Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, December 22, 2019

12/22 Links: New ICC ruling reveals organization's true anti-Semitic intentions; Amnesty International- from bias to obsession; Podhoretz: The Reverse Blood Libel; Save Me from My Defenders!

From Ian:

New ICC ruling reveals organization's true anti-Semitic intentions

Because between the "war crimes" under investigation by chief ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and the request of a country that doesn't exist, "Palestine," are the Jewish communities beyond the Green Line and Israel's self-defense in Operation Protective Edge – versus the persistent attempts to invade Israel's sovereign territory from Gaza under the guise of "March of Return" border protests. In other words: Jewish settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel, which are not at all occupied territories according to actual international law, is a "war crime." Also a war crime, apparently, is preventing "Palestinian refugees" from invading Israel's sovereign territory from an area that Israel willingly transferred to Palestinian control.

This is not, therefore, a legal measure to bring any Israeli "war criminals" to justice, but the exploitation of the international judicial system to implement the diplomatic goal of destroying the State of Israel. According to the international definition of anti-Semitism, this amounts to pure anti-Semitism because it entails the denial of the Jewish people's right to self-determination and employs double standards against Israel.

Bensouda willingly ensnared herself in the web spun by the "Palestinians" around the international judicial system for the purpose of creating their own international law, to incriminate Israel and put it on the same footing with the Nazis. Thus, from their perspective, they can kill two birds with one stone: The Jews would no longer be perceived as victims of history, and another precedent will have been set in their war to delegitimize the existence of the Jewish state. It now remains to be seen whether the ICC's judges fall into this trap and further throw their own court's legitimacy into question by turning it into yet another absurd circus show – ala UNESCO, UNRWA, and the UN Human Rights Council.

Bensouda, who has struggled mightily to launch war crimes and crimes against humanity investigations in the most clear-cut of cases (such as Venezuela or Ukraine), has filed a request with judges to decide whether the ICC has jurisdiction in Judea and Samaria, east Jerusalem, and Gaza. Israel – similar to the United States and Russia – declared long ago that it has no intention of ratifying the tribunal's inaugural convention. Therefore the ICC has no authority to discuss Israel's affairs, unless crimes were committed against a country that is a signatory to the ICC convention (among its neighbors, only Jordan falls in this category), and unless it is proven that the Israeli justice system is incapable of properly trying suspected war criminals.

The judges at The Hague, therefore, must determine whether "Palestine" is a country at all, the status of the "territories," and whether the Israeli judicial system is functioning properly or not. Tackling these matters is akin to wading into a minefield, which could threaten the very viability of the International Criminal Court.

Netanyahu on war crimes probe: ICC has become a ‘weapon’ against Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday tore into the International Criminal Court for saying there were grounds to investigate alleged Israeli and Palestinian war crimes, calling it an “absurd” decision that showed the court was being weaponized against Israel.

“As we’re moving forward to new places of hope and peace with our Arab neighbors, the International Criminal Court in The Hague is going backwards. On Friday it finally became a weapon in the political war against Israel,” Netanyahu said at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.

Netanyahu said the prosecutor’s decision contained three “absurdities,” the first of which was going against the court’s founding principles.

“The ICC was established after the horrors of World War II, in particular the terrible horrors done to our people, and it is meant to deal with problems that states bring up against war criminals, such as genocide or mass deportation,” he said.
Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda in the courtroom of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands, August 28, 2018. (Bas Czerwinski/Pool via AP)

Second, taking aim at the court’s scrutiny of West Bank settlements, Netanyahu argued that the decision went against “historical truth” of Jewish rights in the historic land of Israel.

“It is acting against the right of Jews to settle in the homeland of the Jews. To turn the fact that Jews are living in their land into a war crime — it is hard for there to be a greater absurdity than this,” he said.

Finally, Netanyahu said the ICC was ignoring the “present truth,” lashing it for not instead pursuing probes of Iran or Syria.

“This is terrible hypocrisy,” he said. “We’ll fight for our rights and our historical truths with all tools at our disposal.”

He also said the US was “fighting these distortions, this lack of justice and this lie,” without elaborating.

The ICC Prosecutor is saying that Jews living in the Old City of Jerusalem is a war crime. No one has ever been prosecuted for this “war crime”, & Prosecutor herself has ruled that Russians moving into occupied Crimea is NOT a war crime. This is not int’l law, its something else.
— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) December 21, 2019

My academic article explaining why the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israeli settlements (whether or not there exists a "State of Palestine" is, alas, paywalled (a drawback of peer-reviewed journals) but here is the abstract https://t.co/HfkJsUHQvd
— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) December 21, 2019

Aaron Klein: ICC Decision to Probe Israel for ‘War Crimes’ Is Pure Antisemitism

The inexcusable decision by the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor to proceed with a probe into Israeli “war crimes” can only be explained as being motivated by raw antisemitism.

How else to fathom the ICC’s singling out of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), which goes further than any other military in the world to protect civilians in the battlefield.

The IDF operates in a complex theater in which Palestinian terrorists use civilians as human shields, deliberately house their terrorist infrastructures in densely populated civilian areas and indiscriminately fire projectiles into Jewish civilian population zones.

Still, the IDF goes to extreme lengths to ensure the protection of Palestinian civilians even though terrorists intentionally surround themselves with civilians to thwart Israeli operations because they know that Israel is a beacon of morality.

The Israeli military regularly warns civilians of incoming attacks with phone calls and text messages. It employs “roof knocking” — or firing warning shots before any aerial bombing – thus providing Palestinian terrorists with advance warning of incoming attacks. If civilians in the vicinity still don’t evacuate, the Israeli army often makes announcements on loudspeakers. The IDF has called off scores of military raids because civilians were in the way.

Making a mockery of justice, ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced on Friday that she was “satisfied that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation into the situation in Palestine.” Bensouda ignores that Palestine, of course, is not an existing state.

Superficial and one-sided BBC reporting on ICC statement

Despite having previously acknowledged in 2015 that “the date chosen by the Palestinians as the starting point for the ICC to investigate requires explanation as it is clearly not arbitrary”, this report makes no effort to inform audiences why the ‘start date’ of June 13th 2014 – which deliberately excludes the abductions and murders of three Israeli civilians by members of a Hamas terror cell – was selected by the Palestinians.

The BBC’s report promotes reactions from the Palestinian Authority and a political NGO also engaged in lawfare against Israel.

“In a statement, the Palestinian Authority said: “Palestine welcomes this step as a long overdue step to move the process forward towards an investigation, after nearly five long and difficult years of preliminary examination.”

Reacting to the ICC decision, B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, said: “Israel’s legal acrobatics in an attempt to whitewash its crimes must not be allowed to stop international legal efforts to, at long last, hold it to account.””

It closes with promotion of the BBC’s standard but partial mantra concerning ‘international law’.

“There are some 140 Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which most of the international community consider illegal under international law. Israel disputes this, and last month the US reversed its position and declared it no longer considered the settlements invalid.”

At the bottom of the article readers are told that they “may also find interesting” an embedded video dating from August 2019 which features as one of its main interviewees the director of another political NGO – Addameer – which is linked to a Palestinian terrorist organisation.

Although the BBC acknowledged years ago that the Palestinian decision to join the ICC and pursue this suit is part of what it has described as “a new strategy to put pressure on Israel“, that information is completely absent from this latest report.

I recently published a Facebook tidbit titled, "The Grounding of Democratic Party Racism is the Progressive Left." There I suggest that the progressive-left is racist in three primary ways. These are anti-white racism, antisemitic anti-Zionism, and an imperial condescension toward those of non-European descent.

In response, Corinne Blackmer, a Professor of Biblical and American literature and gender studies at Southern Connecticut State University, pointed me to a 2019 article by Keith Payne published in Scientific American titled, "The Truth about Anti-White Discrimination."

The thesis is that anti-white racism is, itself, a racist delusion on the part of "white" people. Payne's conclusions are grounded in a piece published in Perspectives on Psychological Science by Michael Norton and Sam Sommers, titled "Whites See Racism as a Zero-Sum Game That They Are Now Losing."

Payne writes:

...a national survey reported that both blacks and whites believed that discrimination against blacks had declined over the past few decades, but whites believed that discrimination against whites was now more common than discrimination against blacks...

Whites tend to view increasing diversity as anti-white bias.

The implication is clear. The only reason that "whites" detect anti-white racism is out of their own sense of unearned privilege. It is not that there is any incessant cultural or academic tendency to berate "whites," but merely an irrational sense of weakness and vulnerability in the face of rising diversity and social justice in the United States.

The premise of Payne's argument rests on the undeniable fact of disparity of income between "white" people in the United States versus "black" people here. He claims that "the average black family earns about half as much as the average white family" and "that the unemployment rate for blacks is twice that for whites..."

Of course, none of this takes into account the fact that East-Asian Americans, Asian-Indian Americans, and American Jews, out-earn Americans of European descent. It seems hard to argue for "white privilege" in a society wherein those at the top of the economic hierarchy are not "white." Nonetheless, the disparagement of "white" people as essentially racist is obviously itself a racist notion and Jews are swept up in it.

Recently there has been considerable conversation around the notion of the "white Jew." The basic idea is that since Ashkenazim are "white" we enjoy "white privilege" and are, in fact, among the primary oppressors of "people of color." Democratic Party devotees of Louis Farrakhan even believe that Jews were the driving force behind that Atlantic Slave Trade and remain so to this day... as if that makes the slightest bit of sense.

The question then becomes, so what is the evidence for this political and cultural anti-white racism? I am not a sociologist and have not done independent research on the question. So we will have to make do with a few pieces of anecdotal evidence, and one scholarly study, that represents a tiny drop in the bucket if you decide to look into the matter further.

My favorite example is MTV's 2017 New Years Resolutions for White Guys. This one is fun because it is just so transparent in its contempt toward "white guys." Another interesting piece from the New York Times, written by Ekow N. Yankah, is titled, "Can My Children Be Friends With White People?" Can you begin to imagine a New York Times piece titled in all seriousness, "Can My Children Be Friends With Black People"? Yankah is not sure that his children can be friends with "white" people and this was published in The Times. Thankfully, Yankah tells us, "I have not given up on being friends with all white people."

And I have no doubt that "white" people -- whoever they may be, exactly -- appreciate that very much.

This one captured my attention shortly after the election of Donald Trump. This is a case wherein some young black kids tortured a mentally-handicapped white kid because Donald Trump won the 2016 election. The torturers made a point of calling the kid "white" as they stripped him naked into a bathtub and taped his mouth. The point, of course, is that he was tortured for being "white"... whatever that means, exactly. I feel reasonably certain that the people doing the torturing were not Republicans.

Finally, I want to point you to a piece written by Muneeb Hafiz, a PhD Candidate and Associate Lecturer at Lancaster University, UK, published in Critical Ethnic Studies by the University of Minnesota Press, titled "On Whiteness" (2018). Hafiz writes:

Whiteness “is on a toggle switch between ‘bland nothingness’ and ‘racist hatred,’” Professor Nell Painter tells us. It is a “metaphor for power” in James Baldwin’s vocabulary. According to Kehinde Andrews, Whiteness is “a process rooted in the social structure, one that induces a form of psychosis.” Whiteness, Achille Mbembe explains, “became the mark of a certain mode of Western presence in the world, a certain figure of brutality and cruelty, a singular form of predation with an unequaled capacity for the subjection and exploitation of foreign peoples.” A fantasy — no more real than Blackness, we should add — later transformed into a kind of common (non)sense, Whiteness “involves a constellation of objects of desire and public signs of privilege that relate to body and image, language and wealth.”

It is frankly astonishing that we can reify "whiteness" as a negative toxic epistemology in human history and not recognize this notion for the racism that it is. This does not only affect those of European descent. It represents racism towards Jews, as well.

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.

Jordanians protest buying natural gas from Israel as Egypt prepares its own purchase

Jordanian haters of Israel are trying to increase pressure on the government to cancel a deal where the energy-poor kingdom buys natural gas from Israel.

They started a hashtag campaign his weekend to "Bring down the gas agreement" complete with graphics like these:

Jordanians are also planning a series of demonstrations against the deal in the coming days.

The companies controlling the Leviathan and Tamar gas fields in Israeli waters plan to sell natural gas to both Egypt and Jordan starting next month. I have not yet seen similar protests from Egypt.

The gas deal with Jordan is worth $10 billion, with Egypt is it worth $15 billion.

Arab media are falsely reporting that the gas deals are with Israel itself, and that Israel admitted that some of the revenue will go towards its military. (Although, of course, some of the tax revenue undoubtedly would, as some portion of taxes from any country would go towards defense budgets.)

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.

Today's Hellenists celebrate Chanukah

Chanukah celebrates a bloody, violent rebellion by Jews against the Seleucids and the assimilated Jews who preferred Greek culture to Jewish religion.

Which is why it is so strange to see pesudo-Jewish groups like IfNotNow and Jewish Voice for Peace pretend to celebrate Chanukah - when they would have been the first to become pro-Seleucid Hellenists.

Jewish Voice for Peace's Chanukah ideas show that they are not even pretending to be interested in peace. They just hate Israel, period.

They aren't saying "criticize the occupation." They aren't saying "criticize the Israeli government." They are saying that they hate the very idea of Israel as a Jewish state and that Jews should subvert their holidays to attack the Jewish state.

Their logo in 167 CE would have looked like this:

Similarly, the "IfNotNow" logo would have looked something like this:

But if you think about it, even the "moderate" J-Street would never have supported Mattithias/Matisyahu slaying the Jewish Hellenist who wanted to sacrifice to the Greek gods, which sparked the Jewish rebellion. They would have been aghast at such seemingly unprovoked violence. Because, they say, they are pro-peace.

Maybe they would have lobbied the Seleucids to allow Jews to worship in their own Temple; maybe they could share the Temple with the Jews? If they ask really nicely?

The sad fact is that most Jews today would not support the Maccabees. And Chanukah is the most ironic holiday in the Jewish calendar as it is the one holiday against Jewish assimilation and yet is has become a Jewish Christmas instead.

And it is the main holiday about Jewish sovereignty over Judea and the Temple Mount - the very areas that the anti-Israel, pseudo-Jewish groups want to make Jew-free again.

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.

12/21 Links: Palestinian NGO employees arrested as a part of Shin Bet crackdown of PFLP; UAE foreign minister tweets article about Israel, Arab alliance; Evelyn Gordon: Jewsraelis

From Ian:

‘Extensive overlaps’ between BDS and terror groups revealed

The Shin Bet announced on December 18 that it arrested approximately 50 members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), ending the investigation into the August 23 terror attack that killed 17-year-old Rina Shnerb and revealing the organization’s ties to BDS, JNS reported. Shnerb’s brother and father, both of whom were with her during the explosion were injured, but survived.

One of those arrested was Khalida Jarrar, who is said to be the head of the terror group’s operations in the West Bank, served as the vice chairperson, director and board member of the BDS organization Addameer, according to JNS. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement calls on the world to put pressure on Israel through economic, academic and cultural measures.

“With regard to Jarrar, this is really the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the BDS/terror connection,” Marc Greendorfer, president of the Zachor Legal Institute and author of “The New Antisemites: The Radicalization Mechanism of the BDS Movement and the Delegitimization Campaign Against Israel,” told JNS.

“Jarrar is simply one example of the extensive overlaps between terror organization leadership and BDS, going all the way to the top, where the organizing and operational leadership of BDS [the BDS National Committee, or BNC] includes a coalition of groups designated as foreign terror organizations by the United States and other countries,” Greendorfer told JNS.

Palestinian NGO employees arrested as a part of Shin Bet crackdown of PFLP

The Shin Bet (Israeli Security Agency) announced that is has uncovered a 50-person terror network operating out of the West Bank in cooperation with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP).

The statement named multiple PFLP leaders who were linked to non-governmental organizations, several of which receive direct funding from the United Nations.

Among those named in the report were Samer Arbid and Abdel Razep Farraj of the Union of Agricultural Work Committees; Walid Hanatsheh of the Health Work Committees; Itiraf Hajaj (Rimawi) of the Bisan Center; and Khalida Jarrar, former vice president of Addameer - who according to Jarrar's indictment, has led the PFLP in the West Bank as of June 2016.

Many of these NGOs receive taxpayer funding from Europe and other nations, including Switzerland, the Netherlands, France, Sweden, Belgium, Italy, Ireland, Japan, Spain, the European Commission and the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Several of the alleged terrorists have work as financial directors, accountants or fundraising directors for many of these organizations.

The Independent must apologise for appalling article claiming antisemitism accusations stifle criticism of Israel while bemoaning “the trouble with Jews today”

An op-ed in The Independent contends that accusations of antisemitism are levelled to stifle criticism of Israel while also complaining about “the trouble with Jews today”.

The brazen article, written by Slavoj Zizek, a Slovenian philosopher, and published earlier this month, adopts the “Livingstone Formulation”, the formula named after Ken Livingstone that claims that accusations of antisemitism are used to silence criticism of Israel.

The article on the one hand claimed that “today, the charge of antisemitism is addressed at anyone who critiques Israeli policy,” while also insisting on the other hand that “the trouble with Jews today is that they are now trying to get roots in a place which was for thousands of years inhabited by other people.”

Aside from the dubious history intended to minimise if not erase the historical and religious connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, which goes back thousands of years, Mr Zizek is “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel,” in breach of the International Definition of Antisemitism. In case this was not obvious, The Independent, recognising that the statement was antisemitic, subsequently amended it to read: “the trouble with the settlement project today is that it is now trying to get roots in a place which was for thousands of years inhabited by other people”.

Of course the irony of the piece — which exemplifies the sinister folly of the Livingstone Formulation — is that Mr Zizek’s “criticism of Israel” was in this instance antisemitic, thereby undermining his entire thesis. Editors at The Independent utterly failed to recognise this, but perhaps they should be credited for correcting the article, not merely for belatedly removing the offending phrase, but also for conceding that Mr Zizek’s choice of words was appalling.

12/20 Links Pt2: British Jews Take Their Stand; Sharpton-Led Group Backs Jersey City Official Who Blamed Jews for Anti-Semitic Attack; Beinart Promotes False Claim in the Forward

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Political auto-immune disease among diaspora Jews

Gluck is said by those who know him to have devoted his life to good works. So it’s not surprising that he’s committed to interfaith initiatives, in which Jews and Muslims try to build bridges around shared experiences.

Indeed, it would appear that Gluck’s commitment to interfaith initiatives is so profound that he has now actually transposed the characteristics of Islamic jihadi fanaticism onto a Jew.

Belief in interfaith within the British rabbinate is so unshakeable that Orthodox rabbis are in the forefront of equating antisemitism with Islamophobia. They have thus become the useful idiots in the Islamist extremists’ strategy of religious war.

The distinction between antisemitism and Islamophobia is as crucial as it is poorly understood. People think Islamophobia is just a word for prejudice against Muslims. It’s not. It’s a term used specifically to silence people who criticize the Muslim world.

After all, the term “phobia” isn’t applied to prejudice against Sikhs or Hindus or anyone else. “Islamophobia” deliberately appropriates the key aspect of antisemitism — that it is truly deranged — and falsely turns all criticism of the Islamic world into a psychological disorder, thus making that world unchallengeable. The difference between antisemitism and Islamophobia is between truth and lies.

The Muslim world is deeply jealous of the unique status of Jew-hatred as the ultimate bigotry. Some in the wider community are similarly jealous because they think it confers ultimate impunity for misdeeds. And that is a fundamentally antisemitic belief.

But the Jews who equate it with Islamophobia can’t bear the uniqueness of Jew-hatred either. That’s because in the diaspora, many Jews don’t want to be unique. They want to be just like everyone else.

They are frightened that uniqueness will make them the targets of hatred. So they deny the uniqueness of antisemitism, and thus its true evil.

And that’s why, although Jeremy Corbyn has now been defeated, the leadership of Britain’s Jewish community is itself marching it towards the edge of the cultural cliff.

Rabbi Meir Y. Soloveichik: British Jews Take Their Stand

Sacks wrote his book as an eloquent critique of multiculturalism, and a plea for Britons to find a way to build a common culture predicated on respect for difference. What Sacks does not describe is the one form of unity that arose from multiculturalism: intersectionality, where diverse groups have come together in a shared culture of victimhood and a shared hatred of Jews. As Sohrab Ahmari wrote in these pages: “Precisely because it is a theory of generalized victimhood, intersectionality targets the Jews–the 20th century’s ultimate victims. Acknowledging the Jews’ profound claims to victimhood would force the intersectional left to admit the existential necessity of the State of Israel.” This, however, the intersectional left has refused to do, because “Israel has been prejudged an outpost of Western colonialism. Therefore, the Jews cannot possibly be allowed to ‘win’ the intersectional victimhood Olympics.” Rather, Jews must be targeted as the enemy that unites the diverse members of the multicultural left.

It should therefore be unsurprising that leftist anti-Semitism took over one of the most important political parties in the Western world. For American observers, it is important to understand why this occurred and to be reminded that it can occur here as well. On Twitter, the Washington Post explained to its readers that Mirvis had attacked Labour leaders because of their “strong statements on Palestinian rights.” In perfect political jujitsu, Jewish fears of anti-Semitism had been turned into a lack of compassion for Palestinian victims. The offending tweet was deleted, but the underlying sentiment that gave rise to its initial publication remains. The forces sympathetic to intersectional victimhood exist in our institutions as well, and they instinctively apologize, obfuscate, and spin on the anti-Semites’ behalf.

As this article goes to print, polls have closed in Britain, and a resounding defeat for Corbyn and the Labour Party has taken place. This electoral result is truly a source of jubilation and celebration; but what occurred in Anglo Jewry before the election is worth celebrating as well. The stand taken by Rabbis Sacks and Mirvis, and others in England, should inspire Jewish pride everywhere. After centuries as guests in an English “country home,” and decades as targets of the multicultural left, British Jews spoke as equals in their country. They issued a plea for the future of Britain to their countrymen, but their outcry has implications for the entire free world. It is therefore apt to paraphrase one of the greatest and most philo-Semitic of Britons in concluding that, whether the three and a half centuries of Jewish thriving in England comes soon to a close, or whether it continues for many hundreds of years, it can well be said that this was their finest hour.

Honest Reporting: UK Rejects Antisemitism

One week ago, British Jews were scared that Jeremy Corbyn's antisemitic Labour party might win the UK's general election. Now, the newly-installed government has moved to show that it's ready to take a stand against antisemitism and BDS.

The PM:
"When it comes to standing by our friends, one innovation that this Queens Speech introduces is that it stops public bodies from taking it upon themselves to boycott goods from other countries.... that with nauseating frequencies that turn out to be #Israel" pic.twitter.com/iqMHiFLrkP
— SussexFriendsofIsrael (@SussexFriends) December 19, 2019

VIDEO: @EricPickles welcomes @BorisJohnson plan to outlaw public body boycotts of Israel.
“If we’re being really honest, BDS is just a thing disguise for antisemitism. We as @Conservatives should always tackle racial discrimination” pic.twitter.com/hpLyCum0vc
— CFoI (@CFoI) December 16, 2019

UCLA students meet with a Palestinian antisemite who believes the "Protocols" myth

Earlier this month I reported that Fatah Revolutionary Council member Osama al-Qawasmi met with two groups of lawmakers, from Wisconsin and California, where he could fill their heads with the usual lies about Israel.

I revealed that Qawasmi has, on multiple occasions, spouted antisemitic conspiracy theories, including that the Jews are following the Protocols of the Elders of Zion by creating Islamist groups to divide the Muslims.

US groups just love to visit this antisemite.

Students from UCLA visited Qawasmi on Friday, what they called a "fact finding mission." Funny that they decide that an antisemite is the best person to provide them with facts.

But the students are so happy!

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.

12/20 Links Pt1: The New Rocket Threat to Israel; Col. Kemp: Turkey’s shameful support for Hamas terrorists could provoke a full-scale Middle East war; For the Anti-Zionist, Jewish Peoplehood Is Itself an Offense

From Ian:

The New Rocket Threat to Israel

Over the past five years, the Israelis have been fighting a quiet war nearly every night. During what is now known as the “Campaign Between Wars” or “War Between Wars,” the Israelis have taken out high-value targets—more than 200 of them, according to estimates published last year, and it’s probably closer to 300 now—from Syria and Iraq to Lebanon and beyond. As early as 2013, the Israelis spoke euphemistically about such strikes, noting that they were targeting “game-changing weapons” that Iran was transferring to its proxies amid the chaos of Syria’s civil war.

Recently, the Israelis have become much more specific. Their targets are precision-guided munitions, or PGMs.

Until now, Israel has been blessed with ill-equipped enemies. The efforts of Iranian proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and PIJ have been mitigated by Iron Dome, which has an 86 percent success rate (some Israeli officials say it’s even higher) in neutralizing incoming enemy projectiles. That rate is boosted by the fact that Israel’s foes have been firing unguided, or “dumb,” rockets. Without GPS or target-acquisition capabilities, many of these rockets undershoot or overshoot their intended targets. When Iron Dome assesses a rocket’s errant trajectory, it declines to intercept it and allows it to explode in an uninhabited space.

Iran is now working overtime to establish a program that will allow its proxies to convert their dumb rockets into smart ones. The United States began a process of converting its own unguided rockets into PGMs back in the late 1990s. The Israelis utilized similar technology. The result was the deadly Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). If the Iranian project proves similarly successful, Israel’s enemies will achieve the capability of striking within five to 10 yards of their intended targets.

Converting an unguided rocket (what some Israeli military types call “statistical” rockets) into a precision-guided munition is both simple and complicated. It’s simple because all it takes are tail fins, a circuit board, and the right software. One former Israeli official estimates that an entire PGM-making kit might cost as little as $15,000 per munition. But it’s also complicated because dismantling a rocket to retrofit it with precision-guided technology and then reassembling it requires knowledge and infrastructure that Iran’s low-tech proxies don’t have. They are laboring to acquire them. But with the Israelis patrolling from the skies with remarkably accurate intelligence, the tasks of transporting parts and assembling PGMs have become hazardous. Israel’s estimated 300 strikes in recent years have reduced the PGM talent pool and destroyed a significant amount of hardware.

Iran and Israel have been playing a quiet game of chess across the Middle East—difficult for the casual observer to discern but punctuated by the periodic explosion. The Iranian effort continues despite the occasional setbacks. And so does the Israeli effort, which is thankless and time-intensive. Both sides understand that when enough PGMs reach the hands of Israel’s enemies, the effect will indeed be game-changing.

Col. Kemp: Turkey’s shameful support for Hamas terrorists could provoke a full-scale Middle East war

An investigation by this paper has made clear that Hamas terrorists have been planning attacks against Israel from Turkey. President Erdogan knows this but denies it. He even denies that Hamas is a terrorist organisation despite the group’s categorisation as such by the US and EU.

According to Erdogan, Hamas is ‘a resistance movement trying to protect its country under occupation’. This is a lie. In fact, Erdogan’s support for Hamas is itself an act of aggression against Israel. In 2015 Turkey agreed to prevent Hamas planning attacks from its territory but has never done so. This inaction harms Israel but is even more damaging to the Palestinian people. Rather than developing Gaza, which it has controlled since Israel left in 2005, Hamas has consistently used the Strip as a base to attack the Jewish state.

Millions of dollars of international aid have been diverted to stockpiling missiles and other weaponry, digging attack tunnels and funding strikes against Israel. Much has also been diverted into the personal bank accounts of Hamas leaders who have been branded the wealthiest terrorists in the world. Not only have Gazans been deprived of much-needed economic development, hospitals, schools, utilities and humanitarian supplies, they have also been blockaded by Israel to protect its own citizens from attack. This has in turn intensified the hardship and suffering faced by ordinary Palestinians.

By encouraging and facilitating Hamas, Erdogan has helped make this situation worse. But any concern he may have for the Palestinian people is heavily outweighed by his long-standing animosity towards the State of Israel.

Caroline B. Glick: Israel's winner takes all election

Thanks to the Trump administration, today Netanyahu has the diplomatic opportunity to implement his vision in relation to the Palestinians. Netanyahu set out that vision in the lead up to the inconclusive elections in September. It involves moving past the failed and mordant peace process with the PLO, and securing Israel’s national and strategic interests in Judea and Samaria by applying Israel law to the Jordan Valley and the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria.

But now that the international path is open, a domestic obstacle has risen to stop him. That obstacle is an opposing revolution – the judicial revolution initiated by retired Supreme Court president Aharon Barak some 25 years ago. Just as Netanyahu is on the verge of completing his revolutionary work, so the legal fraternity that embraced Barak’s revolution is poised to complete Barak’s.

All of Netanyahu’s actions have been taken against the wishes of Israel’s entrenched elites, whether in the labor unions or government service or the media. The economic elites that benefited from Israel’s socialist system opposed his free market reforms. The hidebound diplomats who were promoted on the basis of their allegiance to the idea that making peace with the PLO was the key to Israel’s diplomatic standing, opposed his view that international relations are based on common interests not on ideology or appeasement. The military for a generation was trained to believe that there is no military solution to terrorism.

All along, the source of Netanyahu’s power has been the voters. Without their support, he would never have achieved anything.

In stark contrast, Barak’s revolution is a revolution against Israel’s democratic system. Its goal is to transform Israel from a parliamentary democracy into a post-democratic regime controlled by unelected state prosecutors and Supreme Court justices who control all aspects of public life in the name of “substantive democracy,” and the “rule of law.”

For the past 25 years, with the support of the media and the cooperation of radical NGOs, the Supreme Court, the attorney general and the state prosecutors have seized the powers of Israel’s elected leaders by judicial decree and legal opinion. Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit’s decision last month to indict Netanyahu for behavior that has never been defined as criminal either in law or court precedent is just the latest bid to empty elections of all meaning and deny elected leaders, and the voters who elect them, the sovereign power to determine the path that Israel will advance along.

Is Bernie Sanders Supposed To Be A Symbol of Jewish Pride? (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Earlier this week, Peter Beinart described Bernie Sanders as "the most successful Jewish presidential candidate in American history"

After all, it is a 'thing' now to talk up how 'Jewish' Bernie Sanders is.

I responded to Beinart's tweet:

There were a few responses to what I wrote, but they avoided the question of whether Bernie Sanders actually embraces his being Jewish. Instead, they attacked Lieberman -- totally missing the point.

Or avoiding it.

The fact is that Bernie Sanders, despite the best efforts of Beinart and others, has not registered as a Jew in the minds of voters.

Back in 2016, a Los Angeles Times article reported that Bernie Sanders fares poorly against Hillary Clinton with fellow Jews, polls indicate

Sen. Bernie Sanders has gone further than any other Jewish candidate in a presidential campaign, but he’s not garnering much support from Jewish voters, polls indicate...

Now that the campaign has moved to New York, however, which has the nation’s largest Jewish population, the numbers are in, and they’re not favorable.

That shouldn’t be terribly surprising. Both Hillary Clinton and former president Bill Clinton have long been popular among Jewish voters, and while American Jews tend to be liberal, they’re more often regular Democrats than the sorts of independents most drawn to Sanders.

On the other side, Sanders is not actively engaged in Jewish life. He has also been critical of Israel, although he lived briefly as a young man on a secular, socialist kibbutz. When asked about his faith, his responses have reflected a generalized commitment to liberal concepts of social justice as opposed to any specific link to Jewish ideals of equality. [emphasis added]

The article is based on 2 polls: the Sienna College Poll, which found Clinton leading Sanders among Jewish voters by a 60%-38% margin and the NBC/Wall St. Journal/Marist poll,which found Clinton leading among Jews 65%-32%.

Putting aside where he stands on Israel, the fact remains that Sanders is not Jewishly involved and his inspiration is from socialism, not Judaism.

That is not a judgement on Sanders, just a recognition of where he stands.

In a presidential election pitting Sanders and Trump, Sanders would clearly get the majority of the Jewish vote, but that is because most Jews vote Democrate anyway and not because they think of him as a Jew.

Not only does he not embody Jewish pride, Sanders does not have a typical reaction to antisemitism either. At an event at the Apollo Theater in New York in April 2016, Sanders faced an antisemitic question:

“As you know,” opened the questioner, “the Zionist Jews–and I don’t mean to offend anybody–they run the Federal Reserve, they run Wall Street, they run every campaign.” As this unfolded, Sanders began wagging his finger in dissent, and interjected to deem “Zionist Jews” a “bad phrase.” His interlocutor, pressed to articulate a question, concluded by saying, “What is your affiliation to your Jewish community? That’s all I’m asking.”

“No, no, no, that’s not what you’re asking,” Sanders quickly replied, in a nod to the question’s underlying prejudice. “I am proud to be Jewish,” he declared, to cheers from the audience. But then Sanders did something odd. Rather than using the question as a teaching moment to address and rebuke its anti-Semitic underpinnings, Sanders instead immediately pivoted to his stump speech on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “Talking about Zionism and Israel,” he said, “I am a strong defender of Israel, but I also believe that we have got to pay attention to the needs of the Palestinian people.” He never challenged the actual contents of the question, let alone labeled it anti-Semitic. [emphasis added]

It is tempting to compare Sanders' failure to address the clear antisemitism of the questioner with his making Linda Sarsour his surrogate. This is the same Linda Sarsour who in 2015 spoke at a Farrakhan rally. Then again, Sanders has met publicly with antisemite Al Sharpton.

Associations with Farrakhan and Sharpton don't seem to bother Bernie Sanders.

But that Sanders-Sarsour connection really is especially jarring.

And, as Ron Kampeas points out, that alliance of Sanders and Sarsour is self-contradictory as well.

Kampeas notes Sarsour's statement that:

Ask them this, how can you be against white supremacy in America and the idea of being in a state based on race and class, but then you support a state like Israel that is based on supremacy, that is built on the idea that Jews are supreme to everyone else?” [emphasis added]

Kampeas then points out that:

[Sanders] notes the time he spent in Israel as a young man and says “It is true that some criticism of Israel can cross the line into antisemitism, especially when it denies the right of self-determination to Jews, or when it plays into conspiracy theories about outsized Jewish power. I will always call out antisemitism when I see it.” [emphasis added]

This leads Kampeas to the point:

Is there wiggle room to reconcile Sarsour’s rejection of a “state like Israel that is based on [Jewish] supremacy” and Sanders’ label for those who deny “the right of self-determination to Jews” as antisemites?

This is an issue that does not seem to bother Sanders.

So if he does not embrace his being a Jew and not does publicly react to defend his being a Jew -- why is there this attempt to emphasize that Bernie Sanders is a Jew?

It seems there is an attempt to not only redefine what is and is not antisemitism, but even to redefine what it means to be a Jew -- something that no other minority has to put up with.

Maybe it is an attempt to redefine the connection between Jews and Israel, in the way that small radical fringe groups like If Not Now try to do.

But whatever the reason, this attempt to sell Sanders as a symbol of Jewish pride is a symptom of the weakening of Jewish identity in general and the problematic connection of Jews in the US with Israel.

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.

It looks like the ICC will continue with investigating Israeli actions - but also Palestinian

Today, ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced:

...Following a thorough, independent and objective assessment of all reliable information available to my Office, the preliminary examination into the Situation in Palestine has concluded with the determination that all the statutory criteria under the Rome Statute for the opening of an investigation have been met.

I am satisfied that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation into the situation in Palestine, pursuant to article 53(1) of the Statute. In brief, I am satisfied that (i) war crimes have been or are being committed in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip ("Gaza") (for specifics, see paras. 94-96); (ii) potential cases arising from the situation would be admissible; and (iii) there are no substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice.

Israel released its own objections to why the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction, also today. I'm not sure which statement was released first. The ICC prosecutor did say that she wants to further clarify specifically whether the ICC has jurisdiction over the territories:

However, given the unique and highly contested legal and factual issues attaching to this situation, namely, the territory within which the investigation may be conducted, I deemed it necessary to rely on article 19(3) of the Statute to resolve this specific issue.

Earlier today, I therefore requested from Pre-Trial Chamber I a jurisdictional ruling on the scope of the territorial jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court ("ICC" or the "Court") under article 12(2)(a) of the Rome Statute in Palestine.

Specifically, I have sought confirmation that the "territory" over which the Court may exercise its jurisdiction, and which I may subject to investigation, comprises the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza. Such determination is made strictly for the purposes of determining the Court's ability to exercise its jurisdiction and the scope of such jurisdiction under the Statute.

Looking at the specific charges that the prosecutor believes are admissible as war crimes, besides the usual charges against Israel we see that there are quite a few against "Palestine as well:"

94. On the basis of the available information, there is a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes were committed in the context of the 2014 hostilities in Gaza. In particular, there is a reasonable basis to believe that members of the Israel Defense Forces (“IDF”) committed the war crimes of: intentionally launching disproportionate attacks in relation to at least three incidents which the Office has focussed on (article 8(2)(b)(iv)); wilful killing and wilfully causing serious injury to body or health (articles 8(2)(a)(i) and 8(2)(a)(iii), or article 8(2)(c)(i)); and intentionally directing an attack against objects or persons using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions (article 8(2)(b)(xxiv), or 8(2)(e)(ii)). In addition, there is a reasonable basis to believe that members of Hamas and Palestinian armed groups (“PAGs”) committed the war crimes of: intentionally directing attacks against civilians and civilian objects (articles 8(2)(b)(i)-(ii), or 8(2)(e)(i)); using protected persons as shields (article 8(2)(b)(xxiii)); wilfully depriving protected persons of the rights of fair and regular trial (articles 8(2)(a)(vi) or 8(2)(c)(iv)) and wilful killing (articles 8(2)(a)(i), or 8(2)(c)(i)); and torture or inhuman treatment (article 8(2)(a)(ii), or 8(2)(c)(i)) and/or outrages upon personal dignity (articles 8(2)(b)(xxi), or 8(2)(c)(ii)). With respect to the admissibility of potential cases concerning crimes allegedly committed by members of the IDF, the Office notes that due to limited accessible information in relation to proceedings that have been undertaken and the existence of pending proceedings in relation to other allegations, the Office’s admissibility assessment in terms of the scope and genuineness of relevant domestic proceedings remains ongoing at this stage and will need to be kept under review in the context of an investigation. However, the Prosecution has concluded that the potential cases concerning crimes allegedly committed by members of Hamas and PAGs would currently be admissible pursuant to article 17(1)(a)-(d) of the Statute.

(Paragraphs 95 and 96 talk about prosecuting Israel for "transferring settlers" and for defending itself from Gaza border riots.)

The prosecutor seems to be saying that while she still needs to clarify the ICC's jurisdiction on filing war crimes charges against Israel, she does not need that for determining whether Hamas is guilty of war crimes.

Of course, Israel is not a party to the ICC because parts of the Rome Statute were written specifically against Israel. Still, it is bad for Israel to be subject to such an investigation.

But Hamas cannot celebrate this either.

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.

Two years ago, James Zogby - a prominent pollster and Democrat - tweeted to Rachael Ray that she was engaging in "cultural genocide" by saying that calling a set of foods that Israelis eat every day (like hummus, tabouli, stuffed grape leaves...) is "Israeli" is "cultural genocide."

A few times a year we see similar accusations that people calling foods Israelis are known for eating, like falafel, "Israeli" is "cultural appropriation" and a terrible thing. (No one bothers to mention that street falafel, in pita, is a purely Israeli invention.)

Yet the same people who are so sensitive to "cultural appropriation" have nothing bad to say to Arabs who say that Jesus, his family, his contemporaries and the towns he lived in are "Palestinian."

An egregious example comes from this video by Amer Zahr, a comedian who works for Bernie Sanders whose ancestry is from Nazareth. It was tweeted by the PLO's Saeb Erekat:

pic.twitter.com/0zRIPAOGuj
— Dr. Saeb Erakat الدكتور صائب عريقات (@ErakatSaeb) December 19, 2019

Not one person mentioned in that video would have self-identified as "Palestinian." They were Jews (with a Greek or two thrown in.) Calling Jesus "Palestinian" makes as much sense as calling King David "Palestinian" and it is very offensive.

Appropriating Jewish history itself is much more offensive than people calling falafel "Israeli."

Apparently, "cultural appropriation" is one of the many things that are a crime only when Jews do it.

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 Supreme Fatwa Council, the decision making body of the Palestinian Fatwa House which was created by Yasir Arafat as an official Palestinian institution in 1994, has announced that it does not accept the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

The Council said that it cannot accept any provisions of CEDAW that are inconsistent with the provisions of Islamic Sharia Law.

Here's where it gets interesting. The Palestinian Authority says it acceded to CEDAW in 2014 without any reservations. But, the Supreme Fatwa Council notes, the Palestinian Constitutional Court ruled in 2018 that international human rights treaties and agreements must agree with the religious and cultural identity of the Palestinian people.

Which means that since CEDAW violates Sharia law, the Palestinian leadership really never accepted the convention. Indeed, several NGOs noted last year that Palestinian laws fall far short of what CEDAW requires - there are no equal rights for women under existing Palestinian law, even five years after supposedly acceding to CEDAW. In fact, Palestinian laws for women seem to be fully in line with Islamic law and inconsistent with CEDAW.

The Fatwa Council said that CEDAW cannot be accepted specifically in terms of Palestinian laws for marriage and inheritance. Shares of the inheritance today are calculated according to Sharia law for all Muslims and Christians as well in the West Bank. Each female share, upon the death of their parents, is equal to half of each male share. If there is no male child, siblings receive the inheritance before daughters. The rules are complicated but generally unequal towards women.

The Council also reiterated its opposition to abortion, as codified in a 2008 law. Abortion is forbidden except under extremely limited cases which have to be approved by the Mufti.

The Supreme Fatwa Council has only male members.

For some reason feminists who say they are pro-Palestinian never say a word about the Palestinian laws that explicitly discriminate against women and against abortion. The news media, of whom there are many in Israel and the territories, avoid topics like this. As always, if being pro-Palestinian is regarded as a liberal cause, then illiberal Palestinian laws and customs must not be mentioned.

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.