Thursday, September 13, 2018

  • Thursday, September 13, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon

Jewish Rights to Israel (Part 2):
Israel’s Nation State Law
 (part 1 here)

Israel’s system of Basic Laws is kind of weird. There is a saying in Israel that the things that are temporary are the ones that are most permanent and that is how we ended up with Basic Laws rather than a constitution.

The Israeli Declaration of Independence stated that a formal constitution will be formulated and adopted no later than 1 October 1948 but the war that ensued the day after the declaration was made got in the way, one thing led to another and eventually we ended up with Basic Laws - constitutional laws of the State of Israel, intended to be draft chapters of a future constitution and act as a de facto constitution until that time. Basic Laws can only be changed by a supermajority vote in the Knesset (with varying requirements for different Basic Laws and sections). Many of these laws are based on the individual liberties that were outlined in the Israeli Declaration of Independence.

The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, protecting the freedom and equal rights of Israeli enjoys super-legal status, giving the Supreme Court the authority to disqualify any law contradicting it, as well as protection from Emergency Regulations.
While the status, importance and legitimacy of the Jewish State clearly defined in Israel’s Declaration of Independence (see Part 1), until very recently, there was no law to safeguard the rights of the State of Israel as a Jewish State. In cases of legal questions, Israeli courts could not bring into consideration the importance of protecting the future of the Jewish State because there was no law on which to base such rulings. In order to amend this imbalance, a new Basic Law was passed: Israel - The nation state of the Jewish people.
The new law sparked an uproar, mostly within the Jewish world. The question is, why? Is there something wrong with the law? In order to address these questions, we must first examine the content of the law. It is short and written in very clear language.   
The following is the full content of the Basic Law:
1. The State of Israel
a)     Israel is the historic homeland of the Jewish people in which the State of Israel was established.
b)     The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, religious, and historic right to self-determination.
c)     The fulfillment of the right of national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

This point defines Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People in which the Zionist movement, the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in the ancestral land of the Jews, has been fulfilled. By extension, the right of self determination as a nation within the Jewish Nation State is unique to the Jewish People.
Is there anything wrong with these statements? Are they any different from what is written in Israel’s Declaration of Independence which clearly defines Israel as the Jewish State, Jewish rights to the land as those of the indigenous people and the rights of other inhabitants as being the same individual rights as any other Israeli citizen?
  
2.  National symbols of the State of Israel
a)     The name of the state is Israel.
b)     The flag of the state is white, two blue stripes near the edges, and a blue Star of David in the center.
c)     The symbol of the state is the Menorah with seven branches, olive leaves on each side, and the word Israel at the bottom.
d)     The national anthem of the state is "Hatikvah"
e)     [Further] details concerning the issue of state symbols will be determined by law.

Is there anything wrong with these statements defining that the current symbols of the Jewish State are the legal symbols of the Jewish State?
  
3.  [The] unified and complete [city of] Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

This a reference to and reinforcement of the Basic Law: Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel (passed in 1980) which defined the status of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and secure its integrity and unity. It determines that Jerusalem is the seat of the President of the State, the Knesset, the Government and the Supreme Court. The law also deals with the status of the holy sites, secures the rights of people of all religions, and states that Jerusalem shall be given special priority in the activities of the authorities of the State so as to further its development in economic and other matters.

4.  The Language of the State of Israel
a)     Hebrew is the language of the state.
b)     The Arabic language has a special status in the state; the regulation of the Arab language in state institutions or when facing them will be regulated by law.
c)     This clause does not change the status given to the Arabic language before the basic law was created.

Hebrew is the language of the Jewish State. Is there anything wrong with that?
Up until this law it was customary to make sure, particularly in official documentation and state institutions that Arabic would appear alongside Hebrew. For those who know neither language, English usually appears as well. For convenience many times there are also other languages such as Russian and Amharic. Now the law defines Arabic as having special status, particularly in regard to language in state institutions and instructs not to change (demote) what was customary before the law. This is actually an improvement in status as it makes what was customary but not mandatory, part of the law.

5. The state will be open to Jewish immigration and to the gathering of the exiled.

This is the legal version of the statement in the Declaration of Independence with almost the exact same wording: The State of Israel will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles. Adding this to the Basic Law is a reinforcement of Israel’s Law of Return (passed in 1950).  
  
6.  The Diaspora
a)     The state will labor to ensure the safety of sons of the Jewish people and its citizens who are in trouble and captivity due to their Jewishness or their citizenship.
b)     The state will act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious legacy of the Jewish people among the Jewish diaspora.

This clause defines the relationship of the Jewish State with the Diaspora:
The State of Israel will labor to protect anyone in trouble or in captivity due to their Jewishness or Israeli citizenship – including Jews who are not Israeli, sons of Jews (not necessarily Jewish according to Halacha) and non-Jewish citizens of Israel. This set of values and feeling of responsibility has led the decision-making process of the Jewish State from its inception to this day in regard to rescuing Jews in trouble anywhere in the world as well as paying the same regard and effort to assist all Israelis in trouble, whether they are Jewish or not.
The State will act to preserve Jewish legacy among the Jewish diaspora. This is a paradigm shift from the request in the Declaration of Independence asking diaspora Jews to assist the newly born State of Israel.
  
7. The state views Jewish settlement as a national value and will labor to encourage and promote its establishment and development.

This clause is the one that certain groups objected to but is it really any different from what is stated in the Declaration of Independence? Or the ideals of the Zionist movement? Or that of any newly founded nation state?
If the clause denied the right of non-Jewish settlement for Israel’s non-Jewish citizens that would certainly be problematic however that is not the case.  

8. The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the secular calendar will serve as an official calendar. The usage of the Hebrew calendar and of the secular calendar will be determined by law.

This is the current custom of the country, now made law.

9.  National Holidays
a)     Independence Day is the official holiday of the state.
b)     The Memorial Day for those who fell in the wars of Israel and the Memorial Day for the Holocaust and heroism are official memorial days of the state.  

This clause defines Israel’s Independence Day and Memorial Days as National holidays (as opposed to religious holidays). This has ramifications in regard to employer obligations to employees.

10. Saturday and the Jewish Holidays are the official days of rest in the state. Those who are not Jewish have the right to honor their days of rest and their holidays. Details concerning these matters will be determined by law.

Whereas the previous clause deals with national holidays, this deals with religious holidays. In continuation of what appears in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, the law determines that while the official holidays and rest day of the Jewish State are the days noted in the Jewish tradition, non-Jews have the right to honor their holidays and rest day. This can become a little complicated as Muslims, Christians (and people of other faiths) have different holidays and rest days, for example Muslims rest on Friday while Jews on Saturday and Christians on Sunday. Honoring the different holidays and rest days, including making it possible for employees to take vacations and receive full benefits, is already the custom of the land. Now it is reinforced by this law.

11. This Basic Law may not be altered except by a Basic Law that gained the approval of the majority of the Knesset members.

Like other Basic Laws, this law is harder (but not impossible) to overturn or change than regular laws.
Conclusion

Much has been written about Israel’s Nation State Law. Examination of the concerns raised leads one to discover that the objections are not to the actual content of the law but rather questions about what does not appear in the law:

1. “Why does the basic law not mention, as the Declaration of Independence does, equality for all citizens?”

When one understands the Israeli system of Basic Laws and notes the content of the new law, this question becomes moot.
Equality for all citizens is already enshrined in previous Basic Laws, the new law does not overturn or cancel previous laws, it only provides a legal basis upon which it is possible to balance the needs and rights of individual citizens with the needs and rights of Israel as the Jewish Nation State.
In addition, the new law reinforces the rights of minorities within the framework of the Jewish State regarding language and freedom of religion (which also effects freedom of employment).    

2. “Why is it necessary to create this law when all these points can be understood from the Declaration of Independence?”
All the points in the law are elements lifted directly from Israel’s Declaration of Independence however a declaration is just that – a declaration, not a law.
Although these points are understood, it is necessary to give the court system laws on which they can base their decisions. Before this new law, there was no legal basis on which the courts could rule when questions regarding symbols of the state, holidays, language etc. arose.  

3. What about Israel’s non-Jewish citizens who are objecting to this law?

Israel takes the rights of her non-Jewish citizens very seriously and has done so since the establishment of the State.  It is important to examine the concerns raised and address each and every one of them – with the understanding that there are different groups making different objections. Each much be addressed separately and not lumped together as if they were the same people raising the same issues. The Israeli government is in the process of doing exactly this.

Some issues are easier than others to address:

·         Some object to Israel as the Jewish Nation State, refusing to recognize Israel as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish People. These are the people who demonstrated in Rabin Square with PLO flags shouting “In blood and with fire we will free Palestine.”

·         Others object to the fact that the Nation State Law does not legalize the status of minority groups in Israel. While previous laws define the rights of all individuals, including minorities, there is no law defining the status of minorities as groups. This does not indicate a problem with the existing laws but does suggest that it might be necessary to pass an additional law defining the status of minorities as groups.  

·         Druze and Bedouin who feel that the law drives a wedge between them and the State of Israel.  This is a sentiment that must be taken seriously. Those of the Arab population (such as most Druze and some Bedouin) who have chosen to ally themselves with the Jewish State are people who we do not want to alienate.
Close examination of their objections uncovers that their complaints are not really about the law itself but about what does not appear in the law. A large portion of the objectors in this group used the discussion of the law to raise issues of inequality in day-to-day life Israel that need to be addressed in order to create a better society but do not actually have anything to do with the law or any other laws being broken, rather societal issues and some government bureaucracy that if amended would make it easier for minorities to better integrate in the general population. Others were asking for their minority status as a group to be addressed in law, which as previously stated, is not an indication of a defect in this law but that it is worth considering creating a new law for that purpose.

Finally –

Israel’s Nation State law is the realization of what the founding fathers of the reborn Jewish State detailed in Israel’s Declaration of Independence – the self-determination of an indigenous people returned to sovereignty in our ancestral homeland, the realization of 2000 years of yearning for Zion and a stunning example for all other indigenous peoples around the world.

And yes, there are a lot of people who don’t like that but that’s too bad. We are Zion, home to stay.  



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.
  • Thursday, September 13, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
A family from Deir al-Balah in Gaza is protesting a UNRWA decision not to allow 45 children from their family to attend UNRWA schools.

UNRWA has been educating the al-Aqra family's children for free since the 1950s, but now does not want to accept them - because they are not descendants of refugees.

The family admits this, because it says that it donated much of the land for the UNRWA camp in the 1950s. Which means that the family always lived in Gaza.

And while UNRWA, prompted from its budget woes, might now have incentive to find ways to cut services to those who never deserved them to begin with, by default UNRWA has always allowed non-refugees to take advantage of its services, because it didn't want to cause a scene.

Here is a fascinating summary of what happened in the West Bank camp of Jalazon from the 1950s through 1968:
The administrative decision to replace the refugees' flimsy tents with more permanent housing and to attach a plot of land to each hut succeeded in turning most of the camps into permanent urban or suburban quarters within a decade. By the 1960s, this process had run its course: The camp-dwellers had built up their plots and become the de facto owners of real estate, which they sold freely on the housing market. The project was so successful that UNRWA rapidly lost control of its own camps, occasionally making feeble but unsuccessful efforts to require residents to seek its permission for the sale of homes. By the end of the 1960s, UNRWA ceased to intervene in sales of houses.
Even in the 1960s, the camp population did not exclusively comprise the original 1948 refugees; there was a continuous stream of new arrivals. Data from a 1968 study of the Jalazon refugee camp, situated north of Ramallah in the West Bank, showed half the camp's households arrived from 1950 onward. Some people moved from outlying camps to ones situated close to a larger city in order to improve their chances of employment, but most of the newcomers, while officially designated as refugees, had never been in a camp. They typically had been living in towns and their circumstances had changed. Some had lost their livelihood, others had grown old and weak or had no one to take care of them. They moved into a camp because there were advantages to be gained: They paid no rent and no municipal taxes and their water supply and sanitation were free. While all designated as refugees had access to UNRWA services, the camp-dwellers were better placed to make proper use of them. Most health clinics, for instance, were located in camps, and their free services were available mainly to the inhabitants. Monthly food rations, which the heads of refugee households had to collect personally, were distributed in camps. From 1955 onward, the plots of land became an added inducement to move into camps. As a result, between 1951 and 1967, the camp population in the West Bank grew by two thirds, from 94,000 to 144,000, while the total West Bank population grew by only 12 percent—from 768,000 in 1951 to 871,000 in 1966.
It is well-known that poor people in the West Bank and Gaza would pretend to be "refugees" in order to gain free services from UNRWA, and UNRWA gave up on its basic responsibility to count and keep track of residents and real refugees, as the camp residents resisted any attempt at a census and the population kept growing by attracting non-refugees.

This is just one more example of how UNRWA abdicated its original mandate to help real refugees and to reintegrate them into the Arab world, and instead it has become a huge welfare operation for Palestinians, whether they ever lived in today's Israel or not.

(h/t Irene)




We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
From remarks by EU High Representative/Vice-President Federica Mogherini at a plenary session of the European Parliament on the threat of demolition of Khan al-Ahmar and other illegally constructed Bedouin villages:

...The European Union does not and will not give up on a negotiated two-state solution. We will continue our engagement on the ground in support of building a viable Palestinian state, in support of the essential work that UNRWA [United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East] is doing, and in support of projects that keep the perspective of a two-state solution alive. Several Member States are involved in the funding of Khan al-Ahmar, in particular, the Tyre school. Thanks to their engagement, hundreds of Palestinian children have been able to go to school and receive quality education.

Here are a couple of photos of the "tire school."



See the map of "Palestine" painted in the colors of the PLO flag on the school?

It doesn't look like this EU-funded school teaches the kids anything about a two-state solution. The "peace" that these kids are taught - symbolized by the doves - comes from driving out any Jews who want self-determination in the region.

How can Federica Mogherini self-righteously proclaim that the EU is solidly behind the two state solution when she admits that the EU proudly funds schools that teach generations of kids that Israel must be conquered?

(h/t Irene)



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

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

From Ian:

Soviet Antisemitism in a British Guise
Most of all, there was the Soviet practice of wheeling out “citizens of Jewish nationality” to denounce Zionism as a “racist” tool of “imperialism.” In March 1983, the Soviet news agency TASS even published a definition of Zionism drawn up by the state-run “Jewish Anti-Zionist Committee” that read as follows:

“In its essence, Zionism is a concentration of extreme nationalism, chauvinism, and racial intolerance, justification of territorial seizure and annexation, armed adventurism, a cult of political arbitrariness and impunity, demagogy and ideological sabotage, sordid maneuvers and perfidy.”

To my mind, the most obvious question here to Jeremy Corbyn, The Morning Star, and those of a similar pedigree, is this: Is there anything in this Soviet definition of Zionism that you disagree with? Make no mistake, the answer is critically important, because it is exactly this characterization of Zionism that grounded both the USSR’s domestic persecution of its Jewish community, and its international alignment with Arab regimes and terrorist groups.

If the answer is to disagree with this formulation — highly unlikely, given that Corbyn himself was present at dozens of left-wing political gatherings during the 1970s and ’80s where Soviet and Arab antisemitic literature was distributed — then it is a disingenuous one. Because when Corbyn and those in his camp speak and write about the triangle of Jews, Zionism, and Israel, these are the terms in which they think, and have always thought.

That is why Corbyn’s house journal uses terms like “embittered fifth column” to describe their leader’s Jewish opponents — also used by Valery Emelyanov, an official Soviet ideologue, in 1978 to describe the “internal danger” posed by Soviet Jews. It’s why they have no qualms about saying that Jewish leaders opposed to Corbyn have “tasted blood,” despite the associations with the antisemitic blood libel that such a metaphor unleashes; then again, Vladimir Begun, a particularly toxic Soviet antisemite, wrote with great enthusiasm of the “bloodthirstiness” that was inherent in “Zionist gangsterism.”

Given the number of occasions that Corbyn publicly defended the Soviet regime — “The Soviet Union makes far greater nursery provision than this country” (1984), “I do not believe that [the USSR] has ever intended to invade western Europe” (1990) — he was clearly well aware of Moscow’s stance on all the key international matters of the time, as well as its propaganda practices. That doesn’t make him a spy, but it does make him an ideological fellow-traveler. And as The Morning Star has demonstrated by defending Corbyn with an ugly rhetorical assault on British Jews, that Soviet-inspired journey rolls on.

Yisreal Medad: An Exercise in Deconstruction
Deconstruction is a literary term indicating "a critique of the relationship between text and meaning ".

I found this poem, "Everything in Our World Did Not Seem to Fit" by Naomi Shihab Nye here. It is an example of "new Palestinian poetry". Excuse me, "Arab Palestinian poetry". Ms. Nye's family roots are in Sinjil, just down the road from Shiloh where I live.

I realized that here poem is a literal work of deconstruction - of history, of Jewish national identity, of politics and of simple rational logic.

Let's deconstruct that literary work.

Once they started invading us.
Actually, the Arabs invaded Eretz-Yisrael in 638 CE. Moreover, despite the loss of political independence, Jews continued to reside in the Land of Israel, if in small numbers depending on the conditions and crcumstances of the various occupiers.

Taking our houses and trees, drawing lines, pushing us into tiny places.
Throughout the Zionist resettlement enterprise, almost all the land was purchased from its owners.

It wasn’t a bargain or deal or even a real war.
The Arab terror war against Jews in 1920, 1921, 1929, 1936-1939 and the 1947 war was real as were the fedyeen and the PLO's launching in 1964.
Interview with Colonel Richard Kemp
A United Nations report on recent violent clashes along the Israel-Gaza border hasn’t been written yet, but international terrorism expert Richard Kemp already knows it will condemn Israel for defending its borders against armed hordes.

Kemp, a retired British army officer who has watched, and fought against, terrorism around the world for 30 years, will tell an audience in Hamilton Thursday that’s the traditional response of a world community that doesn’t want to face up to terrorism.

In an interview ahead of his appearance, Kemp said the recent attacks on the Gaza border were just the latest phase of ongoing efforts by the terrorist group Hamas to smash the Jewish state.

It’s a campaign built around Hamas’ standard tactic of sprinkling its terrorists among civilians in the hope Israel’s response will result in civilian deaths that can, in turn, spark international outrage against the country.

“By creating a situation of violent disorder, breaking through the fence and attacking Israeli communities Hamas hope to provoke Israel in the hope that Israel’s reaction will result in many of (Hamas’) own people being killed,” he said.

Kemp said the tactic has worked to a degree – even fair-minded citizens around the world who understand a country’s right to defend itself are made uncomfortable by the sight of civilians being shot by Israeli soldiers.

“Even if people are against Israel, most sane people can understand that a country has to respond if it is attacked, if rockets are launched at it or attack tunnels are dug underneath it. Most people can accept that even if they don’t like it,” Kemp said.

“Even if they accept that they can’t understand how a civilized country like Israel can gun down people involved in peaceful demonstrations. We know they’re not peaceful demonstrations, but that is how it’s portrayed.”

Last week, Dr. Nan Greer gave us an overview of the various international definitions of what it means to be an indigenous people. We learned about Greer’s work in protecting the indigenous rights of peoples as disparate as the Mayangna and Miskitú peoples, Native Hawaiians and other ethnic groups on Hawai'i Nei, and the Cahuilla-Serrano people of California. Now Greer is turning her energies toward legalizing the indigenous rights of the Jewish people. To that end, Greer spent the summer of 2018 in Israel meeting with anyone she could to explain her mission and enlist their assistance—people like Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Amb. Dr. Alan Baker, and Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked.

Here, Greer expands on her work on indigenous rights in Israel and abroad.
Judean Rose: How did you become interested in indigenous land rights?
Nan Greer: As a child, my parents were dedicated to helping those in poverty - specifically children.  As I grew up, I was taken around the world by them, and introduced to different forms of charity, community development, and community assistance. When of age, I worked with my parents to form a family foundation dedicated to assisting those marginalized in society. 
As such, after graduating from college, I traveled to Central America. While working there, I was asked to visit marginalized indigenous communities in rainforest areas. Upon meeting the Mayangna and Miskitú indigenous peoples, I was asked to assist them in documenting and defending their rights to ancestral lands. From 1995 until the present, I have worked with these indigenous communities, including on the first indigenous land rights case argued under international law (Awas Tingni vs. Nicaragua). Working with the 9 territories of the Mayangna, and other Miskitú territories in the BOSAWAS Biosphere Reserve, we established a methodology of documenting the indigenous right to land under international law - providing an example for other indigenous groups around the world.
Nan Greer at left during community meeting.

While these methods are shared worldwide, one particular indigenous group has continually been denied support in this area. In fact, many have refuted the idea that Jews are indigenous to their homelands. While Jews in Europe were once told to “go home,” once home, Jews were then told to get out, as they were now considered colonists. This is another terrible narrative obviously made up to reject the rightful claim Jews have to their homelands, Israel.
Judean Rose: How did you become interested in specifically Jewish indigenous land rights? Are you Jewish?
Nan Greer: I am not Jewish. This year, I have applied for and been accepted into a Jewish Orthodox conversion program. I was not baptized until I decided to do so under the Episcopalian Church at age 13. I attended catholic schools from 6th grade until graduating from my undergraduate school, Seattle University. While a church-goer for some time, it wasn’t until I began reading the history of Jews, their cultural, social, political, economic, and religious experience, that I become fascinated with the Jewish religion.
I have come to reject the racist theories of Christian replacement theology, in addition to the idea espoused that Jews killed the Christ-figure - it is astounding that Catholic popes only exonerated Jews of this “crime” in both 2015 and 2017, so recently. During my time learning about Jewish connections to the lands of Israel, I have come to reject other religious teachings, and favor those of the Jewish Modern Orthodox religion. 
Judean Rose: Can you tell us about your work in Israel?
Nan Greer: A previous student from my classes at Kaua`i Community College asked what I think about the case of the Jews in Israel. We began talking about this in 2014, and by 2016 my previous student loaned me enough funding to allow me to travel to Israel. How amazing it is that students can often become our teachers!

Noe Coleman - Current Nicaragua Indigenous Representative to MesoAmerican Group of Indigenous; leader, Matumbak - Mayangna meets with one of Greer's students at Kaua`i Community College.
I arrived with my family in December of 2016 and stayed through mid-January 2017. During this trip, I interviewed various individuals dedicated to protecting the lands of Israel. I began to examine the case of Jews as indigenous under the structure of international law. I was surprised as to how marginalized they had become under international structures that were dedicated to protecting indigenous populations such as the Jews. 
Since my travel to Israel in 2016 and 2017, it has become apparent that other ethnic groups, specifically Arab-Muslim groups, are pressuring the international community to reject the indigenous status of the Jewish people, both in international and national law. Many cases have arrived at the Israeli Supreme Court, without proper legal documentation/evidence of legal right, that have caused the Israeli government to remove their own Jewish people from the lands of their forefathers. This has happened repeatedly in Judea and Samaria, with additional pressure on areas of East Jerusalem, such as the community of Ramat Shlomo. This is a violation of the rights of Jewish indigenous people, with a potential of permanent damage and loss of critical land long recorded as Indigenous.
With abundant archaeological data, literature and historical records, in addition to the obvious maintenance of distinct Jewish culture, religion, and socioeconomic forms, it is apparent the Jewish people of Israel are afforded legal protection as a people under international law - a protection that is not being upheld currently. Assisting the Israeli government to self-declare the Jewish people indigenous, and to sign the UNDRIP (Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People) with reservations, is an enormous first step in protecting the right of Jewish indigenous to their own lands, culture, religion, history, and maintenance as a people, in perpetuity. With the historical onslaught against their ethno-religious group, Jews have been discriminated against for several millennia. As the global community furthers legislation protecting culture groups around the world, there is a clear demand to protect the Jewish people - there are more than 6 million reasons why this is important.

Nan visits the Knesset to stump for Jewish indigenous land rights.
Among the experiences of the Jews is a multi-generational response to discriminatory attack. As many other indigenous communities’ experience, depression is a common affliction passed from one generation to the next. While this may be some of the experience of the Jewish people, they stand resilient in the face of their past, recreating a miraculously developed nation state in only the past 70 years - with a large number having returned, rejoining their small minority of permanent residents in Israel, to repatriate their lands after two thousand years, restore their spoken Hebrew language, and to reinvigorate their ancestral culture in their homelands, and the birthplaces of their forefathers.
While not all in the international community recognize their astounding resilience and recapitulation as a people, Jews are truly an example to the world of cultural survival, protecting cultural diversity in a world often devoid of such distinctions. Were we not to protect the Jewish people at such a juncture, we would fail humanity, and further the vicious anti-Semitic campaigns set out in history at various times, annihilating those who have led the world religiously, culturally, and environmentally. Not protecting the Jewish people is simply not acceptable under human rights, and humanity at its base.

A radiant Nan after visiting the Temple Mount
Judean Rose: What has been the response of Israeli leadership to the idea of declaring the Jewish people the indigenous people of Israel?
Nan Greer: Many people in the Israeli government have been supportive of declaring Jews indigenous to Israel. However, many also have challenged this, stating national sovereignty is sufficient to protect the Jewish people. I disagree with this.
While other ethnic groups in this geographical locale have gone to the United Nations, introducing various motions and resolutions to condemn Israel, great pressure has been put upon Israel by the international community, a community that has not had the benefit of truly examining the Jewish indigenous case. Due to the lack of engagement in international circles such as the UN, Jewish people have not had their rights protected under international laws focused on protecting indigenous people, such as the UNDRIP - the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People. It is imperative that the international community recognize the Jewish people as indigenous, that Jews are afforded protection under international law designed to protect such traditional people. To deny any indigenous status in the land of Israel to the Jewish people is anti-cultural, anti-historical, and anti-religious under international law. 
Nan meets with US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, Tammy Friedman, and Dr. Mordechai Kedar
Judean Rose: You teach at Redlands University in California. What do you teach there and what has been the response of your students and colleagues to your work on behalf of Israel? Do they know about your work for Israel?
Nan Greer: I am an adjunct lecturer at the University of Redlands where I teach cultural and environmental anthropology, in addition to indigenous land rights. I have an ethnically diverse group of young students dedicated to learning. However, often times these students, as in other universities around the United States, are taught narratives to believe, rather than how to think. As such, many of my students have been misinformed about the Jewish people. While several of my students are Jewish, these unique individuals often do not identify themselves as such for fear of mistreatment and discrimination.
In fact, I commonly find out their Jewish affiliation at the end of the semester, or privately after classes. I am astounded as to the consistent fear of Jewish students in a learning environment that purports to be all inclusive - as my own experience and evidence suggests (as documented in numerous publications), these unique students suffer anti-Semitism, ethno-religious rejection, and ridicule, these very students must be protected and strengthened in their incredible identity and uniqueness.
Judean Rose: What are your impressions of Israel and the Israeli people, particularly during your most recent stay here over the summer? Could you ever move to Israel?
Nan Greer: Both my daughter and I want to stay in Israel and live here permanently. We are very sad about having to leave. We are however, planning on finishing our conversion to Judaism and making Aliyah when possible. If ever there was an opportunity to move to Israel prior to this, I am certain we would take it!



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, September 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
Pastor Thomas Wessel
From Ruhrbarone.de:

Thomas Wessel, Pastor of the Christuskirche (Church of Christ) in Bochum, has found a solution against BDS: sponsors from Israel.

Christuskirche in Bochum is a church that has partially been transformed into a successful cultural event location, one of the „hot spots“ for concerts in the Ruhr Region. The church hosts dozens of concerts every year, some of  which have included Laibach, Peter Murphy, the regular show „Urban Urtyp“, and many others.

This is a challenging task for Pastor Thomas Wessel, who does not want artists who support the BDS movement to perform in his church. BDS is short for „Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions“ – a movement aiming to destroy Israel.

Excluding BDS supporters from the venue meant a lot of research work for Pastor Wessel, who checked every single artist before they performed at his church, trying to find out if they signed one of the antisemitic BDS calls to boycott Israel. This is a question that could not always be easily answered: Brendan Perry for example signed in the name of „Dead Can Dance“. Lisa Gerrard, the other part of „Dead Can Dance“, however, did not sign – Gerrad will be playing at Christuskirche on October 12th.


Pastor Wessel found a better way to make sure that BDS supporters will not perform at his church. Instead of checking each artist, he decided to create a situation that makes it impossible for BDS supporters to perform at Christuskirche without betraying the objectives of the movement: Wessel succeeded to engage several Israeli companies in sponsorships, among them businesses that cooperate with Israeli government institutions. Performing at Christuskirche now automatically means not supporting the objectives of BDS. „I am not interested in preventing artists from performing here. I want to offer my audience an attractive program. Whoever wants to play at Christuskirche must know we have Israeli sponsors. Artists who have concerts here oppose the antisemitic rules of the BDS movement. Artists who cancel their concerts here, will disappoint their supporters, and we will see how they will like that.“

Pastor Wessel hopes that many public and private venues and organizers will follow his example. Germany is one of the biggest music markets in the world. If it is clear that supporting BDS makes it more difficult to gain access to that attractive market, the BDS movement could lose some of its influence among artists. Roger Waters, the biggest supporter of this modern version of the „Don`t buy from Jews“- campaign, will not reimburse artists for losing their fees.

This is a great idea. Any owners of major concert venues who are against BDS can do something similar. Moreover, Israeli companies like Sodastream or Bank Leumi can offer sponsorships at major venues as well.

(h/t Gastwirt)



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:

U.S. Decision to Defund UNRWA Aimed at Refocusing Attention on Ways to End the Conflict
UNRWA has existed for more than 60 years as a "temporary" initiative to address the needs of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 Israeli-Arab conflict and to facilitate their resettlement and/or repatriation. The U.S. has provided UNRWA with more than $6 billion since 1950.

Unfortunately, that support did not bring the situation any closer to resolution. On the contrary, it absolved Palestinian leaders of the responsibility to provide health care, education, and other basic services that sovereign governments - which the Palestinians claim to be - are expected to provide for their own people.

Contrary to the claims of the Palestinians, the U.S. is not "violating international law" by ending funding for UNRWA. U.S. funding is voluntary, not a legal entitlement, and America reasonably expects that its support not be misused and that the Palestinians earnestly engage in the peace process.

Instead, Palestinian leaders have rejected increasingly generous offers since the 1990s. This intransigence, encouraged by Iran and rejectionist Arab leaders, lies at the root of the Palestinian refugee problem and harms the Palestinian people.

Although it will likely cause short-term ramifications, the decision to defund this agency will, hopefully, refocus attention on what is necessary to end this protracted dispute.
How does UNRWA impact Palestinians and Israelis?
Millions around the world were made refugees in the 1940’s. Over 70 years later, they are not refugees anymore. So why are Palestinian Arabs perpetually referred to that way? WATCH our new video on the controversy surrounding UNRWA - the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East.


Likud minister: Trump peels Palestinian lie like an onion
Transportation and Intelligence Minister Yisrael Katz (Likud) on Wednesday welcomed US President Donald Trump's decision to close Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) offices in Washington DC.

"This decision joins the decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the decision to stop funding UNRWA, which is an organization that perpetuates the refugees' pretend right of return,"Katz said. "All these steps reach the roots of the conflict and tell Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas that he can not continue his double-talk."

"Trump is peeling the Palestinian lie like an onion - layer by layer. Their educational system as well teaches their children that 'big Palestine' is from the Jordan River to the sea. Trump cmes and says: 'If you want to sit and negotiate, do it from a realistic place - Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and there is no right of return. Abbas' response shows exactly what he thinks of these issues."

Katz also slammed Israeli leftists who oppose Trump's actions.

"They should have been the first ones supporting it, if they believe in negotiating based on something different," he said. "But they're so immersed in supporting the Palestinian narrative and blindly following whatever the Palestinian leaders say that they don't truly examine reality, and that's a shame."


Diplomatic retribution at last
The closure of the Palestinian mission in Washington is just the latest in a series of moves by a U.S. administration that does not differentiate between the Palestinians' diplomatic warfare against Israel and the various terrorist methods it employs.

The Palestinians have attempted to enlist the International Criminal Court in their efforts against Israel. Under President Donald Trump, the Americans announced they would "use any means necessary" against the ICC should it decide to begin proceedings against Israeli officials.

As the U.S. administration sees it, the Palestinians, along with the Iranians, are corrupting global democracy.

Under Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinians serve Iranian interests. Abbas and the PA are the ones fanning the flames in the Gaza Strip and they are responsible for the deteriorating situation there. Hamas, meanwhile, supplies the goods in return for Iranian funds. The Palestinians also sent a senior delegation to attend North Korea's 70th-anniversary celebrations. This is the political and ideological environment of the PA.

The Trump administration is breaking norms. Instead of courting the Palestinians in the hope that they will enter negotiations, the White House is punishing them and acting to bring about their defeat. In Israel, many recoil from this strategy. We are the ones who live with the Palestinians and what their defeat will mean for us remains unclear. The last time the Palestine Liberation Organizations looked like it was about to wiped off the map, the organization had its pieces pulled back together and the Oslo Accords were signed.

  • Wednesday, September 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
As the PLO leaders bitterly complain about the US plans to close their Washington office, a brief look at their official PLO.ps website shows (among other things) that they have a section on "Revolution Songs."

Many of them point to videos on YouTube that have been taken down, presumably for content that encourages terrorism.

But we can read all of the titles, including "Pull the trigger twice," "Kalashnikov - let your bullets rise," a song extolling children throwing stones and Molotov cocktails, and a song celebrating terrorist Dalal Mughrabi.

All on the PLO website, today.

They still support and celebrate terror, today.

Everyone knows this.

Somehow, pointing out this undeniable fact makes one against peace.




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, September 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
Some very telling excerpts in an op-ed by Mariam Barghouti in The Forward:
Because of the Nakba, there is a part of Palestinian identity that is inherently linked with being a refugee. ... The Palestinian refugee story is the backbone of the Palestinian struggle. It is referenced in the poems we write and in the nostalgia that comes with exile, and it is the symbol of return to a life of dignity and belonging.
Since their self-identification as Palestinians is so tied up with their identification as refugees, then they must be defined as refugees. This is the logic the world is expected to accept - and pay billions of dollars for.

The implication is that if the definition of refugee as defined by international law applies to Palestinians, a large part of their identity would be taken away from them.

Their identity is based on a lie.

Forget the myths of them being Canaanites or Nabateans. Forget the pretense that soap-makers in Nablus or costumes in Bethlehem is what binds Palestinian people together with a shared history. All of that is fiction and they know it. The only thing that binds them together is their choice to remain "refugees."

And it is a choice. Barghouti, without irony, says that most of the residents of Gaza are "refugees" - turning the definition of refugee as someone forced out of their country on its head. The Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank and Jordan cannot be considered refugees under any reasonable definition - but, we are told, they must fight to maintain this completely incorrect label because they need to. Facts be damned - their entire self-identification is dependent on a lie and therefore the lie is more important than the truth.

Which brings us to UNRWA. While the agency continues to pretend that its purpose is to provide relief to "refugees," Palestinians say (accurately) that its purpose is to allow them to remain refugees forever, as this screenshot from a recent interview with an official at an NGO at the Aida camp says explicitly;




These admissions made by Palestinians in response to the reasonable demand that they be defined according to the same rules as every other people in the world reveals how shallow the idea of Palestinian nationalism is - their nationalism and indeed their very claim to be a people is mostly based on the lie of most of them being refugees.

They cannot argue that they truly are refugees - because they are not. So they must argue that since they want to be considered refugees for their very survival, the world must oblige them.

Telling the truth, that most Palestinians would happily become citizens in other Arab countries (and millions of them have when given the opportunity, in Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt), is an inconvenient fact that must be hidden. Any misery that Palestinians have after 70 years is because of decisions made by Arab leaders so many decades ago, decisions that remain in force today, decisions explicitly made in order to keep Palestinians stateless in the name of their "unity."

The Trump decision to end this farce is forcing even the most eloquent Palestinian spokespeople to admit that Palestinian nationalism is artificial. This is a long-overdue debate, and I'm happy to see it finally get some exposure.




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, September 12, 2018
  • Elder of Ziyon
A tweet from Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif:


See? Iran doesn't hate Jews! How dare anyone think otherwise?

Except that Iran supports the Houthi rebels in Yemen with sophisticated arms and even admits it provides moral and advisory support.

And the Houthi flag, and slogan, includes the phrase "Curse the Jews."


I'm not even talking about Iranian complicity in the bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Argentina. Today, Iran explicitly supports a group hates Jews so much that it places that hatred on its official flag.





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, September 11, 2018

From Ian:

UNRWA’s Bloated Farce
According to the Times of Israel, “A Republican senator introduced a bill Thursday that would require the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) to change its definition of what constitutes a Palestinian refugee in order to receive future US assistance.” The Trump administration wants UNRWA, corrupt and inefficient, to be cut down to size. They want “Palestinian” refugees to be limited to those who really are refugees, that is, people who left Mandatory Palestine, or Israel, almost 70 years ago. They want “Palestinian refugees” to be defined the same way all other refugees have been defined: as people who have fled a particular territory or country, which does not include their descendants. How many “Palestinians” who left Palestine/Israel between 1947 and 1949 are alive today? Estimates range from 20,000 to 40,000. Compare that with the five million “Palestinian refugees” that UNRWA now claims are eligible for its services. But it is UNRWA that is wrong.

One further point that deserves to be made is that even those Arabs who left Palestine/Israel from 1947 to 1949 are not exactly “refugees” in the full meaning of the term. They did not flee persecution at the hands of Israelis. There was no persecution. Some left before, or during, the hostilities, to get out of the way of battles they assumed the Arabs would win, in the belief that they could soon return. Others left after the Arab defeat, for they assumed — wrongly — that the victorious Jews would treat them as the Arabs would have treated the Jews had they won. Again, there was no forcing them out. They did not flee. They chose to leave. If this history were to be taken into account, there would be no “Palestinian” refugees in the proper sense of the term.

UNRWA is a completely corrupt organization. It has been grossly overstaffed, mainly by extravagantly-paid “Palestinians.” The more UNRWA inflates its rolls with the names of millions of descendants of refugees, described and treated as refugees themselves, and the more dead people it keeps on those rolls, the more aid UNRWA can request from its donors. Who are those donors? Ambassador Nikki Haley has pointed out that the fabulously rich Gulf Arabs give very little to support the “Palestinian refugees.” Of the top fourteen contributors to UNRWA, only one — Saudi Arabia — is an Arab country. All the rest are in Europe, save for the United States, which has been the most generous contributor, by far, to UNRWA.

The Americans have now done something the Arabs find outrageous and, until now, unthinkable. They have decided to refuse to continue accepting, much less, bankrolling, this state of affairs. They want exactly one thing: for the world to define a “Palestinian refugee” as someone who left Mandatory Palestine, or Israel, between 1947 and 1949, and to stop pretending that the millions of descendants of those people are “Palestinian refugees” themselves. After the billions that the United States has poured into UNRWA, it has both the right and the duty to put an end to funding that bloated farce. It is willing to help UNRWA minister to the needs of the 20,000-30,000 Arab refugees still living, but not to those five million descendants. If UNRWA refuses to agree, let it go its own way. Our contribution, and ideally that of our Western allies as well, should at that point be reduced to zero.
Read the peerless Howard Jacobson's speech about Jeremy Corbyn and antisemitism
Something tells me you're expecting me to call Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite. There's been a bit about it in the press, and I... well, you know...

But I'm not going to call him anything. He says he isn't an antisemite, Hamas says he isn't an antisemite, the white supremacist David Duke says he isn't an antisemite, and that's good enough for me.

Am I being ironical? Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm incapable of irony.

We know what an antisemite look like. He wears jackboots, a swastika arm-band, and shouts Juden Raus; Jeremy Corbyn wears a British Home Stores vest under his shirt and is softly spoken. Antisemites accuse Jews of killing Jesus; Corbyn is an atheist and seems not to mind if we did or didn't. Whether that's because Jesus was Jewish and killing him meant one less Jew in the world, is not for me to say. And - and - he doesn't deny the Holocaust...

Mind you, he knows a man who does. In fact he knows a surprising number of men who do. That he denies ever having been in their company - until photographs turn up of him rubbing noses with them at the gravesides of mass murderers, offering to show them his belief systems if they'll show him theirs - 'Gosh, they're the same size!' - should come as no surprise. You can't spend your whole life in the company of blood-libellers and holocaust-deniers and expect to remember them all by name.
Labour MPs are conferring legitimacy on anti-Semitism
Former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has been roughed up enough lately and I am loath to add to the calumnies but something he keeps saying bothers me. ‘The hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews.’ Sacks has dropped this aphorism into speeches and articles for the past few years and no wonder: it’s a pithier version of the Niemöller verse, a shorthand for the metastatic nature of prejudice.

First of all, I’m not convinced it’s true. They always come for the Jews but they don’t always come for the Communists or the Catholics or the trade unionists, not least because the Communists and the Catholics and the trade unionists are sometimes busy coming for the Jews themselves. There is a more fundamental objection. ‘The hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews.’ To which I ask: So what if it did?

What if the fractious bigotries stirred by the Labour Party limited themselves to the Jewish people? Would they be any more tolerable? Why does the left recoil instinctively from hatred of blacks and Muslims and Asians but require a three-hour PowerPoint presentation and a course of diversity training when it comes to Jews? Why is empathy unlocked only by fear the tormentors of the Jews may one day turn on others?

The answer is that the left, specifically the brand of left which Corbyn appeals to, divides the world into three categories: Victims, victimisers and the virtuous. Ethnic and religious minorities have been targets of historical imperialism and contemporary intolerance and so they are victims. Western white men have been largely responsible and so they are victimisers. The left champions the former against the latter and so they are the virtuous.

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