I now work in an area where, for whatever reason, there are TVs all over the place, with the volume down and closed-captioning on, and nearly all of them tuned to CNN.
So for the past several weeks I've been treated to seeing CNN all day.
I never realized how bad this network was.
Every day, the producers decide to take one story and beat it to the ground. For what seems like 20 minutes out of each half hour, the different hosts all tackle the same story with the same blaring headline on the screen underneath the talking heads discussing it.
On Tuesday the story was all about how Donald Trump's transition team is in disarray.
To me, a mere blogger, the obvious thing to do with a story like this would be to compare this transition with those of previous presidents of different parties than the previous administration. I didn't spend too much time researching this myself, because it isn't really the topic of this blog, but I did see that George W. Bush didn't get to start his transition in earnest until early December because it wasn't clear that he won the election. It seems that this is a salient fact when people are saying how far Trump is behind on this crucial task.
But I didn't see anyone in the hours of coverage even considering to look at previous handovers of power.
On Wednesday, the obsession was over the fact that Trump went out to dinner with his family without having the press tag along.
The coverage was similar to this NBC news headline:
The talking heads who were incensed about the idea of a president-elect having dinner with his family without them invoked "democracy" as the rationale for their "right" to follow him.
Apparently, there is a tradition that the "protective press pool" follows the President everywhere so they can record what he does in case he gets shot or says something stupid. But it is merely a tradition - it isn't law and it isn't a matter of "security" as Rachel Maddow said. The media went berzerk over what they regarded as a huge insult.
It is not a headline story, but CNN made it into their main story for several hours.
It was followed by some rumors that Jared Kushner is firing the most competent potential advisors to Trump, with more talking heads discussing how much of a mess the transition supposedly is.
I don't know if it is or it isn't a mess, but I do know this: neither does CNN.
I'm not a fan of Donald Trump. I'm quite concerned about who he is choosing to be in his cabinet and who he is choosing to advise him. But CNN, and the media in general, are not reporting on this important story responsibly. They float rumors as facts and uninformed opinion as serious analysis. In fact, their blatantly anti-Trump coverage (with the token talking head who supports him among the screaming headlines) makes me more sympathetic towards Trump wanting to go out with his family to dinner before he moves into the White House fishbowl.
I was already familiar with how superficial and meme-driven CNN's coverage of Israel is. But it is clear that it isn't only Israel - this superficiality is part and parcel of CNN itself.
This is not journalism. This is gossip disguised as news. CNN is no more responsible as a media outlet than Access Hollywood is.
There are real stories out there. There are a few real journalists out there. And right now, important things are happening. But so long as the CNNs of the world care more about ratings than about news, we'll hardly ever see any real news behind the bright spotlights of the Gossip News Network.
(Yes, I'm sure I would be just as critical of Fox News and MSNBC if I was subjected to them all day as well.)
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Israel’s supporters were hoping Hillary Clinton could forestall the Democratic Party’s seemingly inevitable turn against the Jewish state. Clinton’s loss last week means we’re officially après Hillary — and must prepare for the flood.
This could be the last US presidential election that Israelis don’t have to watch with existential dread. At least, the first signs of a post-Clinton Democratic Party aren’t good. Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, a fiery critic of Israel, is the front-runner to be the next Democratic National Committee chairman.
As Scott Johnson detailed in The Weekly Standard when Ellison was on the verge of winning his House seat in 2006, before his congressional career Ellison had worked with Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam and even defended Farrakhan against accusations of anti-Semitism.
Ellison has left Farrakhan far behind, but his Israel criticism remains scathing. As the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported, Ellison “has organized letters urging pressure on Israel, and was an advocate of drawing lessons from the UN Goldstone Report following the 2009 Gaza War.” Even Richard Goldstone, the author of the infamously anti-Israel report, wound up essentially disowning it.
The defense of Ellison by supporters is that the Louis Farrakan stuff was long ago, that he’s changed. And indeed, from much of what I’ve read about Ellison, he tries to play some of his activism when it comes to Israel to the left of center but not to the extreme.
Yet those words of reasonableness are called into question by his association with anti-Israel groups. U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation The U.S. Campaign to end the Israeli Occupation, recently rebranded as the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, is one of the most active BDS groups. As we have covered many times, the U.S. Campaign is active on campuses and in churches urging the boycott of Israel.
The U.S. Campaign is so uncompromising, so vitriolic and so biased, that the United Methodist Church assembly recently voted to seek withdrawal from the U.S. Campaign coalition. The U.S. Campaign is so toxic that it could not find a single congressman or congresswoman to sponsor its planned event on Capitol Hill, as we previously reported, Report: Pro-BDS event on Capitol Hill canceled after nature of group exposed:
In his inspiring book “Words That Hurt, Words that Heal,” Rabbi Joseph Telushkin wrote: “Because words can be used to inflict devastating and irrevocable suffering, Jewish teachings go so far as to compare cruel words to murder.”
Thus it is painful to see the malicious character assassination and false accusations of “anti-Semitism” being hurled against President-elect Trump’s appointee Stephen Bannon and Bannon’s company, Breitbart Media.
In fact, as pro-Israel writer and Breitbart senior editor Joel B. Pollak wrote, Bannon is “an American patriot who defends Israel & has deep empathy for the Jewish people.” Pollak is an Orthodox Jew; would an Orthodox Jew praise Bannon and tolerate spending six years working with Bannon if he were an ugly Jew hater and Israel basher?
ZOA’s own experience and analysis of Breitbart articles confirms Bannon’s and Breitbart’s friendship and fair-mindedness toward the Jewish people and Israel. To accuse Bannon and Breitbart of anti-Semitism is Orwellian. In fact, Breitbart bravely fights against anti-Semitism. Here are a few of many examples:
Loudspeakers have been in the news in Israel. For those not in the know, the Knesset is working on a piece of legislation to ban loudspeaker use in houses of worship. This is because the Arab muezzin call to prayer is blasted over loudspeakers five times a day and the sound carries to Jewish neighborhoods. This would not be a problem at all, if one of those five times of the days were not dawn, which this time of the year is at 4:33 AM, when the majority of the citizens of the Jewish State are fast asleep.
In my own neighborhood of Efrat, some of the neighborhoods are closer to Arab villages than others, and it definitely does wake people up. Efratians are just regular people who work 9-5 and need a good night's sleep. Efrat has politely (and repeatedly) asked the villagers to turn the volume down a bit. Our Arab neighbors comply for a week or so and then the volume begins to creep back up until it's being blasted at full volume once more.
And let me tell you. It's LOUD.
Now, this isn't specific to Efrat. I know this because I haven't always lived in Efrat. In fact, when I first came to Israel in 1979, I lived for a time in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. I was in Israel as a year student at a seminary.
That first night in the dorm, it was hard falling asleep; getting used to a strange place; a new bed; dorm mates chatting in the kitchen, walking around; and so forth. But I finally did nod off. Until at dawn, the muezzin's call came blasting into my bedroom.
I was 18 and American and terrified. I didn't know it was the call to prayer coming at me from a loudspeaker. I sat bolt upright in my creaky cot, heart pounding. I thought it was an invasion, an attack of marauding Arab terrorists come to rape me and slit my throat.
I thought it was the end. (Just my luck—my first night in Israel.)
But as the prayer continued inexorably on I realized there was not a peep from my roommates. Deductive reasoning told me this was obviously NOT a terror attack. I didn't know what it was, that loud Mideastern caterwauling but I realized it couldn't be anything dangerous or I would see some movement, hear some screaming. Something. I did my best to fall back asleep, thinking I'd ask about it in the morning.
And that, my fair readers, was my introduction to Muezzin, his loudspeaker, and the Arab dawn prayers.
In every place I have since lived, I have seen and heard the same phenomenon, and heard about it from other Israelis in different parts of the country, as well. The Arabs are asked to lower the volume a bit, they do for a time, then back up it goes, the volume, in every mosque in every Arab town, city, and village in Israel. Sometimes we Jews do something smart and blast Jewish music from loudspeakers in our towns, loud enough to disturb the Arabs, during the day or at a middle of the night time OTHER than their dawn call to prayer.
That may feel momentarily good, but it does nothing, however, to rectify the situation.
More effective perhaps, was this effort by Jewish citizens to demonstrate for their mayor that we're talking serious noise pollution here.
The thing is, there is already in place, a law to limit the volume at which loudspeakers are used. Of course, the Arabs ignore the law, and nobody dares enforce it, because oh my, the left might have a conniption fit, so the law is, for all intents and purposes, worthless at keeping the prayers at a sane volume.
As Elder noted, this new bill was approved by the Knesset on Sunday and while it will need several readings to pass into law, Netanyahu threw the weight of his approval behind the legislation. The Prime Minister said that while freedom of religion is important, a government must also protect its citizens from noise pollution. Naturally, the Arabs are not happy campers. The PA is threatening to go to the Security Council. MK Zahalka said that anyone who doesn't like the noise should leave and go back to where they came from. (As if the Jews, the Yehudim in Hebrew, or Yahud as they are called in Arabic, don't come from Yehuda/Judea.)
But what really irked me most from all the responses was this message that flew into my work inbox unbidden, from the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI), in the form of a press release on how this think tank sees the legislation:
IDI Scholars Responds to Bill Prohibiting Loudspeakers at Houses of Worship:"Offensive to the Muslim Israeli Community, Harmful to its Freedom of Expression"Scholars from the Israel Democracy Institute submitted an opinion to Ministerial Committee on Legislation regarding the pending piece of legislation, scheduled to be discussed on Sunday, 13/11/2016, by the, which would ban the use of loudspeakers at houses of worship.
November 13, 2016 --------IDI's Vice President Professor Mordechai Kremnitzer; Co-Director, The Project for Arab-Jewish Relations, Adv. Eli Bahar and Head of the Defending Democratic Values Project ,Dr. Amir Fuchs explained:
"Israel's Knesset has already passed legislation that prohibits an inappropriate level of noise. However, this new proposal asserts that any sounds emanating from a loudspeaker system will automatically become illegal. In essence, this bill seeks to ban even reasonable levels of noise.This is unacceptable and contradicts the stated purpose of this proposal, to uphold the quality of life standards for all Israelis."
In addition, the authors noted that "even though the bill is worded in neutral language and defines a house of worship as a 'synagogue', 'church' or 'mosque', it is clear that in practice this law is aimed at limiting and harming the activities of mosques only. After all, only Muslim houses of worship make frequent use of public address systems."
Kremnitzer, Bahar and Fuchs emphasized that "it is impossible to ignore the fact that this bill's supporters have stated that it seeks to 'stop the broadcasting of nationalistic messages and incitement,' a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with excessive noise. Israeli law of course offers a number of legal remedies to deal with offences related to incitement. As such, there is no reason to use the pretext of too much noise."
Finally, the authors of IDI's response stated: "the use of this seemingly innocuous piece of legislation cannot disguise the nefarious purpose of its drafters: to not only violate Muslim Israelis' freedom of religion, but to stir up strife and arouse resentment among members of this community."
The IDI's policy position would have us believe that with this new bill, Israel is attempting to stifle Muslim freedom of worship. Nothing could, however, be further from the truth.
See, here's the thing: knock yourselves out praying at dawn. But do it without loudspeakers. Because you have proven that you can't use them at a normal volume, loud enough for Muslim worshippers, and soft enough for Jewish people who still have a few hours left to sleep before a long day of work. Instead, you've proven that you use these loudspeakers as a direct provocation to assert religious supremacy over the Jews and to show your non-recognition of Israel as the Jewish State.
Since these worshippers can't respect Jewish rights in the Jewish State, it seems obvious that some limits would need to be applied to keep their behavior in line with societal norms. In the Jewish State, you see, the people who comprise the majority have the right to be asleep at 4:33 AM, if they so choose, without having loudspeakers coercively blaring Muslim prayers in their ears. And enforcing this right to quiet and a good night's sleep is just what this bill aims to accomplish. It goes beyond the worthless bill limiting volume, and puts an end to the practice of using loudspeakers altogether.
Which makes that IDI policy statement really smell. Which is no surprise. Author Yitzchak Klein said, in a 2009 article about IDI entitled The strange case of the Israel Democracy Institute, "If the Church of England was once described as the Conservative Party at prayer, IDI is this country's secular left-wing elite thinking out loud. The IDI's ideal model of Israel is a secular, nonnational, economically and socially liberal society with its Jewish character and ethic pressed as much out of view as possible."
In other words, if you're with the IDI you think that it's fine to be Muslim in Israel, but don't anyone dare try to be Jewish! (Loudspeakers YES, Jewish sleepers, NO.)
And by the way, this isn't the first time the IDI has attempted to undermine and override the rights of Jews in the Jewish State. IDI also worked in tandem with the IDF to develop a strategy to carry out Disengagement. An article in Mida by Ran Baratz describes the outcome of this alliance:
In any well-governed country, the working paper which the IDF issued together with the Israel Democracy Institute would have become a major scandal. For example, under the general heading “Army-Society Relations in the Disengagement Process”, under the sub-heading “Purpose of the Teamwork,” the document identifies three different populations within the general public: (1) Those who accept the Disengagement; (2) Those who are severely opposed to the Disengagement; (3) Those who have reservations about the Disengagement (whose position is not clear cut). With respect to those who have reservations the document states (emphases added): “We have marked this population as the main target of our activities, because it may be possible to influence their positions and behavior.”
The scandalous discussion on influencing positions and behavior of the public is not accidental. “Shaping the Public Consciousnessby means of an advocacy campaign” is an important objective that is explicitly designated in the document.
We’ve found a definition of political objectives already in the Introduction: classifying the public according to attitudes concerning a political program, and marking one segment of the population as a target for activities designed to “shape consciousness.” The document continues to detail the objectives and the means of advocacy, including roles designated for the political echelons:
The Disengagement Plan is a political move that was accepted in a completely democratic process – this argument should be made by jurists and law experts (such as retired judges, political science experts and public figures) … concerning the underlying rationale of the Disengagement Plan – a clear rationale for the program should be presented. This rationale will be presented by the political echelons.
The document is an example not only of political action, but also of political commentary. It also presents the position of the YESHA (Judea and Samaria) leadership concerning a referendum – an idea that the IDI decisively rejects (after all, for the champions of “democracy” in Israel, there could be nothing more “anti-democratic” than an act of direct democracy, which renders superfluous all the power hubs the left so diligently maintain):
The YESHA leadership is interested in conducting a referendum for several reasons:
a. A referendum may lead to a change of the decision;
b.A referendum could enable the process to be postponed and ultimately dissolved;
c.Conducting a referendum and potential results may enable the leadership to gain better control over reactions of populations they lead and may moderate the intensity of the public outcry against the plan.
The IDI, in its dealings, betrays its desire to ride roughshod over the democratic norms of the Jewish State to impose the will of the Arab inhabitants on the majority Jewish population. The question is why? Why does the left think it's okay to rob Jews of their rights to give Arabs their rights in the Jewish State?
My colleague Myles Kantor says that for at least one public figure to the left of the political spectrum, the new media director of the Times of Israel, Sarah Tuttle-Singer, it's about masochism and wanting to impose that abuse on everyone around her, on an entire country in fact.
Tuttle-Singer is supporting widespread aggression that traumatizes kids and damages the general population's health in a fundamental area. A mother stated in 2014:
"From the time she was born until she was nearly two, my daughter woke up in a panic every night from the call of the muezzin."
"Yungreiss...said mosques use extremely powerful loudspeakers that are unnecessarily loud, and children in the neighborhood have suffered from a lack of concentration in school due to their sleep being disturbed."
Not content to enjoy suffering privately, Tuttle-Singer wants to impose the sickness upon Israel as a whole.
And, like saying Sgt. Azaria "committed a heinous crime" and "should rot in jail," it's all because she loves Israel so much.
The truth is, I'm not sure why this new bill would work any better than the old bill. If they couldn't enforce the volume issue with the old bill, how are they going to enforce the no loudspeaker thing with this new bill? In both cases, it would seem that in order to enforce the law, the police/army would be required to actually go into the mosques and issue warnings or even arrest worshippers for repeated violations. I can't see the Israeli government being any more brave about dealing with loudspeakers than dealing with loudspeaker volume.
They will be too afraid of the backlash of the UN, the EU, and other assorted anti-Israel abbreviations.
Which is an incredibly sad state of affairs.
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.
Jerusalem, November 16 - No date has been announced for the trip to Israel President-elect Donald Trump has promised to make once he assumes office, but the country's Arab lawmakers are already preparing to greet the controversial leader with a traditional display of disrespect, modified to suit the particular recipient of the treatment.
Members of the Joint List parliamentary alliance of Arab parties decided unanimously today that if and when Trump makes his official visit to the Knesset, instead of throwing shoes at a man perceived as hostile to Muslims and Arab interests, they will throw gloves and mittens sized for small children as a reference to his supposedly tiny hands.
Joint List Chairman Ayman Odeh and his colleagues agreed at a delegation meeting today to coordinate the move, and named MK Dr. Ahmad Tibi as supervisor of the effort to obtain, store, and, when the time comes, distribute the gloves to the other twelve members of the alliance. Tibi told reporters he felt honored at being selected, but that the occasion for the honor removed any other positive feelings.
"Trump is a bigot," proclaimed the legislator, whose party supports homophobia and misogyny, and denied the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish State. "We will protest his attitude and the statements he made throughout his campaign by subjecting him to the dishonor of being pelted with shoes, but instead of shoes, we will throw small gloves to fit his tiny, tiny hands," added Tibi, who, along with his Joint List colleagues, never feels the need to compensate for shortcomings.
Odeh revealed that he instructed Tibi to get his hands on specifically on gloves manufactured in China, whom Trump has blamed for many of the US's trade and employment woes, as well as for global warming. "I also told him that if he could find gloves emblazoned with the Mexican flag, that would be perfect, but that's probably not going to be easy. I suppose we could commission something from Etsy, but that's going pretty far, and the Communist-leaning members of of our alliance wouldn't be so happy about that."
MK Taleb Abu Arrar supported the decision but nevertheless confessed misgivings about its wisdom. "Given Trump's experience with hecklers, and the way he assumes they're out to harm him physically, this could backfire against the entire Arab and Palestinian community," he explained. "But in the end I decided to go along with it, because doing things that backfire against the Arab and Palestinian community is basically our thing.
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.
National Public Radio takes a nice look at the issue of relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem. Unfortunately, Daniel Estrin’s dispatch assumes Jewish ties to eastern Jerusalem only began in 1967. The western part of Jerusalem is almost entirely Jewish. The eastern part of the city was entirely Arab when Israel captured it in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Many Israeli Jews have moved into the eastern part of the city, and Israel claims all of Jerusalem as its capital, though no other country recognizes this.
Talk about twisted context.
Jerusalem was a unified city. There were no distinctions between “East” and “West” Jerusalem until Jordan captured the city’s eastern neighborhoods and Old City. The only reason it was “entirely Arab” when Israel reunified the Jerusalem during the Six-Day War was because the Jordanians expelled the Jews from its jurisdiction, systematically destroyed synagogues, and generally made its half of the city judenfrei.
Wrapped in Israeli flags and holding signs condemning UNESCO, hundreds of people walked in Midtown yesterday protesting the UNESCO resolution. “And to all of UNESCO, we declare ‘Am Yisrael Chai,'” shouted Rabbi Avi Weiss, who heads the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale in the Bronx. “We have faced enemies in the past. We have overcome. We are overcoming. We will overcome.”
On Thursday afternoon, StandWithUs, in cooperation with Artists 4 Israel, set up a giant Pinocchio effigy across from the United Nations, symbolizing the lies the U.N. is spreading about the UNESCO decision.
This followed the “We Stand Together” rally at the Israeli Consulate, organized by AMCHA-Coalition for Jewish Concerns, and co-sponsored by StandWithUs New York and other groups. Among the attendees were students from the Moriah School in Englewood, N.J. and members of Weiss’s shul. StandWithUs is a non-profit organization that educates people around the world and students on college campuses about Israel. Artists 4 Israel utilizes art to benefits all Israelis regardless of race, religion, national origin or political belief.
The position of the two Palestinian leaders, Arafat and Abbas, is deeply rooted in the Palestinian tradition and culture, in which any compromise with Israel is considered an act of high treason. Abbas knows that concessions on his part would result in being spat upon by his people -- or killed.
Hence the PA president has in recent years avoided even the pretense of negotiations with Israel, and instead has poured his energies into strong-arming the international community to impose a solution on Israel.
The French would do well to abandon their plan for convening an international conference on peace in the Middle East. Declaring a Palestinian state in the Security Council only makes them look as if their actual goal is to destroy Israel -- and they know it. They would be fooling no one.
Many in Europe, particularly France, seem be aching to do just that -- as a "present" to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to show how submissive they can be; to encourage more "business" with Muslim states, and, they might hope, to deter more terrorist attacks. Actually, if the members of the UN Security Council declare a Palestinian state unilaterally, they are encouraging more terrorist attacks: the terrorists will see that attacks "work" and embark on more of them to help the jihadi takeover of Europe go even faster.
In June, I noted an op-ed in the popular Egyptian newspaper Al Masry al-Youm by a respected writer that minimized the Holocaust, and then said that the Jews deserved it.
He said that he received his information from a video that a friend sent.
The speaker is Ahmed Huber, a Swiss-German neo-Nazi and convert to Islam who died in 2008.
He was featured in a CNN segment after the US declared him a terrorist who was helping Al Qaeda back in 2001.
For some reason, Arabs have no problem with this neo-Nazi who happened to have been a Muslim.
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.
A wonderful byproduct of Donald Trump talking about moving the US embassy to Israel's capital in Jerusalem (and people believing him) is seeing the reactions of supposedly pro-Israel groups who make their living by criticizing Israel.
After all, there is no legal reason why the US embassy should not be in Jerusalem, and lots of good reasons why it should. It is Israel's capital, after all. The idea that Jerusalem would ever become an international city, the official US reason for not moving it, has been dead for 67 years. The real reason the US hasn't moved the embassy is because of a bizarre hope that somehow that disrespect towards the State of Israel will motivate Zionists to give up more concessions to Palestinians. Yet, as David Gerstman writes in Legal Insurrection, that has backfired into more Palestinian intransigence, and moving the embassy would destroy the fiction that coddling Arabs brings us closer to peace.
Israel's enemies don't object to siting foreign embassies in Jerusalem because it would undermine diplomatic negotiations. They object because they deny Israel's claim to any part of Jerusalem, even parts that have always been sovereign Israeli territory. They deny, in other words, that Israel's very existence is a settled issue. Moving the US embassy to Jerusalem would send one message, simple but significant: Americans do not regard the survival of the Jewish state as negotiable.
Most Israelis, from the left to the right, would welcome moving the embassy to Jerusalem. Most Americans who expressed an opinion say it should be moved.
When asked if Trump’s much-publicized promise to move the American embassy to Jerusalem was good for Israel, Amidror didn’t hesitate. “No question. It will not change anything fundamental on the ground but it would be very symbolic that the capital of Israel is becoming a real capital in which foreign countries are building their embassies,” he said. “It’s very important symbolically.”
In short, there is no legal or security reason why the US shouldn't do what is right, and many important reasons why it should.
American elected officials should respect the need for the permanent status of Jerusalem to be determined in the context of a negotiated two-state solution, and refrain from steps, rhetorical or practical, that inflame an already tense situation – for instance, calling for the immediate relocation of the American Embassy to Jerusalem.
J-Street cares so much about possibly upsetting Arabs that Jews who feel passionately about Israel's attachment to Jerusalem can go to hell. The Jews don't start knifing people when they get upset, so their opinions aren't as important as those of the Arabs who threaten to do exactly that.
This is J-Street's "pro-Israel" position - "cower before your enemies and maybe they'll like you better, because everything is your fault anyway."
Jerusalem is a wonderful litmus test as to whether you are pro-Israel: If you are against things that most Israelis are adamantly for and for things that they are against, and you use the excuse that it is for their own good, you can be sure that you aren't really pro-Israel.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
At their weekly meeting Tuesday, Central Student Government voted 34 to 13 to reject a resolution that would have called on the University of Michigan to divest its investments in several companies that allegedly commit human rights violations against Palestinians.
The resolution, which was brought to the assembly by student organization Students Allied for Freedom and Equality, initially considered a range of companies, but was limited during the meeting to only Boeing, G4S, Hewlett-Packard and United 130 Technologies. This is the 10th attempt since 2002 to pass a resolution to divest at the University, including in 2014 and 2015, following in the path of similar resolutions at many other schools around the country. The vote this year was less close than it has been in recent years.
I found this argument against Israel interesting:
University alum Devin Jones, who said he was a Palestinian citizen, told the story of his mother and grandfather, born in the same house on the same street, but facing drastically different political climates in their lifetimes. “But she was born in a different state… We were not indigenous to our own land because we were on the wrong side of a battle, a battle that wasn’t our fault,” Jones said. “Basically, we were stripped of our Palestinian identities and forced to become Israeli citizens.”
If he describes himself as Palestinian, how does his mother becoming an Israeli citizen (with equal rights to Jews) strip him of his identity?
If he lives in the US, does that mean that he has voluntarily stripped himself of Palestinian identity?
The anti-Israel arguments get dumber every year, which may be why the divestment movement has been weakening year after year.
(h/t Dan)
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 Oberlin College board of trustees voted to dismiss professor Joy D. Karega, effective Nov. 15.
After extensive consideration and a comprehensive review of recommendations from multiple faculty committees and Oberlin President Marvin Krislov, the college voted to let go the assistant professor of rhetoric and composition for failing to meet the academic standards that Oberlin requires of its faculty and failing to demonstrate intellectual honesty, according to a news release from the college.
The release said: “As a board, we agree with President Krislov and every faculty committee reviewing this matter that the central issues are Dr. Karega’s professional integrity and fitness. We affirm Oberlin’s historic and ongoing commitment to academic freedom.
“During this process, which began with Dr. Karega’s posting of anti-Semitic writings on social media, Dr. Karega received numerous procedural protections: she was represented by counsel; she presented witness testimony, documents, and statements to support her position; and she had the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses testifying against her.
“The faculty review process examined whether Dr. Karega had violated the fundamental responsibilities of Oberlin faculty members – namely, adherence to the “Statement of Professional Ethics” of the American Association of University Professors, which requires faculty members to “accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending and transmitting knowledge” and to “practice intellectual honesty."
“Contrary to this obligation, Karega attacked her colleagues when they challenged inconsistencies in her description of the connection between her postings and her scholarship and she disclaimed all responsibility for her misconduct, according to the release.
She also continues to blame Oberlin and its faculty committees for undertaking a shared governance review process, the release said.
“For these reasons, the faculty review committees and President Krislov agreed on the seriousness of Dr. Karega’s misconduct. Indeed, the majority of the General Faculty Council, the executive body of Oberlin’s faculty, concluded that Dr. Karega’s postings could not be justified as part of her scholarship and had “irreparably impaired (her) ability to perform her duties as a scholar, a teacher, and a member of the community.
“In the face of Dr. Karega’s repeated refusal to acknowledge and remedy her misconduct, her continued presence undermines the mission and values of Oberlin’s academic community. Thus, any sanction short of dismissal is insufficient and the Board of Trustees is compelled to take this most serious action,” according to the statement.
her dismissal is not only because of her antisemitic posts on Facebook, but from her activities since they were revealed.
I know the news is coming in. Trust me, this is not a surprise. I've been dealing with the persecution, incompetent leadership, and discrimination from Oberlin College since March. No surprise here.
I will be issuing an official statement soon. I could easily release a "Kiss My Ass" statement. I would be MORE than justified in doing so. But that is not my style. I choose my weapons CAREFULLY and STRATEGICALLY. And trust, I have done that. There will be a challenge and defense of my rights, using ALL the avenues I have available to me -- litigation, public, etc. The pathway for that has already been laid.
...For my Africana faculty, I'm sorry that it had to come to this. I'm sorry that now you all will be placed at the center of the litigation that is coming. I never wanted that. But the College has left me no choice.
She also claims in her post that she was targeted because she is black. ("To my faculty colleagues who had a hand in this decision and to my faculty colleagues who have sat back and done NOTHING: When this precedent that is being set extends beyond mere harm to faculty of color, you will have NO right to complain or say anything.")
The news articles that have been about her, by their nature, minimize her antisemitism and her willingness to embrace absurd anti-Israel conspiracy theories - in other words, her complete inability to distinguish truth from fiction and her willingness to espouse hate.
Thanks to David Gerstman at The Tower, who broke the story about this professor, we have screenshots of what she has actually said in context:
This article has more, and so does this, where Karega "liked" a post that bragged about "exposing the Jew."
Stanley Fish, the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law at Florida International University and author of Versions of Academic Freedom: From Professionalism to Revolution, said Karega can say whatever she wants on social media or even in her scholarship, even if it’s patently false and relates directly to her subject area—as long as she doesn’t attempt to present it in class as a fundamental truth (and there’s a sound pedagogical reason for presenting it at all)
This is probably why Oberlin is couching her dismissal not in terms of her posts, but in terms of her antagonism towards her employer in the wake of their asking questions about her posts. It was her refusal to “accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending and transmitting knowledge” and to “practice intellectual honesty."
These academic standards quoted by the AAUP and professors who comment on the case are written by people who have an interest in protecting their own jobs. It seems to me that the bar for teachers, and journalists, must be higher, because their entire jobs are dedicated to conveying truthful information. If a professor or journalist cannot distinguish between truth or fiction - even on Facebook posts that have little to do with their professional work - then one must be concerned about their ability to perform their jobs professionally, too. If they prove that they are bigots on Facebook, then they disqualify themselves from pretending to be honorable members of their profession in the office or classroom.
Free speech is important, but for professions that depend on truth and a modicum of fairness, free speech isn't a defense against lies and hate. These opinions aren't merely "controversial." They are wrong and disgusting, and that should disqualify people from jobs that rely on the ability of the professional to know the difference between truth and fiction and between reasoned opinion and hate disguised as truth.
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 latest FBI Hate Crimes statistics report, for 2015, shows that the number of antisemitic hate crimes increased by 9% last year, from 609 to 664.
Hate crimes against Jews outnumber hate crimes against every other religious group.
But anti-Muslim hate crimes increased sharply, by 67%, so most of the news headlines concentrate on how awful that is. But still, it is only 257 attacks, far less than the number of antisemitic attacks.
I'm not saying that it is great, and it is a worrying trend, but Jews remain far more likely to be targets of hate crimes in America than Muslims are. Yet most of the news stories barely mention that.
AP waited until the last sentence of the article to mention that most religious based hate crimes are against Jews. So did CNN. Fox buried it in paragraph 9. The Guardian made it sound like there were far more Muslim hate crimes than any other, with a quote from an "expert": "Levin said that Muslims were now the most disdained social group in the US, and have subsequently been subject to widespread prejudice." The Christian Science Monitor mentioned Jewish attacks in the second paragraph but the headline was about Muslims.
One of the only news outlets that tried to be accurate was MassLive. Even though its headline also only mentioned Muslim victims, the first paragraph says:
The number of hate crimes reported against Muslims nationally jumped by 67 percent in 2015 — but a majority of religiously motivated hate crimes were still committed against Jews, according to statistics released Monday by the FBI.
Now, was that so hard?
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.
Biased information about Israel in the French press is not an episodic occurrence. It is a systematic one. The main engine of this biased information industry is blatantly the Agence France Presse. It is so thoroughly a "pro-Palestinian news agency" that this French institution does not see anything unethical about hiring Palestinian activists as reporters: "Nasser Abu Baker, the chairman of the Palestinian Journalists' Syndicate, the leading force for the boycott of Israeli journalists and media, also writes for the influential French news agency."
The same bias appears in the media and news agencies all over the developed world, including Reuters, the BBC and the AP. Why, when it comes to Israel, is such a misinterpretation of reality so generalized in the press? The only answer is that a war is in progress: a war of delegitimization.
Stephen Bannon, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick as White House chief strategist, helped mold the Breitbart News Network website into a home of the racist, anti-Semitic alt-right movement, but never himself displayed any overt hatred of Jews, according to a former editor of the site. Ben Shapiro, who served as editor-at-large of Breitbart, said he never saw “any direct evidence that Bannon was an anti-Semite” when he worked with him, but witnessed his comfort with “pandering” to the publication’s fringe readership, which over the last year and a half galvanized Trump’s improbable ascension to the presidency. Bannon’s pick as senior counselor and chief White House strategist, one of the top positions in the upcoming Trump administration, has drawn scorn from Democrats and Republicans alike, along with Jewish, Muslim and anti-hate groups.
“It’s a sad day when a man who presided over the premier website of the ‘alt-right’ — a loose-knit group of white nationalists and unabashed anti-Semites and racists — is slated to be a senior staff member in the ‘people’s house,” the racism watchdog Anti-Defamation League said in a statement late Sunday, right after the appointment was announced.
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has released a statement stating that it is "painful" to see the character assassination against President-elect Trump’s appointee Stephen Bannon. ZOA President Morton A. Klein said that the Anti-Defamation League and its president Jonathan Greenblatt should apologize for essentially accusing Bannon and his media company of “anti-Semitism” and Israel hatred. Greenblatt/ADL tweeted that Bannon “presided over the premier website of the ‘alt right’ – a loose-knit group of white nationalists and anti-Semites."
"In fact," Klein continued, "as pro-Israel writer (and orthodox Jew) Joel B. Pollak wrote, Mr. Bannon is 'an American patriot who defends Israel and has deep empathy for the Jewish people.'” In addition, the ZOA asks rhetorically, "would pro-Israel stalwarts/Trump advisors Gingrich, Giuliani, Pence, Kushner, Friedman, Greenblatt, Adelson allow an anti-Semite on board?"
Trump's appointment of Bannon as his "chief strategist and senior counselor" has raised concern in some sectors due to controversial statements and positions taken by Bannon. However, the ZOA has researched and found many pro-Israel and pro-Jewish positions taken by Bannon and the Breitbart media site he headed. Some ZOA examples of Bannon's "friendship and fair-mindedness towards Israel and the Jewish people" include his efforts against the anti-Semitic rallies at CUNY, as well as articles reporting that the Palestinian Authority defames Israel with blatant falsehoods.
Dr. Ahmed Majdalani, member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, says that Israel is planning "the liquidation of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, as happened with his predecessor, Yasser Arafat."
Majdalani told Xinhua News Agency that "the same old scenario in which Israel used with Arafat is currently being used with Abbas, and this is now clear to every Palestinian."
"We noticed that scenario to get rid of Arafat began as he was no longer [considered] a partner for peace and he had been accused of supporting terrorism, and currently Abbas is described as no longer a partner for peace and practicing international and diplomatic terrorism," Majdalani said.
Also, "We have noted corruption charges against Abbas and his family, which is the same as what happened previously with Arafat."
Why now? "Because [Israel] could not force him to surrender him as they pushed him to give up Palestinian rights, and therefore he is considered an obstacle and the campaigns to target him politically are a blatant introduction of the possibility of his being targeted physically."
Conspiracy theories aren't just for the past any more!
Abbas is 81 years old and he won't last that much longer, so why not blame Israel for his death ahead of time?
This isn't the first time Palestinian leaders preemptively blame Israel for things that might happen. This is like the people who claim that the Al Aqsa Mosque us being undermined by Israeli tunnels or chemicals - if there is another earthquake, they have already planted the seed that Israel is behind its possible collapse.
There is one constant: if anything bad happens or will happen, Israel is to blame.
It seems likely that Majdalani is floating this now, along with his praise of Abbas, to position himself on Abbas' good side before the upcoming Fatah conference scheduled for November 29.
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.
I just experienced one of the most Israeli moments you can possibly have.
That Israeli moment when your man helps his son decide which IDF unit to request. Enlistment is mandatory but the IDF gives pre-inductees the opportunity to rank their preferences. Final decisions are made according to need and, of course, the capabilities of each individual soldier.
I watched two versions of the same man, so similar and yet so different, one grown up, one almost grown up, sit shoulder to shoulder, to choose the destiny of the younger.
To watch a father watch his son read about each army unit and what they do.
“This commando unit is better than that one, isn’t it dad?”
“Yes. They go first in to fire.”
To watch a father imagine his son die a thousand ways. In Gaza, in Lebanon, in Judea and Samaria. Arresting terrorists. In urban combat. Sneaking behind enemy lines on a special mission. By a sniper shot, in an explosion, in a battle.
The nightmare floating in front of his eyes. The sound of the dreaded knock on the door ringing in his ears…
“If you don’t pass the tests for the elite you unit want, you should go to the anti-aircraft defense unit.”
“Dad, there is no way I’m going to sit in a base and push a button to knock planes out of the sky when I could be in the field, directing combat.”
That expression on his face, simultaneously glowing with pride and drowning in the horrible possibility of losing that which is most precious… I watched him sit silently, listening.
“Dad, dismantling bombs is kinda cool, don’t you think?”
That moment when a father watches his son make his choices, explain his priorities and preferences. When a son asks his father, “Is it ok dad? Did I choose well?”
“Yes son.”
That moment when a father waits until his teenage son walks out of the room to let the tears well up in his eyes.
Quietly I said, “You should tell him that you are proud of him.”
“I want my son to come home, not a [dead] hero.”
“I know dear. I know.”
My God. What a moment.
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.
Following the election of Donald Trump as the next US president, Palestinian leaders and others have reacted to the choice of the American people and voiced their opinions and expectations of Trump.
Deputy Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee Jibril Rajoub commented on Trump's "true" nature, categorizing him as a "Zionist and racist": "Regarding [US President-elect Donald] Trump, I think that even before he won, he revealed his true face, Zionist and racist, supporting and adopting the Israeli right-wing and racist policy. In my opinion, his predecessor [US President Barack Obama] is not better than him, even though at the beginning he tried to present himself in a different way." [Al-Mayadeen TV (Lebanon), Nov. 11, 2016]
The PA ambassador to the UN "warned Trump" against carrying out his campaign promise to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, considering it an "aggression" and "attack": "Palestinian Ambassador to the UN Riyad Mansour said that if [US] President-elect Donald Trump decides to implement his promise to transfer the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, the Palestinians 'will make life miserable' for the US at the UN institutions. 'If they attack us by transferring the embassy to Jerusalem, that will constitute a violation of a [UN] Security Council resolution, and [UN] General Assembly Resolution 181 (i.e., the UN Partition Plan), which was drafted by the US. A step such as this would mean a revelation of aggression towards us..."
[Amad, independent Palestinian news agency, Nov. 13, 2016, emphasis added]
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is a terrorist organization designated as such by the US, EU, Canada, and Israel. The PFLP is involved in suicide bombings, hijackings, and assassinations, among other terrorist activities targeting civilians. Many European countries fund a network of organizations, some of which are directly affiliated with the PFLP, and others with a substantial presence of employees and officials linked to the PFLP. The non-governmental organizations (NGOs) include Addameer, Al-Haq, Alternative Information Center (AIC), Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCI-P), Health Work Committee (HWC), Stop the Wall, Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), and the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC).
The NGO ties to the PFLP range from establishment and operation of NGOs by the PFLP itself to NGO officials and staffers being convicted of terrorism charges by Israeli courts. Some of these individuals have been denied entry and exit visas by Israeli (and Jordanian) authorities due to security concerns. A significant number of these NGO officials hold multiple positions in various organizations, indicating the close connections and relationships between these groups. Donors to the NGOs include the EU, the governments of Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Norway, Ireland, UK, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, France, and Switzerland, and the United Nations. Continued funding raises serious questions about due diligence and evaluation on the part of the governments and the UN, as well as compliance with domestic and international laws.
One such example is the NGO Addameer, which is funded by Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and others. Addameer campaigns in support of Palestinians convicted of security offenses. This agenda should have demanded close scrutiny and due diligence before any grants were provided.
The PA maintains longstanding legislation and payments to subsidize terrorists and their families. This amounts to an officially sanctioned PA government incentive system to kill Israelis. When I learned of this in November 2015, I was quite shocked. I proceeded to raise the issue with organized American Jewish community leaders and Israeli policymakers, and was told “everybody knows.” Disconcerted by my own lack of knowledge, I canvassed numerous American political leaders who, without exception, were unaware of the PA legislation/budget. The few leaders who were aware that the PA directly pays terrorists thought that the funding was only $5-$6 million; they were shocked to learn that according to the official PA budget online, it is $300 million for 2016.
Last year, the prevailing opinion was that the wave of knifers against Israelis consisted of young and disaffected “lone wolves.” As I examined the issue more closely, I realized that the “incitement” is much more than just an errant cleric or wayward school board, but rather is an institutional campaign of violence against Israel, coordinated, and funded by the PA themselves.This “struggle” or war is endorsed by the Palestinian leadership, as evidenced by their 2004 legislation specifying, “The prisoners and released prisoners are a fighting sector and integral part of the fabric of Arab Palestinian society.” PA budget line items are earmarked for funding prisoners, released prisoners, and families of “martyrs.”
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Hezbollah Leader
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Iran, War, Hezbollah, Nasrallah, Israel,
Lebanon,]
He's gone with the wind.
* * *
*Please make a donation to Dry Bones.*
Use Pa...
Weekend long read
-
1) At the Misgav Institute, Arsen Ostrovsky explains ‘The Law Of Exploding
Pagers’. “Last week the world watched as the terrorist army Hezbollah was...
T...
Weekend long read
-
1) At the Misgav Institute, Arsen Ostrovsky explains ‘The Law Of Exploding
Pagers’. “Last week the world watched as the terrorist army Hezbollah was...
T...
Making a Correction
-
Researching for an article on the "Saison", I checked the Hagana history
volume and a footnote directed me to the Palestine Post and a column
entitled "R...
The transparent mob attack on the Jewish Chronicle
-
Make no mistake, the Jewish Chronicle made a huge error in trusting a
source they should not have done. But as embarrassing as this episode may
be – the ...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Yom Hashoah 5784 – 2024
-
Israel’s Yom Hashoah began at sundown this evening with the annual ceremony
at Yad Vashem with torches lit in memory of the 6 million Jewish victims of
the...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Elder of Ziyon
