Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, March 12, 2023

92.5% of Palestinians killed this year were members of terror groups or actively involved in attacks

As he did last year, Adin Haykin is documenting every single Palestinian killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank this year, and explaining the circumstances.

I put his current thread on a Twitter Thread Reader post.

Out of 80 killed this year, I count six who were uninvolved civilians. (I'm counting a father who was shot while trying to stop his son's arrest as a civilian.)

That means that 92.5% of those killed were actively part of hostilities, or members of armed groups. And that includes every single minor who was killed this year.

It is also entirely possible that some of the civilians listed were killed by Palestinian fire, which as we've seen has been quite wild.

A far as I can tell, never in the history of urban fighting has the percentage of innocent civilians killed been this low.

In contrast, over 50% of those killed in Operation Banner in Northern Ireland by the British Army were uninvolved civilians.

Western troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria have never achieved anything close to this record.

The mainstream media emphasizes the uninvolved, as they should. But they do not contextualize their deaths with these facts that the IDF is far exceeding what is considered acceptable by any other army in history, especially when it often operates in an extremely challenging environment when there stone throwers and firebombs coming from attackers on all sides.

If any other army went under the same microscope that the IDF does, they would look horrible by comparison.

For example, the New York Times reported in 2021 about an attack by US forces five years earlier that no one knew about:

Shortly before 3 a.m. on July 19, 2016, American Special Operations forces bombed what they believed were three ISIS “staging areas” on the outskirts of Tokhar, a riverside hamlet in northern Syria. They reported 85 fighters killed. In fact, they hit houses far from the front line, where farmers, their families and other local people sought nighttime sanctuary from bombing and gunfire. More than 120 villagers were killed.

Do you remember reading about this incident, or the dozens of others that were uncovered in that story using Pentagon records? No, the story disappeared from the news media radar in no time.

Now, imagine the tsunami of coverage from multiple news outlets, the UN resolutions and condemnations from every nation on the planet, that would result if Israel killed 120 civilians in an air strike and claimed it was a successful strike on dozens of fighters.

That is not just a double standard. That is treating Israel as uniquely evil and ignoring far, far worse things done by "the good guys."

And that is the entire point. Israel's critics do not want you to know this context when they accuse Israel of war crimes. They do not want you to see how Israel compares to other armies. They never make 3D models of US bombing of wedding parties.

There is only one possible explanation for putting Israel under an electron microscope for doing an amazing job targeting terrorists while virtually ignoring the horrible mistakes that every other professional western army does. It isn't "concern over taxpayer dollars" or "humanitarian concerns" or any of the dozens of other excuses used to justify this obsession with how Israel fights terror. None of the Western armies who wantonly bombed dozens of innocents had to worry about an immediate threat of someone slipping through a porous border and attacking their own citizens who live only a few kilometers away.

The only explanation is antisemitism.

Maybe not the explicit, neo-Nazi kind, but this crazed obsession with finding everything wrong with Israel defending itself from real, imminent threats while ignoring everyday Palestinian terror cannot be logically explained any other way except to say that a Jewish state is assumed to be automatically criminal the way Jews have lived under that assumption for thousands of years.

The truly remarkable thing is that the IDF, like the Jews throughout history, don't respond by saying that they might as well act the way they are being accused of acting. Instead, they continue to improve their methods and work towards a 100% record of only killing those who are actively trying to kill them first. (In attacks on Iranian targets in Syria, they are very close to that 100%.)

The IDF is truly the most moral army in the world. It isn't even close.

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 frame appears to show a muzzle flash, but the WaPo can't see it.

The Washington Post has an article that they believe damns IDF troops - and they are so excited about it they took away the paywall so everyone can see their computer-modeled 3D analysis.

They did indeed document a war crime, but not the one they are pretending to have uncovered.

Israeli security forces in an armored vehicle fired repeatedly into a group of civilians sheltering between a mosque and a clinic after a Feb. 22 raid in the occupied West Bank city of Nablus, killing two people, including a teenager, and wounding three others, according to witnesses and a visual reconstruction of the event by The Washington Post.

For all the fancy 3-D modeling and hundreds of photos they claim to have used, the newspaper relies completely on one video, taken from above, showing a man with his arm extended with what appears to be a gun, and then running for cover. It is in the third part of this video:

The newspaper tries to claim that there is no evidence that the gunshot one can hear was from that gun, and even says, " The videos reviewed by The Post do not clearly show whether the man had a gun or fired, and none of the witnesses interviewed by The Post said they saw a gunman fire at the Israelis." Yet there appears to be a muzzle flash at the very beginning of the video (see photo above.) It is ignored by the Post.

They consult two experts about the two bangs heard, who say wildly different things: one says that they are not gunshots at all, and the other says they are gunshots but come from the Israelis, without saying how he could make such a distinction.

If two experts cannot even agree if a sound is gunfire or not, then what value do they add? The answer is that the WaPo can claim that they consulted audio experts when coming up with their foregone conclusion, even when they don't agree on anything!

When you look at the video of the man who appeared to be pointing a weapon then running to where the civilians are trying to avoid gunfire, it is obvious that he is holding something heavy like a gun. If his hands were empty he would not be running with his arms close together in front of him; his arms would be pumping at his sides the way normal people run.

Moreover, the civilians are running away before the IDF vehicle is shooting anything. (Look at the ones in the sunken plaza.) It appears they are running away from previous Palestinian gunshots, not Israeli.

The nature of open source forensics is that they are necessarily incomplete. We have no idea if there are any gunmen in the building behind the civilians, or on surrounding roofs, or across the street that may have shot the victims. The IDF did certainly fire in this video; we can see that some shots hit the pillar. But even if the IDF did shoot at the gunman and accidentally hit the victims, it is not a war crime. It is a split-second decision based on the information the soldiers had - they were being shot at, the gunman went for cover behind a stone pillar, and they were responding to the likelihood that the gunman would resume shooting at them as they passed the pillar. It is unclear that the soldiers even saw the civilians on the top of the stairs before the gunman ran to cover behind the pillar.

The entire life and death decision needed to be evaluated and made in fractions of a second.

Under the laws of armed conflict, while the existence of civilians is one factor to be weighed in such a decision, it is not the only factor. Troops are allowed and expected to defend themselves. A known gunman who runs for cover behind a pillar and who is about to be in line of sight is certainly a legitimate military target.

