Showing posts with label helen thomas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label helen thomas. Show all posts

Monday, February 27, 2023



James Abourezk, the first Arab American U.S. senator, died last week at 92.

AP wrote an obituary that mentions his positions, and says, "Abourezk also became an outspoken critic of Israel and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East after touring the region and visiting his parents’ hometown in Lebanon as a senator. The position lost him many political allies, and he decided to retire from the Senate after a single term. Abourezk returned to practicing law in Washington and founded the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, where he passionately and colorfully denounced Israeli aggressions in the Middle East. "

Perhaps the obituary should be somewhat expanded.

In 2007, Abourezk went on Hezbollah's Al Manar TV for an interview, in English, where he expressed his support for terror groups:

Interviewer: You also called Hizbullah and Hamas "resistance fighters."
James Abourezk: They are.
Interviewer: While the U.S. administration brands them as "terrorist organizations"...
James Abourezk: That was done at the request of Israel. That name was done at the request of Israel – that the United States calls them terrorist organizations.
He also said that the Arab hijackers on 9/11 were cooperating with the "Zionists:"

Interviewer: Here I need to ask you something, which is growing and escalating in the Western world, and particularly in the U.S., which is this immense wave of anti-Arab, anti-Muslim sentiment, lumping all Arabs together as "terrorists." This was clearly manifest in movies and TV series, like "24." Why? Why now? Is it just after 9/11?

James Abourezk: No, it's after the Soviet Union collapsed. The Zionists were looking around for another enemy to have, because to them the Soviet Union was an enemy because they wouldn't allow Jewish emigration. So they used that as an organizing tool, basically, and when the Soviet Union collapsed, there was no more organizing about the Soviet Union. So they looked around, and they said: Well, the Muslims. Let's find the Arabs and the Muslims, and make them the boogeyman. And that's what they did.

Interviewer: But why did this sentiment of hatred increase after 9/11?

James Abourezk: Well, because the Arabs who were involved in 9/11 cooperated with the Zionists, actually. It was a cooperation. They gave them the perfect excuse to denounce all Arabs. It's a racist sort of thing, really racist – you know, picking out these 19 or 20 terrorists – they were terrorists – and saying all the Arabs are like them. So, you know, people in America don't really look at it that deeply, and they accept what the government and the press are saying.
These were not Abourezk's only outrageous comments. When Helen Thomas was fired from AP for her explicit antisemitism, Abourezk came to her defense - doubling down on her desire to ethnically cleanse Jews from the Middle East:

Helen was not necessarily done in by her statement about Israel. What she said is what I’ve been saying for years - the Zionists should get the hell out of Palestine.

Where they go when they leave there is not my concern, just as it is not the Zionists' concern where the Palestinians went when they were driven out of Palestine.
Of course, Thomas said the Jews should get out of Palestine. When she said they should go "back" to Poland and Germany it was clear whom she meant, and when the interviewer asked her to clarify that she wants the Jews to leave Israel she added other places for them to go. 

Abourezk was a terror supporter, a 9/11 truther and an antisemite. An honest obituary would mention that. 

(h/t Irene)




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, February 24, 2023

The announcement that Jimmy Carter is entering hospice care at his home is prompting a wave of fawning pre-obituaries about what a wonderful humanitarian he is.

No one is talking about his antisemitism.

Carter's animus towards Israel is legendary, but the source of that hate is not his progressivism or humanitarianism, but old fashioned Christian antisemitism.

For decades, Jimmy Carter gave a weekly Sunday sermon at his Georgia church. Some of his lessons promoted classic Christian antisemitism, way beyond what the Christian scripture says.

