Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, April 03, 2024

CAIR's Islamophobia methodology is garbage

Yesterday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a report saying that CAIR had received 8,061 complaints nationwide in 2023, the highest number of complaints CAIR has ever recorded.

So I looked at their methodology.

Each year, thousands of Americans contact CAIR through a variety of media, including telephone, email, and our online complaint system. When possible, CAIR staff also may also reach out to offer their services to individuals whose incidents were reported in news sources and not directly to CAIR. With each complaint, case intake staffers review preliminary materials and conduct interviews with prospective clients as part of the confidential intake process. These nationwide intake staff will then classify the case using the complaint category definitions provided earlier in this report. Each CAIR office that does intakes then submits their annual totals to the research and advocacy team.

Notice anything missing? CAIR doesn't even pretend to vet the complaints. Anyone can fill out anything in the online form and it gets counted as an incident.

Compare to the ADL's annual report on antisemitic incidents:

ADL staff verify the credibility of every incident, eliminate duplicates and weed out trolling and spam before including them in the Audit.

CAIR's list includes pretty much anything. If a Muslim man thinks that he is not getting his coffee fast enough because of his religion, that would be a complaint that gets counted.

Moreover, even if there is good reason for a Muslim to be treated differently because of his or her actions, it gets counted anyway. For example:

Banking-specific discrimination based on perceived identity/social class such as religion, race, ethnicity, or disability. This type of discrimination may result in an individual’s bank account or credit being closed for unexplained reasons. It includes peer-to-peer payment apps such as Venmo, CashApp, and Zelle and money transfer services like Western Union.

If a bank or payment service refuses to do business with someone, it is because that person violated their policies, not because they are Muslim. They could be sued if it was religious discrimination, and no one wants that.

Or this:

FBI Interrogation: An FBI agent approaches an individual and conducts, or attempts to conduct, an interview. FBI agents commonly approach individuals at work, school, or their home. The individual who has been approached may not know why the FBI is interested in speaking with them.

There isn't even a hint here that the person's religion has anything to do with the FBUI speaking to them - but CAIR considers this to be a valid complaint and it counts it.

CAIR have 20 categories of complaints. They categorize them but do not even pretend to vet them to see if they are in fact discriminatory.

And the report is largely based on this self-reported, unverified list of over 8,000 "complaints."

One other aspect of this report is worth mentioning.

It defines "anti-Palestinian racism" as “a form of anti-Arab racism that silences, excludes, erases, stereotypes, defames or dehumanizes Palestinians or their narratives."

This means if historians say that the Second Temple was on the Temple Mount before Al Aqsa Mosque was built, they are erasing a Palestinian narrative that the Temples were myths - and that makes them racist.

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!

Here is a video of a Muslim woman in London berating a gay supporter of Hamas at an anti-Israel demonstration:

The one-way relationship between "Queers for Palestine" and Muslim supporters of Hamas is one of the most bizarre aspects of modern antisemitism.

There is no possible reason for people to support those who want to see them dead - unless they want to see Jews dead even more.

So many people try to contextualize anything bad Palestinians do, while ignoring the antisemitism that underlies Israel-bashing. Context is wonderful when used in only one direction. "There is homophobia everywhere!" Yes, but not enshrined into law, and not subject to the death penalty. Sheesh.

Haaretz today writes about documentation Israel discovered in the tunnels under Khan Younis giving first hand details of the torture and eventual execution of a senior Hamas member, Mahmoud Ishtiwi.

"I went through torture that no one has gone through in Palestine, not by the Palestinian Authority, not even at the hands of the Jews, but by Hamas internal security," Mahmoud Ishtiwi wrote before his execution in February 2016.

The documents collected by IDF soldiers also show that following Ishtiwi's execution, Hamas continued to locate, dismiss, interrogate, and torture any member thought to be gay. A secret internal Hamas document from December 2019 discusses the discovery of "un-Islamic" activity by members, including drug use, prohibited relations with young women, theft, and pedophilia.

The file suggests that the organization feared anyone engaging in such activities was exposed to blackmail by Israeli security forces. But it seems that the most severe measures were taken against gay men, who were automatically marked as collaborators with Israel – a capital crime punishable by death.

The papers cite examples from 2018, when five Hamas members were arrested and interrogated for "committing the abomination of lying with a man, having illegal relations by a man with young women, taking sleeping pills, watching pornographic films, illegal relations with a young woman online, relations with young children, adultery, lying with a man, and harassment."

The reflexive response to these kinds of stories from gay Hamas supporters is "shut up!" Or, as with wife beating, it is "They only oppress gays because of the occupation!" Or, "Jews are homophobic too!"

Dr. Sa'ed Atshan, a professor of anthropology and peace and conflict studies at Swarthmore College, wrote a book called Queer Palestine and the Empire of Critique. He engages in a couple of these responses:

It's very dangerous to pathologize Palestinian society as uniquely homophobic or that homophobia is endemic to the society without this broader context, as well as without understanding the ways that life under brutal military occupation exacerbates homophobia within Palestinian society as well. In order for us to deal with questions of how queer people are treated in Palestine, we have to address the broader landscape of the denial of freedom to Palestinians more generally speaking.

Really? Why? Is it impossible for Palestinians to work towards solving any problems at all as long as Israel exists?

Because that is the real message being given.

(h/t Yoel)

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!

04/03 Links Pt1: Blame terrorists, not Israelis, for the suffering in Gaza; Iran Is Winning the War; Haniyeh: Hamas won't back down from hostage deal demands

From Ian:

Iran Is Winning the War

Weakness in Washington: Advantage Iran
Do Joe Biden and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin signal fearsome intent when they fire missiles at Iranian proxies while telling Tehran the United States has no desire to escalate? When Secretary of State Tony Blinken says to Iran, “we would like to see them tell the Houthis to stop,” do you think Iran feels the heat?

The questions answer themselves.

