Showing posts with label roger waters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label roger waters. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 03, 2024



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein. Please note that this post contains extremely graphic descriptions.

Roger Waters is an evil antisemite. The word “evil” here is no hyperbole. Some people hate Jews out of habit or ignorance, but Roger Waters is a rabid, virulent Jew-hater, who denies that Jewish babies were burned and Jewish women were raped on October 7. Even though there is ample evidence to the contrary, as Piers Morgan rightly stated during a recent interview with the Pink Floyd co-founder and Jew-hater par excellence.

Roger Waters: Wouldn't it be great to have that conversation at some . . . and wouldn't it be great if we could have an actual real investigation beyond the very good Al Jazeera documentary that we all saw that came out and all the great work that the Gray Zone and Electric Intifada people did in debunking all the filthy disgusting lies that the Israelis told after October the 7th about burning babies and women being raped which were all completely . . .

Piers Morgan (interrupts): Actually women were raped.

Roger Waters: No they weren’t.

Piers Morgan: Yes, they were.

Roger Waters: Well, there's no evidence.

Piers Morgan: It's been must been established by the United Nations.

Roger Waters: You can say anything that you want but there's no evidence.

Piers Morgan: Actually there is extensive evidence. . .

Roger Waters (interrupts): There is no sex assault and rape.

Piers Morgan: Well, there is, okay?

Waters is only annoying. No one takes him seriously anymore, except for his fellow haters. Still, there is much frustration among those of us who are all too well aware that in fact, babies were burned and women were raped. There is more, much more, and we can prove it—Hamas recorded it all with their GoPro cameras.

That being the case, say the naysayers, why haven’t we seen this evidence?

I would answer that there are very good reasons you haven’t seen the evidence of mass gang-rapes and beheadings; the baby shoved into a microwave oven; others decapitated or burned alive. For one thing, there are families to shield from seeing how their loved ones were brutalized. We also have the dignity of the victims to consider. But then there is the issue of the footage being difficult to watch.

A 43-minute video, a compilation of raw footage of the October 7th carnage, was produced by the IDF and shown to foreign journalists. At the request of Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, the film was subsequently shown to Knesset members at a November 1st, closed-door screening.

From the Jerusalem Post:

The Knesset screened the IDF's uncensored October 7 documentary for MKs on Wednesday.

The movie, which is made up of footage taken from killed and captured terrorists, was previously screened for Israeli and foreign journalists to show them the horrors of Hamas's attack.

The MKs who watched the footage on Wednesday were heavily affected by it, with Likud MK Keti Shitrit leaving the auditorium sobbing a few minutes after the documentary began. Fellow Likud MK Tsega Melaku reportedly fainted after the screening and was taken to the Knesset's infirmary.

Likud MK Gilat Distel-Atbaryan said the Knesset's doctor was at the entrance to the auditorium offering MKs relaxation medications before they went in to watch the documentary. Three psychologists were also available afterward to help those who watched the documentary to cope.

"I held it out in the hall for five minutes and then I ran out sobbing and shaking," said Distel-Atbaryan.

Even with the relaxation pill, which she had accepted, she said the footage gave her a panic attack like she had never experienced before.

Fox News’ Harris Faulkner reported on a screening for Members of the House:

Harris Faulkner: And on Capitol Hill, Members of the House visibly shaken after they watched Hamas’ footage of the October 7th atrocities. Many of those terrorists wore body cameras—as you know they were “GoPro-ing it,” as they were slaughtering men, women, and children, entire families, one in front of each one of them and then killing the last one.

It's torture.

Senators are planning a wider viewing tomorrow in their chamber.

(cut to reactions)

US Representative Elise Stefanik: These horrific images of atrocities are etched into my memory forever.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson: You could have heard a pin drop except for the sighs and cries in the room, because the video would make anyone with a soul, cry.

Congressman Mike McCaul: Horrific scene, that I can't get into detail because they are so disgusting. They are a messianic cult, they’re a terror organization, a cult.

Harris Faulkner: The devil is what they are. Incarnate. Michigan Democrat Haley Stevens posted, “I'm gutted. This is barbarism. An attack on all humanity."


California Republican Darrell Issa said, “Watching the footage made me sick to my stomach.

(cut to Harris Faulkner): Heartbreaking and dramatic newly-released video from October 7th shows the bravery of a young off-duty soldier. He was defending civilians inside a rocket shelter as the terrorists tossed in grenades. The soldier, lobbing them right back before they would explode. One after another after another.

Seven times he did that, before he himself was killed by the eighth grenade.

Martha MacCallum, also at Fox, described the experience of watching those 43 minutes:

"Everyone has seen some of these images online, but the unfiltered video is absolutely – it’s so horrific it’s hard to put into words," MacCallum told Dana Perino Monday on "America’s Newsroom."

"There is obviously so much blood, so many charred bodies, it’s very difficult, obviously, to watch this. But the two things that stuck with me, Dana, more than anything is a moment when two young boys, they’re probably [ages] 8 and 10, a grenade is thrown into the room that they are in with their father, and their father is killed and then the terrorist, the Hamas terrorist, pulls the boys out and basically pushes them into their kitchen, and they’re crying, one of them can’t see from the grenade," she continued.

"And the terrorist starts drinking water, or milk or juice out of their refrigerator… these boys are screaming, and one of them says, ‘I want my mother,’ and then he says, ‘Why am I alive?’" MacCallum became emotional when recalling the chilling video of some of the Oct. 7 terror that gripped Israel.

