Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Palestinian PM lies to the EU, repeatedly.

Palestinian Authority prime minister Mohamed Shayyeh spoke to the EU Committee of Foreign Affairs yesterday and took questions. He made a lot of ludicrous claims, like how "Palestine" is committed to democracy, how Israel has been stopping them from having elections, how not a penny of foreign aid goes to terrorist organizations.

He claimed that there was not a single Palestinian member of ISIS. That is a bald-faced lie.

He claimed at the very end that Palestinians do not have access to the Dead Sea. Another complete lie.

He claimed that Palestinians do not have access to the Mediterranean Sea. What about everyone in Gaza? What about the thousands that visit during Ramadan every year? Or the many that came last August?

Here is where he insists that the EU funds are not misused and that Palestinians cannot swim in the Dead Sea (he mentioned the Mediterranean earlier.)

Palestine Times quotes him in an especially nonsensical claim:

The prime minister in Ramallah, Muhammad Shtayyeh, expressed the Palestinian side's readiness for a dialogue with "Israel" as soon as possible, but pointed out that the "Israeli side's actions do not reflect an intention for dialogue."

"The Israeli president always talks about that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and others, which suggests to us that it has no intention of ever reaching an agreement with us," Shtayyeh said during a meeting of the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee.

Apparently, Israel saying that Jerusalem is its capital shows that it is not serious about peace talks, but the Palestinians insisting that Jerusalem is their capital shows that they are serious about peace talks.

Perhaps someone should come up with a list of rules that are different for Palestinians and Israelis. It would be a long list.

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.

10/13 Links Pt1: Palestinian PM: God help us if Trump wins; Why does BBC promote my daughter’s murderer?; Israel's coronavirus death toll exceeds 2,000

From Ian:

Palestinian PM: God help us if Trump wins

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh told the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee on Monday that voting US President Donald Trump out of office is critical for the Palestinians.

“The election is very important. God help us, the EU, and the whole world if there are four more years of Trump,” he said.

Shtayyeh spoke out against Trump’s peace plan, presented earlier this year.

“Trump has wasted four years of everyone’s time,” he said. “The ultimate deal was not delivered. [Trump’s plan] was rejected by the Palestinians, the Arabs and Europe… The US is just too biased.”

Shtayyeh called for Europe to recognize a Palestinian state, saying it would help bring about a two-state solution and called for a full association agreement to be drawn up between the EU and the PA in preparation for statehood.

The PA prime minister lamented Trump’s “unilateral measures,” such as moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and the US cutting aid to the Palestinians.

Among other reasons, the US slashed the aid because of the Taylor Force Act, which halts American funding to the PA until it stops paying terrorists and their families through its Martyr’s Fund. In 2019, the PA spent NIS 517.4 million ($152.6m.) on salaries to terrorists, in and out of prison.

MEP Charlie Weimers of Sweden, a member of the European Conservatives and Reformists, challenged Shtayyeh on this front, asking: “Can you look European taxpayers in the eye and promise that none of their money - directly or indirectly - will be used for terrorism? Can you promise them that you will cease the support for terrorism and embrace peace?”

Weimers highlighted “loopholes in EU counter-terrorism financing legislation, which lead to EU funds to the PA being funneled to EU-listed terror organizations.”

MEP Charlie @weimers to #Palestinian PM @DrShtayyeh:

"Can you look European taxpayers in the eye and promise that none of their money - directly or indirectly - will be used for terrorism?"

Of course @PalestinePMO could not. Question is, what will #EU do next? @JosepBorrellF https://t.co/EdK197hhPB
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) October 13, 2020

According to former French ambassador to Israel @GerardAraud, Arafat launching a 5 year campaign of suicide bombings, lynchings, stabbings and mass shootings which killed 1000's of Israeli civilians and foreign nationals was simply him "waiting for better people to talk to." https://t.co/EoP1Ff8He5
— The Mossad: Zionists and Loving It (@TheMossadIL) October 13, 2020

Poll: Ahead of US Elections, 63% of Israelis Say ‘Trump Better for Israel’

A clear majority of Israelis favor the reelection of US President Donald Trump come November’s presidential elections, a new poll conducted for i24NEWS showed Monday night.

Answering the question, “which US presidential candidate do you think will be better for Israel?” 63.3% of respondents chose the Republican leader.

In contrast, Democrat candidate and former vice president Joe Biden came up with a mere 18.8%.

Moreover, 53.2% said they thought the Israeli right would be significantly harmed if Trump was not reelected. A little over 21% replied that “Israel acts independently,” and therefore won’t be influenced by a change in the White House.

Almost half of Israelis (48.2%) thought that US Jews are “mistaken” to support the Democratic Party, versus 35.5% who thought they were “correct” in doing so.

On the question of whether a rift has grown between American Jewry and the State of Israel in recent years, 47% replied that it could be mended, 35.3% said there’s “no rift, only debate,” and 12.4% answered the rift could not be mended.

i24NEWS Poll: Ahead of US Elections, 63% of Israelis Say Trump Better for Israel

MEMRI: Saudi Journalist: Peace With Israel Is A Necessity, Not A Choice; Turkey And Iran Are A Greater Threat Than Israel

In an article titled "Peace Is A Necessity, Not A Choice" in the Saudi state daily 'Okaz, published one day before the signing of the peace agreements between the UAE, Bahrain and Israel, Saudi journalist Fahd Ibrahim Al-Dughaither welcomed these agreements as harbingers of coexistence, economic growth and constructive competition in the region. Al-Dughaither added that Saudi Arabia not only does not oppose the agreements, but has future development plans of its own that require peace and stability; therefore, it has the right to make decisions that serve its supreme interests, at a time of its choosing.

Al-Dughaither wrote further that the Arab states have supported the Palestinian cause for years and have sacrificed for it, yet the Palestinian leaders have been stubborn and corrupt, filling their own pockets with the aid money provided by the Gulf. Responding to Palestinian claims that normalization with Israel is an act of betrayal,[1] Al-Dughaither stressed that the Arab countries that have signed peace agreements with Israel, starting with Egypt and Jordan, have continued to support the Palestinians and their rights. However, he said, the recent decades have seen vast changes in the region, chief of them the growing threat to the Arabs posted by Turkey, Iran and their regional proxies, which is much greater than the threat posed by Israel. These changes have caused the Arab countries to reassess their priorities and to advance towards peace with Israel.

The following are translated excerpts from his article:[2] "After the signing of the peace and normalization agreement between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain we have begun to see, even if from afar, a new future, different from the past 70 years: a future that contains some hope of coexistence, development, constructive competition and the avoidance of war and military conflicts -- even if it does bring about the realization of all the aspirations related to the Palestinian issue. This is a trend that can isolate the rogue regimes and organizations, which support violence and benefit from the rivalry in our region. This future is very different from the destructive future that former U.S. president Barak Obama envisioned for our region, [namely] the so-called 'Arab Spring'…

"Saudi Arabia certainly does not oppose the trend of peace and has impressive development plans for the future, whose implementation required an environment of stability and mutual interests vis-à-vis all the countries of the world. Therefore, Saudi Arabia has the sovereign right to make decisions according to its supreme interests, whenever it wants and without paying attention to populist rumblings [that are heard] here and there. Let me just remind [the readers] that it was Saudi Arabia that laid down the foundations for the Arab peace initiative, known already in the 1980s.[3] [And] what have I said about Saudi Arabia and its development ambitions is also true for Israel and of all the Arab states…

Gal Gadot: Famous Movie Star -- And Lightning Rod For Anti-Israel Haters (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Movie star Gal Gadot is not a controversial movie actress, but she has attracted some controversy.

It started with Gadot's title role in the 2017 movie Wonder Woman, when it became an issue whether Gadot was white or a woman of color.

For its part, ComicBook.com alerted its followers that There IS A Person Of Color In The Lead Role:

Wonder Woman hits theaters tonight in some places, but there seems to be a misconception out there about the film's lead character, and it's frankly a bit absurd. So consider this a PSA -- if you will -- for those who have called out concerns about there being no person of color in the film.

