Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, November 02, 2022

The hot girls of Gaza

I've been to my share of trade shows, and it is not surprising that exhibitors will try to find attractive women to front their booths and try to being in more men.

Guess what? It happens in Gaza, too.

Even with the women covered up, there was no shortage of makeup as the best looking ones were on display at the Gaza National Products exhibition, held on Tuesday in order to promote Palestinian products.

Here are some of the scenes from the show.

Now, do you think that the hijab stops these women from being harassed in Gaza as much as Western women in less modest clothing are? We know that in neighboring Egypt, the hijab has zero effect on reducing harassment - in 2013, the UN reported that 99.3% of women surveyed in Cairo have experienced sexual harassment and rape is a serious problem.

It is probably not nearly as bad in Gaza as in Egypt, because the culture is far more conservative, but that's the point: women are not responsible for being harassed and attacked, it is the men who attack them, no matter what the women choose to wear.

In Gaza, if there is no problem with women dressing up nicely and wearing makeup to put a nice face on a business, then there should be no problem if they want to take off the hijab, too. The harassers are the criminals, not the victims of harassment.

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!

Today's car ramming terrorist was 54 years old. Is this something to worry about?

This morning, at a checkpoint near Beit Horon, a Palestinian rammed an IDF soldier with a van, seriously injuring him. The terrorist then exited the vehicle with an axe and attempted to kill the soldier who was lying on the ground.The officer managed to shoot the terrorist, killing him.

Here is security camera footage of the incident:

The terrorist in this case was Habis Abdel Hafeez Youssef Rayan, who is 54 years old.

It is unusual for a man of that age to be directly involved in a terrorist attack. What could be his motivation, and will this be the start of a new wave of older male terrorists?

According to the Palestinian Shams news agency, two of Rayan's sons are members of Islamic Jihad from the town of Beit Dukko. One is Qusay Rayan, who is in Israeli prison, and Assem Rayan, who was released from prison.

I assume this is Assem with Habis.

Abu Ali Express notes that someone named Ra’ed Yosef Rayan, of Beit Dukko, has been on a hunger strike for administrative detention and that detention was just extended yesterday. It seems likely that Ra'ed is another relative of Habis, but it seems unlikely that he would go on a suicide attack for a nephew's detention extension when his own son has been in prison for longer.

When young Arab women attack soldiers at checkpoints, it is often discovered afterwards that they had faced some sort of humiliation - often caught in an illicit relationship - and their "martyrdom" is an attempt to end their shame. We will not learn it from Palestinian media, but it is possible that Habis Rayan was facing serious business problems or bankruptcy, and this is a surefire method to ensure a salary for his family for as long as the Palestinian Authority exists.

One person isn't a trend, but we need to see if other older Palestinian men decide to follow Habis - especially since he is getting widely praised in Palestinian media as a heroic martyr.

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!

Palestinian Legislative Council building

Over the summer, the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center surveyed Palestinians and asked them, out of a list of prominent potential successors to Mahmoud Abbas, how much they trust them.

The results are abysmal for nearly everyone who has a chance to be the next leader of the PA, the PLO and Fatah.

Q17. How much trust do you have in the following people: Much, somewhat, no trust or don’t know?

1. Mahmoud Al Aloul
Much trust 8.0
Somewhat trust 18.9
No trust 25.8

2. Jibril Rajoub
Much trust 8.6
Somewhat trust 25.0
No trust 38.3

3. Nasser Qidwa
Much trust 7.6
Somewhat trust 23.3
No trust 27.6

4. Marwan Barghouthi
Much trust 55.2
Somewhat trust 26.3
No trust 7.2

5. Hussein Al Sheikh
Much trust 8.2
Somewhat trust 22.0
No trust 39.8

6. Mohammad Shtayeh
Much trust 13.3
Somewhat trust 31.1
No trust 41.9

7. Ismail Haniyeh
Much trust 17.4
Somewhat trust 23.7
No trust 42.3

8. Yehya Sinwar
Much trust 16.4
Somewhat trust 20.8
No trust 39.4

9. Khaled Meshaal
Much trust 14.6
Somewhat trust 20.5
No trust 42.0

10. Mohammad Dahlan
Much trust 8.8
Somewhat trust 21.8
No trust 47.7

11. Mostafa Al Barghouthi
Much trust 19.3
Somewhat trust 35.6
No trust 24.3

The only person they really trust is a terrorist, in Israeli prison for his part in murdering five Israelis.

The only one they somewhat trust, Mostafa Barghouti, is General Secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative and would be considered a moderate by most Westerners; he is not a terrorist and says he does not support violence.

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!

11/01 Links Pt2: Hatred of Israel drags us back to the Middle Ages; Radical social justice ideology is fueling US antisemitism; Edward Said’s Jews

From Ian:

Hatred of Israel drags us back to the Middle Ages

Since it was established in 1948, Israel has endured numerous wars and hundreds of bloody terrorist attacks. It has been forced to defend itself against continual attempted invasions by its neighbors.

Most importantly, it has sought a peace agreement with the Palestinians many times. Each time, it has been rejected by the Palestinians, who hope Israel will simply disappear.

But there is an even more important reason for Magni to consult with history: Today, there is a large alliance of forces that former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer has called “medievalist.” They are autocratic, confessional and terroristic. Many of them have Iran has a primary sponsor. They persecute women, homosexuals, ethnic and religious minorities and others. They almost uniformly back Russia’s violently anti-Western policies.

Aligned against this unholy alliance are the forces of modernity. Today, they are united more than ever in the need to defend democracy, the rule of law and coexistence in the face of brutal aggression, whether by Iranian terrorism or the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

At the U.N. last week, however, many nations—including Italy—defended Israel from the anti-Semitic U.N. Commission of Inquiry into the May 2021 Israel-Hamas conflict, which is dedicated solely to condemning Israel.

In other words, times are changing. Those members of the Italian parliament who hate Israel should realize they are on the wrong side of history. Indeed, when will the left understand that, especially since the signing of the Abraham Accords, embracing hatred of the Jewish state only drags us back to the Middle Ages?

Radical social justice ideology is fueling US antisemitism

Even while many Jews back social justice movements calling attention to police abuse and mass incarceration, some worry that rhetoric characterizing America as a white supremacist society and demonizing whiteness has and will continue to spill over into hostility toward Jews. As proponents of this ideology tend to view Jews as white, how could it not?

We worry that supposedly white adjacent groups with higher average incomes and educational achievements, such as Jews and Asians, are being implicated in white supremacy for allegedly succeeding on the backs of marginalized communities.

Moreover, it strikes us that the new social justice activism is not just a call for a much-needed shift in policy priorities but a fundamental challenge to the liberal order, which would render everyone, Jews especially, more vulnerable. The ideologues in the movement often don’t seek to fix institutions but to tear them down, as was evident in the campaign to defund the police. Those of us who have studied the history of antisemitism know that when illiberalism sets in, whether on the political right or the left, resurgent antisemitism is never far behind.

The hypothesis that radical social justice ideology foments antisemitic sentiment on the Left is supported by a new survey of 1,600 likely voters. The survey shows that self-described progressives and very liberal Americans who believe that America is a structurally racist nation also tend to see Jews and Asians as white adjacent to the tune of 80%. That same subset views Jews as having too much power and privilege by nearly 2-1 over comparable groups, such as Black, Asian or LGBT Americans. These percentages on both questions steeply decline among moderates and conservatives.

The survey also indicates that on the far Left of the American political spectrum, Israel is being increasingly viewed as a colonizer, which calls into question the country’s very right to exist. A plurality of progressives now views Israel in these very extreme terms. While the new data is not a smoking gun that the spread of radical social justice ideology is driving antisemitic sentiment on the left, it comports with what many of us have observed with our own eyes.

Adam Levick's London talk on Critical Race Theory and antisemitism

The inevitable course of the CRT understanding of the West also includes a likely antisemitic outcome:

Ibram X Kendi’s “How to be an anti-racist” (a dumbed down version of CRT) promotes the ideology’s belief that racial disparities in outcomes are, by definition, evidence of systemic racism – bigotry that, in his rejection of liberalism, must be combated by “anti-racist discrimination” against ‘whites’ (including, it follows, against Jews) – that is, the institutionalisation of preferential practices based on overtly racial and (per such racial essential-ism) antisemitic criteria.

Equality under the law and colour-blind admission standards in education, for Kendi, insofar as such traditional liberal expressions of anti-racism don’t produce equal results, is in fact racist.

While liberalism seeks traditional justice, CRT proponents seek what Thomas Sowell calls “Cosmic Justice”, a Utopian concept that, by demanding not just a fair and transparent process, but the desired result, is irreconcilable with personal freedom based on the rule of law.

CRT turns the Greek saying “character is destiny” on its head, and posits instead that “colour is destiny”.

CRT embraces fatalism and cynicism over liberalism’s agency and optimism.

CRT is obsessed with identity, while liberalism’s project has always sought to transcend identitarianism and the obsession with who we are as the result of mere accidents of birth.

The CRT inspired myth of the white-adjacent, white or even hyper-white Jew helps explain why some anti-Zionists obscenely characterize Israel as a “white supremacist state”, which brings us to a powerful observation by the Israeli writer Yossi Klein Halevi:
Anti-Semites have typically “turned Jews into the symbol of whatever it is a given civilization finds as its most loathsome quality.
Under early Christianity, the Jew was the Christ killer. Under communism, the Jew was the capitalist. Under Nazism, the Jew was the ultimate race polluter.
Now we live in a civilization where the most loathsome qualities are racism, and, lo and behold, Jews have become “white people” oppressing “people of colour”.

This represents, Halevi concludes, a “classical continuity of thousands of years of symbolising the Jew”.

Moreover, the message of Jewish tradition is that none of us are at the mercy of qualities or characteristics that can never change. Our message has always been one of action and hope—each one of us is a work in progress, even kings and great leaders.

CRT nullifies this powerful and liberal idea—that we are individuals with the power to make a difference in our own lives.

Equality before the law, regardless of class, colour, or creed, is not just the only answer that has worked for Jews, and the greater good, over the long run, it’s also the only solution with any moral authority – the only idea that has proven itself to be most likely to result in human flourishing.

It is not by chance that Jews in particular tend to thrive in societies in which liberalism is enshrined in law and civic culture:
The veneration and codification of individual as opposed to group rights, which are protected via the neutral application of laws.
The idea that we should judge each person not by their station or their family lineage, but by their decisions, actions and achievements.
The sacredness of the individual over the group.
Human agency over fatalism.

It is the idea that all men are created in the image of God, that freedom is a natural self-evident right which precedes the state, and is shared by all individuals—revolutionary ideas originating in the Torah, but ushered into the West by Locke, Mill, Montesquieu and the drafters of the US Constitution – which offer the only real protection against increasing threats to Jewish freedom and the liberal values that serve as a bulwark against racism and tyranny throughout the world.

This photo is not from today, but it is such a great picture of Arabs participating in the democratic process - the exact opposite of how Israel haters frame things.

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!

9 protesters outside Jerusalem UK consulate against Balfour Declaration. 10 articles about them.

Today, a group of Palestinians protested outside the British Consulate in Jerusalem to mark the 105th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration.

They attempted to present a lengthy letter of protest, demanding an apology and compensation from the British. The consulate refused to accept the letter so they placed it on the grate of the front door.

I count nine protesters.

Sama News, SND news, Al Siasi, Maan, AlQuds, Roya News, Wattan, NABD, Al Watan Voice and Safa are all covering the story.

That means more Palestinian news sites wrote about the protest than the number of protesters to begin with.

And the Israel haters do this often. While they do sometime get big crowds to their demonstrations, they cover even the tiniest protests as big news, to give the impression of far more political power than they really have.

After all, perception is as important as reality, and the anti-Israel side is excellent at propaganda techniques.

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!

11/01 Links Pt1: How Israel’s elections may impact the Middle East; UN: Suspend adoption of IHRA definition of antisemitism; Canada Calls to Oust Iran From UN Women’s Rights Commission

From Ian:

Seth Frantzman: How Israel’s elections may impact the Middle East

As Israelis voted for the fifth time in less than four years, the region could greet these latest elections with a shrug. After all, another election will probably come in a year or so.

However, the current government of Prime Minister Yair Lapid and alternate Prime Minister Naftali Bennett made major strides in the region. Lapid, Bennett and Defense Minister Benny Gantz put a premium on public meetings and outreach around the Middle East, including hosting such important forums as the Negev Summit.

On the other hand, Lapid also rushed into the agreement with Lebanon days before the election. This matters, and on policies from Ukraine to Turkey, there could be shifts after the election that impact the region.

Israel and Turkey
One of the most important shifts in the last year has been Israel’s decision to work with Turkey. After years in which Ankara had bashed the Jewish state, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and backing Hamas, Turkey sought to change its tone over the last year. This resulted in numerous high-level meetings and visits.

The normalization between Ankara and Jerusalem may be only on the surface, because Turkey’s ruling AKP Party is the same party as before the reconciliation. But it could also mark a shift that continues after the election.

It’s clear that with Turkey, there was a choice to normalize relations after former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu left office. Ankara had increased its extreme rhetoric and anti-Israel behavior during Netanyahu’s 10 years in power. This included the launching of the Mavi Marmara flotilla, as well as hosting Hamas leaders and vocal threats to “liberate al-Aqsa.”

Ankara’s behavior occurred against the backdrop of close Turkey-US relations during the Trump administration and its increasing role in Syria. It’s not entirely clear what led to Turkey’s increasingly anti-Israel behavior, especially considering that in the early 2000s, the countries had managed to continue amicable relations despite the differences between the AKP and Israel. The party is rooted in the Muslim Brotherhood and is close to Hamas ideologically, making it naturally hostile to Israel.

During the Netanyahu era, there was little chance of reconciliation with Turkey. Netanyahu always believed that Israel had to exude strength in the face of threats, and he wasn’t afraid to critique Turkey’s actions.

Today, both Ankara and Jerusalem have shifted rhetoric, and this has enabled major changes on the political and diplomatic fronts.

The Commentary Magazine Podcast: Will Bibi Make a Comeback?

Dan Senor joins the podcast today to map out five scenarios for the Israeli election results—Israel is voting today. And then we discuss why professional Republicans seem a little more anxious than thrilled about the clear pattern in the polling about what’s going to happen next Tuesday here in the American elections. Give a listen.

Netanyahu's peace plan with the Saudis may also end the Arab-Israel conflict

Israel’s Leader of the Opposition Benjamin Netanyahu has broken his silence - giving his nod of approval to examining the Saudi-proposed Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine solution (Saudi Solution) :
“I think the big prize is peace with Saudi Arabia, which I intend to achieve if I go back into office… The rise of Israeli power facilitated the Abraham Accords, and the continual nurturing of Israeli power will also nurture a broader peace with Saudi Arabia and nearly all of the rest of the Arab world. I intend to bring the Arab-Israeli conflict to a close.”

Peace with Saudi Arabia and ending the Arab-Israeli conflict will require Netanyahu to successfully negotiate to make the Saudi Solution - published in June - acceptable. That would see:
· Jordan, Gaza and part of Judea and Samaria ('West Bank') being merged into one territorial entity to be called The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine - with its capital in Amman - not Jerusalem
· Abandonment of the 74 years-old Palestinian Arab demand to return and live in Israel
· Recognition of Jewish sovereignty in part of Judea and Samaria ('West Bank') for the first time in 3000 years
· No new Palestinian Arab state between Israel and Jordan

Yesh Atid Party Leader - Yair Lapid, Blue and White Party Leader - Benny Gantz - and Labor Party Leader - Merav Michaeli - have all rejected the Saudi Solution outright - aligning their respective parties policies with President Biden’s to continue pursuing the failed unachievable two-state solution first dreamt up by the European Union in 1980 and endorsed by the United Nations in 2003.

The leaders of all other Israeli political parties have yet to comment on the Saudi Solution.

Netanyahu, however, indicated his thinking was clearly in sync with the game-changing proposals.

Hundreds of Jews visit Temple Mount on election day

Twice the number of Jews visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on election day this year compared to last year, the Temple Mount Administration reported on Tuesday afternoon.

“The visitors said they took advantage of the election day vacation to go up and visit the site where the House of God stood,” the administration said in a statement. “It reminds them of how fortunate they are to be in a Jewish state, voting for a Jewish government.”

Nearly 300 Jews had already visited the mount by 10:30 a.m., the administration said.

Visits to the Temple Mount by Jews have been on the rise over the past year in general.

Some 47,988 Jews visited the Mount last year, in Hebrew year 5782—a 94% increase over the year before.

Anything about the Palestinian Auth, which is in the 18th year of Abbas’ 4 year term, without elections? No, didn’t think so. Just more lies and Jew hate from @hrw? https://t.co/0jkRZI9fWq
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) November 1, 2022

Israeli courts have upheld a ruling to demolish an illegally built structure in Area C that purports to be a school.

The metal prefabricated building, in Ein Samiya Al-Badawi, was built last January. And the ramshackle, dangerous building appears to have been built deliberately to be demolished, so Israel looks bad.

I'm not convinced that the building was ever used as a school. The only photos of video I can find of the interior show some desks and even schoolbooks scattered on some of them, but no walls, no whiteboard, no lights and seemingly no electricity.

The bathrooms are portable toilets outside the building.

What decent government wouldn't condemn such a building meant for children?

But it appears that there was never any intent to build a real school. It was all a sham meant to provide good fodder for the anti-Israel crowd when Israel brings in the bulldozers to demolish it, probably early next year.

One way we know this is from the stories that say who sponsored the school to begin with.

It was erected in coordination with the Palestinian Ministry of Education, a European NGO, and...."the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission."

That doesn't sound like an education organization. And it isn't.

It was established by the Palestinian Authority to pressure international organizations to condemn Israel for its settlement activities.

All of this is playacting, and everyone knows it - Israel, the Palestinians and the European funders for these structures, and the media which reports on these stories straight as if there is nothing amiss in the constant building of structures in Area C for communities that never existed a few years ago.

Here is Ein Samiya in 2021 and in 2014, according to Google Earth.

It is a shame that no media bothers actually reporting the truth.

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!

Yes, extremist rhetoric can normalize violence - and that includes "anti-Zionist" rhetoric

Historian Matthew Dallek writes in a New York Times op-ed:

The assault on Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, last week shocked even those who have become inured to rising violence in the United States. The erosion of norms restraining extreme behavior that began well before the election of Donald Trump in 2016 appears to have accelerated. Society looks as if it is coming apart at the seams.

...Under Mr. Trump’s leadership, groups on the right have felt increasingly comfortable incubating, encouraging and carrying out violence.

The consistency of the rhetoric (“enemy of the people”; “Our house is on fire”; “You’re not going to have a country anymore”; “the greatest theft in the history of America”; “Where’s Nancy?”) has ingrained dehumanization of Republican opponents in parts of the political culture; conservatives have often painted their critics as enemies who must be annihilated before they destroy you. As the Department of Homeland Security has reported, domestic violent extremism — such as the white supremacist Charlottesville riots and the Jan. 6 insurrection — is one of the most pressing internal threats facing the United States.

I don't disagree with any of this except for the term "conservatives" instead of "the far-right" in the paragraph above - there is little conservative about those who support political violence.

Dallek makes a half-hearted attempt at even-handedness:

Some on the left, too, have increasingly abandoned norms of civility and respect for rules and institutions. The gunman who in 2017 targeted Republican members of Congress and shot five people playing baseball — the Republican House whip, Steve Scalise, was seriously wounded — drew inspiration from his hatred of Republicans and Donald Trump. In June, a California man was arrested outside Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home and charged with attempted murder after posting on the social platform Discord that he was going to “stop Roe v. Wade from being overturned.”

But then Dallek draws a distinction that isn't really there, as the rest of the article ignores far-Left incitement:

While Democratic leaders for the most part are quick to condemn violence, Republican leaders increasingly minimize its severity or turn a blind eye.

But Democrats are no less guilty at minimizing the violence on their side.

One obvious example: Hundreds of Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 were violent, but the political Left emphasized that 93% of the protests were peaceful - as if the hundreds of violent protests shouldn't be reported.

Has anyone reported on the percentage of rallies on the Right that are violent compared to non-violent? I'm sure the percentage that are non-violent is far higher than 93%.

Both sides are guilty of emphasizing the excesses of the other side and downplaying those on their own, not just the Right. And the Left's blind side is not only for anti-racist protests but also for anti-Israel rhetoric that can easily escalate into violence.

Most of the anti-Israel protests in the US are sponsored by far-Left groups like Samidoun and Within Our Lifetime. They feature chants that call for violence against Zionist Jews, sometimes implicitly and sometimes explicitly. After all, the chants of "Globalize the Intifada" are a call for violence against Jews worldwide. "From the river to the sea" is a call to ethnically cleanse Jews from the Middle East. "By any means necessary" is explicit support for terror attacks against Jews. Yet this incitement is minimized by the larger Left.

Some of these protests have indeed escalated into violence, as we saw last year in New York and Los Angeles. The vicious beating of a Jew in New York was blandly reported as "clashes between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel protesters." Only this past week, a yeshiva boy in New York was attacked by someone who demanded he say "Free Palestine", mirroring a similar attack in May. The line between Leftist rhetoric and violence against Jews has already been crossed multiple times - but it is downplayed, over and over.

Overseas, the same socialist sponsors chant pro-violence messages that are even more explicit, and they can be seen as a preview of what we will be seeing soon in the US. This past weekend in Brussels, a rally organized by Samidoun included these chants:

Stand firm until it ends, by throwing a stone or shooting bullets. My people have a war and have no fear, either with a stone or with a Kalashnikov. And fire your rockets, O Motherland...O Motherland, we are coming to you. O my love, O Grand Rocket, hand over this land to me. In war and sword, we will return.

The rally featured people dressed up as masked Palestinian terrorists and holding signs supporting specific terrorists.

This is not just inciting to violence - it is romanticizing it. And the ideological basis for murdering Jews comes from the socialist PFLP, whose philosophy of violence against Zionist Jews was written in the 1960s are remains unchanged today. The PFLP is a terror group that has been behind countless attacks on civilians worldwide.

How many people on the political Left call out the PFLP and Samidoun and Within Our Lifetime when they call for violence? On the contrary, the Left supports the PFLP as a social justice political party that has founded human rights groups.

Incitement to violence is wrong no matter who does it. It will not stop until those on the same political side are brave enough to call it out, even if it means there will be dissent within the party.

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!

When "anti-Zionists" were antisemites of the Right

In the 1940s and 1950s, there was a burgeoning publishing industry of far-Right antisemites.

Jack Tenney was a California state senator who published a number of antisemitic tracts in the 1950s - but he insisted that he was only anti-Zionist.

The cover for his "Zionist Network" was pretty much identical to Nazi antisemitic propaganda:

The inside cover of Tenney's book "Zion's Fifth Column" includes a quote where he insists he has nothing against Jews:

Of course. Tenney didn't think his hate of Jews was unreasoning. In "Zionist Network" he describes how close-knit Jews control the world.

Also similar to today's antisemitic anti-Zionists, Tenney creates a hit list network of Jewish organizations, similar to the Boston Mapping Project this year and much of what David Miller still does.

In "Zion's Fifth Column" he lists many Jewish organizations, along with the names of their officers. It is indistinguishable from what one can see in Electronic Intifada on any given day.

Another notable "anti-Communist" publication was called Common Sense (not to be confused with a 1940s' magazine nor with Bari Weiss' current newsletter.)

Reading Common Sense now shows a funhouse mirror version of today's anti-Zionists who are just as antisemitic as this publisher was. In many ways Common Sense resembles Arab media antisemitism, complete with Khazar conspiracy theories and railing against the Talmud.

Here are some of the top headlines of Common Sense, where Jews and Zionists are used interchangeably.

Especially notable is this cover, which is the obverse of today's Left accusing Zionists of weaponizing antisemitism. It turns out the far Right agreed with them!

Common Sense also included Holocaust denial. It was partially funded by Benjamin Freedman, a famous antisemite and Holocaust denier.

It had a circulation of about 50,000 and published up until about 1970. It was recognized as a hate group by the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1954. While the Committee was associated with the Right, it recognized and condemned those who used anti-Communism as an excuse for their hate.

Communism’s present threat to the very survival of the United States and the rest of the free world has placed heavy burdens on the defenders of human freedom and dignity. The Committee on Un-American Activities is concerned to observe that this burden is being aggravated by certain individuals and organizations unscrupulously exploiting the menace of communism to promote other activities equally subversive and equally un-American. Such activities would destroy the very foundation work of the American Republic, if permitted to operate unnoticed or unchallenged. Committee investigations disclose that this organized activity falls into two patterns: (1) The neo-fascist organization which openly espouses a fascist regime for the United States; and (2) The organized hate group, which masquerades as a defender of our republican form of government yet conducts hate campaigns against racial and religious minorities in the infamous tradition of the fascist dictatorships.

The Committee, which is now associated with the most extreme excesses of the Right, wrote this - something that you will hardly find either today's Left nor today's Right ever saying: "Those who would support the extreme right today do as great a violence to our national institutions as do those on the extreme left. "

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!

10/31 Links Pt2: Indoctrinating schoolchildren to hate Israel and Jews; Far-left MK: Kiryat Arba shooter not a terrorist, settlers aren’t innocent civilians

From Ian:

Head-Scratching Questions about Jews and Israel

Writing a weekly column isn’t for the faint of heart or the perpetually bored. Sometimes, I tire of attempting to write heartfelt words and reflections week after week. Therefore, I’ve devoted this week’s column to asking readers 25 head-scratching questions about Jews, Israel and that harmoniously peaceful corner of the world known as the Middle East:

1. If Jews control the media, why does the media generally depict Israel in such a harsh and even untruthful manner, and in the same vein, if Jews control the world, why isn’t the world more sympathetic toward Jews?

2. If Jews are white, why do the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups chant “White Power” while demanding their demise, and if Jews aren’t white, why are they excluded from progressive groups that vow to protect non-whites?

3. Why do Jew-haters get to keep their jobs, but those who espouse prejudiced views toward other groups are canceled? Case in point: Why has it taken more than two weeks for Adidas to drop Kanye West? (Thanks to Balenciaga, though).

4. Given that the regime in Iran is currently butchering protestors, including young girls, why have Iranian diplomats still not been expelled from any Western countries, with the exception of one (see below)?

5. Why did Iran conduct a major cyberattack against Albanian government websites (yes, Albania) last month, resulting in the expulsion of diplomats from the Iranian embassy (and can the rest of Europe take a cue from Albania)?

6. Why did the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) just ask the Supreme Court to overturn Arkansas’ anti-boycott (BDS) law against Israel, citing concern for Palestinians’ rights, but the organization hasn’t uttered a single word about Iranians dying to protect the civil liberties of their fellow citizens?

Indoctrinating schoolchildren to hate Israel and Jews

The cognitive war against Israel has been pursued on college campuses for well over a decade. It has persuaded many to view the Jewish state as a racist, colonial oppressor of an innocent indigenous people and an illegal regime that exists on land stolen from Palestinians. Now, these slanders, lies and distortions are being injected into younger and even more impressionable minds: those of schoolchildren.

A recent example of this was the Newark, New Jersey school board’s decision to include an anti-Israel book on its mandatory reading list. The book, A Little Piece of Ground by Elizabeth Laird, found its way into the sixth-grade English curriculum for the 2022-2023 school year. According to its description on Amazon, it “explores the human cost of the occupation of Palestinian lands through the eyes of a young boy.”

The book depicts Israelis as an evil force that constrains the life of the young protagonist in a capricious and cruel way. Karim, the 12-year-old protagonist, complains that his father is “humiliated” by the Israeli checkpoints, but young readers are not told that such checkpoints exist because Israeli citizens have suffered decades of terror attacks.

Israelis are portrayed throughout the book as an inhuman military machine. “The Israeli tank that had been squatting at the crossroads just below the apartment block for days now had moved a few meters closer,” the reader is told. “He could imagine the great armored machines lying down there, like a row of green scaly monsters, crouched waiting to crawl back up the hill and pin the people of Ramallah down in their houses again.”

Some Israelis are literally rather than metaphorically dehumanized. “Human?” Karim says at one point. “You call those settlers human?”

A spokesperson for the Newark school district tried to justify the inclusion of the book by claiming that it “elevates historically marginalized voices, strengthens and sustains a focus on the instructional core and provides opportunities to learn about perspectives beyond one’s own scope”.

In a letter to Newark’s superintendent of schools, Morton Klein and Susan Tuchman of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) pointed out that the book will manufacture a false and negative image of Israel and Jews in the minds of students. They said the author was “clever, repeatedly sending the false and outrageous message to her young readers that Israelis are heartless and cruel, that their goal is to humiliate Palestinian Arabs and make their lives a misery, and that Jews are stealing other people’s land.”

Far-left MK: Kiryat Arba shooter not a terrorist, settlers aren’t innocent civilians

Hadash-Ta’al MK Ofer Cassif said Monday that he did not consider the Palestinian gunman who killed Ronen Hanania in a shooting attack near the West Bank settlement of Kiryat Araba on Saturday to be a terrorist.

In an interview with the Ynet news site, Cassif was asked if he considered settlers killed in West Bank attacks to be victims of terror, with Hanania given as an example.

Cassif, the alliance’s only Jewish MK, said he did not.

“Don’t portray him as a simple man,” he said of Hanania.

“Especially those that live as a thorn in the side [of the Palestinians], they can’t be considered innocent civilians,” Cassif said.

“Myself and my friends in Hadash have for years said that we support a nonviolent struggle, but that’s what happens in every place where there is occupation and repression — those who expect the occupied and repressed to just sit and do nothing are lying to themselves,” the lawmaker added.

Hanania and his son Daniel were shot Saturday evening while visiting a convenience store located between Kiryat Arba and the adjacent city of Hebron.

The attacker was identified as Muhammed Kamel al-Jabari, an apparent member of the Hamas terror group. After shooting Hanania and his son, Jabari opened fire on medics and settlement security guards who arrived at the scene to help the pair, seriously wounding a paramedic.

English speakers trying to figure out how to vote in the Knesset elections, and why these elections are important, please watch the video that @AviAbelow and I did this morning where we lay it out.https://t.co/r15jnLjzyV
— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) October 31, 2022

This is a lie. All Israeli citizens, Arabs, Jews, Druze, Armenians, Christians, Muslims, Jewish people, however one identify or whatever religion one is, can vote. #Israel https://t.co/PzGBCnBsXk
— ?? Shai De Luca ?? ????? (@ShaiDeLuca) October 30, 2022

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!

There are stories this morning about how Israel's closure in Nablus has been affecting the businesses there, as shops that sell furniture and other goods who get most of their customers from outside Nablus are losing business.

One might feel a little more sorry for the affected business owners if Palestinians themselves didn't declare their own strikes all the time - that affect these same businesses even more.

Twice in the past two weeks, Palestinians declared general strikes - not only in Nablus but throughout the entire West Bank - in reaction to Israel killing terrorists.

These strikes are declared every time Palestinian groups want them - and how it affects Palestinians themselves is not part of the equation.

It isn't as if these strikes bother Israelis at all. All they do is hurt the Palestinian economy.

So forgive me if I am not so sympathetic to articles blaming a loss of business in Nablus on Israel. There are general Palestinian strikes practically every month, sometimes multiple times a month, sometimes for a couple of municipalities but often throughout the West Bank. No Arabic articles talk about how they affect the Palestinian economy.

No shopkeepers are interviewed about whether they agree with the strikes or not. No economists are consulted to opine on whether a general strike twice a month drops the Palestinian GNP by 5 or 10%.

Imagine how different the Palestinian territories would be if journalists were allowed to cover a story like that.

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!

10/31 Links Pt1: The UN CoI's 2nd: The Continued Assault on Israel; Sunak should acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel’s capital; NZ PM calls to expel Iran from U.N. Women’s Rights Commission

From Ian:

NGO Monitor: The UN Commission of Inquiry’s Second Report: The Continued Assault on Israel

Failure to Address Commissioners’ Antisemitism

In issuing its second report, the members of the COI ignored the numerous condemnations of the antisemitic statements they had made since the COI began.

In June 2022, speaking before the UN Human Rights Council, Commissioner Chris Sidoti appeared to trivialize the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA) consensus-building definition of antisemitism by dismissing it as “the definition of antisemitism promoted by the government of Israel, and its GONGOS.” He contended that “accusations of antisemitism are thrown around like rice at a wedding,” and claims that such accusations “legitimize” antisemitism.

In July 2022, Commissioner Miloon Kothari also made antisemitic comments on a podcast, claiming that the “Jewish lobby” controls social media and questioned whether Israel should have UN membership. In a letter to UNHRC President Federico Villegas, Pillay refused to condemn Kothari’s remarks, stating his comments “have deliberately been taken out of context…[and] deliberately misquoted.”

Dozens of countries, as well as UN Special Rapporteur Ahmed Shaheed, and HRC President Federico Villegas condemned these remarks. (Read NGO Monitor’s letter to United Nations Human Rights Council President Federico Villegas calling on him to initiate an assessment of the UNHRC’s Commission of Inquiry on Israel for violations of the mandate and UN codes of conduct as well as NGO Monitor’s joint letter to the UNHRC President calling for the removal of the Commissioners due to their antisemitic biases. NGO Monitor has also thoroughly documented the Commissioners’ prior anti-Israel biases and their links to Palestinian NGOs in detailed reports.)

Nevertheless, no punitive action was taken against the COI or its commissioners, and the COI report made no mention of the controversy. As a result, following the presentation of the report, many countries, including Albania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Federated States of Micronesia, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Palau, Republic of Nauru, and the United States, again condemned the antisemitism exhibited by the Commissioners. Many of these countries also denounced the inaction of the United Nations to repudiate these statements or remove the Commissioners from their positions.

Once again, Navi Pillay ignored this glaring criticism, and made several false and dismissive statements in response to the State remarks. Pillay falsely claimed, “This has been dealt fully by the President of the Human Rights Council, who is the proper authority to clear up criticism of the mandate and clear up criticism of those he selected for appointment as commissioners. So I do encourage you to look at the President’s website on that.” To date, the President has taken no action. Pillay also rejected claims of antisemitism, stating that “I’m 81 years old now, and this is a very first time I’ve been accused of antisemitism. In my own country, that will not be received well because everybody knows the role I played, and similarly with the other two commissioners. So let me make absolutely clear, we are not antisemitic.” These remarks represented yet another attempt by Pillay to whitewash the clear antisemitism expressed by the Commissioners and to absolve herself and the COI from taking the necessary concrete steps to address the deep-seated problems.

At the United Nations, Israel Becomes the Outlaw when Palestinians Reject Peace

First and foremost, the COI claim relies on ignoring that Israel has, in fact, repeatedly tried to end the occupation. Nowhere in the COI report is there any mention of the repeated offers of statehood made by Israel, including in 2000 at Camp David, and then the even more generous 2008 offer by then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

How does one square these offers with the claim that Israel has “no intention of ending the occupation?” How does one square Israel’s agreement to the Oslo Accords, which gave a Palestinian entity autonomy over parts of the West Bank for the first time ever in history, with this charge? Any serious legal inquiry would have to account for and overcome these facts to come to the conclusion that the COI reached .

Second, the claim relies on ignoring all the instances when Israel gave up land for peace, and even gave up land in the hopes of reaching peace. Far from Israelis being “covetous aliens” and Israel being an “acquisitive occupier,” as Lynk claimed while using openly antisemitic tropes in his final report, the Jewish state has repeatedly traded land captured in defensive wars back to states like Egypt and Jordan in exchange for lasting peace. As Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s recent statement at the UN General Assembly demonstrated, that is still Israel’s desire when it comes to the Palestinians, too. No amount of baseless, conspiratorial assertions by the COI that Israel only “uphold[s] the appearance of agreement” — with a two-state solution as part of a duplicitous strategy — can overcome this history.

This is particularly evident when considering Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, which the COI only acknowledges to the extent necessary to absurdly accuse Israel of still “occupying” the territory. To admit that Israel completely uprooted not just its military, but also thousands of Israeli residents of Gaza, would require also acknowledging that many of the policies that the COI claims are designed to make Israeli occupation in the West Bank “permanent” are, in fact, quite capable of being overcome, just as they were in Gaza.

Third, and perhaps most telling, is that the claim relies on ignoring Palestinian rejectionism and maximalist demands. The entire narrative crafted by the likes of the COI members is that Israel alone bears responsibility. The fact that Israel prevailed in repeated wars of survival against invading Arab armies and decades of terror attacks that began long before the “occupation” started in 1967, does not square with the COI’s portrayal of pure Palestinian innocence and absolute Israeli malevolence. The COI has to conceal that the conflict persists in large part due to Palestinian rejectionism and refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state in any part of the Land of Israel.

That is also why Palestinian leaders openly bragging about rejecting peace offers must go unmentioned, as with Mahmoud Abbas’ demand that “not a single Israeli” will be allowed to be part of a Palestinian state. It is why the COI cannot acknowledge that the Palestinian Authority (PA) arrests and tortures Palestinians for participating in peace workshops. It is why Hamas is rarely if ever mentioned — and no acknowledgement is made of its violent, antisemitic, and openly genocidal charter. The fact that the PA tells its people that the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Charter still calls for Israel’s destruction must also remain hidden.

Stephen Daisley: Sunak should acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel’s capital

Under Jordanian occupation, Jews were expelled from eastern Jerusalem and their synagogues burned, but under Israeli authority there are provisions to facilitate freedom of worship. This set-up is not particularly loveable. Jews are banned from praying on Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism, while Muslims are free to pray there. There are tensions. Clashes are not unknown. But on the whole it works.

The UK’s policy, one shared by the overwhelming majority of countries, is to deny recognition to this uneasy but enduring arrangement. We pretend that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel because we fear doing otherwise would concede that international law, or at least the dominant reading of it, has failed as a conceptual framework in the most scrutinised conflict of modern times. We wish to see a viable Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem and fret that acknowledging Israel’s capital would prejudice or hinder that.

This is an error born of a paradox. Mindful of its history in Palestine, Britain wishes to be uninvolved in the conflict but uninvolved in a way that aggrandises its status in the region. By withholding recognition of Jerusalem, we tell ourselves, the UK is advancing the cause of peace. Without wishing to sound like one of those ‘Britain is crap, ackshually’ historians, we are seriously overstating our swing in this part of the world. The Palestinian conflict with Israel will end when the Palestinians accept their own state alongside the Jewish state. Nothing we say or do is likely to influence them either way. This is their conflict, not ours.

Those of us who advocate recognition tend to do so in political, historical, moral, legal and, yes, emotional terms. But there is also a realist case. Under these terms, recognising Jerusalem is not about what Israel or the Palestinians want. It is about what the UK considers its foreign policy ought to be. What is in our interests? Some might argue that it is in our interests to be scrupulously even-handed and leave well enough alone. Even if that were true, the fact is that we are not neutral at present. Even as it refuses to acknowledge Israeli sovereignty in any part of Jerusalem, the UK government defines East Jerusalem as part of the ‘Occupied Palestinian Territories’. So our position is not one of balance or non-intervention. We have intervened in the conflict to say that East Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinians and West Jerusalem is up for debate.

A story of Palestinians fuming over a Star of David

Earlier this month, a Filipino Christian group rented out a hotel meeting space in Bethlehem and decorated it with cardboard cutouts that included a Star of David and a Temple menorah:

They were almost certainly visiting to join thousands of other Christians for the annual "Feast of Tabernacles" parade and celebration in Jerusalem held during Sukkot every year.

The Filipino delegation probably had no idea that the Palestinians were antisemitic when they put up these decorations. After all, how much media coverage is there of systemic Palestinian hate of Jews? They are only anti-Zionist, right?

Here's what happened.

Shehab News Agency tweeted a video of the hall.

Rumors started flying that the hotel was hosting Israelis for a normalization conference.

Elias al-Arja, the owner of Bethlehem Hotel, told a Palestinian radio station, “I was surprised to see that they installed the Star of David. I removed it and told them that they are not permitted to hold the conference in my hotel. I don’t want any problems....We don’t allow Jews to come here."

A group of angry armed Palestinians threatened the hotel and reportedly shut it down.

Gunmen shot bullets towards the hotel; luckily no one was injured.

The Palestinian Authority Ministry of Tourism announced on Facebook that it closed the meeting hall and launched an investigation into how this terrible thing might have happened.

Needless to say, this is not "anti-Zionism." This is pure hatred of Jews and anything peripherally associated with Jews.

No matter how much the Palestinians insist that they have nothing against Judaism, only Zionism, this incident - the anger shown, the hate that surrounded all aspects of the incident - proves what everyone knows but few are willing to say out loud:

Palestinians don't hate Jews because of Israel, they hate Israel because of 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!