Amnesty International has documented unnecessary and excessive force used by Israeli police to disperse Palestinian protests against forced evictions in East Jerusalem as well as against the Gaza offensive. The protests were mostly peaceful though a minority attacked police property and threw stones. In contrast, Jewish supremacists continue to organize demonstrations freely. On 15 June thousands of Jewish settlers and supremacists marched provocatively through Palestinian neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem.
Friday, June 25, 2021
- Friday, June 25, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
- Amnesty, antisemitism, Big Lie, glorifying terror, Jewish supremacy, Leila Khaled, NGO lies, Saleh Hijazi, supporting terror
- Friday, June 25, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
The prohibition of using human shields in the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol I and the Statute of the International Criminal Court are couched in terms of using the presence (or movements) of civilians or other protected persons to render certain points or areas (or military forces) immune from military operations.
Most examples given in military manuals, or which have been the object of condemnations, have been cases where persons were actually taken to military objectives in order to shield those objectives from attacks. The military manuals of New Zealand and the United Kingdom give as examples the placing of persons in or next to ammunition trains. There were many condemnations of the threat by Iraq to round up and place prisoners of war and civilians in strategic sites and around military defence points. Other condemnations on the basis of this prohibition related to rounding up civilians and putting them in front of military units in the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Liberia.
These seem to indicate that Hamas must coerce civilians to protect military sites, or at the very least not allow them to leave, to be guilty of human shielding.
Placing military targets among civilians is still a war crime - mentioned as such in the Rome Statute Article 8 (2) (b) (xxiii) - but it is unclear if it is considered human shielding. The ICC's explanation of that law indicates that it is:
Article 8 (2) (b) (xxiii)
War crime of using protected persons as shieldsElements
1. The perpetrator moved or otherwise took advantage of the location of one or more civilians or other persons protected under the international law of armed conflict.
2. The perpetrator intended to shield a military objective from attack or shield, favour or impede military operations.
3. The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with an international armed conflict.
4. The perpetrator was aware of factual circumstances that established the existence of an armed conflict.
I cannot find a clear answer on whether placing military objects in civilian areas is human shielding. The wording of the ICRC and ICC explanations indicates it is, but no one mentions this an an example.
However, the Shields Act of Congress seems to limit itself only to cases where people are actively placed in danger:
Each foreign person that the President determines, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act— ... (A) is a member of Hamas or is knowingly acting on behalf of Hamas; and
(B) knowingly orders, controls, or otherwise directs the use of civilians protected as such by the law of war to shield military objectives from attack.
Hamas has done this in the past - threatening people not to leave an area after Israel dropped leaflets warning them to leave - but I have not read about any coercion in last month's war, which the Shields Act seems to require for sanctions.
It seems that Hamas did commit the crime of human shielding last month - we saw tunnels deliberately built under apartment complexes, schools and shops - but did not violate the conditions mentioned in the Shields Act.
It seems the Shields Act needs to be re-written to include the more expansive definition of human shields.
Thursday, June 24, 2021
Underdog appeal: Why the West loves the Palestinian narrative
The pile-on of the left against the Jewish state has with little doubt been fueled by the end of the apartheid era in South Africa in 1994. For self-styled progressives of the Left, always in want of a cause, Israel-Palestine was a no-brainer; in fact, it was there waiting. The verbal artifacts of this period, specifically “racism,” “apartheid” and “colonialism” were ready-made and easily adapted to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by leftist ideologues. These have been joined with additional charges of “war crimes,” “crimes against humanity,” “murder of children” and “genocide” in creating the image of a society that is the epitome of evil.Biden Admin Walks Back U.S. Recognition of Golan Heights as Israeli Territory
The impunity with which these baseless and fallacious allegations have been leveled is facilitated by the fading significance of the Holocaust. Ironically, though, Holocaust inversion rhetoric, i.e. what the Nazis did to the Jews, the Jews are now doing to the Palestinians, is also employed in the malicious campaign to defame Israel. Israelis are today’s Nazis.
The ability of otherwise well-meaning people to buy into this narrative and to look the other way at, if not actually applaud, the incessant bombardment of civilian Israeli communities, requires on their part a powerful selective filtering of reality. The throngs of pro-Palestinian Western marchers and protesters see past the terrorist organization’s war crimes and focus only on the unfortunate non-combatant residents of Gaza, who themselves are victims of Hamas.
It is like those who only saw Bonnie and Clyde as a daring young couple standing up to a corrupt justice system. This is only possible for people who view the perceived underdog and social justice as synonymous; no more need be known nor asked. The underdog is blameless. That is the bite of the underdog.
What can Israel do? In the short term there is nothing Israel can do to alter the equation in its favor. Israel is now Goliath, the Palestinians are David. That image is accepted by most of the world. But if Israel continues to advance diplomatic relations with her Muslim neighbors, it is reasonable that they would concede the need for the Palestinians to also recognize Israel’s legitimacy and negotiate a mutually acceptable settlement. Diplomatic and even economic pressure from Arab countries at peace with Israel could serve as catalyst for positive change among the Palestinian leadership and within Palestinian society. If we are fortunate enough to arrive at that stage, the hateful rhetoric and deceitful imagery that is today the Palestinian narrative will simply lose relevance. The underdog will have wandered off.
The Biden administration is walking back the United States' historic recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the contested Golan Heights region along Israel's northern border, a significant blow to the Jewish state and one of the Trump administration's signature foreign policy decisions.Meghan McCain Presses Bernie Sanders On Anti-Israel Rhetoric Of The Progressive ‘Squad’
The Trump administration declared the territory—seized by Israel from Syria in 1967 and later annexed by the country—to be wholly part of the Jewish state in 2019. Then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo took a trip to the area in 2020 and reaffirmed that America formally abandoned a decades-long policy of considering the area occupied.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken first raised questions about the Biden administration's view on the matter in February, when he would not say if his State Department continues to abide by the former administration's decision. At the time, Blinken would only say the Golan Heights "remains of real importance to Israel's security," but that its formal status remains unclear. Pressed on the issue by the Washington Free Beacon, a State Department official said the territory belongs to no one and control could change depending on the region's ever-shifting dynamics.
The shift in policy is already causing outrage among Republican lawmakers who backed the Trump administration's decision and hoped to see it continue. It is also likely to rankle Israeli leaders of all political stripes, the plurality of whom say the Golan Heights is absolutely vital to Israel's security in light of persistent threats from the Iran-backed Hezbollah terror group in Lebanon and other militant forces stationed in war-torn Syria.
"The secretary was clear that, as a practical matter, the Golan is very important to Israel's security," a State Department official told the Free Beacon. "As long as [Bashar al-Assad] is in power in Syria, as long as Iran is present in Syria, militia groups backed by Iran, the Assad regime itself—all of these pose a significant security threat to Israel, and as a practical matter, the control of the Golan remains of real importance to Israel's security."
Recognizing Israel's control as a "practical matter," however, falls far short of the formal policy change ordered by the Trump administration, which became the first government to recognize Israel's complete control over the territory. As it stands now, U.S. policy on the matter is unclear, at best.
Meghan McCain called out Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) during an episode of “The View” over his relationship with controversial progressive members of the Democratic Party.
“You are the Godfather of ‘The Squad.’ You’re a hyper-progressive socialist, and you’re talking about social justice before it was cool,” McCain said. “But it feels like the squad today has moved even to the Left of you. How is it for you to stand by everything AOC, Rashida Talib, and Ilhan Omar have said and done, particularly when it comes to Israel and talking about ‘From the river to the sea’ and the extermination of Israel, as a right to exist? Or do you think the movement, which you started, has moved away from what you envisioned?”
Sanders responded, “Well Meghan, first of all, I don’t believe that’s what they’re saying, and second of all, it’s not my job to have to defend every member of Congress, any more than it is their job to defend every statement that I make.”
The senator went on to discuss his work on a budget, as well as efforts to rebuild infrastructure and create good jobs, citing policy initiatives that varied from taxes to child care.
“I think the … progressives in the House are doing a very good job standing up for working families,” Sanders said. “It’s not my job to comment on everything that any member of the House says, any more [than] it is for them to comment on what I say.”
Know how it’s done? Like this! pic.twitter.com/bJrkudvOrA
— The Conspiracy Libel (@ConspiracyLibel) June 24, 2021
- Thursday, June 24, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
- humor, Preoccupied
Berkeley, June 27 - Undergraduates across the country who hide their Jew-hate behind opposition to Israel expressed anticipation and enthusiasm for a post-COVID restoration of a routine that social distancing had disrupted, with specific anxiousness to bring back experiences that Zoom had replaced during the pandemic such as physical attendance of classes and face-to-face bullying of Jews under the pretext of protesting Israeli actions.
Self-proclaimed "anti-Zionist" students here at the University of California at Berkeley and and at college campuses across the country voiced their excitement this week at the prospect of a full return to normal, which for them involves actual presence in a lecture hall and the regular harassment of Jews on- and off-campus, as they exercise their animus toward those of the Hebraic persuasion by couching it in the more socially and politically accepted idiom of opposition to the Israeli government, its alleged policies, or other libels.
"It's been a tough year," acknowledged Jewish Voice for Peace activist Muhammad Bakri, who attends Berkeley. "Getting together on a screen to learn, or to rail against Jewish settlers or against ethnic cleansing just doesn't provide the same experience, or the same emotional rush as getting in the face of a Jew because I'm convinced that other Jews somewhere else have done something horrible to brown people. I can't wait to get back to that kind of fulfilling education and activism."
"My posters calling for BDS have been sitting in my room for months and months," lamented Charlize Beckett, a member of both of Students for Justice in Palestine and If Not Now and a student at Ohio State University. "I miss carrying them around campus and shouting at people I think are Zionists, on my way to class. I miss putting provocative messages on placards and challenging random people to condemn Israel or get called ethnic-cleansing apologists, Nakba-deniers, or white supremacists. You can't do that online, even on Twitter."
Faculty members displayed similar relief at finally being able to bring their antisemitic-dressed-up-as-anti-Israel-concern-for-human-rights diatribes and conduct back to the classroom. "During the pandemic closures and distance-learning I could still schedule exams for Jewish holidays," noted Oberlin University Professor of Sociology Cassandra Blohardt. "I could also try to single out students with Jewish-sounding names and berate them for not denouncing Israel. But on Zoom it just comes out wrong and you don't get the same effect as in the physical presence of a room full of other students, all condoning my actions with their silence and isolating the target of my projection. I want that Jewish student to feel intimidated, judged, and alone, like Israel."
Gerald Steinberg: 20 Years after the UN’s Durban event, the antisemitism continues to grow
We now stand 20 years later, and the Durban NGO strategy is being implemented through attacks on different fronts. Poisonous “apartheid weeks,” featuring the same NGOs and their anti-Israel slogans, are annual events on university campuses, inciting attacks on Jewish students who identify with Israel. Human Rights Watch and their allies, such as Al Haq, as well as some radical Israeli NGOs generously funded by European governments to act as political sub-contractors, continue to market the “apartheid” slogan, including a recent campaign and report that used the term 200 times, and received widespread media coverage, with no justification. Now, they have combined under the false banners of intersectionality and solidarity, adding the term “Jewish supremacy” to the poisonous agenda. Antisemitic attacks are at the highest levels since the end of the Holocaust. And in parallel, the NGO network is pushing a well-funded propaganda campaign to dismantle the IHRA working definition, disguised as an alternative “Jerusalem definition” without the Israel-related examples, precisely because it is the most effective mechanism for defeating the Durban strategy.Pressure on Europe about Palestinian textbooks is working
As if the current plague of antisemitism is insufficient, the UN Human Rights Council is planning a conference to revive and “celebrate” Durban, likely to be held in September 2021. In 2009, the major democracies stayed away from Durban 2 in Geneva, and under the leadership of NGO Monitor and like-minded groups, the NGO Forum was cancelled. Durban 3 in 2011 was also a non-event, but now, the anti-Israel majority of the UN Human Rights Council, under the leadership of Michelle Bachelet, is trying again. While the US, Canada, Australia and the UK have announced a boycott, others, particularly in Europe have not.
For the Jewish people, the scars of the original Durban events remain very painful, and the powerful UN and NGO network that hijacked the human rights agenda in order to demonize Israel continues to spread its poison. For world leaders who claim to oppose antisemitism, their complicity and silence in the wake of the virulent targeting of Israel and the Jewish people has already gone too far. Saying no to another Durban hate fest is the least they can do.
In December, speaking at the opening of the weekly Cabinet meeting held in Ramallah, P.A. Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh told his colleagues: “The Palestinian curriculum is the product of our history, culture, struggle, religion and contribution to civilization, which we held on to at the negotiating table and which we will not give up.”The Joshua and Caleb Network: Can Israel Take the Pressure of Iran's New Butcher?
He added, according to the Palestinian news agency WAFA: “Those who link their assistance to us to this, then we will finance our curriculum from our budget.”
Last year, following a vote by parliamentarians to withhold some funding if the curriculum wasn’t changed to become more inclusive, the P.A. made noises that it would instigate some changes. But when the education minister addressed his colleagues, he made it clear that the narrative of Palestinian armed resistance to Israel would be amplified, not reduced.
This means that education could well become the issue that breaks the Mephistophelian pact between the E.U. and the P.A.
It is clear to any sensible person that teaching Palestinian children to fear and hate Israelis, and to engage in the violent destruction of Israel, is no basis on which to build a two-state solution. Not only is it detrimental to Israel, but it is deeply wounding to the children themselves, who are given no hope of a bright future within their own state. The E.C., whose commitment to the Palestinian cause is ideological, has nowhere to hide on this issue.
Meanwhile, the P.A.—whose senior members have grown fabulously wealthy from all the funding poured into their coffers—is trapped between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, if they give in to demands to deliver a fit-for-purpose curriculum, the drive behind their Palestinian nationalist narrative will quickly falter, leading eventually to normalization with Israel and to their rule being toppled in favor of true moderate rule. On the other, if they brazen it out and have funding pulled, they risk an impoverished Palestinian population turning on them.
Either way, the true winners in both scenarios would be the children of Palestine, who might, at last, have a chance of receiving a reasonable education, setting them up for a prosperous life. Which is precisely why the pressure on the E.C. must not let up at any cost.
Israel has a new government in place, and it’s confusing! Is the new prime minister liberal or conservative? The answer….is yes! Find out all the details on today’s program.
At the same time, the United States is attempting to install an anti-Israel Consulate General in Jerusalem. And they are attempting to re-negotiate a deal with Iran, who just elected a “butcher” for their president.
Can Israel stand up to all of this pressure, and do what is necessary to keep their nation safe?
- Thursday, June 24, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
- analysis, Daled Amos
Last year I wrote a post about David Bar-Illan and his 1993 book, Eye on the Media: A Look At World News Coverage of Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict. The book was based on a column he regularly wrote for the Jerusalem Post. Skimming through his book, I realized how little has changed over the past 30 years.
Sheikh Jarrah
The issue of Sheikh Jarrah concerns the case in the Israeli courts involving documented Jewish property rights dating back to Jewish land purchases made in 1875. Following Jordan's participation in the 1948 war, it claimed Yehudah and Shomron (the "West Bank") as its own, expelling the Jewish residents and seizing their property. During the Six Day War in 1967, Israel recaptured that territory. In the cases where Jordan officially transferred title of the formerly Jewish-owned property to Palestinian Arabs, Israel allowed the Arab owner to remain -- despite the fact that the Arab ownership was based on the forcible taking of land in a war of aggression followed by the ethnic cleansing of Jews. In other cases, where there was a dispute over the title of ownership but Jordan never gave legal title to the Arabs, the Israeli courts followed the unbroken rights of Jewish plaintiffs and returned their property to them.
Now rewind back to July 5, 1991, when Bar-Ilan wrote a post entitled Raw Diehl (p. 187-190). The title refers to Jackson Diehl, now the deputy editorial page editor of The Washington Post. Back. Back then, he was a journalist for the paper.
Bar-Ilan writes:
On May 14, the Washington Post published a story he filed from "Artas, the West Bank," headlined "Israel boosts land seizures--takes over land that West Bank Arabs have long farmed," and subtitled "Rush of confiscations appear linked to new Jewish settlements." It makes 14 highly damaging allegations against the State of Israel.
Since Mr. Diehl did not find it necessary to investigate these allegation, they are repeated below--with the truth thrown in as a public service.
State-owned land, including land claimed as such by British and Jordanian authorities, is 40 to 50 percent of the total acreage of Judea and Samaria. If this around 10 percent was declared government-owned by Israel.
California’s Proposed Curriculum Guide In Ethnic Studies
Despite a rash of recent anti-Jewish hate crimes, including shootings at temples in Pittsburgh in 2018 and near San Diego, Calif., in April, the curriculum omits “any meaningful discussion” of anti-Semitism, the letter said. It omits Jewish contributions to American culture, even as it includes such contributions from Americans of African, Native, Arab, and Latin descent, it said.
“We cannot support a curriculum that erases the American Jewish experience, fails to discuss antisemitism, reinforces negative stereotypes about Jews, singles out Israel for criticism, and would institutionalize the teaching of antisemitic stereotypes in our public schools,” the caucus’ letter said.
...The Jewish Caucus, and Jewish organizations, also took issue with the way the curriculum depicts Israel and the Palestinian-led “boycott, divestment, and sanctions” movement that’s designed to pressure the country to change its approach to Palestinians. Likening BDS to movements such as BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo, the curriculum says it is a “global social movement that currently aims to establish freedom for Palestinians living under apartheid conditions.”
“The glossary ... parrots more BDS talking points while offering no critical perspectives about this campaign of hate, which seeks to end Israel’s existence,” Batsheva Kasdan of Los Angeles said in remarks submitted through the state’s public-comment portal. [emphasis added]
The New York Times has its widely criticized 1619 Project Curriculum, redefining that year -- when the first African slaves were brought here -- as the founding of America and claiming that the real reason the American Revolution was fought was to preserve slavery.
At a time when the moral imperative is to “be less white,” there is no identity more pernicious than that of a once powerless minority group that, rather than joining the struggle to dismantle whiteness, opted into it.
In the critical social justice paradigm, that is how Jews are viewed. Jews, who have never been seen as white by those for whom being white is a moral good, are now seen as white by those for whom whiteness is an unmitigated evil. This reflects the nature of antisemitism: No matter the grievance or the identity of the aggrieved, Jews are held responsible. Critical race theory does not merely make it easy to demonize Jews using the language of social justice; it makes it difficult not to. [emphasis added]
What makes the media particularly effective is that they do not restrict their Israel-bashing to news channels. Newsweek, for example, which has portrayed Israelis as drug-addicted wife-beaters who spend American aid money ($1,000 a year for every Israeli!) on Jacuzzis, also provides a social studies program for American schools. With characteristic even-handedness, its The Middle East: Tug of War, used in schools throughout the U.S., flatly states, "Yasser Arafat has made tremendous concessions in hopes of bringing Israel to the negotiating table."
In the June issue of the excellent American Jewish bimonthly Moment, Charles Jacobs exposes the extent of blatant anti-Israel and antisemitic propaganda in American teaching materials, some of which are produced by the media. The Public Broadcasting Service (producers of the McNeil-Lehrer Show seen on Israel's Channel 2) distributes a teachers' guide for a study unit titled Arab and Jew: Wounded Spirits in a Promised Land.
Among its many gems there is the contention, a favorite of Israeli leftists, that Arabs and Jews are equally guilty of terrorism. Arab operations against civilians, the only kind that truly meet the definition of terrorism, cost the lives of thousands of Jews and Arabs in the riots of 1920, 1929, 1936-1939, and thousands more in PLO operations and the current intifada. It is never mentioned.
But far more dangerous than these gross historical distortions is the assertion in the PBS guide that "In Jewish eyes, the Arab is dirty, lazy, thieving, incompetent and uppity." In short, Jews are racists. As Jacobs puts it, "it is not difficult to see how a black child in an American classroom would react to these hateful words -- dirty, lazy thieving, incompetent and uppity --words often unfairly aimed at blacks. How could any minority student not be enraged at such hateful people?"
To make sure that the racism charge and the analogy to American racism sink in, the guide includes a study question: "What are some of the patterns of discrimination between Jews and Arabs that exist between groups in other countries, including blacks and whites in the U.S.?" [emphasis added]
IfNotNow
...it is doubtful a bona fide politician would last long in the Jewish world after writing, "The Jewish community is racist, internally corrupt, and an apologist for the worst aspects of American capitalism and imperialism." Or "Black antisemitism is...a tremendous disgrace to Jews; for this is not an antisemitism rooted in...hatred of the Christ-killers but rather one rooted in the concrete fact of oppression by Jews of blacks in the ghetto...an earned antisemitism" Or, "The synagogue as currently established will have to be smashed." [emphasis added]
In response to Alexander’s article, Lerner said that he was sorry he had made those statements, but they were part of his “adolescent rebellion,” although he was 27 at the time.
...he organized advertisements in American newspapers calling on Israel to 'end the occupation.' He also likes to tell plain Jews how to pray. Tikkun publishes its own Haggada, in which a prayer has been added before the Kiddush: "This year the Jewish people itself has become the symbol of oppression," it asserts. And in another addition to the Pessah service it says "The Land of Israel, which gives bread to two peoples, must be divided in two."In an interview in The Washington Post Lerner stated that on Yom Kippur the Jews had "a great deal to repent for in light of the action of the State of Israel." [emphasis added]
...In a May 23, 1991, article in The Los Angeles Times he wrote, "Israeli activists privately tell me that should Israeli intransigence block the progress of the impending peace conference, American peace activists should do everything in our power to convince Secretary of State Baker to pull out all the stops and pressure Israel....Rabbi Bernard Mandelbaum, president emeritus of the Jewish Theological Seminary, where Lerner studied in the 1960s, brands Lerner's writing "vicious, antisemitic and anti-Israel. He has come as close to anyone in the Jewish community to comparing Israel's treatment of Arabs to the Nazi treatment of Jews. Tikkun produces a steady stream of ant-Israel bias and poison." [emphasis added]
- Thursday, June 24, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
He charges Jews control of the media and dual loyalty: “It is an insult that the State of Israel through its agents here in Chile wants to import the strife” ... “they have to learn and define if they are Chilean citizens.”Last year, Recoleta’s Municipal Council passed a resolution stating, “Palestinian people have been the victim of a deliberate plan of violence and terror by armed Zionist groups ...”Jadue insists, “... The leaders of the Jewish community in Chile act on behalf of the State of Israel in Chile …,” adding, “I get along very well with the Jews, with the Zionist I have certain problems.”Jadue is always referring to Chile’s Jews as the “Zionist” community of Chile.At a time of soaring global anti-Semitism and Islamist terrorism striking from France to the Philippines, Jadue insults three Abrahamic Faiths: “If you are born into a Jewish family, you can legitimately believe that you are part of the Chosen People and you can kill the Palestinians to stay with their lands’ possession…
- Thursday, June 24, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
U.S. Sixth Fleet formally announces participation in the upcoming annually held Exercise Sea Breeze 2021 (SB21) cohosted with the Ukrainian Navy, June 21, 2021.The exercise is taking place from June 28 to July 10 in the Black Sea region and will focus on multiple warfare areas including amphibious warfare, land maneuver warfare, diving operations, maritime interdiction operations, air defense, special operations integration, anti-submarine warfare, and search and rescue operations.This year’s iteration has the largest number of participating nations in the exercise’s history with 32 countries from six continents providing 5,000 troops, 32 ships, 40 aircraft, and 18 special operations and dive teams scheduled to participate.
Ukraine and U.S. are cohosting the exercise in the Black Sea with participation and support coming from 32 countries in total: Albania, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, France, Georgia, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Morocco, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Senegal, Spain, South Korea, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States.
A spokesman for the Ministry of National Defense stated that Tunisia had received an invitation to participate in a major naval maneuver led by the Sixth Fleet, and that Tunisia had not accepted this invitation and that the national army could not participate in these maneuvers.The ministry confirmed that what is being circulated, quoting foreign media, regarding the participation of an element of the Tunisian Navy in the maneuver, is unfounded.The Secretary-General of the Tunisian Republican Party, Issam Chebbi, sent a letter to President Kais Saied earlier today, asking him to clarify the Tunisian army's participation in joint maneuvers in the Black Sea with the Israeli army.
Wednesday, June 23, 2021
Has Hatred of Jews Morphed into Mania/Mass Hysteria?
I think Jew hatred has now reached a worldwide case of hate-based insanity. Here is the definition of insanity: madness, and craziness characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. And we can add mass hysteria, culturally acquired psychosis, and the internalization of a Jew hating cultural meme. It could even be a dissociative disorder; a mental disorder that involves experiencing a disconnection and lack of continuity between thoughts, memories, surroundings, actions and identity. People with dissociative disorders escape reality in ways that are involuntary and unhealthy and cause problems with functioning in everyday life. Or perhaps it is collective obsessional behavior or a “phenomenon of collective suggestion” or “moral panic.” This is a sociological concept that refers to the phenomenon of masses of people becoming distressed about a perceived — usually unreal or exaggerated — threat portrayed in catastrophizing terms by the media.
Social media has allowed this “mental illness” to spread everywhere; right into your living room and bed room. No corner left untouched.
After two hours of speeches and prayers at the vigil for the Muslim family that was killed, Imam Munir El-Kassem of London’s Islamic Centre of Southwest Ontario was invited to the stage to give closing remarks, in front of PM Justin Trudeau, Jagmeet Singh and other elected officials and went on to attack the JEWS.
“There’s a reason why they say the world is a small village. Every country has a foreign policy. I just want to say, whatever is happening in Jerusalem and Gaza is related to whatever happened in London, Ontario. Period.”
The crowd could be heard cheering following El-Kassem’s remarks. No stone left unturned when it comes to the Jews.
Does that mean If Israel did not exist – this Muslim family would be alive?
This has to be a case of hate-based insanity. Right? Because if it is not insanity then it is brazen, pure, unedited, unadulterated hate for Jews for the crime of being Jewish.
Jew hatred has been with us for as long as the Jews have been a people – about 3500 years. Today, it’s different. Because today we have social media and the hate is at your fingertips 24/7.
One would have thought that after the Holocaust Jew hatred would go away – or at least move underground. But, no. It is everywhere. There is no shame in Jew hatred-no calls of racist. No doxing or canceling. No naming and shaming. It must be mental.
Antiracism and Antisemitism
Last month, the Manhattan Institute invited Bari Weiss and me to participate in an online discussion about the relationship between two growing trends in the U.S.: antiracism and antisemitism. It was a productive and at times provocative conversation. We ranged from midcentury antisemitism in Chicago to the recent conflict in Gaza, from Gayle King and Michelle Obama to Alice Walker’s regrettable antisemitic statements.
In other words, we had a lot to talk about. You’ll find a video of the conversation below, as well as a short transcript where we address the uncomfortable issue of antisemitic and anti-Asian acts perpetrated by Black people.
Israel Advocacy Movement: Fighting antisemitism with Arsen Ostrovsky, David Collier, Sussex Friends of Israel and IAM
Former US Antisemitism Envoy: US Lawmakers Need to Call Out Antisemitism
- Wednesday, June 23, 2021
- Varda Meyers Epstein (Judean Rose)
- Judea-Samaria, Judean Rose, Opinion, Varda
But the Arabs of Dheisheh are enterprising. They see opportunities for commerce with the Jews of Efrat.
This is expressed by, for instance, this pop-up car parts concern, just outside the north gate of Efrat. It looks as though it was built on a shoulder, but not too long ago, there was no shoulder. The owner created one, specifically to court Efrat patrons. As far as I know, he is not paying for the privilege of using this invented space, and no zoning czars prevented this space from coming into existence. He's for sure not paying taxes, and no one is kicking him out.
In the distance, you can see illegal Arab homes that have been built up right against the Jewish homes of the Dagan neighborhood of Efrat, where one can see a communications tower.
I did my best to reassure him. His eyes followed our car as my husband drove us away.
As we near the intersection of Efrat, Dheisheh, and highway 60, to the right is the red sign warning us that we are at the entrance to Area A, and that it is forbidden for Israelis to enter. The larger sign is a municipal welcome sign, all in Arabic.
Mercaz HaShalom [Peace Center]Body-Shop and PaintUnder Management by Maher
- Wednesday, June 23, 2021
- Elder of Ziyon
- Opinion, Vic Rosenthal
Weekly column by Vic Rosenthal
That answer is given by Zionism, which holds that a sovereign state in the Land of Israel is a necessity to protect and preserve the Jewish people – and that their preservation is an objective worth attaining.
The Zionist view implies certain things about the nature of the state, things that logically follow from its function as a refuge for persecuted Jews, a source of strength for the Jewish people, and a place where it is possible to live a fully Jewish life, according to whatever combination of religious and cultural elements are important to the individual.
It is a place where the Hebrew language is dominant, the majority religion is Judaism, the holidays are the traditional Jewish ones (religious and national), and most of the population are Jews. It is (or should be) a place where antisemitism is not tolerated, indeed, where it is unthinkable. Because there are forces that work against these principles, it can’t be expected that they will appear by themselves. They must be woven into the legal fabric of the state and they must be affirmed by its leaders. The Law of Return and the Nation State Law are not accidental; they are essential.
The Zionist state can share some characteristics of a liberal, secular, democratic state such as the USA aspires to be (although recently this conception has come under attack from the anti-rational Left in America), but it cannot be such a state. It will unavoidably need to distinguish between Jews, for whom the state exists, and non-Jewish citizens, in very specific ways that relate to the character of the state – e.g., the language and symbols of the state, the official holidays, etc. – and to the maintenance of its Jewish majority.
Israel is special. It is the only Jewish state, the only one with that specific purpose. It is not a smaller version of the USA. Its socialist founders, despite their emphasis on democratic principles and guaranteeing rights to all citizens, nevertheless were Zionists and proclaimed that they were declaring a Jewish state. Those weren’t just words.
The state may try to provide every possible civil right and protection against discrimination to its minorities, but when there are conflicts between liberal-democratic ideals and Zionist principles, Zionism must prevail. Otherwise the state will ultimately lose its function as a Jewish state. It will lose its ability to protect and preserve the Jewish people as a people, against persecution and assimilation.
Zionism is unpopular throughout the world. The majority of those who have thought about it do not approve of Zionism for one reason or another. Either they don’t see the importance of there being a Jewish people, they actively dislike them, or they think that the cost to others of the existence of the Jewish state is not justified (I suspect that most of those in this group also fit in the second).
Ever since the founding of the state, there have been Jews who are uncomfortable with Zionism. They correctly note that Zionism can conflict with liberal democratic principles, and for this reason they bitterly oppose it and want to “dezionize” Israel. Sometimes they have even made common cause with enemies of the state.
This issue has come up now in the dispute over the “family unification law” which since 2002 has made it difficult for residents of the Palestinian Authority who marry Israeli citizens to move to Israel in order to live with their spouses. I won’t get into the interesting politics of it now, with Bennet’s coalition trying to extend the existing law despite opposition from some of its Arab members, while Bibi’s opposition tries to embarrass them by proposing an even stronger Basic Law on the subject of immigration in general (something that I favor, although not as a tactic to overthrow the coalition). I mention it to note how the opponents of the law, like the publisher of Ha’aretz Amos Schocken and his antisemitic writer Gideon Levy, scream “racism, apartheid, Jewish supremacism!”
This law has nothing to do with “race,” which is essentially meaningless where Arabs and Jews are concerned. It is not “apartheid” which means enforced separation of racial groups, which would not apply to Israel even if Arabs and Jews were different racially. And it certainly doesn’t imply that Jews are superior to Arabs or believe that they ought to dominate them. Although the original purpose of the law was to reduce terrorism (a disproportionate number of terrorists were the product of “unified” families), it is not embarrassing to admit that it helps maintain Israel’s Jewish majority. It is a Zionist law that is unfair to non-Jews. So be it.
Post-Zionists Schocken and Levy also oppose the Law of Return (or would like to see it apply equally to Palestinian Arabs) as well as the Nation-State Law. They also oppose efforts to repatriate the tens of thousands of African migrants that entered the country via the Egyptian border, before an effective fence was built. These things are “undemocratic.” Perhaps, but they are necessary.
The post-Zionist vision is remarkably empty. The right-wing Jabotinsky and the left-wing Ben Gurion had very different ideas of what the Jewish state should be like. Schocken and Levy do not think there should be a Jewish state. In their monumental stupidity and arrogance, they wish for a soulless techno-state built on “equality” and “democracy” for peoples that would have nothing in common except geographic proximity, and a great deal of resentment for each other.
Imagine an Israel without its Zionist purpose (and very quickly, without its Jewish majority). How long would it survive? Why would anyone want to fight for it? Would Jews and Arabs make common cause in support of a liberal, democratic state? It’s hard to imagine. We saw last month what happened in mixed cities like Lod and Acco, where there are about half as many Arabs as Jews.
Most likely, Jews with money and foreign passports would flee. After the initial bloodbath, the ones who were left would face a descent into the tenuous, contingent existence that characterized the Middle Eastern diaspora for more than a millennium. Of course, it’s doubtful that the “lucky” ones in Europe, America, Australia, and other places would fare much better.
Just as a Jewish state is essential to the survival of the Jewish people, Zionism is essential to the survival of the Jewish state.