It might come as a shock, but there are people of color in the film, and one of them is in the lead role.

Yep, with a quick google search, it turns out that Gal Gadot is not actually Caucasian, but is in fact Israeli. [emphasis added]

Gal Gadot. Youtube screencap

Now Gadot is taking on a new and very different role -- and again there is controversy, this time over her being cast in the lead role of a movie about Cleopatra.

Here is one typical reaction:

Typical of the response to the mistaken impression that Cleopatra was an Arab is an article in The Jerusalem Post -- which notes that Cleopatra was Greek, not Arab.

(On a side note, the article also points out that the above Sameera Khan is a former journalist for RT, who left the network after her enthusiastic praise for Stalin’s gulags)

But for me, the interesting part about the outcry for an Arab to portray Cleopatra is that it illustrates the lack of awareness of the actual connection of Egypt with Arabs and Islam -- and of Arab conquest and colonization both inside and outside the Middle East.

In his book, The Crisis of Islam, Bernard Lewis, touches upon the change in Egyptian identity after the Arab conquest:

There can be few, if any, nations with a better claim to nationhood--a country sharply defined by both history and geography, with a continuous history of civilization going back for more than five thousand years [than Egypt]. But Egyptians have several identities, and for most of the last fourteen centuries, that is, since the Arab-Islamic conquest of Egypt in the seventh century and the subsequent Islamization and Arabization of the country, the Egyptian identity has rarely been the predominant one, yielding pride of place to the cultural and linguistic identity of Arabism and for most of their history, to the religious identity of Islam. [p. 19]

In another of his books, What Went Wrong? Lewis outlines in more detail the many other Muslim conquests:

o Seventh century: Muslim armies advancing from Arabia conquer Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and North Africa, all then part of Christendom

o  Eighth century: Muslim forces conquer Spain and Portugal and invade France

o  Ninth century: Muslims conquer Sicily and invade Italy, sack Ostia and Rome

o  Thirteenth century: the Tatars of the Golden Horde conquer Russia. After the Khan of the Golden Horde and his people convert to Islam. Russia, and much of Eastern Europe, are subject to Muslim rule -- until the late fifteenth century. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Turks conquer Anatolia, capture the ancient Christian city of Constantinople, invade and colonize the Balkan peninsula, and threaten the very heart of Europe, twice reaching as far as Vienna. [pages 4, 6]

That's some list:

Syria (then under Christendom)
Palestine (then under Christendom)
Egypt (then under Christendom)
North Africa (then under Christendom)
Spain
Portugal
France
Sicily
Sacking Rome
Russia
Anatolia
Constantinople
Balkans
Vienna

We know that the Muslim invasion of Europe was turned back, as Lewis himself describes tongue-in-cheek:

But again European Christendom was able to oust the invaders and again, now more successfully, to counter-attack against the realms of Islam. By this time the jihad had become almost entirely defensive--resisting the Reconquest in Spain and Russia, resisting the movements for national self-liberation by the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, and finally as Muslims see it, defending the very heartlands of Islam against infidel attack. This phase has come to be known as imperialism. [Crisis, p35-36. emphasis added]

Apparently, Zionism is not the first nationalist self-liberation movement to be labeled 'imperialist' by the Muslim world.

As for the movie itself, will there be nearly as much excitement when they announce who will play the part of Marc Anthony?

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.

Most Arabs still oppose normalization with Israel - but their numbers are shrinking VERY fast

Pro-Israel media mistakenly reported on a recent poll by Zogby Analytics, which was misreported by Sky News Arabia, saying that a majority of Arabs in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt support Arab countries having normalized relations with Israel.

The actual results were flipped from what was reported. Only in the UAE itself was there a majority support for the Abraham Accords.

While the majority of Arabs are still against normalization, the number that support it is amazngly high, considering how much opposition there has been over the years.

The 2019-20 Arab Opinion Index, a massive survey of 28,000 Arabs throughout the region sponsored by the Doha-based Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, was released last week. Practically the entire survey was done before the announcement of an agreement between Israel and the UAE.

