Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: leftists

Showing posts with label leftists. Show all posts

Sunday, July 16, 2023

Study: Antisemitism is associated with conspiracy thinking, authoritarianism and desire to overturn the social order

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.., made headlines this weekend when he seemed to claim that COVID-19 could have been genetically engineered to target certain populations, and then mentioned there have been studies that suggested that Chinese people and Ashkenazic Jews are less susceptible to the virus.

"COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese," the Democratic presidential candidate said in a video that the New York Post published.

There is indeed such a study, from 2020, which he gets slightly wrong. The two groups that the study claimed were less likely to be susceptible to COVID-19, based on an analysis of two specific genes, were Ashkenazic Jews and the Amish. Latino, South and East Asian, and Finnish people were less susceptible than other groups as well.

Kennedy later clarified, saying he “never, ever suggested that the COVID-19 virus was targeted to spare Jews. I do not believe and never implied that the ethnic effect was deliberately engineered.”

Obviously, a large number (and percentage) of Ashkenazic Jews died of COVID-19, so the study did not predict anything accurately.

But the cat is out of the bag, and conspiracy theorists now have more ammunition to attack Jews.

And they are the most likely people to be antisemitic to begin with.

A new study published in Nature shows that antisemitism is not so much associated with the political Right or Left as it is with extremist thinking and conspiracy theories.

The researchers checked the association between antisemitic attitudes and likelihood to believe in other theories. For example, they found a high correlation between antisemites that those who believed in totalitarianism:

•To bring about great changes for the benefit of mankind often requires cruelty and even ruthlessness.
•Soft and idealistic people can never be the doers of great events.
•Almost any unfairness or brutality may have to be justified when some great purpose is being carried out.
•The unhappiness of a few people simply doesn’t matter when it is a question of a step forward for the majority of the people.
•Sometimes when a new society is in its early stages, the masses have to be ruled with an iron hand for their own good

Similarly, antisemitic attitudes were correlated with belief in conspiracy theories, such as:

•The government permits or perpetrates acts of terrorism on its own soil, disguising its involvement.
•The power held by heads of state is second to that of small unknown groups who really control world politics
.•A small secret group of people is responsible for making all major world decisions such as going to war.
•Secret organizations communicate with extraterrestrials, but keep this fact from the public
•The spread of certain viruses and/or diseases is the result of the deliberate, concealed efforts of some organisations.
•Technology with mind-control capacities is used on people without their knowledge.

And they are also associated with support for authoritarianism, both associated with the Right:

•What our country needs most is discipline, with everyone following our leaders in unity.

•An ideal society requires some groups to be on top and others to be on the bottom.
•Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups

And the Left::

•Rich people should be forced to give up virtually all of their wealth.
•Most investment bankers need to be thrown in prison.
•Political violence can be constructive when it serves the cause of social justice.

•Books that contain racism or racial language should be censored.
•I should have the right not to be exposed to views I find offensive.

While both the Right and the Left attack each other as antisemites, they usually remain blind to the antisemitism that is on their own side. And too many on their own sides want to see an authoritarian government that supports their viewpoints - and violently represses others.

Which indicates that antisemites are often some of the worst people on Earth. And those who find antisemites on their own political side should be in the forefront of denouncing them, not accommodating them.

Incidentally, the introduction to the study cited quite a few studies that showed a strong correlation between Judeoiphobic antisemitism and anti-Zionist antisemitism. And the people who would self-describe as anti-Zionists were just as likely to believe in the other noxious theories listed here as those who espouse the "old" antisemitism.

(h/t Irene)

our country needs most is discipline, with everyone following our leaders in unity.

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!

Some Leftists and Arabs are upset at promoting mutual respect and equality between Israeli Jews and Arabs

Atidna describes itself this way:

Atidna is a coalition of educators and social entrepreneurs, Arab citizens of Israel together with Jews from the State-Zionist Camp in Israel.

We, Israeli educators, society and entrepreneurship, believe that true integration will only begin when all of us, Arabs and Jews alike, will see the Arab Israeli public as an equal partner in a Jewish and democratic state.

The vision:
An Arab-Jewish partnership based on mutual respect and full civil equality in the State of Israel as a Jewish-democratic state. A strong Arab community, proud of its culture and heritage, which is integrated into Israeli society.

Atidna's mission:
Building a young and courageous leadership of Arabs and Jews, who have equal rights and duties, and who are proud of their identity and culture and are committed to the challenge of the successful integration of the Arab minority in the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. The movement works to create a critical human mass connected to Atidna values by developing and leading child, youth and student empowerment programs. Atidna is committed to supporting the building of a trusting, optimistic, independent and integrated Arab-Jewish community at the decision-making centers and throughout Israeli society. Atidna is committed to building a young Arab leadership avenue, which has an optimistic but practical outlook on life, which recognizes the challenge and the importance of the task and is ready to mobilize them into action in the spirit of Atidna’s values.

What makes Atidna special?
Atidna is a coalition of educators and social entrepreneurs, Arab citizens of Israel together with Jews from the State-Zionist Camp who joined together to work for successful integration in the State of Israel.
Atidna builds a community! All of Atidna’s programs are interconnected and create a multi-generational leadership community that creates change.

Addressing a diverse target audience from elementary school, students and adults.

Building a critical mass to create social change.

In short, Atidna wants to build a proud Arab society in Israel that embraces Zionist values and which will benefit everyone.

And therefore, the anti-Zionists are screaming bloody murder.

Haaretz is hysterical that the initiative is trying to create Arab Zionists.

We may be at a pivotal moment. If we wake up in a few years and discover that a right-wing Zionist youth movement is flourishing in Arab society and is slowly crowding out the old movements, we will not be able to say that we did not know. You don't have to go far to identify the long-term vision: the realization of the dream of Netanyahu and his friends on the deep right: the emergence of a significant right-wing Arab current in Israeli society.

In fact, Atidna admits it themselves. "In the long run, we hope that the social movement will become a political movement and be part of the coalition and part of the government," said Dr. Dalia Padilla, a co-director of the movement, in an interview with the "Jerusalem Post". A source in Atidna who left the movement with a slammed door was impressed that the targets are more focused. "The talk was about a Jewish-Arab party that would cut off from the territory the existing leaders of the Arab public in the Knesset," said the source, "a party that would weaken the left."

