These days, along with the rush to condemn Israel in its war to eliminate the Hamas terrorist threat, there are instances of retractions and deletions of hasty anti-Israel posts. One of the more unusual and unexpected examples is Ilhan Omar backtracking on her accusation that Israel bombed a hospital:
While Omar has reacted to pressure, Tlaib is still at it.
Another example of backtracking comes from Secretary of State Blinken. It's not that Blinken condemned any particular action of Israel, but rather that he came out with a suggestion that was so insulting and ill-timed that he soon deleted it. Just one day after the Hamas massacre of Israeli civilians, Blinken publicly recommended a cease-fire:
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken deleted a social media post Monday morning that expressed support for a "cease-fire" in Israel after Palestinian militants invaded the nation late last week.
The now-deleted post, which appeared on Blinken's X account late Sunday, described a conversation Blinken reportedly had with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan.
Fernandez is a former US diplomat and vice-president of MEMRI.
Keep in mind that it is unlikely that Blinken would publicly suggest this and try to set the idea for a cease-fire in motion without Biden's approval. A friend suggested to me that this was a trial balloon, which was soon shot down.
But there is another example of deletion, one not intended to save face but intended instead to save the Hamas terrorists and save their own skin.
Shifa has indeed “become a de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices,” the Washington Post reported on July 15. The Wall Street Journal‘s Middle East correspondent, Nick Casey, wrote on Twitter that Hamas uses Shifa “as a safe place to see media,” but removed the post afterwards.
Italian journalist Gabriele Barbati said he was able to speak freely about witnessing a Hamas misfire that killed nine children at the Shati camp, confirming the Israel Defense Forces version of events, but only after leaving Gaza, “far from Hamas retaliation.”
Why did Barbati wait until after he was out of Gaza? The answer has implications for the reporting by the journalists who stay in Gaza.
In 2021, when Israel destroyed a 12-story building in Gaza used by Hamas military intelligence and AP denied knowing that it shared a building with the terrorist group, a former AP journalist refuted their claim:
As to whether AP was aware of Hamas involvement with the building, Matti Friedman wrote in his 2014 Atlantic piece: “When Hamas’ leaders surveyed their assets before this summer’s round of fighting, they knew that among those assets was the international press. The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby — and the AP wouldn’t report it.”
Friedman claimed the Hamas militants would regularly “burst into the AP’s Gaza bureau and threaten the staff — and the AP wouldn’t report it.”
UNRWA's deletion and subsequent "clarification" shows that the same fear exists. And the history of Hamas's massive violations of international law makes the indications of Hamas stealing humanitarian supplies from their own people very believable.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
I recently gave an address to students at Westminster Abbey about Holocaust Memorial Day; the theme for this year was “ordinary people.”
During my speech, I asked everyone in the audience, myself included, to imagine being in the middle of our ordinary, daily routine, doing your homework or preparing for a test, when suddenly you’re told that you and your family are about to be deported — segregated from the rest of the population, sent to a ghetto that will ultimately be a place of starvation, forced labor and mass shootings.
I find it hard to imagine this scenario, and it seems almost impossible. Yet this was the fate for so many young Jewish people, along with their families, not so long ago.
The perpetrators of the Holocaust intended for Jews to think of what we would eventually become to much of the world — six million Jewish victims as a nameless, faceless mass, dressed in striped pajamas, unworthy of life. But we must resist this and remember every single victim as an individual, like you and me. We should think of their hopes and dreams; what they liked to do after a long day of classes; what they found pleasure in; what joy brought to others, or the good they could have done for society.
One of these individuals was my relative, Leah. Along with the rest of her large family, Leah was uprooted and sent to a ghetto in Latvia. Leah was a doctor, and one day, after visiting a patient, she came home to find that her family, including her parents, her many brothers and sisters, her husband, and her only young daughter, gone. They had been taken to the nearby forest, shot, and dumped in a ditch.
After the war, when the mass graves were finally opened, Leah found the remains of her daughter — identified by her brightly-colored doll found next to her that the little one was never parted from. Leah kept this doll until her last day, and was one of the very few people who ever got out of the ghetto alive. Leah spent the rest of her life alone.
Another relative, my great-grandfather, was an artist in the Soviet Union. When the Russians allowed Jews to live in big cities, he moved to Leningrad, while many of those who stayed in his birthplace of a little Jewish town in Ukraine were killed. Like Leah, he survived where others did not. Much later in his life, he made a lithograph depicting a woman in front of a gravestone engraved with Russian and Yiddish text that mourns her loss.
If it looks and quacks like speech, don’t let that fool you. It may be a boycott.
The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether to hear Arkansas Times v. Waldrip, which hinges on a question that is slipperier than it sounds: Is there a constitutional right to boycott?
More specifically, did Arkansas violate the rights of a Little Rock monthly when the state dangled the possibility of public-funded advertisements if and only if the newspaper signed an agreement refusing to boycott Israel?
Josh Halpern, an academic fellow and lecturer at Harvard Law School, and Lavi Ben Dor, a D.C. attorney, argue in a forthcoming paper that boycotts are not speech, and thus the state did not violate the paper’s rights.
The chances are good the Supreme Court will defer hearing the case with a decision to that effect likely coming this month, Halpern told JNS. Active litigation is pending in several appeals courts, including in Texas and Georgia. “Why not wait and see what those courts do?” he said.
A federal appeals court ruled last that Arkansas law does not violate First Amendment rights by requiring state contractors to forswear, for the duration of the contract, boycotting Israel or entities that do business with Israel.
The Arkansas paper has not stated that it supports boycotting Israel, but a state college has advertised in the paper, which placed the latter in the position of having to decide whether to sign the agreement.
BDS opponents should not necessarily start celebrating, however. If boycott is not protected speech, then boycotting boycotts could also remain unprotected. In a different political climate, a state might require entities that want its business to sign agreements stating that they will boycott Israel.
King Abdullah needed Netanyahu‘s assurance that Israel would support Jordan’s Hashemite rulers retaining custodianship of the Islamic holy sites - if Abdullah was to show support for implementing the Saudi Solution.
The Palace communique gave Abdullah an exit strategy: “The King reaffirmed Jordan’s steadfast position in support of the two-state solution, which guarantees the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the 4 June 1967 lines, with East Jerusalem as its capital, living side by side with Israel in peace and security.”
This was indeed King Abdullah’s position prior to publication of the Saudi Solution which trashed the two-state solution – consigning it to the garbage bin of history unimplemented - after being proposed by the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002.
Abdullah has not mentioned the two-state solution once since publication of the Saudi Solution. He is appearing to signal re-supporting the failed two-state solution – should Israel seek during the implementation of the Saudi Solution to renegotiate the current terms of custodianship on terms unacceptable to King Abdullah.
The United Nations, the media and its analysts, and independent analysts have totally ignored the Saudi Solution’s existence since its publication in the Saudi government-controlled Al Arabiya News on 8 June 2022.
None has considered the Saudi Solution newsworthy enough to report on or analyze. It’s time they did.
Netanyahu’s visit to King Abdullah indicates the Saudi Solution may be on the way to being implemented on the way to hopefully becoming a reality.
For several decades, the NUS has been closely wedded to the cultural politics of identity. As an institution, it works as a kind of coalition of identity groups that are all governed by an ideology of victimhood. Within the ranks of the NUS, identities perceived as ‘victims’ enjoy formidable authority.
But the NUS has apparently made an exception in recent years when it comes to Jews. In this, the NUS follows the identitarian mindset now widespread in our culture, which positions each identity within a hierarchy of victimhood – and which inexplicably places Jews near or at the top of that hierarchy.
