Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, August 03, 2021

08/03 Links Pt2: Boycotting the Western Wall; When cancel culture comes for Jews; My College Experience at Temple University Was Tainted by Antisemitism

Mittal has made it crystal-clear that she considers eastern Jerusalem “occupied territory.” As recently as July 30, for example, she re-tweeted a statement about “Israeli occupiers” arresting Arab rock-throwers “from Sultan Suleiman Street in J’salem.” Sultan Suleiman Street runs along the walls of the Old City. Part of it is within the pre-1967 armistice line, part of it is beyond. To the chair of the Ben & Jerry’s board, it’s all “occupied.”

So why, in their official announcements, has Ben & Jerry’s been coy about Jerusalem? Because they know what would happen if they said, openly: “Our company is boycotting the Old City, the Western Wall and Temple Mount because we consider it to be Occupied Palestinian Territory.” The volume of protests that Ben & Jerry’s is facing would be ten-fold what it is now. The Gristedes supermarket chain would not be reducing its Ben & Jerry’s shelf space by 30 percent, as they have announced; they would reduce it by 100 percent. Delta would not still be serving Ben & Jerry’s on its flights to Israel; neither would any other airline.

But as long as the company makes it seem as if it’s just targeting “settlements,” a certain segment of the Jewish community will support them. A number of left-wing Jewish groups, including J Street, Americans for Peace Now and Partners for Progressive Israel, have issued statements taking the side of the ice-cream makers.

And some major liberal Jewish groups, such as the Union for Reform Judaism, have not actively joined the protests. Look at the URJ website. Not a word about the Ben & Jerry’s action against Israel.

A divided Jewish community undermines the anti-Ben & Jerry’s protests and makes it more likely that the company will stick to its guns. The backing of Jewish left-wing groups enables Ben & Jerry’s to say, “See? We’re not anti-Semitic. We’re not anti-Israel. Look at these Jewish groups that support us.”

Could an organization such as the Union for Reform Judaism remain on the sidelines if a major American company says it is boycotting the Western Wall? I don’t think so.

It’s time for Ben & Jerry’s, and its left-wing Jewish supporters, to stop playing word games. Stop trying to pull the wool over the public’s eyes. Stop pretending that this is an argument over a handful of wild-eyed “settlers” on remote hilltops. This is a fight over boycotting the Western Wall. They know it, and we know it.

Imagine the reaction if Israel decided to …

For many of us, the world’s hypocrisy when it comes to Israel is self-evident, and the double standards applied to the only Jewish state are clearly anti-Semitic. Typically, we think about these biases when issues arise directly related to Israel, but it may be even more obvious to others if we consider the likely response if Israel engaged in some of the policies and activities of other countries.

Imagine the reaction if …

Israel announced it was planning to ban halal slaughter.

The European Union’s highest court ruled in 2020 that countries can ban ritual slaughter (including by Jews) to promote animal welfare. How loud do you think the condemnation would be if Israel told Muslims how to practice their religion?

Israel moved to disband Muslim civic groups and shut down a mosque where thousands worship as the French have done?

Look at the furor over Israel’s activities related to the Temple Mount even as tens of thousands of Muslims were praying there on their most recent holy day.

Israel banned Muslims from wearing headscarves?

In another ruling, the E.U. court said companies could ban the hijab if justified by an employer’s need to present an image of neutrality to customers. France has prohibited the wearing of headscarves in state schools since 2004. Unlike the Europeans, Israel does not feel threatened by Muslim attire, and women can be seen in hijabs at the beach in Tel Aviv and the streets of Jerusalem.

Israel made it illegal for Muslim women to wear the full-face veil?

France first enacted a ban in 2010. In April, Switzerland became the latest European country to ban the niqab. Other countries with full or partial bans include Belgium, Bulgaria, Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway. It is inconceivable that Israel would consider, let alone get away with, fining or arresting women for wearing veils.

My College Experience at Temple University Was Tainted by Antisemitism

In the Fall of 2018, I took my first political science course at Temple University. In November of that year, Marc Lamont Hill gave an antisemitic speech at the United Nations, which led to his firing at CNN. During a class discussion, my professor proudly stated that he “fully supported” Marc Lamont Hill’s call for a “Free Palestine from the river to the sea” — a dog whistle to ethnically cleanse Israel of its Jewish population.

One year later, I attended a political science social event. I was repeatedly asked,“how do you feel about Israel and Palestine?” And I soon found myself debating with a notable campus leftist, who violently declared that “Jews are not a people.”

This was just the beginning.

In January 2021, Jewish students were welcomed back to campus with a viral Snapchat video posted by a Temple Student Government representative viciously raising his middle finger at the Israeli flag with the caption “f*** outta here.” Facing backlash, the student resigned from his position.

On February 26, 2021, a Temple University student spoke through a university program called “Dissent in America Teach-In.” Her presentation was titled, “Israel/Palestine: Can Biden’s Middle East Policy Broker Peace?” I just so happened to see the event advertised in the Temple Political Science Department newsletter, so I decided to attend.

The presentation was riddled with propaganda, antisemitism, and threats.

One slide stated that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is one of the strongest lobby groups in the country, with the speaker stating that “Jewish political participation is important because of [the] dependence of politicians on campaign cash.” This is a classic antisemitic trope — that Jews have financial control over the political landscape.

Another slide displayed a cartoon of Uncle Sam serving then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a drink with an AIPAC umbrella on a golden platter. Bibi was depicted with a pinocchio-like nose, resembling the “hook nose” Jew from 1930s Nazi propaganda, which categorized Jewish people as racially inferior.

It's amazing how Mizrahi Jews and Ethiopian Jews in Israelcan turn on a dime from being people of color oppressed by Ashkenaz Jews into becoming Jewish white supremacist oppressors, depending on the day's narrative.

On anonymity

There was a thought provoking article about Internet anonymity in the New York Times this week. In general, the writer supports the ability to be anonymous, despite the chances that bad actors will abuse that ability.

I've always remained anonymous because of concerns about my career far more than any worries about harassment or threats. In recent months, though, the latter reason has come to the forefront for me.

Antisemitism is worse than it has been in decades, and the digital world is where one can see it in its most ugly forms, in real time.

I see how Zionist social media stars - especially but not exclusively women - are routinely harassed. One of the reasons is because they are not anonymous. Bigots want something to hang onto as their objects of hate, and the more human a person is, the more of a target they are.

I've become most appreciative that I have separated the Elder persona from my real world self as I've seen the explosion of antisemitic attacks both in the real world and online.

If I was only concerned with my own safety, I could brush it off. But I have to worry about my family, my kids and grandkids - all of whom could become targets from sick, hateful Jew haters (including those who swear they are only "anti-Zionist.")

It is actually frightening to think that the more I share about myself, the less safe I and my family would be.

We aren't in 1930s Europe yet. But all arrows are pointing in that direction. The Internet is where to see the early indicators of hate, and it has been a reliable metric for what happens in the physical world not long after.

08/03 Links Pt1: It’s Time for Biden to Leave a Bad Deal in the Past; 'Violations' the UN Security Council Does Not Care About; Commercial ships no longer safe after Oman attack

From Ian:

Richard Goldberg: It’s Time for Biden to Leave a Bad Deal in the Past

When asked if Raisi’s selection would complicate the administration’s drive to rejoin the nuclear deal and lift U.S. sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, Biden national-security adviser Jake Sullivan said only one person mattered in Iran: the supreme leader. How funny — that’s exactly what opponents of the nuclear deal said back in 2013 when the Obama administration was selling America on the need to embrace a flawed nuclear deal to empower “Rouhani the moderate.”

Of course, Sullivan is correct — and the selection of Raisi is only one of many signals the supreme leader has sent Biden this year, making clear that Khamenei fully intends to pocket any sanctions relief he receives from Washington to fuel the Islamic Republic’s war on the United States and its allies.

The Justice Department revealed last month that Iran attempted to carry out a terrorist attack on American soil, kidnapping a U.S. citizen from New York. Iran-backed proxies in Iraq have attacked U.S. forces for months with little to no response from Biden. Iran-sponsored terror groups such as Hamas in Gaza and the Houthis in Yemen have lobbed missiles at Israel and Saudi Arabia. And the supreme leader has vastly escalated his nuclear provocations — enriching uranium up to 60 percent purity, producing uranium metal, and limiting monitoring by international inspectors.

In every way that matters, Khamenei is telling Biden, “We will bury you.” Biden’s response has been to offer cash. After all, the nuclear deal is fundamentally an appeasement pact masquerading as a nonproliferation deal; it offers Iran money for temporary nuclear restraint, and no restraint at all on the development of nuclear-capable missiles and the regime’s pursuit of regional hegemony.

In his first press conference as president-select, Raisi made clear that Iran would never negotiate the longer, stronger deal Biden said he could achieve by first returning to the old one. Khamenei reaffirmed as much last week. Biden should take “no” for an answer and leave a bad deal where it belongs — in the past.

Iran’s New Suitors

King Abdullah II of Jordan has always been glorified by both the Western and Israeli media as a moderate monarch who seeks peace and even democracy for his country and the Middle East. But perhaps Abdullah should be understood more in the light of his recent trip to the Jordanian village of Kerak, 75 miles south of Amman, to visit the tomb of Ja’far ibn Abi Talib, a cousin of the Prophet Muhammad and the brother of Ali ibn Talib, the founder of Shi’ite Islam. The Kingdom of Jordan has never opened this site to Shi’ite visitors.

Ja’far ibn Abi Talib is a holy figure among Shiites, one of the “rightly guided” caliphs, as the first four successors of the prophet are called. The majority of Muslims worldwide, and nearly all Jordanians—95% of whom are Sunni—consider visiting graves for prayer as an act of polytheism. But there was Abdullah, wearing his military uniform and performing prayers in a Shi’ite shrine with the Jordanian media and state cameras rolling.

In the past several decades, Abdullah has never had much patience for Shi’ites. There is not a single Shi’ite mosque in the kingdom. Jordanian intelligence keeps a close watch on Shi’ites in Jordan, as well as on any local Sunni Muslims who adopt elements of Shi’ite faith and practice. Jordanian authorities, for example, bar any Shi’ite-related religious ceremonies, especially Ashura, the mourning of the death of Husayn ibn Ali, the son of Ali ibn Abi Talib. Shi’ite clerics abroad claim that Jordanian intelligence has broken into private homes to prevent such observances. Abdullah’s sudden decision to publicly embrace the Shi’ite faith was as shocking as it would be if the president of the United States had himself filmed performing Islamic prayers at a mosque.

One day before his visit to Kerak, Abdullah flew to Baghdad on June 27 for a curious meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi and Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi. All three men signed an agreement for a “New Levant,” ostensibly an economic deal for the three countries to cooperate in the fields of energy and electricity, agriculture, and the oil trade, with Jordan serving as a transit point for Iraqi oil to Egypt, and from there on to Europe via the Mediterranean Sea. The three leaders also decided to establish a single visa for entrance into all three countries. This type of European-style border arrangement is exceptionally rare among Arab countries.

The question puzzling many in the region is why Egypt, which shares a border with neither Jordan nor Iraq, is part of such a deal. One likely possibility is that el-Sissi feels isolated in general, and in particular with regard to his struggle to prevent Ethiopia from building a mega dam that threatens Egypt with drought. With very little help from the Biden administration, and the Gulf Arab states wielding almost no leverage within the Egyptian government, el-Sissi is signaling a tilt toward Iran—short of full normalization, but steps in the direction of better ties. As the Iranian regime controls the Iraqi government, military, and intelligence service, all of which are used as puppets to help Iran avoid U.S. sanctions, Egyptian participation in the export of Iraqi oil—which is also controlled by Iran—would have been unimaginable during the Trump administration. Under Biden, who is tilting toward Iran himself, it’s close to common sense. This is the opportunity Abdullah seems keen to exploit.

Khaled Abu Toameh: 'Violations' the UN Security Council Does Not Care About

Such Security Council sessions have become routine and almost always end up with statements denouncing Israel after hearing complaints from PA officials about Israel's alleged "violations" and "aggressions."

Yet the Security Council meeting, which was held last week, did not hear a word about human rights violations and aggressions committed by the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

[Nizar] Banat, the anti-corruption activist and vocal critic of the PA leadership, was allegedly bludgeoned to death on June 24 by more than 20 Palestinian security officers.

More than a month has passed since his brutal murder but the Security Council has not found the time to address this grave incident.

The Security Council has undoubtedly not heard of the case of Emad Al-Tawil, a 27-year-old Palestinian who died on June 25 after being beaten by Hamas security officers. Tawil was a resident of Nuseirat refugee camp in the Gaza Strip.

The Security Council and international human rights organizations and journalists most likely did not hear about the case of Hassan Abu Zayed, a 27-year-old Palestinian from the Gaza Strip, who was shot dead by Hamas "border guards" on July 23.

The Palestinian human rights abuses and the crackdown on political activists and journalists are ignored not only by the UN, but also by the Biden administration.

Instead of pressuring Palestinian leaders to cease imprisoning, torturing and killing their people, the Biden administration is, absurdly, searching for ways to strengthen the PA leadership.

Apparently, in the eyes of the Biden administration, strengthening PA leaders means allowing Palestinian security officers to beat political activists to death, drag women by their hair on the streets of Ramallah, and imprison and intimidate journalists. The Security Council members, meanwhile, take their unjustified obsession with Israel to new heights as Palestinians are taken to prison or the graveyard at the hands of the PA and Hamas.

By Daled Amos

The Palestinian Authority goes to great lengths to dissuade Palestinian Arabs from selling land to Jews.

That is nothing new.

Recently, Palestinian Media Watch reported, Fatah publicly exposed, shamed and endangered an Arab “traitor” who sold land to Jews in Jerusalem:

The PA has publicly exposed, shamed, and literally endangered the life of an Arab who sold land to Jews in Jerusalem. According to the PA, Palestinians who sell land to Jews are considered “traitors” and criminals. In fact, the PA has forbidden selling land to Jews by law. Anyone who tries to sell land to Jews will be sentenced to 5 years of hard labor, and someone who actually sells land to Jews will be sentenced to life in prison with hard labor. [emphasis added]

Despite this "law," Palestinian Arabs selling land to Jews is an ongoing problem for the PA.

For example, in December 2018, The Jerusalem Post reported that 44 Palestinian Arabs were arrested for selling property to Jews. One of them, a Palestinian-American, was sentenced to life imprisonment -- and only with pressure from both the US and Israel, was he released and deported 3 weeks later.

This came from the Palestinian Authority -- Israel's "peace partners," who are theoretically dedicated to the idea of a two-state solution that will bring about a Palestinian state living in peace side-by-side with the Jewish State of Israel.

This dedication to a two-state solution might be considered progress, since there was a time when even suggesting the idea of an Arab Palestinian state existing side-by-side with Israel could get you killed.

Hussein Aboubakr Mansour, an Egyptian political dissident, tweets about Fatah's former opposition to a Palestinian state next to Israel:

Quoted from: Armed Struggle and the Search for State: The Palestinian National Movement, 1949-1993 by Yezid Sayigh (emphasis in the original tweet)

Similarly, Avraham Sela writes in The PLO at Fifty: A Historical Perspective. Contemporary Review of the Middle East:

Even before attaining a collective recognition of the Arab states as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, Fatah sought to silence local public figures (by force, if necessary) who made public statements concerning the future of the Occupied Territories, challenging the PLO exclusive authority as the ultimate Palestinian policymaker. Tensions and differences between the ‘outside’ PLO and public figures in the Occupied Territories reached a boiling point already in the late 1960s resulting in threats on the lives of Hebron Mayor Muhammad Ali al-Ja`bari, and publicists Hamdi al-Taji al-Farouqi and Muhammad Abu Shalbayah, and the lawyer Aziz Shehadeh (who was eventually assassinated)—all avant-garde advocates of the idea of a Palestinian state within the Occupied Territories [emphasis added]

There were deep divisions among the Palestinian Arab leadership on the issue of establishing a Palestinian state.

The example of West Bank lawyer Aziz Shihada (Shehadeh) is instructive.

Following the Six-Day War, Aziz Shihada was, in fact, one of the first to suggest the creation of an independent Arab Palestinian state that would exist alongside Israel in the context of a peace agreement with the Jewish State.

According to The New York Times, Shihadi "became the first Palestinian to draft a proposal for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict" -- and was threatened with death:

In broadcasts from their Damascus exile, the [Palestinian] leadership addressed him directly: ''A.S., you are a traitor, a despicable collaborator,'' it announced over the airwaves. ''You shall pay for your treason. We shall eliminate you. Silence you forever.''

As noted above, Fatah was not opposed to the idea of a separate Palestinian state at first. But as it turned out, Shihadi's treatment by his fellow Palestinian Arabs is a precursor to today's all-out refusal to have anything to do with Israel that would imply normalization:

The Palestinian lawyers' union refused to practice before Israeli military courts in an act of protest against the occupation. But there were no other courts to which Palestinians could appeal, and Shehadeh felt that this refusal to challenge Israel under its own rules simply gave the Israelis a free hand. He insisted on defending Palestinians against land seizures and arbitrary treatment at the hands of the military. For his efforts, he was disbarred for life by his own union, which subsidized Palestinian lawyers on the condition that they not practice their profession. [emphasis added]

For all his support for a Palestinian state side-by-side with Israel, Shihadi still saw Israel as the opposition. But then again, he was wary of Jordan as well.

Prior to 1967, Shihadi was imprisoned because of his opposition to The Occupation -- in this case, Jordan's occupation:

Shehadeh, whose first name Aziz means 'the dear one,' was imprisoned several times by Jordan's King Hussein because he viewed Jordanian control of the West Bank after 1948 as occupation. [emphasis added]

In the end, Shihadi was killed in 1985, and it was never known whether his murder was politically motivated or because of a legal case he had taken on.

This was 4 years after Sadat was assassinated in 1981, in part for his having made peace with Israel. Later, there were Palestinian representatives who still condemned Sadat as a traitor:

This clip of Professor Musa Mazzawi, one of Arafat's consultants, reacting to Sadat's assassination is darkly hilarious: pic.twitter.com/kOzUNlXzCX
— CasualtiesOfTheDay (@Ayei_Eloheichem) July 27, 2021

Another twitter account, CasualtiesOfTheDay, also tweeted about the Palestinian rejection of normalization. He quotes from the book, My Home, My Land: A Narrative of the Palestinian Struggle, a memoir by Salah Mesbah Khalaf, also known as Abu Iyad. Abu Iyad was deputy chief and head of intelligence for the PLO and the second most senior official of Fatah after Arafat, before being assassinated in 1981, by the Abu Nidal's organization.

In his memoirs, Abu Iyad wrote that the idea of a Palestinian "mini-state," even with the ultimate goal of a unified Arab state of Palestine, was controversial within Fatah.

He drew comparisons on the one hand with Zionist leaders such as Ben Gurion who accepted the 1947 partition plan in the short term -- with the Vietnamese, North Koreans and East Germans on the other:

Abu Iyad claims that it was not just moderates like Shihadi who talked about a Palestinian state in the "West Bank" and Gaza following the Six-Day War, but within the Fatah leadership as well. But Faruq Qaddumi, a member of the PLO leadership was in the minority. Not only the idea of a mini-state, but according to Abu Iyad, "the strategic objective of a democratic state in all Palestine didn't have everyone's support either":

Normalizing relations with Israel remains a problem for leaders of the Palestinian Arabs today, just as it was then -- even if such normalization is considered as merely a short-term goal towards eventual control over all of Israel.

This is highlighted by the periodic claims of unification between Fatah and Hamas, a neat trick if indeed Abbas is committed to the two-state solution when Hamas is decidedly not.

If anything, their attempt at unification shows that both groups want Israel's destruction, just by different means and different speed, and remains a priority above and beyond the creation of a Palestinian state.

What would it look like if Zionists attacked leftist haters using their own methods? A humorous, yet very serious, example.

Al Jazeera published a profoundly idiotic op-ed where a contributing editor of the socialist Jacobin site engages in faux outrage that Zionists are attacking Hamas paramilitary training of children in summer camps.

Normally, I would fisk Belen Fernandez' arguments, noting how the entire article is a huge exercise in whataboutism, with provably false claims that Israel is worse than Hamas in every possible aspect and therefore Zionists have no right to say a word against Palestinian child abuse.

But facts are irrelevant. Fernandez doesn't care about facts - which is why she doesn't address them. She wants to play to readers' emotions, accusing Israel of raising its own children with the singleminded goal of blowing up Arab babies. She wants to change the subject. This is the modus operandi of Israel's critics - since the facts aren't on their side, they ignore the facts and make up others, or engage in character assassination or other diversions, all to avoid actually addressing the issue.

So this time, instead of pointing out facts, I will take a page out of the socialist, leftist playbook.

My foray into writing an article that ignores actual issues, makes up facts based on the flimsiest of evidence, and adopts the methods of the anti-Israel crowd begins here.

______________________

Belén Fernández is a sexist.

She writes in Al Jazeera:

Recently, Lawrence J Haas of the American Foreign Policy Council took to the pages of Newsweek to publicise a dangerous phenomenon: “Western Silence as Gaza Summer Camps Train Future Terrorists”.

According to Haas – whose panties have been propelled into a massive bunch by the (hallucinated) idea that Western media and academia are obsessed with a “narrative of Israeli oppression and Palestinian victimisation” – Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are teaching teenage boys in the Gaza Strip how to “shoot guns, launch anti-tank missiles and protect themselves while peering around walls”.

The expression "panties in a bunch" comes from the British expression "don't get your knickers in a twist." As Eric Partridge writes in A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English, eighth edition (1984):

knickers in a twist. Don't get your ..., don't become cantankerous or contentiously touchy: both among men (implying femininity) and from men to women: since ca. 1950. (L[aurie] A[tkinson] 1976)—2. Get (one's) knickers in a twist, to get flustered, to panic: coll[oquial]: since 1960 at latest.

Using that expression against women says that women are over-emotional and not to be taken seriously. Using it against a man says that the man is as bad as a woman is in not being able to look at an issue with a clear head. To use that expression against a man is to agree with its premise that women are unable to think clearly and logically and men who get upset over something are acting in an inferior "female" way.

Fernandez' use of this expression also betrays her transphobia, as she is clearly denigrating men who choose to wear women's undergarments.

Ignorance is no excuse. The phrase has been recognized as offensive for years.

This is a sexism, and by using that highly offensive phrase, Belen Fernandez proves that she feels that women are inferior to men. Consciously or not, Fernandez hates women.

She's not even embarrassed to use this phrase. Maybe because she is a privileged, white-passing person who could afford to spend six years of her life hitchhiking across Europe with no idea of what the word "responsibility" means.

Perhaps she chose Al Jazeera as her media outlet to engage in explicit sexism because she looks down at Arabs and feels that they aren't as sensitive as Westerners towards misogyny, and she feels more comfortable using a highly offensive sexist phrase in an environment where she thinks it would be more welcomed. That attitude is condescending and racist.

Such a shocking phrase from an alleged leftist and nominal feminist should raise alarms about the systemic sexism, transphobia and hypocrisy that permeates socialist circles.

Anyone who truly cares about feminism, trans rights and human values must demand that Balen Fernandez apologize to Lawrence J. Haas - and keep apologizing until he and everyone else she has attacked in this article accepts her apology.

Obviously, Fernandez must be fired from her position for her offensive, sexist and racist behavior, and all of her articles must be scrubbed from existence, so no one can be exposed to her offensive hate of women. Jacobin surely does not want to be associated with someone like that, and anyone who cares to fight for equity for women must insist that her employer does the right thing.

_______________________________

Does this type of argument look familiar?