"I will never forget these two boys, I just can’t imagine," she said.

"Beyond the blood and the horror is the emotion of, I don’t know if they survived, but of the survivors, and the other thing that will haunt anyone that hears it or sees it, are the phone calls," MacCallum continued.

"There is a Hamas terrorist who calls his parents… he says, ‘Mom and dad, you would be so proud of me. I’m a hero. I killed 10 Jews with my own hands.’"

MacCallum said the terrorist’s parents were "cheering" on the call.

"It’s horrifying and I think that the reason, obviously, that they’re showing it to people is that they don’t want this part of the story to be forgotten, and it is important to remember what the spark was," she said.

MacCallum is absolutely correct. But no one who is swept up in the antisemitic protests cares about the nature of the “spark” that lit the fire in Gaza. It’s too late for that—they’ve been indoctrinated with the falsehood that Israel, in 1948, by its very creation, was the spark that led to the destruction in Gaza in the wake of the October 7, 2023, massacre.

On the other side of the aisle, Matt Gutman, writing for ABC News, talked about his turn to view the 43-minute film, and how it was for him:

"You won't see rape, there's no rape in this video... We won't show you beheaded babies," a senior Israeli officer said to a small group of journalists, saying such images existed but would not be shown.0000

The journalists were the first to watch a screening of an hour-long reel cobbled together from Hamas helmet cam, mobile phone video, surveillance video, dashboard camera video and victims' livestreams. . .

. . .  Journalists were not allowed to record or use the video presented, and our phones were deposited outside the room.

The video started slowly. Hamas fighters are seen on the back of a pickup, with RPGs spiking out in every direction. You can sense their excitement. The video shows several groups cut through the fence and wave a pickup truck through.

Then it shows three separate angles of motorists in Israel being flagged down, then gunned down -- the AK-47s puffing smoke -- on the road outside the Kfar Aza and Be'eri kibbutzim. Bodies are yanked out of cars.

Then a pair of attackers in Be'eri is shown. For several minutes, we watch as they amble around the kibbutz. They poke into one house and you can hear someone's alarm going off. It's 8 a.m. You can hear them breathing heavily. The one wearing the body camera has a high, soft-spoken voice that seems to belie his mission.

At a playground, he wonders in Arabic, "Where are the kids?" The duo set fire to one house, shoot an encroaching dog, and shoot another old man through a darkened screen. They are parsimonious with their ammunition, and chillingly unhurried as they pick through the tidy vegetable gardens and open the latches of wooden fences.

Then the video gets grisly. Other militants are busy mashing a dying man's face with their boots. Another pair screams "Allahu akbar" as they use a garden hoe to try to decapitate another man.

In another house, a gunman sticks the muzzle of his rifle into a room inhabited by a family. It's a mash of colors. In one, a terrorist is standing on an Israeli man's chest and shoots him point-blank in the face.

Then, the scenes of bloodied bedrooms start to blur. The rooms and the gore are the same -- it's how the bodies are arrayed in death that's different. There are so many children. Some are jam-packed together in a slippery mass of human flesh. Huge blood stains streak the tiles.

So many of the bodies are burnt. It was unclear if this was because they were set fire to or if it was from the grenade blasts. Other videos show Israeli first responders trying to put out the still-smoldering skeletal remains of victims -- with water bottles, as if watering a parched plant.

In another video, a grenade was apparently tossed into one of the bomb shelters that line the roads in southern Israel. It was filled with partygoers who'd left the Supernova music festival. The camera shows a flash of limbs, some dismembered, some still attached to writhing, screaming bodies. A selfie camera shows a young man weeping, while someone croaks hoarsely in the background, "help, help." Hamas then drags survivors out, some by their hair, to trucks, and then batters them some more in the backs of the pickups on the way to Gaza.

Forensic images show bodies burned in cars, on beds, on the streets and in the fields in various states of incineration.

There’s a reason that not everyone should or is capable of watching this footage, or even reading these descriptions. It’s gruesome, gory. Inhuman. Bestial. 

“Screams Before Silence,” available to everyone, and not just the press or the Knesset, was difficult to watch, but the worst images were blurred. Many Israelis and Jews felt the film as painful vindication of what they knew to be all too true. Here, finally, was the proof an angry, hateful world had demanded. At last, here was a way to make them understand. To see the real “spark,” as Martha MacCallum put it.

If only that were true, and perhaps it is true of most people, that on viewing factual evidence, they believe what they see. Not so, however, the evil. People like Roger Waters.

Given proof, the evil will deny and discredit what they see and hear. For the Roger Waters of the world, any proof you show them will be likened to Karine Jean-Pierre’s “cheap fakes.” You could show Waters photos of charred infants, and he will say, “The Israelis did it. False flag operation.”

You could show him the interrogation of an October 7th terrorist describing rape and murder by a father and his sons, and Waters will say, “He’s being coerced by his Israeli interrogators,” or “That’s an actor. His accent is suspicious.”

Martha MacCaullum is, of course, correct that none of this story should be forgotten, the story of the October 7th massacre. But when it comes to evil people like Roger Waters, it’s not a question of remembering, and it’s not even a question really, of hate. Once a person says that what happened on October 7, didn’t happen, he has gone over to the other side. It’s not just a dislike of Jews, but an embrace of evil.

This, in the end, may be the most serious consideration in deciding who should and should not see real, raw October 7 footage. The last thing Israel should do is expose the bodies of my dead sisters to the scorn and ridicule of black-hearted people like Roger Waters. All it does is give him more rope to heap abuse on murdered Jewish women.

He has perfected the art of feigning belief. And he’s got an answer all at the ready, to everything. “Even if there was rape, it was limited . . .” say the Roger Waters of the world.

The evil are immune to proof, because they take glee in the murder and rape of Jewish women and children, and the burning of families alive in their homes. Should we then share our sorrow in order to give evil joy? It’s a point that is hard to absorb, because like Anne Frank—that is, before she was found out and sent to die in a concentration camp under horrible, unbearable conditions—in spite of everything we “still believe that people are really good at heart.”

We want to believe that proof will make a difference. Maybe so. For some people. But don’t bother to show that brutal footage to people like Roger Waters. They’ve gone to the Dark Side, lost for good.



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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, October 02, 2023

It's been a few weeks since I last posted my latest graphics....

















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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, September 27, 2023

The Campaign Against Antisemitism has released a film called "The Dark Side of Roger Waters," featuring interviews with Jews whom he has worked closely with who say that Waters is (at least functionally) an antisemite. 

It is well worth watching. 






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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, June 13, 2023




In April, when the city of Frankfurt planned to cancel their Roger Waters concert for antisemitism, he wrote on Instagram:

ROGER WATERS FRANKFURT SHOW UPDATE
FRANKFURT COUNCIL WERE LEGALLY REQUIRED
TO RESPOND TO ROGER WATERS INTERIM INJUNCTION
BY MIDNIGHT APRIL 14
DID THEY?
NOBODY KNOWS?
WE CAN ONLY GUESS AT
WHAT’S GOING ON IN FRANKFURT?
ARE THEY PLAYING FOR TIME?
WHO KNOWS?

NOT THAT IT MATTERS MUCH!
WE’RE COMING ANYWAY!
BECAUSE HUMAN RIGHTS MATTER!
BECAUSE FREE SPEECH MATTERS!
YES! FRANKFURT CITY COUNCIL
WE REMEMBER KRISTALLNACHT!
LIKE SOPHIE SCHOLL
OUR FATHERS STOOD
WITH THOSE THREE THOUSAND JEWISH MEN
AND TODAY WE STAND WITH THE PALESTINIANS!
WE’RE COMING TO FRANKFURT
ON THE 28TH OF MAY!

LOVE

R.
(Yes, he pretends to understand Kristallnacht better than the Germans do.)

Last week Waters again said that he supports free speech:




Free speech matters! 


This week, for at least the third time, a fan with an Israeli flag was forcibly removed from a Roger Waters show and the flag desecrated.

Former Pink Floyd star Roger Waters, who has lately featured repeatedly in the news for all the wrong reasons, has stated that wearing a mock Nazi uniform in his concerts was actually a "statement against fascism", but that does not explain why a fan who was waving an Israeli flag was manhandled by security and escorted off site.

"There was no intent on my part to provoke anyone," said Gilad Emilio Schenkar, who arrived at the concert with his partner. "And I certainly did not plan on being thrown out."

"Both I and my partner are huge Pink Floyd fans, and this was dubbed a farewell tour, so we just had to buy tickets. Since we've been noticing the antisemitic displays in his concerts lately, we decided to take an Israeli flag with us.

Shortly after displaying the Israeli flag, he was summarily ejected from the venue. "It was brutal. They grabbed and dragged me out. It was quite painful. They took me to a side room and interrogated me. Who I am, what I was doing there and all that. They firmly held my hands while they searched me. They then took the flag, threw it in the garbage and kicked me out. I told them that I thought this was a democracy, so why is a Palestinian flag allowed but an Israeli one isn't?"

Unlike the earlier incidents, in this case there was no written message, no chanting. The man simply displayed the Israeli flag quietly. It is not blocking anyone's view. It is not disruptive in the least.




And that was too much free speech for Roger Waters.

When Waters says "We remember Kristallnacht," it appears to mean that he remembers it from the Nazi point of view. Because his treatment of peaceful protesters at his concerts are right in line with how Nazis dealt with protests.





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

German site Belltower has a review of Roger Waters' concert in Berlin. Writer Nicholas Potter goes into detail about all the implicit and explicit antisemitism he saw during the concert. A video of the concert is online so there are even more offensive parts that Potter didn't mention.

The concert was outrageous, starting from before the concert itself.

German police stopped Jewish protesters of the concert - but allowed BDSers to hand out literature.

Waters began the concert by declaring "A court in Frankfurt has ruled that I am not an anti-Semite." This is a lie, he has been allowed to move forward with the concerts for various bureaucratic reasons, but there was no such ruling.

During the song "The Powers That Be," Waters put up photos of people he claims were murdered because of the crime of their identity. Two of them were Anne Frank, and Shireen Abu Akleh, the latter supposedly executed for the crime of "being Palestinian."

This is Holocaust trivialization and incredibly insulting.


One person listed during the song was not killed for being Jewish or Roma or Black or female. That was Rachel Corrie, "sentenced to death" for the "crime" of "defending Palestinians."



Rogers' hypocrisy is acidly noted: his stage backdrop screams "resist capitalism" while he gets rich by charging hundreds of euros per seat for the concert. 

But the most antisemitic part was an entire dialogue displayed on the backdrop before the aforementioned "The Powers That Be."   

The on-screen dialogue says:

"They must think we're fucking stupid!"
"Who do you mean by they?"
"Them, up there in the penthouse, the fucking oligarchs"
"Ah, you mean....the Powers That Be."
"Yeah, the powers that fucking be."
"Wow! Why are they so brutal?"
"Because they want to crush our resistance and keep ruling the world."




Waters is asserting that there are powerful wealthy people who secretly pull the strings and control the world, specifically attacking anyone who speaks truth to power.

Waters is promoting a conspiracy theory that is virtually identical to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. But like the Soviet-era antisemites, he couches his hate of Jews in terms like "oligarchs"- a euphemism that he uses the way the Soviets used "rootless cosmopolitans" and "bourgeoisie," or how more recent antisemites say "Wall Street bankers" or "globalists." 

Now, a reminder of what Waters said about Sheldon Adelson: “the puppet master who is pulling the strings of Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo..." And he then claimed that  "Sheldon Adelson believes that only Jews – only Jewish people – are completely human. That... everybody else on Earth is there to serve them."

This was an antisemitic trope right out of Nazi literature, and it is what Waters believes - that Jews like Adelson are "the powers that be" who brutally rule the world. 

Which makes it difficult for the audience not to then associate the rich "Wall Street globalists" with the pigs in suits opening up suitcases of cash  during the later song  "Money," evoking the classic antisemitic trope of Jews as pigs. 


His twin hatred of Israel and his hate for "the powers that be" only make sense when you consider what, to his mind, the two have in common: Jews. Israel cannot be considered a worldwide "power that be" unless you also believe that the powers that be are primarily Jewish.

In a later song, "If I Had Been God," Rogers took direct aim at Israel. The graphics started off with supporting Julian Assange and then general slogans using his limited vocabulary, like "Fuck the patriarchy," "Fuck imperialism," "Fuck drones" and "Fuck the war on terror."  Yet inevitably - while wearing a keffiyeh so no one could mistake his real message as being universal - he zeroed yet again in on Israel. The display said, "Fuck bombing people in their homes. Fuck the occupation. You can't have occupation and human rights."


He isn't talking about the Russian occupation of Crimea or parts of Ukraine, which he evidently supports. There is only one "occupation" he goes beyond criticism to real hate.  

If that isn't enough Israel obsession, he also displays  Israel's life-saving security barrier during "Us + Them." 



Us vs. Them is the theme of the show. This rich white male rock star getting paid a fortune to spew half-baked political messages pretends to  be the everyman "Us" while the Jews and Israelis of every race and economic status are the unseen wealthy "Them" that secretly control the world and oppress the disadvantaged for no reason beyond their age-old greed and bigotry. 

This is the profoundly antisemitic message that Roger Waters is giving to millions of his fans. A large number of Germans recognize it for what it is - because they know all about the euphemisms for Jews that incite hate and violence.




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, April 27, 2023

From Ian:

Jeffrey Herf: Israel Is Antiracist, Anti-Colonialist, Anti-Fascist (and Was from the Start)
Nor did support for Israel come only from the Soviet bloc. Liberals and leftists in London, Paris, New York, and Washington heard Jamal Husseini, the representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations, reject a Jewish state in Palestine, because, he said, it would undermine the “racial homogeneity” of the Arab world. Such remarks resonated in a profoundly negative fashion with Americans who had followed the appalling news out of Germany during and after the war. In the Senate, Robert Wagner, a major author of New Deal legislation, extolled the Jewish contribution to the Allied cause. He had already denounced appeasement of the Arabs during the war. With the Allied victory, continuing to appease Arab rejectionism surely made no sense. In the House, Democratic Congressman Emanuel Celler of Brooklyn led efforts to focus attention on Jamal Husseini’s cousin, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, who had entered into a written understanding with Germany and Italy to “solve the question of the Jewish elements, which exist in Palestine and in the other Arab countries . . . as the Jewish question was solved in Germany and Italy.”

The liberal media also took note. Husseini’s collaboration with the Nazis was thoroughly documented in the New York Post as well as in the left-wing publications PM and The Nation, by I.F. Stone, Freda Kirchwey, and the Pulitzer Prize–winning Edgar Mowrer, who urged Husseini’s indictment at Nuremberg. Nevertheless, despite extensive State Department files on Husseini’s collaboration with the Nazis, the American bureaucracy succeeded in resisting efforts to put him on trial and publish its evidence of his Nazi-era activities.

The brief confluence of Soviet and liberal Western sympathies for the nascent Jewish state was brilliantly exploited by Ben-Gurion. He understood better than anyone that it presented a unique moment to bring Israel into existence, with the assent of the world’s two great powers — and that it was an opportunity that would soon close, as indeed it did. During the “anti-cosmopolitan” purges of the early 1950s, Stalin reversed course, spread the lie that Israel was a product of American imperialism, repressed the memory of Soviet support for the Zionist project, and launched a four-decade campaign of vilification against Zionism and Israel. It was one of the most successful propaganda campaigns of the Cold War.

Stalin succeeded in rewriting American history, too. His insistence that it was the Americans and not the Soviets who had wholeheartedly supported the establishment of the State of Israel carried the day. And yet the records of the Departments of State and Defense and the CIA clearly document their emphatic and consequential opposition to the Zionist project.

The differences between the international political landscape of the late 1940s and the one that emerged first in Soviet and then world politics in the 1950s and 1960s need to be reflected in American-Jewish discussions about the establishment of Israel. Contrary to what we’ve heard at the United Nations for decades, in international BDS efforts, and in academic descriptions of Israel, the Zionist project was never a colonialist one.

