The hypocrisy from this event is off the charts.
What could it be?
Is Israel the one country that should be regularly tagged as "apartheid" even though so many countries discriminate in much worse ways?

Two days after the brutal murder of the 19-year-old Israeli woman Ori Ansbacher, official Palestinian Authority TV broadcast a song celebrating that Palestinians cause Israelis grief:
"A bone in the throat of the Zionists... We have given them a taste of grief"
[Official PA TV, Feb. 9, 2019]
The song tacitly promises 10 times more terror than Israel has suffered until now by promising there will be 10 times more Palestinian prisoners:
"We swear in the name of the prisoners In place of one [prisoner], here are ten"
While singing the words promising more prisoners, the singer points to a young child he is holding as if to say: This child is the future terrorist; this child is the future prisoner. The song's message is that today's children are the future terrorists and prisoners - those who will grow up to give "a taste of grief" and be "a bone in the throat of the Zionists."
"We are not afraid of the enemy - a bone in the throat of the Zionists
Palestinians - We are! We are!
The people of Jerusalem - We are! We are!
The people of Jenin - We are! We are! ...
O Al-Aqsa [Mosque], your wounds will heal
Victory is certain, it's inevitable
A rock thrown with expertise...
The people of Jaffa - We are! We are!
The people of Haifa - We are! We are!
The people of Lod - We are! We are!
The people of Ramle
The people of Acre - We are! We are!
The people of Nazareth - We are! We are! ...
We swear in the name of the prisoners
In place of one [prisoner], here are ten
We have given them [the Israelis] a taste of grief
We have given them a taste of grief - a bone in the throat of the Zionists"
[Official PA TV, Feb. 9, 2019; July 30 and Aug. 6, 2016]
In response to the horrifying rape and murder of Ori Ansbacher by a Palestinian terrorist, MK Aida Touma-Sliman, chairwoman of the Knesset Committee on the Status of Women and Gender Equality, claimed that "the crime should be called what it is: The rape and murder of Ori Ansbacher is a gender-based crime. The criminal being Palestinian doesn't make the crime less horrifying and it cannot be part of the struggle for [Palestinian] national liberation."Ori's blood cries out to deaf ears
The Palestinians Knesset member and Israeli citizens, like her friends in the various Palestinian terrorist organizations, were prepared for a public relations battle to characterize the rape and murder of Ori as another woman being murdered. In other words, some nameless killer with a knife just raped her for the heck of it on a chilly morning, just because she was a woman – not because she was Jewish. Why did the Palestinian criminal arm himself with a knife, cross the security barrier, rape and fatally stab Ori, rather than some random Palestinian woman?
The reason is simple: Every Palestinian who is exposed to incitement in some mosque, on social media, or in speeches by Palestinian leaders, knows that the enemy's blood can be shed. But if he rapes a Palestinian woman (a gender crime) or even secretly has his way with her in private, he'll be slaughtered and his immediate family members will follow him to hell.
After all, Muslims have honor and they are permitted to commit murder to uphold it. So whom are they allowed to rape and murder on the basis of their gender? Jews and Christians, who are defined as weak and out of bounds of the Arab code of vengeance.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d say the lack of coverage was purposeful…a blanket wall-to-wall blackout.
But I do know better and I still call it a confederacy of silence, beginning at The New York Times.
They are all in it together. I cannot prove it; rather it’s for them to prove that they are not carriers of journalistic malpractice. I know that scoffers’ smell of theirs from my own years in the newsroom and travelling with them to Israel where they went, and came back, like the Spies, to curse the land.
I saw it firsthand, their scandals of playing hide and seek with the truth. It’s in this and this book. They won’t tell it; I did.
Yes, the topic is Ori Ansbacher, a beautiful 19-year-old daughter of Israel who was found in the Ein Yael forest in south Jerusalem, dead from a particularly horrific act of rape and murder.
Did you read about it in the Times, in the Post, or in any other major (even minor) newspaper? Neither did I? Zero.
Did you watch any of it from CNN, the BBC, ABC, NBC, CBS or any other network? Same here. Nada. Zilch.
Ori’s blood cries out to deaf ears. A nation is in distress, the world shrugs, the media yawns.
This can only be achieved by establishing One Democratic State of Palestine for its indigenous people, the refugees who we were forced out of the country and its current citizens. This is the key to a ‘fair and permanent solution of conflict’ in the region, and to a ‘just solution’ for the Palestinian cause. Failing this, war and mutual destruction will continue.They say they have no problems with Jews, which means they would allow any Jews who were there in 1917 or 1880 or something like that to stay, but anyone else who arrived after the Zionist movement began would not be welcome.
On the last day of the 2014 Gaza War, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a secret meeting with a special envoy from the Saudi king. In the meeting, Saudi Arabia proposed a joint diplomatic initiative on re-launching Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, rebuilding Gaza and confronting Iran, three sources briefed on the effort told me.
Why it matters: This was an unprecedented move by the Saudis — who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel — that could have profoundly shifted the regional dynamic. More surprisingly still, the Saudis planned to present it in public with the Israelis.
The details of the Saudi proposal, according to the sources:
-Israel and Saudi Arabia would draft an updated version of the 2002 Arab peace initiative.
-Netanyahu and the Saudi foreign minister would then present the initiative together during the UN General Assembly.
-Israel and Saudi Arabia would announce a process to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians would be re-launched.
-Saudi Arabia would lead a regional push for the reconstruction of Gaza.
The backstory, according to the three sources:
In early September 2014, Netanyahu held a secret meeting with Saudi national security adviser, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan. The meeting took place in a third country.
Bandar told Netanyahu at the meeting that Saudi Arabia wanted to re-launch the peace process in order to be able to unite the region against Iran.
Netanyahu was enthusiastic, and after 10 hours of talks he and Prince Bandar agreed to start preparing for a summit at the UN.
In the next few weeks, meetings were held between Netanyahu's advisers and Bandar's aides to draft a joint document.
Israel presented a draft, and while the Saudis agreed to many of the points, they asked Israel to show flexibility. Netanyahu refused to go further and the talks collapsed, the sources told me.
Between the lines: The sources told me the Saudis felt they went out of their way towards Israel. They said the Saudis felt angry and humiliated, and held Netanyahu responsible.
The sources told me that Prince Bandar conveyed a message to Netanyahu two months later, with the bottom line being that he believed Netanyahu lied to him.
The big picture: The affair created a deep crisis between Israel and Saudi Arabia and communications between the parties almost stopped — even on the Iranian issue. The crisis ended only a year later, several months after the death of King Abdullah and the inauguration of King Salman.Notice that Ravid is doing everything he can to make Netanyahu look like the bad guy here. His headline is "Israel rejected 2014 Saudi proposal on Palestinian peace talks." All Israeli media followed that headline, saying it was Netanyahu who rejected a Saudi peace proposal.
![]() |
Ori's
murderer smirks during his arraignment
|
The problem for Democrats here is not only moral but political. Calling for Northam’s resignation was a low-cost engagement—at least, it was before it was learned that his potential successors have blackface and sexual assault controversies of their own. No one is calling for Omar’s resignation or even relieving her of her influential committee assignments so the people of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional district can “heal and move forward,” in part, because it wouldn’t end with Omar.Jonah Goldberg: Ilhan Omar’s Lazy and Anti-Semitic Tweets
Rep. Rashida Tlaib invoked the noxious “dual loyalty” canard when she expressed her opposition to an anti-BDS bill before Congress by accusing Republicans of forgetting “what country they represent.”
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has never had to revisit her claim that the organizers of the Women’s March are the “suffragists of our time,” even though its organizers have since embraced the anti-Semitic Minister Louis Farrakhan and were accused of discriminating against its Jewish members. Indeed, when asked if she would condemn these formerly feted Democratic organizers, she declined to comment with any specifics. She did, however, offer a blanket denunciation of anti-Semitism.
The party has been unable to explain why some of its members vehemently denounce Farrakhan while others, including Reps. Andre Carson, Al Green, Danny Davis, and Maxine Waters, seem keen not only to embrace him but defend their association with the Nation of Islam.
To apply the Northam standard to casual acts of anti-Semitism would purge the Democratic caucus of many of its most valuable members. As such, it’s not really a standard at all. It’s more like a talking point.
Of course, it’s no surprise that Omar believes this garbage. It’s one of the lazier and most timeless talking points of a rogue’s gallery of cranks, Islamists, and, of course, anti-Semites of the Left and Right, as well as conspiracy theorists generally. Congress is “Israeli Occupied Territory” according to all the worst people.Ben Shapiro: The Democratic Party Has Become The Party Of Anti-Semitism. Here's Why.
Now a few points seem worth making. AIPAC isn’t a foreign lobby. It’s an American organization run by Americans. It spends remarkably little on lobbying and Israel spends virtually nothing on lobbying Congress. According to Open Secrets, the biggest political contributor of the “Pro-Israel” lobby in the 2018 cycle was . . . J Street, which spent nearly four times as much ($4,057,820) as the next biggest contributor NORPAC ($1,126,063). Planned Parenthood gave $5,734,048. In 2018, AIPAC did spend the most on lobbying — which is different than contributing. But again, its expenditures were relatively miniscule at 3.5 million. Lawyers spent nearly three times as much on lobbying ($15.4 million) and their contributions totaled over 217 million. The financial, insurance, and real-estate industries contributed nearly $883 million and another half-billion on lobbying.
Now, I’m not naïve. Of course, pro-Israel groups and individuals spend money on politics in other ways, direct and indirect. One need only look at Sheldon Adelson’s political giving to understand that.
But sometimes when people say “It’s not about the money” it’s actually not about the money. The best analogy is to the NRA. For many on the Left and in the media, it’s an article of faith that Republicans don’t cross the NRA because of all of the “blood money” the group lavishes on Congress. They find gun-rights arguments to be so outlandish on their face — in part because they live in gun-free blue bubbles — they immediately assume that bribery is at play. But, as I wrote here, the NRA gives remarkably little in terms of donations. The NRA’s — and the broader gun lobby’s — real power lies in the fact that it can mobilize voters.
Israel is popular with a number of important constituencies including many Jews (imagine that). But its real popularity resides among evangelical Christians and voters generally. And, despite its perfectly debatable flaws, real and alleged, it should be popular. It’s an ally. It’s democratic. It’s Western. And its enemies are largely our enemies. It’s no coincidence it’s listed as the “Little Satan” alongside the “Great Satan” that is America, by some of the most evil and backward regimes in the world.
Anti-Semitism now thrives inside the Democratic Party. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) wrote a piece for Louis Farrakhan in 2006; she’s welcome in the party. Linda Sarsour continues to be an ally to the new Democratic Fresh Faces™ as well as more established names like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) (in November, Sarsour slammed “folks who masquerade as progressives but always choose their allegiance to Israel over their commitment to democracy and free speech”). Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) holds conference calls with vicious British anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn, to no serious blowback from the Democratic Party. Keith Ellison, now attorney general of Minnesota, was nearly made the head of the Democratic National Committee after engaging in blatant anti-Semitism for years.
How has the Democratic Party morphed into the party of anti-Semitism? By embracing the philosophy of intersectionality on the one hand, and by embracing the myth that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are completely separable on the other. The former provides the emotional impetus for nodding at Jew-hatred; the latter provides the intellectual framework for doing so.
The philosophy of intersectionality has othered Jews from the intersectional coalition. Because intersectionality is built on the premise that the prevailing Western system of thought has victimized various groups, and that those groups must band together in order to destroy that system, those who have thrived under the West must be excised from the intersectional agglomeration – being, as they are, representatives of the fact that Western thought is not, in fact, rooted in evil. The Jews are simply too financially, educationally, and politically successful to be seen as anything other than members of the power structure. Thus, slurs against them must be countenanced from more victimized groups.
In 1939, 20,000 Americans rallied in New York’s Madison Square Garden to celebrate the rise of Nazism – an event largely forgotten from American history. A NIGHT AT THE GARDEN, made entirely from archival footage filmed that night, transports audiences to this chilling gathering and shines a light on the power of demagoguery and anti-Semitism in the United States.
The ACLU has long argued that although private parties have the right to refuse to do business with people for ideological reasons, the government need not fund such conduct. “Taxpayer dollars must not fund discrimination” carried out by private parties, the ACLU states in its issue brief on government-funded discrimination. It has successfully pushed measures banning the federal government from contracting with companies that engage in certain boycotts. And it “strongly” supported legislation that would bar federal funds from being used by states in contracts with companies that engage in boycotts.
Identity politics is the key to understanding the ACLU’s apparent change of heart. The antiboycott laws the ACLU has defended are meant to protect gays and lesbians, an identity group they favor. The ACLU acknowledges that in many states it is “legal to fire or refuse to hire someone based on their sexual orientation,” but argues that companies that do so “must not be allowed to do so with taxpayer dollars.” It inexplicably ignores that the logic of those antiboycott laws applies equally to Israel.
The ACLU may think that refusing to do business with people because of their sexuality is immoral while refusing to do business with people connected with Israel is a blow for justice. That’s an intelligible political position, but it’s lousy First Amendment jurisprudence. First Amendment protections are the same regardless of what one thinks of the underlying conduct.
I played a role in developing the state anti-BDS laws, submitting testimony to legislatures and advising private groups that supported the measures. To avoid any constitutional doubts, I stuck to the model of antiboycott laws that the ACLU supports, comfortable in the knowledge that their constitutionality was unquestioned. I underestimated how much changes when sexual identity is replaced with Israeli identity.
There is more at stake here than hypocrisy. The ACLU’s enthusiasm for Israel boycotts has led it to take legal positions that threaten to undermine the antidiscrimination norms it has worked for decades to achieve. Now it is prepared to risk legal protections for sexual minorities for the sake of creating a constitutional right to boycott Jews. The ACLU probably hopes to have it both ways, arguing that boycotts of Israelis are “political” and boycotts of gays and lesbians are just mean. But courts won’t maintain one standard for boycotts of progressives’ favored targets and another standard for everyone else.
Read my new op-ed in @WSJ: "The ACLU opposes laws against boycotting Israel, even though the laws are patterned after those that protect gays and lesbians" https://t.co/PyOpRb4FJF via @WSJOpinion
— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) February 12, 2019
It is rare for mention of Jews of Arab countries to penetrate the mainstream international media, let alone for a voice in the maligned Israeli government to make itself heard. This piece in Newsweek by the minister of social equality, Gila Gamliel, bucks both trends. Gamliel recently launched a new app for uploading the stories of Jews from Arab countries to an oral history website, Seeing the Voices.Rivlin marks 70th anniversary of last Jewish camps in Cyprus
Gila Gamliel: story with us for good
Like most things, this history has its good and its bad periods; peaceful neighborly relations were followed by economic discrimination and then deadly violence as thousands of Jews were murdered in violent rioting caused by blood libels and false accusations.
My father Yosef escaped Yemen at the age of 10, and came to Israel as an orphan, where he was adopted by a Polish Jewish family. My mother Aliza came from Libya to Israel at the age of 6, the oldest of 12 brothers and sisters.
Aliza and Yosef were just two people among the 850,000 other Jews from Arab countries who were forced to leave their homes.
For seven decades, the story of the Jews from the Arab countries—both the good and the bad—was left largely untold both in Israel and around the world.
Now as a Minister in the Government of Israel, I am working to preserve the rich cultural history of our parents and grandparents from the Arab world.
We’ve just launched an app allowing Israeli citizens to document the testimony of family members and friends; we’ve promoted research on this history by academics and historians, we have marked an annual commemoration of the Jewish communities from the Arab countries; and we’ve made sure this history is in our classroom schoolbooks.
I can say with satisfaction that this important part of history is now with us for good.
It is a critical part of the story of the Jewish people who over centuries of steadfast determination managed to maintain their identity and religion, along with the dream of one day returning to the Holy Land.
President Reuven Rivlin flew to Cyprus Tuesday to mark 70 years since the closure of British detention camps on the island for Jews trying to reach Palestine after World War II.
He was to visit a monument in Nicosia dedicated to the 2,200 children of Holocaust survivors who were born in British colonial camps there between 1946 and 1949.
Rivlin also held talks with Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades.
Cyprus and Israel aim to upgrade relations, “especially on energy, security, economy, tourism, research and innovation,” tweeted Anastasiades.
Rivlin said cooperation between Israel and Cyprus on intelligence, security and terror prevention has made the Mediterranean “much, much safer.”
After the talks Tuesday with Anastasiades, he said Israeli-Cypriot security ties “have never been better” with the two countries’ navies and commando units sharing “space, knowledge and experience.”
He added that the focus of the neighbors’ strategic partnership, which includes Greece, is developing the East Med gas pipeline that “could be one of the greatest underwater projects in the world.”
The envisioned pipeline would carry natural gas from deposits in the eastern Mediterranean to Europe via Greece and Italy.
All of them can be seen in her "apology," as well as an additional one I would call the "Deflection Apology":
- Tactical apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is rhetorical and strategic—and not necessarily heartfelt
- Explanation apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is merely a gesture that is meant to counter an accusation of wrongdoing. In fact, it may be used to defend the actions of the accused
- Formalistic apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology after being admonished to do so by an authority figure—who may also be the individual who suffered the wrongdoing
Deflection apology - when a person accused off wrongdoing offers an apology but tried to change the subject by saying that others do the same or are worse.
Left-wing anti-Semitism is a gift to the right.
Consciously or not, Omar invoked a poisonous anti-Semitic narrative about Jews using their money to manipulate global affairs. ...Her words were a gift to Republicans, who seek to divide the Democrats over Israel, even as their president traffics in anti-Semitic imagery and stereotypes. The knives were out for Omar and she ran right into them.Goldberg is doing everything she can to minimize Ilhan's statement.
Omar herself has been subject to vicious Islamophobic smears, and has also come under attack for supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which seeks to use economic pressure to secure Palestinian rights. Perhaps such criticism is why she’s sometimes seemed unwilling or unable to distinguish between disingenuous political pile-ons and good-faith calls to respect Jewish sensitivities. But whether from carelessness or callousness, her weekend tweets damaged her political allies and squandered some of her own hard-won power.
I certainly have no problem with denunciations of Aipac, which plays a malign role in pushing American policy in the Middle East to the right. [AIPAC has been supportive of the two state solution for a long time now and plenty of moderate Democrats support AIPAC. - EoZ]Apparently, no one supports Israel because it is the only Jewish state in a world that has historically treated Jews badly. No one supports Israel because it is a liberal bastion in a shockingly backwards Middle East. No one supports Israel because it has managed to survive after seven decades of attacks, both militarily and politically. No, if you support Israel you must be a crazy religious nut, or a white supremacy apologist.
In truth, while Aipac’s influence is extensive, no one needs to pay off conservatives to make them support Israel. Evangelicals, a far bigger constituency than American Jews, tend to be pro-Israel for religious reasons; some believe that the return of Jews to their biblical homeland is a precondition for the rapture and the Second Coming of Christ. Plenty of others on the right love Israel because it’s a nationalistic, pro-American power in the middle of the Middle East. You can’t blame Jewish money for Kevin McCarthy’s terrible politics.
Not long after Pelosi’s statement, Omar released one of her own, apologizing “unequivocally.” She wrote, “Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.” Personally, I’m happy to accept her apology.Goldberg sickeningly refuses to publish the rest of the text of Omar's "apology," where she said "At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA or the fossil fuel industry. It's gone on too long and we must be willing to address it."
Buy EoZ's books!
PROTOCOLS: EXPOSING MODERN ANTISEMITISM
If you want real peace, don't insist on a divided Jerusalem, @USAmbIsrael
The Apartheid charge, the Abraham Accords and the "right side of history"
With Palestinians, there is no need to exaggerate: they really support murdering random Jews
Great news for Yom HaShoah! There are no antisemites!