Amazingly, some senior Biden administration officials give the impression that the supreme leader’s supposed fatwa banning nukes just might be real—despite the history of Ali Khamenei driving the country’s once-clandestine nuclear-weapons project. Nothing about the Islamic Republic’s “peaceful” nuclear research since 2002, when the weapons program was first publicly revealed, makes sense unless one assumes the supreme leader’s original objective remains.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the regime currently has enough 60 percent enriched uranium for three nuclear weapons, which could rapidly be spun up to 90 percent, the ideal bomb-grade. The stockpile of 20 percent uranium would allow for several more. As it stands now, according to the Institute for Science and International Security, which closely monitors the Iranian nuclear program, Tehran could produce bomb-grade uranium for one weapon in seven days; one month would give enough for six bombs; five months would allow for 12 weapons.

Washington went through a similar experience with North Korea. There, U.S. officials wanted to believe that there was a chance that Pyongyang could be bought off short of a nuclear test, and if it couldn’t, then nuclearization was better than risking war on the peninsula.

Barring some monumental miscalculation by Tehran, Biden surely will be no more bold against the Islamic Republic than George W. Bush was against North Korea. The president’s recent decision to release $10 billion held in escrow for Iraq’s electricity payments to Iran, combined with the not-so-secret indirect talks between U.S. and Iranian officials in Oman, strongly suggest that the White House is trying hard to appease Tehran. Washington wants the clerical regime to halt its proxy attacks on U.S. forces and its atomic advance short of a fissile test—at least before the November election.

So What Can Be Done?
Americans and Israelis have for decades shied away from militarily punishing the mullahs for their malevolence. This hesitancy—an unwillingness to escalate—has fed an Islamist appetite for violence. But diplomacy and its euphemisms, sanctions, and whack-a-mole retaliatory strikes have run their course. And what Jerusalem is doing right now—beating back Iran’s proxies—will become a lot dicier once Tehran goes nuclear. Jerusalem might be obliged to accept as permanent a low-level, bloody duel with Iranian proxies. An insoluble Palestinian problem will gnaw at Israel from the West Bank, Gaza, and possibly from within Israel itself. Khamenei’s vision for destroying the “Zionist colonial settler-state”—an approach that will surely survive his death—is to erode Israeli happiness and foreign investment, not a catastrophic nuclear confrontation. Iranian nuclear weapons, the ultimate check on Israel and the United States, are a means to that end.

We are way past time pretending that any other avenue than military action against Iran has a chance of checking an Islamist nuclear-threshold state that is close to dominating the Middle East. The Biden administration’s preferred path—encouraging regime change in Israel, pining for a two-state solution, and importuning the Saudi crown prince to recognize Israel (while granting more sanctions relief to Iran and quietly sending emissaries to Oman)—is guaranteed to make a bad situation worse. As everyone in the Middle East knows, and as the Israelis momentarily forgot before October 7, hard power is the only coin of the realm.

Col. Richard Kemp: What happens if Israel does not go into Rafah? Look at Afghanistan

There is no doubting Israel’s spectacular military success so far in Gaza. I have been on the ground inside the Strip several times since the war began, and have seen first hand the remarkable combat actions of the IDF.

They have all but taken apart Hamas as a coherent fighting organisation, while doing everything in their power to minimise civilian casualties and working round the clock to get humanitarian aid to the Gazan population, which I have also witnessed.

Despite all this, the IDF has not yet accomplished its mission in Gaza: to destroy Hamas’s ability to threaten Israel and govern the Gaza Strip and to rescue the hostages. To achieve that, the IDF must launch a major offensive against the four Hamas battalions in Rafah. Focused now on its own survival, Hamas is determined to prevent that from happening and increasingly the international community seems intent on helping them.

That was underlined this week when the UN Security Council demanded a ceasefire in Gaza, which Britain supported and the US failed to veto. That historically shameful resolution was the culmination of a decades-long propaganda campaign under which Israel is an illegitimate entity. As the narrative goes, whatever is done to Israel, including the October 7 massacre, it had it coming; and whatever Israel does in its own defence, including finishing off Hamas in Rafah, it is wrong and uniquely evil.

Many supposed military experts say Israel should not mount an offensive in Rafah. I have not heard any of them put forward a single viable alternative. The White House is apparently recommending a strategy based on pinpoint, clinical strikes into the city, targeting Hamas leaders. Their template seems to be US special forces operations in Afghanistan, and we all know how that ultimately worked out. The Taliban survived, gained strength and eventually re-conquered the country. Under Taliban rule, Isis in Afghanistan has launched multiple global terrorist attacks including last week’s massacre in Moscow, according to US intelligence. A salutary lesson for those who think Israel does not need to finish off Hamas in Gaza.

In any case, in a heavily defended area like Rafah, no military operations can be “clinical”. In February, Operation Golden Hand showed us the necessity for overwhelming violence to enable special forces to extricate a single Israeli hostage from Rafah. The rescue mission had to be backed up by air strikes which reportedly killed dozens of people to enable the withdrawal of the hostage and the rescuers. Left intact, the Hamas battalions in Rafah will fight furiously against any “pinpoint” raids, which will not achieve the level of surprise of Operation Golden Hand if they become part of a series of such operations.

The Rafah conundrum: Crafting an effective strategy to crush Hamas

On Monday, the Israeli and U.S. national security advisors, along with other senior officials, had a video call in which they discussed the IDF’s current plans to evacuate civilians from Rafah, the city on the southern tip of Gaza where Hamas’s military strength is now concentrated. Israeli television reported that the American participants rejected the plan, and that their reaction was “harsh.” But, absent a Hamas surrender, one way or another the IDF will have to find have to find a way to deal with the terrorists in the city.

Amos Yadlin and Udi Evental explain that such an operation is necessary to eliminate the four Hamas battalions in Rafah, to kill or capture the group’s other leaders, and if possible to free the remaining hostages. There is yet another reason, which, Yadlin and Evental claim, is “far more important,” namely

the need to cut off the smuggling routes from the Sinai, aboveground and primarily underground, along the Egypt-Gaza border (the “Philadelphi” route). This smuggling activity has enabled Hamas to amass an enormous quantity of weaponry, which the citizens of Israel and IDF forces have encountered in the war. Without thoroughly addressing this issue, the smuggling tunnels will enable Hamas to reap profits, receive assistance from its supporters in the Muslim world, and ultimately restore its military capacity and resume its military buildup.

It should also be emphasized that complete Israeli control in Rafah does not guarantee the success of blocking the smuggling tunnels and effectively monitoring the Rafah crossing (and the adjacent Saladin Gate). These objectives depend, in part, on effective action by Egyptian forces on the other side of the border, who rake in profits from the smuggling and conduct a policy of calibrating pressures vis-à-vis Gaza.

They go on to explain how Jerusalem might deal with this diplomatic and military conundrum:

[T]he threat of an extensive operation in Rafah serves as leverage vis-à-vis Hamas in the context of a hostage deal. The IDF should take advantage of the Ramadan period to start to evacuate civilians and amass forces along the outskirts of Rafah.

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese tweeted:

Knowing how Israel operates, my assessment is that Israeli forces intentionally killed #WCK workers so that donors would pull out & civilians in Gaza could continue to be starved quietly.Israel knows Western countries & most Arab countries won't move a finger for the Palestinians.

Who needs an investigation? we have an expert who knows what happened without any pesky things like proof!

This is a blood libel being proudly published by a supposed defender of human rights.

Albanese, with her amazing mind-reading abilities, "knows how Israel operates." It murders aid workers in order to be able to indirectly murder two million Palestinians.

For reasons known only to her and other antisemitic conspiracy theorists, Israel spends a lot of time and money pretending to only target Hamas when it really wants to kill every Gazan and probably every Palestinian. It has struck more targets in Gaza than the number of people killed but that must be just to make Jews look less bloodthirsty they really are.

And the conspiracy to hide Israeli atrocities runs very deep. Look how hard they try to hide their determination to stop all humanitarian aid:

243 humanitarian aid trucks were inspected and transferred to the Gaza Strip yesterday (Apr. 1). 162 trucks were distributed within the Gaza Strip by UN aid agencies.
216 packages with hundreds and thousands of meals were airdropped over northern Gaza yesterday (Apr. 1).
13 trucks carrying food aid were transferred directly to northern Gaza. So far, 60 food trucks were transferred directly to northern Gaza via a designated delivery route.
Yesterday, (Apr. 1) 4 tankers of cooking gas and 3 tankers of fuel designated for the operation of essential infrastructure in Gaza, have entered the Gaza Strip.
A delegation of 22 doctors by the Rahma organization entered the Gaza Strip yesterday (Apr. 1).

All of this humanitarianism is meant to hide Israel's efforts to perform genocide against Palestinians!

People like Albanese know the truth: when Israel kills civilians, it is deliberate murder. When Israel helps civilians, it is to hide their intent to murder civilians. When Israel goes to great lengths to target militants, it is to hide the fact that they really want to kill civilians.

Everything Israel does is evil and Francesca Albanese has the brilliant mind that can figure out how.

There is absolutely no difference between how Albanese judges Israel and how neo-Nazis look at Jews. Everything they do is immoral and with the intention to subjugate the goyim. All evidence to the contrary is either twisted to be evidence supporting the conspiracy theories, or quietly ignored.

When will the world wake up to the fact that antisemites from the Left are just as reprehensible and bigoted as those from the Right?

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!

On Monday, Israel apparently bombed an Iranian "consular building" that was part of the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus. Seven members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards were killed, chief among them General Mohamad Reza Zahedi, who was the leader of the Quds Force for Palestine, Syria and Lebanon. Two other senior generals were also among the 11 who were killed.

No civilians were killed.

Was this attack legal under international law?

The New York Times interviewed several law experts, and it appears that this did not violate international law, although it is highly unusual and violated longstanding practice.

Most of the literature on diplomatic immunity discusses immunity from the hosting state against embassy personnel who are diplomats. If they commit even the most heinous crimes, they cannot be prosecuted by the hosting country; they can only be declared persona non grata and deported back. Even the murderers of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul could not be prosecuted by Turkish authorities.

But does a third party have any responsibility to respect the inviolability of an embassy or consulate, especially when that third party has no relations with the either the hosting country of the consulate nation?

“Israel is a third state and is not bound by the law of diplomatic relations with regard to Iran’s Embassy in Syria,” said Aurel Sari, a professor of international law at Exeter University in the United Kingdom.

In practice, there is a strong taboo in international relations against attacking embassies, said Marko Milanovic, a professor of public international law at Reading University in the United Kingdom. But that custom is broader than what international law actually prohibits, he said.

“Symbolically, for Iran, destroying its embassy or consulate, it’s just seen as a bigger blow,” he said, than “if you killed the generals in a trench somewhere.” But, he added, “the difference is not legal. The difference is really one of symbolism, of perception.”

The closest similar situation I could find was the US bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, but the US called that an accident and Bill Clinton apologized.

The NYT quotes legal expert Yuval Shany saying that an embassy has no greater protection than any other civilian object like a school, and if it is used for military purposes against Israel then it becomes legal to attack it.

Was the building even a diplomatic site to begin with? Israel says it was not.

CNN reports:

A military spokesperson said Israel believes the target struck was a “military building of Quds forces” — a unit of the IRGC responsible for foreign operations.

“According to our intelligence, this is no consulate and this is no embassy,” Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari told CNN. “I repeat, this is no consulate and this is no embassy. This is a military building of Quds forces disguised as a civilian building in Damascus.”

News media are referring to the site as an Iranian consular building on the Iranian embassy compound. I have never heard of a consulate in the same city as an embassy. A consulate does only a subset of what embassies do, typically in major cities outside the capital.

The NYT article notes,

Iran has long blurred the lines between its diplomatic missions and its military operations in the Middle East. It selects its ambassadors to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen — countries that make up the “axis of resistance” — from the commanders of the Quds Forces, the external branch of the Revolutionary Guards Corps, rather than its career diplomats. In 2021, Mohammad Javad Zarif, then Iran’s foreign minister, said in a leaked recording that Iran’s foreign policy in the region is determined by its field military operations and not traditional diplomacy set by the foreign ministry.

It appears likely that this building was meant for military, not diplomatic, purposes. Iran using proxies to fight a war with Israel doesn't mean that they are not military targets. The IRGC generals were meeting with leaders of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror group which receives its funding and often its orders from the IRGC.

The only legal question is whether Israel can attack a third country when defending itself in a war. From Israel's perspective, this is no different than its many airstrikes in Syria meant to stop the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon and certainly self defense. It would be difficult to argue against it when the West routinely has been attacking terrorists in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and elsewhere, usually without permission from those governments.

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 mistaken targeting of the aid workers from the World Central Kitchen should never have happened. Whoever was responsible for the airstrike decision should be removed from their posts immediately. It is not only a human rights catastrophe, but it also hurts Israel and the IDF tremendously.

However, the reaction from the world is more indicative of assuming that this is a pattern of neglect by the IDF, which is an absolute falsehood.

It is woefully underreported that the IDF is doing an amazing job in this war. Most of the things the IDF is doing are literally unprecedented by any army in history. Military colleges will study this campaign for decades to come.

While some of the groundwork was of course set up beforehand - notably the tight integration between the air force, navy, ground troops and artillery, where ground troops can call in a strike from the other parties and - the actual implementation was done on the fly, with mostly reservists learning the procedures on the job with only a couple of weeks of training.

The IDF has been able to retrieve intelligence and make it actionable in hours or days, not months. It has been able to test out brand new methods of urban and tunnel warfare never before seen - face recognition and other new technologies, robotics, AI, and many new methods that are still under wraps.

Importantly, the IDF is flexible. It has changed the military campaign at the turn of a dime several times. It has improved itself in real time.

Even more impressive are the logistics - the dividing up Gaza into hundreds of areas and directing people to avoid airstrikes using phone messages and drones with speakers, as well as old fashioned leaflets. Scanning and passing through humanitarian aid. Coordinating the aid with multiple third parties.

Much of this is brand new and never before seen in any war. All wars are complicated, but the complexity of this war is far beyond what any media is talking about. Israel didn't choose the timing for this war. It is like building a basic space shuttle to take off in two weeks and being expected to upgrade it every day while it is flying. Every mistake is magnified and criticized, while the fact that it is even off the ground and improving every day on the fly is beyond amazing.

It is doing all of this under the most scrutiny of any army in history. And it has gone beyond what other Western armies have done to minimize civilian loss of life in urban warfare. Never before Hamas has an enemy relied on civilian deaths as a major part of their strategy.

The US, UK and other Western powers have killed tens of thousands of civilians over the past two decades during wars. No one accused them of targeting civilians deliberately even though they killed thousands of civilians in much less challenging environments.

9,000 civilians were killed by the US-led coalition in Iraq between 2003-2005.

In July 2008, the US hit an Afghan wedding party, thinking they were a large number of terrorists. 47 Afghan civilians were killed including the bride. And in November, a similar airstrike at a wedding killed 37 civilians, mostly women and children.

Between 86 and 147 Afghan civilians were killed in another 2009 US airstrike.

In September 2012, a US drone shot at a truck in Yemen, killing 12 civilians, including three children and a pregnant woman.

In 2015, the US fired over 200 shells at a hospital building in Kunduz, Afghanistan, killing 42 patients and staff. Days later, it admitted the mistake, saying that it had intelligence that the Taliban were in the building.

In March 2017 , the US dropped a 500-pound bomb on a building where about 50 people were sheltering in ISIS-controlled Syria.

In 2018, the US Army shot a Hellfire missile at a mother and daughter in Somalia, and when one tried to flee, it hit them again, killing them. .

In 2021, a US drone shot and killed 10 civilians in Kabul, including an aid worker and seven children. It wasn't a split second decision - they watched the vehicle for eight hours without considering that perhaps the people they were watching were innocent.

Last May, the US announced the killing of an Al Qaeda leader - but the victim was really a 56-year old former bricklayer.

As recently as February of this year, US airstrikes in Iraq killed civilians.

In nearly all of these cases, the US didn't admit their mistakes until weeks or months later, if ever, and only when pressured would they release any results of investigations.

So when Joe Biden, who was president and vice president during a great number of these US airstrikes killing so many civilians, says he is "outraged" at Israel, he is being more than a little hypocritical The US track record on transparently investigating mistakes and taking responsibility is horrible compared to Israel's.

There is one other difference between US and Israeli airstrikes. US citizens are not directly threatened by terrorists in the Middle East, but the spouses and parents of Israeli soldiers are only a minute away from being killed by a rocket or a terrorist every day. A mistake in the other direction, allowing a terrorist to live, can have devastating consequences for the people who live, work or study only a couple of hours drive away.

Wars are complex. There are a lot of people doing a lot of things and the communications between the different sections are not always perfect. Mistakes are made by even the best armies. And the most professional armies in the world, with the best human rights protections, sometimes kill civilians despite their best efforts to avoid it.

If Biden is so outraged at Israel's mistakes, he should take personal responsibility for the US killings of civilians to the extent that Israel does. As far as I can tell, he hasn't publicly apologized for a single killing of civilians by his armed forces as Netanyahu did Tuesday.

Not to excuse Israel's airstrike - it shouldn't have happened and you can be certain that the mistakes that led to that strike will be reviewed and fixed. But this outrage over what happens in every war by every Western power is more than a little disingenuous.

Hamas started this war, Hamas benefits from the deaths of aid workers, and Hamas is the party ultimately responsible for their deaths. Defeating the terrorists is the moral thing to do, and that cannot always be done as antiseptically as everyone would like.

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!

04/02 Links Pt2: The unbearable sanctimony of the ‘pro-Palestine’ set; The Real Reason Al Jazeera Faces Suspension in Israel; Is CNN now part of Pallywood?

From Ian:

The Indigenous Sovereignty Movement Called Zionism

Furthermore, another question: Does every people-group around the world have a place to which it is indigenous except the Jews? Of course not. The word Jew comes from Judah, son of Israel, a patriarch for whom the nation is named—long before Judea was renamed to “Palestine” in the fourth century by Roman conquerors.

A beautiful truth concerning the Jewish people is that a tenet of the founding principles (the Ten Words/Commandments) includes a command not to steal and not to covet what a neighbor owns. This includes property. By and large, the Jewish people have observed this principle, sticking to only wanting what their Deity entrusted to their nation. Jews do not lay claim to Iraq or Egypt. They do not engage in wars of conquest against their neighbors or seek to establish global empires.