He says that modern Israeli Jews are persecuting Palestinian Christians in line with alleged Jewish persecution of Christians in the New Testament because of Jewish supremacism:
“…this morning I’m gonna be trying to relate the assigned Bible lesson to us in the Uniformed Series with how that affected Israel and how it affects us through Christ personally… It’s hard for us to even visualize the prejudice against gentiles when Christ came on earth. If a Jew married a gentile, that person was considered to be dead. … How would you characterize from a Jew’s point of view the uncircumcised? Non believer? And what? Unclean, what? They called them DOGS! That’s true. … What was Paul’s feeling toward gentiles in his early life as a Jewish leader? [Paul was not a Jewish leader. Ed.] Anybody? Absolute commitment to persecution! To the imprisonment and even the execution of non-Jews who now professed faith in Jesus Christ. … We know the differences in the Middle East. But the differences there are between Jews on the one hand who comprise the dominating force both militarily and also politically and the Palestinians who are both Muslim and Christians. …
Carter bizarrely claims that sacrifices in the Jewish Temples were a means for rich Jews to avoid taking care of their elderly parents:

“Corban [sacrifices] was a prayer that could be performed by usually a man in an endorsed ceremony by the Pharisees that you could say in effect, ‘God, everything that I own all these sheep all these goats this nice house and the money that I have, I dedicate to you, to God.’ And from then on according to the Pharisees law those riches didn’t belong to that person anymore. They were whose? God’s! So as long as those riches were belonged to the person, that person was supposed to share them with needy parents right? But once it was God’s it wasn’t theirs and they didn’t have anything to share with their parents. So with impunity, and approved by the Pharisaic law, they could avoid taking care of their needy parents by a trick that had been evolved by the incorrect and improper interpretation of the law primarily designed by religious leaders to benefit whom? The rich folks! The powerful people! Because the poor man wouldn’t have all of this stuff to give to God. He would probably, in fact he might very well have his parents in the house with him or still be living with his own parents.”
This is a completely fictional reading of Jewish law.

Carter repeatedly said that Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus for various reasons, spreading the very source of Christian antisemitism as truth:
 The subject of his first class was the tale of Jesus driving the moneylenders from the temple. The press soon reported that the president had informed his students that this story was “a turning point” in Christ’s life. “He had directly challenged in a fatal way the existing church, and there was no possible way for the Jewish leaders to avoid the challenge. So they decided to kill Jesus.” 
So the Jews wanted to kill Jesus because he opposed the moneylenders! And in another lesson, Carter doubled down on Jewish hate of Christians:
He soon spoke at a Sunday-school class again; and, with an AP reporter in attendance, told those assembled that Jesus, in proclaiming himself the Messiah, was aware that he was risking death “as quickly as [it] could be arranged by the Jewish leaders, who were very powerful.”
There is a theme of rich, powerful Jews who want to oppress the gentiles - that informed Carter's view of the modern Middle East.

And his opinion of American Jews reflected that same animosity he has towards the Jews of Jesus' time. he blamed Jews for his loss in the 1980 election, more than once.

Kenneth Stein, who worked with him and interviewed him for his own book, quotes Carter as railing against the "Jewish money" that opposed him:
"[Vice president] Fritz Mondale was much more deeply immersed in the Jewish organization leadership than I was. That was an alien world to me. They [American Jews] didn't support me during the presidential campaign [that] had been predicated greatly upon Jewish money."

Carter's aide Stuart Eizenstat also says that Carter blames Jews for his 1980 loss: “From the New York primary [in March 1980] onward, I believe Carter was left with the view that New York Jews had not only defeated him in the primary but were also a factor in his loss in November.” However, while New York Jews did vote overwhelmingly for Ted Kennedy in the primary, more voted for Carter than Reagan in the presidential election. 

Reagan took over 90% of the electoral college in 1980. It was a landslide. For Carter to blame New York Jews for his huge loss is nothing less than pure antisemitism. 

Carter's antisemitism doesn't end there. He noted how Palestinian Christians were fleeing, but he blamed not the Muslim supremacists who are persecuting them, but Israel, continuing his theme of powerful Jews persecuting Palestinian Christians - even though Israel's Christian community has stayed steady.

His hate of Jews naturally spread to his supporting antisemites. When Helen Thomas lost her job for calling for the ethnic cleansing of Jews in Israel, saying Jews must "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Germany or Poland where they were massacred, one of the very few people who supported her was....Jimmy Carter. She told Playboy that he was very sympathetic but didn't want to go into details because it would get him into trouble. 

