The Arab League held a meeting of Arab foreign ministers this week.
Despite the many problems in the Arab world, their final statements appears to be nothing but a litany of anti-Israel resolutions:
* Calling on the UN to convene an international conference to impose a "peace process" against Israel
* Condemning anyone (meaning the US) that is not working towards a political solution and that emphasizes economic and humanitarian issues
* Work vigorously to mobilize broad support for the renewal of the mandate of UNRWA.
* Condemn any decision by any state to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital
* Support the PLO holding Israel accountable for its crimes against the Palestinian people, to provide the necessary technical and financial support for these Palestinian endeavors
* Help the PLO in any legal actions against Israel including going to international court to overturn the Balfour Declaration
* Condemning Israel withholding funds from the Palestinian Authority that goes to terrorists and their families
* "Respect the legitimacy of the PLO, the legitimate and sole representative of the Palestinian people, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas," and to have the PA take over Gaza from Hamas
* "The Ministers expressed their deep concern over the malicious Israeli plans on the African continent," meaning any diplomatic activity whatsoever in Africa
* "Confront any Israeli attempt to circumvent the status of Palestine in Africa, which was built on the common values against colonialism, oppression and segregation.
* "The Council warned against the establishment of Israeli-African conferences, and urged African countries not to participate in any of them."
* Condemn Israel for closing the "Bab Al-Rahma" chapel on the Temple Mount which was opened by Hamas earlier this year
*Condemn "all violations by Israel (the occupying Power) of Islamic and Christian holy sites, especially attempts to change the historical and legal situation in Al-Aqsa Mosque, to divide it temporarily and spatially, and to undermine the freedom of Muslim prayer and deportation from it, and to try to control it."
* Condemn "Israeli excavations under Al-Aqsa Mosque and its walls."
* "Strongly condemn repeated incursions by extremist settler gangs and Israeli officials to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, attacking its sanctity, under the support, protection and participation of the Israeli government and forces, and warning the so-called 'Israeli Supreme Court' to allow Jewish settlers and intruders to pray in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, after allowing them to storm and desecrate it, within the Israeli plans to divide the mosque temporarily and spatially, including what is going on around the "Gate of Mercy" Jewish incursions and 'Talmudic' prayers, and warn that these attacks It has serious implications for international peace and security.
* Condemn "the systematic Israeli policy of distorting the educational curricula in the city of Jerusalem, and the imposition of the fabricated Israeli curriculum instead of the Palestinian curriculum in Arab schools, including the application of financial and administrative sanctions on Palestinian schools that do not comply with this malicious policy aimed at distorting the Islamic culture and identity of the Arab city of Jerusalem."
* "Rejection and condemnation of attempts to terminate or reduce the role and mandate of UNRWA through systematic Israeli campaigns against it, including seeking to close all centers and schools in the occupied city of Jerusalem and the replacement of Israeli occupying institutions"
* Rejection of the US decision or any similar decision to stop funding UNRWA
* "Express concern about UNRWA's annual budget deficit. Emphasizing the necessity of calling on the UN General Assembly Member States to launch a global appeal to expand the donor base of UNRWA to all Member States"
Literally every statement is about "Palestine."
The interesting part is that while "Palestine" seems to control the agenda of what statements to issue, even the Palestinians don't expect the members of the Arab League to actually do anything for them. Before the conference, the alternate Palestinian representative to the Arab League Muhannad al-Aklouk stated that he intended a resolution "to take punitive measures, whether political, diplomatic or economic, against any country that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and it will be up to each country to implement them as they see fit."
Even the PLO knows that it cannot call for Arab states to boycott countries, or close diplomatic missions, against nations that recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital - because they won't do it. Palestine is something to support with words and with occasional cash but the PLO no longer asks the Arab League nations to actually do anything concrete.
The Arab League was created to oppose Zionism and this is part of its DNA.
These statements at the end of many hundreds of Arab League meetings are meaningless but they make Palestinians feel important. Deep down, though, even the Palestinians know that the Arab League is one of the last institutions that can be counted on to reliably rubber stamp their demands as long as the members states aren't asked to actually do anything.
(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.
Another hypocritical tweet from Human Rights Watch's chief Ken Roth:
Beyond humanitarian reasons, there are good strategic reasons to resettle refugees in safe places: the frustration of endless stays in refugee camps tend to make them breeding grounds for radicalism and regional instability. But Trump isn't listening. https://t.co/lLt2uCwRQFpic.twitter.com/Xy2LwFpNuK
Since Ken Roth took his position, I am fairly certain that he never said anything remotely like this for Palestinian "refugees." On the contrary, HRW advocates the "right to return" for them claiming that Israel must be forced to accept an arbitrary number of Arabs as citizens if they choose to "return" to where their grandparents lived.
The further irony is that the camps in Lebanon and Syria, Gaza and the West Bank are indeed places that so-called "refugees" get radicalized. In Lebanon, fighting erupts between different parties in the camps fairly regularly, and the sometimes spill into the rest of Lebanon. Roth doesn't care about Palestinians getting radicalized. He doesn't call for the camps to be demolished and the residents integrated into their host countries. And if anyone should be resettled, it is Palestinians whose statelessness has gone on for three generations, a much more acute problem than that of any real refugee group.
Just like Israel is expected to live up to standards that no other nation does, Palestinians have unique human-rights rules as well. They can be denied human rights as long as the reason is to make them cannon fodder against Israel.
Roth is a hypocrite, and this tweet proves 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.
As we began Kabbalat Shabbat, I asked everyone to rise and the Cantor led us in the “Star Spangled Banner.” Since our synagogue, like most in the US has an American flag proudly displayed, we all turned and looked at it. Some saluted. Some put their hands over their hearts. Some war veterans wore their caps for the service, and some people cried – both women and men. Those moments were parallel to what was going on the city where almost every block had an American flag flying.
When I took the pulpit, I first asked everyone to rise and recite the Kaddish mourner’s prayer for the nephew of a doctor in our congregation. The young man in his 30s had been killed in the Pentagon where he worked. Most people have forgotten that Washington, DC, was a major target. The only place the first plane was able to hit was the Pentagon. The plane, which the assailants took over before the passengers overpowered them, was headed for the White House. The passengers triumphed over these terrorists.
Sadly, the plane went down and everyone aboard was killed.
I read from President Bush’s address to the nation the night of 9/11. Then I added a few of my own thoughts.
“I feel today that we are one nation – Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, black and white and brown. We are one nation, indivisible, united in our fear and outrage. Our compassion and resolve from now on September 11 will be a second Memorial Day in honor of our civilian casualties of war.
“Each of us is a reservoir of hope and strength. Surely we all saw hope in the firefighters who stood in burning debris, with boots melting, trying so hard to find more survivors. That hope should be a part of all our lives. We must do what we can to help. Ve’im lo achshav, aymatai? If not now, when?”
Then I asked everyone present to rise, and we offered a prayer for America and for all of us. As we stood, we sang “Hatikvah” as we looked proudly at the Israeli flag. On this 9/11 eighteen years later, let us pray that terrorism will be combated and peace will reign.
StandWithUs: Remember their names
2,977 men, women and children lost their lives on September 11th, 2001. We remember their names. We mourn the lives that could have been.
Danny Lewin, veteran of the IDF’s elite commando team, outstanding graduate of Israel’s Technion and MIT PhD student at MIT will be forever remembered for his attempt to prevent the hijacking of Flight 11, becoming the very first victim of 9/11.
On the morning of September 11, 2001, Danny Lewin boarded American Airlines Flight No. 11 in Boston, expecting to reach Los Angeles. Instead, the flight was hijacked and commandeered by Arab terrorists, crashing into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. On that fateful flight, Danny Lewin became the very first victim of the largest terrorist attack in history in which almost 3,000 Americans died. An internal memorandum of the Federal Aviation Administration says “that in the course of a struggle that took place between Lewin, a graduate of Israel’s elite commando unit, Sayeret Matkal, and the four hijackers who were assaulting that cockpit, Lewin was murdered by Satam Al Suqami, a 25-year-old Saudi.”
Sometime after the attack, the Lewin family in Jerusalem received a telephone call from the FBI offices in New York. On the line was the agent responsible for the investigation of the attack on Flight 11. He told Danny’s parents that there is a high degree of certainty that Danny tried to prevent the hijacking. The FBI relied, among other things, on the testimony of the stewardess Amy Sweeney.
Sweeney succeeded in clandestinely getting a call out during the flight to a flight services supervisor in Boston, from the rear of the plane: “A hijacker slit the throat of a passenger in business class and the passenger appears to me to be dead.” To this day the American investigators are not convinced that Danny Lewin was murdered on the spot. An additional stewardess, Betty Ong, who succeeded in calling from a telephone by one of the passenger seats, said that the passenger who was attacked from business class seat 10B was seriously wounded. It turned out that 10B was the seat of Danny Lewin.
The Lewin family, Danny’s parents and brothers, have no doubt that Danny battled the hijackers. And it is for them a tremendous consolation. “I wasn’t surprised to hear from the FBI that Danny fought. I was sure that this is what he would do,” Yonatan, his younger brother, said. “Danny didn’t sit quietly. From what we heard from the Americans, the hijackers attacked one of the stewardesses and Danny rose to protect her and prevent them from entering the cockpit. It is a consolation to us that Danny fought. We see it as an act of heroism that a person sacrifices his life in order to save others. That battle in the business section ended quickly. Lewin was overcome and bled to death on the floor. Two additional flight attendants were knifed and the captain was murdered. The hijackers were already inside the cockpit. They announced to the passengers to remain quiet in their seats.
Eighteen years is a long time. If you were born 18 years ago, you are today a young adult, old enough to find a job, begin college, enlist in the military, and vote for the first time. You also should know what happened in 2001, the year you were born. But, given the state of America’s educational system, I’m not confident you do. So let me briefly fill you in.
Back then, the Soviet socialist experiment had collapsed ending the Cold War which had followed World War II which had followed a decade of economic depression which came 11 years after the end of World War I.
That led to the belief – naïve but widely held – that there was a “new normal,” that Americans could cash a “peace dividend,” that whatever differences remained among the world’s peoples could now be resolved through diplomacy, commercial relations, and the intercession of transnational bureaucrats.
Then, on Sept. 11, 2001, a sparkling late summer morning, enemies of America hijacked four passenger jets and turned them into guided missiles.
Two planes brought down the World Trade Center, symbol of America’s economic might. One struck the Pentagon, headquarters of America’s military strength. A fourth was headed for the White House, where America’s top elected leader resides. That fourth jet failed to reach its target thanks to the heroic resistance of the passengers onboard.
Nearly 3,000 people, ranging in age from 2 to 85, were killed, a higher death toll than Pearl Harbor in 1941. Al-Qaida, the organization responsible, spent about a half million dollars to plan and execute the attacks. The cost to the U.S. has been estimated at over $3 trillion.
With elections coming up, I
have been feeling my own pulse, examining what I do and don’t believe. It seems
a good time, in general, to dig deep and clarify our thoughts about our fundamental beliefs. What
sort of government do I want? How far to the right does my ideology go?
Because, yes. My beliefs are to
the right of the spectrum on Israel. Always have been.
But just how far right they go, is always
a question for me.
I’m going to pick a few topics
here to illustrate what I mean:
Mosque arson. Am I for it?
I’m not. But if someone says, “Well, I am,” I begin to consider why mosque arson might be okay. Even
though my knee-jerk feeling is that mosque arson is ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCALLY NOT
OKAY.
Why would it be okay to torch
all the mosques in Israel? Because the Land of Israel is Jewish land, and Islam
is not our religion. For us, hosting the house of worship of another religion
on our land could conceivably be considered a kind of
defilement of the Holy Land. Certainly an unwelcome intrusion.
Okay. But look: now they are already here, the mosques. We were not able to prevent that eventuality. Sadly. Tragically. And since this is the situation in which we find ourselves, we have to ask, “Is it a mitzvah to burn them down?”
The answer will likely depend upon whom you ask. But I believe that a rabbi with a good and peaceful bent will
say that it is not necessary, and certainly not a
mitzvah. That it is better now that
the mosques are here, that we do not destroy them, as this will only ruffle feelings
and people could get hurt.
If, on the other hand, a structure might be moved to a more appropriate place, might we not be able to assist in this endeavor? That would be a worthy goal moving forward. Especially in regard to the Temple Mount.
Separation of synagogue and state. If you were to ask me how
far right I am on the question of Israel being run according to Jewish halacha, the answer would be pretty darned far. I believe the halacha,
Jewish law, to be the best possible government for the Land of Israel. Except that I also believe it's possible to
blend the current system of government as we have it, with the halacha,into a harmonious whole.
It has to be that way.
Otherwise, we will have chaos. And I am definitely not for chaos.
Transfer. I completely understand the concept. We have a declared enemy on our territory, acting out violently against us. But transfer implies an agreement with other countries. Do we have that now? Someone has to want them.
Also, there has always been some level of coexistence. I think those who demonstrate loyalty to the State
of Israel should be allowed to stay. I also think it's a complicated subject. How do they do this so we believe them? I would need them to acknowledge that they live in a Jewish State.
None of this precludes our respecting their rights.
But anyway, perhaps far right is a bad term. Maybe it comes down to shades or gradations along the scale of right.
Or maybe it comes down to the mature and the immature right.
Because I don’t believe in taking the
law into my own hands and hot-dogging it. I’m no cowboy.
I am aware that many will
disagree with me. Some will think I am horrible for the things I have written
here. They will say I am exclusionary, a racist.Others will think my views fall way short of what the Torah wants from us. They want a revolution.
They all want what they want. But the thing is, I know what is right for me.
And I also know right from
right.
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.
PM Netanyahu promised a dramatic announcement Tuesday night. It was about as dramatic as he could have made it, given that he is a caretaker PM who does not have a coalition, and that it is one week before the election. I brought my dinner into the living room to eat while watching him on the TV. It was probably unnecessary. There is very little that he could actually do at this point, no matter how much he wanted to.
Netanyahu noted that the long-awaited Trump plan would be released shortly after the election, and that this was a historic opportunity to take action that – thanks to his close relationship with President Trump – would receive the sanction of the US. He promised that if elected he would apply sovereignty (ribonut) to all Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria as soon as Trump’s plan was released. He promised that immediately after the election, without waiting for the American plan, he would apply Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea area. He displayed a detailed map of the area that would be included. This would finally establish, he said, the eastern border of the State of Israel, and would ensure that Judea and Samaria would not become a terrorist stronghold like Gaza. Here is Netanyahu’s map:
On the right you can see a list of the Jewish communities that would be included. There are also several Arab towns that will remain under PA control, including Jericho (the orange area in the center).
Netanyahu mentioned that the presence of the IDF in all of the Jordan Valley is absolutely essential for the defense of the country. He is not the first to have said this. In fact, his words “the entire Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of the term” echo a similar statement by Yitzhak Rabin in his last speech to the Knesset before he was murdered.
Although the Left likes to present Rabin as the martyred champion of its policy of withdrawal, Rabin was extremely suspicious of the Oslo accords that he was unable to avoid signing, and envisioned a final agreement that would create a Palestinian entity that was less than a sovereign state, and which occupied less than the entire area of Judea and Samaria. In particular, he wanted to keep the Jordan valley. A glance at a relief map of Israel – I have one on my wall – shows why:
The heights here are exaggerated, but the difference in elevation between the valley floor and the mountains surrounding it is between 1000-2000 meters. The importance of Netanyahu’s and Rabin’s stress on the “broadest meaning of the term” is that it includes both the valley floor and the rising western slope. Any attack on Israel from the east would have to cross this formidable natural barrier; and if an enemy were able to dominate the western ridge, the heavily populated areas of the country would be at its mercy. The topography is similar to that of the Golan Heights, but the Jordan Valley is even more critical strategically.
Netanyahu mentioned the US President and his close relationship with him at least five times (I stopped counting), and while this is apparently good politics in Israel where most people – both on the Right and the Left – are in awe of the power of the US, it has several worrying aspects. For one thing, the transformation of Israel into a partisan issue that was encouraged by the Obama Administration has become even more apparent as it is fed by the polarized domestic American politics surrounding Trump. The more Netanyahu associates himself with Trump, the more Trump’s enemies become our enemies. And when they ultimately gain power, they will attempt to reverse Trump’s policies, including – especially – his pro-Israel ones. In May, Bernie Sanders even indicated that he would consider moving the American Embassy back to Tel Aviv “if it would help bring peace” (he seems to have since backtracked).
Another concern is that Netanyahu seems to be building on an assumption of continued administration support. There is a degree of instability in US policy, as is indicated by the surprise departures of Trump’s special envoy Jason D. Greenblatt, who was to be the key negotiator of the “deal of the century,” and National Security Advisor John Bolton. Bolton was more hawkish on such North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan than Trump, and while as of this writing we don’t know what particular disagreement prompted Trump to fire him, it could be related to the rumors that Trump will meet with Iranian President Rouhani. While no US President has been as consistently pro-Israel as Trump, there is no guarantee that this will continue.
Although it is an election promise, nevertheless the statement that he will bring about the extension of sovereignty to all the communities in Judea and Samaria is a significant one. Critics on the right point out that he did not promise to apply sovereignty to the land as he did to the Golan Heights and as he intends to do to the Jordan Valley, but only to the communities. This is an interesting application of the concept of sovereignty, which may have important consequences.
Next Tuesday’s election is too close to call at this point. There are, like last time, parties that are flirting with the 3.25% threshold of votes needed to enter the Knesset; like last time, Netanyahu’s Likud and its center-left opposition are running neck and neck; and also like last time, Avigdor Lieberman will hold the balance of power in coalition negotiations.
One thing that is clear, however, is this: one failed round of coalition negotiations and rerun of the election in a year is all the Israeli people will stand for. Either they will come up with a government this time, or the people will rise in revolt (and I will join them). There is a huge amount of frustration that has built up against politicians who seem to be unable to deal with the rising cost of living – especially housing – the endless drip of terrorism, the arson balloons and rockets from Gaza, the continued presence of African migrants in Tel Aviv, questions of religion and state, army service for Haredim, and countless other issues. It doesn’t help that many Knesset members, who are well paid, are accused of or even already indicted for corruption (one of Netanyahu’s opponents accused him of trying to create a “government of suspects,” a memshelet chashudim).
I’m still not entirely sure whom I will vote for, although I am leaning toward Yamina, the right-wing coalition led by Ayelet Shaked. I don’t like to decide things earlier than necessary. I never know what might happen to change my mind. So I won’t be certain until I am standing there and reaching for that little slip of paper, the great instrument of democracy.
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.
Hamas, which seeks to annihilate Israel, certainly was none too pleased with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement Tuesday evening that if re-elected, he would apply Israeli sovereignty over the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea in coordination with the United States.
Hamas has good reason not to like what Netanyahu said. It even made sense that Gaza’s terror regime tried to harm Netanyahu politically by launching a volley of missiles at Ashdod while Netanyahu was giving a speech in the city. (Netanyahu’s political rivals on the Left and Right were quick to take Hamas’ bait and use Hamas’ aggression as a means to score political points against Netanyahu.)
Hamas was right to hate what Netanyahu said because Netanyahu’s statement Tuesday evening was a strategic blow to the hundred-year-old Palestinian war against the Jewish state.
What did Netanyahu do in that statement? Most media commentary claimed his statement wasn’t substantive. It was just another political promise from a desperate politician who is looking with increasing panic at unflattering polls.
But that assessment obscures more than it reveals. Netanyahu may be concerned about his polling numbers. But his statement Tuesday was not a display of political desperation but of diplomatic triumph. Netanyahu’s statement made clear that he enjoys a cooperative relationship with US President Donald Trump that has no parallel in the history of Israel-US relations.
The Jordan Valley lies in Area C of the West Bank where, under the Oslo Accords, Israel retains full civilian and military control. According to the Israel Democracy Institute, 48% of Jewish Israelis support extending sovereignty over the Jordan Valley with U.S. support, with 28% opposed.
Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, director of international law at the Jerusalem-based Kohelet Policy Forum, said, "The Prime Minister's announcement is fully in line with Israel's international legal rights. Because these territories were part of the British Mandate, Israel has as much legal right to them as to Tel Aviv." Kontorovich said such a move should not be seen as annexation because the territory currently does not belong to a foreign country and annexation means the taking of the territory of a foreign country.
"Israel waited for more than 50 years to regularize the status of these territories, giving the Palestinians opportunity after opportunity to make a peace deal that would have given them a sovereign state. The Palestinians refused time after time, rejecting initiatives under presidents Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump. Israel has now decided that the people in these areas cannot be held in limbo forever; Israelis should not pay the price for Palestinian intransigence."
Likud voters – buoyed by the post-April statements detailed in 1, 2 and 3 below – will most likely vote again – whilst Blue and White and Yisrael Beiteinu voters – unhappy with their leaders’ post-April statements detailed in 4 and 5 below – are more likely to stay home.
Any increase in general voter turnout this time beyond 67.97 per cent would defy the diplomatic downturn – but should still see parties on the Right securing more of those new votes than parties on the Left. Statements made since April by Trump’s Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, President Trump himself, Likud’s Netanyahu, Yisrael Beiteinu’s Lieberman and Blue and White’s Gantz support this conclusion.
1. Ambassador Friedman indicated that some degree of annexation of the West Bank would be legitimate.
“Under certain circumstances, I think Israel has the right to retain some, but unlikely all, of the West Bank”
More new voters – conscious of their own families’ personal safety – would vote Right – than those opposing any annexation – who would vote Left.
2. Trump endorsed Netanyahu as “a great guy”
3. Netanyahu – speaking in Elkana – located in Samaria – pledged: “With God’s help we will extend Jewish sovereignty to all the settlements as part of the (biblical) Land of Israel, as part of the State of Israel. “This is our land…”We will build another Elkana and another Elkana and another Elkana. We will not uproot anyone here”
In a first-ever public address from Hebron by a sitting Israeli prime minister – Netanyahu vowed: “To cite the late Menachem Begin and the late Yigal Allon: ‘Hebron will not be devoid of Jews.’ It will not be Judenrein [ed: i.e. Jew-free]. And I say on the 90th anniversary of the disturbances [ed: when 67 Jews were murdered] – we are not foreigners in Hebron, we will stay here forever.”
These patriotic declarations should attract more Right-supportive than Left-opposing new voters.
Richardson became a professor of international affairs and wrote a few papers on the Palestine refugee situation in the early 1950s. He was no Zionist and he was truly concerned over the plight of refugees of Palestine
To Richardson, as to most of the people at the time who wanted to find solution to the refugee problem, it was obvious that the Arab countries were at fault for no solution and that it was their responsibility to help resettle the Arabs of Palestine in their states. In fact, it would be beneficial to them to integrate this population.
This is how you can tell the difference between people who are pro-Palestinian and those who are just anti-Israel. People who really care about Palestinians would insist that Arab states make them into citizens, especially those that have been "guests" for generations. People who truly care about Palestinians want to end their statelessness and their suffering in camps.
People who are anti-Israel insist on "return,' and are angry when Palestinian Arabs themselves say they want to become citizens in Lebanon, Gulf states or the West. They are the ones who insist on supporting UNRWA to keep the issue alive - and Palestinians in limbo - until a fantasy time when Israel is destroyed. They want to see millions more refugees.
Sometimes you need to look at the past to understand the present.
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.
Mondoweiss has an article by Sarah Doyel where she describes the horror of how Israelis are proud that Israel is a vegan-friendly country:
Israel is using veganism as a calculated facade to justify its military’s program of terror, gloss over its occupation of Palestine, and appropriate regional culture and traditions that predate Israel by hundreds if not thousands of years.
Doyel quickly establishes that she is not just a vegan, but she is an activist for whom veganism is an all-or-nothing proposition, and anyone who disagrees is a hypocrite, as she castigates Ben and Jerry's:
Put simply, veganwashing is the act of using veganism to create positive image associations or appear more compassionate than one actually is. A classic example is Ben & Jerry’s line of non-dairy ice creams, which they use to brand the company as vegan-friendly without ever actually decreasing their contribution to animal exploitation.
Keep in mind that PETA supports the Ben and Jerry's vegan ice creams. VegNews is happy to support Ben and Jerry's.
For normal vegans, having more choices of what to eat is something to celebrate. For crazy people, unless Ben and Jerry destroys its entire business model, it is evil.
Doyel uses this same logic against Israel and Israelis in ways that show that her real agenda has nothing to do with morality.
For example, she is upset that Tel Avivians - not Israel, but Jews who live in Tel Aviv - are proud to call their city "the vegan capital of the world." Apparently, pride in one's city is immoral when the city happens to be Israeli. I can't wait for the Mondowiss article on "beach-washing."
While she claims that she is only going after official representatives of Israel in her criticism, but she has a curious definition of them:
I am also sure that there are many vegan Israelis who are committed to ending the occupation of Palestine, which is why I deliberately focused on veganwashing as propagated by the Israeli government, corporations, and public figures such as bloggers and business owners, rather than private citizens of Israel.
This is of course a lie. The Independent article she links to quotes anonymous residents of Tel Aviv as calling the city the "vegan capital of the world." By definition, they are private citizens and have absolutely nothing to do with the government.
Doyel's fake morality is really revealed in this paragraph:
Restaurants in my current home of Washington, DC engage in this kind of cultural appropriation all the time, which might be slightly less disturbing to me if they weren’t so successful as a result. When fellow District residents find out that I’m vegan, Israeli-owned restaurants Shouk and Little Sesame are two of the top five restaurants people tend to ask if I’ve visited. These spots quickly became favorites among vegans and non-vegans alike who don’t realize just how problematic it is to eat at a place that calls its cooking “modern Israeli street food” (Shouk). News also just broke that the NYC-based “Tel Aviv-style” falafel chain Taïm will be opening its first location in DC this fall.
Yes, a proud vegan is against anyone visiting American vegan restaurants based only on where the owners were born.
This is hatemasquerading as morality.
Calling falafel "modern Israeli street food" is completely accurate and not offensive to anyone who already isn't looking to be offended. It was never Arab street food. It was never as popular in any Arab country as it has been in Israel. No one is claiming that Israel invented it (although falafel in pita is, to my understanding, a purely Israeli invention - which is what made it street food to begin with.) There is a difference between "Tel Aviv-style falafel" and traditional Arab falafel - is it immoral to market that fact?
No - it is immoral to call to boycott a business based on its accurate description of its product simply because it includes the word "Israeli" or "Tel Aviv" in its marketing literature. It is immoral to boycott a business based on where the owners were born.
There is an excellent kosher Turkish restaurant I enjoy going to. Should I boycott it because I am against Turkey's policies? If I claim to do that, everyone would know that my real agenda has nothing to do with politics or morality.
And everyone knows that Sarah Doyel, by refusing to enter vegan restaurants that happen to be owned by Israeli Jews, is not acting out of morality - no matter how much she claims that she is so sensitive to moral issues that force her to become a vegan to begin with.
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.
Palestinian Arabic media are filled with stories about Netanyahu going to a rocket shelter in Ashdod yesterday during his press conference as the Red Alert sirens went off.
It seems likely that the rocket fire was calculated to do exactly this - disrupt the press conference and make headlines worldwide.
It was exactly the same logic that a two-year old child who cannot quite communicate her feelings uses when making a temper tantrum.
Palestinianism is being sidetracked by the world. Over the past few years more and more people - especially Arabs - have realized that the old formula of "linkage" that said that the Palestinian issue must be solved before anything else could happen in the Middle East was not only wrong but counterproductive. Arab states have other concerns; Syria showed that hundreds of thousands of people could be killed in the region without any link to Palestinianism, and the more that Israel conceded to Palestinians, the more intransigent they became.
Palestinians, sensing the change in direction, switched strategies to tie their cause not with the larger Middle East but with "progressive" causes. This new linkage has had some success in far-Left circles where antisemitism-disguised-as-anti-Zionism is an attractive option but it also results in a hijacking of many liberal agendas by anti-Israel activists, and this is also making many people sick of the Palestine cause. BDS is losing far more battles than it is winning, academic groups are treating pro-Palestinian issues like kryptonite as they see how places like the American Studies Association has only suffered after adopting anti-Israel policies.
Palestinians, who were so used to being able to push their agenda on cable news networks and major newspaper op-eds at will, now are seeing that the world is putting their issues in a more proper perspective. Compared to the real problems of people living in the region, Palestinians don't have it that bad, and giving them so much oxygen has suffocated far more important causes for a long time.
But the anti-Israel, pro-terror activists are frustrated at this change in focus. They are like spoiled children who are suddenly forced to share their toys with others. They keep trying to come up with more and more absurd excuses to own the agenda (like accusing Israel of "veganwashing.")
This mentality is shared between anti-Israel activists and Palestinian terrorists. They aren't the center of attention anymore and they must stage a temper tantrum to regain the spotlight. A parent can't ignore their child screaming in the middle of the market, can they?
Palestinians are proud that Gaza rockets are powerful enough to force an Israeli prime minister to react, just as toddlers are happy to get attention from their parents by screaming that they want a chocolate bar.
The difference is that up until now, the world has been patiently hoping that the Palestinian toddlers will grow up. In the years since Oslo, real toddlers have indeed grown up, started companies and had children of their own - but Palestinians and their fans have stayed exactly where they were.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
A former Palestinian Arab terrorist who was ordered to be deported by Canada's federal government is a guest speaker at an upcoming University of Toronto student event.
In response, Hasbara Fellowships Canada, which empowers student leaders to become advocates for Israel, is urging the university to intervene and prevent his participation in the event.
Issam Al-Yamani is a self-admitted former member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), which is a recognized terror group in Canada.
Despite the Immigration and Refugee Board ordering his deportation in 2005 for his terror associations, he remains in Canada. A 2007 federal court decision confirms that he admitted to being a member of the PFLP.
In 2014, Mr. Al-Yamani gave a speech in downtown Toronto that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) interpreted as inciting violence. The CBSA then issued a report stating that he is a "danger to the security of Canada.” A CBSA report also claims that two PFLP members tasked with bombing an airplane “confessed to placing the bomb on instructions from Al-Yamani.”
According to a Global News investigation on Mr. Al-Yamani published in March of 2018, the Government of Canada has been "trying to deport him" for the past 26 years.
Despite lip service offered by senior French officials, Jew hatred still runs rampant in France and the main threat is solidly contained in the Muslim migrant community.
This the French have not addressed with any conviction. Until they do, French Jews will continue to enjoy the protection of Israel.
It should be beholden on the French to have Polanski’s movie screened on their own soil at the Cannes Film Festival.
In a sense, Israel is the Dreyfus of today. The Jewish state is constantly accused of criminal charges that Israel did not commit.
The accusers cover up for the crimes of others, those they support and welcome into their societies. They shower these criminals with money, honors, invitations to join their austere organizations. They do not question their evil intent. Their Esterhazy must be protected lest their finger pointing at the collective Jew be considered as something that dare not speak its name.
And so it is the Middle East Jew, that imposter, that must continue to be condemned while the Palestinian Esterhazy is allowed to literally get away with murder and treachery against the whole notion of justice and peace.
Ian Austin MP, who resigned from Labour in protest at antisemitism within the Party earlier this year, delivered a passionate indictment of the Labour leadership in a speech in Parliament yesterday, branding Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party’s leadership “extremists”.
Standing amongst Labour MPs on the opposition benches, Mr Austin said: “I left the Labour party to shine a spotlight on the disgrace it’s become under his [Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s] leadership…I regard myself as proper, decent traditional Labour, not like the extremists who have taken over this Party and are dragging it into the mud…These are people [Mr Corbyn and Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, John McDonnell] who spent their entire time in politics working with [and] defending all sorts of extremists, and in some cases terrorists and antisemites…They always back the wrong side, whether it’s the IRA, Hamas and Hizballah, whom they describe as ‘friends’.”
As Labour MPs heckled him and told him to stop sitting with them, Mr Austin continued: “No previous Labour leadership would have allowed a Party with a proud history of fighting racial prejudice to have been poisoned by racism, which is what’s happened under these people — racism against Jewish people, to the extent that members have been arrested on suspicion of racial hatred, that the Party itself has become the first in history to be investigated under equalities laws by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. These people, and the people around them, are a million miles away from the traditional, mainstream, decent politics of the Labour Party. They have poisoned what was once a great party with extremism. They cannot be trusted with the institutions that underpin our democracy. They are completely unfit to lead the Labour Party, let alone our country.”
Mr Austin was joined by another former Labour MP, Ivan Lewis, who also resigned the Labour Party whip over antisemitism. Mr Lewis added his condemnation of Mr Corbyn, saying: “He does not have the leadership skills required at a time of so many challenges facing our country, and his leadership has led to the party of anti-racism and equality becoming the party of institutionalised antisemitism, so much so that a majority of Jews in this country feel that they would not be safe in the event of his becoming Prime Minister.”
The Egyptian state security prosecutor's office has again extended the detention of activist Ramy Shaath, the son of a former Palestinian foreign minister, on suspicion of having terrorist ties, an accusation his family denies.
Shaath was arrested July 5 at his Cairo home after prosecutors added him to a list of previously arrested suspects that includes journalists, businessmen, politicians and former members of the Egyptian parliament, and involves 19 companies. All the suspects are accused of being members of and funding the Muslim Brotherhood, which Egypt considers a terrorist group.
Palestine Today has a similar story of am 81-year old Hamas member and his son who were arrested in Saudi Arabia:
A Hamas leader and his son in were arrested in Saudi Arabia for several months without any justification, as part of a campaign against many Palestinians living in the kingdom.
Mohammed Saleh al-Khodari (Abu Hani) and his son Hani, who have been living in Jeddah for nearly three decades. were detained. Hamas considers the arrest of al-Khodari and his son a strange and reprehensible step, especially since he was responsible for managing the relationship with Saudi Arabia for two decades.
These are very prominent Palestinians being arrested. The days of Arabs reflexively supporting Palestinians are long gone.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The Arab Liberation Army was set up by the Arab League in late 1947 specifically to fight the Jews in Palestine, before the British Mandate expired. It was staffed with volunteers.
Its first attack inside the boundaries of the Mandate was in January, 1948.
Given that its name was the Arab Liberation Army, one might think that the primary goal of the army was to set up an Arab state in liberated Palestine.
But its logo showed that the purpose was not to build a political entity - but to destroy one.
How much more obvious does it need to be?
Here is an armored vehicle used by the ALA that was captured by the Haganah, which has the logo:
Remember, this is before the State of Israel and its flag. While Zionist did use the Star of David, this representation of the dagger through the Star cannot be interpreted as anything but pure antisemitism.
Since then, nothing has changed, but it is not politically correct to point that out.
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.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Tuesday that if he is re-elected, he will express Israeli sovereignty over all the Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, starting with the Jordan Valley.
Netanyahu said the steps would be taken in coordination with the administration of US President Donald Trump. He revealed that Trump intends to announce his Middle East peace plan the day after the September 17 election.
“This is an historic opportunity that we may not have again,” Netanyahu said in his statement that he delivered at Ramat Gan’s Kfar Hamaccabiah Hotel.
Pointing to a map of the Jordan Valley, he said Israel could carry out the plan without annexing a single Palestinian and while ensuring that Palestinians maintain complete freedom of movement.
He warned that if he did not win the election, Blue and White leaders Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid would not take such steps and would not be able to handle the Trump administration’s plan.
But both Gantz and Lapid have said in the past that they envision keeping the Jordan Valley forever.
Fatah, like all terror promoting organizations, needs a platform to turn its unknown terrorists into heroes and role models to emulate. Fatah has chosen Facebook as its prime tool, and through its Facebook page instantaneously promotes terror to its 224,000 Facebook followers.
PMW again demands that Facebook immediately close down Fatah’s official page before more innocent lives are lost to murderers who are inspired and drawn to terror by Fatah’s Facebook page.
In January 2019, Palestinian Media Watch sent a copy to Facebook officials of our comprehensive report on Fatah’s Facebook page documenting Fatah’s use of its official Facebook page to promote terror and glorify terrorists throughout 2018. PMW director Itamar Marcus spoke with the Director of Facebook’s Global Counterterrorism Policy Team, Brian Fishman, and described how Fatah’s use of Facebook for its terror promotion was both life threatening and in violation of Facebook's Community Standards.
Tragically, in spite of the clear documentation, Facebook has chosen to knowingly let Fatah continue.
Below is PMW's new report on Fatah’s use of Facebook from January to June 2019, which shows that Facebook still constitutes a central part of Fatah’s terror promotion mechanism. Facebook’s willingness to ignore all the evidence and keep the page open makes Facebook a willing and active partner in Fatah’s terror promotion. Whereas in 2018 Facebook was an unwitting accomplice in Fatah's terror promotion, in 2109, Facebook is a partner by choice.
Fatah says this 17-year old suicide bomber is “Magnificent” and is using @facebook to publicize its terror mission. Demand Facebook stop partnering with Palestinian terror promotion & close Fatah’s terror page. #CloseFatahFB
They were angered by a video she posted on social media of herself with the man she was soon to be engaged to. Her brother claimed she dishonored the family by showing the two of them together before they were married. The father called on the brother to beat Israa, and while trying to escape, Israa Ghrayeb fell from the second floor of their home, suffering serious spinal injuries. Then, while she was at the hospital, Ghrayeb was apparently attacked a second time and died.
The family claimed she died of a heart attack.
Another honor killing.
But this one was different.
The death of a young Palestinian woman in the West Bank has sparked widespread outrage across the Middle East amid accusations that it is nothing but another case of so-called honor killing.
The suspicious circumstances of 21-year-old Israa Ghareeb’s death in Bethlehem have also drawn attention to a practice increasingly seen as a stain on the conscience of Middle East societies.
...Soon afterwards, #WeAreAllIsraa began to trend on Arabic Twitter, with more than 50,000 tweets displaying the hashtag.
This anger is not only against the Palestinian government -- it is also against Jordan.
There has never been a sovereign Palestinian state in what is now referred to as the "West Bank". Before Israel recaptured it in the Six Day War of 1967, the area was under Jordanian rule after it claimed it as its own during the 1948 War, the validity of which was recognized only by Great Britain and Pakistan.
The law that allows Palestinian men to kill female members of their family with relative impunity originates from Jordan.
Mohammad Abequa, a U.S. citizen born in Jordan, confessed Wednesday in an Amman courtroom that he strangled his estranged wife in her New Jersey apartment in July. Abequa, 46, said he killed his 40-year-old Turkish-born wife, Nihal, to protect his honor, an argument accepted by Jordanian courts as a reason for a reduced sentence. He is charged with murdering his wife, whose body was found July 4 in the apartment in the community of Parsippany Troy-Hills, as well as kidnapping his children, Lisa, 6, and Sami, 3. Abequa brought the children to Jordan after his wife's death. In what was seen as an effort to get a reduced sentence, Abequa told a crowded courtroom that he lost his temper when his wife told him that the man leaving her house as he arrived was her boyfriend. 'I asked her who the man was, and she told me it was her boyfriend and showed me a new tattoo on her thigh that he gave her,' Abequa said. [emphasis added]
At the time, the article contended that though Abequa could face the death penalty in Jordan if he was found guilty of murder, he might be able to avoid execution if he could convince the court that it was an 'honor killing.'
But judicial sources doubted Abequa would receive a reduced sentence because the highly publicized case has been the focus of U.S. interest and personal attention from Jordan's King Hussein.
It was troubling enough to the victim's family that Mohammad Abequa, who murdered his wife in New Jersey in 1994 and fled to Jordan with their two young children, was sentenced to only 15 years by a Jordanian court.
But then yesterday came the news that the confessed killer had been pardoned for his crime after serving five years in prison, and had been set free.
So how to begin to deal with this tragic injustice embedded in Jordanian law?
“We discovered that (Jordan) had taken this article from the Syrian penal code, which was taken from the French penal code,” Hassan explained. “So the basis for it was France: French law, not Islamic, nor Arabic.”
She noted: “Of course, France had abolished this article, and honor crimes were never again a problem the French legal system had to face.”
I realized how damaging colonization has been.
I felt a surprising sense of pain — but also hope — at this revelation. It made me realize just how damaging colonization has been for the Middle East.
Let's put aside the irony of the long history of the colonization by the Islamic expansionism that itself reached as far as France.
Is there a basis for Jordan blaming France?
Then how to explain how widespread honor killing is within the Arab world?
The Arab News article quoted above provides the following chart
Is the influence of France really that widespread?
Are these honor killings just another manifestation of the kind of abuse found the world over?
Are honor killings just another form of domestic violence?
Phyllis Chesler, an American writer, psychotherapist, and professor emerita of psychology and women's studies at the College of Staten Island, takes a closer look at the distinction between honor killings and domestic violence, noting that
The frequent argument made by Muslim advocacy organizations that honor killings have nothing to do with Islam and that it is discriminatory to differentiate between honor killings and domestic violence is wrong.
She demonstrates that there are differences, and that honor killings are in fact to an alarming degree an Islamic phenomenon. One key difference between domestic violence and Islamic honor killings is that unlike honor killers who tend not to be condemned by Muslim society
the batterer-murderer is seen as a criminal; no one defends him as a hero. Such men are often viewed as sociopaths, mentally ill, or evil.
Committed mainly by Muslims against Muslim girls/young adult women.
Committed by men of all faiths usually against adult women.
Committed mainly by fathers against their teenage daughters and daughters in their early twenties. Wives and older-age daughters may also be victims, but to a lesser extent.
Committed by an adult male spouse against an adult female spouse or intimate partner.
Carefully planned. Death threats are often used as a means of control.
The murder is often unplanned and spontaneous.
The planning and execution involve multiple family members and can include mothers, sisters, brothers, male cousins, uncles, grandfathers, etc. If the girl escapes, the extended family will continue to search for her to kill her.
The murder is carried out by one man with no family complicity.
The reason given for the honor killing is that the girl or young woman has "dishonored" the family.
The batterer-murderer does not claim any family concept of "honor." The reasons may range from a poorly cooked meal to suspected infidelity to the woman's trying to protect the children from his abuse or turning to the authorities for help.
At least half the time, the killings are carried out with barbaric ferocity. The female victim is often raped, burned alive, stoned or beaten to death, cut at the throat, decapitated, stabbed numerous times, suffocated slowly, etc.
While some men do beat a spouse to death, they often simply shoot or stab them.
The extended family and community valorize the honor killing. They do not condemn the perpetrators in the name of Islam. Mainly, honor killings are seen as normative.
The batterer-murderer is seen as a criminal; no one defends him as a hero. Such men are often viewed as sociopaths, mentally ill, or evil.
The murderer(s) do not show remorse. Instead, they experience themselves as "victims," defending themselves from the girl's actions and trying to restore their lost family honor.
Sometimes, remorse or regret is exhibited.
The difference is more than between the Arab world and the West. There is also a distinction between Islam and other religions:
Families that kill for honor will threaten girls and women if they refuse to cover their hair, their faces, or their bodies or act as their family's domestic servant; wear makeup or Western clothing; choose friends from another religion; date; seek to obtain an advanced education; refuse an arranged marriage; seek a divorce from a violent husband; marry against their parents' wishes; or behave in ways that are considered too independent, which might mean anything from driving a car to spending time or living away from home or family. Fundamentalists of many religions may expect their women to meet some but not all of these expectations. But when women refuse to do so, Jews, Christians, and Buddhists are far more likely to shun rather than murder them. Muslims, however, do kill for honor, as do, to a lesser extent, Hindus and Sikhs.
A year later, in an article describing a study that she did on Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings, Chesler dug deeper. She did a study of honor killings, analyzing 172 incidents and 230 honor-killing victims where 100 of the victims were murdered in the West and 130 additional victims were murdered in the Muslim world.
Her findings reflected the Arab News graph in how widespread honor killings are in the Muslim world.
The perpetrators and victims lived in 29 countries or territories: Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Gaza Strip, Germany, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, and the West Bank.
The conclusion:
In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims. In North America, most killers (84 percent) were Muslims, with only a few Sikhs and even fewer Hindus perpetrating honor killings; in Europe, Muslims comprised an even larger majority at 96 percent while Sikhs were a tiny percentage. In Muslim countries, obviously almost all the perpetrators were Muslims. With only two exceptions, the victims were all members of the same religious group as their murderers.
You cannot pin this all on France.
Here is the Jordanian law in Article 340 again, this time with revisions made in 2010:
Now the law specifies that the killing has to be done "immediately," apparently to allow for this to be a crime of passion as opposed to being premeditated.
Also, in the spirit of evenhandedness, the woman is allowed to kill her husband as well, but without mentioning other relatives as is allowed to the man.
But the point of all this is not about nitpicking.
This is about dealing with the problem of honor killing by addressing the problem itself. Treating honor killings as just another manifestation of domestic abuse just avoids the issue and fails to understand this for what it is. That is why these public grassroots protests are an important step towards attacking the problem. There is more to be done than just applying a bandage to the existing law.
Now there are signs that people are beginning to realize that.
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.
One argument made by people on the Left - especially since Bari Weiss' book on antisemitism was released - is that there is no comparison between left wing "anti-Zionism" and right-wing antisemitism, because only the right-wing antisemites are violent.
The most insidious lie that @bariweiss tells us is that legal right wing antisemitism which has literally *killed* American Jews is *less dangerous* because “everyone agrees about it.”
I don't think Weiss says that at all, but this is a typical take - right wing antisemites have guns and have shown that they will kill Jews, while left-wingers only protest.
It is true that left-wing antisemites in America are not physically dangerous at this time. That is America, today. Many Palestinian terror groups that have killed many Jews over the years are are left-wing groups like the PFLP and DFLP, so the Left is not inoculated against antisemitic violence. we have also seen left-wing argument supporting Palestinian terror.
But is actual violence the only metric that matters? If Jews cannot feel comfortable walking though college campuses (or British subways) without being berated because they are presumed to be anti-Palestinian, is that not an issue that should be brought up? When Jews in college dorms are singled out for fake "eviction notices," is that not antsemitism?
Yes, right-wing antisemitism is dangerous. It is also, thankfully, rare. Most Jews walking on the street are not going to run into a violent right-wing antisemite. (Far more likely they would be attacked by a person of color, at least in New York.)
But left-wing antisemitism, disguised as anti-Zionism, is all over the place. They have rallies and demonstrations and "Israel Apartheid Week" displays all over. Jews do not feel comfortable expressing their views because of the intimidation and threats that the BDSers and friends use to shut down any pro-Israel speech.
To say that violent antisemitism is the only threat worth bothering to mention is like saying that women shouldn't complain about a work environment where men sneer at them and make jokes about their bodies - because they aren't actually getting raped.
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.
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.
Hating Thanksgiving
-
It wouldn't be Thanksgiving without turkey, long lines, and people browsing
their phones for Black Friday deals in which the products had their prices
r...
Italian senate marks exodus of Jewish refugees
-
The Italian senate in Rome held a commemoration of the exodus of 850,000
Jews from Arab countries on 25 November. See video here. The moving force
behind...
Turkey Day
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Thanksgiving, Ham, Turkey, America, Holiday,
Jews, Pork, Holiday,]
An American Favorite
* * * Celebrate Thanksgiving by Supporti...
Hamas/Gaza War Musings #36- Dangerous Surrender!
-
As a student of the Bible/Tanach, most recently Prophets/Navi, that's the
message. Gd will save us if we do the right thing. That's how we won the
1967...
Introducing Rashid Rida on Zionism
-
Anyone who follows pro-'Palestine' Islamic propaganda will recognzie in the
excerpts below the source material for the virulent antisemitism,
exaggeratio...
An open letter to the police and CPS
-
To the police and CPS. With reference to complaints made by Gabriel
Kanter-Webber about Rupert Nathan. I understand that the matter has now
been referred...
7 Biggest Dungeons In Elder Scrolls Games
-
Please verify your email address. Labyrinthian in Skyrim is a maze of
Nordic ruins with fiends to battle and treasures to find. Sundercliff Watch
in Oblivi...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Thursday, September 12, 2019
Elder of Ziyon
