Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, November 16, 2020

The PLO's Red Lines for a Palestinian state, from the Palestine Papers, part 1: Borders and recognition

In 2011, Al Jazeera and The Guardian released a collection of over a thousand documents related to the Israel/Palestinian peace process, most of them leaked from the Negotiations Support Unit (NSU)of the PLO headed by Saeb Erekat. They were known as The Palestine Papers. One of Erekat's many resignations came in response to these papers being leaked, presumably by one of his own people.

The articles at the time from Al Jazeera and The Guardian cherry picked out-of-context quotes from Israeli negotiators quoted in the papers to make them look bad. As far as I know, I am the only person who spent a bit of time actually reading the Palestine Papers and discovering many embarrassing things about the PLO as well as how Al Jazeera and The Guardian mischaracterized their findings.

After Saeb Erekat's death, I revisited the Papers which are still available at the Al Jazeera site. I found one document that is terrifically important, possibly the most important document in the collection, that no one else seems to have noticed - or wanted to report on.

It is called the NSU Negotiation Principles Matrix and it lists, over fifteen pages, every single issue that Israel and the PLO negotiated over, what the PLO's core position was on each issue, and what the PLO was ready to be flexible on and exactly how much.

It is a blueprint to the maximal concessions that the PLO would ever give for peace and what their true "red lines" are. This document, in all probability, is why Erekat dissolved the NSU and resigned - it showed all of the PLO's negotiating cards.

It also shows how impossible it is for Israel to make peace with the Palestinians. The PLO's public negotiating position is entirely consistent with this document and there is no reason to think that the Palestinian leadership has moved from these positions one bit.

Given that a new Biden administration will go back to an Oslo mentality, trying to negotiate a two state solution, this document is more relevant than ever. It shows, in the PLO's own words, how intransigent they are and how intransigent they always will be.

It makes no sense to pressure Israel for more concessions when the PLO already says that they won't be enough.

The matrix starts off with the PLO positions on the negotiations as a whole, upon which there is no flexibility.

ISSUE

CORE PRINCIPLES

POSSIBLE FLEXIBILITY

CORE PRINCIPLES

· No end of claims until full implementation of the CAPS

· Strong implementation and verification mechanism

· No backdoor acceptance of state with provisional borders

· No end of occupation until full withdrawal of army and all settlers and full Palestinian control over all the territory, its inhabitants and all external relations

· Full normalization with Israel by any Arab State shall only commence following the full implementation of the Treaty.

Most of these are things we have heard before as PLO demands.

Note here that the PLO is insisting that they must receive all of their demands, completely and up front, before Israel gets anything. Notice also that the PLO is speaking for all Arab states, whether they like it or not.

MUTUAL RECOGNITION

· Should include recognition of Israel along recognized and agreed borders.

· Must not include recognition of certain characteristics of the state of Israel, i.e as a Jewish state.

Here the PLO is saying that they will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state. This is meant to protect the "right to return" so they can plan to turn Israel into an Arab state by forcing it to take in all so-called "refugees" which will be discussed later on in the document.

INTERNATIONAL BORDERS

Location of international borders

· Must be based on 1967.

· 1967 line = 1949 armistice line, including all legal and agreed modifications. [Alternatively,

· Land corridor/link could be part of swap package if Palestinians get sovereignty over the land corridor.

language could specify that the West Bank includes East Jerusalem and No Man’s Land.]

· Demographic arguments cannot be used to draw the border. If Israel wants to argue demographics then UNGA 181 must be the basis of discussion.

· Negotiate size of area, not percentages.

· Swaps must be minor - not more than 100 km² in TOTAL .

· No swap of land inhabited by Palestinians, regardless of citizenship (e.g., Um el Fahm).

· Equal in quantity and quality (e.g., Jerusalem land for Jerusalem land, agricultural land for agricultural land).

· Swap only settlement built-up areas, not empty Pal land (i.e., no ‘blocs’).

· Swap only settlements adjacent to the border. Swapped areas cannot disrupt contiguity. (No annexation of Ma’ale Adumim, Ariel, Pisgat Ze’ev, Neve Ya’cov, Giv’at Ze’ev, or Efrat.)

· No swap of land inhabited by Palestinians regardless of citizenship (i.e Um el Fahm).

· Proposals for tripartite land swap with Egypt (or Jordan) should be rejected.

· No leasing.

· Most of the options with respect to borders will be in the various swap scenarios, which should be guided by the principles herein.

· Residency rights is a creative option to avoid swapping difficult areas and which may make Palestinians look more reasonable at the table.

Here the PLO is saying that the 1949 armistice lines must be the basis for the final borders, and the Palestinians should even get the "no man's land" between the Israeli and Jordanian positions in 1949.

It is saying that it does not want to gain land in Israel that includes a single Arab. Only lands where Jews would be expelled, or empty land, can be swapped for small settlement areas adjacent to the Green Line.

It explicitly says that Israel must give up all lands that are not, in the PLO's view, contiguous with the 1949 armistice lines. Ma’ale Adumim, Ariel, Pisgat Ze’ev, Neve Yaakov, Giv’at Ze’ev, Efrat - and certainly places like Bet El, Hebron and scores of other communities - must be emptied of Jews.

But if Israel pushes back, the PLO can consider allowing a few Jews to stay as residents of Israel "to make Palestinians look more reasonable."

All of these are clearly non-starters for Israel. But the PLO is saying that it will not budge on this - hundreds of thousands of Jews must leave their homes before Israel can get any benefits of peace.

Delimitation and demarcation	· Delimitation on agreed and appropriately scaled maps.	· This is purely a technical issue. It should not be contentious.
Maritime Boundaries	· Palestine will claim full share of what we are entitled to under international law as a coastal state. · Maritime boundaries must be agreed, according to international law. · Include clause that says maritime boundaries will be agreed in the future [ideal time would be at or immediately post CAPS].	· Willing to negotiate shared/joint zones. · Maritime boundary does not have to be agreed at the FAPS or CAPS stage. It can be agreed post-statehood. · There are many options for the maritime boundaries in line with international law and equitability.
Private property	· Deal with private property interests in the swapped areas separately from delimitation of the border	·
Sovereignty and Inviolability	· West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip are one united and integral part of the territory of Palestine · Palestinian sovereignty must be full and respected by Israel	· NOTE: issues of sovereignty should not be confused with functional arrangements that suit both Palestinian and Israeli interests. For example, Palestine could enter into arrangements based on its sovereign equality on various issues in accordance with its own interests.

The next section we will look at contains the PLO demands about Jerusalem.

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.

I can't believe anyone takes @Mondoweiss seriously

I don't read Mondoweiss, but sometimes people send me links and I simply cannot get over how people think that is a serious site.

The New York Times reported that Israel assassinated an Al Qaeda leader in Tehran in August. Mondoweiss comes up with a conspiracy theory that the entire story was made up, leaked in order to give the US an excuse to attack Iran!

In what universe would the discovery of an Al Qaeda leader in Iran be an excuse for a war?

But the analysis by James North is even worse (if possible.)

The article reeks of dishonesty. At least one of its four authors, Ronen Bergman, an Israeli (who has lavished praise on the Israel lobby AIPAC), has sources in Israel’s spy apparatus, which immediately raises suspicion. The report’s only sources are those unnamed “intelligence officials,” who provide suspiciously precise details, reminiscent of a movie script: the paper said that last August in Tehran, al-Masri

was driving his white Renault L90 sedan with his daughter near his home when two gunmen on a motorcycle drew up alongside him. Five shots were fired from a pistol fitted with a silencer. Four bullets entered the car through the driver’s side and a fifth hit a nearby car.

Bergman literally wrote the book on Israel's spy agencies, and it wasn't a hagiography. Mondoweiss' writer has no evidence that Bergman has ever reported anything inaccurate but the fact that he has contacts in the Mossad is by itself enough to discredit his reporting for the anti-Israel drones who read that absurd site.

North, meanwhile, has been warning about the US trying to start a war with Iran pretty much every month for years. He must be very frustrated that his keen analysis of Trump's supposed desire to start a war has been so wrong so many times and yet he doubles down again and again.

Also, North's claim that the NYT article didn't cover the fact that Iran and Al Qaeda are not normally allies is false:

That he had been living in Iran was surprising, given that Iran and Al Qaeda are bitter enemies. Iran, a Shiite Muslim theocracy, and Al Qaeda, a Sunni Muslim jihadist group, have fought each other on the battlefields of Iraq and other places.
Iran may have had good reason for wanting to hide the fact that it was harboring an avowed enemy, but it was less clear why Iranian officials would have taken in the Qaeda leader to begin with.

Some terrorism experts suggested that keeping Qaeda officials in Tehran might provide some insurance that the group would not conduct operations inside Iran. American counterterrorism officials believe Iran may have allowed them to stay to run operations against the United States, a common adversary.

It would not be the first time that Iran had joined forces with Sunni militants, having supported Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Taliban.

“Iran uses sectarianism as a cudgel when it suits the regime, but is also willing to overlook the Sunni-Shia divide when it suits Iranian interests,” said Colin P. Clarke, a counterterrorism analyst at the Soufan Center.

Mondoweiss is a joke that is taken seriously by a large percentage of the Left.

(h/t Yoel)

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

11/15 Links: David Collier: There is no real justice for Jewish people in the UK; Saudi lawyer claims Al-Aqsa Mosque's true location 'is not in Jerusalem'

From Ian:

David Collier: There is no real justice for Jewish people in the UK

Three years ago I was present at the pro-Hezbollah Al-Quds rally in London. In the process of whipping up the crowd to prepare them for the march, the leader of the rally, Nazim Ali, made several blatantly antisemitic statements over a loudhailer. After it became known that Nazim Ali was a pharmacist, complaints were made to the General Pharmaceutical Council. They took three long years to even arrange a hearing. Last week they published their determination – that the four test statements they had selected, whilst offensive, were not antisemitic. An embarrassing joke of a finding and a slap in the face for all of us. The obvious conclusion from this story is that there is no real justice for Jewish people in the UK.

Justice and the facts The undisputed facts of the case are these: Nazim Ali is a pharmacist and is also a Director of the Islamic Human Rights Commission. The IHRC is an extremist group ‘inspired by the worldview of Ayatollah Khomeini’. On the last Sunday of each Ramadan, they hold a demonstration on ‘Al Quds’ day, an Ayatollah designed, pro-Hezbollah, pro-Iranian march through London. Until proscribed in the UK, Hezbollah flags were ever-present at these rallies. Nazim Ali has been the voice of the Al-Quds demonstration for several years.

At the event in 2017, and before the gathered protestors began to march, Nazim Ali made several antisemitic comments about Zionists. Some examples: Ali claimed Zionists were not real Jews, he blamed them for the Grenfell disaster, stated that they genetically need to ‘occupy’ and suggested British Rabbis have blood on their hands.

Justice fails in the findings The publication of the findings of the ‘Fitness to Practise’ hearing confirmed all our worst fears. The entire process had been a badly handled, incompetent affair, that resulted in a near total whitewash. The Committee decided that whilst offensive, the words of Nazim Ali were not antisemitic.

There are several *major failures* in the determination. These are the two that I consider the most important:

Antisemitism – In deciding what was and was not antisemitic, their Legal Adviser had provided them with the dictionary definition. The IHRA definition was included by the Council in the bundle of papers ‘for guidance’. In assessing whether a comment was antisemitic, the Committee decided it would attempt to judge the view of a ‘reasonable person’, with knowledge of all the facts and context. Someone with ‘no particular characteristics‘ (ie not Jewish).

Impartiality – both myself and Jonathan Hoffman were not considered impartial. They mentioned that I had just returned from a visit to Israel along with the fact my daughter recently volunteered for the Israeli Defence Force. They concluded that this meant I was not an ‘entirely impartial observer‘. For Jonathan they stated that he had described himself as being ‘of the Jewish faith’, before mentioning his public order conviction and the fact he had visited Nazim Ali’s pharmacy as the reasons why he too, was not fit to be described as a ‘wholly impartial observer‘.

They found we were of ‘little assistance’ in reaching their decisions (page 52).

Saudi lawyer claims Al-Aqsa Mosque's true location 'is not in Jerusalem'

Osama Yamani claims that Al-Aqsa is located in Al-Ju'ranah near Mecca, in Saudi Arabia

A Saudi Arabian lawyer claimed that Al-Aqsa (the Farthest) Mosque, traditionally held to be Islam's third holiest site after Mecca and Medina, is not in fact, located on the Al-Aqsa compound (Temple Mount) in Jerusalem's Old City.

Writing in Saudi news outlet Okaz, Osama Yamani maintained that the mosque - which is one of the world's most ancient permanent Islamic buildings, having been completed in 705 CE - is actually located in Al Ju'ranah, near Mecca in Saudi Arabia, cited Israeli outlet, Israel Hayom.

In his piece, Yamani argued that the centuries-long confusion stems from the fact that history books have mistakenly located Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem.

"Jerusalem is not Al-Aqsa, which is not cited in the missions that Allah gave Muhammad and the caliphs. Similarly, Jerusalem is a city, and Al-Aqsa is a mosque," he stated.

Yamani added that originally, Muslims did not face in the direction of Mecca while praying and instead faced Jerusalem, a function imposed by Umayyad dynasty's fifth caliph Abd al-Malik, who built the adjoining Dome of the Rock in 691 CE.

Yamani explained that: "There are stories influenced by political considerations that served the purposes of that time, and sometimes claims are made that they have nothing to do with faith or following religious dictates."

Islamic tradition dictates that although the Prophet Mohammad's corporeal body never entered Jerusalem, with the word never being mentioned in the Qur'an, legend affirms that he ascended to heaven on al-Buraq - a winged horse, which is said to have taken off from the foundation stone underneath the Dome of the Rock.

We are already witnessing what a war of ideas inside the Islamic world looks like with Sunni and Shia Muslims continuing a battle that has raged for more than 1,300 years. A battle over the so-called "true" location of Al-Aqsa Mosque between Saudis and Palestinians could similarly spell trouble.

Honest Reporting: CNN’s Christiane Amanpour Compares Trump Era To Kristallnacht

CNN’s chief international anchor, Christiane Amanpour, compared US President Donald Trump’s tenure in office to Nazi Germany after the recent anniversary of the Kristallnacht pogroms.

“This week 82 years ago, Kristallnacht happened,” Amanpour began as her show opened. “It was the Nazis’ warning shot across the bow of our human civilization that led to genocide against a whole identity, and in that tower of burning books, it led to an attack on fact, knowledge, history and truth. After four years of a modern-day assault on those same values by Donald Trump, the Biden-Harris team pledges a return to norms, including the truth.”

This, on a show which CNN describes as its “flagship global affairs interview program.”

Kristallnacht, in English known as the “Night of Broken Glass,” was a series of violent Nazi attacks that in the eyes of many historians constituted the start of the Holocaust. Over the course of two days in November 1938, thousands of Jewish properties and homes were ransacked and destroyed, 90 Jews were murdered, and 30,000 were deported to concentration camps, many never to return.

Amanpour’s remarks are offensive on a number of levels: First, for seemingly attempting to invoke Nazi atrocities in order to further a contemporary political agenda. Second, for seeking to universalize Kristallnacht by never mentioning Jews as the targets. And third, by cheapening history by engaging in such an over-the-top analogy.

Amanpour’s remarks were met with condemnation by media critics such as Glenn Greenwald — who, to say the least, is not known for his support of Zionism — and cable TV producer Steve Krakauer, as well as from leading Jewish figures such as Hillel Neuer and David Harris.

Krakauer reacted swiftly on Twitter, saying that, “Comparing Trump to Hitler and Kristallnacht, saying they ‘assault’ the ‘same values’ is obscene and outrageous.”

UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer wrote that such distortion of the Holocaust by a journalist on US television was unprecedented, adding, “the Nazi genocide was not ‘an attack on fact, knowledge, history & truth.’ They murdered 6 million Jews. Say it.”

Never before in the history of U.S. news networks did a journalist distort the Holocaust for political purposes as Amanpour just did on on CNN & PBS.

No, @camanpour, the Nazi genocide was not “an attack on fact, knowledge, history & truth.“

They murdered 6 million Jews. Say it. pic.twitter.com/Cwkzj1lUBK
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 14, 2020

@CNN talk of listening and learning and say we can trust them. Wrapping the Kristallnacht anniversary in to a Trump piece was as disgusting as it was ridiculous.

CNN must do better. @jaketapper @wolfblitzer @andersoncooper @camanpour pic.twitter.com/298jmLMdl3
— Milk Media (@milkmedianewyor) November 14, 2020

This is from a travelogue by a monk named Felix Fabri, describing his visit to the Holy Land in 1483. In this section he describes a tour of the area beneath the Temple Mount known as "Solomon's Stables" that was led surreptitiously by a Jewish guide.

On the fourth day, after dinner, we went down the Mount Sion together, led in a half-secret fashion by a Jew, who said that he would show us some things which were hidden. As we were going down, we came to the south side of the church, which stands near the Temple of the Lord, where, in the days of the Christians, there used to be a way up some stone steps to a high door, through which one entered that church. We climbed up to this door over the ruins of the walls, and kissed the wall in which the door is, for the sake of the plenary indulgences which are to be gained there (ff).... We visited this place with fear and in silence, for, had the Saracens [Muslims] seen us, we should have been in danger, which was why we chose the time when they take their rest. From that place we went further down, and came to an exceeding ancient wall, enormously strong, built of huge squared rocks, and this wall is tolerably high, albeit it once was much higher, as may be seen from the ruins, for the place is full of squared stones scattered round about. It is said that upon this wall stood the house of the forest of Lebanon, which was the king's house, built by Solomon, whereof we read in i Kings vii., where he saith, ' Glory,' etc. This house was called the house of the forest of Lebanon, because its upper part was built of timber which was hewn from the forest of Lebanon. The author of the Spccuhini Historiale says that this house was built of twofold material ; the lower part was of stone, and was called Nethota, that is to say, the place of perfumes, wherein the spices and pigments for the use of the temple and of the king's house were stored up, that by reason of the (cool) earth and the (thick) wall they might long keep their freshness. The upper part was of wood, of the timber from Lebanon, wherefore it was called the house of the forest, the house of Lebanon, or the house of the forest of Lebanon. ...

...When we had viewed this wall from the outside, guided by the Jew, we climbed up over the ruins to the wall itself, and there is one of the great square blocks which has been torn by vast force out of the wall, so that there is a hole through the wall into Nethotam. So we bent ourselves down and went in, one after another, and at first we could see nothing whatsoever, because it is the nature of the eyes that those who go into the shade out of the sunlight can see nothing ; but after we had stood still there for awhile, we got back our sight by degrees, and beheld great vaulted buildings. There were here seven rows of columns, supporting the vaults and upper buildings, which were built above them in the days of old, though at this day there stands an olive grove above it at the side of the temple. The Jews and Saracens say that these underground chambers were the stables of Solomon's horses....

Now, beneath these vaults there were many heaps of stones piled high up, whereof the Jew who brought us into that place told us that the Jews pile up these stones to occupy a place beforehand, for they hope that erelong they will again inhabit the Holy Land ; and therefore their pilgrims, who come from far countries, take places before- hand, in which places they hope that they shall dwell after the return. Above in the vault there is one place where a great hole is broken through, through which the Saracens cast down all the sweepings of the temple and courtyard. We were in great fear there, for had the Saracens found us there, they would indeed have treated us ill. Had we not been afraid, we might have climbed up over the rubbish into the courtyard of the temple. So when we had seen all the aforesaid sights, we went out through the hole by which we had come in, went round the Mount Moriah, which is the mount of the temple, and up the hill to the wall of the Holy City, as far as the corner where the east wall joins the south wall.

From here we see not only that many Jews would risk their lives to visit the chambers beneath the Temple Mount as late as the 15th century, but also that they hoped to see Israel rebuilt.

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 remarkable events continue.

From Gulf Business:

The Fresh Market in Dubai’s Ras Al Khor area, opened the first-ever display of Israeli produce on Saturday, November 14.

Operated by the Dubai Municipality, the Fresh Market is located on Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed road, near Dragon Mart.

The event organised to mark the introduction of Israeli products into the market was attended by Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, group chairman and CEO of DP World, and Essa Abdul Rahman Al Hashemi, head at the Food Security Office, the Prime Minister’s Office, among other senior officials.

Also in attendance was Shlomi Fogel, chairman of Carmel Agrexco. “We are excited to be part of the growing ties between Israel and the UAE. Together with our colleagues in Dubai, we are beginning to see the ‘fruits of peace’ today,” said Fogel.

“The export of fresh agricultural products from Israel to the UAE market has a significant advantage because of the geographical closeness and the speed with which the products can be transported directly to markets in the UAE and beyond.”

“Within few hours of picking, the fresh produce can reach points of sale. It’s a fact that Israeli agriculture is highly advanced and we are confident that everyone will enjoy our produce.”

Fogel added that Carmel Agrexco intends to invest in agricultural farms in the UAE, and incorporate the latest innovations in agro-technology.

Israel is helping the UAE increase its food security in two ways: by helping it diversify its sources of food imports and by helping the UAE improve its own agriculture yields.

What is truly amazing is that, unlike Egypt or Jordan, the UAE is pushing Israeli products as a selling point - assuming that ordinary Emiratis will want to specifically buy Israeli products.

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.

Continuing my series of major quotes from Joe Biden in JTA and elsewhere:

April 19, 1989:

Secretary of State James Baker told a congressional panel Tuesday that he supports the Justice Department’s policy to grant refugee status on a selective basis to Soviet Jews wishing to enter the United States.
Jewish groups have criticized the Bush administration for continuing a policy started last fall by the Reagan administration of refusing to give refugee status automatically to all Soviet Jewish emigrants wishing to enter the United States.
...
Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the INS, said during Baker’s testimony Tuesday that the United States should “keep in context the position we have taken for such a long time,” that “Soviet Jews have demonstrably been victims of persecution in the Soviet Union, and I see no evidence of that changing.”
“I hope we would not make the mistake of concluding that, until we have a total standard that all can agree on, we are not going to deal with a group of people who have for thousands of years, from czars to commissars, been clear victims of persecution in their country,” he added.
“Despite the remarkable changes under (Soviet leader Mikhail) Gorbachev, I have not seen convincing evidence that, in fact, Soviet Jews within the Soviet Union are no longer persecuted,” Biden said.

February 1, 1990:

Two senators criticized President Bush on Tuesday for moving too slowly to waive trade sanctions against the Soviet Union. But a third said he did not necessarily disagree with the president’s judgment.
The subject came up during a Capitol Hill news conference during which the three senators proposed a $511 million aid package for Eastern Europe.
Responding to a question, Sens. Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.) and Paul Simon (D-Ill.) said they felt Bush should have moved more quickly to issue a waiver of trade sanctions under the 1975 Jackson-Vanik Amendment.
But Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) said it was a “close call” as to whether Bush should issue a waiver of the amendment, which denies most-favored-nation trade status to Eastern European countries until they improve their emigration policies.
... During the news conference, Biden was asked about the recent proposal by Senate Minority Leader Robert Dole (R-Kan.) to cut U.S. foreign aid to the largest recipients, including Israel, by 5 percent. The savings would be reapportioned to Eastern European countries and Panama.
Asked about Senate support for Dole’s proposal, Biden said, “I think the prospects of it passing are zero.”
“The Dole proposal is particularly insidious, in my view,” he said. “It pits longtime allies against emerging, potential democracies.”
“I think it would be particularly dangerous if the Poles and the Hungarians” thought that the reason why they were not getting additional assistance was because of Israel, he said.

March 20, 1991:

Three major Jewish defense agencies testified before the Senate on Tuesday against a federal appeals court nominee who until last week was a member of private country club in Florida that allegedly discriminates against blacks, Jews and other minorities.
The groups also opposed the nomination of U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Ryskamp because of what the American Jewish Committee called the “gross insensitivity to civil rights concerns” reflected in his court rulings to date.
Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, said Ryskamp had issued some “erroneous rulings” and that he had concerns about his sensitivity to minorities. But he told the nominee, “That doesn’t mean you won’t be confirmed.”

Biden speaking at AIPAC in 1992, an excellent speech, where he disparages the notion that Israel is an obstacle to peace, that there would be peace in the Middle East without Israel, and that it is ever appropriate for the US to publicly criticize Israel for anything.

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.

11/14 Links: Israeli agents killed al-Qaeda’s No. 2 on Iran street, at behest of US: NYTs; ‘Borders On Holocaust Denial’: CNN Blasted Over Shocking Segment Comparing Trump To Nazis Purging Jews

From Ian:

Israeli agents killed al-Qaeda’s No. 2 on Iran street, at behest of US: NY Times

Israeli operatives gunned down al-Qaeda’s second-in-command on a Tehran street in August at the behest of the United States, the New York Times reported on Friday.

Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, who used the nom de guerre Abu Muhammad al-Masri, was accused of being one of the chief planners of devastating attacks on two US embassies in Africa in 1998.

He was killed on August 7, the anniversary of the attacks, the report said, citing unnamed intelligence officials.

The attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed 224 and injured hundreds more.

A former Israeli intelligence official told the newspaper that Al-Masri is also accused of ordering the 2002 attack on an Israeli-owned hotel in Mombasa, Kenya which killed 13 and injured 80.

Al-Masri was driving his sedan close to his home when two Israeli agents on a motorcycle pulled up alongside his vehicle and fired five shots from a silenced pistol, killing al-Masri and his daughter, Miriam, who was married to Osama bin Laden’s late son Hamza bin Laden.

The assassination has not been publicly acknowledged by the US, Israel, Iran or al-Qaeda.

The US was keeping tabs on al-Masri and other members of the terrorist group in Iran for years, but it’s unknown what role the US played in the killing, if any.

Al-Masri was one of the earliest members of al-Qaeda and likely the next to lead the terror group after its current chief, Ayman al-Zawahri.

TV: Al-Qaeda No. 2 was planning attacks on Israelis, Jews when killed in Tehran

The Al-Qaeda No. 2 reportedly shot dead by Israeli agents in Tehran in August was planning attacks on Israeli and Jewish Diaspora targets when he was killed, Israel’s Channel 12 news reported Saturday night.

Earlier Saturday, The New York Times reported that Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, aka Abu Muhammad al-Masri, was killed by Israeli agents at the behest of the US on August 7. Iran denied the Times story, claiming it was “made up information.”

“Abu Muhammad al-Masri had recently begun planning attacks against Israelis and Jewish targets in the world,” the Israeli TV report said, quoting unnamed Western intelligence sources. This further underlined why the US and Israel had a “shared interest” in his elimination, it said. The US was seeking him for orchestrating two devastating attacks on embassies in Africa in the 1990s, while Israel alleges he oversaw the 2002 suicide bombing of an Israeli-owned hotel in Kenya in which three Israelis were killed.

The killing of al-Masri was the result of a huge, year-long operation, that went off without a hitch, the Israeli report said. The New York Times story said he was shot dead in Tehran by two Israeli agents on a motorbike, who fired five bullets at close range.

Iran denies Israel killed al-Qaeda’s No. 2 in Tehran: ‘A Hollywood scenario’

Iran said Saturday that a New York Times report that al-Qaeda’s second-in-command was secretly killed in Tehran this summer by Israeli agents was based on “made-up information” and denied the presence of any of the group’s members on Iranian soil.

Iran’s foes, the United States and Israel, “try to shift the responsibility for the criminal acts of [al-Qaeda] and other terrorist groups in the region and link Iran to such groups with lies and by leaking made-up information to the media,” foreign ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said in a statement.

Khatibzadeh accused the US and “its allies in the region” of having created al-Qaeda through their “wrong policies” and advised US media to “not fall into the trap of American and Zionist officials’ Hollywood scenarios.”

The New York Times reported Friday that Abdullah Ahmad Abdullah, indicted in the United States for the 1998 bombings of its embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, was shot and killed in Tehran in August by two Israeli operatives on a motorcycle at Washington’s behest.

The senior al-Qaeda leader, who went by the nom de guerre Abu Muhammad al-Masri, was killed along with his daughter, Miriam, the widow of Osama bin Laden’s son Hamza, the Times said, citing intelligence sources.

Washington accused Tehran of harboring al-Qaeda members and of allowing them to pass through its territory in 2016, an accusation denied by Tehran officials at the time.

Are Israel and the US planning to attack Iran?

In 2008, after the election that brought former US president Barack Obama to power, there were some officials in Israel who were confident that the previous president, George W. Bush, would not leave office with Iran’s nuclear facilities still standing. They were wrong. Iran’s nuclear facilities are not only still standing; they have grown in quality and quantity.

This is important to keep in mind amid speculation – once again during a presidential lame duck period – that in his last few weeks in office, Donald Trump will either order US military action against Iran or give Israel a green light, as well as some assistance, to do so on its own.

The speculation has a number of catalysts. First was the firing of Mark Esper as secretary of defense this past week and the replacement of him and other top Pentagon officials with Trump ideologues. Some media outlets in the US have raised the possibility that Trump wanted to get Esper out of the way, so he could more easily carry out controversial military moves.

In addition, there is no doubt that there is a lot of coordination already taking place on Iran. Elliott Abrams, the administration’s top envoy on Iran, was in Israel this week for talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will be here next week for three days to continue those conversations; and on Thursday night, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kochavi held a video call with his US counterpart, chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley.

And then there was the interview that H.R. McMaster, Trump’s former national security adviser, gave to Fox News on Wednesday in which he raised the possibility that Israel – fearful of President-elect Joe Biden’s Iran policies – would attack Iran in the twilight of Trump’s term in office.

For veteran Israel-Iran watchers, this feels like a rerun of what happened in 2008 as well as in 2012 when Israel also seemed on the verge of an attack. While ministers later confirmed that Netanyahu had in fact wanted to launch an attack in 2012, he ultimately failed to muster support in the cabinet, so the IDF had no choice but to back down.

Europe's battle against Islamist terror – Jerusalem Studio 557

France has become a major battleground in the fight between governments of Europe -whose populations are mostly Christian, and Islamist terrorists - who are out to impose their ideology by all means possible.

The recent brutal attacks in France and Austria have reignited dialogue among European leaders to combat (what they term) political Islam.

Is it just a security problem, or a more fundamental one?

Will the measures taken by French and other authorities decrease the friction, or only increase it?

Panel: - Jonathan Hessen, Host. - Amir Oren, Analyst. - Dr. Ely Karmon, Senior researcher - The Institute for Counter Terrorism, IDC Herzliya - Colonel Richard Kemp, former British infantry commander and head of international terrorism intelligence team at the British Cabinet Office.

Israel signs official contract with Pfizer worth NIS 800 million

Israel signed a formal contract with Pfizer Inc. on Friday to receive eight million doses of its coronavirus vaccine candidate, if successful.

The Pfizer vaccine will cost the country NIS 800 million, Ynet reported – NIS 100 per dose or NIS 200 per person, as every person needs two doses to be protected.

Israel is meant to provide Pfizer with a NIS 120m. cash advance as early as this week and an additional NIS 680m. in January, when the vaccines are supposed to start arriving.

“This is a great day for the State of Israel and a great day on the way to our victory over the coronavirus,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday. “Today we see a light at the end of the tunnel.”

The contract, which was signed by Health Ministry Director-General Chezy Levy, Health Ministry Accountant Hassan Ismail and Pfizer’s vice president Janine Small, does not include any commitment by Pfizer to supply the vaccines to Israel. Rather, wrote Ynet, the contract includes only an intention to do so “according to circumstances.”

Israel was eager to get the Pfizer vaccine after the company announced last week that an interim evaluation of its Phase III study found the candidate to be 90% effective.

When Jews were wanted in Transjordan (update)

The King-Crane Commission report of 1919 detailed an estimate of the population of different areas of what they called "Occupied Enemy Territory Administration" of Levantine lands occupied by allies after World War I.

It includes a curious table showing the estimated population of each district of the OETA.

OETA East is roughly what became Transjordan.

King–Crane Commission population estimates
	OETA South	OETA West	OETA East	Totals
Muslims	515,000	600,000	1,250,000	2,365,000
Christians	62,500	400,000	125,000	587,500
Druses		60,000	80,000	140,000
Jews	65,000	15,000	30,000	110,000
Others	5,000	20,000	20,000	45,000
Totals	647,500	1,095,000	1,505,000
Grand Total				3,247,500

So what became of these 30,000 Jews?

I can find no record of any significant Jewish population in Transjordan. My guess is that these estimates were not grounded in any real censuses or research. Because if the British had expelled 30,000 Jews from Transjordan, I think there were be some records of it!

Another piece of evidence that these 30,000 Jews never really existed comes from the Palestine Bulletin, May 9. 1930, with a very interesting anecdote:

If a significant Jewish community of 30,000 were already there, they would have been mentioned.

Of course, the Zionist Jews had little interest in settling in Transjordan as a trade for settling in Eretz Yisrael. (Revisionist Zionists, of course, wanted land on both sides of the Jordan.)

(h/t Irene)

UPDATE: Here is the original Doar Hayom article (h/t Yoel):

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

11/13 Links Pt2: Melanie Phillips: The choice between love and hate; Prince Charles: I have lost a trusted guide, an inspired teacher and a friend; Introducing Muslim Zionism

From Ian:

Prince Charles: I have lost a trusted guide, an inspired teacher and a friend

The death of Rabbi Lord Sacks is the most profound loss to the Jewish community, to this nation and to the world. Those who knew him through his writings, sermons and broadcasts will have lost a source of unfailing wisdom, sanity and moral conviction in often bewildering and confusing times.

Those who, like myself, had the privilege of knowing him personally, have lost a trusted guide and an inspired teacher. I, for one, have lost a true and steadfast friend.

His family, most of all, have lost a great man whose devotion to them knew no bounds, and my heart goes out to them in their grief.

Over many years, I had come to value Rabbi Sacks’s counsel immensely. With his seemingly inexhaustible store of learning, his never-failing wisdom and his instinct for the power of the story in our lives, he could be relied upon to identify clearly the moral issues in question, and to define fearlessly the choices being faced.

The apparent ease with which he could cut through the confusion and clamour of our current concerns was grounded in his deep scholarship in both secular and religious disciplines, making him uniquely able to speak with conviction across boundaries of religion, culture and generations.

His life was distinguished by three commitments: commitment to listening to, and learning from, others without fear of compromising either his or their deeply held convictions; commitment to the institutions of the Nation which he nurtured through his own advocacy and participation; commitment to the integrity and harmony of God’s Creation, to Shalom.

Remembering Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (1948-2020)

Like so many young Jews, I first encountered Jonathan Sacks when I began asking serious questions about Judaism. At the time, he was the chief rabbi of a community an ocean away, but through his books—he would write dozens, at a pace of one per year—I had access to him as a high school student in New York.

I wasn’t the only one who did this. In college, a friend went to Harvard’s Widener Library, photocopied pages from the first edition of Sacks’ post-9/11 work The Dignity of Difference, and passed them around like contraband. (Rabbi Sacks’ expansive view of religious pluralism—and of the integrity of Christianity and Islam—had upset his ultra-Orthodox constituents at the time, and he subsequently gently revised the book to assuage them, even as he never abandoned his original position.) When he visited the states and spoke at MIT, many of us trekked across Cambridge to hear him.

For 22 years as chief rabbi, Sacks walked a tightrope as an Oxbridge-educated modern Orthodox rabbi tasked with representing a diverse Jewish community, both in official and unofficial capacity. As he wryly put it back in 1991, “There are many great Jewish leaders. There are very few great Jewish followers. So leading the Jewish people turns out to be very difficult.”

His tenure, however, was a success, spanning over two decades. In 2013, he surprised many by retiring as chief rabbi at age 65—not to recede from public life, but to pursue grander ambitions. That’s when I met him.

I interviewed Sacks for the first time shortly after he stepped down. I expected him to deftly sidestep some of my more pointed questions about politics and faith, but he surprised me by tackling most of them head-on. It soon became clear that this was one reason he had decided to depart his post. As he put it, “When you’re no longer captain of the team, you are much more able to express yourself as an individual.” Being freed from institutional constraints enabled him to reach and embrace broader parts of the Jewish community than he could when encumbered by the political sensitivities and geographic limitations of his office. He traveled the globe, taught at Yeshiva University and New York University, and made connections with Jews outside the Orthodox world—many of whom mourned his loss over the weekend.

But for all the tributes from people like me in the media, Sacks didn’t just talk to those with large platforms or celebrity. I know firsthand from friends how he emailed personally with students, elementary school teachers, and others who sought his guidance. I can only imagine the amount of correspondence he must have received, and cannot imagine how he managed to fit it into his schedule between his dozens of books, online videos, and speeches and media appearances around the globe.

Nuance: The critical legacy of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks – opinion

RABBI SACKS taught us that this art of nuance and disagreeing agreeably goes beyond the realm of the American election. It applies to every area of life, and is desperately needed in the complex reality called the Jewish State of Israel.

One can vehemently disagree with the religious practice of others while also standing up for their right to choose their own theology; one can believe that all of Israel belongs to the Jewish people while also caring deeply for the well-being of the Palestinian people; one can live in a settlement while also firmly hoping and striving for peace that may require relinquishing that community; one can believe that Torah study is the highest value while also supporting military service for all; one can be against racism and discrimination while also calling out the failings of Israel’s Arab population and their elected leaders; one can be proudly Left wing and Zionist, and one can be strongly Right wing and open-minded; one can support Benjamin Netanyahu for prime minister without suggesting that Benny Gantz or Yair Lapid are horrific human beings, and vice versa; and we can learn much from the example of friendships such as that between the late minister Uri Orbach from the right-wing and religious Jewish Home Party and MK Ilan Gilon from the left-wing and secular Meretz Party, both of whom labeled each other as “best friends.”

“Diversity is a sign of strength not weakness,” Rabbi Sacks once wrote in Jewish Action. “As the Netziv writes in his commentary to the Tower of Babel, uniformity of thought is not a sign of freedom but its opposite.... So difference, argument, clashes of style and substance are signs not of unhealthy division but of health.”

Divisive and polarizing rhetoric are reaching destructive levels worldwide, to the point that democratic systems and decent civilizations are at risk of total collapse. As we mourn the passing of Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, we must save the very foundations of civilized society by internalizing and putting into practice his lessons of nuance and tolerance.

12 lessons I learned from Rabbi Sacks

When I was a post-graduate student at Yeshiva University, Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks came as a visiting professor for the semester, teaching undergraduate students. Despite not being an undergraduate, I signed up. I knew this was an opportunity of once in a lifetime. Having listened to so many of his classes and adoring his teachings, I went to every class of his I could attend. From that semester, and following so many of his lectures, I found so many valuable lessons, speaking volumes of who he was, and giving me goals to aspire to. Here are some of them:

Education is everything- Rabbi Sacks loved children. His saying: "to defend a country, you need an army, to defend a civilization you need schools," resonated in Jewish day schools around the world. Rabbi Sacks was a brilliant intellectual, yet he made sure his works took the form of a family edition Covenant and Conversation for Shabbat dinners. Time and again, Rabbi Sacks spoke about Jewish education as the epicenter of our existence. Day schools, children, and Jewish education meant everything to him. History will record that day school enrollment in the United Kingdom during his tenure as chief rabbi has skyrocketed, something for which he gets a great deal of credit.

Love- Rabbi Sacks' life did not go on without controversy. He faced criticism from multiple directions. Yet those always fell by the wayside—not because Rabbi Sacks fought back or engaged in mudslinging or heavy debate; it was his way of love, kindness, and graciousness always prevailed. "When the Lord accepts a person's ways, He will cause even his enemies to make peace with him." (Proverbs 16). As Menachem Begin put it, "not in merit of power, but the power of merit." No attack on him was important enough for him to hit back at those who criticized him. No insult was a justification for self-defense.

I remember showing Rabbi Sacks' famous video "Why I am a Jew" to a group of Jewish 5th graders who did not study in a Jewish day school. The room was dark and quiet, and Rabbi Sacks' beautiful voice was resonating in the room. Suddenly one of the kids asked most innocently and beautifully: "Is that God speaking?" To carry the message of God, Rabbi Sacks radiated love, compassion, and care for every person; that is how he found his way to so many hearts.

I once came to Rabbi Sacks right before class with a book of his I had meant to give my grandmother for her birthday. I asked him if he can quickly autograph it if it was not a trouble. He asked what her name was and then went on to write her a beautiful and thoughtful note. Thoughts, wisdom, and ideas, can never go too far without the heart that comes with it. Rabbi Sacks embodied Eleanor Rosevelt's saying: "nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care." Even if you never met Rabbi Sacks, you knew he cared.

The Tikvah Podcast: Daniel Gordis on America, Israel, and the Sources of Jewish Resilience

The year 2020 has been one of real suffering. The Coronavirus has infected tens of millions the world over and has taken the lives of a quarter of a million Americans. It’s decimated the economy, shuttered businesses, brought low great cities, and immiserated millions who could not even attend funerals or weddings, visit the sick, or console the demoralized. This podcast focuses on how to think Jewishly about suffering and about the sources of Jewish fortitude in the face of tragedy and challenge. In his October 2020 Mosaic essay, “How America’s Idealism Drained Its Jews of Their Resilience,” Shalem College’s Daniel Gordis examines recent experiences of Jewish suffering and how different Jewish communities responded to it. In doing so, he makes the case that Jewish tradition and Jewish nationalism endow the Jewish soul with the resources to persevere in the face of adversity. Liberal American Jewish communities, by contrast, have no such resources to draw upon. He joins Jonathan Silver to discuss his essay and more.

On topics that have not been discussed on the blog:

I'd love to find the tweets where @KenRoth demanded that Europe and the US condition agreements with Iran on its human rights record. https://t.co/cDhwBsSulj
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 8, 2020

All you need to know about @Haaretzcom:

Its HEADLINE for the obituary for Rabbi Jonathan Sacks CRITICIZED him. But only praise in the obituary for serial liar and terror apologist Saeb Erekat. pic.twitter.com/4Z5wC1sr4k
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 10, 2020

Good Biden 1995 statement on Senate floor to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (video) https://t.co/KffNZTmnGf pic.twitter.com/Sgf5NlQB5B
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 9, 2020

Saeb Erekat was not the saint that people (like the @nytimes) are making him out to be. It would take an encyclopedia to catalog his egregious (often antisemtiic) lies and pro-terror positions. Here are only a few examples. https://t.co/bl2tKJvvu4 pic.twitter.com/ieQZj8dx0h
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 10, 2020

Far Left: "We can't handle the slightest opinion outside our echo chamber, especially when lots of people are agreeing with me and someone pointing out facts upsets us." pic.twitter.com/uYWPaV0wQF
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 12, 2020

Only a true antisemite like David Sheen would look at a couple of Orthodox Jews pumping their fists in the air (no straight arms, no outstretched hands) and say - wow, they look just like Nazis! pic.twitter.com/oEhNDzYA1F
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 12, 2020

What are the latest polls showing how happy the Iranian people are under your rule?

Oh, right, you wouldn't allow any.
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 7, 2020

Is there anything sadder than a Jew who is so "woke" that they throw out their own history to support their politics? https://t.co/k6SIurVRVk
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 10, 2020

Zionism isn't racism.

Anti-Zionism is.
— Elder of Ziyon 🇮🇱 (@elderofziyon) November 10, 2020

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.

11/13 Links Pt1: Caroline Glick: The approaching storm in US-Israel relations; Pompeo to visit West Bank settlement, Golan; Iran Is Already Saying No to Joe Biden

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: The approaching storm in US-Israel relations

Resolution 2234 was geared towards setting up Israeli leaders and civilians to be prosecuted as war criminals in the International Criminal Court by claiming baselessly that Israeli communities in unified Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria are illegal. In the words of the resolution, those communities and neighborhoods, which are home to more than 700,000 Israelis have "no legal validity," and "constitute a flagrant violation under international law."

President Trump's recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's determination last November that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria are not illegal were of a piece with the Trump administration's attempt to nullify Resolution 2234, at least from a domestic US perspective. A Biden administration will ignore the Pompeo Doctrine and the State Department's legal opinion substantiating his position just as Obama ignored Trump's repeated statements of opposition to 2234 in the weeks before its passage.

Driving home their plan to pick up where Obama left off, Biden, Harris, and their advisers have all said they will reinstate the Obama administration's demand that Israel bars Israeli Jews from asserting their property rights to build homes and communities in Judea and Samaria.

As for Jerusalem, while Biden has said that he will not close the US Embassy in Jerusalem and reinstate the embassy in Tel Aviv, he has pledged to reopen the US consulate in Jerusalem to serve Palestinians. Until Trump recognized that Jerusalem as Israel's capital, the US Consulate in Jerusalem operated independently of the embassy. The US consul in Jerusalem was not accredited by the Israeli president because the US refused to acknowledge that Jerusalem is located inside Israel.

Although Biden congratulated Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain on signing the Abraham Accords – which Sudan has since joined as well – his advisers have spoken of them derisively. This week, Tommy Vietor, who served as National Security Council spokesman under Obama, spoke derisively of the normalization deals, which just weeks after the accords were signed have already blossomed into a deep and enthusiastic partnership and alliance encompassing private citizens and government ministries in all participating countries.

Vietor said they were not peace deals but a mere vehicle for the UAE to acquire F-35s. Vietor then alleged that the UAE wants to use the deals to help Saudi Arabia win its war against the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen.

Biden, Harris, and their advisers have pledged to end US support for Saudi Arabia in the war and to reassess the US-Saudi alliance.

If implemented, these policies will not end the Saudi war against the Houthis. They will end the US-Saudi alliance. For the Saudis, the war against the Houthis is not a war of choice, it is an existential struggle. The Houthis are an Iranian proxy regime. Their control over the strait of Bab el-Mandeb threatens all maritime oil shipments from the Red Sea. Houthi missile strikes already temporarily disabled Saudi Arabia's main oil terminal and have hit Saudi cities. If the US ends its alliance, the Saudis will continue their war and replace their alliance with the US with an alliance with China.

Caroline Glick: The 2020 Election Has Been Terrible for the Jews

No matter who ultimately wins the presidential election, the Jews in America are the big losers. As Professor Ruth Wisse of Harvard has long explained, Jews are the bellwether for the health of democracies. Hatred of Jews rises in societies whose democratic institutions and values are in crisis. Jew-hatred is generally low in healthy, working democracies.

If we learned nothing else from the election campaign and its aftermath, we learned American democracy is in crisis.

The media is the first force responsible for this crisis. For the past four years, all major U.S. television networks and national newspapers have dedicated themselves not to reporting news, but to defining the boundaries of acceptable public discourse. Big Tech firms—Facebook, Google and Twitter, in particular, having amassed powers the KGB could only have dreamed of—serve as the enforcers of those boundaries.

The goal of all media corporations has been the same: to overturn the results of the 2016 election. To advance this goal, the media have demonized President Donald Trump and his supporters for four straight years. The shared conviction has been that by subjecting the public to continuous indoctrination to hate Trump and his supporters, Trump would disappear from the White House, whether through a prolonged special counsel probe, impeachment or defeat at the polls.

Nearly all the stories about Trump and his supporters have been negative for the past four years. Consequently, while most Americans never heard that Trump conceived and implemented an entirely new foreign policy doctrine that has met more success than any adopted since the end of the Cold War, all Americans know that the media expect them to believe Trump is a racist. They know that the media expect right-thinking Americans to hate Trump and his supporters, and admire his opponents, from Nancy Pelosi to Black Lives Matter (BLM).

David Singer: Trump-Netanyahu Mapping Committee needs to deliver the map

Trump still has until 20 January 2021 left in his present term to try and bring his Plan to fruition.

Trump – unlike Clinton, Bush and Obama - has been unable to get the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to negotiate with Israel on his Plan.

However Trump can still materially advance his Plan by: - releasing the Mapping Committee’s map showing the areas of Judea and Samaria where Israeli sovereignty can be applied now - procuring consent to that map by Egypt, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Bahrein and Sudan who have all normalized their relationships with Israel - getting other Arab states to normalize their relationships with Israel and agree to the Mapping Committee’s proposals - attempting to get the PLO to negotiate with Israel and - giving Israel the green light to apply sovereignty when it considers appropriate

Trump begun his presidency by visiting Saudi Arabia and pledging to bring peace to the Middle East.

During his Presidency - Trump took significant steps to recognise Israel’s claim to Judea and Samaria by determining that: - Israeli settlements located there were not inconsistent with international law - the US would not distinguish between Israel and Judea and Samaria in its future dealings with Israel

Early release of the Mapping Committee’s map will ensure Trump’s momentum for peace continues full speed ahead until at least 20 January 2021 - and beyond if re-elected for a second term.

Kamala Harris may become the first woman vice president of color, but she is not the first VP of color. That distinction goes to Charles Curtis:

Charles Curtis (January 25, 1860 – February 8, 1936) was an American attorney and Republican politician from Kansas who served as the 31st vice president of the United States from 1929 to 1933 becoming the first minority to hold the office and Senate Majority Leader from 1924 to 1929. A member of the Kaw Nation born in the Kansas Territory, Curtis was the first person with any Native American ancestry and with acknowledged non-European ancestry to reach either of the highest offices in the federal executive branch. He is the highest-ranking enrolled Native American ever to serve in the federal government. He is the most recent Executive Branch officer to have been born in a territory rather than a state.

It turns out that Curtis was also a fervent Zionist - and he was instrumental in getting the US government to support the Balfour Declaration. From JTA, October 22. 1928:

Senator Charles Curtis, Republican candidate for vice-president, was disclosed as the prime mover of the resolution adopted by Congress in June 1922 endorsing the Balfour Declaration, in an article by Max Rhoade, published in the current issue of the “Jewish Tribune.”

The writer, who lives in Washington, has, he declares, intimate knowledge of the history preceding the adoption of the resolution.

“The most important and interesting of these facts is that neither Lodge nor Fish but quite another person was the original sponsor of the resolution in Congress” writes Mr. Rhoade, “and it was his preparatory work that paved the way for its ultimate adoption. This ‘person’ was none other than Senator Charles Curtis of Kansas, who is now Republican candidate for Vice-President of the United States.

“The story goes back to the fall of 1921 when a certain Orthodox rabbi, Simon Glazer by name, then Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Greater Kansas City, decided, in his fervent Jewish patriotism and zeal, to establish some contacts which might lead to an official pronouncement of sympathy with the carrying of the Balfour Declaration by the United States Government through its then Republican administration, and thus clear the way for ratification of the Palestine Mandate. Gradually, Rabbi Glazer’s thoughts materialized into the idea of a resolution of Congress. Though untrained in the school of politics or diplomacy, the rabbi was gifted with rare instincts in that direction. He proceeded to establish acquaintance with Governor Henry J. Allen of Kansas, and laid his thoughts fully before him. The governor was completely won over by Rabbi Glazer’s enthusiasm and deep sincerity, and promised to exert every effort to enlist Senator Curtis of that State.”

Mr. Rhoade contnues: “Senator Curtis thereupon entered into negotiations with the State Department regarding the resolution, with the object of obtaining full sanction of that department. He took the matter up direct with Secretary of State Hughes. While these negotiations were still pending, a delegation of New England Zionists, under the direction of the Zionist Organization of America, presented the plan of such a resolution to Senator Lodge. Elihu D. Stone, assistant U. S. attorney, of Boston, now chairman of the National Executive Committee of the Zionist Organization of America, took the leading part in organizing this delegation and arranging the conference with Lodge. It was agreed as a result of this conference that Senator Lodge, owing to his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, should officially introduce the resolution. Senator Curtis readily consented to this arrangement in his desire to do anything that might facilitate the accomplishment of the object in view. Thus Senator Lodge became known as the official sponsor of the resolution, while Senator Curtis remained in the background. Curtis’ negotiations with the State Department, however, had already prepared the way for the resolution when Senator Lodge appeared on the scene.”

After the Hebron pogroms against Jews in 1929, Curtis said:

The Jews of Palestine have my sincere sympathy. It is my earnest hope that order may be speedily restored and the Jews fully protected in all their rights I hope the good work of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency may be amply rewarded. I know the officials of our government will do everything possible to protect American citizens in Palestine.

He also was at the launch of the American Palestine Committee, a Zionist lobbying group started in 1932.

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.

Obituaries about Saeb Erekat invariably emphasized how dedicated he was to peace, to a two state solution, and to finding a way to end the conflict.

Typical is this NPR article:

But Erekat had his admirers, including Joel Singer, one of his Israeli negotiating counterparts during the Oslo process.

"I see him as a courageous Palestinian who devoted his life to reaching peace with Israel, peace on terms that would be acceptable to the Palestinian people," said Singer. "But yet unlike some other Palestinian groups that don't want to reach peace with Israel, he genuinely wanted to reach peace and never gave up."

Peace did not come in Erekat's lifetime – something he reflected on in his conversation with NPR in 2010.

"We have come a long way. We have come a long way," Erekat told NPR, referring to both Palestinians and Israelis. "We are different people. Unfortunately, we don't have peace."

Current and former Western leaders similarly described Erekat as dedicated to peace, This statement from Tony Blair is typical:

Saeb Erekat and I had many differences over the peace process and how to bring it to a successful conclusion. But I never doubted for one moment his sincerity, his knowledge or his deep and abiding commitment to the Palestinian people and to peace. He was a legendary negotiator, aware of every intricacy and detail of the ‘two state solution’ and a tireless advocate of it. He dedicated his life to the cause of an independent sovereign State of Palestine and it is tragic that he never lived to see it come into being. But when it does, he will remembered as one of its core architects. My thoughts and condolences are with his family. May he rest in peace.

Now look at the obituary from the PLO's Negotiations Affairs Department, that Erekat headed:

With heart-wrenching sadness and pain, today we bid farewell to Dr. Saeb Erekat. The fierce fighter, proud patriot, human being, compassionate father, friend, and an exceptional colleague. Especially in this challenging phase in our cause's history, we will miss a stubborn and dedicated fighter for Palestine.
Dr. Erekat devoted his life to defending and fighting for the achievement of our right to freedom, self-determination, national independence, and the return of Palestine's refugees. His memory will remain eternal enlightening his people's conscience until the fulfillment of what he fought with them to achieve: the end of Israel's brutal occupation and the realization of Palestine's independence with Jerusalem as its capital.
We pray to Almighty God to bless Dr. Erekat with the breadth of his mercy and to dwell in his spaciousness. Our sincere condolences to Dr. Erekat's family and the people of Palestine. May God grants all of us patience and solace to bear this significant loss.

Not a word about "peace" or "dialogue" or "two state solution".

Similarly, see what PA president Abbas said about him:

The President of the State of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas, today, Tuesday, in his name and in the name of the Palestinian leadership and the government, mourned to the masses of our people and our Arab and Islamic nation, and friends in the world, the great national leader and the martyr of Palestine, the Secretary of the Executive Committee of the PLO, a member of the Central Committee of Fatah, and a prominent academic Saeb Erekat, who spent his life as a fighter and a hard negotiator defending Palestine, its cause, its people, and its independent national decision.

President Abbas said, "The departure of the brother and friend, the great fighter, Dr. Saeb Erekat, represents a great loss to Palestine and our people, and we feel deeply saddened by his loss, especially in light of these difficult circumstances facing the Palestinian cause."

The president added, "Palestine today misses this patriotic leader, and the great fighter who had a great role in raising the banner of Palestine high and defending the rights of our people and their national constants, in all international forums, and he had a prominent role when he was a member of the Palestinian delegation at the Madrid conference for peace in 1991, Minister of Local Government, and his tireless work as Chairman of the Negotiations Department of the PLO, and a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council for two consecutive terms, culminating in his tenure as a secretariat and membership of the Executive Committee of the PLO."

And the president added: Our people will remember the great deceased Dr. Saeb Erekat, the righteous son of Palestine, who stood at the forefront defending the causes of his homeland and his people in the fields of work and the national struggle and in the international arena."

He mentions the Madrid peace conference but doesn't say anything about Erekat and peacemaking.

It seems that people project their own feelings and desires onto Erekat and by reading their descriptions of him, they are really describing themselves.

The PLO leaders, by virtually ignoring the word "peace" when describing Erekat, show that they are the ones who never wanted real peace. To them, associating Erekat with peace would be an insult, not a compliment.

(h/t Daniel Rubenstein)

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.