In response to the news that Benjamin Netanayahu will visit the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron today, Palestinian Chief Justice Mahmoud al-Habbash stated that "the infringement of the Palestinian territories and Islamic holy sites for electoral contests is a crime and a violation of the Palestinian rights in the land and holy sites, and a flagrant violation of international laws and resolutions of international legitimacy, especially resolutions of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization "UNESCO", which confirmed more than once that the city of Hebron and the Ibrahimi Mosque It is a pure Islamic heritage and there is no right for non-Muslims in it like the Temple Mount and the Old City of Jerusalem."
Is that what UNESCO said?
In 2017, UNESCO declared the old city of Hebron to be a "Palestinian heritage site." But its description of the Cave of the Patriarchs does not say that it was an Islamic holy site alone:
The main monument of the town is the centrally sited Al Haram Al-Ibrahimi Mosque/The Tomb of the Patriarchs. Elements of the current building date back to long before the Mamluk Period, as do its religious associations and the reasons why it is revered by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike. The mosque is said to host the remains of God’s prophet Abraham/ Ibrahim, his wife Sara, their sons Isaac and Jacob and their wives Rebecca and Leah, as well as Jacob’s son Joseph. (?)
There is reference in the Book of Genesis to Abraham purchasing the field for the tomb. The sanctity of the tomb site was known from as early as the Herodian Period, (1st century BCE) when a monumental enclosure was built around the sacred Cave of Machpelah, whose location is now lost. This enclosure of massive, finely dressed stone blocks still frames the mosque and within it are structures that reflect later Fatimid, Crusader, Ayyubid, Mamluk and Ottoman periods. The great covered prayer hall was constructed in 12th century out of the remains of the Crusaders 11th century Romanesque church which in turn arose from the ruins of a 7th century mosque.
Habbash is lying - UNESCO never declared Hebron or the Tomb of the Patriarchs to be "Islamic," let alone exclusively Islamic. It recognizes that that main frame of the site was built in Herodian times, under Jewish self-rule. It also recognizes that it was a holy Jewish (and Christian) site way before Islam.
UNESCO simply declared it Palestinian based on the world believing that it is part of a mythical nation that never existed. But it never said a word about it being exclusively Muslim.
Given that under international law, people have the right to visit their holy sites, Palestinians are lying when they try to ban Jews from worship in sites that were holy 2000 years before Mohammed ever soiled his first diaper.
I also will note that already in 2009, when "Palestine" first bid to join UNESCO, they made it clear that the primary purpose of them joining that organization was to ban Jews from holy sites.
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.
Expectations are high for a dramatic announcement on Wednesday, when Benjamin Netanyahu will make Israeli history by becoming the first prime minister to deliver a public address in Hebron. The event is a state ceremony at the Tomb of the Patriarchs marking 90 years since Arab rioters killed 67 Jews in the biblical city, thereby decimating the ancient Jewish community.
No Israeli prime minister has ever attended or spoken at such a ceremony in Hebron, and few have ever visited the city.
A group of fanatic illegal Israeli colonialist settlers installed, Tuesday, a large tent in Tal Romeida Palestinian neighborhood in Hebron city, in the southern part of the occupied West Bank, to welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who intends to conduct a provocative visit to the city, Wednesday.
The Ministry of Endowments and Religious Affairs warned of the serious repercussions in the occupied city of Hebron after Israeli settlers erected large tents in the Tel Rumeida area in preparation for receiving Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday under the pretext of participating in official rituals to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Buraq Revolution.
The Ministry of Endowments pointed out that Netanyahu's visit and what is happening in the occupied city of Hebron is a reminder of Ariel Sharon's visit to Jerusalem in 2000, which ignited the Al-Aqsa Intifada, stressing that the visit is a serious escalation and prejudice to the feelings of Muslims, and dragging the region to a religious war that will have great consequences.
When they say that an Israeli peacefully visiting a Jewish holy place is going to ignite a religious war, they mean they want to ignite a religious war. Appealing to religious sensibilities is the most effective way they have to rouse Palestinians to attack.
I'm happy any time an Israeli leader visits Hebron, but I wish it didn't feel like an election stunt.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The 975,000 thousand or so British news consumers who purchased the Sunday, Sept. 1st print edition of the Daily Mail (The Mail on Sunday) gotta nice freebie: a “giant, glossy” map of the world featuring “essential geographical facts“.
Here’s a promotion of their special offer on Twitter, noting that the map is “just in time for going back to school”.
However, they got one “essential geographical fact” wrong, as you can see here in this close-up of the Middle East section of the map.
Elsewhere on the map, it makes clear that the square icons (which you see next to Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, and Amman) represent the capitals. So, the maps from the Daily Mail delivered “just in time for school” contain a blatant factual inaccuracy about Israel.
Despite the fact that we’ve posted countless times on this issue, and contacted editors to remind them that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital, usually resulting in corrections, this mistake continues to crop up periodically. Though we contacted Daily Mail editors to ask for a prominent editor’s note acknowledging the error, in light of the fact that the claim was made in an actual paper map that nearly one million Britons received (and not merely online), the damage can’t really be undone.
✏️Today's crossword clue: The Holy Land (9)
Surely the answer is Israel? Unless, you are doing the crossword in today's @theage and @smh newspapers, where the Holy Land is apparently Palestine. pic.twitter.com/lD3D0lBtab
Besides being a gifted singer and actor and a tireless and eloquent advocate for the civil rights of African Americans during the Jim Crow era, Paul Robeson was also a committed Communist of the Stalinist variety. Even after the Soviet purges began in the 1930s, and as he became aware that all was not well in the workers’ paradise, Robeson continued to defend the regime in public and to toe the party line. His interactions with leading Soviet Jewish figures—he was deeply connected with Jewish circles and often performed Hebrew and Yiddish songs—illustrate much about his attitudes. Describing these relationships in a longer discussion of Robeson’s Communism, Ron Radosh writes:
Despite Robeson’s constant cheerleading [for the USSR], he was privately dismayed by Soviet repression of the Jews. During his 1949 Soviet concert tour, Robeson asked to meet his friends [the Yiddish poet] Itzik Feffer and [the great Yiddish actor] Solomon Mikhoels, . . . whom he had first met in 1943 when Stalin sent them to tour the United States on behalf of the “Jewish Anti-Fascist League.” Little did Robeson know that Mikhoels had since been murdered on Stalin’s orders, on January 13, 1948, in what was disguised as a hit-and-run car crash. Feffer, meanwhile, was being held at the infamous Lubyanka prison in Moscow, having been arrested by the NKVD in December 1948.
The authorities made [Feffer] presentable for the occasion and brought him to meet Robeson in his hotel room. Feffer signaled that the room was bugged, and that they should only make pleasantries but communicate with hand gestures and written notes. Feffer told Robeson about the growing anti-Semitism, and the prominent Jewish cultural figures who were under arrest. Then Feffer put his hand across his throat, indicating that he expected that his days would be short. He was shot to death a few years later.
Robeson was shaken, and to his credit told the audience at his concert in Moscow that night that he was friends with Feffer and Mikhoels and had just met with Feffer. He then sang in Yiddish the Warsaw Ghetto resistance song written by Hersh Glick, a Jewish poet and fighter, Zog Nit Keynmol. It was indeed a bold gesture. By singing this song and mentioning his friendship with Feffer, he signaled his disapproval without having to say anything publicly against Stalin.
Yet when Robeson returned to the United States, he told the waiting press that he had seen Feffer in Russia and saw no traces of anti-Semitism there. . . . Robeson’s denial of Soviet anti-Semitism was the one always [cited] by American defenders of the Stalinist regime.
The BBC has included a pro-Corbyn political activist who has made deeply problematic comments on antisemitism as a “historian and expert” on Nazism as part of a new multi-part documentary.
Ash Sarkar, a contributing editor of Novara Media, did not substantially contribute to the first episode of BBC Two’s Rise of the Nazis, produced by production company 72 Films, however the introduction to the programme signalled that she will feature in later episodes.
Ms Sarkar has defended the vandalism of the walls of the Warsaw Ghetto and claimed that the International Definition of Antisemitism is merely a front to silence criticism of Israel.
In 2010, activist Ewa Jasiewicz sprayed political “Free Gaza and Palestine” on the walls of the Warsaw Ghetto, the largest and most well-known of the ghettos designated by the Nazis in German-controlled territory, from which hundreds of thousands of Jews were sent to death camps or killed by shooting and another hundred thousand died of starvation and courageous revolt. Essentially a mass grave, the Warsaw Ghetto serves as a salient symbol of the Holocaust for all and evokes sensitivity and strong emotion on the part of Jews in particular.
Palestinian girls pose in front of Dalal Mughabi Center named after a mass murderer
For the past two years, the PA's official Wafa news agency has had a regular weekly feature where it says it "monitors incitement and racism in the Israeli media." This is their response to groups like MEMRI and Palestinian Media Watch that expose hate and antisemitism in Palestinian and Arabic media.
The results are often comical.
This week, it is claiming that a column by Yoram Ettinger in Israel Hayom is racist and inciting hate. According to its own translation, here is what Ettinger says:
Journalist Yoram Ettinger, in an article published in the Israel Hayom newspaper, said: "Palestinian terrorists are, above all, graduates of the Palestinian education system in nurseries, schools and mosques. This body is governed by the PLO, which refines the opinion of Palestinian society." The Palestinian Authority hides these principles and actions behind the mask of gentle and friendly rhetoric, to delude Israel and the Western world to believe that they support peace and coexistence, but hate education on the one hand, and coexistence for peace, on the other, are contradictions that refute the approach that claims that a Palestinian state is part of the solution to the conflict. "
Is there anything the least but incorrect in this?
However, when the PLO is looking for "incitement" they are doing it through the lens of their own honor/shame dynamic.
The Israeli monitor groups are looking through the lens of honesty. They mean to expose the hate that the Palestinians still say to each other in Arabic.
To the PLO, exposing its own hate is considered "incitement" because these are things that should remain hidden - they are shameful, and the exposure itself is considered hate and incitement!
The PLO is complaining not that the Israeli media is wrong, but that it is showing the truth that they want to remain hidden. Under honor/shame, such exposures do not prompt them to examine their own actions but to lash out at the people who expose them. Self-reflection and the desire to improve themselves have a low priority when the first and often only instinct is to hide their indefensible actions from the rest of the world.
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.
In a recent interview, the defense analyst and former three-star general, Lieutenant General (r) Ghulam Mustafa, shared what has been more than interesting. According to him Pakistan’s Shaheen-III missile has the capability of destroying Israel’s Tel Aviv in mere 12 minutes.
He said that the Shaheen III is 18 times faster than the speed of sound. He also declared that the enemies are well aware of it and they were afraid on 27th of February that Shaheen III would be launched at them. The Indian media had itself broke this news.
On 27th February two Indian Airforce jets were shot down by Pakistan. The Indian army was planning an intrusion in Pakistan which they failed. Mustafa also claimed that the United States (US), had this rightful fear that Pakistan would attack Tel Aviv as well.
This was the reason to why it handed over its Air-3 missile to Israel on 28th of February. He also believes that the Pulwama attack was a pre-planned one and was actually planned by “India’s premier intelligence agency and Israel” in which the US played a vital role.
To make things clear, Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) has issued a statement allowing Mustafa and 25 other retired officers of the armed forces to appear in media as defense analysts. However, whatever they say are their opinions and are not attributable to the institution.
Sure sounds like a threat to me.
(h/t Tomer Ilan)
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.
On the morning of Aug. 23, an Israeli teenager was killed by a terrorist bomb in Samaria. That night, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) killed an armed Palestinian trying to cross the Gaza border.
The next day, Israel’s Air Force bombed Syria to sabotage a planned Iranian attack of armed drones. That day, three rockets were fired from Gaza; Israeli drones reportedly exploded above Beirut; an explosive device was found and neutralized near a settlement.
On Aug. 26, the IDF concluded that Hezbollah planned an attack on its forces in the Galilee; Hezbollah’s leader made direct threats; opposition leader Benny Gantz was invited to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office for a security briefing; Iraqi leaders declared reported Israeli raids in Iraq an act of war. In the meantime Iran and the United States toyed with the idea of direct negotiations for a new Iran deal.
On Aug. 27, Netanyahu advised Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah to “calm down”; Britain’s Times newspaper reported that Israel’s attack in Lebanon targeted machinery for precision-guided missiles; Just before midnight, an explosion killed two in Gaza.
And that was in less than a week.
Should we say this is war?
Consider this: There are attacks, counterattacks, maneuvers and threats. Israel is active on five fronts: the West Bank, where violence is contained and yet the situation is volatile; Gaza, where violence threatens to erupt daily; Syria, where Iranian forces keep trying to form a base against Israel that Israel won’t allow; Lebanon, where pro-Iranian forces feel compelled to act in response to Israeli actions; and Iraq, where Israel reportedly operates as part of the war against Iranian expansion.
Prominent Palestinian religious leader denounced "Jewish attacks" against Palestinian religious symbols in Jerusalem and referred to the Jewish presence in the land of Israel as a "colonialist cancer," NGO Palestinian Media Watch said on Monday.
According to a report by the Palestinian Authority official daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, as quoted by PMW, the Supreme Fatwa Council, led by Mufti Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, "Warned of the danger of attacks against the religious and national symbols in occupied Jerusalem, and held the occupation government fully responsible for these violations."
"The council expressed its rejection of all types of settlements and emphasized that the Palestinian people will not stand idly by in the face of this colonialist cancer," the report added.
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem is the Palestinian Authority's highest religious leader. Hussein, a former imam of the Al Aqsa mosque, was appointed by PA President Mahmoud Abbas in 2006.
Hussein is not new to controversial statements and incitement. Shortly after his appointment, he called suicide bombing: "legitimate as long as it plays a role in the [Palestinian] resistance."
In 2012, he quoted an ancient Islamic text encouraging Muslims to kill Jews while speaking at a ceremony broadcasted by the PA TV.
In 2015, Hussein denied that there had ever been a Jewish holy site on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
Germany’s Protestant Church said on Monday it is sticking with its appointment of an accused anti-Israel cleric who has allegedly written in a Hamas style to serve as the interim provost for the landmark Redeemer's Church.
Last year, the virulently anti-Israel cleric Rainer Stuhlmann wrote in a German Protestant Church document on the 70th anniversary of the re-founding of Israel that the creation of the State of Israel was for the Palestinians a “reason for mourning” because Israel engaged in “expulsion, destruction, coercion and injustice.“
Stuhlmann continued his alleged tirade against Israel, stating: “In recent years, military superiority has led Israel to brutally enforce its interests against Palestine. With an aggressive settlement policy, facts are created that narrow the scope of Palestine more and more.”
Last year, the editor-in-chief of the Westdeutsche Zeitung, Uli Tückmantel, wrote that Stuhlmann’s writing is, “one-sided finger-pointing against Israel in the propaganda style of Fatah and Hamas.”
When asked by The Jerusalem Post if he is anti-Israel or antisemitic, Stuhlmann, who is presently in Jerusalem, wrote by email: “I have been a friend of Israel for decades. For decades I have been engaged in the fight against all forms of antisemitism, including antisemitism related to Israel.”
AJ+ Is Al Jazeera
There’s a social media site whose glitzy videos populate your newsfeed. Its content overflows with typical leftist tropes. No, it’s not CNN or MSNBC. You should know what it is and the nefarious people backing it. Raheem Kassam, author of No Go Zones, explains why, when you come across these videos, you should swipe left.
With its recent clash with Israel, Hezbollah is again in the news. But for all of the attention Hezbollah gets, there are still elements of its history that remain ignored -- or just misrepresented.
In his article, The Secret History of Hezbollah, Badran writes that while the Hezbollah mythology claims that the group was founded in 1982, in Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, as a resistance group to the Israeli invasion that year -- the truth is:
Hezbollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran have been joined at the hip from the very beginning, even before the 1979 Iranian revolution.
Because Hezbollah's origins are directly tied to the origins of Iran's Islamic Revolution, the terrorist group's own beginnings go back to the rivalry between Iranian revolutionary factions that opposed the shah of Iran. The conflicts between these factions played themselves out not only in Iran, but among their followers in Lebanon as well.
Why Lebanon?
In Arafat and the Ayatollahs, Badran traces the relationship between the Iranian revolutionary factions and the PLO back to the late 1960s, when Arafat rose to power. After the shah's crackdown in 1963, Iranian opposition groups adopted guerrilla tactics against the shah and by the end of that decade made contact with the PLO in Qatar, as well as Iraq -- where Khomeini had been living since 1965. Iranian guerrilla organizations looked for training and made their way to PLO camps in Jordan and South Yemen.
But during the early to mid 1970s, Lebanon was especially valuable as a training ground for these groups because of its weak government and lack of control:
Even before Lebanon’s own system collapsed, and the country plunged into civil war, fueled in part by Palestinian weapons and ambitions, the country had become a training ground for revolutionaries from all over the world, and a magnet for cadres of the main Iranian revolutionary factions, from Marxists to theocrats and everything in between.
Iranian revolutionary activists gravitated to Lebanon -- not because of any interest in the fact that Lebanon bordered Israel, but because of the weakness of the Lebanese government. At the time, Lebanon was home to the PLO too, which had been kicked out of Jordan in 1970 following 'Black September'. The PLO was free to run their military training camps. Those camps made it possible for the anti-shah groups to get military training and weapons, contact other revolutionary groups, form alliances, and establish networks to support their fight against the Iranian regime.
Another plus for these Iranian factions, was Lebanon’s large Shiite population, which included the influential Iranian cleric Musa al-Sadr, who helped many of the Iranian opposition groups. Down the road, the networks of both Sadr and the PLO would continue to be helpful after the Iranian revolution, during the power struggle between Iran’s revolutionary factions that followed. Also among the Iranian groups operating in Lebanon at the time was the Liberation Movement of Iran (LMI). One of its leading figures was Mostafa Chamran, who together with the LMI worked closely with Sadr.
Sadr relied on the PLO for training his Amal militia -- but again, not for the purpose of fighting Israel. Instead, with the onset of the Lebanese civil war, Sadr wanted to protect his and the Shiite community’s interests from the other Lebanese factions.
In fact, both Sadr and Chamran were ambivalent about the Palestinians and the divide between Sadr and the PLO widened further:
o In 1976, Sadr supported Syria’s entry into Lebanon, which the PLO opposed o At the same time, Palestinian attacks on Israel from the south of Lebanon endangered the Shiite villagers which worried both Sadr and Chamran.
Meanwhile, the other main faction of Iranian revolutionaries operating in Lebanon consisted of the followers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. That group maintained close relations with the PLO, while mistrusting Sadr and the LMI. This is the faction would go on to become part of the Islamic Republic party after the Iranian revolution. Many of them also became top commanders in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
According to PLO operative Anis Naccache, who coordinated with the Iranian revolutionaries, Khomeini's group fear of a coup following their victory, led to the creation of the IRGC, for which he took personal credit, claiming he was approached specifically to draft the plan to form what became the main pillar of the Khomeinist regime.
According to Badran:
The formation of the IRGC may well be the greatest single contribution that the PLO made to the Iranian revolution.
One of those associated with this Khomeinist faction was Hojjatoleslam Ali Akbar Mohtashami, a student of Khomeini who would play a critical role in the emergence of Hezbollah. Another important figure, Mohammad Saleh Hosseini, played a key role in forming Hezbollah and was a founding member of the IRGC. Hosseini and the Khomeini's followers recruited young Shiites who were pro-Khomeini who became the nucleus of Hezbollah. The most famous of these was Imad Mughniyeh, who went on to become the group’s military commander and the mastermind of many of Hezbollah’s most notorious operations, such as the Marine barracks bombing in 1983.
The tensions between the Sadr and Khomeini camps in Lebanon played out back in Iran after the revolution. And then in August 1978, Sadr disappeared during a trip to Libya.
After Sadr’s disappearance, events accelerated. The shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979, leaving the way open for Khomeini to return to Iran a few weeks later in triumph. Soon after, the Islamic Republic party was formed, bringing together Khomeini’s followers and the founding of the Islamic Republic. They began calling themselves Hezbollah, to distinguish themselves from their rivals, the LMI and allied factions.
By the summer of 1981, the Islamic Republic party finished taking sole control of the government, and called themselves “the Hezbollahi government.”
Mohammad Saleh Hosseini was assassinated in Beirut in April 1981, but by then the assets that he and the top IRGC leadership had been cultivating in Lebanon since the mid-70s were consolidated. Mughniyeh was summoned to Iran to discuss providing training for Hezbollah and in 1982, an Iranian delegation arrived in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley.
Badran writes:
In the conventional narrative of Hezbollah’s origins, it is the arrival of this contingent, the work it did there, and the men it trained that is typically said to signal the organization’s birth. However, by the time Dehghan, Mohtashami, and Mughniyeh engineered the October 1983 attack that killed 241 American servicemen, the Khomeinists had already been active in Lebanon for over a decade. [emphasis added]
In effect, just as Khomeini and his followers took over control of the revolution in Iran, they did the same thing where it had all began, in Lebanon:
And now it was all coming full circle as Iran’s triumphant Islamic Republicans, Hezbollah, spawned their namesake in Lebanon.
Arafat must have been thrilled.
His support for Khomeini and for Hizbollah seemed to bode well for the terrorist's influence with Iran. In fact, when he arrived in Tehran on February 17, 1979, he was the first “foreign leader” to be invited to visit Iran -- just days after the victory of the revolution.
Arafat and Khomeini, 1979
Arafat tried to exploit his new-found friendship, but just like he did in Jordan, Arafat soon made himself unwelcome.
o Arafat tried to mediate the US Embassy hostage crisis, but his interference angered Khomeini, and made him suspicious. o The Iraq-Iran war only made things worse. Arafat could not afford to side with Iran against Iraq and risk losing the support of the Arab world that funded the PLO. He tried to mediate, but Khomeini refused to even see him.
In the end, Arafat's plans backfired:
By forging ties with the Khomeinists, Arafat unwittingly helped to achieve the very opposite of his dream. Iran has turned the Palestinian factions into its proxies, and the PLO has been relegated to the regional sidelines.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The head of the Department of History and Archaeology at the Islamic University of Gaza, Dr. Ghassan Weshah, has stated that there is no evidence whatsoever of any Jewish presence in the region, ever.
The fact that the Quran itself admits that Jews lived there seems not to bother him.
Weshah says that there is no evidence that there was any building under the Temple Mount, and as evidence he mentions that the Marwani Mosque in the southeast corner, which was built after excavations in the area known as "Solomon's Stables," did not see any evidence of a structure. Of course, the Temple Mount Sifting Project has been going through the many tons of dirt illegally dug out to create that mosque and has found many artifacts of Jewish life in the area.
The most outrageous claim from this academic - who has published a couple of papers about archaeology in Muslim periods in Gaza - is this one:
He pointed out that no matter how the Zionists tried to falsify some of the artifacts and claim that they prove their presence in Palestine, the largest and most famous museums in the world discovered the falsification by the occupation of these pieces and refused to exhibit any artifact coming from the occupation state to display in international museums because they are forged.
This statement alone should be enough to stop any academic journal from ever publishing anything from this fraud.
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.
Israel's National Library blog has a very interesting story about the passenger of the Marine Carp USNS:
The USNS Marine Carp was originally built for the purpose of transporting military forces to Europe and back. Following the conclusion of World War II, the vessel was repurposed as a passenger ship and set on a regular, commercial route. She embarked out of New York, crossed the Atlantic, and docked in Athens, Beirut, Haifa, and Alexandria. At the end of the route, she returned to New York via Italy. During the post-war period, the Marine Carp transported many American Jews to the Land of Israel in order to volunteer on kibbutzim, attend youth gatherings, or simply immigrate to the Land of Israel legally (if they were able to make it past the border checkpoints successfully). The ship set out from New York every five weeks. On May 4th, 1948, Marine Carp embarked on its regular route. There were many Jewish travelers aboard, including Jews from the Land of Israel studying or living in the United States who were answering a general enlistment call put out by the Hebrew Yishuv which was already fighting for its life in the War of Independence.
When the ship reached Beirut, a stop on its regular route, 400 Lebanese soldiers were waiting for the passengers at port. The Lebanese authorities did not want to allow Jewish men of military age to continue on to Israel. Indeed, 69 passengers, all Jewish men between the ages of 18 and 50, were forcibly removed from the ship. Among the detainees were 41 American citizens, 23 fresh Israeli citizens, 3 Canadians, and 2 others.
The ship’s crew tried to resist, but their efforts were in vain. Daniel Doron, another passenger (and a great-grandson of Zerah Barnett, co-founder of the city of Petah Tikva). testified:
“Most of the ship’s crew were black. We made friends with them. We would sing with them, drink with them and eat with them. They refused to leave Beirut. They said, ‘We are not leaving, not moving the ship. We are not leaving Beirut without the Israelis.’ It was only when the ambassador convinced them that the incident would be resolved within a week that they agreed to continue on their way.”
The detainees were taken by truck to the city of Baalbek, where they were held in an abandoned French military camp.
The detainees were taken by truck to the city of Baalbek, where they were held in an abandoned French military camp. Daniel Doron reflected on the drive to the camp:
“We drove all night. We departed at 10 o’clock or 12 o’clock at night. That was the most dangerous part because the trucks – Lebanese military trucks – were in bad shape. The brakes did not work very well. They bounced up and down, you know…”
Some of the passengers complained about how the U.S. was handling their detention, and even accused the U.S. consulate in Beirut of anti-Semitism. The United States condemned the refusal of the Lebanese to release the detainees, causing a minor diplomatic incident between the two countries.
So, what was the catalyst that eventually led to the liberation of the captive Jews? What finally contributed to stepping up U.S. efforts to end the affair? The official answer has never been revealed.
According to testimony from Daniel Doron, a family member was able to speak to then-US President Harry Truman about the issue. Truman was, apparently, able to find a solution to the crisis over the course of the two weeks that followed the meeting.
“Truman said, ‘What?!’ Then he told him the story. Truman fumed and went to the red phone. He picked it up, and the head of covert services was on the other end. He said, ‘Listen, my friend, either you free these people within two weeks or you can look for another job.’”
The American detainees refused to accept the release that had been arranged for them without their Israeli counterparts. Lebanese attempts to separate the populations had failed. Finally, on June 30th, almost a month and a half after the incident, the Lebanese agreed to release all of the detainees. They were sent back to New York, but many of them were unable to obtain a visa and were forced to stay on Ellis Island. From there, they again departed with the Marine Carp. Some of the passengers, anxious to return to Israel, had not waited to arrive on American shores. They chose to hop off the ship at other ports and found creative ways to get back to Israel.
Some details are filled in by a passenger on the ship, Elihu King, including the antisemitism of the US Consul in Beirut:
The Marine Carp was a semi-converted Liberty ship, and accommodation was frugal. The women were bunked six to a cabin, two tiers of three bunks. The men slept in huge bays with racks of pipemetal framed steel spring bunks five high. By tacit understanding or something, we Jewish men, about 75 of us, were given one bay to ourselves though it was not full. Some were Israelis going home. A few were from Canada, Mexico and elsewhere, off to fight in Palestine. There were some old religious Jews. About 24 of us were native born US citizens fully covered with passports, visas, and blue jeans. Oded Bourla was the designated commander of us Americans including 5 of the women in the "first class" cabins.
The Atlantic was very rough and most of us on board were badly sea sick. I avoided being sick by sleeping on deck and never going below until I got my sea legs. There were some deck chairs lashed to a rail on a hatch cover and that was my place for the first three days and nights.
While cruising through a now calm Mediterranean we got the news on the ship's radio that the STATE OF ISRAEL had been declared. Somehow the Arab passengers on the "Marine Carp" disappeared, maybe they moved away from where we were. Us Jews gathered in the dining hall and roared out our joy and pride. We sang "Hatikvah" and a thousand other anthems and songs, danced the hora until we dropped, cried, laughed, and carried on. The fears and doubts were kept inside, for that evening.
The crew joined us. Their union was Communist led and they were radicals all, and they were very much on our side.
...
The captain of the "Marine Carp" (we later learned) was concerned about the well being of his Jewish passengers when the ship called in at Beirut on its way to Haifa. It was an American ship and so we were unlikely to be bothered, but still...... He contacted the US Consul General in Beirut by radiotelephone and asked for instructions. The story I heard, from good sources, is that the Consul told him that there would be no trouble, he was to bring the ship in.
At 5 in the morning we pulled into the harbor at Beirut and tied up alongside a pier. The US Consul was there to greet us. So were about 400 Lebanese Marines, in tight uniforms of blue wool - must have been awfully hot for them, when the sun came out fully. The Marines came up the gangplank and set up machine gun posts in the main corridors. An announcement was made on the loudspeakers: all Jewish passengers were to assemble in the main lounge.
We didn't do that. We bunched up in little groups throughout the ship talking and trying to work out what to do. My group crowded around Oded Bourla in the shower room next to our sleeping bay. Some of the wild ones said we should fight. Two of them had pistols. We gabbled like a bunch of geese. There were an awful lot of the Lebanese. Then another announcement on the PA system: if the Jewish men would come along and be "interned" in Lebanon, the Jewish women would be allowed to continue their voyage to Haifa unmolested. The women were under Lebanese guard while we decided. This was clearly a serious threat. Most of the women were wives of husbands on the ship; couples had been separated because of the barracks-like sleeping arrangements.
We decided to submit. The Israelis among us were fearful but they led in that decision. Us Americans felt confident we'd be repatriated in a few days at most.
The two guns were stripped down to small parts and hidden on (in, actually) the bodies of a number of the men, as was ammunition. Somebody had a compass. Each took from his bags what he thought best. And so we slowly shambled up to the main lounge. The US Consul was there, and he collected the passports of the US citizens (and, it transpired, turned them over to the Lebanese commander). Some of us passed notes to the crew, for our families. In glum, defeated dribs and drabs we went down the gangplank and climbed onto Lebanese Army trucks. The Lebanese left behind some old, sick men, but 69 of us were taken away. The Jewish women waved and called to us as the trucks drove away from the pier.
The trucks drove through the city of Beirut and out through its suburbs. Through small towns and valleys and villages we drove, until the pressure on my bladder became extreme and I pissed off the rear of my truck after getting sign-langauge permission from the Marines who guarded us. After what seemed like about four hours, the last parts climbing high into the cool hills, we arrived at Baalbek. We were taken to what had once been a French Foreign Legion barracks, a handsome building with large rooms opening out onto a long balcony on the second floor. At the head of the stairs, a washroom with a water tap, a pissing trough, and an Arab squat latrine.
In the three large barracks rooms were piles of boards of nice, soft pine. Three of these for a sleeping pallet and a thin blanket, a tin bowl and a spoon - these were issued to each of us. The guards turned out to be Palestinians, refugees. The Lebanese themselves acted frightened of us, very nervous. Some of the Palestinians were allright, some were sadistic bastards.
We were given a meal: a small cube of goats' milk cheese, a radish, a green onion, two pitas (the large flat kind, not the pocket kind). We could get water from the tap. That's what we got every day for our three meals though sometimes we each got a large spoonful of beans in tomato sauce for dinner instead of the cheese. I weighed 150 lbs when I got there, and 110 lbs when we got out six weeks later.
And so to bed, worried and fearful about what tomorrow would bring.
The morning brought the US Consul, all the way from Beirut. We all gathered together to meet with him. He told us that were a real nuisance, that the Lebanese were treating us very well, and that the families of the Americans were working for our release. He heard our requests for medicine for the two of us who were down with severe measles, and agreed to get us what we needed, we could give him the money now.
We had elected some leaders from among us, and they mentioned that the last time an American citizen had been taken by force from a ship (not even a US flag ship, at that) the US Navy had a cruiser in the harbor the next day and the citizen was released under the threat of our guns. The Consul assured us that there was no danger of that happening now. The Consul showed a marked distaste for Jews; of course he was accredited to an Arab state, so that would explain it.
(It was not until the 1960s when I subpoenaed my files from the US State Department in connection with my citizenship case that I felt the reality of the discrimination. The important document about me started out thus: "This obstreperous member of a despised race.......". The US Consul in Beirut had endorsed it thus: "Right!"). So much for the Consul. When we read in the local French language newspaper that he had been on the podium at an anti Israel rally at the American University of Beirut and had seen fit to stay there while a resolution calling for our (the US prisoners) death was passed by acclamation, we were not really surprised.)
The next big event for us was the Selection. (That term refers to the procedure in the concentration camps in Europe, where those who were to be killed that day were separated from the rest). We had contacts with some of the guards, who would bring us news and stuff for money, so we were prepared. The camp commander showed up with a specially big and tough retinue of guards, and called us all together. He had all our passports before him, and told us that the Israelis would be taken to a different location. We had discussed this possibility and it seemed to us that this would enable the Lebanese to kill the Israelis without risking the consequences of killing citizens of the USA or Canada. So the night before we had all - Americans, Canadians, the two with Argentinian passports, and the Israelis (who had British passports) - shaved our heads so we would not be easily identified from our passport photographs.
The first man was called forward and asked his name. "Yisrael ben Yisrael", he said, "Israel son of Israel". And so said the second shaven-headed man, and the third, and the Selection was called off.
After we'd been there for a month, and our families' efforts to get the US State Department to move on our case seemed to be stuck despite the best efforts of then-Congressman Jacob Javits of New York, we started to plan an escape. We had some Israelis among us who knew the topography pretty well, and they worked out a route to Israel (though we had no idea where the actual front line might be). We had the weapons we'd smuggled in, and accepted the fact that we would have casualties. We were tired now from poor nourishment, and dispirited from being prisoners, but we felt we had to do it.
Just as we were getting ourselves ready, storing food at the expense of eating it and so on, we got some hints that we might be released. Then the US Consul came to visit. The Lebanese offered to release us and let us go back to the USA, providing we would each swear never to attempt to go to Israel. That included the Israelis. We agreed. An oath under duress is okay.
Then we waited some more.
One morning, the Lebanese Army trucks came grinding into the courtyard. We needed no further notice, put our belongings into our pockets and lined up with the weakest and sick ones at the head of the line....just in case. But no, they took us all. Huddled together in heaps at the bottom of the truck, we were too weak to sit upright and too scared that it might not be for real to sing or joke around. But yes, they took us to the pier, and there was the same "Marine Carp", this time on its way back to the USA on another round trip.
Weakly, still very fearful that the ordeal was not really over, we climbed up the gangplank. Crew members helped us on board and down to the sleeping bay and up onto the bunks. Later they gave us a festive meal of turkey and all the trimmings, ice cream, the lot. We gorged ourselves and soon returned the goodies, which our shrunken and tender tummies refused to hold.
The ship now carried many refugees from the war zone, Americans going home, many of them Jews. I met some politicals who told me with great excitement that they had a message for us from Haganah!!! Special arrangements had been made, they said, and the ship would make an unscheduled call at Palermo where Haganah awaited us and would take us off and on to Israel! Huzzah!
As they say in Israel, "Lo dubim v'lo yaar", "No bears and no forest".
Yes, we did pull in at Palermo. But nobody, it seemed, awaited us. Of those who decided to make a break for it anyway, some bought their crew papers from crew members, some went over the side and swam ashore. Three of us, lacking in funds or anyway experience or imagination, pried fillings out of our teeth and went to the captain and begged to see a dentist. The captain agreed, and called an escort of eighteen Carabinieri to take us to the dentist. Foiled!
The three of us, scrawny young Dave from Montreal, hulking Big Joe ("Gonna kill me a thousand Ayrabs!") from New York, and scrawny young me. We were taken in a truck to the center of town. Off we got and went upstairs to the dentist's office leaving two Carabinieri to guard the downstairs entrance. Once inside, Joe offered to go first. Dave and I sat in the waiting room, with two Carabinieri guarding the door and the rest sitting around in the room with us.
What the hell, I thought, what the hell. I can't get out of this. But I can give it a try, and then won't be so ashamed when they drag me back to the ship. I had stuffed my pockets with packs of American cigarettes before I left the ship, primo currency in Europe in those days. I stood up, walked briskly to the door, handed a pack of cigarettes to each of the guards, said "Vino, vino" with great brio, and walked out. To my surprise, nobody stopped me. (Why did I say "Vino"? Well, I couldn't think of anything else, that's why). I walked briskly down the stairs. The guards at the street door barred my way with their carbines. I handed them each a pack of cigarettes and said my magic "Vino" at them. They seemed confused but did not stop me. I marched down the main street of Palermo with calm and confidence until after a minute I heard them yelling and their pounding feet behind me so I picked mine up and ran like hell.
I ducked into a shop, a pharmacy, and the woman behind the counter, quickly seeing that I was running from the police, grabbed my arm and pulled me down to a crouch behind a counter where I couldn't be seen from the street. After a minute the chase seemed to have passed me by so I got up, said "Grazie" to the woman, and walked out of the shop.
Turns out that all the Carabinieri ran down the street after me, so Dave Sidorsky, finding himself all alone in the waiting room, stuck his head into the dentist's office and told Joe Nagdimon and then he walked out and down the stairs and out the front door and away. Nagdimon chose to stay and be taken back to the ship.
There were over twenty of us who got off the ship in Palermo, but ten went back to the ship before it sailed. The rest of us were rounded up into a cheap restaurant by street urchins who seemed to understand what was going on. We had a meal, and decided to look for Jews to help us. In Palermo there were none left so we took a train up to Naples where we found some but they wanted nothing to do with us because the police were after us and sent us up to the Jewish Agency in Rome where we finally found people to take care of us.
After some more adventures in a DP camp near Rome, I was assigned to lead a bunch of sturdy young Bulgarian Jews on their way to Israel in a chartered airplane. This was about 9 July.
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.
Melbourne doctor Ann Drillich, the daughter of Polish Holocaust survivors, is a rare kind of Jew who owns a Catholic church. The brick structure, Our Lady of the Scapular, stands on Drillich’s ancestral property in the medieval town of Tarnów, near Kraków. Her late mother, Blanka Drillich née Goldman, inherited the land at the end of the second world war. Aged 18, Blanka was the sole living heir to the Goldman estate, all others perished in the town’s ghetto: she found her mother shot dead in her bed.
But Drillich has never been inside her church.
“I tried to enter it once,” she recalls. “It was locked.”
The reason: in 1987, with the help of a trusted friend of the Drillichs, the Catholic church in Poland effectively stole the land and built the house of worship on the site. The Drillichs didn’t know. Ann Drillich only learned of the theft in 2010 when, as heir, she ordered a public records search about her family’s estate.
“At first it took a while to settle in, the shock of the betrayal,” she says. “And the idea that behind the injustice is a church.
“My mother’s family was one of the most prominent in town. It was like they had stolen not just our land, but my family’s history.”
And so after the shock settled, she sued.
“How could I not?” she asks.
So began an expensive, traumatic and escalating battle that pitched this meticulous woman with a scientific sensibility against a powerful religious institution.
The church appealed. Stalled. Obstructed. Counter-sued. The Polish courts, meanwhile, delivered justice to Drillich, again and again. And yet again, in a final ruling in 2016 when three district court judges found the church had acted in “bad faith” when it acquired the “abandoned” land. (h/t Yerushalimey)
Numerous Rockland County Republican elected officials in February previewed the controversial video put out by the party that critics have branded as anti-Semitic for warning of a “takeover” by the Hasidic Jewish community, The Post has learned.
The early look at the digital attack ad — some six months before its public release — shows that the targeting of the ultra-orthodox community was a well-thought-out, deliberate strategy, sources said.
No one in the room objected to it, a GOP source who attended the February meeting told The Post.
“The video was introduced by Lawrence Garvey [the county GOP leader] and played in front of a room of 20-35 people. The entire video was played with Ed Day [the Rockland County executive] there,” the source said.
“We were told we are raising money for the county legislators’ races and unveiling a strategy and we saw the video then. I thought it was a bad strategy,” the source said.
But the source didn’t raise an objection at the time.
In a tweet, the Republican Jewish Coalition wrote, “This video is absolutely despicable. It is pure anti-Semitism … . The Rockland County Republican Party is an embarrassment and has no place associating itself with our party.”
Dov Hikind, a former Democratic New York state assemblyman from Brooklyn, tweeted that the video is a “shocking & brazen display of antisemitism! [sic]The Republican Party of Rockland Cty [sic] has the audacity to put out this vile trash that amounts to ‘the Jews are taking over’ with ‘Jewish money and power’!”
Following the criticism, the video was removed from the Rockland County Republican Party’s Facebook page, although others have downloaded it, and it can still be found online.
Despite the backlash, Rockland County Republicans insist their message must be heard. Lawrence Garvey, the county’s Republican chairman, claimed the issue is not a religious one, but a matter of “right and wrong.”
“For those not living in Rockland, it is harder to see a real and unique problem that exists here. The people of Rockland have become desperate for attention to the problems facing our communities and many live every day with the threat of losing their homes and neighborhoods,” he wrote in a statement. “Anyone who dares speak up about overdevelopment, corruption or education is immediately labeled as anti-Semitic without any concern for facts or without any idea of the true issues at hand.”
Fellow Republican, Rockland County Executive Ed Day, said in a statement, “While the content of the video is factual, the tone and undercurrent is unacceptable. … I have a great deal of respect for our Jewish neighbors and want them to know that as their county executive, I will always stand up against hatred. That said, the concerns raised about overdevelopment are accurate, well-grounded and desperately need to be addressed, but must be done in a way free of rhetoric and rancor.”
I want to concentrate on #4, Watch Your Language, about how grouping people together can fuel stereotypes and strip people of their humanity.
There is a major exception to this rule, that every progressive and woke person seems to happily violate, all the time.
Here's a quick look at a search on Amnesty's site for the word "settler" used in the context of Israel.
Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria are a monolith of rowdy gangs who attack Arabs for no reason and steal land. They are never humanized - even in the rare instances that Amnesty condemns an attack on a settler, it is combined with an Amnesty attack on settlers themselves (using a "both sides must avoid violence" formulation that never occurs when Jews can be blamed alone.)
Settlers are stereotyped, demonized and scapegoated all the time - without looking at their point of view, without differentiating between religious or secular or even mentioning the many Arab Israelis who have also moved across the Green Line.
Amnesty won't change, and neither will the self righteous progressives who are quick to accuse others of bigotry and who remain stubbornly blind to their own.
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.
One of the most interesting things about the rhetoric used by the BDS
“movement” and similar Israel-disliking organizations is that the BDSers’ life
on the psychological extreme means that the rhetorical tactics they employ also
tend towards the extreme.
When one is dealing with a “normal” political situation, there have
traditionally been forces that keep discussion within general bounds of
civility. Until recently, candidates primarily
dropped innuendos about their opponent’s inadequacy for the job, while
surrogates got much more specific and accusatory. But the simple fact that most of those
running for office still feel the need to be perceived as even-tempered and
fair implies an understanding that public discourse needs to follow certain
civilized rules.
The public is also interested in variety, which means using the same
tactic over and over again is likely to bring diminishing returns, especially
if that tactic is perceived as controversial or extreme. And one of the rhetoric tactics that tends to
wear out its welcome fast is Argumentation from Outrage.
Argumentation from Outrage is considered in informal fallacy, that is a
fallacy not based on breaking any formal logical rules (such as All Dogs are
Animals, All Cats are Animals, therefore all Dogs are Cats – a formal fallacy
which is wrong even if you substitute letters, imaginary animals or nonsense
words for Cats, Dogs and Animals). But with
an informal fallacy, the actual content of the argument is relevant or, in the
case of Argumentation from Outrage, how that content is presented.
Argumentation from Outrage is usually brought up in discussions of
cable TV or radio political talk show hosts who seem to be able to break into a
screaming fit at the slightest provocation, although in our current political
culture it has travelled from this venue to the candidates themselves (at least
as of now).
In the contexts of shock-political media, Argumentation from Outrage is
meant to short circuit reasonable debate by raising the temperature to such a
degree that the only choices an opponent to the screamer has are to (1) capitulate;
or (2) begin screaming back (usually a losing proposition for a talk show guest
inexperienced at public howling who does not control the microphone or editing
booth). And while such a tactic may play
well to a talk show’s fan base which gathers to watch their hero put
wrong-minded guests in their place, most people who play in politics put the
brakes on such tactics (especially when playing before a mixed audience of friends,
foes and undecideds).
But as we have seen, people playing the BDS game have no such brakes
for the simple reason that “the audience” for them are not real people, but
simply props in a fantasy-laden drama going on in the boycotters own
heads. Which is why if you point out the
inconsistencies in their arguments, they’ll fly into a rage. If you point out their hypocrisy of snoozing
while Hamas missiles fly but rousing themselves into righteous fury when Israel
shoots back, they’ll fly into an even bigger rage. If you point out that their “movement” draws
its strength from being aligned with the needs and goals of wealthy and
powerful states, they will burst a blood vessel.
In fact, doing or saying anything that challenges their self-perception
as courageous and virtuous human-rights champions speaking truth to power means
it’s just a matter of seconds before someone’s face is two inches from yours
shrieking abuse and spewing saliva (either literally or virtually – although
without the saliva when this dynamic plays out in online debate – as it
inevitably does).
The point of Argumentation from Outrage is to raise the discomfort
level so high that people will avoid further attacking (or even questioning)
the person having the tantrum. Most
normal people, after all, don’t like being in situations where emotions are
running red hot. And a boycotter losing
an argument knows this, which is why they tend to explode so readily in hope of
making it impossible for normal debate to continue.
This helps to explain why anti-Israel “dialog” tends to be so
shrill. I have occasionally teased
certain anti-Israel writers for starting their writing in a snit and then
working themselves into frenzy of accusation and fury. But if you think about it, starting an
argument in a state of outrage is yet another way of avoiding a debate you know
you cannot win.
The trouble (for the BDSers anyway) is this perpetual outrage is used
to justify all kinds of behavior that tends not to play well with a general
audience which does NOT like to be patted down on the way to class by a bunch
of Israel haters dressed up in Israeli soldier costumes during some campus protest,
does NOT like to have their concerts or theatre performances interrupted by
people shrieking slogans and waving banners, and does NOT trust people who seem
to be shouting, even when the situation doesn’t warrant it.
The good news is that the boycotters’ outrage tactic has done little to
further their cause. The bad news is
that they have help mainstream Argumentation from Outrage to the point where it
is now becoming the tactic of choice for people on all ends of the political
spectrum, an outcome that puts in peril the normal human deliberation upon
which democracy depends.
Thanks guys!
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.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
A Sephardi-style psalm for Rosh Hashana
-
As the Jewish world prepares to celebrate Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year
5786, we wish all Point of No Return readers a Year of Health, Success and
Pe...
Shana Tova – Happy New Year!
-
Wishing all our readers celebrating Rosh HaShana תשפ”ו a happy, healthy and
peaceful new year which will bring freedom for all our hostages.
The post ...
Shana Tova – Happy New Year!
-
Wishing all our readers celebrating Rosh HaShana תשפ”ו a happy, healthy and
peaceful new year which will bring freedom for all our hostages.
The post ...
Shabbat Shalom and Shana Tova!
-
Soon to be a new year, Shana Tova! Dry Bones Golden Oldies in the fond
memory of Yaakov Kirschen (Dry Bones). Brought to you by Sali, the LSW.
Shabbat ...
Now What?
-
Today, Jews cannot walk down the street in North America, Europe, or even
Australia without the possibility of being spat on, beaten, or even
murdered. Cou...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Wednesday, September 04, 2019
Elder of Ziyon
