Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, December 13, 2022

12/13 Links Pt2: Landes on Why Leftists Embrace Islamist Ideas about the West; The history of the media intifada against Israel; Brandeis Center: FBI Report Grossly Understated Antisemitic Crimes

From Ian:

Richard Landes on Why Leftists Embrace Islamist Ideas about the West

Richard Landes, chair of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) and author of Can the "Whole World" Be Wrong? Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism, and Global Jihad, was interviewed in a December 5th Middle East Forum Webinar (video) by Dexter Van Zile, editor of the Middle East Forum's Focus on Western Islamism (FWI), regarding the left's embrace of Islamist ideas about the West.

Landes said Edward Said's 1978 book, Orientalism, had "pretty much taken over academia" with its premise that any criticism of Islam was a form of "Western racism." By 2000, said Landes, Said's ideas had "crystallized into a basic feature of the Western public sphere." In 2001, a further significant watershed in this process was the U.N.-sponsored Durban conference, an international forum purportedly held to fight racism. At the conference, "You had the NGOs ... their sacred theme was human rights ... lining up with and joining forces with some of the most regressive groups on the planet. And so as a result ... And the key thing in that unification was the adoption by both sides .... They had already both more or less developed this thought, but they jointly targeted Israel and the United States as, in millennial terms, the Antichrist. Or in Muslim terms, the Dajjal."

Landes described the alliance formed at Durban, followed three days later by the jihad against America on 9/11, as a "red-green alliance" between the "progressive left and jihadis." He referred to it as a "marriage between post-modern sadism and post-modern masochism." The poisonous seeds of that merger account for the Islamists' marching in lockstep with the left, targeting both Israel and the U.S.

Landes said their joint strategy to undermine the West is "demopathy," i.e., using democracy to destroy democracy. Both groups used their platforms to channel their hostility, often publicized at anti-U.S. and anti-Israel protests in the form of symbolic imagery on placards linking swastikas with the American flag and the Jewish star. Landes noted that Islamist propagandists have grown "bolder and bolder. Initially, they didn't think they could get away with saying the things that they say now, so they couched it in human rights terms." He said that "what's happened over the last 20 years is that they've just seen how foolish Western leaders are and that they can get away with just about anything. But I think they still, by and large, don't openly say in English what they say in Arabic."

Phyllis Chesler: The history of the media intifada against Israel

From the moment Yasser Arafat launched his long-planned second intifada against Israel in 2000, the most brazen lies about both Jews and Israel were relentlessly told and widely believed. For years, master propagandists in cyberspace, the Western media and academia managed to diabolically invert reality. The entire world believed an utterly false narrative.

Richard Landes’s new work Can the Whole World Be Wrong?: Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism and Global Jihad fearlessly, carefully, relentlessly and brilliantly documents this history.

Landes is a historian and a scholar of apocalyptic movements. He is the author of eight books and countless articles. He maintains a formidable website, The Augean Stables. He is also a consummate wordsmith. For example, he coined the phrase “Pallywood” (Palestinian Hollywood) to describe the Palestinians’ tactic of staging theatrical productions in war zones in order to create anti-Israel propaganda disguised as news.

In his book, Landes proceeds blood libel by blood libel, beginning with the iconic death of Mohammed al-Dura, a Gazan child allegedly murdered with malice aforethought by cruel Israeli soldiers. With his death caught on video and immediately blamed on Israel, even though the video proved no such thing, al-Dura became the boy whose image has graced a thousand mugs and t-shirts, inflamed the entire world and led to countless Muslim atrocities, including suicide bombings, shootings, knife attacks and car-rammings against Israeli civilians.

As Landes notes, the initial reporting on the incident was malicious and incendiary: “The (flawed) footage and its accompanying narrative immediately went viral, then mythical. The footage was spectacular, as emotionally powerful as the dogs attacking Black protesters in Birmingham (1963), and the terrified Vietnamese girl running down the road naked, aflame with napalm (1972). … Despite extensive problems with the footage … journalists piled on the story. … It became the icon of hatred for the 21st century. One cannot overestimate its impact.”

“The role of al-Dura as incitement is clear,” Landes writes, “and if the damage was less than the old European pogroms, it’s only because the Israelis could defend themselves as the Jews of Kishinev could not.”

Landes also reminds us that Osama bin Laden used al-Dura in a recruiting video for global jihad and that the first Palestinian suicide bombers featured al-Dura in the videos they left behind.

EU source says anti-Israel measure 'tainted' in wake of Qatar corruption scandal

A source that has been privy to the European Parliament's behind-the-scenes deliberations over an anti-Israel resolution has told Israel Hayom it was problematic to have this measure come up for a vote at this time in light of the recent revelation that Qatar allegedly bribed senior officials in the legislative body in exchange for treating it with kid gloves over human rights.

"This corruption case involving the parliament raises the question of whether this is the right time to vote on this [anti-Israel resolution]," the source said.

The parliament's subcommittee on human rights has been at the center of the scandal and its chair Maria Arena has had to step down due to possible involvement (it is unclear if she is among the four being charged, who include EU Parliament's Vice President Eva Kaili, who was arrested).

Arena, who has initiated the anti-Israel motion, has stepped aside as chairperson in the wake of the investigation and her office has been sealed off, but the subcommittee has continued working on the draft. "This is the same subcommittee that has initiated the effort to hold the vote on the Israel resolution," the source said. "Considering this, perhaps it would be inappropriate to have these measures stay on the subcommittee's docket; perhaps they should be shelved for the time being until the picture becomes clearer."

On Monday, the various elements in the parliament tried to reach an agreed language, but all the drafts currently being circulated are not good for Israel, with some outright hostile. All call for the adoption of the two-state solution. The most pro-Israel draft has been sponsored by the right-wing parties, as it condemns Palestinian terrorism and demands it come to an end. The other resolutions call on Israel to avoid approving new communities in Judea and Samaria and voice criticism over the Abraham Accords, while also coming out against the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism.

NGO Monitor: Report: Potential Abuse of German Development Resources by Terror Affiliated Palestinian NGOs

Development and cooperation aid is seen as one of the most effective strategies for promoting democracy and fundamental rights, as well as building sustainable and inclusive societies, particularly in places where these processes are in their initial phases. To be sure, the path to building a democratic society is a political process, traversing existing ideological and social rifts, and subject to passionate debates between different political camps.

Especially in conflict ridden areas, politicization can result in development aid lending a platform to radical voices and amplifying inflammatory, hateful narratives. Such aid is particularly susceptible to abuse by groups that promote radical political narratives.

This is even more pronounced in the Palestinian-controlled areas, including Gaza, where many of the political factions are designated as terror groups by Europe (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine [PFLP]).

This paper provides a case study that examines the ways that political actors propagate and legitimize radicalized narratives – namely, local Palestinian civil society organizations affiliated with the PFLP terror group, which receive European and more specifically German development aid.

The PFLP is multifaceted, consisting of overlapping functions including militant operations, local partisan political activity, and international advocacy via a “human rights” NGO network. These aspects are complementary, all contributing to the broadening of the PFLP’s sphere of influence and to achieving its goals.

The overlapping character of PFLP activities was illustrated acutely when several senior NGO employees (including those in financial leadership positions) were arrested for a PFLP terror attack in 2019, in which Rina Shnerb, a 17-year-old Israeli, was murdered. A subsequent investigation run by the Israeli Ministry of Defense (MoD) concluded that six PFLP-affiliated NGOs had diverted public funds. Ultimately, all six were designated as terror entities.

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 Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research has released a new survey of Palestinians. It was taken between December 7-10.

The most notable finding was that a huge majority of Palestinians support the formation of terror groups like "The Lion's Den."

72% of Palestinians (84% in the Gaza Strip and 65% in the West Bank) say they are in favor of forming terror groups such as the “Lions’ Den,” which do not take orders from the PA and are not part of the PA security services; 22% are against that.

Even more, 79%, are against members of that group surrendering to the PA, and 87% say the PA does not have the right to arrest members of those groups to prevent them from carrying out attacks against Israelis.

In general, the Palestinians are more negative about Abbas than they had been in previous polls. Only 23% of Palestinians are satisfied with Abbas' leadership.

Support for terror increased: 55% support a return to "armed confrontations and intifada" to break the current deadlock. Given a choice of the best way to obtain an independent state, 51% choose terror, an increase of 10 percentage points in three months; only 21% choose negotiations, and 23% choose "popular resistance. "

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!

12/13 Links Pt1: Jonathan Tobin: The Triumph of Trump’s Amateurs; Ruthie Blum: The making of a Palestinian martyr; Would Iran give a nuclear bomb to al-Qaeda?

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: The Triumph of Trump’s Amateurs

And yet the conflict served an unexpectedly creative purpose. It provided the leverage the United Arab Emirates needed to justify its decision to normalize relations with Israel. In the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE ambassador to the United Nations, published an op-ed blasting the annexation idea. But while ostensibly critical of Israel, the column offered the possibility that the Arab world would open its arms to the Jewish state—because putting off annexation indefinitely would provide a rationale for normalization by Arab nations that were eager for an excuse to ditch the Palestinians.

Kushner and his chief aide, Avi Berkowitz, with the enthusiastic support of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (who had replaced Tillerson in 2018), went to work securing what would become the Abraham Accords. The UAE went first, but the Kushner-Berkowitz team also got Bahrain and then Morocco (at the cost of American recognition for its occupation of the former Spanish Sahara) to join in.

The establishment of Israeli diplomatic relations with these countries was by any objective standard a historic achievement. It added to the total of Arab nations that recognized Israel after more than seven decades of the Jewish state’s existence; only Egypt and Jordan, both former direct combatants in the wars against Israel, had normalized relations before this point. Even more important, as Kushner’s book makes clear, the normalization was also done with the acquiescence of Saudi Arabia. The accords demolished the claims that peace with the Arab world could only follow a resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians.

Trump’s amateurs proved that John Kerry’s notorious 2015 answer of “no, no, no, no,” when he was asked about the possibility of a wider peace, had been a function of the foreign-policy establishment’s tunnel vision and not a reflection of diplomatic reality. It provided the template for future peace agreements along the same lines with other Arab nations and could, in theory, prod a new generation of Palestinian leaders to seek an agreement with Israel and the United States that would be similar to the Peace Through Prosperity formula.

That the amateurs had arrived at this point by an indirect route, and only after years of struggle both inside the U.S. government and in futile attempts to engage the Palestinians, doesn’t detract from their achievement. But so deep is the contempt for Trump and Netanyahu within the ranks of the Washington establishment, and so entrenched are their preconceived notions about the Middle East, that not even the reality of the Abraham Accords and their significance are enough to change minds.

With the same cast of characters who so conspicuously failed in the Middle East under Bill Clinton and especially Barack Obama now back in control of American foreign policy, the familiar refrains about Israel needing to make concessions to encourage the Palestinians are once again in vogue. Though the Palestinian reputation for intransigence has made it difficult for even President Joe Biden’s team to find any meaningful way to appease Abbas and Company, Trump’s successor has failed to follow up on the Abraham Accords, thus squandering the opportunity for more peace deals and a united front against Iranian aggression and nuclear threats.

That is why the four books by Trump’s amateurs deserve to be read—and, despite their pedestrian renderings of everyday diplomacy (and Kushner’s deeply unattractive efforts at revenge and score-settling), understood as a useful guide to how Washington can break its addiction to policies that have been tried and proven to fail. Their authors may suffer from the opprobrium that the educated classes attach to anyone connected to Trump. But their successes deserve to be remembered and honored, and they stand as a lesson to all who will follow in their footsteps.

Ruthie Blum: The making of a Palestinian martyr

Her grieving uncle’s contradictory accounts of the night in question were just as big a giveaway, albeit unintentional. He told one outlet that his niece had been at home minding her own business when the sound of gunshots overhead spurred her to race to the roof. He was quoted on Twitter as claiming that she had gone to the roof to find her missing cat.

Both stories are revealing; most young girls would have responded to the noise of gunfire, all-too-familiar in Jenin, by cowering under their beds, not rushing to get in on the action. It’s puzzling that no adult blocked her exit from the apartment under the circumstances.

As Israeli soldiers and Border Police were in pursuit of terrorists, three of whom were known to be plotting imminent attacks, residents of the area hurled rocks, Molotov cocktails and explosives at them. Experience has taught both the murderers and those seeking to arrest them that rooftops are the best perch for this. IDF snipers were thus appropriately positioned.

The one who ended up shooting Zakarneh was simply doing his extremely difficult, dangerous job—in pitch darkness, no less. Had the young woman not been next to the targeted terrorist, filming the exchange to post on social media for propaganda purposes, she would still be alive and well.

But, then, mobs of hate-filled Palestinians would have been robbed of the ritual of carrying her flag-draped body through the streets of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) city that has become a key base for arms-hoarding and terrorist activity against the “Zionists.” It’s par for the making of a martyr, whose family will be rewarded with a generous monthly stipend from the P.A.

That’s a given, as is the vile way in which the whole scenario will be depicted in Gamba’s report.

Amb. Alan Baker: The Annual UN General Assembly Resolution Calling on Israel to Give Up Nuclear Weapons – “Much Ado about Nothing”

As part of the annual three-month “Israel-bashing” festival at the United Nations General Assembly, an automatic majority of 146 states adopted, on 7 December 2022, one of its annual resolutions calling upon Israel to renounce possession of nuclear weapons and to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision. Only six states voted against the resolution – Canada, the U.S., Palau, Micronesia, Liberia and Israel.

Anyone familiar with the annual ruminations and musings of the UN General Assembly should not be surprised or even bothered by the automatic repetition of old, archaic resolutions, year after year, singling out Israel for all the various ills of the world.

Apart from elements within Israeli media seeking to sensationalize and dramatize such resolutions, as well as some politicians and officials unfamiliar with the machinations of the UN, no one gets excited or bothered by such resolutions.

Even within the UN itself, the annual festival in the General Assembly of “Israel-bashing” resolutions based on an automatic, politically driven majority has for decades become a routine and unavoidable annoyance and irritant for all except the Arab and African states that sponsor them. Such resolutions certainly do not and are not intended to advance the cause of Middle East peace. Nor do they achieve anything other than stain the reputation of the organization.

They are endured by most states that, out of political correctness and fear of Muslim backlash, simply go along with them and even support them, knowing that they are meaningless.

Substantively and legally speaking, such resolutions, like all General Assembly resolutions, have no binding legal authority and represent nothing more than the collective, partisan political viewpoint of the automatic majority of states that regularly vote against Israel, no matter what the subject.

From CBS News:

The FBI released its 2021 hate crime statistics, but the data falls short of providing a complete picture of targeted violence in the U.S. Despite rising concerns about targeted violence and domestic terrorism, less than two-thirds of law enforcement agencies reported data on hate crimes to the FBI, last year, marking a significant drop-off.

Agency participation for hate crime statistics fell dramatically from 93% in 2020 to 65% in 2021. That drop comes as the FBI and the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics transition to a more detailed and comprehensive crime-reporting system, known as the "National Incident-Based Reporting System" or NIBRS. The new data collection method offers a more complete picture of crime in the nation, with additional information gathered about victims, offenders, and those arrested — including age, sex, and race, as well as a description of any relationship between victim and offender.

Incidents of hate crimes are not decreasing, according to the FBI. But until participation in the FBI's new data collection programs increases, the bureau will not be able to make a meaningful comparison of the number of hate crimes with years past.

For reporting on anti-Jewish crimes, the inaccuracy is much worse - because the cities with the highest Jewish populations are not represented at all:

Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, noted 35 major U.S. cities reported zero hate crimes in 2021. "The report provides a woefully inadequate assessment of the reality and extent of hate crimes targeting Jews in the United States," he said in a statement.
Major cities, including New York, Los Angeles and Miami, did not provide data to the bureau. Others, including Chicago and Phoenix, reported zero hate crimes in 2021, according to the FBI's report.

The FBI reports that anti-Jewish hate crimes decreased from 963 in 2019, to 683 in 2020, to only 324 in 2021.

Yet in New York City alone, there were 196 anti-Jewish incidents recorded in 2021. (And 195 this year through September only.)

In Los Angeles, there were over 80 anti-Jewish crimes in 2021.

Chicago reported only 8 antisemitic crimes last year but over 25 this year.

None of them are recorded in the FBI statistics. Even though these statistics are publicly reported, the FBI chooses to ignore them because they are not using the FBI's official system.

The FBI has always had a problem with many cities not reporting their statistics, but this is far worse than ever before. And now we cannot tell how much worse antisemitic crimes are getting.

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 White House initiative against antisemitism falls way short

A week ago, lawmakers sent a bipartisan letter to President Biden asking for various government agencies to work together to fight antisemitism:

We welcome the measures the Administration has taken thus far to address antisemitism. However, combating a growing threat of this magnitude, particularly here at home, requires a strategic, whole-of-government approach. Interagency coordination also could benefit from considering a broadly understood definition of antisemitism, as several agencies have adopted or recognized individually. Because many individual agencies play a critical role in combating antisemitism, closer coordination is needed to share best practices, data, and intelligence; identify gaps in efforts; streamline overlapping activities and roles; and execute a unified national strategy. The strategic collaboration of such entities would also send a key message to the American people and the international community that the United States is committed to fighting antisemitism at the highest levels.

As such, we urge you to prioritize coordination among all agencies working in this space, including, but not limited to, officials from the Department of Homeland Security; the Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Department of Education, including the Office for Civil Rights; and the Department of State, including the Office of the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism, the Office of the Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues, and the Office of International Religious Freedom; in addition to representatives from the Intelligence Community; the Office of Management and Budget; the National Security Council; the Homeland Security Council; the Domestic Policy Council; the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; in order to ensure all relevant entities within the Executive Branch and Congress are working in tandem. Creation of an interagency task force led by an official at the Assistant Secretary rank or higher is one way to accomplish such coordination.

Likewise, we request that agencies working collaboratively to combat antisemitism work with the leadership of the House and Senate Bipartisan Task Forces to Combat Antisemitism and key non-profit community stakeholders to develop a National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism. Doing so will provide a cohesive and comprehensive plan for interagency efforts in this critical space.

Seemingly in response, the White House issued this statement Monday:

As President Biden has made clear: antisemitism has no place in America. All Americans should forcefully reject antisemitism – including Holocaust denial – wherever it exists.

The President is establishing an inter-agency group led by Domestic Policy Council staff and National Security Council staff to increase and better coordinate U.S. Government efforts to counter antisemitism, Islamophobia, and related forms of bias and discrimination within the United States. The President has tasked the inter-agency group, as its first order of business, to develop a national strategy to counter antisemitism. This strategy will raise understanding about antisemitism and the threat it poses to the Jewish community and all Americans, address antisemitic harassment and abuse both online and offline, seek to prevent antisemitic attacks and incidents, and encourage whole-of-society efforts to counter antisemitism and build a more inclusive nation.

There are some significant differences between what the members of Congress asked for and what the White House is establishing.

First of all, and most troubling, is that the Biden administration letter lumped in Islamophobia and "related forms of bias and discrimination" with antisemitism. This already weakens the initiative, even with the strong language about antisemitism being its first task. Antisemitism is not like other types of bias and it cannot be fought using the same tools. It appears that the Biden initiative is going to consider antisemitism as a purely right-wing phenomenon, ignoring progressive, Black and Muslim-based antisemitism. It is difficult to call out those forms of antisemitism when they are considered fellow victims - one cannot imagine a group denounce Muslim antisemitism when members of the same group are fighting Islamophobia at the same time. They would issue kumbaya statements about being against Nazis, not real recommendations.

This is "all lives matter"ing antisemitism.

The White House letter's specifically mentioning Holocaust denial hints at this concentration on only one kind of antisemitism, from the far-Right. While Holocaust denial is horrible, it is a fringe opinion in the US and not a major ideological threat. Denying the emotional, historic and religious Jewish connection to Israel, claiming that Jews controlled the slave trade, demonizing the Jewish state, denying that Jews are "real Jews" altogether, and claiming that Jews are a monolithic group that controls the media, financial system and government - those are the ideological threats that American Jews face today that can and does turn violent.

Secondly, the Congressional letter specifically said that a unified definition of antisemitism is important to fight it. It clearly means the IHRA working definition (although mine would be better.) The White House did not mention that, almost certainly because of fears of attacks on the initiative from progressives - who are part of the problem. This fear of upsetting the "Squad" has already taken one of the most important tools to fight antisemitism - defining it properly - off the table.

Thirdly, while the Congressional letter asked that this inter-agency group have some real power by being lead by an official at at least Assistant Secretary rank, the White House response only says that it will be led by "staff." It will have no power except, perhaps, to call meetings.

The White House press release language is strong, but given how it is watering down what over 120 lawmakers asked for, it appears like it is a cosmetic move to make it look like they are doing something rather than a real effort to fight antisemitism. And it is hard to escape the conclusion that this watering down is out of fear of upsetting the "progressives" who are a major component of today's antisemitic ideologies.

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!

Sham Bilal Abdullah Hamdan

Do you recognize this photo of a baby girl in Gaza? Of course not - her murder was barely reported.

Arabic websites are screaming about the death of Jana Zakarneh, 16, who was killed during a firefight when IDF troops were shooting at armed terrorists on rooftops, where she was watching the fighting and taking photos.

Here is a photo of the IDF she sent to a friend before her death, apparently from the roof of her building. It is possible that the IDF thought she was a spotter. It is possible that she was a spotter. (h/t Abu Ali Express)

The photo and timestamp shows that the unlikely and contradictory explanations that her family told reporters for her going to the roof (she went without her phone to check out the fighting, she went to get her cat, she was only on the roof for a few minutes) are lies.

Nevertheless, Palestinian media is up in arms about what they are calling a cold blooded execution.

So their media must really care about their children, right?

Except they don't.

On Saturday night, someone broke into the house of a family in the Bir al-Naja neighborhood in Gaza. He assaulted a mother and, according to sources, tossed a four month old baby, Sham Bilal Abdullah Hamdan, out of the third story window, killing her. Gaza police are investigating.

Most Palestinian Arabic media didn't even publish this horrific story. One of the few that did, Ultrapal, has complained that most Palestinian media doesn't report on the many murders that take place in the territories.

Of course, this post is the first time this story is being published in English - even though it happened more than two days ago, the crime is particularly heinous, and the victim is a beautiful baby girl, all elements of a notable story.

The two incidents prove once again that Palestinian media, and international media, don't care about Palestinian children who are killed - even under the most horrific circumstance - unless their deaths can be blamed on 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!

12/12 Links Pt2: The Apartheid Libel to Destroy Israel; Teaching Terror to Tots - reevaluating the Oslo Accords; Collier: An open letter to Gary Lineker

From Ian:

PMW: Teaching Terror to Tots - reevaluating the Oslo Accords

Many observers have been puzzled why the 1993 Oslo peace accords did not lead to peace but precisely the opposite. Sporadic Palestinian terror attacks prior to 1993 were replaced by repeated Palestinian terror waves murdering more than 2,000 Israelis. PMW’s report "Teaching Terror to Tots” is the key to understanding the post-Oslo terror enigma.

Palestinian Media Watch as been documenting official PA/Fatah ideologies, policies and messages disseminated through every framework they control for over 20 years and everything that PMW has exposed has raised questions about the sincerity of the PA/Fatah in the peace process. PMW recently published a report on Fatah’s Waed magazine for children ages 6 – 15, covering every issue published over the last eight years. The messages for Palestinian children spread through Waed confirm that the PA/Fatah end game was, and remains, Israel’s destruction and Israel’s replacement by “Palestine”.

The hundreds of examples in the 70 page report show that through Waed, Fatah – that has dominated and controlled the PA since its creation – has been teaching Palestinian children that:
“From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” after “the Zionist invaders will go to the garbage can of history” because “the period of Zionism will eventually pass.” As a last step all “the Jewish settlers in Palestine will disappear.”

Israel must be destroyed because Jews/Israelis are:
“Zionist thieves who stole our land”… “Jewish invaders”… “foreigners from all ends of the earth who did not know Palestine and did not live in it – neither them nor their forefathers.”

Since Jews have no rights, Palestinians have the “right to wage an armed struggle to take back its stolen homeland.” This is the only PA/Fatah path, because “the liberation of Palestine will only be achieved through armed struggle.”

In short, the PA/Fatah’s message to children is that Israel was created by theft, its continued existence is a crime, and its destruction via the armed struggle is justified and inevitable. The children who read Waed are taught that they have the responsibility to bring about the future world without Israel.

The PA/Fatah education that is documented in the report is the driving force behind the current Palestinian terror wave that is led by Palestinian youth who have been raised on these hate messages. If no action is taken to combat the PA/Fatah education to hate and terror, it will continue to be the driving force for Palestinian violence for generations.

PMW’s exposure of the PA/Fatah messages through Waed should have far-reaching political implications. Attitudes towards the Oslo Accords and policy towards the PA must be reassessed based on the reality of what the PA is and not the illusion of what the international community imagined it would be. If Palestinian terror is to be stopped and stability returned to Israel, the newly exposed PA/Fatah teachings must be the impetus for a new attitude towards the PA.

PMW is releasing this report at the GPO’s Christian Media Conference in Jerusalem.

To read PMW's "Teaching Terror to Tots" click here.

The following is an Executive Summary of "Teaching Terror to Tots":

Khaled Abu Toameh: The Apartheid Libel to Destroy Israel

Recently... however, with the UNHRC's persistent allegations that Israel is an apartheid state, that label is being pushed even further in an apparent effort to make it stick. The complicity of recent reports from NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch appear to be trying to ensure that their libel will be complete.

The campaign emboldens the radicals among the Palestinians, including the Iranian-backed Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), whose declared goal is to eliminate Israel and replace it with an Islamist state.

Terrorist groups such as Hamas and PIJ are undoubtedly happy to see non-Arabs and non-Muslims -- and even ostensible human rights organizations -- join their effort to falsely depict Israel as an apartheid state.

Former UNHRC chief Navi Pillay, despite extensive evidence of massive anti-Israel bias, was recently appointed to chair the UNHRC's first and only open-ended Commission of Inquiry.

Basically, [the New York Times] is saying that although the two countries cannot be equated, the comparison is being forced and twisted into place for the sake of furthering an alternate agenda which has little to do with the facts on the ground.

Israel's founding charter pledges to safeguard the equal rights of all residents: "... It will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations."

Among many of South Africa's Apartheid laws, the Bantu Homelands Citizenship Act effectively stripped all Blacks of their South African citizenship and of the right to vote.

Israeli Arabs, however, have full citizenship, including the right to vote and to public demonstration. They are represented in all levels of government, including positions as members of Knesset (parliament), in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and as Supreme Court justices. Israeli Arabs hold positions as high-ranking officers in the Israel Defense Forces, including that of major-general in the Central Command.

David Collier: An open letter to Gary Lineker

Last week a Palestinian tried to attacked Israelis in the car. He then stabbed a nearby border guard in the face. When he lost a struggle to steal a weapon he was shot and killed. A UN spokesperson reduced it to a ‘scuffle’. This vile rewriting of history was then repeated in the Guardian newspaper.

There is no correlation remaining whatsoever between the event (the terror attack) and the way it was reported (an innocent man was shot). It is the lie that goes viral. Raw propaganda packaged for the international virtue signallers.

Why on earth would you want to get involved in this?

Spreading myths empowers the extremists. It perpetuates the conflict and pushes peace further away. Nobody in their right mind seriously believes those people attacking Israelis want a two state solution. Nor do those putting up illegal structures. They have deliberately created a battlefield (it doesn’t actually exist unless they come out to confront Israelis).

All this ends with people on the outside, people such as yourself – making it all worse by promoting the propaganda.

So please, can you virtue signal at someone else’s expense – and leave what you do not understand alone.

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!

From Saba (Yemen):

Today, Monday, the Zionist enemy authorities hung banners at the entrance to the "Al-Maghariba Gate", one of the doors leading to the courtyards of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, encouraging the intensification of settler incursions into Al-Aqsa Mosque, in a flagrant violation of the status quo in the sanctuary.

And the Palestinian News Agency said that the enemy authorities removed a banner placed by the chief Rabbinate of Zionism, decades ago, prohibiting Jews from entering the "Al-Aqsa Mosque".

One of the new signs encouraging a breach of the status quo on the Haram reads, "The Directorate of Ascenders to the Temple Mount welcomes pilgrims" and "Your prayers are accepted with good deeds."

This is partially true. From Haaretz last week:

For decades, a sign warning, in the name of The Chief Rabbinate, that “according to Torah law, it is forbidden for any impure person to enter the Temple Mount because of its holiness,” stood at the entrance to the Mughrabi Bridge in an effort to discourage Jewish pilgrims.

However, since being removed – apparently by pilgrims waiting to ascend the mount during last summer’s Tisha B’Av fast – the Western Wall Heritage Foundation, which manages the complex, has failed to return it to its place.

Instead, new and prominent signs were placed at a police checkpoint and in a waiting hall at the entrance to the bridge by the Temple Mount Administration, by an activist group, listing the rules for going up to the Temple Mount according to Jewish law, which include immersion in a ritual bath and the prohibition of wearing leather shoes.

Whoever is responsible for taking down the old sign, it is all meaningless. Jews who believe that it is allowed to visit the Temple Mount within certain specific parameters ignored the sign anyway, and those who hold that Jews cannot enter at all would not go, sign or no sign.

There was once another sign at the entrance to the Temple Mount, written in Greek over 2000 years ago:

"No stranger is to enter within the balustrade round the Temple and enclosure. Whoever is caught will be himself responsible for his ensuing death."

Stranger, in this case, means non-Jew.

Perhaps this sign should be restored at all the entrances of the Temple Mount. After all, for hundreds of years, it was the status quo.

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!

12/12 Links Pt1: Shireen Abu Akleh Death ‘Witness’ Turns Out To Be Islamic Jihad Terrorist; Hady Amr’s Fantasy; Palestinian teen said killed in Jenin firefight with IDF forces

From Ian:

Matthew Continetti: Why Is the FBI Investigating Israel?

The State Department treated the IDF statement as the final word. “We welcome Israel’s review of this tragic incident, and again underscore the importance of accountability in this case, such as policies and procedures to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future,” said spokesman Ned Price. The bureaucratic tut-tutting was unnecessary and offensive to Israeli ears—American history, after all, is replete with evidence that the best policies and procedures cannot prevent human error or freak occurrences. Still, though, after months of controversy and two investigations, the unfortunate matter appeared finally settled.

Then things got weird. On November 14, months after the IDF report and not long after elections in both Israel and the United States, Israeli defense minister Benny Gantz acknowledged that the FBI had opened an investigation into the Akleh killing. Even more remarkable than this unprecedented move was the fact that neither the White House nor the State Department seemed to be aware of it. The National Security Council provided Axios a banal statement of regret for Akleh’s death. Both the White House and the State Department let it be known that they had had nothing to do with the FBI inquiry. And the Department of Justice would not comment.

The only government that seemed to have its business in order was Israel’s. Gantz said the obvious thing: There was no way Israel would cooperate with the FBI. Van Hollen, meanwhile, cheered the news from his office in Washington. Yet imagine his reaction if the Shin Bet announced an investigation into the U.S. Army.

At the time of writing, no one knows the details of the FBI inquiry, or the identity of the official who authorized it, or how long it will go on before the U.S. government realizes its ineffectuality. What is known is that the anti-Israel gang successfully bullied an agency of the United States government into taking the extraordinary step of treating the military of the Jewish state as a criminal enterprise, with no consideration of the potential fallout in the Greater Middle East or the precedent that might be set for U.S. soldiers in future actions.

Tyrannical governments in China, Iran, Venezuela, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip murder, unjustly imprison, and violate the dignity and human rights of individuals every day, yet the Biden administration sees fit to crack down on Israel. It’s hard to decide whether to be more outraged at Biden’s appeasement of Israel’s enemies or at the confusion and incompetence of his lieutenants.

In early December, Secretary of State Blinken spoke to the anti-Israel group J Street and pledged his commitment to expanding the circle of peace encompassing Israel and her Arab neighbors. “Integrating Israel,” Blinken said, “also means continuing to fight for Israel to be treated the same way as every other nation—no more, no less.” Maybe he should tell that to the FBI.

HonestReporting EXCLUSIVE: Shireen Abu Akleh Death ‘Witness’ Turns Out To Be Islamic Jihad Terrorist

A key “civilian” eyewitness in the formal complaint against Israel filed by Al Jazeera at the International Criminal Court (ICC) over the death of Shireen Abu Akleh Tuesday is a terrorist affiliated with the US-designated terrorist organization Islamic Jihad, HonestReporting discovered exclusively on Sunday.

Jenin resident Sleem Awwad’s social media profiles reveal that he is a staunch supporter of Islamic Jihad, having posed with the flag of the jihadist terror group. Our editorial team found at least five photos of Awwad brandishing firearms, including military-style rifles with scopes.

“The credibility of the investigations of Al Jazeera in probing Abu Akleh’s death are questionable now that HonestReporting exposed their chief witness as an active member of a murderous terrorist organization,” HonestReporting executive director Gil Hoffman said.

On December 6, Al Jazeera filed a formal complaint against Israel with the International Criminal Court over the death of Abu Akleh, the Palestinian-American reporter tragically shot on May 11 during a counter-terrorism operation in Jenin.

A thorough Israel Defense Forces probe previously concluded that she was likely mistakenly shot by a soldier who failed to identify her as a member of the press. After pinpointing every spot where troops had come under fire, the investigation found that they had strictly complied with the IDF’s rules of engagement.

In July, a report issued by the US State Department similarly said that Israeli forces probably fired the deadly shot, but that there was no indication Israelis intentionally killed Abu Akleh.

Nevertheless, Al Jazeera last week announced it contacted ICC prosecutor Karim Khan in the wake of “new evidence” it uncovered “based on several eyewitness accounts.” Without presenting proof, the Qatar-run broadcaster argued that their correspondent was somehow “targeted” as part of a campaign by “Israeli Occupation Forces [sic]… to silence Al Jazeera.”

The network’s submission under article 15 of the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the ICC, followed just days after the airing of “The Killing of Shireen Abu Akleh,” a 40-minute documentary produced by Al Jazeera’s Fault Lines series, which set the stage for Israeli soldiers to be prosecuted in The Hague.

3 reasons Al-Jazeera should be put on trial for dishonest reporting ??????
Sound on ?? pic.twitter.com/CfSvFRzyyI
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 11, 2022

Defending the Jewish State: HonestReporting Exposé Featured on Israeli Prime-time News Program

In an exclusive report, HonestReporting revealed that the star witness in the complaint against Israel filed by Al Jazeera at the International Criminal Court over the death of Shireen Abu Akleh is a terrorist affiliated with the US-designated terrorist group Islamic Jihad.

On December 11, 2022, HonestReporting Executive Director Gil Hoffman was invited to discuss our findings on Channel 13, one of Israel’s most-watched television stations. In the broadcast, outgoing Diaspora Affairs Minister and former IDF spokesperson Nachman Shai praised our work in defending Israel from media bias.

When antisemites sue the Jews: Lessons for Al Jazeera - opinion

The Al Jazeera media network has filed suit against Israel over the accidental shooting of its reporter, Shireen Abu Akleh, last May. The history of extremists suing prominent Jews suggests that Al Jazeera may regret what its lawsuit will reveal.

The lawsuit that Al Jazeera has filed in the International Criminal Court (ICC), could shine an embarrassing spotlight on the network itself. Those who do not regularly follow Al Jazeera might be surprised to learn that it is, “a major exporter of hateful content against the Jewish people, Israel, and the United States,” according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

The ADL points out that Al Jazeera: “has sought to cast doubt upon the Nazi genocide of the Jewish people” (referring to it as “the alleged Holocaust”); “routinely glorifies violence against Israeli Jews”; and has ranted against what it calls, “the control of the Jews over the pornography industry.”

Al Jazeera also has a record of “providing a platform to all manner of virulent anti-Israel and even antisemitic extremists” in its commentary sections, the ADL notes.

Another question is whether Al Jazeera should be compelled to register with the US Justice Department as a foreign agent, just as the Russian television channel RT was required to register as an agent of the Russian government. Al Jazeera was founded by the government of Qatar, receives funding from the government, and maintains “extensive ties to the Qatari regime,” according to the ADL.

Both Al Jazeera and the Qatari corporation for public broadcasting are overseen by the same government official. The US ambassador in Doha “determined a number of years ago that Qatar’s government uses Al Jazeera as a tool of Qatari statecraft,” the ADL reports.

Hearings before the ICC about the Abu Akleh case, would enable the defense to ask uncomfortable questions about both the content of Al Jazeera’s reporting, and the details of its relationship with Qatar.

BBC News again promotes Al Jazeera lawfare

Readers are not informed that the UK based lawyer’s previous activities at the ICC include representation of the IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation in the Mavi Marmara case.

As has been the case in the past, BBC audiences are not provided with any of the relevant context concerning Al Jazeera such as its throwing of a birthday party for a terrorist, its record of Holocaust revisionism, its hosting of antisemitic content from the late Muslim Brotherhood leader Qaradawi, its acceptance of an award from Hamas for ‘exemplary coverage’ or the fact that it is funded by the same government that has poured millions of dollars into the Gaza Strip.

Gritten’s report continues with amplification of a statement from a person who was invited to Al Jazeera’s press conference concerning its submission to the ICC: “Abu Aqla’s family, who submitted their own complaint to the ICC in September, said they supported Al Jazeera’s submission.

“The evidence is overwhelmingly clear, we expect the ICC to take action,” her niece, Lina Abu Aqla, told a news conference in The Hague.”

By Daled Amos

There was a time when Jews just did not criticize Israel in public.
Now we have reached the point where people who define themselves as Jews condemn Israel publicly.

But just this month, a respected Jewish leader has come out publicly saying that he may not be able to back Israel.

In an interview last week with the Jerusalem Post, the former head of the ADL, Abe Foxman, said:

If Israel ceases to be an open democracy, I won’t be able to support it.

I never thought that I would reach that point where I would say that my support of Israel is conditional. I’ve always said that [my support of Israel] is unconditional, but it’s conditional. I don’t think that it’s a horrific condition to say: ‘I love Israel and I want to love Israel as a Jewish and democratic state that respects pluralism.’ [emphasis added]

I want Israel to be Jewish, absolutely. But I want it to be a democracy.

Not support Israel?
Support Israel...conditionally?
Israel has to be pluralistic as well as democratic to earn support?

Abe Foxman (YouTube Screencap)

This latest development is a result of the latest Israeli election that resulted in the inclusion of Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich in Netanyahu's coalition, along with their right-wing views on the Law of Return, the Israeli Supreme Court and the status of LGBT.

Foxman believes he is not only speaking for himself -- he says that it would be difficult for most Jews outside of Israel to support the Jewish state if such laws were changed.

But the new government has not even stepped in yet.

Foxman is basing himself on things that have been said by Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, without waiting to see how much of what was said was just politics. Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, deputy mayor of Jerusalem, argues that Israelis voted for Ben-Gvir because of what he said about security, not because of his extremist views. He has claimed, “I have matured, I have moderated." There is no choice now but to wait and see.

Unless you are the media, which will do what it does best -- offer wild speculation.
There is no need for Jewish leaders to do the same. Instead, Foxman should follow his own advice.

He recalls how Jews in the US reacted to the election of Menachem Begin in 1977:

It was a shock to the American Jewish system because they didn’t know him. It was a very scary time. I personally knew Begin and I knew what he believed in. It wasn’t a shock to me, but to the American Jewish community it was horrifying.

But Foxman was not the one who turned things around. It was the Reform leader, Rabbi Alexander Schindler:

Schindler wasn’t a supporter of the history or the philosophy of Begin and of Revisionist Zionism,” Foxman said, adding that in just two weeks, Schindler “turned the American Jewish community around, basically saying that, as long as Israel is a democracy and as long as Begin was elected by the Israeli public, we will find a way to work with them."

e Why can't Foxman follow Schindler's example and go and meet with Ben-Gvir and Smotrich before talking publicly about not supporting Israel?

The article quotes from The Encyclopedia Judaica, that Schindler

publicly embraced Begin, a man with whose views he disagreed as the elected prime minister of Israel’s democracy, and demanded that the Jewish establishment give Begin a fair chance and not delegitimize him at the outset. [emphasis added]

When the parallel between 1977 and now was pointed out to Foxman, he replied, “there’s a lot more anxiety today than there was then.” Not only does Foxman deny the comparison with Begin in general, he also will not make any attempt to follow in Schindler's footsteps to attempt to make dialogue:

I don’t think they [the heads of the right-wing Israeli parties] care about us. I don’t think they really care what I think, or American Jewry thinks. I think it’s a different mentality. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think so.

I don’t think they appreciate [us], so I don’t think this is a time for dialogue.

Yet at the same time, Foxman says in his Jerusalem Post interview that he personally has told critics in the US Jewish community that they should "relax," because Netanyahu wants to leave a legacy and that will temper what he does. The way Foxman puts it is that Netanyahu "[can't] afford to put into his government people who will blackmail him every day." Yet Ben-Gvir and Smotrich both have ended up with significant positions in the new government.

In the final analysis, Foxman's doomsday prediction that a right-wing win signals the end of democracy in Israel seems familiar. Elliott Abrams points out a comparison:

There is a striking parallel between the comments being heard from the left in the United States about the meaning of a possible Republican victory November 8th, and from the left in the United States—as much as or more than in Israel—about the meaning of the victory of the right in the Israeli election on November 1st. The meaning, we are told, is the end of democracy.

One element of what Foxman sees as an attack on democracy in Israel is the intent of the right wing to make changes to what he refers to as "Israel’s world-class judiciary system." The problem is conflating the idea of democracy with the concept of liberalism. The two are not synonymous, and when it comes to the Israeli supreme court, the two may even be in conflict.

An article in the National Review points out that Judicial Reform in Israel Is Urgent and Necessary And the reason why reform is needed is that the Israeli Supreme Court is not quite as "world-class" as Foxman makes it out to be:

The Israeli Supreme Court, not a popular-representative body, unilaterally declared a written constitution in the 1990s, a surprise to the lawmakers who had passed the statutes the Court decided to ‘constitutionalize.’ The Court then endowed itself with the power of judicial review of parliamentary legislation despite the absence of a duly ratified constitutional document. And the Court departed from its own tradition of restraint to effectively eliminate any limitation on standing and subject-matter jurisdiction in constitutional cases.

At issue is the Supreme Court's appropriation of policy-making power -- not exactly the hallmark of democracy, no matter how liberal the decisions of the court may be. The article could just as well be talking about Foxman when it notes that "some foreign-press coverage of these issues, however, has conflated the substance of the proposed reforms with a partisan distaste for their current advocates."

Another problem with the Israeli Supreme Court is that has the ability to "pack" itself.

New judges are appointed by a committee consisting of 9 members. Three of those members are justices who are already members of the Supreme Court. Since a candidate to the court requires a minimum of 6 votes, those 3 members can single-handedly veto any candidate they don't like, for instance, because the candidate does not share the judicial philosophy of the current judges.

What wouldn't those US Democrats who want to pack the US Supreme Court do to have a system like that?

The article echoes Abrams in calling for the need to keep partisan politics out of the need for fixing the problems in the Israeli Supreme Court:

It would be a mistake to confuse current politics, warts and all, with the urgent and justified call for far-ranging judicial reform in Israel — and its importance to the flourishing of the world’s only Jewish democratic state.

And what about the issue of the "override clause," an amendment that the incoming Netanyahu government has promised to make, allowing the Knesset to override the Israeli Supreme Court's reversals of the laws passed by the legislature. These judicial reversals, unlike in the US for example, are not based on a written constitution, since Israel has none. The basis for such a decision is purely their own opinion with no objective, judicial guidelines.

But going a step further, Haim Ramon, the former minister of justice, recently pointed out that people seem to have forgotten the history of this "override clause" which is supposedly such a threat to democracy and the very foundation of justice in Israel:

I’d like to take the opportunity to remind all those who tend to ignore the history of the override clause that its … father was none other than Aharon Barak [a former president of the Israeli Supreme Court]...
I also intend to reiterate that the best of nine judges led by Barak ruled that the override clause was completely constitutional—with a 61-Knesset seat majority [which is what is being suggested now]. Barak even stated clearly that "the goal of the override clause is to enable the legislature to achieve its political and social objectives without fearing—when its constitutionality is subject to judicial review—that it will be deemed unconstitutional and therefore nullified.” [translated by Ruthie Bloom; emphasis added]

So much for that threat to democracy.

Alan Dershowitz sides with Foxman about the "override clause" and believes that “the Israeli Supreme Court has been the gem, the jewel, of judiciaries around the world." But Dershowitz offers another reason for keeping things the way they are. He believes that the Israeli Supreme Court

has been the main argument that Israel has been able to make to keep issues away from the International Criminal Court and other international courts … [It] is essential not only to the preservation of Israeli democracy, but to Israel’s attempt to present itself in an honest, truthful and positive way to the world. [emphasis added]

Dershowitz concludes, “It is not broken. Do not fix it.”

Alan Dershowitz (YouTube Screencap)

That last point, as we have seen, is debatable. But since Dershowitz does not address the claims of judicial overreach, excessive power in the selection of judges and the support by Barak for the "override clause," we can only wonder if Dershowitz is right about the continued strength of the Israeli Supreme Court's reputation in repulsing the intervention of international courts in Israeli affairs.

As for Foxman's public criticism of Israel, we wait to see what Netanyahu's latest coalition will do. At the same time, who knows what kind of unhinged attacks await Israel in public and on social media.

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!

Moroccan football fans' "Jews are gay" chants comes from other antisemitic football fans

On Saturday, Arabs in the Netherlands who were celebrating Morocco's World Cup victory started chanting, "“alle Joden zijn homo's” - "All Jews are gay" - while waving a Palestinian flag.

The hate seen here turned, as all hate eventually does, violent.

Of course the slogan is both antisemitic and anti-gay, but they didn't make up the chant. It is a popular chant for fans of other European football clubs.

In 2019, a complaint was dismissed when fans of Club Brugge chanted "All Jews are gay" and "Anyone who doesn't jump is a Jew" during a match against rival Anderlecht.

Also in Belgium, many fans will call opposing clubs (such as Ajax) "Jews", and clubs defend their fans on the basis of "freedom of expression."

Here is a Photoshopped poster of player Steven Berghuis, made by the fans of Feyenoord after his trade to the 'Jews' of arch-rival Ajax - complete with Nazi yellow star.

In this case, the Arab supporters of Morocco are not doing anything worse than "normal" football fans do: calling their opponents the worst possible insult, which in this and other cases, is "Jew."

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!

This year, the PLO created an "Anti-Apartheid Department" to make sure that they are important members of the NGO war against Israel.

On Sunday, their first conference was held in Al Bireh. The "National Conference against Apartheid" was organized with such objective groups as the BDS Movement, the UN Human Rights Council and the Palestinian Ministry of Justice.

Their final statement called for the establishment of an international coalition of legal and human rights institutions to create a global lobby attacking Israel in international and legal forums. They also want to start a campaign to have the Israeli political parties on the Right to be declared terrorist organizations.

As always, they make the decisions before they come up with the definitions.

One does not have to read too much between the lines of the PLO's description of the conference to realize that they have no idea what apartheid actually is - they are defining it as pretty much anything they accuse Israel of doing. The conference defined apartheid as a tool of Zionist colonialism.

Speakers included Shawan Jabarin, a PFLP terrorist who is also head of the Al Haq NGO, and Saleh Hijazi, who was a prominent pro-terror researcher for Amnesty (also Human Rights Watch) but now is the coordinator of the BDS campaign in Africa.

And of course there was some obligatory antisemitism baked in to the purportedly "anti-racist" conference.

Deputy head of Fatah, Mahmoud Al-Aloul, said that Jews consider themselves the chosen people, and everyone else must serve them.

Muhammad Baraka, head of a committee supposedly concerned with Israeli Arabs, said that the incoming Israeli government is as close as possible to neo-Nazism.

From Durban in 2001 to today, antisemitism has permeated the movement to label Israel as "apartheid." Sometimes it is more obvious than others, and the PLO's initiative, together with prominent NGOs, is one of the more obvious ones.

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!