Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, November 13, 2016

Abbas claims that the Torah supports Palestinian history

I wrote about how PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas bragged in his speech honoring arch-terrorist Yasir Arafat that the PLO has made no concessions since 1988, including the entire time he has led the group.

Mahmoud Abbas said some other outrageous things in his speech that have been ignored by the media.

Here's one of them:

By the way, it is written in the Divine Books and in the Torah that we [Palestinians] have been here in the land ever since even before our Master Ibrahim (i.e. Abraham), our presence has not been interrupted. We are not the [only] ones saying this, the Torah and history are saying this. We were not taken to some [other] country and we were not absent [from this land]; we stayed here all the time, and we are still here and we will remain here, and we will never leave our land. We will stay steadfast and patient until we will obtain for our people its independence.

Abbas and other Palestinian leaders have previously made the claim that they were descendants of Canaanites.

Or Jebusites.

Or Philistines.

Never mind that they all contradict one another. All of them are lies anyway.

Palestinians are Arabs - they say so explicitly in all their official documents from the 1964 PLO Covenant to the 2003 "Constitution" - and the Arabs some from, surprise, the Arabian peninsula. The Arab tribes overran the Levant around the time of the spread of Islam.

Beyond that, as far as I can tell, every single prominent Palestinian family traces their origins to outside the land.

Even more outrageous, Abbas is saying that the Jews, by being forcibly exiled from the land for some brief periods, have no historic claim on their historic homeland. (He won't say the word "Jews" explicitly, because by admitting that Jews are a people, he would open up a can of worms.)

By pretending to use the Torah as a basis for Palestinian claims, Abbas is trying to use the very document that proves Jewish historic rights to the land against Jews.

It is not only disrespectful - it is fundamentally antisemitic.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

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.

Masked terrorist supporters - at university - celebrate Arafat's death anniversary

These scenes were at Bir Zeit University on Saturday to mark the anniversary of Yasir Arafat's death.

So moderate! So liberal! So peaceful!

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.

11/12 Links: Glick: Israel in the Trump era; 500 Jewish mothers bake challah for IDF soldiers

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Israel in the Trump era

As I explained in my book The Israeli Solution – A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, there was a dismaying consistency in US policy toward Israel that ran from Bill Clinton’s administration through the George W. Bush administration and on to the Obama administration. At least since the Clinton years, the received wisdom of the American foreign policy elite has been that the US must seek to swiftly cause Israel to sign a deal with the PLO. The contours of the deal are similarly clear to all concerned. Israel must surrender control over all or most of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and transfer the areas, more or less Jew-free, to the PLO.
This bipartisan view is inherently hostile to Israel. It places all the responsibility for making peace on Israel. And as the sole responsible party, Israel is also the sole party that is guilty for the absence of peace. The flipside is similarly dismal. Palestinians are absolved of responsibility for terrorism, hatred and political warfare against Israel.
The anti-Israel hostility inherent in the two-state paradigm has brought on a situation where even pro-Israel US officials end up joining their anti-Israel colleagues in bearing down on Israel to act in ways that are inimical to both its national security and to the very concept of a US-Israel alliance. The foreign policy ruling class’s commitment to the two-state paradigm has blinded its members to Israel’s strategic importance to the US and caused them to see the US’s only stable ally in the region as a drag on US interests.
Many of Trump’s advisers, including Gingrich, who has been raised as a leading candidate to serve as either Trump’s White House chief of staff or as secretary of state, have rejected this received wisdom. In a Republican presidential debate in 2011, Gingrich referred to the Palestinians as an “invented people,” and noted that they indoctrinate their children to perceive Jews as subhuman and seek their annihilation. For his statement of fact, Gingrich was brutally assaulted by Democratic and Republican elites.
But he never rescinded his statement.
Trump’s election provides Israel with the first opportunity in 50 years to reshape its alliance with the US. This new alliance must be based on a common understanding and respect for what Israel has to offer the US as well as on the limits of what the US can offer Israel. The limits of US assistance are in large part the consequences of the many genies that Obama unleashed during the past eight years. And the opportunities will come more in areas related to Israel’s relations with the Palestinians and the political war being waged against it by the Europeans and the international Left than to the challenges posed by the ascendance of Islamism in the Middle East.
To be sure, Trump is inconsistent. But from what we do know we must recognize that his rise marks a deflection point in US history.
It is a rare moment where things that were unimaginable a month ago are possible. And if we play our cards right, like the American people, Israel stands to gain in ways we never dreamed of.

Trump and Netanyahu — a match made in heaven?

Would Netanyahu have preferred Clinton over Trump? We might never know.
But already, Israeli politicians to Netanyahu’s right, such as Naftali Bennett, are seizing on the Republican platform’s omission of a two-state solution — essentially trying to push Netanyahu into formally abandoning the idea, and preparing to undermine him from the right if he doesn’t. He can expect more pressure from the right, too, to expand settlements — once Trump is in the White House and such building may not be criticized as it routinely was under Obama. Netanyahu is wary about Palestinian statehood, and is a supporter of the settlement enterprise, of course, but he benefited, in the complex dance of domestic politics and regional diplomacy, from being able to find a middle path between the pro-peace-talks, anti-settlement US administration and the opposite stance of the political hawks at home. A president Clinton would have enabled him to chart a similar course, albeit with slightly greater empathy from Washington. A president Trump will likely give Netanyahu a freer hand — which, however paradoxically, might make life more complicated for him.
On Wednesday, the president-elect and the prime minister spoke on the phone for about 15 minutes. They exchanged pleasantries and discussed “regional issues,” according to Netanyahu’s office. Trump also invited Netanyahu to the White House “at the first opportunity.” Netanyahu gladly accepted.
Pretty soon, then, we might find out more of what Trump plans for the Middle East — if anything. We’ll also see how well the two men get along. And Netanyahu will have a better idea of whether president Trump is as “easy to work with” as Hillary Clinton would have been.

Trump's Israeli friend (and donor)

Donald Trump's Jewish connections extend beyond his converted daughter Ivanka. Businessman Yaakov Shaham is one of the few Israelis who can call themselves a friend of the American president-elect.
Shaham and his wife Helena own the Palace Group, a chain of prestigious senior living communities in Miami.
"The Donald Trump that I know is completely different from the Trump that yells at rallies and inflames the crowds," said Shaham. "Privately, Trump is much quieter, much more sensible, and also a very smart man with a great sense of humor. The man's a pal. He pats on the back. He'll take a picture with you, will talk with you eye-to-eye. He's just a completely different man behind closed doors."
He recounted, "I met Trump for the first time four years ago in Palm Beach at the golf course there. We chatted for a bit, had lunch, and that was it. Half a year before he decided to run in the election, when he finished renovated his resort in Doral in the Miami area, he invited me to play golf with him, and we played together for three hours. I was really impressed. He's a very positive man. From then, our relationship began to grow. We kept meeting every fortnight at the resort." (h/t Elder of Lobby)

11/11 Links Pt2: Vote for the Dishonest Reporter of 2016; Leonard Cohen Dies at 82

From Ian:

Celebrating One Hundred Years of the Balfour Declaration

John Howell is MP for Henley and Vice-Chairman of Conservative Friends of Israel.
Today marks the start of the year-long celebrations of the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, when the UK and Israel will unite to commemorate one of the most defining moments in our shared history.
Over the past century the world has witnessed a country rise out of the desert and flourish, against all odds, to become the ‘Start-Up Nation’ – a world leader in technological innovation, cyber security, academia, and medicine.
The Balfour Declaration was instrumental in the creation of the State of Israel, adding the official British voice to the chorus that wanted to give “a land without a people to a people without a land”.
The document served, in effect, as a legal birth certificate, in the form of a letter from Conservative Foreign Secretary Arthur J Balfour to Lord Rothschild dated 2nd November 1917. It conveyed Lord Balfour’s support of His Majesty’s Government for Zionist aspirations for Jewish self-determination in Israel, the land of the Hebrew Old Testament, following centuries of persecution.
Lord Balfour wrote, “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.

Daniel Pipes: America’s know-nothing diplomacy

Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for president, recently said something astonishing in defense of his foreign policy ignorance: “The fact that somebody can dot the i’s and cross the t’s on a foreign leader or a geographic location then allows them to put our military in harm’s way.” In other words, not knowing where a place is a good thing because, in Alice Ollstein’s witty summary, “You can’t get into a war with a country you can’t find.”
As a student of U.S. foreign policy this struck a chord — not because it’s an outlandishly whacky statement but precisely because it is mainstream. Really. Here are three notable precedents from the last century:
In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson dispatched the International Commission of Inquiry (commonly known as the King-Crane Commission) to Palestine and Syria to ascertain the political wishes of their residents. The leaders of this potentially influential commission monumentally lacked qualifications for the undertaking. Henry C. King was a philosopher and president of Oberlin College; Charles R. Crane was a busybody, anti-Semite, and heir to the fortune from his family’s plumbing fixture company. Strikingly, their ignorance was seen as an advantage; a presidential aide explained that Wilson “felt these two men were particularly qualified to go to Syria because they knew nothing about it.”
Secretary of State Robert Lansing, who thought Wilson wrong on this, explained that the president did not want to appoint “persons who are familiar with the subject” of political and territorial questions. Instead, Wilson thought that “an empty mind is more receptive of the truth than one affected by experience and study.” Indeed, ignorance is an “essential qualification for an investigator.”
The King-Crane Commission report, not surprisingly, was (in the words of the historian Elie Kedourie) “as ill-informed as its influence on policy was negligible.”
In 2003, the Bush administration announced John S. Wolf as the new U.S. presidential Middle East envoy (more formally, “chief, U.S. Coordinating and Monitoring Mission for the Middle East peace process”). The Washington Post (in an admiring article titled “For Mideast Envoy, Rookie Status May Be an Advantage”) quoted a senior administration official saying that “It’s a good thing that he has exceptional negotiating skills and very little direct experience in the area.”

Honest Reporting: Vote for the Dishonest Reporter of 2016

Now’s the time to vote for the Dishonest Reporter of 2016. It’s our annual recognition of the year’s most skewed and biased coverage of Israel and the Mideast conflict. Make your voice heard and we’ll announce the ignoble winners by the end of the year.
Vote for one reporter or news service, along with a brief reason for your choice. This year’s nominees — in no particular order — are:
1. Luke Baker: The Reuters Jerusalem bureau chief and (then) head of the Foreign Press Association told a Knesset panel discussing news bias that media watchdogs like HonestReporting make government oversight unnecessary. Within days, Baker baselessly attacked HR.
2. Leila Hatoum: An editor at Newsweek Middle East, whose anti-Semitic tweets demonstrate that she’s not fit for her position.
3. Headline writers: Throughout the year, headline fails repeatedly twisted the stories of Palestinian stabbings, shootings, and car-ramming attacks.
4. AFP: For maliciously using World Press Freedom Day and International Women’s Day to bash Israel.
5. The Independent: While we secured plenty of corrections from The Independent, the sheer volume of negative stories demonstrated a near-obsession by the editors. One especially nasty story never amended spun a survey to claim “Nearly half of Israeli Jews believe in ethnic cleansing.”

Palestinian T-Shirts make Trump a Chasid, Obama an Arab

Seen here, apparently at an anti-Israel souvenir souk in Jerusalem:

It appears that these were created before the election.

But there is some truth to this: the election was between Trump and Obama, not Trump and Clinton.

While we don't know what Trump's position on Israel will really be, the T-shirt maker has a clear vision how the Arab world views Obama and Trump.

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.

11/11 Links Pt1: Trump’s Election Upsets the Palestinian Authority’s Diplomatic Campaign Against Israel

From Ian:

PMW: PA TV: Israel murdered Arafat, now targeting Abbas - "the plot is renewed"

Today, November 11, is the anniversary of former Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's death and on this occasion the PA traditionally repeats its libel that Israel murdered Arafat with poison.
This year is no exception. In a new video, which PA TV has been broadcasting several times daily the last few days, Israel "and its allies" are accused of committing "the murder with poison". In addition, PA TV suggests that Israel is plotting to murder PA Chairman Abbas as well, stating that "the plot is renewed":
Earlier this week, Palestinian Media Watch reported on similar Palestinian claims that Israel is planning to "eliminate Abbas politically and physically."
A young girl earlier this year repeated her belief that Israel played a role in Arafat's death, stating that "the Jews killed him":

JCPA: Trump’s Election Upsets the Palestinian Authority’s Diplomatic Campaign Against Israel

One of the biggest losers from the U.S presidential election of Donald Trump is the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority depended on the election of Hillary Clinton so that they could unleash a diplomatic blitz against Israel in the halls of the United Nations. “Civil society” organizations were specifically designed for the task of expelling the State of Israel from the United Nations and replacing it with Palestine. The brazen demand that Israel “return” the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Palestinians is part of the Palestinian strategy to erase Israel and inherit its Jewish heritage, much in the same vein as the PA scheme of pushing a “Palestinian Jesus.”
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki, the architect of the diplomatic blitz against Israel, was the first to comment on the meaning of Trump’s election. In the first Palestinian public remark on the election, Malki said that he “was concerned” because Trump represented an absolute supporter of Israel. With Trump’s election, he warned, global stability is threatened.
One of the aspects of the French Middle East peace initiative that worried Israel was the intention that NGOs (non-governmental organizations) would play a leading role in that international conference. These organizations, based in Ramallah, lead the campaign of hatred against Israel. Riyad al-Malki and Mustafa Barghouti, the heroes of the anti-Israel Durban Conference, stand out as clear leaders of these organizations, and from them, the BDS movement sprang.

Iran's Threats Louder after Obama Appeasement

Chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" were heard across Iranian cities as thousands of Iranians marked the anniversary of the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the taking of 52 American hostages for 444 days by militant students.
The State Department's reaction is classic: ignoring these developments and continuing with appeasement policies.
These anti-American demonstrations are not rhetoric, but are the cornerstone of Iran's revolutionary principles and foreign policies, which manifest themselves in Iran's support for terrorist proxies, support for Assad's regime, and the scuttling of US and Israeli foreign policies in the region.
Many other Iranian officials who were engaged in attacks against the US currently serve in high positions. Hossein Salami, who enjoys one of these high-level positions, is the deputy commander in chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. He stated at the rally: "America should know that if they do not honor their agreement in the nuclear deal, we will resume uranium enrichment..."

Nearly 1/4 of all West Bank Arab worker income is from Israel

The latest Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics labor report is out.

While joblessness increased across the board, there are still nearly 112,000 Arabs working in Israel or Israeli settlements, about 13% of the workforce.

But Arab workers in Israel get more than double the income of those in the West Bank, 222 shekels a day compared to 97. They also work fewer hours every week.

This means that nearly a quarter of the total income of West Bank Arabs comes from Israelis.

Imagine what would happen to this already teetering economy if they would follow BDS advice and boycott Israel - or even if they would follow Peter Beinart's and other "progressive" Jewish advice and boycott only the Jews who live in Judea and Samaria.

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.

First page of official PA 7th grade reading textbook that incites kids to hate. UNRWA schools use it.

The Jerusalem Post reported this week:

Over 200 US-government approved textbooks used in hundreds of Palestinian UNRWA-sponsored schools are reportedly teaching Arab children between the first and ninth grades to kill Israelis, and sacrifice themselves as martyrs to drive Jews out of the country.
The violent narrative can be found in 240 books – ranging from civics to mathematics – in over 400 UNRWA schools in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, said experts at a Tuesday conference for the Center for Near East Policy Research in downtown Jerusalem.
David Bedein, who heads the research institute and Israel Resource News Agency, said the disputed books were purchased from a warehouse owned by the Palestinian Authority and then carefully vetted by a team of researchers.

Of course, UNRWA denies this.

I asked Bedein if he could send me examples, because I like to check things out for myself.

They check out.

UNRWA already admits that it uses the PA curriculum, as it uses the curricula of the host countries in every area it operates.

The specific textbooks that the Center for Near East Policy Research looked at are indeed part of the current curriculum - because all of those textbooks (from first through eight grades) are online. And I verified for the worst examples that I saw were in the books being used, today, that can be downloaded online.

Finally, I verified the translations done by Dr. Arnon Groiss with my Arabic expert "Ibn Boutros."

So what is UNRWA teaching its schoolkids, today?

Here is part of a poem called We Are Returning:

We Are Returning

Returning, returning, we are returning

Borders shall not exist, nor citadels and fortresses

Cry out, O those who have left:

We are returning

Returning to the homes, to the valleys, to the mountains

Under the flag of glory, Jihad and struggle

With blood, sacrifice, fraternity and loyalty

We are returning

Returning, O hills; returning, O heights

Returning to childhood; returning to youth

To Jihad in the hills, [to] harvest in the land

It came from a fifth grade textbook called Our Beautiful Language, Part 1 (2015) p. 50.

I took a screenshot of the entire page. The book is online here.

Here are excerpts from a poem called The Martyr in a seventh grade textbook:

Hearing [weapons'] clash is pleasant to my ear

And the flow of blood gladdens my soul

As well as a body thrown upon the ground

Skirmished over by the desert predators

…

By your life! This is the death of men

And whoever asks for a noble death – this is it!"

I found the book it was from as well; here's the entire page:

From the book "Reading and Texts," grade 8, part 1, there is a poem called "Palestine" that starts off with "O brother, the oppressors have exceeded all bounds and Jihad and sacrifice are necessary…"

The documentation I was sent said it was on page 44, but in fact it is on page 66:

What is most outrageous is that the US government supposedly researched these issues in 2013 and concluded that nothing was wrong in the textbooks, a position they reiterated this year.

Here is absolute proof that the PA and UNRWA are teaching hate.

The State Department needs to explain itself, and the US must stop funding this hate immediately.

(h/t Josh K)

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.

Mahmoud Abbas released a statement on the anniversary of Yasir Arafat's death.

He said that the Palestinian investigation into the cause of his death, twelve year later, were going to be released "soon."

But besides that, Abbas repeated something he has said many times before, something that demolishes his reputation in the West as being a "moderate" and a peacemaker.

In this passage, he speaks about the unchanging positions and principles of the PLO. The main word is translated as "constants" or "invariables" (الثوابت) indicating that the word is stronger than just principles, so I have kept that wording:

The PLO achieved recognition as the sole and legitimate representative of Palestinian people and kept the unchanging positions ("constants"), and declared Palestinian independence in 1988 in Algeria, and we went back with him [Arafat] to establish a Palestinian national authority, on our land, Palestine .

Many people are talking about constants. Where are the constants?, They are the constants that were declared at the Palestinian National Council in Algiers. And some people speak without knowledge, ...and I say here, I challenge [them to show] that we gave away one constant since 1988. We come back to the constants adopted by the famous National Council, which was attended by 700 members, which represent the entire spectrum of the Palestinian people, and have taken these decisions, and we are sticking to these constants by our teeth and say: We are sticking by them and continue to hold firm in order to achieve them.

Abbas is bragging once again that no concessions have been made by the PLO since before Oslo, let alone during his entire term as Arafat's successor.

None.

During that time period, Israel has has allowed terrorist leaders to move into the territories, it has given up land, it has accepted a two state solution.

And the Palestinians have done literally nothing for peace since 1988 - according to their own leader.

Notably, that part of his speech (and other inflammatory parts that I will write about) were not translated into English by the official Wafa news agency report of the speech.

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 media bias: IBTimes calls Temple Mount a "Muslim mosque"

The headline:

The reporter calls the entire Temple Mount a "Muslim Mosque." Muslims actually claim this, but that doesn't make it true. And no Jew is interested in praying inside the Al Aqsa Mosque or the other mosques on the site.

The headline is also wrong in saying that "Israel" wants Jews to pray at the holy site. If Israel wanted it, it would have already happened. A few Knesset members brought up the idea.

Moreover, the article does not say once that the Temple Mount is holy for Jews (let alone Christians,) let alone the holiest site for Jews. It only says that it is holy for Muslims.

Some Israeli lawmakers want to allow Jews to pray at an Islamic holy site in Jerusalem, a contentious proposal that is opposed by Middle Eastern leaders and could stroke tensions between Jews and Muslims in the Israel.

All this adds up to an article that has more bias than facts.

The incompetent reporter doesn't even know that the expression is "stoke tensions," not 'stroke tensions."

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.

11/10 Links Pt2: Apologise for the Balfour Declaration? You are having a laugh; Dutch anti-Israel group holding Kristallnacht event in synagogue

From Ian:

David Collier: Apologise for the Balfour Declaration? You are having a laugh

One of the ‘apologise for Balfour’ campaigns was launched by the Palestine Return Centre in the House of Lords. It was to give a platform to vile comments and would lead to the suspension and resignation of Baroness Jenny Tonge.
Another of these campaigns, ‘the Balfour Project’ held an event at Southwark Cathedral last weekend. This itself part of a worrying trend of anti-Israel events recently held in Christian places of worship in the UK. Reports from that event suggest the campaign is “yet another vehicle for the vilification of Israel.”
Israel exists. The Jewish home was eventually created (albeit in a circular route), and is without much argument, the most liberal nation in the entire region. So just what should the UK Government apologise for?
There has been endless commentary on anti-Zionist outlets. I have analysed several of the pieces on the Balfour apology. They all centre around several key points.

To use Balfour to establish Israel as a settler colonial enterprise.

To use the Balfour Declaration to suggest contradiction between Zionism and democracy.

To demonise Israel by suggesting Israel exists because of the support of global ‘unsavoury’ elements.

To suggest it was the antisemites of the UK, rather than the Jews, who sought to support Zionism.

A recent article by Ben White is a perfect example of this. White pushes all these elements in his argument. Ben White is a prolific writer and one of the leading lights of the Boycott Israel campaign (BDS) in the UK. Another example is a recent article penned by Robert Cohen, one of the speakers at the Balfour Project conference.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement Didn’t Create the Borders of the Modern Middle East—and Redrawn Borders Won’t Fix Its Problems

A common refrain of Western commentators writing about the Middle East is that its problems stem in part from the supposedly artificial borders drawn up by Mark Sykes and François Georges-Picot in the 1916 agreement that bears their names. However, David Siddhartha Patel explains, not only was the agreement never implemented, but the order that existed prior to 1914 was neither wholly imposed from without nor wholly artificial:
Europeans did not draw borders willy-nilly, without regard to local factors. Local actors and historical precedents played important roles in determining not only what borders were drawn but even which proposed states survived and which did not. The Sykes-Picot agreement, for example, awarded much of south-central Turkey . . . to the French zone of direct influence; these and later efforts to carve up Anatolia were stymied by [the Turkish ruler] Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Local actors and politics [also] heavily influenced the specific location of the Iraq-Syria border. . . .
Local precedents for seemingly “artificial” states also mattered more than analysts often recognize. For example, scholars have demonstrated the extent to which the modern state of Iraq had Ottoman administrative roots.

Balfour Declaration resources at your fingertips

As has already been demonstrated the centenary year of the Balfour Declaration, which commenced last week, is set to be the focus of anti-Israel activity by various parties and that – together with events marking the centenary itself – will no doubt be accompanied by media coverage.PA Balfour Decl art
We have already reviewed the BBC’s portrayal of the Balfour Declaration and noted the corporation’s promotion of the notion that the Balfour Declaration conflicted with earlier pledges given by the British government in the Hussein-McMahon correspondence.
In order to help readers locate material relating to those topics easily, we have added a section to the menu bar above titled ‘Library‘ (top right) where relevant links and documents can be found and we will be adding additional resources such as those below to the page.
In his book titled ‘The Balfour Declaration’ published in 1961, Leonard Stein wrote the following in relation to the Hussein-McMahon correspondence.

EoZTV: Manfred Gerstenfeld interview part 2: European antisemitism

From my interview in July.

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

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

It’s Wednesday morning, and the American presidential election has just been decided. Honestly, I didn’t expect this result. I didn’t underestimate Trump’s appeal, but I failed to realize just how much the voters disliked Clinton. Of course working-class people overwhelmingly chose Trump, but I think many others – Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans – who would have voted for Hillary couldn’t stomach the tawdry revelations of influence-peddling by the Clintons. “If it’s between a shithead and a Secretary of State who sold out her country, I’ll take the shithead,” said a friend.

So much for my very unprofessional analysis – the professionals will be dissecting this election into the future, as they did with the Brexit vote, and Menachem Begin’s 1977 upset victory in Israel (not to compare Trump with Begin)!

This election will be of great importance to Americans in countless ways. But what does it mean for Israel?

The only real answer is “who knows?” Trump is not famous for consistency, and he will be learning the rules and the players as he goes. But a position paper on US-Israel relations released last week by his “Israel Advisory Committee” was remarkably positive. Among other things, it makes clear that Trump would not support any efforts to impose a solution on Israel and the Palestinians via the UN; it calls for “defensible borders” and rejects pressuring Israel to “withdraw to borders that make attacks and conflict more likely;” and it states that

The U.S. will recognize Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the Jewish state and Mr. Trump’s Administration will move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.

Yes, they all say that. But maybe he is the first to mean it. The document is not signed by Trump and it isn’t clear if its authors will have positions in his administration. But it is certain that his intentions will be tested quickly.

One litmus test will be whether he will stand up against the State Department’s irrational and anti-Jewish position that no part of Jerusalem belongs to Israel, move the embassy, and issue an order that State shall recognize (at the very least) western Jerusalem as an integral part of Israel. If the embassy move does not begin within the first 100 days of his administration, it will signal that we should not expect much from Trump on other matters.

Now would be the time to take this step, when the conservative Sunni Arab states are minimally hostile to Israel and when plentiful oil has made their economic influence in the US ebb. Trump would be missing an opportunity to improve relations with Israel and congressional conservatives if he does not take advantage of this.

Regarding Iran, the document calls for the US to “counteract Iran’s ongoing violations” of the nuclear deal with new sanctions, but does not – as Trump has said he would – repudiate it. The Obama Administration appeases Iran time after time because the unsigned ‘deal’ is its baby, and would be embarrassed if the Iranians publically denounced it. But it isn’t part of Trump’s legacy. He owes the Iranian regime nothing.

The Obama Administration, since its inception, has fed friendly media with suggestions that Israel and in particular the Netanyahu government, is responsible for the continuation of the conflict with the Palestinians. It adopted the phony “pro-Israel” J Street organization as a favored voice among Jewish organizations, inviting it to the White House while spurning groups like the Zionist Organization of America. If the document is even partially representative of Trump’s thinking, the anti-Israel psychological warfare campaign will lose its impetus. Had Clinton been elected, it is unlikely that any of the above would have changed.

Either Barack Obama personally hates Bibi Netanyahu, or he found it useful to pretend antipathy in order to achieve his goals. Either way, his disrespect and even contempt for Israel’s Prime Minister – which he expressed on numerous occasions – damaged relations between our nations and reflected badly on the American presidency itself. Trump has no reason to behave this way.

Americans concerned about the lack of recognition of the jihad, both military and psychological-political, being waged against the West and its values by radical Islam have been boiled like the proverbial frog in the pot for eight years. Regardless of his precise positions on the relationship between America and the Islamic world, Trump’s rejection of political correctness and limitations on speech will be a breath of fresh air for discourse about the Middle East. After two terms of Obama-speak, one has to look forward to Trump’s more direct language.

It is generally thought that Barack Obama will take some kind of action in the lame duck period which begins today to bring about an Israeli withdrawal from the territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Trump’s victory doesn’t make this impossible, but it may be that Obama will be less likely to do something that clearly goes against the spirit of the wishes of the American people. Trump may be able to embarrass him by publicly asking him to refrain. If Obama does go ahead, it will be proof positive of his bias and hostility – just like another former president, Jimmy Carter.

As with any president – in fact, even more so because of his relative inexperience and (one must admit) ignorance of foreign affairs, a great deal will depend on Trump’s choice of confidants and advisors. And I expect that he will become more serious and careful as the mantle of responsibility settles on his shoulders.

This election campaign was viciously fought, certainly more so than any other in my lifetime. I don’t recall an election in which candidates were accused of murder and rape! Trump’s success as President or lack thereof will be felt throughout the world, and especially here in Israel. And that will depend on both sides understanding that the campaign is over, and that from here on it’s necessary and appropriate for them to work together for everyone’s good. Trump made a good start in his victory speech. Now it’s up to his opponents.

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.

11/10 Links Pt1: Trump, Israel and the Middle East; Hundreds protest, burn Israeli flag at UN climate talks

From Ian:

Mordechai Kedar: Trump, Israel and the Middle East

Trump's attitude towards US Jewry is complex. On the one hand, he is surrounded by Jews - his daughter Ivanka underwent an Orthodox conversion, his son-in-law is Jewish, and he is also surrounded by Jewish advisers, some of whom wear kippahs without giving it a second thought. On the other hand, the Republican party has some voters who speak about Jews as worthy candidates for genocide.
In all fairness, it must be noted that the Democratic party has no shortage of anti-Semites. The last DNC included PLO flags waving outside the convention hall, and former president Jimmy Carter, one of the party's respected figures, published a book whose title calls Israel an apartheid state - implying that it is worthy of disappearing just as South Africa's apartheid regime did.
I am concerned about America's reaction to the fact that Trump is surrounded by Jews, because even if they play no part in the formation of his policies, there will be those who will accuse them of pro-Israel bias and of influencing Trump's policies in that direction. We have already seen people accusing the Jewish Lobby, during the days of George W. Bush, of running US foreign policy and of instigating the Iraq War (2003). There are even two academics who published a book about it. Trump's time in the White House may unleash the same anti-Jewish genies from the bottle.
And one last point: There are approximately two months until Trump enters the White House, on the afternoon of January 20, 2017. President Obama has full presidential authority up to that date and can make decisions that create a problematic reality for Israel and Trump, such as a UN Security Council decision recognizing a Palestinian State whose capital is Jerusalem. I suspect that there are those, such as J Street, who will respond to Trumps' victory by trying their utmost to get Obama to recognize a Palestinian State whose capital is Jerusalem while he still can. Israel will need all its diplomatic skills and all its real friends in the USA and the world to prevent this from happening.
My blessings and best wishes to Donald J. Trump from here for a successful presidency. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

Pro-Israel Groups to Erect Gigantic Pinocchio Near UN to Protest Jerusalem Resolutions

Pro-Israel groups will erect a giant Pinocchio effigy across from the United Nations headquarters in New York City in protest of the recent resolutions passed by its cultural body, UNESCO, which deny Jewish and Christian connections to Jerusalem.
The Pinocchio display will be put up in Dag Hammarskjold Plaza across from the UN following a “We Stand Together” rally at New York City’s Israeli Consulate Thursday afternoon. The rally is organized by AMCHA-Coalition for Jewish Concerns and co-sponsored by StandWithUs New York and other groups.
Roz Rothstein, CEO of StandWithUs, said UNESCO through its resolutions not only negates 3,000 years of Jewish roots in Jerusalem, but also “deprecates and belittles” Judaism.
“These are lies that betray UNESCO’s own mandate to ‘contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture.’ Instead of contributing to peace by building bridges between Israel and its Arab neighbors, UNESCO has become a vehicle for fomenting conflict and strife,” Rothstein said.

Dore Gold: Middle East Looks to America for Leadership

The countries of the Middle East are looking for America to be an ally. They are looking for America to lead the peoples of the Middle East. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency in certain parts of Washington in recent years to try and see how to fix America’s relations with its adversaries – with Syria’s Assad in the Levant, with the Iranians and with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and with other radical groups across the Middle East. This leaves America’s allies, like the famous situation with President Mubarak of Egypt, in the lurch.
There is a hope that is common to Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with Egypt under President Sisi, with Saudi Arabia under King Salman, and with the United Arab Emirates under Mohammed bin Zayed. All of these leaders are hoping for a United States that will lead them against the twin radical threats of ISIS and Iranian imperialism.

Douglas Murray: Donald Trump won’t be as bad as you think

For 18 months, Donald Trump was amazingly useful to British politicians. Whatever their party, he provided them with the most magnificent means with which to polish their liberal credentials. In January, when the British Parliament spent three hours debating a public petition to ban Trump from entering the country, we learned from Labour’s Rupa Huq that he was ‘racist, homophobic, misogynist’, from the Conservative Marcus Fysh that he was ‘the orange prince of American self-publicity’ and from the SNP’s Gavin Newlands that he was not only ‘racist, sexist and bigoted’, but ‘an idiot’.
So perhaps now that the giggling has subsided, we can get down to a more realistic assessment of the man and his views. Some unsavoury personal moments aside, the accusation that Trump was a misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic racist simply constituted the liberal press’s best effort at holing his campaign below the waterline. In reality, Trump is a man who holds liberal New York opinions and would be unable to set about ‘rolling back’ liberal rights even if he wanted to.
The other accusations against him have been equally cynical. For months there has been a hysterical insistence, by everyone from Democrat peaceniks to Cold War nostalgists, that a Trump presidency would fundamentally undermine and even end Nato — the centrepiece of the UK’s defence capability. The basis for this claim lies solely in Trump’s complaint during his campaign that America should not be bailing out its Nato allies if they are not willing to pay a fair share for their own defence. Though it was expressed more forcefully than is usually the case, there was nothing so surprising about this. For decades, US presidents have implored their European partners to fulfil the minimal 2 per cent spending requirements that membership of Nato should require. There is nothing immoral or unstrategic about asking European powers to demonstrate a commitment to their own security. Rather than ‘weakening’ Nato, such a stance is likely to underpin and strengthen it.
Then there are the fears about American trade protectionism. But these would have pertained whoever won the White House. Pulled to the left by the Bernie Sanders insurgency within her own party, President Hillary Clinton would have been at least as protectionist as Trump will prove to be.

An April article in El Saba has started popping up on other Arab sites about Jews who continue to live secretly in Egypt, pretending to be Christians.

The article was prompted by the story of Dina Ovadia, the IDF soldier who grew up in Alexandria without knowing that she was Jewish. After some fundamentalist Muslims attacked them, her family escaped.

El Saba looked for other secret Jews in Alexandria, and it found some.

Dr. Majid, a professor at a university in the city, says of his family growing up, "I remember when we were practicing religious rituals in silence, fearing that others will know that we are Jews, in the late forties, and in the beginning of Nasser's rule, worried that we would be considered traitors to the homeland... the media and politicians took part in it."

Majid's grandfather went to a Catholic church and asked to change his religion for fear of attack on his house and store, and since then they worship in secret for fear of ostracism and persecution.

His mother created a miniature model synagogue in the family home as a place for her husband to worship.

He told his children that they are Jewish but that they are free to believe what they want.

His 80-year old mother says that most of their relatives fled in 1948, but her father who was a gold dealer in Upper Luxor went to Alexandria, where they were not known as Jews, and set up his business there. She says that many fellow gold dealers in Alexandria were secret Jews as well.

George Sweilem works as an accountant for a political party, also said that he is officially a Christian but his family is really Jewish. He claims that there are hundreds of Jews pretending to be Muslims and Christians to avoid repercussions, although he claims that most of them are anti-Israel and love their homeland of Egypt.

Nawal Darwish, a human rights researcher, is a Muslim of Jewish descent. She said she is not surprised there are some Jews who were hiding as Muslims or Christians, saying that it started in the 1940s and during the Nasser era out of fear for their families, and some of those families still take the same approach to protect themselves today.

The newspaper then interviewed Egyptian and Islamic officials who claim that there is no discrimination against Jews and that no Jews were persecuted or expelled because of their religion.

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.