Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, October 12, 2020

10/12 Links Pt2: Facebook bans posts that deny or distort the Holocaust; Apologize for Columbus? Let Islam apologize for Temple Mount; CUNY’s Systemic Jew-Hatred

From Ian:

Facebook bans posts that deny or distort the Holocaust

Facebook said Monday that it will be banning posts that deny or distort the Holocaust and will start directing people to authoritative sources if they search for information about the Nazi genocide.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the new policy in a post on Monday, in the latest attempt by the company to take action against conspiracy theories and misinformation ahead of the US presidential election next month.

Zuckerberg said that he believes the new policy strikes the “right balance” in drawing the lines between what is and isn’t acceptable speech.

“I’ve struggled with the tension between standing for free expression and the harm caused by minimizing or denying the horror of the Holocaust,” he wrote. “My own thinking has evolved as I’ve seen data showing an increase in anti-Semitic violence, as have our wider policies on hate speech.”

In a separate blog post, Monika Bickert, vice president of Facebook’s content policy, said that the company was “updating our hate speech policy to prohibit any content that denies or distorts the Holocaust.”

The move, Bickert said, “marks another step in our effort to fight hate on our services. Our decision is supported by the well-documented rise in anti-Semitism globally and the alarming level of ignorance about the Holocaust, especially among young people.”

Surveys have shown some younger Americans believe the Holocaust was a myth or has been exaggerated.

Jpost Editorial: UN makes mockery of its Human Rights Council

The shameful charade of the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council is continuing. Tomorrow, the UN is scheduled to hold elections for the 47-state membership of the UNHRC and the list of countries running for a place on the body supposedly dedicated to fighting human rights abuses includes some states better known as abusers than defenders of freedom and justice. Among those likely to be elected are China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

This makes a mockery of the whole purpose of the UNHRC.

UN Watch, an NGO dedicated to monitoring the work of the United Nations and promoting human rights, distributed material ahead of the vote and has pointed out the absurdities. It also held a webinar with human rights dissidents persecuted by these very regimes to call on governments everywhere to oppose the election of the states with a record of abuse.

“Electing these dictatorships as UN judges on human rights is like making a gang of arsonists into the fire brigade,” said Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch.

Disconcertingly, despite the valiant efforts of UN Watch and other groups dedicated to fighting human rights abuses, the report shows how Cuba and Russia, which are the only candidates in their respective regional groups, are almost certain to be elected.

In the Asian regional group, where there are five candidates vying for four spots, the election of China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is almost assured, according to Neuer.

“It’s logically absurd and morally obscene that the UN is about to elect to its top human rights body a regime that herded 1 million Uighurs into camps, arrested, crushed and disappeared those who tried to sound the alarm about the coronavirus, and suffocated freedom in Hong Kong,” said Neuer.

Adolph Ochs’ Legacy at The New York Times

A taxi passes by in front of The New York Times head office, Feb. 7, 2013. Photo: Reuters / Carlo Allegri / File.

The New York Times’ Jewish problem is more than a century old. It dates to 1896, when Adolph S. Ochs, publisher of The Chattanooga Times, purchased the failing New York newspaper. A proud Reform Jew, Ochs insisted that Judaism was a religion, not a national identity that might compromise the patriotic allegiance of American Jews and prompt the dreaded charge of dual loyalty.

Constant criticism of Israel in The New York Times — usually focused on Jewish settlements or its failure to reach a peace agreement with the unmovably resistant Palestinian Authority — is not random. It reflects an enduring, by now embedded, discomfort with the very idea, let alone the reality, of a Jewish state in the Biblical homeland of the Jewish people.

It began with Joseph Levy, the Times’ first Jerusalem-based correspondent. He became a partisan advocate during the 1929 Arab riots in Palestine when hundreds of Jews were murdered and the centuries-old Hebron Jewish community destroyed. Levy’s primary sources were the Grand Mufti (who incited rioting with the lie that Jews intended to endanger Muslim holy sites on the Temple Mount) and Hebrew University Chancellor Judah Magnes (formerly a New York Reform rabbi) who advocated a bi-national state of Jews and Arabs.

The Times’ nadir came during the Holocaust. By then Arthur Hays Sulzberger, Ochs’s son-in-law, was the publisher. When the slaughter of six million Jews was even noticed, it was buried in the inside pages lest the Times be portrayed as a “Jewish” newspaper. Instead, the Times became the sounding board for the vehemently anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism. The subsequent birth of the State of Israel could not be evaded, but it took the Times five years to finally recognize it as “an outpost of democracy in the Middle East.”

Its belated embrace was short-lived. The Times condemned the trial of Nazi war-criminal Adolph Eichmann in Israel, lest the Jewish state be perceived as representative of the Jewish people. After the Six-Day War editors focused on the plight of Palestinian refugees, while ignoring Jewish refugees from the Middle East and Africa who found a home in Israel. The Jewish state was depicted as a malevolent occupying power.

Times of Israel reports:

Israel’s Gabi Ashkenazi and his UAE counterpart Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan bumped elbows instead of shaking hands in line with measures to halt the spread of the coronavirus, as they met face-to-face for the first time after their countries signed a US-brokered deal in mid-September to normalize relations.

It was the UAE foreign minister’s idea to visit the site alongside his Israeli counterpart, the Walla news site reported.

In a handwritten message in the visitor’s book at the memorial, the Emirati top diplomat commemorated the “European Jewish victims of the Holocaust.”

“A whole group of humanity fell victim to those calling for extremism and hatred,” he wrote, adding that the visit to the memorial “underscored the importance of human values such as coexistence, tolerance and accepting the other… as well as respect for all creeds and faiths. These are the values upon which my country was founded.”

“I salute the souls of those who fell victim to the Holocaust,” Al Nahyan wrote, before quoting from a Jewish prayer translated into Arabic: “May their souls be bound up in the binds of life.”

“Never again,” he wrote, in both English and in Arabic.

Morocco's Akhbar Ona found the use of the phrase "never again" by an Arab to be "strange and weird:"

The newspaper said that the phrase is "a slogan often used by Holocaust survivors of WWII to justify actions to protect Israel and the Jews."

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 MBC Group, a large Arabic media company headquartered in Saudi Arabia, has taken down what was considered the most important Palestinian historical drama.

Al-Taghreba al-Falastenya (The Palestinian Alienation) is a 2004 "dramatic epic that revolves around the suffering of a poor Palestinian family during the time of the British occupation of Palestine, then the massacres by the Jewish gangs between the 1930s and 1960s."

Earlier this year, when some Arabs were upset over the Ramadan dramas that did not demonize Jews, some of them warmly remembered this series as being from a time when "normalization" would never have been considered.

According to Arab media, the Saudi MBC channel recently abruptly removed the Palestinian alienation series from its "Shahid Net" website.

Palestinian media is assuming that Saudi recognition of and normalization with Israel is merely a matter of time.

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.

10/12 Links Pt1: Study Finds Majority Support for Ties With Israel in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan and Egypt; Australia halves UNRWA funding

From Ian:

Study Finds Majority Support for Ties With Israel in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan and Egypt

A study published in the United Arab Emirates over the weekend shows growing support for establishing ties with Israel in some Arab countries.

The poll, conducted by US-based Zogby Analytics, found majority support in four Arab states for normalizing relations with Israel and that the driving force behind this shift is a desire to stabilize the political and military situation in the Middle East.

According to Sky News Arabia, the poll included 3,600 Arab respondents living in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, and was supervised by James Zogby, founder and president of the Arab-American Institute.

Sky News Arabia was the only media outlet reporting on the results of the survey.

According to the survey, 59 percent of Jordanians and Saudis, along with 58 percent of Egyptians and 56 percent of the residents of the UAE support normalization agreements between Israel and the Arab world, citing primarily regional stability and economic prosperity. In sharp contrast, the poll said that 61 percent of Palestinians opposed normalization.

A recent study by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, however, found that overall, Arab social media users were less enthused about the Abraham Accords than the UAE poll might suggest. The ministry’s data suggests that a whopping 90 percent of all Arabic social media discourse on the recent rapprochement between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain is negative.

The report shows that between August and September, 95 percent of Arabic social media posts commenting on the issue slammed the UAE, with 45 percent of the posts calling the agreement a “betrayal.”

Other allegations against the UAE focused on the ban on signing agreements with the “Zionists” (27 percent), Abu Dhabi’s “hypocrisy” and its “capitulation” to the United States (5 percent).

But not all was negative: 61 percent of the posts favoring the deal cited security benefits, 33 percent noted economic potential and 6 percent said the accords simply made an existing situation official.

Australia halves UNRWA funding

The Australian Government has quietly halved its contribution to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).

The cut to UNRWA funding was not formally announced by the Morrison Government, but was listed in the 2020-21 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade budget papers. In 2020-21, Australia will contribute $10 million to UNRWA, down from $20 million in 2019-20.

It is important to note that despite budgetary pressures due to COVID-19, the Australian Government has not made significant reductions to its contributions to other global humanitarian organisations, including UN agencies.

Support for the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has remained the same, support for the World Health Organisation and UN Children’s Fund is constant, but there was a drop in support for the World Food Programme. UNRWA is the only organisation of its type whose funding was halved by the Australian Government in this Budget.

This decision marks the end of a period when Australia, beginning under then-foreign minister Bob Carr, became one of UNRWA’s most significant funders. In 2012. Carr announced a five-year $90 million funding deal for UNRWA. This was topped up with an additional $4.5 million in 2013. By 2017, Australia was UNRWA’s 12th largest donor.

The Coalition Government extended UNRWA funding, contributing, on average, $20 million a year until 2019-20.

However, there have been calls for the Australian Government, including from the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) to carefully consider whether supporting UNRWA is truly in Australia’s national interest or whether Australia should be making its funding contingent on reforms to UNRWA. It should be noted that the United States withdrew its funding of UNRWA in 2018 due to concerns over its effectiveness and neutrality.

The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation was formed last December from the merger of several other US aid agencies. It is the development finance institution of the United States, responsible for providing and facilitating the financing of private development projects in lower- and middle-income countries, partially as a counter to Chinese development projects worldwide.

Late last month, the DFC issued a press release indicating that it wanted to leverage the Israel/UAE accords to improve life throughout the Middle East:

Building on the historic Abraham Accords, DFC and other delegation members visited Israel to explore opportunities to translate that agreement into tangible initiatives to improve the lives of people across the region. In particular, DFC is pursuing projects with countries such as Israel and the United Arab Emirates that will enhance regional trade, create jobs, increase energy security and reliable access to electricity, and support agriculture and sustainable access to water in the region.

The DFC has a number of Middle East projects, including financing to rehabilitate a gas pipeline from Israeli gas fields to Egypt and a water pipeline from southern Jordan to Amman.

It appears that the DFC wants to help Israel and the UAE offer aid to other Arab countries beyond the aid that the US gives.

(h/t Irene)

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

This is the time of the year of the Palestinian olive harvest, and there are lots of stories and photos about how critical this time of year is to the Palestinian economy. Most of the olives are converted to olive oil.

How much is the annual olive oil yield in the West Bank? According to UN-OCHA, it is between $110 and $120 million a year.

Articles try to say how critical the olive oil business is the the Palestinian economy, with figures tossed around that it is the main income for 100,000 Palestinian families. Simple math shows that this is impossible because that would mean each family only has an annual income of $1200, when the average Palestinian family income is over $20,000. Clearly the olive oil industry is not nearly as large as we are told.

But there is another comparison that is useful. The annual budget in the Palestinian Authority to pay prisoners, "marytrs" and their families was $315 million in 2016 - meaning that the Palestinian Authority gives nearly triple the annual olive oil revenues to terrorists and their families every year.

The Palestinian leaders want the world to think that their top priority is the olive oil industry. Clearly paying terrorists and their families is a far, far higher priority.

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.

Brown U professor hates Israel so much she erases Jews from her photos of "Palestine" (UPDATE)

About a week ago, Ariella Aisha Azoulay of Brown University gave an anti-Israel lecture at Cornell.

One of the attendees described the lecture this way:

Today I attended a lecture given by Brown University professor Ariella Azoulay who had been invited to talk to a Cornell class in the school of architecture. This lecture was afactual, ahistorical and steeped in antisemitic narratives to the extent that all photographs showing Jews or Israelis she had erased the image of the people (see below) because "I can't bear to look at them". Deeply disturbing and profoundly depressing.

Sure enough, Azoulay tweeted her photos that she showed at the lecture, and they show all Jews who were the early pioneers of modern Israel are deliberately blacked out of the photos.

Even though Azoulay is Jewish, she actually went out of her way to blacken the images of Jews because, in her words, she couldn't bear to look at them. This is dehumanizing Jews and only Jews - there is really no other way to interpret this. (In her caption of an unedited photo advertising the lecture, Azoulay specifically calls out Jewish - not Zionist - soldiers.)

There was no controversy at Cornell over this blatant dehumanizing of Jews. On the contrary - the controversy was over the fact that a few minutes into the lecture s message was placed on the screen, apparently in response to the one-sided nature of the lecture, which said, “We are aware that these topics are sensitive and have multiple view points and would like to assure all participants that the department is looking forward to organizing a future lecture that presents other view points than those that are offered here today and in subsequent talks.”

This message prompted a petition with nearly a thousand signers about how terrible it is for a college to say that they would make alternate points of view available.

This may be the most antisemitic thing I have ever seen in a US university lecture hall.

(h/t Andrew P)

UPDATE: Here's Azoulay's editing of the classic photo of Ben Gurion declaring the State of Israel, along with the original.

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.

10/11 Links: UAE envoy to Britain: ‘The idea Arabs and Israel must be at war is nonsense’; What binds the radical US Left is hating both Israel and the USA; Does Israel need a ministry to fight BDS?

From Ian:

The makings of a true peace

It’s a new Middle East and anyone who has been following the news or more importantly, social media, is discovering an entirely new language with respect to Israel-Arab relations, one characterized by warmth, curiosity and excitement sparked by the recent peace deals signed between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

The people have spoken, and they love each other. It happened so instantly that it has caused some skeptics to raise eyebrows and question the authenticity of this rapprochement, but anyone who is in touch with the “other side” knows that this outspoken sympathy is genuine.

Terms like “warm peace” and “normalization” are often used but only for lack of better description. Truth be told, the peace between Israel and the UAE isn’t just warm—it’s sizzling hot.

“It’s like we’re dating,” said Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, while Chief Rabbi of the UAE Yehuda Sarna believes “Israeli tourists won’t want to leave.”

Emiratis are reacting similarly. Dubai-based businessman Thani AlShirawi, who co-founded the Israel-UAE Business Forum with Hassan Nahoum, says he is “on cloud nine.” Emirati author Omar al-Busaidy, who attended the White House signing ceremony on Sept. 15, said he hasn’t stopped smiling and “you can feel the energy everywhere.”

If anything, the Abraham Accords is a people’s peace. For many Israelis—especially at a time when they face a second coronavirus-triggered lockdown that is compounded by political uncertainty and nationwide protests—this peace is a gift to be enjoyed by generations to come, one the impact of which will be felt long after the COVID and political crises have gone.

Less than a month after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan joined U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House for the signing ceremony, dozens of partnerships have been formed between the Jewish state and the Arabian Gulf power, and the list grows daily.

UAE envoy to Britain: ‘The idea Arabs and Israel must be at war is nonsense’

The United Arab Emirates ambassador has urged British Jews to visit the country as he expressed his wish to be an ally in the fight against antisemitism in the UK and decried hate in parts of the Arab media.

Mansoor Abulhoul made the comments in his first interview with the Jewish media after his country and Israel signed the historic Abraham Accords to normalise relations.

The envoy, who studied at Leeds University and whose British mother moved to the UAE in 1968, said the region had suffered from decades of “indoctrination stemming from the Arab nationalist movement” and been “held back” by a fear of engaging with others. “The narrative that the Arabs should be in endless war with the Israelis is absolute nonsense and the Abraham Accords proves that” he insisted.

“To have a dialogue you have to be at the table and we very much see the Abraham accords as a new pathway to peace. For us to ignore a major power engine we’re denying the region strengths and bonds from which we can build peace. We’re both very dynamic economies and its difficult not to be able to work together.”

He strongly disagrees with any suggestion that the deal doesn’t progress the issue of peace with the Palestinians, whose leadership have accused the UAE of betrayal.

“Where we had looming annexation – which would have sent peace into overdrive reverse gear – that’s been removed. It’s important the Palestinians use this time to come in and engage.”

It is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to decide what sort of solution they finally come to. But the UAE will do all it can to urge both sides to break the impasse. We will be able to help precisely because we can now communicate directly with Israel.”

Great interview by @ReinsteinJosh with MK @CotlerWunsh, one of #Israel's most eloquent and passionate spokespeople, but also an indefatigable champion for Olim community in the Knesset.

Both Michal and Josh are outstanding role models!https://t.co/0M707LAyLU
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) October 10, 2020

What binds the radical US Left is hating both Israel and the USA

Note that the ammunition being used to separate the heretofore special bond between the U.S. and Israel is based on the lie that Israel is a usurper and an “illegal occupier” of another’s land!

To understand the calumny, read for yourselves what is enshrined in international law, as well as in historical fact. The preeminent expert in this legal arena is Howard Grief (deceased, June 2013). All the facts are contained within Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law

For all intents and purposes, the Democratic Party’s current incarnation (as it moved left-ward, incrementally, over a period of years) is ideologically imbued with those who would like to see Israel’s destruction. America’s, too. Even though the Democrat Party of yesteryear, tradition-wise, has always been supportive of Israel, this no longer seems to be the case.

The party's radical, Marxist/communist element hates Israel for the same reasons they hate America. This tragic truth is plain for all to see, but only if one’s eyes are wide open enough to absorb the seismic upheavals taking place all over America. Akin to the outcome of a civil war, the upcoming 2020 election will determine the absolute fate of the nation. This is so on both the domestic and foreign fronts.

In addition to conservative leaning Americans - those who believe in the Constitution and all that it represents and upholds - the next biggest losers to a Biden win will be those who seek to safeguard the "sacred and special" friendship between America and Israel. This includes not only American Jews who seek to ensure the safety of Israel from within the diaspora, but millions of Christians in America who not only pray for Israel's safety, but support the Jewish homeland in a myriad of ways, seen and unseen.

The upcoming 2020 choice for President of the United States couldn't be any clearer, starker, or more monumental.

Chag sameach!

Wishing all my readers who celebrate a wonderful Shmini Atzeret/Simchat Torah!

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.

10/09 Links Pt2: President Rivlin: The people of Israel will defeat coronavirus; Why are Cuomo and de Blasio singling out Orthodox Jews?; NY Times Recasts Nazis, Collaborator, as Anti-Zionists

From Ian:

President Reuven Rivlin: The people of Israel will defeat coronavirus

On Friday, everything starts fresh. Will we also be able to? Yes, yes, my dear ladies and gentlemen, completely anew. On the morning of Simchat Torah, we will read the 54th and final weekly Torah portion, V'Zot HaBerachah ("and this is the blessing"), immediately after which we will read the beginning of the Torah -- Bereshit ("Genesis").

We must also take the deepest of breaths, inhale the new air, and try starting fresh. To shake off the fatigue of the recent period, the lockdown, and rally together in the common cause of fighting the pandemic. We are well aware that our existence, as a nation and culture, also hinges on the deep-rooted ties to our traditions, historical heritage, the path of our forefathers, and the vision of the prophets.

The Simchat Torah holiday is a reminder that the bond between the people of Israel and the Torah -- the simple yet profound, honest joy of a people's connection to their most fundamental values – cannot be broken. This year, we cannot rejoice with the Torah as in years past. Instead of dancing in our crowded, happy circles, with our children on our shoulders, we will have to pray in limited gatherings in accordance with the directives meant to save our lives. It is very sad, but to ensure that next year we can return to dancing with our loved ones and Torah scrolls, I know we have no other choice.

If we don't fight together, shoulder to shoulder, in the battle for the public's wellbeing, we will fail. We must celebrate the holiday in adherence to the safety protocols, in the spirit of mutual guarantee for our fellow man, in solemn prayer that this scourge will be driven from our land.

Defining Antisemitism as a Jewish Problem Is a Lose-Lose Proposition

Radical groups — the radical left, the radical right, radical Muslims, and the radical African-Americans who champion Louis Farrakhan — are spearheading efforts to erode the core principles that make our country exceptional. The Islamo-leftist alliance, in particular, is gaining momentum. While many Jewish and other civil rights organizations singularly focus on far-right white nationalists as the main generators of extremism, the Islamo-leftist alliance parades in public as a social justice cause while infiltrating and undermining our communities and institutions. Collectively, these radical groups reject the Judeo-Christian values that have supported the foundation of our country and protected all minority communities in America, including Jews.

Proponents of the Islamo-leftist alliance seek to undermine the structures and institutions that keep our country open, democratic, and healthy, including the family unit, businesses, communities, religious institutions, impartial media, law enforcement, the military, and the courts. Increasing antisemitic attacks and the public display of hatred are trial runs for what is to come from these radical movements. For years, Jews have been at the receiving end of this hatred. If we are truly ready to overcome it, we must stop playing the victim and start fighting this head-on together with other Americans.

We will lose as Jews and as Americans if we continue accepting our prescribed role as the sacrificial canary in the coal mine, hoping that others may recognize the danger after it has already consumed us whole. Instead, we need to be eagles looking to the horizon, detecting threats far before they grievously harm us and our country. There are practical actions we must take to go on the offensive against antisemitism. They include (1) investigating and exposing the radical movements that fuel the spread of this hatred by identifying their networks, money trails, and agendas; (2) increasing knowledge-sharing capabilities that inform the American people about the threats and empower them to act; (3) holding the media accountable to the standards of a fair and free press; and (4) supporting legislation that curbs the influence of the hate movements in our institutions.

Presenting antisemitism as a Jewish problem has been a lose-lose proposition because it has not spurred anyone to take meaningful action against it. Rather than griping about the problem, it is now time for all Americans to fight against this hatred and racism and for Jews to stand at the forefront of this fight. Our history and increasingly dangerous reality show that the inalienable rights afforded by the Constitution cannot be taken for granted. We need to fight for our safety and security today so that tomorrow we and future generations can continue living freely and proudly. We must fly into the future as brave eagles and free America from the dangers of antisemitism and the extremism it represents.

Who First Said Anti-Zionism Isn’t Antisemitism?

Roosevelt noted the Arabs underestimated the Jews and overestimated their own capabilities. “They thought they could do a job on Israel in a very short time with comparatively little effort, and they told their peoples that too, which was about the worst mistake of all.”

Fighting was still going on when he spoke, so he concluded by arguing that the only way to bring peace to Palestine was for the United States “to declare that any further fighting or any further infringement of a truce or an armistice in Palestine would result in a firm embargo by the United States on any kind of shipments, including specifically dollars, to whichever side started the violation.” Though he said this should apply to both sides, his chief concern was what the Arabists saw as Israeli aggression.

During the Q&A, Roosevelt argued the press had a pro-Zionist bias because newspapers were dependent on advertising from department stores, which “are in the hands of people who may not be Zionists themselves, but they are subject to very strong pressure from the Zionists.” He added that some publishers were susceptible to “a kind of friendly insistence that they not allow anything to appear in their papers which could encourage antisemitism.”

Ironically, he followed up this antisemitic trope about Jewish control of the media with the conclusion that “one of the most dangerous elements in this situation … has been the way in which the Zionists have identified antisemitism with anti-Zionism.” Roosevelt argued, “Sooner or later there is bound to develop in this country strong anti-Zionism. There is no strong reason why that should mean antisemitism, but the Zionists are making it all the more likely by their insistence that if you are an anti-Zionist you are an antisemitist.”

According to Roosevelt, not only is it unreasonable to suggest that anti-Zionism is antisemitism, but doing so provokes antisemitism.

Roosevelt may not have been the first to make the argument, but he certainly was not the last. Today, a universal dodge employed by antisemites is their insistence that they have nothing against Jews, only the state of the Jews, and that seeking the destruction of that state — anti-Zionism — is not antisemitism.

Even Pakistani media is discussing opening ties with Israel

This article in Pakistan's Daily Times starts off sounding like a typical demonization of Israel:

According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

The recent episode of ‘Middle East Peace Process’ is a proposal of Greater Israel by the Trump administration to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict formally unveiled in White House on 28 January 2020.The Greater Israel strategy is not strictly a Zionist Plan for the Middle East, but is an integral part of US foreign policy. The strategic objective is extending American hegemony beside fracturing and balkanising the complete Middle East region. The plan operates on essential premise that to survive Israel must become an imperial regional power, and must effect the division of the Arab world into numerous small states. Small, here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. The Zionist hope is that sectarian-based Arab states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation. This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking.

But by the end of the article, the author - a retired Pakistani army officer - sees no reason why Pakistan shouldn't have formal relations with Israel!

Hatred against Israel and the refusal to recognise or establish diplomatic relations with Israel is no new phenomenon to Muslim countries in Asia. This abomination is based on feelings of Islamic solidarity with Arab countries and a sense of religious belonging to the global Islamic community. The main factors preventing Pakistan from recognising and establishing diplomatic relations with Israel are solidarity with Muslim countries in general, Saudi Arab in particular, and fear of an adverse response by influential religious groups and militants from within Pakistan.

The key question is why should Pakistan restrain ties with Israel on the basis of the Israel-Arab conflict while many Arab countries have established suitable relationship with Israel?Pakistan and Israel do not have a specific hostility or conflict area. What people don’t understand is that we are losing out against India by not maintaining ties with Israel. If Pakistan carries good diplomatic relations with Israel, it can help winning unfailing support from many developed countries of the world, with which Israel has the strongest lobbying powers. We are so wrapped up in what is good for everyone else; that we are losing sight of what is good for us as a nation. Nonetheless, it is time to be practical and relook genuinely, what Pakistan is losing out by not establishing appropriate diplomatic relations with Israel?

Every day I find myself saying....WOW.

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 the Arab world becomes less antisemitic, the Palestinians are naturally going the other way.

Writing in Egyptian news site Essahra and Palestinian site Mashreq News and also Palestinian news site Al Bousla, Dr. Nasser Al-Yafawi writes that the traditional antisemitic blood libel is absolutely true, concentrating on the Damascus blood libel.

His article, entitled "The truth about the Jews baking pies with the blood of gentiles," start off with "On their holy feasts, especially the Eid al-Kabir, crunchy bread is eaten, and the crime is that this bread is not kneaded unless it is kneaded with the blood of a non-Jew from the goys."

According to his Facebook page, Dr. al-Yafawi is a Director at the Ministry of Education in Gaza for the Palestinian Authority.

Even other Gazans argued with him in Facebook saying that the blood libel isn't true, linking to the Arabic Wikipedia page on the topic, yet he insists that it is true.

This is what Palestinians are taught. Every day.

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.

10/09 Links Pt1: Zionism is about being pioneers in the land; How False Assumptions Prevent Israeli-Palestinian Peace; Rabin’s words and AOC; Have the Palestinians fallen from International grace?

From Ian:

Zionism is about being pioneers in the land

Yet there are two critical facts that the late Elhanan Oren, one of the finest historians of Zionist settlement, emphasizes have to be added to the account. The first is that spirit, ruach, preceded official intellect in the creation of these settlements. It was socialist Zionist youth who called to conquer the land, to attack new territory through constructive civilian settlement, rather than make due with passive defense for existing settlements. This was particularly true along the coast (Tel-Aviv) against the Arab challenge, before Zionist officialdom realized the intrinsic geo-strategic importance of these settlements rooted in spirit.

The second point he makes is the argument that took place in Zionist officialdom. The argument was between the “rationalists,” Arthur Ruppin, the expert on German colonization who brought his expertise to bear in promoting Zionist settlement; Eliezer Kaplan, the movement’s leading economic mind who argued to stick to the existing coastal blocks; and the “visionaries,” Moshe Shertok (later prime minister Sharett), Joseph Weitz in the settlement department in the Jewish Agency, and others who called for far-flung settlement to deny the British Peel Commission – which was deliberating Palestine’s future – the option of further partitioning the Land of Israel.

Who was right? Israel’s War of Independence proved the importance of these settlements in staving off the enemy, either Palestinians or even more critically, the Arab states that attacked the fledgling state. Shertok knew when he made the decision to support the “visionary” plan (in the absence of David Ben-Gurion who was in the United States at the time) that the incorporation of these areas would further aggravate the demographic problem. It was a situation in which Jews were less than one-third of the population in the Holy Land. However, Shertock, later known as a “dove,” chose spirit over matter. In the end, spirit combined with matter prevailed.

How much more so should our leaders and warriors value spirit over bureaucratic thinking when the resources of the State of Israel, demographically and economically, are so much greater, and the foe is still adamant about conquering the Land of Israel from “the river to the sea?”

Alas, Reshef and his colleagues, have lost the spirit on which they were nurtured. The Palestinian Authority’s strategic settlement plan from 2011 is a challenge that Israel and Zionism never faced before. That and the more traditional means of burning what Zionists by planted by Hamas launching incendiary devices from Gaza, proves that Homa umigdal is as relevant today as it was in the 1930s, or more so.

David Singer: Rabin’s words and AOC

The approaching 25th anniversary of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s assassination on 4 November 1995 has seen leading left-wing Democratic Party Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) cancelling her planned attendance at a memorial event organised by leftist Americans for Peace Now on 20 October.

Ocasio-Cortez withdrew after journalist Alex Kane tweeted and AOC replied:

AOC Pulls Out of Event for Murdered Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, the First to Recognize Palestinian Nationalism | CNSNews

Alex Kane is telling the truth, but not the whole truth.. Rabin did say to "break their bones" during a violent and murderous Arab uprising in Gaza, but that was because he did not allow the use of guns during that period of attacks against Israelis and instead, gave the soldiers truncheons with which to try to keep the peace. Israeli mothers were less than happy at that decision.

Rabin was indeed a liberal peacemaker and AOC’s decision is to be deplored.

Summary of thread from 🇪🇺 @EUpalestinians: Blank check for hate, rejectionism, terror, and corruption. 40+ years of political & bureaucratic failure, billions wasted, nothing learned. @JosepBorrellF @eu_eeas @vonderleyen @EUinIsrael https://t.co/MpMppA09qn
— Prof Gerald M Steinberg (@GeraldNGOM) October 9, 2020

Caroline Glick: A magic carpet ride over the anti-Netanyahu protests

Mendelblit's contempt for the public was on prominent display last month in remarks he made at a Rosh Hashanah toast to his subordinates.

Referring to himself as the "guardian of democracy," Mendelblit spent most of his speech attacking his critics who view his decision to indict Netanyahu on bribery and breach of trust charges for his alleged efforts to win positive coverage from news outlets, as legally and normatively defective. Diminishing studied criticism as mere background noise, Mendelblit said derisively, "the windows [of this building] are sealed off from the noises outside."

Mendelblit expressed pure contempt for Israel's elected leaders whose criticism of his actions he attacked as anti-democratic, and worse. He referred to Public Security Minister Amir Ohana's criticism of his behavior as "a terror attack against democracy."

But then at the end of his remarks he turned to the anti-Netanyahu protests organized by Haskel and his comrades. Referring to them, Mendelblit waxed poetically about the "foundational right to protest" in a democracy.

In recent weeks Mendelblit's subordinates have instructed the police not to charge Haskel and his fellow Netanyahu haters for breaking the laws in the course of their protests, lest their democratic right to protest is trampled.

The glaring contradiction in Mendelblit's remarks – his seething dismissal of "noises from outside" made by those who oppose his deeply controversial efforts to criminalize otherwise lawful political behavior to oust Netanyahu from power on the one hand, and his self-righteous defense of the "foundational right to protest" in speaking about Haskel and his band of Netanyahu haters on the other – is disturbingly similar to the tale revealed by Haskel's videos.

Haskel rejected the foundation of Zionism by demanding the gratitude of the children of Ethiopian Jewry while glorifying the contribution he made to one of its greatest triumphs – the airlift of Ethiopian Jewry to Israel. Mendelblit revealed his contempt for democracy by rejecting the legitimacy of elected leaders while upholding the right of anti-Netanyahu protesters to break the laws in the name of "democracy."

Haskel's anti-Zionist outbursts and Mendelblit's anti-democratic speech show that Israel is not in the throes of an ideological battle between two competing ideological camps. Instead, a large majority of Israelis joined in their dedication to Zionism and democratic norms is being assaulted by an aggressive, hateful and arrogant minority whose leaders cynically exploit Zionist concepts and the language of democracy to undermine both to advance their naked, nihilistic bid for power.

France is a card-carrying member of the European Union.

As such, there are certain basic positions that France shares with the EU -- such as the "two-state solution."

In fact, one year ago, Josep Borrell, the incoming EU foreign policy chief, made the EU position clear:

The European position is to defend the two-state solution. I hope this continues to be the EU position.

France has been equally clear as well.

Just last month, on September 24, France participated in a meeting in Amman, Jordan:

The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Egypt, France, Germany and Jordan, met in Amman today to continue their coordination and consultation on means to advance the Middle East Peace Process towards a just, comprehensive and lasting peace. The meeting was attended by the EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process.

The Ministers declared:

...We stress that the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the basis of the two-state solution, that ensures the emergence of an independent and viable Palestinian state on the basis of June 4, 1967 lines, living side by side a secure and recognized Israel, is the path to achieving comprehensive, enduring peace and regional security.

What a difference two weeks make!

On Wednesday, the French ambassador to Israel, Eric Danon, indicated that in light of the Abraham Accords, France was open to peace possibilities other than the two-state solution:

The envoy indicated that France prefers a two-state solution, but that doesn’t mean they can’t accept something else, adding that his country will accept any solution agreed upon by the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Clearly, France is not ready to dump the two-state solution altogether.

Also, it is clear that France is still supportive of the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinian Arabs and the idea of their having their own sovereign state.

But by the same token, France also recognizes that Trump has changed the rules, and unlike during the Obama administration, the Palestinian Arabs are no longer in the driver's seat:

The Palestinians must take into account their weak position on the international and Arab arenas, stressed Danon...They warned that Palestinians could lose everything now.

A French diplomatic in Paris confirmed that what was once the personal opinion of Danon was now becoming official French foreign policy:

“French diplomacy is having a hard time putting all its weight on the two-state solution, as it becomes unrealistic on the ground,” the diplomat pointed out. “What the ambassador said is self-evident. That it is important to resume negotiations as soon as possible. The Palestinians have never been so weak. They could lose everything.” [emphasis added]

Why is France now suddenly seeing the light?

It might be because of Frances's diplomatic relations with the Gulf states

France, one of the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council, has close ties with Gulf Arab states, in particular Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and rarely publicly criticizes internal political issues. [emphasis added]

And that includes Bahrain in addition to the UAE.

The UAE is also a major client for French weapons.

It would be in France's interests to support the UAE and Bahrain, not only in terms of the new agreements with Israel, but also to support the new potential for different options for peace.

So it is not just a matter of some countries wanting to ally themselves with Israel in order to get into Washington's good graces -- now there are advantages of allying with the Gulf states too. And if support for the Abraham Accords is the price to pay to reap the benefits of better relations and agreements with rich Arab states, it may not be just the smaller developing countries that see an opportunity.

Which is just one more way that Abbas's kleptocracy is left out in the cold.

Part of the goal of the Abraham Accords is to further weaken the PA.

Based on France's new stand -- that seems to be working.

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 last paragraph of a +972 article by Sahar Vardi, cofounder of Israeli NGO Hamushim, highlights the anti-Israel tunnel vision of people who ludicrously claim to be peace activists:

As a peace activist, it is strange to do anything other than support any kind of peace treaty. But, this normalization agreement — what the Israeli government is trying to sell as a peace deal — forces us to remind ourselves what we actually mean by peace. An agreement in which the main profiters are arms industries and economic elites, and the losers are the people, is not a peace accord. It is a war agreement — of governments against the people.

Why is Vardi against the agreement? Because, he says, it only profits arms dealers, and everyone else loses:

With this win-win-win for the arms industries, who loses out from it all? Given that the UAE is already using Israeli technologies to prevent dissent and opposition among their own citizens, and considering Abu Dhabi’s role in the war on Yemen, the real losers of this “normalization” are apparent: the people.

In Jerusalem, the local loss is also apparent: firstly, Palestinians, who have just watched countries that have historically claimed to support their rights and independence sign a normalization agreement with their occupier.

Secondly, Israelis, who are now in a second full COVID-19 lockdown amid a devastating economic recession, are having to watch their prime minister spend his time and energy on normalization agreements that have no effect on their daily life, and that profit only the upper echelons of Israeli society.

There is nothing "apparent" about the first paragraph at all. The UAEs astonishing modernization project of the past few decades has attracted huge numbers of workers from throughout the Middle East including as many as 100,000 Palestinians. There are challenges of having such a large expatriate population to be sure, but Arabs and others want to live in the UAE even without citizenship.

The second paragraph isn't true either, except the psychological issue of Palestinians having lived their entire lives in a bubble of free money from their Arab brethren with no responsibility towards their own future - and seeing that evaporate in an instant. Now they will have to live in the real world where their decisions have consequences and compromise becomes part of their vocabulary. That is not a loss - that is a huge gain for Palestinians and the entire world.

The third paragraph is so absurd, one wonders at the mentality of the author.

The Israel/UAE agreement is supported by the vast majority of Israelis. Seven decades of feeling alone under siege has been immensely lessened. The Arab boycott of Israel has resulted in Israel being more hawkish just to survive.

The signed and rumored business deals so far have not been limited to the arms industry, as Vardi ludicrously claims, but also medicine, cybersecurity, tourism and other industries that help ordinary people in both countries. It is the exact economic boost that will help the COVID-19 recession.

But the real point that is ignored by these hypocritical "peace activists" is the larger sea change in the Arab world towards Israel. Suddenly, Arabs in Lebanon and Syria and other antagonistic states are rethinking the wisdom of seven decades of pretending Israel will disappear because of their boycotts. The lose-lose mentality of doing everything necessary to try to hurt Israel has instead hurt Arabs far worse.

Moreover, in a single stroke, the toxic antisemitism of the Arab world has been reduced. Arabic media is interested in the history of Jews in the region. The agreement is like a pressure valve that has been loosened.

None of that means anything to hypocrites like Vardi and the other self-hating Israelis at +972. They continue with the hateful mindset that anything that benefits Israel must be opposed.

The only opponents to the deal are the jihadists, the Palestinian leaders who are losing their own gravy train of endless cash they can skim, and the "peace activists" like Sahar Vardi. That last group is reduced to writing insane pieces like this in +972 to justify their irrational hatred for Israel under new circumstances.

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.