Al Quds al Arabi summarizes the Haaretz piece::

A new journalistic investigation, this time published by Hebrew-language Haaretz, revealed a project to obliterate the identity of the rising generations of the Palestinians of the interior in cunning ways and by building Zionist Arab youth movements. The talk is not only about an Israeli initiative aimed at corruption, but rather an unprecedented strategic right-wing governmental project whose malicious goal is to produce a “new Arab citizen” in Israel, i.e. a “good Arab” whose identity is a hybrid without a backbone and who has no demands inconsistent with a long-term vision sponsored by the Zionist right.

The Hebrew newspaper, which published an extensive investigation on the matter last Friday, confirms that this project will explode in the face of its sponsors as soon as the Arab youth discover that the Jews only intend to use them as "Shabbos goys," i.e. a mere means to Judaize the country.

I have no idea how much traction Atidna has made in the Israeli Arab community, but the anger from the Left on an initiative from the Right to tackle systemic inequalities between Jews and Arabs in Israel feels so much like the reaction from "progressives" in the US to hearing an intelligent Black conservative. They feel betrayed that members of their pet causes might disagree with their own philosophy - which proves that their own pretense as being the only champions of minority rights is a sham.

A Zionist Arab, like a Black conservative, indicates that some minorities do not want to be treated as if they cannot think on their own. And the "progressives" cannot handle that.

Haaretz' article is, to put it bluntly, racist. Arabs are free to go shopping in the marketplace of ideas; if some of them choose to become Zionist, that is their right. If the Israeli Left is so convinced that Atidna holds no benefit for Arabs then Atidna is not a threat to them and they can make jokes about it, not panicked articles about waking up in a world where an Arab party is part of a right-wing government.

The fear permeating this article is that a significant number of Arabs just might become Zionists if given a chance to learn what Zionism really is. This is a community that the Left felt that they have in their pockets and they are alarmed at even the possibility that many Arabs might be more attracted to the Right than the Left when they are exposed to real Zionism, not the racist caricature of Zionism that fills Haaretz articles.

If some Arabs want to embrace Zionism - and certainly some do - then no one should infantilize them and tell them that they cannot.

Because that is racist.

(h/t YMedad)

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!

Some over-the-top articles about the new government in Israel

Here are some excerpts of articles about the new Netanyahu-led government, showing how over-the-top and hysterical some analysis is:

The alarm clock rang long ago already. It rang at fascist speeches by ministers. It appears that we turned it off and slept on. Now it is ringing again . . . One feels like weeping in view of the darkness that is slowly descending on our lives; in view of the takeover of extremist and racist opinions and worldviews, sometimes in such flagrant fashion as in this instance, and sometimes without our even being aware that it is happening. (1)

The new, anti-liberal Israeli Right and Religious Zionism have joined forces, following the logic that guides totalitarian regimes, [aiming] to capture the souls of the pupils and to transform them from lovers of people into stuck-up nationalists. This is the way to turn Israel from a Jewish and democratic state into a religious-nationalist state with a thin veneer of democracy. (2)

It looks like Weimar, it smells like Weimar; it’s malignant like Weimar. We aren’t the Weimar Republic, but a lot of what is happening here is reminiscent of what happened there’. (3)

‘Think of the media as a giant keyboard that the government can play on,’ famously declared Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany, who certainly knew a thing or two about communications and cinema, and about the psychology of the masses. On this point, at least, the present Israeli government is acting as though in agreement with him. (4)

This is a sophisticated revolution, full of scheming, that rests on an obedient, ‘normative’, even liberal and tolerant Revolutionary Guards. The sort whose very inaction and habituation feed the revolution. They are sure that we are not Iran, and that we won’t become like Egypt or Turkey. No one is going to surprise them one morning with the execution of intellectuals and the burning of books. There will be no need for that. What happens here is that people march politely along with the revolution, saluting it proudly. (5)

Don’t be surprised if one day someone in civilian dress knocks on your door and takes you for questioning. For two days no one will know your whereabouts, and then you’ll be released, with no explanation . . . We will howl that its ‘undemocratic’. . . and they’ll say, ‘You can say “undemocratic” in Sweden; not by us’. (6)

I'm sorry, did I imply these articles are recent? No, they are from seven years ago.

1. S. Kadmon, “Between the Wall and the Fence” (Yedioth Aharonoth, December 31, 2015)

2. M. Kremnitzer, “Human Rights? A Whole Lot of Nonsense” (Globes, December 9, 2015).

3. N. Barnea, “Not Even Death will Liberate from Betrayal” (Yedioth Aharonoth, January 28, 2016).

4. N. Anderman, “Regev Learned from Netanyahu How to Crush the Cinema” (Haaretz, March 29, 2017).

5. Z. Barel, “We, the Revolutionary Guard Corps” (Haaretz, February 24, 2016).
6. Y. Klein, “Please, Censor Me” (Haaretz, January 27, 2016).

None of the confident predictions about the government came true.

I have no idea what the new Israeli government will do. But the point is - neither does anyone else. Especially the types of people that made these confident predictions in 2015 and whose jobs rely on their newspapers getting eyeballs.

I found these excerpts in a recent academic paper in Israel Affairs titled, "‘It’s a war on Israel’s liberal democracy’: the Israeli left as a moral panic community, 2015-19." The abstract is worth reading:

This article examines the discourse of the Israeli Left in the years preceding the succession of general elections in 2019–21, with a focus on claims of the purported threats to democracy presented by the right-wing government. Rhetorical analysis of opinion pieces and political commentary in the press on issues relating to education, science, and culture shows recurrent use of appeals to fear – such as comparisons with totalitarian regimes and invocation of other dystopian spectres resulting from nationalist indoctrination and processes of ‘religionization’. This article defines the appeal to fear and other forms of the Left’s identity claims making during this period as moral panic discourse, around which the Left sought to revive its relevance in the public debate at a time when it was viewed as a marginal political force in ideological decline. The article’s main argument is that while the labelling of the Right as a ‘danger to democracy’ has been entrenched in leftist discourse since the 1977 ‘Upheaval’, during the period in discussion it became the principal – almost sole – theme in leftist publicist discourse, serving as a flag issue around which the Left reorganised its identity as the ‘democratic camp’.

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!

11/21 Links Pt2: Why is the religious left taking sides against Israel?; 1,000 Israeli Students Call on Harvard Crimson to Move Office from "Stolen Lands"

From Ian:

Why is the religious left taking sides against Israel?