Just the reverse. The generation that created the state, and its supporters abroad, viewed it as part of the era of liberal and leftist opposition to colonialism, racism, and, of course, antisemitism. The evidence is clear: Whatever faults Israel may have, its origins had nothing to do with American or British imperialism. The argument to the contrary is a conventional unwisdom that has found a home in too much scholarship and journalism of recent decades. Israel’s establishment was not a miracle that eludes historical explanation. It was an episode of enormous moral and military courage for which space was created by canny and hard-headed political leaders in the cause of historical justice — in particular David Ben-Gurion, who seized a fleeting moment, Israel’s moment, to create an enduring achievement.
Daniel Ben-Ami: Why the world has turned against Israel
From Israel's foundation in 1948 through the 1960s, the left generally celebrated Israel as an expression of Jews' right to national self-determination. By the 1990s, however, Western elites started to reject the idea of national self-determination. Yet the denigration of the right to national self-determination undermines the Palestinian cause, too.

Indeed, many of today's anti-Israel activists aren't really interested in Palestinian self-determination. They are mainly concerned with attacking Israel as a symbol of everything they dislike. This leads them to uncritically endorse Hamas, the leading Islamist representative of the Palestinians, and often Islamism more broadly.

Islamism's goal is not national self-determination, for the Palestinians or anyone else. Rather, it wants to create an international Islamic order. The destruction of Israel - and not the creation of a Palestinian state - is seen as central to achieving that objective. Islamists regard Jews as an expression of "cosmic Satanic evil," who should be physically exterminated if Islam is to flourish.

The Palestinian slogan, "from the river to the sea" (meaning from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean), is popular among both Islamists and Western leftists. Islamists often state openly that they want to murder most if not all of the Jews living there. So when they chant "Palestine should be free," they typically mean free of Jews.
Stephen Daisley: Why I love Israel
[T]here are plenty of reasons for Zionists to be gloomy on this, Israel’s 75th birthday, but there is one reason for optimism that outshines them all: Israel is 75. Israel was created; survived an immediate Arab effort to annihilate it; ingathered the survivors of the death camps; settled the land and built kibbutzim; struggled through the lean and lonely years; triumphed in the Six-Day War and reunited Jerusalem; pulled through the Yom Kippur War; endured two intifadas; rescued Beta Israel and welcomed the refuseniks; lost Yamit, lost Rabin, lost Gush Katif; made the desert bloom with fruits and microchips; and made peace with Arab nations. All of that in 75 years and, despite impossible odds, Israel lives yet.

Israel is a hard country and for many a hard country to love. It is flinty but whiny, eager for the world’s love but diplomatically tin-eared, unsentimental but gripped by existential angst. It is a country that adores its army and reveres military discipline but is so hectically informal that you wonder how it made it to 75 days, let alone 75 years. It also boasts the highest density of rude people in the known universe, although I find that strangely endearing. I have never loved Israel more than the time the manager of a Tel Aviv minimart yelled at me for a) not speaking Hebrew, b) being a foreign journalist, and c) coming in to shop when she was trying to watch TV. Only in Israel, the innovation nation, could they invent the inconvenience store.

If Zionism is the theory, Israel is the practice and like all practical translations of idealism it is compromised, haphazard, sometimes unsightly, and occasionally disheartening. But that tension between Zionism and Israel, between ahavat and ha’aretz, is where the great debates take place and where the course of Jewish history can be set or changed. Israeli independence, as it reaches 75 years, is still a miraculous application of a mundane idea: Jewish self-determination.
Israel Independence Day: Celebrating 75 Years with Natan Sharansky
Former Prisoner of Zion Natan Sharansky's personal journey reflects that of the Jewish people, and the centrality of Israel in his life and Jewish identity mirrors the experiences of so many Jews around the world.

Sharansky: "The existence of Israel and, in a way, the existence of the Jewish people is the best demonstration of the importance of these two basic desires of people - to be free and to belong."

"For a thousand years, what were we fighting for? For our right to live freely in accordance with our identity. And then Israel was established. It could not be created as a non-Jewish state and it would never have succeeded in gathering all the Jews if not for its freedom." "There is no other nation or any other state which embodies the strength of this connection. And if you look at history and compare us with Israel 50 years ago, we have much more freedom and much more identity. We have far more of a Jewish and democratic state, so that's the direction we're heading in....Our history and our triumphs are the best proof of how important it is for these two things to go together." "I grew up [in the Soviet Union] having zero connection with anything Jewish except through antisemitism....It was Israel that came in a very powerful way to the center of our life, from the Six-Day War, and it allowed us to discover our identity, that we have a history, we are a people and we have a state. That gave us the strength to fight for our Jewish rights and for a better world."

"When people simply want tikkun olam [repairing the world] without any identity...your life is very shallow. Look at how all these Birthright kids - whose bar mitzvah was the last time they've had a connection to being Jewish - suddenly discover that it's cool and even interesting to live inside history....Suddenly, they have energy, meaning and understanding....In this age, there is no better way to quickly give Jews a brief injection of the importance and meaning of discovering their Jewish identity than coming to Israel."

Sunday, February 26, 2023

My post about Jimmy Carter's antisemitism last week prompts a question: but what about all the wonderful things he has done?

One cannot argue that Carter has not been sincere when he works with Habitat for Humanity, for example. His Middle East work may be influenced by his antisemitism, but he has worked on many other worthy causes. How can those things fit together?

But one can ask the same thing about lots of other antisemites. Alice Walker is a gifted poet and storyteller, but that doesn't make her immune from antisemitic attitudes. Roger Waters was a good songwriter in the 1970s, but that doesn't mean he doesn't harbor antisemitic attitudes. Roald Dahl wrote fantastic children's books, but also hated Jews. 

Then again, we can go back in history and ask the same questions. Voltaire was a groundbreaking philosopher, but he was also a racist and antisemite. Martin Luther was a brilliant theologian and an obsessed Jew-hater. 

If theology can coexist with hate, perhaps that invalidates the theology. But pioneers in theology and philosophy and humanitarianism and progressivism and socialism and science and even medical ethics have been found to be antisemites - and these are all fields that, in theory, if you believe their self-definitions, should be immune to antisemitic thought.

Obviously, theory is very different from practice.

Some people say that antisemitism is a conspiracy theory. Or that it relegated to the Right. Or that is is a form of bigotry that is part of a larger group of discriminations against race or sexual preference or age. 

Yet it fits in no clear category. It morphs into new forms every few decades. 

It is a virus with new strains coming out all the time. 

Viruses have only one imperative - survive by adaptation. Right now the most virulent strain of antisemitism spreads by pretending to be outraged at how Jews act in Israel - and it cloaks itself by insisting that this current hate of Jews in Israel has nothing in common with the previous instances, despite the obvious parallels.  

This is hardly the first time antisemitism pretended to be the opposite. In 1873, the Southern Baptist Convention issued a resolution on antisemitism that pretends to be philosemitic - but ends up wishing that all Jews should convert to Christianity.

Is this any different than modern antisemites who wish just as fervently that the Jewish state be destroyed, that Jews should live as second class citizens in a Muslim majority state and most of them should be ethnically cleansed? Is the Southern Baptist desire that all Jews see the light different from those who want all Jews to be "good Jews" who shed all nationalism and all attachment to the land of their ancestors? 

And both of them claim to be doing it because they care so much about Jews. 

The other strains of the antisemitic virus didn't die out. The Middle Ages strain is still there, the Christian strain still thrives in many places, the Nazi strain stays stubbornly alive and spreading. Social media has been a huge boon to the virus, allowing it to spread at the speed of light. People can work very hard for years to come up with a way to minimize the threat of one strain but another one can emerge and propagate in days. 

Today, we hear people arguing against accusations of antisemitism. How can Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch be antisemitic when their entire organizations are based on human rights? How can  Jeremy Corbyn be antisemitic when he is an avowed anti-racist?

The virus doesn't care what philosophy you have. Whatever you hate most in life can be linked to Jews, and usually is. 

Instead of reflecting on the history of antisemitism that shows that anyone can catch the virus of antisemitism, many pretend that they are immune. Worse, they pretend that their progressivism or humanitarianism or anti-racism inoculates them from antisemitism - that they aren't and cannot be antisemitic because their worldview does not allow it. 

On the contrary, the virus can grow in any medium. The anti-racists become antisemites by accusing Jews/Israelis of racism. The humanitarians become antisemites by accusing Jews of inhumanity. The very ideas that people believe make them immune to infection are the ones that spread it.

Just like before, they justify their hate as being based on facts, unlike all of their predecessors. even though those predecessors said the exact same thing. They write their articles and posts and tweets that show the exact same kind of irrational, obsessive hate that previous centuries of antisemites had. 

As we know from recent experience, viruses are hard to eradicate. We still need to try. But we need to understand that the virus does not avoid anyone because of their belief system. On the contrary, it often uses that very belief system as a means of spreading further. 

Beware of anyone who says they cannot be antisemitic because of their worldview. Instead, teach them about the history of antisemitism, and show that they have very prominent Jew-hating forebears, who were the world's leaders in theology, the arts, philosophy, science and the Enlightenment. 




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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, November 02, 2022

From Ian:

The Stories She Never Told
My mother loved to talk politics, real estate, and cooking. She’d happily offer intelligent insights on nearly any subject except one: her own life. With stops in prewar Hungary, Auschwitz, the Sorbonne, Mexico, and finally Manhattan, my mother’s life was extraordinary, but she kept it to herself. I hated that, but I knew why. So tender-hearted that news of terrorist attacks or natural disasters brought her to tears, she needed to distance herself from the pain of her own past. Still, as her child, I needed to understand her and the world that created her.

As a teenager and young adult, I plied her with questions, but I was only partly successful. I uncovered the scaffolding of her past but not its interiority. My mother is gone now, but my curiosity remains. I still search for her by immersing myself in stories of prewar Hungarian Jewry. Surprisingly, a new book about a Sephardic Holocaust survivor has opened a window into my mother’s inner life.

One Hundred Saturdays: Stella Levi and the Search for a Lost World, a Natan Award winner, is a Tuesdays with Morrie-style recollection of journalist Michael Frank’s conversations with nonagenarian Stella Levi, who grew up on the island of Rhodes. My mother was born thousands of miles and a universe away in the Romanian city of Satu Mare, the small Romanian city better known by its Yiddish name Satmar—the birthplace of the Satmar Hasidic sect—yet their lives seem to mirror each other.

They were born within two years of each other in the mid-1920s; both grew up in religiously observant but non-Hasidic families (prewar Satmar was home to many non-Hasidic Jews), and both belonged to the last generation of Jews to feel deeply rooted in their European birthplaces. My mother’s forebears had lived in or around Satmar for more than two centuries. Levi’s family had been part of the Juderia, Rhodes’ Jewish district, since the Spanish Inquisition. Both grew up in the embrace of aunts, uncles, and cousins in a world that moved to the eternal rhythms of the Jewish calendar.

Living within a 5-mile radius in Manhattan, both Levi and my mother viewed themselves as consummately modern women, yet both were intensely nostalgic for their childhood homes. Levi spoke of “a place where old women sat outside and told stories … took dishes to be baked in the communal oven … and where a granddaughter learned to prepare her grandmother’s sweet and savory dishes.” Unable to access the right words, my mother expressed her longing to recreate the flavors of her childhood and by carrying a crumpled photograph of her doomed aunts and cousins inside of her wallet.
Daniel Greenfield: The Holocaust Is Not Your Metaphor
"A production of Romeo and Juliet for non-binary performers"

This is what happens when the Holocaust becomes universalized, a free-floating metaphor and finally woke kitsch.

Yes, that’s the problem there.

This production, which has now been canceled, comes on the heels of things like the various Anne Frank revisions, including the Latino/ICE one. The underlying problem though is the use of the Holocaust and Hitler as a metaphor for everything bad.

The Holocaust is not a lens. It’s certainly not a lens for whatever woke nonsense is trying to appropriate Jewish history to make claims about the “rise of fascism” today.

There, is to a much lesser degree, similar objections to Netfix’s Dahmer movie which distorted and rewrote the history of the murders to score political points.

Treating real events, especially the murder of people, as a metaphor reduces the dead to the means of a political end while robbing them of their voice, their history and their identity.

The Holocaust is not slavery, slavery is not the Holocaust, whatever some sexual minority is upset by is not either one, and real events are not interchangeable. Neither are real people.
The Balfour bogeyman
In the eyes of the Palestinian Authority, one historical act is attributed with all future Palestinian suffering. That act is the Balfour Declaration, issued today, Nov. 2, in 1917. The declaration was the first contemporary, internationally recognized expression of the right of the Jewish people to establish a national homeland in the geographical area known as “Palestine”.

“His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

As exposed by Palestinian Media Watch, the PA Ministry of Information called the Balfour declaration: “The greatest crime in the history of mankind,” and the official PA daily called it “The crime of the century.”

PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, who also serves as the PA’s Supreme Shari’ah Judge recently claimed that the Balfour declaration violated international law:
“Israel’s very existence contradicts international law. On what right do you bring people who have no connection to this land and plant them here and tell them: This is your national home? Who gave Britain a right to give a national home? Was Palestine the land of [former British Foreign Secretary Arthur] Balfour’s father?”

[Facebook page of the Fatah Commission of Information and Culture, Oct. 10, 2022]


So how then, can one answer the PA’s claim?

While the Balfour Declaration was an important statement of policy on the part of the UK government, it certainly did not have the ability to bring about the creation of the Jewish state without wide international consensus.

Historically, the declaration was issued as part of a new regional order that was born out of World War I and the demise of the Ottoman Empire, which, inter alia, had controlled most of the Middle East for centuries. As part of the new order, new borders were drawn and countries were, for the first time, carved out.

In the Ottoman Empire, “Palestine” as the separate national country and identity, as the PA claims, never existed. Rather, the region was merely just another region of the empire with no specific definition.


Abbas’ advisor: Israel’s existence contradicts international law

Thursday, October 13, 2022

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: How Ken Burns Misuses the Holocaust
Yet contrary to the film’s conclusion, the Holocaust tells us little or nothing about what to do about America’s contemporary immigration debates or the current American problem with Jew-hatred. Any attempt to frame the Holocaust as a representative moment in the history of human intolerance is a moral calamity. Burns demonstrated this in a CNN interview to promote the film. He spoke of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s decision to ship illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard—whose affluent liberal residents advocate open borders but prefer to have border communities deal with the humanitarian crisis this has engendered—as if it deserved to be mentioned in the same conversation as the subject of his documentary.

That Burns, a longtime supporter of the Democrats and liberal causes, would be guilty of playing along with such an inappropriate Holocaust analogy demonstrates that the filmmaker’s efforts to frame the question of American guilt in this context should be viewed with suspicion. The same is true of his attempt to claim that current political opponents of open borders—such as Trump, DeSantis, and their supporters—are figures who conjure up the threats that America and the Jews faced in the past.

Anti-Semitism isn’t merely a collection of hateful sentiments; it’s a political organizing principle that has attached itself to a variety of different ideologies, from Nazism to Communism to Islamism. The answer to such threats isn’t open borders for America, amnesty for illegal immigrants, or even ensuring that more people read The Diary of Anne Frank. The only way to deter another genocide of the Jews is Jewish empowerment and our ability to defend ourselves, something we would gain only after the war with the creation of the State of Israel.

Some who attempt to use the Holocaust as an exhibit in contemporary immigration-law debates are actually indifferent to the security of Israel and, indeed, support appeasement of an Iran that seeks nuclear weapons to possibly perpetrate another Holocaust. This makes it hard to take them seriously when they lecture Americans about the murder of 6 million Jews in the past century.

The Holocaust was a chapter of history marked by American failure. But whatever one may think about Franklin Roosevelt and his indifference to Hitler’s victims, the responsibility for the murder of 6 million Jews still belongs to the Nazis and their collaborators. It was a crime the United States may not have had the power to deter, but one this nation could have done more to stop had its political leadership been willing to do so. This is a disturbing fact for many who lionize Roosevelt. But Burns and others who clearly wish to apply the lessons from this failure to complicated 21st-century political debates, while ignoring real-time genocides or potent threats to the security of millions of living Jews, shouldn’t pretend they have learned anything from the past or have anything to teach us about it.
Jonathan Tobin: How Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, Berkeley and Wellesley mainstream anti-Semitism
At what point does a rise in anti-Semitism stop being viewed merely as a series of isolated, troubling occurrences and start being treated like an emergency? When mass- media programs mainstream hatemongers who target and seek to delegitimize Jews? When elite academic institutions behave as though it’s acceptable conduct? When Jews are attacked in the streets?

