Showing posts with label apartheid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label apartheid. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 30, 2022



Although it took way longer than I would have liked, NGO Monitor released a thorough, line by line debunking of the Human Rights Watch 2021 report that accused Israel of "apartheid."

No unbiased person can read the NGOM report and end up concluding that the HRW report has a shred of intellectual honesty.

The HRW report is not just filled with errors. That is an understatement. When they cherry pick parts of an article that support their thesis, and ignore the parts that debunk it, it is not an error - it is willful lying.

I could make 200 blog posts out of the lies listed here. Here is a very minor example that illustrates the whole, perverted attempt to paint Israel as an apartheid state:

HRW cites disparity in playgrounds in one location as evidence of apartheid 

HRW consistently cherry-picks statistics, misrepresents data, and makes broad claims of Israeli evil based on minor incidents and minutiae. This example discusses charges of “playground apartheid.” HRW claims: “Israeli authorities sharply discriminate in the provision of resources and services between Palestinians and Jewish Israelis in Jerusalem” (p. 115). The first specific evidence to back this charge is the fact that in 2016, there were two playgrounds in the Arab Jerusalem neighborhoods of Shuafat and Beit Hanina with a combined population of 60,000, compared to nearby Jewish neighborhoods with a playground for every 1,000 residents. HRW cites an article in Haaretz discussing how the Jerusalem District Court ordered the construction of playgrounds in response to a lawsuit filed by two East Jerusalem residents in these specific neighborhoods. The rest of the news story reveals key information that HRW ignores. The Court acknowledged the contention by the City that one could not compare older Arab neighborhoods to newer, planned neighborhoods that incorporated space for playgrounds. Indeed, it was shown that playground density in Arab neighborhoods was similar to ultra-Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods, contradicting the notion of “playground apartheid” favoring Jews over Arabs. The municipality also demonstrated efforts to build playgrounds in these Arab neighborhoods but explained “that most of the appropriate land for such playgrounds is in private hands, and arrangements must be reached with the owners.” Despite these explanations, the Court ordered the City to build playgrounds in these two Arab neighborhoods, evidence that the government-run courts consistently apply laws that contradict apartheid.
HRW cited a Haaretz article that showed there was no difference between how Israel treated Jewish and Arab neighborhoods - and extracted half-truths to make it look like the opposite.

This is only one of hundreds of similar, egregious misreporting of facts. 

Another tiny example: HRW says that it takes hours for Palestinians to cross the Qalandiya checkpoint, citing an article from 2017. This is used as evidence of how badly Israel treats Palestinians. But Israel overhauled the checkpoint in 2019 - at great expense - and now it takes only minutes for Palestinians to cross. Is it remotely possible HRW is not aware of that overhaul, which was widely reported?

Or HRW's assertion that the very concept of a Jewish state is evidence of apartheid, ignoring the many states that are officially Christian or Muslim. 

The sheer number of these clearly purposeful omissions, double standards and outdated facts is overwhelming, but all of them point to the same conclusion: HRW decided that Israel was guilty first, and manufactured the evidence afterwards, secure in the knowledge that very few people would fact check them - and by the time it happens, they have already gotten their message out.

Put it this way: Public trust in the media is at near an all time low.  The media, however, often corrects mistakes. Human rights NGOs never correct the mistakes in their reports. 

Which means that human rights NGOs are less trustworthy than the media is.





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, October 30, 2022



There is one overarching rule that both the antisemitic Right and Left share: everything is always the Jews' fault.

A truly absurd example can be seen in an article in The Intercept today, accusing Israel of "weed apartheid" because Palestinians under Palestinian Authority rule have different laws than Israelis under Israeli rule.

Really.

In the dusty occupied hills west of the Jordan River, segregation shapes the smoking experience of Palestinians as much as every other aspect of Palestinian life. For Israelis, the police’s relaxed attitude toward weed carries over to the occupied West Bank. Rather than face military justice, Israelis living in Jewish West Bank settlements are protected by an entire legal system built on inequities so rife that it has contributed to Israel being accused of the crime of running an “apartheid” system.

The disparity in treatment for Palestinians and Israelis when it comes to cannabis constitutes a facet of this system that might be called weed apartheid. A Palestinian and Israeli breaking the same law in the same place in the West Bank, for instance, will be dealt with by different security forces and processed in different legal systems.
This is of course not true. A Palestinian in Area C lighting up with an Israeli will not have to worry about going to Palestinian jail, because Israel is responsible for security there. Writer Jesse Rosenfeld spends a lot of time fudging the truth, by comparing Palestinian laws in Areas A and B with Israeli laws - both military and civil - in Area C.