For the old religious and evangelical left, Israel often represents Western Civilization, colonialism, and imperialism. For aging denizens of Liberation Theology, the Palestinian cause offers the narrative of a Third World people oppressed by First World wealth, technology, and cultural superiority. Israel is an ally of the United States, and from the religious left’s perspective, is an unwelcome extension of American (and British) power into the Mideast. The Palestinians, from that view, are victims of the American imperium, meriting special advocacy by concerned justice-minded American Christians.

The religious left’s animus towards Israel leads to often absurd contradictions and double standards.

Evangelical leftists relate to this narrative, often informed by their own neo-Anabaptist perspective, which is pacifist and anti-empire. Israel of course has by necessity a significant military force, much of it made possible through American aid. This rankles neo-Anabaptists who think anti-violence is the gospel’s chief theme. There is another sometimes-underlying concern for neo-Anabaptists. They are discomfited by ancient biblical Israel, with its divinely ordained kings, warrior heroes, armies, and military victories, all of which defy the neo-Anabaptist stress on God as supremely peaceful. If only unconsciously, they are inclined towards a form of Marcionism, the early church heresy that minimized the canonical authority of the Old Testament. This discomfort with the Hebrew scriptures facilitates unease with modern Israel.

The religious left’s animus towards Israel leads to often absurd contradictions and double standards, especially for a denomination like the PCUSA. It and the other mainline Protestant bodies have countless statements condemning Israel for ostensibly oppressing the Palestinians among other depredations. But they are largely silent about human rights abuses so prevalent among Israel’s Arab neighbors, including the Palestinian Authority, not to mention countless repressive regimes around the world. They ignored Hamas’s July rocket attacks on Israel. A 2011 PCUSA report affirmed calls for democracy during the Arab Spring, but such calls are rare, and it naturally focused on criticizing U.S. Mideast policy.

The PCUSA General Assembly in July did condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But it devoted more verbiage to the United States and NATO having “flooded Ukraine with lethal weapons,” enriching “war profiteers—at the expense of the taxpayers, the poor and the planet,” guided by “powerful geopolitical and financial interests.” It also derided sanctions against Russia and lamented the cost to “planetary survival and social justice.”

The Religious Left descends from the Social Gospel, later radicalized by Liberation Theology. It disdains capitalism, bourgeois democracy, America, Western Civilization, and human rights regarding speech, religion, and property. But its hostility to Israel is especially pernicious, not just for its double standards, but also for its underlying disregard for a people who have been among the world’s most tormented.

Modern Israel arose from the ashes of the Holocaust. From the beginning, Israel has had to fight for its very existence. Christians should understand that opposition to Israel as a Jewish state is opposition to Israel as a nation.

John-Paul Pagano: First Principles

Antisemitism is different from most other forms of racism. In order to combat it, we need to understand what is a conspiracy theory.

It's customary to hear well-meaning people intone something along these lines: "Antisemitism and anti-black racism are part of the same fight.” In a basic sense, this is true: they are both odious forms of hatred that endanger people and corrode society. Diminishing them as much as possible is part of the same overarching defense of our civic health.

But it’s a platitude that papers over essential differences between two opposite forms of racism. Few human phenomena can be described with an algorithm. There are always ambiguities and exceptions. Nevertheless, it’s heuristically valid to arrange racism into two categories: a caste-oriented, “down-punching” form and a conspiracist, “up-punching” form.

By and large, anti-black racism constructs an underclass that the racist regards as inferior, to be segregated, plundered, and exploited. In the main, Antisemitism views the Jews as a preternaturally powerful, evil elite that plunders and exploits the Antisemite—and the broader society he seeks to awaken to the struggle. In the ugliest of ironies, however much he rails about Jewish degeneracy, the Antisemite invests the Jews with traits and abilities that make them seem diabolically superior.

Jonathan Tobin: The ADL is waging war on free speech, not on Trump or Twitter

Yet the ADL has shown a dangerous propensity for Internet censorship—an authoritarian impulse that it usually veils behind a desire to quell the rising tide of antisemitism. Its consultations with the PayPal online payment system, for instance, were geared toward demonetizing anyone, not just far-right extremists, whose opinions were out of favor with the left.

The attempt to sink Twitter by persuading advertisers and users to exit it goes beyond those efforts to harness Big Tech clout to enforce woke orthodoxy on the Web.

What the ADL is now demanding is to set a standard by which no social-media platform or Internet service can survive if it enables conservatives to participate on an equal footing with liberals.

Censored or uncensored, Twitter—or any similar company—will always be something of a sewer, as it prizes angry discourse and discourages thoughtful exchanges. But if the ADL and others succeed, a precedent will be set to ensure that no platform encouraging debate from both ends of the spectrum can survive.

The consequence of the above—such as the Biden administration’s use of social- media companies to squelch COVID-19 debate—will be an even more divided country and greater civil strife.

Just as important, it will create an atmosphere in which free speech is not merely under assault, as it is on college campuses and other places that have been completely captured by the left. It will mean we are moving closer to a society where the norm will be to silence dissent on all important topics.

It is already a disgrace that the ADL treats partisan advocacy as more important than its core mission of fighting antisemitism. But its effort to sink Twitter makes clear that its real goal is to shut up those who don’t toe its political line.

Think what you like about Trump or Musk. But this latest stand shows that there is no greater foe of democracy than the ADL under Greenblatt.

10/23 Links: The gaping holes in the UN Commission of Inquiry report; From Oslo to Abraham; Rushdie ‘going to live’ but has lost use of eye and hand, says agent

From Ian:

The gaping holes in the UN Commission of Inquiry report

What is missing from this report as context for this difficult environment is startling. Not a word about Palestinian rejectionism for decades. Not a word on Israeli steps that completely contradict the narrative that Israel is all about permanent occupation and annexation.

Not a word about Israeli efforts to make Palestinian life better, despite Palestinian rejection and terrorism in the form of thousands of Palestinian workers making a decent living working in Israel every day. Not a word about the anti-democratic forces and corruption at work in Hamas or the Palestinian Authority, which have greatly contributed to the ills of the Palestinian people. Not a word about an educational system in the Palestinian community, which preaches and teaches hatred of Israel and Jews and the virtues of violence against the Jewish state.

Most significantly, related to the two major themes of the report — that Israel is engaged in moving toward permanent control of the West Bank and its Palestinian population and toward de facto annexation — is the complete failure to mention numerous Israeli peace offers that would have transformed Palestinians lives, including through the creation of a Palestinian state. Israel’s offer at Camp David, then later at Taba, in 2000, would have meant the withdrawal of Israeli from most of the territory and the removal of most settlements. The Palestinians said no and turned to violence and suicide bombs.

Then came Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, including from all settlements, only to have Israel met with a Hamas takeover, and years of attacks from Gaza on Israeli civilians. And then at Annapolis in 2008, Israel offered the Palestinians one more opportunity to end the conflict and move toward a state as Israel withdraws, only to be met again with no response.

In sum, there are real issues to discuss. But it’s impossible to do that in a serious and responsible way when the approach is the kind of biased one that the COI report represents. The consequence of such one-sidedness is to make the Palestinians think once again that history is on their side in their decades-old rejection of Israel’s legitimacy. This delusion has been harmful to Palestinians and is repeated here once again.

At the same time, a report like this plays into the hands of those Israelis who see the world as against them and prefer the status quo rather than creative solutions and initiatives.

The bottom line: Israel will surely reject this report for what it is: a continuing of counterproductive, anti-Israel propaganda by an arm of the UN that has a long history of bias against the Jewish state.

At the same time, the reality of the situation in the territories, even though it does not reflect either Israeli permanence or annexation, demands Israeli initiatives on the ground to improve living conditions for the Palestinians and to open up new possibilities for negotiations and solutions – even if the Palestinians have not shown they are ready for either.

American Jews must give up the illusion that they have ‘no enemies’ to the left or the right

The final straw came in 2000, when Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader held a massive campaign rally in Boston. From the stage, I was told, his running mate, Winona LaDuke, shrieked, “We’re going to stop the slaughter in Palestine!” This would have been bad enough, given that it erased Israel’s name from the map and, with it, the numerous Jews then being murdered by Palestinian terrorists in the name of “Palestine.”

But what made my blood run cold was the description of what followed: The crowd howled its approval and rose to its feet in a standing ovation. At that moment, what I saw in my mind’s eye was Hitler and the great crowd rising as one to hail him. These people, I suddenly realized, wanted to kill me.

What followed was not merely anger, but a horrific sense of betrayal. I believed in the catechisms of the left. I felt that I was one of them. But now, I suddenly realized, they did not think I was one of them. And this was because, despite everything, I did believe that the Jews have a right, at the very least, to defend themselves. I now knew that my former comrades did not believe in that right. But I did, and I would fight for it.

I will not go into the long journey that followed, which led me to Zionism, aliyah and everything that came after. Suffice it to say, I rejected the left in its entirety, and became very right-wing for a very long time.

I can no longer count myself an ideological right-winger. I believe I have learned a great deal from both the left and the right, from the likes of Orwell and Camus along with Burke and C.S. Lewis. These days, I prefer to keep my own counsel. But that sense of betrayal has never left me, and I am still angry about it.

That many Jews on the right now feel the same way is painful but also, I regret to say, not particularly surprising. All non-Jewish movements contain people who believe very ugly things about the Jews. The left has Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, the right has its “alt” contingent and now Kanye West.

But I must say, and perhaps this will comfort him, that I do not agree with Haworth’s despairing conclusion that “no one cares about us.” In fact, there are non-Jews on both the right and the left who care very deeply about the Jews, whether they be Ritchie Torres on the left or Meghan McCain on the right. Sometimes they are forced to fight a rearguard action against the haters, but they are there, they are not to be underestimated and we must work to embrace them all.

Indeed, for Jews to believe that we have “no enemies to the left” is as absurd as believing we have “no enemies to the right.” There is no single political movement—except Zionism—that is monolithically philo-Semitic. Jews, in the end, have no right or left. We have only ourselves and our friends or enemies, wherever they may be on the political spectrum. To wholly commit ourselves to one side or the other only sets us up for a rude awakening followed by a terrible disillusionment.

"Documentary Series Exposes 3,000 Hours of Vile Leftist Antisemitism Recorded by Swedish Spy"

Zvi Yehezkeli, an Israeli television journalist and documentarian who heads the Arab desk at News 13, on Sunday night is launching “Sh’tula” (implant), a five-episode espionage docu-series on Channel 13, which reveals for the first time authentic documentation of what goes on behind the scenes of human rights organizations operating in Judea and Samaria.

The series was three years in the making. “There are 3,000 hours of footage, all of which required legal backing, and the content features many characters,” Yehezkeli told Ma’ariv. “In general, this thing is explosive, with the possibility of international lawsuits, so this process has been crazy. And it’s also the longest series I’ve ever done.”

The series “Sh’tula” follows a pro-Palestinian young Swedish woman who came to Israel as a tourist to study architecture. She met someone from the Eli settlement who explained that there’s another side to the Israeli-Arab story.

“Slowly, she is gaining ground within the human rights organizations that operate in Judea and Samaria and is actually becoming an intelligence agent,” Yehezkeli relates. “After a year, she reaches the real leadership, the Hamas people, who reveal to her the mechanism of raising money for the organizations, and the connection between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Hamas headquarters in Europe and human rights organizations. This means that human rights organizations like BDS are operated by Hamas members.”

“It became a treasure trove of intelligence, including secrets that Hamas members told her and are documented on paper,” he continues. “So, we started building a series out of it. It’s very complicated because there’s a lot of use of hidden cameras, and we also have to protect her life.”

At some point, Yehez told Army Radio on Sunday, his spy recorded a European activist who confessed on tape that she wanted to see all the Jews dead, on both sides of the “green line,” arguing that their very existence was rooted in sin. Should be fun to watch, especially if at some point you thought European activists were fair and even-handed and wanted only to help poor suffering Arabs.

Elder Comix: When the Left realizes that they hate most Jews

Inspired by this.

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!

10/07 Links Pt2: Spanish top court says Israel boycotts are always discriminatory; Leftists Most Likely To See Judaism As ‘Incompatible’ with French Values

From Ian:

In landmark ruling, Spanish top court says Israel boycotts are always discriminatory

Over the past several years, dozens of Spanish courts have rejected Israel boycotts by nonprofits, municipalities and other groups. Now, the country’s top court has ruled that the movement to boycott Israel represents “discrimination” that “infringes on basic rights.”

Separately, the Spanish parliament on Wednesday passed legislation that bars public funding for organizations that “promote antisemitism.” The law uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which cites as examples of antisemitism some forms of Israel criticism.

The ruling by the Supreme Court of Spain, which was issued Sept. 20 and published on Tuesday, was about an appeal that a pro-Palestinian nonprofit, Associacion Interpueblos, filed contesting a lower court’s 2020 ruling that called a specific action to boycott Israel discriminatory.

ACOM, a Spanish pro-Israel nonprofit that has sued multiple entities for discriminating against Israel, claimed the ruling as a major win. Spain was once a hotbed of efforts by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, known as BDS. A slew of lower-court rulings in Spain had curtailed that trend, but they had pertained only to individual cases and thus had a limited impact, the group said, but the Sept. 20 ruling will function as a legal precedent applicable to all cases going forward.

Prior to the appeal, pro-Palestinian groups in Spain had not escalated appeals to the top court for fear of losing and creating precedent. “Also, it was a risk for us, but our legal team worked hard and turned that risk into an historical opportunity,” an ACOM spokesperson wrote in an email to JTA.

This judicial policy is similar to the one practiced in France, where attempts to boycott Israel resulted in the 2003 adoption of a law that declares any attempt to single out countries discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Leftists Most Likely To See Judaism As ‘Incompatible’ with French Values

A survey has found that those who support left-wing parties in France are far more likely to believe that Judaism is not compatible with French values, while also being the most likely to claim Islam is compatible.

The “French Fractures” survey, which was carried out by the polling firm Ipsos and the consulting firm Sopra Steria for the newspaper Le Monde, the Jean-Jaurès Foundation and Cevipof, found that those who support leftist parties were far more likely to find that Judaism is incompatible with the values of French society.

Among supporters of the far-left France Insoumise (FI) party, only 75 per cent stated that they believed Judaism was compatible with French values, while every other party saw 80 per cent or more believe that Judaism was compatible with French society, including 90 per cent of the supporters of the centre-right Republicans.

When the same question was asked of Islam, the left-wing FI supporters were the most likely to state that Islam was compatible with France, with 64 per cent agreeing, while those on the right overwhelmingly disagreed as just 17 per cent of supporters of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally believe Islam is compatible with France, and just eight per cent of the supporter of conservative pundit Eric Zemmour’s Reconquest! party.

Overall just 40 per cent of the respondents stated that Islam was compatible with French society, with people under the age of 35 being far more receptive to the idea than those over 60.

More than 90% of slanted articles in top U.S campus papers were biased against Israel—report

Between 2017 and 2022, 92.82% of the articles in leading U.S. college newspapers that strayed from journalistic objectivity were anti-Israel, according to a report from Alums for Campus Fairness.

ACF surveyed 75 leading college and university newspapers. Of all the articles about Israel exhibiting a bias, 181 were biased against Israel and 14 portrayed it positively.

Coverage spiked during periods of tension between Israel and Hamas, including in November 2018, May 2019, November 2019 and May 2021. There is an intense fixation on Israel, with nearly 1,500 stories on the topic, the researchers found.

Avi Gordon, executive director of ACF, told JNS that the increase in “hatred towards Jewish and pro-Israel students standing up for the truth” reflects the fact that Israel has become a “divisive topic.” Israel is always considered newsworthy, which fosters a culture of saturation coverage in which bias against the Jewish state is popular, he explained.

Large public universities produced the most content about Israel. While liberal arts colleges produced less, small private colleges exhibited the most anti-Israel bias. The Claremont Colleges, a consortium of seven private institutions in Claremont, California, and Swarthmore College in Pennslyvania, for example, produced 31 articles over a five-year period.

Gordon said there has also been a shift in the general discourse on Israel. “Whereas it used to be, ‘I am not anti-Semitic—I am anti-Israel’ or ‘anti-Zionist,’” this distinction is increasingly becoming meaningless.

“Jewish students are more afraid to share their Judaism or their love for Israel” openly, he noted, describing instances of people who are scared to wear a yarmulke or IDF shirt on campus, or to share their culture and faith.

Rashida Tlaib, the Lion's Den, and the ubiquity of Jew-hate across political boundaries (plus comic)

Last week, member of Congress Rashida Tlaib said at a Palestine Advocacy Day event, “I want you all to know that among progressives, it becomes clear that you cannot claim to hold progressive values yet back Israel‘s apartheid government.”

The formulation asserts both the lie that Israel is an apartheid state and that people cannot be both progressive and support Israel.

One does not see similar litmus tests for progressives. Indeed, the virtually unanimous support that the anti-Israel crowd has for the emphatically Islamist, regressive groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad shows the absurdity of the idea that these supposed progressives support only progressive causes.

This was already evident back in 2006 when gender theorist Judith Butler said, "Yes, understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important."

If Hamas is part of the global Left, and an Israel where there are equal rights for Arabs and women and gays is cast as part of the bigoted far-Right, then the terms have lost all meaning.

But there is another political theory that is far more powerful than the arbitrary Left/Right divide.

Jew-hatred explains the obvious contradictions between what "progressives" claim to believe and what they actually believe.

And it works both ways. Far right Jew haters, who are far more willing to take pride in their bigotry, regularly pretend to be pro-Palestinian - happily quoting the most far-Left personalities. The racist shooters at Overland Park and Pittsburgh were partly fueled by the antisemitism of the Left.

The far-Right pretense of caring about Palestinian human rights is as transparently false as the far-Left pretense of caring about women's and gay rights while supporting Hamas.

Another proof that antisemitism trumps Left/Right politics comes from the new West Bank terror group, called The Lion's Den. As Khaled Abu Toameh reports:

This is the first organized armed group that consists of gunmen belonging to a number of Palestinian factions – including Fatah, Hamas, IJ and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

The PFLP is a Communist group. Islamic Jihad and Hamas are Islamist groups. How can they work together?

Because for antisemites, there is no Right and Left. Those political affiliations are excuses for their hate of Jews, not the reasons for it. Arab antisemites are far less wedded to their supposed Leftist or Islamist Rightist causes than they are to hating Jews - but it is the exact same logic that allows Western "progressives" to be as hypocritical as Western white supremacists who pretend to love Palestinian Arabs.

The only consistency is Jew-hate.

Perhaps it is time to resurrect the political parties like the late 19th century Deutschsoziale Antisemitische Partei whose primary ideological basis was antisemitism, so these people on the Right and Left can join together and enjoy consistent political positions.

The Lion's Den is a model for how today's antisemites can put aside their differences for the greater good of ethnically cleansing Jews from the planet.

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!

Peter Beinart pretends antisemitism hasn't changed since 1944

One of the most important features of antisemitism is that it morphs over time to make Jews villains as circumstances change.

Jew-haters of the 18th century - where Jews were primarily considered Christ-killers (or the Islamic equivalent of "killers of prophets") - would not recognize the "scientific" antisemitism of Wilhelm Marr asserting that Jews were racially inferior and criminal. They would be mystified at the idea of the traditionally weak Jews in ghettoes being the Elders of Zion controlling the world.

Jew-hatred is insidious because it changes with the times, to claim that Jews are guilty of whatever the worst crimes of the age are. Today, that would be racism, violation of human rights, white supremacy, and colonialism.

But to Peter Beinart, in a discussion in Germany last month, antisemitism is exactly the same as it was in the 1940s, as he defines it here:

"By antisemitism I mean a kind of classical definition that says you don't like Jews because they're Jews, right, you say they have too much power, they stick together too much, you know, they're trying to rip everyone off, whatever."

As a master propagandist, Peter first frames the argument before he makes it. But he uses a false framework, and he knows it. He repeatedly says "classic antisemitism" because he knows that antisemitism does change, and today's antisemitism is as different from that of a hundred years ago as that one was from a hundred years before that.

The examples that he uses are telling as well. Beinart doesn't mention that classical antisemitism also says that Jews enjoy killing Christian children, that they poison the wells of the non-Jews, that they control the world politically. But he doesn't want to mention those examples in his definition, because the audience might realize that modern antisemites on the Left say that the Jewish State enjoys killing Palestinian children, that Israel poisons Palestinian water supplies, and that Zionists control the Western world.

Modern antisemites accuse the Jewish state of everything the "classic" antisemites accused Jews themselves of doing. Mentioning that fact would undercut Beinart's thesis that anti-Zionism has nothing to do with antisemitism.

His absurd extrapolation that Zionists are themselves antisemitic itself fits the pattern of how antisemitism morphs. After the Holocaust, antisemitism became a major social crime. So of course, anyone who supports Israel must be guilty of that crime, because Zionists and Israelis are guilty of every social crime, by the Left's definition. Beinart then twists reality to ensure that Israel is guilty of antisemitism just as Jews have been guilty of every social crime in history.

Beinart's selective definition of antisemitism is itself proof that anti-Zionism is modern antisemitism.

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!

Any support for Israel is "anti-Palestinian racism" according to left-wing UK Jewish group

From Jewish News (UK):

Anti-occupation group Na’amod have claimed they are opening a “conversation on anti-Palestinian racism” within the UK Jewish community after publishing a series of testimonies that are alleged to shed light on the scale of the problem.

So what are examples of the "anti-Palestinian racism" that they are so horrified at? The article lists:

Among a series of 18 personal testimonies from young members of the community, is a claim that a peaceful pro-Palestine protest at Bristol University was disrupted by a group of students hailing from north west London who “stormed the peaceful protest, sporting large Israeli flags as they frantically ran through the crowds of protestors.”

Holding an Israeli flag is racist? I'm not sure of when this happened, but perhaps it was this incident, which shows who the racists are:

However, the protest attracted a degree of controversy from fellow students. One group of Zionist Jewish students objected to the protest and stood by the marchers holding an Israeli flag. They reported that marchers shouted at them saying, ‘you are murderers’.

Second-year Languages student, Talia Rack said, ‘No side is blameless but it didn’t feel appropriate to counter-protest this march on Nakba day, in light of what happened on Monday in Gaza’.

So holding an Israeli flag is racist, but holding Palestinian flags and calling British Jews "murderers" is perfectly fine!

Another example of so-called Jewish racism:

A further testimony includes a claim that pointing out the appalling treatment of LGBTQ+ people in Gaza by Hamas to people holding “Queers For Palestine” banners is “a deeply racist idea — and one that often goes unchallenged in our community.”

Telling "Queers for Palestine" that they would be murdered by Hamas is a "deeply racist idea"?

There were two other examples given that were so vague as to be meaningless:

Another account suggests there are “overt examples of anti-Palestinian racism in the wider British Jewish Community” including “the occasional outbursts of certain members of the Board of Deputies to come face to face with naked bigotry.”

Other examples detail alleged racist responses to the Palestinians, while another testimony from former JFS pupil “Josh” says teaching around Israel at the school meant that “Palestinians were only referenced as an obstacle, a safety threat and a thorn in the side of Jewish freedom and safety.”

This is a list of people being offended at any point of view not their own - but there is not a single example of racism, by any definition.

Meanwhile, in Bristol, the openminded pro-Palestinian crowd routinely burns Israeli flags. Imagine how racist that would be if Zionists did that to Palestinian flags in Bristol!

Maybe the report will have more examples, but from what we see so far, the only thing this proves is that British pro-Palestinian Jews call anyone who disagrees with them "racist" - and they act worse than their supposed tormentors.

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!

North Carolina Democrats resolutions call for destruction of the Jewish state

From the Carolina Journal:

A group of N.C. Jewish clergy leaders are calling out the N.C. Democratic Party for anti-Israel resolutions that were considered at the party convention held June 18 in Durham. Calling the resolutions potentially “dangerous.” the clergy members point to the party’s Platform Committee Special Report, which sets a wide range of positions that the state party takes in the upcoming year, including 2022 elections.

The North Carolina Jewish Clergy Association issued a statement on June 17 that criticized Democrats’ resolutions that said Israel violated the human rights of Palestinians, called for an investigation into the alleged killing of a Palestinian-American journalist by Israeli forces, and establishing May 15 as Nakba Remembrance Day, recognizing the destruction of Palestinian villages.

“Of the seven resolutions devoted to foreign affairs, three are focused on criticism of Israel,” said the NCJCA Steering Committee, including Rabbi Judy Schindler, Rabbi Eric Solomon (co-chairs), Rabbi Mark Cohn, Rabbi Lucy Dinner, Rabbi Andy Koren, Cantor Shira Lessek, and Rabbi Batsheva Meiri. “While some of our clergy are sympathetic to some of the claims embedded in the statements, on the main, these resolutions are not thoughtful nor balanced. In short, they contain one-sided representations of the complexities of the decades-long Arab-Israeli conflict.”

The document is ridiculously anti-Israel, to the point of calling for the destruction of the Jewish state via the fictional "right of return."

It includes:

Forcible Transfer: In which Israel has removed and demolished tens of thousands of Palestinian communities and homes that it refuses to recognize, even though those communities existed there for decades, in order to maximize land available to Jewish communities; by making it exceedingly difficult to remain in certain areas, through blocking building permits and access to utilities such as water, sewage, and electricity, amounting to forcible transfer through a policy of ‘relocation.’