Furthermore, the Jewish people—unlike some other groups—do not have a historical, worldwide effort to force-convert and proselytize the known universe into their faith, culture, fashion, and customs or to set up diaspora colonies in every possible country to force their Torah upon unassuming local indigenous tribes, overriding and usurping local legal law. To do so would have been to transgress into becoming colonizers.

We recognize the Jewish people as the indigenous people of Israel, Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. More than that, Israel is the prime example of hope for other displaced indigenous tribes worldwide. Here is why: Israel stands as the original land-back and decolonization model multiple times in history. The Jewish people have kept a fire burning deep within their hearts even through the historical traumas of forced removals, conversions, crusades, torture, inquisitions, assimilation, and colonization by multiple empires. That inner fire speaks of an eternal promise of returning to the land of their ancestors and never again being removed. Moreover, when given the opportunity, many have returned to the place of their indigenous inception—Israel.

An ancient tribal people, the Jews, an entire nation taken hostage, enslaved, and scattered to the four directions on countless trails of tears, have been restored to the place of their origin, to the locations of their sacred places, to the land that holds their ancestors’ bones. Even the soil responds, blossoming and springing to life when its original caretakers walk upon it once again. This is the dream of any indigenous person: to return home to the land of their ancestors, to the origin place of their traditions, customs, beliefs, and language.

Empowering the Jewish people to dwell safely in their ancestral sovereign land, allowing them to self-govern as they protect their borders and people, ensuring they have charge of their own holy sites—this is Zionism. This is the essence of being indigenous.

Six years ago, in 2018, we had the vision of an indigenous embassy in Israel. While we first applied the vision to First Nations of North America, our elders later told us to expand our vision to a worldwide indigenous embassy for people all over the earth to support Israel’s declaration of indigeneity.

Now, the Indigenous Embassy of Jerusalem is a reality. It will celebrate Israel as her people, in the words of Rabbi Pesach Stadlin, “re-indigenize.” As the first nation to be restored to the boundaries of its original covenant land with the Creator, Israel stands as a beacon of hope not just to Jews around the globe but to all indigenous people—worldwide.

‘We are a great nation’: Bereaved father slams anti-gov’t protesters

The father of an IDF soldier killed in action in Gaza has denounced renewed anti-government protests, accusing demonstrators of using the plight of bereaved families and the relatives of hostages to further their political aims.

“Nobody should burn the country down,” Hagay Lober, whose son Staff Sgt. (res.) Elisha Yehonatan Lober, 24, was killed in the southern Gaza Strip in December, wrote in a viral Facebook post on Sunday.

“You cannot dismantle the country. You cannot riot. You cannot block roads. You cannot clash with the police. You cannot call for military [refusal to serve]. You cannot attempt to break into the prime minister’s house,” added Lober.

He spoke after protesters gathered at the Knesset on Sunday night, demanding that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu resign and agree to early elections. A day earlier, some families of hostages announced that they would join forces with those calling to overthrow the government.

“I was completely shocked that people were speaking like this after October 7. It felt like a second knock at my door. The first knock was the army coming to tell me that Yehonatan fell in battle in Gaza,” Lober told JNS on Tuesday.

“I am not a fighter. All I have is my Facebook page, so I wrote what I needed to say. I felt that I had the right as a bereaved parent to tell the hostage families to stop this. We are brothers, we only have one country. We should do things right. After, I was happy to see that the majority of people in Israel think like me,” he added.

On Saturday night, 16 people were arrested in Tel Aviv for blocking roads and violating public order. Protesters also clashed with police in Jerusalem, where some 200 people broke through barriers to protest near Netanyahu’s official residence, and in Caesarea, where they blocked roads close to the premier’s private home.

The demonstrators called for the prime minister to resign in a familiar chant heard during the protests against judicial reform in the months preceding Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack.

Daniel Gordis: "Even if you have family kidnapped in Gaza, I'm not going to let you burn this country down."

The post above was written by Hagai Luber, father of Yonatan Luber, z’l, 24, who was killed in battle in last December in Southern Gaza, leaving behind a pregnant wife and a nine-month old son. His words were then posted on Instagram here.

Here is what Yonatan Luber’s father wrote, via social media, to the protesters now swarming the capital:

No one is going to burn my country down.

I'm tired of the threats from the extremists.
Yes, even if these extremists have family members being held in Gaza
You're not going to burn this country.
There's no way.
And if you have to be resisted, I will resist.
Millions of people are staring at you, without believing what they're seeing, without agreeing, with horror,
And only out of respect for you, they're staying quiet.
I will not stay quiet.

My son was killed in Gaza.
He went to defend and to free your children
and he was killed.
He left everything, a pregnant wife and a nine month old son
And was killed.
He will never come back. Not in any "deal."

So I have the right to say to you:
You have no right to pull the country apart
You have no right to go crazy on the streets
You have no right to block roads
You have no right to scuffle with police officers
You have no right to call for people to refuse army service
You have no right to shake police cars
You have no right to try to break in to the Prime Minister's home.

That your children are being held captive in Gaza
It hurts, it saddens, it cuts us all to shreds inside
It will get me to send, once again, my three remaining sons
to fight, to put themselves in danger--for you.

But all that gives you no special rights.

You have no right to "take off the gloves"
You have no right to curse elected public officials
You have no right to scream "Shame!"
You have no right to create public mayhem
You have no right to block the airport
You have no right to call for a general strike.

Control yourselves. Do you hear me?
C O N T R O L Y O U R S E L V E S.

Express your views, but don't shout.
Say that we need a "deal" now, but don't block streets
Say we need an "everyone for everyone" deal but don't call for revolution.
Say that the Knesset should not be going out on recess, but don't threaten
Say that it's high time to vote Bibi out, but don't light fires
Say that we need elections now, but don't you dare try to swarm the Knesset
Say that everyone failed, but don't even think
about the possibility of revolution.

Stop threatening this people.
That's your view. We heard you. Now don't force it on anyone.

Want to hear my views, too?