The deception given in this article is remarkable. It emphasizes that Israeli citizens in the West Bank are subject to Israeli civil laws while Palestinian non-citizens are subject to military law - a mainstay of the "apartheid" charge that ignores that every country on Earth treats citizens and non-citizens differently.

But when it talks about draconian anti-pot laws for Palestinians, it suddenly pivots to Palestinian laws, not Israeli laws. You have to carefully parse the article to see how deceptive it is. For example, the article makes clear that Israeli military law doesn't give a damn about Palestinian pot use unless they are major dealers, smuggling drugs to Israel. But Palestinian laws are much harsher for minor offenses.

And The Intercept blames Israel for that!

To show how this analysis is ultimately antisemitic, let's pretend that Israel does what the article pretends it wants. 

If Israel applies the exact same laws to Palestinians in the territories as to Israeli citizens, and therefore cannot be accused of "weed apartheid," that would mean that Israel is annexing the entire West Bank. This is the very definition of annexation - applying the same laws to a new area.

No matter what Israel does, short of national suicide, Israel is oppressing Palestinians!

Nowhere in this article is there any criticism of the Palestinian Authority for their anti-marijuana laws and strict enforcement. Somehow, this is all Israel's fault. Just as the Left blames Israel for Palestinian men beating their wives, every dysfunctional part of Palestinian society is ultimately blamed on the Jews. 

Because to these bigots, Palestinian Arabs are not mature enough to be responsible for their own actions. 

UPDATE: I hadn't noticed it first, but the "Jewish Israelis" in the headline is another way to know that The Intercept is functionally antisemitic. 

Because "Muslim Israelis" and "Christian Israelis" have exactly the same laws as "Jewish Israelis."



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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, October 28, 2022

I've seen bias from the UN before, but I don't recall ever seeing a document that looks like it was written by a hardened Israel hater. 

The reports usually at least pretend to be unbiased. Not this one.

Francesca Albanese, UN "Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967," issued a report in September that apparently was just made public. The summary gives a flavor of how crazily biased it is.

One of her goals in this report, in the inevitable path to soon officially calling Israel an apartheid state, Albanese accuses Israel of "settler colonialism" without going into any arguments why, just footnoting lots of equally biased papers. 


Throughout the report, Albanese fully accepts the Palestinian narrative as true and doesn't even mention any Israeli counter-claims. The reader sees only one side of the argument, and is not even informed that perhaps Israel has its own arguments. Albanese doesn't want to acknowledge even the possibility that Jews have a right to their own state. 

Her one-sidedness is quite deliberate. She describes the Palestinian right to self-determination this way:
The right to self-determination is an “inalienable right” of the Palestinian people, as affirmed by the General Assembly. The origins of Palestinians’ right to self-determination can be traced back more than a century, preceding the first codification in the Charter of the United Nations. The people of Palestine (Muslims, Christians and Jews), like other peoples in the Levant, also had their right to self-determination recognized under the Covenant of the League of Nations of 1919. Article 22 of the Covenant stipulated that “Class A” mandates (Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Trans-Jordan and Syria) would enjoy provisional independence “until such time as they are able to stand alone”. The “wishes” of the local communities were to be “a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory”. 
But she doesn't mention the Mandate for Palestine which specifically says that Jews have the right to self-determination - and no one else!
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. 
This is lying by omission. Albanese knows the contents of the Mandate document - but wants to hide it from those reading this propaganda.  And it happens over and over again.

She offers a brief history of the region where Jews are the only people who ever do anything wrong:
The culmination of centuries of antisemitism and persecution of Jews in Europe in the genocidal horror of the Holocaust strengthened support for political Zionism. This movement saw Palestine as the land to realize a “State for the Jews” through settlement and colonization. However, in that land a native Palestinian Arab population had resided for millennia. In 1947, the United Nations resolved to reconcile the separate claims to the land of the indigenous Palestinian people and the largely European Jewish settlers and refugees from Europe, by recommending the partitioning of British Mandate Palestine into an “Arab State” and a “Jewish State”. Soon after, the creation of the State of Israel in most of the territory of Mandate Palestine was accompanied by massacres and the mass expulsion, wholesale denationalization and dispossession of most of the Arabs of Palestine. They continue to be deprived of their right to self-determination, together with their descendants, the refugees further displaced in 1967 and other non-refugee Palestinians. 

She doesn't once mention that Jews have historical ties to Israel. She doesn't mention the attacks by Arabs on Jews in Palestine decades before 1948. She doesn't mention that the Arabs rejected partition. She doesn't mention that the Arabs attacked the Jews. She doesn't mention that the territories annexed by Jordan ethnically cleansed  every single Jew.