Creation of Separate Reserves and Ghettos: The purposeful end goal of Israeli actions such as expropriation of land and forcible transfer is the fracturing and ghettoization of Palestinian lands. While Palestinians make up about 20% of Israel proper’s population, the vast majority are restricted to only 3% of its land...

Denial of the Right to Leave and Return to Their Country, and the Right to a Nationality: ...In addition to making it difficult for Palestinians to leave Gaza and the West Bank, those wishing to return to their family lands are also faced by near-insurmountable challenges. While Israel gives any Jew, anywhere in the world, the right to immigrate to and become citizens of Israel at any time, even if they settle in occupied East Jerusalem or the West Bank, those Palestinians and their families who were either expelled from Israel in 1948 or fled from fighting in the region after that time are not granted that same right of return. Finally, by both not recognizing Palestine and holding the revocation of residency as a threat above all Palestinians, Israel denies the Palestinians a right to a national identity. By denying this right, Israel subjects all non-Israeli citizen Palestinians to a “state” in which they have no legal protections or rights, even to basic needs like food, water, and shelter, as can be seen in the actions of Israel towards these people;

The text is riddled with lies, half-truths and purposeful mixing up of different issues to give the worst impression. Here's a really egregious example accusing Israel of dropping American bombs on civilians just for fun:

WHEREAS, as Israel has shown itself to be either unwilling or unable to address these human rights violations, the United States must ensure that American resources, such as the bombs used without justification on civilian targets this past May...

This is the wholesale hijacking of the NC Democrats by the extreme Left of the party. Many Zionists are concerned about the depth acceptance of the "Squad" mentality in the mainstream of the party, items like this document cement that concern.

It will be interesting to see the reaction from Zionist Democrats to this extreme anti-Israel document.

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!

When the utopian vision of a one-state socialist "Palestine" crashes into Palestinian Islamism

Both Western Leftists and Palestinian Arabs agree that they would love to see a single state from the river to the sea.

Neither of them admit aloud how different their visions of such a state are.

When speaking to Western audiences, the Left - whether they are Jews like Peter Beinart or prominent Palestinian Leftists like Leila Khaled - describe a socialist utopia where Jews would ostensibly be treated equally with Arabs under the law, but the state would be strictly secular.

Palestinian Arabs, however, favor an Islamist state run by Sharia law. To them, the Palestinian Authority is too secular already.

The last time Pew did a survey of Muslims worldwide, it found that 89% of Palestinians would want Islamic law - Sharia - to be the law of the land. This was the third highest in the world, behind only Afghanistan and Iraq.

A vast majority of Palestinians would like to see corporal punishment for crimes like theft and stoning as a punishment for adultery. A majority would like their state to give the death penalty for those who leave Islam. Most Palestinians say that it is a bad thing that their current laws do not adhere closely to sharia law.

There is nothing in common between these two views of what a single Palestine would be. The majority of Palestinians have no interest in the secular paradise that you see described in the pages of Open Democracy and The Guardian and Jacobin. Most Palestinians say that their end goal is not one state with equal rights for Jews but one Palestinian state from the river to the sea where Jews are, at best, tolerated second class citizens - and many openly advocate for deporting any Zionist from the country altogether.

Polls show that a mere 10% of Palestinians want a state with equal rights between Jews and Muslims. The latest political polls show that socialist parties like the PFLP and DFLP would only get 2% of the vote in any election held now.

Palestinians hate socialism. They prefer Islamism.

Palestinians do not want equal rights for Arabs and Jews. They want an Islamic state.

Everything written about a one-state solution in the pages of the Washington Post and the New York Times is fiction. The Western Leftists will trot out people with Arabic-sounding names who write passionately about a single state with equal rights for all as if they represent Palestinian public opinion.

Only rarely does the Left admit that the idea of equal rights for Jews in a majority Arab state is problematic. Edward Said, the intellectual father of the one state idea, admitted in 2000 that he couldn't see how Jews would be treated equally in his solution. "It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews is very difficult for me. I really don't know."

The socialist fantasy and Palestinian reality cannot co-exist. A single state would become a nightmare for Jews. Everyone knows it.

Which goes to prove that the Leftists who make their one-state argument in the West - and who do not make the same argument in Arabic-language media - are only paying lip service to equal rights for Jews. They want to see Israel destroyed, and they are willing to partner with their Islamist ideological opponents to make that happen. They paper over their differences and hoping that no one notices that they are supporting a Muslim ethnostate where Jews are tolerated if they behave like good dhimmits and persecuted if they demand their own rights.

There is only one reason the socialist Left and the Palestinian Right support each other: their shared antisemitism.

Antisemitism unites the Right and the Left - for Palestinians

It has been long long recognized that the extreme Right and the extreme Left in the US disagree on everything - except their antisemitism.

For Palestinians, it is the same thing - but there is no "extreme" about it.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine is holding a celebration today for the 20th anniversary of the assassination of Israeli Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze'evi. The PFLP and its offshoots the DFLP, PFLP-GC and others are Marxist and their terrorists like Leila Khaled are the darlings of the anti-Israel Left.

Yet during the Second Intifada, the PFLP coordinated terror attacks on Jewish civilians together with Hamas and Islamic Jihad - both of them Islamist organizations whose values are polar opposites to Marxism.

Their philosophies could not be more different, but they share something far more fundamental than mere politics: both sides hate Jews, and therefore they are allies. Even today, they coordinate their activities in Gaza for fighting Israel.

The divide between Right and Left simply doesn't exist when they both share their belief in antisemitism.

Even more amazing is that the socialist Left in the West does not seem to have any real philosophical problem with far Right, Islamist terror groups in the Middle East. This goes to absurd lengths, such as when far Left icon Judith Butler said that "understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important." She admitted to some differences of opinion with Islamist groups, but altogether they are considered part of the Left because they oppose Israel - even though their opposition is based on traditional Muslim Jew-hate and not, as she claimed, their "anti-colonialist" stance.

Similarly, Western anti-Israel rallies organized by socialist groups will include signs and banners supporting Hezbollah.

In the end, people have their own biases and then will attach to groups that share those biases, and ignore any inconsistencies. Jew-hatred is a fundamental principle, and the haters will attach to whichever group supports that position, and not be too particular about the specifics.

