Last month I reported that the advisory panel for USAID, the American aid agency that funnels millions of dollars to Palestinian organizations, has recommended that the US should build institutions in Area C, ostensibly to promote Israeli-Palestinian cooperation.
However, these institutions would almost certainly not be available to Jews who already live in Area C, meaning that they would be effectively a way for USAID to take land away from under Israeli control and give it to Palestinians.
One of the more outrageous proposals mentioned was to build an entire university in Area C for Palestinian use.
Now, Israel's Channel 14 is reporting that Joe Biden supports the idea.
Israeli Channel 14 said, on Wednesday, that US President Joe Biden gave oral approval to a request submitted by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) to establish a Palestinian university in an area classified as C according to the Oslo Accords.
She added, that a senior official in (USAID) confirmed to her the news, and that the agency recently held a closed meeting to discuss this file after Biden's approval, and an informal tour is expected in the coming weeks to choose the land that will be allocated to the university buildings.
She noted that USAID officials presented the idea to Biden during his recent visit to Jerusalem.
As I wrote, USAID programs are supposed to be officially joint Israeli-Palestinian initiatives, but if Palestinians are meant to reap the benefits, why not place them where the Palestinians mostly live?
The MEPPAfunding program behind these ideas has two goals: economic development of the Palestinian private sector and "person to person" peacebuilding programs. Building a Palestinian high tech university on Israeli-controlled lands is not either of these - it is a land grab. Even if some of the instructors are Israelis.
I don't know if the USAID officials were taking advantage of Biden's possible confusion, or if Biden understands that this is a direct challenge to Israel's rights.
On Thursday, the highest ranking US liaison to the Palestinians Arabs gave a wide ranging interview to Palestinian media in Ramallah.
On Thursday, a high-ranking US official spoke about the meeting between US President Joe Biden and his Palestinian counterpart, Mahmoud Abbas, in Bethlehem, during his visit to the region on the thirteenth of this month.
During his meeting with a number of journalists in the city of Ramallah, the head of the American office for Palestinian affairs, George Noll, confirmed that President Abbas presented Biden with his demands, which he aspires to achieve, for the Palestinian people.
Noel said: "President Biden responded to his Palestinian counterpart that these demands need the Lord Jesus Christ, the miracle maker, to fulfill them."
Noll made no secret that President Biden had felt great sympathy for the Palestinians, indicating that there were limits to what America could do to put pressure on Israel to end the occupation.
The US official added: "America is against the occupation and against settlements, but there are those who believe that the United States is able to pick up the phone and ask Israel to do such and such. I wish it were this way, but it is not."
He pointed out that Biden empathized with the violation of the dignity of the Palestinians, indicating that this was what prompted him to stress the importance of preserving the dignity of the Palestinian people.
Noll also pointed out that President Biden has reaffirmed America's position of a negotiated political solution on the basis of the two-state solution, finding a negotiated solution in Jerusalem, halting settlements, and obtaining equal measures for the Palestinians with the Israelis.
The head of the American office for Palestinian affairs in Jerusalem stressed that the idea of Palestinians traveling through Ramon Airport in southern occupied Palestine(sic) is not an American idea, explaining that they are intensifying their efforts to solve the problem of the Karama crossing bridge (to Jordan.)
The US official indicated that his country is still pressuring Israel to open the US consulate office in occupied Jerusalem.
He pointed out that the matter is still in the hands of Israel, especially since the law states that the country hosting the consulate is the one that gives approval for the residency decision.
He explained that the US office for Palestinian affairs in Jerusalem is carrying out the same tasks and procedures that the consulate is supposed to carry out.
Regarding the opening of the office of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington, Noel stressed that this matter requires the organization to amend some procedures in American law...
In a related context, Noel confirmed that the US administration continues to follow up on the results of the investigations into the killing of journalist Sherine Abu Akleh, noting that the legal procedures take a long time.
I was at first skeptical when I saw this story, but it is being reported in multiple outlets without being copied, so it really appears that George Noll said all these things.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
President Biden said he confronted Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) directly Friday about the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, telling him in a “straightforward and direct” way that the killing was unacceptable and “making clear what I thought of it at the time and what I think of it now.”
The crown prince, who is the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, “basically said that he was not personally responsible for it,” Biden recounted. “I indicated that I thought he was.”
That account is from The Washington Post, which then goes on to quote Princess Reema bint Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi ambassador to the US, who confirmed that Biden did in fact bring up Khashoggi's murder, though not in as confrontational a way as Biden claimed:
It was candid, it was honest, it was open. And what I found profoundly refreshing is the president said, "I just need to be clear and direct with you," and the crown prince said, "I welcome you being clear, candid and direct, because that’s the way that we move forward.”
"I didn't hear that particular phrase," al-Jubeir said. "The President mentioned that the US is committed to human rights because since the founding fathers wrote the constitution and he also made the point that American presidents -- this is part of the agenda of every American president."
So -- did Biden directly confront MBS face-to-face on Khashoggi's murder or not?
Mr. Biden is by nature a storyteller with a penchant for embellishment. He has often told the story of meeting President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in 2011 as vice president and telling him, “I’m looking into your eyes, and I don’t think you have a soul.”Others present at the time had no memory of that specific exchange.
Mr. Biden has similarly described an unvarnished confrontation in 1993 with Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian nationalist leader who unleashed an ethnic war in the Balkans. “I think you’re a damn war criminal and you should be tried as one,” Mr. Biden, then a senator, related having told Mr. Milosevic, according to a 2007 memoir, “Promises to Keep.” Some other people in the room later said they did not recall that line.
Mr. Biden likes presenting himself as standing up to dictators and crooked figures. Another favorite story stemmed from a meeting with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan in 2008, when the Afghan leader denied that his government was awash in corruption. Mr. Biden said he grew so irritated that he threw down his napkin, declared, “This dinner is over,” and stormed out.
Often, others in the room for such sessions say that some version of what Mr. Biden has described did take place, only not with quite as much camera-ready theatricality.
So when he claims he did not hear Biden berate MBS to the degree the president claims, al-Jubeir is in good company.
And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.
So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him. (Laughter.) I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a b***h. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time. [emphasis added]
Here too, all we have is Biden's account of events -- and Biden is actually being modest about the pressure he put on Ukraine. According to Tablet Magazine, a highly placed source confirmed that it was also Biden who pressured Ukraine into voting 'yes' on UN Resolution 2334 which declared that Jewish settlements in the West Bank (including the Old City of Jerusalem) were in violation of international law.
But in fact, we have an example on the record when Biden actually did angrily confront a world leader -- Menachem Begin, prime minister of Israel.
The Begin Center Diary blog has the full text of an article in The Jerusalem Post by Moshe Zak, written on March 13, 1992, describing how Biden, when he was a Senator, lost his temper with Israeli PM Menachem Begin during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing:
During that committee hearing, at the height of the Lebanon War, Sen. John Biden (Delaware) had attacked Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria and threatened that if Israel did not immediately cease this activity, the US would have to cut economic aid to Israel.
When the senator raised his voice and banged twice on the table with his fist, Begin commented to him: "This desk is designed for writing, not for fists. Don't threaten us with slashing aid. Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do?
We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us." [emphasis added]
But ironically, in this case, where there is a clear example of Biden giving an ultimatum to a world leader, Biden himself is eager to deny that it ever happened. Sarah Honig of the Jerusalem Post writes:
Back 1982, Senator Biden (D-Delaware) threatened to cut off aid to Israel. In subsequent years he hotly denied this but Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s late right-hand man Yechiel Kadisha’i unequivocally confirmed Biden’s bullying in many conversations we held. [emphasis added]
The bitterest exchange was said to have been between Mr. Begin and Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, who told the Israeli leader that he was not critical of the Lebanon operation but felt that Israel had to halt the policy of establishing new Jewish settlements in the West Bank. He said Israel was losing support in this country because of the settlements policy. [emphasis added]
There is no mention of threats from Biden about the settlements, just anger. According to this account in The New York Times, instead of threatening to take action, Biden was warning Begin about the prospect that Israel would lose support in the US.
Reporting on his meetings with the members of Congress, Mr. Begin said one of the senators had threatened to cut off aid if Israel continued creating settlements in the West Bank.The senator is reported to have been Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware. [emphasis added]
So which was it: did Biden warn that Israel was facing the prospect of losing support or was Biden threatening that he, himself, would see to it that aid would be cut off?
Senator Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat, jabbing his finger at Begin,warned that U.S. support for Israel was eroding. Begin shouted back: "Don't threaten us with cutting off aid to give up our principles! [emphasis added]
The Time Magazine account allows for the possibility that Biden was not actually warning that he would cut aid. He was pointing out that US opposition to the settlements could lead to the loss of US support. Begin saw Biden's comments, made in anger, as an ultimatum to cut aid.
Begin's own account of what happened also seems to indicate that Biden's "threat" was less than explicit. Yisrael Medad quotes on his blog My Right Word the now-deleted page from the website of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which gives Begin's own account of the incident in his own words:
He [Biden] hinted - more than hinted - that if we continue with this policy, it is possible that he will propose cutting our financial aid. And to this I gave him a clear answer: Sir, do not threaten us with cutting aid.
There is no record of what Biden actually said, but even according to Begin there was no explicit threat. But whatever Biden said, it apparently hinted that more than just an erosion of support was at stake. And that Biden himself could have a role in it.
So to recap:
o Moshe Zak article: Biden "threatened that if Israel did not immediately cease this activity, the US would have to cut economic aid to Israel."
o The New York Times (June 23, 1982): Biden "said Israel was losing support in this country because of the settlements policy."
o The New York Times: (June 24, 1982): "Mr. Begin said one of the senators had threatened to cut off aid if Israel continued creating settlements in the West Bank."
o Time Magazine: Biden "warned that U.S. support for Israel was eroding. Begin shouted back: "Don't threaten us with cutting off aid to give up our principles!"
o Menachem Begin: "He [Biden] hinted - more than hinted - that if we continue with this policy, it is possible that he will propose cutting our financial aid. And to this I gave him a clear answer: Sir, do not threaten us with cutting aid."
Even according to the Moshe Zak article, which seems to be the main source usually cited, the warning was that the US would cut off aid -- not that Biden would personally see to it.
Even according to Begin's personal account, whatever it was that Biden specifically said, it only hinted at the loss of aid -- it was not an explicit threat.
According to Time Magazine, whatever Biden said about the erosion of US support led Begin to understand it as a threat and call it that on the spot in front of everyone.
Based on The New York Times article from June 24, it seems that reports of the "threat" are based on Begin's account to the media.
Whatever actually happened, Biden could have responded immediately when it was clear that Begin understood what he said as an ultimatum. He could have assured Begin in from of everyone that he was not making any threat. Biden did not do that. Nor did he seem to respond immediately in the press to Begin's account of what happened.
Without a transcript of what transpired, there is no way to be sure what exactly Biden said, whether it was said as an ultimatum, and what exactly he was warning would happen. But it does seem possible that under the pressure of the moment, Begin responded to something that was not an explicit threat.
Which is not surprising.
As Moshe Zak himself pointed out:
And not only with Carter, but at all his meetings with heads of state and government, Begin customarily replied with direct, frank words against anything he perceived as harming Israel's interests or honor.[emphasis added]
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
President Biden, like it or not, is in Israel. Israelis on
the left are thrilled. To prove it, Peace Now hung a massive
PLO flag on the side of a Tel Aviv building to welcome the President.
Israelis on the right, far from welcoming the President, are gritting their
teeth at the anticipated challenges to Israel’s sovereignty, and the
concessions that are sure to be demanded of Israel, alone.
The views of the Israeli left and right, in this regard, are
in diametric opposition. One wing, the left, wants the American president to
force Israel to give the Arabs everything they want. Money, land, a state. They
want Biden to demand that Israel stop
building Jewish homes.
The Israeli right, on the other hand, wishes the American
president would mind his own business and leave us alone. Don’t patronize us.
Don’t tell us what we can and cannot do.
The right is jealous for Israel’s right to make its own
decisions on matters of national importance like any other sovereign nation. We
don’t like being squeezed for concessions, we don’t like being forced to give
succor to despotic Arab regimes that incite their people to cut down Jews in
the streets of the Jewish State. It sticks in our collective craw.
The right, moreover, perceives a profound insult in the way these
presidential visits tend to manifest. They see a disturbing pattern to the
visits in which Israel is threatened, abused, and extorted. Israel is treated
like the enemy, and told to jump when Abbas, the architect of the murder of so
many Jews, says jump.
The PA, meanwhile, is treated with indulgent presidential
paternalism. America has always told the Arabs, albeit in diplomatic code, “You’re
Arabs. Of course you can’t help murdering Jews. We understand. We’ll get you
some of their land, give you some more money, and you’ll calm down for a bit.” *Cue
the presidential wink and backslap*
Whether right, left, or Arab, on one thing we all agree: all
of us know by now that a president’s visit means monumental traffic snarls, in
particular along the narrow streets of Jerusalem. According to general
consensus, until Biden leaves the country, one might as well cancel all
appointments and stay
home.
Of course there are worse things than traffic, for instance,
terror attacks. Arabs generally attempt to murder Jews whenever a president or
even a vice president visits Israel. It happened when George W. Bush came to
Israel in January 2011. From the Meir Amit Intelligence and
Terrorism Information Center:
1. On the morning of Tuesday, January 8, the remains and fragments
of two rockets were found in the Western Galilee town of Shlomi. Investigation
showed them to be two 107-mm rockets fired from Lebanon during the night.
2. In the early afternoon of the same day, a roadside
bombing targeted a vehicle traveling on a road to the north of Sidon. Two
soldiers belonging to the Irish contingent of the peacekeeping force were
wounded as a result.
It happened when Obama visited Israel. A terrorist took it
in his head to ram Jewish civilians with a backhoe, right near Obama’s hotel.
It happened when Biden was vice president. From Time
Magazine:
A Palestinian attacker went on a stabbing rampage, killing
an American student and tourist and wounding nine others before being shot by
police, according to officials. The bloody attack unfolded in the ancient
Mediterranean coastal port city of Jaffa, which joins Tel Aviv—a mixed Arab and
Jewish area—and came soon after two other serious attacks across Israel in a
little under two hours.
On Tuesday evening, as Biden was at the Peres Centre for
Peace in Jaffa, a Palestinian man ran down the seaside promenade, stabbing and
wounding three people, before fleeing and carrying out stabbings in two other
places, wounding another seven people. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said
the attacker, 22-year-old Bashar Masalha, from Auja, near Qalqilyah in the West
Bank, was shot dead. Israeli police also confirmed the 29-year-old American
student and tourist—identified as Vanderbilt University student Taylor
Force—had died of his wounds on his way to hospital in Tel Aviv. The Israeli
news website Ynet reported that his wife was also critically wounded.
The stabbings in and around Jaffa, came on a violent day
when four other people were killed—three Palestinian attackers and a
50-year-old Palestinian woman who Israeli police say intended to carry out a
stabbing attack. The day is one of the worst in a five-month wave of violence
between Israelis and Palestinians, in which 30 Israelis and nearly 200
Palestinians have been killed, two-thirds of which Israeli officials say were
killed while carrying or attempting to carry out attacks.
Less than two hours before the attack in Jaffa, a
Palestinian man on a motorbike opened fire on two Israeli border police on a
main shopping street in East Jerusalem, wounding them both, before he was shot
and killed in turn. Within minutes of this attack, another Palestinian man
stabbed an ultra-Orthodox Jewish man in the neck in Petah Tikvah, near Tel
Aviv. The man removed the knife from his neck and used it to stab and kill his
attacker, Israeli television media reported.
You would think that terrorists would think twice before
committing violent acts in the run-up or even during an American president’s visit
to Israel. After all, the Arabs stand to gain from such visits, which always
end with largesse for the PA and concessions from Israel. Why risk such
concessions by behaving in a manner not conducive to reward? It seems
illogical.
Logic, however, never applies when it comes to Israel and
the Jews. The terrorists, with encouragement by the PA, believe that if they target
Jews with violent acts of terror, the president will force Israel to make
concessions. Unfortunately, they’re right. That’s exactly what happens. Every
single time.
This is a tragic dynamic that should not exist: Arab
violence followed by Israeli concessions. Why should Israel reward terror?
Because a third party demands it, in this case the American president.
To the Israeli right, this makes no sense. It makes us
chafe. Common sense says we should give no concessions to terrorists. To the
contrary, terrorists and regimes that legitimate and foment terror, for example
the PA, should be punished, their aid slashed. They should be shunned, treated
not as desperados, but as the antisemites and murderers they are.
President Biden, of course, has already shown his disdain
for the Jews, and his approval of the despotic Arab regime that attacks them.
The President’s itinerary includes a visit
to an Arab hospital on the Mount
of Olives, the first time an American president has visited an institution
in “East” Jerusalem. The hospital visit sends the message that Biden does not
recognize Israel’s sovereignty over a united Jerusalem, and is rolling back Trump’s
recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. There was even a
diplomatic kerfuffle over whether an Israeli security detail or perhaps even a minor
official from the Ministry of Health would be allowed to accompany the
President’s entourage. Underscoring the intent of Biden’s hospital visit, the
President will announce his intention to give $100m
to “Palestinian” hospitals—this during a time of rising US inflation—to show
American support for the people responsible for spilling so much Jewish blood. This,
after he had already restored approximately $500 million in aid to the “Palestinian”
people.
National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan was pleased to remind
us of this support for the people who murder Jews in his July 11 press
conference, in which he also, remarkably, attributed a Hamas ceasefire to
Biden: “Under President Biden’s leadership, we helped end the war in Gaza,
which easily could have lasted months, in just 11 days.”
How has Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas
responded to American expressions of support for his people? Abbas’ response to
Biden’s cash gift is to demand even more. He wants Biden to abolish the Taylor
Force Act that put an end to US economic aid for the PA until such time as it ceases
paying salaries to terrorists and their families, otherwise known as Pay for
Slay. Abbas not only demands these things, but doubles down on his support for terror
by raising the salaries of hundreds
of terrorists.
The PA, in fact, has issued a long list of demands from the
Biden administration, accompanied by threats, including more terror attacks on
Jews. From MEMRI:
The Palestinian leadership, headed by President Mahmoud
'Abbas, clearly articulated what it expected the visit to yield – namely the
fulfilment of a series of commitments they claim Biden made them during his election
campaign and since the start of his presidency. Chief of these demands are: the
removal of the PLO from the Congress list of terror organizations; the
reopening of the PLO representation in Washington, which was shut down by the
previous administration; the reopening of the U.S. consulate in East Jerusalem,
which served as the U.S. representation to the PA until it was closed upon the
Trump administration's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital; the
renewal of the U.S. financial aid to the PA, halted in August 2018 by president
Trump; exerting significant pressure on Israel to halt what the Palestinian
leadership refers to as Israel's unilateral settlement activities in the West
Bank, its attempts to change the status quo in East Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa, and
the escalation of its actions against the Palestinians; a reiteration of the
U.S. commitment to the two-state solution, and serious action towards renewing
the negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel . . .
. . . Fatah Revolutionary Council member and Al-Hayat
Al-Jadida columnist Muwaffaq Matar [warned] that, in the current
situation, there are only two options: Biden's visit will either restart the
political process, or it will lead to consequences that the Israelis cannot
imagine, and the U.S. administration will be responsible for this. He wrote:
"The U.S. administration will have to bear the consequences for the fact
that we [Palestinians] have only two options, and no third option: either a
breakthrough in a peace process based on the UN resolutions – which must begin
with practical measures and by exerting pressure on the occupation, settlement
and apartheid state, i.e., the state of Israel… – or else the second option,
which will [dire] beyond the expectations of the experts and strategic analysts
of the Israeli occupation and its supporters…"
In other words, if Biden doesn’t give us what we want, we
will kill Jews.
Abbas need not worry. Biden looks with favor upon many of
these demands. The American president is, for example, reportedly mulling over
a demand that Israel stop building homes for Jews in Judea and Samaria: the
ever popular building
freeze that so delights the Arab people, who want these territories handed
over to them Judenrein. Anticipating this demand, and wanting to please the US
president, Lapid, according to the Jewish
Press, “ordered the removal of two plans from the Jerusalem District
Planning and Building Committee agenda,” which would have created “a total of
2,000 new housing units in Jewish neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem.”
Alas, Lapid was thwarted in his desire to earn the affection
of the Biden administration. Ayelet
Shaked, Israel’s Interior Minister, countermanded the order. “I will not
allow harm to construction plans for Jews only on my watch,” said Shaked in a
statement. “So, I decided to postpone all of the plans, by a week.”
Again, not to worry. Lapid has other ways to kiss up to
Biden. Lapid, in tandem with Israeli President Isaac Herzog, plan to give Biden
the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honor, an award not dissimilar from giving
Obama a Nobel Peace Prize, before he even stepped foot in the White House. From
Arutz Sheva:
“This award makes no sense. A ‘true friend of Israel’ and
fighter against antisemitism would not pursue the numerous policies undermining
Israel’s sovereignty and security that President Biden and his administration
are pursuing, including 100’s of millions of U.S. tax dollars financially
aiding and abetting Palestinian Arab terror against Jews,” said ZOA National
President Morton A. Klein and Director of Research & Special Projects Liz
Berney in a statement.
“Nor would ‘a true friend of Israel’ take advantage of
Israel’s caretaker government to make visits, as Biden is doing, to symbolic
Palestinian Authority institutions in eastern Jerusalem. Former Israeli
Ambassador Danny Danon noted that these Biden visits are unprecedented and were
‘created to pave the way for the U.S. administration to challenge Israel’s
sovereignty over Jerusalem,’” they added.
“Biden bragged about giving $500 million of U.S. taxpayer
dollars to the Palestinian Arabs – and is planning to announce an additional
aid package for Palestinian Arab facilities on his upcoming trip to Israel.
This funding for Palestinian Arab government functions aids and abets terror by
freeing up the $400 million per year that the Palestinian Authority spends on
substantial lifetime pensions to reward Arab terrorists for murdering Jews and
Americans. (The more Jews murdered, the higher the PA reward.) Biden is
blatantly violating and/or circumventing the Taylor Force Act. The Biden
administration’s indirect funding of these heinous PA payments needs to end.”
“In addition,” said ZOA, “Biden restored funding to UNRWA –
which hides Hamas rockets in its schools, employs Hamas terrorists, and teaches
children to murder Jews. UNRWA textbooks currently used throughout both Gaza
and the Palestinian Authority teach students to die as a martyr by killing
Israelis.”
“Outrageously, Biden and his administration (including
Secretary Blinken and Ambassador Nides) condemn Jews for building homes in the
lawful Jewish homelands in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria while saying nothing
about massive illegal Arab building. It’s time for the Biden administration to
end these blatant antisemitic attacks on Jews’ rights to live in the Jewish homeland,”
said Klein and Berney.
“Biden has attacked Jews for living in the Jewish homeland
throughout his political career. In 1982, then-Senator Biden threatened
then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin during a Senate Foreign Relations
Committee meeting to cut aid to Israel if Israel refused to agree to Biden’s
demands to stop Jews from living in Judea/Samaria. PM Begin famously responded:
‘Don’t threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew
with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history.
Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody
came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We
fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend
them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your
aid.’”
“But now, Lapid and Isaac Herzog are responding to Biden’s
lifelong anti-Jewish policies by giving Biden and award! Where is their pride?”
said Klein and Berney.
It’s great to have this support from American Zionists. But
where are the Israeli Zionists in all of this? Why aren’t we hearing their
voices? Because the Israeli government has squelched its attempts to speak out.
From the Jewish
Press:
Israel Police denied a request submitted by a group of
nationalist organizations to protest President Joe Biden’s visit to eastern
Jerusalem later this week. The Regavim movement responded, saying, “Lapid
agrees that eastern Jerusalem is not part of Israel’s capital.”
Ahead of Biden’s visit, and in response to reports that
Israel will allow the presidential delegation to visit eastern Jerusalem
without official coordination with or an escort by the Israeli government, the
Zionist organizations Regavim, The Sovereignty Movement, Im Tirtzu, The
Bithonistim, Ad Kan, and ZOA submitted a permit request to the Police for a
protest vigil along the route of Biden’s entourage, “to clearly demonstrate the
Zionist view on Israeli sovereignty over its unified capital, and to sound the
alarm against the government’s failure to express the basic Zionist principle
of Jerusalem as the undivided, eternal capital of the sovereign State of
Israel. “
Israel Police denied the permit request, claiming that all
roads along the route to the proposed demonstration site would be closed during
the presidential visit. In a Police Regional Headquarters hearing of the
request Monday morning, two alternatives were proposed: the demonstration could
go ahead at the location in question only after President Biden concluded his
visit or the organizations may seek a permit for an alternative location, away
from the route of the visit altogether.
The Zionist organizations expressed their anger and
frustration, arguing that the alternatives do not permit them to express their
legitimate Zionist position appropriately. The only alternative they agreed to
would allow them to express their political views in eastern Jerusalem during
Biden’s visit.
If the police persist in denying them their right of free
speech, the Zionist groups plan to seek relief from the High Court of Justice.
Meir Deutsch, Director General of Regavim, said: “This is
nothing short of a complete breakdown of the system. The Israeli government
gave in and allows the visit, thus is re-dividing our capital – in violation of
both US and Israeli laws. This is an outrageous capitulation and we demand the
right to express our objection with our presence in Israel’s united capital. If
the police denies us this right, we will appeal to the High Court of Justice.”
The Israeli right is tired of having its rights trampled not
only by Biden and his handlers, but by the Israeli leadership. It doesn’t seem
to matter whether our leaders are to the left, right, or center, the resultant
kowtowing to American druthers is the same. It doesn’t matter whom we vote for,
or what we do. They stop us from building homes in our indigenous territory,
and they offer incentives to the people who want to kill us, rather than live
with us in peace on Jewish land.
All that is left, it seems is our undying hope. Hope for an
Israeli leader with cajones, and hope
for another American president who understands our rights in the region, a
president who is unafraid of withdrawing support for Arab terror, and most of
all, a president with creative new ideas for bringing peace to our region.
As long as in the heart within,
The Jewish soul yearns,
And toward the eastern edges, onward,
An eye gazes toward Zion.
Our hope is not yet lost,
The hope that is two-thousand years old,
To be a free nation in our land,
The Land of Zion and Jerusalem.*
*Translation of Hatikvah, the Israeli anthem, lyrics
composed by Naftali Herz Imber, circa 1878.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
What is it about Jews building homes that gets under peoples’
skin? We know what they claim. They say that building homes for Jews in
disputed territory is an “obstacle to peace.” That, however, is an obvious lie.
The real reason the world does not want Jews to build homes in Israel is Jew-hatred:
antisemitism.
How do we know that the “obstacle to peace” mantra is a lie
providing cover for hate? We know this because of history and precedent. The 600
homes of the Jews of Yamit
proved no obstacle to peace with Egypt. The 2,530 homes
in Gush Katif and the 270 residences in Samaria did not stand in the way of
the great Gaza giveaway. And the 450,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria did not stop Oslo and local Arab autonomy.
Despite the thousands of homes built to shelter Jews in
their holy, indigenous territory, Egypt still received the gift of Sinai, while the UNRWA “refugees” were given de facto states in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.
Construction, even of Jewish homes
in ancient Jewish land, did not prevent any of this from happening. Where Jewish
homes once stood, today there are no Jews. These areas have been ethnically
cleansed of any Jewish presence, with the exception of a handful of captives
held by Gaza in the years since 2005, two of them almost certainly dead.
Jewish homes don’t get in the way of peace negotiations
or Israeli concessions because Israel doesn’t let them. Instead, the Jewish State
simply expels thousands of its own people, Jews themselves, and flattens their homes
with bulldozers.
It really is that straightforward. Thousands of Jewish homes go up and come down. Sinai gets Egypt. The rest get autonomy and Gaza.
None of this truth is reflected in the July 1st letter sent by 29
Democratic Congressmen to Anthony Blinken, on the eve of Biden's trip to Israel. The letter writers do not care that Israel anyway destroys the homes before handing over the land. They demand that the President pressure Israel to STOP BUILDING HOMES FOR
JEWS!
We write to express our alarm over the Israeli government’s renewed effort to build settlements in the West Bank area known as E-1.
The writers, in their own words, write to express their “alarm”
over Israel’s “renewed effort to build settlements” in parts of the Jewish
homeland they don’t want us to have.
Note the EU symbol on this illegal Arab structure in "disputed" Israeli territory. The EU finances these illegal homes for Arabs while, like the 29 Democratic congressmen, it condemns legal Jewish construction. If that's not an overt expression of antisemitism, what is? (photo courtesy of Regavim)
As legislators committed to the goal of a just and secure peace between Israel and the Palestinians, we are grateful to this administration for its previous work to prevent harmful actions that move us further from this goal, including the successful prevention of E-1 settlement plans that were under consideration last year.
The 29 legislators call the building of Jewish homes, “harmful actions” and laud the President for preventing such construction in the past. They say these things, they claim, because they are committed to a “just and secure peace." This is a demonstrable lie. If they were committed to a just and secure peace, they would speak out not about Jewish homes, but Arab terror. Especially considering that according to a 2015 article by Batya Medad, 15 percent of the home-building Jews are American citizens, with all the right to the protections that citizenship affords.
Note the EU stickers on the solar collectors and homes of this illegal Arab shanty town. The world is happy to finance ARABS building (illegal) homes. (Photo courtesy of Regavim)
Everywhere you find illegal Arab building on Jewish land, you will find evidence of world support. (Photo courtesy of Regavim)
We ask that you continue holding firm on this issue, especially as you prepare for President Biden’s forthcoming visit to the region.
The letter is by way of reminding Blinken that his job, as a court Jew, is to
continue to hold firm against Jews building any more homes on their land.
As 26 Members of
Congress wrote in a letter from November 2021, efforts to advance settlement construction
in E-1 “pose an irreconcilable challenge to a lasting peace solution between
Israel and the Palestinians… [and] have been referred to as ‘doomsday settlements’
because they would threaten the territorial contiguity necessary for a viable
independent Palestinian state by dividing the north of the West Bank from the
south, as well as the West Bank from East Jerusalem.”
The writers, from the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party, point us to the fact that their numbers are growing. In November there were 26. Now there are 29 of them, all demanding that Jews stop building houses. This letter, write the congressmen, echoes the November letter which states that Jewish homes “pose an irreconcilable challenge to a lasting peace solution.”
The homes themselves, are referred to as “doomsday settlements” without a hint of irony or any recognition that it is antisemitic to characterize a Jewish town in this manner. The 29 are quite frank in stating that there will be no peace if a Jew builds a home anywhere in Judea, Samaria, or Jerusalem. Which means that should Jews build homes, as far as these members of congress are concerned, they can be murdered by Arab terrorists with impunity and it will be the Jews' own damned fault.
Preserving this territorial contiguity is vital to the prospects for
peace and a two-state solution, and we remain strongly opposed to any such
effort to entrench the occupation of Palestinian territory.
The antisemitic letter signed by the 29 Democrats uses all the familiar catchwords to cover their hate. Peace, blah blah blah, Two-state solution, blah blah blah, Occupation, blah blah blah. But the end game remains the same, the goal is no Jewish presence. And no building homes in the meantime. They don’t want the Jews to be comfortable.
How do we know the shibboleths of peace, two-state solution, and occupation are meaningless doublespeak? We know it because neither Jew nor Arab wants two states for two peoples. There are a million polls to attest to this fact. And here's another, quite salient fact: Jewish homes are always destroyed by Israel when the Jewish State cedes Jewish territory to Muslims.
We were heartened that the Biden administration shared Congress’s
concerns and upheld the strong stance held by previous administrations of both
parties in opposing settlement construction in E-1. U.S. Ambassador to Israel
Thomas Nides has called the proposed settlements a “disaster” and has described
the Biden administration’s efforts to prevent it as going “full bore.”
The congressmen were “heartened” to hear that Biden also wants Jews to stop building homes. They want to remind Blinken that even Nides, also a Jew, fell into line, calling Jews building homes a “disaster.” They are saying they want Biden to come down on the Jews “full bore” to make them stop. building. homes.
This administration has demonstrated the progress that serious
diplomatic engagement on these sensitive
issues can lead to, and we are looking forward to the President’s first visit
to Israel this month. Despite this administration’s clear commitment to
preventing settlement construction in E-1, theIsraeli government has recently reversed its position and announced
plans to move ahead withE-1
settlementsonce again,scheduling the final hearing on the
objections to the project within days of the President’s planned visit. United
States intervention at this pivotal moment is critical. In recent months, there
has been an increase in violent clashes, and we are hopeful that the
President’s visit will help ease tensions and reassure both parties of the
United States’ commitment to a negotiated peace.
They are so looking forward, say the letter-writing Dems, to the President giving Israel a good diplomatic thrashing over Jews building homes. The Jews know that Biden doesn’t like Jews to build homes, yet the Israeli government has announced brazen plans to even build MORE Jewish homes. The Democrats speak of the causal effect of Jews building homes to “an increase in violent clashes” AKA Arab terror.
We are encouraged by
reports that the Biden administration has pushed the Israeli government not to
move forward with the planned hearing on E-1 settlement construction, and we
hope you will continue to prioritize this issue with the current interim
Israeli government and any future coalitions.
The 29 Democrats say they are encouraged by the fact that Biden is pushing Israel to stop all these conniving Israeli plans of building more homes for Jews. They hope, as well, that Jews building homes will be treated as a major issue on Biden’s agenda for his Israel visit.
We urge you to
continue emphasizing in the lead-up to this visit that settlement construction
in E-1 remains a red line for the United States, and to use every diplomatic
tool at your disposal to ensure that Israel does not further advance these
devastating plans.
In conclusion, the signees “urge” the President to keep “emphasizing” that when Jews build homes, it crosses a “red line," and suggest he should use “every diplomatic tool at your disposal” to ensure this building of Jewish homes, comes to a stop. Their message to Biden is that the very thought of Jews taking shelter in their historic homeland--actually LIVING there--is in their opinion, a “devastating” thing.
Sincerely
They mean all this. Sincerely.
We know it to be true: antisemites and antisemitic congressmen come and go. They
each in turn, get the chance to lend authority to the antisemitic hate they spew. They will say, for example, that no Jew has the right to build a home on his land, and that no wonder the Arabs get violent at the very thought of it. The truth does not matter to them. If the truth mattered a damn to them, they'd realize that violence derives not from building homes, but from hatred for those who seek
shelter therein.
A Jew building a home is a harmless thing. Bricks and
mortar, red tiles and heavy machinery, they matter not. There is no natural relationship between construction and violence. Violence comes from hate. The building of homes for Jews no more invites Arab terror than the rape victim's choice of clothing provokes sexual violence.
The 29 congressmen should be ashamed of blaming Jewish victims for being attacked and murdered by vicious Arab terrorists. But the 29 are not ashamed. They are proud to reveal their naked antisemitic hatred, before the entire world.
Here are their names:
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
It was created as a response to the January 6 events in Washington, and it is mostly concerned with the threats of white supremacist terrorists, with a smattering of other potential ideologies:
According to this assessment, one key aspect of today’s domestic terrorism threat emerges
from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists and networks whose racial, ethnic,
or religious hatred leads them toward violence, as well as those whom they encourage to
take violent action. These actors have different motivations, but many focus their violence
towards the same segment or segments of the American community, whether persons of color,
immigrants, Jews, Muslims, other religious minorities, women and girls, LGBTQI+ individuals,
or others. Their insistence on violence can, at times, be explicit. It also can, at times, be less
explicit, lurking in ideologies rooted in a perception of the superiority of the white race that
call for violence in furtherance of perverse and abhorrent notions of racial “purity”
or “cleansing.”
Another key component of the threat comes from anti–government or anti–authority violent
extremists. This significant component of today’s threat includes self–proclaimed “militias”
and militia violent extremists who take steps to violently resist government authority or
facilitate the overthrow of the U.S. Government based on perceived overreach; anarchist
violent extremists, who violently oppose all forms of capitalism, corporate globalization, and
governing institutions, which they perceive as harmful to society; sovereign citizen violent
extremists, who believe they are immune from government authority and laws; or any other
National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism 9
individual or group who engages in violence – or incites imminent violence – in opposition to
legislative, regulatory, or other actions taken by the government. Other domestic terrorists
may be motivated to violence by single–issue ideologies related to abortion–, animal rights–,
environmental–, or involuntary celibate–violent extremism, as well as other grievances – or
a combination of ideological influences. In some cases, individuals may develop their own
idiosyncratic justifications for violence that defy ready categorization.
Nowhere in this document does it discuss any threat from Islamic terrorists.
It doesn't even mention 9/11 once.
This is frightening. Federal authorities have foiled many attacks from Muslim extremists over the past two decades, both against Jewish targets and against governmental targets.
It is mind boggling that given the history of Islamist terror attack attempts over the past two decades, the White House implictly declares that this is no longer a problem that deserves strategic thinking - and possibly resources.
Many lives have been saved by US intelligence services and police monitoring for domestic Islamist terrorists. No one can doubt that the desire from both ISIS-style groups and Iranian-aligned terror groups to kill Americans and specifically Jewish targets has not abated.
It is difficult to escape the conclusion that this national strategy is partially motivated by political factors. American lives, and American Jewish lives, should not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness - but this appears to be exactly what is in danger of happening.
Following the news of Israel's peace agreement with the UAE and Bahrain, we
had a laugh at John Kerry's expense when we watched the 2016 video of Kerry
assuring his audience that peace between Israel and the Arab world without
first resolving the Palestinian question just wasn't possible.
And Kerry knew this because he had, even a week earlier, spoken to
"leaders of the Arab community."
It would be interesting to know just what Kerry said to those Arab leaders
-- and what exactly they said to him in response.
Did he misinterpret what they said to him?
Did those leaders intentionally mislead Kerry?
It certainly wouldn't be the first incident of an apparent 'miscommunication"
between Arab leaders and a member of the US government.
Once again, Arab officials apparently misled a US politician as to what they
were thinking about Israel.
Joe Biden (YouTube screencap)
But apparently, this is not limited to US politicians.
As a matter of fact, Arab leaders have been known to mislead other Arab
leaders as well.
In his book The Arab Mind, Raphael Patai tells a story from the eve of the 1948
Israeli War of Independence:
Musa Alami, the well-known Palestinian Arab leader, made a tour of the Arab
capitals to sound out the leaders with whom he was well acquainted. In
Damascus, the President of Syria told him:
I am happy to tell you that our Army and its equipment are of the highest
order and well able to deal with a few Jews; and I can tell you in
confidence that we even have an atomic bomb...Yes, it was made
locally; we fortunately found a very clever fellow, a tinsmith...(p. 53-54)
[emphasis added]
Patai gives another example, this one from the Six Day War, when on the first
day (June 5, 1967) the commander of the Egyptian forces in Cairo sent a
message to the Jordanian front:
that the Israeli air offensive was continuing. But at the same time,
he insisted that the Egyptians had put 75 per cent of the Israeli air
force out of action. The same message said that U.A.R. bombers had destroyed the Israeli bases
in a counter-attack, and that the ground forces of the Egyptian army had
penetrated into Israel by way of the Negev! (p. 109)
If Egypt had been honest with Jordan from day 1, Hussein might not have
entered the war, and Jordan would have retained control of Judea and Samaria
-- and the Kotel.
But behind these examples of miscommunication, there are issues of Arab
culture.
For example, the story about the tinsmith is pure exaggeration, what Patai
refers to as the "spell of (Arabic) language," namely the "prediliction for
exaggeration and overemphasis [which] is anchored in the Arabic language
itself" (p. 55)
As for Egypt's deception of Jordan, Patai describes it as wajh, or
an attempt to avoid loss of face. In fact, Patai blames King Hussein's years
in England for his failure to see this for what it was:
Had Hussein not lost, during his formative years spent in England, the ear
for catching the meaning behind the words which is an indispensable
prerequisite of true communication among Arabs, he would have understood
that a real victory over Israel would have been announced by Amer and
Nasser in a long tirade of repetitious and emphatic assertions, and that the
brief and for Arabs, totally unusual factual form of the statement betrayed
it for what it actually was: a face-saving device, a reference not to a
real, but to an entirely imaginary victory. [emphasis in original] (p.
112-3)
But what about Biden and Kerry?
Again, without knowing what each side actually said, it is impossible to know
what went on.
But their misunderstanding of their Arab hosts might be due to the Arab
concept of shame.
Patai distinguishes between shame, which is "a matter between a person and his
society," and guilt which is "a matter between a person and his conscience" --
or as he puts it: "A hermit in a desert can feel guilt; he cannot feel shame."
One of the important differences between the Arab and the Western
personality is that in the Arab culture, shame is more pronounced than
guilt...What pressures the Arab to behave in an honorable manner is not
guilt but shame, or, more precisely, the psychological drive to escape or
prevent negative judgement by others. [p. 113]
We tend to associate the Arab concept of shame/honor with of 'honor killings,'
but there are implications on a national level too.
In his preface to the 1976 edition of his book, Patai writes that although
Egypt lost the Yom Kippur War, the fact that they caught Israel by surprise
and were able to initially gain the upper hand, allowed the Egyptians to
perceive the war as a victory, and cleared the way for peace negotiations:
A manifestation of this new Arab self-confidence is the willingness to enter
into disengagement agreements with Israel. It is, in this connection,
characteristic that it is precisely Egypt, the country that won what it
considers a victory over Israel, which has embarked on the road of
negotiation with her....It is quite clear that the feeling of having demonstrated strengh is for
an Arab state a psychological prerequisite of discussing adjustments and
reaching understanding with an enemy.
[emphasis added] (xxiii - xxv)
How would shame/honor manifest itself in discussions between Arabs and
Westerners?
In his 1989 book, The Closed Circle: An Interpretation of the Arabs, David Pryce-Jones writes about
Kenneth Pendar, an American intelligence officer whose task it was to
persuade Moroccans to side with the Allies during the last war, expressed
the difficulties of conducting a negotiation in which
he expected a yes or a no from people unable to commit themselves to
either,
because they could not tell who would win the war and acquire honor or who
would lose and be shamed. [emphasis added] (p. 45)
Pryce-Jones goes on to quote Henry Kissinger, who complained of the
difficulty of negotiating with the Saudis because of their style that was
"at once oblique and persistent, reticent and assertive" based on the
allocation of honor or shame.
Based on this, one can imagine that Kerry and Biden could each have easily
misinterpreted what they heard in accordance with what they wanted to pass on
to their respective audiences.
Interestingly, when Patai writes about the confidence the Yom Kippur Was
instilled into the Arab world in 1973, he contrasts Egypt -- which considers
the Yom Kippur War a victory -- with other Arab countries that either cannot
make such a claim or have never fought Israel, and are therefore opposed to
negotiation.
That would seem to rule out Jordan and Sudan, on the one hand, and the UAE and
Bahrain on the other.
But King Hussein making peace with Israel is not surprising, considering his
tenuous control over his country, the majority of whom are Palestinian Arabs.
There was leverage the US could apply, even if the peace treaty itself could
cause trouble for Hussein at home.
Considering the leverage that the US applied to Sudan, that country also had a
lot to gain. But both Egypt and Jordan have a cold peace with Israel and the
Arabs in both countries have expressed their hatred of Jews and Israel. It's
not clear that the situation in Sudan is any better.
What about UAE and Bahrain?
Some have belittled the Abraham Accords because those 2 countries have never
actually been involved in a war with Israel.
But maybe that is the point.
Egypt and Jordan fought against Israel, and whatever the considerations on the
government level -- on a national level, Israel remains an enemy in the eyes
of the Egyptian and Jordanian people, regardless of the benefits Israel has to
offer and are nowhere near normalizing relations. There is an absence of a
state of war, but the mood of belligerence persists.
Not so with UAE and Bahrain, which has never fought Israel.
The intent of the Abraham Accords is not to bring peace in order to end a
state of war -- instead the point is to normalize relations, a goal that is
conceivable for UAE and Bahrain, but not for Egypt and Jordan, which still
cannot go beyond a 'cold peace,' let alone a full, real peace.
In November 2017, Mordechai Kedar wrote The Ten Commandments for Israeli negotiations with Saudi Arabia, which he described as "immutable principles" for negotiating with Saudi
Arabia "and any other Arab nations who wish to live in peace with the Jewish
State."
One of those principles is the need for normalizing relations as
opposed to just making peace:
10. Peace with the Saudis must entail more than just a ceasefire with an
attached document ("Salaam" in Arabic) . Israel agreed to that in the case of
Egypt and Jordan as a result of the ignorance of those running the
negotiations on Israel's side.
Israel must insist on complete normalization ("sulh" in Arabic), which
includes cultural, tourist, business, industrial, art, aeronautical,
scientific, technological, athletic and academic ties and exchanges, etc.
If Israel participates in international events taking place in Saudi Arabia,
the Israeli flag will wave along with those of other countries, and if Israel
is the victor in any sports competition in Saudi Arabia, the Hatikva anthem
will be played, as it is when other countries win medals. Israeli books will
be shown at book fairs, and Israeli products officially displayed at
international exhibitions taking place in Saudi Arabia.
An economic
document, whose details I am not in a position to elaborate, but which must be
an addendum to the agreement, is to be based on
mutual investments and acquisitions as well as a commitment to non-
participation in boycotts. [emphasis added]
This is what we are seeing now.
A foreshadowing for what is possible is in another comment by Patai, where he
addresses the "Arab street" that today we are told is supposedly ready at any
moment to rise up in protest, yet whose anger Trump has somehow been able to
avoid these past 4 years:
The volatility of Arab reaction to the October War was paralleled four years
later by the rapid evaporation of Arab wrath over President Satat's
initiative in establishing direct contact with Israel. This was observed by
Fuad Moughrabi, professor of political science and co-editor of the
Arab Studies Quarterly, in 1980:
The Arab world reacted strongly and passionately to Sadat's visit to
Jerusalem. But contrary to what many had expected, the intensity of the
reaction was not followed by any concrete, effective steps to neutralize
the conseqauences of the visit. Sadat did the unthinkable and got away
with it. (p. 339)
Moughrabi wrote this in 1980.
Sadat was assassinated in 1981 -- by the extremist Muslim Brotherhood.
Back then, Arab opposition to Sadat was not directed against the idea of
peace, but against the Camp David Accords themselves, which removed Egypt as a
participant in the war against Israel -- a war which was supposed to benefit
the cause of the Palestinian Arabs.
Today, with the Arab support for the Palestinian Arab cause at its lowest ebb,
there are genuine prospects for continuing what the Trump administration
started.
That is, assuming that this time around Biden actually listens to what the
Arab leaders are saying.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Chris Cuomo Calls Out The Anti-Israel Protests
-
[image: Chris Cuomo Calls Out The Anti-Israel Protests]
I may not always agree with Chris Cuomo, and I may not agree with
everything he says here, but boy ...
Universities Were Always Extreme
-
The Nazi cheers of Sieg Heil didn’t start out in Munich, but in
Massachusetts.
The Nazi chant was borrowed from Harvard football cheers and imported to...
If Not Now Seder Advanced To Friday Morning
-
They cannot afford to squander such an opportunity to piggyback their
political agenda onto an ancient tradition.
The post If Not Now Seder Advanced To F...
The Palestinian “Two-State” Plan: Duping the West
-
One of the great unsolved mysteries of the 21st century is why, given what
a catastrophe it proved to be, anyone, much less a whole phalanx of
politicians,...
06-Feb-24: Obituary: Naftali Gordon
-
The obituary that follows was published yesterday by *Times of Israel* under
the headline "*Master Sgt. (res.) Naftali Gordon, 32: A man of ‘honesty and
...
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...
Wednesday, August 10, 2022
Elder of Ziyon
