Thursday, July 27, 2023

From Ian:

A List of Communities in Ashkenaz Obliterated by Violence During the Black Death
The Black Death, which erupted across Europe and lasted for about four years (1347-51), caused immense devastation, and it appears that the mortality rate among the European population was between 25% and 45%. The immediate consequences of that pandemic had a significant impact on the Jewish population, as the Jews were accused of poisoning the wells that led to the outbreak of the plague, which spread on a massive scale. Throughout Europe, severe persecutions against Jews began, resulting in the death of many Jews and the extinction of hundreds of communities. Various sources, both Hebrew and Christian, bear witness to these events, preserved in our hands, descendants of that time and later.

Knowledge of Jewish martyrology during the Middle Ages, specifically lists documenting Jews who were martyred for sanctifying the Name of God, has been preserved in the manuscript books of various communities, primarily in Germany, which were collected by Siegmund Salfeld, Das Martyrologium des Nürnberger Memorbuches. Information regarding the events of the Black Death is somewhat fragmented. Salfeld heavily relied on one of the manuscript books, but he also supplemented the lists with information from other sources, including individual prayers and elegies that address those persecutions. Additional lists pertaining to martyrdom have been conserved in Hebrew manuscripts.

An unknown memory list has been preserved in a compilation of legal and liturgical texts from the 14th century, or possibly slightly thereafter, which were bound together and written on parchment in various Ashkenazi scripts. This compilation is housed in the library of the University of Gießen in Germany, and it includes: (a) a prayer book following the Ashkenazi custom, (b) laws of prayers according to Rabbi Elazar ben Nathan (Rabbanite), (c) Sha’arei Dura by Rabbi Yitzchak ben Meir Dura, (d) a collection of prayer customs following the “Würzburg” and “Mainz” traditions, (e) Tashbetz by Rabbi Shimson ben Tzadok.

In Hebrew manuscripts, it is common for the owner to add something from a source that is at their disposal in an empty space in the manuscript. Here, someone added a list of communities during the outbreaks of the Black Death in Germany. They undoubtedly saw a need for it, as it would serve them in the prayer of “Yizkor” (Remembrance). In this compilation, a prayer book according to the Ashkenazi custom can also be found, and through this addition, they sought to express the devastation that befell German Jewry during these difficult events. It is unclear whether the individual recorded the names of the communities from memory or copied an existing list. The exact date of its composition is also unclear. I estimate that it was written in the second half of the 14th century or shortly thereafter. Indeed, a similar list is not recognized in our records. It should be noted that there is no direct connection between this list and the accompanying text. A digital photograph of the manuscript was provided to me by Mr. Olof Schneider of the mentioned library in Gießen, and for that, I am grateful.
MEMRI: Fight Antisemites, Not Antisemitism
The rise in violent antisemitism in the West is so significant that the White House, the European Union, and the United Nations have all taken action to devise strategies to counter this phenomenon. This document will address historic and modern antisemitism, will analyze recent national and global strategies for combating it, and will suggest an effective strategy and plan of action.

It is critical to understand that there is no such thing as "combating antisemitism" without combating antisemites themselves, in the same way that one cannot fight crime without fighting criminals or fight terrorism without fighting terrorists. As will be explained below, any strategy that deviates from this principle constitutes an evasion on the part of governments from their responsibility to protect targeted minorities.

Antisemitism – A Historical Perspective
Antisemitism is a multifaceted millennial phenomenon with deep roots in Christian[1] and Islamic traditions, and it would be presumptuous to suggest that antisemitism can be eradicated. Every era has had its own distinct expression of antisemitism, including blood libels, the Black Plague, accusations that the Jews were poisoning wells, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion conspiracy, and accusations that the Jews foment revolutions throughout the world.[2] Today, one of the most prominent antisemitic conspiracy theories in the West is that the Jews are implementing a plot to replace whites in America and Europe with minorities.[3]

Antisemitism and Israel
Over the past century, the Israeli-Arab conflict (and later the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) has been serving as a catalyst for antisemitism aimed at Jews outside of Israel, even though these Jews have little or no connection to the conflict or to the State of Israel.[4]

In modern history, two solutions to antisemitism arose among Jews: The first was to assimilate, and the second – Zionism – was to establish a Jewish state and bring to it all the Jews from the diaspora, thus transforming the Jews into a nation among the nations and ending antisemitism. Neither answer appears to have solved the problem of pervasive antisemitism.
Palestinian Refugees Were Used as a Political Prop
In "Palestinians Deserve a Passport" (op-ed, July 20), Abdullah Ektileh justly focuses on the abominable treatment Palestinians have been given by Arab governments. Where, in the great population exchanges of the 1940s, Muslims were absorbed into Pakistan, Hindus into India, Silesian Germans into West Germany and Jews from Arab lands into Israel, the Palestinians were an exception.

Rejected by their fellow Arabs, who largely kept them cooped up in camps and fed a diet of hatred and revenge from birth, Palestinians were meant to be a tool for a war of total destruction against the Jewish state. Eventually, the plan backfired and, after the (barely) failed attempt of radicalized Palestinians to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy, they became too dangerous to absorb. To this day, they suffer from their exclusion by their fellow Arabs, while directing their passionate hatred toward Israel.

The Oslo agreement intended for them to become citizens of a Palestinian state, one offered by Israel in 2000, 2001 and 2008. During what was supposed to be a transition period, Oslo granted them autonomy under the Palestinian Authority. But the PA has flatly refused all those offers of statehood and promoted terrorism, even making payments to Palestinians who kill Jews. By their policies, the Arab states created a monster that terrifies them and also has made the two-state solution, one perfectly sensible in theory, a practical impossibility.

The Palestinian leadership's last card has been posing as victims. While that has succeeded in whipping up a worldwide wave of Jew-hate, it has done nothing to help the Palestinians themselves.


From the Jerusalem Post:

The United States slammed as “unacceptable” National Security Minister Ben-Gvir’s visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound on the Temple Mount on Thursday, to mark the annual Tisha Be’av fast.

“We reaffirm our long-standing US position in support of the historic status quo at Jerusalem’s holy sites,” State Department deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel told reporters in Washington.

Any unilateral action or rhetoric that deviates or jeopardizes the status quo is completely unacceptable,” Patel emphasized.

The US Embassy in Jerusalem issued a similar statement and US Ambassador Robert Wood echoed his country’s displeasure in a speech he delivered to the United Nations Security Council.

“This holy place should not be used for political purposes. We call on all parties to respect its sanctity,” he said.
No matter what one thinks of Ben Gvir, what is unacceptable is for the US to say that some Jews have a very limited right to visit their holiest spot, which is bad enough, and then to make it worse by saying that some Jews should have no rights to visit it at all.

From a Jewish perspective, it is the Muslims who visit the Dome of the Rock and the areas around it who are desecrating the holy spot. Every single day.

Jewish sensitivities towards the most sacred spot in Judaism are meaningless to the State Department. 

But for some reason, Muslim sensitivities to make the entire area Judenrein is not something to be condemned by the US government.. 

Even when they give antisemitic speeches there. 

Even when they wave Hamas flags.  

Even when they stockpile projectiles and fireworks. 

When those things happen, the State Department never issues sanctimonious statements urging Muslims to "respect its sanctity." 

Anything and everything that Muslims do on the Temple Mount is somehow part of the mythical "status quo" while anything Jews do is a threat and a potential powder keg.

There is something very wrong here.

Ben Gvir did nothing provocative and said nothing that is offensive, certainly when compared to the Jew-hatred being spouted regularly on Al Aqsa. But the State Department feels that they can attack him without repercussions from the Jewish community, because he is so reviled by so many. 

What Jews need to realize is that this attack on him was couched in terms of an attack on all Jews who want to assert historic rights to our most sacred place, and that is what is "completely unacceptable."






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 Al Quds Brigades of Islamic Jihad - Jenin Brigade today issued a warning, and a not so veiled threat, to any media that reports things it doesn't like:

In the name of God, the most gracious, the most merciful

* Notice issued by the Jenin Battalion - Military Media *

Media brothers, institutions and individuals,

We note to you that it is forbidden to carry out any media activity such as photographing people or places or otherwise inside the camp, specifically with regard to the capabilities and connections of resistance work, without permission from concerned brothers. Whoever disobeys bears responsibility for that. We note that the capabilities of the resistance and the sacrifices of the mujahideen are not a place for a press scoop.

I think they make themselves quite clear.

And it is almost a certainty that the international media will adhere to these rules. 

Which is why you won't see photos of terrorists burying IEDs in their own streets, or booby-trapping houses of Jenin residents, or any of the other gross violations of human rights that the terror groups do daily in Jenin. And without photos, there will be no reporting. And without reporting, the only aggression being reported on is from the Israeli side.

Remember how reporters used to be brave and fearless in their commitment to telling the entire story no matter what the consequences? 

Those days are long gone. Now we have reporters who stay in hotels in Tel Aviv and drive over to Ramallah and Jenin to parrot the terrorist talking points about how awful the Israelis are - and justify the lies by calling it a "narrative," before returning to their bars in Israel where they can boast about their "speaking truth to power."




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 Ian:

Mark Regev: Netanyahu should have been in the room with Herzog and Biden
Over the last seven months, Biden has repeatedly expressed his discomfort with Netanyahu’s government, its “extremist” cabinet members, behavior in the West Bank, and judicial reform proposals. Although in his CNN interview with Fareed Zakaria, the president did offer some backhanded praise, saying: “Hopefully Bibi will continue to move toward moderation.”

Jerusalem-Washington ties have gone through periods of tension in the past, with numerous examples of American presidents adopting a confrontational approach towards an Israeli prime minister, to secure a policy change. But the White House tactic of involving Israel’s ceremonial president in such a dispute is a relatively new development.

New York Times columnist Tom Friedman recently reminded his readers of the March 1975 Israel-US “reassessment” crisis. Then, president Gerald Ford and his secretary of state Henry Kissinger got tough with Israel, believing that the government of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was being intransigent in the negotiations over an Egypt-Israel interim agreement.

Kissinger abruptly ended his Cairo-Jerusalem shuttle diplomacy and returned to Washington, where the administration declared it was reconsidering its entire approach towards Israel – and in the meantime suspending arms deliveries, including the supply of new F-15 aircraft.

During the “reassessment,” Ford didn’t consider inviting Israeli president Ephraim Katzir to the White House for a president-to-president meeting to demonstrate that despite the administration’s troubles with Rabin, it really did have Israel’s back.

Another crisis in Israel-US ties erupted in June 1990 between the administration of president George H. W. Bush and the government of prime minister Yitzhak Shamir.

Differences over the composition of a Palestinian delegation for peace talks had secretary of state James Baker theatrically tell Israel that “the phone number [for the White House] is 202-456-1414. When you’re serious about this, call us.” Baker was threatening a US disengagement from Arab-Israel peacemaking.

Then, too, America’s 41st president did not invite his fellow head of state, Israeli president Chaim Herzog – the father of the incumbent – to the White House to parade his administration’s love for Israel and to demonstrate it only had a problem with the “hardline” and “inflexible” Shamir.

A precedent was broken in June 2012 when, for the first time, Israel’s president was inserted into some adroit American triangular diplomacy.

President Barack Obama had a testy relationship with Netanyahu, with their differences over Iran, the Palestinians, and settlements constantly creating friction.

But during his reelection campaign, Obama didn’t want to be seen as hostile to Israel. He decided to award the prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom to president Shimon Peres in a White House ceremony; the photographs of the US president adorning a beaming Peres with the medal seemingly attesting to Obama’s heartfelt friendship for the Jewish state.

None of this is to say that Herzog should not have gone to Washington. It is almost impossible to reject a White House invitation and an opportunity to speak before Congress. Moreover, it appears that Herzog was working in tandem with Netanyahu – as indicated by their pre-visit coordination meeting.

It is even possible that Herzog’s imminent visit had something to do with the timing of the US president’s phone call to the Israeli prime minister, and the announcement that a Biden-Netanyahu meeting was finally being scheduled.

Israelis followed their president’s US visit with pride. Herzog excels as the nation’s chief diplomat, a picture of consummate statesmanship.

Although pleased with their president’s performance and delighted by Washington’s lauding of the Israel-US partnership, Israelis would do well to remember that the Biden White House is playing a very serious diplomatic game – hugging their ceremonial head of state, while snubbing their elected head of government.
Peter Baker: Biden Takes His Battle for Democracy Case by Case
With Mr. Netanyahu defying him, the question is whether Mr. Biden will go beyond jawboning. The United States provides billions of dollars a year in security aid to Israel, but Mr. Biden appears unlikely to use leverage beyond entreaties to pressure Mr. Netanyahu to back down.

“So far, Biden’s pressure has only been rhetorical, and not only is that insufficient to challenge Netanyahu’s expanding authoritarianism, it indicates how out of sync Biden is with his own voting base,” said Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and a longtime critic of Israel’s handling of the Palestinians.

The president’s aides said his words were important. “I wouldn’t say it’s just rhetoric,” said Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary. “When the president speaks, it sends a message.”

To Mr. Netanyahu’s supporters, the president’s outrage over democratic erosion in Israel feels selective. For one thing, they argue the prime minister’s plan to limit the authority of the courts is not anti-democratic but instead puts more responsibility in the hands of elected leaders.

Moreover, Mr. Biden has advanced legislation on “the slimmest possible majority” plenty of times. Indeed, Vice President Kamala Harris just matched the record for most tiebreaking votes in the Senate in American history.

“There’s no question Israel is being treated differently,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, a nonpartisan organization in Washington focused on advancing the U.S.-Israel strategic partnership.

He noted that in France, President Emmanuel Macron ran roughshod over parliament to enact unpopular pension changes without the broad consensus Mr. Biden has insisted Mr. Netanyahu seek, generating strikes, street demonstrations and sporadic violent protests. “Yet you’ll search in vain for even a single word from President Biden of real criticism against his French counterpart’s handling of these purely internal French matters,” Mr. Hannah said.

Richard Fontaine, chief executive of Center for a New American Security, said America’s approach to promoting democracy abroad “has always been a model of inconsistency.” Mr. Biden is right that the world currently faces a contest of democracy versus autocracy and that the United States should stand up for the former, he said, but he must balance it against other objectives.

“The inconsistency and whataboutism are inevitable byproducts of a foreign policy that seeks changes in other countries’ domestic situations,” he said. “That’s not ground for abandoning the effort to support democracy abroad — just for understanding that it’s no easy task.”
Poll: Israel is America’s top ally outside English-speaking world
Nearly all (94%) of those who named Israel as America's top ally said defense ties are very important to the relationship, higher than those who said so about the UK (86%) or Canada (78%).

More of those who named Israel also said that shared values (79%) are very important than those who named the UK (72%) or Canada (69%).

Asked who is the biggest threat to the US, China led with 50%, followed by Russia at 17%. North Korea was tied with the US itself at 2%.

The last time Pew asked the question, in 2019, China and Russia were tied. In 2014, Russia was considered the leading threat. In 2017, it was Iran, which no longer ranks among the top responses.

The poll was conducted among 10,329 American adults on May 30-June 4, 2023.

Wednesday, July 26, 2023

Jews' Place of Wailing, Jerusalem, 1842, William Henry Bartlett

For those who mark Tisha B'Av, have an easy and meaningful fast.

I will not be posting until Thursday afternoon. 





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 Ian:

Lyn Julius: The distorted ‘nakba’ narrative
Israeli Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli is an angry man. Chikli, who has a history of being outspoken, has lately turned his sights on the German government. He has complained about inappropriate comparisons between the Holocaust and the Palestinian nakba—Arabic for “catastrophe.” Worse still, the German government has been sponsoring the dissemination of such comparisons.

Chikli’s complaint concerns a government-funded event in Potsdam at which German journalist Charlotte Wiedermann made the comparison in question. Wiedermann has denied doing so, but whether the allegation is true or false, the comparison has become increasingly common. It is now trendy to equate the industrialized murder of six million Jews to the displacement of Palestinian Arabs during Israel’s 1948 War of Independence.

This war was launched by seven Arab countries and resulted in the expulsion of every last Jew in eastern Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria. Arab League members then declared a second war against their own Jewish citizens, whom they branded “the Jewish minority of Palestine.” This resulted in the near-total destruction of ancient Jewish communities throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Ninety-nine percent of the regions’ Jews were forced to flee.

What angered Chikli the most was that the Potsdam event was officially sponsored by public institutions. Moreover, it was not the only event of its kind. It was part of a series of such events held in Berlin in recent months. These events included lectures with titles such as “Understanding the Pain of Others: The Holocaust and the Nakba,” “Hijacking the Memory of the Holocaust for the Benefit of Dehumanization in Palestine,” and “Zionism Can Also Motivate Antisemitism.”

This year, coinciding with Israel’s 75th anniversary, campaigners for the Palestinian cause have succeeded in moving the nakba from the margins to the mainstream. For the first time, the U.N. held a “Nakba Day” commemoration at its New York headquarters. Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas, sporting a symbolic key affixed to his lapel, demanded permission to return to his native Safed, which is inside Israel proper.

Over 75 years, the meaning of the term nakba has evolved. It was popularized by the Syrian Christian journalist and historian Constantine Zureik. To him, the “catastrophe” in question was the Arab defeat in the 1948 war—that is, the Arab failure to destroy Israel.

Zureik wrote, “Seven Arab countries declare war on Zionism in Palestine. … Seven countries go to war to abolish the partition and to defeat Zionism, and quickly leave the battle after losing much of the land of Palestine—and even the part that was given to the Arabs in the Partition Plan.”

He concluded, “We must admit our mistakes … and recognize the extent of our responsibility for the disaster that is our lot.”


MEMRI: Kuwaiti Journalist: We Teach Our Children To Hate The Jews As Their Enemies, But In Fact We Are Our Own Worst Enemies
In his May 16, 2023 column in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Qabas, liberal Kuwaiti journalist Ahmad Al-Sarraf harshly criticized the curricula taught in Kuwaiti schools, which, he said, are replete with hostility for Jews and present them as enemies of Islam and the Muslims who must be eliminated. He decried the fact that the curricula focus on cursing the other instead of teaching critical thinking and promoting values of tolerance and freedom. The Arabs, he added, fail to realize that one of the reasons for the Jews' advantage over them is that the Jews focus on education and the acquisition of knowledge, rather than on cursing others, whereas the Arabs are their own worst enemies.

The following are translated excerpts from his column:[1]
"Reading some passages in one of the textbooks taught in our schools… I was reminded of the saying 'we showered [our enemies] with curses and they showered us with blows!' These passages show clearly that whoever writes [the Kuwaiti] curricula is completely out of touch with reality, or lives in an idealized world and is full of unlikely ambitions.

"Reading three of four pages of the textbook at random, we discover that, according to the educators who wrote it, the nation's major concern, which should be focused on, is hostility towards the Jews and the desire to eliminate them. But this is in fact rather embarrassing, for there are 400 million Arabs and a billion Muslims, and it is inconceivable that all of them should focus their energy and aspirations… on eliminating a state of six or seven million people.

"This is clearly a problem. Had the Education Ministry allowed to teach the subject of critical thinking in our schools, the students would have understood on their own how foolish this text is… In our present state of weakness, division and backwardness – medical, social, moral, industrial and financial -- our entire [Muslim] nation [together] would not be able to eliminate the state of Israel. [In fact,] some of the texts in our schoolbooks clarify [exactly] how our mentality differs from the mentality of those we wish to see as our enemies. Yet despite this, throughout the century they have spent in our midst, we have not managed to understand why they continue to beat us in every military and moral campaign!

"The texts our children learn in school teach them how to deal with the plots of the Jews, but we have forgotten that [we Arabs] plot against one another more than they [the Jews] plot against us. Our preoccupation with internal disputes is the greatest factor that strengthens them and weakens us, especially given that [our] curricula do not even address the issue of putting a stop to our disputes, accepting one another and ending our internal division and rifts… Without liberalism and freedoms we have no hope!

"Our curricula focus on the fact that the Jews' hostility towards Islam and the Muslims is ancient and deep-rooted, which is clearly a fallacy. And even if it is true, I do not believe for a moment that they devote as much attention as we do to this hostility, to thinking about it and teaching it in their curricula. Being wise, they devote their curricula to teaching progress in every domain, not to cursing the other…

"Our curricula focus on the narrative that the Jews are violators of treaties, which automatically implies that we are not. [But] that too is a lie that half our clever schoolboys and schoolgirls will find difficult to buy. The curricula also say that one of the Muslims' greatest duties is to defend Islam by observing its laws and boycotting the products of the enemy. That is the greatest irony and foolishness of all, as even a mediocre mind will realize. In short, we are our own enemies, far more than anyone else is our enemy…"
Putin Regime’s Actions ‘Made Rise of Antisemitism Inevitable,’ Russian Scholar Argues
Nearly eighteen months into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there is a “palpable presence of antisemitic overtones” across the country’s political life that builds upon the “fertile ground” of historic “Soviet antisemitic and anti-Western campaigns,” according to a new assessment by a scholar of Russian Jewish history.

In an extensive article published earlier this month by Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Ksenia Krimer — a Russian citizen who is now a fellow at the Leibniz Center for Contemporary History in Potsdam, a research institute partially funded by the German government — traced the upsurge in antisemitic tropes inside Russia as President Vladimir Putin’s regime arrived on the cusp of open conflict with western nations as a result of the invasion.

Krimer, who obtained her PhD from the Central European University (CEU), argued that Putin’s “philosemitism” — his past expressions of support for both Israel and the Jewish community — was now an irrelevant consideration. In 2022, nearly 33,000 Russian Jews emigrated to Israel, a 400 percent increase on the previous year, according to the Israeli authorities.

“In 2023, it is no longer a question of whether Putin himself harbors antisemitic prejudices or not,” Krimer wrote. “The very logic of his regime and the forces it unleashed nationally and globally made the rise of antisemitism inevitable.”

There is now a “palpable presence of antisemitic overtones in political rhetoric, repressions, and everyday interactions,” Krimer added.

Among several examples she cited was a soldier’s manual published in 2022 with the approval of the Russian Ministry of Defense. Justifying Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to those tasked with carrying it out, the manual claimed that “all power [in Ukraine] is concentrated in the hands of citizens of Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom. They orchestrated the genocide of the native inhabitants…Today, all of us, Russian Orthodox and Muslims, Buddhists and shamanists, are fighting against Ukrainian nationalism and the global Satanism that supports it.”


RFK Jr. got into hot water on July 15, when the New York Post aired footage of a press event during which he said (emphasis added):

“COVID-19. There is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately,” Kennedy said. “COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.”

“We don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted or not but there are papers out there that show the racial or ethnic differential and impact,” Kennedy hedged . . .

When called on the carpet for these antisemitic, racist, conspiracy theorist comments, RFK Jr. doubled down, tweeting:

“The U.S. and other governments are developing ethnically targeted bioweapons and that a 2021 study of the COVID-19 virus shows that COVID-19 appears to disproportionately affect certain races. The furin cleave docking site is most compatible with blacks and Caucasians and least compatible with ethnic Chinese, Finns, and Ashkenazi Jews. In that sense, it serves as a kind of proof of concept for ethnically targeted bioweapons.”

Except that none of this is true. Jews had a higher mortality rate from COVID-19 compared to other ethnic groups in, for example, the UK. From the JPost (emphasis added):

Despite Kennedy’s claims that Ashkenazi Jews had a higher immunity to COVID-19, in June of 2020, the Office for National Statistics released data revealing Jews had a higher mortality rate from COVID-19 in the United Kingdom compared to other ethnic groups. At the peak of the pandemic, in April 2020, Jewish mortality from COVID-19 was twice that of non-Jews.

But perhaps we can’t altogether blame RFK Jr.’s hateful views about Jews, since it’s kind of a family
legacy going all the way back to Grandpa Joseph P. Kennedy, a known antisemite. From Joseph Kennedy and the Jews (emphasis added):

Arriving at London in early 1938, newly-appointed U.S. Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy took up quickly with another transplanted American. Viscountess Nancy Witcher Langhorne Astor assured Kennedy early in their friendship that he should not be put off by her pronounced and proud anti-Catholicism.

"I'm glad you are smart enough not to take my [views] personally," she wrote. Astor pointed out that she had a number of Roman Catholic friends - G.K. Chesterton among them - with whom she shared, if nothing else, a profound hatred for the Jewish race. Joe Kennedy, in turn, had always detested Jews generally, although he claimed several as friends individually. Indeed, Kennedy seems to have tolerated the occasional Jew in the same way Astor tolerated the occasional Catholic.

The above article, by the way, is prefaced with a note:

“Note: Due to a number of anti-Semitic comments that have been posted, comments have been disabled for this article.”

Here is more from the same source in which Hitler is viewed as a solution to the Jewish question, and Communism, too (emphasis added):

As fiercely anti-Communist as they were anti-Semitic, Kennedy and Astor looked upon Adolf Hitler as a welcome solution to both of these "world problems" (Nancy's phrase). No member of the so-called "Cliveden Set" (the informal cabal of appeasers who met frequently at Nancy Astor's palatial home) seemed much concerned with the dilemma faced by Jews under the Reich. Astor wrote Kennedy that Hitler would have to do more than just "give a rough time" to "the killers of Christ" before she'd be in favor of launching  "Armageddon to save them. The wheel of history swings round as the Lord would have it. Who are we to stand in the way of the future?" Kennedy replied that he expected the "Jew media" in the United States to become a problem, that "Jewish pundits in New York and Los Angeles" were already making noises contrived to "set a match to the fuse of the world."

During May of 1938, Kennedy engaged in extensive discussions with the new German Ambassador to the Court of St. James's, Herbert von Dirksen. In the midst of these conversations (held without approval from the U.S. State Department), Kennedy advised von Dirksen that President Roosevelt was the victim of "Jewish influence" and was poorly informed as to the philosophy, ambitions and ideals of Hitler's regime. (The Nazi ambassador subsequently told his bosses that Kennedy was "Germany's best friend" in London.)

Columnists back in the states condemned Kennedy's fraternizing. Kennedy later claimed that 75% of the attacks made on him during his Ambassadorship emanated from "a number of Jewish publishers and writers. ... Some of them in their zeal did not hesitate to resort to slander and falsehood to achieve their aims." He told his eldest son, Joe Jr., that he disliked having to put up with "Jewish columnists" who criticized him with no good reason.

RFK Jr. isn’t the only descendant of Joe Kennedy to become an ardent antisemite. Joe Jr. was apparently a chip off the old block. He thought Hitler was just the bee's knees (emphasis added): 

Like his father, Joe Jr. admired Adolf Hitler. Young Joe had come away impressed by Nazi rhetoric after traveling in Germany as a student in 1934. Writing at the time, Joe applauded Hitler's insight in realizing the German people's "need of a common enemy, someone of whom to make the goat. Someone, by whose riddance the Germans would feel they had cast out the cause of their predicament. It was excellent psychology, and it was too bad that it had to be done to the Jews. The dislike of the Jews, however, was well-founded. They were at the heads of all big business, in law etc. It is all to their credit for them to get so far, but their methods had been quite unscrupulous ... the lawyers and prominent judges were Jews, and if you had a case against a Jew, you were nearly always sure to lose it. ... As far as the brutality is concerned, it must have been necessary to use some ...."

. . . Like his friend Charles Coughlin (an anti-Semitic broadcaster and Roman Catholic priest), Kennedy always remained convinced of what he believed to be the Jews' corrupt, malignant, and profound influence in American culture and politics. "The Democratic [party] policy of the United States is a Jewish production," Kennedy told a British reporter near the end of 1939, adding confidently that Roosevelt would "fall" in 1940.

On July 17, 1949, the JTA released a report that states in part (emphasis added):

Anti-Semitic views claimed to have been expressed by Joseph P. Kennedy — during the time when he was U.S. Ambassador in London — in his conversations with the German Ambassador there in 1938, were revealed here today in captured German diplomatic documents made public by the State Department.

The documents, which claim that Kennedy approved of the Nazi treatment of Jews in Germany, were discovered in the top secret archives of the German Foreign Ministry. One of them is a letter from the then German Ambassador to Great Britain, Dr. Herbert von Dirksen, to Baron Ernst von Weizsaecker, State Secretary of the German Foreign Ministry who was recently convicted on war crimes charges. In this report, von Dirksen wrote of Kennedy as follows:

“The Ambassador then touched upon the Jewish question and stated that it was naturally of great importance to German-American relations. In this connection it was not so much the fact that we wanted to get rid of the Jews that was so harmful to us, but rather the loud clamor with which we accompanied the purpose. He himself understood our Jewish policy completely; he was from Boston and there, in one golf club, and in other clubs, no Jews had been admitted in the past 50 years. In the United States, therefore, such pronounced attitudes were quite common, but people avoided making so much outward fuss about it.


In Joe Kennedy’s Answer to the ‘Jewish Question’: Ship Them to Africa, Clive Irving writes about Joe Kennedy's personal solution to "the Jewish problem." Send them to Africa (emphasis added):

In 1938 Joseph Kennedy had a solution to “the Jewish problem.” The New York Times reported that he had worked out with prime minister Chamberlain a plan to ship all German Jews to Africa and other places in the Western Hemisphere under the joint administration of Britain and the United States. That was news to the State Department, which Kennedy had not consulted, and to President Roosevelt for whom Kennedy had become an embarrassing loose cannon.

You might be tempted to say—considering the legacy of antisemitism that RFK Jr. inherited from Grandpa Joe—that all the Kennedys suffer from the same malady. Except that there is reason to believe that this is not so. For one thing, JFK's daughter Caroline, married a Jew. And in Bobby Kennedy’s Admiration for Israel, we learn that while RFK Jr.’s father Bobby at first tried not to choose sides in his coverage for the Boston Post of events leading up to Israel’s declaration of statehood. Then he changed his mind, and realized that Israel was in the right (emphasis added):

[In] “British Hatred by Both Sides,” RFK labored mightily to present the arguments of both Arabs and Jews. “There are such well-founded arguments on either side,” Kennedy wrote, “that each side grows more and more bitter toward the other. Confidence in their right increases in proportion to the hatred and mistrust for the other side not acknowledging it.”

Bobby Kennedy, father of RFK Jr., really seemed to get it. How brave the Jewish people were in fighting to create a Jewish state in Palestine, after thousands of years in exile. From the same source (emphasis added):

In the subsequent three articles, however, RFK and his Boston Post editors no longer attempted to convey an objective view of the competing claims of Jews and Arabs. As the headline on his June 4th article indicates, RFK chose a side: “Jews Have a Fine Fighting Force—Make Up for Lack of Arms With Undying Spirit, Unparalleled Courage—Impress the World.” The article gets directly to the point: “The Jewish people in Palestine who believe in and have been working toward this national state have become an immensely proud and determined people. It is already a truly great modern example of the birth of a nation with the primary ingredients of dignity and self-respect.” Many similar articles appeared in the American press of the day. The surprising thing about these Boston Post articles was not their pro-Zionist sentiments, but the fact that they had been written by Joseph P. Kennedy’s son.

After RFK Jr.'s latest remarks, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz gave him a talking to from the podium. It was a pretty good speech. But it's hard to take her seriously, considering she's on the wrong side of many issues that pose a danger to Israeli Jews.

 

RFK Jr.’s response to Wasserman Schultz carried more than a grain of truth, for which we must give him credit:

Joseph P. Kennedy's grandson RFK Jr., looks to be a serious contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. As such, it is important to talk about his problem with Jews and Asians and to keep talking about it long and loud. Everyone should be well aware of the character of the candidate they choose for president. And that includes our current Democratic president.



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!

 

 

In the 19th century, apparently, Jews referred to Tisha B'Av as the "black fast" and Yom Kippur as the "white fast."

The earliest description I can find in English-language newspapers is from The Argus of Western America
25 Jun 1828. It was printed in Kentucky, which was "western America 'at the time.

The article is about the customs of Jews altogether.


Towards the end, it describes fast days, and then descends into bizarre claims and antisemitism.



A much more accurate description can be found in The Western Daily Press (Bristol, England) 13 Aug 1883:







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 Ian:

Despite Widespread Protest and Controversy, Israeli Democracy Endures
On Monday, the Knesset passed an amendment to Israel’s Basic Law stating that courts cannot countermand a ministerial decision or override a ministerial appointment on grounds of unreasonableness. The measure has set off intense protests in Israel, as well as condemnations and expressions of concern from Democratic politicians in the U.S. The editors of the New York Sun comment:

President Biden’s reaction—to lecture the Israeli leader that a measure of such magnitude shouldn’t be allowed to squeak by—is condescending nonsense, particularly from a president who gained passage of his own economic program by slim votes.

The most impressive thing about the drama unfolding in Israel, though, is Israel’s democracy itself. The protests have gone on, the press is at full tilt, and the scene in the Knesset was as raucous as could be.

In other words, democracy is functioning as it should. No mass arrests. No one is being “disappeared.” Democracy is often messy, and one could say the more turbulent, the more democratic. Yet, save for some isolated incidents, there has been little violence over this in Israel.

The truth is that what we’re seeing in Israel is what one would expect from any healthy democracy or any country of laws. And why not? This is a fight over laws that are being made or reformed. Those refusing to defend the county or those physicians who protest by betraying the Hippocratic oath will, if there are violations for civil disobedience, be held accountable by the laws of the country. They are unlikely to have a major impact on the outcome.
Alan Dershowitz: If you truly love Israel, it’s time to compromise
Protesters claim that this judicial reform, especially if followed by further weakening of the Supreme Court, will end Israeli democracy. They are categorically wrong. As President Isaac Herzog told a combined session of the US Congress, democracy is in Israel’s DNA, and it will remain there forever. The best proof that this is true is both the frequency of Israeli elections and the intensity of the recent protests on both sides. These are not symptoms of a weakening of democracy; they are evidences of a strong democracy at work.

Even if all of the so-called reforms were to be enacted— which I would strongly oppose — Israel would become more like Great Britain and the United States than like Hungary or Poland. Indeed, some European democracies have little or no judicial review of the decisions and actions of the elected branches, and they continue to be vibrant democracies.

The most disturbing aspect of this controversy is that it has become internationalised. Judicial reform is a domestic issue, whether in the United States, in India or in Israel. Other countries should butt out of this entirely domestic issue. It does not affect the United States, Great Britain, the European Union or the United Nations.

But Israel has always been subjected to a double standard of super-scrutiny with regard to its domestic concerns. This internationalisation of a purely domestic issue is partly a result of that double standard, but it is also the responsibility of some of the Israeli protesters who have sought help from outside the country. In doing so, they are deliberately weakening the Israeli economy, just as the refusal of soldiers to serve is weakening Israel’s military capacity.

The extremes on both sides of this debate are overreacting and harming Israel in the process. The controversy over judicial reform requires moderate compromises from both sides. This is not happening because extremists are benefiting from the controversy by pandering to their bases and exaggerating the implications of enacting or failing to enact judicial reform.

Those who love Israel, whether inside or outside the nation-state of the Jewish people, must pull back from extreme measures and advocacy and follow President Isaac Herzog’s lead in seeking a compromise that is acceptable even if not preferred, by the majority of Israelis who favour a middle ground.
Israel’s judicial reform of its courts’ unchecked power is not as radical as activists would have you believe
The new legislation is extremely modest.

It leaves reasonableness review intact except where used to second-guess the decision-making of elected officials.

Israel’s high court remains the most powerful administrative-law court in the Western world.

The importance of the reasonableness amendment right now is largely political.

It will prove significant only if Israel’s parliament adopts the remainder of the reform without excessive delay.

The new law brings the center of the debate over judicial reform from the streets back to where it ought to be — the chambers and hallways of the elected legislature.

The prime minister has asked opposition leaders to join him in hammering out a compromise version of judicial reform that can enjoy broader public support.

One can only hope opposition leaders rise to the occasion.

The fear now is that Israel’s Supreme Court will declare it can ignore the legislation and continue to exercise “reasonableness” review, enacted law be damned.