Leftist Jews say Palestinians aren't antisemitic - but Jews are racist

It is a predictable pattern: any time anything happens in the news, a group of anti-Israel Jews issue a "letter" from "Jewish leaders" that try to gaslight the world and pretend to represent Jews as a whole.

The Israel-hating Left is very frightened by the wave of antisemitic attacks that have gotten publicity worldwide - attacks that clearly aren't initiated by the far Right that they blame for all antisemitism. So, they wrote a letter to fool people into thinking that the attacks are an anomaly, and roundly condemned by pro-Palestinian activists.

As usual, they are lying.

This one has the absurd title "Jewish Leaders Say: We Won't Be Distracted, We Won't Be Divided." The gaslighting begins in the title: they represent only a tiny fringe of Jews (only some 3% of Jews are actively anti-Zionist.) The writers of this letter are the ones who are actively trying to divide the Jewish community, not the mainstream Zionists.

We are Jewish leaders who have a range of opinions, perspectives, and approaches to Israel-Palestine.

Yes, some of them (IfNotNow, JVP) want the Jewish state destroyed today, and some (J-Street) are willing to wait until tomorrow.

We are deeply concerned by recent reports and outcries from certain corners of our community which suggest a direct confluence between the growing movement for Palestinian freedom and violent incidents against Jews in our cities.

Their "concern" is that the attacks delegitimize their movement as being based on liberal principles. The letter is an attempt to deflect from that.

We unequivocally condemn attacks on members of our Jewish community. Jewish people deserve to walk safely in the streets of our cities without fear of attack or harassment — just like anyone else. Blaming all Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli government is antisemitic. We are shocked and disgusted by individuals who would use this moment of heightened support for Palestinian rights to advance antisemitic hatred and violence.

It does not take political courage to condemn random attacks on Jews. But after they do, then they go on to minimize and justify them.

We reject efforts to stoke fear and division. Supporters of the Israeli government — including some in the American Jewish establishment — are misrepresenting fringe and widely-condemned acts of individual antisemitism as characteristic of the broader Palestinian human rights movement.

The only people stoking division are these fringe Jews. The entire purpose of this letter is to give the impression that a significant number of Jews consider Israel to be beneath contempt.

Palestinian liberation and dismantling antisemitism are intertwined. For decades, the organizations and activists leading the Palestinian freedom movement have been resoundingly clear that antisemitism has no place in the movement, which is guided by principles of human rights and antiracism. When fringe antisemitic events occur, they are swiftly and roundly condemned by movement leadership.

Ooooh, look at all those hyperlinks! Most of them point to tweets, in English, from people no one heard of, that deny Palestinian antisemitism.

But if you spend time looking at Palestinian Arabic media, the story is very different.

MEMRI and Palestinian Media Watch expose blatant antisemitism in Arabic media all the time, as do I, but that's not the entire story. I have not once seen Palestinian backlash against explicit antisemitism in their media. If one is going to represent antisemitism as a fringe opinion in Palestinian circles, then one would expect that Palestinians would condemn other Palestinians who spout Jew-hatred - and that never happens.

I have never seen a single Palestinian media outlet criticize their first political leader, the Mufti of Jerusalem who collaborated with the Nazis in the Final Solution, as antisemitic. I have never seen a Palestinian respond to the mainstream Palestinian belief, popularized by Yasir Arafat, that Jerusalem is not really holy to Jews and there was never a Temple there. The antisemitic theory that most Israeli Jews are really Khazars and not Jews at all is never even debated. When Hanan Ashrawi's Miftah organization published the blood libel in Arabic, after defending it, it issued an apology, but only in English. Mahmoud Abbas claimed that rabbis want to poison the water of Palestinians. He has blamed Jews for the Holocaust which he claims was vastly exaggerated. The official PLO position is that there is no such thing as a Jewish people.

This is not "fringe antisemitism." This is as mainstream as it gets.

I think that these examples outweigh a few tweets from nobodies. But that's how one does propaganda - highlight the few counterexamples and ignore the overwhelming evidence disproving the thesis. But the "leaders" deny the reality:

Linking the movement at large to antisemitism is baseless and harmful. Especially in this moment, we must condemn this thinly veiled attempt to delegitimize Palestinian leadership and distract from Palestinians experiencing state violence by Israel.

The Leftist Jews don't only deny the undeniable antisemitism that is at the very core of Palestinianism. They then say that it is the Jews who are really the racists!

We commit to standing up against anti-Palestinian racism, so often unreported and unacknowledged in our communities.

First they bend over backwards to deny the existence of Palestinian antisemitism, no matter how explicit and blatant. But you know who the real bigots are? Jews!

....We support our Palestinian siblings’ right to describe their lived experiences without being accused of antisemitism. {W]e refuse to be more outraged by the words Palestinians use than the actual violence they endure.

4300 rockets, decades of terror attacks, Palestinian leaders inciting violence against Jews - they all go unmentioned. No, these As-A-Jews pretend that the only problem with Palestinians is that they sometimes say some bad stuff - which are all completely justified, by the way, because of Israel - and Jews are racists for calling those out. And when Palestinians say that Jews are Nazis, well, that is their "lived experience" and cannot be considered antisemitic.

Similarly, we refuse to allow progressive leaders of color who speak out in support of Palestinian rights to be smeared for their principled stand.

Claiming that Jews are racist is antisemitic itself. Mainstream Jews refute the antisemitism and terror-support from Roger Waters and Betty McCollum as energetically as they refute the lies from Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. To claim that somehow Marc Lamont Hill should not be called out for his antisemitic conspiracy theories because he is Black is the actual racism.

Beyond that, was Kareem Abdul Jabbar being racist when he called out the antisemitism from among Black Lives Matter supporters last year? There is a serious problem with Black antisemitism, whether it is from celebrities or from people attacking random religious Jews in Brooklyn. These "Jewish leaders" deny it, meaning that they condone it.

We know safety comes through solidarity. Antisemitism — like anti-Asian, anti-Black, anti-Palestinian, and Islamophobic attacks and rhetoric — exists in every community, but it is fostered and exploited by rightwing movements in the US and around the world, which gain power by keeping us divided.

Yes, a letter that is supposedly against antisemitism ends up blaming only the Right, and dismisses all other Jew-hatred as "fringe." Which means that this letter ends up tacitly defending all antisemitism that is not rightwing - antisemitism from Arabs, from the Left, from people of color, from Louis Farrakhan - as justified or anomalous, and not something that needs to be specifically called out or fought.