Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: z can't make this stuff up

Showing posts with label z can't make this stuff up. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 20, 2023

Palestinian militants in Ein al-Hilweh break into houses and steal - bras

Lebanon24 reports that a man was interviewed by the new youth oriented Blinx network in the Lebanese camp Ein al-Hilweh.

The man, who didn't want his name used, spoke about how terrorists there stole everything from his house - even bras. He asked, "Why do they need bras?"

A Palestinian next to him then explained why Lebanese terrorists like bras.

"Bras are very important for the gunman... In Lebanon, during the civil war between 1975 and 1990, a civilian would cross the front lines and try to avoid being shot by a sniper. He would carry a bra and wave it over his head because it is like a transit card.

“My father used to tell us this and we used to laugh about it, but through many stories about the same subject I am now certain that it was true. That's why the gunman, if he wanted to cross from one place to another without a weapon, could carry this bra so that the snipers in the camp would think that he was a civilian. It's actually very funny."

The victim also said that his wife's jilbabs (long loose fitting robes that cover the entire body) were stolen as well, and he speculates that the Islamist terrorists use them to dress up as women so they would not be stopped and searched.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

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!

How to become a post-doctoral fellow at Columbia? Write 341 pages of anti-Israel gibberish!

Columbia University's Center for Palestine Studies welcomes its newest post doctoral fellow!

Ali H. Musleh will be working on his first book project, To What Abyss Does This Robot Take the Earth? Using his dual background in design and political theory, he focuses on Israel's design, development and deployment of drones, autonomous weapons and artificial intelligence, treating them as technological processes of managing and differentiating forms of life.

Apparently, this book is a version of Musleh's 341-page PhD dissertation, with the same title. Here's the abstract:

How do weapons make the colonial worlds that Palestinians and Jewish-Israelis inhabit? My dissertation attends to this question starting from an experience shared by Palestinians: that the majority of us have never encountered an Israeli settler, whether in uniform or out of uniform, who is not attached to a weapon, be it an assault rifle, a fighter jet, or a tank, etc. Taking this experience as a philosophical provocation, I subject the settler colony to a form of insurgent study exercised everyday by Palestinians that confronts the settler as contingent and transitory human-weapon ensembles. These studies are bodying and worlding. They reveal and unravel the spatialized embodiments, sensations, affective terrains, orientations and regimes of truth that weapons generate as lived world(s) of experience. In doing so, Palestinians exercise a fleshy sociality that constantly puts into question the self-evidence of the settler and the settler state. Thinking with Palestinians and alongside peoples of struggle, my dissertation is a performance in reverse engineering that moves from micrological sites, scenes and bodies of war, to macro formations of sovereignty. My itinerary focuses primarily on encounters with remote and robotic weaponry as technologies of engineering spatial and procedural distance between the settler and weapon. My task has been to show how that distance became the abyssal site from which forms of war, apartheid, and erasure emerge that consign settlers to martial automatisms that materialize and mediate their existence. The result is a work that dissects settler colonialism as a form of life inseparable from weapon power, as I also consider Palestinian rehearsals of decolonial life in the robotic age of war.

This abstract is a combination of gobbledygook, lies, obfuscation and antisemitism.

Gazans indeed don't have much of a chance to see Israelis., settlers or otherwise, since no Israelis live there. But it is really true that West Bank Palestinians never see "settlers" without weapons? The thousands of Palestinians that visit Rami Levy supermarkets shop alongside Israeli civilians. Well over 100,000 Palestinians work in Israel, and tens of thousands more work in settlements - and most "settlers" do not walk around their towns toting assault rifles. Those "settlers" who roam the Temple Mount, where they are seen by thousands more, don't carry weapons. Most Jews at the Mamilla Mall in Jerusalem, where many Palestinians shop, don't carry weapons. His assertion that most Palestinians never see Jews without weapons is a fabrication.

And then there are Israelis who visit Palestinian towns on their own to go shopping or get their cars repaired. Like Shay Silas Nigreker and his son Aviad Nir who went shopping in Huwara and were murdered two weeks ago because they were Israeli Jews. They weren't "attached to weapons," but they were murdered by Palestinian weapons.

So Musleh's "philosophical provocation" that is the very basis of his paper and book is bullshit to begin with. But what thesis advisor has the knowledge or guts to dispute the falsehood that underpins the text?

To Musleh, all Jewish Israelis are "settlers." After all, how would Palestinians know that Israelis in fighter jets or tanks are settlers or not? And in the first sentence he considers all Israeli Arabs to be "Palestinian" which means that when he says "settlers," he really means "Jews" from either side of the Green Line. Further proof from a similar article he wrote in Politics Today, where he said, "Weeks, months, if not years can go by without an inhabitant of Gaza encountering a settler, but they are more likely to encounter a faceless machine in their day to day life."

To Musleh, every Jew is an implant, who has no business living in the land of their forefathers. If that isn't antisemitic, what is?

Beyond that, to Musleh, every Jew in Israel is not a human being. They are hybrids of humans and weapons. They are essentially cyborgs. The entire paper is meant to dehumanize every Jew who lives in the region.

Musleh tries to sound intelligent by using words that either don't exist or in contexts that make no sense. There is no such words as "bodying" and "worlding." And does his treatise on Israeli evil really deal with "micrological sites"?

Musleh himself characterizes the paper not as reflective of objective truth but as "a form of insurgent study" as well as "a performance" in finding links that simply do not exist in real life, which he falsely calls "reverse engineering" to make it sound quasi-scientific.

Another form of antisemitism we see in this abstract is that it accepts libels against Israel that are not at all universally accepted, and that are provably false, as truisms. "Settler colonialism" and "apartheid" are routinely used in academia and much of the media as fact, but they aren't. By pretending that these lies are truth, the paper is nothing more than naked propaganda.

Yet no one in Columbia University is the least bit bothered by these issues. After all, the social sciences are filled with self-serving propagandistic garbage like this, where the "feelings" of the writer are considered more factual than actual facts.

To Columbia, this self-serving propaganda filled with lies and Jew-hatred are a feature, not a bug.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The UN's latest anti-Israel legal argument is predicated on lies

On Thursday, the UN published a document titled, "Study on the Legality of the Israeli Occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Including East Jerusalem."

It is 107 pages of tendentious and one-sided arguments all intended to declare Israeli actions since 1967 to be illegal. There are counterarguments to each of their arguments - but they don't let the readers know that.

However, the entire basis of the paper is bogus. Turn to page 18, which declares its "methodology.":

The study takes it as a starting point that the Palestinian territory – i.e., the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip – was occupied by Israel in 1967, in the course of an international armed conflict.

Setting aside Gaza for now, the question is - when did that territory become "Palestinian?"

Looking at newspaper articles in the years after the Six Day War, the West Bank was usually described as "occupied Jordan."

Here are two articles from 1972, the first about how militant Arabs threatened fellow Arabs running for office in the first elections in the West Bank after the war:

When, exactly, did the territory turn from "occupied Jordan" into "occupied Palestinian territory"?

It never happened. The world just went along with Palestinian propaganda and eventually believed it.

The question gets starker when we realize that Jordan's annexation of the West Bank in 1949 was illegal, and almost no nations recognized it. It was never legally Jordanian territory.

So the West Bank was never "occupied Jordan." It was part of the British Mandate of Palestine, the same mandate that promised the land to be the Jewish state. Not a Palestinian homeland - only a Jewish homeland.

This is international law, that has never been abrogated. Israel has a superior legal right to Judea and Samaria than anyone else. Israel's characterization of the territory as "disputed" was probably a mistake - it should have always claimed it all. But "disputed" is accurate, "occupied" is not.

Which is why the Mandate is never mentioned, and the "methodology" deliberately omits it, pretending that the territory is "occupied Palestinian territory" without ever saying when, legally, it became "Palestinian."

The paper spends a lot of time on the argument that the Mandate system provided a "sacred trust" for the rights of self-determination of the peoples in the territories. But as the Palestine Mandate document above shows, only the Jewish people were given that right under the Palestine Mandate. And the reason is as simple as it is unpalatable to the UN's legal "experts" - in 1920, no one considered that there existed an Arab "Palestinian people." The Arabs of Palestine who were speaking of nationalism wanted to become part of Syria, their interest in an independent state only arose (with very few exceptions) after the West drew the borders of British Mandate Palestine and unity with Syria was no longer an option.

To apply the League of Nations Mandate language to apply to the self determination of a people who didn't exist as a people at the time - who didn't even consider themselves a people - is the height of deception.

The next part of the "methodology" is even more absurd:n"The study also takes it as a starting point that Israel continues to occupy the Gaza Strip."

Before Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, no legal expert had ever said that an occupation is possible without soldiers physically on the ground controlling the territory.

For example, see the definition in the 1972 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms:

Military occupiers are obligated, under international law, to set up a court system, to ensure that cities are governed and continue to run, to set up an entire bureaucracy to run the territory. That is impossible without "boots on the ground," the informal definition of occupation for over a hundred years.

Israel does not control Gaza. It cannot stop rockets or mortars, weapons manufacturing or military exercises. Israel cannot create a military court system - which is required under the rules of occupation. It cannot arrest anyone.

The second sentence makes it quite clear that Area A in the West Bank is not "occupied" even if one accepts that somehow the West Bank is "Palestinian territory."

As with all other legal analyses when it comes to Israel, this paper was intended from the outset to determine that Israel's actions and "occupation" are illegal. It set the ground rules to ensure that pesky arguments like the League of Nations Mandate or the accepted definitions of occupation pre-2005 not even be brought up. (When JFK blockaded Cuba, did the US "occupy" Cuba?)

This isn't international law. It is twisting international law against only one state - coincidentally, the only Jewish state.

And that is only the beginning of the problems with this document. But since the methodology itself is based on lies, that ensures that the rest of the document built on this foundation of lies is invalid as well.

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!

A Lebanese SWAT team shows their skills confiscating Israeli kitchen towels! (video)

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Lebanon’s National Security Ministry confiscated Israeli goods from store shelves around the country, its National Security Ministry announced, according to Lebanese media reports on Tuesday.

It is unknown how the Israeli goods ended up in commercial centers in Lebanon, as the two countries do not have diplomatic relations and do not engage in trade.

According to the reports, the Lebanese ministry stated that “relevant parties had been summoned for questioning.”

According to Ynet, among the Israeli goods confiscated in Lebanon were kitchen towels from the Netanya-based home goods company, Golf & Co. as well as sealing strips from PROMAX.

This doesn't come close to capturing the absurdity of Lebanon's zealousness at enforcing Article 285 of the Lebanese penal code which prohibits trade with an enemy state.

Lebanese State Security released this video dramatizing how their strangely masked employees received the information of the dangerous goods, then enter a vehicle while heavily armed, where they race down the streets in order to confiscate the contraband that is, shudder, "MADE IN ISRAEL."

It is a clown show, yet they are taking this all so seriously.

The entire country is going to hell, but at least Lebanese citizens can sleep at night knowing that their security forces are protecting them from Zionist kitchen towels.

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!

A cringy woke apology for complaining about Hezbollah T-shirt at a gay pride event

Two weeks ago, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that anyone who engaged in a homosexual act should be killed.

A week later, at the Berlin Whole LGBTQ festival, a person was seen wearing a Hezbollah T-shirt on the stage, which upset a Lebanese citizen at the event, who complained about seeing someone wear a symbol of oppression to gays.

He then apologized for complaining!

This apology is truly remarkable.

The hezbollah t-shirt on beach stage

@Chris on #general -

@Chris on July 31, 2023:

To the person who was wearing a Hezbollah t shirt on the beach stage, I'm sorry if my complaint caused you upset. I unfortunately felt triggered by the t-shirt because the party leader recently encouraged the killing of queer people. I understand that wearing the t-shirt was used as a trendy fuck you to the hypocrisy of what is called terrorist vs what is not, and I understand being told that it's not ok to wear it by a white man can be triggering - however, given that whole is about celebrating queerness, I feel that perhaps there are other symbols to wear that are less complicated politically and more inclusive to the different experiences of people. I'm sorry again that it happened this way, I hope you are ok now. To the security people who listened to me and talked to the person, thank you. I wish you let me speak to him directly, it would have been validating and perhaps he would have understood the nuances of my views given that I'm Lebanese myself, but I also understand you wanted to make sure we are both heard.

Needless to say, we don't have any similar apology from the Hezbollah T-shirt person.

A week earlier, at a different Berlin gay festival, someone was seen wearing a gay version of a Lion's Den terrorist group T-shirt, with pink submachine guns.

At these same demonstrations, anti-Israel posters and rhetoric are commonplace.

There must be a name of the psychosis where one loudly supports those who would murder them and opposes those who fight for their rights.

We could apply that same terminology to the small set of "progressive" Jews as well who avidly support those who want to destroy Jews.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The world sends a message: Israel should just accept Jews being murdered

From Times of Israel:

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres on Thursday said Israel used excessive force in the counter-terror operation in Jenin earlier this week and blamed Israel for the violence in the West Bank city.

During a press briefing at UN Headquarters in New York City, Guterres said he had been “deeply disturbed” by news of the Jenin operation and “strongly condemns all acts of violence against civilians.”

Asked if his condemnation applied to both sides of the conflict, Guterres said, “It applies to all use of excessive force and obviously in this situation there was an excessive force used by Israeli forces.”

“Israeli airstrikes and ground operations in a crowded refugee camp were the worst violence in the West Bank in many years, with a significant impact on civilians,” Guterres said, blaming Israel for disruptions to water and electricity services, and blocking people from accessing medical care, a charge that Israel denied.

“I once again call on Israel to abide by its obligations under international law, including the duty to exercise restraint and use only proportional force,” Guterres said. “The use of airstrikes is inconsistent with the conduct of law enforcement operations.”

“I understand Israel’s legitimate concerns with its security but escalation is not the answer,” he added. “It simply bolsters radicalization and leads to a deepening cycle of violence and bloodshed.”

The article goes on to quote other UN officials also claiming that the Jenin operation was excessive and disproportionate.

Guterres is the least anti-Israel UN Secretary General in many decades. But his statement reveals the thinking of much of the Western world, even from Israel's putative allies. When they frame their criticisms in terms of proportionality, they are saying that Israel should simply accept that terrorists will kill Jews every few days, and only use token methods to try to stop them.

Jenin's camp had turned into a locus for terror. The PA didn't do anything to stop that from happening. The Jenin Brigades have been building a Gaza-style military center in the midst of a civilian area - just like Gaza. The longer Israel would wait, the more difficult the inevitable counter-terror operation would become, and the more it would affect civilians.

The IDF managed to destroy critical terror infrastructure, something that could not easily be done with only ground troops. The operation took months to plan and clearly the Israeli intelligence on targeting crucial infrastructure was excellent. The additional force and airpower used reduced the number of casualties compared to what a ground-only operation would have done. And every single Palestinian killed was an armed militant - a valid military target.

In other words, this operation was successful by every metric, including proportionality. And while the IDF cannot stop all "lone wolf" operations, it can stop much bigger attacks that were being planned.

But Guterres and much of the Western world, outside of military analysts, simply do not understand the facts. They don't see that the increased firepower is necessary because of the increased capabilities of the terrorists. And they cling to how they pretend things are, not the reality on the ground.

Which brings up another point from another UN official:

On Tuesday, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk decried the cycle of violence in Israel and the West Bank... Turk said the scale of the Jenin operation, including the use of repeated airstrikes, along with the destruction of property, raised serious issues regarding international human rights norms and standards.

Some of the methods and weapons used “are more generally associated with the conduct of hostilities in armed conflict, rather than law enforcement,” he said.

“The use of airstrikes is inconsistent with rules applicable to the conduct of law enforcement operations. In a context of occupation, the deaths resulting from such airstrikes may also amount to willful killings,” he said.

Turk is saying that as an occupier, Israel is only legally allowed to do "law enforcement" and not treat this as an armed conflict.

He has it exactly backwards. Israel doesn't occupy Jenin - if it did, then the terrorists there would never have been able to build such an extensive infrastructure. Jenin is not under Israeli control, and it is clearly not under Palestinian Authority control - it is under Iranian control by proxy. The terrorists are not "criminals." Criminals don't walk around openly with M-16s.

If Israel would wait longer, Jenin would become another Gaza, and the steps necessary to protect Israeli lives would be much harsher. If these UN officials really cared about human rights, they would want terror groups combatted earlier rather than wait until it is too late.

Israel's actions are the only way to minimize civilian casualties (outside of really re-occupying much of Area A.) People whose very jobs are to uphold human rights should understand these basic facts - and when they are so ignorant of the realities on the ground, they shouldn't say anything until they learn the entire story.

(That being said, Israel once again did not do a good job explaining this operation.)

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!

BBC's blood libel came straight from a recent antisemitic Haaretz op-ed

The BBC has weakly apologized for presenter Anjana Gadgil saying, as a fact, that “Israeli forces are happy to kill children” during her interview with former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett.

In a statement, the BBC said, “While this was a legitimate subject to examine in the interview, we apologise that the language used in this line of questioning was not phrased well and was inappropriate.”

But how could Gadgil have even thought that Israelis are such monsters to begin with?

The answer is almost certainly - Haaretz.

A review of news articles from the past 20 years finds that it is very rare for even the most extreme haters of Israel to accuse Israelis of happiness at killing children.

During the 2009 Gaza war, in The Guardian, a resident of Gaza writes in an op-ed, "A short message to the pilots in the Israeli F-16s: does it make you feel happy to kill Palestinian children and women? Do you feel it's your duty? Killing every child and woman, man and teenager in Gaza? I don't know what exactly you feel, what exactly you think, but please think of your mother and sister, your son and daughter." But even for a Gaza resident seeing airstrikes, the idea that Israel wants to kill children was not stated as a flat fact.

A satirical Israeli filmmaker in 2012 prompted children visiting a war museum to say that killing Arabs makes them happy, which the Electronic Intifada promoted as if they don't understand how Borat-style filmmakers can elicit the responses they want from people eager to please an interviewer.

But outside of those contrived cases from years ago, I cannot find even the most biased news source making such a libelous claim that killing children makes Israelis happy.

Until this two months ago.

That's when Haaretz published an op-ed by an execrable person named Yossi Klein who wrote, "Killing children is designed to cause pain, to strike the most sensitive place of all. It isn’t designed to stop terrorism; it’s designed to deter the terrorists and make us happy."

The Haaretz headline that everyone saw, since changed, was "Killing children brings Israelis together."

At the time I argued that this was the most antisemitic article ever published. Hitler never claimed Jews relish killing children. Medieval Christians and later Muslims said that the Jews murder gentile children for religious reasons, not out of sheer pleasure.

Only Haaretz made that claim.

Western news professionals rely heavily on Haaretz to inform themselves of the alleged Israeli zeitgeist. It cannot be a coincidence that Gadgil's libelous accusation comes on the heels of Klein's own blood libel. No one would have dared to say something so outlandishly false unless they felt that it was backed up by facts - and Haaretz gave the antisemites of the world the ammunition they need to go even beyond the classic blood libel accusation.

When the Haaretz article was published, I wrote that Klein's words "will be used by antisemites forever as proof that Jews admit their happiness at murdering Arab children."

That is exactly what happened here.

And it will keep happening - because what would be unthinkable to say out loud gets a kosher stamp of approval when a Jew says it.

(Interestingly, as of this writing, Haaretz has not reported on the BBC interview nor on the apology. Could it be that they do not want people to make this connection between their own libel and that of Anjana Gadgil?)

(h/t Benjamin)

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!

Antisemitic Grand imam of Al-Azhar tells UN Security Council how to be tolerant

Egypt’s Grand Imam of Al-Azhar mosque, Sheikh Ahmed Al-Tayeb, spoke at the UN Security Council Wednesday about the importance of "human fraternity," tolerance and mutual respect in achieving world peace.

The UN summarizes his statement:

Ahmed Al-Tayeb, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Sharif and Chairman of the Muslim Council of Elders, rejected claims that Islam is a religion of the sword or war, insisting that war is only acceptable for self-defence. Urging the international community to move away from pointless conflicts, he noted tragedies caused by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Syria, Libya and Yemen, ancient civilizations have been destroyed, and these lands have become battlegrounds forcing their people to flee. Highlighting efforts made by religious leaders to promote human fraternity, he said Al-Azhar Al-Sharif aims to identify shared responsibilities in addressing climate change and the escalating wars.

Tayeb actually spoke for about 12 minutes, and even when addressing the UN on tolerance, he proved his own intolerance. As he railed against wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan, he added, "I am talking about my sanctities and your sanctities in Palestine, and the arrogance of power and the cruelty of the tyrant" - implying that Israel is violating Muslim and Christian holy places in Jerusalem. He deliberately excluded Jews when he said "your sanctities" in Jerusalem, saying - for those willing to listen to his words carefully - that Jews walking on their holiest site are "tyrants."

To this UN icon of tolerance, Jews do not have any rights to their holy places in Jerusalem - only Muslims and Christians.

Tayeb also insisted that violence is the exception and not the rule in Islam, and that Muslims only wage war for good reasons - self defense, land, and honor. No one will dare point out that waging a war for "honor" goes against what the UN stands for. And no one will point out that every Arab war waged on Israel was for "honor" far more than for "defending Palestinians" or "land."

This is only the hypocrisy within his speech. Tayeb has, in the past, shown his intolerance and rabid antisemitism in other contexts. You can trace over the past ten years how he switched from publicly railing against Jews to changing the term to "Zionists."

In 2013, Tayeb was not so careful to distinguish between Zionists and Jews. He said, "See how we suffer today from global Zionism and Judaism, whereas our peaceful coexistence with the Christians has withstood the test of history. Since the inception of Islam 1,400 years ago, we have been suffering from Jewish and Zionist interference in Muslim affairs. " He then went on to justify antisemitism with Quranic verses, and then said that people were justified in hating Jews because of their arrogance and behavior.

Tayeb soon changed his lyrics, but not his tune. In 2018, while claiming that there is no antisemitism in the Muslim world, he blamed all intra-Arab fighting and violence on the "Zionists," saying that they were behind all Muslim strife, and that if it wasn't for them the Arab world would be progressing. He then added that the Jews - sorry, "Zionists" - intended to march into Mecca and Medina and take over the holy mosques there.

This is classic antisemitism with a word switch.

The hypocrisy doesn't end there.

And while he emphasized to the UN Wednesday that the Quran says "there is no compulsion in religion," in 2016 he emphasized that Islamic apostates who refuse to repent should be killed.

This is who the UN chose as the Muslim representative of tolerance and fraternity.

If he was Christian or Jewish, the media would be digging under rocks to find anything negative to say about him, and any hypocrisy would be gleefully reported. But the media that saw this broadcast is still hiding the antisemitism and intolerance he said within his speech at a UN Security Council meeting on...tolerance and fraternity.

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!

UNRWA gives free services to 775,000 who aren't refugees even by its own definition!

This table is from the UNRWA Registered Population Dashboard, showing who receives UNRWA services.

We've discussed many times how the UNRWA definition of "refugee" is completely at odds with the official UN definition of refugee, drastically inflating the number of real refugees they raise funds for. They include descendants of refugees that UNHCR would never consider refugees, they include two million Jordanian citizens, they include well over two million Palestinians who are citizens of the Palestinian Authority.

We've seen how their "registered refugee" metric includes hundreds of thousands of people who no longer live in their areas of operation but whom UNRWA still counts as receiving services.

We've seen how hundreds of thousands of today's UNRWA "registered refugees" were not even refugees under their own definition when it started, but UNRWA registered them anyway and today hundreds of thousands of UNRWA's "Palestine refugees" didn't even descend from real refugees in 1948.

But this chart shows even more duplicity.

According to UNRWA, they provide services to over 770,000 people who aren't refugees even according to its own bizarre and counterfactual definition.

Doing some digging, I found the definition of "non-refugee" spouses and children.

UNRWA definition of “other eligible population” includes: (i) “Non-Refugee Wives” – women who are (or were) married to registered Palestine refugees, and as such are eligible to register to receive UNRWA services; (ii) “Non-Refugee Husbands” and “Non-Refugee Descendants” (including legally adopted children) – husbands and descendants of women who are Registered Refugees and are (or were) married to a non-refugee. They are also eligible to register to receive UNRWA services. Once they are registered with UNRWA, persons in this category are referred to as Married to Non-Refugee (MNR) Family Members.

So being married to a "refugee" makes one eligible to access free UNRWA health and housing. Which would have made Palestinian "refugees" very attractive marriage partners! According to this, some 450,000 non-refugees have married UNRWA aid recipients - an astonishing number.

Moreover, even if the spouses get divorced, he or she can keep getting those benefits forever - and so can their descendants! Not a bad deal!

What about "frontier villagers," "Jerusalem poor" and "Gaza poor"?

UNRWA’s Commissioner-General (then Director) stated in his annual report to the General Assembly in 1961: "The Agency’s definition of a refugee eligible for assistance is narrowly drawn and stipulates the loss of both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 hostilities. Substantial numbers of Palestine Arabs do not qualify for Agency relief on the technical grounds that they did not lose both home and means of livelihood, i.e. they may have lost their source of income and may be wholly destitute, but did not lose their home. This category has become known as 'economic refugees' and includes frontier villagers in Jordan, some destitute inhabitants of Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, and certain Bedouin expelled after 1948. The General Assembly has more than once confirmed that, despite the undoubted need of these unfortunate people, the Agency’s mandate does not extend to them.

That was 1961. Since then, "The present Agency position is that, while registered for the purposes of receiving UNRWA services, these persons are not counted as part of the official registered Palestine refugee population. Except for descendants through the male line, UNRWA does not accept new applications from persons wishing to be registered in these categories.

So if a person was considered a "frontier villager" or "Jerusalem poor" in 1950, even though they weren't refugees and the UN consistently said they are not to receive UNRWA services during the 1950s, today their descendants can continue to receive UNRWA benefits as a poverty stricken Palestinian - even if they live in a mansion in Ramallah.

Do the UNRWA donors even know that UNRWA spends 11% of its budget on people who aren't "refugees" even under its own definitions?

The problem is, as we've mentioned before, that, unlike UNHCR, UNRWA has no means to remove anyone's "refugee" status. The vast majority of UNRWA's "Palestine refugees" are not refugees in any sense. And now we see that even non-refugees continue to receive UNRWA services forever.

There are more non-refugees under UNRWA's own definition receiving services today than there were real refugees in 1948. That shows, in a nutshell, why UNRWA must be abolished.

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!

Iran announces HUGE technical breakthroughs. Usually fictional, but HUGE!

Last week, Iran announced it had designed a "quantum processor."

This is Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari, the Coordinating Deputy of the Islamic Republic’s Army, holding a so-called ‘quantum processor’ that he claimed Iran developed, showing it off during a ceremony at the mam Khomeini Maritime University in Noshahr.

Only one problem. You can buy that same board on Amazon for $589.

Iran International, which covered this story, reminds us that Iran claimed in 2020 to have developed a "breakthrough" super-device that could detect people infected with coronavirus from a football field away. IRGC Commander-in-chief Hossein Salami unveiled the device and claimed Iran would mass produce it.

Previously, Iran also announced they built a stealth fighter jet, which couldn't possibly fly. And also a home-built fighter aircraft that was a 1970s-era US-made F-5F Tiger with paint.

But what about Iran's other announcement this week?

Earlier this week, Iran announced that they had produced a hypersonic missile that could evade all known defenses.

It claimed that the missile, the Fattah, could travel at Mach 15 and could maneuver to avoid anti-missile defenses.

Is this legit?

Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard’s aerospace program, said that they had performed a ground test of the engine. Which means they didn't actually test the missile: it has not flown a meter and no one knows if it could really maneuver itself or fly as fsst as they claim if it gets built.

No country has publicly revealed a missile that surpasses Mach-8, so Mach-15 - over 11,000 miles per hour - sounds like a fantasy. (Such a missile would reach Israel from Iran in about three minutes.)

In May, Russian Kinzhal missiles, which was also claimed to be hypersonic and impossible to defend against, were downed by US-made Patriot anti-missile systems in Ukraine.

But at least one Israeli expert says that the missile looks like it could be built, although he doesn't agree that it cannot be defended against.

Tal Inbar, a senior research fellow at the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, a nonprofit organization that promotes public support for missile defense systems, told JNS on Wednesday that the claims being made by Iran about the missile’s features, range and precision appear to be true.

The missile, he said, is a “new product, that has no equivalent in the world. It can open, for Iran, a new operational door.”

I'm not quite as convinced; this would be significantly better than anything developed by any major power. Iran has some very talented engineers, and the missiles they do have are a real danger to the world. They have learned North Korean missile technology. But I'm skeptical that their engineers are the best in the world.

Either way, the other stories like the ones about the processor and Covid detector and stealth aircraft prove that you cannot trust a word that Iran says.

One open question is how exactly these obvious deceptions occur. The leaders making the announcements are typically not engineers and they are parroting what they are told by the engineers who report to them. I cannot believe that they are in on the deception, which means that their underlings are terrified to tell them the truth that the pet project that they promised is impossible, and they built these fake devices for them to embarrass themselves with in front of the world.

If the chain of command in Iran is so dysfunctional, that might be very good news for any future conflict.

(h/t EBoZ)

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!

Again, Palestinians use Israel's preservation of Islamic antiquities as proof of Israel destroying Islamic antiquities

The Palestinian Safa news agency "reports:"

The Israeli occupation authorities are still continuing their efforts to obliterate the Islamic and Arab features of Al-Aqsa Mosque, including the Umayyad palaces area, falsifying its identity and ancient history, and stealing its antiquities and historical stones, in order to impose an alleged biblical narrative, and prepare for the establishment of the alleged "Temple".

With its ancient stones and ancient buildings built by the Umayyads, the Umayyad palaces represent an Arab Islamic heritage, and a symbol of Islamic civilization in Palestine, which refutes the claims of the occupation that it discovered Jewish antiquities and assets in the region during its excavations over the past years.

The Umayyad palaces were shown during the early Islamic conquest as a house for the emirate, palaces for the Muslim caliphs and Islamic institutions for managing the affairs of Jerusalem, Al-Aqsa Mosque and Palestine about one thousand four hundred years ago.

In 1967, the occupation took control of this area, and tried to confiscate it under the pretext of the so-called "Holy Basin", in order to suffocate Al-Aqsa Mosque from the southern and western regions, and also turned it into museums, shrines, and Talmudic manifestations, to narrate the biblical Talmudic narrative.

Settlement organizations claim that the palaces are built in the "Holy Basin" area of the "Temple", but the excavations that lasted more than 40 years with the participation of Jewish archaeologists have proven that the buildings are Umayyad palaces and an emirate house, and there is no evidence indicating their relationship to the "Temple" or anything else.

This is a funhouse mirror version of history that ends up not even close to reality.

We've discussed the Umayyad palaces before. They were discovered by Jewish archaeologists and they are being preserved by Israel. If it wasn't for Jews, the Arab world would not even know they ever existed.

The site is there today for visitors. It is preserved by the State of Israel and the Jerusalem municipality. No one is claiming that the Umayyad palaces were never there or that they were Jewish-built. No one is damaging the site.

The real question is why we don't see more Muslim visitors to the area, since it is clearly a major historical Muslim site.

And it is hardly the only Islamic site preserved by Israel in Jerusalem, open to all, with clearly marked signs explaining the importance of the site.

The Safa article also lies in its claims that there is no evidence of any Temple on the southern areas surrounding the Temple Mount. For example, there are dozens of ritual baths in the area which pre-date the Umayyad structures, and the only reason for so many would be if masses of people were preparing to visit the Temple Mount.

The people who are claiming that Jews are erasing history are...wait for it....erasing Jewish history.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The irony in a "BDS victory"

According to the Felesteen news site and many other Palestinian sites:

Cyprus International University canceled a lecture that was supposed to be given by a lecturer from the Rubin (or Rabin?) Institute for Studies, in the Israeli occupation entity.

This came after pressure from students in solidarity with the Palestinian cause, who organized a demonstration on the university campus, in front of the hall in which he was to lecture on the topic of "Jewish Victims in the Arab-Israeli Conflict."

The sit-down demanded the university administration to cancel the lecture and expel the Israeli speaker, while the International Academic Campaign Against Occupation and Apartheid and the Campaign for Palestine sent hundreds of letters to the university asking it to cancel the lecture.

I couldn't confirm this story outside Palestinian media, which says the lecturer's name is Erez Shishani.

But there is a huge irony here.

Cyprus International University is in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus. While it has many international students, the Turkish students there are illegal settlers - forced to go there by the Turkish government, as the New York Times reported in 2014:

Students from Turkey are generally placed in Northern Cyprus by the Turkish higher education board, which has integrated the Northern Cypriot colleges into its own roster and assigns students on the basis of a points system that leaves them limited control over where they study.

This exactly fits the violation in the Geneva Conventions of transferring one's citizens to an occupied territory. The crime that everyone falsely accuses Israel of.

So now Palestinians are celebrating that a university that is part of an illegal occupation. You can't make this up.

One other irony: the university that caves to student pressure to censor lectures has the slogan, "Open for Open Minds."

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!

UN Rapporteur Francesca Albanese again says that Jews do not deserve human rights

There was a most interesting communication between Israel's Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Minister Amichai Chikli and Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur for the Palestinian territories.

Albanese had recently tweeted that "Israel has a right to defend itself, but can't claim it when it comes to the people it oppresses/whose lands it colonizes." The clear implication is that Jews who are killed by Palestinians have no right to self defense as long as the murderers can claim that they are oppressed by Israel.

Chikli wrote a pointed and detailed response to the UN, demanding that Albanese be fired.

Over 3000 years ago, the moral imperative not to kill was established as the most fundamental commandment given to humanity within the framework of the Ten Commandments - one of the most authentic human rights charter. Throughout history, the importance of the right to life and the prohibition of murder have been developed by philosophers such as John Locke, and has been incorporated into many official documents. One of the most prominent milestones in this context is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, whose Article 3 declares that ''Everyone has the Right to life, liberty and security of person."

Against the background of this long process of establishing the universal right to life for all individuals, I am writing to express my profound shock, condemnation and dismay at the recent comments made by formal UN employee and special rapporteur, Ms. Frances. Albanese. Ms. Albanese's reprehensible, irresponsible and terror-inciting remarks made earlier this week called into question Israel's very right to defend the lives of its citizens.

Ms. Albanese's statement is not only outrageous but also explicitly denies the right to life and personal security of many Jewish citizens of the State of Israel. Her comments contradict the basic core foundational human rights upon which the United Nations is built, setting a dangerous precedent. It is also unacceptable for a UN representative to make such a statement, even if she thinks that part of the country is disputed territory.

I would like to draw your attention to a concerning matter regarding Ms. Albanese's recent remarks. It appears that her words may have been intentionally influenced by the recent horrific terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians: Just last week, a British-Israeli mother, Lucy Dee, and her two teenage daughters, Maia and Rina Dee, were brutally murdered in the Jordan Valley by a Palestinian terrorist who deliberately rammed their vehicle and then shot them at point blank range. Ms. Albanese's statement seems to suggest that Lucy Dee and her daughters, three innocent human beings driving on a holiday, were not deserving of the right to be protected by the State of Israel.

This statement is especially troubling, as it casts a dark shadow on Ms. Albanese's basic human compassion, and her ability to uphold the principles of the United Nations and carry out her duties as a representative on its behalf.

Regrettably, this is not an isolated instance of Ms. Albanese's relentless, systematic and irrational bias against Israel and display of antisemitism. As a representative who should be applying intemational law equally for all, irrespective of their faith, background or geographic locality, this is deeply concerning.

A particular, troubling example is her speech at a Hamas-sponsored conference in Gaza in November 2022, during which she urged her audience to "resist". Moreover, in recent years, Ms. Albanese has also accused the "Jewish Lobby" of controlling United States and Europe, supported the BDS campaign against Israel, compared Israelis to the Nazis and refused to condemn Palestinian terrorism.

Ms. Albanese's actions and statements clearly violate the impartiality and objectivity requirements outlined in the UN Code of Conduct for Special Rapporteurs. Her clear and persistent display of antisemitic rhetoric, hostility and prejudice towards Israel demonstrates that this particular rapporteur does not uphold these values. The United Nations is failing to uphold its own commitment to protecting fundamental human rights for all and applying equal treatment of all its member states by allowing Ms. Albanese to continue to spew hatred, antisemitism and incite violence. Her blindly one-sided anti-Israel mandate is unacceptable and clearly goes against the principles of the United Nations.

Therefore, I strongly urge you to take prompt action and terminate Ms. Albanese, position's permanently. It is s essential that the United Nations uphold its own principles and convey a resolute message that antisemitism and support for violence and terrorism have no place within its organization. In this context, I would like to refer to Chaim Herzog's powerful speech at the United Nations General Assembly on November 10, 1975, stating that "It is indeed fitting that the United Nations, which began its life as an anti-Nazi Alliance, should, 30 years later, find itself on its way to becoming the world center of anti-Semitism". We very much hope that it is still possible to change this sad situation.

Yours respectfully,
Amichai Chikli
Minister of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism

Albanese did not respond to any of these points. Instead, she composed the equivalent of a schoolyard taunt:

I wonder how the 3000-year-old "moral responsibility [sic] not to kill" can be reconciled with the thousands of Palestinians killed since 2007 in oPt (4k out of conflict; 4.4k in-conflict, i.e. in Gaza: 2008/9, 2012, 2014, 2018/9, 2021, 2022).

She is saying that Israel is hypocritical on two levels: one by not adhering to the same human rights standards that Chikli is saying she is guilty of violating, and secondly of not upholding Jewish laws itself in killing Palestinians.

Even though Albanese has already distinguished herself with her blatant bias and tacit support for Palestinian terror, this is fairly astonishing. By not defending her own words justifying Palestinian "resistance," she is saying that Palestinian terror is not even worth discussion - because Israel is worse.

In her moral universe, two wrongs make a right.

It is clearly a false charge. The vast majority of those killed by Israel were either legitimate targets or collateral damage when Israel was attacking legitimate targets in wartime. Some were tragic accidents.

One is not liable for those deaths under either Torah law or the Geneva Conventions.

Palestinian terrorists, including the killers of the Dee mother and daughters, are guilty of murder in their deliberate targeting of uninvolved civilians; And Palestinian terror is illegal under both of them.

Albanese ignores or condones Palestinian murders while condemning Israel's defensive wartime actions - and she cynically invokes Jewish law to make her case, including that Jews (and only Jews) do not have the right to defend themselves against those who claim "oppression."

In Albanese' perverted moral calculus, Israeli Jews cannot claim to be oppressed by those who daily call for them to be ethnically cleansed from their homes. Only Palestinian lives matter and Palestinian murders are "legitimate resistance;" Jewish Israelis do not have the right to claim either self defense or oppression, which is the golden ticket needed to kill anyone on the other side.

This is another case where Albanese's own words cross the line from "anti-Zionism" into 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!

Some TikTok guy makes Arabic anti-Israel videos as "General Moshe", and Arabs believe he's a real Israeli general

Some Arab got a black yarmulka and a mail order IDF uniform and set himself up on TikTok pretending to be "General Moshe," a dissident Israeli general who for some reason only sends his disparaging messages to the Israeli government in Arabic.

Some of his rants have over a million views!

Many Arabs actually believe this is a real Israeli general, including Jordan's Al Ghad news site.

This account claims that he is a Palestinian actor and "it is part of the media war with which we are fighting this usurping occupation!"

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!