Israel, of course, has no constitution, and there is no legal precedent for such an action by the court.

It’s hard too to ignore the questions of legitimacy raised by a court declaring itself above the law to aggrandize its already-excessive authority.

Unfortunately, Israeli Supreme Court decisions, particularly in recent years, have exhibited neither moderation nor restraint.

The political chaos that will follow the court’s overreach could be devastating.
In 2019, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 73/328, "Promoting interreligious and intercultural dialogue and tolerance in countering hate speech." It included this paragraph:

Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centres or places of worship, as well as all attacks on and in religious places, sites and shrines that are in violation of international law, 

A resolution voted on yesterday thas an identical title. But it has a paragraph that says this:

Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their religious symbols, holy books, homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centres or places of worship, as well as all attacks on and in religious places, sites and shrines in violation of international law,

It adds "religious symbols" and "holy books" to what cannot be attacked, and it changes "that are in violation of international law" to "in violation of international law." 

In other words, Pakistan just managed to pass a UNGA resolution that states that burning Qurans is against international law.

There was, by all accounts, a major debate. Spain tried to take out the words "in violation of international law" from the text, but its attempt was voted down, 62-44 with 24 abstentions.

And then the entire resolution was adopted by consensus.

While burning the Quran is something to be condemned, it is not against international law, and this is on the slippery slope of adopting Islamic concepts of blasphemy as something the entire world must adopt. 

The text is in the preamble, and UNGA resolution itself, has no legal effect, but this is still significant - people use the text of UN resolutions as evidence of what international law is.

Two weeks ago, the UN Human Rights Council passed its own resolution that "Calls upon States to adopt national laws, policies and law enforcement frameworks that address, prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or  violence, and to take immediate steps to ensure accountability." 

As one critic notes, "One only has to look at some of the 28 states that voted in favor of the (HRC) resolution to realize that the real purpose is not to counter hate speech or foster equality and tolerance, but to provide authoritarian governments cover and legitimacy when suppressing dissent."

There is a thin line between hate speech that could lead to violence - which is incitement - and legitimate criticism. Muslim-majority states are trying to blur that line to force the West to adopt their own bans on blasphemy as international law.

As we saw in the UN yesterday, the West caved. But free speech is not something to give up on. 

I don't have the text of the UNGA resolution, but the UNHRC resolution has at least two other problematic elements.

One is that, as we've seen, any statements against antisemitism are always paired with condemnations of Islamophobia. But the UNHRC resolution, supposedly against religious hatred, mentioned Islamophobia - and not a word about antisemitism. Which makes it pretty obvious that people are not serious about combating antisemitism.

The other is that the UNHRC resolution refers to the Quran consistently as "the Holy Qur’an." The word "Holy" should not be there - the Quran is only holy to Muslims. The insistence of that language indicates again that these resolutions are not meant to fight religious hatred as much as they are to elevate Islam as a belief over 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!

 

 

  • Wednesday, July 26, 2023
  • Elder of Ziyon
The UN's OCHA issued a press release listing the humanitarian activities implemented  in Jenin after Israel's raid earlier this month.

As you would expect, the text discusses topics like providing water, food, shelter and psychological support to residents of the camp affected by the fighting. 

Some of the support they are sending, however, indicates that the media reporting on Palestinian issues in the territories is very skewed.

For example:
A mine action expert has conducted two training sessions on explosive ordnance risks (EOR), targeting 30 UNRWA staff in Jenin camp to reduce community exposure to UXO threats and promote safety. 
Outside of my own, I have not seen a single article in the media that discusses how Palestinian terrorists are endangering their own people by burying huge IEDs in the ground for IDF vehicles. 

But aid workers know. Which is why reports like this can be used to glean a lot of information that the media choses to downplay or ignore. 

The report implies that there is an uptick in violence against women and sexual abuse in the wake of the raid: (GBV is "gender based violence".)
Partners specializing in GBV response have, on average, provided medical services and psychosocial support (PSS) to 50 women per day.
One partner has sent social workers to Jenin to reinforce the provision of PSS.
A hotline based in Nablus is receiving daily calls and has provided online PSS.
UNRWA is ensuring ongoing safe identification and referral of cases needing more specialized counselling and follow-up (including for people exposed to GBV or sexual exploitation and abuse).
Partners responding to GBV have sent psychosocial support teams to Jenin camp, to assess the needs and provide services. Two nationwide hotlines are available to support women who seek support in response to GBV. The GBV Sub-Cluster has informed women and girls of available services.

If 50 women are being counseled on gender based violence every day, that indicates that hundreds of Palestinian women may be subject to violence and sexual abuse. 

We know this is true, NGO reports have mentioned - although rarely highlighted - the huge amount of violence that Palestinian women endure from their fathers and husbands. A 2019 survey showed that 29% of Palestinian married women had experienced some form of GBV by their husbands in the previous twelve months, including 18% being subjected to physical violence and 9% to sexual violence. 

Palestinian Arab men use an Israeli raid as an excuse to abuse their wives.

But even that is not the most troubling fact to emerge from reading between the lines of this report. It also says:

In coordination with UNRWA, SAWA ...has been actively educating the affected population about the importance of accessing confidential reporting channels. This effort aims to empower people to report any misconduct or wrongdoing by humanitarian workers, ensuring a safe and accountable environment for everyone.

Misconduct by medical workers is rampant enough to prompt NGOs to pro-actively educate people on how to report it? They are paying for commercial spots on the radio. 

What kinds of misconduct could this be? 

UNRWA publishes this poster about its zero tolerance policy for sexual abuse by its staff.


In other contexts, sexual abuse by humanitarian aid workers have been well reported. But finding specific statistics on how often this happens in the territories is not easy. The Palestinian and international media is clearly not interested in reporting about it.

What we do know is that a lot of NGOs are  spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and assigning scores of workers and "focal points"  to fight this abuse against Palestinian women and children - that no one is talking about. 

Clearly, there is some serious sexual abuse by UN and other aid workers against Palestinian women and children. The extent of that abuse is not being compiled and reported anywhere as far as I can tell. But these organizations wouldn't be putting this much money and effort into fighting this abuse if it was only a marginal, rare concern. 

 





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 Palestine Post, July 26, 1948, reported:
A commentator on the Baghdad Radio strongly criticized the refugees in the Arab States for their complaints about their treatment.

 Arabs who said they wished they had stayed in Palestine with the Jews should he shot as spies. he urged.

 "The Jews will make you their slaves, if you return to them." the commentator said. "They will feed you only on bread and water. They will force you to sleep in the open. five on one blanket. They will take your wives and daughters from you.  Choose death rather than the Jews."    
That's how much they supported Palestinian Arabs!



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!

 

 

Tuesday, July 25, 2023

From Ian:

Bassam Tawil: The EU-Funded Education for Jihad and Martyrdom
While the Iranian-backed Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror groups in the Gaza Strip use summer camps to train children how to become combatants and murder Jews, the Palestinian Authority, through its education system, effectively does the same thing. It poisons their hearts and minds through incendiary material in its school textbooks.

Even the European Parliament condemned the Palestinian Authority over the "hateful" content of its textbooks. The European Union, for the past two-and-a-half years, withheld assistance from the Palestinian Authority while demanding political reforms and the purging of incitement to violence from Palestinian textbooks. A resolution passed this year by the European Parliament went so far as to directly link the content of the textbooks with Palestinian terrorism... The resolution also acknowledged that there is antisemitism in the textbooks and demanded that it be removed.

The Palestinian Authority, however, has not removed from its textbooks material that promotes violence or loathing Jews.

Nevertheless, despite repeated talk by the European Union on the need to change Palestinian textbooks, it is apparently resuming unconditional financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced last year during a visit to Ramallah, the de facto capital of the Palestinians, that EU funds will be resumed "rapidly."

This sudden burst of generosity raises questions about the EU's seriousness when it talks about the need to remove the "hateful material" from the textbooks.

The announcement by the European Commission president shows that the Europeans do not honestly care if the Palestinian Authority continues to incite violence and promote Jew-hatred in its schools. In fact, by resuming unconditional financial aid to the Palestinians, the EU is signaling that it approves of the hateful material in the textbooks and actually encourages the Palestinians to continue their Jihad against Israel and Jews.


Reuters Parrots Palestinian Historical Revisionism in Archaeology Report
In its brief report on a recent archaeological discovery in Gaza, Reuters not only reported the facts but also uncritically provided a platform for inane Palestinian historical revisionism.

Detailing the unearthing of 125 Roman-era tombs near a building site, including a rare find of two sarcophagi made from lead, both Reuters’ report and accompanying video also aired the statements of two Gaza-based authorities who hijacked this exciting archaeology news by unabashedly trying to connect this ancient discovery to the modern-day Palestinians.

Fadel Al-A’utul, of the prestigious French School of Biblical and Archaeological Research, claimed that this find “proves to the world about the existence of Palestinian culture and heritage.”

Likewise, Jamal Abu Reida, the General-Director of the Hamas-run Antiquities Ministry, asserted that:
The cemetery is important because it deepens Palestinian roots on this land and that it dates back to thousands of years and it refutes the Zionist allegations. It refutes Israeli claims that Palestine is a land without people and that its people are without land. The existence of this cemetery…signifies stability and ongoing habitation.

However, the fly in the ointment for both Al-A’utul and Abu Reida’s claims is that these tombs predate the Palestinians and are entirely unrelated to Gaza’s current inhabitants.

Related Reading: Forensic Architecture ‘Investigation’ Into ‘Destruction of Gaza’s Antiquities’ Glosses Over Real Archaeological Crimes

According to a 2014 historical survey in Haaretz, the Gaza of Roman times was inhabited by a diverse population of Jews, Greeks, Romans, Philistines, Egyptians, Persians and Bedouin.

Notice who’s missing?

The Palestinians didn’t reside in Roman Gaza because there weren’t any Palestinians yet.

The Palestinians claim to trace their heritage back to the Muslim Arab conquest of the region in 637 C.E., hundreds of years after these ancient tombs would have been sealed.

By ludicrously alleging that these tombs are evidence for 2000 years of Palestinian history and that they also serve as a refutation of long-standing Jewish ties to the region, Al-A’utul and Abu Reida are not only distorting history in the service of modern-day politics but are also calling into question the integrity of any academic archaeological work that is conducted in the Hamas-administered coastal enclave.


From BNN:
The Iraqi Fencing & Modern Pentathlon Federation recently decided to withdraw its team from the FIE Fencing World Championships in Milan due to a potential confrontation with Israeli players. 

This is not the first time the Iraqi team has made such a decision. The team also withdrew from individual races in a previous World Fencing Championship held in Istanbul for the same reason.

Azhar Ali, the director of the Federation’s media, stated that the team’s withdrawal only applies to confrontations with Israel, and that the Iraqi players would continue to participate in other competitions. Ali also emphasized that the Iraqi Federation would not face any penalties due to the withdrawal, as it is in compliance with international regulations.
That last sentence does not seem to be true.

The official FIE regulations state:

t.113  Refusing to fence an opponent  
1 No fencer (individual or team) from an FIE member national federation may take part in an official competition if he refuses to fence against any other fencer whatsoever (individual or team) correctly entered in the event. Should this rule be broken, the penalties specified for offences of the 4th group will be applied (cf. t.158-162, t.169, t.170). 

Offenses of the 4th group means a black card. 

2 The FIE shall consider whether there are grounds, and to what extent, for taking sanctions against the national federation to which the disqualified competitor belongs (cf. FIE Statutes 1.2.4 and Rules Article t.170).

Any black card awarded at a competition of the FIE or at a competition organized by any Confederation which has subscribed to the FIE disciplinary code shall be reported within 10 days to the President of the FIE, for him to assess whether the severity of the offence committed warrants the sending of the report made by the FIE supervisor or by the Directoire Technique to the president of the Legal Commission, requesting him to establish a Disciplinary Tribunal to determine if penalties in addition to those imposed at the competition should be imposed. 
Given that the Iraqi team did the same thing in Istanbul a couple of months ago, if the FIE has any concern for the sport, it should expel any team that has clearly stated that they refuse to participate in these competitions against legal competitors. 




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!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive