Wednesday, June 13, 2018

From Ian:

Bipartisan Bill to Counter Palestinian Textbooks That ‘Demonize Israel’ Introduced in Congress
Members of Congress have brought forward a bipartisan bill to review textbooks and other materials used in Palestinian schools that have been accused of promoting extremism.

The Palestinian Authority Educational Curriculum Transparency Act — introduced in the House of Representatives on Thursday by Rep. David Young (R-Iowa) — calls on the US State Department to annually verify whether educational resources published by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the United Nations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip continue to encourage “violence or intolerance toward other nations or ethnic groups.”

The bill notes that despite being reformed in 2016 and 2017, Palestinian curriculums for grades 1 through 11 “fail to meet the international standards of peace and tolerance in educational materials established by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.”

Textbooks used by the PA and the UN’s Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) likewise “demonize Israel, encourage war, and teach children that Palestinian statehood can be achieved through violence,” it warns.

UNRWA — which has in the past asserted that its textbooks have been rigorously reviewed to ensure they are in line with UN standards — maintains 349 schools in the Palestinian territories, with 240,400 students in Gaza and 50,000 students in the West Bank.

If passed, the State Department will be required to inform Congress whether any US foreign aid was used to fund the inciting materials, and of any steps the PA and UNRWA have taken to address the situation.
False Terminology and the Delegitimization of Israel
Furthermore, when Israel pre-empts attacks, it is the aggressor, when it responds to attacks, its response is disproportionate, when it is attacked, it deserves little sympathy because of the occupation. In effect, the liberal media whitewashes the disproportionality of the Islamic terror onslaught on Israeli Jews as a “natural response” to “settlement growth” or “glimmering hopes of peace”, while requiring Israel to adhere to artificial under-proportionality “norms” when dealing with the homicidal national security threats.

This is not neutral reporting, this a concerted effort to create an anti-Israel bias and resentment, bordering on incitement.

Then there are false clichés and expressions that are used left and right. Take the “peace process”, for example. No sane person would choose war over peace, yet if the “peace process” is in fact a cynical euphemism for Israeli land surrender without enforceable long-term security guarantees, no sane person would support it, unless, like many Western liberals, he believes that the land is stolen in the first place.

Despite the obvious falsity of this claim, it is impossible to fully rebut it as long as one continues to call the land “Palestine” and the Arabs “Palestinians”. The same goes for other liberal mantras, such as the “two-state solution” rather than proposal, the “cycle of violence”, which is equates terrorism with self-defense and security measures, or the “land-for-peace” formula, which has the accuracy of a Russian roulette.

The unravelling of these false myths will not come about until the false terminology is unravelled together with them. All those who value truth and integrity must call these terms for what they are: false euphemisms, misnomers or canards.

Once the anti-Israel jargon is replaced with the historically accurate, logical and balanced terminology, the demonization and delegitimisation of Israel would lose its appeal for the decent but largely ignorant majority, and the unique story of Israel as a nation risen from the ashes of the Holocaust and the two thousand years of exile would give inspiration and hope to people around the world.
The Palestinians’ ‘Kitetifada’ deserves an ignoble prize
With Hamas’s “Kitetifada,” Palestinians are pushing new frontiers in terrorism, again – while giving nationalism a bad name, again.

It’s become a routine surprise to watch the world overlook Palestinians’ assaults on international norms. One day their goons threaten Argentinean soccer stars – and everybody blames Miri Regev for the “Messi mess.” (Even while criticizing her grandstanding, let’s acknowledge that boycotters don’t need her to prompt their thuggishness.) Before and after that debacle, Palestinians violate the Geneva Convention’s ban on attacking foodstuffs or crops, and everybody blames Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu for the American embassy to Jerusalem move.

We should be used to this selective perception and moral prosecution-as-persecution. Still, it’s disappointing that many who renounce nationalism because they dislike Trump’s aggressiveness nevertheless tolerate Palestinians’ violence.

It’s become one of this spring’s big underreported stories. Once again being honest, exposing the “March of Return” as an attempt to destroy its neighbor, Hamas launched hundreds of combustible, often poisonous kites and balloons.

The kites – in a touch no novelist or anti-Palestinian propagandist would dare concoct – were exposed by Adele Raemer of Kibbutz Nirim and other intrepid bloggers as gifts from the Japanese people to Gaza’s children. While Israel’s air defenses have intercepted as many as 500 burning kites, another 300 or so have set more than 270 fires, destroying 2,510 hectares of land, including vast parts of the Be’eri Crater Nature Reserve. Once known for its red carpets of anemones every February, its gazelles, its porcupines, its turtles, the reserve is now scarred by tens of hectares of newly blackened wasteland.

The Geneva Convention’s 1977 protocols proclaim: “It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works... whatever the motive.”


Varda Epstein’s recent review of my book Ten From The Nations: Torah Awakening Among Non-Jews offers me a perfect opportunity to elaborate on how I see the world and why I do what I do. To the best of my knowledge, Varda and I have met exactly once, fleetingly. Nevertheless, we maintain a mutually respectful, professional relationship and admire one another’s work. It’s important to mention that at the outset because, although our viewpoints differ on a number of issues, civility is important to both of us. And I thank Varda for her graciousness in giving me a chance to respond.
I spend a significant amount of time each week building bridges with people from the Nations. Most of them come from Christian backgrounds, although many of the people with whom I interact no longer consider themselves mainstream Christians. A huge part of what distinguishes them from the rest of the 2.2 billion Christians worldwide is their fascination with Israel, with the Torah and with the Jewish people. Although they identify variously as Christian Zionists, as Ephraimites, as Bnei Noach or as gerei toshav, they are united in their understanding that the Jewish people have something to offer them.
I believe we are in an unprecedented time in history when, after 2,000 years of anti-Semitic pogroms, forced conversions and murder of Jews by Christians, there are now Christians who are singing a whole new song to the Jewish people. These are the people whose stories I published in Ten From The Nations and whose spiritual longings to get closer to Israel and to authentic Torah I both admire and work to nurture. In a nutshell, these are not your grandparents’ goyim. These are not the non-Jews you’ve been taught to fear, mistrust and hold at arm’s length.
I was raised to mistrust non-Jews at worst and to see them as irrelevant to my life at best. Since becoming involved in this work, my viewpoint has changed. It took a series of paradigm shifts for me to get to where I am now. 
As I see it, Varda and I differ in our understanding about three main issues.

A) Do all Christians have a missionizing agenda?
B) To whom does the Torah belong?
C) Do the Jewish people have any responsibility to non-Jews?
I’ll address these one at a time.
Do all Christians have a missionizing agenda? I believe that the vast majority still do. At the same time, I have personally met hundreds of people coming from Christian backgrounds who actively repent for the sins that have been committed against the Jewish people for 2,000 years. They have put to rest the fallacious and destructive ideas behind Replacement Theology and no longer believe that Christianity replaced Torah and that Christians replaced the Jewish people in God’s eyes. In the main, it was the return of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel that rocked their theology and caused them to reexamine the most fundamental truths they had been taught. Rather than being the “strange ducks” that Varda suggests, I believe they are spiritual leaders who buck the potent forces of convention to follow Truth.

It has been suggested that only 1% of Christians today have renounced Replacement Theology. On the one hand, 1% is a tiny minority. On the other hand, 1% is 22 million people.  And that’s enough to keep me busy for the rest of my life.
I wish to be very clear. I find the proselytizing of Jews odious. I have zero tolerance for it. The relationships I build with people from the Nations are based on mutual respect. We agree to let our differences be settled by God at the End of Days. In the meantime, we inhabit the space where our worldviews overlap – a love of God, a love for Israel, a longing for Torah and a joy at seeing Biblical prophecy fulfilled in our days.

To whom does the Torah belong? I used to believe that Torah was the exclusive property of the Jewish people and its precepts were for us alone. Over time, the words of the Torah itself convinced me that it was intended, from the beginning, to be shared with the Nations. I believe that the Jewish people were tasked with being guardians of the Torah – until the rest of the world was ready for its teachings. Then we were intended to become the teachers of Torah to people from the Nations, while maintaining our unique relationship with God’s Holy texts.
Do the Jewish people have any responsibility to non-Jews? There are dozens of verses in Tanach, and also in our liturgy, even during Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, that speak of a time when the entire world will worship the One True God, the God of Israel. I believe that time has dawned. The shift is already taking place. Just as it says in the Book of Zechariah, people from the Nations are aligning with the Jewish people and begging, “Teach us about God.” This is unprecedented and the exact thing for which we have been preparing for 3,300 years.
Varda wrote, Being a ‘light unto the nations’ doesn’t mean preaching Torah to them. It means being a good and moral example. No more, no less.” I also used to think exactly as she does. Now I see things differently. Today, I understand that fulfilling our God-given role as Ohr LaGoyim means that, when the Nations are receptive, we are obligated to teach them. Without question, the people I teach are desperately hungry for authentic Torah. It may not yet be the tafkid of the Jewish people as a whole, but I believe that Hashem has given this task to me personally, to serve among the group of Jews who are willing to build bridges with people from the Nations, using Torah as a primary tool.

Varda wrote, “I don’t understand why any Jew wants to help these people, instead of their own people, as a calling. I think that’s bizarre.” Working with non-Jews is an important part of my life, but it is not the only thing I do in life. For me, it’s not “instead of”. Rather it is “in addition to”. We are not all intended to do the same work in the world. Each of us is uniquely qualified for certain tasks. I believe, with all my heart and soul, that Hashem chose this challenging work for me personally. As Varda correctly said, I do indeed see it as holy work.

It would be misleading if I didn’t acknowledge that there are landmines in this work. There are things I see, hear and read that make the Jew in me cringe. All is not sweetness and light. We are building something new and it’s a huge and, oftentimes, messy job. I accept that as part of the process. I see Hashem’s Hand in bringing geula closer by re-aligning the relationship between Jews and people from the Nations. I can be patient.
I realize that, no matter what I say, there are people who will remain unconvinced. I accept that as part of the nature of what I do. If you have questions you’d like to ask me, I can be reached at editor@tenfromthenations.com. I’m happy to conduct a respectful dialogue with anyone who is interested. 



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.
Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory



Check out their Facebook page.


barbed wireGaza City, June 14 - Openness that many hope will come in the aftermath of a summit between the leaders of the US and North Korea has officials in the Islamist movement that governs Gaza hoping they can provide expertise to the dictator of the latter country in such areas where they have significant experience, such as depriving one's population of essential goods and investing resources instead in near-suicidal, Sisyphean projects for purposes of threatening neighbors.

A spokesman for Hamas told reporters today (Wednesday) that while the long-term outcome of the warming relations between the US and North Korea remains undetermined, Kim Jong-un's administration in Pyongyang could benefit from more than a decade of experience that the organization has accrued since overthrowing Fatah in a violent coup in 2007.

"Mr. Kim has much to learn from us, and we are willing teachers," stated Yahya Sinwar, who leads the movement within the Gaza Strip. "The many parallels between our situations invite collaboration across a range of issues, but most importantly, we have much in common in our preference for conflict over prosperity. Both societies stand to gain from a sharing of information and expertise in that arena."

"Of course our situations differ somewhat, in that non of our people are starving, thanks to the UN, whereas Kim starves his own people," continued Sinwar. "But the principle remains the same. He diverts crucial resources that could feed his people into his nuclear and military programs, whereas we allocate every available dollar to tunnels for attacking Israel and smuggling or hiding weapons for killing Israelis, but overall, we're engaged in the same kind of activity, and I'm sure we can help each other out."

"It's telling that the Trump-Kim summit took place in Singapore," remarked Ismail Haniyeh, whom Sinwar succeeded in Gaza and now heads Hamas's political echelon from Qatar. "It's always Singapore that our critics cite in noting that we have chosen to make fighting Israel our only priority rather than invest in peaceful infrastructure and economic enhancements - that we could be like Singapore if we stopped making jihad our raison d'être. Well, we'd rather be like North Korea, thank you very much. We already have so much in common: an alliance with Iran, ties to Syria, a knack for abusing our own people, taking and holding foreign hostages, and a dream of conquering territory that we have pursued for decades despite that quest condemning our people to prolonged suffering."




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.
From Ian:

Shin Bet chief reveals Israel has prevented 250 terror attacks in 2018
Using traditional and new big-data abilities, the Shin Bet has prevented 250 terrorist attacks so far in 2018, director Nadav Argaman told a group of visiting interior security ministers Wednesday at a closed session of a Jerusalem international conference on terrorism.

Though Argaman’s presentation was closed to the public, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) provided a summary to the media.

Argaman said that the agency had succeeded in blocking major terrorist attacks involving suicide bombings, kidnappings and shootings.

The Shin Bet chief said that especially big-data abilities had helped the agency to hone in on lone-wolf attackers in a way that was impossible before Israeli intelligence advanced its abilities in massively tracking postings on social media.

Argaman said that the Shin Bet was striking the right balance between continuing its effective human intelligence collection programs and new cyber intelligence gathering abilities.

One of the flagship issues was to stay ahead of the curve when using technology to fight terrorism. He previously disclosed that under his leadership, the Shin Bet’s technological workforce has jumped from single digits to representing around one-quarter of the work force.

Argaman also emphasized the importance of “strategic cooperation with our international partners in Israel and overseas as well as with the Israeli hi-tech community and other civilian bodies.”
JPost Editorial: Did Trump achieve what Obama couldn't?
During his term of office, US president Barack Obama was roundly slammed by his critics for pushing away traditional allies in favor of new alliances. How could he block out friends like Israel and Saudi Arabia in favor of the radical regime in Iran, they shouted, even if it was aimed at reaching a deal to curb its nuclear ambitions and ultimately make the world safer?

Life is full of irony, as this week we’ve seen Obama’s successor, US President Donald Trump, take more or less the same tack.

Over the weekend, he went on the attack at a Group of Seven summit in Canada in an escalating clash over trade between Washington and some of its closest global partners. He alienated NATO allies, the European Union and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and backed out of a joint communique that attempted to reach a fragile consensus on the trade issue.

Leaving America’s traditional alliances frayed, Trump left the summit early to fly to Singapore ahead of Tuesday’s history-in-the-making summit with Kim Jong Un of North Korea, one of America’s bitterest foes.

And history-making it was. In a stark contrast to the now-famous weekend G7 shot of the US president petulantly staring up at a gaggle of stern-faced world leaders, Trump and the North Korean dictator shook hands with big smiles, while disproving the naysayers who, based upon the summit-on/summit-off seesaw of the past couple weeks, expected something outrageous, dangerous or embarrassing to take place – if the summit went through at all.

After all, Trump boasted that he would be able to ascertain Kim’s motives and sincerity within the first minute of meeting him. Kim must have impressed Trump, because in a substantial move that would have been unthinkable a year ago, the two leaders signed a joint statement pledging to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula while Washington stated its commitment to provide security guarantees for its longtime enemy.
The "Trump Doctrine" for the Middle East
Trump has shown the strength of the United States and restored its credibility in a region where strength and force determine credibility.

Trump more broadly laid the foundation for a new alliance of the United States with the Sunni Arab world, but he put two conditions on it: a cessation of all Sunni Arab support for Islamic terrorism and an openness to the prospect of a regional peace that included Israel.

Secretary of State Pompeo spoke of the "Palestinians", not of the Palestinian Authority, as in Iran, possibly to emphasize the distinction between the people and their leadership, and that the leadership in both situations, may no longer be part of the solution. Hamas, for the US, is clearly not part of any solution.

Netanyahu rightly said that Palestinian leaders, whoever they may be, do not want peace with Israel, but "peace without Israel". What instead could take place would be peace without the Palestinian leaders. What could also take place would be peace without the Iranian mullahs.

  • Wednesday, June 13, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
I have mentioned many times before that Palestinians aren't interested in building a state, but in destroying one.

The latest evidence for this comes from a new upcoming edition of the Encyclopedia of Palestine.

The author states the purpose of the book in the introduction: "to refute the Jewish claim to their historical right in Palestine."

That's Palestinianism in a nutshell - to deny Jewish history.

Just imagine any other encyclopedia whose introduction says that its purpose isn't to teach the history of the cover subject, but to refute the history of an entirely different group of people.

Of course, the book has to create a fake history where Arabs inhabited Palestine before Jews.

"The right of the Arabs in Palestine is immaculate and true. They are connected to it, and inhabited it since the dawn of its history and before there were Jews in the world," the book is quoted as saying.

Meaning that suddenly the Hittites. Jebusites, Amorites and other Canaanites were somehow all Arab.

Which they weren't.

So we have an entire encyclopedia, purportedly a scholarly work that should be in all Palestinian schools and libraries, that simply makes things up in order to deny Jewish history.





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.
  • Wednesday, June 13, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon


I reported yesterday that a UN report on gender based violence, ignored by the media, mentioned very matter of factly that Palestinian men systematically abuse their wives, sisters and daughters.

The report noted that Palestinian wives as subject to physical and emotional abuse from their husbands when any source of frustration enters the husbands' lives. Also that many Palestinian women are forced by their families to marry against their will, many of those while still children. And even in cases of the husband dying, the wives are not given the freedom to raise their children as they see fit, and the husband's family forces the widow to act as they desire, sometimes forcing her to marry the brother of the deceased.

This is the everyday reality of Palestinian women that can be seen if one digs deep in UN reports. These details are rarely reported in the West.

Now, right after the UNFP report, comes the news that the UN Economic and Social Council passed a draft resolution on the "situation of and assistance to Palestinian women.'

The resolution, after a long anti-Israel preamble, starts off with a statement that even the UN knows is a lie:
Reaffirms that the Israeli occupation remains the major obstacle for Palestinian women with regard to their advancement, self-reliance and integration in the development of their society...
The resolution effectively hurts Palestinian women by ignoring the very real misogyny in Palestinian society and instead instructing the world to only concentrate on Israel's fictional role in their being discriminated against. Palestinian women are forced to remain silent about the real problems they have in fear of retribution for diluting the unified Palestinian message of always blaming Israel for everything, no matter how absurd.






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.
  • Wednesday, June 13, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
A couple of days after a demonstration in central Ramallah demanding that Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority lift their sanctions on Gaza, the PA has responded.

By making such demonstrations illegal.

The same group had planned to hold another demonstration tonight, the first day of Eid al Fitr, but the Palestinian Authority issued a statement  "prohibiting the granting of permits to organize marches or to establish gatherings that will disrupt the movement of citizens and cause confusion, and affect the course of normal life during the holiday."

Gaza groups saw through the game right away. Two groups, the Mujahadeen Movement and the PFLP, issued statements denouncing the PA and supporting the demonstrators.

The Sunday rally was actually much larger than I had reported. The movement behind the anti-Abbas rallies released this photo:


This is democracy, Palestinian style.





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.

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: -Palestinians: No Place for Gays
On June 8, an estimated 250,000 people attended the Gay Pride Parade in Tel Aviv. Tourists from all around the world came to Israel to watch and participate in the event. The theme of this year's event is "The Community Makes History" -- a reference to the LGBT community in Israel.

Meanwhile, as the Israelis were celebrating tolerance on the streets of Tel Aviv, their Palestinian neighbors were busy doing precisely the opposite: they were demanding that people should be fired for producing a television comedy about gay people in the Gaza Strip.

The controversial program, called "Out of Focus," has drawn strong condemnations from Palestinians, who are now calling for punishing those responsible for "insulting Arab and Islamic values."

In Palestinian and Arab society, homosexuality is denounced and stigmatized. Homosexuality is illegal under Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip, and dozens of gay Palestinians have fled to Israel out of fear of persecution and harassment. In the West Bank, the laws of the Palestinian Authority also do not protect the rights of gay Palestinians.
Expert_ Palestine fails international law test for statehood at ICC
Experts need to continue to press back on the International Criminal Court’s recognition of Palestine as a state, because “there is still time and room to counter this,” international law scholar Andrew Tucker told The Jerusalem Post.

Tucker and Matthijs De Blois of The Hague Initiative for International Cooperation held a press conference along with NGO Monitor and its legal expert, Anne Herzberg, on Thursday night to discuss their book Israel on Trial: The Role of the UN and the EU in Lawfare and the Delegitimization of Israel, which advocates for Israeli positions on a range of international law issues, including dropping the ICC war crimes probe of Israelis.

Tucker said while he recognized that the ICC Prosecution and the ICC’s legislative body – the Assembly of State Parties – recognized Palestine as a state in 2015, enabling it to ask the ICC Prosecution to probe alleged Israeli war crimes, he said a party could file a motion with the ICC’s Pretrial Chamber to veto the ICC Prosecution’s acceptance of Palestine as a state.

If Palestine was ruled not to be a state by the ICC Pretrial Chamber, then the ICC Prosecution’s probe of Israelis would likely fall by the wayside.

While Tucker would argue numerous points for why Palestine fails the test of international law for statehood, he emphasized the Palestinian Authority’s inability to effectively govern the West Bank and Gaza as a single state.

  • Tuesday, June 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
Haaretz has a fascinating article:

The decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to pull his country out of the Iran nuclear deal has already wreaked widespread economic damage to Iranians. According to intelligence assessments presented to Israeli leaders, the chain reaction of the American decision last month has been more severe than originally forecast.

Some American companies, among them airplane manufacturer Boeing and General Electric, which signed contracts to supply equipment to Iran’s outdated oil industry, are already preparing to halt their investments in the country.

It was reported this week that sports equipment maker Nike canceled at the last minute a delivery of soccer cleats to the Iranian national squad, which is participating in the World Cup starting Friday in Russia. In Europe, British Petroleum announced that it would end its investment partnership with the Iranian oil company in deep-sea drilling off the Scottish coast.

According to Israeli intelligence, Iran had hoped to reap sizeable profits from deals with European and American companies during the coming period. However, now the Tehran regime faces abandonment by companies that already signed contracts, in addition to the negotiations with other companies, because of the American move. Thus, internal pressure on the regime, in the form of frequent demonstrations by the opposition in cities across the country, is also coming into play. Most of the demonstrations focus on the cost of living.

Israeli intelligence officials have the impression that the double economic pressure, domestically and from abroad, is accelerating the division at the top of the regime between the conservative camp and the more moderate one. Part of the dispute involves the question of Iranian foreign aid to terrorist and guerilla organizations across the Middle East. According to various assessments, Tehran disburses nearly $1 billion annually to these clients, including Hezbollah, Shi’ite militias fighting on its behalf for the Assad regime in Syria, Houthi rebels in Yemen and two Palestinian organizations in the Gaza Strip, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The moderate camp supports cutting these expenditures. Some protesters in Iran have made vocal calls or waved signs condemning the use of government funds for these purposes at the expense of the Iranian people.
Boeing last week said that it will not be delivering any equipment to Iran:
Boeing will not deliver aircraft to Iran in light of US sanctions, effectively aborting a pair of large contracts with Iranian carriers, a Boeing spokesman said on Wednesday.

“We have not delivered any aircraft to Iran, and given we no longer have a license to sell to Iran at this time, we will not be delivering any aircraft,” the Boeing spokesman said.
Peugeot suspended its Iran expansion plans. Mazda and Hyundai suspended deals.  And Iran's Mehr news agency lists even more companies pulling out:

South Korea’s Daelim Industrial said on Friday that a contract worth 2.23 trillion won ($2.08 billion) for a refinery project in Iran was canceled amid the fear of sanctions from Trump administration.
The order was canceled as the Esfahan Refinery Upgrading Project failed to procure financing because of economic sanctions imposed on Iran, Daelim said in a regulatory filing.
In recent weeks, European companies such as oil giant Total SA, plane maker Airbus SE and industrial conglomerate Siemens AG have said they were pulling back from Iran opportunities to comply with US sanctions.
General Electric Co. also is closing its office in Tehran due to the US sanctions on Iran. The company is planning to end sales of oil and natural-gas equipment later this year in Iran, people familiar with the matter said
 The good news is that Iran is still keeping its end of JCPOA in fear of losing even more business from Europe.

From all indications, all the people who warned that Trump scuttling the deal would be catastrophic have been shown to be 100% wrong.

(h/t Yoel)




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.


  • Tuesday, June 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon


The United Nations Population Fund has written a report about the dangers to Gaza women as a result of the "Great Return March."

The report proves that Palestinian society is pretty sick.

The report identifies four groups of Gaza women who are negatively impacted by the riots.

Mothers with injured children  reported increased gender-based violence, especially psychological/emotional violence as mothers were often blamed by their husbands and other family members for ‘allowing’ their children to participate. 
So - Gaza women can be beaten for allowing their children to go to a march, or pretty much anything else.

 Women whose husbands have been killed or injured during the demonstrations are expected to meet the financial needs of the family, which is difficult in a situation with a high unemployment rate. Moreover, widows and wives who were subjected to forced child marriage often do not have proper education, which makes the job search even more difficult. 
Oh, by the way, a significant number of Palestinian women are child brides.
Widowed women are in higher risk of immediate psychological/emotional and economic violence by family members, as some are expected to re-marry, potentially with a brother of the former husband. Additionally, the family of the late husband will often take control over the finances. 83.7 percent of the males killed are between the age of 18-39, which means that many of the women left behind are around the age of thirty, and, therefore, still perceived by society to be able to remarry, thereby risking the custody of their children. 
Oh, by the way, many Palestinian women are treated like they have no rights whatsoever. They cannot decide what is best for their families even after the death of their husbands.

Girl children who lost a father or who are expected to have a father with disability are in increased risk of forced child marriage due to reduced income as the father/husband is usually the breadwinner of the family. Marrying off daughters is perceived as a protection mechanism to ensure the livelihood of girl children. In reality, it turns out to be a negative copying mechanism.
And it is not only adult Palestinian women who are treated like garbage, but girls as well.

The report pretty much says that as much as Gaza women's lives already were terrible where they are forced to do whatever their husbands or husband's family says, the riots can make their lives even worse.

But who is actually talking about how bad their lives are to begin with? No that is a taboo topic, because if Israel cannot be blamed for how misogynist Palestinian society is, then the media and world is simply not interested.

(h/t G)



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.
From Ian:

PA: We will continue to support terrorists and their families
The Palestinian Authority (PA) government in Ramallah sent a defiant message to the United States and Israel on Monday regarding its support for terrorists and their families.

Yusuf al-Mahmoud, spokesman for the PA government, said in this context that "there is no force in the world that can cause us to renounce our prisoners and the martyrs."

He said Israel bore full responsibility for the situation of the Palestinian Arabs and claimed that it was "stealing their money on the pretext of offsetting tax revenues."

Last week, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu instructed Meir Shabbat, chief of Israel’s National Security Council, to deduct money from the taxes collected by Israel on behalf of the Palestinian Authority in order to pay for the damage from fires caused by Gazan rioter-terrorists sending kites attached to firebombs into Israeli territory.

Last week, Gazan terrorists burned 75 acres in a single day. On Saturday alone, the terror kites sparked 17 fires.

The PA regularly pays terrorists who are imprisoned in Israel, as well as families of dead terrorists who carried out attacks against Israelis. The PA policy of paying higher salaries to terrorists serving longer sentences means that the more heinous the and deadly the terror attack, the more the terrorist is rewarded by the PA for committing murder.

MEMRI: Calls In Palestinian Authority For Arranging Mechanism For Transfer Of Power Following Palestinian Authority President 'Abbas's Hospitalization
On May 20, 2018, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud 'Abbas, who is 83, was rushed to a Ramallah hospital following complications from middle ear surgery five days previously. The international Arab press reported that he had pneumonitis and a high fever, and that he was intubated; these reports were confirmed later in an announcement by Fatah Central Committee secretary Jibril Al-Rajoub.[1]

'Abbas's nine-day hospitalization, and his general health status, prompted a broad discussion in the Palestinian media with regard to how he would be replaced in the event that he becomes incapacitated, in light of his advanced age, the concentration of power in his hands, and the absence of a clear and agreed mechanism for choosing his successor.

The possibility that 'Abbas will become unable to carry out his many roles, in the absence of an agreed-upon successor, sparked expressions in the Palestinian media of fears of chaos and civil war within Fatah, which 'Abbas heads, and also between Fatah and Hamas, along with calls to urgently and legally arrange a legitimate mechanism for succeeding 'Abbas while he is still in office so as to avoid a sudden crisis. At the same time, the official PA and Fatah spokesmen are preferring to deny rumors about 'Abbas's hospitalization and with delegitimizing discussions of possible future scenarios, instead of focusing on who will take his place.

This report will present the public discussion in the PA about scenarios of crises of leadership in the Palestinian arena in the event that 'Abbas becomes incapacitated.
Melanie Phillips: Crazy world G7 v Trump, Hezbollah in London, Brexit agony
Please join me here as I discuss with Avi Abelow of Israel Unwired the latest developments in our crazy world. We talk about the G7/Trump temper tantrum and just how long it will take for the EU and other G7 countries to work out that in a trade war with the US there’s only going to be one winner and it isn’t going to be them. This leads us to discuss Trump’s negotiating strategy and whether it’s a thing of genius or whether he actually has one at all. Plus the odious spectacle of Hezbollah flags parading on the streets of London and Britain’s deepening Brexit agony, which is truly dreadful to behold




Last week, The Algemeiner held a discussion about The New York Times and its coverage of both Israel and of Jews in general.

Entitled, "The New York Times and the Jews," it was hosted by Dovid Efune, the Editor-in-Chief of the Algemeiner and featured Ira Stoll, Laurel Leff and Dovid Goldman. Ira Stoll writes a regular column for the Algemeiner, where he critiques the New York Times coverage of both Israel and of Jews. Laurel Leff is the author of Buried by the Times: The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper. Ari Goldman was a journalist with the New York Times for 20 years, from the 1970's to the 1990's and now teaches journalism at Columbia University.

screenshot
Dovid Efune, Ira Stoll, Laurel Leff and Ari Goldman discuss "The New York Times and the Jews"

The crowd that came to hear the discussion was one of the largest for one of Algemeiner's events. Many may have come to see and hear The New York Times burned in effigy. Instead, the presentation was even-handed, despite the fact that the paper had turned down an opportunity to have someone attend to represent them.

A History of The New York Times


During her part in the discussion, Leff presented some historical background of the New York Times and differentiated between the philosophy of the paper early on, in contrast to what it is today.

The founder of the modern New York Times was Adolph Ochs, who bought the paper in 1896. His parents were German Jews who came to the US in the 1840's. Ochs married Iphigene (Effie) Wise, the only child of Rabbi Isaac Meyer Wise, the founder of Reform Judaism and its institutions in the US.

photo
Adolph Ochs. Public Domain

This is important because Ochs adopted his father-in-law’s philosophy, as did his own son-in-law, Arthur Hays Sulzberger (publisher 1935-1961), later. Sulzberger, a Reform Jew, was an outspoken anti-Zionist at a time when the Reform movement was still debating the issue.

A basic idea of Reform Judaism was that Jews were no longer a people, an ethnicity or a nation. Judaism was just a religion.

Flowing from that principle:
  • Ochs and Sulzberger were opposed to Zionism and the creation of a Jewish state
  • They did not want the New York Times to be seen as a Jewish newspaper
  • Jews should not be separated out in any way, except for religion
This affected The New York Times coverage of the Holocaust years later:
  • There would be no special pleading for the Jews. This led to downplaying the Shoah
  • Jews were not alone in suffering. “Everyone” was suffering
  • The paper opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine, a big issue during the war.
But despite this negative view of Israel, that attitude is not necessarily relevant to the New York Times coverage of Israel and Jews today.

While classic Reform Judaism had a tremendous impact during the first half of the 20th century, the attitudes it fostered at The New York Times basically died with Arthur Hays Sulzberger, who remained an unrepentant, anti-Zionist, classical, Reform Jew.

Most Reform Jews abandoned that anti-Zionist position and supported the creation of the state of Israel. As a result of this change, Sulzberger became disillusioned with Judaism and withdrew. His attitude towards Israel was not passed on to his son, the second Arthur Sulzberger, who became indifferent to his Judaism and married an Episcopalian.

According to Leff, the current publisher, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger, has no connection to Israel or Judaism and there is no sense of Jewish identity left.

This does not mean there are no biases or that their coverage cannot be criticized. It just means that the basis for the paper's view of Israel does not come from any historical sense of their Jewishness.

Bottom line, the current publisher does not care especially about Judaism and is not like the first Sulzberger, who was strongly motivated by his anti-Zionism.

Categorizing New York Times Errors


Ira Stoll addressed what Dovid Efune playfully suggested were “the most egregious crimes” of The Times. Stoll noted that for something to be a crime, one needs to prove intent. Instead, he said, these issues were mistakes, errors, problems -- and bias, only if one can see patterns. And before dealing with the “why” and the motivation, it is safer to start with the mistakes and what categorizes them.

Towards that end, Stoll offered a categorization of some of these problems in the paper's reporting, based on his book, a collection of his critiques of The New York Times appearing in his Algemeiner column. The book is entitled "The New York Times and The Jews".


Stoll went over a few of the categories covered in his book:

Corrections


There are items the editor admits are mistakes, corrections of basic facts there were misstated. Among those, the following New York Times articles are problematic:

For Juicy Beef for Your Seder Table, Look Beyond Brisket, featured a correction:
An earlier version of this article incorrectly implied that beef tenderloin is kosher and appropriate for Passover. It is not kosher, but other cuts of beef that are kosher may be used in the recipe in its place.
When a Spouse Dies, Resilience Can Be Uneven had this correction:
The Personal Health column on Tuesday, about resilience after the death of a spouse, misstated the length of the Jewish period of mourning for a spouse. It is 30 days, not a year. (The one-year period is for those who have lost a parent.)
In contrast with these mild examples, there is "The Correction of the Year." The article Is Facebook’s Campbell Brown a Force to Be Reckoned With? Or Is She Fake News? included this correction:
An earlier version of this article erroneously included a reference to Palestinian actions as an example of the sort of far-right conspiracy stories that have plagued Facebook. In fact, Palestinian officials have acknowledged providing payments to the families of Palestinians killed while carrying out attacks on Israelis or convicted of terrorist acts and imprisoned in Israel; that is not a conspiracy theory.

Not Fit to Print


Another category, Stoll calls "Not Fit to Print" -- stories that appear in other newspapers that the New York Times did not find room for. While Stoll did not actually give any examples, here are some from his Algemeiner articles that he mentions in his book:

New York Times Finds News of Pro-Israel Vote in Congress Not Fit to Print:
"The US House of Representatives voted on January 5 to approve a resolution objecting to UN Security Council Resolution 2334 as “biased against Israel” and calling for it to be repealed or fundamentally altered."
New York Times Finds Gaza Cancer-Patient Terror Attempt Unfit to Print:
"An attempt by the Hamas terrorist group to use cancer patients to sneak explosives into Israel"
Not Fit To Print? New York Times Ignores Palestinian Insult of US Diplomat:
"The Palestinian president publicly called the American ambassador to Israel, Dovid Friedman, a “son of a dog” — and The New York Times ignored it."
None of those stories made their way into The New York Times.

Adjectives and Adverbs


Stoll mentioned the inconsistent use of adjectives in describing world leaders.

He pointed out that The New York Times has described Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as both loquacious and taciturn, as he also describes online in Does Bibi Talk Too Much, or Too Little? The New York Times Has All The Answers.

Stoll referred also to the different ways Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif and Netanyahu are described, a point he elaborates on in New York Times Showers Compliments on Iranian Foreign Minister. Zarif is referred to as “the urbane, American-educated diplomat,” while Netanyahu is not referred to being American educated at all. In the same article, Stoll points out that Defense Minister Lieberman is described as "ultra-nationalist" and John Bolton, before becoming National Security Advisor, was described as "combative."

Double Standards


Here too, Stoll described the category without actually giving any examples.

In When the New York Times Is for the Birds, Stoll writes about "an editorial condemning the New York City Parks Department for offering women-only bathing hours at a Brooklyn swimming pool frequented by Orthodox Jews." But on the other hand, "a previous Times article had praised a Toronto pool that offered women-only hours geared to Muslims as “a model of inclusion.”

New York Times Coverage of Jews, Israel, Is as Slanted as Its Coverage of Trump contrasts the superior coverage of a Muslim art exhibit in Washington, DC as opposed to an exhibit of First Jewish Americans in New York. Besides the difference in location of the article in the paper and the size of the article, the article about the Jewish exhibit concludes “in the exhibit, we see the kind of religious fervor that promotes a kind of violence against certain groups” -- and odd, negative mention that does not appear in the other article about the Muslim exhibit.

In The New York Times’ Double Standards on Display — Yet Again, Stoll gives the example of The New York Times giving 2 interviews to author Amos Oz about his new book 'Judas'. The interviews were an opportunity to allow Oz to be quoted saying:
  • Netanyahu is "a coward"
  • “The day people in this country start calling Netanyahu a traitor I will know that something may change.”
  • “The day Israelis start calling Benjamin Netanyahu a traitor, I will know something is moving at last.”
By contrast, when Israeli author, Daniel Gordis, came out with his book 'Israel: A Concise History of a Nation Reborn,' there was no interview, no review and no coverage.

Anonymous Sources


Another category of problems with The New York Times is its use of anonymous sources. Despite its stated rule not to overly rely on them, there are cases where the paper does not adhere to its own standard when it comes to Israel.

In his article In Its Attack on Netanyahu, the New York Times Violates Its Own Anonymous Source Policy and Contradicts Itself, Stoll notes how the paper patted itself on the back on its campaign to cut down on the use of anonymous sources -- and how they seem less successful in this goal when it comes to Israel.

He refers to the article “How Benjamin Netanyahu Is Crushing Israel’s Free Press”:
“What can management do?” a Walla News journalist lamented to me. “We’re threatened here by a combination of the most powerful politician in the country and one of the most powerful commercial companies in the country.”

Walla News isn’t alone. An atmosphere of intimidation has begun to take hold in many, if not most, of the country’s newsrooms. A source in Israel Hayom, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job, told me that the prime minister “holds everyone on a leash — everyone — not just us. With the other outlets, you might not realize what their interests are but they exist all the same.” [emphasis added]
Not only does the New York Times discard their rule about anonymous sources, but the claim in the article about a lack of a free press is contradicted by the paper in another article where it reports that “leaks of allegations and investigations large and small have gradually dripped out in Israel’s competitive media caldron.”

Stoll deals with the problem of The New York Times use of anonymous stories in these Algemeiner articles:

Stoll could have made a far stronger case for a pattern of bias in The New York Times if he had given examples for each of the categories he mentioned.

Journalists Are Only Human


Ari Goldman, as a former journalist for The New York Times, takes up its defense.

He breaks the issue of The New York Times and its coverage of Israel into 2 parts:
  • How to view the institution
  • His experiences at The New York Times vis-a-vis the Jewish question -- not including Crown Heights
Goldman stressed that The New York Times is run by human beings who make mistakes every day. And correct them. This is what it means when journalism is referred to as "The First Rough Draft of History"

Since journalists can only go by what they know, errors are not necessarily a conspiracy. It could simply be the information they have available.

He conceded that The New York Times has an agenda It is an agenda to write "great" stories in the "most dramatic, exciting" way. Left unaddressed was the question whether the desire to write great, dramatic and exciting stories might potentially lead a journalist to allow their biases to dictate the story or to exaggerate or omit information.

Goldman also tried to make the case that The New York Times was not a liberal newspaper. His proof was that the paper exposed the Eliot Spitzer scandal and covered the story of Hillary Clinton's email server. By that standard, if Fox News reports scandals of conservative politicians, should that serve as proof that they are not a conservative news program?

Goldman claimed that Jews and Israel were just not as high on the agenda of the paper as it was during his time there in the 1970's through the 1990's, saying "I don't think they care as much about us as we care about them."

The Crown Heights Riots


But even Ari Goldman agrees there was a real problem with The New York Times coverage of The Crown Height Riots in 1991, the 3 days of riots following the accidental death of Gavin Cato by one of the cars in the Lubavitcher Rebbe's motorcade. Three hours after the riot started, a mob surrounded Australian Jew Yankel Rosenbaum and murdered him.

Ari Goldman was one of the journalists who covered the story for The New York Times and in 2011 wrote an article for The Jewish Week -- Telling It Like It Wasn't.

Goldman quoted himself from that article, that during those riots he saw "journalism go terribly wrong" in framing the story as a clash between the black community and the Jewish community instead of recognizing the issue of black Antisemitism.

According to Goldman, this perception of a "clash" was even picked up by the Jewish community itself at the time. He said that the JDL admitted that it did not come out as strongly for the Lubavitch community at the time as it should have because of the way the riots were framed.

None of the speakers seemed to sense any comparison between the media coverage of The Crown Heights Riots and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

Both the riots and the conflict are described by the media as clashes of equally responsible groups, without any sense of the Antisemitism involved. How often have we heard of the conflict being described as a "cycle's of violence" where both sides are warned to show restraint.

Goldman writes that in order to show Jewish culpability during the riots, The New York Times went so far as to run a picture of a Chasidic man "brandishing an open umbrella before a police officer in riot gear" with the caption "a police officer scuffling with a Hasidic man." In the Middle East, the media goes to not dissimilar lengths when it waits for Israel to respond to terror attacks before reporting, so as to be able to present a more "balanced" report of two sides clashing.

Writing about the riots at the time at The New York Times, AM Rosenthal described how the media “treats it all as some kind of cultural clash between a poverty-ridden people fed up with life and a powerful, prosperous and unfortunately peculiar bunch of stuck-up neighbors" -- not unlike the way the Gazans are described vis-a-vis Israel. Rosenthal went on to describe those riots as an "Antisemitic pogrom" -- a term that certainly fits the behavior and goals of the current Gazan riots.

The Democratization of the Media


One of the benefits of social media is the ease with which public opinion may be gauged. Today, readers not only read the story, but they can also affect which ones are covered just by clicking on them online. The gap between editorial decisions and the public is narrowed, emphasizing the importance of the democratization of the media.

One benefit is the speed with which the public can lodge a complaint about a story.

In 2015, The New York Times ran a story about Lawmakers Against the Iran Nuclear Deal, which included a chart that was supposed to do more than just show which Congressmen were in favor or opposed to the deal. The chart went so far as to  show which Congressmen were Jewish -- and highlighted them in yellow.

Here is the chart for the Senate:


After a huge outcry, the chart was amended

On the flip side, however, there is a negative aspect to opening up to popular input.

Last year, Ira Stoll wrote ‘Parasitic Thug’ Is New York Times’ New Name for Netanyahu, about how The New York Times not only published an Antisemitic reader's comment describing Netanyahu as a "parasitic thug" influencing US elections, it also accused Jews of forming a "5th column." The New York Times even awarded the comment with a gold ribbon as a New York Times pick. The fact that the comment received 76 "thumbs up" votes from fellow readers is also food for thought. The comment was later removed.



The fact that newspapers now have a trending chart, whether visible to the journalists (CNN) or just the editors (New York Times) is a further indication of influence readers can potentially have on newspapers.

The Coverage


Towards the end of the discussion, Laurel Leff addressed the issue of The New York Times coverage of Israel. She insisted that no one covers Israel like the New York Times -- not even The Wall Street Journal because the paper itself has a different purpose. A better comparison would be between The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Leff continued that it was not fair to say that The New York Times does not understand the Israeli perspective. Most of the journalists live there, some for a long time. By the same token, she claimed that Palestinians criticize journalists that they don't understand what is going on because they live in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem instead of in Ramallah. If only journalistic insight were a question of geography.

She also noted that journalists get pressure from both sides as well as from both the left and the right and that journalists tend to side with whom they perceive as being the underdog.

Taking Ari Goldman's earlier point about the errors made by The New York Times against Israel being honest mistakes, Dovid Efune asked Ira Stoll if he could think of any honest mistakes made by The New York Times that actually favored Israel.

Stoll's example was a point he has written about before. There appears to be a tendency in The New York Times to refer to Mahmoud Abbas as "aging." Apparently, the point is that the paper feels that Abbas is senile, incompetent and unable to do his job, yet resorts to euphemisms instead of addressing the issue in an article.

That hardly qualifies as "an honest mistake" made in Israel's favor.

Too bad the question was not asked of Ari Goldman.

The Bottom Line


The bottom line is that during the discussion, every effort was made, not just for balance, but to avoid piling on The New York Times. Despite the fact that Ira Stoll clearly had multiple examples of potential bias, based on the paper's use of double standards and anonymous sources and on the stories it ignores, those examples were mentioned only in passing with no actual examples given. Having raised the point that a claim of bias would have to show a pattern, Stoll could easily have presented a case -- a strong case -- which is why he makes numerous references to the "bias" of The New York Times in his book.

Laurel Leff was deliberate in distancing the Sulzberger's of today from the original Sulzberger and defended the paper from any charge of bias. Her position seemed to be that The New York Times was no different from any other paper in its coverage of Israel -- only better.

Ari Goldman felt the greatest responsibility for defending the paper. At one point, he went so far as to tell the audience that if they felt there was a problem with The New York Times coverage of Israel, they should tell their children to be journalists. But it was Ari Goldman himself who opened the door to the issue of New York Times bias in the Crown Heights Riots.

Even given the restraint in the criticisms of The New York Times that night, it is hard to claim that was a unique case.

(Watch the discussion on The Algemeiner's Facebook page)





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.
  • Tuesday, June 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon


Dr. Ahmed al-Tayeb, Sheikh of Al-Azhar in Egypt, gave a speech last night for Laylat Al-Qadr where he stressed how tolerant Islam is towards Jews.

That tolerance seems to only go so far, though.

Dr. Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the Sheikh of Al-Azhar called upon Muslims (pointing out) the necessity of differentiating between Jews (on the one hand) and the occupying Israeli state (on the other hand). He said: “Jews are one thing and Zionism is another thing. Criticising the Zionist entity doesn’t necessarily mean criticising Jews or Judaism “. He pointed out that the issue of (accusations of) antisemitism have turned out to be a lie that no longer fool the peoples (i.e. nations).

The Grand Imam stressed in his speech that he delivered at the Waqf Ministry’s celebration of Laylat Al-Qadr  that there isn’t a single Quranic verse that calls for the killing of Jews or Christians, and that there is no place in that book for this kind of barbaric cruelty. He stressed that the verses talking about fighting are supposed to (urge Muslims to) repel aggression.

He added: “The fair (or righteous) ones among the Jews themselves admit that they enjoyed a secure life with Muslims and acknowledge (that) the Islamic state in Egypt and Andalusia (acted this way).”

He pointed out that Islam does not blame/admonish/punish contemporary Jews for the crimes of their forefathers....

He mentioned that the words “curse” and “humiliation” in the Quran were not meant for all the Jews, only those among the People of the Book who denied (the truth) of the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Quran.
See? As long as Jews are willing to live as second class citizens in a majority Muslim country, where they have to pay a poll tax and cannot build synagogues higher than mosques, they are fine. As long as they don't deny the truth of the Koran, they are fine.

Only the others who actually have some pride are the ones that should be cursed.

(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.
  • Tuesday, June 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon


Last week I mentioned that a Palestinian NGO had started a social media campaign against the PA government for its punitive sanctions on Gaza that hurt two million people.

I mentioned that the group had called for a demonstration on Sunday last week, but I didn't see any coverage of it.

It turns out that there was a small demonstration last week, and today there was another. 

Dozens of people publicly called for the immediate lifting of all punitive measures imposed on the Gaza Strip and to end Abbas' sanctions against the territory.

Most interestingly, they emphasized a slogan: One people, one enemy.

The slogan itself shows how deeply wedded the even the most moderate Palestinians  are to the idea of Israel being their eternal enemy. These people want peace between the PA and Hamas, but you will never see any rallies in Ramallah calling for peace with Israel the way that there have been huge peace demonstrations in Israel.

This incident shows yet again that the entire purpose of Palestinianism is rejection of Israel, not the building of a Palestinian Arab nation.






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.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



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.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive