of the motion described it as “ridiculous” and compared it to blaming black South Africans for apartheid.

As those taking part left the debate, protesters who had regrouped outside chanted “shame” and “Durham Union you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide”.

At one stage officers arrested a protester on Palace Green, prompting fellow activists to surround a police van, shouting “shame” and “who do you protect? Who do you serve?”.

Durham alumnus Ben Dory, a pro-Israel campaigner who spoke in the debate, said: “We were worried about taking part, especially as there was someone with us from Israel who was still traumatised from the October 7 attacks.

“It was a real win for freedom of speech on campus and both the union and the university should be commended for ensuring the debate went ahead.”


Harvard Students Plead Not Guilty to Assault on Israeli
Two Harvard students, Elom Tettey-Tamaklo and Ibrahim Bharmal, entered not guilty pleas this morning in Boston Municipal Court on misdemeanor criminal charges of assault and battery and of interfering with the civil rights of another student during an anti-Israel protest on the Harvard Business School campus.

A prosecutor from the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office told Judge Stephen McClenon that “there is an ongoing investigation” into the clash during the October 18, 2023 demonstration. “This is a continuing investigation,” she said, suggesting that law enforcement officials are continuing to seek information about the identity of other students involved in the event.


Indian business owners confront Kashmiri shopkeeper who booted out Israeli tourists
Two Israeli tourists were kicked out of a shop in the town of Thakkadi in southern India on Wednesday after the shop’s Kashmiri owners realized they were from Israel, Ynet reported on Thursday.

The couple from Israel had initially been invited into the store but were asked to leave upon the discovery of their nationality. After refusing to leave, the business owner reportedly turned off the shop’s lights and escalated the situation.

The pair were then driven to the local police station to file a report but news of the incident spread through the town, leading to nearby business owners confronting the store, demanding they apologize to the Israeli tourists.

After receiving pressure from the local community, the owner of the store apologized to the Israeli couple on camera.

Legal response to the incident
Police said that they were aware of the incident, but the Israeli couple declined to file a complaint. No legal proceedings are expected.

Despite the issue seemingly having resolved itself, the Christian Association & Alliance For Social Action (CASA) has begun campaigns for legal action, The New Indian Express reported on Friday.

“The police themselves should file a case against the culprits who have humiliated India’s friends and Israel’s children in Kumily,” one CASA notice read.

Another CASA notice demanded, “The government should take immediate action to save the tourism sector in Kerala from the grip of fundamentalists.”
Argentina police seize large arsenal of Nazi firearms, Hitler-era memorabilia
Argentine police arrested a man in Buenos Aires who possessed a large number of vintage Nazi weapons decorated with Third Reich symbols from Adolf Hitler’s infamous regime, officials said on Friday.

Police seized over 60 firearms from the man’s home, including 43 rifles emblazoned with Nazi eagle markings, 15 pistols, five bayonets and a machine gun, according to a report from Argentina’s federal police.

Nazi flags, military uniforms, hats, helmets as well as busts of Hitler were also confiscated by authorities, the report said.

Personnel from the Buenos Aires Holocaust Museum assisted the law enforcement action, which sought to enforce a national anti-discrimination law, the police report said.

The home where the objects were found is located in the city of Quilmes, near the southern edge of the sprawling metro area of Buenos Aires, the capital. Police had been tracking the man after he traveled abroad and was implicated in an investigation initiated by the federal police of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

After World War Two, many Nazi officials including notorious death camp supervisor Adolf Eichmann emigrated to Argentina to avoid trials for war crimes.

Last year, local security forces raided and shut down an Argentine bookstore that was selling books about Nazism online.


12,000-year-old spindle whorls discovered in Israel suggest early wheel-like technology
Newly unearthed stone tools reveal evidence of early axle-based rotation technology, predating the invention of carts by thousands of years and marking a significant milestone in the development of rotational tools like wheels. This discovery sheds light on ancient innovation, showcasing the early mastery of rotation mechanisms that paved the way for one of humanity’s most transformative inventions.

A recent study in the open-access journal PLOS ONE suggests that a collection of perforated pebbles discovered at the Nahal Ein Gev II archaeological site in northern Israel may be the earliest known spindle whorls. Conducted by researchers Talia Yashuv and Professor Lior Grosman from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the study analyzed 113 perforated stones dating back approximately 12,000 years. These artifacts could indicate early use of rotational technologies in the region, potentially paving the way for later inventions such as the potter's wheel and the cart wheel.

Since 1972, archaeologists have uncovered 113 of these punctured artifacts at the Nahal Ein Gev II site, which may have been used for spinning threads. Spindle whorls are round, weighted objects attached to a spindle stick that stabilize and extend the rotational movement of the spindle, making the process of creating threads easier and increasing the spinning rate. The stones, mostly limestone and measuring 3 to 4 centimeters in diameter, feature a circular shape perforated by a central hole. The holes generally ran through the pebble's center of gravity, indicating a deliberate design for balance during rotation.

The research team used three-dimensional scans and advanced computational technology to analyze the morphological structures of the stones. They introduced an innovative method for studying perforated objects, based on digital 3D models of the stones and their negative holes. Using 3D scanning, dedicated software for model analysis, and practical experiments, the researchers demonstrated that the stones could have served as spindle whorls, supporting the hypothesis that they were used in early thread spinning.

Analysis revealed that the holes had been drilled halfway through from each side using a flint hand drill, which leaves a narrow and twisting cone-like shape. Drilling from both sides would have helped balance the stone for more stable spinning. "Considering all functional parameters: the central location of the perforation, the size and weight of the stones, their shape, raw material, the shape of the holes and their size, it seems that the perforated pebbles from Nahal Ein-Gev II are best suited to have functioned as spindle whorls," the study authors wrote.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!
 

 

at