Carter also condoned terror attacks against Jews in Israel. Really.

In his "Peace, Not Apartheid" book, Carter wrote, "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."

This "humanitarian" didn't call for suicide bombings against Jews to end unconditionally. He advised Palestinians to use them as a bargaining chip to force Israel to give in to their demands. That is literally the definition of terrorism, and Carter is saying that he supports the goals of Palestinian terror.

Carter made many hateful statements about Israel which clearly cross the line into antisemitism. For example, he once downplayed the Iranian nuclear threat because they would only have a couple of bombs while Israel has hundreds, as if dropping a nuclear bomb on Tel Aviv is no big deal. Carter's support and even compliments for Hamas, for Palestinian "democracy" and other outrageous anti-Israel statements could fill a book. But even without mentioning Israel, his antisemitism is clear and unambiguous.

The single most damning example of Carter's antisemitism comes from an incident in 1987.

Neal Sher was the head of  the Office of Special Investigations, the Justice Department’s Nazi prosecution unit. They had iron-clad evidence that a Chicago resident, Martin Bartesch, a member of the SS Death’s Head Division at the Mauthausen concentration camp, was a war criminal and a murderer.

Bartesch's family started a huge campaign against the OSI, writing letters to members of Congress and other prominent people asking for help. Most politicians contacted the OSI to find out the details, OSI provided them with evidence of his guilt, and they would drop the matter.

But, Sher says, not Jimmy Carter.
In September 1987, after all of the gruesome details of the case had been made public and widely reported in the media, I received a letter sent by Bartesch’s daughter to the former president. Citing groups that had been exposed for their anti-Semitism, it was an all-out assault against OSI as unfair, “un-American” and interested only in “vengeance” against innocent family members.

...Not even the staunchest and most sincere devotee to humanitarian causes could legitimately claim that an SS murderer who deceived authorities to obtain a visa and citizenship was somehow deserving of exceptional treatment.

That’s why I was so taken aback by the personal, handwritten note Jimmy Carter sent to me seeking “special consideration” for this Nazi SS murderer. There on the upper-right corner of Bartesch’s daughter’s letter was a note to me in the former president’s handwriting, and with his signature, urging that “in cases such as this, special consideration can be given to the families for humanitarian reasons.”

Unlike members of Congress who inquired about the facts, Carter blindly accepted at face value the daughter’s self-serving (and disingenuous) assertions.
Here is Carter's note supporting the case of a known Nazi war criminal.


Carter took the side of a family of a Nazi against his own government. And he couched it in "humanitarian" terms.

Maybe, maybe one could excuse one or two of these examples in isolation. But in the aggregate, there is no denying it: Jimmy Carter is an antisemite, and anyone who doesn't think that this detracts from his humanitarian work is condoning world's oldest hate.





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, February 17, 2011

From Commentary's Alana Goodman:
During an interview with Joy Behar last night, Helen Thomas made it clear that she was standing behind her statements that Israeli Jews should “go back” to Germany and Poland. However, she did make a couple of additions to the list of countries that Jews should “return” to, such as Russia and the United States.

“They’ve been free ever since,” said Thomas, referring to the Jews after the Holocaust. “They didn’t have to go anywhere really, because they weren’t being persecuted anymore, but they were taking other people’s land.”

A visibly uncomfortable Behar then asked Thomas whether she considered herself anti-Semitic – and got something less than a clear answer. “Hell no. I’m a Semite. Of Arab background,” said Thomas. “[The Jews are] not Semites. Most of them are from Europe.”

The former White House reporter then launched into a tirade against the Israel lobby. “We have organized lobbyists in favor of Israel,” she said. “You can’t open your mouth. I can call the president of the United States anything in the book, but if you say one thing about Israel … you’re off-limits.”

Asked whether she had any regrets about making her controversial statement last spring, Thomas said her only regret was that “everybody misinterpreted it.”

“You have the Ari Fleischers and the Abe Foxmans distorting everything,” said Thomas. “So I certainly knew that and I should have kept my mouth shut probably.”