In that survey, taken between November 2019 and September 2020, the overwhelming majority of Arabs throughout the region - 94% of those who expressed an opinion - opposed recognizing Israel. Note that the question was not about normalization but mere political recognition, a far lower bar.

These numbers opposing any diplomatic relationship with Israel have remained steady over the years:

Which means that in only two months, the percentage of Arabs in Saudi Arabia and Jordan who support Arab relations with Israel skyrocketed from 6% to 41%; in Egypt (which already has relations) it zoomed from 13% to 42%.

These are astonishing numbers.

Once again, it is difficult to overstate how earth-shattering the Israel-UAE agreement is, even though too many "experts" continue to absurdly downplay it, like this New York Times foreign desk editor.

Mr. Trump's transactional approach to the Middle East hasn't blown up in his face as some experts had predicted. But aside from a few more Arab recognitions of Israel, he doesn't have much to show for it. @halbfinger @NYTBen @farnazfassihi https://t.co/iG5pR0jWZi
— rickgladstone (@rickgladstone) October 11, 2020

(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.

Palestinian Authority warns it will prosecute any NGO that agrees NOT to hire terrorists as a condition for funding. Really.

One of the lesser known Palestinian Authority sections is the Civil Society Organizations Commission, an attempt to centralize administration of the huge number of foreign-funded NGOs and "civil society" organizations.

It is headed by Major General Sultan Abu Al-Enein.

Al-Enein just instructed all of the Palestinian NGOs not to cooperate when foreign funders, mostly European, want to put anti-terror clauses on their funding. And if any Palestinian NGO signs a clause that says that they will not hire or fund terrorists, they will be prosecuted under Palestinian law!

You read that right.

From the official WAFA news agency Palestine Today (and other Arabic news sites):

The head of the Civil Society Organizations Affairs Authority, Sultan Abu Al-Enein, warned the private sector not to be an entry point for normalization or marketing of liquidation plans for our national project, represented by the "deal of the century", or normalization agreements, through their acceptance of conditional funding or politically oriented programs to put pressure on our leadership and our people.

Abu Al-Enein said that there are intense contacts that some countries or international institutions are making, through civil work, to sign documents that harm the fundamentals of our Palestinian people, in return for financing their programs and societal and cultural activities.

He said that the acceptance by some civil institutions of this conditional funding would be a blow to the steadfastness positions announced by the Palestinian leadership at the level of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the national and Islamic action factions.

He renewed the warning that accepting this funding is national betrayal and a departure from the national ranks, and will not pass without punishment, stressing that the competent authorities will work to prosecute these institutions legally and nationally, and expose those in charge of them in front of the Palestinian public, which rallies around its national constants.

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.

10/12 Links Pt2: Facebook bans posts that deny or distort the Holocaust; Apologize for Columbus? Let Islam apologize for Temple Mount; CUNY’s Systemic Jew-Hatred

From Ian:

Facebook bans posts that deny or distort the Holocaust

Facebook said Monday that it will be banning posts that deny or distort the Holocaust and will start directing people to authoritative sources if they search for information about the Nazi genocide.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the new policy in a post on Monday, in the latest attempt by the company to take action against conspiracy theories and misinformation ahead of the US presidential election next month.

Zuckerberg said that he believes the new policy strikes the “right balance” in drawing the lines between what is and isn’t acceptable speech.

“I’ve struggled with the tension between standing for free expression and the harm caused by minimizing or denying the horror of the Holocaust,” he wrote. “My own thinking has evolved as I’ve seen data showing an increase in anti-Semitic violence, as have our wider policies on hate speech.”

In a separate blog post, Monika Bickert, vice president of Facebook’s content policy, said that the company was “updating our hate speech policy to prohibit any content that denies or distorts the Holocaust.”

The move, Bickert said, “marks another step in our effort to fight hate on our services. Our decision is supported by the well-documented rise in anti-Semitism globally and the alarming level of ignorance about the Holocaust, especially among young people.”

Surveys have shown some younger Americans believe the Holocaust was a myth or has been exaggerated.

Jpost Editorial: UN makes mockery of its Human Rights Council

The shameful charade of the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council is continuing. Tomorrow, the UN is scheduled to hold elections for the 47-state membership of the UNHRC and the list of countries running for a place on the body supposedly dedicated to fighting human rights abuses includes some states better known as abusers than defenders of freedom and justice. Among those likely to be elected are China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

This makes a mockery of the whole purpose of the UNHRC.

UN Watch, an NGO dedicated to monitoring the work of the United Nations and promoting human rights, distributed material ahead of the vote and has pointed out the absurdities. It also held a webinar with human rights dissidents persecuted by these very regimes to call on governments everywhere to oppose the election of the states with a record of abuse.

“Electing these dictatorships as UN judges on human rights is like making a gang of arsonists into the fire brigade,” said Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch.

Disconcertingly, despite the valiant efforts of UN Watch and other groups dedicated to fighting human rights abuses, the report shows how Cuba and Russia, which are the only candidates in their respective regional groups, are almost certain to be elected.

In the Asian regional group, where there are five candidates vying for four spots, the election of China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is almost assured, according to Neuer.

“It’s logically absurd and morally obscene that the UN is about to elect to its top human rights body a regime that herded 1 million Uighurs into camps, arrested, crushed and disappeared those who tried to sound the alarm about the coronavirus, and suffocated freedom in Hong Kong,” said Neuer.

Adolph Ochs’ Legacy at The New York Times

A taxi passes by in front of The New York Times head office, Feb. 7, 2013. Photo: Reuters / Carlo Allegri / File.

The New York Times’ Jewish problem is more than a century old. It dates to 1896, when Adolph S. Ochs, publisher of The Chattanooga Times, purchased the failing New York newspaper. A proud Reform Jew, Ochs insisted that Judaism was a religion, not a national identity that might compromise the patriotic allegiance of American Jews and prompt the dreaded charge of dual loyalty.

Constant criticism of Israel in The New York Times — usually focused on Jewish settlements or its failure to reach a peace agreement with the unmovably resistant Palestinian Authority — is not random. It reflects an enduring, by now embedded, discomfort with the very idea, let alone the reality, of a Jewish state in the Biblical homeland of the Jewish people.

It began with Joseph Levy, the Times’ first Jerusalem-based correspondent. He became a partisan advocate during the 1929 Arab riots in Palestine when hundreds of Jews were murdered and the centuries-old Hebron Jewish community destroyed. Levy’s primary sources were the Grand Mufti (who incited rioting with the lie that Jews intended to endanger Muslim holy sites on the Temple Mount) and Hebrew University Chancellor Judah Magnes (formerly a New York Reform rabbi) who advocated a bi-national state of Jews and Arabs.

The Times’ nadir came during the Holocaust. By then Arthur Hays Sulzberger, Ochs’s son-in-law, was the publisher. When the slaughter of six million Jews was even noticed, it was buried in the inside pages lest the Times be portrayed as a “Jewish” newspaper. Instead, the Times became the sounding board for the vehemently anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism. The subsequent birth of the State of Israel could not be evaded, but it took the Times five years to finally recognize it as “an outpost of democracy in the Middle East.”

Its belated embrace was short-lived. The Times condemned the trial of Nazi war-criminal Adolph Eichmann in Israel, lest the Jewish state be perceived as representative of the Jewish people. After the Six-Day War editors focused on the plight of Palestinian refugees, while ignoring Jewish refugees from the Middle East and Africa who found a home in Israel. The Jewish state was depicted as a malevolent occupying power.

Times of Israel reports:

Israel’s Gabi Ashkenazi and his UAE counterpart Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan bumped elbows instead of shaking hands in line with measures to halt the spread of the coronavirus, as they met face-to-face for the first time after their countries signed a US-brokered deal in mid-September to normalize relations.

It was the UAE foreign minister’s idea to visit the site alongside his Israeli counterpart, the Walla news site reported.

In a handwritten message in the visitor’s book at the memorial, the Emirati top diplomat commemorated the “European Jewish victims of the Holocaust.”

“A whole group of humanity fell victim to those calling for extremism and hatred,” he wrote, adding that the visit to the memorial “underscored the importance of human values such as coexistence, tolerance and accepting the other… as well as respect for all creeds and faiths. These are the values upon which my country was founded.”

“I salute the souls of those who fell victim to the Holocaust,” Al Nahyan wrote, before quoting from a Jewish prayer translated into Arabic: “May their souls be bound up in the binds of life.”

“Never again,” he wrote, in both English and in Arabic.

Morocco's Akhbar Ona found the use of the phrase "never again" by an Arab to be "strange and weird:"

The newspaper said that the phrase is "a slogan often used by Holocaust survivors of WWII to justify actions to protect Israel and the Jews."

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 MBC Group, a large Arabic media company headquartered in Saudi Arabia, has taken down what was considered the most important Palestinian historical drama.

Al-Taghreba al-Falastenya (The Palestinian Alienation) is a 2004 "dramatic epic that revolves around the suffering of a poor Palestinian family during the time of the British occupation of Palestine, then the massacres by the Jewish gangs between the 1930s and 1960s."

Earlier this year, when some Arabs were upset over the Ramadan dramas that did not demonize Jews, some of them warmly remembered this series as being from a time when "normalization" would never have been considered.

According to Arab media, the Saudi MBC channel recently abruptly removed the Palestinian alienation series from its "Shahid Net" website.

Palestinian media is assuming that Saudi recognition of and normalization with Israel is merely a matter of time.

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.

10/12 Links Pt1: Study Finds Majority Support for Ties With Israel in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan and Egypt; Australia halves UNRWA funding

From Ian:

Study Finds Majority Support for Ties With Israel in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan and Egypt

A study published in the United Arab Emirates over the weekend shows growing support for establishing ties with Israel in some Arab countries.

The poll, conducted by US-based Zogby Analytics, found majority support in four Arab states for normalizing relations with Israel and that the driving force behind this shift is a desire to stabilize the political and military situation in the Middle East.

According to Sky News Arabia, the poll included 3,600 Arab respondents living in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, and was supervised by James Zogby, founder and president of the Arab-American Institute.

Sky News Arabia was the only media outlet reporting on the results of the survey.

According to the survey, 59 percent of Jordanians and Saudis, along with 58 percent of Egyptians and 56 percent of the residents of the UAE support normalization agreements between Israel and the Arab world, citing primarily regional stability and economic prosperity. In sharp contrast, the poll said that 61 percent of Palestinians opposed normalization.

A recent study by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, however, found that overall, Arab social media users were less enthused about the Abraham Accords than the UAE poll might suggest. The ministry’s data suggests that a whopping 90 percent of all Arabic social media discourse on the recent rapprochement between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain is negative.

The report shows that between August and September, 95 percent of Arabic social media posts commenting on the issue slammed the UAE, with 45 percent of the posts calling the agreement a “betrayal.”

Other allegations against the UAE focused on the ban on signing agreements with the “Zionists” (27 percent), Abu Dhabi’s “hypocrisy” and its “capitulation” to the United States (5 percent).

But not all was negative: 61 percent of the posts favoring the deal cited security benefits, 33 percent noted economic potential and 6 percent said the accords simply made an existing situation official.

Australia halves UNRWA funding

The Australian Government has quietly halved its contribution to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).

The cut to UNRWA funding was not formally announced by the Morrison Government, but was listed in the 2020-21 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade budget papers. In 2020-21, Australia will contribute $10 million to UNRWA, down from $20 million in 2019-20.

It is important to note that despite budgetary pressures due to COVID-19, the Australian Government has not made significant reductions to its contributions to other global humanitarian organisations, including UN agencies.

Support for the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has remained the same, support for the World Health Organisation and UN Children’s Fund is constant, but there was a drop in support for the World Food Programme. UNRWA is the only organisation of its type whose funding was halved by the Australian Government in this Budget.

This decision marks the end of a period when Australia, beginning under then-foreign minister Bob Carr, became one of UNRWA’s most significant funders. In 2012. Carr announced a five-year $90 million funding deal for UNRWA. This was topped up with an additional $4.5 million in 2013. By 2017, Australia was UNRWA’s 12th largest donor.

The Coalition Government extended UNRWA funding, contributing, on average, $20 million a year until 2019-20.

However, there have been calls for the Australian Government, including from the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) to carefully consider whether supporting UNRWA is truly in Australia’s national interest or whether Australia should be making its funding contingent on reforms to UNRWA. It should be noted that the United States withdrew its funding of UNRWA in 2018 due to concerns over its effectiveness and neutrality.

The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation was formed last December from the merger of several other US aid agencies. It is the development finance institution of the United States, responsible for providing and facilitating the financing of private development projects in lower- and middle-income countries, partially as a counter to Chinese development projects worldwide.

Late last month, the DFC issued a press release indicating that it wanted to leverage the Israel/UAE accords to improve life throughout the Middle East:

Building on the historic Abraham Accords, DFC and other delegation members visited Israel to explore opportunities to translate that agreement into tangible initiatives to improve the lives of people across the region. In particular, DFC is pursuing projects with countries such as Israel and the United Arab Emirates that will enhance regional trade, create jobs, increase energy security and reliable access to electricity, and support agriculture and sustainable access to water in the region.

The DFC has a number of Middle East projects, including financing to rehabilitate a gas pipeline from Israeli gas fields to Egypt and a water pipeline from southern Jordan to Amman.

It appears that the DFC wants to help Israel and the UAE offer aid to other Arab countries beyond the aid that the US gives.

(h/t Irene)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

This is the time of the year of the Palestinian olive harvest, and there are lots of stories and photos about how critical this time of year is to the Palestinian economy. Most of the olives are converted to olive oil.

How much is the annual olive oil yield in the West Bank? According to UN-OCHA, it is between $110 and $120 million a year.

Articles try to say how critical the olive oil business is the the Palestinian economy, with figures tossed around that it is the main income for 100,000 Palestinian families. Simple math shows that this is impossible because that would mean each family only has an annual income of $1200, when the average Palestinian family income is over $20,000. Clearly the olive oil industry is not nearly as large as we are told.

But there is another comparison that is useful. The annual budget in the Palestinian Authority to pay prisoners, "marytrs" and their families was $315 million in 2016 - meaning that the Palestinian Authority gives nearly triple the annual olive oil revenues to terrorists and their families every year.

The Palestinian leaders want the world to think that their top priority is the olive oil industry. Clearly paying terrorists and their families is a far, far higher priority.

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.

Brown U professor hates Israel so much she erases Jews from her photos of "Palestine" (UPDATE)

About a week ago, Ariella Aisha Azoulay of Brown University gave an anti-Israel lecture at Cornell.

One of the attendees described the lecture this way:

Today I attended a lecture given by Brown University professor Ariella Azoulay who had been invited to talk to a Cornell class in the school of architecture. This lecture was afactual, ahistorical and steeped in antisemitic narratives to the extent that all photographs showing Jews or Israelis she had erased the image of the people (see below) because "I can't bear to look at them". Deeply disturbing and profoundly depressing.

Sure enough, Azoulay tweeted her photos that she showed at the lecture, and they show all Jews who were the early pioneers of modern Israel are deliberately blacked out of the photos.

Even though Azoulay is Jewish, she actually went out of her way to blacken the images of Jews because, in her words, she couldn't bear to look at them. This is dehumanizing Jews and only Jews - there is really no other way to interpret this. (In her caption of an unedited photo advertising the lecture, Azoulay specifically calls out Jewish - not Zionist - soldiers.)

There was no controversy at Cornell over this blatant dehumanizing of Jews. On the contrary - the controversy was over the fact that a few minutes into the lecture s message was placed on the screen, apparently in response to the one-sided nature of the lecture, which said, “We are aware that these topics are sensitive and have multiple view points and would like to assure all participants that the department is looking forward to organizing a future lecture that presents other view points than those that are offered here today and in subsequent talks.”

This message prompted a petition with nearly a thousand signers about how terrible it is for a college to say that they would make alternate points of view available.

This may be the most antisemitic thing I have ever seen in a US university lecture hall.

(h/t Andrew P)

UPDATE: Here's Azoulay's editing of the classic photo of Ben Gurion declaring the State of Israel, along with the original.

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.