Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, August 27, 2018

08/27 Links Pt2: Collier: Antisemitism, anti-Zionism and the principle of the divided cloth; In praise of Richard Millett!; Saluting McCain; Jeremy Corbyn honouring Richard Falk

From Ian:

David Collier: Antisemitism, anti-Zionism and the principle of the divided cloth

Before I talk of a divided cloth, let me address the antisemitic events. Last September I was turned away at the door of a fringe event at the Labour conference because I was a ‘known Zionist’. Last summer as I sat to eat a meal with my wife and eleven-year-old son during a day out at the PalestineExpo I was approached by security and asked to leave. I was treated like a criminal. My ‘unwelcome’ presence had been ‘reported’ by Labour Party members.

I have been de-registered from an event at Parliament because I am a ‘Zionist’ and at Warwick University I was recently turned away from an event with feeble excuses about a ‘PREVENT’ strategy. These however remain oddities in a long line of events I have witnessed over that past few years. If I am recognised once successfully inside, I am treated as a pariah. I have my photo taken, I am ‘accidentally’ nudged, I have abuse hurled at me.

It is not the only reason I identify with the recent story about Jeremy Corbyn’s antisemitic attack on Richard Millett.
The Zoo animals

I have witnessed far too many events where I have seen both Richard Millett and Jonathan Hoffman treated disgracefully. As someone who researches antisemitism online, I have also seen that abuse frequently carried over into social media. These two posts about Richard were shared by two well-known antisemites:

Only those who have been to these events can truly understand how it feels to be inside one. You become an object of hate and ridicule. All Jews do. Antisemites are all around, each speaker trying to outdo the other and the more vivid the hatred of Jews, the louder the applause. Whether on campus or in parliament, the system is set up to protect the hate. If you protest, you will be evicted. There are feelings of helplessness and at times despondency and depression.
Vilified and vindicated

Sadly only a few Jewish people have been doing this circuit, Richard longer than most. Each of us have our own methods and in several cases our differences have allowed us to benefit from each other. Richard’s questions probe, Jonathan’s outbursts provoke or distract and my silence leaves me more unnoticed than most. Nothing though creates a better feeling than seeing the others in the room. I know this because those times I have felt the worst, were all the times I was the only Jew there.

In praise of Richard Millett!

In 2012, blogger Richard Millett was attending a SOAS Palestine Society event in London and was called “a typical Israeli” by a pro-Palestinian attendee who objected to his filming of the event.

Millett is not Israeli. He’s a British Jew whose family has been in the UK for nearly 150 years. He also routinely defends Jews and Israel with first person reports published at his blog – posts which include audio and video recorded while monitoring events featuring activists (and sometimes even MPs) hostile to Israel’s existence and, at times, openly hostile to Jews.

Moreover, If you’re wondering whether the charge hurled at Richard was racist, simply replace “Israeli” with any other identity and repeat the charge. “You’re a typical Arab.” “You’re at typical Black,” etc.

Or, how about “You’re a typical Zionist”?

Well, Jeremy Corbyn, the current leader of the British Labour Party, said something akin to this in a reference to Millett at a 2013 event, per a story in the Daily Mail last week.

Here’s a clip of Corbyn’s speech at the conference, which, tellingly, was promoted by the propaganda wing of Hamas.

IsraellyCool: Maajid Nawaz Rips Jew Hater a New Corbyn

See what I did there?

British activist and politician Maajid Nawaz rips a caller defending a-hole Jeremy Corbyn, claiming he is not antisemitic, after the caller shows the very kind of antisemitism of which people are accusing Corbyn.

How’s that for English irony?

I found this footnote buried in the 2012 UNRWA and Youth background document at the UNRWA site:

The analysis in this section is based on UNRWA’s registration data, which tends to over-estimate the de facto refugee population in each field. Registration with UNRWA is a voluntary process. Individuals who move overseas, either permanently or on a temporary basis, may remain registered. Further, deaths tend to be under-reported, as do the numbers of those under five.