In peacetime, police are held to this higher standard of doing everything possible to avoid accidentally hitting civilians even if it means the gunman gets away. For armed conflicts, the laws are different. But the Washington Post doesn't say that - their entire article is geared towards the idea that the IDF had no right to target an armed man who was hiding among civilians. (And they know quite well that the civilians were not the intended targets.)

Isn't it interesting that the Post spent weeks and used four reporters with several experts consulted, and yet didn't even ask an international law expert whether Israel violated the laws of armed conflict?

And that brings up the other omission in the Washington Post's coverage: the armed man ran for shelter among civilians, making them into human shields. I mean this literally - he placed himself behind civilian bodies knowing that he was a target, possibly even shoving one person aside. And that really is a war crime!

Apparently, the reporters know quite well that the IDF didn't violate any laws. And that the Palestinian gunman did. And they don't want their readers to know that.

Remarkably, whenever the news media spends lots of time and money putting together elaborate 3D models of something involving Israel, it is always to say Israel is guilty. They try to replace honest investigations with razzle dazzle. And they are nearly always wrong.

When you put it all together, this article, like the others, is not meant to illuminate the truth, but to obfuscate it.

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!

03/11 Links: Wiesenthal Center urges UN's Guterres to denounce Iraq's law banning peace with Israel; US professors speak at terrorist's conference

From Ian:

The next Intifada is about to begin

I’ve argued elsewhere that the entire Palestinian predicament is the outcome of three very different Arab-Israeli wars which began in 1947, 1967, and 2000. It’s not an intuitive historical argument to make, as these three wars have so little in common. The first began as an Arab-Jewish civil war fought village by village, which then expanded into a multi-state war across four borders lasting a year and a half. The second was a rapid but conventional military conflict fought in less than a week. And the third was a low-intensity armed conflict characterised by frequent terrorist attacks and counterinsurgency operations by an occupying army which took about five years to peter out.

All three were preceded by a wave of righteous ecstasy on the Arab side. All three ended in a disastrous defeat for the Arab side that irreversibly worsened the political and economic situation of the Palestinians. And all three defeats were followed by the collective erasure of any memory of the excitement before the conflict. They instead became stories of distilled victimisation, almost ensuring a repeat performance a generation later.

Why does this keep happening? It’s not that Palestinians are uniquely irrational; nor are the Palestinians the only nation birthed by the collapse of an old imperial order. The Irish, Bulgarians, Greeks, Turks, Armenians, Poles, Ukrainians and many others formed modern states on a mix of historical claims and very modern myth-making throughout the 20th century, frequently in conditions of war and displacement, and always with unanswered territorial claims. Some of these were the basis for lingering resentments and conflicts for generations.

Yet none except for the Palestinians rejected statehood when it was on offer because it didn’t include all their territorial claims. And this includes the Israelis who accepted the UN partition plan on roughly half of what was left of the original British Mandate. Zionists accepted a state that didn’t even include Jerusalem, the focal point of Jewish longing for two millennia and already then, as for a century before, home to a Jewish majority. This is the difference between a movement for national liberation and a movement for the elimination of another nation. In the former, even a very difficult compromise can be understood as an achievement (however partial or internally controversial). In the latter, a compromise that leaves this unwanted presence is still an unacceptable defeat.

The Arab war against Zionism has been a central organising political fact of Arab politics for over a century. This self-destructive passion hit its peak in the mid-20th century, dragged numerous Arab states into repeated military catastrophes and saw nearly every Jewish community in the Arab world completely erased, some after a continuous presence of more than 2,000 years. Anti-Zionism serves the same totemic function for broad circles of activists and intellectuals in the West too. Accepting that Israel is not a state whose policies may merit severe critique, but one whose existence is a crime, is now the price of entry to the community of the good.

This is how the “Arab-Israeli” conflict morphs into the “Israeli-Palestinian” conflict, which then morphs into just “the occupation” and now increasingly “apartheid”. The first transition denied the scope of the conflict and effaced the reality of a tiny Jewish minority being marked for destruction by the Arab world as a whole. The second denied that there was a conflict at all, and rendered the entire situation as an extended outcome of an Israeli sin. The third eliminates even the possibility that such a sin can be expiated; it instead holds Israel’s existence as inherently evil. Between these two external forces, and with all the internal dysfunction of Palestinian politics, it is nearly impossible to expect the Palestinians to do what every other national liberation movement has done: seek political freedom and build a society from there. After three catastrophes in three generations, there is not even a hint of an alternative.

Three destructive and unnecessary wars put the Palestinians in the lamentable place they now inhabit. It’s impossible to know what the fourth will look like, but it’s unlikely it will resemble that or any of the previous three. The current violence has not sparked that war yet, but unless something dramatic changes in the political trajectories of both parties, something eventually will. And when it does, Israelis will pay a heavy and avoidable price — and the Palestinians an even larger one.

Daniel Greenfield: An Anti-Israel Op-Ed Accidentally Exposes the Bias Machine

Nadav Ziv fails to disclose that this was a response to the murder of two young men who were stuck in traffic in Hawara followed by celebrations in the Muslim village. One of a series of murders and assaults.

I’ll let Shmuel Sackett, an activist who lives in the area, tell the rest of the story. “1,600 Jewish families live in Har Bracha, Yitzhar, Itamar and Elon Moreh and their only way home, from the main Tapuach junction, is via this town. Every day, yes! – every single day – at least 20 Jewish cars get stoned while driving through Hawara. I highly doubt that this has ever happened to Rabbi Hauer… It’s important to note that “stoning cars” is not what you think. None of the violent Jew haters are throwing pebbles. They are throwing bricks and dropping cinder blocks from rooftops.”

Imagine a young mother with 3 children in her car, driving home from the supermarket. As she is driving, a brick comes crashing through her windshield. The shock of what happened is enough to give her a heart attack! The children start screaming, there is broken glass everywhere, but she cannot stop for help… because she’s in the middle of Hawara with a mob just waiting to finish the job.

This is not an exaggeration. This happens every day and the murder of Hillel and Yagel Yaniv was something that Hawara residents live for. After the brutal murder, candies and sweets were handed out, cake was distributed, and people were singing.

I’m going to be writing about Hawara elsewhere. Ziv’s ugly and dishonest op-ed is interesting for a whole other reason.

A LinkedIn with that name reveals that he appears to be an employee of 90 West: a strategic communications firm that are “committed to working with mission-driven organizations and individuals whose work aligns with the issues we believe are central to creating a more just, equitable, and sustainable future.”

What’s Ziv’s job at 90 West?