After insisting that her statements weren’t insensitive, the journalism veteran launched into a rambling diatribe about Palestinians being “pushed from their homes” in the middle of the night.

Watch the full clip here if you wish. Though you could probably hear a more rational and pleasant perspective on Middle East policy from a ranting homeless person at a bus station.

From Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic:

Nir Rosen, the journalist who infamously mocked Lara Logan (and who was completely dismantled by Anderson Cooper last night), has been saying hugely outrageous things for years, as I've documented here. He is sympathetic to the Taliban; he thinks al Qaeda poses no threat to America; he wishes Americans would "get over" 9/11; and he thinks Israel is an "abomination" that should be destroyed. After I posted about his previous statements, I was flooded with e-mails from Goldblog readers who told me I missed the nuttiest thing Rosen ever said. It came in an article about his Israeli origins, in which he called his homeland a place of "bloody nationalism, paranoid identity and violent religion." In reading this treatise on Israel and its sins, it becomes clear that Rosen (who attended an Orthodox Jewish day school in New York) feels the sort of hate for Israel and Judaism that one associates with the hardest core of Hamas. 

The truly revealing part of this treatise comes at the end, when Rosen discusses ways to convince Israel to behave in a way he thinks is just: "I find myself in the unique and painful position of calling for international sanctions against Israel and wondering if a punitive bombing of Tel Aviv, the city I love, until it complies with international law, might be a good (albeit quixotic) idea."

Yes, Rosen is calling for the physical destruction of the world's largest Jewish city. I wrote yesterday that I would try to avoid armchair psychoanalysis in this matter, but sometimes these things are fairly obvious. Rosen, an American of Israeli origin, has spent his career rationalizing the actions of Israel's, and America's, most bitter enemies, and he envisions a day when the world community will conduct a bombing campaign of Tel Aviv. Nir Rosen seems to be engaged in a ferocious attempt to shed his identity to the point where he aligns himself with Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Taliban, and argues for the literal destruction of the city from which he came. It is deeply pathetic.  
No comment necessary - these haters speak for themselves.

Although the Helen Thomas defenders in the CNN site run the usual gamut.
JOY: You owed Helen some respect. And you didn't show it. And now I have no more respect for YOU. For someone who claims to be Catholic, you sure are a Zionist and your antagonistic Jew-loving one-sided brutality towards this journalism hero who speaks nothing but the damn truth, just shows you're either really a JEW or you're bought and paid for by your JEW MEDIA CORPORATE EVIL
That's me- Jew Media Corporate Evil!

(h/t DM)

Monday, January 17, 2011

As I mentioned last week, the Society of Professional Journalists officially decided to retire their Helen Thomas Award.

From SPJ:
INDIANAPOLIS – The board of directors of the Society of Professional Journalists voted Friday to retire the Helen Thomas Lifetime Achievement Award.

The vote means the Society will not give out an award for lifetime achievement. The action does not rename the award or remove Thomas’ name.

Both the board of directors and the executive committee heard from many people inside and outside of SPJ’s membership and journalism. SPJ fully understands the concerns expressed by both sides regarding whether renaming or retiring the award is necessary or improper.

A prominent objection to taking any action was that of Helen Thomas’ free speech rights. SPJ staunchly believes Helen Thomas and all people in the United States have a right to free speech. The Society defends that fundamental legal right as a core organizational mission, even when the speech is unpopular, vile or considered offensive.

However, the controversy surrounding this award has overshadowed the reason it exists. To continue offering the award would reignite the controversy each year and take away from its purpose: honoring a lifetime of work in journalism. No individual worthy of such honor should have to face this controversy. No honoree should have to decide if the possible backlash is worth being recognized for his or her contribution to journalism.

“As I said last week after the executive committee meeting, it’s time we in SPJ stop focusing on this divisive topic and start focusing on what unites us,” SPJ President Hagit Limor said. “There’s tremendously important work for us, like training our members for our ever-changing industry and fighting to ensure journalists and citizens have access to public records.”
A very proper decision.