People who support Israel see this sort of thing every single day.

(h/t YMedad)

During the war in May, as hundreds of thousands of Israelis were forced to run to bomb shelters as Hamas sent thousands of rockets towards them, a member of the Brighton NY town board, Robin Wilt, posted on her Facebook page "Free Palestine" and featured a picture of her with her arm around Linda Sarsour, who has spoken out against humanizing Israelis under attack and who has defended antisemites like Louis Farrakhan.

When the Jewish community raised their voices in concern, Wilt doubled down. She spoke at an anti-Israel rally (43.25) where the speaker before her told a ridiculous story that there are separate checkpoints in Gaza with signs for Jews and non-Jews. Wilt herself gave herself a pat on the back, saying that she supports Palestine even though there are lots of Jewish voters in town. (That part was edited out.)

She, and other town board members, attended a Zoom session against antisemitism, and Wilt showed not the slightest amount of empathy for Jews nor regret for how uncomfortable she made her Jewish constituents feel.

Which brings us to the town hall that was in Brighton last week.

For hours, there were Jews arguing that they have a right to be upset at Wilt while Wilt's supporters argued that the Jews were racists and white supremacists for attacking her. As usual, the lies from the pro-Palestinian contingent were legendary, like Israel has expelled 1500 residents of Sheikh Jarrah to build a theme park.

When Jews spoke, they were routinely interrupted and shouted at.

At the end, when Wilt spoke, she made herself into the victim and again took no responsibility for hurting a large number of residents of Brighton with her words.

But the story isn't an idiot councilmember who opposes Jewish nationhood. It is the many people who felt comfortable publicly attacking Jews as racists and baby-killers. The town hall has made the Jews of Brighton even more uneasy and feeling under attack than they were beforehand. The councilmembers seemed to listen, but no one on the other side in the audience (from the portions I watched) showed any empathy, instead many of them played the victim card themselves as they attacked the Jews, as if someone who is Black cannot possibly have done any wrong.

This is a heavily liberal, supposedly tolerant town. As we've seen in recent years, leftist tolerance usually has a Jewish exception.

(h/t kweansmom)

08/02 Links Pt2: Waiting for social media companies to tackle anti-Semitism is utterly pointless; Full saga of Israeli trio held in Nigeria; Protestors in New York cry ‘Globalize the intifada’

From Ian:

Stephen Pollard: Waiting for social media companies to tackle anti-Semitism is utterly pointless

The CCDH reported 714 anti-Semitic posts, such as Nazi, neo-Nazi and white supremacist content, across a six-week period this year. The posts received up to 7.3 million views. Less than a sixth were removed.

My only surprise at today’s finding that Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok refused to act on 84% of posts reported to them is that the figure is so low.

It’s not just me, of course. There is not a single ‘out’ Jew on social media who is not deluged with this stuff. It is difficult to overstate its scale and how intrinsic it is to the experience of being a Jew on social media.

It took me a while to realise this, but that’s the point. Racism, along with misogyny, conspiracy theories and the like are not a terrible by-product of Twitter and the other social media sites. They are their purpose. The CCDH’s findings are not a shocking indictment of their lax systems. They are a statement of the obvious.

Let me explain.

All these sites have one thing in common. They make almost all their money from advertising. And the sums are huge. In 2020, for example, Twitter’s revenue was $3.72 billion revenue. That advertising is dependent on users. The more users, the more revenue. What drives traffic to them? Racism. Misogyny. Conspiracies. Etc.

What happens to the sites if they leave such posts up? They get money from the users who view them. What happens if the remove such posts? They don’t get that money.

So while it is legal for them to act like this, earnest entreaties to be decent chaps and not host racists are hilariously pointless. Responding to the report, a Twitter spokesperson said the company condemned anti-Semitism and was working to make the platform a safer place for online engagement: “We recognise that there’s more to do, and we’ll continue to listen and integrate stakeholders’ feedback in these ongoing efforts.” Yeah, right. Does anyone fall for this guff? It’s like an arms manufacturer saying they condemn the use of arms.

The racism is integral to their business model.

Twitter and the other social media sites will not change voluntarily. Why would they? Opprobrium means nothing to them – and, ironically, it would largely manifest itself nowadays via their sites.

There is only one way to change this: legislation. The Online Harms Bill is promising, but seems to be continually – perhaps permanently – delayed. These are now huge vested interests. And they need to be confronted.

Top social media platforms fail to act on reported antisemitism, study finds

Social media platforms are mostly not acting against antisemitic content even when it is flagged by users, according to a new report.

The Center for Countering Digital Hate, a UK and US nonprofit organization, said that over a six-week period earlier this year it used official complaint systems to report hundreds of incidents of anti-Jewish hatred it found on the Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok platforms, but 84 percent of the time nothing was done about it.

The findings show a “serious and systematic failure to tackle antisemitism,” the Center for Countering Digital Hate said in a statement accompanying its Failure to Protect report, which was released Friday.

“This is not about algorithms or automation; our research shows that social media companies allow bigots to keep their accounts open and their hate to remain online, even when human moderators are notified,” said Imran Ahmed, CEO of the CCDH, in a statement.

“No one has a fundamental right to have an account on a social media platform to bully Jews or to spread hatred that we know can end in serious offline harm,” he said.

From May 18 to June 29 this year the CCDH flagged 714 posts. However, only in less than one in six cases the accounts were deleted or the content removed.

‘We didn’t know if they’d execute us’: Full saga of Israeli trio held in Nigeria

Rudy and Noam were later transferred to a larger cage, but one that contained two Nigerians held on terrorism and weapons charges.

“We were on edge in every way at all times,” Rochman said. “If they had told us at the beginning that we’d be there for twenty days, that would be much better, since at least we’d be counting down the days.”

“Still, we were not putting our heads down. We were looking for ways to make a weapon, to have something on us in case someone attacked us, to try to undo the lock, to try to find a way to steal a phone.”

Rochman managed to sneak a small pair of scissors from a toiletry bag into the cell for protection.