It would take weeks to show the depth of Albanese's dishonesty, but here is just one paragraph of many:
The transformation of the Gaza Strip into a heavily populated, impoverished enclave controlled by Israel through a suffocating sea, land and air blockade, is part and parcel of that same settler-colonial design. The containment of the colonial population into heavily controlled reserves is at the core of the settler-colonial goal to ensure the demographic supremacy and prevent Palestinian self-determination. 
How do these assumptions fit in with the fact that Israel forcibly removed every Jew from Gaza in 2005? Was that part of the plan too? And did Israel plan for Hamas to take over Gaza so it could have an excuse for blockading it? 

This is not just re-writing history. This is Soviet-level propaganda.





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, September 25, 2022

Continuing on exposing Mahmoud Abbas' lies in a single speech to the world...

Moreover, the Israeli government allowed the formation of racist Jewish terrorist organizations that practice terrorism against our people, and provided them with protection as they attack the Palestinians and call for their expulsion from their homes. At the top of these terrorist organizations are the Hilltop Youth, the price tag groups, Lahava, and the Temple Trustees, and these terrorist organizations are led by members of the Israeli Knesset, and, in this context, we call on the international community to put these terrorist organizations on the lists of global terrorism.   
Have these groups placed bombs on Arab buses or encouraged their members to kill Arabs? I am unaware of that. However, some of them have done illegal things and they were arrested by the Israeli police. So claiming that Israel supports them is another lie.

Abbas is trying to say that Israel is guilty of everything he himself is guilty of. After all, the Al aqsa Martyrs Brigades are part of his Fatah organization and takes credit for terror attacks.
Israel has left us nothing of the land to establish our independent state in light of its frenzied settlement attack, so where will our people live in freedom and dignity? Where will we establish our independent state to live in peace with our neighbors? 
The land situation is virtually the same as it was during the Oslo process. 
Israel is imposing forged educational curricula in our schools in occupied Jerusalem, in violation of international law, and disrupts the presidential and legislative elections in Palestine, by preventing Palestinian citizens of Jerusalem from participating in them, as took place in three previous elections (1996, 2005, 2006), and enacts racist laws that it perpetuates a system of racial discrimination, an Apartheid against our people in front of the international community, and evades accountability and punishment, so why not hold Israel accountable for violating international law?  
Here is a firehose of lies.

Israel is encouraging Arab schools in Jerusalem to use the Israeli curriculum, it is not forcing anything

The curriculum is accurate and the criticisms of it by Palestinians are ludicrous.

Israel is not stopping Arabs in Jerusalem from participating in elections; they just have to travel a few minutes to get to a polling booth - or they can vote at post offices. Abbas is the one who has used Israel as an excuse not to hold elections. 

Israel has no racist laws. The lists given by anti-Israel groups are not discriminatory.

Israel does not perpetuate a system of racial discrimination. It treats Arab and Jewish citizens equally, and it treats non-citizens differently from citizens, just like every other country does.

Israel does not practice apartheid and this is simply an antisemitic slur

Israel has not refrained from the repeated violation of our land and its recent closure of the headquarters of six Palestinian human rights organizations operating in the Palestinian territory, in accordance with Palestinian and international law, after it had accused them in the past of being terrorist organizations, while the whole world rejected and condemned this accusation, after confirming it was baseless. 
The links between those groups and terror groups, especially the PFLP, are beyond dispute. 

More coming....




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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, September 13, 2022

From Ian:

Anti-Zionists advocate a global apartheid
As I have recently written, the claim that Israel is an apartheid state has, in fact, little to do with the actual charge of apartheid. It is, first, little more than a cheap attempt to demonize the Jewish state. But more ominously, it is also a call for Israel to be dismantled, just as South Africa’s apartheid regime was, quite rightly, dismantled.

To destroy the Jewish state would, of course, be an injustice to the Jews quite as horrific as the injustice apartheid did to black South Africans. But it is worth pondering the nature of this injustice and following the dark logic of the apartheid libel to its inevitable end.

Its logic culminates in something hinted at many decades ago by Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. The struggle for the Jewish state, Ben-Gurion said, is not a question of the Jews and the Arabs; it is a question of the Jews and the world.

This simple but remarkably profound statement points out that injustice need not take place only in a community or a nation. Injustice can be global. It can rise higher than mere questions of territory and individual rights. It can be expressed in the nature of the international system itself.

In the case of the Jews, this global injustice was obvious: By leaving the Jews without a nation of their own, and thus denying the Jewish people its right to self-determination and self-defense, the world constructed a discriminatory regime that kept the Jews separate and unequal—second-class citizens of the world. It was, in effect, a global apartheid.

Implied in Ben-Gurion’s insight is not only that this global apartheid must end, but that it can only be ended by the creation and perpetuation of a Jewish state. Thus, in Ben-Gurion’s view, Zionism is not simply a territorial or nationalist movement. It is a global movement that seeks to correct a global injustice. It is a struggle to do nothing more—but also nothing less—than to make the Jews equal citizens of the world.

This has profound implications—and not only for the Jews—because it implies not simply a moral imperative but an assertion of certain responsibilities. The world, Ben-Gurion was saying, must remember that it is overwhelmingly not Jewish. As such, it has responsibilities towards one of its smallest and most beleaguered minorities, just as an overwhelmingly white nation has towards its black minority or a Muslim nation towards its non-Muslim minority.

The world’s responsibility is or ought to be fairly clear: It is to ensure that the Jewish people is not a second-class people, and that it enjoys the same rights and privileges as any other people via a state of its own.
Emily Schrader: BDS opposition to Project Nimbus will harm Arab-Israelis, too - opinion
Once again, the ugly BDS movement has reared its head over the landmark $1.2 billion (NIS 408 b.) Project Nimbus contract between Israel and tech giants Amazon and Google. Under the guise of civic action by employees, fringe anti-Israel groups, such as Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Linda Sarsour’s MPower group have led a campaign to demonize the two companies over their contribution to Israeli “apartheid.” In the process, they are politicizing an apolitical project that will benefit all of Israel’s citizens, including two million Arabs.

Project Nimbus, according to Google, focuses exclusively on upgrading cloud computing services at the government level for ministries, such as finance, healthcare, transportation, and education, in an effort that will create over 3,000 jobs for Israeli Arabs and Jews alike. The project has nothing to do with military or weapons technology. But that’s never stopped anti-Israel activists from, once again, hijacking the narrative to make every single issue somehow about Palestinians.

This past week, protests against Project Nimbus took place in four locations, intended to give the impression there is a tremendous pushback from within the companies involved. The reality, however, is quite different.

The protesters claimed that Project Nimbus could be misused to oppress and surveil Palestinians, despite the fact that Google and Amazon confirmed that’s not related to the project in any capacity. Google’s representative even stated, “Today’s protest group is misrepresenting the contract. Our work is not directed at highly sensitive or classified military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.”


University of Vermont Faces Federal Investigation for Fostering ‘Severe Anti-Semitic Harassment’ on Campus
The Department of Education has opened a formal investigation into the University of Vermont over allegations several Jewish students have been "subjected to severe and persistent anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination."

A group of Jewish students who are remaining anonymous due to concerns for their safety say they have been targeted in a range of school settings merely for openly identifying themselves as Jewish. This includes Jewish students being kicked out of a support group for sexual assault victims, "online harassment against Jewish students by a Teaching Assistant," and attacks on the university's Hillel building, which supports Jewish life on campus.

The Education Department, which only investigates matters with substantial amounts of evidence, will review these incidents to determine if the University of Vermont "allowed a hostile environment to proliferate on its campus" in violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on race and religion.

"Jewish students have expressed fear about identifying publicly as Jewish, report hiding their Jewish identity and have considered transferring out of UVM due to the hostile environment toward Jews," according to the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, a legal advocacy group that filed the complaint with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.

The University of Vermont investigation is one of several being handled by the Education Department as anti-Semitic incidents proliferate on America’s campuses, driven by an ever-growing cohort of anti-Israel student activists who target Jews. The University of Southern California is also being investigated over allegations it fomented "a hostile environment of anti-Semitism" on its campus that forced a Jewish student government official to resign from her position.

At Vermont, a number of Jewish students approached the Brandeis Center after they faced a series of anti-Semitic incidents. The complaint filed with the Education Department alleges that "an environment of harassment and intimidation has existed at UVM for years, but it intensified in 2021 when a UVM [teaching assistant] repeatedly instigated hate against Jewish students who express support for Zionism, even threatening to lower their grades." Separately, "two student groups deliberately excluded Jewish students who expressed support for Zionism from membership, and the [UVM] Hillel building was pelted for nearly 40 minutes and vandalized."

The complaint alleges that school administrators were aware of these incidents, but have "taken no steps to rectify the situation."

Monday, September 12, 2022

   ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’
           ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean different things–that’s all.’
           ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master–that’s all’









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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 


The 1968 Palestinian National Covenant (Charter) has an interesting paragraph:

Article 6:
The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.
The Palestine Ministry of Information notes that the year of the "Zionist invasion" is considered to be 1917. It does not appear that they are including descendants of those Jews, so the issue is moot, but it points to something interesting in official Palestinian language.

This is one of the few uses of the word "Palestinians" in the document. Most of it refers to "Palestinian Arabs." So, for example:
Article 3:
The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.
If the only people that have the legal right to the land are Arabs, then the Jews - even those they call "Palestinians," who had been there continuously for thousands of years - do not. 

In other words, the Charter gives legal rights to Arabs that it withholds from non-Arabs. 

Isn't that apartheid?

This is besides the explicit antisemitism in the charter itself - which has never been revoked - that denied the existence of the Jewish people to begin with. "Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong."

Now look at the 2003 Palestinian constitution. There, they refer repeatedly to the Arab Palestinian people. The first paragraph of the preamble says:

The continuous attachment of the Arab Palestinian people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact that has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence, issued by the Palestine National Council. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding onto national identity, and in the realization of wondrous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Palestinian people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Arab Palestinian people and their national entity, on equal footing with other nations.
Why the need to emphasize "Arab Palestinian people"? By 2003 (and unlike 1968), the term "Palestinian" was well known. 

It appears that the term is used specifically to exclude Jews from calling themselves "Palestinian."

The Palestinian Arabs are well aware that the term "Palestinian" usually referred to Jews before 1948. They want not only to make sure that they are the only "Palestinians" with rights to the land but to ensure that they assert that Jews have no historic or legal rights to the land.

That explains why they call themselves "Palestinian Arabs" or "Arab Palestinians." 



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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, August 30, 2022

James Zogby is the founder and president of the Arab American Institute, Managing Director of Zogby Research Service which provides polling services, a visiting professor at New York University Abu Dhabi, and a former member of the Executive Committee of the Democratic National Committee. He is a leading anti-Israel voice in the media and social media.

On Saturday, he tweeted a link to Daniel Levy warning about Israel's reputation, saying, "It may be uncomfortable to some to hear the inescapable truth that Israel is an Apartheid State. The truth is often uncomfortable. And btw, it’s not antiSemitic to call Israel Apartheid - the problem is w/ Israeli behavior."

I responded with a thread:

I've looked at the actual legal definition of apartheid. Those accusing Israel of apartheid are knowingly lying. And I've shown this. No one has found any holes in my arguments.

Falsely accusing Israel of apartheid using made up definitions is indeed antisemitism.

And if you look at the history of the apartheid libel, it is blindingly obvious that the accusation came first, and the fake legal arguments were created after the fact to justify the lie.

B'Tselem's definition was absurd - it could prove that JEWS were victims of apartheid.




So HRW tried, very hard, to combine definitions from the Rome Statute with the ICERD to make it look like Israel was guilty of apartheid. But they ignored the part of ICERD that exonerates Israel. It was a conscious lie, and every legal scholar knows it. 
 
Amnesty copied HRW's argument but tried to strengthen it by adding a 1971 case that they pretended is about apartheid - but it isn't. 

It is clear: they all know they are wrong but they want to accuse Israel so much they MADE UP INTERNATIONAL LAW. 

But even worse, in these NGOs' Jew-hating zeal, they want to make Israel look uniquely guilty. So the cases of real apartheid in the world, like Lebanese treatment of Palestinians, or Chinese of Uyghurs, others - are shunted aside and not given that label. Real victims suffer. 

When you look at all the evidence and history (the Soviets made up the "Israel is apartheid" accusation originally) the desire to paint Israel with the label of apartheid has NOTHING to do with real facts, and everything to do with a desire to demonize the Jewish state. This is antisemitism, plain and simple. 
My response received over 500 "Likes" and Zogby finally felt he could no longer ignore it, so he attempted to prove that, yes, Israel really is guilty of apartheid:

1. It’s apartheid when when Israel has two systems of law - one for Arabs & one for Jews; when they’ve expelled 750,000 from their homes & refuse to let them go back to their properties; when they’ve demolished 500 Palestinian villages, seized their land & businesses;…  
To which I immediately responded:

Israel doesn't have two systems of law for citizens. 

And what happened in 1948 was a war for survival, not apartheid. 

But you know that. And lie anyway.

 And, of course, by your definition every Arab country that expelled nearly all of their Jews are guilty of apartheid.

Not my definition - YOURS.

Trying to shoehorn a new definition of the term to fit Israel only is indeed antisemitic.

He responded:

 It was a deliberate planned expulsion to remove Arabs from the Galilee, the coastal cites and areas around Jerusalem. Ben Gurion’s letters, Moshe Sharret’s diaries, & others have testified to this fact. & what they did afterwards to those whom they expelled made the intent clear

To which I said:

 Then why are there still two million Arabs in Israel? If there was a policy to expel them, what is taking Israel so long?

And how does that relate to the LEGAL DEFINITION OF APARTHEID? I am giving a legal argument, you are throwing stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks.

He doubled down:

2…when they have laws that provide that the Arab land they’ve seized & turned over to Jews can never be sold to Arabs; when they continue to seize Palestinian land to build Jewish-only housing & infrastructure, while Palestinians struggle to get permits to build;…

3…when any Jew can immigrate & become a citizen while descendants of those who were expelled cannot; when Israel has multiple laws & policies in place to control what they call the “demographic problem” - that is limiting or controlling the growth of the non-Jewish population…

4. These policies & laws that favor the rights of one group at the expense of Palestinians , constitutes Apartheid. You may not like it, but don’t deny it. Have you no regard for the humanity of Palestinians; no compassion for the discriminatory polices to which they subjected?

But then he moved the goalposts:

5. The problem isn’t our calling Israeli behaviors Apartheid. To try to make that the issue is an effort to deflect. The problem is Israel’s behavior - that’s what must change. And stop resorting to calling antiSemitic anyone who criticizes Israel & defends Palestinian rights.

Zogby's entire argument, repeated at least three times, was "Israel is apartheid!" Yet when challenged, he changed it  to "Don't get hung up on the precise definition of apartheid!"

So I called him on it:

No, I am saying when Amnesty or HRW claims Israel is guilty of apartheid, they are lying because it has a specific definition.  You know that I am right. Which is why you are changing the subject.

By your argument, every Arab state is guilty of apartheid, because they define themselves as Arab and discriminate against non-Arabs for citizenship. 

Tell me, are they guilty of apartheid or not? And why not?

You won't answer because you want to say ONLY Jews are guilty.

Yes, it is antisemitic to say that the Jewish people do not have the right to self-determination. It is antisemitic to apply terms like "apartheid" ONLY to the Jewish state. It is antisemitic to have one standard for the world and another for Israel. 

This thread proves it.

James Zogby, the great intellectual defender of Arabs and highly regarded figure in Democratic Party politics, responded....by blocking me on Twitter.

In the end, even the most articulate critics of Israel and defenders of Palestinian intransigence know that they are using their intellectual gifts not in the service of truth but for lies.  They assume that their ability to use propaganda methods and gaslighting is the same as real arguments. (For their antisemitic fans, it actually is.)  

When their hypocrisy is clearly called out, outside their usual bubble, they try to reframe their arguments to what they think is more solid ground. 

When called on that, they are left with only one recourse: shutting down the discussion. 

When an anonymous blogger can so thoroughly dismantle the arguments of one of America's leading Arab intellectuals in the constrained format of Twitter, it shows that the anti-Israel side has no argument to begin with. 

Their running away from debate proves that they know it, too.





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, August 22, 2022


Times of Israel reports:
A group of Palestinians took off to Cyprus on Monday, for the first time using Ramon Airport outside the southern city of Eilat as part of a pilot program allowing the facility to be used by residents of the West Bank for certain flights, part of a series of gestures from Israel aimed at easing the lives of Palestinians.

Until today, Palestinians wishing to fly abroad needed to travel to Jordan and board a flight from there, or secure a hard-to-come-by entry permit into Israel to fly from Ben Gurion Airport.

Arkia Airlines is operating the inaugural service, which is flying 40 residents of Bethlehem and Hebron from Ramon Airport at 11:30 a.m. to Larnaca. A return flight is scheduled for Friday. The route will also serve Israelis, who will be seated alongside the Palestinian passengers.
So much for "apartheid."

Who are the Palestinians traveling to Cyprus?

According to Ultrapal, they are doctors and pharmacists who work for a Ramallah-based pharmaceutical company who is paying for the trip. Their families are coming as well. 

The employees were given a choice of whether they prefer to fly out via Amman or Ramon Airport. About 40 are leaving through Israel. 

I wish my employer would pay for a free vacation for my family!

I can't determine which company is behind this. The Palestinian pharmaceutical sector is pretty successful; the largest company Jerusalem Pharmaceuticals has manufacturing facilities in Jordan and Algeria as well. There are several other major pharmaceutical companies in Ramallah.

Israel Hayom reports that when this initiative was first announced, many Palestinians expressed interest in taking the hours-long trip to Eilat to fly from Ramon, because travel to and from Jordan has been a nightmare.The Palestinian Authority has been discouraging Palestinians from using Ramon Airport, because anything that makes Israel look like anything other than a monstrous regime is anathema to them, and they would prefer their own people suffer than to allow them to benefit from anything Israel does to make Palestinian lives easier. 




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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, August 03, 2022

Baha'i family in Iran whose home was burned down
From Iran International:

Security forces laid siege to a village in northern Iran Tuesday and started demolishing houses and farms belonging to members of the persecuted Baha’i faith.

Simin Fahandej, a spokeswoman for the Baha’i International Community, told Iran International Tuesday that over 200 security forces were deployed to block the roads leading to Roshankouh, a village in Mazandaran Province, and begin demolition of the houses and farms belonging to Bahai’s.

According to Fahandej, security forces arrested some Bahai’s who tried to stop the operations, confiscated mobile phones of some villagers to prevent them from recording videos and publishing them on social media, and warned locals not to take any photos or videos of their operations.

A video posted on social media by the Baha'i International Community Tuesday shows security forces using heavy construction machinery to demolish buildings in Roshankouh.

Since early June security forces and the judiciary of the Islamic have intensified pressure on the followers of the Baha’i faith, raiding over a dozen households, arresting tens including three of the former leaders of the community, and shutting down businesses.
Iran's persecution of Baha'i fits Human Rights Watch and Amnesty's definitions of apartheid far better than Israel's treatment of Palestinians. This was pointed out in an article by South African Winston Nagan  for PBS back in 2012: "Having grown up with the indignities of the apartheid system in South Africa, I bristle whenever I hear anyone equate a government's treatment of a portion of its citizenry to apartheid. Usually, the claims are exaggerated. But in Iran today, the government's treatment of the Baha'i community bears striking similarities."

He pointed out:

Both Blacks in South Africa and Baha'is in Iran have been excluded from being legislators.

Both have been excluded from universities.

Both have been limited under the law from building their own educational institutions.

Both have been excluded from certain jobs.

Both have had their property confiscated for no reason.

Hundreds of members of both groups have been executed for their political beliefs.

Iran has even banned Baha'i from burying their dead according to their laws. It has demolished Baha'i cemeteries and built parks and cultural centers on top of them.

Since that article, things have only gotten worse
Under Iranian law, Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians are the only religious minorities accepted. Baha'is are considered to be "unprotected infidels," according to a July 2019 report by the UN special rapporteur to Iran, Javaid Rehman.

Despite facing persecution, Bahai's are forbidden by their faith to lie about their religion. This means that the new identity card application prevents them from applying for and obtaining official identification, as they cannot claim affiliation to one of the three legally recognized minority religions.
Iran's policy towards the Baha'i is arguably worse than that of apartheid-era South Africa towards Blacks, because it is meant to ultimately ethnically cleanse them from the country altogether - something that is nearly complete in Yemen.

Even though Israel has none of the discriminatory laws against Arabs that Iran has towards the Baha'i,  major human rights NGOs have decided to declare only Israel guilty of apartheid. This hurts the Baha'i because these NGOs resist using the term anywhere else for their own anti-Israel propaganda purposes. This means that the Baha'i are not able to easily use that appellation to pressure Iran to treat them better.



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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, July 28, 2022



I came across this 2021 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Kubin et al: "Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts."

People believe that facts are essential for earning the respect of political adversaries, but our research shows that this belief is wrong. We find that sharing personal experiences about a political issue—especially experiences involving harm—help to foster respect via increased perceptions of rationality. This research provides a straightforward pathway for increasing moral understanding and decreasing political intolerance. ....In moral and political disagreements, everyday people treat subjective experiences as truer than objective facts.
The paper makes the assumption of goodwill; if you want to convince someone of the truth of your position, enhance your facts with personal experience. The authors suggest that narratives can increase political tolerance.

But it doesn't consider how malicious people weaponize this knowledge in order to lead people away from the facts to begin with  - and how propagandists can use this to increase intolerance.

A commentary on the paper in PNAS does touch on this:
The power that story has over facts to capture the imagination and create respect for an individual’s position is easily exploited. ...Narratives are easily weaponized by propagandists and other bad actors. From this perspective, Kubin et al. may not have uncovered a feature in human discourse that might bridge moral divides but rather a bug that could be easily exploited. While presenting facts garners more respect than claims with no backing at all, these studies still find that narratives beat out facts in creating a greater perception of rationality and even perceived truth. Yet, a position backed by one personal anecdote is no more objectively true than one backed by no anecdote or facts at all. More crucially, a position backed by a personal narrative is not more true than a position backed by facts.

While both narratives and facts can be cherry-picked to support a position, personal narratives, as the authors point out, are unimpugnable. A conclusion drawn from facts, on the other hand, can be disputed and disproven and, thus, science and society should prefer fact-based positions. Yet, when it comes to respect, feelings are prioritized over facts. As these studies show, what is true gains less respect than what one might feel to be true.

Are we to get into a battle of cherry-picked narratives of harm to promote our policy positions, amplified by social media and the ease with which these narratives can spread? How can such narratives be combated? The counter to a story of harm is, by definition, a story of lack of harm (e.g., a vaccine that reduces future infection). However, the larger problem is that the real counternarrative for any anecdotal evidence is found in the data (e.g., a peer-reviewed paper showing the benefits of vaccination for the treatment condition). As such, a troublesome implication of this work is that a false personal story will have more power to create respect than facts, including those facts that would serve to correct the narrative.
This is accurate - but it doesn't go far enough, either.

If narratives are more effective than facts, and personal narratives about being harmed are most effective of all (because no one wants to impugn a personal story about how someone was harmed,) then over time the cumulative narratives of alleged harm by a specific certain group will create hate for that group.

The original study hoped that using personal narratives would increase tolerance. It didn't anticipate that large groups were already weaponizing that as a propaganda method that increases intolerance - towards Jews. Because the Palestinian propaganda machine promotes antisemitism with a torrent of stories about humiliation at the hands of the Jews. 

When a Palestinian goes through a Jordanian checkpoint, they are angry and upset. But when they go through an Israeli checkpoint, even though they are treated with more respect, they claim they are humiliated - because they resent Jews on what they consider their land to begin with. So the only stories the world hears are those of humiliation, whether true or not. And over time the followers of that topic start to believe that Jews are deliberately humiliating Palestinians, because that is what the Palestinian stories say. 

NGOs also weaponize this propaganda tool against Israel. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch reports against Israel are far more detailed and longer than those on other countries. I once did a comparison between two Amnesty reports released around the same time:

Amnesty reports

Israel/WB

Syria/Yarmouk

Title of report

Trigger-happy

Squeezing the life out of Yarmouk

Number of pages in the report

87

39

Number of civilians killed according to Amnesty

22

194

Time period covered

12 months

8 months

Circumstances of their deaths

Mostly while participating in or near violent acts

Starvation, sniper fire, bombings

Number of extensive personal stories given for victims

At least 18, some three pages long

Zero

Number of photos of victims (dead and injured)

At least 14

Zero

Video produced to support report?

Yes, 4 minutes

No

Placement on Amnesty webpage

Linked from front page two weeks after report issued

On front page only the day it was released


Palestinians are humanized and their stories are told. Those stories are detailed and centered on showing how they were harmed and at creating empathy for them. 

Meanwhile, to Amnesty, Syrian victims are just statistics. 

Along with the empathy for the subjects of heart-rending stories comes anger at the victimizers. This is especially true when the storytellers themselves are angry at their supposed tormentors. Just as the audience wants to identify with the victim, they want to share in the anger the victim has towards those they blame for their pain.

So it is no surprise that the Western narrative about Israel, over time, has become more explicitly antisemitic. These same NGOs are now completely at ease in claiming that Israel has a policy of "Jewish supremacy," meant to evoke white supremacy, one of the most evil crimes possible. Singling out Israel as the only current state practicing (a made up definition of) apartheid is another example of normalizing antisemitism in the name of supporting the victims of Jewish greed. Gaza children are only victims of Israeli war crimes; their being cynically used as human shields by terrorists who were the target of the bomb is not mentioned. 

The decades of favoring narrative over facts has created conditions ripe for increased Jew-hatred.

Also, in this world where narratives are favored over facts, there is little penalty for lying. After all, the victims are describing the facts as they claim that they experienced them, and arguing with that is considered to be adding to their victimhood.

One of Israel's reasons for existence is so that Jews will no longer be hapless victims of a world that doesn't care about them. Israel has helped achieve that goal - so now Jews are at a permanent disadvantage in the discourse about which side is in the right exactly because we can no longer claim the same degree of victimhood. And victimhood is the coin of the realm.

There is no defense. Ben Shapiro's famous quote "facts don't care about your feelings" may be true, but facts cannot argue with feelings, either. People want to empathize with and support the real or imagined victims. 

Israel's success at protecting Jews is itself its unforgivable crime, and the Israel-haters are using that success as a reason to try to destroy it. 





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, July 19, 2022

With a special appearance by a young looking Ken Roth.








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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



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.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive