Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, January 02, 2020

01/02 Links Pt2: Ben Shapiro: When Anti-Semitism Doesn’t Matter; The Attempt to Dejudaize Jesus; Digging the land: The top 10 Holy Land archaeology stories of 2019

From Ian:

After Monsey, it's time to say Jewish lives also matter

De Blasio should also reconsider the Democratic Party's flawed and specious addiction to identity politics, which pits groups against each other and, in its obsession with a difference and power dynamics rather than with universal ethics and spiritual transcendence, is in no way consistent with Dr. King's vision.

This brutal attack and those that preceded it are a reminder that prejudice, racism and anti-Semitic hate have no one face, no one race, no one religion and no one political ideology. Anyone can be either a victim or a perpetrator. While socioeconomic disparities and injustices are real – and some groups have suffered unique hardships – none of that gives anyone the right to abuse another person or group because they are different or perceived to be "privileged," as some imagine Jews to be. And being part of a historically disadvantaged group shouldn't provide immunity from the law.

Those quick to point to a "climate of hate" when it concerns the utterances of U.S. President Donald Trump, and who also embrace identity politics, should consider how they may unwittingly be contributing to this climate by dividing and apportioning values based on ethnic and racial identity without recognizing the deeper truths that we are all human, that no one has a monopoly on prejudice, and that we are all equal under the law. Are kids learning this at home and in school? They should be.

It's long past time to teach the simple truth that anyone, of any religion or race, is capable of dehumanizing others, which is the essence of racism. And anyone can be better than that.

Perhaps that's the first thing that Mayor de Blasio should insist be taught in Brooklyn's public schools as part of a new curriculum he has promised if he's serious about countering hate and the terrible ignorance we've seen spewing onto the streets of New York City in recent weeks.

Lesson One could be: There is only one race, the human race.

“Well, it all started after Dr. King’s death...”
— Dumisani Washington (@dumisani6) January 2, 2020

Ben Shapiro: When Anti-Semitism Doesn’t Matter

In October 2018, during Sabbath morning services, a white supremacist attacked the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, murdering 11 people and wounding another six. In April 2019, in the middle of Passover, a white supremacist attacked the Chabad of Poway synagogue, murdering one person and seriously wounding another three. Both incidents started absolutely necessary conversations about the prevalence and nature of the white supremacist threat to Jews across the country.

Four people were murdered at a kosher supermarket in Jersey City by self-described Black Hebrew Israelites just weeks ago; five people were stabbed at a Hanukkah celebration in Monsey, New York; this week alone, New York police are investigating at least nine anti-Semitic attacks. The upsurge of violence against Jews in New York in particular has finally prompted commentary from Democratic politicians ranging from New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who just weeks ago expressed shock at anti-Semitism reaching “the doorstep of New York City”; to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who expressed puzzlement at the attacks, noting broadly: “This is an intolerant time in our country. We see anger; we see hatred exploding.”

This isn’t new. Back in 2018, The New York Times admitted there was a massive spike in anti-Semitic attacks in the city — and even acknowledged that the newspaper of record had failed to cover that surging anti-Semitism because “it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy.” But that has always been true of anti-Semitism. It’s possible, as the Times should recognize, to walk and chew gum at the same time in covering anti-Semitism.

But it’s not mere lack of focus and time preventing the media from taking anti-Semitism in New York seriously. It’s the identity of the attackers. Armin Rosen wrote for Tablet Magazine back in July 2019 about the Jew hatred in New York and correctly noted “that the victims are most often outwardly identifiable, i.e., religious rather than secularized Jews, and the perpetrators who have been recorded on CCTV cameras are overwhelmingly black and Hispanic.” This throws the media — and many left-leaning Jewish organizations — into spasms of confusion, since it cuts directly against the supposed alliance of intersectionality so beloved by the political Left. White supremacists attacking left-leaning Jews fits a desired narrative. Black teenagers beating up Hasidic Jews in Williamsburg doesn’t.

And so the Left ignores the wrong type of anti-Semitism.

This is the city we live in, @NYPDHateCrimes data shows jews were attacked a staggering 166 times in first 3 quarters of 2019 pic.twitter.com/C6KDOHZh5D
— WILLIAMSBURG NEWS (@WMSBG) January 1, 2020

Bari Weiss [C-Span Video]: How to Fight Anti-Semitism

New York Times editorial writer Bari Weiss talked about her book, How to Fight Anti-Semitism, in which she argued there is a rise in anti-Semitism in America.

Israel offers free schooling to Palestinians, so naturally this is regarded as evil

From Arutz-7:

The Jerusalem Municipal Council approved Tuesday night a plan to construct an educational campus for Education Ministry schools near the city's Arab Shuafat and Anata neighborhoods.

These schools will be an alternative to the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) schools which currently dominate the area.

The project will cost 7.1 million NIS ($2,055,617), and will be located in an area outside the pre-1967 borders but within Jerusalem's municipal borders.

Naturally, the response to giving Palestinian children a free education and new schools is being slammed as another proof of Israel's evil.

Hanan Ashrawi, member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), condemned on Thursday the announced plan of the Israeli municipality in occupied Jerusalem to replace UNRWA-run schools.

"The announced plan of the so-called Israeli municipality in occupied Jerusalem to replace UNRWA-run schools is an extension of the Israeli establishment's campaign of aggression against Palestinian rights and roots in the City,” Ashrawi said in a statement. “It is also an assault on multilateral institutions and international law.”

She continued, “This reprehensible plan also embodies the Israeli establishment's disdain for the United Nations, rejection of Palestinian rights, and illegal actions aimed at altering the historic, cultural, and demographic composition of occupied Jerusalem.”

Note that the original article says nothing about closing the UNRWA schools, but merely to provide an alternative. While I'm sure Israel wants to close the UNRWA schools that teach children to admire terrorists and to hate Jews, I am not sure that they can under existing agreements with the UN and UNRWA.

If this is true, then when Israel opens the schools, either some parents will want to take advantage of the Israeli curriculum - or they will be threatened to keep their kids in the underfunded and crowded UNRWA schools.

Of course, if UNRWA was truly an objective UN agency, given its budget woes it should welcome Israel offering to take over some of its functions - in fact, it should be pressuring Jordan and the Palestinian Authority to do the same for "refugees" who clearly aren't refugees under any definition. But UNRWA has long ago ceased to be useful and now it tries to stay self-perpetuating rather than the temporary agency it was meant to be.

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.

NY Times Calls Baghdad Embassy Assault "Vigil Against Antisemitism" (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

: Credit: Mehr News Agency

New York, January 2 - The Paper of Record followed up its delicate terminology in referring to violent attackers as "protesters" and "mourners" Thursday with a description of the Iran-backed mobs surrounding and invading the US embassy in Iraq's capital as demonstrating in solidarity with the embattled US Jewish ethnic minority.

The New York Times coverage of the embassy storming began Tuesday with pro-Tehran propaganda in the guise of impartial journalism, then proceeded Wednesday to invoke issues of questionable connection to the episode, but which allow the publication to paint Iranian machinations with a sympathetic brush. That tendency began in earnest in the lead-up to the 2015 nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic, when the Times carried water for the Obama administration and helped marginalize opponents of the arrangement, most notably supporters of Israel who raised concerns that the deal enabled, rather than constrained, Iran in its hegemonic ambitions. Iranian leaders have repeatedly stated intentions to destroy Israel or have predicted the Jewish state's demise.

In describing the embassy storming as a "vigil against antisemitism," the Times drew parallels to an actual vigil taking place in the New York area, where increasing antisemitic attacks have turned deadly in the last several weeks. That vigil, which organizers touted as opposing "all bigotry," involved no one from the "ultra-orthodox" Jewish communities most affected by the current wave of assaults; it served as a vehicle for social justice activists to showcase their concern and pet causes, some of which bear a direct causal relationship to increased antisemitism in the American public sphere.

Sympathetic descriptors of malign people or entities emerged long before the Times selected the "mourners" and "vigil" terminology: the Washington Post obituary headline for arch-terrorist Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of the Islamic State, for example, called him an "austere religious scholar." The Post and Times have engaged in a years-long campaign to outdo each other in sympathy for groups and ideologies that may espouse genocidal, misogynistic, homophobic, racist agendas, but at least they oppose President Donald Trump, which redeems other offenses.

Editors at the times declined to disclose what other unconventional nomenclature they intend to employ, but experts predict with some confidence that its effect will swing in an anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-Jewish, anti-religious, or anti-West direction. "We've only ever seen these rhetorical devices go one way," observed media consultant Tenn Denschuss. "For some reason no headline writer there ever fails to live up to healthy journalistic standards in a way that actually makes Israel look good, for example. Quite remarkable."

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.

01/02 Links Pt1: Eugene Kontorovich: Why President Trump is keeping the promise made at San Remo in 1920; Iran Can No Longer Rely on Shia Militias to Fight its Wars

From Ian:

Eugene Kontorovich: Why President Trump is keeping the promise made at San Remo in 1920

It is easy to criticize the artificiality of the countries established by the League of Nations. But in a world, and particularly a region, where ethnic and religious groups live intermixed and not separated into grid-like boxes, some arbitrariness of borders is inevitable.
Every League of Nations-mandated territory lumped an unhappy minority in with a majority: the Muslims in with Lebanon’s Christians, the Kurds with Iraq’s Arabs, everyone with everyone in Syria. The process was imperfect, but the known alternatives are what existed before – a vast pan-ethnic empire – or every group trying to carve out its own sliver of territory, which ends up looking like Syria over the past eight years.
THIS IS why the post-World War I borders are overwhelmingly accepted as the binding sovereign borders of the countries that arose in the British Mandatory territories. Both Kurdish secession and Syrian annexation of Lebanon get no international support because they would call into question Mandatory borders.

There is one place in the Middle East where the international community takes the entirely opposite position about Mandatory borders. And that, of course, is Israel.

While the Pompeo statement did not say anything about borders, it did reclaim the San Remo principle that Jewish settlement is not illegal. The legal basis for this deserves some discussion.

Pompeo repudiated the conclusions of a 1978 memorandum by the State Department legal advisor Herbert Hansell. The memo’s conclusions had already been rejected by then-president Ronald Reagan, but it had never been formally retracted.

The four-page memo jumped in broad strokes across major issues, and cited no precedent for its major conclusions. Indeed, in the decades since, its legal analysis of occupation and settlements has consistently not been applied by the US, or other nations, to any other comparable geopolitical facts. It was always what lawyers call a “one-ride ticket” applicable just for Israel.

Hansell’s memo had two analytic steps. First, he concluded that Israel was an “occupying power” in the West Bank. That triggers the application of the Geneva Conventions. He then invoked an obscure provision of the Fourth Geneva Convention that had never been applied to any other situation before (or since). It says the “occupying power shall not deport or transfer its civilian population” into the territory it occupies.

Hansell, without much discussion, concluded that Jews who move just over the Green Line have somehow been “deported or transferred” there by the State of Israel. In short, he read a prohibition on Turkish-style population transfer schemes as requirement that Israel permanently prevent its Jews from living in those areas that Jordan had ethnically cleansed during its administration.

Under international law, occupation occurs when a country takes over territory that is under the sovereignty of another country. This is why borders of countries arising in former Mandatory territories are those of the relevant Mandate. That, for example, is why Russia is considered an occupying power in Crimea, even though most of its population is Russian and it has historically been part of Russia. Yet due to internal Soviet reallocations, when Ukraine became independent, Crimea was incorporated into the borders of its predecessor, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. For international law, this establishes clear Ukrainian sovereignty, even over the self-determination objections of a local ethnic majority.

PodCast: Clifford D. May on Antisemitism, Iran, and Israel

Middle East Forum Radio host Gregg Roman spoke on December 18 with Clifford D. May, founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), about the recent British election and the fight against antisemitism and radical Islamist actors in the Middle East.

According to May, the victory of Boris Johnson and the defeat of Jeremy Corbyn, was first and foremost a resounding public endorsement of Brexit – the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. Though approved in a popular referendum three and a half years ago, parliament has voted against ratification three times, causing seething resentment across the political spectrum.

However, the scale of the Conservative victory underscored the public's rejection of the Labour Party's increasingly socialist platform and the virulent antisemitism of its leader, Jeremy Corbyn. According to May, Corbyn's embrace of Hamas and Hezbollah alienated British Jews, long a mainstay of Labour's political base. Jews "had been leaving the Labour Party, some of them were packing their bags to go elsewhere – to Israel, the United States, Australia somewhere they feel safer," he said. "They can now unpack."

But the fight against antisemitism, an "ancient and shape-shifting pathology," is "not over in Britain by any means," May warned. Antisemitism, both in Britain and in the rest of the world, "is not going away, we're not going to cure this pathology. It can, however, be treated." He pointed to President Trump's recent executive order strengthening the protection of Jewish university students under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act as model of such treatment:
What President Trump did is to say antisemitism is rampant on American college campuses. As the laws are now interpreted, Jews are not protected as other minorities are. This executive order says Jews also should be protected as are other minorities facing discrimination.

May expects Prime Minister Johnson to use his stronger parliamentary mandate to promote policies combating antisemitism:
They're already talking about an anti-BDS resolution or law, understanding the extent to which BDS – a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions [against] Israel – is based on antisemitism and is fundamentally antisemitic in its intent. Boris Johnson seems to understand this. So this is good news. Both of these are battles won in this this endless war against this very specific brand of bigotry.

The Tikvah Podcast: Arthur Herman on China and the U.S.-Israel “Special Relationship”

In both Israel and the United States, most politicians, foreign-policy experts, and citizens desire a strong and ever-closer relationship between the two nations. Israel and America share values, interests, and a deeply rooted biblical heritage that ties them inextricably together. But lately, U.S.-Israel relations have hit an impasse of sorts. As the Jewish state pursues greater economic ties with the People’s Republic of China, it has created new friction with America, which views China—rightly—as a geopolitical and economic rival.

In his December 2019 Mosaic essay, Hudson Institute scholar Arthur Herman delves into the sources of the U.S.-Israel tension caused by China and suggests a path forward. This new piece follows up on his 2018 essay, “Israel and China Take a Leap Forward-but to Where?” In this podcast, Herman joins host Jonathan Silver to discuss the evolving nature of Israel’s relationship with China, how that relationship has strained relations with Israel’s most reliable ally, and how Israel and the United States can best preserve their special relationship as they both seek to meet the challenge of China’s rise.

A Fatah member and writer, Sri al Kidwa, just wrote a column accusing Israel of stealing the organs of Palestinian "martyrs."

After it stole the land and Palestinian history, it today steals human organs in complicated operations carried out by the occupation gangs, in violation of all laws. This is a heinous crime and a bitter reality by all standards.