The 2010 UNRWA Annual report of the Department of Health is slightly more explicit about why UNRWA has no idea how many of the people it tracks may have died:

The demographic pyramids are difficult to analyse due known distortions related to a delay in the registration of new-borns leading to a smaller 0-4 age group estimation and the lack of a compulsory death notification system in the Agency leading to a possible over-estimation of the over 60 age group.

At the top of this page are the pyramids they are talking about. Note how much the over-60 population has increased as a percentage of population between 1992 and 2010, even though the birth rate has been so high.

The only thing that can explain this is that Palestinian recipients of UNRWA aid, like their parents and grandparents, don't report the deaths of relatives because this way they get more free stuff.

UNRWA, which claims to be an efficient agency that is not at all wasting international funds, has somehow over 70 years refused to implement any actions to actually keep track of the number of actual people under its care. In fact, in every annual health report the agency notes that "deaths may be under-reported."

UNRWA knows this - and doesn't do anything about it. Because the more people it can claim as "refugees," the more money it can demand from the international community.

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.

08/27 Links Pt1: Ron Prosor: UNRWA is not the solution; The Great Middle Eastern War of 2019; Iran Claims Full Control of Gulf; Canadian opposition party recognizes Jerusalem

From Ian:

Ron Prosor: UNRWA is not the solution

It seems quite a few officials at IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv are concerned by reports that the United States plans to cut funding to the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees and revoke its mandate to operate in the West Bank.

It is high time these officials realize that UNRWA – the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East – is not the solution, but the problem. It is hard to believe that in Israel, of all places, these officials claim to be in favor of finding a solution to the seven-decade-long refugee problem, but when push comes to shove, it seems the timing is never right.

Established for the exclusive benefit of Palestinian refugees, UNRWA has, instead of resolving the problem, done everything in its power to perpetuate it. Instead of peace and coexistence, it teaches hatred and incitement. Instead of fighting terrorist organizations, it collaborates with them. As someone who has worked toward UNRWA'S closure for years, I am glad Washington finally gets it and I hope the people at IDF headquarters will soon come to their senses.

According to media reports, the White House is determined to solve this persistent problem and plans to take the necessary steps, including ending the Palestinians' unique ability to inherit refugee status, and recognizing 500,000 Palestinian refugees instead of the 5 million UNRWA purports to serve.

While it is in Israel's long-term interest that UNRWA be closed, in practice the defense establishment acts as the agency's representative. Following the media reports, it took less than 24 hours for the fear-mongering to begin, with officials arguing that ending UNRWA's operations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would result in Israel being made to bear the burden of providing the education, health and welfare services for which the agency is currently responsible.

What could happen if US rejects Palestinian 'right of return'?

David Bedein, head of Center Near East Policy Research, says implications of perpetual 'refugee' status more serious than just wasted money.

Bolton: US to Cut Its Funding to UN Human Rights Council

US National Security Adviser John Bolton said on Thursday that the United States plans to cut its funding to the United Nations Human Rights Council, which the US withdrew from in June due to the body’s anti-Israel bias.

“We are going to de-fund the Human Rights Council,” Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations, told the Associated Press.

As the UNHRC’s largest donor, the US contributes 22% of the council’s budget. However, it does not contribute directly; instead, the funds are taken from the overall US payment to the United Nations.

“We’ll calculate 22% of the Human Rights Council and the High Commissioner’s budget, and our remittances to the UN for this budget year will be less 22% of those costs, and we’ll say specifically that’s what we’re doing,” said Bolton. “We expect that impact to occur on the Human Rights Council.”

The UNHRC was founded in 2006 to advocate for human rights globally. However, its constant double standard and demonization of Israel has frustrated American leadership, among other moves like allowing countries, such as Venezuela, which violate human rights, to be members of the UN body. Last May, it passed five resolutions against Israel, which is not a member of the council.

Palestine Today reports that Jenin has been enjoying a huge economic boom in the past two years, as Israeli authorities allow Israeli Arabs to drive to the town to shop.

Visitors to the city have doubled since 2009, and their number accelerated since 2015 when Israel allowed Israeli Arabs to drive their personal vehicles into the city.