The ongoing epidemic of violence against Jews in New York City is mostly ignored, both by the media and much of the organized Jewish world. This is not only because the victims are Orthodox Jews who are easy to pick out. They’re also not the sort of people with whom opinion leaders, and even most American Jews, identify or associate.

But the mainstreaming of anti-Semitic attitudes on major campuses around the United States is harder to dismiss. Even more difficult to ignore are the widely disseminated programs that embrace open anti-Semites as legitimate voices worth considering.

Indeed, what is unfolding, inch by inch, is the normalization of anti-Semitism in the U.S. in a manner unprecedented in the post-Holocaust era. Nor is it confined to a specific segment of society or particular end of the political spectrum.

Indeed, as the events of the past week illustrate, Jew-hatred is thriving on both the left and the right. Individually, each of these instances—the legitimization of the BDS movement and targeting of Jewish institutions at Boston’s Wellesley College; the establishment of a Jew-free zone by student organizations at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law; the appearance of BDS advocate Roger Waters on the Joe Rogan podcast; and the featuring of the rapper formerly known as Kanye West on the Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight”—can be unpacked, denounced or rationalized and then forgotten, before the public’s attention is diverted to new controversies.

Taken together, they represent a trend that ought to set off alarms about the way insidious ideas that normalize hatred for Jews and Israel are gaining a foothold in mainstream forums. More than that, the growing tolerance for them and lack of consequences for those responsible bode ill not just for Jews, but for the future of civil society.
Roger Waters: Israeli policy is the mass murder of Palestinians
Roger Waters, British rock musician and founding member of band Pink Floyd has expressed his strong opinions about the relationship between Israel and Hamas in a recent appearance on commentator Joe Rogan's popular podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience.

"The Israelis seem now to have a policy of ... murdering so many of them that they are absolutely trying to create another intifada. So they can make it an armed conflict...so they can just kill them all," he said, adding that Israel is provoking the Palestinians into an armed conflict in order to manufacture an excuse to destroy them.

Waters started out his statements by reminding Rogan that Hamas is actually "the democratically elected government of Gaza." He quickly added that "there is an armed wing and whatever..." and then began speaking about occupation and the Geneva convention.

Rogan pressed him, asking whether or not the elections in Gaza were corrupt. Waters responded saying, "I have no idea, I wasn't there...Has there been an election since then? I don't know. ...I can't really answer that question because I'm not there and I don't know."

Touching on the subject of rockets fired into Israel, Waters asserted that rockets fired from Gaza "almost never do any damage because they're very ineffectual."

Friday, October 07, 2022

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.

Tuesday, October 04, 2022




Rolling Stone has an interview with Roger Waters by an investigative journalist who actually knows his stuff - and he makes Waters look like an idiot.

The interviewer, James Ball, concludes:

Waters’ live show repeatedly flashes up one particular message that clearly compels him: “Control the narrative, rule the world.” 

I leave the interview thinking it’s almost the opposite: Waters is an example of how we can construct our own narrative and twist the world to fit in, with no amount of mainstream media, propaganda, or even real-world facts and evidence able to let any light in. It leads us to a nihilistic place, where we are only able to feel compassion for victims that fit our personal narrative, minimising or even actively denying the suffering of others.  
We've already shown how Roger Waters is a real antsemite - not just an "anti-Zionist" - because he applied neo-Nazi, fake Talmud translation conspiracy theories about Jews to Sheldon Adelson.

The text of the interview shows that Waters also adheres to the antisemitic Khazar myth.

 Ball: Yes, but isn't settler quite offensive when there are Jewish people who have lived there for two millennia? 

Waters: No, it's not. Those people are not from there.They are not the descendants of indigenous people who've ever lived there. They're all from northern Europe or America or somewhere else.
As with his Adelson ideas, this is muddled in his brain from the original, but the sources for both the Adelson quote and this one are quite clear - Roger Waters reads antisemitic literature and assimilates it into his worldview. He even goes beyond it, saying that even Sephardic Jews are not from the Middle East.

Yes, saying that all Jews are lying about their own origins to steal land from others is antisemitism. By any definition.



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, September 01, 2022

Israel-hater and antisemite Roger Waters is in the midst of a North American tour. The Times of Israel writes about the concert and the protesters outside his New York show on Tuesday.

Waters puts political messages on a massive screen, and among them are messages about how awful "occupation" is.




Waters became a spokesperson for BDS in 2011, so it is safe to say that he held these opinions for over a decade.

Moreover, Waters has said that any artists performing in Israel endorse the Israeli government. 

If all that is true, then how come he performed Pink Floyd's "The Wall" in 2013 - in Istanbul, Turkey? You know, the country that occupies part of Cyprus?

Waters, in his own words, must endorse the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus. 

Which means Roger Waters, human rights activist, endorses occupation. 

And indeed he does. After all, Roger Waters has said that he supports Russia in the current war in Ukraine, which is a war of occupation, and he supports Russia's occupation of Crimea. 

How to reconcile these two opinions about occupation?

When he says "FUCK OCCUPATION," he must mean "...but only if it can be blamed on Jews. Otherwise, carry on!"







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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

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