Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, August 13, 2023

Interview With Aryeh Lightstone On The Third Anniversary of The Abraham Accords (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Aryeh Lightstone served as an advisor to US Ambassador David Friedman and as special envoy to the Abraham Accords. His account of his experiences, Let My People Know, was published last year. Today is the third anniversary of the announcing of the Accords.

Last week, I had the opportunity to interview Aryeh Lightstone, days before the news that there was progress in getting Saudi Arabia to join the Accords. The text has been edited for clarity.

How does it feel to prove all of the experts wrong by negotiating the Abraham Accords Then Trump is voted out of office, those "experts" are back -- and they are back to spouting the old disproven policy.

That's why I wrote the book Let My People Know. In May of 2021, Matt Lee, the great reporter for the AP, asked Ned Price, the spokesperson of the State Dept., what were these agreements called. And you can watch 2 minutes and 47 seconds of Ned Price turning himself into a pretzel to do anything but say the words "Abraham Accords."

To me, that was insulting -- not because I needed to hear it, but because there were countries that took a risk and joined a circle of peace without preconditions and they called it the Abraham Accords. So for the US not to honor, recognize and support this agreement that it brokered, and walk away from it was so reprehensible. So that is why I wrote "Let My People Know" -- so that people will know about the Abraham Accords. And if people knew what they were, Democrats would be up in arms against such ignorance by the Biden administration. The very first time that the Biden Administration came out pro-actively supporting the Abraham Accords was the day after the Afghanistan debacle, so they know that it works. It's just a question of whether they can get past the personality and politics to get to the policy. They know it is good policy, it's just bad politics to openly say it.

The Abraham Accords happened because of the leadership of Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt, David Friedman, yourself and others -- but it was more than that. What else had to fall into place, both in the Arab world and in Israel to make this happen?

Well, I think a couple of different things happened.

Foremost, the United States is the undisputed superpower in the world and when we act that way, a lot of really good things happen. When we back away from that, there is a vacuum. And it is not filled by Costa Rica -- it is filled by the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians. And for all their genuflecting to others, the Democrats put the world at enormous risk. Every one of our allies knows who we are, but sometimes we don't know who we are. One of the greatest things we did was move the US embassy to Jerusalem. Israel didn't need us to do that, we needed to do that. We were afraid to move the embassy because of what other countries were going to say or do when we took an action that we wanted to do. But when we made that move, that was a superpower move. And when we opened up the embassy 6 months later, the rest of the countries in the region said, "Wait a second. This is an America who knows who they are and we want to be close to this America. And the path to Washington runs through Jerusalem." They know that the only democracy in the Middle East has a special relationship. And the closer those other countries are to that special relationship, the more they can elevate their own relationship with the United States.

Secondly, Israel is an attractive friend because of its economy and because of its military strength. It is not a "noch schlepper." Just look at what world leaders said during COVID. They said that the solutions were going to come from the US or from Israel. Just look at the number of calls that the US National Security Council had with other countries. We had a twice-weekly call with Israel. We didn't have that with any other country. World leaders see the innovation, the power and the strength that comes out of Israel. Israel is the prettiest girl at the ball.

You see the Arab countries who come and say that they want to build for the next hundred years, not re-litigate the last hundred years. How do they do that? They see that the Palestinian Arabs, by not moving forward on peace, are holding these Arab countries back and if they can move the Palestinian issue to the side then they can go ahead and take the next step forward. That takes a lot of guts and courage from those leaders.

Thirdly, Iran is terrifying.

Now suddenly the same Biden Administration that couldn't say the words "Abraham Accords" is now pushing it. What changed?

I'm very skeptical that anything gets done. And here's the reason: Biden hasn't officially invited Netanyahu to the US. And when he met MBS last year in Saudi Arabia, the question was whether he was going to shake his hand or give him a fist bump. When the president cannot decide to embrace two of our allies, it is going to be very hard to picture him in that 3-way handshake. And the reason he cannot do that three-way handshake is that according to Biden's politics, MBS is a bad guy and Bibi is a terrible guy. And that's a shame because both of those leaders and the people they represent are incredibly important to the US. I don't see how Biden overcomes that.

The second thing is, why did it take them so long to come around to the Abraham Accords? Because who won in the Abraham Accords? Israel won -- which is not such a great thing in the world of progressive Democrats. The people that Obama tried to undercut -- MBS and Bibi -- got stronger. These are strong, great leaders that we need to support, but there is a difference between Democratic and Republican foreign policy.

The more the Abraham Accords succeed, the less likely it is for there to be a two-state solution on the 1967 lines. And that is the great foreign policy goal of the Democrats. And the more you push the Abraham Accords, the less leverage the Palestinian Arabs have and the less likely meaningful concessions can be extracted for the Palestinians. That is really why the Democrats cannot get behind the Accords.

So the Biden Admin is going to push the Abraham Accords even though they are antithetical to the JCPOA?

Getting the Saudis to join will guarantee three things:

Biden will win a Nobel Peace Prize.

There may be a grand bargain involving the Saudis and Israel to step back from protesting against the Iran Deal.

They can get meaningful concessions, or put Bibi in a situation where he will be forced to change his government or retreat from the judicial reform.

The Saudis are the great prize that changes the Middle East forever.

Can you picture a scenario where it would be inadvisable for Israel to enter into the agreement with the Saudis?

I can picture a scenario in all situations where there would be a disadvantage. But for the most part, peace is a good thing with external countries and I do not imagine Netanyahu's government saying this would not be a good idea. This Israeli government has certain red lines and it is not going to move on these red lines.

But won't the Saudis insist on Israeli concessions to the Palestinians?

The Emiratis told Israel that it had the option to apply or not apply sovereignty, but if it did not then they would start a relationship with them. Israel had not applied sovereignty up to that time, they still have not applied it, and now they have peace with five Muslim countries. Israel will call that a win. There are things the Saudis can ask that are beyond the pale and there are things that are very reasonable.

We believe the problem is not the Palestinian people. The problem is the so-called leadership of the Palestinians. Anything that enfranchises the leadership is a mistake for the region and the Saudis see that also. If there is something that helps the Palestinians have better jobs and better opportunities, I think Israel would embrace it. I think the region should embrace it.

