Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, November 30, 2021

Recalling Israel's Initial Response To Hamas Rocket Attacks (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Of the attitudes of the international community towards Israel, one of the most maddening is criticism of Israeli reaction to the terrorist rocket attacks launched by Hamas -- and the lack of international condemnation of those rocket attacks themselves, deliberately launched against civilian targets.

We criticize the West for its lack of sustained outrage against Hamas targeting civilians.
We note that no country would tolerate such attacks without taking strong measures to stop such attacks.

But does Israel itself bear any of the responsibility for the failure of the international community to condemn these deliberate terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians?

In a 2012 article, Where 8,000 Rocket Launches Are Not a Casus Belli, Evelyn Gordon blames this on the indecisiveness of the IDF in retaliating against Gaza rockets as:

the rotten fruit of a government policy that for years dismissed the rockets as a minor nuisance for reasons of petty politics: For the Kadima party, in power from 2005-2009, admitting the rockets were a problem meant admitting that its flagship policy, the Gaza pullout, was a disaster.

A 2011 report for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, The Missile Threat from Gaza:From Nuisance to Strategic Threat, by Israeli missile defense expert Uzi Rubin notes how Israeli leaders at the time played down and even dismissed outright the Hamas rocket threat:

o Dov Weisglass, senior advisor to Ariel Sharon, in June 2005 referred to the rockets as "flying objects...in terms of national risk management, they do not constitute a significant factor."

o  Koby Toren, then Director General of the Ministry of Defense, dismissed the the rockets in 2006 as nothing more than a "psychological threat" because of their low level of lethality.

o  Shimon Peres, then Deputy Prime Minister, complained in 2006, "Everyone is stoking the hysteria. What is the big deal? Kiryat Shmona was bombed for years."

o  Ehud Olmert was still downplaying the need for bomb shelters in 2007, announcing that "we will not shelter ourselves to death."

o  Deputy Minister of Defense, Maj. Gen. (res.) Matan Vilnai made a speech at the Knesset in 2008 comparing the complaints of Israeli communities near Gaza with the resilience of Jerusalem’s residents in the face of suicide attacks: "We in Jerusalem…suffered hundreds of dead...did we complain that we could not sleep at night?...Did we claim to have been forsaken?"

In fairness to Peres, he did not totally ignore the Qassam threat. The same article that quotes him minimizing the Qassams, also reports:

Translation:

According to Peres, "Palestinians need to be told: Qassams Shmassams, we will persevere. We will not move from here." The deputy prime minister also accused that "our response stimulates the other side to strike. A series of measures must be taken to eliminate the Qassam." Peres declined to elaborate on what means he meant.

According to Rubin, Olmert qualified his comment about shelters with "...though there may be extreme situations in which we will have a limited response capability."

Also according to Rubin, Vilnai visited the Jewish areas near Gaza the very next day in order to correct the negative impression his comments made.

But the fact remains that Israeli leaders initially played down the threat of Qassam rockets coming out of Gaza.

For years.

The lack of a strong Israeli response to the Hamas rocket attacks took the US by surprise.

In a 2011 interview, former US envoy to Israel Dan Kurtzer said that PM Sharon's failure to respond to Hamas rocket attacks following the 2005 Disengagement was a major mistake:

Kurtzer, in an interview with The Jerusalem Post, said that immediately after Israel left the Gaza Strip he told Washington “to expect a very serious Israeli response to the first act of violence coming out of Gaza.”

...Kurtzer said his message to the Bush Administration was to be ready for a sharp Israeli military response to rocket fire, “and be ready to support it.”

“The success of disengagement rested on the aftermath of its implementation, so I was very surprised there was no reaction to the first rocket, second rocket and 15th rocket,” Kurtzer said.

Instead, according to Kurtzer, "Sharon argued that the rockets were landing in fields, 'not really that bad,' or were being fired by dissident elements, and not the Gaza leadership" -- setting the tone for excuses of Israeli leaders who followed.

As Gordon points out, one of the motives of the Israeli government in initially downplaying the rocket attacks was to defend the Disengagement itself.

But the Begin-Sadat Center report gives other reasons as well. After all, it was not just the leadership that showed disinterest:

the same Israeli public that withstood so determinately the suicide attacks from the West Bank, demonstrated a lack of unity and determination in contending with the Gaza rocket campaign.

The initial rocket attacks started in 2001 and need to be understood in the context of the Second Intifada that was creating a crisis at the time. Life in Sderot was "was calmer and more secure at the time than metropolitan areas like Netanya, Hadera or Jerusalem":

In hindsight, the scant attention paid to the campaign at its onset in 2001 is easy to justify against the backdrop of violence of the Second Intifada and the suicide terror offensive raging at the time through the heart of Israel's major cities, an offensive which reached its peak in April-May 2002. This absorbed all the attention of the general public as well as Israel's political and military leadership. The few hits, the negligible damage and the insignificant casualties inflicted by the primitive rockets launched at the time from Gaza were justifiably regarded as a minor nuisance compared to the ongoing terror campaign against Israel's traffic, public transportation, shopping malls and civic centers. [emphasis added]

But that does not explain the continued lackadaisical response the following year when Operation Defensive Shield was succeeding in combating the Second Intifada.

According to Rubin, both local as well as national leaders played down the threat during the first 3 years. Even when Israel took steps to invade nearby launching areas in Gaza and fired on rocket production areas that were further away,

At the same time, active defense – that is, anti-rocket systems that could destroy Gaza rockets in flight – was shunned repeatedly until about five years into the campaign when the shock of the Second Lebanon War prompted Israel's incumbent minister of defense [Amir Peretz] to initiate the development of an active defense system against short-range rockets. The failure to do so earlier is another indication of the low significance attributed to the rocket campaign against the south of the country by the political leadership of the time. [emphasis added]

The Second Lebanon War came to an end in mid-August, 2006 and Israel was focusing on the failure to secure an undisputed victory. During this time of soul searching, the priority was on rebuilding the IDF, recovering from economic losses, and repairing damage in northern Israel. The needs of the Israeli communities near Gaza were put on the back burner.

The decision to start development on Iron Dome was not taken until February, 2007 and Israeli bureaucracy delayed not only the development of Iron Dome but also the government-sponsored building of shelters.

The report gives several reasons for this:

o The slow increase in the number of rockets and casualties after the first rocket hit Sderot in 2001 lulled residents as well as local and national leaders into inactivity.
o A full-scale defense initiative against the rockets would have been an admission that the Disengagement was responsible for a deterioration in Israel's security.
o There was disagreement over the correct strategy in response to the Qassams. Eli Moyal, the Mayor of Sderot was one of those who believed that civil protection was an admission that Israel was acceding to terrorist aggression -- "to accept civil protection is to accept terror as part of your life" and that instead of defensive measures, "the war should have been pursued aggressively."

o There was a concern that as the terrorist rockets increased in range and efficiency, and more communities were put at risk, so too would there be an increased demand for costly population protection.

Today, we proudly point to Israel's system of shelters against terrorist attack from Gaza.

But according to Rubin:

In his 2005 report on the status of the school and kindergarten sheltering program in Sderot, the State Comptroller condemned the government's mishandling of the situation, calling it "a continuous debacle." This harsh term could well describe the government's handling of the entire sheltering program in southern Israel.

Israel has come a long way since that 2011 report, especially in terms of Iron Dome, which is now in demand by other countries facing similar threats.

But we tend to forget the initial slow response by Israel to the Qassam threat, and that may have served in part as an initial excuse by the international community to downplay the dangerous threat that Hamas rockets continue to pose to Israeli civilians.

Jordanian media has been upset over the surfacing of this video from 2013, where Joseph Braude, a scholar of Islam, interviews Jordanian preacher Mustafa Abu Rumman:

Jordanians just found out that Braude is Jewish. Even worse, his grandfather was reportedly a rabbi in Iraq! Now they are questioning the credentials of Abu Rumman and wondering if he allowed Braude to wander around the Waqf building.

Abu Rumman had to clarify that he met Braude at a conference in Italy, and that the scholar was able to recite the Quran perfectly by heart, even with correct intonation. He says that Braude is not a Zionist and even prayed with him in a mosque.

This episode is now feeding in to an older Arab conspiracy theory - of the Islamic University of Tel Aviv.

As Awad Dhaif Allah Al Malahama writes in Khaberni:

In 1956 the Israeli Mossad decided to establish the Islamic University of Tel Aviv. It is a closed university. Only outstanding Jewish students are accepted there. The Israeli Mossad supervises them directly, as it determines the study materials, the curriculum for each subject, the university professors, and its students, according to a carefully studied plan. The university's Jewish students are chosen very carefully by the Mossad. In it, Jewish students study various Islamic subjects, such as doctrine, interpretation, hadith, jurisprudence, and Arabic language, from a Zionist point of view. Jewish students take special courses in which they are trained on how to live among Muslims, deal with them, and deceive them. Their training is supervised by: psychologists, communication experts, sociologists and politicians.

The Mossad makes this Jewish graduate a Muslim sheikh, and he is presented as a great scholar. This Jewish sheikh is given an Islamic name. And the Mossad prepares for this sheikh, his Islamic place of work, with the utmost intelligence precision. Where this sheikh does his Islamic work, communicates with Muslims, lives with them, spies on them, distorts whatever texts and concepts of their Islamic beliefs as possible, and submits everything about them to the Mossad. This Sheikh issues special terrorist fatwas prepared for him by the Mossad, in order to distort the true image of Islam. The Mossad may ask this sheikh to establish an Islamic jihadi organization and recruit dedicated people in it. This organization may carry out operations planned by this sheikh who was planted by the Mossad.

Malahama assumes that Braude is a graduate of this secret program - how else can he possibly know the Quran? - and that Rumman is therefore a Mossad recruit.

Of course, this fits in with the Muslim theories that anyone they don't like must be a secret Jew.

Senator Jacob Javits, on March 23, 1960, gave a speech before Congress where he summarized the Arab boycott against Israel. Here are some excerpts where Javits makes it clear that the boycott is not anti-Zionist, but antisemitic.

---

One of the gravest and most threatening problems in the situation is the Arab boycott and blockade of Israel. This boycott is illegal, a violation of the U.N. Charter and of international law; because it has not been stopped, it has grown into full-scale economic warfare-not only against Israel, but against the free world as well. Its corrupting influence has fouled up the channels of world trade and commerce, subjected American business firms and business-men to discrimination on religious grounds, and involved the U.S. Government in the Suez Canal problem as well as in several embarrassing situations.

This Arab boycott tried to prevent businessmen from trading with Israel, and air and shipping lines from serving Israel, by threatening them with reprisals and blacklists. They are not only prohibited, according to the boycott, from trading in Arab countries, to use Arab ports, and to enjoy the other usual courtesies and rights, but also they may not be owned or operated by Jews.

While the Arab governments respect a decisive position, they exploit weaknesses; they did not retaliate when several European governments, among them Switzerland, West Germany, the Netherlands, brushed aside Arab boycott demands and vigorously rejected Arab threats of reprisal. On the other hand, the list of American firms and individuals affected by the Arab boycott continues to grow.

Arab pressures were so strong that some companies yielded to their demands. The major American and British oil companies have yielded to Arab boycott demands. Passengers on cruise ships and American airlines on Near East routes are advised that those of Jewish faith will be denied tourist privileges in certain Arab ports and stopping points. A number of American freighters have been put on the Arab blacklist because they had business dealings with Israel.

Yesterday the Lions International was reported placed on the Arab blacklist. This morning I learned that the Studebaker-Lark Corp. and the International Business Machines Corp. have also been placed on the Arab boycott list. A number of our moving-picture actors, actresses, and singers are on the Arab blacklist, and the showing of their films or sale of their records is prohibited because they either are Jewish or appeared at a Jewish fund-raising function. The New York State law against employment discrimination was invoked against Aramco because the oil company refused to hire Jews in its New York offices out of deference to Saudi Arabia where its wells are located and which supports the Arab boycott. And there is also the economic problem created by counter boycott action against firms which have succumbed to Arab pressure.

11/29 Links Pt2: White Noise and the Haters of Israel; Squash world championship in Malaysia canceled over refusal to allow in Israelis

From Ian:

White Noise and the Haters of Israel

To me, this story of horror and triumph is Israel’s ethos, encapsulated within a single life. When Israelis and Jews speak, they speak as people who have been chewed up and spit out by history; as people who have crawled out of history by their fingernails. When they invoke morality, it is as people with the most intimate knowledge of the horrors of life. And they know what these horrors have to teach us about how tenuous and compromised morality can be, and what it means to live in the absence of morality. They can speak to its inherent complications, compromises, and desperations. They know, in other words, of what they speak. They possess an ethos their enemies cannot, because they have earned it.

The saints, on the other hand, believe that one can simply assert one’s morality and be done with it — that by claiming to be moral, they become moral. The horrors of life are not just irrelevant but inconceivable to them, because they have never known these horrors. Nor can they conceive of the inevitable consequences of these horrors, because as a sheltered and privileged class, they have always lived without consequences. They will never have to pay the cost of what they demand of Israel and the Jewish people. This is how they can not only advocate hurling the Jews back into statelessness and exile, but actually claim it is the moral thing to do. It is how they can justify and even praise the wanton violence they and their allies incite. It is how they can remain blissfully ignorant of what all this says about their morality and their ethos.

What it says is quite clear: the saints have no ethos. They are a morally bankrupt privileged caste who, in their fantasies of rectitude, presume to judge a people who have known horrors of which they cannot begin to conceive. These are people who weep when Whole Foods runs out of kale, and then condemn those who have survived the gulag. And in a supreme act of hubris, the saints not only judge these refugees from history, but consider themselves their moral superiors. The admonitions of such people can, in the end, never be anything more than white noise.

Promised Government action on anti-Semitism is just blah, blah, blah

Other European states who have expressly adopted the definition have voiced no similar reservations and the Minister failed to identify which of the illustrative examples the Government takes exception to and why. At a time of escalating anti-Semitism in Ireland and criticism of Israel being freely and increasingly used as a Trojan horse to justify and disguise the spread of anti-Semitic tropes, there is a need for greater Government clarity.

O’Gorman assured Devlin of the Government’s commitment to an anti-racism strategy, to the enactment of new hate crime legislation and to preventing anti-Semitism and other forms of racism. He also reminded him of the funding annually provided by the State for many years to support the national Holocaust Memorial Day commemoration.

Memorialising Jews murdered in the Holocaust in today’s world generates enthusiasm and is not politically complicated. It seems that protecting today’s Jews against escalating anti-Semitism in Ireland generates less enthusiasm and is deemed so complicated that the Government is incapable of endorsing illustrative examples of anti-Semitism agreed and adopted by most EU member states.

The enactment of new anti-hate or anti-racism legislation will have no practical application to countering anti-Semitism if unaccompanied by a working definition of anti-Semitism and illustrative examples. In that context ministerial talk of action being taken to prevent anti-Semitism, to use the words of Greta Thunberg, is just so much “ blah, blah, blah”.

Squash world championship in Malaysia canceled over refusal to allow in Israelis

The World Squash Federation announced on Monday that the men’s world championship scheduled for next week in Kuala Lumpur was canceled after Malaysian authorities refused to allow entry to Israeli athletes.

In its statement, WSF said it “believes in an open and inclusive” event, and it was forced to cancel “due to the lack of confirmation over the issuing of visas and travel authorizations.”

Malaysia and Israel have no diplomatic ties, and Israelis are barred from visiting the South Asian country. In 2019, Malaysia was stripped of the right to host the World Para Swimming Championships for threatening to refuse Israeli athletes, and the competition was moved to London. This year’s tournament was moved to Malaysia from New Zealand because of coronavirus-related travel restrictions.

WSF President Zena Wooldridge indicated that Malaysia’s Olympic officials worked to allow the entry of Israeli athletes, but were unsuccessful in persuading the government to reverse course.

“I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to the International Olympic Committee and the Olympic Council of Malaysia for their unwavering efforts to influence the highest authorities of Malaysia to ensure the ability of all participating teams including Israel to enter Malaysia and compete, without any political discrimination, in accordance with the principles and rules of the Olympic Charter,” said Wooldridge. “It is important to WSF that no nation who wishes to compete misses out on the event.”

Chanukah video night 2: Nissim Black and Kosha Dillz, The Hanukkah Song 2.0

Just released yesterday, and it shows two candles, so it has to be watched tonight!

Another fake victory for Palestinian hunger strikers

It barely makes the news anymore, but Palestinian Arab prisoners have been going on hunger strikes a lot over the past few months with various demands.

Lately, Palestinian media has been celebrating "victories" where they end their strikes claiming they got their demands.

Here's one:

But as this article shows, he was already supposed to be released on December 14!

Middle East Monitor reported on more "victories" where hunger strikers agreed to end their strikes, but remain in detention for many more months:

Palestinian prisoner Ayad Al-Harimi has suspended his hunger strike after 61 days after Israeli occupation authorities agreed to release him on 4 March 2022.

On 11 November, Palestinian prisoner Miqdad Al-Qawasmi agreed to end his hunger strike, which was ongoing for 113 days, after Israeli prison authorities agreed to release him in February.

In each case it appears that Israel is releasing the prisoners on the original date they were supposed to be released, and not a day earlier.

There is certainly no indication that the hunger strikes are affecting any Israeli decisions on their release.

(h/t Tomer Ilan)

11/29 Links Pt1: The Most Legitimate State on Earth; Indian Ambassador to Israel, Indian-Israeli Jews Mark Anniversary of 2008 Mumbai Attacks; Iran Rep. Urges Israel’s ‘Annihilation’ Before Nuclear Talks

From Ian:

The Most Legitimate State on Earth

For a brief moment in the late 1980s, with communism passing away in Europe and Central Asia and its serf states breathing free, you may have been forgiven for assuming “The End of History” was correct, that the debate about which worldview best guarantees peace and prosperity had been decided, and that proponents of global empire would henceforth speak more softly, if at all. But then came the European Union, the cheerleaders of a hegemonic Pax Americana, an increasingly confident and expansive China, and the captains of the global oligopoly, all braying praises to their new world orders and warning us that attempts to resist them meant returning to carnage and chaos.

If such resistance could be embodied in a state, it would be the Jewish one. Israel may be an enthusiastic participant in international diplomacy and the high-tech global economy, but it is not in any danger of being assimilated into the borg. Its upper crust still sees itself as committed primarily to national interests, not cosmopolitan pieties. And it is not afraid to defy an empire or two for the sake of its survival—as it did, for example, when it bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq and was rewarded only with condemnation from the United States, the United Nations, and everyone in between.

But even more than Israel’s actions, it is the country’s essence that is so troubling to advocates of a global moral and political order that preaches sameness, not difference. Israel’s existence, and its continuing success, are an intimation that the light unto the nations may shine not from the embrace of universalist dogma, whether proclaimed from on high in Brussels or Beijing or Cupertino, but rather from a small nation that insists on living by its own traditions and happy to simply lead by example.

The idea that particularism is not an atavistic survival technique from a benighted past, but in fact the wellspring of human culture and social process, is as wicked to the Davos set as the Peace of Westphalia was to the Roman Catholic Church. To those who despise the idea of national sovereignty and national character, to those who want us all to watch the same shows, buy the same goods, and obey the same regulations and standards of virtue promulgated by a single authority, there can be no greater threat than the continuing existence of a strong, prosperous, and free Jewish state with its capital in Jerusalem. And what case can be made for a particularistic national existence in countries like Japan and France—to say nothing of more brittle constructions like Nigeria, Brazil, or the United States of America—if Israel is judged to be illegitimate?

Israel’s continuing success in the face of universal condemnation and scorn is a reminder that Herder’s celebration of difference was a solution to the universalist dreams of Pope Innocent X and his ideological successors, who nearly drowned the world in blood. Today, the universalist set foolishly insists that there is no greater crime than the belief that people and nations are and should continue to be different rather than the same. Feel free to ignore them.

On this day the Palestinians rejected statehood because they didn’t want to live next to a Jewish state. How has that approach worked for them? @YosephHaddad and I review:

??Partition plan
??1948
??1967
??First & Second intifada
??2008, 2012, 2014, 2021
pic.twitter.com/5LBlNgsDDt
— Emily Schrader - ????? ?????? (@emilykschrader) November 29, 2021

A report immediately following the UN #partitionplan detailing how the Arabs chose violence instead of statehood. pic.twitter.com/kJoro65cYN
— Emily Schrader - ????? ?????? (@emilykschrader) November 29, 2021

The International Day for Destroying Jewish Nationalism

Today is the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, as declared by a 1977 UN General Assembly resolution.

The date was specifically chosen to coincide with the anniversary of the 1947 UNGA Resolution 181 that called for a partition of Palestinian into a Jewish and Arab state. As the UN webpage for the day says, "The International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People is observed annually on or around 29 November, solemnly commemorating the adoption by the Assembly, on 29 November 1947, of resolution 181 (II), which provided for the partition of Palestine into two States."

November 29 was a day of celebration for Jews, as the UN recognized the necessity of a Jewish state in Palestine.

But it also handed the Palestinian Arabs their own independence from colonial Ottoman and British rule. If they would have accepted partition, they would have been given their own state . They would have been able to celebrate their 73rd anniversary this year.

Instead, Palestinian Arabs - and the entire Arab world - violently rejected the partition resolution and started a war within hours of the vote, threatening a "holy war" and "massacres" of Jews not only in Israel but throughout the Arab world.

Clearly, there was little desire for a Palestinian Arab state. The anger, threats, and terror attacks in 1947 were to stop a Jewish state, not to create a Palestinian Arab state.

By choosing November 29 as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, the UN is extending the genocidal intent of the Arabs in 1947. It has nothing to do with the desire for a Palestinian state, but for the destruction of the Jewish state. That choice of date is a deliberate insult to Jews.

It is notable that in 1977, when the resolution was made, Palestinians were still best known as international terrorists. And barely four months after this resolution, Yasir Arafat's Fatah murdered 38 Israeli civilians including 13 children in the Coastal Road Massacre. The UN called for solidarity with murderers and terrorists against Israel, not for them to build a state.

Similarly, "Nakba Day" is not the date of any massacres, or military defeats, or expulsions, but it is tied with the date Israel declared independence. Nakba Day commemorates a "catastrophe" because that was the first full day of independence for Israel.

Both the Day of Solidarity and Nakba Day give a message that is anti-Israel, not pro-Palestinian. They say that any days that Jews celebrate are days of mourning for the world.

The outbreaks of Arab violence in Palestine before 1947 were generally not aimed at throwing off colonial rule or agitating for a Palestinian Arab state. The violence was all primarily aimed at the Jews - against Jewish immigration, against Jewish land ownership, against Jewish nationalism.

Think about the Palestinian "red lines" for accepting peace with Israel: control of the Old City of Jerusalem, ethically cleansing Jews from Judea and Samaria, insisting that millions of Arabs have the right to "return" not to a Palestinian state but to the hated Jewish state, releasing terrorists who have attacked Jews from prison. Not one of them is a prerequisite for a state. All of them, however, are deliberately intended to weaken the Jewish state and Jewish ties to the Jewish historic homeland.

A look at the last 140 years of modern Zionism shows a consistent pattern of the Arab desire to destroy Jewish nationalism, and Palestinian nationalism has been only a facade to help accomplish that goal when military means failed.

Everything in Palestinian Arab history is consistent with the idea of destroying Israel as a Jewish state, including Oslo. This is why even today Palestinians deny any Jewish connection to the land - to Hebron, to Jerusalem, to Bethlehem - and why they rewrite history to erase the core of Jewish ties to Eretz Yisrael.

November 29 is not a day of solidarity with Palestinians. It is another attempt to destroy Jewish nationalism.

Israel's President Isaac Herzog lit the first flame of the Chanukah menorah in Hebron, at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. He emphasized that the Jewish connection to Hebron is beyond question, but Muslims are also descendents of Abraham.

The historic connection of Jews to Hebron, to the Tomb of the Patriarchs, to the heritage of the patriarchs and matriarchs, is unquestionable. Recognition of this connection must be beyond all controversy

You won’t agree about everything, but we need to remember that ‘we are all one man’s sons.’...

We all have shared roots from this cave. Alongside that, we have to remember that our roots are not the only ones that go back to this cave. Especially today, and especially here, in this holy space dedicated to all sons of Abraham, we have to continue dreaming of peace, between all faiths and creeds in this land, and to condemn any type of hatred or violence.

Then we saw a repeat of a theme we've seen countless times before.

Palestinian prime minister Mohammed Shtayyeh denied any Jewish connection to Hebron, as Wafa reports:

Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh rejected the claims of Israeli President Isaac Herzog that the Jews have a historic right to the city of Hebron.

Shtayyeh stated that Herzog's statements are an attempt to impose more false facts in the Arab Islamic city, as a prelude to Judaizing and extending control over it, and subjecting its original inhabitants to the apartheid regime whose features are evident in the streets and lanes of the Old City, which is subjected to ethnic cleansing and racist discrimination. .

Shtayyeh condemned Herzog’s provocative intrusion into the Ibrahimi Mosque, warning of its dangerous repercussions, and called on the United Nations and UNESCO, which placed the Haram al-Sharif on the World Heritage List, to take urgent action to stop these violations of Islamic and Christian sanctities, especially in the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. And the Ibrahimi Mosque in the city of Hebron.

Jews accurately say that a holy site was theirs first, and they are willing to share but not forfeit their rights. The Palestinians say that the Jews have no historic rights to anything in the region and are trying to steal it all from them.

Facts don't matter - the Palestinians take a political position, that they are the only people with a legitimate claim to the region, and they twist history and archaeology and common sense to their bigoted, antisemitic viewpoint.

It happens all the time. But Westerners cannot grasp the concept that Palestinians lie so openly, contradicting what Muslims have themselves admitted for centuries. So the false Palestinian claims get enshrined at UNESCO because no one wants to upset them.

It turns out the story about the University of Toronto -Scarborough Student Union (SCSU) is much, much worse than I originally reported.

There were two resolutions passed. One was the pro-BDS resolution that I reported about, saying that all vendors - including kosher food vendors - must pass an anti-Israel purity test before being allowed to serve the campus.

But there was another resolution passed at the same time that was arguably even worse.

The Jewish Students Union submitted a motion to counteract the BDS motion, emphasizing that Jewish students must be treated equally as any other student, with the freedom to hold any political opinions.

The SCSU passed the motion - after taking out the parts it found objectionable, including giving Jewish students equal rights on campus!

Those parts included the right for Jewish organizations to exist on campus.

And it did this without even consulting the Jewish students who drafted the motion.

In other words, the SCSU took a motion to support Jewish students and turned it into an antisemitic motion where Jewish students are denied the same rights that all other students have on campus.

Here is the entire resolution, entitled "RE-AFFIRMATION OF RIGHTS OF JEWISH STUDENTS AT UTSC," with the deleted parts in blue and struck out.

WHEREAS the Scarborough Campus Students’ Union (SCSU) membership is a diverse mix of students of different nationalities, ethnicities, places of origin, and religions whose views sometimes conflict; and

WHEREAS Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects freedom of expression everywhere in Canada subject to statutory limits of hate speech, including at UTSC; and

WHEREAS the Scarborough Campus Students’ Union’s equity statement assures students that “any form of discrimination and harassment will not be tolerated;” and

WHEREAS the SCSU equity statement further declares: “We all have an obligation to ensure that an open and inclusive space, free of hate is established;” and

WHEREAS the SCSU is obligated to follow the principles articulated in the University of Toronto’s Policy on the Recognition of Student Groups, stating, “the University will not attempt to censor, control or interfere with any group on the basis of its philosophy, beliefs, interests or opinions expressed unless and until these lead to activities which are illegal or which infringe the rights and freedoms already mentioned;” and

WHEREAS the SCSU membership includes Jewish students, including citizens of the State of Israel, who are protected under Ontario’s Human Rights Code (1962) based on creed, ancestry, place of origin, and/or ethnic origin, defined as “social, cultural or religious practices drawn from a common heritage or a shared historical past;” and

WHEREAS provisions of the Ontario’s Human Rights Code protects Jews, including Jewish students, from discrimination in the provisions of services and by vocational associations and unions, including from discrimination by the SCSU or in the services the union provides students at UTSC; and

WHEREAS most Israeli citizens are compelled to serve in the Israeli military or perform mandatory national service.

BE IT RESOLVED that SCSU re-affirm its commitment to ensuring that Jewish students are unencumbered by discriminatory policies or actions by the union or its officers, as promised by the union’s equity statement, and the Ontario Human Rights Code, by recognizing the right of Jewish students, like all students, to organize & advertise events to express their political, cultural and/or religious views; and

BE IT RESOLVED that SCSU executives oppose conditions that discriminate against, or significantly impede, full Jewish participation in political, religious, cultural, academic, or social life on and off campus. To do so, the union, its executives, and staff will:

1. Continue to recognize Jewish student groups, including Jewish student groups affiliated with outside organizations, consistent with the University of Toronto’s Policy on the Recognition of Campus Groups; and

2. Protect the right of Jewish students to enjoy their Charter rights of a freedom of expression on campus, including the articulation of political views, the practice of religious beliefs, and the display of Jewish symbols.

3. Fund all recognized student groups who apply for, and qualify for, union funding for student programming events through normal processes ~~without exceptions for particular political beliefs held by the student groups, the views expressed by participants or organizers of such events, or the political views of co-sponsors of the events.~~

4. Refrain from placing restrictions on Jewish students or Jewish student organizations seeking to affiliate with outside organizations when organizing, funding, or advertising events beyond the limits established by the University of Toronto’s Policy on the Recognition of Student Groups

5. Oppose and condemn hostile behavior directed against Jews because they are Jews, or Israeli students because they are Israeli citizens, by executives and staff of the SCSU, and discourage any such behavior in social media forums controlled by the SCSU, its executives, and staff.

6. Eschew the use of union participation in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as an inhibition of student participation in campus organizations like Hillel, or community organizations like UJA or Independent Jewish Voices.

~~7. Defend the principles of academic freedom, by ensuring that students, staff and faculty at UTSC enjoy opportunities to:~~

~~• attend lectures, workshops and films about Israel and/or Palestine,~~

~~• participate in joint research with Israelis or Israeli institutions,~~

~~• enroll in classes offered in conjunction with Israeli universities,~~

~~• travel or study abroad in Israel, or with organizations that support Israel or Zionism.~~

8. Disavow remarks or rhetoric that may be seen as antisemitic, including statements that:

• amplify historical tropes about Jewish power;

• perpetuate stereotypes about Jews;

• blame Jewish students for the actions of the Israeli government or military;

9. Be mindful of conflating support for Israelis or Palestinians with support for actions by the governments of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and their allies, or other groups operating within Israel and Palestine;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ~~regardless of positions taken by the union on contemporary politics in Israel, Palestine, or more broadly in the Middle East,~~ the union will continue to support campus events through normal processes including but not restricted to, educational events about the Holocaust, Jewish religious beliefs, or Jewish history, ~~or current events that are organized or sponsored, in full or in part, by campus and community groups that support Israel or Zionism.~~

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that to avoid discriminating on the basis of ancestry or place of origin, the union will ensure that neither prior service in the Israeli military, nor reserve service in the Israeli military, will disqualify students, faculty and staff from engagement with the union.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the union will not refrain from co-sponsoring activities or entering into contracts with organizations that include participants, directors, or employees who have served in the Israeli military, or continue to hold reserve status in the Israeli military, solely on that basis.

By deleting the parts that it found inconsistent with BDS, the SCSU showed that it is explicitly opposed to academic freedom, to Jewish student groups being given the same rights as other student groups, and to Jewish students not being discriminated against!

This is pure antisemitism by any definition.

The President of the University of Toronto only addressed a small part of this in his letter by mentioning "striking of the language about academic freedom from the second motion." But they struck the very first "be it resolved" that says Jewish students should not be discriminated against for any reason.

The SCSU says there are some reasons to discriminate against Jews!

This unilateral editing of the Jewish Student Union motion to change it to something it was not intended to be shows blatant disrespect for the Jewish community on campus, and the parts it chose to remove betray an actual desire to discriminate against Jewish students - no other students are forced to prove that they hold certain political positions to be treated equally on campus with everyone else.

BDS is antisemitic, and this proves it.

(h/t Andrew P.)

Chanukah video night 1: Six13: West Side Chanukah Story

Returning to my tradition of bringing you a new music video for every night of Chanukah. Here's Six13 parodying West Side Story.

Happy Chanukah!

Chanukah is as Zionist a holiday as one can imagine.

It celebrates a military victory of Jews against people who were trying to take over their homeland. It celebrates a victory of the few over the many. It celebrates the purification of the holiest Jewish site, the Temple in Jerusalem. It celebrates a miracle of the oil, showing God's involvement in the Jewish story.

It goes against everything the anti-Zionist, secular, socialist, "Jewish" Voice for Peace stands for.

But JVP's entire raison d'etre is to pretend that their brand of anti-Zionist Jew-hatred is actually a part of Judaism itself. So Chanukah is a challenge to them.

They must redefine the holiday itself. And, in so doing, they must redefine Judaism itself as well.

Here's what their Hanukkah page says:

Come celebrate Hanukkah this year building a radical, loving, anti-Zionist Jewish movement for liberation.

Who was liberated in the original Chanukah again? Oh yes, the people whose descendants JVP wants to exile!

Hanukkah means rededication.

Actually, it means "dedication."

This Hanukkah Against Apartheid, we rededicate our resolve to be bold and win against all that is life-taking and land-grabbing.

Oh? They are against Hamas, who just murdered a Jew? No, of course not.

It is said, the Temple was cleaned, sanctified, and rededicated after the Maacabees [sic] won the fight. Here, in diaspora, we can recognize the “Temple” as what we are building together: Judaism beyond Zionism. The Temple is where we practice our treasured values of justice, freedom, and equality; it is this practice that sanctifies the Temple.

JVP's' Temple has been replaced with a new, symbolic "Temple."

Sounds somewhat familiar....

Oh, yes, it sounds like Christian supersessionism! In various flavors of Christianity, the Jewish Temple has been replaced with the Christian people - or with Jesus himself, just like the Jewish people have been replaced with Christians.

Jewish Voice for Peace cannot stomach an actual Temple being central to Judaism. They take a page from Christianity and replace the Temple that is a central component of Judaism with whatever they consider important - in the process, saying that real Judaism is obsolete and their replacement theology is the real thing.

Similarly, JVP cannot subscribe to real Judaism, because in real Judaism the Temple and Jerusalem as central - and they don't want Jews to have any attachment to those. So they replace them.

You can call it a replacement theology.

"Jewish" Voice for Peace cannot possibly accept real Judaism. So it has to make up its own religion of anti-Zionism and calls it Judaism. And if that religion borrows some concepts from Christianity, well, why not? That religion was a success!

And then JVP writes something that sounds truly Christian:

Scroll down for JVP and friends’ virtual Hanukkah offerings.

Jews simply don't use the word "offerings" today.

Christians do it all the time.

There is nothing Jewish about "Jewish Voice for Peace." Their concept of and knowledge of Judaism is not Jewish at all.

I didn't think about this when I made this cartoon, but, wow, it is really true.

11/28 Links: A Call to Action: Join the Maccabees; Brown University’s Anti-Zionist Fantasy World; Congress urge SEC inquiry into Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s

From Ian:

A Call to Action: Join the Maccabees

The Maccabean victory over Greece, the world’s major military power of the time, was miraculous. Perhaps even more miraculous was the third major successful effort to reestablish an independent Jewish state.

The modern-day Greek nations were first the Ottoman Empire and then the British Empire, upon which the “sun never set”; that is, until the British departure from Israel.

Last week, we witnessed the murder of Eli Kay. He immigrated to Israel on his own in his teens; served with distinction in the esteemed paratroopers’ unit; studied in a yeshivah; worked as a tour guide in the Old City; and was engaged to be married. A newly commissioned Israel Defense Forces paratrooper who attended his crowded funeral said that you could sum up the mood in one word: “determination.”

In other words, if you think that terrorists or their sympathizers are going to have even a shred of impact on our will, you are sorely mistaken. This only strengthens our resolve. We are the Maccabees. With God’s help, we have vanquished the world’s largest empires. More of us are coming, and we are building families and our Jewish future right here in the land of Israel.

This year, when celebrating the joy of Hanukkah, we must make it more than a superficial effort. Remember those who fought and found the oil to light our way.

Thank God for the miracle of Israel then and now. Commit to support the mission of the Maccabees of today. Support our people and help build the State of Israel.

Edwin Black: Yom HaGirush—The inside story of ‘Expulsion Day’

No one can show me any identification of Arabs as Palestinians before 1964. On “The Edwin Black Show,” I have publicly asked for just one example. Yet the “Palestinian” cause has been championed—based on false history, fake facts, Jewish ignorance and the forgotten realities of 850,000 expelled Jews.

There have been many expulsions and forced migrations in history. The Spanish Inquisition broadly covers a single sphere of expulsion. The Trail of Tears covers one category of forced migrations, that of Native Americans. But never since the Roman Empire has the world seen some 15 countries openly coordinate the deprivation and expulsion of their citizens based solely on their religion.

Even though this grave act was always a flame burning in the families of the dispossessed, it was forgotten by the world. The “sha-sha” virus can infect an entire people proving there is both collective memory and collective amnesia.

But I stumbled upon the Farhud in researching my 2003 book Banking on Baghdad. This rekindled the torch of awareness.

“The Farhud Recognition Project,” energized by Sephardim in the United States, only asked for the mass murder to be remembered. I dove further into the topic, resulting in my 2010 book, The Farhud—Roots of the Arab-Nazi Alliance in the Holocaust, which tracked the Arab-Nazi alliance, the awful pogroms and the post-war expulsion.

In June 2015, I and a group of committed communal leaders were able to do what many memory-seared families called the impossible: proclaim International Farhud Day at the United Nations in a historic event globally livestreamed by the U.N. itself.

But I always wanted to do more and give identity and homage to the mass expulsion. This month, with the support of my colleagues in many countries, on a special edition of “The Edwin Black Show,” I proclaimed Nov. 30 forever more to be a day of remembrance named “Yom HaGirush.”

That name, Yom HaGirush, marks when Jewish communities across many countries were once again dispossessed, but became repossessed in the free nation of Israel. The Jewish state now possesses these people and their descendants—and they in turn now possess their Jewish state. Possession is nine-tenths of survival. Israel has become the final stop for the Jews.

From Morocco to India, and from Yemen to Afghanistan, the lives and centuries of legacies were incinerated. It was done in broad daylight with barely a murmur from the world.

It happened not even five years after the world learned that six million Jews had been exterminated and millions more made refugees. Mark it down on a piece of paper: Yom HaGirush. YomHaGirush.com is now in embryonic form, but soon will be a vibrant worldwide resource and a warning to the world that when we say, “Never again,” we mean it.

Brown University’s Anti-Zionist Fantasy World

Brown University is working hard to become the most anti-Israel school in America. In its competition with Columbia University and New York University, Brown not only boasts the nation’s first ever endowed chair in Palestinian studies (named after PLO poet Mahmoud Darwish), but the recipient of that dubious honor, professor of history Beshara Doumani, is currently serving as the president of Birzeit University, located down the road from PLO headquarters in Ramallah. Brown University has become the Providence Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

To that end, Brown’s Center for Middle East Studies competes with Columbia’s Center for Palestine Studies and NYU’s Kevorkian Center to celebrate Palestinianism and decry the evils of Israel. Brown’s latest effort came on November 12 in the form of a Zoom talk by Somdeep Sen, associate professor in international development studies at Roskilde University, Denmark. Sen was promoting his book, titled “Decolonizing Palestine,” which is academic-speak for “Denouncing Israel.”

Like many anti-Zionists, Somdeep Sen lives in a dream world, partially of his own creation and partially thrust upon him by the fantasy world created by a sect of pro-BDS, anti–Semitic liberal-arts academics who insist that Israel is an “apartheid state” and there is a country called “Palestine.”

He announced repeatedly that his book is an attempt to “normalize Hamas” by rendering it “de-exceptionalized.” In academic jargon, this means that Sen’s work is dedicated to softening the image of Hamas, contextualizing the terrorist organization so that it seems to be just another movement of downtrodden underdogs fighting against oppressors. This delusion led him, multiple times during his talk, to compare Hamas to Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

Breaking the Silence, Peace Now and Hamas agree: Jews should not be allowed in Judaism's second holiest site for Chanukah

Israel's President Isaac Herzog plans to light the first Chanukah candle in Hebron, at the Tomb of the Patriarchs - Judaism's second holiest place.

The reactions from the "moderate" Palestinian Authority and "extremist" Hamas were nearly identical.

Mahmoud al-Habbash, advisor for religious affairs to Mahmoud Abbas, and Husam Abu al-Rub, undersecretary of the Palestinian Ministry of Awqaf and Religious Affairs, said that Herzog's visit represents a provocation to the feelings of the Palestinians, and to the feelings of millions of Arabs and Muslims.

Hamas said that the visit would be "a provocation to the feelings of the Palestinian people and a flagrant violation of the sanctity of the Ibrahimi Mosque." It warned that "the occupation bears full responsibility for the repercussions of this attack," calling on the Palestinians in the West Bank, and Hebron in particular, to "confront this provocative step and confront the attack on the Ibrahimi Mosque."

But Leftist Israeli groups are no less strident.

Breaking the Silence, Peace Now and other groups plan to protest in Hebron, making a pun on "The Days of Chanukah" into the "Days of Chanufah - Impiety/Hypocrisy:"

Israel's previous President Reuven Rivlin also visited Hebron, also to protests.

Hamas and the Leftist protesters agree: Jews should not be allowed to visit their holy places unless the Muslims generously allow them to.

Historically, Jews were never allowed to enter the Tomb of the Patriarchs (or the Temple Mount) when they were under Muslim rule. Jews had a pay an annual protection payment to ensure that Muslims wouldn't destroy Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem and that they would be allowed to visit the Western Wall. Right now, the only way Jews can visit places like the synagogue in Jericho or Joseph's Tomb in Shechem (Nablus) is under permission from the PA and IDF protection.

That is what these groups want the status quo to return to.

According to these groups, freedom of religion is not a human right - but Muslim antisemitism is.

UPDATE: All Palestinian media headlines at this moment say "Herzog stormed the Ibrahimi mosque."

On Thursday, I reported on the insanely antisemitic resolution passed by the University of Toronto at Scarborough Student Union (SCSU) that demanded that all student groups - meaning Jewish student groups - actively support boycotting Israel in order to be accepted, and that all suppliers of kosher food to Jewish students must also be anti-Israel (although the new fascists might allow exceptions if they decide that it is absolutely necessary for Jews to eat.)

On Friday, the adults in the room made a statement about how unacceptable this new brand of antisemitic fascism is on campus.

From the President of the University of Toronto, Meric Gertler:

The University of Toronto is opposed to all forms of discrimination, and committed to the protection of freedom of speech and academic freedom. The University was alarmed to learn about two motions passed at the Scarborough Campus Students’ Union (SCSU) Annual General Meeting on November 24. Both motions are inconsistent with the University of Toronto’s core values of freedom of speech and inclusion.

One motion reaffirmed SCSU’s commitment to the “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” (BDS) movement; another concerns the rights of Jewish students at UTSC. Student organizations are free to take positions on a wide variety of controversial topics. Student societies for which the University collects mandatory fees based on registration must abide by our Policy on Open, Accessible and Democratic Autonomous Student Societies. This Policy simultaneously affirms the independent operation of autonomous student societies and the requirement that “autonomy must be exercised in a manner that is compliant with the law and University policy. Further, all Student Organizations must conduct themselves in an open, accessible and democratic manner.”

One of the requirements in the BDS motion is that SCSU “refrain from engaging with organizations, services, or participating in events that further normalize Israeli apartheid.” The motion allows an exception for suppliers of Kosher food if “no alternatives are available.” A requirement that providers of food as a religious accommodation be required to apply for an exemption, or even be asked about their views about issues elsewhere in the world is unacceptable.

So too is the striking of the language about academic freedom from the second motion. Academic freedom is an individual right, and the Policy on Open, Accessible and Democratic Autonomous Student Societies requires that these organizations must permit their members to determine which positions to take. Nor should they restrict the speakers that they can invite, or organizations with which they can cooperate based on their connections to a particular country.

The motions are specifically focused on Israel in a way that is troubling to many members of the community. Such motions would be no more acceptable if focused on another country, or if a student organization in which members are enrolled by their registration were to take multiple stands on a wide variety of issues.

The University’s place in society requires that its members be free to take positions on controversial questions. These issues are addressed by a number of University of Toronto policies, including the Statement on Freedom of Speech and the Policy on the Recognition of Student Groups. According to our Statement of Institutional Purpose,

The University of Toronto is dedicated to fostering an academic community in which the learning and scholarship of every member may flourish, with vigilant protection for individual human rights, and a resolute commitment to the principles of equal opportunity, equity and justice.

Within the unique university context, the most crucial of all human rights are the rights of freedom of speech, academic freedom, and freedom of research. And we affirm that these rights are meaningless unless they entail the right to raise deeply disturbing questions and provocative challenges to the cherished beliefs of society at large and of the university itself.

These requirements apply directly to the SCSU motions. It is not acceptable to impose political tests on the recognition of Jewish student groups on any of the University of Toronto campuses. It is unacceptable to impose political tests on suppliers of Kosher or any other type of food.

The University will be following up with the SCSU to address our concerns.

Meric S. Gertler
President

The statement is way too polite. The people behind these motions were themselves violating University policy, not to mention basic decency and liberal standards, and they should be put on notice. Putting a purity test on student groups and on suppliers of goods and services is, simply, fascism.

Singling out Jews by making a specific motion banning kosher food from vendors who are not sufficiently anti-Israel is clear-cut antisemitism, and President Gertler should have called that out. As the Jewish Student Life group at U of T mentions:

Although there were many strong comments made by the University in our support, there is a need to call out bigotry by name when it is so clearly manifested. The actions of the SCSU were not simply political disagreement. The passing of these motions is an act of blatant antisemitism and must be addressed as such.

I am also troubled by one sentence: "The University’s place in society requires that its members be free to take positions on controversial questions." This implies that supporting the existence of the only Jewish state in the world is controversial. It is not; it is mainstream. Calling it controversial is essentially saying that one supports the positions of such human rights luminaries as Algeria, Syria and Iran. When President Gertler says a statement like that, it shows that the haters have scored a victory in putting Israel's very existence into question even in this statement against them.

Gertler's mother survived the Holocaust and he has lectured in Israel, so no doubt the modern fascist antisemites will claim that his position is due to his being "Zionist," not because he is right.