To my mind, Yonatan was killed because of the Oslo agreements,
which some of you supported.
To my mind, Yonatan was killed because of the Disengagement from Gaza,
which some of your encouraged
with pro-disengagement signs at the entrances to kibbutzim.

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!

I was interviewed by JNS a few weeks ago, ahead of my 20th Blogoversary coming up this August.

The reporter dug up some stuff about the site even I had forgotten. (I added links.)

The Washington think tank Jewish Policy Center has called him an “essential” read half a dozen times, and the watchdog CAMERA UK said he is “indefatigable” and “one of the best pro-Israel bloggers out there.”

“Elder of Ziyon” is the pen name of a man who works in high tech and, for the past 20 years, has authored some 40,000 posts on a reader-supported, pro-Israel blog that goes by the same pseudonym. The site has received between 30,000 and 50,000 daily views, “Elder” told JNS.

The anonymous poster’s first entry was dated Aug. 15, 2004, and it ran five words, linking to an article in the Israeli press. Since then, “Elder”—whose identity is unknown to JNS—has reported longer-form material, including an investigation that led McGraw-Hill Education to pull the publication of a textbook he accused of anti-Israel propaganda.

In 2022, “Elder” self-published Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism, which Gerald Steinberg, founder of NGO Monitor, called “the essential reference handbook” in “exposing the lies behind the modern embodiment of the infamous ‘Protocols.’”

....Among the blog’s greatest hits over the years are some cheeky items, including the backdoor nomination of “Elder” for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2019.

“Is it that difficult to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize? Not really. The Nobel committee has criteria for who can nominate others for the prize, and tens of thousands of people—parliamentarians and university professors in certain fields among them—are qualified,” he wrote on Oct. 3, 2018.

“A friend of mine, who happens to be one of those people, has officially nominated my blog persona, the Elder of Ziyon, for the Nobel Peace Prize of 2019,” he added.

The blog also offers an “intersectionality victimhood” calculator—an attempt to calculate “who is the perceived underdog, and therefore, the more righteous of each side in any conflict.”

The blog is also quite serious at times.

An “Elder gets results” section details some of the site’s impact, from an antisemitic article removed from an Arab news site to Israel and its flag added to U.S. online visa applications, and Washington boycotting the Durban IV conference to an amended National Geographic article that displayed anti-Israel bias.

Looking ahead, “Elder” would like to see human-rights nonprofits answer whether Gazan refugees who want to go to Egypt or Jordan ought to be allowed to do so.

“That’s the only question I want to know because they’re so pro-refugee,” he told JNS.

“Elder” noted that Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International complained that Egypt created unnecessary impediments for refugees entering from Sudan. The organizations also supported Iraqi, Somali and Syrian refugees. “So why not Palestinians?” he asked.

When you have over 40,000 articles over 20 years, you are allowed to forget a few.

Read the whole thing!

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!

04/02 Links Pt1: Palestinian terrorism is not about self-determination; Iran is at war with the West, but only Israel is fighting back

From Ian:

Palestinian terrorism is not about self-determination

At its core, Palestinian terrorism against Israel has nothing to do with high-minded, law-based principles of statehood or national self-determination. As a pragmatic tactic of terror, such principles merely disguise relentless criminality usefully sanitizing darkly primal objectives.

Israel must first examine Palestinian violence against the innocent in terms of the wider human need to belong. This compelling need can be expressed harmlessly, as in sports hysteria and rock concerts, or perniciously, as in jihadist terror. Further, the Hamas murders of Israeli noncombatants on October 7, 2023, went far beyond the pernicious. Prima facie, they were conspicuously barbarous and patently inexcusable.

What does this candid assessment suggest about the seemingly authentic Palestinian demand for a “two-state solution?” Above all, it reveals a demand that is based upon deliberate misinformation and orchestrated subterfuge. Not only would a Palestinian state fail to inhibit or halt Palestinian terrorism, it would render such grievous wrongdoings increasingly likely and still more injurious.

In explaining these many-sided security matters, analytic thinking and philosophy will deserve pride of place. Long ago, Aristotle understood that “man is a social animal.” Typically, the seminal Greek thinker recognized that even “normal” individuals can feel empty and insignificant apart from tangible membership in the “mass.”

Aristotle’s reasoning endures. Sometimes that “mass” is the state. Sometimes it is the tribe. Sometimes the faith (always the “one true faith”). In the case of Palestinian terror violence, it is the aspiring state.

Details aside, whatever the “mass” claims at a particular historical moment, it is an unquenchable craving for belonging that threatens to produce the catastrophic downfall of individual responsibility and correlative triumphs of collective criminality.

In jihadist-centered parts of the Middle East – and this includes places that harbor the Shiite Hezbollah as well as the Sunni Hamas/Fatah/Islamic Jihad – belonging is generally determinative. Unless millions can finally temper the all-consuming psychological desire to belong, all military, legal, and political schemes to control virulent terrorism will fail.

Col. Kemp: Iran is at war with the West, but only Israel is fighting back

Tehran claims that the air strikes which killed Iranian military commanders in Damascus on Monday were “Israel’s latest war crime against a foreign mission with diplomatic immunity”. They were nothing of the sort.

The target was, in fact, widely reported to have been an Iranian command centre coordinating military action against Israel, adjacent to the Iranian consulate. This would not, then, make the strikes a breach of the Vienna Convention, as those ever eager to condemn Jerusalem have suggested. Israel is perfectly entitled to hit military facilities in another country that is engaged in active hostilities.

Nor was this a major escalation by Israel, however, as many others have argued. It was merely the latest move in a war that Tehran itself has launched against Israel and the West.

Indeed, it may well turn out to be the most significant strategic setback for Iran since the US took out Qasem Soleimani, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force commander, in 2020. The main target of Monday’s attack, IRGC brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi, was believed to be the principal interlocutor between Syria, Tehran and its terrorist proxy Hezbollah. With decades of experience in this clandestine world, he will not be easily replaced.

The flow of arms to Hezbollah could well now be further impeded. Since October 7, that terror group has launched regular missile strikes against Israelis near the Lebanese border, as a consequence of which nearly 100,000 civilians have been evacuated. Do Jerusalem’s critics really expect it to sit back and let those attacks continue?

But the real question is why it only seems to be the Israelis who are taking the Iranian threat seriously. It’s not as if Iran has only been targeting Israel. Iranian proxies have attacked international shipping in the Red Sea and Iranian-backed militias have launched more than 150 strikes against US forces in Syria, Iraq and Jordan since October 7 alone.

Arsen Ostrovsky and Richard Kemp: Israel's Attack on Rafah Must Proceed. Here's Why

In 1944, as the Allies were preparing for the D-Day landings in Normandy, it is unfathomable that anyone sought to pressure British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and President Franklin D. Roosevelt to halt the landings and enter a ceasefire agreement with Nazi Germany. Yet that is exactly what the international community is seeking to do with Israel, in pressuring the Jewish state to enter a one-sided ceasefire with Hamas and avert a necessary operation in Rafah.

Although the perpetrators may have changed 80 years later, Hamas' monstrous savagery and agenda is no different to the Nazis. And just as Normandy was a pivotal turning point in World War II, putting the Allies on a decisive path toward victory, so too can be an IDF operation in Rafah, the last remaining Hamas stronghold in southern Gaza.

Yet since its establishment in 1948, the Jewish state has been the only democracy repeatedly denied the right to achieve total victory against enemies who have time and again initiated wars and now pogroms too, seeking no less than its very annihilation.

This week, for the first time, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution calling for a unilateral ceasefire in Gaza, following the United States' decision to abstain from the vote. Meantime, both the U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Cameron, have been exerting overwhelming pressure on Israel to avoid a ground operation in Rafah.

However, any leader's primary duty is, first and foremost, to defend their nation. In Israel's case, this follows in response to the most heinous massacre perpetrated against the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and one in which 134 people, including children, elderly people, and women, suffering horrific ongoing sexual abuse at the hands of their Hamas captors, remain hostage in Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that Israel "will not compromise on less than total victory over Hamas."

"Victory" in this sense includes destroying Hamas's military and governing capability to ensure there can never be a repeat of Oct. 7, that Hamas cannot constitute a threat to Israel, and the return of all hostages.

It is currently estimated that up to 60 percent of Hamas' 30,000-strong terrorist force in Gaza has been either eliminated, severely wounded or arrested by IDF forces since Oct. 7, while at least 20 of their 24 battalions have been dismantled, with the remaining 4 battalions still present in Rafah. Israel is also operating on the working assumption that Hamas is holding hostages captive in Rafah as well.

Simply put, the IDF cannot complete its military aims, without a full ground incursion into Rafah, to take out the remaining Hamas battalions. Those who are seeking to pressure Israel to refrain from entering Rafah are denying the Jewish state the decisive victory it has every right to pursue against Hamas after the pogrom of Oct. 7.

Occasionally, videos pop up of Gazans expressing their anger at Hamas. Yet the mainstream media - who rely on Gaza-based stringers who are afraid of Hamas - steer away from any stories that show both how Gazans are angry at Hamas and how they still fear the group, which makes the quotes of all Gazans suspect.

Haaretz' Amira Hass, to her credit, reports that Gazans are deathly afraid to denounce Hamas, even though they know it is Hamas decisions that are making their lives miserable.

The donkey cart full of people and mattresses is one of the sights of the war on Gaza and the current siege. "More than once, I've heard a cart owner urging his donkey on and saying something like, 'Move it, Yahya Sinwar, move it,'" says Basel (a pseudonym, as I've used for everyone in this article).

"People are constantly cursing Sinwar, but this isn't reflected in the journalists' reports," he says.

As he put it in a phone conversation, not our first, he said, "Early this week, an elderly man standing in the middle of the market cursed Ahmed Yassin for giving us Hamas" – Yassin was one of the Hamas leaders assassinated by Israel in 2004. "I blew him a kiss for his courage. I'm not for cursing a dead man, but I love it when people rebel."

I didn't know Basel before we started our phone correspondence; he initiated the contact to express his fury at what he calls "Hamas' takeover of our narrative." He's angry that the Palestinians outside Gaza and their supporters expect Gazans to shut up and not criticize Hamas, because the criticism ostensibly helps the enemy. He rejects the assumption that doubting the decisions and actions of this armed group – and to do so publicly – is an act of treason.

"I have the right that they should know what I think and feel, even if I'm in the minority – and I know that I'm not in the minority. And I know that I speak for a lot of people," Basel says. "I have the right to speak, if only because I'm one of the millions whose lives Hamas is gambling with for crazy slogans with no basis in reality, which have dwarfed the Palestinian cause and turned the struggle for high and existential goals into a struggle for a piece of bread and cans of food."

Two friends and an old acquaintance of mine confirm that Basel's criticism of Hamas represents many people.

[Nura] too hears the curses against Hamas everywhere: at the hospital that couldn't treat her wounded granddaughter, when she's waiting in line to fill their water container, and when passing by piles of stinking garbage that no one clears – and there's nowhere to take it to anyway.

"I sat with some friends at a café," says Shaher, 75. ..He and his friends sat at the café and criticized Hamas. But, "the owner heard us and told an employee not to serve us until we went," Shaher says and adds: "The café owner may agree with the criticism, but it was clear he got afraid." Meaning, he was afraid that someone from Hamas might overhear and harm him in one way or another.

"Obviously, there's enormous anger and bitterness everywhere against Hamas," says Amal, another woman in her mid-60s, whose apartment building in Gaza was bombed at the start of the war a few days after she and her family moved south. She has also heard about people "who were threatened after they expressed their opinion in public."

Nura tells how someone proposed that they demonstrate, but others were afraid that Hamas would shoot at them.

Shaher tells about demonstrations that called for Hamas to release the hostages in order to end the war. "Applying a typical tactic of a dictatorship, anonymous supporters of the organization mixed in among the demonstrators until the slogan was changed to 'We demand to go back to the north of the Strip,'" Shaher says.

As Basel puts it, "Hamas' military power in Gaza has been almost totally destroyed, but not its power to oppress us."

Basel and Shaher boil with anger when they talk about the silence of the Palestinian and Arab-world media – and about the freelance photographers who turn their cameras aside when one of the people gathering around the rubble cries out against the Islamic resistance movement rather than only against Israel, the United States and the world in general. Whether they're photographers who support Hamas or are simply afraid of the group, the result is the same.

The Free Press also has shown a number of cases of Gazans railing against Hamas.

Don't think the mainstream media is simply not aware. As I noted earlier this week, CNN interviewed a person, who insisted to remain anonymous, confirming Israel's story that Shifa Hospital had hundreds of Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists, many openly brandishing guns. But they said they "couldn't confirm" the statement and buried that fact between anti-Israel statements by others.

The depth of fear that ordinary Gazans have for Hamas is simply not being mentioned in the thousands of articles that uncritically quote Gazan "testimony" saying things like they have seen Israeli bulldozers run over living people. Gazans know the narrative they are supposed to say to Western reporters and they play their part.

It is just another example of how most media cares more about an anti-Israel agenda than telling the truth.

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!

Egypt denies more Gaza medical permits than Israel ever did. NGOs who issued reports condemning Israel are silent.

The hypocrisy of so-called human rights groups is more apparent every day of this war.

In 2017, five of those NGOs released yet another statement condemning Israel for denying or delaying medical treatment for many Gazans.

The record-low rate of permits issued by Israel for Palestinians seeking vital medical treatment outside Gaza underlines the urgent need for Israel to end its decade-long closure of the Gaza Strip, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP), and Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI) said today in a joint statement.

Israeli authorities approved permits for medical appointments for only 54 percent of those who applied in 2017, the lowest rate since the World Health Organization (WHO) began collecting figures in 2008. WHO reported that 54 Palestinians, 46 of whom had cancer, died in 2017 following denial or delay of their permits.

Now, when Gaza's health crisis is far more acute, how many medical permits are being approved by Egypt for travel and treatment?

According to the latest Gaza health ministry report, Egypt has a far worse approval rate than Israel ever had. (They don't say "Egypt" - only "abroad.")

They count 8,120 patients applying to be treated abroad (most of them multiple times) but only 3,283 have been approved to travel.

That is a 40% approval rate - far lower than Israel even did in 2017, and half of the 80% Israel was approving every month of 2023 before the October 7 massacre.

The Gaza-based Al Mezan Center for Human Rights issued a report yesterday about how kidney dialysis patients in Gaza are having a difficult time getting treatment. Not one of its recommendations mentioned urging Egypt to allow more dialysis patients to travel there to be treated. As with the MoH, the word "Egypt" is not even mentioned in their report. But according to the ministry of health, only 20% of the applications for kidney patients have been approved by Egypt for travel and treatment.

The "human rights organizations" refusal to say anything negative about Egypt's denial of Gazans to take refuge even extends to not saying a word when Egypt refuses most Gazans who need lifesaving medical help!

The conclusion is inescapable: all these NGOs that issue report after report on Palestinian suffering lose all interest in the topic if someone besides Israel is to blame. They don't care about Palestinians - they only want to do their part to deny the human rights of 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!

🎶🎵"Who's afraid of the big red cow, the big red cow, the big red cow?"🎶🎵

Arabic and even English Arab media are up in arms over the potential slaughter and burning of a purely red cow. As Egypt's Shorouk News reports:

Extremist Temple groups are counting on the fact that holding a ritual of purification by slaughtering and burning the five red cows could open the way for hundreds of thousands of religious Jews to storm Al-Aqsa Mosque, who abstain from doing so on this day in compliance with the official rabbinic prohibition.

According to the allegations, once that cow appeared; The time of the “Savior’s” descent will come, and the Third Temple will be built on the ruins of Al-Aqsa Mosque after its demolition, and then it will be slaughtered as the first sacrifice inside the Temple. So that the Jewish people will be prepared to enter it.

Last February, during the war, the Temple Institute published an announcement requesting volunteer priests to train them in the ritual of purification with the Red Cow, and set special conditions for the volunteers. This process is supposed to take place on a plot of land that these groups had previously seized for the purpose of slaughter on the Mount of Olives in exchange for Al-Aqsa.

Another site notes that Hamas leaders are talking about the red cow as well:

The Red Cow and its Relationship to the Flood of Al-Aqsa.
In one of his speeches, Abu Ubaydah, the spokesman for the Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' military wing, mentioned that Israel's red cows were ready, referring to a news report last July about the most extremist Israeli government importing 5 cows from Texas; USA, signaling the start of building the third temple on the ruins of the Al-Aqsa Mosque; according to Torah teachings.

Khaled Meshaal, the leader of Hamas, also stated that there was a plan to demolish Al-Aqsa Mosque and build the alleged temple by importing five red cows from the United States in order to carry out the Zionist plan and destroy AI-Aqsa as quickly as possible.

A photo illustrating several articles and tweets make a red cow look as sinister as possible:

I think we can do one better:

A Yemeni site adds quite a bit of antisemitism in its Red Cow reporting:

Some of the articles accurately say that many religious Jews refuse to ascend to the Temple Mount without this purification procedure, but chances seem quite low that they would ascend even with it, since they would follow their own rabbis and not the religious Zionist rabbis who are considering slaughtering the red cows next week.

The only difference I can imagine is that the religious Zionists who ascend today to the Temple Mount would be allowed to visit the area of the Dome of the Rock; right now they stay on the perimeter of the Mount when they visit. That is the only practical effect I can see happening.

As far as destroying the Al Aqsa Mosque, I have bad news for the Muslim doomsday prophets: No one cares about the Al Aqsa Mosque. There is no reason to destroy it. Jews could visit there without the ashes of the red heifer because it is on one of the Herodian extensions of the Temple Mount; it is not where the Temple was. That would be the vicinity of the Dome of the Rock.

But no one is going to destroy Al Aqsa or the Dome of the Rock. The Israeli government would not allow it, the police stop Jews from bringing prayer books to the Temple Mount let alone sledgehammers.

For over 100 years Muslims have been warning that Jews are about to destroy the mosques on the Temple Mount. And it is just as much a fiction today as it was when the Mufti made up that libel.

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!