It uses as its only source the fully discredited 2009 article in Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that made the same claim and then admitted that it had no evidence but was just "raising questions." Even professional Israel hater Gideon Levy called the Aftonbladet report "cheap and harmful journalism" while his employer Haaretz wrote, "Donald Bostrom, a veteran Swedish journalist, wrote a despicable, utterly baseless article."

Al-Kidwa evidently feels that since it has been over a decade since the controversy, he can resurrect it without fear of anyone fact checking him and then add that this organ stealing is still happening today, again without even the pretense of evidence.

It is just another blood libel against Jews. And it is not only a single person, but the Palestinian Authority made that same claim in an official letter to the UN.

Al-Kidwa's article was republished in a number of news sites including Jordan's Ad Dustour.

(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.

The Elephants in the Room, 2020

I used to have a roughly annual feature called The Elephants in the Room, where I would list all of the inconvenient facts that show that peace is impossible.

I haven't done it since 2013, and the list is still very similar to what it was then. The real issues are swept under the rug, while everyone talks about "occupation" as if that is the main obstacle to peace.

It isn't.

So here is a slightly updated list of elephants that is still being ignored by nearly everyone:

Elephant 1: Hamas controls Gaza

Every peace plan includes Gaza in a Palestinian Arab state, and none of them has any provision on how to handle the fact that Gaza is a terrorist haven, in much worse shape since Israel uprooted the settlements there, controlled by a terrorist group that is consistently and wholeheartedly against Israel's existence. Peace is impossible with this elephant, so it is easier to pretend it isn't there.

Elephant 2: Palestinian Arabs elected a terror government

In the only fair, democratic elections in the territories, the Hamas terrorists were chosen by the people. Poll after poll shows that Palestinian Arabs support terror in Israel itself. (52% still support a violent intifada in 2019.) The elections proved that the conventional wisdom was wrong - and the conventional wisdom proceeded to ignore it.

Elephant 3: The current PA government was not elected

This corollary to Elephant 2 means that the people representing "Palestine" on TV and at the UN do not represent the people. Even if they sound moderate or compromising, they have no mandate. The current PA president is well past his term of office, and none of his prime ministers were ever elected Negotiating with the PA is, literally, meaningless.

Similarly, the unelected PLO is the real power behind the PA. The PA officially reports to the PLO, and all negotiations are done by the autocratic, Fatah-dominated PLO, not the PA.

Elephant 4: The current PA government has almost no power - and no respect

Outside of Ramallah, the Abbas government has little popular support and little power. Hamas is a very real threat to the PA in the West Bank and is quietly building its base, although the PA is pretty ruthless in attacking Hamas directly and indirectly through financial means. The attitudes that forced the PA to abandon Gaza - a lack of passion by people for its positions - could very well play out in the West Bank as well, especially if there are new elections.

Elephant 5: The PA is being kept alive by artificial methods

The PA budget is bloated from "payroll" of non-working workers, including terrorists who receive a salary for not working. The PA may also still be paying Gaza workers who were kicked out of their government jobs in 2006 by Hamas. The very basis of the organized Palestinian Arab workforce is a fiction being kept barely alive by ever-increasing infusions of cash with no real plan to fix the problem.

Elephant 6: Fatah remains a terrorist group paid by the PA

Despite the claims that the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades has dismantled, it is a joke meant to appease the wishful-thinkers. The PA might arrest Hamas members in the West Bank, but there still remains - today - terrorist groups that report to Fatah. Here's the webpage of one of them. There has been no serious move by the PA to dismantle their own terror groups, and they still appear in public with their guns.

Elephant 7: The PA's goal remains the destruction of Israel

Whether it is by "right of return" or not changing the Fatah charter or by printing map after map showing no Israel, even the most moderate Palestinian leader clings to the idea of destroying Israel, and looks upon a Palestinian Arab state as only one stage in the process. One only needs to look at the maps of "Palestine" in official PA documents and schoolbooks.

A 2011 poll that remains criminally under-reported proves that when Palestinian Arabs say they want a two-state solution, it is only a stage towards their real goal of destroying Israel.

And polls in 2019 confirm it.

Elephant 8: Jerusalem

Most Israelis want a unified Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty. Most Palestinian Arabs refuse to accept anything less than all of ("east") Jerusalem as the capital of a Muslim state. The positions are not compatible and a compromise will not reduce the chances for violence - it will increase it.

Elephant 9: What happened to Gaza

Forgetting Hamas for now, the time period between Israel's dismantling settlements in Gaza and the Hamas takeover is instructive as to how Palestinian Arabs take advantage of territory they gain. They didn't build new houses or communities to reduce the "refugee camp" population, no schools or hospitals. They destroyed the greenhouses purchased for them by American Jews; they turned beautiful former settlements into training camps for terror - in other words, Israel's last major concession not only didn't help achieve peace, it ended up encouraging terror. Any claims that something similar wouldn't happen in the West Bank is the triumph of wishful thinking over experience.

Elephant 10: Palestinian Arab "unity"

Related to Elephant #1. No peace plan can work unless Hamas and the PA/Fatah reach some sort of unification agreement. This is not possible in the foreseeable future. Moreover, Hamas is powerful enough that any such agreement must include a hardening of PLO positions that would be completely incompatible with the basic minimum standards for peace - renunciation of terror, recognition of Israel and acceptance of previous agreements.

Elephant 11: The Palestinian Arab "diaspora" and Arab intransigence

Any final peace agreement would mean that Arab countries could no longer justify keeping Palestinian Arabs in "refugee camps" nor could they justify their continued refusal to discriminate against Palestinian Arabs from becoming citizens of their countries should they want to stay. The millions of PalArabs in the Middle East becoming citizens would not be accepted by many Arab countries as it would endanger their own tenuous holds on power.

Elephant 12: Economics

Some 25 years after Oslo, the economy in the territories is still close to non-existent and wholly dependent on foreign aid. Not only is there no free market, there is no incentive to build one as the very mentality of Palestinian Arabs and their leaders is one of welfare rather than responsibility. All the plans to create a Palestinian Arab state do not consider Day 2 and how such a state would be able to sustain itself. The expected influx of hundreds of thousands of people from "refugee camps" would make it even worse. It would take at least a generation to turn the poisonous attitude of entitlement around.

Elephant 13: Gaza demographics

Gazans have no room to expand as their numbers continue to grow at among the fastest rates in the world. Theoretically they could move to the West Bank but only a small percentage would. This is another Day 2 powder keg that is being ignored in the interests of a "solution" of a "Palestinian state."

Elephant 14: Palestinian Arab leaders never showed interest in independence

The West assumes that the goal is an independent Palestinian Arab state where Arabs no longer have to live under "occupation." But the actions and words of Palestinian Arab leaders have never borne that goal out; they have not worked towards building the institutions and infrastructure that would be necessary in an independent state. Their insistence on "right of return" and "Jerusalem" as issues that must be resolved before independence betray their thought processes - inconsistent with independence (neither of which require those two issues to be resolved) and consistent with a desire to destroy Israel in stages.

Elephant 15: A unilateral Palestinian Arab state would be militarized

There is no way that a new Palestinian Arab state would remain demilitarized for any length of time. The Palestinian government could invite a friendly Muslim nation to position anti-aircraft weapons within its territory; to shoot missiles at El Al planes landing a few miles from the Green Line, or to get a few thousand tanks poised to cut Israel in half.

Iran already effectively controls Lebanon and Syria and is working to ensure Gaza comes back under its orbit. They would use the nascent state of Palestine to position themselves on the West Bank as well. Just like the PA ran away from Gaza at the first sign of trouble, so would they abandon their state to Iranian proxies and Islamic terrorists.

The PLO's will to defend themselves is not nearly as strong as their will to destroy Israel, a desire that has been inculcated in them for generations. Palestinian Arab nationalism is a fundamentally weak and externally-imposed construct. Iran is poised and anxious to take advantage of the chaos that would follow a unilaterally declared state, even if at the moment they are distracted.

But the West is ready to risk Israel for that elephant as well.

Elephant 16: The so-called "right to return"

The PA is showing no interest in integrating the Palestinian Arabs outside of the territories into their state. On the contrary; the "refugee camps" in PA controlled territory continue to grow, rather than shrink. Clearly, the PA expects the bulk of the "diaspora" to go to Israel, not a Palestinian Arab state, and decades of incitement both within and without the territories have brainwashed generations of Arabs to not accept anything less than a "return" to a land that most of them have never stepped foot in. (UNRWA has been a major promulgator of this lie.)

Elephant 17: Corruption and human rights abuses are still endemic in the PA

Despite the publicized successes, the PA remains mired in corruption, hardly a model for an independent state. The 2008 Global Integrity Report rated the West Bank as close to the bottom in its corruption ratings and more recently Palestinians rated local corruption among the worst in the Arab world. Women are discriminated against by law. Press freedom remains low; the justice system is opaque, and whistle-blowers are forced to go to the Israeli press to expose corruption. The success that the PA has had in weakening Hamas in the West Bank has come at the expense of massive human rights violations, including torture.

Elephant 18: Palestine would be Judenrein

Statements by PA leaders make it clear that their state of Palestine would not have any Jewish citizens allowed within. Jews whose ancestors have lived in Judea and Samaria, whether for decades or for millennia, will be legally barred from living in Palestine - an extraordinary display of state antisemitism that is completely at odds with the Western standards that the nascent state of "Palestine" is attempting to live up to.

Elephant 19: The Muslim world's antipathy towards Israel

Although this is weakening, the Arab world and the Muslim world remains implacably against the idea of a Jewish state in the midst of supposedly Muslim lands. Iran remains in de facto control of southern Lebanon and Gaza; ordinary Jordanians and Egyptians remain among the worst anti-semites in the Arab world. The best "peace" would be bitter cold; it will not include any real normalization, and the threat from radical Islam remains potent in Arab and Muslim states. The best peace plan would result in Israel being exactly where it is today - surrounded by enemies, with less of a land buffer, and Israel relying on US money to prompt Arab neighbors to keep radicals in check.

That is not peace, and that is not security.

Elephant 20: The Arab Spring

We now see how tenuous is the hold of Arab leaders on their nations. The chances of a similar upheaval in the Palestinian Arab-controlled areas is not small. What would happen to the "peace agreement" then?

Abbas has no successor. Polls show that if elections were held today, the new president of the PA would be a convicted terrorist now in Israeli prison. Even if Abbas would sign a peace agreement today, that paper would be next to worthless after he is gone.

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 apartheid against Palestinians in Lebanon is getting worse - but since Israel isn't involved, no one bothers to pretend to be in solidarity with them.

Yasser Ali, a member of the General Secretariat of the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad, warned of "the specter of famine" in Palestinian camps in Lebanon.

He stated that the unemployment rate in the camps that Palestinians are forced to live in worsened from 56% to 65% in 2019 and the poverty rate worsened from 65% to 80%.

Palestinians in Lebanon are barred from some 73 categories of jobs in Lebanon, which is why their unemployment and poverty rates are so high.

In addition, Ali said, Lebanese banks does not allow Palestinians to withdraw funds or even to have funds transferred from abroad.

A large number of refugees mainly depend on their children's remittances from abroad, estimated at about one hundred million dollars per year. Most UNRWA "registered refugees" in Lebanon have left Lebanon long ago; as of a couple of years ago there were only 174,000 actually in Lebanon out of some 470,000 listed. Now, the numbers are probably lower as young Palestinians in Lebanon have literally no future.

In addition, there are some 20,000 Syrian Palestinian refugees who are still in Lebanon, who are also forced to live in the same overcrowded camps as the other Palestinians.

Palestinians in Lebanon held massive demonstrations to allow them to hold more kinds of jobs this year, according to Ali. But when the larger demonstrations against the government began, the Palestinians decided that they should stop their own protests, because their situation is so precarious and they didn't want to look like they were taking sides. After all, most Lebanese despise their Palestinian "guests" and the poor Palestinians don't want to make things even worse for themselves and their families.

Lebanon is the worst place in the world for Palestinians by any measure. Discrimination against them is the law in Lebanon. They are not allowed to buy land or even to expand their houses. They are hated by the population. They would love to live in the West Bank or even Gaza.

Yet how often do you see any articles about Palestinians in Lebanon? How many NGOs that pretend to care about Palestinians even mention the situation in Lebanon? When was the last time Human Rights Watch tweeted about Palestinians in Lebanon?

The sad fact is that when Jews aren't involved, no one gives a damn about Palestinians. 5000 were killed in Syria - the media is silent. Corruption is endemic in the West Bank - no one cares. Christians have virtually all left Gaza because of Muslim persecution - but the only mention of them in the media is when Israel limits their travel on Christmas.

Virtually every person and group that says they are pro-Palestinian are proven by this story and others to be nothing of the sort. They are simply anti-Israel, and the only reason anyone would care more about Israel's treatment of Palestinians more than the far worse treatment they receive in Lebanon is good, old fashioned antisemitism.

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.

Lessons from the Pale of Settlement (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

If I go to shul on a Friday evening, I might encounter a group of young black men in their upper teens and early twenties on the street. Instead of worrying whether they will attack me, I tell them Shabbat shalom, because they are Jews, and given their ages, probably soldiers in the IDF. Today it’s better to live in Israel than in Brooklyn, where I was born.

Antisemitic violence by blacks (and a few Hispanics) against Orthodox Jews in New York City, including a vicious machete attack in nearby Monsey, following several murderous assaults by white racists on synagogues elsewhere in America, has gotten major media attention.

The immediate response was that the NYPD should do a better job. Given the constraints placed on them by the justice system, which seems to be unable to hold anyone less murderous than the Monsey attacker for more than a few hours, they are probably doing the best they can. A massive increase in manpower could reduce the incidence of violence in particular areas temporarily, but is unaffordable in the long run.

And now we are seeing the inevitable backlash from the “progressive” community. In response to Mayor De Blasio’s statement that the police presence in affected areas will be beefed up, A group called “Jews for racial and economic justice” tweeted,

This is what dividing vulnerable communities looks like. Instead of investing in restorative solutions that prioritize the safety of all communities, @NYCMayor is implementing a plan that treats abuse of Black and Brown communities as the answer to antisemitic violence. It isn’t.

Police, they think, aren’t the solution – they are the problem, at least for the “Black and Brown communities.” The position of these “woke” Jews is that non-Jewish minorities are “vulnerable” and need to be protected (from police), while Jews need to adopt “strategies” like “interfaith collaboration and crisis de-escalation, as well as long-term interventions such as creating alternative safety teams, rapid response networks, and broader cultural education around antisemitism and white supremacy.” But no police, and of course no guns. For these Jews, the safety of other Jews is the lowest priority.

For total chutzpah or maybe just stupidity, though, nothing beats the group called “A Jewish Voice for Peace” (JVP). Usually JVP contents itself with bashing Israel, supporting BDS and working to help Palestinian terror organizations and Iran in their attempt to destroy the Jewish state. Now they seem to have turned to domestic concerns. Here is what they tweeted after eight days of Hanukkah in which New York City saw at least one violently antisemitic incident every night:

We know we have to address rising white nationalist violence – against Jews, Muslims, Black people and all people of color – while not relying on the very forces detaining and locking up and killing our friends, family & neighbors.

It is impossible that they haven’t noticed the color of the attackers in Crown Heights and other Jewish neighborhoods of New York. What seems to be going on is that they believe that “people of color” (POC) are incapable of bigotry (this is an article of faith of intersectional wokeness) and Jew-hatred is a form of bigotry. So it must somehow be that white nationalism, inspired of course by Donald Trump, is poisoning the minds of these POC and causing them to act out violently (please don’t ask me to find a coherent argument here). But whatever you do, don’t try to stop them by force.

As someone who has read a few books about Jewish history, I don’t find any of this surprising. We have a minority of Jews living among a larger low-income gentile population. The blacks of Brooklyn have problems and frustrations, and the reasons for them and the possible solutions are not always obvious. The local prince and nobles (the Mayor and city officials) talk a good game, but little changes. The Jews are nearby, easily identifiable, and there are plenty of antisemitic ideas in circulation, fed by black nationalist groups like the Nation of Islam, and increasingly by the white woke Left. Black teenagers who grew up on the street express themselves violently. Of course they pick on the Jews. And as in the days of the Tsar, antisemites can always find Jews to take their side.

The local population is generally antisemitic. Whether their complaints against the Jews are fair or not, they believe them. If they wouldn’t say that they approve of the assaults on the streets, they would say they understand them. The Jews deserve it.

The Jews, on the other hand, grew up coddled by their families and communities. It is hard for them to understand why non-Jews dislike them, since everyone they are close to loves them. Few of them engage in sports or hard physical work, and even fewer are familiar with violence in any form. They are the softest of soft targets. Things have not changed much for the Jews on the ground since my grandfather’s time in the Russian shtetl.

History can be useful. There are lessons to be learned from the Pale of Settlement that can be applied to Crown Heights, Williamsburg, and Boro Park. And here is one of the most important and most relevant:

Jews can’t depend on the goyim to defend them.

The police in New York are not the police of the Tsar. They don’t participate in or even approve of attacks on Jews. But they cannot be everywhere, and there is even opposition to their temporarily increased deployment.

Here is another lesson:

Antisemites can’t be educated by Jews.

Some people, like the aforementioned “Jews for Economic and Racial Justice” think that we can talk to, negotiate with, and educate the local community to stop hating us. We can’t. Louis Farrakhan Is more credible for them than we are. And that will always be the case.

That leaves only two options: defend oneself or leave. Many people, including myself, have called for Jews to learn Krav Maga or similar martial arts. While this would be healthy, most Orthodox Jews – especially the Haredi (“ultra-Orthodox”) ones – have spent most of their lives in books and not struggling to survive in the street. They do not have the aggressive personalities or physical fitness that are needed to go with the technical knowledge to defend themselves successfully.

Perhaps it would be possible for Jewish communities to expand self-defense organizations, such as Shomrim. Such volunteer patrols cannot legally carry weapons, although they can make citizen’s arrests. But there can be serious problems resulting from legal restrictions and the complicated relations with the police. While the Shomrim have helped the police capture some of the assailants in recent weeks, the justice system apparently does not treat them in a way that deters them from continuing to commit offenses of the same kind, over and over. And of course the Shomrim are not capable of stopping more serious crimes, especially by armed criminals.

So, what about leaving? Nobody wants to abandon their home, even to go to a safer place. But as Jews – including my grandparents – learned, sometimes there is no other solution. There is one place that any Jew can go to if he wants to enough, and that is the State of Israel. This is a problem for some Haredi Jews, in particular the Satmar Hasidim of Monsey and Brooklyn, who strongly oppose the Jewish state.

It would be a problem for Israel, too, which surely doesn’t need any more residents, Jews or Arabs, who oppose the existence of the state that protects them and makes it possible for them to thrive. But saving Jews is part of the reason for being of the Jewish state, whether or not they are grateful. That is what this country does. They should keep that in mind.

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.

01/01 Links Pt2: BDS or BS?; Netflix Doco on Murder of Argentine AMIA Bombing Prosecutor; Gertrude Himmelfarb, 1922-2019; Corner of God’s Altar in Shiloh’ takes 2nd place in 2019 top discoveries

From Ian:

BDS or BS?

Another feature of BDS is that it often condemns both an action and its opposite. If the Israeli government were to restrict gay rights, it would be homophobic – if it extends them, it is pinkwashing. If the local Israeli embassy pays the airfare for a director to come to discuss what is more than likely a pro-Palestinian film, then the festival is accepting blood money and should be boycotted. But if the Embassy didn’t make the payment, it would be accused of running a North Korean type hasbara propaganda machine, supporting only films supporting the government’s line. UK films are universally supported by the government through generous tax credits, of course, but you don’t see screaming mobs outside showings of Hugh Grant films, despite some of our questionable actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our complex relationship with the Saudis.

The government is right to propose an anti-BDS bill (and let us not kid ourselves that any council would apply a boycott to Malaysia, despite its open discrimination against its Chinese population, or the Iranians for persecuting almost everyone, dare we even bother mentioning the prospect of a boycott of China, currently operating concentration camps?), because those who are at the sharp end will otherwise have an impossible job. Can you allow council premises to be used for an Israeli/Palestinian dialogue group (normalization), or host a singer who has recently performed in Israel? Could a university host a Jewish Society that serves Israeli kiddush wine, or allow a speaker who has been in the Israel Defence Force? Could a library order Amos Oz books or host a church group organising a trip to Jerusalem and Bethlehem? Could the mayor welcome a group of disabled IDF veterans? No-one really knows the answers, but the hope of BDS activists is that people will take the safest route by simply not asking, so achieving the movement’s goals by default.

Given that your average declared anti-Zionist would struggle to find the West Bank on a map, the chance of a council worker or university administrator being able to make a reasoned decision on BDS is close to negligible. And the legal and administrative costs of getting it wrong will be borne by the benighted taxpayers and ratepayers, very few of whom have the slightest interest in the Middle East conflict. Meanwhile, a generation of otherwise engaged Jews would grow up fearful that their local authority considers them to be second-class citizens, and their Israeli relatives to be uniquely and irredeemably evil.

BDS activists can of course try to boycott Israel, Zionists, or anything they like when doing their shopping, but should leave their personal prejudices at the door when it comes to local or national government.

Stand With Us: A New Middle East?

In the past decade, Israel has developed closer ties to Arab states in the region. From sporting events to official diplomatic delegations and regional infrastructure plans we are seeing a positive shift in the Middle East. Peace is possible!

Prof. Phyllis Chesler: I saw the writing in the sky

For years, organized American and European Jewry have refused to take a courageous stand about Jew hatred. Please note that I am not calling this “antisemitism.” I have been using the phrase “Jew hatred” for many years now, sometimes the regrettably ungraceful term: “Judeophobia”. Scholar Shulamit Magnus has a very good piece about this. In short: Jews are not a “race,” we are a people, and we exist in all the colors of the rainbow. Arab Muslims and Arab Christians are also Semites and the term “antisemitism” applies to them as well.

Most big-monied American-Jewish groups have tended to universalize antisemitism as “racism” or “prejudice,” perhaps in the hope that Jew haters who oppose anti-black, anti-brown, and anti-immigrant racism would therefore magically realize that nearly half of all Jews, at least in Israel, are black, brown, or olive in skin color and that even white-skinned Ashkenazi Jews are human beings who are currently being verbally and physically menaced, shot down, stabbed, punched, and blown up in Israel and in the West.

I started writing about this almost full-time in the fall of 2000. I saw the writing on the sky. I’d seen it before in the early 1970s and 1980s, but never so clearly, never so alarmingly. Others did too. Some had been our shomrim for a long time. They were barely and only rarely heeded and were defamed as conservatives.

However, most American Jewish organizations, including the ADL, insisted that the greatest danger to Jews was coming from white Christian conservative men. They refused to name Islamic Jew hatred or black American, black Caribbean, or black African Jew hatred. The media happily kept quoting such views. Oddly, the ADL’s own stats, which they’ve released over many years, tells us another story.

Jews are not lemmings, Mr. Gandhi

“They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs.”- Mahatma Gandhi, suggesting that mass suicide should have been the preferred Jewish response to the Holocaust, as opposed to fighting back or seeking refuge elsewhere.

Throughout the West various leftists and pacifists still worship the passive resistance legacy of Gandhi. This worship or virtue-signalling, however, does not impress me, especially because my father was a slave labourer in Auschwitz and his parents and then 8 year old sister were murdered in the gas chambers there.

We should also examine myths surrounding lemmings jumping off cliffs, as Gandhi seems to infer that is moral, as quoted above.

Non-violence is a fair tactic when dealing with the British or Indian authorities, but we contend that it is a very stupid and immoral practice when dealing with Hitler and the Nazis (and more recently with Islamist supporters of terrorism and oppression of their own people and their neighbours all over the world).

First let us think about Gandhi’s preference for jumping into the sea when confronted with enemies seeking your death.

Non-violence is a fair tactic when dealing with the British or Indian authorities, but is a very stupid and immoral practice when dealing with Hitler and the Nazis (and more recently with Islamist supporters of terrorism and oppression of their own people and their neighbours all over the world).
The notion of jumping into the sea reminds us of the supposed conduct of Norwegian lemmings. According to a good Wikipedia article about them, it is accepted that these lemmings do periodically jump off cliffs. However it argues that they have become “the subject of a widely popular misconception that they are driven to commit mass suicide when they migrate by jumping off cliffs. It is not a deliberate mass suicide where the animal voluntarily chooses to die, but rather a result of their migratory behavior. Driven by strong biological urges, some species of lemmings may migrate in large groups when population density becomes too great.