The Jenin Chamber of Commerce says that 860,000 vehicles crossed through the Green Line to the Jenin Governorate in 2016, and the number rose to 929,000 in 2017.

Most of the Israeli Arabs go to Jenin on Fridays and Saturdays.

The number of new malls, shops and restaurants, and coffee shops has doubled in recent years. In 2017 alone, the number of shops increased from 2300 to 3000.

Israeli Arabs are also flocking to the Arab American University in Jenin, where over half the students are Israeli citizens.

Jenin is in Area A and officially Israelis are not allowed to go there but the IDF allows Israeli Arabs to go there freely while stopping Israeli Jews.

It should be noted that before the first intifada, Israeli Jews could freely go to Arab cities in the territories to go shopping. One person I know who lives in the territories said that she used to buy challah for Shabbat in Ramallah, where the local merchants brought in the bread from Israeli bakeries.

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.

.@AFP makes part of the Holocaust debatable

From AFP:

Pre-war Lithuania was home to a thriving Jewish community of more than 200,000 people, with Vilnius a hub of learning known as the "Jerusalem of the North".

But historians contend that around 195,000 perished at the hands of the Nazis and local collaborators under the 1941-44 German occupation, nearly the entire Jewish population.

"Historians contend?" Usuallly, whenever that phrase is used in other news stories, it means that some historians have a theory about something - a theory that others may dispute. For example from recent news stories;

Historians contend that no single event caused the revolution on continental America inclusive of her 13 colonies. It was instead a series of event that led to the war.

Historians and economists, for example, have long disputed the cause of a mid-nineteenth-century spike in Southern productivity. Economists argue for agricultural innovations, such as new cotton seeds, while historians contend that greater levels of violence drove heightened production.

Some historians contend the 1848 song [Oh! Susanna] is actually an early, subtle anti-slavery song.

In each case the use of the phrase means that there is a novel, possibly controversial assertion made by historians.

The decimation of Vilnius is a well-documented fact. If the specific number 195,000 is in dispute, then the paragraph should have been rewritten as "Virtually all the Jews in Vilnius were murdered by the Nazis and local collaborators..."

This is nothing less than a subtle form of Holocaust revisionism, given the imprimatur of a major wire service that newspapers throughout the world use as authoritative.

Worse yet, this is an AFP boilerplate. The exact same sentence was published in 2016 in another AFP story about Vilnius.

(h/t Jewdah Maccabee)

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.

I don't know how reliable this report is, but Al Akhbar in Lebanon is reporting that PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas is drawing up plans to severely punish all Gazans if the current negotiations in Egypt with Hamas prove fruitless.

The newspaper quoted "informed political sources" that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has instructed his government to prepare a "full vision on stopping the financing of Gaza."

This would include stopping salaries of employees in ministries of social affairs, health and education.

According to the newspaper, the sanctions would also include stopping the work of the Monetary Authority in Gaza, which means the closure of all banks in the sector, which will paralyze all commercial activities and affect the ability to pay for any imports.

"There are other steps that the PA is preparing to implement, including stopping the transfer of social welfare services serving more than 80,000 families from Gaza, freezing medical transfers for patients, cutting off medicines and supplies for the health sector, cutting off electricity in Gaza" according to the report.

The head of the delegation of Fatah to Cairo, Azzam al-Ahmad, told Egyptian officials of the intention of Abbas to impose these new sanctions if the truce agreement fails.

Ahmad has told the media that Fatah will respond to the Egyptian reconciliation plan sometime today.

Previous sanctions on Gaza by Abbas have been met with a big yawn from the international community and from virtually all supposed pro-Palestinian "activists" - except for the ones aligned with Hamas to begin with.

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.

Disney's Big Bad Wolf was dressed as a Jewish peddler stereotype (video)

I don't remember this scene from when I was a kid....

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.

08/26 Links: Late Senator John McCain Remembered as ‘True Supporter of Israel’; Oren: $200 Million Cut in US Aid Might Bring Palestinians to Negotiating Table

From Ian:

Late Senator John McCain Remembered as ‘True Supporter of Israel’

The death of Senator John McCain is being mourned by US Jewish groups and Israeli political leaders from across the political spectrum.

The 81-year-old McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who was the Republican nominee for president in 2008, passed away on Saturday at his home in Arizona after a battle with brain cancer.

During his three decades in the Senate, McCain — the son and grandson of four-star admirals who graduated from the Naval Academy and served his country as a fighter pilot — was known as a staunch advocate for freedom around the world.

Part of this outlook was manifested by his backing of a strong US-Israel relationship.

“Throughout his congressional career Senator McCain stood with Israel because throughout his life he stood up for America’s allies and our shared democratic values,” the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) said in a statement on Saturday. “As Chairman and longtime member of the Armed Services Committee, Senator McCain consistently worked to ensure that Israel had the critical resources to defend herself. In times of crisis, his eloquent voice could always be counted on to speak out in solidarity with the Jewish state.”

American Jewish Committee CEO David Harris remembered McCain as a “statesman and a national treasure — and an avid supporter of Israel, an ally he first visited nearly 40 years ago.”

“A passionate advocate for American global leadership, Senator McCain rightly bemoaned those who favored a US pullback from world affairs,” Harris added.

Jewish leaders mourn McCain for his bipartisanship, fierce commitment to Israel

Sen. John McCain, who made human rights and Israel centerpieces of his advocacy for a robust US influence across the planet, has died.

The Arizona Republican, who on Friday declined further treatment for brain cancer, died Saturday. He was 81.

He was with his family at the family ranch in Sedona, Arizona, when he passed. “With the Senator when he passed were his wife Cindy and their family,” a statement from his office said. “At his death, he had served the United States of America faithfully for sixty years.”

Never-Trump Republicans and not a few Democrats during the campaign and presidency of Donald Trump have held up McCain as an avatar of what the Republican party once was, and still could be: the national security flagship ready to overcome partisan differences to advance US interests. Indeed, the relationship that was perhaps most emblematic of his dedication to national security and to bipartisanship was his close friendship with Joseph Lieberman, the Orthodox Jewish senator from Connecticut.

McCain became in his final years the reluctant unTrump; he was the hero who spent 1967-1973 in a Vietnamese jail for American POWs, when Donald Trump was a swinging young businessman who won five deferments from service; McCain was the victim of torture who led advocacy against the practice, while Trump embraced it; McCain was the flag-bearer for robust American interventionism abroad, while Trump counsels conciliation and isolationism; McCain was candid about his flaws while Trump seldom apologizes; McCain took long meetings and delved into detail, while Trump eschews particulars for the big picture; McCain forgave his enemies while Trump nurtures his enmities.

Netanyahu salutes McCain as American patriot, true friend of Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli politicians on Sunday hailed US Sen. John McCain for his principled leadership and stalwart support of the Jewish state, following his death on Saturday.

McCain, a war hero and towering figure in American politics known for reaching across the aisle in an increasingly divided nation, passed away Saturday following a battle with brain cancer. He was 81.

“I am deeply saddened by the passing of John McCain, a great American patriot and a great supporter of Israel,” Netanyahu tweeted in English Sunday morning. “I will always treasure the constant friendship he showed to the people of Israel and to me personally.”

“His support for Israel never wavered,” he said. “It sprang from his belief in democracy and freedom. The State of Israel salutes John McCain.”

President Reuven Rivlin bid farewell to the “great leader,” whom he hailed as a “defender of his people, a man of strong values, and a true supporter of Israel.”

Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman praised McCain as “an American war hero” and one of Israel’s “greatest friends.” Liberman recalled that in a recent meeting with McCain, the senator showed him a photo of his time in captivity and told him that “even despite my terrible suffering I never wavered in my commitment to the values of freedom and justice.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) meeting Senator John McCain during a visit to Israel in 2015. (GPO)

Former prime minister Ehud Barak said that McCain, a longtime personal friend, was among the few principled political leaders today.

“A man that was in touching distance of the White House, but never let it crush his spirit. Neither in Vietnam, nor at the peak of his political career in Washington.” Barak added that McCain was “a huge friend to Israel, especially regarding its security.”