Thomas' Arab defenders like Ray Hanania should note that the SPJ understood what Thomas really said, even as they continue to deny it:

The Jan. 8 executive committee meeting marked the second time in nearly six months the committee considered removing Thomas’ name, stemming from an incident earlier in 2010 when the longtime White House reporter and columnist commented to a rabbi on video that Jews in Palestine should “go home.” Thomas drew widespread criticism after the video was posted online, and she later resigned her job as a Hearst Newspapers columnist. The executive committee considered removing Thomas’ name during a July meeting but did not, noting it was a one-time, spontaneous remark for which she apologized.

In December, Thomas reiterated her previous comments before a speech in Dearborn, Mich., the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News reported. The News quoted her at the time as saying, “Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by the Zionists. No question.”
The SPJ knows very well what Thomas meant when she said "Zionists." Apologists for her are the ones who look like fools.

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

From the Society of Professional Journalists:
The Executive Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists voted Saturday to recommend that the organization retire the Helen Thomas Award for Lifetime Achievement. The recommendation, which will be sent to the full board of directors within the next 10 days for a vote, states that the award will be retired with Thomas’ name attached.

The recommendation by the executive committee is to retire the Helen Thomas Award for Lifetime Achievement, meaning no lifetime achievement award will be given. The recommendation is not to rename it or to remove Thomas’ name.

The retirement will not take effect unless the board votes to accept the recommendation.

“This is a complex issue, and the executive committee considered comments and letters from both sides. Because of the importance of this decision, it is appropriate to put this before the full board,” SPJ President Hagit Limor said.

The executive committee said the following in making its recommendation: “While we support Helen Thomas’ right to speak her opinion, we condemn her statements in December as offensive and inappropriate.”
They published this absurd argument against rescinding the award from a self-proclaimed Jew and Zionist, Lloyd Weston, condemning Wayne State University from pulling their Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity Award:
The reasoning behind WSU’s decision to no longer offer the Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity in the Media award sends a mixed message to its students – especially journalism students – that the values instilled in them over four years of education are both flexible and expendable; that freedom of speech and of the press is not a foundation, set in stone, upon which life in America is based, but rather merely a suggestion to be taken if it suits you, or left behind when it becomes inconvenient or embarrassing.

I have urged officials of WSU to reconsider what they have done, and to apologize to Helen Thomas, of course, but, more importantly, to the Wayne State University students and alumni who expected better of them.
Weston of course does not explain how getting rid of an award whose very name has turned into an embarrassment is a threat to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is important, but it does not run roughshod over other freedoms - such as the freedom of Wayne State University and the SPJ from not wanting their names associated with a bigot.

(h/t Backspin)

Friday, December 17, 2010

I have mentioned a couple of times that I could not find a single prominent Arab American who did not defend Helen Thomas' anti-semitic comments, by either denying they were anti-semitic and/or confirming that they were true. I also showed that major Arab American organizations specifically went out of their way to honor her because of, not in spite of, her anti-Jewish outburst.

A single exception has just appeared.

Hussein Ibish, a quite prominent Arab American, has written a pretty good essay on the topic. He spends much of it going rebutting Thomas' and her acolytes' false definition of "anti-semitism" and gives a history of the term as well as of both Christian and Arab anti-semitism. He then goes into the Thomas affair as well:

I really had intended to stay out of this altogether, and I'm not going to ultimately pass any definitive judgment on her recently expressed sentiments, but some observations seem necessary. Her initial comment was very disturbing, but could certainly have been dismissed as an off-the-cuff remark to a hectoring videographer by an exasperated and elderly journalist who was trying to be deliberately obnoxious to someone it seems may have been pestering her. The explanation offered at the time that she was referring to the occupation was never very convincing because she referred to Jews getting out of Palestine and going home to Germany, Poland or the United States, but not to Israel. But had it been isolated and off-the-cuff, as it first appeared, it really shouldn't have been that big a deal, especially since she apologized right away.
Unfortunately, Ibish refrains from mentioning that the full video shows that Thomas seemed to be happy to answer the initial question from Rabbi Nesenoff about journalism as a career and she did not seem irritated at all, and even laughed heartily as she went onto her anti-semitic rant.

