Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Antisemites to give talk about "antisemitism" in NYC

In August I noted that "Jewish Voice for Peace" published a book on antisemitism that justifies some kinds of antisemitism.

Now the people who passionately believe that the only people on Earth who do not have the right to self-determination are Jews are holding a conference to claim that the only kind of antisemitism that matters is that neo-Nazi type than can be blamed on the ultra-Right.

Leftist antisemitism, as we've seen in the British Labour party, is not antisemitism as long as the person spouting the hate claims - sometimes way after the fact - that they were only criticizing Israel.

The people who are speaking and claim to care about antisemitism are the exact kind of people who don't give a damn about antisemitism - they are only using Jews as pawns to demonize their political opponents.

Here are the speakers:

Leo Ferguson is the community and communications organizer for Jews for Racial & Economic Justice.
Lina Morales is a member of Jews of Color and Mizrahi/Sephardi Caucus of Jewish Voice for Peace.
Linda Sarsour is the former Executive Director of the Arab-American Association of New York, a co-chair of the National Women's March, and was a co-founder of MPower Change.
Rebecca Vilkomerson is the Executive Director of Jewish Voice for Peace.

Yes, suddenly Linda Sarsour is an authority on antisemitism. She is, but not for the reasons she claims.

Get ready for lots of talk about how Zionist call all critics of Israel antisemites (no, only the ones who actively seek the destruction of the only Jewish state) and how there is suddenly much more neo-Nazi activity since Trump was elected (there isn't but the media is covering it much more.)

Meanwhile, here is your handy guide again for the differences between anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

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

11/13 Links Pt2: Judea Pearl: The Balfour Declaration at 100 and How It Redefined Indigenous People; Normalizing anti-Semitism on campus

From Ian:

Judea Pearl: The Balfour Declaration at 100 and How It Redefined Indigenous People

Balfour understood that Eretz Israel is an inextricable part of Jewish identity. Accordingly, he also understood that indigeneity is based on intellectual attachment and historical continuity no less than on physical presence or genetic lineage.

In 2014, when peace negotiations seemed somewhat hopeful, Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat was reported in The New York Times as saying: “the Palestinians could never accede to Israel’s demand that they recognize it as the nation-state of the Jewish people. … I cannot change my narrative.” A few months later, when pressed to explain what narrative defines his position Erekat told the Times of Israel: “I am the proud son of the Netufians and the Canaanites. I’ve been there for 5,500 years before Joshua. ”

On this centennial celebration of the Balfour Declaration it is worth reminding Erekat and Khalidi that the declaration’s most profound imprint on the world’s conciousness has been a universal understanding that the essence of indigineity is cultural and intellectual, not genetic or geographical.

Palestinian resistance to accepting their neighbors as equally indigenous to the region has been so obsessive and so counter-productive that it begs to be enlivened through a hypothetical scenario, however imaginary. I can’t resist imagining Balfour attending Khalidi’s lecture at Columbia, raising his hand and asking politely:

“Professor Khalidi, can you name a Canaanite figure that you are proud of? A Canaanite poem that you enjoy reciting? A Canaanite holiday that you celebrate? A Canaanite leader who is a role model to your children?

Replace the word “Canaanite” with “biblical” and you will find four questions that every Israeli child can answer half asleep.

There is merit and wisdom in hypothetical scenarios. In this case, I would hope it could mitigate the Palestinian claim to exclusive ownership of the title “indigenous people” and, God-willing, usher a genuine reconciliation effort based on mutual recognition and shared indigeneity. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

JPost Editorial: Bipolar Britain

What’s more, the meetings became known to the Foreign Office three months ago. If they were such a big source of concern, why was nothing done about them for so long? Why is it that the “scandal” was made public in Britain last Friday, to coincide with Netanyahu’s visit to London for meetings with May and to mark the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration?

Meanwhile, the British press, in a tendentious attempt to sensationalize what was in reality nothing more than a breach of protocol, presented one leg of the trip as though Patel was seeking to transfer hard-earned British taxpayers’ money to the Israeli military.

In reality, however, Patel was looking into the possibility that Britain would help defray some of the costs for maintaining an Israeli field hospital on the Golan Heights that treats wounded Syrian refugees.

Both The Guardian and The Independent – at least initially – reported that the money was going to the IDF, as noted in a piece for The Algemeiner by Simon Plosker, managing editor of HonestReporting.com.

The Times of London claimed, meanwhile, that Patel sought to provide British aid to an Israeli Army program “treating wounded Syrian jihadists, including al-Qaida fighters.”

We understand that newspapers have to make money and that sensationalism sells. We also understand that nearly anything to do with Israel arouses strong emotions in Britain.

But what about journalistic integrity? There is much to appreciate in Britain’s approach to Israel. May is undoubtedly one of the most pro-Israel heads of state in Europe, though she is bogged down with political problems.

But Patel’s treatment is not just the collateral effect of May’s crisis-ridden government. Rather, the Patel scandal is an uncomfortable reminder of the toxic atmosphere of anti-Israel sentiment both in British society and in the Foreign Office. Apparently, it is no coincidence that this reminder was made now, as Israel and Britain celebrate the Balfour Declaration, the Jewish people’s first decisive diplomatic success on the road to statehood.

Antisemitism Campaigners Urge Prince Charles to Repudiate 1986 Letter Decrying US ‘Jewish Lobby’

CAA Chairman Gideon Falter said that Charles’s letter was “disturbing.”

“It appears that our future king believed in 1986 that the ‘influx’ of Holocaust survivors to Israel were not ‘Semitic,’ ’cause great problems’ including terrorism, and should be ‘eliminated,’ presumably through their removal,” Falter said. “The letter also appears to endorse the view that Israel is not simply the result of Jewish self-determination in the historic Jewish homeland, but the result of bullying by an all-powerful ‘Jewish lobby,’ which holds US presidents in its clutches. We view these comments as unmistakably antisemitic.”

Noting that Charles retains a good relationship with the UK Jewish community, Falter called on Charles to “urgently repudiate” these “historic remarks” as a gesture of reassurance.

The eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II – who this year became the longest-reigning monarch in British history – Charles and his suitability for the throne have long been a favored topic of discussion in the British press. Critics of the prince charge that his publicly-expressed views over the years on matters as varied as architecture and religion show him to be remote and out of touch.

Prince Charles’ staff issue statement disavowing his 1986 letter as “not the Prince’s own views”

In a letter exposed today in the Mail on Sunday, it was revealed that Prince Charles made deeply troubling comments about refugee Holocaust survivors and the power of the “Jewish lobby”. Following criticism by Campaign Against Antisemitism and others, Clarence House, Prince Charles’ residence and office, has now issued a statement dismissing the views he expressed in a letter over thirty years ago.

In a 1986 letter to explorer Laurens van der Post, the heir to the throne wrote: “Dear Laurens, Am on my way to Cyprus and Italy having passed through Suez Canal. Lovely having three days at sea. This tour has been fascinating and have learned a lot about Middle East and Arab outlook. Tried to read a bit of Koran on way out and it gave me some insight into the way they think and operate. Don’t think they could understand us by reading the Bible though. Much to admire some aspects of Islam – especially accent on hospitality and accessibility of rulers. Also begin to understand their point of view about Israel. Never realised they see it as a US colony. I now appreciate that Arabs and Jews were all a Semitic people originally and it is the influx of foreign, European Jews (especially from Poland they say) which has helped to cause great problems. I know there are so many complex issues, but how can there ever be an end to terrorism unless the causes are eliminated? Surely some US president has to have the courage to stand up and take on the Jewish lobby in the US? I must be naïve, I suppose! Charles”

Following publication of the letter, Campaign Against Antisemitism issued a statement saying: “This letter is disturbing. It appears that our future king believed in 1986 that the ‘influx’ of Holocaust survivors to Israel were not ‘Semitic’, ‘cause great problems’ including terrorism, and should be ‘eliminated’, presumably through their removal. The letter also appears to endorse the view that Israel is not simply the result of Jewish self-determination in the historic Jewish homeland, but the result of bullying by an all-powerful ‘Jewish lobby’ which holds US presidents in its clutches. We view these comments as unmistakably antisemitic. However, since the letter was written, the Prince of Wales appears to have warmed to the Jewish community and we note his friendship with the former Chief Rabbi, Lord Sacks, as well as his attendance at the inauguration of the present Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis. In order to reassure the worldwide Jewish community, including Jews living in Israel, that the heir to the throne has changed his views, these historic remarks must urgently be repudiated by Prince Charles.”

In case you missed it: Recent notable EoZ articles

Here are some notable recent EoZ articles:

The biggest Israel-related story of the decade that no one (right or left) wants you to know

Why are prominent British Zionists so willing to push the fake Palestinian narrative?

UK diplomat admits "second half of Balfour" doesn't exist - but it SHOULD

Fisking Mahmoud Abbas' anti-Balfour article

Where are all the predicted NYC anti-Muslim hate crimes after the terror attack?

Three months after riots, Israel quietly reinstalls cameras at entrances to Temple Mount

"If UNRWA goes, the refugee issue is over"

"Shlomo Shekelberg" and using Jews as a political football

J-Street U says being against the Jewish State's existence is "nuanced debate"

Fact-free British columnist looks forward to Israel's destruction

Academic fraud Joseph Massad claims Ashkenazic Jews are really European

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.

Columbia professor Joseph Massad or Stormfront?

By Petra Marquardt-Bigman

A few days ago, EoZ highlighted the latest screed of Joseph Massad, who is a professor at Columbia University and an occasional contributor to Ali Abunimah’s “The Jewish state is our misfortune/Hail Hamas”-website. Elder wondered in his post what Massad’s sources or evidence might be, and I pondered the same question a few years ago, when I researched Massad’s writings on the evil Zionist entity for several articles. I found at least a partial answer: for some of his main “arguments,” Massad clearly relies on the kind of “evidence” that is popular at the neo-Nazi site Stormfront and that David Duke promoted in his “minor league Mein Kampf.”

You can read the post where I demonstrated this in considerable detail here (warning: it’s longish!); but if you don’t have the time, you can just take the quiz I posted back then to illustrate how hard it is to distinguish between Massad’s stuff and what’s popular on Stormfront (correct answers at the end of this post; some of the quotes have originally British spelling, I Americanized it to avoid giving the game away).

1) “Nazism was a boon to Zionism throughout the 1930s.”2) “For all intents and purposes, the National Socialist government was the best thing to happen to Zionism in its history.”3) “In Germany, the average Jews were victims of the Zionist elite who worked hand in hand with the Nazis.”4) “Hitler could have just confiscated all the Jewish wealth. Instead he used the ‘Haavara Program’ to help establish the State of Israel.”5) “Between 1933 and 1939, 60 percent of all capital invested in Jewish Palestine came from German Jewish money through the Transfer Agreement.”6) “In fact, contra all other German Jews (and everyone else inside and outside Germany) who recognized Nazism as the Jews’ bitterest enemy, Zionism saw an opportunity to strengthen its colonization of Palestine.”7) “Zionists welcomed the Nazis’ anti-Semitic policies. Like the Nazis, they believed in race-based national character and destiny. Like the Nazis, they believed Jews had no future in Germany.8) “the Zionist Federation of Germany […] supported the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, as they agreed with the Nazis that Jews and Aryans were separate and separable races. This was not a tactical support but one based on ideological similitude.”9) “Zionism […] developed the idea of the first racially separatist planned community for the exclusive use of Ashkenazi Jews, namely the Kibbutz.”10) “The Zionists were afraid that the ‘Jewish race’ was disappearing through assimilation.”

Before I let you find out how you did, I should perhaps note what I just found out: my articles on Massad got me an honorary mention on Stormfront! As I noted in my post back then, Stormfront members shared and debated Massad’s notorious Al Jazeera column “The last of the Semites,” which Jeffrey Goldberg immediately denounced as “one of the most anti-Jewish screeds in recent memory.”

A few weeks later, one Stormfront member came across my post and linked to it with some heartfelt compliments, including “not-so-hidden Hasbara shill” who writes a “stinking blog, brimful with Israeli propaganda, lies and deceit;” “a manic proponent of the Zionist doctrine and propaganda.” But the Stormfront member noted that reading my post wasn’t entirely a waste of time, because it lead to “another two very interesting Massad’s articles” – which s/he liked so much that s/he promptly shared them…

Oh well, I do think I deserve their disdain – and Columbia professor Joseph Massad deserves their admiration.

* * *

1) Massad 2) Stormfront 3) Stormfront 4) Stormfront 5) Massad 6) Massad 7) Stormfront 8) Massad 9) Massad 10) Stormfront

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.

11/13 Links Pt1: Pipes: Why Palestinian delusions persist; PA textbooks teach “martyrdom as a life goal”

From Ian:

Daniel Pipes: Why Palestinian delusions persist

In 1974, 2nd Lt. Hiroo Onoda of the Imperial Japanese Army was still fighting for his emperor, hiding in a Philippine jungle. He had rejected many attempts to inform him of Japan's surrender 29 years earlier. During those many years, he senselessly murdered about one Filipino and injured three others each year. Only a concerted effort by his former commander finally convinced Onoda that the emperor had accepted defeat in 1945 and therefore he too must lay down arms.

The Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza are Onoda writ large. They formally acknowledged defeat by Israel 24 years ago, when Yasser Arafat stood on the White House lawn and recognized "the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security." Trouble was, Arafat himself did not sincerely offer this act of surrender and most Palestinians rejected it.

Accordingly, the war continues, with Palestinians emulating that grizzled, vicious Japanese soldier: They, too, battle on for a failed cause, murder senselessly, and ignore repeated calls to surrender. Just as Onoda insisted on believing in a divine emperor, Palestinians inhabit a fantasy world in which, for example, Jesus was a Palestinian, Jerusalem was always exclusively Islamic, and Israel is the new Crusader state on the verge of collapse. (In this spirit, Iranian dictator Ali Khamenei has helpfully provided the precise date of Sep. 9, 2040, when Israel will vaporize, and his acolytes built a large doomsday clock to count down the days.) Some imagine Israel already gone, with nearly every Arabic map of "Palestine" showing it replacing the Jewish state.

How do Palestinians ignore reality and persist in these illusions? Due to three main factors: Islamic doctrine, international succor, and the wariness of the Israeli security services. (The Israeli Left was once a major factor but it barely counts anymore.)

PMW: Fatah official: Israel has a "fascist governmental plan, typical of Nazism"

In 2013, the Palestinian Football Association (PFA), headed by Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee Jibril Rajoub, launched an unfounded attack against the Israeli Football Association (IFA) in FIFA. The PFA claimed that the IFA is in breach of FIFA's statutes since six of its registered clubs play in what the PFA refers to as "its territory."

On Oct. 27, 2017, FIFA's Council rejected Rajoub and PFA's claim, deciding
[To] "refrain from imposing any sanctions or other measures on either the Israel FA or the Palestinian FA, as well as from requesting any other FIFA body to do so. The matter is declared closed..." [FIFA Council statement, Oct. 27, 2017]

While not acting on Rajoub's complaint, FIFA's council also said it would not act against the PFA. The basis for acting against the PFA was Palestinian Media Watch's complaint to FIFA's Disciplinary Committee which provided evidence that the PFA and Rajoub were inciting terror, glorifying terrorists, and promoting racism and Antisemitism.

In response, Rajoub continues to use denigratory and discriminatory language, saying Israel has a "fascist governmental plan... that is typical of Nazism," in breach of section 58 of FIFA's Disciplinary Code. Two days after FIFA's decision, Rajoub said:

"This is a blatant violation when they [Israelis] organize an official [football] league on lands that are not Israeli lands. Even the Israel [Football] Association did not dare to claim: "These lands belong to us." The one [Israel] who brings in politics and makes sport political is the one who works according to a fascist governmental plan, a government that is typical of Nazism. We have rights, and we will continue to demand them at the FIFA court in accordance with all the laws and regulations, and also the laws of Switzerland where FIFA is located."
[Official PA TV News, Oct. 29, 2017]

PMW will be submitting another complaint to FIFA against Rajoub's new breach of FIFA's Disciplinary Code.

New Palestinian Authority textbooks teach “martyrdom as a life goal”

For years we’ve been covering incitement on the part of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its failure to prepare Palestinian society for a resolution of the conflict via non-violent means.

The PA is viewed by the West as the ‘moderate’ Palestinian body and Israel’s supposed ‘partner for peace’, but as we’ve repeatedly highlighted, its officials routinely demonize Israel and glorify terrorists as national heroes. Young people are exposed to this radicalization, as schools and educational programs justify and condone the use of violence.

The sad reality is that a whole generation of Palestinian children is learning in schools and playing in sports fields and arenas named after mass murders.

Now a new study by the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education (IMPACT-se) documents how kids in Palestinian Authority-controlled areas are being further indoctrinated to hate through their schoolbooks.

Like earlier textbooks that were used to teach “over one million impressionable children”, the IMPACT-se report finds that the new textbooks—recently released as part of the PA’s first full reform of the educational curriculum since 2000—are still promoting the demonization of Israel.

But the IMPACT-se assessment also finds that the radicalization is pervasive across this new curriculum—to an even greater extent than before.

Basically, Palestinian children are being groomed to commit to jihad war and to sacrifice themselves to martyrdom.

A survey of civic organizations that have embraced the BDS agenda would show a number of groups (possibly a majority) in a state of institutional collapse. Which surfaces the question of whether dying organizations tend to embrace BDS on their way to oblivion vs. the embrace of the BDS being the cause (vs. the symptom) of decay.

An example I’ve covered ad nauseam for the “dying institutions embrace BDS” argument is the US Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) which voted in BDS in 2004, only to overturn that vote in 2006 with subsequent votes in 2008, 2010 and 2012 also ratifying lack of interest for returning to the BDS fold.

Like the University of Michigan - now about to enjoy its tenth referendum on boycotting Israel - the Presbyterian Church was never going to be left alone by the Israel haters until they finally voted as they were told (which they finally did in 2014 when they reinstated their BDS credentials).

Those who understood church politics well enough to see past the BDS issue understood that boycott votes that took place year after year after year were a symptom of a much deeper problem within the church having nothing to do with Israel or the Middle East. For the Presbyterian Church, like all Mainstream Protestant denominations in the US, has seen membership decline by 50% over the last several decades and has struggled to stay relevant in a world where people are not interested in listening to what the church has to say, much less joining a dying institution.

This collapse of membership can be traced to changes in the wider culture, notably secularization and the rise of popular Evangelical Christianity. Both of these factors created competition for the Mainline Protestant denominations (which include Methodists, Episcopalians, Lutherans as well as different branches of Presbyterianism) who tried to deal with these challenges through a logical approach that only accelerated their decline.

Why, thought the Mainliners decades ago when these trends were becoming apparent, should we be making it easy for people to join Evangelical churches or abandon church affiliation altogether by making it harder to understand, much less embrace, the creed of one Protestant sect over another? Why, in other words, should subtle and difficult-to-understand doctrinal difference between Methodist and Presbyterian (for example) become a barrier for someone to join either church?

And so the Mainline churches joined together in ecumenical communion in which these differences in doctrine were played down in order to stress what united vs. what separated one Mainline institution from another.

Perfectly reasonable, most of us would agree even today. But as it turned out de-emphasizing what made it unique to be a Presbyterian made it difficult to explain what unique value one would get out of becoming one. And having put aside religious disputes to focus on areas of agreement, what most churches found agreement on was secular politics.

This swing towards politics had two unintended consequences.

First, it helped to accelerate the decline of every church participating in this strategy. For, as it turned out, if all the church was offering were ways to participate in social justice causes, then it was competing with a host of secular organizations, many of them offering more direct and effective opportunities to fight for those same causes. More importantly for readers of this site, the focus on politics made these organizations vulnerable to those who wanted to leverage church reputation for their own political ends.

And this is the true cause of how BDS became Presbyterian dogma, replacing older dustier traditions outlined in the church’s Book of Order, as the source of militant, decades-long debate. It was during the course of this transition that church leaders rose to their positions fully committed to the anti-Israel cause – regardless of what harm it might do to the church they purported to lead.

And thus the corruption that led to countless BDS votes turned an organization that once served as backbone to US cultural life into nursing home for aging members and clergy, led by officials more interested in overseeing the decline of a politically homogenous institution than building up a church that might stray from now doctrinal anti-Israel animus.

So here we have an example of how a dying religious institution tried to redefine itself as a secular political one, only to see its collapse accelerate as outsiders with no interest in the church scavenged the remains in hope of giving their BDS agenda unearned weight. One can see secular examples of similar “Walking Dead” institutions in groups like the Lawyer’s Guild.

With PCUSA as the exemplar of the “dying institutions tend to embrace BDS” hypothesis, we will next turn to an example where the embrace of Israel hatred preceded organization disintegration: The Quakers.

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.

Arab and Muslim paranoia about Israel continues

Three completely different articles from wildly different Arab and Muslim sources all agree that Israel is behind everything.

From the Daily News Egypt:

All developments in the region are in favour of Israel, and lead it to regional and civil wars, former Egyptian assistant to the foreign minister, Hussein Haridy, said.
He added that the US president’s speech in October, the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariry, and the recent developments in Saudi Arabia, all revealed a plan to eliminate Iran’s influence in the Arab region, as a prelude to a general confrontation, where all conflicting parties would stand to lose, except Israel. If the Israeli plan succeeds, they would end up with a declaration of the Greater Israel.
Why is Israel involved in this confrontation? One of the goals of this war is to stop the expansion of the Iranian belt from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea. Israel and Saudi Arabia share that goal, whether by agreement or not.So Israel is the main player in the current scene? Israel is the catalyst of events and its interests coincide with American arms manufacturers’. The Israeli strategy does not only aim at the elimination of Iran but also exhausting the main Arab forces and draining their economic resources, in preparation for establishing Greater Israel.What do you mean by Greater Israel? For the first time since the establishment of the State of Israel, it will have borders, as it is considered the only United Nations member without internationally recognized borders so far. This is the undeclared goal.Is Sinai part of this scheme? The Israeli scheme had four phases: the first phase was the Balfour Declaration, the second phase was the establishment of the so-called State of Israel, the third phase was the 1967 aggression, and we are witnessing now the final phase. At one time, Sinai was part of the Zionist project since its launch.It is known that Al-Arish was an alternative to the establishment of the Israeli homeland before the Ottoman Empire rejected that. Regardless of this rejection, there was an agreement between the British and the World Zionist Movement to replace Al-Arish with Palestine. When the two state solution was suggested, the Israeli side thought of expanding the Gaza Strip westward to absorb the density of population. This proposal was met with approval under the rule of the [Muslim] Brotherhood in Egypt.So the 30 June revolution aborted this scheme? It destroyed this project, which put the Zionist and Turkish forces and those who were behind this project in an awkward position, and made the Arab world preoccupied with confronting Iran. Unfortunately, the engine and the beneficiary is Israel.

I am trying to figure out the logic behind all this, but I can't. In the end - everything happening in the Arab and Muslim world is Israel's fault and Israel is using all the chaos to expand. Why Israel gave up the Sinai and much of the West Bank and Gaza are questions that only someone as smart as Hussein Haridy can answer, I guess.

From KashmirWatch:

Despite the repeated assurances of Pakistan’s military and civil leadership that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are well-protected and are under tight security arrangements, having well-coordinated command and control system, a deliberate propaganda campaign against the safety of these weapons keeps on going by the US, India and some Western countries who are acting upon the Zionist agenda to ‘denuclearize’ Pakistan.
It is mentionable that being the only nuclear country in the Islamic World, Pakistan was already on the hit-list of the US, India and Israel, including some Western countries. Based in Afghanistan, American CIA, Indian RAW, Israeli Mossad and British MI6 which have well-established their covert networks there and are well-penetrated in the terrorist outfits like the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and their affiliated Taliban groups are using their terrorists to destabilize Pakistan by arranging the subversive activities such as target killings, suicide attacks, hostage-takings, sectarian and ethnic violence in various cities of the country. Now, these foreign entities have also started backing the Islamic State group (Also known as Daesh, ISIS, ISIL) in order to weaken Pakistan through terrorist acts.

...These Zionist-controlled foreign elements have, again, started terror attacks in Pakistan to show that nuclear weapons of the country are insecure.
Overtly, American high officials remark that they seek stability in Pakistan, but covertly, they continue to destabilize it to obtain the illegitimate interests of Israel.

This gibberish was originally written in the "Veterans Today" antisemitic conspiracy site.

From Iran's Abna24:

Iranian Parliament’s General Director for International Affairs Hossein Amir-Abdollahian underlined the role of the United States and the Zionist regime in crisis in Middle East and said “the Zionists are after controlling the region.”
Hossein Amir-Abdollahian made the remarks in a televised interview with Negah-e Yek on Saturday.
Referring to the resignation of Lebanon’s PM, Amir-Abdollahian said “during the last 6 years, simultaneous with the Islamic awakening, an unholy alliance was forged between the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia through which they resorted to various means, such as ISIS, in order to suit their fundamental purpose.”
“Defeating ISIS, with all the support it had received from terrorists and super-powers, was a major step that was taken in about three years. ISIS had set the destabilization of the region as its primary objective and wanted to effect demographic change through tribal conflicts,” added Amir-Abdollahian.
“When they realized ISIS had failed in the region, they forced the referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan. But Masoud Barzani was only used as a means to an end,” he went on.
“Americans gave Barzani the green light. Barzani had asked Israel to maintain peace, but he stood alone, so Israel finally had to take measures. Iran provided the greatest support for Kurds in this situation,” said Iranian Parliament’s General Director for International Affairs.
“The Zionists are after controlling the region, but their plots have failed. Their next plan is to disturb peace in the region. They will accept peace and security in the region only when Israel is in peace and other countries, even Saudi Arabia, are destroyed and separated,” he went on.

The old ways of thinking that Israel and Jews must be behind everything have never left the Arab and Muslim world.

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.

Terror suspect found innocent by Israeli military court? I thought that never happens!

Human Rights Watch wrote in June:

Israeli authorities have incarcerated hundreds of thousands of Palestinians since 1967, the majority after trials in military courts, which have a near-100 percent conviction rate.

The "hundreds of thousands" claim is unsourced, in keeping with HRW's careful adherence to anti-Israel lies. I've looked at the statistics on how many Palestinians have been incarcerated and the numbers are much, much lower than the 800,000 that Palestinian NGOs like to spout, and that HRW believes without question.

What about the near 100% conviction rate? That comes from a Haaretz article from 2011, and that is the only source ever cited for that claim.

Have things changed since then? No one has bothered to check. But the figure is quoted, over and over again, as if it is current. Which shows again how much HRW cares about the facts.

CAMERA has looked at this statistic, and showed that in the US in the same year:

the US military's “conviction rate for all crimes is more than 90 percent.” This rate includes conviction for all crimes including sexual assaults; the sexual assault conviction rate was only 27%, bringing the total conviction rate down.
In US federal civilian criminal courts, the conviction rate is slightly higher. For fiscal year 2015, the most recent year for which data is available, 94.2 percent of criminal defendants in federal district courts either pleaded guilty or were convicted, and 91.8 percent of criminal defendants in federal magistrate courts either pleaded guilty or were convicted.

CAMERA gives various reasons for the high conviction rate, mostly that prosecutors in Israel have huge incentives to only bring cases that have enough evidence to result in conviction.

So it is interesting to see a seeming exception that was just reported:

A Palestinian prisoner was exonerated by an Israeli court on Thursday from charges against him alleging that he carried out a bombing at an Israeli hotel in 2015.

According to Lawyer Yousif Nasasra of the Palestinian Committee of Prisoner’s Affairs, Jerusalemite Khalil al-Nimr, 23, was detained on November 30th, 2015 over accusations of carrying out an explosion that targeted the Rio Hotel in the southern Israeli city of Eilat.
According to a statement from Nasasra, al-Nimr was proved innocent on Thursday after several court sessions.

How can this be if the courts are stacked against Palestinians? Why would anyone be exoneratred?

I guess it is court-washing.

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.