The Democratic Party versus the Jewish People (Michael Lumish)

The Democratic Party versus the Jewish People

Michael Lumish

aKu - Turning Away

I understand that most American Jews do not want to hear this message, but there is no getting away from certain obvious political truths.

The progressive-left and the Democratic Party believe that the Jewish people of the Middle East, in the form of Israel, are not humane to the Palestinian-Arabs. What this means is that if the Democratic Party gains power in the forthcoming US midterm elections they will turn against Israel in a harsh manner, because they are already in the process of doing so. We can see this very clearly from the upcoming candidates that the Democrats are fielding.

In a recent piece for The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, PhD student at the School of Political Science, Government and International Affairs at Tel Aviv University, Doron Feldman, tells us:

Israeli decision-makers must recognize what is happening in American society and politics and prepare strategically for the worst possible outcome. If the Democrats manage to overtake the Republican majority in Congress as a result of the midterm elections, Washington could significantly reduce its military and diplomatic involvement in the Middle East, perhaps even to the point that it ceases to function as a superpower in the region and in the world – a situation that would benefit Russia and China. In the longer term, Israel’s decision-makers must consider and prepare for the possibility that the midterms are a harbinger of the presidential election of 2020.

Although I agree with the overall assessment, I do not agree that a US cut in military assistance to Israel is necessarily bad for Israel or for the Jewish people. US Diplomatic involvement must be emphasized, but Israel has the capacity to take care of its own military needs. In fact, it would presumably improve Israel's economy to transfer all Israeli weapons manufacturing from the United States to Israel, itself. The three billion per year that the United States spends on domestic weapons ear-marked for Israel is a tiny proportion of Israel's overall economy. It does not even equal what PepsiCo just spent in its purchase of SodaStream.

Of more significance, however, is Feldman's focus on what he calls the "leftist-socialist-progressive wing" of the Democratic Party. These are the people who, when they do not directly support antisemitic anti-Zionism, generally think that Arab violence against the Jewish minority in the Middle East is, at least, understandable. That is, they tend to view the tiny national homeland of the Jewish people as a European transplant onto "indigenous" Arab land while entirely forgetting that Arabs are from the Arabian peninsula and the Jewish people -- who are tiny by number in comparison -- hail from Judea, which is also known as Israel.

The Democratic Party, sadly, supports antisemitic anti-Zionism to the extent that it considers Israel a "colonial-settler" imposition onto a native people. Their problem is less anti-Jewish ill-will -- from what I can tell, at least -- than it is historical ignorance of thirteen centuries of Arab and Muslim imperial stomping on Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian faces.

But even in the unlikely event that the Democrats turn a cold shoulder to their anti-Zionists, it is increasingly evident that the Party is no friend to the Jewish people. Feldman writes:

Several individuals from the leftist-socialist-progressive wing of the Democratic Party are considering running for the presidency in 2020. They include Bernie Sanders, who won 43.1% of the vote in the 2016 Democratic primary, and Elizabeth Warren, who dubiously claims to be of Native American descent. Both these candidates have expressed anti-Israel positions. If they are elected, they can be expected to follow through on those positions, not only in terms of US policy but also at the UN.

On a less lofty level, we see Democratic Party friends of the racist Louis Farrakhan coming to prominence within the party. These include, but are not limited to, and in no particular order, Linda Sarsour, Tamika Mallory, Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, and NY candidate for Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who, according to Ha'aretz:

In the midst of her primary campaign, Ocasio-Cortez spoke out strongly against the Israeli army’s actions on the Gaza border on May 14, tweeting, “This is a massacre. I hope my peers have the moral courage to call it such. No state or entity is absolved of mass shootings of protesters. There is no justification. Palestinian people deserve basic human dignity, as anyone else. Democrats can’t be silent about this anymore.”

The obvious political trend on the American-Left and the Democratic Party vis-à-vis the conflict is increasingly friendly toward the hostile Muslim majority in opposition to the well-being of the Jewish minority in the Middle East. As Feldman points out, even if the moderate Hillary / Biden wing of the Party comes to prominence, the emerging hard-left is forcing them into a crusty, pro-Oslo, intransigent stance on Israel along the line of Obama's Middle East policies.

Progressive-left Democrats think of Israel as a racist, colonialist, settler-state and have little sympathy for it if they even believe it should exist at all. The moderate Democrats merely believe that the Jewish people must be leashed. The "moderates" believe that it is the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria, our indigenous homeland -- what they insist upon calling "West Bank" and, thereby, erasing Jewish heritage -- that is the fundamental problem.

What we need to do is stand up for ourselves and insist upon the fact of Jewish indigeneity to the Land of Israel.

At the end of the day, it is our first and final home and if the Jewish people will not stand up for ourselves, nobody else will.

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.

From TOI:

The Trump Administration will announce in the next few days that it rejects the long-standing Palestinian demand for a “right of return” for million of refugees and their descendants to Israel, an Israeli television report said Saturday night. The US will announce a policy that, “from its point of view, essentially cancels the ‘right of return,'” the report said.
...
The US — which on Friday announced that it had decided to cut more than $200 million in aid to the Palestinians — and has also cut back its funding for UNRWA — will also ask Israel to “reconsider” the mandate that Israel gives to UNRWA to operate in the West Bank. The goal of such a change, the TV report said, would be to prevent Arab nations from legitimately channeling aid to UNRWA in the West Bank.

I was not aware of any mandate Israel gives to UNRWA in the West Bank, besides allowing officials to travel through Tel Aviv and similar services given to any NGO.

I also didn't think that it was possible for Arab nations to give money to UNRWA in the West Bank directly.

While I believe that UNRWA has no reason to exist in the West Bank, this story needs to be explained a bit better.

This story highlights a basic truth, though.

Any move to defund UNRWA in the West Bank would include lots more money for the Palestinian Authority to expand the services it already does for the "other" kind of Palestinian, and to do it more efficiently - more schools, more hospitals, more medical clinics. The PA would gain hundreds of millions of dollars to help its own citizens.

Yet is would prefer that this money go to UNRWA.

Have you ever heard of a government that had the opportunity to enrich its coffers and prefer the money go to an NGO instead?

This is all the proof you needs that the Palestinian leadership isn't interested in building a state, but in using the false "refugee issue" to eventually destroy Israel - no difference than how they acted when UNRWA was created in 1950.

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.

Professor Joseph Massad of Columbia University has written an article for Electronic Intifada where he again tries to make an argument that Zionism is in fact antisemitic, and anti-Zionism is a principled form of anti-colonialism.

We've demolished his arguments and proven that he lies before. Massad's words about Zionism are indistinguishable from those of neo-Nazis. It is most interesting that the leftists seem to embrace Massad because he also lumps another group as anti-colonialist - the gays.

The beginning of the article, however, includes an historical aside that shows again how deceptive this Columbia professor is with the facts.

To establish his bona fides about being against antisemitism, he writes:

No thinking person, for example, is expected to believe that descriptions of Jews as engaging in a “worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization,” as Winston Churchill accused “international Jews” of doing in the Sunday Herald in 1920, are not anti-Semitic.

Was Churchill an antisemite?

Here is the article that Massad is referring to, entitled "Zionism vs. Bolshevism."

The very beginning of the article shows that there is no way that Churchill can be characterized as a hater of Jews.

SOME people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.
Disraeli, the Jew Prime Minister of England, and Leader of the Conservative Party, who was always true to his race and proud of his origin, said on a well-known occasion: “The Lord deals with the nations as the nations deal with the Jews.” Certainly when we look at the miserable state of Russia, where of all countries in the world the Jews were the most cruelly treated, and contrast it with the fortunes of our own country, which seems to have been so providentially preserved amid the awful perils of these times, we must admit that nothing that has since happened in the history of the world has falsified the truth of Disraeli’s confident assertion.

Massad obviously read this - but he knows that most of his readers will not bother to read the poor facsimile of the article that he linked to instead of the actual text.

While Churchill's words from nearly a century ago do not conform to political correctness nowadays, he is careful to distinguish between the "international Jews" who supported what was proven to become a genocidal political movement and the majority of Jews.

Good and Bad Jews.
The conflict between good and evil which proceeds unceasingly in the breast of man nowhere reaches such an intensity as in the Jewish race. The dual nature of mankind is nowhere more strongly or more terribly exemplified. We owe to the Jews in the Christian revelation a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of mankind, worth in fact the fruits of all other wisdom and learning put together. On that system and by that faith there has been built out of the wreck of the Roman Empire the whole of our existing civilisation.

And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested, would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.

Here is the full context for Massad's quote, that proves that he took a single sentence out of context in order to paint Churchill, and all Zionists, as antisemites:

"National" Jews.

There can be no greater mistake than to attribute to each individual a recognisable share in the qualities which make up the national character. There are all sorts of men – good, bad and, for the most part, indifferent – in every country, and in every race. Nothing is more wrong than to deny to an individual, on account of race or origin, his right to be judged on his personal merits and conduct. In a people of peculiar genius like the Jews, contrasts are more vivid, the extremes are more widely separated, the resulting consequences are more decisive.

At the present fateful period there are three main lines of political conception among the Jews, two of which are helpful and hopeful in a very high degree to humanity, and the third absolutely destructive.

First there are the Jews who, dwelling in every country throughout the world, identify themselves with that country, enter into its national life, and, while adhering faithfully to their own religion, regard themselves as citizens in the fullest sense of the State which has received them. Such a Jew living in England would say, “I am an Englishman practising the Jewish faith.” This is a worthy conception, and useful in the highest degree. We in Great Britain well know that during the great struggle the influence of what may be called the “National Jews” in many lands was cast preponderatingly on the side of the Allies; and in our own Army Jewish soldiers have played a most distinguished part, some rising to the command of armies, others winning the Victoria Cross for valour.

The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and useful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia’s economic resources and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organisations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.

International Jews.

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

If characterizing one of three groups of Jews makes one an antisemite, then Joseph Massad just defined himself as an antisemite - because guess who Churchill's third group of Jews is? Zionist Jews!

Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism, it presents to the Jew a national idea of a commanding character. It has fallen to the British Government, as the result of the conquest of Palestine, to have the opportunity and the responsibility of securing for the Jewish race all over the world a home and a centre of national life. The statesmanship and historic sense of Mr. Balfour were prompt to seize this opportunity. Declarations have been made which have irrevocably decided the policy of Great Britain. The fiery energies of Dr. Weissmann, the leader, for practical purposes, of the Zionist project, backed by many of the most prominent British Jews, and supported by the full authority of Lord Allenby, are all directed to achieving the success of this inspiring movement.

Massad's single-minded hate of Zionism is comparable to Churchill's hate of Communism. If Churchill's words against "international Jews" are antisemitic, them Massad's decades-long battle to demonize Zionist Jews is no less.

And indeed it is more, because by denying that Jews have a right to self determination and by labeling all who have that desire as racist and colonialist as opposed to liberal and freedom-seeking, Massad is being directly antisemitic.

Which is why he is so desperate to change the definition of antisemitic to include Zionists.

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.

08/25 Links: Caroline Glick: A conversation with John Bolton; NYTs Publishes a Rejection of Yossi Klein Halevi’s Plea for Reconciliation; Why Jeremy Corbyn's 'Zionist' comments were racist

From Ian:

US set to announce it rejects Palestinian ‘right of return’ — TV report

The Trump Administration will announce in the next few days that it rejects the long-standing Palestinian demand for a “right of return” for million of refugees and their descendants to Israel, an Israeli television report said Saturday night. The US will announce a policy that, “from its point of view, essentially cancels the ‘right of return,'” the report said.

The “right of return” is one of the key core issues of dispute in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Palestinians claim that five million people — tens of thousands of original refugees from what is today’s Israel, and their millions of descendants — have a “right of return.” Israel rejects the demand, saying that it represents a bid by the Palestinians to destroy Israel by weight of numbers. Israel’s population is almost nine million, some three-quarters of whom are Jewish. An influx of millions would mean Israel could no longer be a Jewish-majority state.