Ms. Thomas decided to make some additional remarks that got her into even deeper trouble. Parsing whether or not any of it descends to the level of anti-Semitism seems utterly beside the point. But to suggest, as she did in her subsequent remarks, that "Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by Zionists" is just silly, and it's indefensible. Let's take them one by one.
Later he writes
I do think it's possible to read Thomas' most recent comments as a rallying cry to Arab-Americans to get more involved, and that's certainly good advice. But the phraseology is extremely unfortunate and, indeed, inaccurate. And certainly she didn't do anything to contradict the impression that was created in many minds by her original off-the-cuff ill-advised remarks, and more than reversed whatever corrective had been accomplished by her well-advised apology. The debate over whether her original or follow-up comments are anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist or simply inaccurate isn't particularly interesting. But it needs to be clearly stated that the idea that because Thomas is of a Semitic Arab heritage she therefore cannot be anti-Semitic herself by definition holds no water at all. Sadly, there is far too much genuine anti-Semitism among Arabs and Arab-Americans, just as there is a disturbing plethora of anti-Arab and Islamophobic sentiment among Israelis and Jews around the world, including the United States.
Ibish falls short of the clear-cut condemnation of Thomas that is sorely needed in the Arab American community. But at least he recognizes that she was wrong, something that makes him utterly unique - and which highlights that the vast majority of Arab American leaders really either do support Thomas' remarks wholeheartedly or are too cowed by institutional anti-semtism in their community to say anything against them.

Ibish's attempts to draw a parallel between Jew-hatred among Arabs and "Islamophobia" among Jews are unsatisfying as well, simply because the former is apparently endemic while the latter is anything but, especially in the United States. It is possible to find (way too) many Jews whose positions on the Arab/Israeli conflict are in perfect consonance with the official positions in the Arab world, but it is nearly impossible to find any Arabs whose public positions align with Israel's.

So while his essay is flawed, it at least is a belated acknowledgment of the issue, it is thoughtful, and it is welcome as a worthy  addition to the debate.

(h/t Alex)

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Yet another article by the "moderate" Ray Hanania  shows that his grip on reality is getting more tenuous by the day.

Yes, he still denies that Helen Thomas was demanding, in an unguarded moment, that Jews should  "get the hell out of Palestine." And he insists that her comments about "Zionists" owning Congress, the White House, Hollywood and Wall Street" - classic anti-semitic tropes - were about Zionists. (No doubt, hook-nosed "Zionists" at that.)

But now Hanania is going off on his own bizarre theory - that Zionism is an organization!
Thomas has criticized and denounced Zionism, a political movement with headquarters in new York City. The purpose of the organization is to champion the interests of a foreign country, Israel.

...Zionism is a political organization with headquarters in New York. Its agenda is to defend a foreign nation.

...Ms. Thomas criticized Zionism, a recognized political organizati­on that champions the interests of a foreign country.
That's three times he claims that there is an organization, based out of Jew (sorry, New) York City, that is called "Zionism."

Is he referring to the Zionist Organization of America? Or the ADL? Or, more likely, has he just lost his mind?

Even funnier is how he tries to imply that supporting a foreign country is somehow inherently anti-American. Yet on one of his many websites, he headlines it "Can we save Palestine"? Isn't he then advocating for a foreign entity whose policies might be against American interests? Not only that, on that page he announces his candidacy to run for the Palestinian National Council and for the PA Parliament - indicating that Ray Hanania is more loyal to "Palestine" than to his own country of birth! Why, Ray, is being a Zionist somehow inherently anti-American but wanting to join a foreign government is not?

Just more hypocrisy from good ol' Ray. Keep it coming; it is really funny to see you fall apart like this, over a bitter old bigot no less. Since you claim to be a comedian, surely you can see the humor in this.

The real problem is that, by any objective measure, Hanania really is much more moderate than 99% of Palestinian Arabs. And even he cannot find a way to condemn the explicit bigotry of a fellow Arab. Which does not bode well for the chances of peace.

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 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive