Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, September 01, 2022

09/01 Links Pt1: Col. Kemp: A Deal Based on Lies: The Iran Nuclear Agreement Will Make War More Likely; Iran deal bashed in letter to Biden from 5,000 Israeli security experts

From Ian:

Col. Richard Kemp: A Deal Based on Lies: The Iran Nuclear Agreement Will Make War More Likely

Iran has been waging war non-stop on the West and its allies in the Middle East since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Appeasing Tehran by endorsing its nuclear program and handing it billions of dollars from sanctions relief will empower and encourage the ayatollahs to even greater aggression.

The mantra of the apologists for President Biden's attempt to revive President Obama's failed agreement from 2015 that paved the way to an Iranian nuclear bomb is "a bad deal is better than no deal." Well, no, it is not. The argument is that it buys time for the West, with optimism that "something will turn up." But optimism is not a strategy and certainly not for dealing with a violent revolutionary regime dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state, which it sees as the proxy of its ultimate enemy, America.

The "buying time" argument only works if you do not understand Iran and are naive enough to believe the regime will honor what it agrees to. The reality is that the regime in Tehran will ignore constraints imposed by the deal that it does not like. That is what it did with the original JCPOA and its other international undertakings including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that it has frequently breached.

Tehran will continue to develop its nuclear capability - deal or no deal - at the speed it wants until it is physically stopped from doing so. The $100 billion a year it will receive as a result of lifted sanctions will enable Iran to speed up its nuclear program, including development of ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to Europe and the U.S. Iran's regional aggression will shift into overdrive with the massive cash injection.

What kind of Temple Mount access do Israelis want?

The issue of the Temple Mount becoming a geopolitical flashpoint between Israel and its neighbors has robbed us of the opportunity of speaking about it religiously and historically. The increasing numbers of Israelis supporting a Jewish presence on Temple Mount, and the growing number of Jews ascending to Temple Mount – most famously the recent visit by conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro – demand that we ask ourselves: where is this all heading, and what would we like to see happen on the Temple Mount?

If the White House, Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, Jordan’s Abdullah, China’s Xi Jinping, and the Secretary General of the UN all called and told the Israeli government that they would be delighted to see Israel take full control of Temple Mount, what would we do next? Differing Jewish views on the matter

To answer this, we must note the different positions among the Jewish people on this matter. The overwhelming number of Orthodox rabbis and the Chief Rabbinate would ask that the area be fenced in and that no one be allowed at the site known as Har Habayit until the messiah miraculously arrives.

On the other side of the spectrum, there is a fringe group of religious Jews who have been anticipating such a moment and would like to engage in a complete reconstruction of the Temple, build the Third Temple, and bring daily sacrifices and offerings so that “the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem shall be pleasing to God as in the days of yore and in the years of old” (Malachi 3).

In fact, in 1962, five years before the Six Day War, the IDF’s chief rabbi, Shlomo Goren, published an article saying that if Israel were to take over Jerusalem, we would be obliged to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash.

These two sides of the spectrum are irreconcilable. Those who believe in fencing the area off until the messiah arrives are not neutral on the matter – it is their belief, and they are the majority. To them, building the Temple and offering sacrifices – or even going up there today – is a far worse problem than the current status quo.

Unpacked: The Secret Agreement That Shaped the Middle East | History of Israel Explained

It was 1916 and World War I was raging. Countries were fighting for resources, land and power and the Ottoman Empire was on its deathbed.

With all eyes on the Empire’s territories, the secretive Sykes-Picot agreement was created to decide who would get control over what would become Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, and Iraq, as well as parts of future Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

However, in 1920, representatives at the San Remo Conference tossed these secret plans out in favor of “mandates'' AKA territory temporarily governed by an Allied power. This led to the British Mandate over Palestine, and the eventual establishment of Israel as a legal national home for the Jewish people.

CNN Arabic quotes an episode in Jared Kushner's book Breaking History that I couldn't find in any English-language articles. The quotes are obviously translated from English to Arabic and back, so they will not be exact quotes from the book.

The President was scheduled to meet with the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank. Abbas came to the White House in May, told the president he was ready to negotiate, and expressed confidence in Trump as an arbiter of a peace agreement between the Palestinians and Israel. We were impressed, but we were still waiting to hear more. Just before we left, Ambassador Friedman showed Trump a video of Abbas making serious threats towards the Israeli people.

Friedman's message was clear: Be careful with Abbas - he tells you he's for peace in English, but look carefully at what he says in Arabic. Tillerson saw what was happening in the video and got angry, claiming he was dishonest. Friedman replied: ' Are you saying he didn't say these things?' Tillerson had to admit that they were Abbas's words, but he was angry that he was losing control. It was important for the president to see all sides of the issue, especially since he was hearing from so many respectable businessmen that Abbas was a serious man who genuinely wanted to make peace.

During the bilateral meeting in Ramallah, Abbas recited the same talking points he had used during his last visit to the White House. It was as if the first meeting never happened. He failed to show any progress on the issues he and Trump had previously discussed. Trump was disappointed. He was furious and did not mince his words: 'You pay those who kill Israelis. This is official government policy. You have to stop this. We can make a deal in two seconds. I have the best players on it. But I want to see some action. I want to I see it quickly, I don't think you want to make a deal.'

Abbas became defensive and complained about Israeli security. Trump replied: 'Wait: Israel is good at security, and you say you're not going to take security from them? Are you crazy? Without Israel, ISIS can take over your territory in about twenty minutes. We're spending so much on the military. Everyone in this region spends a fortune on security. If I can get high-quality security for free to America and save the cost, I'll take it in a second'.... After witnessing Abbas' stubbornness, I understand better why 12 former presidents tried and failed in reaching a peace agreement.

This sounds like Trump - and Tillerman, and Friedman, and Abbas himself. It is consistent with what Friedman wrote in his memoir about the meeting with Trump. The Jerusalem Post said that the businessman who had tried to convince Trump that Abbas was peaceful was Ronald Lauer, which is sort of amazing - he used to be a Netanyahu supporter but had a falling out, but to hate Netanyahu so much as to tell Trump that he should accept Abbas as a peaceful statesman is almost beyond belief.

CNN Arabic contacted the Palestinian foreign ministry to comment with no response.

It is interesting that this was not reported in English-language CNN. Apparently, criticizing Abbas in English does not fit the narrative.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Roger Waters opposes "occupation" - except when he supports it. A real mystery.

Israel-hater and antisemite Roger Waters is in the midst of a North American tour. The Times of Israel writes about the concert and the protesters outside his New York show on Tuesday.

Waters puts political messages on a massive screen, and among them are messages about how awful "occupation" is.

Waters became a spokesperson for BDS in 2011, so it is safe to say that he held these opinions for over a decade.

Moreover, Waters has said that any artists performing in Israel endorse the Israeli government.

If all that is true, then how come he performed Pink Floyd's "The Wall" in 2013 - in Istanbul, Turkey? You know, the country that occupies part of Cyprus?

Waters, in his own words, must endorse the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus.

Which means Roger Waters, human rights activist, endorses occupation.

And indeed he does. After all, Roger Waters has said that he supports Russia in the current war in Ukraine, which is a war of occupation, and he supports Russia's occupation of Crimea.

How to reconcile these two opinions about occupation?

When he says "FUCK OCCUPATION," he must mean "...but only if it can be blamed on Jews. Otherwise, carry on!"

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The New Arab reports:

Lebanese ministers were filmed hurling rocks across the country's border with Israel during a visit to Lebanon's southern border on Tuesday.

A report broadcast by Lebanon's Al Jadeed TV showed Minister of Energy Walid Fayyad and Minister of Social Affairs Dr. Hector Hajjar throwing several rocks across the Blue Line, which marks the country's southern frontier with Israel.

The ministers were accompanied by several other members of Lebanon's cabinet.

Video of the event was widely shared - and widely mocked by Lebanese.

Abu Ali Express translated some of their comments:

1. "It's so sad... They are literally throwing my future away..."
2. "Before finding the time to throw stones, how about you work on providing me with electricity."
3. "[The ministers] prevent us from ever progressing out of the Stone Age..."
4. "(Dear) Minister of Energy, you can't even turn on a light bulb, and you want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth by throwing a stone (at it)?"
5. "They took a group of idiots and made them ministers..."
6. "Echoes of explosions of laughter heard yesterday coming from the Israeli settlements..."
7. "How do you want us to have electricity when the "Minister of Darkness" is an idiot, and the "Minister of Diapers" is even more idiotic than him?
8. The Minister of Energy and the Minister of Social Affairs threw stones at Israel. One cannot guarantee an hour of electricity, and the other is responsible for having 80% of Lebanon below the poverty line.

Others say the Energy Minister is trying to cut off electricity to Israel since he has experience in that area, or that the ministers are bombing Lebanon with the newest missiles.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/31 Links Pt2: Zionism past and present: From Herzl to Herzog; What ‘CNN’ left out of its special on anti-Semitism; Sharansky: Gorbachev wouldn’t have released Soviet Jews if not for global pressure

From Ian:

Gil Troy: Zionism past and present: From Herzl to Herzog

The past and present danced together on Monday night in Basel, Switzerland. It wasn’t just due to the black-bearded, top-hatted Theodor Herzl impersonator, who gave stunningly relevant answers by quoting Herzl’s writings to questions about various contemporary issues today. It wasn’t just due to the moving appearance of the great-granddaughter of the falsely accused French army captain, Alfred Dreyfus, in the Stadt Casino where 208 delegates gathered 125 years ago in 1897 to launch the formal Zionist movement.

And it wasn’t just due to the brave speeches of various Swiss leaders who owned up to the ugly Swiss tradition of antisemitism – during Herzl’s and Hitler’s eras. The choreographer-in-chief that night, who harmonized the history of yesterday with the wonders of today before 1,400 people, was Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog.Wisely speaking in Hebrew, even though much of the 125th anniversary of Herzl’s First Zionist Congress this week transpired in English, Herzog was at his best. The setting was sublime, oozing with Herzl’s essence, with the nervousness, excitement, and ultimately, the miraculous, epic transformations triggered by that one game-changing meeting decades ago in Basel. Using Herzl’s words, dreams and achievements as launching pads, Herzog challenged us all to reclaim Zionism. Zionism, he explained, was not an evolution but a revolution – a radical, brave, break from the past to save the Jewish people.

It was bold, modern and democratic, yet rooted in Jewish tradition. Ultimately, Herzog explained, Zionism’s greatest gift to the Jewish people was delivering independence after millennia of toxic dependence on others.

Today, when we are so used to Jewish independence, our challenge is to keep dreaming and keep building. Without being heavy-handed, without finger-pointing or guilt-tripping, and without being partisan, Herzog articulated a renewed liberal-democratic Herzlian vision of understanding that nationalism is the most effective vehicle for finding meaning in life individually and improving the world collectively. “Zionism,” Herzog explained, “is not just a shared fate, but a shared mission.”

Herzog: Gorbachev was one of the 20th century’s most extraordinary figures

Israeli President Isaac Herzog and Prime Minister Yair Lapid joined international leaders on Wednesday in eulogizing former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, who died on Tuesday at the age of 91.

“Mikhail Gorbachev was one of the 20th century’s most extraordinary figures,” Herzog said in a statement. “He was a brave and visionary leader, who shaped our world in ways previously thought unimaginable. I was proud to meet him during his 1992 visit to Israel. Heartfelt condolences to his family and friends.”

Lapid issued a statement saying that “Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, passed away yesterday at the age of 91. He was a brave leader and great statesman, who contributed greatly to the rehabilitation of relations between his country and Israel, and opened the gates of the Soviet Union for the great wave of Jewish immigration to Israel in the 1990s.”

Russia’s Central Clinical Hospital in Moscow said in a statement on Tuesday that “Gorbachev passed away tonight after a serious and protracted disease.”

Gorbachev was instrumental in helping to end the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States without bloodshed but failed to prevent the Soviet Union from collapsing, Reuters noted in a report on Tuesday.

He secured armament reduction treaties with the U.S. and alliances with Western powers to lift the Iron Curtain that had divided Europe since World War II and bring Germany back together, the report said.

However, his internal reforms contributed to the Soviet Union’s demise, which Russian President Vladimir Putin has described as the “biggest geopolitical calamity” of the twentieth century.

Sharansky: Gorbachev wouldn’t have released Soviet Jews if not for global pressure

Former refusenik and prisoner of Zion Natan Sharansky said on Wednesday that the late leader of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev would never have released Soviet Jewry had it not been for the global pressure campaign to do so.

Sharansky’s comments came following the death of Gorbachev at 91 on Tuesday.

The former Israeli cabinet minister and chairman of the Jewish Agency said that for Gorbachev, the heavy cost the Soviet Union paid due to its political repression was what convinced him to relax policies toward Jewish practice and emigration, not any particular sympathy he had for Soviet Jews.

Sharansky, who spent almost nine years in a forced labor camp, was the first Soviet political prisoner to be released by Gorbachev after the latter assumed the leadership of the Soviet Union in 1985.

“Gorbachev strongly believed in communism and believed that the ideas of Marx and Lenin were truly what was best, but also realized that the system wasn’t working for the Soviet Union,” Sharansky told The Times of Israel.

“He understood that there was a need to give some freedom to people,” such as greater civil rights and economic opportunity.

“What he didn’t understand was that if you give a little freedom, the people will demand a lot of freedom,” he said.

The anti-Israel crowd likes to insist that Israel can’t be “home” for a Jew, because the Jews were gone for thousands of years. The Arabs, they say, have a more recent claim. But what about the Arabs who live in Jordan, comprised of 80 percent of the British Mandate for Palestine? How can they “return” to “Palestine” when they are already IN Palestine—Mandate Palestine. Aren't they already home?

The Right of Return in the eyes of the world applies only to Arabs, never to Jews. The "key of return" has come to symbolize the hope of Arabs to boot out the current residents of homes their ancestors fled in 1948. Why is it not equally valid for Jews, with their own symbol of hope, the mizrach sign that points to Jerusalem and denotes the direction of prayer, to return to the Jewish homeland? Does it matter where they lived after expulsion? What is the expiration date on reclaiming a home and who gets to determine this date?

An Arab woman holds a symbolic "Key of Return"

Framed mizrach with the word מזרח on the wall (Jan Voerman, De treurdagen 'the sorrowful days', c. 1884)

A more basic question might be: Where is home? Is it the place where your grandparents lived or the city of your birth? Because if you tell me that I should go back to Pittsburgh because I was born there, isn't it the same for those who were born in Amman, Lebanon, Syria, and the many other countries to which Arabs fled in 1948? They had children and grandchildren born in these countries. And of course, those who fled to Jordan never really left. They just moved to a different part of "Palestine."

As did those who fled to Syria.

Veteran (now dead) White House Correspondent Helen Thomas once suggested that “Jews Get the Hell out of ‘Palestine’” and “go home” to Poland and Germany. Thomas covered the White House through ten presidential administrations, from Kennedy to Obama. But telling Jews to go back to Poland and Germany, as it turns out, was considered beyond the pale. Because everyone knew that it was in Germany and Poland that Jews, not so long ago, had been systematically gassed and burned in the millions. Thomas, in essence, wasn't sending Jews home, but to their deaths.

Even those who agreed with Thomas' sentiment probably would have wished her more circumspect. Thomas had allowed the veneer of the professional journalist to slip, revealing her hate. The optics were not good. As a result, Thomas was forced to retire in disgrace, a victim of her own loose lips. At 89, she was still in full possession of her mental faculties, the verbal fart notwithstanding. She knew exactly what she was saying. She just hadn’t known she would not get away with it.

I remember Thomas often, though not with fondness. She comes to mind when I respond to comments on Twitter or Quora suggesting I have forfeited the right of return. Not long ago, for example, when I spoke of returning to my homeland, Mary-Lee Lutz commented, “If everyone returned to the place where their ancestors lived thousands of years ago we’d all live in Africa,” and “Your home is in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. Come home. You will be welcomed back.”

Lutz says Pittsburgh is my home, because this is where I was born and raised. This business of others defining "home" for Jews in exile, has become part of the anti-Israel, really antisemitic narrative. Jews are often told that Europe is “home," as in the aforementioned case of Helen Thomas. If we follow this logic, how then do we account for Sephardim and Mizrachim—Jews who were not in Poland and Germany? How do we account for the continuous, though sometimes minority Jewish presence in Israel? And as was alluded to earlier, how do we account for the Arabs who were not born in the State of Israel, for example, most of the over 80% of the Arab population of Jordan that calls itself “Palestinian?”

The creation of Transjordan was meant to placate the Arabs. They were angry after the Balfour Declaration declared British government support for the creation of a Jewish national home in British Mandate Palestine. The Arabs wanted their own national home in British Mandate Palestine. So the British carved away some 80 percent of the Mandate from land they’d promised to restore to the Jews, and gave it instead to the Arabs.

There, one might reasonably say to the Arabs of Jordan. There is your state. Your Palestine. Your home. Return your keys to the new owners after your relocation to a different part of the same country.

Because if you are in Jordan today, and call yourself “Palestinian,” you are more likely to have been born in Jordan as opposed to what is today, the State of Israel. Jordan and Israel both exist within the confines of the British Mandate for Palestine. Does it matter who is sovereign or where your grandparents lived? And if “Israel” is really “Palestine,” why isn't Jordan?

If you live in Amman, Jordan is your most recent home, no matter how long your family lived in Haifa or Jerusalem. Why then do you insist that you are not, in actual fact, at home?

This 1949 Jordanian stamp picturing King Abdullah, bears the label "Palestine" in both English and Arabic.

This 1964 Jordanian stamp bears the likeness of King Hussein and depicts Mandate Palestine as an undivided territory comprising all of modern day Israel and Jordan.

In 1948, King Abdullah declared, “Palestine and Jordan are one,” and in 1981, his son King Hussein said, “The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine Jordan.”

Why should we not believe them? Are these kings of “Palestine” somehow not sufficiently authoritative? Rabbi Joe Katz offers a fuller picture of reality:

[About] seventy-five percent of Palestine's "native soil," east of the Jordan River, called Jordan, is literally an independent Palestinian-Arab state located on the majority of the land of Palestine; it contains a majority of Palestinian Arabs in its army as well as its population. In April 1948, just before the formal hostilities were launched against Israel's statehood, Abdullah of Transjordan declared: "Palestine and Transjordan are one, for Palestine is the coastline and Transjordan the hinterland of the same country." Abdullah's policy was defended against "Arab challengers" by Prime Minister Hazza al-Majali: “We are the army of Palestine.... the overwhelming majority of the Palestine Arabs ... are living in Jordan.”

Although Abdullah's acknowledgment of Palestinian identity was not in keeping with the policy of his grandson, [King Hussein], Jordan is nonetheless undeniably Palestine, protecting a predominantly Arab Palestinian population with an army containing a majority of Arab Palestinians, and often governed by them as well. Jordan remains an independent Arab Palestinian state where a Palestinian Arab "law of return" applies: its nationality code states categorically that all Palestinians are entitled to citizenship by right unless they are Jews. In most demographic studies, and wherever peoples are designated, including contemporary Arab studies, the term applied to citizens of Jordan is "Palestinian/Jordanian."

In 1966 PLO spokesman Ahmed Shukeiry declared that “The Kingdom of Palestine must become the Palestinian Republic.”

Yasser Arafat has stated that Jordan is Palestine. Other Arab leaders, even King Hussein and Prince Hassan of Jordan, from time to time [affirmed] that "Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine." Moreover, in 1970-1971, later called the "Black September" period, when King Hussein waged war against Yasser Arafat's Arab PLO forces, who had been operating freely in Jordan until then, it was considered not an invasion of foreign terrorists but a civil war. It was "a final crackdown" against those of "his people" whom he accused of trying to establish a separate Palestinian state, under Arab Palestinian rule instead of his own, "criminals and conspirators who use the commando movement to disguise their treasonable plots," to "destroy the unity of the Jordanian and Palestinian people."

Indeed, the "native soil" of Arab and Jewish "Palestines" each gained independence within the same two-year period, Transjordan in 1946 and Israel in 1948. Yet today, in references to the "Palestine" conflict, even the most serious expositions of the problem refer to Palestine as though it consisted only of Israel -- as in the statement, "In 1948 Palestine became Israel." The term "Israel" is commonly used as if it were the sum total of "Palestine."

I am reminded of a necklace I wear, a gold silhouette of the map of Israel. More and more, Arabs are marketing this necklace and other items taking this shape, as if it were the map of “Palestine.” If it were really the map of “Palestine,” would it not then include Jordan, established as the national Arab home in Palestine in 1922, and declared as such by so many Arab luminaries in subsequent years? And why, if you were born in Amman, are you not already home—I would posit more so than if you had been born in Pittsburgh, Warsaw or Berlin?

Because Pittsburgh is not in Palestine, but Jordan is. To what then are you returning?
And why should anyone leave home?

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Hassan II mosque in Casablanca

Maariv has an op-ed by Sam Ben Sheetrit, president of the World Federation of Moroccan Jewry, which is getting attention in Arab media.

It says:

The Hassan II Mosque in Casablanca is one of the largest and most magnificent mosques in the world. This mosque was built half on the sea and half on land. Unlike Al-Aqsa Mosque, there is no restriction on visiting and praying there by Muslims, Jews and Christians. The concept is generous and broad: a house of prayer is meant for everyone. That's why Jews also visit the mosque and pray with their neighbors, out of closeness to others and love of people.

The financing of the construction of this mosque, which lasted eight years, was imposed on all Moroccan residents regardless of religion. During Ramadan, the King of Morocco, his son and his government ministers pray at the Hassan II Mosque, and the event is broadcast on Moroccan television networks and other media. 80,000 believers can enter and pray in the prayer hall. Usually, it is an impressive event that is covered by the media and is also appreciated by people of culture.

During one of my visits to this mosque, during the MIncha prayer, a Jewish Israeli stood next to me, who put a kippa on his head and prayed quietly. At the end of his prayer, a Muslim Arab approached him and greeted him in Arabic: "God will accept your prayer."

This is the face of tolerance in Morocco. In Morocco I have often been asked why there are Muslim Arabs who oppose the visit and prayer of Jews at the Temple Mount: after all we are all monotheists, believe and pray to one God. I answered that I perceived everything to be the fault of Moshe Dayan, who did not establish arrangements for the visits of Jews, but gave the keys of al-Aqsa to the people of the Waqf, and here they are the ones who determine almost everything that happens on the Temple Mount.

Since then we have been witness to the cries of "Al-Aqsa is in danger" and come across documents of the Waqf trying to erase every archaeological trace that confirms the Temple. Today, there are archaeologists whose job it is to sort the debris from the Temple Mount sites, and there are archaeological finds that have been discovered in this debris.

He isn't wrong, although it is interesting that he blames Moshe Dayan for the intolerance of Palestinian Muslims - as if one cannot possibly expect tolerance from them.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/31 Links Pt1: Biden Admin Mum After Abbas Claims Israel Commits ‘50 Holocausts’ on Palestinians; The Iran Nuclear Deal Is a Dangerous Con

From Ian:

Biden Admin Mum After Abbas Claims Israel Commits ‘50 Holocausts’ on Palestinians

The State Department will not say if it is considering any repercussions for the Palestinian Authority after the authority's president, Mahmoud Abbas, accused Israel of committing "50 Holocausts," comments that sparked an international diplomatic scandal.

"We recognize that President Abbas today has, quote, reaffirmed that the Holocaust is ‘the most heinous crime' in modern history, and we reject any attempts to draw false equivalencies or to minimize Holocaust atrocities," State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters who questioned him about the administration’s response to the scandal.

Abbas during remarks in Germany earlier this month claimed that Israel has committed "50 Holocausts" against the Palestinians since its creation in 1948. Distortion of the Holocaust remains heavily restricted in Germany, making Abbas's comments as he spoke next to the German chancellor unprecedented. While Germany quickly condemned the remarks, the Biden administration's State Department attempted to play defense for Abbas, telling reporters that the Palestinian president later apologized.

The State Department also would not answer a series of Washington Free Beacon inquiries about how it is responding to the issue and whether it is considering any type of diplomatic penalties for Abbas's comments, such as downgrading relations or withholding aid money to his government. Republican foreign policy leaders in Congress and Jewish community officials say the State Department's reaction is providing cover for Abbas as the Biden administration supplies his government with millions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer aid. The Trump administration froze that aid due to the Palestinian government's promotion of anti-Semitism.

"The Palestinians are so emboldened to make abhorrent statements like these because the Biden administration has made clear that the U.S. will continue to hand them money and carry water for them diplomatically no matter what they do," Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the Free Beacon.

A State Department official would not say whether it addressed the issue with Abbas or other top Palestinian government leaders. The department also would not say if it is considering imposing diplomatic penalties on the Palestinian Authority for the comments.

Rep. Lee Zeldin (N.Y.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and one of two Jewish Republicans in Congress, said Abbas maligned the memories of more than six million Jews while standing in the country that perpetrated the crimes.

"To accuse the Jewish state and the only functioning democracy in the Middle East of committing '50 Holocausts,' while standing in Germany, is something that only someone with as little character and sense of morality as Abbas could rationalize," Zeldin said in a statement. "Six million Jews and millions of others were brutally murdered during the Holocaust. There has been absolutely no equivalence to that at any time anywhere in the world."

Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine:Gantz Ignoring or ignorant?

Two statements made this past week by Israel’s current Defence Minister– Benny Gantz – could see his run for Israel’s next Prime Minister ended after it has just started.

Gantz told Kan Reshet Bet:
"Those who, in a clear left-wing position, consider 'two states for two peoples' as a solution are living in an illusion, and those who, in a radical right-wing position, think of a state without Arabs in the 'West Bank', are living in a greater illusion,"

Gantz has apparently not heard of or read the 2022 Saudi Peace Plan published on 8 June – which provides for the merger of Jordan, Gaza and parts of the 'West Bank' into one territorial entity to be called The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine.

Implementation of the Saudi plan in the 'West Bank' could possibly see:
- The State of Israel – sovereign in about 30% (designated green and yellow) on this leaked map - where 1% of the 'West Bank' Arab population live.

- The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine – sovereign in about the remaining 70% (designated red) - where 99% of the 'West Bank' Arab population resides:
Constructing a network of tunnels and roads will enable this subdivision.

Gantz committed an even bigger gaffe - telling 103 FM Radio:
"I repeat and insist that Jerusalem is the unified capital of the State of Israel ... And I do not see how we can continue towards an arrangement [with the Palestinians] in the coming years, but we must begin by initiating processes to reduce the conflict and strengthen security ... There are villages in the east that the Palestinian [Arab]s call Jerusalem, and they are not in the metropolitan area of Jerusalem. It is possible to define them as a capital."

A Ceasefire Line Is Not a Border for a Palestinian State: Debunking the Green Line Myth

In a recent opinion piece for The Washington Post, noted Israeli activist and journalist Gershom Gorenberg referred numerous times to the Green Line as “Israel’s border.” Gorenberg is far from being the only one to refer to the line that separated Israel from its Arab neighbors between 1948 and 1967 as a “border” (see here and here). Even the European Union, in determining which Israeli entities are eligible for EU funds, refers to Israel’s “pre-1967 borders.”

However, the term “border” is a misnomer, connoting an agreed-upon permanent demarcation between two sovereign entities.

In actuality, the Green Line came about as the result of an armistice agreement between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Arab armies at the conclusion of the 1948 War of Independence.

In this piece, we will take a look at the history of the Green Line, its status after the Six Day War in 1967, and what it means for any future peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA).

As the War of Independence was coming to a close in early 1949, Israel and its belligerent neighbors (Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) entered into ceasefire talks in an effort to end hostilities and establish armistice agreements.

Between February and July 1949, Israel finalized armistice agreements with each of its neighbors. As part of these agreements, armistice lines were established, delineating the territory that separated Israeli military forces from the armed forces of its neighboring Arab countries.

These armistice lines ultimately became known as the “Green Line” due to the color of the pen that was used to mark these lines on the map.

However, at the insistence of Egypt, Jordan and Syria during the ceasefire negotiations, each of the armistice agreements features clauses that state unequivocally that these lines are not official borders and will not prejudice any future territorial claims made by any country.

The armistice agreement that was signed between Israel and Jordan states that “The Armistice Demarcation Lines…are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.”

It also states that the agreement is “dictated exclusively by military considerations” and would have no effect on a future peace settlement.

Similarly, the armistice agreement between Israel and Egypt reads “The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary.”

Interesting to see that al-Sheikh has since deleted the tweet. J Street is too Zionist for the PA, despite being almost single-mindedly dedicated to getting Israel out of the West Bank. https://t.co/KoykL3Vvqd
— Lahav Harkov (@LahavHarkov) August 31, 2022

Mahmoud Abbas told Wafa News Agency that he plans to tell the world how heroic the terrorists who are in Israeli prisons are in his address to the UN in September.

"The presidency affirmed that the Palestinian people and their leadership stand with the heroic prisoners in their battle in which they defend the dignity and sanctities of their people," the statement said.

The statement went on, "President Mahmoud Abbas is constantly following the suffering of the heroic prisoners in the prisons of the occupation, and that their issue is at the top of the agenda along with the right of return, the state and self-determination. ...These prisoners are heroes and symbols of the Palestinian people. We are proud of them and their steadfastness and adherence to the justice of their cause."

Palestinian immorality is so entrenched, so much a part of their ethos, that no one blinks at the demand that terrorists be released so they can attack Jews again. So much so that Abbas knows he can say this to the entire world without criticism.

Notice that releasing the prisoners and the fictional "right of return" to destroy the Jewish state are listed before statehood in his list of demands. Because killing Jews and destroying Israel are higher priorities for the "moderate" Abbas than actual statehood.

−

Calling for the murder of Jews on the streets of New York City

On Monday, there was a rally in Manhattan's Washington Square Park demanding that Israel free all terrorists from prison.

At the rally one could see this sign to "globalize the Intifada," a call to attack Jews worldwide.

Even more explicit were these signs for "Palestinian return" and "Palestinian liberation" - "BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY."

"By any means necessary" means "including murdering Jews." It isn't even a dog whistle, it literally justifies terrorism.

This is incitement to murder Jews being proudly displayed in the city with the world's largest Jewish population.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

On Tuesday, a group of five religious Jews tried to visit Joseph's Tomb in Shechem (Nablus) without coordinating the visit with the Israeli army.

This is stupid. Everyone knows it is stupid. But sometimes even stupid things need to be explained to truly understand the situation.

Why is it stupid for Jews to try to visit a holy spot in Nablus?

Because everyone knows that Palestinians will try to kill any Jews wanting to pray in areas they control.

Which is exactly what happened.

Two of the Jews were injured, one seriously. One of the injured is a 17-year old child. One of the injured left a trail of blood as he hid in the bushes as the wonderful, tolerant Palestinians torched the car they were in.

Palestinian political and terror groups praised the shooting of Jews. Hamas called shooting a child who wanted to pray "heroic." Islamic Jihad also called shooting Jews "heroic." And so did the Palestinian Resistance Committees.

These would-be worshipers weren't armed. They didn't threaten anyone. They didn't hurl insults. They didn't humiliate anyone. Their only crime was being Jewish. If they were American tourists with kipot, the exact same thing would have happened.

They were in danger because most Palestinians are antisemites by every measure, every survey, every poll. They were shot because they were Jews - not because of Israel or Zionism or "occupation" or "humiliation" or "storming" or any other reason.

Even though practically everyone knows this obvious fact, it cannot be said in polite company.

The media knows the truth, but seemingly considers pointing out Palestinian antisemitism to be more offensive than their antisemitism itself.

The "pro-Palestinian" activists know the truth, but they consider it their job to hide that truth.

So even in a story like this, where the reason for the shooting is not at all a mystery, very few people are willing to point out that when Palestinians use deadly force against Jews who want to worship at a Jewish holy spot, it is because most Palestinians hate Jews.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/30 Links Pt2: Zionism won. So why is it still under attack 125 years after Basel?; Israel sentences Gaza aid worker to 12 years for funding Hamas terror

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: Zionism won. So why is it still under attack 125 years after Basel?

Anti-Semitism has not only survived but thrived in the last 125 years as it attached itself like a parasite to a variety of different political movements—fascism, Nazism, communism, and in our own day, Islamism and woke neo-Marxism—all of which have helped perpetuate hate for Jews. Instead of eliminating the raison d’être of anti-Semitism, Israel has become the focus of it.

Anti-Zionism is not merely masquerading as something other than that hatred; it is the essence of 21st-century anti-Semitism. Its premise is not only to deny rights to the Jews that no one would think of denying to any other group. It is the mechanism by which intimidation, delegitimization, violence and terrorism against Jews are rationalized and justified.

That is why Jew-haters demonstrate against a commemoration of Basel, as well as calling for the abrogation of every milestone along the path to Jewish statehood—the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the 1947 Partition Resolution. Their global anti-Semitic BDS movement aimed at stifling the Israeli economy has largely failed. Nevertheless, it has provided a framework by which Jew-haters can not only organize themselves but do so while pretending to be advocates for the human rights of Palestinians, whose goal is to eliminate Israel.

It has also allowed the same world body that authorized Israel’s creation—the United Nations—to be the stronghold of those who believe not unrealistically that they can libel Zionism as racism and eventually isolate and ultimately destroy the Jewish state.

That is why advocacy for Zionism—the national liberation movement of the Jewish people—is not only relevant today; it is absolutely necessary in order to preserve not just Herzl’s legacy, but to fight back against a movement whose goals could only be achieved through the genocide of Israel’s 7 million Jews.

Though Herzl was wrong to think that a Jewish state would solve the problem of anti-Semitism, he was right to believe that one was necessary, as well as a just solution to the plight of Jews in Europe and the Middle East where they would never be fully accepted as equals or safe.

Long after the rebirth of Jewish sovereignty in Israel has become a reality, it may seem odd that we must continue to discuss the right of the Jews to their state. The triumph of Zionism was something that few Jews or non-Jews thought was possible in 1897. Yet as unthinkable as the destruction of the Jewish state is today, the fact that hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people believe its destruction is a good idea points to the persistence of anti-Semitism. Just as important, it should remind all people of goodwill—Jews and non-Jews alike—of the necessity for continued Zionist activism.

UAE Founder of First Holocaust Memorial Gallery in Arab World Speaks at Zionist Congress in Basel

H.E. Ahmed Obaid AlMansoori of the United Arab Emirates, Founder of the First Holocaust Memorial Gallery in the Arab World, was among the key speakers at the 125th Anniversary of First Zionist Congress in Basel.

AlMansoori revealed a rare letter handwritten and signed by Theodor Herzl, currently on display at his museum in Dubai. Advertisement

“Jews have always been an important part of the Middle East and I am committed to telling the story of the Jewish People and of Zionism to the Arab World,” said AlMansoori, who is also the Founder of the Crossroads of Civilization Museum in Dubai and a former member of the UAE Federal National Council.

The Crossroads of Civilization Museum started as a private collection in AlMansoori’s home in 2006, and went public in 2011 at the Emirati government’s request, who identified its potential.

Located at the Royal House on the main road in the historical area of Dubai, the award-winning museum has housed historical Jewish documents, letters and coins since its established – long before the signing of the Abraham Accords peace treaties.

AlMansoori has dedicated a significant portion of his museum to displaying the rich history of the Jewish People in the Middle East, highlighting that Jews are an indigenous and important part of the region.

On Holocaust Remembrance Day, 2021 (Yom HaShoah), and in the wake of the peace treaties signed between Israel and Arab states, AlMansoori took his commitment to promoting Jewish-Arab relations even further by establishing the first and only Holocaust Memorial Gallery in the Arab world.

The Crossroads of Civilizations Museum Holocaust Memorial Gallery has since evolved into an international hub for Holocaust commemoration events and ceremonies; a center for advancing peace, tolerance and Jewish-Arab solidarity in the Middle East; and an important place of gathering for the Emirati Jewish community.

A celebration of Zionism: Thousands mark 125th anniversary of First Zionist Congress

Suhair Fahd Jaradat, writing in Rai al-Youm, thinks that the Jews are panning to take over the Kingdom of Jordan.

This comes up every once in a while. Here are her "proofs:"

"The Israeli narrative claims that the Jewish state should have been established on both banks of the Jordan River, which goes back to the British pledges to establish the national home for the Jews west and east of the river. "

"Petra is coveted by the Jews. Although their Bible did not mention its name, their rabbis rely on prophecies and religious texts indicating that the land of Jordan will be the site of the last suffering before the end of time, when the Jews will flee from the Jewish land (Jerusalem) and take refuge in Petra the fortified city before the Antichrist comes with his demonic armies from all sides except for the east, where Jordan is."

"Jews market Petra as a tourist spot as part of the Zionist entity, with slogans such as: 'Book your ticket to cities of the forefathers in Greater Israel, and enjoy the freedom of religious rituals!'"

"Jews have made many attempts to falsify history, by burying Israeli potteries written in Hebrew and forged Jewish artifacts, to prove that the Jews have sites, shrines and monuments east of the Jordan River,"

"Do not forget the attempt to film the controversial American movie 'Jaber,' which claims the right of Jews in Petra and southern Jordan and Palestine, where a Bedouin boy discovers in Wadi Musa a road leading to the city of Petra, and finds a piece of ancient rocks written on it in Hebrew, to prove the Biblical story about the migration of Jews with Moses from Egypt to Petra instead of Mount Sinai, before moving to Palestine. They claim that the ark and the staff of Moses are buried in Petra. "

She also claims that Jews, through intermediaries, tried to buy land in Petra around 2011.

Half the time Jordanians worry that Israel wants to take it over, and the other half of the time they worry that Israel wants to expel all Palestinians to Jordan.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Don't tell me how to spend the money the West sends me!

The International Monetary Fund visited Israel and the territories this month to give advice on helping the Palestinian economy.

They issued a final statement with a summary of their findings. But there was something missing:

A single word about the Palestinian Authority Martyrs Fund or the other programs that pay terrorists and their families.

The PA spends about $270 million every year on prisoner salaries and "martyr" family payments, a significant chunk of the PA budget altogether (a few years ago, it was 8%, it has probably increased since then.) It is nearly 2% of the total Palestinian GDP!

This is similar to the April World Bank report that also didn't mention "Pay for Slay" as a potential target for cost cutting.

Mahmoud Abbas has said many times that the top priority of spending for the Palestinians is on paying these terrorists - more than healthcare, more than education, more than retirement benefits.

That appears to be the reason the IMF and World Bank don't bother making the recommendations to cut a program that throws hundreds of millions of dollars away annually to terrorists and their families - because they know that the PA will ignore them. But that is a profoundly bad reason - their job is to make the best recommendations they can, and then report if the PA refuses to comply.

By hiding a huge source of the PA's financial woes, these world financial organizations are not doing anyone any favors. On the contrary - they become complicit in supporting terrorism.

Say the truth, and let the PA defend the indefensible.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/30 Links Pt1: '50 Holocausts' Remark Proves Abbas Head Must Go; Israel: UN human rights office is a mouthpiece for Palestinian Authority; Iran is a real threat and should not be underestimated

From Ian:

Bassem Eid: 'Fifty Holocausts' Remark Proves Palestinian Authority Head Must Go

Abbas, let us remember, was supposed to be the pragmatist, the moderate, compared to his predecessor. Yasser Arafat's essentially violent nature and strategy were well known to the world, as he had committed innumerable acts of terrorism and cruelty as the leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) since 1969. The astonishing fact is that the world suspended disbelief—even handing him the most undeserved Nobel Peace Prize in history—until he shredded their illusions in the orgy of blood and thunder that was the Second Intifada, responsible for the violent deaths of more than 5,000 Palestinians and about 1,400 Israelis.

When Arafat died, and Abbas succeeded him as ruler of both the PLO and PA in 2004, it was hoped by many in the West that he would seriously govern as a moderate and pursue peace, yet already in his initial 2004-2005 campaign for PA president, Abbas said he would shield Palestinian terrorists from Israel and that he had no plans to crack down on them. Abbas won a four-year term in that election; 17 years later, no new election has ever been held. Unsurprisingly, the democracy monitor Freedom House rates Abbas's PA-run West Bank to be Not Free, noting that: "[t]he PA lacks an executive or legislature with an electoral mandate. Because the legislature has not functioned since 2007, new laws are introduced via presidential decree... The news media are generally not free in the West Bank; journalists are surveilled and repressed... Human rights groups regularly document allegations of arbitrary detention by PA security forces." In contrast, Freedom House designates Israel as Free, finding that "Israel is a parliamentary democracy with a multiparty system and independent institutions that guarantee political rights and civil liberties for most of the population."

In hindsight, perhaps the Holocaust denial of the dictator Abbas should not have been so shocking. In 1982, Abbas wrote a doctoral thesis at Patrice Lumumba University in Soviet Moscow, titled "The Secret Connection between the Nazis and the Leaders of the Zionist Movement," in which he asserted that under a million Jews had died in the Holocaust; a later 1984 introduction challenged the existence of the Nazi gas chambers. Horrifically, he alleges that Jewish Zionists joined forces with the Nazis to inflict the Holocaust on European Jewry. Perhaps when a famous Holocaust denier denies the Holocaust, he isn't telling us anything about himself we don't already know. Nevertheless, it is an important light in which to consider the consistent antisemitic incitement in Palestinian educational materials and public media.

For those who don't know—for instance, for those raised in regimes like the PA, which distort and deny the Holocaust—the Nazi Third Reich carried out an industrialized genocide of most of Europe's Jews, slaughtering 6 million Jews out of about 16 million then living in the world. Even according to the most optimistic interpretations, the Jewish population has never returned to that prewar peak. Meanwhile, by some estimates, the Palestinian population has increased by nine times since the Partition of the British Mandate. Somehow, this is supposed to be happening while Israel (according to Abbas) perpetrates 50 equivalents of the slaughter of the 6 million—which would mean killing approximately 300 million Palestinians, about the current population of the United States. The mind boggles.

Yet, in the Middle East of today, the mathematically, historically, and ethically challenged Abbas is allowed to masquerade as a statesman, a moderate, and a peacemaker. It surely helps him that his domestic opposition, Hamas, is dedicated by charter to Israel's destruction, while the violent Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) is a pawn of revolutionary Iran, and the forces of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) attempt to "anti-normalize" the Israeli state. Yet these forces are as often allies as rivals in the poisonous stew that passes for Palestinian politics, as each supported Abbas's "50 Holocausts" comment—not only in spirit but in content. That should tell the world as much as one could hope to know about the prospects Israel has for peace with a Palestinian culture that has been brainwashed by decades of official Holocaust denial and antisemitic incitement. Israel has about as much of a chance of a peace agreement with this group of "leaders" as it does of a joint space program with moon landing deniers. For peace to materialize in the Holy Land, a whole new generation of Palestinian leadership must step forward.

Mahmoud Abbas’ “50 Holocausts” Remarks Are Part of the Palestinian Narrative

Mahmoud Abbas’ remarks about the “50 holocausts” carried out by Israel and the subsequent international criticism catalyzed Palestinians to support the Palestinian leader, echoing and intensifying his antisemitic messages.

Abbas’ claims are part of the distorted and antisemitic Palestinian narrative according to which there was no history of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel compared to the ancient indigenous Palestinian people with historical roots in Palestine, so the solution to the Jewish problem should not be in this land.

This narrative also states that the Palestinians are the only victims of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, suffering the expulsion, the refugees, and the various Israeli measures against them. As long as Palestinians have not achieved their goals and eliminated the injustice done to them, they must engrave in the world consciousness their suffering and perpetuate it, as Abbas did at the press conference in Germany.

Despite Abbas’ relentless promotion of this narrative that encourages the struggle against Israel, Israel’s defense establishment and government are fully committed to the arguments that justify the dialogue with the PA and its strengthening. Their primary consideration is to prevent an outbreak of violence in the near future, and they believe, based on questionable arguments, that strengthening the PA contributes to this while ignoring the medium and long-term repercussions.

The best way for Israel to deal with the dilemma is to recognize that the status quo is the least of the evils and must be lived with. A gradual improvement in the situation may be achieved by directly encouraging the many Palestinians who do not promote the problematic narrative and are not involved in terrorism through measures that will improve their quality of life and do not harm Israel’s ability to prevent security risks to the extent possible.

JPost Editorial: Iran is a real threat and should not be underestimated

Israeli officials are concerned that the agreement will pave the way for the lifting of international sanctions against Tehran. This in turn would enable Tehran to receive and spend billions of dollars on developing its nuclear program and supporting its terrorist proxies, including Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, posing even more of a security threat to Israel’s national security.

During his term as prime minister, Netanyahu’s policy was to speak out forcefully against the Iran deal wherever and whenever possible. Lapid, on the other hand, has preferred – until recently – to voice his views mostly behind closed doors via diplomatic channels, while only occasionally vocally opposing the deal in public.

While their styles are different, their opposition to the Iran deal has been steadfast and there is no doubting the sincerity of both their stances in the national interest.

It is precisely for this reason, for the sake of the country, that Lapid and Netanyahu – and other politicians across the political spectrum – should not be trying to score political points on the Iran issue.

Lapid recently dispatched both Gantz and National Security Adviser Eyal Hulata to Washington to hammer home Israel’s opposition to the deal, and is said to be trying to organize another meeting with Biden on the matter. KAN News quoted a senior Israeli official as saying the idea is to schedule a meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly’s annual session next month.

Last week, Mossad chief David Barnea made public comments calling the new nuclear deal “a strategic disaster” for Israel and saying the US “is rushing into an accord that is ultimately based on lies,” citing Iran’s claim that its nuclear activities are peaceful in nature.

Because it is rare for a Mossad leader to take such a public position and Barnea has no political agenda, his warning should be taken seriously. But from now until Election Day, we urge all politicians: Speak out against the Iranian deal by all means – but not against each other.