You mentioned Russia, China, and Iran -- how dangerous are they to the Middle East in general and to the Abraham Accords in particular?

When China brokers a reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the biggest losers at the table are the US and Israel, because as soon as the US retreats from the Middle East, even a little bit, someone else shows up. And if it is China, it means Russia and Iran as well. And that is dangerous. How much is that a danger to the Abraham Accords? The Abraham Accords have proven to be incredibly resilient. If the US does not project power appropriately, that will weaken Israel, because Israel has made clear they are with the US. You'll see other countries throughout the region and throughout the world who say they are not sure whether they love the Chinese policy or not, but they can count on it for the next 100 years. But US policy seems to change every four years -- and it doesn't change a little bit. It changes 180 degrees. It's really hard to make plans when you don't know whether the US is your ally, depending on who wins an election that you have no influence over. It's really a scary thing for our friends and allies and it weakens the United States.

There has been talk over the past few weeks about whether the time has come that it would be beneficial for Israel for the US to end military aid. If the US were to do this, what kind of impact would that have on the Accords?

Every time the US takes a step back, that weakens Israel's hand because the US and Israel are so tightly linked. But in this case, the US weakens itself. The aid that goes to Israel is incredibly well-spent money in the US. The aid might not be in Israel's best interest, but it is in the US's best interest.

By the way, it is absolutely in the US's best interest to make sure that Israel and the rest of the region are linked to the US and not to China. If you look at China's spreading influence, China has great natural resources, Russia has great natural resources, and Iran has great natural resources -- and now Saudi Arabia has the greatest natural resources. So if China secures that corridor, they become a power that is incredibly threatening to us. Forget about military reasons, just for economic and energy dominance.

Now take the opposite approach: cut off China's influence in Iran, which is a natural place to cut off, and you have the entire Abraham Accord region extending through Oman, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Egypt and Israel -- all as one strong alliance, getting along with each other, all deregulated. That's unlimited land, unlimited workers, unlimited energy and unlimited economics -- all in the US corner, surpassing what China is able to do. This is the pivotal part of the math that we need to win, "we" meaning the US. We need to win the Middle East, purely with influence. Israel and UAE are willing to defend themselves by themselves and the US gets a tremendous return on that investment. We shoot ourselves in the foot when we don't do that.

Why are the Saudis edging towards Iran and should we be afraid of how far they may go?

The Saudis are undergoing one of the greatest experiments in world history, of building a nation while reforming it and modernizing it all at the same time with basically unlimited resources. But this is a culture that does not adapt very quickly. They are cautious. But the Crown Prince MBS is not being cautious -- he is going at warp speed. The agreement with Iran, brokered by China, reflects the Saudi attitude that they are not in the war business, they are not in the war of religion business -- they are in the building-a-nation business. So they want to be left alone, and this agreement is what it will cost to be left alone.

Again, this happened because the US took a step back. If the US had been there to say "This is our region and an attack on the Saudis is an attack on us" -- those words would matter, because no one wants to attack the US in a way that pokes the bear and it in turn attacks them. They only attack the US and their allies when we are weak. When we are strong, they don't do that.

It's in the Chinese interest to have the Saudis and Iran get along also.

But while the Saudis may want to be left alone, leaving other countries alone is not something Iran is known for -- as Syria, Lebanon and others can attest.

Yes, but Syria and Lebanon are not Saudi Arabia. The UAE re-established relations with Iran. They are basically saying "I accomplish nothing by considering you the axis of evil, especially since I don't have the axis of good on my side."

The Middle East is trying to get out of the war business and trying to get into the sustainability business, how to get from an oil and gas-based economy to an economy that works without oil and gas. They are trying to compete commercially, not ideologically. And because of that, they are trying to be friendly with everybody.

It is difficult to be friends with some countries. Iran is number one. But I think all of those countries look around and say "Well, Israel will probably take the brunt first and we'll see where the world is. See if the US can have a consistent policy towards Iran, whether Iran will turn nuclear." There are a lot of things that will happen in the next four to six years that will determine what people's permanent foreign policies are toward Iran.

The Biden administration will condemn Israeli domestic policies but where are they on these people in Iran who are sacrificing their lives on the street, this ultimate bravery in a non-democratic world? Just contrast these two things and I don't know what set of world values somebody can have where they want to pick what is right and wrong in Israel but will not pick the side of truth versus falsehood in Iran. This is just moral bankruptcy.

Have the Abraham Accords had any positive influence on the Palestinian Arabs?

Two weeks ago, Abbas visited Jenin for the first time in eighteen years. To think that there is a Palestinian Authority is a joke. They are a bunch of different tribes that exist independently. If The US would work with specific individual leaders there, we could cultivate some meaningful relationships. But you need consistent policy across the board from Israel and from the US.

If it hadn't been for COVID and if we had had the support of the Abraham Accord countries also, then the Emiratis or Saudis or Moroccans could have come in and built Palestinian Arab businesses and industrial zones -- better than the US or Israel could do it.

The way I rank the greatest beneficiaries of the Abraham Accords in order are the US, Israeli Arabs, the Abraham Accord countries, the Palestinian Arabs and finally Israel. We'll see if I'm right or not as this plays out in the next twenty years.

You mentioned Israeli Arabs. How do they benefit?

Put yourself in the shoes of an Israeli Arab. From an identity perspective, that is a difficult place to be when the rest of the region has chosen to isolate you instead of embrace you. And if you are looking at the leader of the Arab world in terms of modernity you are looking at the UAE, which is considered "cool" And if the UAE says that Israel is "cool", and I as an Israeli Arab can be a link between the UAE and Israel -- then that gives me a strategic advantage. I can be a bridge instead of being in isolation. So as more countries join and you have a uniform Middle East where you can land in Tel Aviv or in Abu Dhabi and take a train without needing your passport or a visa across Saudi and Oman and Qatar and Bahrain and Israel and Jordan -- at that point being an Israeli Arab is going to be very advantageous. That will solve their dual identity challenge.

I am very friendly with two Arab Israeli business leaders and their eyes light up when talking about the Abraham Accords because they speak both languages. I'm not talking about speaking to the investors but to the people of the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco. Israeli Arabs realize that together with these Arabs and Israelis they can do incredible things. They see the unique opportunities they have. If you were to put the same Israeli Arab in Silicon Valley, they would be disadvantaged. It is the opposite of the Israeli who because of his networking background would fit right into Silicon Valley, but does not fit in as well as the Israeli Arab in Abraham Accord network.

You wrote in an article in the Jerusalem Post last year that "the single greatest lever to encourage other countries to join the Abraham Accords, and yes that includes the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is to show that the current Abraham Accord countries are a unique priority for Israel." Will the current tensions and protests in Israel negatively affect how its partners in the Abraham Accords see them as an ally?

What bothers me in the current situation is the language of the protestors and counter-protestors. It is reprehensible and shows a complete lack of awareness of the precarious situation Israel finds itself in. For four years I told other countries you cannot use derogatory language about Israel and now you have Israelis using that exact language about each other. Now when someone applies terms like "apartheid" "dictator" etc to Israel, they don't have to quote one of our more progressive members of Congress. They can quote the opposition leader or the Prime Minister or the former Prime Minister. It has never worked out well. It's turning an opponent into an enemy. It's unforgivable if you know anything about Jewish history. It's unforgivable when you are trying to acclimate yourself to a region that doesn't have a lot of free speech and protests.

Why do we not hear as much about Arab travel to Israel as we hear about Israeli travel to Arab countries?

Two factors

Israelis enjoy traveling everywhere. Compare this to the 1.2 million Emiratis and 400,000 Barhraininas -- about 1.6 million between them. Of the traditional Arab citizens of those countries, unmarried women are not going to travel on their own and the children are not going to travel until they are more established and married. So it is a fairly limited Arab population that is going to be traveling to Israel for non-business reasons. The flow is more in one direction.

To me, the big change will be when Jordanian and Egyptian businessmen and women are coming back and forth as business people and as tourists. That will be another sign of the warming of the region. There is an acculturation process that is going to happen.

If you go to Morocco or the UAE or Bahrain, they are thrilled with Israeli tourism and also the American Jewish tourism.

Any final words?

Bottom line, does any of this really matter?

We understand how the Abraham Accords matter to Jews and people who are pro-Israel because of shared values. But why should the Accords matter to someone in Iowa or Kansas?

I'd like to make the argument that it matters meaningfully, primarily because under Trump we saw that when you act like a superpower and you stand with your allies and friends, you can end up with meaningful results that the so-called experts never predicted -- and the ramifications become incredibly meaningful.

We were able to block out the Chinese from an area they were expanding into. Then, when we retreated, the Russians, Chinese and Iranians showed up. The Ukrainian situation would not have happened if the US had not retreated from the ME in the way that we did. To me, the Abraham Accords are the canary in the coal mine. As the Accords expand and grow, you will see the Chinese cautious about Taiwan and the Russians more hesitant about Ukraine. As we retreat, back off and have two distinct foreign policies, you will see chaos. Because it illustrates two foreign policies which are no foreign policies and anybody can run amuck. That is what you are seeing now.

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!

Haaretz reports:

In the summer of 1942, Fritz Sendel, chief of staff of the German Order Police in occupied Poland, sent a message to the force’s commanding officers. Its subject: protecting the rights of animals that were transported on trains. “In the spirit of the Reich Animal Protection Act, I order, with immediate effect, that the officers of the stations (German and non-German) intervene immediately in cases of cruelty to animals, put a stop to it and report the offenders,” he wrote.

Sendel noted that “the majority of cases involving the cruelty to animals until now have been observed in regard to the horses used by the police forces.” On top of this, “the crowded conditions in the railway cattle cars, especially for animals being sent to slaughter, have also led to many credible complaints.”

The document in question was found in Poland’s Institute of National Remembrance by Eliyahu Klein, a PhD candidate at Tel Aviv University, whose dissertation, under the supervision of Prof. Havi Dreifuss and Dr. David Silberklang from the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem, focuses on the relationship between Jews and non-Jews under the German occupation in Poland and elsewhere.

Sendel added an appendix containing precise instructions, ordering the police officers to take action to prevent cruelty to animals and to report on any colleagues who mistreated them. The recommendations included reducing the number of animals per railcar, allowing them to have time to rest and monitoring their condition.

“The text mentions the need to oversee the conditions of the animals being transported,” Klein says. Officers were urged to ensure that the railcars were properly ventilated, to take note of the capacity of the cars and keep track of the number of animals loaded onto each one, and to make note of their physical condition, including details of injuries, respiratory problems and other symptoms. In addition, the German personnel were to see to it that the animals were not struck unnecessarily while being loaded onto the train, and asked to report on cases of sickness or death during the transport.

Klein mentions an exchange of correspondence in the summer of 1942 between two high-ranking Nazi figures. In it the deputy transport minister of Nazi Germany, Albert Ganzenmueller, updated Karl Wolff, chief of staff of Gestapo head Heinrich Himmler, about the transports to Treblinka from the Warsaw Ghetto. In response, Wolff wrote, as quoted in Kerstin von Lingen’s 2013 book “Allen Dulles, the OSS, and Nazi War Criminals”: “I note with particular pleasure after reading your communication that a train with 5,000 members of the chosen people has been running daily [to Treblinka] for 14 days and that we are accordingly in a position to continue with this population movement at an accelerated pace. ..."

Notice how Ganzenmueller sarcastically refers to Jews as the "chosen people" in a way not dissimilar to how we see the term used by today's anti-Zionists.

The seeming contradiction between how Nazis treated Jews and how they treated animals is not a new topic. I found a very interesting 1992 article that tried to explain this dichotomy in terms of Nazi ideology and its German antecedents.

It would be easy to dismiss the apparently benevolent Nazi attitude toward animals as “hypocrisy,” but this would be a facile way of evading an examination of the psychological and social dynamics of Nazi thinking and behavior. Rather than questioning the authenticity of the motivations behind Nazi animal protection—a question that is unanswerable—it may be more useful to ask how such thinking was possible and what significance it had.

