Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, June 25, 2020

Ahmad Erekat’s death shows yet again that Palestinian “eyewitnesses” often lie

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights wrote a narrative of what happened at the Abu Dis checkpoint based on “eyewitnesses.”

But before the video of the incident was released.

According to PCHR’s investigations and eyewitnesses’ testimonies, … At approximately 15:55, when Erekat’s vehicle approached the checkpoint, it deviated from its path and collided into the traffic island opposite the glass room where Israeli border guard soldiers stationed. The soldiers immediately opened fire at the vehicle, wounding Erekat with several live bullets in his upper body. They pulled him out of the vehicle, threw him on the ground and prevented Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS)’s medical crew from approaching him or providing first aid; leaving him to bleed to his death on the dirt at the checkpoint.

But then the video was released, showing that he got out of the car on his own and was not pulled out and thrown on the ground. He jumped out of the car and was immediately shot.

No one who saw the incident could make such a mistake; the “eyewitnesses” lied.

We have documented many similar cases where Palestinian eyewitnesses are quoted as if they are credible only to be found later to have made up the entire incident or crucial details.

The PCHR, which has links to the PFLP terror group, uncritically believes and reports what it wants to report.

As far as "leaving him to bleed to his death," we do not have video but the police at the scene dispute that too:

Responding to the allegations, a Border Police spokesman told The Times of Israel that forces provided medical attention to the assailant within minutes, but were forced to declare his death minutes later.

Footage from the scene after Erekat had been shot shows him bleeding, but still moving. The Border Police spokesman said the video in question had been filmed in the minutes before medics arrived at the scene.

Given that the Border Police was found to be telling the truth about the incident initially, they have far more credibility than the Erekat family of known and consistent liars.

One more inconsistency that should be mentioned, also from the TOI article:

Shani Orr Hama Kadosh was lightly injured in the incident at a checkpoint in Abu Dis, near Jerusalem.

“I signaled to him to halt, the car started to slow down, and I moved in his direction,” Kadosh told Channel 13 news. “He saw that I took a step, he looked me in the eye, turned the steering wheel and rammed into me, and I flew to the other side” of the median.

“The soldiers understood what happened, heard me yell, turned straight in his direction, saw him getting out in their direction, cocked their weapons, and fired in his direction,” Kadosh said.

In the video, a car driven by Erekat can be seen approaching the checkpoint before abruptly accelerating and turning toward a group of police. The car then rams into Kadosh, who is knocked into the air, then it collides with a booth and comes to a stop.

As the driver gets out of the vehicle, he appears to begin running from the police officers, but quickly falls to the ground after being shot.

“He waited for a good moment, turned from the middle of the lane to the side to get a better angle to hurt the officer and then accelerated, turning his car 90 degrees, and lunged wildly at the officers,” a Border Police statement said.

Was Erekat running away and shot in the back, or was he running towards the officers?

He is blurred in the video, but there is enough there to show that he was facing the officers when he was shot. He exits the car a mere 0.2 seconds after the car finishes its recoil from the crash (innocent people in an accident are stunned for several seconds) and Erekat certainly appears as if he is about to run towards the police but they shoot him before he gets a chance. I don’t see him “lunging” but it sure looks like he was about to. (He certainly didn’t slowly exit the car with his hands up.)

And, as we saw from his other videos, it looks more like he wanted “suicide by cop” rather than a planned attack.

EoZTV: Steven L. Pomerantz, expert on law enforcement

This was a really fun interview.

Steven L. Pomerantz is the Director of the Homeland Security Program at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) and a former #3 at the FBI. He created one of the popular police exchange programs between the US and Israel (there are three of them).

We spoke of course about the lies of Jewish Voice for Peace about those programs and what those programs actually teach. Besides that, we also spoke about US law enforcement in general, police morale when people talk about defunding police, what kinds of positive changes could be made to US police departments, how cutting their budgets could affect Jews, and a little about the FBI’s cooperation with Israel.

Definitely worth a listen!

It will be OK (Vic Rosenthal)

Vic Rosenthal's weekly column

Israelis are sometimes criticized for saying “yehiye b’seder” [it will be OK] without sufficiently considering the consequences. But there is such a thing as decision paralysis, when you can’t act because you never feel that you have enough information. Sometimes that’s worse than a less-than-perfect decision. I think the opponents of Israel’s application of civilian law to parts of Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley are trying hard to induce decision paralysis.

Today (Wednesday) there is supposed to be a meeting in the White House at which Trump Administration officials reportedly will decide whether to green-light the move. Of course it will be a good thing if the US recognizes Israel’s action, especially if that means that it will issue an official statement that Jewish communities outside the Green Line are part of Israel.

But on the other hand, there is a feeling that the US is trying to micromanage Israel’s behavior. Perhaps, it is suggested, the “green light” will only include several communities near Jerusalem. Or maybe a phase-in that will take several months. Or maybe the US will require Benny Gantz’ explicit agreement. Or – who knows?

Gantz, incidentally, is remarkably unclear about his position, if he indeed has one. Here is how Noa Landau, a left-leaning journalist for Ha’aretz, describes it:

Not unilaterally, yes unilaterally. Only with the international community’s (unobtainable) consent, only with Jordan’s (unobtainable) consent. Only the Jordan Valley, only the settlement blocs. Only as part of the broader Trump plan, only a limited symbolic step. Only with a gesture to the Palestinians – but who needs the Palestinians anyway? Just don’t ask us to elaborate.

There is great pressure being applied from many quarters, both against PM Netanyahu and against Trump, to oppose this step, which is almost universally referred to as “annexation of [part of] the ‘West Bank’”. As Eugene Kontorovich argues [$], it is not “annexation” because the territory in question

…isn’t legally the territory of any other state, nor has it been since Israel’s independence in 1948. Neither the U.S. nor the European Union recognizes the existence of a Palestinian state, and Israel’s sovereign claim to the territory is superior to any other country’s. Putting this move in the same category as Russia’s seizure of Crimea is entirely misleading.

The Union for Reform Judaism (URJ) in the US is asking its members to lobby Congress against the plan, “out of a concern for Israel’s safety and security, for the preservation of Israel’s democratic character, and for the place of Israel among the nations of the world.” Its talking points come directly from the Israeli Left, which has been consistently defeated at the polls since the disasters wrought by the government of Ehud Barak in 2000. But don’t liberal American Jews know better than Israeli voters?

The Obama Gang has weighed in as well. Here’s Gangster Susan Rice: “So when it comes to annexation, I think the obvious argument against it is that it all but makes that objective of a two-state outcome impossible…”

What she means, of course, is that it makes impossible the Gang’s version of a two-state solution, in which Israel, including Jerusalem, is divided along the 1949 armistice lines. But that was always so, because it would render Israel indefensible, precisely the opposite of their contention. The Gang also envisioned the expulsion of tens of thousands of Jews from the territory in order to make a Jew-free Palestine possible, and Israel giving up control of Judaism’s holy places – which worked so well [not] under the Jordanians.

But a demilitarized Palestinian autonomy in less than all of the territory is far less dangerous. It does not require expelling Jews (or Arabs), and very few Palestinians are incorporated into Israel. That’s the Trump Administration version of the two-state solution.

Opponents of the move worry a great deal about the response of the Arab countries, especially Jordan, and the Europeans. I must note that if I have misgivings about the US micromanaging Israeli policy, I am even less likely to be influenced by the public pronouncements of Arab leaders who have been pumping anti-Israel venom into the veins of their subjects for decades, and now – when they depend on us for their security – are afraid that they will be overthrown if they don’t show sufficient enmity toward us. Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states all know who will help them when they are in trouble, and who wants to hurt them.

The intersectional Left is fond of asking people to “check [their] privilege.” To the Europeans, I say “check your history,” you who practiced viciously exploitative colonialism for hundreds of years, who started world wars, and who either participated in the genocide of the European Jews, prevented their escape (Britain, I am looking at you), or turned a blind eye. It hasn’t been long enough to give any weight to your moral pronouncements.

Returning to President Trump, I think that moving this deal forward is of great importance to him, to show both his allies in the Middle East and his pro-Israel domestic supporters that he keeps his promises. The fact that his political enemies are mobilizing against him in force – particularly the Obama Gang – shows the importance of this issue. This gives Israel some leverage, which should be applied to keep the initiative from being watered down. We don’t have to agree on anything other than the map, and certainly not to a sovereign Palestinian state.
I think time is very short. The American election campaign will soon begin to absorb all the energies of the administration. Any gradual phase-in of sovereignty will not survive a change of administration, if it should occur. I am convinced that if Mr. Biden is elected, his administration will be dominated by the Obama Gang, which has proven itself an enemy of the Jewish state.
A Biden Administration could reverse an American position established by Trump – as Obama did with respect the Bush-Sharon letters – but it can’t undo Israeli decisions, which can and should be translated into facts on the ground.

It’s imperative that Israel move ahead and extend civilian law to communities in Judea and Samaria and to the Jordan Valley, in July as planned. If the map that will delineate the lines isn’t complete, it should be completed, unilaterally if necessary. I don’t see Trump objecting to unilateral action. Why should he? The details, essential to us, are unimportant to him.
There’s one week left in June. If not now, when?

06/24 Links Pt2: Antisemitic Judensau relief preserved, Columbus statue toppled; Sarsour Group Says ‘No Zionists’ at Civil Rights Rally; NFL Quarterback Kirk Cousins Talks About His Love for ‘All Things Jewish’

From Ian:

Antisemitic Judensau relief preserved, Columbus statue toppled

Recently in these columns there appeared the disturbing story of a Protestant Church in Calbe, Germany, whose Pastor, Jürgen Kohtz, was forced by law to reinstall a relief of the Judensau after it had been dismantled for restoration work.

The Judensau – the Jews’ Sow – is one of the more scurrilous images to have come out of the Church. Originating in Germany in the 13th century, when the only Christianity in Europe was Catholicism, it typically depicts Jews as piglets, suckling from their “mother” the sow, sometimes eating her excrement. In its even more obscene form, it depicts Jews engaging in sexual intercourse with the sow.

Martin Luther, who broke away from Catholicism in 1517 to found the Protestant Church, was a particularly eager exponent of the Judensau.

The Judensau found its way into popular German anti-Jewish sentiment, and of course the Nazis made full use of it. Following the First World War, when the German-Jewish industrialist and physicist Walther Rathenau was appointed Foreign Minister, the anti-Semitic masses – those who would later form the core of the Nazi Party – popularised the chant:

“Erschlag den Walther Rathenau / die gottverdammte Judensau”
(“Kill that Walther Rathenau / the God-damned Jewish sow”).

This was later expanded into the lyrics of a song:
“Auch der Rathenau, der Walther
Erreicht kein hohes Alter;
Knallt ab den Walther Rathenau,
Die gottverfluchte Judensau”
(“Also this Rathenau, this Walther,
Do not let reach old age;
Knock off Walther Rathenau
This God-accursed Jewish sow”).

It mattered not to them that Rathenau was deeply patriotic to Germany, his Fatherland; that he was unstintingly loyal to Germany; that he began the secret program to re-arm Germany, in contravention of the Treaty of Versailles, directly challenging the Allied powers who had defeated Germany in the recent World War; or that Rathenau defined himself as “a German of Jewish origin”.

For the anti-Semites he was a Jew – and therefore marked for destruction.

These were not empty words.

One man's quest to take down antisemitic sculptures from German churches

They date back to the late Middle Ages and irritate to this day: The Judensau (literally “Jewish sow”) is a Christian folk image that depicts Jews sucking on the teats or peering into the anus of a pig.

Mostly found in the form of reliefs or gargoyles on the exterior of German churches, some of them major historical landmarks, the images have been the subject of increasing public debate in recent years. And now Germany’s highest court will weigh in on the matter when it hears the case of a Jewish man who says one such sculpture insults him personally.

Michael Duellmann has already lost his bids against St. Marien Church in Wittenberg in district court and on appeal.

“This is the first case regarding a Judensau that is going to the Federal Supreme Court,” Duellmann’s attorney, Christian Rohnke, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

In fact it may be the first Judensau case to go to court at all, but it’s certainly not the first time a German church has tried to lance this abscess. Last week, a landmarks commission in the town of Calbe ruled against a local church that was seeking to retire its Judensau, which had been removed temporarily for restoration. The commission insisted the sculpture be put back on the church facade. The church has not decided whether to appeal.

There are assumed to be about 40 Judensaus in Germany, the oldest dating to the 13th century. Intended to teach lessons about sin and virtue, they were usually placed inside where Jews would not see them.

But beginning in the 14th century, churches also placed them outside, according to the late Israeli historian Isaiah Shachar. In a 2017 interview with the Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, Shachar said there are Judensaus in Portugal, France, Poland and Sweden, but most are in German-speaking countries.

Opinion is split over how to deal with the sculptures. The German-Jewish historian Michael Wolffsohn recently told Deutschlandfunk radio that the Judensau is a “perversity,” but he opposed taking them down, saying it’s better to address the issue forthrightly than hide it from view.
“What’s done is done and cannot be undone,” he said.

But Germany’s commissioner on antisemitism, Felix Klein, says all the Judensau reliefs should be taken down and put in museums.
Wolfram Kastner, an artist and activist, agrees.

“They have to be removed from the public space,” he said.

A comprehensive list of antisemitic celebrities doesn't exist and it would probably be impossible to create one. What follows is at least the beginning of such a list, to be updated as candidates are suggested (or out themselves in the public sphere).

What constitutes a celebrity? A decision was made to limit the list to entertainers, and to exclude antisemitic politicians and writers who surely deserve their own lists. All in good time. (Which is not a threat. If people go on record with their views, the public is allowed to take note.)

Do we include European celebrities? We can, and did, though Hollywood is king.

How is such a list useful? First and foremost, it serves to tell the world that antisemitism is evil. If we see it, we will call you out on it. Because antisemitism is evil and this is society's way of enforcing morality.

Can a Jew be an antisemite? Sadly yes. There are many inclusions to this list that are either Jewish or of Jewish heritage. The self-hating Jew is a real phenomenon.

What is antisemitism? The official IHRA working definition of antisemitism aside, sometimes it's difficult to know, in particular when antisemitism involves criticism of Israel. Each name in the list is linked to an online news piece that serves as a source for the allegation (more about methodology HERE). Readers may not agree with every inclusion. For purposes of this list, the working guide was "where there's smoke, there's fire."

Does an apologetic statement get a celebrity removed from the list? It's possible, but in most cases, we must remain suspicious. After all, it's only good PR to apologize or remove a tweet deemed a bad move by the public (or one's publicist). There's really no way to know if an entertainer's apology is sincere.

Feel free to email me to suggest other candidates and if a source can be found backing assertions of antisemitism, the list will be updated to include them.

The Comprehensive List of Antisemitic Celebrities:

Sean (P. Diddy) Combs

Dieudonne M'bala M'bala

Letty Cottin Pogrebin

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.

Times of Israel reports:

Qatar is reportedly threatening to cut off millions of dollars in aid to the Gaza Strip if Israel goes ahead with annexation, in an apparent bid to pressure Jerusalem to rethink the plan.

Qatari payments to the impoverished, Hamas-controlled Strip have been key to maintaining quiet there, as well as an unofficial truce between Israel and terror group, and Qatar is reluctant to be seen as enabling any West Bank annexation, Channel 13 reported Tuesday.

Of all the Arab nations, only Qatar has shown a willingness to actually help Gaza, as it coordinates its aid through Israel and has spent billions on housing and food for Gazans while every single other Arab nation only plays lip service to the Palestinian cause.

Here, though, Qatar is threatening to end aid to Gaza in order to make things worse in Gaza so there would be more reason for Hamas to resume rocket attacks – which would bring an Israeli military response.

Even to Qatar, the one nation who has shown sympathy for actual Palestinians as opposed to sound bites and photo-ops of every other Arab country, is saying that politics is more important than Palestinian lives.

Also, Qatar is indirectly showing how Israel cares more about Palestinian lives and livelihoods than any Arab country does. If Israel was as anti-Palestinian as the haters claim, it would not care at all if Gazans have no shelter or food. But it is the Arabs who don’t care about Palestinian lives, and the only reason this threat makes any sense is because Qatar knows that Israel doesn’t want to see innocent Palestinians hurt.

Only Arabs do.

06/24 Links Pt1: Kontorovich: Don't Buy the "Annexation" Hype; Belgium to vote on recognizing Palestinian state, sanctions on Israel; Iran is ready for talks if US apologizes over nuclear pact

From Ian:

Prof. Eugene Kontorovich (WSJ): Don't Buy the "Annexation" Hype (google link)

Applying Israeli civilian law to West Bank settlements wouldn't preclude peace or violate Palestinian rights. It is widely described as an Israeli "annexation." But annexation has a precise meaning in international law: the forcible incorporation by one state of the territory of another state.

The land to which Israel seeks to apply its laws isn't legally the territory of any other state. Neither the U.S. nor the European Union recognizes the existence of a Palestinian state, and Israel's sovereign claim to the territory is superior to any other country's.

Over the past 53 years, Jews have returned to Judea and Samaria, territories from which they had been ethnically cleansed by the Jordanians in 1949. After five decades of Palestinian rejectionism, it is hard to argue that the legal regulation of these communities must remain in limbo until a far-off peace deal is signed.

Past peace efforts have been based on the morally repugnant and impractical assumption that the creation of a Palestinian state must be preceded by the expulsion of all Jews from its territory.

The application of Israeli law wouldn't affect the treatment of Palestinians. In the West Bank, they would continue to be governed by the Palestinian Authority.

The Israeli move may help bring the Palestinians to the table, as it would show Palestinian leaders that turning down negotiations weakens their hand.

David Horovitz: Netanyahu’s annexation bid is bad for Israel. Our ally the US should just say no

Many in the international community, too lazy or ideologically blinded to distinguish between cause and effect, have castigated Israel through the decades for the ostensible crime of defending itself against those who have sought our destruction, when the most cursory of inspections would confirm that the “Middle East conflict” would end if the aggression against Israel were to halt.

But Israel itself has known the truth. Its very resilience — its capacity not merely to survive but to thrive through decades of warfare, terrorism, and efforts to demonize it — is the greatest testament to that domestic confidence in our cause and legitimacy.

Unilaterally extending Israeli rule into the West Bank — preempting the Trump administration’s declared effort to foster a negotiated accord, with a land grab that turns Israel into the rejectionist party — marks the very opposite of our national interest. It not only damages the way we are perceived around the world, it remakes the way we present and see ourselves.

The Palestinian Authority rejected the Trump plan before it was even unveiled. It routinely incites against Israel, and its president, Mahmoud Abbas, in incendiary speeches designed to foster intolerance and intransigence, repeatedly seeks to separate modern Israel from its historic Jewish heritage. We cannot safely relinquish territory to this Palestinian leadership, not in the toxic climate it has helped create. We are also, of course, mindful of the devastating consequences of having relinquished adjacent territory to the north (the South Lebanon “security zone” in 2000) and south (the Gaza Strip in 2005), where in both cases terrorist organizations filled the vacuum, sparked wars and conflict, and pose ongoing danger.

But neither should we subvert our own long-term goals, the foundational principles of our own Declaration of Independence — to flourish as a Jewish and a democratic state ready and willing to defend itself against its enemies, and with its hand stretched out in peace to those neighbors who truly wish to live in tranquility alongside it.

Why Netanyahu purports to see a “historic opportunity” in the declarative extension of Israeli sovereignty to disputed parts of the West Bank, deepening Israel’s entanglement among the hostile Palestinians and ceding the moral high ground that is central to Israel’s own resilience and self-confidence, is hard to fathom. He was previously wary of the dangers of a bi-national state between Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea in which Israel would either lose its Jewish majority or have to subvert its democracy.

But he has said he will only go ahead with the approval of the US, our most important, trusted and closest ally. And so it falls to the Trump administration, now deliberating whether to green light Netanyahu’s gambit, to just say no.

In January, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal avowedly designed “for the benefit of Palestinians, Israelis and the region as a whole” as a recommended basis for direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiation on a “realistic two-state solution.”

Let’s stick with that.

Australia Takes a Stand Against Anti-Israel Bias

COMMUNAL leaders have lauded the Australian government’s stance at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), after it was the only country to vote against all five anti-Israel resolutions at UNHRC’s 43rd session.

The UNHRC, which has a history of systemic bias against the Jewish State, passed five resolutions against Israel, leading the Australian Mission to the United Nations to blast its “disproportionate focus”.

“Australia has been consistent in its principled opposition to biased and one-sided resolutions targeting Israel in multilateral forums,” the mission said.

Stating, “Our position has not changed,” it added the resolutions “do nothing to contribute to lasting peace and stability for Israelis and Palestinians”.

Meanwhile, Australia’s ambassador to the UN Sally Mansfield said the UNHRC “holds Israel to a higher degree of scrutiny than any other state”.

Noting that Australia has “insisted on bringing these resolutions to a vote, so that they cannot simply be waved though as consensus resolutions”, Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-CEO Peter Wertheim said, “The Australian government is to be highly commended for consistently voting against these resolutions, and for exposing the bias and puncturing the hypocrisy which motivates them.”

Zionist Federation of Australia president Jeremy Leibler said the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister had refused to “kowtow to the UN’s obsessive focus on Israel”.

Jews: From Asiatic, Mongoloid, Slavonic, Low-Level Caucasians To Privileged White Supremacists (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

When it comes to spreading Jew-hatred, Tamika Mallory -- a disciple of Al Sharpton -- learned her lessons well. Back in 2018, she was quoted in a New York Times article, about how much she knew about those white Jews:

Since that conversation, we’ve all learned a lot about how while white Jews, as white people, uphold white supremacy, ALL Jews are targeted by it.

Labeling Jews as "white" and accusing them of having "white privilege" has proven to be a winning strategy for Jew-haters, as protests in response to the police killing of George Floyd have devolved into riots, some of them deliberately targeting Jewish businesses and synagogues.

But as we've pointed out before, Jews Were Not Always Considered "White" In The US

In her article, Diabetes and Race: A Historical Perspective, Arleen Marcia Tuchman writes about how difficult the US government found it to pigeonhole Jewish immigrants at the turn of the century. The Dillingham Commission, a US Congressional Committee set up in 1910 to ascertain the "whiteness" of immigrant groups, apparently had their hands full with the Jews:

In the 19th century, the United States Bureau of Immigration had classified Jews as “Slavonic,” a subgroup of the elite Aryan stock. However, the Dillingham Commission took issue with this, insisting that linguistic and physical criteria, including the “Jew’s nose,” placed them among the Semites, lower down on the Caucasian ladder.

...extreme nativists, who were determined to end the influx of eastern European Jews into the United States [referred] to the Jews’ physical stature, moral traits, and origins as a nomadic tribe, they insisted that the Jews not be classified as Caucasian at all, but as “thoroughbred Asiatics.”...One author could not hide his disdain for the “primitive, tribal, Oriental” character of the Jews. Yet another wrote disparagingly of the “Mongoloid traits” of the Jews, which he attributed to the blood of the Mongolian Khazars allegedly coursing through the Jews’ veins.

Now at last the Jews have finally made it as full-fledged members of the white race in the US -- only to find out that now being "white" is a bad thing.

How are Jews supposed to respond to the charge of being White?

One recourse has been to point out that not all Jews are white -- a fact that is part of the complex history of the Jews.

Ethiopian Jews are, of course, only one example of Jews of Color.

Here is another example of a Jew of Color:

Gal Gadot. Youtube screencap

When Wonder Woman hit theaters in 2017, the Comicbook / DC site confirmed:

Yep, with a quick google search, it turns out that Gal Gadot is not actually Caucasian, but is in fact Israeli.

For proof that Gal Gadot is not "white", the article pointed its readers to a post by Dani Ishai Behan on the Times of Israel Blog, who addresses the question -- Are Jews A People of Color?

At issue is the culture of antisemitism on the "anti-racist" left:

if we are “just white people with funny hats”, then we are perforce not “really” an oppressed group, thereby enabling anti-racists to retain their credentials without having to listen to Jews or take our concerns seriously.

And by extension, labeling Ashkenazic Jews as "white," makes it that much easier to portray Israel as a "white colonial project," based on some religious whim, taking advantage of the Arabs.

Behan responds by saying straight out that Jews -- including Ashkenazic Jews -- are People Of Color:

For one thing, we are an indigenous people of the Middle East. Our identity, our DNA, our culture, our language, and our history all attest to who we are as a people – centuries of exile doesn’t change that.

An obvious rebuttal is that the fact remains that Ashkenazic Jews are...white.
Behan's response is -- so what?

but this is fairly common among all Levantine groups, not just Jews. Moreover, fair skinned Latinos, Iranians, Pashtuns, and Native Americans aren’t exactly rare either. This is called “white passing”: the ability to blend in and escape some of the more immediate effects of non-whiteness while still suffering from the marginalization and othering that non-Jewish minorities experience. To put it another way, looking white is not the same as being white. [emphasis added]

You know, Behan may have a point.

Linda Sarsour. Youtube screencap.

In a second post, Behan writes that Ashkenazic Jews also qualify on the basis of their history for inclusion in the PoC club:

An indigenous people of the Middle East, Ashkenazi Jews were driven out of their homeland by European (and later Arab) colonists and taken as slaves to Europe where they were consistently regarded as savages, periodically massacred, and excluded from society on the grounds that they are a foreign, non-Christian, and non-European (or in the words of our European oppressors: Oriental/Asiatic) presence on European soil. [emphasis added]

The fact that today, Ashkenazic Jews are able to pass as "white," mix with them, and be accepted by them still misses the key point that Behan made before: "looking white is not the same as being white" --

having to hide one’s ethnic background just to be treated as a “normal” human being is not privilege, because white people (*actual* white people, not Jews) don’t have to do this. They don’t need to change their names, or flatten their noses, or bleach their skin, or straighten their hair, or take their kippahs off, etc. The fact that Ashkenazim, and white passing Jews in general, need to *work* just to be seen as regular people really says it all...

A perfect recent example in Winona Ryder, who spoke in an interview of her own experiences of antisemitism as an actress:

“There are times when people have said, ‘Wait, you’re Jewish? But you’re so pretty!’ There was a movie that I was up for a long time ago, it was a period piece, and the studio head, who was Jewish, said I looked ‘too Jewish’ to be in a blue-blooded family.”

True, Jews, to some extent, are able to "pass" themselves off as "white" and do not suffer from the same kind of racism as other groups. But those who exploit this difference in order to attack Jews in the US as benefiting from "white privilege" are jumping the gun -- and show a certain amount of hypocrisy as well:

All in all, we mustn’t make the mistake of assuming Jews enjoy “white privilege” just because our experiences are not symmetrical with those of African-Americans or Hispanics, as to do so would be unreasonable, fallacious, and hypocritical (again, no other ethnic minority is held to this standard). Anti-Jewish racism looks different because the stereotypes are different. In other words, we are not viewed by society as “uneducated thugs”, but as “dishonest”, “conniving”, “clannish”, and “bloodthirsty” mongrels who control everything behind the scenes, and these racist tropes play out in the way we are treated in this country. [emphasis added]

Those who will argue that the economic success of Jews is proof of their "white privilege" are willfully blind to history. There was a time that Jews enjoyed that same level of economic success in Germany and France -- and we all know how fleeting and impermanent that turned out to be.

Bottom line, those elements that combine to make a Jew an Ashkenazic Jew make him non-white as well:

Inasmuch as a group’s non-whiteness is contingent on their history, experiences, heritage, and relationship with the concept of “white” as defined by its pioneers, Ashkenazim certainly do qualify as a non-white people.

If other people from the Middle East are considered to be "people of color" -- regardless of their appearance, then the same must go for Jews as well, and the length of time that Jews have been displaced from their home in the Middle East does not make one bit of difference -- "Centuries of displacement from our land does not change this fact, and alleging otherwise is a form of erasure and antisemitism."

Yet, of all ethnic groups, it is the Jews who continue to be begrudged their Middle Eastern roots on account of the color of their skin.

Now that's creepy.

Saeb Erekat’s nephew, killed during an attack at a checkpoint, seems to have made a farewell video (UPDATE)

Yesterday, Israeli forces killed Ahmad Erekat, a nephew of PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat, as he appeared to purposefully swerve into an Israeli soldier at a checkpoint. The Erekat family is calling it a cold blooded execution:

Palestinians said a man shot and killed by Israeli forces during an alleged car-ramming attempt was actually rushing to pick up his sister and mother ahead of a family wedding later Tuesday evening, accusing Israel of executing him in cold blood.

Senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat said his cousin, Ahmad Moustafa Erakat, was only rushing when Border Police shot him dead at the “Container” checkpoint in the neighborhood of Abu Dis, north of Bethlehem. Erekat rejected the Israeli account that the 28-year-old victim had attempted to run over a female officer in an attempt to commit a terror attack.

“My cousin, the nephew of my wife, was executed, murdered in cold blood and Netanyahu bears responsibility,” Erekat was separately quoted as having told the Kan public broadcaster.

According to Border Police, the younger Erekat was speeding when he arrived at a checkpoint at the entrance of Abu Dis. When an officer flagged him to halt, the driver veered toward her and slammed into the checkpoint tower. He subsequently got out of the vehicle and advanced toward forces who opened fire and killed him.

The Border Police have not yet released the video of the incident* (see below) which could clear up a lot. But a video has surfaced, from Ahmad’s phone, that appears to show that he was depressed and fighting some sort of accusations against him of collaborating with Israel, and that he had shamed his family:

The audio is unclear, but Shimrit Meir, who broke this story, says that he is saying, “Your brother is not a spy, I have never betrayed my homeland. I didn’t look at other men’s girls; ever since I got to know that girl, I didn’t know any secret of hers nor she of mine…Look at the situation I am in, I started telling things….I brought shame on my parents, and myself. …What happened to me has to do only with my fear and the thing that they put in my drink, and nothing else.”

I verified that this is consistent with what other Arabic speakers can understand from the video.

UPDATE 1: Meir says there was another similar video on his phone as well, where he spoke about the Shin Bet trying to recruit him, his saying some names to them, and something about his photo on the COGAT page, which may be what shamed him.

The part that Erekat says about shame, together with his exiting the car after the crash and approaching the border police, strongly indicates that Ahmad was intending “suicide by cop.”

The shirt in the video seems to be the same one he was wearing when he was shot, which means that this video might have been made only minutes before the attack. (I don’t know the provenance of this photo.)

It seems possible that Ahmad was the target of a “honeytrap” where an Israeli poses as an Arab girl and strikes up a friendship to get information, and the family suspected.

The family claims that Ahmad was engaged to be married next month. Perhaps Erekat was also pressured to become engaged to a girl he did not want.

There are still questions to be sure, and the Erekat family is also accusing Israel of allowing him to die without giving him medical attention – there is one video showing him still moving while a border police officer walks near him. Without knowing more, it appears that more could have been done to save his life.

But the video from the car strongly indicates that Ahmad Erekat fully intended to die and to erase his shame for some incident with a girl.

(h/t Yisrael Medad and Ibn Boutros)

UPDATE 2: Video of the incident shows what can only be a deliberate car ramming attempt.

Palestinians are REALLY sick of Abbas

The latest Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research poll shows that Hamas and Fatah are virtually tied if evections were held today in the West Bank and Gaza.

If new legislative elections were held today with the participation of all factions, 66% of Palestinians say they would participate in such elections. Out of those, 34% say they will vote for Hamas and 36% say they will vote for Fatah, 8% will vote for all other third parties combined, and 23% are undecided.

Four months ago, the same question gave Hamas 32% of the vote and and Fatah 38%.

Also, if Mahmoud Abbas would run against Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, Haniyeh would win 49% to 42%. Abbas would also lose against imprisoned terrroist Marwan Barghouti.

An astonishing 58% of Palestinians want Abbas to resign (it was 62% four months ago.)

Perhaps Palestinians are no longer fooled by the wall-to-wall photos on social media and in posters of Abbas and Arafat together as equals.

06/23 Links Pt2: Two thirds of Americans think it's okay to question US-Israeli ties; 8 American monuments celebrating anti-Semites; What isn’t being said about the Reading attack victims?

From Ian:

Two thirds of Americans think it's okay to question US-Israeli ties - online poll

Some two-thirds of Americans believe it is acceptable to question the US-Israel relationship, a new Washington Post poll has found. The poll was conducted online by Prof. Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland, among 2,395 participants.

According to the poll, 43% of the participants believe that “it is acceptable for a member of the US Congress to question the US-Israel relationship,” (42% of Republicans, 46% of Democrats, and 39% of independents). An additional 24% said that “it is the duty” of a member of the House to question the relationship between the two countries.

Notably, Republican and Democrat voters were split on whether it is the duty of Congress to defend the relationship between the US and Israel or to question it. A third (32%) of Republican participants said that a House member must defend the support for Israel. In comparison, only 9% of Democrat voters agreed.

On the contrary, 35% of those who identify as Democrats said it is a duty of Congress people to question the relationship between the countries, with only 11% of Republican voters agreeing with the statement.

Participants were asked how important of an issue the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for the US interests. Almost half (47%), said it is among the top five issues, while more than a third (35%) said it is not among the top five. Only 17% thought that the conflict is at least among the top three, or is even the most significant issue for the US interests.

8 American monuments celebrating anti-Semites

In the weeks since protests against racism began after the killing of George Floyd, activists around the world have been toppling statues, either by pressuring public officials or by tearing the monuments down themselves.

Activists have naturally focused on memorials to Confederate leaders or others who enacted racist policies, and associate monuments to anti-Semites with Europe, where they are common. The United States has its own such memorials.

Mary Elizabeth Lease
Lease, born in 1850, was an 19th century Populist and a leader of the women’s suffrage movement. She campaigned in favor of women’s and farmers’ rights, as well as the prohibition of alcohol. One scholar has claimed that Lease, who was based in Kansas for much of her fame, was the inspiration for the character of Dorothy in “The Wizard of Oz,” written by L. Frank Baum. But her crusade against bankers, who she felt were oppressing farmers, often veered into anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. People who were forced to take out bank loans were “paying tribute to the Rothschilds of England, who are but the agent of the Jews,” she claimed.

A statue of Lease was erected in Wichita, Kansas in 2012 by the Hypatia Club, the state’s oldest women’s club, which Lease founded. “She was an incredible role model when she couldn’t even vote,” a club member told the Wichita Eagle.

Thomas E. Watson
Watson was a Georgia [Democrat] congressman and newspaper publisher who served as a vice-presidential nominee for William Jennings Bryan’s Populist Party in 1896. During the 1913 trial of Leo Frank, a Jewish man falsely accused of murdering a 13-year-old Christian girl, Watson’s paper whipped up anti-Semitic sentiment. After Frank was convicted and his sentence was commuted, Watson advocated for Frank to be lynched, which he eventually was. Watson was elected to the Senate in 1922 but died in office a year later. In addition to his anti-Semitism, Watson was also a white supremacist and anti-Catholic.

The statue of Watson on the steps of the Georgia state capitol was long controversial. Then-Gov. Nathan Deal removed the statue in 2013, but claimed that his move was only for renovation purposes. The statue is now located in a park across the street from the building.

Douglas Murray: What isn’t being said about the Reading attack victims?

Imagine if on Saturday evening a white neo-Nazi had stabbed three men to death. Imagine, furthermore, if in the wake of the killings it had turned out that all three of the victims were gay. Or ‘members of the LGBT community’, to use the lexicon of the time. And then imagine if two days later nobody in the UK or anywhere else was very interested in any of this. So what if the victims were all gay? Why bother sifting around for motives. What are you trying to say? Bigot.

Well something that might well be analogous to that happened in Reading on Saturday evening and over the days since.

On Saturday evening, Khairi Saadallah went on a stabbing spree in Forbury Gardens, Reading. His victims were three gay men, James Furlong, David Wails and Joe Ritchie-Bennett. It has since emerged that the 25-year old suspect, who is now in police custody, came to the UK from Libya in 2012. He is reported to have come to the attention of MI5 last year as an individual who had the potential to travel overseas for terrorism purposes. The Security Service apparently decided that he was not an immediate risk.

The families of Furlong, Wails and Ritchie-Bennett might beg to differ on that last point. But who knows. So far there has been almost no interest expressed in the possible motives of the attacker. Quite possibly there is a mental health component. In which case I would expect that to be looked into. Quite possibly there will be some drugs-related component. In which case I would expect the usual voices to demand an investigation into that. But anything else to see here? Any other reason why a migrant from Libya who was given asylum in the UK might want to go around stabbing gay men? Well who would even ask such questions? What do you want to find? Bigot.

Something new for Leftist Israel haters to blame on “pinkwashing”

It didn’t make major headlines, but Israel quietly swore in its sixth openly gay Knesset member on Monday, Yorai Lahav Hertzanu of Blue and White.

Five percent of Israeli lawmakers are now openly gay, the fourth-highest figure in the world, according to political scientist Andrew Reynolds.

It comes “after Britain, 8.1 percent, Liechtenstein, 8 percent, and the Scottish parliament, 7.7 percent,” said Reynolds, who directs an LGBT representative programme at the University of North Carolina in the United States.

The BBC adds:

The country has the most progressive attitude towards LGBTQ people in the Middle East, despite opposition from some conservative sections of society.

They are protected by anti-discrimination laws, have adoption and same-sex inheritance rights, and have been allowed to serve in the military since 1993.

Last year, Amir Ohana, from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, became Israel's first openly gay member of cabinet when he was appointed acting justice minister. He is currently minister of public security.

In a normal world, people on the Left who push for LGBTQ rights would be celebrating. Instead, we have Israel haters who say that everything Israel does for gay rights is simply a smokescreen to hide how evil it is.

The accusation is a crazed example of bigotry. But I think if everyone in the world would do good things to hide bad things, the world would be a better place.

06/23 Links Pt1: Friedman to Democrats: Palestinian Authority needs to condemn terror; EU, UN officials attend Fatah-sponsored anti-annexation rally

From Ian:

Friedman to Democrats: Palestinian Authority needs to condemn terror

Israelis condemn violence by their own against Palestinians, but the Palestinian Authority does not do the same, US Ambassador David Friedman wrote in a letter to Democratic members of Congress on Monday.

"In the three years that I have served in this position," Friedman wrote, "I have observed far too many murders of Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorists where the Palestinian leadership has failed to condemn these acts."

Friedman pointed out that Hamas openly celebrates terrorism, while "the so-called moderate" Palestinian Authority pays terrorists a regular stipend.

The Palestinian Authority paid NIS 517.4 million ($150.5m.) in salaries to terrorists in prison and released prisoners in 2019.
"In contrast, in the less frequent circumstance of a violent crime by an Israeli against a Palestinian, the act is condemned by the Israeli government and virtually the entire population of the State of Israel," Friedman wrote.

The ambassador's remarks came in response to a letter from over 50 members of Congress from the Democratic Party sent to him earlier this month, calling on him to denounce violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians. The J Street-supported letter was initiated by Rep. Deb Haaland (D-NM), and among its signatories are major Israel critics in Congress, such as Betty McCollum (D-MN), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN)

Friedman noted in his response that the letter did not call on him to denounce Palestinian terror against Israelis.

Top House Republicans Back Netanyahu as He Pushes to Annex West Bank Territory

A delegation of congressional Republicans wrote to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday to express its support for the Israeli leader's decision to annex portions of Palestinian territory in the West Bank, saying Israel has the right to execute any policy it sees as integral to its security.

One-hundred-sixteen Republicans led by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) and other senior lawmakers told Netanyahu that they fully support Israel's move, which would see the country take over several contested territories long-controlled by the Palestinians. Netanyahu is reportedly seeking to take this step early next month.

"We are aware of and deeply concerned by threats being expressed by some to retaliate against Israel as it makes decisions to ensure defensible borders," the lawmakers wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. "It is shortsighted to threaten relations with Israel, a long-time friend and critical ally that shares our democratic values."

Democratic lawmakers are frustrated by the decision to send the letter. They recently warned Israel that such a move would fray the historically close ties between the United States and Israel. Congressional Republicans, however, flatly reject this view.

The letter highlights a growing partisan schism in Washington over the Israeli government's policies under Netanyahu. While the Trump administration and its Republican allies in Congress have been a reliable partner for the conservative Israeli prime minister, Democrats have become increasingly frustrated over moves they see as damaging to the peace process and U.S. relations with the Jewish state.

The GOP lawmakers expressed in their letter support for the Trump administration's recently unveiled Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, which has inflamed tensions in the region and has been rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

"We assure you that we will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel and oppose any effort to apply pressure," the lawmakers wrote.

The White House has not publicly commented on the annexation plan yet and is likely waiting to see how Netanyahu proceeds in the coming days.

IDF generals urge Trump to stand behind Netanyahu’s sovereignty plan

A group of IDF generals has written a letter to US President Donald Trump urging him to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s annexation plan to apply sovereignty over parts of the West Bank.

The group, known as habit'honistim – Protectors of Israel – holds that the plan offers Israel an unparalleled security opportunity to place 30% of the West Bank within Israel’s permanent borders.

“Your farsighted vision for peace, which includes a recognition of Israel’s sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria – the cradle of Jewish civilization – has put wind in the wings of thousands of Israel Defense Force officers and warriors and buffeted the sails of the Israeli nation as a whole,” the group wrote.

“Mr. President, thanks to your friendship and visionary leadership, we stand now at an historic crossroad in the 4,000-year history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel,” it continued.

“We trust that you will continue to work to secure the future peace of the people of Israel and of the Middle East as a whole by standing with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he applies our sovereignty to our eastern frontier, the Jordan Valley and to our cities, villages and farms in Judea and Samaria in accordance with your visionary peace plan,” the group said.

“As God Almighty said to Joshua as he stood before the Jordan River, poised to lead the Nation of Israel to the Promised Land, so we say to you today: “Be strong and of good courage,” they wrote.

The idea of Israeli sovereignty over 30% of the West Bank, including all of the settlements, is already incorporated into Trump's peace plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Here is @HabithonistimEn's letter to @realDonaldTrump which also appears as a full page ad in today's edition of @thehill. pic.twitter.com/4s4XAB2ZkS
— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) June 23, 2020

This is the beginning of a three-part series published in Sotal Iraq and Palestinian news site Amad:

The features of the Children of Israel, their attributes, what is ingrained in their chests, and the hatred of their hearts, their hatred, envy and grudge .. appear from the days of their father, Israel, peace be upon him !!! When they plotted, planned, and stayed under the cover of darkness, a demonic, evil, malicious intrigue, to kill their little brother Joseph, peace be upon him, and get rid of him !!! Under a false pretext, and a weak argument, that their father loved him, cared more about him !!!
From that moment on, their attributes bearing all the characteristics of criminality, murder, maliciousness and conspiracy were evident, which then passed down through the generations to their children, their offspring, and their successors. It swelled, took root in their depths, took root more and more, and became entrenched in the dynasty of the Children of Israel !!!

The article goes on to say how the evil Jews rebelled against Moses and turned into apes and pigs, and how the Jews tried to kill Jesus.

Part 2 talks about how the Jews continuously betrayed Mohammed.

Obviously part 3 will be about how today’s Jews are keeping up their tradition of “disbelief and denunciations of their covenants, their greed, their prostitution and injustice, their foolishness, immorality, and their tyranny.”

But the only antisemitism that is allowed to be reported in the media is the neo-Nazi flavor.

77711185f6e8cd048427c37d4fc88c39cb3c3c4f

From MEMRI:

Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri said at a June 19, 2020 rally that was aired on Al-Aqsa TV:

Oh enemies, Netanyahu and Gantz, with the accursed Trump behind you, if you think that you can pass the Deal of the Century, annex the West Bank, Judaize Jerusalem, and do away with it, while we remain silent - then you are deluding yourselves! We are holding our weapons in our hands and we are firm in our resolution. We are ready with our weapons. We are ready with our rockets. We are ready to blow up buses. We are ready to carry out martyrdom-seeking operations. Our people are ready for a powerful revolution against the occupier. Allah Akbar and all praise be to Allah!

This sounds like normal Hamas threats against Israel, but another Hamas announcement today may indicate something more:

The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas called on our masses of the people to revolt everywhere, in order to purify our lands and our sanctities from the impurity of the occupation, stressing that our enemy is weaker than the spider's house if we move together to resist it and expel it from our lands and our sanctities.

Hamas called on our people to participate actively and in all activities and events against the annexation decision, considering participation as a religious, moral and patriotic duty.

The “revolution everywhere” language indicates that Hamas is calling on attacking targets worldwide – probably Israeli embassies but possibly American and moderate Arab targets as well.

Hamas probably doesn’t have the infrastructure for worldwide terror, but it has friends (like Iran and its Hezbollah proxy) that does.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)