Among devotees of identity politics, the Jewish identity has lost much of its claim to moral authority. The status held by Jews since the Holocaust has been revised. Jews are once again being portrayed as powerful, privileged and as aggressors. They are equated with the state of Israel and presented as the oppressors of a highly acclaimed victim group – the Palestinians.
In a world in which victim status trumps all others, this shift has had significant consequences for Jews. It is not that identitarians set out to cultivate anti-Semitism. But identity politics has helped to create a cultural and political climate in which Jewishness is increasingly perceived with hostility, as a negative identity. The validation of some identities always implies a devaluation of others – it is a zero-sum game. Today, the Jewish identity is on the losing side of that game.
Jewish identity is gradually becoming what sociologist Erving Goffman, in his classic 1963 study Stigma, characterised as a ‘spoiled identity’. A spoiled identity is one that lacks any redeeming moral qualities. It is an identity that invites stigma and scorn. Today, this is demonstrated by campaigns against the age-old Jewish practice of male circumcision, implying that Jews are perpetuating a barbaric custom. In a similar vein, attempts to ban kosher meat in parts of Europe signal an air of condescension toward Jewish culture, which is viewed as inhumane.
Bigotry has returned through the seemingly innocuous medium of identity politics. Back in March 2021, Politics Live, the BBC’s flagship politics programme, featured a bizarre debate on whether or not Jews are an ethnic minority. Apparently, this was open to question because some Jews have now reached positions of power and influence in British society. For identitarians, Jews have joined the ranks of the oppressors. Jewish privilege is seen as another version of ‘white privilege’.
This identitarian mindset has fuelled the new anti-Semitism. It must be confronted – not just within the NUS, but across British society.
Though Jews Don’t Count may be a weak and frivolous exercise in moaning, it has nevertheless struck a chord with that section of UK Jewry who, by virtue of their acculturation and success, are best positioned to make their voice heard. Of course, no one is completely immune to the kind of narcissistic self-pity that Baddiel and his guests have to offer, but this popularity is still, at first sight, surprising. Surprising, that is, until we understand its subtext, which contains an attempt to answer the central question of what Shaul Maggid has called “post-Judaism”: what does it mean to be a post-ethnic and post-religious Jew?
In Jews Don’t Count, Baddiel interviews over a dozen Jews, but there are few Israelis, religiously observant Jews, or Zionists among them. He thus deemphasizes or excludes something like 80 percent of the Jewish people from his analysis. The only time we see a yarmulke is in the background when Baddiel visits a New York deli and observes that Jews like pickles. Jews Don’t Count is, in other words, very clear about what Judaism isn’t (religion, Israel, and, of course, being white), but it is silent on the question of what positive content being Jewish has. Baddiel has stated elsewhere that “I’m really interested in and connected to the culture, the comedy, and obviously the identity, which is core to my being.” (Baddiel is, of course, a vocal atheist, and someone who doesn’t even care enough about Israel to oppose it, though he makes no bones about not liking it very much.) But what does that identity, which is the core of his being, consist of? What exactly is Baddiel identifying with?
In lieu of any indication that there is something other than anti-Semitism that Baddiel finds interesting about Judaism, the alarming answer to that question appears to be that Baddiel’s Jewish identity consists precisely of being a member of a persecuted group. The otherwise baffling popularity of Jews Don’t Count indicates he is far from alone. While, historically, many Jews have abandoned their faith and people in order to shed the burdens of being a loathed minority, the post-Jew does the opposite: clinging desperately to that legacy of persecution as the essence of being as a Jew. For some Jews, a denial of God’s existence, the divine authorship of the Torah, or their eternal connection to the Land of Israel is more than just an argument they disagree with: it’s an attack on their fundamental being. For post-Jews, the same blow is received when someone tries to gently point out that they are not a victim of anything but their own inability to quit while they are ahead.
The New Antisemitism
The modern rise of antisemitism also known as the New Antisemitism kicked off at the start of the 21st century with the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement. With the Islamo Leftist alliance behind it, BDS, with its agenda to demonize the Jewish people and destroy the State of Israel, quickly moved from the fringes of our society and into the mainstream. Civil society organizations, American universities, and far-left politicians would come to endorse the BDS ideology.
Behind BDS, there has always stood a burning hatred of America, its exceptional liberal democratic and capitalist character, and worldwide influence, which is why it has been embraced by the far left and radical Muslims.
With American Jews unable to mount an effective defense against BDS due to our small numbers, division, and aversion to conflict, a door was opened for BDS to get incorporated into the Left’s radical ideologies as they have gained popularity over the past twenty years, normalizing antisemitism as an integral part of anti-Americanism.
Antisemism is now part of the Left Radical Ideologies
BDS and CRT are now intimately intertwined through the left-wing theory of “intersectionality”, and are being aggressively implemented in the workplace and school through CRT-adjacent policies like DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) and Ethnic Studies Curriculums. Americans from an increasingly early age are being indoctrinated to view America as intrinsically evil that must be totally remade according to racialized and socialist ‘Woke’ standards.
Although Jews are a major target of these groups, the struggle is not really about us—the ultimate target has always been America.
American Jews need to create alliances with other Americans focused on helping the public to understand that anti-Semitism spreading BDS, CRT, Ethnic Studies and DEI are first and foremost a threat to our core American values. Nothing less than the future of America – and the Jewish American community – is at stake.
[The Amcha] report paints a stark picture of an increasing, intensifying and carefully coordinated campaign of attacks on Jewish identity at over 60% of the colleges and universities that are popular with Jews, including 2,000 incidents intended to harm Jewish students since 2015.
[T]hese activists demand an end to Zionism, which... means just one thing: an end to the democratic State of Israel. This itself is antisemitism in any book and is spelt out as such in the US State Department definition of antisemitism.
Despite expending so much energy against their fellow students, German Gentiles had plenty left for their Jewish professors. Unsatisfied with Nazi race regulations restricting Jewish faculty, students boycotted the classes of those who were exempt under the race laws and pressured university authorities to dismiss them. The result was that every Jewish professor who was still legally allowed to teach had resigned by 1935.
The Amcha report characterises the situation on US campuses today as a crisis for American Jews. It is much more than that. It is a crisis for us all that one section of our student body is bullied, abused, intimidated and cast down by their fellow students and often abandoned by their professors and faculty authorities.
It is high time for the federal government, under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, to withdraw its funding from all universities that participate in bigotry such as that.
By standing with Omar, Democrats, including President Joe Biden, have effectively normalized antisemitism. And McCarthy’s effort to punish her will again test whether they mean what they say when they speak of their opposition to hate.
As was the case with Greene and Gosar last year, it will take a vote by the majority of the House to remove Omar from her perch on the Foreign Relations Committee. Given the GOP’s narrow majority, the fate of Schiff (who repeatedly lied about the hoax he helped promote that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election) and Swalwell (who had an intimate relationship with a Chinese spy) will also be part of the same debate.
Democrats will also answer the list of Omar’s antisemitic statements and actions with their own brand of “whataboutism,” which will involve McCarthy’s recent embrace of Greene, who was an ally during his fight for the speaker’s chair. They’ll bring up other Republicans for censure, as well. One is Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), who lied about just about everything during his campaign for election, including whether he was Jewish.
If every member of Congress or the executive branch had to be censured for lying, however, Washington would soon be emptied of politicians, including Biden, who takes second place to no one when it comes to being a serial fabulist. Moreover, there is an argument to be made that neither party should be engaging in this kind of tit-for-tat punishment.
If the voters think they deserve nothing better than to be represented by such scoundrels, perhaps it’s best if we leave it to them to decide at the ballot box who should sit in Congress or on committees. As the great cynic, journalist H.L. Mencken wrote, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
Nevertheless, if the Democrats are going to play this game, then McCarthy can hardly be blamed for answering in kind. And if House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) isn’t prepared to agree to remove Omar, then the speaker is justified in seeking to oust her.
At stake here is not the broader question of how much extremism or bad behavior Congress should be willing to tolerate in its members. Rather, it is specifically one that will force Democrats to decide what is more important to them.
Is it the fight against antisemitism at a time when Jew-hatred is on the rise throughout the globe? Or is their true allegiance to identity politics and the toxic intersectional myths that allow Omar to paint herself as an oppressed victim, rather than a hatemonger, simply because of the color of her skin?
As Israel is being pilloried at the U.N. Security Council by friend and foe alike for daring to allow Jews to visit the Temple Mount, professor Richard Landes joins Caroline Glick on this week’s episode of the “Caroline Glick Show” to discuss the contemporary roots of the demonization of Jews and the Jewish state.
Landes recently published “Can the Whole World Be Wrong: Lethal Journalism, Anti-Semitism and the Global Jihad,” the product of 22 years of work.
He began his study of the subject in the aftermath of the first modern blood libel, the alleged killing of Muhammed al-Dura, a 12-year-old Palestinian boy, by IDF forces in Gaza on Sept. 30, 2000.
The false allegation that the boy was killed by IDF forces that day, and that they murdered him deliberately, formed the basis of a massive propaganda effort. Its product has been the legitimization of the mass murder of Jews in Israel and worldwide by Palestinians and other jihadists.
Landes argues that the West’s embrace of the al-Dura blood libel was the foundation not only of the antisemitism assaulting the Jewish people worldwide today, but also of the West’s inability to acknowledge, let alone defeat, the forces of global jihad, whether in the United States or Europe or in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and beyond.
Glick and Landes examine the current pathologies of the “woke” West—including the assault on Jews for embracing their heritage, by among other things, visiting the Temple Mount—through the prism of the al-Dura incident. Their conversation traverses space and time and ends with vital insights into what needs to happen for the West to survive the ravages of the Red-Green alliance which was born with the al-Dura blood libel.
There are many Jews out there who blame Israel for antisemitism:
“If only we didn’t ‘occupy’ the ‘Palestinians,’ there would be no antisemitism.”
“If only those ultra-Orthodox Jews wouldn’t dress like that and stick to their ‘primitive ways,’ people wouldn’t hate us so much.”
But they’ll never accept our apology, so it’s time we stop apologizing.
The new government is too right-wing for you? You must have confused me for someone who cares about your opinion.
Foreign aid? Go ahead, Biden, try to pull it. Try to boycott Israel, BDS. Go for it, let’s see how that goes for you.
We don’t need you any more than you need us.
Allow me to officially declare that the era of the apologetic Jew is dead. It should rest in peace.
Now let me introduce you to a new creature: the proud Jew.
We have a lot to be proud of.
20% of all Nobel prizes have been awarded to Jews. We have the most moral army in the world. We are able to balance our military power with our unwavering need to behave morally and ethically, sometimes too ethically.
We lead the world in life-changing tech: Medicine, food, you name it, we are at the forefront of it all.
We took a desert that Mark Twain famously referred to as “a hopeless, dreary, heartbroken land” and transformed it into one of the most flourishing societies in the Middle East and the world, and it only took us 75 years.
So, it’s time we all declared the apologetic Jew dead and introduced the world to a new breed of Jew, the proud Jew.
If we don’t respect ourselves, how can we expect the world to?
Our new government, despite its shortcomings, represents the proud Jew. There has never been more Torah learning than there is right now. We have never been stronger physically or economically. That’s something to be proud of.
This new government will support Torah. It will support the land of Israel—all of it. It will support our needs, not the needs of our enemies.
We have always talked about and prayed for the people of Israel, with the Torah of Israel, in the land of Israel. And now, we have arrived, not yet to the final destination, but we are well on the way.
For that, we, the Jewish people, should be proud, not ashamed and apologetic.
Once upon a time, identifying an antisemite required the proverbial duck test. If it quacked like an antisemite, then it probably was an antisemite.
Back then, antisemites had ways to avoid responsibility, but this has changed in recent years due to the widespread adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, which is now used by 38 countries, including the United States.
The IHRA definition, which includes examples of antisemitism directed against Israel, fits Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) perfectly.
For years, Omar has used the vocabulary of antisemitism delineated in the IHRA definition, such as tweeting “Israel has hypnotized the world” and that U.S. politicians’ support for Israel is “all about the benjamins”—a reference to hundred-dollar bills.
Even the Democratic House leadership, headed by outgoing speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that Omar “engaged in deeply offensive antisemitic tropes.”
One of the IHRA definition’s most important examples of antisemitism is “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel.”
Omar did precisely that in Feb. 2019, when she angered fellow House Democrats Eliot Engel and Nita Lowey (both of New York) by saying in reference to Israel, “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”
Omar has also repeatedly applied double standards to Israel and singled out the world’s only Jewish state for her attacks, both of which are also included in the IHRA definition. She even equated Israel and the U.S. with Hamas, Afghanistan and the Taliban.
But despite all that quacking, several left-wing groups that label themselves “Jewish” and “pro-Israel” recently had the audacity to pretend that Omar is not a duck.
Who came to Omar’s defense when House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) pledged to remove Omar from the House Foreign Affairs Committee?
It was J Street, Ameinu, Americans for Peace Now, Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, Habonim Dror North America, the New Israel Fund, T’ruah and the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.
To Western liberals, the suffering of Israeli victims at the hands of the Palestinian Arabs is all but invisible. So too is the suffering of Palestinians under their own leaders.
Western liberals appear not to see that Palestinian leaders jail, torture and kill their own people. They don’t see Palestinian attacks on Christians or Druze. They don’t see Hamas throwing gays off roofs to their deaths.
Last month, Ahmad Abu Marhia, a gay 25-year-old Palestinian Arab living under asylum in Israel in fear for his life at the hands of his family and residents of his village, was abducted and beheaded in Hebron.
The liberal media was mostly silent. There were no demonstrations on American campuses. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Thomas Nides tweeted his horror at the murder but conspicuously failed to say the victim had fled his Palestinian village for sanctuary in Israel because he was gay.
Western liberals have fixed in their heads the falsehood that Palestinians are the oppressed victims of Israel and therefore can do no wrong. In parallel, these liberals have blanked Israel out of their moral universe, so that Israelis don’t have the same right to exist as Western liberals do themselves.
How can we explain this astounding and shocking mindset?
The history of the Jewish people tells us that when cultures are beset by terrifying forces apparently beyond anyone’s control, Jews are identified as the cause. Pinning the blame on the Jews is how the simple-minded have tried to make sense of incomprehensible threats for generations.
But there’s always a catalyst: The people who actually point the finger at the Jews and incite the mob against them. In the Middle Ages, it was the Church. In the last century, it was Hitler. Today, it’s the Palestinian Arabs.
The common factor is their psychotic demonization of the Jewish people. Yet there is an even more devastating connection.
War was waged against the Nazis to defend the free world, which was duly saved from invasion, enslavement and tyranny. The war was not waged, however, to save the Jews. Indeed, the West shut its eyes to the extermination of the Jews, of which Western leaders were made well aware at the time.
Much of the West regarded Hitler as a monstrous aberration who managed to brainwash the Germans into supporting his psychotic ravings. But in the Middle East, the Palestinian Arabs were Hitler’s legion. They were led by the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who pledged to exterminate every Jew in the Middle East if Hitler won the war.
The PA is the recipient of huge largesse internationally. Probably per capita, the West Bank has received more international financial support than any other place in the world over the last decades.