One motivation was the German desire to distinguish themselves morally from Jews. The practice of Jewish ritual slaughter was attacked in the 19th century by German animal rights activists and banning kosher slaughter was one of the first acts of the Nazi government. Propaganda films that attempted to show how cruel Jews were to animals were widely distributed. Moreover, Nazis framed animal experimentation as a "Jewish" practice which should be curtailed (although laws to that effect had many loopholes.)

More interestingly, the paper argues that while there was no consistent Nazi ideology, to a large extent Nazis regarded all humans as animals, with Aryans as the highest form of animal that had to be protected from intermixing with lower forms such as Jews (untermenschen.) It quotes one SS document:

The subhuman—that creation of nature, which biologically is seemingly quite identical with the human, with hands, feet, and a kind of brain, with eyes and a mouth—is nevertheless a totally different and horrible creature, is merely an attempt at being man—but mentally and emotionally on a far lower level than any animal. In the inner life of that person there is a cruel chaos of wild uninhibited passions: a nameless urge to destroy, the most primitive lust, undisguised baseness… But the subhuman lived, too… He associated with his own kind. The beast called the beast… And this underworld of subhumans found its leader: the eternal Jew!

In the hierarchy of the animal kingdom, the Jews occupied the lowest possible position:

When groups of people, most commonly Jews, were likened to specific animal species, it was usually “lower” animals or life forms, including rodents, reptiles, insects, or germs. Hitler (1938), for instance, called the Jews a “pack of rats,” and Himmler, in order to help soldiers cope with having just shot one hundred Jews, told them “bedbugs and rats have a life purpose…but this has never meant that man could not defend himself against vermin” (Hilberg 1961, 219). The propaganda film Triumph of the Will superimposed images of rats over presumed “degenerate people” such as the Jews, and the 1940 film The Eternal Jew portrayed Jews as lower than vermin, somewhat akin to the rat—filthy, corrupting, disease carrying, ugly, and group oriented (Herzstein 1978, 309). ... Jews were also likened to bacteria and “plagues” of insects (Herzstein 1978, 354).

But the Germans even regarded Aryans, in a sense, as animals. Nazis proposed ways to breed superhumans the same way that animals are bred, reducing even Aryan human beings to little more than breeding stock:

Much of Himmler’s knowledge about animal breeding practices was directly applied to plans for human breeding to further Aryan traits (Bookbinder 1989). One of Himmler’s obsessions was the breeding of many more superior Nordic offspring (Shirer 1960, 984). Financial awards were made for giving birth if the child was of biological and racial value, and potential mothers of good Aryan stock who did not give birth were branded as “unwholesome, traitors and criminals” (Deuel 1942, 164–65). Encouraging the propagation of good German blood was seen as so important that several Nazi leaders advocated free love in special recreation camps for girls with pure Aryan qualities. In one of Himmler’s schemes, he argued that if 100 such camps were established for 1000 girls, 10,000 “perfect” children would be born each year (Deuel 1942, 165). Despite the criticism of the Reich Minister of the Interior, who opposed the “idea of breeding Nordics” when it reached the point of “making a rabbit-breeding farm out of Germany” (Deuel 1942, 203), plans were developed for a series of state-run brothels, where young women certified as genetically sound would be impregnated by Nazi men. The intent was to breed Aryans as if they were pedigreed dogs (Glaser 1978).

This viewpoint of all living beings as on the same continuum where the higher animals must be protected from the lower animals is, on its own terms, a coherent moral philosophy that was twisted into a monstrous reality.

It is all too simple to relegate Nazis to cartoonish villains as being evil for evil's sake. But the frightening part is that they justified their evil in the language of ethics. Their position towards animal rights were the most advanced in the world at the time and (unconsciously) influences animal rights activists' philosophy today. Similarly, Nazi Germany was in the forefront of medical ethics, using the same kind of logic described here to justify persecuting Jews as an ethical imperative to protect Aryans.

We see this same perverted twisting of ethics in the 21st century.

Today, there is an unmistakable singling out of Jews as the world's worst violators of ethics, just as the Nazis positioned Jews as morally reprehensible in their treatment of animals.

And today we see "human rights defenders" justifying murdering Jews as an ethical imperative of "resistance.".

Today's supposed "human rights" leaders believe that they have the moral high ground and cannot even see their own bigotry is being justified by their bizarre, twisted sense of ethics. Like the Nazis, they are writing long, seemingly well-researched papers to justify their foregone conclusions in the name of social justice.

Their justifications for attempting to destroy Israel are an eerie echo of the Nazis' ethical justifications for destroying the Jewish people.

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!

Hamas really upset over a demonstration at Hebron University

A week ago, several girls who were members of the Hamas group at Hebron University were assaulted by Fatah students. . Five students were expelled, four from Fatah and one from Hamas.

Five girls wearing the logos of Hamas made a small skit in front of Hebron University on Saturday about these events.

They were dressed wearing Hamas logos, and apparently they were protesting the assaults, insulting the university president and administration for not protecting the women.

However, Hamas reacted angrily at this demonstration, saying that the students were not their members. A number of Hamas and "human rights' officials called to identify the student demonstrators.

One Hamas official said "the administration of Hebron University and the security apparatus are responsible for revealing the identity of the perpetrators and bringing them to justice, because their shameful act could create discord among the Palestinian people, who must devote themselves to fighting the occupation."

The director of the office of the Independent Commission for Human Rights, Farid al-Atrash, instead of supporting a peaceful demonstration, denounced it. He stressed the need to open a serious investigation and find out who is behind that demonstration, pointing out that "whoever tampered with the security of Hebron tampered with the security of the homeland and cannot be trusted."

These sort of stories are difficult to track down because the Palestinian media does not want to describe the details when there are stories that point to their internal problems. But that reticence is not only to avoid being shamed, but to adhere to the unwritten rule - that Hamas stated - that all public demonstrations be aimed at Israel and not anything else.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/12 Links: Iran close to testing nuclear weapons for first time; Michael Pompeo: The Biden Turn Against Israel; Elliott Abrams: Do Not Cut Off Aid to Israel

From Ian:

Iran close to testing nuclear weapons for first time - European intel

The Islamic Republic of Iran is close to possibly testing a nuclear weapons device and has sought to obtain illicit technology for its active atomic weapons program, according to a series of shocking European intelligence reports released in 2023.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) first published translations of the intelligence documents on its website. The Jerusalem Post is the first Israeli newspaper to report on the intelligence findings from the Netherlands, Sweden and Germany.

The most unsettling revelation from the batch of intelligence data comes from the Netherlands General and Intelligence Security Service (AVID).

The AVID determined the Iranian regime’s fast-moving development of weapons-grade uranium "brings the option of a possible Iranian first nuclear test closer."

According to the Dutch intelligence report, "Last year, Iran proceeded with its nuclear program. The country continues to increase stocks of 20% and 60% enriched uranium. By means of centrifuges, this can be used for further enrichment to the 90% enriched uranium needed for a nuclear weapon."

How close is Iran to nuclear power?
The AVID report added "Iran is further ignoring the agreements that were made within the framework of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). And by deploying increasingly more sophisticated uranium enrichment centrifuges it is enlarging its enrichment capacity."

The European reports mainly cover Iran’s alleged illicit conduct in 2022.

The Swedish Security Service wrote in its annual report in 2023 that "Iran engages in industrial espionage, which is mainly aimed at the Swedish high-tech industry and Swedish products that can be used in nuclear weapons program."

Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV)—the country’s federal domestic intelligence agency—said in its report "The authorities for the protection of the constitution were able to find, in 2022, a consistently high number of indications of proliferation relevant procurement attempts by Iran for its nuclear programs.”

The German domestic intelligence agency defines proliferation as "the activities of foreign powers (that) also include procuring products and knowledge for the production of weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, other armaments or elements of new weapon systems."

Colonel Richard Kemp: Iran is a threat to the UK, not only to Israel

On top of this incitement to violent jihad and propagation of hate, the Jewish Chronicle revealed in June that at least 11 British universities have been collaborating with Iranian engineers on research that has potential military applications, including developing faster, high-altitude drone engines, upgraded fighter jets and battlefield armour plating as well as technology that could allow hundreds of swarming drones to be operated simultaneously using lasers.

This latter activity may well be illegal under current sanctions against the IRGC, involving as it does IRGC-linked establishments and one must hope it is under investigation by the authorities. But the Islamic Student Association is not breaking the law by hosting IRGC commanders while the group remains un-designated, although the speakers’ incitement to violence — promoted and disseminated by the ISA — may breach existing UK counterterrorism legislation.

Such platforms could be immediately denied to the IRGC by its designation as a terrorist group. So why has the British government failed to take action while the IRGC plans terrorist attacks on its territory and at the same time works to radicalise students in Britain?

Firstly, like the U.S., it remains wedded to the folly of re-establishing a nuclear deal with Iran, and in pursuit of that dangerous objective remains set on appeasing the ayatollahs. Although the IRGC was labelled a terrorist entity by the previous U.S. administration in 2019, the White House has made no effort to get its allies to follow suit, and perhaps is even encouraging Britain to hold back, given Biden’s enthusiasm for re-kindling the deal.

Secondly, in view of the all-pervading centrality of the IRGC in Iran, its designation would amount to branding the whole regime as a terrorist entity, which is of course the reality. London fears this would cause a break-down of diplomatic relations that would lead to closure of the embassy in Tehran, with potential impact on intelligence operations in the country. That argument has greater validity than craving a deeply flawed nuclear deal, given Iran’s malign influence in the region and across the world, but is outweighed by the immense advantages of curtailing the IRGC’s murderous activities.

Unfortunately, Britain has a track record of misjudgement and weakness in this field. Just as the present government seems to be bending over backwards to mollify Iran, its predecessors made similar mistakes in the 1990s. Back then there was an unspoken policy of tolerating Islamic extremist facilitation of terrorism overseas as well as radicalising activities in the UK.

The misguided and morally indefensible hope was that with this indulgence they would not turn their guns on us. Despite many years of pressure among our allies and some at home, and the discovery of the bomb factory in London in 2015, the government also failed to designate the entirety of Lebanese Hezbollah until 2019. Apart from anything else, designating the IRGC is a logical extension of that belated decision, given it is they who set Hezbollah up, fund and arm it and direct all of its terrorist attacks.

Netanyahu Slams Reported Nuclear Agreement Between US, Iran

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday harshly criticized a reported agreement between the US and Iran, whereby the Islamic Republic would slow down its uranium enrichment program in exchange for the easing of sanctions.

“Israel’s position is known,” read a statement from Netanyahu’s office.

“According to it, agreements that do not dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will not put a stop to its nuclear program. In fact, they only grants the Iranian regime money that will then go to Iran’s terror proxies,” the statement read.

On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Iran “significantly” slowed down the rate at which it accumulated enriched uranium, as well as diluting its stockpile, amid a release of four U.S. citizens to house arrest by Tehran’s regime

There also appeared to be broader agreements between the U.S. and Iran, two Israeli officials told The New York Times. Both American newspapers pointed out that there could be a resumption of talks on Iran’s nuclear program.

08/11 Links Pt2: White supremacist charged with threatening jurors, witnesses in Tree of Life trial; Banned jihadi group in push to ‘infiltrate’ UK campuses

From Ian:

White supremacist charged with threatening jurors, witnesses in Tree of Life trial

Federal agents arrested a West Virginia man on Thursday for allegedly threatening jurors and witnesses in the trial of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, which culminated last week in a death sentence.

The man who was arrested, Hardy Lloyd, 45, is “a self-proclaimed ‘reverend’ of a white supremacy movement,” according to a statement from the US Attorney’s office in the northern district of West Virginia. The statement said Lloyd “made threatening social media posts, website comments, and emails towards the jury and witnesses during the trial.” He is charged with obstruction of justice, witness tampering and transmitting threats in interstate and foreign commerce.

“Jury trials are a hallmark of the American justice system and attempts to intimidate witnesses or jurors will be met with a strong response,” US Attorney William Ihlenfeld said in the statement. “The use of hateful threats in an effort to undermine a trial is especially troubling.”

The Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh welcomed the arrest. It said Lloyd had also targeted survivors of the 2018 attack, the victims’ families and employees of the federation and Secure Community Network, a nonprofit that coordinates security for Jewish institutions.

“The offender in this case targeted the Jewish community for years with hate, vitriol and calls for violence,” Michael Masters, the CEO of the Secure Community Network, said in a statement. “The offender sought to terrorize the community. We now seek justice and accountability.”

According to the federation and Masters’ group, Lloyd extolled Robert Bowers, the man who carried out the attack at the Tree of Life synagogue building, killing 11 worshipers.

Lloyd’s statements allegedly referred to Squirrel Hill, the neighborhood where the shooting took place, which has a reputation for being tight-knit and friendly. It was also the home neighborhood of the late Fred Rogers, the longtime children’s TV host.

“All jews must be murdered. The jew race MUST be wiped out…So, target jews as BOWERS did …” one of Lloyd’s threats allegedly read, according to the federation and Secure Community Network. They said another of his threats read, “make the myths of Hitler seem like Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood … start kidnapping jews and torturing them to death.”

Wheeling, West Virginia, Lloyd’s hometown, is within commuting distance from Pittsburgh. Lloyd allegedly left stickers in heavily Jewish areas of Pittsburgh directing people to his website.

Senior police officer responsible for ‘faith relations’ addressed IRGC linked group

A Police Officer whose role is to engage with faith groups has refused to say if he carried out checks before agreeing to appear as a guest speaker at a UK students group now linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

The group, the Islamic Students Association of Britain, has hosted a series of speeches by commanders of the IRGC who have been sanctioned by the UK government for human rights abuses. The speeches included calls to join an “apocalyptic war” on Jews.

Inspector Arfan Rahouf, North Yorkshire Police’s Operational Lead for Faith and Belief, this week failed to respond when asked if he had carried out any due diligence before giving a speech to the group shortly after it praised a top IRGC general, killed in an airstrike, as a martyr.

A JC investigation has revealed how the organisation, based in Hammersmith, west London, hosted speeches by officials from the IRGC urging the audience to “raise the flag of the Islamic revolution, Islam and martyrdom”. The addresses also urged students to see themselves as “holy warriors” and bring an end to the “era of the Jews”.

Rahouf gave an online talk to the group, which has branches on university campuses across Britain, on “Racism and Islamophobia” three years ago.

Later that same year, the student group also hosted one of the leaders of the IRGC’s notorious plainclothes division which is responsible for the arrest, torture and murder of dissidents. In that online talk, Hossein Yekta urged UK-based students to raise the flag of the Islamic revolution and to embrace martyrdom.

In the same period the Islamic Students Association of Britain also hosted Ezzatollah Zarghami, who talked about his role taking 52 Americans hostage in Iran in 1979. Zarghami, now a member of Iran’s hardline cabinet, was sanctioned by the UK for his role in broadcasting “forced confessions of detainees and a series of show trials” as head of the country’s state-run TV channel.

Banned jihadi group in push to ‘infiltrate’ UK campuses

UK activists affiliated to a notorious jihadi group that advocates the violent destruction of Israel have been covertly returning to speak on UK campuses despite being banned from universities, the JC can reveal.

Prominent members of the British branch of Hizb ut-Tahrir, whose stated goal is to establish a global Muslim caliphate governed by sharia law, have been the keynote speakers at ten separate events at universities in the last 18 months.

Union-affiliated Islamic societies have run the events at universities including Bradford, Birmingham and the London School of Economics (LSE) without publicising the speakers’ links to Hizb ut-Tahrir and despite a longstanding ban on the Islamist group by the National Union of Students.

It is unclear whether any of the Islamic Societies involved were aware of the speakers’ afflilations to Hizb ut-Tahrir.

The speakers have included Luqman Muqeem, who has also posted videos online in which he says Muslims must fight Jews to the death and that the only Jewish “promised land” is hell.

Muqeem, who is featured prominently on Hizb ut-Tahrir’s website, has spoken on campus at least six times since November 2021, giving five talks at Birmingham University and another at the University of Bradford.

A mechanical engineering graduate who lives in Stoke on Trent, he has consistently expressed extremist views online, voicing support for the attack on The Satanic Verses author Sir Salman Rushdie.

Rushdie was left in life-threatening condition and lost an eye and the use of one hand when he was attacked on stage in New York by a knifeman last year.

In response, Muqeem said: “We should feel zero pity for anyone who spent a lifetime mocking and insulting the prophets of Allah.”

He also shared a video of Hizb ut-Tahrir activist Belal Mohammed calling for a jihad to “wipe out the Zionist entity”, commenting that this was a “powerful message from the UK”.

Publicity for his talks did not mention his role with Hizb ut-Tahrir, simply referring to him as Brother Luqman Muqeen and mentioning his previous position with the Aston University Islamic society.

Honest T-shirts for Israel haters

If Israel-haters were honest, their slogans might look something like these:

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

08/11 Links Pt1: A Not-So-Secret Conspiracy - The EU Encourages Palestinians to Violate the Oslo Accords; $6b ransom to Iran will lead to more terrorism, hostages

From Ian:

A Not-So-Secret Conspiracy - The EU Encourages Palestinians to Violate the Oslo Accords

This is Part 2 of a 10-part series exposing the underreported joint European and Palestinian program to bypass international law and establish a de facto Palestinian state on Israeli land.

The brutal wave of Palestinian terror attacks in 2000, which claimed the lives of over 1,000 Israelis in what came to be known as the Second Intifada, had a transformative effect on Israeli public opinion. It discredited the argument of the Israeli peace camp that by ceding land, Israel could buy peace.

Salim Fayyad, then the prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, recognized that terrorism had failed to break the Israeli spirit, and he needed a new plan. That plan was to build. Despite valid fears that Israeli authorities would immediately destroy any illegally erected structures in Area C, the Palestinians went ahead.

When the Europeans saw how Israeli leadership ignored much of the initial construction and understood what their protected Palestinian wards could get away with, they became massively involved, encouraging the Palestinians to build as if there were no Oslo Accords and guaranteeing legal assistance in the event that Israel enforced the law.

First, the European Union established consultancy offices of permanent representation in Ramallah (de facto embassies, but for a state that does not exist), and together with the PA developed multiple master plans to build infrastructure, roads, schools and other puzzle pieces that, when completed, would connect to form an uninterrupted band of Arab territory.

The EU also trained Palestinians in the use of advanced technology and helped to modernize their bureaucracy, essential tasks in order to overcome the conservative, tribal nature of Arab societies. This social model traditionally adhered to by the Palestinians is one factor in why they have failed to create a modern state, despite receiving more humanitarian aid than any group in history.

Dr. Yishai Spivak is an investigative researcher with Ad Kan, an Israeli nonprofit that studies organizations and trends that harm Israel’s sovereignty and Zionist identity.

“It wasn’t just about the Europeans throwing money at the Palestinians or teaching them to build single structures,” he explains. “It was about teaching them how to think about the other families so they could cooperate and share land. Fayyad had the vision. The EU led him by the hand and gave the vision a soul.”

Since 2009, the Europeans have invested anywhere from hundreds of millions to over 1 billion euros in Area C Palestinian development in the form of legal assistance, aid to administration and planning efforts, and direct subsidies for construction.

Mark Regev: Peace with Saudi Arabia is a real possibility

While Washington has been reticent to go down that route, Riyadh has a powerful argument: If America is willing to acquiesce to Iran, a professed enemy of the West, operating a “civilian” nuclear program, why can’t a loyal friend build a similar capability? (Many assume that the Saudis want a developed nuclear infrastructure for the eventuality that Tehran crosses the threshold).

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared Jerusalem-Riyadh normalization a key goal of his government, knowing full well it would be a geopolitical game-changer. The kingdom’s special status across the Arab world almost guarantees that additional Arab countries, who have been sitting on the fence, would follow Riyadh’s lead.

Moreover, Saudi Arabia enjoys a unique leadership role in the 57-nation Organization of Islamic Cooperation. If the kingdom was to make peace with Israel, Muslim-majority countries – from Southeast Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa – could follow suit.

While appreciating that relations with Riyadh would spur additional normalizations, many in Israel will remain wary about the kingdom having unfettered access to advanced US weaponry, as they surely will be over the idea of a Saudi nuclear program.

Of paramount importance is a parallel Jerusalem-Washington dialogue on the parameters and safeguards governing any nuclear development, as well as ensuring that the Saudi military upgrade will not adversely affect the IDF’s qualitative military edge (QME) to which the US is committed.

Presumably, the Palestinian issue cannot be sidelined. But if the Saudis once placed an Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines and the establishment of a Palestinian state as preconditions for normalization, today Riyadh is in a very different place.

While the kingdom is no longer willing to accept a Palestinian veto over its foreign policy, a deal may nonetheless necessitate Israeli concessions in the West Bank.

Netanyahu might be asked to publicly rule out any unilateral annexations, proclaim an openness to the possibility of eventual Palestinian statehood, and even limit settlement construction.

Although difficult, these sorts of steps are neither unprecedented nor impossible: In exchange for diplomatic relations with the UAE in 2020, Netanyahu shelved plans for annexation. He gave qualified acceptance of Palestinian statehood in his June 2009 Bar-Ilan speech, and more recently in his championing of Trump’s January 2020 “Deal of the Century” Israeli-Palestinian peace plan. He could also revisit the understanding of settlement growth discussed with the Trump White House.

Of course, while Netanyahu can be expected to rise to the occasion, it is not clear that all his coalition partners will go along too.

Dubowitz: $6b ransom to Iran will lead to more terrorism, hostages

Washington reached a deal with Tehran on Thursday to release five Iranian Americans, whom the Islamic Republic detained evidently on trumped-up charges. In exchange for the five being released to house arrest, the United States freed up $6 billion worth of Iranian oil and released Iranian prisoners.

Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, applauded the release of the unjustly detained prisoners, though said it comes at a very high cost, which could be counterproductive.

“Paying $6 billion in ransom payments means the regime will only take more hostages. This has become a lucrative means of international extortion for Iran’s supreme leader,” Dubowitz wrote in an FDD analysis.

The Islamic Republic won’t use that $6 billion for humanitarian work, he predicted.

“In the real world, where cash is fungible, it will free up $6 billion to be used for terrorism, funding drones for Russia, domestic repression and nuclear-weapons expansion,” he wrote. “Only when the regime is severely punished for illegally seizing hostages, not rewarded with billions in ransom payments, will it put a stop to these humanitarian abuses.”

Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at FDD, agreed. “This is not a prisoner exchange; it’s the largest hostage ransom payment in American history,” he wrote. “This money isn’t for humanitarian relief; it’s budget support to the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”

In a statement on Thursday, Adrienne Watson, spokeswoman for the National Security Council, called it “encouraging” that Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz and Emad Shargi (and two Americans who did not want to be named) were released to house arrest. She noted that the five individuals should never have been detained at all.

“We will continue to monitor their condition as closely as possible,” she stated. “We will not rest until they are all back home in the United States.”

Rev. Charles Owen Rice

This article from JTA, published in September 1939, sounds like it could have been written today in regard to "anti-Zionists."

DISCUSSES ANTI-JEWISH ATTITUDE
Priest Assails Those Who Say They Are Not. Opposed to "Good Jews."

PITTSBURGH—Those who mask their anti-Semitism with the assertion that they are not opposed to "good Jews" were assailed by the Rev. Charles Owen Rice in an address he delivered yesterday at St. Joseph House of Hospitality here.

"One of the features connected with the present wave of anti-Semitism that is being stirred up is that some of the leading purveyors of anti-Semitism hotly deny that they are anti-Semites," he said. "They employ a clever sophistry in their attempts to escape the stigma. They define anti-Semitism in a certain restricted sense and then they claim that their teachings and utterances -do not bring them under the term. "

"For instance, these enemies of the Jew will define anti-Semitism as persecution of the Jew because he is a Jew. They will hold that because, to their anti-Jewish attacks, they affix a rider saying that they exempt good Jews, therefore, they are automatically absolved of anti-Semitism. "

"As a matter of fact the unctuous employment of the 'good Jews' qualifier generally intensifies that anti-Semitism of the statements as whole. Also we can have attacks upon Jews, as Jews, without direct statements. The brutal crude, direct anti-Semitic utterances, are far less harmful than the subtle ones.

"Off hand I can give a partial list of some of the more commonly used anti-Semitic statements and inferences.

"It is anti-Semitism to exaggerate the power of Jews, whether it be power in finance, in industry, in newspaper publishing, in radio or anything else.

"It is anti-Semitism to say or hint there is a mysterious central controlling Jewish, national or international. leadership.

"It is anti-Semitism to exaggerate the clannishness of Jews.

"It is anti-Semitism to speak of deliberate controlled Jewish campaigns against Christianity.

"It is anti-Semitic to exaggerate Jewish participation in Communism and similar movements.

"It is anti-Semitism to hint at, or charge, a tie-up between 'International Jewry' and International Masonry. The very term 'International Jewry' has definite ant-Semitic implications.

"You will note that these effective types of anti-Semitism consist of lies. and exaggerations. Their harmfulness consists in their engendering a feeling of mixed fear and anger in the breasts of non-Jews. All of them have been proved false. They are damnably un-American, un -Christian and anti-social."

Then, like now, antisemites denied being antisemitic.

Then, like now, antisemites attempt to re-define "antisemitism" to exclude themselves.

Then, like now, antisemites defend themselves by saying that there are some "good Jews" who agree with them.

Then, like now, the subtle antisemitism that hides as social justice is often more dangerous than the explicit kind.

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 Samer Theatre in the Agouza district of Cairo is showing a production of The Jew of Malta, a play written in 1590 by Christopher Marlowe, several years before Shakespeare wrote The Merchant of Venice. This follows a successful run of the play in Alexandria earlier this year.

The main character, Barabas, is a Jew whose fortune was confiscated by the governor of Malta. He devises plans of revenge that end up becoming murder sprees to silence witnesses. He engages in political intrigue and double-crosses to pit the Muslim and Christian leaders jockeying for rulership of the island against each other. In the end, he dies in a fiery cauldron that he had built for his enemies.

Like The Merchant of Venice, there is controversy about whether The Jew of Malta is truly an antisemitic play, since it appears to be critical of all religions. But the Egyptian production, starring Sameh Basioony, is certainly antipathetic to Jews.

One review says that as Barabas "breathes his last, in a concluding scene, he affirms that he 'will not end' and many will come after him to realize the great (eternal) dream of 'ruling the world.'"

Marlowe's play has no such text.

Which means that the director modified the play to ensure that its message was one of a Jewish plot to control the world.

Popular Egyptian news site Youm7 writes in its review:

The show reviews Zionist deceptions and control of the world through the character of Barabas, the cunning rich man who lives on the island of Malta and works to spread the wedge between the Christian governor of Malta and the Turks. His plots were not limited to only them, rather, they extended to the split between countries, and he succeeds in that.

The antisemitic (and anti-Zionist) message of the play is being received loudly and clearly by Egyptian audiences.

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 UN has a webpage where it shows a timeline on the "Question of Palestine."

It is biased as hell.

It starts with "1885 – The term 'Zionism' first coined by the Viennese writer, Nathan Birnbaum."

There is no mention of Jewish history in the region for thousands of years. No mention of Jewish kingdoms. No mention of the centrality of Eretz Israel and Jerusalem to Judaism. No mention of the Bible.

But after that, it simply ignores or whitewashes every single act of terrorism by Palestine's Arabs.

It doesn't mention the murderous Palestinian pogrom against Jews in 1929.

It says, "1936/1939 – Palestinian rebellion against the British Mandate and Jewish immigration." But not that Arabs murdered Jews, just that it was a "rebellion."

It doesn't say anything about the Arab League boycott of Jews.

It doesn't mention any Arab attacks on Jews in 1947-48. No outbreak of hostilities hours after the UN Partition resolution, no mention of the constant attacks on Jewish civilians, no mention of the Hadassah Hospital convoy massacre or the many other attacks on Jewish civilians - but it does mention Deir Yassin, and exaggerates the number of dead as "hundreds." .

The UN gets the date of Israel's independence wrong, saying it happened on May 15, 1948.

There were scores of fedayeen attacks by Palestinian Arabs against Israel in the 1950s and 60s, and hundreds of Israelis were killed. Not one incident is mentioned.

But the UN describes the 1966 As-Samu incident, where Israeli and Jordanian troops battled after a land mine killed 3 IDF soldiers, as a "massacre" of Palestinians. 15 Jordanian soldiers and three civilians were killed. It was not a massacre by any definition.

There is not one mention of Palestinian airplane hijackings in the 1960s and 1970s.

It says, "1987 – First 'Intifada' begins in the Jabaliya Refugee Camp in the Gaza Strip." It doesn't mention that the intifada killed hundreds of Israelis. The many terror attacks that occurred during the Oslo process are nowhere to be found.

Similarly, it says, "Ariel Sharon’s al-Haram al-Sharif visit in September 2000 triggers the Second Palestinian Intifada."

Not a word about Palestinian suicide bombings, or bus bombings, or attacks on pizza shops and Passover seders and bar mitzvahs.

And of course no mention later about rockets from Gaza, massacring rabbis or kidnapping and murdering kids. Hamas is not mentioned as a terror group - or even militant group. In fact, the word "terror" is nowhere to be seen. Neither is "Islam," "Muslim" or "Jihad," although Jews are mentioned.

The Holocaust is not mentioned either. There is simply no information on why Jews might want to have their own homeland in the region.

There is plenty of other anti-Israel bias in wording and choice of incidents.

According to this official UN history, Palestinians have not attacked, let alone killed, a single Jew. The only aggression mentioned is from Jewish and Zionist groups.

The UN's anti-Israel bias is unmistakable even in this public document that is pretending to be objective.

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!