Ma'an reports that Mahmoud Abbas refused a phone call from President Trump today and refused to accept a message from him.
Ramallah News called this snub "a heavy blow to Trump."
As always, the bizarre idea of "honor" causes people to be stupid. And if you were to find a single reason why Palestinians will never accept peace with Israel under any circumstances, it is because of "honor:" the shame of the traditionally weak, dhimmi Jews in a position of power in the center of the Arab world cannot be tolerated.
Peace plans allow Israel to exist.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The thing about peace between Israel and the Palestinians, however, is that the devil isn’t in the details; it’s in the broad strokes. Israeli leaders have long wanted peace while their Palestinian counterparts want to destroy Israel. Trump announced the framework at the White House today alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Both men spoke in hopeful terms about opportunity, peace, prosperity, and warm relations among allies.
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, on the other hand, has called for a “day of rage.”
Which gets to the heart of the matter. Palestinian leaders will take a day of rage over a decade of peace every time. And it’s their very refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist and to negotiate in good faith that’s doomed the long-suffering Palestinian people. Palestinian officials have refused to meet with Americans since Trump announced the opening of the American Embassy in Jerusalem in 2017.
For decades, such self-defeating obstinacy found support among other Arab leaders in the region. This kept the Israel-Palestinian issue at the center of any discussion about Middle East stability. But that has unofficially come to an end. With Iran’s increased aggression against its Sunni neighbors—and Barack Obama’s mistaken effort to strengthen the Islamic Republic—Saudi Arabia and other Sunni kingdoms have formed an unspoken alliance with Israel against Tehran. They have more pressing concerns than Mahmoud Abbas’s latest tantrum. And without the undying support of the Saudis and other critical allies, the Palestinians have lost much of their leverage.
This is in part why the U.S. felt no pressure to wait on Palestinian input before rolling out its framework. And it’s also why, if Palestinian leaders once again fail to seize the opportunity before them, everyone will get along just fine except the Palestinian people.
Moreover, the Trump plan ends the failed paradigm where the future of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) is held hostage indefinitely to Palestinian intransigence.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has already made clear that the U.S. does not regard the Jewish settlements as illegal. Now Israel will finally be able to regularize their status, immediately – a historic victory for Jewish rights to their heartland.
Unlike earlier peace plans, the Trump peace plan is based on justice and realism at the same time. The mass expulsion of people from their homes has never been part of peace agreements with separatist groups, nor is it a decent thing to ask for.
Claims that the plan’s release was timed to impact either President Trump’s domestic difficulties or Netanyahu’s reelection are demonstrably false. Democrats have had Trump under investigation since his first days in office, and Israel has been in an unprecedented series of failed elections for a year, with no clear end in sight.
There is nothing specific about this timing of the release of the peace plan. It is no secret that the U.S. has been working on this plan since near the start of Trump’s term. The Trump administration had hoped to release it much earlier, but then the Israeli election drama kicked in.
Forced to choose between abandoning its efforts and pressing on, the Trump administration eventually chose the latter.
Finally, the Trump plan must be compared to prior diplomatic initiatives, all of which failed to deliver peace and instead mainstreamed Palestinian terrorism. Trump’s proposal is unlikely to do worse.
But to avoid falling into past mistakes, the Trump plan and its implementation must make clear that its contemplation of possible Palestinian statehood is not something Palestinian Authority President Abbas can bank on if he rejects everything else.
For this plan to be fundamentally different, Trump must make clear that Palestinian rejection of the plan means rejecting Palestinian statehood itself.
If Palestinians are unwilling to make needed compromises – as Netanyahu has already agreed to do – the Palestinians must get nothing.
For months, Tehran demonstrated a willingness to court risk, and a direct conflict with Iran appeared imminent. As Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confessed last October, it was incumbent on the U.S. to “restore deterrence.” That was a serious warning. When a revisionist adversary is undeterred, it will test its freedom of action until it encounters an unacceptable level of resistance. Neither Iran nor the U.S wants a war. But by failing to calibrate its attacks, Iran could have easily miscalculated its way into one. It was incumbent on the administration to impose costs on Iran that would deter reckless acts of aggression against vital U.S. interests. Its decision to neutralize a terrorist commander soaked in American blood appears to have had the desired effect.
That is not to say that Iran’s provocations have abated. Sporadic rocket and mortar attacks from inside Iraq on U.S. positions, including Baghdad’s Green Zone, continue. But they are of the more sporadic than the assaults U.S. forces regularly endured last November and December. Foreign policy observers are correct to note that Iran is still likely to respond in unpredictable ways to the killing of Soleimani, which could take the form of asymmetric terrorist attacks on civilian targets far beyond the Middle East. That’s a worrisome prospect, but we have to remember that Iran has executed asymmetric attacks on soft targets since the Islamic Republic came into existence. If that is the form Iranian retaliation takes, it is a return to the status quo ante, and an indication that the Trump administration has made the regime more cautious.
Which leads us back to the American political media’s response to the news that Iran had, in fact, injured U.S. forces in its calibrated and telegraphed ballistic missile attack. Trump was accused not only of deceiving the public but also of callously downplaying the extent of the injuries U.S troops suffered. But what reaction would the nation’s tastemakers have preferred to see from the president? Histrionics? An ultimatum demanding satisfaction from Iran? A kinetic response against Iranian military and government targets? What strategic purpose would that have served other than to upend the president’s successful effort to deescalate the conflict?
For so many of the last administration’s devotees, the Trump administration’s approach to containing Iranian aggression is beyond comprehension. They do not seem to have ever considered that this is less an indictment of the president than a confession of their own insularity and strategic blindness. The worst-case scenarios these and other Trump critics imagined have thus far failed to materialize. That’s a relief to most Americans, but it’s a double-edged sword for the president’s most committed critics. The unavoidable implication that Trump and the hawks with whom he is surrounded were right about Iran is too much for them to stomach.
I was pretty busy on Twitter over the past 24 hours...Here are my most popular tweets on the "Deal of the Century." Many of them could be expanded into posts, but there are only so many hours in the day.
Palestinian leaders: "We Palestinians would rather stay in misery than have a chance to improve our lives - because we have principles!" Palestinian people: "Ummm...you guys live in mansions. We've been suffering for 71 years." Leaders: "Anyone who disagrees goes to prison!"
One thing's for sure: The #DealOfTheCentury would do more to help improve ordinary Palestinians' lives than the past fifty years of NGO and EU aid combined.
The fact that no "pro-Palestinian" activist is willing to even discuss it shows what hypocrites they are.
"Let's reward Palestinians for acting like spoiled brats when they rejected multiple peace plans that included everything we are complaining the Trump plan doesn't have." pic.twitter.com/17aT61jc7f
In other news, extremist right-wing hawk Benjamin Netanyahu offered large swaths of land from within Israel to become part of a potential Palestinian state, tripling the size of Gaza.
As was utterly predictable, a plan that would improve Palestinian lives immeasurably is rejected by fake "human rights" expert @KenRoth who (in only one world conflict) feels that "fairness" is a human right that trumps the right to live in peace, security and prosperity. https://t.co/LWVRHPpKQB
And exactly how does the Palestinian Authority, the violent dictatorship that shuts down any dissent, rewards terrorists and receives billions from the EU, have any legitimacy to speak on behalf of the Palestinians they oppress, @sarahleah1? https://t.co/QMB6f7jO9s
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The most striking thing about the Trump plan is that its goal is completely different than the goal of every previous plan.
Every other "peace" plan had a goal of two states, as if that would magically produce peace. Once two states was achieved, then the job was done. Terrorism, the Palestinian economy, overcrowding in Gaza - none of those were addressed. Day Two after the plan would be implemented was always essentially ignored.
Every other plan was written with the myth that two states is the solution itself, not a component. Because every other plan was written from the perspective that Palestinian leadership wants an independent state above all.
But they don't. History has shown that their desire has always been the ultimate destruction of Israel, which is why they rejected every previous plan that was an obstacle to that goal.
It is inconvenient, and politically incorrect, to point out that there is nothing that Mahmoud Abbas has ever done for "peace" that is inconsistent with Yasir Arafat's 1974 "stages" plan for the destruction of Israel. But that plan is the guiding principle of Palestinian politics, not an independent state. Insistence on "right of return" to Israel is the most obvious proof of that - what kind of nascent independent nation demands its people live in another country, let alone an enemy country that they tell the world is an apartheid state against its people?
The other "experts," to one degree or another, accepted official Palestinian lies of the "red lines" towards a state. And none of the Palestinian demands had the interests of their own people in mind.
After all, why would a leadership that has willingly used its own people as pawns and cannon fodder for 71 years suddenly care about their welfare?
Since Palestinian leaders who don't give a damn abut their own people listed "return" and Jerusalem and release of terrorist prisoners as their red lines, the "experts" happily went along with them and also ignored the actual Palestinian people's welfare. They accepted the false idea that a Palestinian state was the definition of peace when there is no evidence that real peace would follow a state.
The US plan, for the first time in history, is written from the perspective of what would be best for Palestinians, not for corrupt Palestinian leaders. And no one has ever done that before - not the Saudi plan, not the Quartet, not the Obama parameters, not Olmert, not Clinton.
Just a look at the Gaza portion of the map in the Trump plan shows this to be true. While previous plans mentioned a road between Gaza and the West Bank, this plan actually asks Israel to give up significant amounts of "pre-1967"land (in exchange for the Jordan Valley, an Israeli security demand) to help Gaza become viable rather than a powderkeg.
Gaza is too small to accommodate its two million people. This is not news. While some Israeli think-tanks have suggested that Egypt somehow be cajoled into giving up part of the Sinai to Palestinians, no other international peace plan even addressed this obvious issue - an issue that not only had the potential but the virtual guarantee that Day Two of "peace" would fail.
This plan, almost unbelievably, triples the size of Gaza at Israel's expense in order to provide Gaza's millions with space for living, agriculture and industry - as well as a corridor to the West Bank where many would undoubtedly prefer to be.
This plan does more for ordinary Gazans, by far, than any other previous plan.
And it also happens to do more for Palestinians in the West Bank as well.
Ultimately, peace is meant for the people, not the politicians. That simple fact has been ignored in the Middle East for decades because the Palestinian people have no say. Privately they can cheer something like this, but their very lives are in danger for speaking out publicly in support for it. Previous wanna-be peacemakers might have realized this basic fact but they never internalized it because they only negotiated with "leaders" who ignored the welfare of their own people.
It took non-professional outsiders to put together a plan that is better for Palestinians than the Palestinian leadership would ever accept. Because these outsiders have a "naive" view that peace actually means helping people, not corrupt and selfish politicians. And this plan actually has a path to a Palestinian state that is more realistic than any that came beforehand.
The almost unanimous rejection of the plan by so-called "peace" and "human rights" community shows, starkly, that they never had the best interests of the Palestinians in mind. It took some Orthodox Jewish Zionists to come up with a plan that does more to help Palestinians than the "peace"and "justice" crowd ever would.
Of course, Palestinian rejectionism, backed up by leftist groups that pretend to call for "peace" and "justice," guarantees that the Trump (really Kushner/Greenblatt) peace plan is a non-starter.
Congratulations to Mahmoud Abbas and his partners in the "peace" community for throwing away the single best chance to improve Palestinian lives that there will ever be. The only reason is that the plan is also good for Israel, and that one fact is what makes it completely unacceptable to them.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Fayez Sayegh was an academic and propagandist who was born in Syria and whose family moved to Tiberias at a time that many Arabs moved to Palestine from Syria.
Sayegh wrote numerous anti-Israel books and pamphlets, especially after he founded the PLO Research Centre in Beirut in 1965, the official propaganda bureau of the PLO. He was also a member of the PLO Executive Committee. Later he taught at American universities.
Even though he was born in Syria, his "Palestinian" credentials are unquestioned.
I just found a short book that Sayegh wrote in 1956, entitled "The Arab Israeli Conflict." At the very beginning, he describes exactly what Palestine is - and isn't.
Until World War I, Palestine was essentially and inextricably a part of the Arab World. As a political entity, it had no existence of its own; it was an indistinguishable part of a larger Arab region, subject to Ottoman rule. As a community, its language and dialect, its culture and social structures, were identical with those of the surrounding Arab communities. The aspirations of its people were the same as those of neighboring Arab peoples: like other Arabs in adjacent lands, the Arabs of Palestine were yearning for freedom and struggling for independence from Ottoman rule, which for three centuries had been imposed on all Arabs. Palestine was thus thoroughly Arab, indistinguishable and inseparable from the neighboring Arab countries.
This master propagandist notes, honestly, that there has never been a distinctive Palestinian people, culture, political entity or culture.
Which means, of course, that they could have and should have integrated into the surrounding Arab world when many of them fled the fighting in 1948. They indeed expected that they would have; just as Sayegh would have expected to be able to return to his Syrian birthplace, most Palestinian Arabs who fled went to their or their parents' countries of origin.
They are still considered "refugees" because their Arab neighbors chose to treat them as pawns to hurt Israel instead of as brothers.
That policy persists today. And it is clearly perverted based on Sayegh's own words.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The United Arab Emirates appreciates continued US efforts to reach a Palestine-Israel peace agreement. This plan is a serious initiative that addresses many issues raised over the years.
The only way to guarantee a lasting solution is to reach an agreement between all concerned parties. The UAE believes that Palestinians and Israelis can achieve lasting peace and genuine coexistence with the support of the international community. The plan announced today offers an important starting point for a return to negotiations within a US-led international framework.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has viewed the U.S. Administration's announcement of its peace plan titled: "Vision for Peace, Prosperity, and a Brighter Future". In light of the announcement, the Kingdom reiterates its support for all efforts aimed at reaching a just and comprehensive resolution to the Palestinian cause. Since the time of the Founder King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al-Saud, and through the reign of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been at the forefront of the efforts in support of the brotherly Palestinian people, and in standing by their side in all international forums to attain their legitimate rights. Among these efforts was the presentation of the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002, which stressed, in clear terms, that a military solution to the conflict has not brought peace or security to any party, and the comprehensive and just peace is a strategic option. The kingdom appreciates the efforts of President Trump's Administration to develop a comprehensive peace plan between the Palestinian and the Israeli sides, and encourages the start of direct peace negotiations between the Palestinian and Israeli sides, under the auspices of the United States, and to resolve any disagreements with aspects of the plan through negotiations, in order to move forward the peace process to reach an agreement that achieves legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.
But Ma'an reports that the King of Saudi Arabia called up Mahmoud Abbas:
President Mahmoud Abbas received, on Tuesday evening, a phone call from the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. The King stressed to President Abbas that the kingdom's position will not change from the Palestinian issue in order to preserve the rights of the Palestinian people. He said: "Your issue is ours, and the issue of Arabs and Muslims, and we are with you." He called for the necessity of achieving a comprehensive and just peace, considering that peace is a strategic choice, leading to a final solution that achieves the national rights of the Palestinian people.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The German ambassador to Israel deserves credit for acknowledging that she “feel[s] deep shame given the unspeakable crimes committed by Germans.” The German president also spoke movingly on Thursday about German responsibility for the Holocaust’s unspeakable crimes and the power of reconciliation, as well as acknowledging that antisemitism remains a German problem.
However, the government both German officials represent often fails to stand with Israel at the United Nations, refuses “to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital or to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.” Worst of all, Angela Merkel’s Germany has been loath to stop trading with Iran, which has never been coy about why they wish to become a nuclear power.
Times may change, but human nature doesn’t. Speaking up is hard, especially when it means standing alone. There’s a reason we typically revere the heroes of history who found the courage to chart their own course, including protecting those who were weaker or politically powerless.
In the case of the Holocaust and its obvious evil, it’s easy for anyone living today to insist they would’ve fought on the side of justice. But how many people flatter themselves?
Antisemitism has been resurgent in Europe since the turn of the century. It is also rising in the United States, where it has already turned deadly. The cost of condemning Jew hatred is lower now than it would have been in 1930s or 1940s Europe. Yet, even with those lower stakes, many people prefer to stay silent, abandoning their supposed friends and allies when their help — and their courage — is most needed.
If the 75th anniversary of Auschwitz’s liberation is to be truly meaningful, we must show that we’ve all learned the lessons of the Holocaust. That includes a widespread willingness to condemn, quarantine, and fight antisemitism wherever we see it, whether right or left, at home or abroad. “Never again” cannot come with caveats.
Notably, while Germany, the instigator of the Holocaust, was represented at the event, no predominantly Arab countries attended. The Holocaust is apparently a calamity they do not mourn.
Forum ceremonies took place at the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, a city at the center of so much controversy in 2017 when the United States belatedly recognized it as Israel’s capital. This memorial event went a long way toward cementing Jerusalem’s centrality to Jewish and Israeli life in the world’s consciousness, despite the fact that Palestinians and some UN agencies continue to deny any Jewish connection to the city whatsoever.
Above all, the attendance of so many dignitaries at this event underscores Israel’s huge and growing importance on the world stage. Israel represents not only the largest ingathering of a dispersed people in human history, but can boast of unparalleled social, cultural, diplomatic, economic, and military achievements in the past 70 years. Finally, it bespeaks the extraordinary resilience of the Jewish people in the face of one of the world’s greatest, most destructive tragedies.
As Jews, as supporters of Israel, as humans, we should surely make reflective observances to remember our millions of brethren murdered by a hateful fanatic — the worst antisemite in history. But we should also celebrate the accomplishment that is Israel.
When God promised the Jewish people the land of Israel, we could never have dared dream of the magnitude of the threats we would face as we traversed history. But we also could never have imagined the powerful, inspiring refuge — and light unto the nations — that Israel would become.
This miraculous achievement makes Israel worth praising, celebrating, and defending, with all our power and determination.
The founding of Israel was not a result of the Holocaust, nor was it “compensation” for the murder of six million Jews. Rather, Israel is the embodied statement of the Jewish people — and people of goodwill everywhere — that the hate that caused the Holocaust will never succeed again.
Today, a growing number of antisemites seek to continue that dismal work.
They downplay the scale of the killing, draw false equivalence with the contemporary world, even outright deny that what happened, happened.
We cannot let them gain a foothold. Because if we allow the likes of Buchenwald, Belsen and Babi Yar to become simply obscure names on a map, we not only betray the memory of those who died there.
We will, in airbrushing the Holocaust from history, succeed where the Nazis failed and offer succour to the thugs and bigots who are the modern-day bearers of that twisted ideology. So we must remember. But we must also act.
After all, speak to anyone who survived the Holocaust and they will tell you that it did not begin with the gas chambers or the pogroms. It began when antisemitic slogans were daubed on a Jewish shop window.
When a Jewish child was abused on a bus. And when ordinary, law-abiding people chose to turn away and do nothing.
So as we look ahead to Holocaust Memorial Day and to the 75th anniversary of liberation, let me make this promise to Jews right across Britain.
As long as I am prime minister, I will never allow this country to forget what happened 75 years ago. I will do all I can to see that we continue to learn the lessons of the past.
And the government I lead will stand with you and fight alongside you so that the darkest of nights is never again allowed to fall upon the Jews of the world.
A psychiatrist hired to evaluate Grafton Thomas, has declared that Thomas’ mental illness deems him incompetent to stand trial on federal hate crimes charges.
Thomas is accused of using a machete to attack Jews attending a Chanukah party at the home of Rabbi Rottenburg in the Forshay neighborhood of Monsey on Dec. 28.
According to Attorney Michael Sussman, “Mr. Thomas was not competent to stand trial” following an evaluation by Dr. Andrew Levin, who has asked a federal judge to hold what he termed a competency evaluation.
Apparently, Thomas's attack, which injured 6 Jews and put a man in the hospital in a coma with a fractured skull, was not done out of hate -- contrary to his Google search for "Zionist temples" -- but because he neglected to take his meds.
Also:
“He has no history of like violent acts and no convictions for any crime,” Sussman has said in a statement. “He has no known history of anti-Semitism and was raised in a home which embraced and respected all religions and races. He is not a member of any hate groups.”
In other words, his lawyer is also arguing for leniency on the basis of this being Thomas's first offense.
The lawyer also wants Levin's report and all related documents sealed in order to protect his client's privacy.
Sussman has not yet offered any suggestions on how to protect Jews from his client in the future should he get off without having to go to prison.
o In 2003, Sebastian Selam, was stabbed to death by a Muslim who said afterward: “Mother, I’m going to heaven. I killed a Jew!” The murderer, Adel Amastaibou, was found unfit to stand trial -- even though he had no previous history of mental illness.
o In 2015, a Muslim man, Farid Haddouche, was deemed unfit initially to stand trial for his stabbing attack of Jews in Marseille -- because of mental issues. He shouted about Allah during the attack. He had no history of mental illness. After protests by Jewish groups, Haddouche was sentenced to four years in jail.
o Sarah Halimi, a Jewish physician, was murdered in Paris in 2017 by Kobili Traore, a Muslim. A review by an independent panel of psychiatrists determined that Traore was generally mentally competent, but because not on the night of the murder, because he consumed cannabis. The judge in the case went so far as to order a third psychiatric examination -- independent of the defense attorney. More recently, in February 2018, the investigator finally admitted in writing that the attack was antisemitic. But by May 2019, Traore was still being considered unfit for trial.
But there is also a second excuse being used for denying the antisemitism behind attacks on Jews, though it is not as widely used. Yet.
This week a German regional court ruled that the 2014 firebombing of a synagogue in Wuppertal, a region just east of Düsseldorf, was an act of criminal arson, but not anti-Semitic. Instead, the court found it was a protest against Israel, even though the synagogue was obviously not in Israel and those who worship there are Jews, not Israelis. [emphasis added]
The decision upheld that of a lower court, which stated the perpetrators, a trio of Palestinian-born German residents, wanted to “call attention to the Gaza conflict” when they prepared and then lobbed Molotov cocktails at the synagogue one July night in 2014. No one was injured, but the attack caused €800 in damages. The men were ultimately given suspended sentences.
But this is not the first time that antisemitism has been excused on the basis of political protest.
After the National Socialists took power in 1933 and when the newly emerging Swiss front movement became more and more aggressive, the pressure on the Swiss Jews and the Jewish refugees living here increased. Through brochures and pamphlets, racist anti-Semitism, which had already incorporated traditional religious anti-Judaism at the end of the 19th century, reached ever broader sections of the population. The Swiss Association of Israeli Municipalities (SIG), which saw itself as a representative of Swiss Jewry, had to act: under the motto "Defense and Enlightenment", it tried to avert the increasing threat with legal and journalistic actions and to defend the principles of the rule of law and equal rights.
That "legal and journalistic" defense by Jews sounds similar to what we are attempting today -- just substitute "social media" for journalism.
The problem was the fear that being too aggressive would further fuel antisemitism. Besides, there was no legal tool specifically for combatting the distribution of antisemitic publications. But when the "National Front" distributed the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" at a rally in 1933, SIG filed a criminal complaint with the Israelite cultural community in Bern for violating a Bernese statute prohibiting the distribution of "immoral, obscene or brutalizing" texts.
The trial at the Bern district court was opened in the same year. The plaintiffs, who were represented, among others, by the lawyer Georges Brunschvig, did not primarily pursue the goal of convicting the accused frontists as quickly as possible; rather, they sought legal certification that the "protocols" were falsified. So the SIG went all out: it wanted to suppress anti-Semitism by depriving it of a "main weapon" and basis of legitimation - the popular "protocols". It first appeared in the German-speaking world in 1919 and soon reached a circulation of over 100,000 copies; In 1929 they appeared in the ninth edition in the party publishing house of Hitler's NSDAP and from 1934 were official teaching material at German schools. They were particularly widespread in the United States, where they were propagated by automobile manufacturer Henry Ford. By the early 1930s, they had been translated into sixteen languages.
The plaintiffs' strategy seemed to be working: their prominent witnesses (including several Russian historians), but above all the bipartisan opinion of the Bernese writer Carl Albert Loosli, let the courageous judge, who was not impressed by the Nazi expert brought in from Germany by the accused, 1935 come to the conclusion that the "protocols" are plagiarized and violate the law. The frontists were fined. The SIG and with it a democratic public - press representatives from all over the world had followed the process - welcomed the verdict.
In his May 24, 1935 column, The Week in Review, Milton Brown described the verdict as "a blow not only to the Nazis in Switzerland but to the entire anti-Jewish propaganda conducted by Nazis all over the world":
The verdict once and forever puts an end to the legend which was invented thirty years ago by the officials of the Czarist Secret Political Police, that the Jews have mapped a definite program to dominate the world. Although everyone knew the legend to be false, anti-Semites throughout the world did not hesitate from time to time to revive it.
...The verdict of the Berne court will go down in Jewish history as an important victory over bigotry and falsehood. The London Times, after an investigation, long since established the falsity of the notorious "Protocols". Now this falsity has been officially established in a court. The verdict will remain the best argument of the Jews against all those who have been trying to utilize the "Protocols" for their anti-semitic purposes
Of course, we know that is not how things worked out -- "The Protocols" is still going strong.
The victory was premature.
In fact, it backfired.
Back to the NZZ Online:
But neither the frontist press in Switzerland, the National Socialist press in Germany nor the accused were impressed. They appealed and were acquitted in second instance in 1937: the question, according to the Bern Higher Regional Court, as to whether the "minutes" were genuine or not, was irrelevant for the assessment of the facts. They are a "political weapon", not trash literature and therefore do not violate the law. They are unlikely to incentivize a crime. [emphasis added]
The immediate result of the acquittal was the opposite intent of bringing the case to the court to begin with:
the entire anti-Semitic and National Socialist press exploited the acquittal propagandistically, claiming that the authenticity of the "protocols" had now been proven...the attempt to legally refute the "authenticity" of the "protocols" paradoxically strengthened the aura that surrounds it today. In retrospect it seems almost tragic how some honest men tried to expose the "protocols" as "fakes" and welcomed the court ruling as a defense against anti-Semitism.
So here we are.
Reading about the measures being taken around the US to curtail the antisemitic BDS movement, we can only hope that those laws are more effective and -- more permanent.
But when we expect the law to be able to protect against Jew-hatred, I am reminded of the Charles Dickens book, Oliver Twist:
If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass — a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience.”
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The plan definitely takes into consideration Israeli security needs and red lines.
It is quite detailed, meaning that it won't be read by the Israel-haters who have decided already that it is an insult to Palestinians.
It isn't. It takes Palestinian needs very seriously and gives them everything possible without compromising Israeli security and yet there is a path to a state for them.
The only path to a state that is possible in the foreseeable future.
The settlements will be stuck in a sea of Palestinian Arab areas, which means that they will be sitting ducks for ambushes and the like. But there are lots of bridges and tunnels to try, as much as possible, to allow territorial contiguity among the very intertwined areas.
But I don't see Hebron (or Kiryat Arba) mentioned at all.
The border in Jerusalem is the separation barrier. Palestinians can create a capital city in their side of the barrier, and the US could one day open an embassy there.
The option of the "triangle" communities in Israel to become part of Palestine is there, if people want. (They won't.)
Jerusalem Arabs east of the security barrier will have the option to become Israeli citizens if they want.
Jews and Christians would be allowed to worship on the Temple Mount although the Jordanian Waqf would continue to be the official rulers. In other words, the status quo of today will remain with some changes, not the one from 1967.
The Palestinians are expected to mature their counter-terrorism operations, it is unclear how that can be enforced. And demilitarizing Gaza is essentially impossible.
There's lots of detail on proposed joint tourist zones, industrial zones, including some shared with Jordan and Egypt. As the map shows, parts of the Negev at the Egyptian border would become part of Palestine.
Israel would maintain all control of crossings and is even still allowed into Palestinian territory to destroy terrorist infrastructure if necessary. Again, needed from Israel's perspective; a non-starter for Palestinians.
The economic plan for the Palestinians looks very well thought out and impressive. It includes improving the governance, women's participation in the workforce, internal medical capabilities, universities, reduce corruption, imports/exports, and helping the private sector. Any Palestinian who objects to this part of the plan - far more than half the document - is insane. These are all things that need to happen anyway, and it addresses the major problems with the current Palestinian government and environment. It is largely what we saw in the Bahrain economic conference last year, from what I can tell.
It is not a trivial plan; a lot of work went into it. If Palestinians were smart they would try to at least get the economic and governance help it mentions - but they won't.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Fate has sent Israel a rare set of circumstances that is unlikely to come our way again. The “deal of the century” really is a once-in-a-century opportunity, and Israel must seize it.
In October 1937, David Ben-Gurion wrote to his son Amos: “A partial Jewish state is not an end but a beginning … a powerful lever in our efforts to redeem the land in its entirety.”
US President Donald Trump’s Middle East peace plan, which could potentially rip the Israeli nation’s ancient homeland in two, is also not the end, but rather the beginning.
Israel is facing a Ben-Gurion-style monumental decision: Some 73 years after the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, providence has sent the State of Israel, under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a rare set of circumstances that is unlikely to come our way again. The “deal of the century” really is a once-in-a-century opportunity, and Israel must seize it.
The full details of Trump’s peace plan will be revealed soon enough, but if what we know about it so far is true – if Jerusalem, even without the Arab neighborhoods beyond the security fence, remains ours; if the Temple Mount is left under Israeli sovereignty; if all Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria fall under Israeli rule, and if the settlement enterprise in historical lands, the cradle of the Israeli nation, will have territorial continuity and become part of greater Israel – than we must say yes to Trump’s plan.
In 1947, too, the partition plan tore the land of Israel in two, leaving the Western and central Galilee, the eastern part of the Negev, including Beersheba, and even Jaffa (as an enclave) within the borders of the proposed Arab state.
In 2020, too, Trump’s plan will tear Judea and Samaria, the heart of our homeland, apart, and leaves about 70% to a future Palestinian entity. But what time and Arab rejectionism did in the past, time and Palestinian rejectionism will do in the future.
Embracing Trump’s plan at this time is just the beginning, even if parts of it are a bitter pill to swallow.
“The Deal of the Century,” if the leaked details are even close to accurate, is a non-starter. That is the simple take-away. But should Israel wait for the Arabs to blow it up on their own? And then what?
The basic contours being leaked about the forthcoming Trump Mideast plan, which he predictably, in his own typically understated modest way, calls “The Deal of the Century,” suggest that:
1. Israel would get to annex all Jewish communities presently established in Judea and Samaria.
2. Approximately 30-40 percent of Judea and Samaria formally would be integrated into Israel, reunifying those lands.
3. The Arabs in Judea and Samaria (“Palestinians”) would get their own independent country in what is left of Judea and Samaria after Israel annexes its 30-40 percent.
4. Hamas would have to be demilitarized.
5. “Palestine” would have to be demilitarized.
6. Jerusalem would be united. Arabs in Jerusalem could deem themselves “Palestinians.”
7. No new Jewish neighborhoods would be allowed to be added to Greater Jerusalem.
8. No new Jewish communities could be created in Judea and Samaria.
9. Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria that presently exist and are being annexed would not be permitted to expand further.
10. “Palestine” would be barred from having a military and would be protected instead by Israel, with “Palestine” paying for the protection.
In anticipation of the revelation of US President Trump’s Middle East peace plan – the so-called “deal of the century” - the PLO, the PA, and Fatah are emphasizing their rejection of the still unknown plan. They have also announced a “day of rage” on the day the plan is revealed, and called for “escalation of resistance” – a Palestinian euphemism for violence and terror.
Abbas’ Fatah Movement posted a photo of a Palestinian rock thrower in a call for violence accompanied by text implicitly encouraging Palestinians to seek death as martyrs for “Palestine”: Posted text and text on image: “We will redeem you with our blood, #Palestine”
[Official Fatah Facebook page, Jan. 26, 2020]
Similarly, the PLO urged Palestinians to “escalate the resistance and the struggle” against Israel “in all its forms and manners.” Terms like “all forms” and “all means” are used by PA leaders to include the use of all types of violence, including deadly terror against Israeli civilians such as stabbings and shootings, as well as throwing rocks and Molotov Cocktails: “The [Palestinian] National Council (i.e., the legislative body of the PLO) again expressed its objection to every plan, project, deal, or attempt to harm the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights… The National Council yesterday [Jan. 26, 2020] demanded that the PLO Executive Committee implement all of the National Council and [PLO] Central Council’s decisions – and foremost among them the decision determining that the transition period has ended with all of the political, security, and financial obligations in it towards the Israeli occupation – and also to take all the necessary steps to encourage and escalate the resistance and the struggle against the occupation in all its forms and manners.”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 27, 2020]
When Israel makes life easier for Palestinians, it rarely makes the news.
COGAT announced last week when describing a tour of Qalandiya crossing to a group of international visitors:
The Civil Administration has advanced its “Door To Door” project throughout the West Bank this past year. Thanks to this unique project, Palestinian trucks can carry merchandise into Israel without long and exhaustive checking at the crossings, instead relying on modern technology. This project advancement has shortened the crossing time for merchandise by two thirds while saving money, resources, and precious time.
Also earlier this month the Gisha NGO sent a letter to Minister of Defense Naftali Bennett -widely regarded as an anti-Arab zealot - asking him to allow tires into Gaza, as tires have been banned by Israel since April 2018 in response to Gaza riots that burned hundreds or thousands of tires at the border. This is a humanitarian issue, Gisha emphasized.
Because the media ignores stories like these, the Arab and anti-Israel narrative that Israel wants to arbitrarily hurt Palestinians is the only one people can read and watch. But Israel is only concerned for its own security, and always has been - if there are ways to ease Palestinian suffering without affecting security, Israel has shown that it is willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to do so.
(h/t Irene)
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
World War II killed nearly 50 million victims, but the Zionist movement speaks only of the Jewish war victims which did not exceed the most inflated and haphazard allegations, 6 million Jews, as they nationalized and monopolized the horrors of war in favor of their [Zionist] project, in an unprecedented Zionist racism toward the rest of the world.
Some of the recent Arab official statements that came out in solidarity with the so-called Holocaust without mentioning one word about the occupation of Palestine, do not represent or express Arab peoples, but rather are part of the wave of criminal normalization that struck the region in the recent period, led by the kingdoms and emirates of the Gulf.
Remembering the Holocaust: and fighting anti-Semitism, we must not forget the tragedy of the Palestinian people that it is exposed to on a daily basis and the massacres that take place in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli army, expelling the Palestinians from their properties and settling the herds of settlers in their place.
The writer understands European attitudes towards this human tragedy of the Holocaust, but I cannot understand the position of some Arab countries on this tragedy, they have nothing to do with it, and they did not participate in it and they are not historically required to profess this issue.
Seventy years ago "Jews" in Israel usurped Palestine with a European-American conspiracy and that it was planted in the heart of the Arab and Islamic world in order to be a hindrance to its unity and geographical contiguity.
I do not want to remind you of the words of the Almighty in Surat Al - Baqarah verse 120 "And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, 'Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance.' " Why do you scramble towards the tombs of the Jews, victims of European Nazism, to pray for their lives and weep for them?
What we remember in this regard are American and European books (including by Jews) that question the Jewish narration of the event and turn it into an industr as well! The Occupying Power is authorized to exercise the role of executioner without accountability; rather, with blessing, acquittal, or participation under the pretext of honoring the victim. This industry also allows some of the ancestors of the Holocaust contemporaries to be acquitted for their collusion with the very Nazi parties that organized concentration and extermination camps.
British historian David Irving says, “There is no documentation regarding the gas chambers,” as Jews reported, and Irving was not the only historian to discover this fact. There are a large number of historians and researchers who do not acknowledge these lies. The myth of the Holocaust and the Nazi gas chamber is the French researcher Paul Rassinier, as well as the French writer Louis-Ferdinand Céline who was mocking the gas chambers allegedly using the expression "magical gas chambers."
The Fatah International Relations Commission said in a statement commemorating the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz that the Palestinian people, ethnically cleansed by Jewish militias since 1948 and occupied by Israel since 1967 are like the victims of the Nazi occupation of Europe.
Fatah said that open or tacit acceptance of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism and the suppression of the legitimate critique of the State of Israel is tantamount to complicity with the war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by apartheid Israel against the Palestinian people.
“Yad va-Shem, the World Holocaust Remembrance Center, stands just 1.3km away from the lands and the meager remains of the ethnically cleansed and massively massacred Palestinian village of Deir Yasin. This year, the Yad va-Shem commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz coincides with the 72rd anniversary of the Deir Yasin Massacre,” Fatah said in a statement.
There was also anger at the visit to Auschwitz by the secretary general of the Muslim World League, Mohammad bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, along with a delegation of 62 Muslims. British Muslim and pro-Iranian site 5Pillars emphasized that al-Issa was invited by the American Jewish Committee which supports Israel.
However, the article did quote al-Issa as saying, “To be here, among the children of Holocaust survivors and members of the Jewish and Islamic communities, is both a sacred duty and a profound honour. The unconscionable crimes to which we bear witness today are truly crimes against humanity. That is to say, a violation of us all, an affront to all of God’s children.... [those around the world who engage in Holocaust denial are] partners in the crime. They are like Nazis themselves.”
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Joseph Massad, in an interview on RT, claimed (4:14) "Remember there's always been a distinction between Zionism, Jewishness and Judaism and the Israeli government has sought since the 1950s to collapse all these terms and all these references into one ... we see this beginning in the 1970s as an explicit strategy at the time spearheaded by the Israeli politician Abba Eban who was a foreign minister and before that the United Nations representative of Israel who insisted and gave a speech in the early 70s insisting that in fact we must equate Zionism with Jewishness and Jews and that any opposition to Zionism should be cast in the frame of anti-semitism."
I could not find any such speech from Abba Eban, and it is possible that Massad is referring to this 1975 New York Times article that Eban wrote right before the infamous UN resolution equating Zionism with racism. Eban's words are not a "strategy" but a statement of fact.
When I posted this nice quote, a tweeter named Aaron Shakow tried to counter it with a personal story:
Let me put it this way: the anti-Zionism-is-antisemitism formulation describes the Jewish identity of tens of thousands of Jews as illegitimate. My great-great grandfather was one. He was chief rabbi of Boston. He opposed Zionism until the day he died. He was even challenged to a duel by Chaim Weitzmann, whose friends apologized profusely. The only universe where all Jews are Zionists is where nationalists mute everyone with contrary opinions. Which is what Eban was trying to do here.
I'm fairly sure the great-great grandfather he is referring to was R' Gavriel Zev Margolis, who was indeed an anti-Zionist. (The Weizmann story sounds nebulous.)
We've seen this argument made before - that a significant number of Jews before 1948 were anti-Zionist so it is absurd to say that they were all antisemitic.
Columbia University professor Joseph Massad made this same argument in a TV interview for the RT propaganda site on Holocaust Remembrance Day as well.
The people making this argument are being disingenuous.
Before 1948, there was a fierce debate in Jewish circles about whether a Jewish state was good for the Jews. Both religious and non-religious Jews weighed in. There were significant fears about whether such a state would increase antisemitism, whether Western nations would expel their Jews for the Jewish state (no one argued in those days that Jews were not a nation,) as well as religious objections to creating a Jewish political entity before the Messiah comes.
But all of that changed when Israel became a reality. Jewish anti-Zionism became a fringe movement immediately. Only antisemites argued that the existing Jewish state must be dismantled or destroyed.
This 1968 story from a biography of the anti-Zionist Satmar Rebbe illustrates how even the religious Jews who were against the idea of Israel understood that anti-Zionism that was not from a religious Jewish perspective was bigotry:
When Hubert Humphrey was running for president in 1968, he came to speak with the Rebbe. The Rebbe noticed the chassidim whispering to Humphrey, and after the meeting he asked them what they had been saying. They said that they had warned Humphrey prior to the meeting that the Rebbe strongly opposed the State of Israel, and therefore Humphrey should avoid that subject. Humphrey had then asked if he could at least tell the chassidim about his support for the state, and they had laughed. The Rebbe said, "Had he spoken to me in support of the state, it wouldn't have bothered me in the least. We Jews have a Torah which forbids us to have a state during exile, and therefore we cannot ask the Americans to support the state. But a non-Jew has no Torah, and by supporting the state he feels he is helping Jews. And on the contrary, if an American non-Jew is against the Zionist state, it shows he is an anti-Semite." (h/t @yesh222)
Even the most prominent Jewish anti-Zionist understands that when non-Jews and non-religious Jews oppose Israel, they are simply antisemites.
The State of Israel exists. Anti-Zionists today are not arguing the theoretical pros and cons of a Jewish state as Jews did before 1948 - they are saying that they want the existing Jewish state to be destroyed. They want there to be no safe haven for Jews under persecution. They want, ultimately,. for Jews to be ethnically cleansed from the Middle East, under the pretense of "democracy." (Funny how no one fights for a democratic Arab state in the region besides a bi-national Palestinian one where Arabs can outvote Jews.)
In short, before 1948 most Jewish anti-Zionists were of course not antisemitic. But after 1948, anti-Zionists who are against the very existence of a Jewish state are people who hate Jews having any national rights. Ultimately, they support a Palestinian state from the river to the sea that will treat its Jews as every other Arab nation did since 1948 - as second-class citizens at best, as candidates for oppression, pogroms and expulsion at worst.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
A video circulated showing that the American ambassador to the Occupying Power, who the Palestinians call "the settlement ambassador", or "the settler ambassador", David Friedman, traveled on the plane of the Israeli occupation government president [sic], Benjamin Netanyahu, on his trip to Washington to meet with President Trump.
The video showed that Friedman, who was famous for encouraging settlements by raising millions of dollars in favor of building settlements in the occupied West Bank, was performing Talmudic prayers on a Netanyahu plane, during the trip from "Tel Aviv" to Washington.
Palestinians have always been far more frightened of religious Jews than secular Jews. They know that religious Jews are the ones who have emotional ties to the Land of Israel. Just as they use religion to scare gullible Westerners, they are scared of Judaism that pre-dates Islam and whose ties to the land also pre-date Islam.
They think they can win arguments based on international law or recent history but they know that in terms of religion and the emotional ties to the land, they fall way short.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
A new report issued on Monday by the research institute NGO Monitor found that eight Palestinian NGOs, which receive support from Western nations, maintain ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a terrorist organization.
NGO Monitor claimed that the Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, Germany, France, Ireland, Norway, and Belgium funneled millions of dollars to the Palestinian groups. The support was not limited to EU countries as the US, Canada and Japan were also among the donors. UN-OCHA and UNICEF were among the international organizations who also donate.
Over 70 current and former staff, board members, and general assembly members, as well as senior management and founders at these NGOs have direct ties to the PFLP, the report found.
Founded by George Habash in 1967, the PFLP is a Palestinian, secular, Marxist-Leninist terror group, originally supported by the USSR and China.
The PFLP was involved in suicide bombings, shootings, assassinations and other attacks targeting Israeli civilians. The group was well-known for hijacking commercial airlines in the 1960s and 1970s
It would be fair to say that Marxist elements on the political left can freely love the victims of the Nazis. The tragedy of the Holocaust and the anti-nationalist ideologies of the modern left are a perfect fit. What better way to show everyone how evil some of their ideological enemies are, than by holding aloft the furnaces of Auschwitz?
When I began the undercover work into antisemitism it never crossed my mind that Holocaust denial would exist on the Marxist left. Yet just as antisemitism has evolved and mutated so too has Holocaust denial. In fact, ‘left-wing’ antisemitism today is so rooted in Holocaust denial it would be unable to have spread into the mainstream without it. It sits hidden away in an antisemitic sewer titled ‘Rothschild Conspiracy’.
Many people I know – indeed even many people who fight antisemitism – consider Rothschild Conspiracy as something akin to a racist joke. Antisemitic – but put away with Icke’s lizards as a silly and almost laughable version of it. An adaptation of the ‘socialism of fools’ that blames Zionists rather than Jews for the inequality of the world. Marxists hate bankers, antisemitic stereotypes paint Jews as bankers, therefore antisemitic Marxists hate Jews.
This misses the point entirely. Rothschild Zionist Conspiracy – is not throwaway foolishness, nor is the inherent Holocaust denial within accidental. It is all an absolutely vital part of anti-Zionist ideology.
20,000 Jewish children burn
The problem is this: Israel is an ethical imperative. It is why elements of the left supported the early Zionists as a liberation movement even before the rise of the Nazis. The more the Nazis rose – the more of the left understood the necessity of Israel. What the Holocaust managed to do, was simply end the argument. Even amongst Jews – there was near universal support. Zionism was no longer just based on history or universal human rights, but on an undeniable contemporary necessity. Had Israel existed earlier, millions of Jews could have been saved.
This image is from a file at the British archives. The Polish consul sought agreement from the British for 20,000 Jewish children from Poland to be allowed to immigrate into the Mandate of Palestine. The date 18 Sep 1939.
US presidential contender Michael Bloomberg pledged on Sunday to “always have Israel’s back,” while separately joking he was the only Jewish candidate who does not want to turn the United States into a “kibbutz.”
The joke, made during a speech on antisemitism and foreign policy, referred to collectivist farms in Israel and was an apparent dig at fellow Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders.
Bloomberg and Sanders, who are both Jewish, are vying for the Democratic nomination to take on Republican President Donald Trump in the November election.
Sanders is a front-runner in the race and proposes left-wing policies like abolishing private health insurance in favor of a government-run Medicare-for-All program, based on the government program for older Americans.
Sanders spent several months in Israel in the 1960s as a volunteer on a kibbutz, and calls himself a democratic socialist.
Bloomberg has more centrist positions and has largely avoided attacks against individual Democratic candidates. A former mayor of New York whose wealth is estimated at about $60 billion, he has pledged to spend from his fortune to support the eventual Democratic nominee even if he loses the contest.
Bloomberg previously criticized leading Democratic candidates as too liberal to beat Trump. His remarks on Sunday appeared to take aim at Sanders, although he did not mention the senator from Vermont by name.
“I’m not the only Jewish candidate running for president. But I am the only one who doesn’t want to turn America into a kibbutz,” he told a campaign event at a synagogue in Miami.
There are two Jewish presidential candidates.@BernieSanders of them has always distanced himself from Judaism and has surrounded himself with antisemites.@MikeBloomberg is proudly Jewish and has always supported Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel June 2, 2024
-
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel June 2, 2024 IsraelSeen.com
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel June 2, 2024 Israelis might not have
the wisdom of ...
Were IDF Troops Moved to Hawara Prior to Oct. 7?
-
A staple claim of Israel's Left is that a day or so prior to October 7th,
significant enough numbers of soldiers were moved from the Southern Front
Comma...
Congratulations
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Yom Yerushalayim, Jerusalem Day, Israel, Six Day
War, 1967, Holiday, Jews, Jewish, Israel, Palestine,]
A Day of National Pride.
...
Who is Colonizing Whom?
-
*The discovery of America was a response to Muslim colonialism. Now it's
being undone.*
The discovery of America and the apogee of European civilizati...
Women's Rosh Chodesh Prayers
-
Biblical Shiloh is traditional place for prayers. The story of Chana
Hannah praying for a son in Shiloh is well-known. We have retuned.
There's a wel...
Yom Hashoah 5784 – 2024
-
Israel’s Yom Hashoah began at sundown this evening with the annual ceremony
at Yad Vashem with torches lit in memory of the 6 million Jewish victims of
the...
The Palestinian “Two-State” Plan: Duping the West
-
One of the great unsolved mysteries of the 21st century is why, given what
a catastrophe it proved to be, anyone, much less a whole phalanx of
politicians,...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