“I research and write op-eds with a focus on climate change, diversity, and taxes; conduct research on the clean energy transition with a focus on grid reliability and offshore wind; and help clients crystallize their research into coherent and engaging prose.”

Founded by an associate of former MA Governor Deval Patrick, the firm is currently tied to Squad member Rep. Ayanna Pressley. One of its missions is “assisting U.S. companies and organizations seeking to engage in Israel.”

The Los Angeles Times op-ed failed to disclose any of that. Instead, it just states that, “Nadav Ziv is a writer whose work includes essays about Judaism, antisemitism and Israel” While a chain of associations isn’t solid evidence, the failure to disclose that Ziv writes op-eds for a leftist strategic comms firm with a focus on Israel is a serious red flag.

Was the vile op-ed written for a 90 West client and planted in the LA Times to make it appear organic? If so which one? I’ve reached out to both Ziv and LA Times editorial page editors to get a response, but I suspect that there won’t be one.

Anti-Israel basis is systemic, but it’s also fed by a network of not only activist groups, but comms operations, many of which are disguised to appear Jewish or even pro-Israel, because that makes them more plausible. These operations are invisible to most people unless you do some digging. And when you do, what turns up is highly revealing. There are organic participants in an anti-Israel movement, but much of it is planted, bought and paid for with the complicity of the media which chooses not to reveal the machine behind the bias.

Jonathan Tobin: The ADL’s woke war on the right won’t stop antisemitism

Sometimes, the most important questions are the ones that aren’t asked about the issues that generate the most concern. That’s certainly true with respect to the widespread and justified concern about a rising tide of antisemitism that has spread across the globe to the United States. There, the question that isn’t being asked is whether the information we’re being fed by the Anti-Defamation League is illuminating the problem or actually doing more to confuse and distort the discussion about its core mission of fighting Jew-hatred.

Though the partisan tilt of the organization under its current CEO and national director Jonathan Greenblatt has been amply documented, it is still treated by the mainstream corporate media, as well as most of the Jewish community, as the authoritative voice on the subject. So when the group issues a report on the issue, as it did this week with a study on “White Supremacist Propaganda,” the world pays attention. The thrust of that document was the claim that the number of “white supremacist events” rose to an all-time high in 2022. That was treated as fodder for alarmist headlines that stoked the fears of Jews that the United States is in danger of being overrun by neo-Nazis.

But like many of the ADL’s reports in recent years, when reading beneath the headlines, the details don’t quite justify the fear-mongering that drives the group’s successful fundraising efforts. The key data point is that the group counted 170 “events” of white supremacist propaganda in 2022 as opposed to 108 in 2021. By “events,” they don’t reference actual attacks on Jews but rather the distribution of antisemitic fliers and stickers or posters or banners displayed publicly.

Any instance of far-right hate is one too many. Moreover, the memory of the murderous attacks on synagogues in Pittsburgh in 2018 and in Poway in 2019 is deeply embedded in the consciousness of Jews who have now sadly grown accustomed to the sight of armed guards at their places of worship. Anyone who has witnessed any of these “events” is entitled to be angry and concerned.

Yet while vigilance is necessary, the idea that even 170 such instances in a nation of 336 million people constitute a genuine surge of neo-Nazi hate cannot be taken seriously. The voices of far-right extremists are amplified by the Internet, and digital technology has also enabled them to communicate and organize in ways that were impossible a generation ago.

Yet the evidence doesn’t back up the idea that this is the principal threat to Jewish security. That was illustrated by what happened on Feb. 25.

Although many American Jews feared the worst when the news spread last month of a network of neo-Nazi groups planning a “National Day of Hate,” what happened was much like the “events” that the ADL puts forward as proof of a surge of far-right activity. The much-ballyhooed alarmism fell flat when that Saturday proved to be something of a virtual stunt with little, if any, neo-Nazi activity observed. This showed that although they get a lot of PR and attention from the ADL and the liberal media, their numbers remain tiny, and they have no political support for their efforts.

That is, of course, not the case with the intersectional left; it promotes a different brand of antisemitism that doesn’t seem to generate the same kind of threat among American Jewry. The demonization of Israel and its Jewish supporters, who are branded as the beneficiaries of “white privilege” and the oppressors of Palestinian “people of color,” is widespread and routinely published in mainstream publications like The New York Times and broadcast outlets like MSBC, and, as CAMERA pointed out this week, in overseas outlets like France24.

03/10 Links Pt2: Eugene Kontorovich: Our Think Tank Sparked Mass Protests in Israel. We Proudly Stand By Our Ideas; Ruthie Blum: Nakba Day and diversity at the Hebrew University

From Ian:

Victor Rosenthal: Playing chicken with the Jewish state

That one thing is Netanyahu. More specifically, the left’s hatred of him. As a result of this, what should have been a matter of discussion and compromise has become a conflict between the country’s two major blocs.

This is what lies behind the well-financed campaign against judicial reform. This campaign is dishonest and hysterical. If the reforms pass, opponents say, the justice system will be destroyed and Israel will become a fascist dictatorship. The economy will be wrecked, capital and tech workers will flee, the army will not fight and Israel will become a theocratic state soon to be overrun by her enemies.

This is nonsense. Even if the reforms are enacted in full, the situation would be no different than it was prior to the 1980s. If a compromise version of the reform were to pass, democracy in Israel would be enhanced, not damaged.

None of the reform bills have passed more than the first of three readings, so there is plenty of time to negotiate and compromise, and the government is willing to do so. The opposition, however, refuses to talk unless the process is frozen. The coalition believes that if the process is frozen, it will never be thawed, and insists that there can be negotiations during the normal legislative process.

In the meantime, opponents are ramping up their disruptions to the point that there are real fears of serious violence. The opposition sees blood in the water—Netanyahu’s—and can’t face the prospect of losing their veto power over the actions of any right-wing government. They have decided to keep their foot on the gas in the game of chicken until Netanyahu and his coalition blink.

What should happen is for the grownups in the opposition to work out a compromise with the government that will restore judicial balance without harming either side or the nation. This is perfectly possible.

What might happen is that the left has unleashed forces that cannot be controlled. In that case, the game of chicken could end in a fiery head-on collision.

Eugene Kontorovich: Our Think Tank Sparked Mass Protests in Israel. We Proudly Stand By Our Ideas.

If you subscribe to mainstream American newspapers—or if you read Matti Friedman’s piece the other day in these pages—perhaps you’ve heard that Israeli democracy is in grave danger because of the government’s proposed judicial reforms. The two of us are well situated to address those concerns: our think tank drafted some of the policy papers that have informed the current government.

In other words, those marching in the streets of Tel Aviv are protesting many of our ideas.

They are ideas we stand by proudly—and that we suspect will resonate with reasonable people capable of looking past the noise.

Here is the current reality in Israel: the Jewish state is a thriving democracy, but its Supreme Court is a law unto itself. Its unchecked power began in the early 1990s, when the Court’s president, Aharon Barak, announced that even in the absence of a constitution, the Court could invalidate legislation and block government actions with which it disagreed.

Barak’s so-called “constitutional revolution”—that’s what Barak himself dubbed it—also had the effect of creating an ideologically homogeneous court. Unlike the situation in almost every democratic country in the world, in Israel, sitting Supreme Court justices and representatives of the Bar Association—who have strong personal incentives to vote with the justices, and almost always do so in practice—constitute a majority of the committee that selects new judges on all courts. This has resulted in a self-perpetuating clique, drawn largely from the country’s political left and social elite, that has final say over almost every policy decision in the country.

There were other changes, too—and none of them were voted on by the people or the Knesset.

Barak retroactively declared Israel’s Basic Laws to be a functional constitution and began striking down laws on that basis. (Israel has no formal constitution.) The Court also gave itself the power to veto government actions that satisfied all legal criteria, but that the Court simply regarded as “unreasonable.” It also declared that the attorney general is not merely the government’s legal advisor; he is its boss, in the sense that any directive issued by the attorney general is legally binding on the government. Just imagine in the United States if the attorney general—and not the president—got the last word on government policy on every issue from the death penalty to gay rights.

This is the current situation in Israel. For decades, the majority of citizens have had their voices—and the outcome of their votes—silenced by a growing tyranny of unelected officials and technocrats.

The proposed reforms currently under consideration in Israel’s Knesset are designed to remedy the situation by instituting some basic checks and balances on the Court—checks and balances that are the norm in other Western democracies.

Iddo Netanyahu: Judicial reform won't make Israel dictatorship - PM's brother to 'Post'

The members of “Team Amnon,” who served in Sayeret Matkal when my late brother Yoni commanded it and who performed with distinction and bravery in the raid on Entebbe, recently wrote an open letter to Bibi and me. Initially, I did not intend to write a response. Why bother? To yet again, spend my time correcting distortions about my family and me, even if now it was coming from a few of Yoni’s subordinates?

What persuaded me to reply was one sentence that struck me in their letter. It bothered me greatly and still does. We will get to it later.

The team members write that I called the protesters (and by extension, them as well, since it turns out they participated in the protests) “people whose minds were misled.” True, since in my opinion, those who sincerely believe that the proposed judicial reform will turn Israel into a “dictatorship” have indeed allowed themselves to be misled. Had “Team Amnon” bothered to read the explanations provided by the reform initiators and then to think about them in depth, they would know that the reform will certainly not bring about the destruction of democracy, but is intended to do the exact opposite: enhance and strengthen it.

This in fact is also the opinion of quite a few opposition leaders, who in the past spoke emphatically against the current legal system and in support of the reform, only to now furiously lash out against it. They themselves, of course, do not believe for a moment their own slogans about “the end of democracy” and “dictatorship”; they do, indeed, knowingly and intentionally mislead others.

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!

03/10 Links Pt1: 3 wounded, including 1 critically, in central Tel Aviv terror shooting; Iran, Saudi Arabia to resume relations after years of tension

From Ian:

3 wounded, including 1 critically, in central Tel Aviv terror shooting

Three people were shot and wounded in a terrorist shooting near a cafe in central Tel Aviv on Thursday night, police and medics said.

Police said the Palestinian attacker opened fire at people outside the cafe on the corner of Dizengoff Street and Ben Gurion Street, an area typically bustling on Thursday night. He then fled the scene while shooting at other people in the area, before being shot dead in a shootout with police officers a short time later.

One victim was listed in critical but stable condition after undergoing surgery and was still fighting for his life, said doctors at Ichilov Medical Center, where the injured were taken. The other two were listed in serious and moderate condition, the Magen David Adom ambulance service said.

The hospital said the critically wounded victim was stabilized and was to undergo surgery along with the other man who was seriously hurt. Another two victims were brought to the hospital to be treated for anxiety.

Police said they were treating the shooting as a terror attack.

In graphic footage from the moment of the attack, a man in a black jacket can be seen walking briskly behind a group of three men before pulling out a pistol and opening fire at them from point-blank range. He can then be seen trying to flee as panicked cafe patrons take cover.

Tel Aviv terror victim in life-threatening condition, another undergoes neurosurgery

Two people severely injured in a terrorist shooting in Tel Aviv Thursday evening remained in very grave condition the following morning, doctors said.

Three friends in their 30s were injured on Thursday night when a Palestinian attacker opened fire at people outside a cafe on the corner of Dizengoff Street and Ben Gurion Street. He then fled the scene while shooting at other people in the area, before he was killed in a shootout with police officers a short time later.

Or Asher, 32, was hospitalized in critical condition at the emergency care ward at Ichilov Hospital, according to a Friday statement. A second man, Rotem Mansano, 34, was also in serious condition and being treated in the emergency neurosurgery ward, doctors said.

Both victims were sedated and breathing through a respirator.

The third victim, Michael Osdon, 36, who suffered light to moderate wounds, was hospitalized in the plastic surgery ward.

Dr. Or Goren of Ichilov told Kan public radio that Asher was wounded in the neck. According to the doctor, Mansano and Osdon’s conditions were not life-threatening.

Tel Aviv terror attack victim: We're here to stay and keep fighting

Michael Osdon, who was moderately injured on Thursday in the Tel Aviv terror attack and was taken to Ichilov Medical Center where his two friends are fighting for his lives, said that he and his two close friends were on their way to a wedding when the terrorist ran up to them and opened fire.

"Yesterday at 8:40 p.m., were went to Dizengoff from north to south on our way to a close friend's wedding, and just as we were getting to the junction, one of my friends who was to my left was hit with a bullet from behind," he said. "After that, the terrorist moved to my side and shot me from behind. I moved my head, and my cheek was hit instead of my head. He shot another bullet at my third friend."

Osdon said that after his friends fell on the road, he tried to run for help, but the terrorist kept chasing him.

"Unfortunately, my two friends are in a condition that they need to be prayed for very hard."

"He shot another bullet at me, but he missed," said Osdon. "I continued to the ice cream parlor and asked them to call an ambulance, and the incident kept going for another minute and half until security forces showed up. They took us to the hospital, and unfortunately, my two friends are in a condition that they need to be prayed for very hard."

Was the wedding disrupted by the attack?
Osdon may not have reached his friend's wedding, but he said the event happened despite the terror attack. "I'm very happy it did," he said. "We have to continue with our lives, and we cannot stop and give someone the understanding that we don't intend on staying and keep fighting.

Osdon concluded with another appeal for people to pray for his friends' recoveries.

The terrorist, a 23-year-old Palestinian affiliated with Hamas, was shot and killed by Israel Police officers shortly after the shooting.

Today's Muslim antisemitism sounds a lot like Christian antisemitism in England in the 1750s

In the mid 18th century, British lawmakers were debating whether to allow Jews to become full citizens of the country. Jews had been returning to Britain starting in the mid-1600s after being expelled in 1290, but they were not allowed to be citizens.

As Parliament debated the short-lived Jewish Naturalisation Act of 1753 (repealed in 1754), a Christian Jew-hater with the nom de plume "Christianus" wrote to the Newcastle Weekly Courant about all the reasons that Jews should not become citizens of England.

His arguments mirror the antisemitic arguments of Muslims, today.

Muslims claim that Jews break their agreements. Christians in England claimed that Jewish law allows Jews to break all oaths.

Muslims claim that the Talmud is a bigoted work that ensures Jewish supremacism. Christians in England claimed the same.

Muslims claim that Jews are descendants of apes and pigs. The Christians called the Jew "wolves" who would destroy the Christian flock from within.

Muslims claim that Jews kill prophets. Of course Christians in the 18th century believed that Jews killed Jesus.(The letter writer is aghast that "the Murderers of Christ are to be incorporated into the Body of Christians!")

Here is only an excerpt of the letter:

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, 2-year old Hadar Noga Lavi was laid to rest less than a week after being critically wounded in a head-on collision as her mother was returning her from a medical appointment.

Her mother, Idit Lavi of Shiloh, is convinced that her daughter was the victim of a suicide terror attack.

The mother said that Hadar had hurt her back and she took her to Shaarei Tzedek hospital in Jerusalem on Saturday night. She was returning, driving on Route 60 in Samaria, when she saw a car approaching her in the wrong lane. She swerved to the opposite lane, he followed her, and she zig-zagged back to the right lane and he again followed her and crashed into her car head-on.

While Idit Lavi is certain that it was an intentional attack, Israeli police and the Binyamin council are treating this as a simple car accident, complaining about the road conditions that contributed to the crash and about wild Arab drivers on that road.

Arabic media reports from the time do seem to indicate that it was a multi-vehicle accident. Three Arabs were killed and others injured in other cars.

Perhaps the Palestinian driver, with two other young men in the car, was playing "chicken."

But since Hadar's death today, Arab media prefer the narrative that this was a terror operation, calling Hadar a "female settler." Palestinians would rather than their own heroically die by trying to kill a young mother and small daughter than think that they died in an accident.

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!

Did you see the photo of the terrorist hanging out the window in Jenin and trying to shoot Israeli troops with one arm? He ended up being killed.

Well the moderate Fatah organization decided to memorialize him:

I'm no expert on Arab iconography, but I think they are saying that he is now burning up in the hot fires of hell, symbolized by the sun.

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!

03/09 Links Pt2: Ilan Halimi’s murder and the whitewashing of Muslim antisemitism; America's Tradition in Fighting Boycotts of Israel; El-Kurd Destroys His Own Credibility With ‘Apartheid Israel’ Confession

From Ian:

Ilan Halimi’s murder and the whitewashing of Muslim antisemitism

Seventeen years ago, a Parisian gang calling itself “the Barbarians” lured a twenty-three-year-old cell-phone salesman named Ilan Halimi onto its turf, tortured him for three weeks while reciting Quranic verses, and then left him to die by the roadside. Halimi’s murder is often seen as the beginning of the current era of anti-Semitic violence in France. Eleanor Krasne comments on the repeated failure of the French government, and even of Jewish leaders, to confront the sources of such violence:

The French authorities initially neglected to explore the anti-Semitic nature of the crime, but after a three-week search, they finally caught the gang’s leader, Youssef Fofana. When the case went to trial, Fofana wore a t-shirt that said “Allahu Akbar,” and when asked to state his identity said, “My name is Arab, armed African rebellion Salafist barbarian army, and I was born on February 13, 2006 in Sainte-Geneviève-des-Bois.” In other words, Fofana boasted of his allegiance to Salafism, a political-religious movement within Islam that seeks to establish a global caliphate. . . . Fofana was also saying that he was “born” the moment Ilan Halimi died.

Muslims are not solely responsible for French anti-Semitism, nor is every Muslim an anti-Semite. However, radical Islam’s role in French anti-Semitism must not be overlooked. Yet . . . French and American organizations that . . . advocate for Jews seem to shy away from confronting the radical Islamic theology behind these attacks, particularly when commemorating Ilan Halimi’s murder.

Confronting modern-day anti-Semitism in France means confronting the ideology behind it. France is home to 450,000 Jews and a growing community of over three million Muslims. Simone Rodan Benzaquen, the American Jewish Committee’s director in France, wrote in 2017 that Islamic anti-Semitism in France is a result of a variety of factors, “including manipulation of the Palestinian cause, failure of integration into French society, radical preachers and the funding of mosques, and satellite television stations broadcasting a steady stream of anti-Semitic discourse.”

Unfortunately, Benzaquen is correct, and other organizations must join her in facing the reality of Islamic anti-Semitism in France.

ITP: Another Gaping Hole in the Islamist Antisemitism Con

In its statement promoted by CAIR's national office, CAIR-New York Executive Director Afaf Nasher also noted "the disturbing rise in anti-Asian bigotry nationwide."

"All Americans, regardless of their background," he said, must be able to walk down the street without fear of a racist attack."

This is true. Correspondingly, there has been a disturbing rise in antisemitic bigotry in New York city and nationwide. A Times of Israel analysis of NYPD data found an anti-Jewish attack every 33 hours in New York. Masoud presents a clear example of the danger such blind hate about Jews and the Jewish state can pose.

But CAIR cannot bring itself to acknowledge, let alone condemn him. This is an organization with a decades-long record of antisemitism, including co-founder and Executive Director Nihad Awad's repeated insinuations that Jews are "pushing the United States" to advance policies "at the expense of American interests."

In 2014, as ISIS rampaged and Hamas terrorism instigated war in Gaza, Awad called Israel "the biggest threat to world peace and security." Awad also believes Tel Aviv is "occupied" territory. His San Francisco director Zahra Billoo believes pro-Israel Jews are out to hurt Muslims and should be shunned entirely. CAIR stands behind her.

CAIR claims it merely criticizes Israeli policy, as if the question whether a country should exist is a policy up for debate.

Was Masoud merely criticizing Zionists? His "veil of 'anti-Zionism' is pathetically thin in this case," prosecutors wrote. "As an initial matter, the defendant is not an equal opportunity anti-Zionist. He did not attack 'Evangelical Christians . . . who identify with the State of Israel' ... Instead, he repeatedly attacked Jewish men."

In October, CAIR condemned antisemitic material left outside homes in Wyoming.

"Those targeting the Jewish community with antisemitic hate must be repudiated by all Americans," CAIR national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said. "The mainstreaming of bigotry in any form must never be tolerated or excused."

But CAIR mainstreams antisemitism when it stands by frothing haters like Billoo, and when it cannot muster the nerve to condemn an ideological ally like Sadaah Masoud. Antisemitism can't be viewed conditionally. If you can't even bring yourself to condemn premeditated beatings of random Jews, you can't expect to be believed when say you oppose antisemitism by condemning leaflets.

America's Tradition in Fighting Boycotts of Israel

In 1975, President Gerald Ford called for regulations prohibiting U.S. companies from "complying in any way with [the Arab] boycott," and declared emphatically that the United States would not "countenance the translation of any foreign prejudice into domestic discrimination against American citizens." Congress quickly heeded the call, passing not one but two pieces of critical bipartisan legislation: the Ribicoff Amendment assessed steep tax penalties against U.S. companies that participate in the Arab Boycott, and the Export Administration Amendments of 1977 directed the president to prohibit American companies from joining the Arab boycott. In signing that law, President Jimmy Carter acknowledged that the Arab Boycott, though nominally focused on Israel, was in fact "aimed at Jewish members of our society." The U.S. Office of Antiboycott Compliance has been enforcing this regime ever since, on the bipartisan understanding that the boycott of Israel constitutes a tool of discrimination, not protected expression.

And the federal government was not alone in its anti-boycott effort. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, at least 13 states—red and blue—took aggressive legislative steps to prevent U.S. companies from joining the Arab boycott. New York's rule was strikingly similar to the anti-BDS laws of today. In fact, it went further, prohibiting "discrimination," "boycotting," or "blacklisting" based on "national origin" or because a person has done business with Israeli firms. When Gov. Michael Dukakis signed the Massachusetts bill into law, he explained that he wished to send an "unequivocal message" that Massachusetts would "not stand for this type of blatant discrimination" against its Jewish residents.

Today's anti-BDS laws spring from the same pair of political judgments that animate this 50-year tradition of anti-boycott legislation. The first is that the boycott isn't speech, but instead economic conduct that can be freely regulated, consistent with the First Amendment. And the second is that, in the case of Israel, the boycott constitutes discrimination, and not desirable social action.

The tradition of anti-boycott legislation lives on because its historical foundations are fundamentally true. The first boycott against the Jews of Israel took place in the 1890s, and its organizers—the Arab political associations of Mandatory Palestine—could not have been clearer about their anti-Jewish objectives: "Don't buy from the Jews," they declared, "come and bargain with the Arab merchant... We must completely boycott the Jews." And in 1933, as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem grew in political prominence, he called for systematic boycotts against the Jews of Palestine and urged Nazi Germany to do the same.

BDS's appeal to "history and tradition" should ring hollow. For 50 years, state and federal law makers have regulated Israel boycotts, on the understanding that they were conceived in antisemitism and cannot escape its taint. In the court of history, it's the state lawmakers, and not the activists, who enjoy the upper hand.

Palestinian news stories you probably didn't know about

During the funeral of Abdel Fattah Kharousheh, who murdered the Yaniv brothers, Palestinian police fired tear gas and tried to take away Hamas flags. This resulted in Kharousheh's body falling to the ground.

A 37 year old Palestinian in Taffouh was shot in the head and killed during a "family dispute."

Another was killed in a dispute over a coat.

Hamas sentenced three people to death in Gaza, two of them for "collaborating" with Israel and one for drug charges.

A gang of 11 people were arrested in Jenin for threatening other people with sharp objects, and one tried to run over others with his car. A number of victims were hospitalized.

The Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council said "our Palestinian people are facing a war of extermination, which is being carried out by the occupation authorities and herds of settlers."

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!

Unsold Purim Costumes Repackaged As Passover 'Cereal' (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

mullet wig Jerusalem, March 12 - What becomes of the racks and racks of masks, wigs, cloaks, and other mass-produced paraphernalia that no one bought, but occupies valuable display space in the stores? More and more in recent years, the all-plastic products wind up bleached, shredded, dyed, and marketed again, this time as kosher-for-Passover breakfast cereal, according to several store proprietors.

Sunday morning saw employees at MaxStock in downtown Jerusalem continuing to remove hundreds of Purim costumes and costume pieces from the shelves and racks of the discount retail chain, now that the festival of Purim has concluded and the market for such items will wane until late winter next year. But rather than stow the products in storage until then, dispose of them, or attempt to return them to suppliers in China, several years ago a group of vendors realized that some people become so obsessed with finding Passover-compatible equivalents to their everyday foods that they will buy anything, no matter how repulsive, marketed in the appropriate niche - leading those vendors to a joint venture that processes the unsold costumes into colored flakes that they can sell as "Passover Flakes" that enough desperate consumers will buy.

"I don't know why it took us so many years to have that epiphany," recalled one manager. "I don't know if it's a function of our society just getting wealthier or what, but folks are willing to spend good money so on Passover they can badly replicate the food experiences they have during the rest of the year. Heaven forfend they adapt their cuisine for a week! But hey, if they're willing to pay for products of questionable edibility, I'm willing to provide those products. Sometimes all we have to do is add sugar."

The products in question obtain certification as kosher-for-Passover with relative ease. The restrictions for the festival require that products contain no grain component, lest it came into contact with water and became "leavened" under Jewish law. Various communities have adopted further stringencies involving other ingredients similar in appearance or use to those grains as a safety measure. The complete lack of food ingredients makes Rabbinate certification as kosher-for-Passover a formality.

Industry sources indicated that so far, Purim costumes have become breakfast cereal, snack crackers, imitation pretzels, and croutons for soup or salad. A small team of retailers has also formed a task force to explore other products stupid consumers will pay to acquire as substitutes for things they could simply go without for a few days, such as popcorn and chocolate-coated wafers.

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!

03/09 Links Pt1: Blinken Builds a Palestinian Hezbollah in the West Bank; Abbas’ advisor: PA policy is based on the stages plan; Sen. Cotton: Democrats should stop meddling in Israeli democracy

From Ian:

Blinken Builds a Palestinian Hezbollah in the West Bank

While the Biden administration has been busy encouraging and funding the Israeli protest movement against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reforms, it has also launched a far more potentially dangerous and lethal attempt to destabilize the leading military power in the Middle East. The wave of domestic protests in Israel comes on the heels of the most deadly series of Palestinian terror attacks since the end of the Second Intifada. Incredibly, the U.S. is now proposing to take advantage of its ally’s political weakness by standing up a potential 5,000-man Palestinian terror army that would ostensibly fight terrorism in the West Bank in place of the IDF.

Washington, D.C.’s latest bout of Mideast pyromania began with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Ramallah at the end of January, right after a Palestinian terrorist shot dead seven Israelis outside a synagogue in Neve Yaakov. Naturally, the secretary of state came bearing condolence gifts: a lot more money for the Palestinian Authority, an agreement to provide 4G communications in the West Bank—an initiative from U.S. Ambassador Tom Nides, which he “pounded the table” in order to get rolling, even as there are concerns that advanced ICT infrastructure might complicate efforts by Israeli security to monitor terrorist communications—and a commitment to reopen the U.S. Consulate in East Jerusalem.

In addition to those goodies, which in no way constituted a reward for terror, or an incentive for PA-rewarded terrorists to commit further acts of terror targeting Jewish worshippers and other innocent civilians, Blinken also carried with him a new security plan for the West Bank, which the Biden administration has spent the past month putting in play.

The U.S. plan, said to have been drafted by the U.S. security coordinator Lt. Gen. Michael Fenzel, was reportedly presented to the Israeli government and the PA in weeks prior. It envisions the creation of a special Palestinian force that would supposedly go after militias in Jenin and Nablus. Unnamed U.S. officials told Israeli media surrogates that during his visit the secretary of state pressed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to accept the U.S. plan. He then did the same to Israel, which has been repeatedly victimized by mounting waves of Palestinian terror, incentivized by the PA’s “pay for slay” policy.

At his press briefing in Jerusalem, Blinken relayed the administration’s demand that the Israelis stop “any unilateral actions” that “would add fuel to a fire,” echoing a Palestinian condition that Abbas delivered in his joint presser with Blinken—the message being that Team Biden disapproves of Israeli counterterrorism operations. Blinken implicitly blamed Palestinian terrorism on Israel’s actions, painting the Palestinians themselves as an equally injured party in the recent wave of Palestinian attacks.

Mark Regev: Palestinian terrorism will not end if they are given more land

The beginning of the new century produced a similar phenomenon. At the July 2000 Camp David peace summit, prime minister Ehud Barak, a self-declared Rabin disciple, agreed to a Palestinian state on over 90% of the West Bank and all of Gaza, with Jerusalem being redivided and serving as the Palestinian capital.

Yet Barak’s concessions and president Bill Clinton’s hands-on involvement in the talks did not prevent the eruption of the al-Aqsa Intifada in September 2000. Forty Israelis were to be killed before the end of the year, and an additional 25 would die in early 2001 up until 7 March, when Ariel Sharon’s government was sworn in.

Ongoing violence notwithstanding, the final months of Barak’s premiership saw intensive peace talks: Israeli and Palestinian negotiators met in Washington in December, and thereafter Clinton presented a set of parameters designed to be the basis for a future agreement.

Clinton’s proposal called for a Palestinian state on between 94-96% of the West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip, with Israel ceding 1-3% of its pre-1967 territory in land swaps to compensate for annexations. Jerusalem would become the capital of two independent states.

When Clinton left office in January 2001 Israeli-Palestinian talks moved to Taba, Egypt. There, Barak’s negotiators offered even greater flexibility in a last-ditch effort to secure an agreement.

But for the second time in five years, Israeli voters became contemptuous of peace talks in the shadow of escalating terrorism. Sharon was elected to restore security and the new prime minister refused to continue with negotiations while daily attacks continued – placing any political horizon on hold.

Surprisingly for some, vindication for Sharon’s approach could be found in a Palestinian commitment. On September 9, 1993, as a core precondition for the signing of the Oslo Accords, Arafat sent a letter to Rabin in which the Palestinian leader pledged “that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations” and stressed his renouncement of “terrorism and other acts of violence.”

Today, when Palestinians contend that terrorism stems from the absence of a political horizon, they assume (perhaps correctly) that the world will blame Israel for the failures of the peace process. Conveniently forgotten is that it was the Palestinians who said “no” at Camp David; torpedoed Clinton’s parameters; dismissed Ehud Olmert’s 2008 peace plan; and refused to sign up to John Kerry’s 2014 framework.

Israel’s famed dovish foreign minister Abba Eban penned the truism “the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

Palestinians have multiple legitimate grievances. But if the lack of a political horizon is cited to justify terrorism, they should recall the story of the boy who murders his parents only to demand mercy for being an orphan.

Postscript: At the time of the post-Oslo Palestinian terror attacks, Israelis were told that those trying to kill them were enemies of peace. Today, it is repeated ad infinitum that terrorists kill because hopes for peace have disappeared. Catch-22?

PMW: Abbas’ advisor: PA policy is based on the stages plan

During a televised Friday sermon, PA Chairman Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, stressed that the PA still adheres to the “stages plan” for taking Israel's land. According to this long-term strategy, which was coined by the PLO in 1974, all of Israel – which Palestinians refer to as historic “Palestine” - would be “liberated” in stages and Israel thereby destroyed. The “stages” meant that the “liberation” would happen gradually and that the PLO could enter agreements with Israel that would make Israel more vulnerable and which the PLO did not see as binding.

In this recent sermon, Abbas’ advisor, who also serves as PA Supreme Shari’ah Judge, focused on the nature of any compromise that the PA makes regarding Jerusalem and the Western Wall – as temporary:
PA Supreme Shari’ah Judge Mahmoud Al-Habbash: “Islam is truth that is indivisible… The rights are indivisible. Give me 60% or 70% of my rights, and tell me: ‘That’s it, that’s yours, take it.’ Perhaps temporarily, yes. [But] strategically, no! … Our rights are non-negotiable. They want to negotiate over Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque – then by Allah, it is better [to be dead] in the belly of the earth than to be on its surface... There is no negotiation on even one millimeter of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, including the Al-Buraq Wall (i.e., the Western Wall of the Temple Mount), which is an exclusive permanent Islamic waqf (i.e., an inalienable religious endowment in Islamic law; see note below) according to Allah's decree …This is our right, and whoever fights us over our right is an oppressor, and it is a duty to resist (i.e., fight) the oppressors.”

[Official PA TV, Jan. 20, 2023]

Palestinian Media Watch has documented that Al-Habbash has made it clear that according to Palestinian Islam all of Israel is an Islamic waqf that must eventually return to Islamic rule:
"The entire land of Palestine is [Islamic] waqf andis blessed land... it is prohibited to sell, bestow ownership or facilitate the occupation of even a millimeter of it."

[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Oct. 22, 2014]

Al-Habbash has also stressed that PA agreements with Israel are temporary and that Israel will eventually be conquered:
"The Palestinian leadership's sense of responsibility towards its nation made it take political steps [the Oslo Accords] about 20 years ago [1993]...exactly like the Prophet [Muhammad] did in the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah... [He signed a peace treaty but] in less than two years, the Prophet returned and based on this treaty, he conquered Mecca. This is the example, this is the model."

[Official PA TV, July 19, 2013]

By Daled Amos

It looks like the West is finally getting serious about fighting antisemitism.

In December, the Biden Administration declared it would confront antisemitism. Just last month several antisemitism envoys from Europe came to the US to meet with the White House to advise it and a special panel on how to combat Jew-hatred.

Rabbi Andrew Baker, the director of international Jewish affairs at the AJC, saw this as something of a twist, seeing how Europe has been slow to recognize that it had a problem:

Europe has stepped forward. I don’t want to say we became smug in America, but now we find ourselves seeking their help.

And what kind of advice is Europe offering?

Katharina von Schnurbein, the European Commission coordinator on combating antisemitism and fostering Jewish life said in an interview that her recommendations to the US focused on “the whole range of antisemitism—online education, Holocaust remembrance, security.”

And then she said something odd:

Fostering Jewish life is central, she said, “to make sure that Jews in Europe can go about their lives in line with their religious and cultural traditions, and also free from fear.” [emphasis added]

Oystein Lyngroth said something similar.

Lyngroth is Norway’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief and is also the head of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) delegation in Norway. She said:

There needs to be a promotion of the visibility of Jewish life. [emphasis added]

John Mann, UK government advisor on antisemitism, echoed those remarks:

“Let every Jewish person, every Jewish student, be themselves, including those who identify as Zionist as a crucial part of their identity. With no negatives,” he said. “It’s a simple ask, and that’s what we’re building. That’s what I’d recommend to every American university.”

Mann, a panelist, said it’s not his prerogative, nor anyone’s, to try and define for Jewish students how they identify.

The odd thing is that based on these 3 quotes, one would assume that a key component of the European approach in addressing antisemitism is to protect and foster Jewish identity.

That sounds like a great idea, but the problem is how can they claim to be so supportive of Jewish identity, when Europe is working so hard to undermine Jewish identity?

In 2021, Greece joined 8 other European countries in banning shechitah (kosher slaughter): Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Slovenia, and Estonia who all require an animal to be shocked before being ritually slaughtered, thus making shechitah impossible.

While von Shnurbein stated that hand-in-hand with Jews being able to follow their religious and cultural traditions was their ability to live free from fear -- the current limitations being imposed or threatening Jewish communities in Europe cause exactly that. In Belgium for example:

When the Belgian laws came in, Muslim and Jewish groups feared they were being used by nationalists to whip up anti-immigrant sentiment.

And shechita is not the only practice that Europe has taken upon itself to regulate for Jews.
European countries are targeting brit milah as well.

In Iceland, a 2018 bill outlawed circumcision, unless done for medical reasons, because it violates the child's rights, and should not be done until the boys have reached an age where they can make their own decision.

In addition, the bill claimed that circumcision:

o Is comparable with female genital mutilation
o Is often done in homes that are not sterile
o Is performed by religious leaders instead of doctors
o Is a danger of "a high risk of infections under such conditions that may lead to death."

However, at the urging of the US and lobbying groups, the ban on circumcision was put on hold.

Similarly,

o In 2020, a proposal to ban circumcision was removed from a bill in Finland after an outcry.
o  In 2012, a regional court in Cologne, Germany, made circumcision a criminal act -- though it remained legal in Germany as a whole.
o  In 2018, a survey in Great Britain found that that 62% would support a ban on circumcision.
o  In 2017, Norway's ruling party -- an anti-immigrant party -- voted to ban circumcision for men under 16 years old.

Andrew Baker, who welcomes Europe's advice on combatting antisemtism, has himself written that the European attempt to ban bris milah is "threat to Jewish life, though barely mentioned." Hopefully, he mentioned it when he met with the European representatives.

Can this happen in the US? Circumcision is currently more accepted in the US than it is in Europe.

However, according to the National Library of Medicine, newborn circumcision rates in the US have declined significantly in the past few decades and The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that from 1979 through 2010, the national rate of newborn circumcision declined 10%, from 64.5% to 58.3%.

It certainly makes sense that in the face of the threat of antisemitism to Jewish identity, there is a need to foster and encourage Jewish identity. But just who are our allies in combatting this threat?

Europe is portrayed as a major partner -- but as we have seen, it has threatened elements that are critical to Jewish identity.

Douglas Emhoff, husband of VP Kamala Harris, is involved in the US program to fight antisemitism -- but neither his first wife nor his second wife is Jewish, and his daughter by his first marriage explicitly does not identify as Jewish. I do not doubt his desire to fight antisemitism, but how does he define Jewish identity and what is he willing to do to support it? Meanwhile, his wife, VP Harris defended Ilhan Omar from criticism of her antisemitic remarks, saying, "I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk."

In Europe, Muslims appear to be a natural ally in fighting for shechitah and circumcision -- but according to The Law Library of Congress, halal slaughtering is performed by Muslims after being pre-stunned in a number of European countries, including Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. In 2014, approximately 85% of halal meat in the Muslim community in Great Britain was pre-stunned, according to a BBC program. (at 3:37. Warning: The video has explicit images of animals being slaughtered). The following year, in response to the controversy, there was a 60% increase in the number of un-stunned slaughtering in the Muslim community. It's not clear if this reversal has taken place across Europe and to what extent.

It seems that Jews in general -- like Israel in particular -- just cannot be too reliant on others to fight their battles.

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!