According to the Hadashot TV report Saturday, the US in early September will set out its policy on the issue. It will produce a report that says there are actually only some half-a-million Palestinians who should be legitimately considered refugees, and make plain that it rejects the UN designation under which the millions of descendants of the original refugees are also considered refugees. The definition is the basis for the activities of UNRWA, the UN’s Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.

The US — which on Friday announced that it had decided to cut more than $200 million in aid to the Palestinians — and has also cut back its funding for UNRWA — will also ask Israel to “reconsider” the mandate that Israel gives to UNRWA to operate in the West Bank. The goal of such a change, the TV report said, would be to prevent Arab nations from legitimately channeling aid to UNRWA in the West Bank.

JPost Editorial: Bolton’s message

One theory about this week’s visit to Israel by US National Security Adviser John Bolton is that he was dispatched by President Donald Trump to suss out the chances of a resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The visit came after Trump pointedly said at a rally in Charleston, West Virginia, that since he had taken the issue of Jerusalem off the table, “Israel will have to pay a higher price because they won a very big thing” – referring to the US decision to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on May 14.

At a news conference at Jerusalem’s King David Hotel on Wednesday, Bolton explained that Trump, whom he called “a deal-maker,” expected the Palestinians to say after the embassy move, “So we didn’t get that one, we’ll get something else.” But, he added, the parties will have to “talk about it between themselves and see what, if anything, the price of that was.”

The responses from both Israel and the Palestinians were predictable. On the Israeli side, Regional Cooperation Minister Tzachi Hanegbi – who is close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – assured Israelis that Trump has a warm spot for Israel and “will not turn on us.” Hanegbi stressed that he had constant contact with the White House and said that Trump was trying to find a way into the hearts of the Palestinians in order to regain their confidence in the US as an “honest broker.”

On the Israeli Left, Zionist Union MK Amir Peretz said it had been clear that the US would ask for a payback for the US Embassy move, adding, “No one can claim that this is a hostile president with demands that are not legitimate. Netanyahu cannot deny the need to make courageous decisions.”

Palestinian officials were more skeptical. Senior PLO official Ahmad al-Tamimi said Trump’s remarks reflected the “continued American policy that is biased in favor of Israel,” and he reaffirmed the PA’s “categoric rejection” of the peace plan expected to be announced soon by the US president.

Where does this leave us? Well, Bolton sounded upbeat as he voiced the hope that there are “a lot of prospects” to find ways to resolve the problems facing the Palestinian people, but added that it was “a sad outcome” for the Palestinian people that “all they got now is a choice between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.” On the last of his three days of talks in the region, Bolton concluded that the aim of the long-awaited US peace plan is overseeing negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, and he hoped this would become evident when Washington unveiled the plan.

Herein lies the problem and the challenge. As former Jewish Agency head Natan Sharansky told The Jerusalem Post, “Whatever the US peace plan is, Israelis will probably accept it and the Palestinians will reject it.”

Caroline Glick: A conversation with John Bolton

President Donald Trump’s decision to appoint Ambassador John Bolton to serve as his National Security Advisor indicated clearly that Trump is advancing a national security strategy far different from those of his predecessors.

On and off for decades, Bolton has held some of the most senior foreign policy positions in the US government. And throughout his long career in foreign policy, Bolton has been the bane of the foreign policy elites. In part this owes to his extraordinary successes. After 15 years of fruitless and often half-hearted US efforts to repeal UN General Assembly Resolution 3379 from 1975 that branded Zionism as racism, as assistant secretary of state, Bolton got the job done in 1991.

As Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs in the George W. Bush administration, Bolton created and implemented the Proliferation Security Initiative. The PSI was the most successful counter-proliferation program the US has undertaken in recent years.

As UN Ambassador in 2005 and 2006, Bolton dismantled the corrupt UN Human Rights Commission. He opposed the formation of its successor, the equally corrupt Human Rights Committee, saying, “We want a butterfly. We don’t intend to put lipstick on a caterpillar and call it a success.”

Bolton’s record of success engendered jealousy among many members of the Washington establishment. But they were more irked by his refusal to go along to get along. Bolton’s stubborn insistence on basing US policies on reality, rather than ideology or fashion has made him the bête noire of the foreign policy establishment.