On the tenth day, the Israelis were on their way to the first floor of the prison to pick up their kosher food. When they passed by the lobby, they began shouting to civilian visitors that they were innocent and being held unlawfully.

They were dragged back to the cages by guards.

The trios feared for their lives during their captivity. “We didn’t know if they would execute us,” Rochman recalled. “We didn’t know if they would poison our food.”

Nigerian authorities released the trio from prison last Tuesday evening and handed them over to US custody. American embassy staff then took them to the local Chabad center to spend the night.

They were given their passports and phones just before their flight took off for Istanbul the next night.

“They wanted to try us with treason and missionary work,” said Rochman. “They were clearly trying to silence this project and send a message that no one should be documenting the Igbos.”

“We came out there to tell a story, and unfortunately we became the story,” Rochman said ruefully. “This is just a fraction and a taste of what Igbos go through daily.”

Lapid, Michaeli vow to enable gold medal winner to marry

Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid and Labor leader Merav Michaeli both promised on Monday to take steps to enable Olympic gold medalist Artem Dolgopyat to get married in the State of Israel.

Dolgopyat is not Jewish according to Jewish law, because his mother, Angela, is not Jewish and her children are not Jewish according to Orthodox law. Artem’s father, Oleg, is Jewish. Israel has no provision for civil marriage, and citizens can only marry through established religious institutions, such as the Chief Rabbinate, which will only marry members of the same religion.

“I’ll fight with all my might for civil unions for couples,” Lapid told The Jerusalem Post. “It’s intolerable that someone can fight on our behalf in the Olympics, represent us and win a gold medal and not be able to get married in Israel.”

Michaeli said it is unacceptable that Israel does not let Dolgopyat marry in the country. She said Labor would take action to help him immediately after the state budget is passed in November.

“Just like we broke the kosher certification monopoly, the time has come to end the monopoly of marriage in Israel,” she said. “We will work in this Knesset to cancel that monopoly in Israel.”

But Shas leader Arye Deri told the Post that the steps Lapid and Michaeli vowed to take would make Israel no longer be a Jewish state.

“Even he doesn’t claim for himself that he is Jewish,” Deri said. “Winning a medal doesn’t make him Jewish. There is no discrimination against him. Our laws are consistent: For 73 years, marriage in this country has been run by Jewish law.”

Dolgopyat, whose girlfriend is from Belarus, told reporters in Tokyo that he did not want to address the subject.

Two more "Apartheid?" posters, high tech edition

Israeli Arabs have reached not only the top of the Israeli high tech scene, but top positions worldwide.

Here are two examples that show yet again that Israeli Arabs can accomplish anything Israeli Jews can - and more.

Last week, Lebanese media reported that the IDF had stolen 500 goats from a hapless shepherd in southern Lebanon.

The official Lebanese news agency reported that "a hostile Israeli force stole 500 goats and took them into the occupied territories, after shooting over the head of one of their shepherds, west of the Samaqah site in the outskirts of the town of Kfarshouba, Hasbaya district."

I'm trying to picture IDF soldiers leading 500 goats across the Blue Line, and I'm having a hard time of it.

But the story doesn't end there. No, the evil Jews were unhappy with the first batch of goats, and went back into Lebanon and stole another hundred goats on Saturday!

Lebanese media claimed that "an Israeli army foot patrol kidnapped 100 goats belonging to a shepherd in the town of Shebaa, in the Hasbaya district."

UNIFIL does not mention these incidents on its webpage. The IDF is tight-lipped about this matter, clearly because of its national security implications. Hezbollah media is not forthcoming.

It is hard to know what happened. Perhaps the goats were meant to be IDF pets? Ecologically sensitive lawn mowers for IDF bases? Schwarma?

There is clearly a secret mission going on here. Possibly the goats were Israeli spies who had finished their duties and were being retired and put out to pasture after a job well done.

08/02 Links Pt1: UNRWA Teachers Celebrate Deaths of Israelis, Support Terrorism; The IOC and Palestinian athletes; Boris: Iran must face consequences for ‘outrageous’ attack on ship

From Ian:

UN Watch: Report: UN Teachers Celebrate Deaths of Israelis

The UN agency that runs schools and social services for Palestinians is facing calls to fire employees using social media to celebrate attacks on Israelis and promote anti-Jewish hatred.

Over 100 UNRWA educators and staff have publicly promoted violence and antisemitism on social media, according to a new report published by the non-governmental organization UN Watch, an independent human rights group based in Geneva.

The report, entitled “Beyond the Textbooks,” uncovers 22 recent cases of UNRWA staff incitement which clearly violate the agency’s own rules as well as its proclaimed values of zero tolerance for racism, discrimination or antisemitism. UN Watch is calling on the agency’s major funders — including the U.S., Germany, the UK and the European Union — to hold UNRWA accountable to its own standards and commitments.

As revealed in the report, UNRWA staff stationed in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan have publicly incited antisemitism and terrorism. Among the educators who have used their personal social media channels for such propaganda are UNRWA Gaza math teacher Nahed Sharawi, who shared a video of Adolf Hitler with inspirational quotes to “enrich and enlighten your thoughts and minds.” Husni Masri, an UNRWA teacher in the West Bank, posted antisemitic conspiracy theories according to which Jews control the world, created the coronavirus and seek to destroy Islam.

UN Watch’s report lists a total of 113 cases that it managed to capture from UNRWA employees’ public pages alone, all celebrating and promoting violence, even among young children. The watchdog group only examined a sample of Facebook users who publicly identified themselves as UNRWA employees, and estimates that the actual number of UNRWA staff who incite violence and hatred includes many more of the agency’s 30,000 staff.

UN Watch further reveals that despite its numerous prior requests and submission of detailed evidence, UNRWA has failed to fire teachers who incite to racism and terrorism, nor has it taken any other meaningful action. UNRWA should therefore be considered complicit in its staff members’ misconduct, says UN Watch. Click for full PDF report

Who funds this hate?

In 2020:
🇩🇪 Germany $210 Million
🇪🇺 EU $157M
🇬🇧 UK $64M
🇸🇪 Sweden $60M
🇯🇵 Japan $33M
🇨🇭 Swiss $29M
🇳🇴 Norway $28M
🇨🇦 Canada $24M
🇫🇷 France $23M
🇳🇱 Netherlands $22M
🇮🇹 Italy $18M
🇩🇰 Denmark 16M
🇪🇸 Spain $14M
🇦🇺 Australia $16M

& 🇺🇸 US just gave $318 Million. https://t.co/uXB4lGfzfZ
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) August 2, 2021

$92 MILLION PER YEAR to:

???? blame antisemitism on the Jews
???? defend Hamas
???? advocate for the killing of Israeli soldiers
???? smear Israel at every turn

THIS is what Ken Roth from @hrw does with nearly ALL OF HIS TIME and money raised.

More: https://t.co/A8mn6nnrEk pic.twitter.com/Ive123xoct
— StopAntisemitism.org (@StopAntisemites) August 2, 2021

Actually, no @KenRoth @hrw. The ‘bombardment’ was Hamas & PIJ indiscriminately raining down over 5,000 rockets at #Israel in 10 days. But of course, as usual, you invert perpetrator and victim. https://t.co/O78CTPNEgS
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) August 2, 2021

Reminder: Ken Roth is a Hamas apologist. He once defended the “right” of Hamas to build tunnels from Gaza into Israel to attack and capture soldiers, knowing full well how they inhumanely keep captives like Gilad Shalit incommunicado in breach of the Geneva Conventions. https://t.co/Pi6KvmgHH8
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) August 2, 2021

The Arab world is upset that a Saudi judoka Tahani Alqahtani competed against Israeli Raz Hershko at the Tokyo Olympics last week, and that the two competitors even embraced.

This cartoon at Shehab News characterizes the Alqahtani as a surrendered loser, while the Algerian and Sudanese athletes who refused to compete against Israelis - and forfeited - are considered victors and heroes.

Yet all the cartoons in the world cannot stop the cooperation that Israel and Saudi Arabia have been exhibiting quite publicly.

On Tuesday, Google is announcing a massive fiber optic cable system that will go from Italy, underwater to Israel, and from there overland to the Red Sea and to Saudi Arabia, eventually reaching Oman and India.

It is significant that the cable will connect Saudi Arabia and Israel directly, bypassing Jordan - which is already at peace with Israel and which would have been the logical Israeli partner only a year ago. However, realistically speaking, an optic cable line overland in Jordan would be more vulnerable to attack by irate Israel-hating Arabs than a direct underwater cable from Israel to Saudi Arabia.

This is a much bigger deal than a judo match. It shows that the Arab boycott of Israel is effectively dead. The center of Sunni Islam is no longer treating Israel as an enemy.

It is ironic that at the same time Israel has the best relations it has ever had with its sworn enemies, organizations that pretend to care about peace and human rights are increasing their attacks on Israel. Apparently, when the Jewish state moves toward peace, peace is no longer considered a virtue.

Hamas' top priority in Gaza- protect and repair the tunnels

I pointed out last week that some photos of streets in Gaza attacked by Israel show a characteristic cave-in pattern that indicates that a terrorist tunnel underneath the busy streets collapsed after Israeli earth-penetrating bombs were dropped.

NPR notes - without realizing it, of course - that Hamas's first priority has been to cover up this evidence and to start protecting and rebuilding the tunnels underneath:

GARCIA-NAVARRO: So first, thousands of buildings in Gaza were damaged, many destroyed. So take us there. What's the situation like?

ESTRIN: Well, a lot of the rubble has actually been cleared away. Egypt did that. Hamas has repaired roads.

Hamas isn't merely repairing roads. It is spending a lot of money to place pavers on top of some roads, as Hamas' Felesteen site shows:

Pavers coat about 5-10 times as much as paving with asphalt does and take much more time. Why would Hamas spend this kind of money to repair roads?

Because the pavers are meant to protect the tunnels. Israel shot relatively small, burrowing bombs that went easily through the asphalt on the street and then exploded the tunnel foundations underneath. These pavers, which look to be about 4 inches deep, would force Israel to use more destructive bombs to get to the tunnels - bombs more likely to kill innocent Gazans.

These pavers look to be locally produced. Bricks can be produced the same way. Hamas could be repairing buildings and helping Gazans. Instead, it is spending a great deal of money to protect its terror infrastructure.

(h/t Irene)

Roger Cohen of the New York Times has been visiting Israel and filing stories to make Israel look bad.

In Sunday's paper, in an article about the riots between Arabs and Jews in Israel in May, Cohen wrote:

Precariousness, a sense that their homes could always be taken, is a perennial condition of the Palestinian citizens of Israel. Aside from seven Bedouin towns established in the Negev desert, no new Arab towns or villages have been built since 1948. Education remains intricately segregated: Arabs overwhelmingly attend Arab schools and Jews Jewish schools, themselves split into secular and religious categories.

Arab municipalities, occupying less than 3 percent of Israeli territory, are unable to expand because of land regulations and have found themselves hemmed in by more than 900 new Jewish villages and towns.

HRW's Ken Roth quoted from this here, one of three tweets from a single article, which I've never seen him do before.

There is a strange assumption in these two paragraphs, along with some obvious errors. It is implying that Arabs must live in Arab towns or villages in Israel and it seems to imply that they cannot live in Jewish-majority towns.

In fact, according to 2019 statistics from Israel, about 27% of Israeli Arabs live in Jewish majority cities or towns. 360,000 live in Jerusalem alone, and another 33,000 in Haifa, 20,000 in Tel Aviv/Jaffa, and thousands more in Beersheva and Eilat. There are tens of thousands of Arabs living in mixed towns like Akko and Lod.

Now, imagine if Israel would tell Arabs they must live in Arab only towns. Imagine the outcry, the accusations of racism that would follow. But that is exactly what Cohen and Roth seem to be saying is ideal!

We don't have to imagine that outcry. The initial draft of Israel's controversial "nation state law" included a clause (7B) that said “the state can allow a community composed of people of the same faith or nationality to maintain an exclusive community.” President Reuven Rivlin harshly criticized that clause, as did many Israeli liberals and leftists. It was not left in the final version.

Looking at the statistics, there are some towns that are Arab only and some that are Jewish only. Intriguingly, there are many small towns that have a vast majority of one group and a tiny number of the other, indicating that in most communities there are no barriers for anyone to move in if they so desire. I see about 170 towns and villages that are predominantly Jewish yet have less than 30 Arabs living there, and about 45 Arab communities with less than 30 Jews living amongst them. As far as I can tell, except for some villages (less than 400 households) in the Negev and Galilee that can have committees to approve who can move in, it is illegal for Israeli towns to discriminate against any citizen.

It is reasonable to point out that predominantly Arab communities have a harder time getting building approvals that predominantly Jewish communities do. But Cohen is going way beyond that. He's making it sound like Arabs are stuck without the ability to move. And it is nothing short of bizarre that Cohen and Roth seem to be supporting segregating Jews from Arabs - yet if Israel would say that, they would be the first to accuse Israel of racism.

What about his assertion that no new Arab towns or villages have been built since 1948? I've heard this said before, but it does not seem to be true at all. According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, in 1961 there were 109 "non-Jewish localities" and in 2018 there were 137, an increase of 25.6%. At the same time the number of Jewish localities increased from 771 to 1090, an increase of 39.5%. Not equal to be sure, but a definite increase in Arab communities, mostly in the Negev and in the North (even discounting the 5 Arab communities gained from annexing the Golan Heights.)

And has Israel built over 900 new Jewish villages and towns? I have no idea where he got that number from and what he considers "new." As mentioned, the total number of Jewish localities is 1090, and there were 771 60 years ago. That doesn't sound like more than 900 new Jewish communities.

The article pretends to be balanced, but as always, when you look at the details, it shows a clear bias against Israel and Jews.

Book Review: Nevergreen, by Andrew Pessin

In 2017, at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, students decided on modifying their annual racism-awareness "Day of Absence," to expect white students and faculty to stay away from campus and allow only people of color to attend.

One professor of biology, Bret Weinstein, was offended as a liberal for an event where skin color determines who is allowed and not allowed in campus spaces. He wrote a letter protesting the event, and taught his class as usual, and all his students of all races attended without incident.

Weeks later, his letter was publicized and Weinstein went through an Orwellian experience: demonstrations broke out on campus, students chanted his name and called for his resignation. Weinstein tried to speak out, to explain his reasoning, and was not allowed to speak. The next day, as he rode his bike to campus, he saw students taking out their cell phones as he passed by. As he told Haaretz recently, “I thought, what is this? Is this some kind of ambush? And so I rode around to a different entrance to campus and went to the police station. The police were locked inside. They unlocked the door and let me in. And I said to the chief of police: ‘I must be imagining things, but I think that there were people waiting for me.’ She said, ‘I don’t think you were imagining anything. In fact, you’re not safe on your bike. Not only here on campus, but anywhere in town. If they were to catch up to you, I don’t think we could help you.’ ...As I rode back to my house, I was thinking: This can’t be happening in the United States. I’m a civilian who’s incapable of getting protection from the police from a mob of people who have mistaken me for a racist. "

This is a world that Andrew Pessin knows well. He himself was the object of a similar witch-hunt in 2015 when an anti-Israel student at Connecticut College dug up an old Facebook post of his, claimed that it was dehumanizing to Palestinians and started a series of events where Pessin was accused of racism and put in a situation where he couldn't defend himself.

Now, Pessin has written a novel about the toxic atmosphere on campuses today named Nevergreen, an obvious spoof on Evergreen College. Like Evergreen, Nevergreen is in the Pacific Northwest, but it is on an island which used to house an insane asylum.

The story is about a physician, only named "J.", who is convinced to give a guest lecture on an obscure topic at Nevergreen College by a chance encounter with its dean.

As we soon find out, the inmates - in this case, the students - run the asylum.

J. ends up giving his lecture to a completely empty room. Yet the next day, he is caught up in a rumor that he said something very offensive, the bored editor of the school newspaper blows up the story and J. finds himself literally running for his life and unable to leave. The faculty is as crazy as the students are; some are trying to out-woke the students while deathly afraid of being denounced by them. Even seeming allies of J. turn against him as the rumors about his lecture take on a life of their own and he literally becomes the "face of hate."

The book is part comedy and part horror story. From J.'s perspective, he is in real danger, since one cannot distinguish between sanity and insanity at Nevergreen. Yet it is clear to the reader, if not J., that most of the students are just idiots who want to party and get laid, while some really are dangerous - and to someone being "canceled," it is diffcult to tell the difference.

Unlike other horror stories, the monster's motives cannot be discerned, because there are multiple monsters - groups of students at cross-purposes who cancel people for differing reasons or no reasons whatsoever, faculty members who are frightened of their own charges, and others who want to use the resulting chaos for their own personal gain.

Nevergreen College is so committed to diversity that even Nazis are allowed to have their own student club. But one group of people are conspicuous by their absence - Jews. Pessin hints broadly at a sinister backstory, where a few years earlier the campus was rocked by an unexplained "episode," that followed students going to the Middle East to help bring peace between warring factions and who get slaughtered for their efforts. (It is not coincidence that Pessin gave the newspaper editor the name "Corrie," after another famous former Evergreen student.) The book doesn't say what the "episode" was, but the absence of Jews on campus indicates something terrible happened that drove them out. There are reminders of Jews everywhere, even if the Jews themselves are left unmentioned. Even research into Jewish topics must be done secretly.

The extreme tolerance for all viewpoints has its limits at Nevergreen. As usual, one group is outside the pale for everyone.

Nevergreen is really good, often hilarious but it is an uneasy humor; the happenings on the fictional bizarro Nevergreen campus are uncomfortably close to what is really happening today at many colleges. It is a world that Pessin knows well, where sanity is not a virtue and may in fact be a thoughtcrime.

The book will be available on September 1, and you can preorder it here.

Here is its video trailer.