San Francisco State University Professor Rabab Abdulhadi said in an interview that students who expressed concern and outrage over her decision to host known terrorist hijacker Leila Khaled were part of a “Jewish caucus” and “a Zionist agenda."
“The Zionist movement is quite strong, it has resources, it has networking,” Abdulhadi remarked in a YouTube interview with Steve Zeltzer, “so they pressure- and actually, some of the legislation, not all of them, but some of them, went along with them, led by the Jewish caucus, which is all Zionist agenda, it has a Zionist agenda.”
Abdulhadi claimed the outrage over her invitation to Khaled was manufactured by the “Israel Lobby Industry," and said opposition to her was “catering to donors, catering to the right-wing agenda and catering to Islamophobia.” Abdulhadi doubled down on her comments later on in the video, stating that the university president “only talked to Zionists, only talked to one brand.”
“The university is participating in a very discriminatory, racist, defamatory, smearing campaign by the Zionist bullies and their right-wing, neoliberal and wealthy allies,” Abdulhadi said. She also claimed the talk with Khaled was only canceled because of the university’s desire to retain wealthy Jewish donors, alleging the school's president told donors she would “crush the Palestinians” and “crush AMED studies.”
That last sentence is only the most obvious lie.
The interview, which was posted on September 22 before the Leila Khaled event was dropped by Zoom, shows that Abdulhadi has no concept of truth. She [13:07] accuses SFSU president Lynn Mahoney of publishing a piece in J Weekly that is "Islamophobic" - you can read it yourself and see that all she condemned was terrorism and didn't use the words Islam or Muslim once.
The interviewer Steve Zeltzer directly accused Israel of funding universities through American Jews to further its agenda, comparing it to China and Russia influence campaigns:
When we talk about influence - there's a big campaign, both Democrats and Republicans talking about the influence of China, the influence of Russia, yet it seems when it comes to Israel and Israeli funding of institutions in the United States and campaigns to target professors such as yourself and others who are critical of Israel, there doesn't seem to be a problem with that role of Israel in the United States and operating through Jewish community councils and others it seems like a double standard.
Abdulhadi enthusiastically agrees with this accusation, which goes beyond the dual-loyalty trope of American Jews - the accusation is that Israel is paying American Jews to be loyal to it above the US.
This is today's antisemitism, and the only defense they use (as Abdulhadi does in this video) is the one that Jew-haters have used throughout the centuries: "Some of my best friends are Jewish."
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.
The NYU - American Association of University Professors issued a statement about Zoom denying PFLP terrorist Leila Khaled on their platform.
10/23/2020
Today, Zoom unilaterally shut down a webinar hosted by the NYU chapter of the AAUP, and co-sponsored by several NYU departments and institutes. The webinar was scheduled to discuss the censorship, by Zoom and other big tech platforms, of an open classroom session last month at SFSU, featuring the Palestinian rights advocate Leila Khaled.
Of course, we recognize that it is an act of sick comedy to censor an event about censorship, but it raises serious questions about the capacity of a corporate, third-party vendor to decide what is acceptable academic speech and what is not.
The shutdown of a campus event is a clear violation of the principle of academic freedom that universities are obliged to observe. Allowing Zoom to override this bedrock principle, at the behest of organized, politically motivated groups, is a grave error for any university administration to make, and it should not escape censure from faculty and students.
The NYU administration has told us they knew nothing about Zoom’s decision, and that they have taken up the issue with the company’s representatives. We urge the administration to issue a strong statement denouncing this act, and to revisit the terms of its contract with Zoom.
If Zoom will not walk back its policy of canceling webinars featuring Palestinian speech and advocacy, college presidents should break their agreements with the company.
The AAUP chapter is committed to organizing an event for the NYU community to discuss this appalling breach of academic norms.
Back in ancient times of a couple of decades ago, university professors were expected to tell the truth. It seems to be a minimum requirement for the job. But at NYU, the AAUP seems to be allergic to veracity.
Nowhere in this letter does it say the reason Zoom does not allow Leila Khaled on its platform. This is strange because anyone can read Zoom's Prohibited Use policy:
Prohibited Use. You agree that You will not use, and will not permit any End User to use, the Services to: ... use the Services in violation of any Zoom policy or in a manner that violates applicable law, including but not limited to ...anti-terrorism laws and regulations...
Hosting and promoting a terrorists violates anti-terrorism laws.
The reason is because Khaled is a member of a terror group, not because she is an advocate for Palestinians.
When the NYU-AAUP says Zoom has a policy of "canceling webinars featuring Palestinian speech and advocacy," they are not only lying - they are knowingly lying. There are plenty of pro-Palestinian Zoom meetings, every single day.
Almost as bad is saying that Zoom is "censoring" anything by adhering to its own rules against using the platform for terrorism that it has had in place since 2012.
The AAUP, with this statement, has destroyed its credibility - in support of an unrepentant terrorist and current member of an active terror group.
Not to mention that the AAUP has not, to my knowledge, ever said a word in support of academic freedom when gangs of Israel-haters who disrupt lectures and speeches by Zionists or Israelis. This only becomes a "bedrock principle" when a terrorist is affected. Which is its own kind of sickness.
(h/t Andrew P)
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.
The Trump administration is considering declaring that several prominent international NGOs — including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam — are anti-Semitic and that governments should not support them, two people familiar with the issue said.
The proposed declaration could come from the State Department as soon as this week. If the declaration happens, it is likely to cause an uproar among civil society groups and might spur litigation. Critics of the possible move also worry it could lead other governments to further crack down on such groups. The groups named, meanwhile, deny any allegations that they are anti-Semitic.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is pushing for the declaration, according to a congressional aide with contacts inside the State Department.
The declaration is expected to take the form of a report from the office of Elan Carr, the U.S. special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism. The report would mention organizations including Oxfam, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. It would declare that it is U.S. policy not to support such groups, including financially, and urge other governments to cease their support.
The report would cite such groups’ alleged or perceived support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which has targeted Israel over its construction of settlements on land Palestinians claim for a future state.
It’s also expected to point to reports and press statements such groups have released about the impact of Israeli settlements, as well as their involvement or perceived support for a United Nations database of businesses that operate in disputed territories.
There is absolutely no doubt that these groups are structurally and systematically biased against Israel. They hire people to "research" Israel with a history of anti-Israel advocacy.
One example is Amnesty's Saleh Hijazi, Deputy Regional Director of the MENA Region, whose Facebook pages include support for terrorists Leila Khaled and Khader Adnan, a glaring piece of hypocrisy for a supposed human rights advocate.
Similarly, Omar Shakir had a well-documented history of supporting BDS against all of Israel (not just "settlements") and of being obsessively anti-Israel when he was hired by HRW - and that continued even as he was employed by them.
This results in these NGOs issuing anti-Israel reports that are longer, more numerous and more detailed than their reports on virtually any other nation, with only a smattering of reports about Palestinian human rights or Arab human rights abuses against Palestinians (which only exist when their anti-Israel obsessions were revealed so they wrote token reports for "balance.") In fact, in some cases these groups have supported terror-linked NGOs.
Israel is routinely accused of "apartheid" by these NGOs. There is literally no other nation in the world that they make similar accusations of.
These NGOs become obsessed about companies like TripAdvisor and AirBnB that operate in disputed territories. There is literally no other nation in the world that they make similar accusations of, let alone participate in huge funded campaigns against international companies.
Amnesty and HRW knowingly twist international law to pretend that Palestinians have a "right to return." As many as 60 million Europeans became refugees after World War II, but none of them have the same "right to return" that the 700,000 Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants are considered to have today by these NGOs. The only purpose of this demand is to destroy the Jewish state demographically.
Do these obsessions cross the line into antisemitism?
By the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, there is no doubt that these groups are antisemitic because they hold Israel to standards that they do not apply to any other country.
Even if you do not accept the IHRA definition these NGOs seems to have a problem with Jews.
For example, this report from HRW denigrating religious Jews:
Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, who holds the state-funded, statutory position of Israel’s Chief Sephardic Rabbi, said in a March 12, 2016 sermon, partly in response to Eisenkot’s admonition to limit the use of lethal force, that the Bible authorizes a shoot-to-kill policy: “‘Whoever comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first.’ … let them afterward take you to the High Court of Justice or bring some military chief of staff who will say something else … As soon as an attacker knows that if he comes with a knife, he won’t return alive, it will deter them. That’s why it’s a religious commandment to kill him.”
The Sephardic Chief Rabbi does not command police or soldiers, but he heads the Supreme Rabbinical Tribunal and is tasked with advising on the interpretation of religious law.
...
According to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, about half of Jewish Israelis define themselves as religious or traditional, not including ultra-Orthodox Jews, who usually do not serve in the army. Conscription for non-ultra-Orthodox Jewish men is universal. Most soldiers are in their teens or early 20s, and after a few months of basic training, they can be sent to serve in the occupied West Bank.
This is an accusation that religious (and traditional) Jews are bloodthirsty fanatics who would kill Arabs at a drop of a hat - and against army regulations. That is antisemitic slander.
Or this Amnesty employee that denied Egypt's expulsion of its Jews - meaning that Jews are the only group whose human rights are not to be defended.
Or these groups pushing to expel Jews - and only Jews - from their homes in disputed territories when there are also thousands of Israeli Arabs who live across the Green Line but are never called "settlers."
Or Oxfam selling antisemitic literature on its site - copies of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and other antisemitic books that Oxfam members owned, photographed and blurbed on their website without even considering this to be a problem.
In total, it is obvious that these NGOs have a problem not just with Israel, but many of their members have problems with Jews.
Even so, it is unclear whether it is wise for the State Department to declare them antisemitic. Outside the Middle East, the groups seem to do some excellent work and have dedicated employees who really care about human rights. (If the NGOs really wanted to be objective, they would rotate their researchers to different areas of the world instead of allowing obsessive haters of Israel to choose to demonize Israel.)
Declaring the entire organizations themselves to be antisemitic could be counterproductive. But they do have an crazed focus on attacking the Jewish state, and that needs to be publicized.
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.
A recent Mondoweiss article by the "Palestinian Feminist Working Group" sheds some light on how hate for Israel is often disguised using liberal buzzwords that have nothing to do with the actual agenda of these groups.
The article is typically ridiculous - it pretends that Zoom, YouTube and Facebook's pulling the plug on a conference featuring a proud terrorist Leila Khaled was about censorship and a silencing of Palestinian feminist voices when it was simply adhering to existing US anti-terrorist and sanctions laws.
It goes on to justify Palestinian terror as "resistance" and defining everything Israel does as terror.
This is the first appearance of this group, which is what makes it interesting. The group has no website. It describes itself this way:
The Palestine Feminist Working Group is a U.S. based network of Palestinian and Arab feminists who are committed to ending all forms of Zionist colonial and gendered violence and oppression. We believe that social liberation is a critical component of Palestinian national liberation. The working group was founded by the Palestinian Youth Movement’s (PYM) Women’s Committee. To learn more about our work and/or to join our efforts contact us at Palestinianfeminists@gmail.com
Note that it doesn't say a word about feminist issues in the Palestinian controlled territories at all. The supposed feminism of this group begins and ends with attacking Israel.
Many of the people signing this article are academics at US universities:
Noura Erakat, Assistant Professor of Africana Studies, Rutgers University
Dr. Sarah Ihmoud, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, The College of the Holy Cross
Dr. Hana Masri, Postdoctoral Fellow, Center for Advanced Research in Global Communication, University of Pennsylvania
Maisa Morrar, Physician Assistant and member, Palestinian Youth Movement
Dr. Loubna Qutami, Assistant Professor of Asian American Studies, UCLA
Basima Sisemore, Researcher, Othering & Belonging Institute, UC Berkeley
Randa M. Wahbe, Ph.D. Candidate, Anthropology, Harvard University
Yazan Zahzah, MA in Women and Gender Studies, San Diego State University
Leena Odeh, J.D., The Decolonizing Race Project
Isn't it strange that these "Palestinian feminists" have so little interest in feminist issues in Palestine?
The United Nations Development Programme published a comprehensive guide to gender laws under the PA and Hamas in late 2018. It uncovered state-sponsored discrimination against women, which I have summarized before:
Domestic violence: Palestine has no domestic violence legislation. Marital rape: Marital rape is not criminalized. Abortion for rape survivors: Abortion is prohibited in the West Bank by the Jordan Penal Code (Articles 321–325) and in Gaza by the Criminal Code of 1936 (Articles 175–177). Sexual harassment in the workplace: Sexual harassment is not criminalized by the Labour Code. Honour crimes: Mitigation of penalty Laws allowing mitigation of penalties for ‘honour’ crimes were repealed in 2011 and 2018 in the West Bank. However, the government in Gaza has not applied the reforms. Adultery: Adultery is an offence in Gaza and the West Bank. In the West Bank, Article 282 of the Penal Code criminalizes adultery Human trafficking: Palestine does not have comprehensive anti-trafficking legislation. Some provisions of the Penal Code of Jordan apply to trafficking in the West Bank. Sex work and anti-prostitution laws: Prostitution is prohibited by Articles 309–318 of the Penal Code in the West Bank and Articles 161–166 of the Criminal Code of 1936 in Gaza. Marriage and divorce: The personal status laws for Muslims require the husband to maintain the wife. A wife owes obedience to her husband. A husband can divorce by repudiation (talaq). A wife has the right to divorce on specified grounds. She can also apply for a khul’a divorce without grounds if she forgoes financial rights. Male guardianship over women: Muslim women require consent of a wali (male guardian) to marry. There are some weak legal protections for women under guardianship. Women can seek permission from the court to marry if the guardian withholds consent without a legitimate reason. Guardianship of children: Fathers are the sole guardians of children. Custody of children: After divorce the mother has custody up to a certain age, but automatically loses custody of her children if she remarries. Inheritance Sharia rules of inheritance apply to Muslims. Women have a right to inheritance, but in many cases receive less than men. Daughters receive half the share that sons receive. Polygamy: Polygamy is permitted. Legal restrictions on women’s work: Some legal restrictions exist on women’s employment in certain industries that do not apply to men, such as mining.
The report seemingly went into a black hole. There are very few references to it online. Yet it is probably the most comprehensive report on women's rights in the Palestinian territories that exists.
Real Palestinian feminists would be screaming from the rooftops about this. But not the members of the "Palestinian Feminist Working Group."
The fact that Leila Khaled's PFLP actually murdered an Israeli girl last year doesn't diminish her "feminist" bona fides for some reason. None of these "feminists" condemned the murder of a Jewish girl.
These people aren't feminists. They are Jew-haters who use feminism as a justification for their bigotry and hate.
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 October, the ILPS, its member organizations, country chapters, and allied networks will be launching a month-long campaign of Global Solidarity with the Palestinian People.
As part of the Month of Solidarity, the ILPS will deal with issues such as the recently announced Imperialist/Zionist annexation plan, the history of Israeli colonialism and apartheid, the rejection of agreements of humiliation and “normalization” between Zionism and some Arab countries, the global campaign to return to Palestine, support for the Intifada, the liberation of the Palestinian people, the unified capital of Palestine, the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine and so on.
We are inviting everyone to tune in to the launching of this campaign on OCTOBER 3, 11 PM Melbourne time. Our keynote speaker is no other than Palestinian woman activist Leila Khaled, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
For some reason, no Zionists are trying to "censor" this event. In fact, no one really cares. The problem with Khaled is when respectable institutions give her respect.
Interestingly, San Francisco State University specifically told the organizers of their Khaled webcast not to mention the PFLP, under the pretense that she was speaking in a private capacity, in their attempt to avoid violating US anti-terrorism laws. The ILPS, on the other hand, is proud to trumpet Khaled's active ties to terrorism.
In fact, the webinar registration form starts off with "The International League of Peoples’ Struggles (ILPS) stands in militant solidarity with the Palestinian people," leaving no doubt of their support of terror. To Khaled's fans, her terrorism and her support for violence is a feature, not a bug.
It would be a shame if Zionists would treat this webinar the way that Israel-haters treat pro-Israel events, by disrupting it and putting the organizers on the defensive. But if something like that should happen, it would be amusing to see if the ILPS response would be one that supports free speech.
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.
We've discussed before the strange phenomenon of so many philosophers through history who were also antisemitic.
It's hard to know why this is, but I pointed out that philosophers often think that they are smarter, better and have more insight into subjects than the dumb masses, and this hubris extends into the idea that they think that anything they come up with must be assumed to be correct.
Brian Leiter is a philosopher and legal scholar who is a Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of Chicago Law School and founder and Director of Chicago's Center for Law, Philosophy & Human Values. He wrote a pithy post on his blog, which he says is the "world's most popular philosophy blog."
The biggest threat to free speech on campus and academic freedom consistently comes from the pro-Israel interest groups. They are running scared because they realize that far too many of Israel's actions can not withstand public scrutiny.
He's referring to the Leila Khaled incident, of course.
Interestingly, any first year student of logic could see that his second sentence is not at all implied from the first. The idea that not wanting a PFLP terrorist to be honored by a university is somehow really a fear that she is going to say something damning about Israel that we cannot read in the newspaper (or philosophy blog) is absurd and doesn't stand even five seconds of analysis.
Not that his first sentence is true either. There is at least as much of a threat to free speech by the Left. Even Leiter writes about cancel culture which is primarily a Leftist phenomenon. How many campus Middle East Studies departments have hosted Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria? If free speech is the goal, then why is the only speech allowed on most campuses so tilted against Israel?
It is undoubtedly true that Jews living in their ancestral homeland are far more likely to have their speech suppressed on campus than Palestinian terrorists.
Two sentences. The first one has no basis in reality, and the second one does not logically follow the first. That's a pretty bad track record for a philosopher.
Leiter links to an article about the Leila Khaled event from Academe Blog. That article is not as bad, although it incorrectly refers to the incident as "censorship." It isn't.
Censorship is the suppression of speech because it is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient. Yet the objection to Khaled's talk wasn't about the content of her talk, but about her being an objectionable person - inviting an unrepentant terrorist whose support of violence against the innocent has not changed for five decades is as inappropriate as inviting a proud racist or rapist on campus. This is obvious because no one I am aware of objected to the other anti-Israel speakers at that webinar.
Moreover, Khaled has nothing original to say. Her words would have been the same socialist anti-Israel garbage that is said every day among the "woke" - it isn't as offensive as it is boring.
At least the Academe blog has enough intellectual honesty to point out that progressives engage in censorship as well:
For those on the left who demand that tech companies censor speech they think are wrong or offensive, this is a chilling reminder that censorship is a dangerous weapon that can be turned against progressives.
Leiter, with all his philosophy and legal credentials, flattens what could be a nuanced discussion of how different groups try to influence discussion into a very one-dimensional assertion of "Zionists bad."
And for someone who is such an opponent of censorship and advocate of free speech, it is curious that Leiter does not allow comments on his blog. Perhaps he has the fear of truth that he imputes to Zionists.
(h/t Dan P)
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.
For the people who claim that Leila Khaled isn't a terrorist, just listen to - Leila Khaled.
In her autobiography written in 1971 titled "My People Shall Live," she mentions poems she wrote while in Syria after hijacking TWA 840.
I shall return repeatedly to
spread terror in the heart of the enemy.
I shall flag the enemy;
I shall pulverise him.
And why not?
Be with me, my beloved, remember our martyrs,
remember the stolen lands.
Take all difficulties with steadfast revolutionary
violence!
Also:
In Damascus we indeed exploded the cockpit of the imperialist plane as an expression of our strategy,
which aims at hitting the imperialist interests wherever they may be. The Popular Front will destroy the
treasonous enemy-the enemy of humanity, right and justice. Blessed be the arms that carry out deeds
and the revolutionary brains that conceive of deeds and plan them. We shall be victorious.
She described her feelings during the hijacking:
It was a momentous second in my life when I put my fingers on the trigger and ordered the enemy to
obey my command. All my life I dreamt of carrying arms to aim at the enemy-that vengeful enemy
who raped our land and has expropriated our homes without compensation.
The "enemy" here are the innocent passengers going to Israel from Rome.
THE PRINCIPAL FUNCTIONS OF EVERY MEMBER IN THE Popular Front are politically orientated military activities, the spreading of revolutionary propaganda and fund-raising. While these
functions are often closely associated, none the less each comrade specialises in the area to which his or
her talents are best suited.
No moral distinction between armed terror and the propaganda that the PFLP is so skilled at nowadays, hiding in "human rights" NGOs.
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.
San Francisco State University will be hosting a Zoom event called “Whose Narratives? Gender, Justice and Resistance: A Conversation with Leila Khaled,” on September 23.
Leila Khaled, of course, is the PFLP terrorist who hijacked planes in 1969 and 1970. Her image with a machine gun is ubiquitous at lots of leftist rallies.
But no progressive groups march with photos of Rina Shnerb. They fetishize female terrorists, not female Jewish victims of terror.
Khaled is not the only heroine of the progressive crowd. They love Rasmea Odeh, responsible for the murder of two people. Also a PFLP member, Odeh has admitted that she was involved in bombing attacks against civilians. and fought to have photo-ops with her before she was deported from the US.
Odeh, a violent terrorist, was treated like a rock star by the supposedly anti-violent BDSers.
Palestinian "moderates" have been the originators of this mindset where female terrorists are role models. The Miftah NGO, which is headed by Hanan Ashrawi and is in the forefront of Palestinian feminism, has multiple articles in Arabic that praise female suicide bombers as role models - and they had English articles praising female suicide bombers as well before I exposed them.
Palestinian women have also participated in the resistance. As the conflict grew more intense and young men were recruited to carry out military operations against Israeli targets, several young women also decided to join the ranks of the resistance movement. In January 2002, 28-year-old nurse Wafa Idrees, detonated a bomb in Jerusalem’s Jaffa Street, killing one Israeli and injuring 150 others. She was also killed in the blast.
This marked the beginning of a string of Palestinian women dedicated to sacrificing their lives for the cause. Over the next two years, seven other women carried out similar operations, the most deadly of which was carried out by Hanadi Jaradat, a 29-year-old attorney from Jenin. Hanadi detonated explosives strapped to her body in a busy Haifa restaurant, killing 19 Israelis and injuring 50 others.
The "moderate" PLO has become a cult of sorts for Dalal Mughrabi, responsible for murdering 38 civilians. Numerous institutions are named after her and her likeness can be seen all over Palestinian towns.
It appears that the "progressive" Left in the West has embraced the idea of female terrorists as role models. It is this immoral and disgusting thinking that is behind a university effectively honoring a terrorist as if she can teach students something about life, and behind prominent American and European progressives literally embracing a murderer.
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.
If the Star of David on Israel's flag upsets you but the crescent, crosses and other religious symbols on more than 60 other flags doesn't bother you, you just might be an antisemite.
If you believe that the Palestinian Arabs, who never thought of themselves as a nation until the mid-20th century, have more of a claim to nationhood than Jews who have been a nation for 3000 years, you just might be an antisemite.
If you deny that the Jewish people are a nation altogether, you just might be an antisemite.
If the idea of a Jewish state feels vaguely racist to you but the idea of an Arab or Muslim state doesn't, you might be an antisemite.
If Israel is the only nation you ever call an "apartheid state," you just might be an antisemite.
If you get a thrill comparing Israelis to Nazis, you just might be an antisemite.
If you think "Zionists" control Congress, or the banks, or Hollywood, you just might be an antisemite.
If you believe that it is a moral duty to boycott Israeli Jews but not Israeli Arabs, you just might be an antisemite.
If you believe that Ashkenazic Jews are descended from Khazars and have no Middle East ancestry, you just might be an antisemite.
If you ever claimed Israel steals organs from Palestinians, you just might be an antisemite.
If you think Israel is behind the coronavirus, you just might be an antisemite.
If you aren't Muslim but refer to Jewish shrines like the Temple Mount, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs by their Muslim names that came centuries later, you just might be an antisemite.
If you claim that Israel poisons Palestinian wells, you just might be an antisemite.
If you believe that Israel intends to take over all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, you just might be an antisemite.
If you cannot to bring yourself to write the word Israel without scare quotes, you just might be an antisemite.
If you want to see the only Jewish state replaced with another Arab state, you just might be an antisemite.
If you claim to be pro-Palestinian but ignore how Palestinians have been and continue to be treated by Arabs, you just might be an antisemite.
If you say you are against occupation but never said a word about any occupation that cannot be blamed on Israel you just might be an antisemite.
If you claim that Israel does moral things to cover up for immoral crimes, you just might be an antisemite.
If Jews must pass a test of being anti-Israel for you to allow them to speak publicly, you just might be an antisemite.
If you've ever called someone a "Zionist" as an insult, you just might be an antisemite.
If you are offended by the lyrics of Hatikva but have no problem with the Palestinian national anthem that extols violence and vengeance, you just might be an antisemite.
If you regard Leila Khaled, Rasmea Odeh and Dalal Mughrabi as feminist role models, you just might be an antisemite.
If the idea of Jews respectfully visiting their holiest spots makes you angry, you just might be an antisemite.
If you think that terrorism against Jewish targets is sometimes justified, you just may be an antisemite.
If there are any parts of the world that you believe Jews should not be allowed to live, you just might be an antisemite.
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.
David Collier has written a walloping
200-page report (available for download as pdf) exposing the anti-Israel bias and obsession
of international human rights group Amnesty
International. In its sheer breadth of coverage, the report is an
astonishing body of work, but then we’ve come to expect nothing less from
Collier. We watched on, not so long ago, as he issued a similar bombshell, his multipart exposé
of Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party. That report appeared to necessitate
Collier infiltrating a secret Labour Facebook group.
David Collier
This is like the kind of spy
stuff you read about in novels. It would take guts to do that and not a little
caution, sustained over a lengthy period of time, in order to avoid detection. But
Collier’s unconventional methods of research have borne fruit, witness the fact
that Boris Johnson is in and Corbyn is most definitely out.
Collier is using new and
different tacks in the fight for Israel and against antisemitism. The way he
uses social media, for instance, is something we haven’t seen before, at least
not with this level of commitment. What has Collier uncovered about Amnesty and
what can we, as regular people, do to emulate his work going forward? I spoke
with Collier to learn more:
Varda Epstein: Tell us about Jewish
Human Rights Watch. How did this body come to commission you to investigate
Amnesty International? Tell us about your background and credentials. What sort
of manpower and hours were devoted to this project?
David Collier: Jewish Human
Rights Watch is a UK-based NGO. They fight anti-Israel bias the clever way,
either by challenging it in the courts or exposing the toxic nature of those
that stand against us. For example, they have been fighting the legality of
local town councils passing BDS motions and this effort and the publicity they
caused, may have played a part in the UK Government’s recent
announcement that it is going to ban councils from pursuing such motions
altogether.
I have done work for them
before, when they commissioned a report
on antisemitism in the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign. The report
successfully clipped the SPSC’s wings. We both saw bias in Amnesty as a major
issue, so it was natural they would turn to me for this project.
I have been fighting
anti-Israel bias for two decades. My own strategy is different from most. I
don’t push pro-Israeli material so much. Our problem is not whether or not
Israel is perfect – it doesn’t have to be – Israel has every right to be a
state that makes mistakes like all states do. Our issue is that our enemies are
full of toxicity and hate. This is their biggest weakness and we should spend
more time exposing them for what they are. If you engage in a “did/didn’t”
argument with an anti-Israel activist, the bystander becomes confused. Far
better just to show the person you are arguing with is a terrorist-sympathizing
antisemite. Bystanders understand this much more clearly. We will never
convince an anti-Israel activist he is a hatemonger, so don’t both trying, just
expose his hate to others.
The Amnesty research took
months and well over 1000 man hours. There were hundreds of thousands of social
media posts to cover. During the summer of 2019, I didn’t sleep much.
Varda
Epstein: Why do we care about Amnesty International’s bias? What is the impact
of this organization?
David Collier: We cannot
overstate the impact of NGOs like Amnesty. They are the bridge between actions
on the ground and International forums such as the UN, UNHRC and even the ICC. The NGOs are seen as legitimate and
impartial “judges” and their findings carry real weight. None more so than
Amnesty. If Amnesty is simply pushing raw anti-Israel propaganda as evidence
during a UN hearing, they legitimise the UN’s own bias against Israel. In
effect Amnesty acts as the glue which reinforces a global anti-Israel bias – if
they played fair, things would look very different.
Ashira Prem Rachana is a "human rights researcher" for Amnesty International
Varda Epstein: Was Amnesty International always so political? Did it ever do good work? Was there a turning
point?
David Collier: Yes, of course.
Amnesty’s sterling reputation was legitimately earned and this is, in part, why
the situation is both tragic and difficult to address. Amnesty relies on the reputation
from the good work it used to do to shield it from criticism today.
Originally, and in the much
simpler days of the Cold War, Amnesty dealt solely with political prisoners. As
the NGO arena became more overcrowded and competitive, Amnesty sought growth –
both in the areas it monitored and in the type of work it undertook. They
became more political. They felt it necessary to let go of crucial rules they
imposed on themselves to stay clear of conflict of interest issues. In truth
there were logical reasons for them to do so – but they put nothing in its
place and were slowly devoured by activists using Amnesty resources for their
own narrow interests. The decline has been gradual and going on for decades.
Nadine Moawad, MENA communications manager for Amnesty International
Varda Epstein: Your report states that a consultant for Amnesty, Hind
Khoudary, tweeted support for a terror organization, referring to known Islamic
Jihad terrorists as “heroes.” Tell us about that. Was the tweet issued as a
private citizen? Does it matter?
David Collier: It doesn’t
matter at all. I think one of the things Amnesty will do to deflect the
criticism of the report is to suggest some of these people weren’t associated
with Amnesty when they made the unacceptable comments. This is irrelevant. Imagine
a judge going home and tweeting as a private citizen that terrorists are heroes
– would any sane person consider him fit to be a judge? With Khoudary, there
were numerous tweets. At roughly the same time she called the two terrorists
heroes, she also retweeted advice to people in Gaza not to publicly say
anything that would ‘hurt the resistance’. This person is a hard-core
Palestinian activist and a supporter of terrorist groups like Islamic Jihad. At
no point can she be considered impartial, not before or after the time she made
those tweets. As it happens in this case, I think she was listed as an Amnesty
consultant at the time – but in any event, it is absurd to believe she would
ever tell the truth about what is taking place on the ground.
Varda Epstein: How does it feel when you see that Amnesty staffer Laith
Abu Zeyad regularly retweets WaadGh who tweeted a smiley face in relation to the terrorist murder of
Rina Shnerb? Do you ever need a mental health day in your work?
David Collier: That’s a good
question, my wife certainly thinks so. Sadly, I have been doing this for so
long I am used to it. This is what I do, I swim in the sewers with these
people. I have to get into their heads and understand them. If I was sickened
by what I saw, I would never be able to do the research properly. I am even
forgiving. Had Zeyad only retweeted her once, I’d have written it off. We all
make mistakes. But she was a common source for him, they interacted. He must
know the type of politics she pushes. This is the problem - these people don’t
even have to hide these associations because nobody cares.
Varda Epstein: What did you find to be the most shocking fact to come
out of your investigation?
David Collier: There is the big
picture and the little picture. The most shocking single fact I found was a
person listed as the regional Media Manager for Amnesty writing a Facebook post
in Arabic that instructed terrorist factions not to “claim their martyrs” but
rather to let the West think they were innocent civilians – not terrorists. The
most shocking part of it all, though, is the big picture. We all know Amnesty
is biased, but the report exposes the level of that bias – it shows that
Amnesty operates with a subconscious (I don’t believe it is a conspiracy)
political world vision. One that hates Israel most of all, but is biased
against India, ignores the persecution of Christians and is strategically
anti-West. I call it subconscious because it is merely the sum of the parts.
Most of the parts carry a similar bias and this translates into Amnesty policy.
Amnesty is a danger to any Western nation that allows them to operate freely
and more fool the nation that pays attention to their findings.
Varda Epstein: This website, Elder of Ziyon, plays a role in your
report. Can you describe the context? What is the importance of bloggers and
tips from regular people in your investigative work?
David Collier: Elder of Ziyon
plays a role in all my reports. It is probably one of, if not the best, archive
of relevant information stretching back to the Second Intifada. If you are
writing about almost any issue relevant to the conflict, a search of the Elder
site is always advisable. In this report for example, I wouldn’t have known
that Saleh Hijazi, the Amnesty Deputy Director MENA had used images of
terrorists for his Facebook profile, if not for Elder’s website. It both saves
me time and acts as a great source for additional knowledge.
Saleh Hijazi, Amnesty International MENA deputy director used this image of PFLP terrorist and airline hijacker Leila Khaled for his profile photo.
Varda Epstein: What hope do you have that your report will instigate
positive change? Do you think there is hope that Amnesty International can be
reformed? Where might Amnesty International turn its sights instead of Israel,
to make the world a better place?
David Collier: Amnesty won’t
change from within. They can’t, this is what they are now. What needs to happen
is that we need to expose to others the toxicity within. We need to reach its
membership; the political alliances and every forum in which Amnesty has
influence. Show those people the report. Only real external pressure will ever
work and even then, I do not know if it is possible to salvage without a
complete rebuild.
What should they be doing?
Every Human Rights NGO on the planet should currently have one single goal: The
abolition of the UN Human Rights Council and the construction of a new UN human
rights body that has strict, points-based criteria about membership. The UNHRC
should be leading the way on global human rights issues and such a body could
be such a force for good. Instead it is infested with and controlled by
despots. Nothing would improve global human rights more than a properly run
UNHRC, so if you see an NGO currently working with them – rather than calling for
their abolition, you can automatically say that NGO is not a true human rights
NGO.
Sahar Mandour, Amnesty International researcher, Lebanon
Varda Epstein: Can you tell us about your roots and also about the
person you are, today? What makes you a fighter, a person dedicated to digging
deeply to fight against antisemitism?
David Collier: I was born in
the UK and lived in Israel for 19 years. I was part of the Oslo generation,
land for peace, two states, and all that. I worked intensively with
Palestinians during the 1990s. I published a monthly newspaper and used the Al
Ayam publishing house in Ramallah. I worked for peace. Then came the second
Intifada. Israel’s problem isn’t so much the Palestinians, as the global
movement that has turned them into a cause. This conflict should have ended in
1949. The reasons it didn’t have nothing to do with Israel, nor – and I can
hear people shout at me – with the Palestinians. They weren’t even a thing in
1949. The war against Israel is an international one. The Palestinian identity
as we know it today was created from the outside. I recognise this and this is
where I fight my battles.
There is no single thing that
led me to be a fighter. I lost close friends, but then so have most Israelis. I
think I fight because I have to. I do not see it as a choice. People often ask “what
would you have done” when referring to the rise of the Nazis, the creation of
Israel, and other important milestones in history. Well, we are at war now - it
is a global battle and the stakes are higher than most people imagine. If you
are not doing anything today, there is your answer.
Varda Epstein: What’s next for David Collier?
David Collier: I was writing a
book in 2015 when Corbyn was elected to lead the Labour Party. The last four
years have been an enormous time consuming and emotional rollercoaster. Corbyn
was merely a symptom of a growing problem and I see him simply as the first
wave. Boris has now been elected and we have 5 years of opportunity to continue
fighting. I am scared people will think the job is done – it would be a huge
mistake to think that. On the immediate horizon I can go back and hopefully
finish the book. It addresses the rise of the Palestinian identity as a weapon
with which to fight against Israel. I am going back to the British archives in
London to help me as much of the evidence is there. So fingers crossed, the
next major thing for me would be to have my book published.
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.
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.
The Joburg City Council on 29 November adopted a motion to rename Sandton Drive after Leila Khaled.
Martin Williams, Ward 90 councillor, posted a statement on the Ward 90 Facebook group that read, “… The DA were outnumbered when the EFF and ANC voted together.
“As an affected ward councillor, I undertake to ensure adherence to correct policies and procedures. The people of Ward 90 shall have their say.”
Executive Mayor of the City of Joburg, Herman Mashaba, and Councillor Sergio dos Santos also issued a statement regarding the proposed name change.
The statement read that a motion was tabled in Council to move that the City rename Sandton Drive to ‘City of Ramallah’ Drive.
A further amendment to the motion was tabled and accepted, calling for the motion to rename the road after Leila Khaled, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), said the statement.
Mashaba further said in the statement: Therefore, the nature of the motion was substantially altered. It is the view of the DA that in this case, the motion would need to return to the Programming Committee for review and then serve at the next Council meeting.
Leila Khaled, of course, is an unrepentant terrorist who hijacked airplanes in the 1970s.
The only pushback on the Facebook page of this newspaper is that there is no money to change street signs while basic services are lacking for the people in that community. But no one really is concerned over naming a street after a terrorist.
The newspaper articles from South Africa about this don't say who Leila Khaled is, so it is unclear if they are doing this in spite of her terrorism - or because of it.
South Africa is now more anti-Israel and pro-terrorist than most Arab states.
(h/t Tomer Ilan)
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.
There is a refreshingly honest Twitter account devoted to promoting
the otherwise appallingly deceptive
campaign to #FreeAhedTamimi. Among the recently posted
tweets is one declaring: “Israel is dreading that Ahed is the next Leila
Khaled, they will try to break her in anyway or shape. But what they forgot is
to see the fierce and fearless & determine look through her blue eyes.
#FreeAhedTamimi #FreeGeorgesAbdallah.”
It isn’t all that important if this Twitter account is
really an “official” account sanctioned by the Tamimi family, because the images
attached to the tweet are clearly real – and truly worth a thousand words.
So let’s recall who Leila Khaled and Georges Abdallah are.
Leila Khaled, with whom Ahed posed for a photo, is a member
of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The PFLP is notorious
for having “pioneered such terror tactics as airline hijackings” and
perpetrated “hundreds of terrorist attacks.” As Wikipedia puts it without a
trace of irony, Leila
Khaled “is credited as the first woman to hijack an airplane.”
If Ahed Tamimi wants to be “the next Leila Khaled,” we can
only wonder and worry what pioneering acts of terror she will once be
“credited” with.
Now let’s turn to Georges Abdallah,
for whom Ahed campaigned alongside her father Bassem Tamimi: Abdallah is “a
Lebanese militant” who “was arrested in 1984 and sentenced to life in prison in
1987 for the 1982 murder of Lieutenant Colonel Charles R. Ray, who was an
assistant US military attaché and murder of Israeli diplomat Yaakov
Bar-Simantov outside his home in Paris on 3 April 1982, as well as involvement
in the attempted assassination of former American consul in Strasbourg Robert
O. Homme.”
As explained in a subsequent
tweet, the photos showing Ahed and her father Bassem Tamimi campaigning
alongside a terrorist for another terrorist are “from the conference on the
role of women in the Palestinian popular struggle Sep 2017 and international
days of resistance to Free Georges Ibrahim Abdallah Oct 2017.”
So let this sink in: just some three months before much of
the mainstream media dutifully promoted fact-free propaganda about the
wonderful Tamimis and their noble “non-violent” struggle, daddy Bassem and his
famous daughter were all too happy to show that their idea of “non-violence”
includes murder and airplane hijackings.
What’s beyond satire is that the “conference” promoting
terrorism was hosted by two far-left Spanish members of the European
Parliament. According to a report
in the European Jewish Press, pioneering airplane hijacker Leila Khaled
used the prestigious platform at the European Parliament “to praise extremist
violence and demonize Jews. She
glorified terrorism and trivialized the Holocaust. ‘Don’t you see a similarity
between Nazi actions and Zionist actions in Gaza? … While the Nazis were tried
in Nuremberg, no one has ever tried the Zionists,’ she said.”
The outcry resulting from this travesty eventually prompted
the European parliament to endorse a proposal “to systematically deny access to
all persons, groups, or entities involved in terrorist acts.”
Better late than never, I guess – though it remains amazing
to see that terrorists like Leila Khaled and outspoken terror
supporters like the Tamimis can apparently travel freely to Europe.
Now let’s look at one other gem from the #FreeAhedTamimi
Twitter account: this tweet
manages to summarize the Tamimis’ agenda in just one word when it describes a
photo of Hebrew graffiti praising Ahed as a “hero” as having been taken in “occupied
Tel Aviv.”
So next time the Tamimis tell credulous reporters that
they’re fighting “the occupation,” know that they’re surely mightily amused and
pleased that everyone prefers to ignore that as far as they are concerned, Tel
Aviv is just one more occupied Zionist settlement.
And if everything goes well for the Tamimis, Ahed – “the
next Leila Khaled” – will once be credited for her pioneering terror strategies
to liberate occupied Tel Aviv.
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.
Yom Hashoah 5784 – 2024
-
Israel’s Yom Hashoah began at sundown this evening with the annual ceremony
at Yad Vashem with torches lit in memory of the 6 million Jewish victims of
the...
Israellycool May Fundraiser
-
[image: Israellycool May Fundraiser]
It's one of those times of the year again where we ask you to help keep
Israellycool running. Well, actually, to help ...
UK Jewish schools need to teach Sephardi history
-
Rabbi Yitsy David of Chazak UK and Lyn Julius of Harif are among the
voices calling for more to be done to integrate the experience and
heritage of Sep...
Holocaust Remembrance Day
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Yom HaShoah, Holocaust, Jews, Jewish, Israel,
Donate, Oct 7, Jews,]
The first since the Oct 7th Massacre
* * * Help Dry Bones....
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,...
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, October 28, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