This has included European Union support for Palestinian police institutions and US support for the Palestinian Security Forces.
However, despite almost two decades of all this support for law and order and institutions, basic things like treating a victim of a car accident and not letting a body be kidnapped from a hospital elude their security forces.
This kind of lawless criminal behavior is not an aberration. Recently, Israel and the PA have been forced to take on the gunmen of the rogue Lions’ Den group in Nablus.
This is in addition to the daily raids in the West Bank under Operation Breaking the Wave that the IDF undertakes.
It was one of these raids that led to the death of Shireen Abu Akleh in a gun battle between Israeli forces and Palestinian terrorists – that has resulted in international condemnation of Israel and even an FBI investigation of Israel’s actions.
The lawlessness, therefore, is not just a threat to human life and a violation of basic rights of human dignity, such as being treated in a hospital; it is also responsible for incidents that are of international importance to Israel.
The lawlessness could also represent an emerging threat to Israel and the Palestinians. This is because it appears there is a flood of illegal firearms in the West Bank.
The images of Palestinians killed in recent gun battles with Israeli forces has illustrated that many of the Palestinians have access to an arsenal of M-16s and other types of arms.
The men who use these weapons are now turning them on the PA and seem to be taking over more areas in the West Bank, exerting more influence.
With the leadership of the PA aging and increasingly out of touch with average people, the institutions decaying and lawlessness spreading, it’s imperative for all those who care about peace and stability to focus on reducing the role that lawless gangs, armed men, militants and terrorists are playing in the West Bank.
Israeli authorities coordinate with the Palestinians on a variety of issues, as the return of Ferro exemplifies.
However, both sides, as well as the US, EU and other international players, need to take a realistic assessment of how we can improve the situation.
The promotion this week of Hady Amr, who’s been serving as US deputy assistant secretary of state for Israeli and Palestinian affairs since President Joe Biden’s inauguration nearly two years ago, is the latest example of Washington’s disastrous Mideast policies. But at least the heretofore non-existent role that was concocted for the Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer more accurately describes his true leanings, as well as those of his bosses at Foggy Bottom.
The only thing that this already obvious and therefore unnecessary transparency required – other than an undoubtedly handsome pay hike for the proud author of the Brookings Institution’s 2004 report, “The Need to Communicate: How to Improve US Public Diplomacy with the Islamic World”– was the dropping of “Israeli” and addition of “special representative” to his title.
It’s not a shabby career elevation for the founding director of Brookings’ Doha Center in Qatar, among whose additional works for the dubious think tank include “The Opportunity of the Obama Era: How Civil Society Can Help Bridge Divides between the United States and a Diverse Muslim World.”
NOR DID the timing of the announcement to Congress on Tuesday about Amr’s newfound position seem to cause Secretary of State Antony Blinken the slightest bit of embarrassment, despite virtually coinciding with a vile act of Palestinian aggression in Jenin against Israel’s Druze community. It also preceded by less than 24 hours a double bombing in the Jewish state’s capital, which left 16-year-old Aryeh Shechopek dead and some 20 other innocents wounded.
About the latter, Blinken declared in a statement on Wednesday: “The United States stands resolutely with the people of Israel in the face of the terrorist attacks that occurred this morning in Jerusalem. We express our condolences to the family of the deceased and wish all victims a speedy recovery. We remain in close contact with our Israeli partners and reiterate that our commitment to Israel’s security remains ironclad.”
He failed to mention the previous day’s murder of 18-year-old Tiran Fero from the town of Daliat al-Carmel in the Haifa district. The Israeli-Druze car accident victim was being treated for multiple injuries at the Ibn Sina Hospital in the Palestinian Authority-controlled city of Jenin, the area of the crash, when gun-wielding terrorists stormed into his room, threatened the relatives at his bedside, pulled the plug on his ventilator and snatched him from the premises.
Rather than kill each other, Palestinian terrorists seek to build their power and influence by murdering Jews. The more Jews the various factions murder, the more powerful they become. This conceptual model explains both the expanded involvement of the P.A. directly in attacks, and the rise overall in attacks. It also explains why Iran has decided to get involved directly in Palestinian attacks. Iran’s regime wants its proxies to replace Abbas, and by getting involved in directing their attacks, Iran increases its chance of taking over. Indeed, the nature of the Palestinian power struggle is tailor-made for the mullahs.
Since all the Palestinian factions share the same enthusiasm for killing Israeli Jews, none of them has an ideological problem with accepting Iranian money or guidance for the operations. If Iran wants to take over the Palestinian theater, now is the time to act. So it is.
These circumstances are rife with strategic implications for Israel’s war planners. But specifically with regards to the Palestinians, they expose the utter futility of the Israeli left’s hopes of disengaging from the Palestinians by among other things, withdrawing from Judea and Samaria along the lines set out by the Oslo peace process and supported by the Biden administration.
Israel cannot stand back and watch the Palestinians kill each other because that is not what they are doing now, and it is unlikely that that is what they will be doing after Abbas dies. Instead, we are likely to see more of what they are doing now, and worse. After Abbas passes away, Palestinian factions, including the P.A., will continue to compete for power and turf by killing Israelis, wherever they are.
Given this reality, the only way for Israel to defend itself in the short and long run is by ending the conceit that the P.A. is a legitimate governing body and carrying out a military operation that will dismantle the P.A. militias along with the rest of the terror groups operating in Judea and Samaria. For a short while, Israel may need to take on functions of civil governance in the Palestinian population centers. But once it asserts its full security control over the areas, will be able to delegate those powers to local leaders.
In light of the Biden administration’s obsessive support for the Palestinian Authority, and its refusal to acknowledge either the P.A.’s central role in cultivating hatred of Israel and Jews as the central organizing principle of Palestinian society, or the true nature of the power struggle already going on among the Palestinian terror groups, such an Israeli move can be expected to provoke an angry response from Washington.
But Wednesday’s attacks in Jerusalem are a clear indication that Israel’s incoming government will have no choice but to order such an operation sooner rather than later. To this end, upon assuming power, the incoming Netanyahu government will have to embark on a two-pronged strategy. It must prepare contingency plans for taking over the Palestinian population centers by force. And to the extent possible, it must prepare the ground diplomatically for the inevitable.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
To Sum it all up
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Syria, Beirut, Hamas. Oct7th, IDF, Hezbollah,
Assad,]
We are Winning.
* * * Please support DRY BONES (through PayPal or your Cre...
Misinformation is rife about Jews of Syria
-
With the press and media focusing on Syria, the ignorance and
misinformation concerning the Jews and their heritage is astonishing.
Numbers ranging from...
When Hating Isn’t Enough
-
The 2024 election tested the limits of identity politics. Not because
Kamala Harris was running as a half-black, half-Indian and full-time accent
swappe...
▶ The Merneptah Stele – History in Stone!
-
The Merneptah Stele is an ancient Egyptian artifact and one of the
earliest references to the Jewish people! This artifact proves the
deep-rooted indigen...
When Lucy met Mayar – another BBC News nightmare
-
Having been caught consistently working with terrorist supporters to create
BBC News articles, you would have thought that BBC journalists would have
lea...
The Elder Scrolls 6 - everything we know so far
-
The Elder Scrolls 6's release date is still a mystery, given that we've not
received a substantial update on the highly-anticipated fantasy RPG is over
six...
An Observation on Israelis and Archaeology
-
Ariel David of Haaretz reported on a new find, one that appears here and
deals with An Israelite Residency at Mahanaim in Transjordan?
It deals with "th...
Hamas/Gaza War Musings #36- Dangerous Surrender!
-
As a student of the Bible/Tanach, most recently Prophets/Navi, that's the
message. Gd will save us if we do the right thing. That's how we won the
1967...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...