Wednesday, August 16, 2023


The world is in an uproar because Bradley Cooper wore a prosthetic nose to look more like Leonard Bernstein in “Maestro,” a film Cooper co-wrote and produced. They say he wore “Jewface” and that doing so mirrors classic antisemitic stereotypes. Also, they say, his own nose was sufficiently large that it was unnecessary to make it bigger—that the prosthesis is exaggeratedly large—larger than Bernstein’s. There’s more—and we’ll get to that—but to summarize: the general consensus is that the wearing of the wannabe-Jewish shnoz by Bradley Cooper is antisemitic, if not by intention, then by effect. Are they right, or was he just doing what actors have always done, and using prosthetics to “dress the part?”

Perhaps we should begin with prosthetics. Is it common for actors to wear prosthetics to play a part? And is it sometimes inappropriate for them to do so?

Ask google and you will be shown the photos of several contemporary actors, right off the bat, and not wearing the prosthetics in question. 


You might also find the article with the blaring clickbait title, 40 Actors Made Unrecognizable in Prosthetic Makeup: From Emma Thompson to Jessica Chastain (Photos). (One can almost hear the exclamation points.)

In the above photo dump piece, it’s easy to understand why the actors needed prosthetics for their film work. Mostly they were playing fantastical or mythical creatures, or even monsters, going all the way back to Boris Karloff in Frankenstein. 


But then there was Tilda Swinton in Suspira (2018) as the 82-year-old male psychoanalyst Dr. Josef Klemperer. 


Why? Why did they need a woman to play a man. Couldn't they find a man to play the part? Was she wearing "manface?" I am, of course, making fun of anyone who would say this. The transformation of Swinton into the male Klemperer is astonishing, stunning. You would never know this is a woman playing a man. It's nothing like the outmoded practice of blackface.

You need prosthetics to play monsters, mythical creatures, or the opposite sex. But did Cooper really need to put on a nose to play Lenny Bernstein? Bernstein didn’t have THAT big a nose. And Cooper’s nose isn’t really that goyish.

Contrast and compare.

In a side by side comparison, it's hard to see the difference.

So, on the one hand, there’s not that much difference between the nose of the goy Bradley Cooper, and the nose of the Jew Lenny Bernstein.

On the other hand, Cooper perhaps does a disservice to the Jewish people. The wearing of the nose to some seems like a caricature of the Jewish people. Some seem to think that the nose, in fact, is right out of the pages of Der Stürmer with its depictions of Jews as ugly creatures with hooked noses. Those who protest against Cooper’s prosthesis don’t think this is an image we should be reinforcing in viewers’ minds. Especially in a time of rising antisemitism. Especially since Cooper’s own nose probably sufficed.

That is likely the reason Jewish socialite Lizzy Savetsky, who is active on Instagram on behalf of her people and the one Jewish State, said she felt triggered by the prosthesis and unpacked her feelings for us.

Some say Bradley Cooper didn't need the nose, he needed to do the work. He lacked talent, so he used a prop. For those in this camp, it’s not good enough to say that the prosthesis is a professional tool of the trade. Because from this point of view, Cooper isn't acting like a professional. 

Actor, writer, and producer Tracy-Ann Oberman, suggested as much when she wrote on Instagram:

If Bradley Cooper green lights your film to play the Jewish composer Bernstein and you want him over a Jewish A-Lister who can equally play that role - then let Bradley Cooper’s acting be so magnificent and truthful that the character of Bernstein shines through what he already looks like.

If he needs to wear a prosthetic nose then that is, to me and many others, the equivalent of Black-Face or Yellow-Face.

For “Golda,” on the other hand, a prosthesis was definitely indicated, no matter who played her on the big screen, Jewish or not. Golda Meir, whatever you thought of her politics, had a prominent and hawkish nose, for her a mark of distinction. So when Helen Mirren put on a prosthetic nose for the role, there was not too much hubbub over that, only that she was a goy playing a Yid. They accused the actress of “Jewface,” a play on the “blackface” of once upon a time in which white actors wore exaggerated stage makeup to portray and parody black people.

I was sad to read about this when the murmurs began. I was flattered to have Helen Mirren play such an important and historic Jewish figure, because I admire Mirren’s work. Should I now be expected to protest her performance because of her faith? 

(no dogs and Jews allowed)

Then again, isn’t acting all about playing someone else? Jonathan Tobin thinks so (emphasis added):

The idea that only members of a minority group can portray the Jewish people has in recent years taken on the aspect of an unwritten law of the entertainment industry.

The whole point of acting is people pretending to be someone other than themselves.

Tobin takes us through the history, how once white actors played Indians and Asians, and how ridiculous they seemed. Today that just doesn’t happen. And that is all to the good. As Tobin says, “That has saved us from some embarrassing examples of whites engaging in ethnic stereotypes to overcompensate for the difference between their own backgrounds and those of their characters.”

Here is where things get tricky, because Jews are not all one color and many do not have features stereotypically associated with Jews, such as the unusual proboscis of Golda. So why is it that only a Jew can play a Jew? Smells a LOT like bigotry. Tobin blames it on identity politics [emphasis added]: 

[Those] reasonable complaints have now brought us to a situation where identity politics has run amuck. While we are spared the spectacle of a white person using makeup to appear brown or black, the unwritten rules of Hollywood now tell us that no one but a transgender actor can play someone, regardless of race, who claims that identity. That’s something actor Scarlett Johansson, who has pretended to be all sorts of types of persons, including superheroes and ethnicities far removed from her own Jewish background, learned when she had to give up a transgender role after a storm on Twitter.

Tobin hints at the way Netflix insistently pushes anachronistic fare on its paying audience, training us to think it is okay to have a “black Anne Boleyn or the ahistorical foolishness in which, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, British King George III’s wife Charlotte is portrayed as a person of color in Netflix fare like ‘Bridgerton’ is treated as not merely reasonable but necessary.”

It’s all a game, asserts Tobin:

That Jews should be playing this game is both appalling and slightly ridiculous. Indeed, the Jew who screamed the loudest about a previous “Jew face” controversy—comedian Sarah Silverman, who complained about the casting of the non-Jewish Kathryn Hahn to play Jewish comedian Joan Rivers—is a member of the cast of Cooper’s maestro film in which she plays Bernstein’s sister.

Going back to Tobin's point about the olden days of whites playing ethnic minorities, now we have non-Jews playing Jews. According to some, that's not the real problem, the problem is the ratio. From 'Oppenheimer,' 'Golda,' 'Maestro': Will the Real Jewish Actors Please Stand Up?

A flurry of mainstream films released this year pivot on Jewish historical figures who impacted the world in ways impossible to ignore: Robert Oppenheimer, the subject of Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster Oppenheimer, is known to history as the “father of the atomic bomb.” Leonard Bernstein, played by Bradley Cooper in Netflix’s Maestro, which Cooper will also direct, is considered one of the 20th century’s most influential composers. And Golda Meir, played by Helen Mirren in Guy Nattiv’s Golda, served as Israel’s first — and, to date, only — female prime minister, shepherding the fledgling nation through the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

All of these individuals were Jewish. In their cinematic counterparts, none of them are played by Jews.

“The problem right now is the ratio,” says Jewish actor-writer Jonah Platt, who starred in Wicked on Broadway as well as Showtime’s Uncoupled, and will appear in upcoming Universal film The List.

“If we found ourselves in a place, eventually, of more balance, it would be a lot more palatable,” says Platt of the dearth of Jewish actors cast in Jewish roles. “But right now, we're at, like, zero. All of the major giant Jewish parts are played by non-Jews. We have this inherited fear that people are going to say all these nasty things about us if they think we're too powerful or think we're controlling things. We’re so afraid of these very old, ubiquitous and harmful tropes that we abandon our own identity, we don’t take up the space we have earned, we hide from our successes. Instead, we continue to totally hold back, to pull back and give ourselves less representation than we give to everybody else, out of fear.”

Perhaps the most ironic twist to this story is the fact that member of the tribe, Brokeback Mountain actor Jake Gyllenhaal lost the bid for the film to Cooper:  

Actor and producer Jake Gyllenhaal, who has Jewish heritage, previously spoke of his disappointment upon losing a bid for the rights to a Bernstein film to Cooper, admitting he had been yearning to play “one of the most preeminent Jewish artists in America” for almost two decades..

“No one likes to admit this, but, we got beat at our own game,” he told Deadline in 2021.

“That’s basically what happened. There’s really nothing more to say about it than that. There’s always another project. Sticking your neck out, hoping to get to tell the stories you love and that have been in your heart for a very long time is something to be proud of.”



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, August 16, 2023
  • Elder of Ziyon


Very good news from the US Department of the Treasury:

Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Lebanon-based Green Without Borders and its leader. Green Without Borders is a Lebanon-based organization that has provided support to and cover for Hizballah’s operations in southern Lebanon along the “Blue Line” between Lebanon and Israel over the last decade while publicly operating under the guise of environmental activism. 

“The United States rejects Hizballah’s cynical efforts to cloak its destabilizing terrorist activities with false environmentalism,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Brian E. Nelson. “We will continue to support the many Lebanese civil society groups protecting Lebanon’s unique and sensitive natural environment while also relentlessly pursuing Hizballah and their support networks.” 

OFAC is designating Green Without Borders and its leader, Zuhair Subhi Nahla, pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, as amended, which targets terrorists, terrorist organizations, leaders and officials of terrorist groups, and those providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism.
Israel and others have been complaining about Green Without Borders for years. The Washington Institute issued a paper on the group, where they noted that GWB has bragged about being part of the "resistance:"

Green Without Borders registered as a Lebanese environmental nonprofit on June 30, 2013. According to its blog, the group’s mission includes planting trees, cleaning forested areas, establishing public parks, running nurseries, and locating and fighting forest fires, especially in Shia-dominated areas in southern Lebanon and the Beqa Valley. However, through cooperation with the Lebanese Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of the Environment, municipal organizations, and other Hezbollah entities— especially Jihad al-Binaa—the organization also seeks to aid the “southern Green resistance.” In 2017, Hajj Zuhair Nahle, president of GWB, told Lebanon’s Daily Star that “we do not hide this [affiliation with Hezbollah]. All our brochures include this and in all our media campaigns...we write, ‘The trees are the shade of the resistance.’” Nahle emphasized that despite the group’s environmental intentions, tree planting also has a strategic national security dimension, serving as “a veil on the eyes of the enemy in addition to a wall behind which the resistance fighters protect themselves.” The article described Nahle as gleeful that the organization is a “thorn in Israel’s side.”
In addition, GWB has built lookout stations on the border - 27 in the past year alone - and has interfered with UNIFIL forces in Lebanon. 

Yet even though GWB brags to Arab media that it is part of the "resistance," it tells Western media the opposite. My favorite comes from this AP article earlier this year:

“We are not an arm for anyone,” the head of Green Without Borders, Zouher Nahli, told The Associated Press. “We as an environmental association work for all the people and we are not politicized.” He spoke at the Bassam Tabaja Nature Reserve, named for a Hezbollah fighter killed in Syria in 2014, where the NGO has planted hundreds of trees.
The US got this one right, if a bit belatedly.






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:

Australia's government has taken an anti-Israel stance
THIS IS THE first Australian government in nearly 50 years that has been dominated by the left wing of the Australian Labor party. While it has generally striven, with overall success, to present itself as centrist and responsible, the party’s Left does expect some wins from its new control over the party.

Two of the main causes of the left-wing, judging by motions that have come up at the party’s various state conferences, have been questioning Australia’s AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine deal with the US and UK, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, also a preoccupation for some on the Right, particularly in Australia’s largest state New South Wales.

The government continues to support the AUKUS deal negotiated by the previous Liberal government. Labor’s National Conference, which occurs every three years, will be held from August 17 to 19. The government seems determined to avoid any controversies at the conference, especially regarding AUKUS. For several months, there had been speculation that it might do a trade-off with the Left’s power brokers to give further ground on Israel in exchange for consensus on AUKUS, or even just for quiet on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Now it appears the government has preempted the conference with this latest decision. Of course, it remains to be seen whether this will hold off the Left and their allies from further hostile moves regarding Israel. Many are likely to now argue that, given the government has – in their view correctly – identified the proper legal status of the land and settlements, recognizing “Palestine” as a state would be the obvious moral next step.

When the Jerusalem decision was announced last year, the Israeli government’s reaction was appropriately strong. This time, however, while the Australian Jewish community has been overwhelmingly vocal in its disapproval, little has been reported from official Israeli sources.

The Palestinian Authority, on the other hand, reacted quickly, with Australian newspapers reporting on August 10 that the Palestinian Authority’s Foreign Ministry had released a statement welcoming this “significant and important development” and calling on the Australian government to now “recognize the State of Palestine without delay or hesitation” thus reflecting “the position of the Labor party and its members.”

Accordingly, we sincerely hope Israel’s government is seriously considering making public its undoubted reservations regarding Australia’s actions, aiming to discourage the Australian government from taking further counter-productive steps, such as recognizing “Palestine.”
Biden Admin Raised Concerns Palestinian Aid Would Boost Hamas. It Went Ahead With Aid Anyway.
The Biden administration pushed through plans to distribute hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer aid to the Palestinians despite internal assessments that those plans could boost the Iran-backed terrorist group Hamas, according to internal documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

State Department officials in 2021 outlined the concerns in private communications, asking the Treasury Department to exempt them from laws that bar the U.S. government from injecting taxpayer aid into territories controlled by Palestinian terror groups. The Biden administration needed this authorization in order to move forward with its plans to unfreeze more than $360 million in U.S. funds for the Palestinian Authority that were cut off during the Trump administration due to the authority's support for terrorists.

"We assess there is a high risk Hamas could potentially derive indirect, unintentional benefit from U.S. assistance to Gaza. There is less but still some risk U.S. assistance would benefit other designated groups," the State Department wrote in a draft sanctions exemption request circulated internally in March 2021, shortly after Biden took office. "Notwithstanding this risk, State believes it is in our national security interest to provide assistance in the West Bank and Gaza to support the foreign policy objectives."

The documents—obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the watchdog group Protect the Public’s Trust—show the Biden administration was privately worried its efforts to restart Palestinian aid could benefit Hamas and other terror factions operating in the Gaza Strip. As officials publicly provided assurances to Congress and the press that this aid would be doled out "consistent with U.S. law," the State Department was scrambling to secure a sanctions exemption that would let it skirt anti-terrorism laws.

The State Department claimed it needed broad authorities to conduct work in the West Bank and Gaza Strip "that would otherwise be prohibited by the Global Terrorist Sanctions Regulations and the Foreign Terrorist Organization Sanctions Regulations," according to a draft version of the request.

"Such authorization would enable activities, including assistance activities, that are critical to support the administration's efforts to advance prosperity, security, and freedom for both Israelis and Palestinians and to advance and preserve the prospects of a negotiated solution in which Israel lives in peace and security alongside a viable Palestinian state," according to the draft request.

The previously unknown draft request adds credibility to warnings from Republicans at the time that aid would bolster terror groups. In April 2021, 18 Republicans led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) sent a letter to the administration calling for Palestinian aid to be halted until measures could be put in place to prevent it from benefiting terrorists.
Barry Shaw: Biden's bad Iran deal and dire Israeli concerns
The Biden Administration must be told clearly that, for Israel, the Iran problem is not a can to be kicked down the road until 2025.

By the end of 2024, and certainly by the Spring of 2025 when a new President will be in the White House, Iran will be a nuclear threshold state and the money gifted to them by the Biden Administration, would have made this possible.

It would also have strengthened its regional military grip by funding and arming its Islamic proxies, including Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, who are armed to the teeth with ever more sophisticated Iranian weaponry across the northern, southern, and eastern borders of Israel, as well as among the Palestinian population in towns and villages occupied by the Palestinian Authority.

The fact that this deal was a sidebar deal and has zero relevance to Tehran’s advance to a nuclear weapon was confirmed by Ali Vaez, the Iran Director to the International Crisis Group who said, “Nothing of this deal is aimed at reaching a groundbreaking agreement.”

It could, however, result in it being a “groundbreaking” agreement for Israel in the most catastrophic meaning of the word groundbreaking.

Israel has nothing against innocent hostages being released from Tehran prisons, but not if the price of this blackmail deal risks a regional war that would be more devastating than that between Putin and Zelensky.

The way to confront hostage taking is by confronting and sanctioning Iran at the United National Security Council and by instigating a prosecution at the international Criminal Court against Iran’s President Raisi who should have been brought there years ago for his role as the head of the 1988 Death Commission in which he executed tens of thousands of his own people. The world, certainly the region, is paying for this lapse of judgment.

Now we have the new bad unofficial Biden deal.

Israel cannot be seen as a tacit participant of this terrible deal by maintaining a diplomatic or public silence. It must speak out against the very real dangers this insidious side deal imposes on Israel.

The region expects to see more decisive measures taken by the US Administration against Iran. Anything else looks like yet another Iranian victory, a weakening of America, and a growing existential threat to Israel and the region.


The Caroline Glick Show: How the US 6 billion dollar ransom is green-lighting the next Iran Deal
Is the Biden administration secretly taking steps to solidify the next deal with Iran?

To talk about the latest developments in Iran, Caroline’s guest on the Caroline Glick Show this week is Richard Goldberg, a senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Goldberg was the point person in the National Security Council on Iran’s nuclear program during the Trump administration.

They discuss
- several steps such as easing of sanctions that have been taken by the Biden administration to move an agreement forward
- The subterfuge at the heart of the administration’s efforts to shield its nuclear appeasement from Congress
- What Congress can do to fight back


Every year, the Tomb of the Patriarchs is open exclusively to Jews for ten days and open exclusively to Muslims for ten days. The shrine is split between the two groups all the other days of the year.

The schedule is publicized well ahead of time (although the Muslim days may move by a day depending on when the new month is declared.)  There are no surprises. The Waqf and Israeli side cooperate with each other; when one of the exclusive days comes up the other side puts away their prayer objects. 

But in the Palestinian media, every time a Jewish day comes along, they try to incite violence and hatred.

The Palestine Information Center published this morning:

The Zionist occupation authorities closed, this morning, Wednesday, the Ibrahimi Mosque in the city of Hebron, in the southern occupied West Bank, until ten o'clock in the evening today; under the pretext of Jewish holidays.

The director of the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron, Ghassan Al-Rajabi, said in press statements that the occupation authorities closed the mosque from ten o’clock yesterday, Tuesday, until ten o’clock today, and prevented the call to prayer and worshipers from entering the mosque.
He believes that this closure is a crime against the Ibrahimi Mosque and a flagrant violation of it, stressing: “The mosque is a purely Islamic endowment, and the Jews have no right to it.
Let's look at that last sentence.

When the Palestinian Muslims deny that the Temple Mount was ever the site of the Temples, they are obviously lying, but that lie is the justification for their insistence that Jews have no right to visit the holiest Jewish site. 

But they cannot deny that the "Ibrahimi Mosque" is the burial place of the Biblical patriarchs and matriarchs - because they believe it too. They cannot deny that the three (or four) couples buried there are the ancestors of the Jewish people, while only one of them is an ancestor to the Arab people. 

So when the director of the mosque at the site says "The mosque is a purely Islamic endowment, and the Jews have no right to it," he is denying that Jews have even a historical or emotional right to visit the burial place of their own ancestors. Somehow the Muslim claim to the burial place of Jacob, who at best is just a prophet to them, is exclusive, while the Jewish claim to their own ancestors' burial place is meaningless.

It is impossible to interpret that statement as anything other than official antisemitism. 

The Israeli side always tries to respect the rights of all religions. The Palestinian side expresses nothing but contempt for Jewish rights. And the world is more sympathetic towards the side that is institutionally antisemitic.




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, August 16, 2023
  • Elder of Ziyon


For at least 13 years, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights issues a monthly report called "State of the Gaza Strip Border Crossings."

For the past few years, the report has been between five and ten pages long. The report goes into detail of Israeli restrictions on travel and trade to and from Gaza. It describes how many medical cases are approved and denied, how many truckloads of goods are imported, and how Israel continues to restrict certain dual use items. 

It is filled with invective. The latest report  for June 2023, begins like most of them have:
The Israeli occupation authorities continue to impose an illegal and inhuman closure on the Gaza Strip for 16 consecutive years, inflecting negative repercussions on the humanitarian conditions of the Gaza Strip population. The Israeli occupation authorities also isolate more than 2.3 million Palestinians from the outside world through its control over the Gaza Strip’s crossing, by restricting the movement of goods and individuals from and into the Gaza Strip.

We are told that Israel only allowed  42,006 Palestinians to exit the Gaza Strip  and 55,689 entered via the Erez Crossing, many of them day laborers.

There are pages of these statistics leavened with how the Israelis are making Gazan lives awful with these restrictions.

But what about Egypt's crossing with Gaza at Rafah? 

At the very end of the six page report is a single paragraph:
Movement at Rafah Border Crossing 

According to the Crossing and Borders Authority in Gaza, in June, 12,995 persons traveled from the Gaza Strip via Rafah Crossing while 17,405 persons returned to the Strip. Moreover, the Egyptian authorities denied travel of 214 persons. Travelers returning to the Gaza Strip via Rafah Crossing suffer from prolonged, recurrent, and unjustified searches. 
How many of them were medical? What were the reasons given for the denials? Why are the numbers of Gazans allowed to go to Egypt so much fewer than those allowed to go to Israel? What are the restrictions on Gazans once they enter Egypt? Are Egypt's more draconian restrictions of travel "illegal and inhuman?"

Clearly, PCHR knows more about what goes on at Rafah than they are publishing, because they know that Egypt is treating Gazans with little respect. They know about Egypt's permit system and how Hamas prioritizes its own members to be able to travel while ordinary Gazans who try to travel to Egypt and beyond cannot plan their trips because of the arbitrary nature and last minute changes of these permits. 

PCHR knows all this - but it doesn't report these facts in its monthly reports that are supposedly about all the border crossings with Gaza. It barely mentions anything negative about Egypt, instead concentrating on Israel, which allows three times the number of travelers that Egypt does. 

If PCHR is a human rights group, then it shouldn't matter whether it is Israel or Egypt restricting travel. The report should be equally critical and expansive describing both of them. Israel has no control over the Raha crossing, only Egypt and Hamas.  But if PCHR is really a PFLP-dominated anti-Israel propaganda organization that pretends to care about human rights, then it would act exactly as it does - only emphasizing what Israel does and virtually ignoring what Egypt does.

This is a microcosm of how little "human rights" groups care about Palestinians. When they are oppressed by their fellow Arabs, these organizations will only report the minimum they can get away with. after all, their funding is directly proportional with the amount of anti-Israel reporting they do. 



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, August 16, 2023
  • Elder of Ziyon


On Sunday,  an attack at a Shia Muslim shrine in the Iranian city of Shiraz left one dead. 

The official IRNA news agency said a gunman attempted to enter the Shah Cheragh mausoleum and then started shooting visitors.  

So who is to blame? The same people who have been scapegoated for others' crimes for millenia!

Tuesday, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards revealed new details about the terrorist attack on the shrine of Shah Cheragh in the city of Shiraz, southern Iran, accusing Israel of being linked to the perpetrator of the attack .

Yadullah Bu Ali, commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ Fajr Fares Corps, said in a statement, “The attacker was operating within the framework of a network operating in several countries,” adding that “this network is undoubtedly linked to the Zionist entity and was stationed in Shiraz a month ago to make the necessary arrangements.”
What do you call it when people automatically blame Jews for everything bad that happens? There must be a word for it....





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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, August 15, 2023

From Ian:

The Sbarro bombing mastermind is still free. Put her back in jail
Whenever Tamimi’s name was mentioned in the media in reference to prisoner swaps, the Justice Ministry assured the Roth family that there were no plans to release her. Over the years, however, it became clear to the Roth family that the woman who orchestrated their daughter’s murder would not stay in prison for long.

In October 2011, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his plan to release 1,027 terrorists in a prisoner exchange for Gilad Schalit, an Israeli soldier held captive by Hamas for about five years. Despite the years of reassurance, the worst had come true for the Roth family: Ahlam Tamimi was one of the terrorists to be released.

The nature of Tamimi’s discharge was akin to twisting the knife and reopening wounds to the families of the Sbarro victims. Tamimi was taken to a private meeting with Khaled Mashaal, former leader of the Hamas terror organization. She was then put on a VIP flight to Jordan and was received as a hero and a model of Palestinian resistance. Today, Tamimi lives in a middle-class neighborhood and is a television presenter on a Hamas-affiliated Jordanian TV channel.

Several weeks following Tamimi’s return to Jordan, the US Department of Justice intervened, since a federal statute mandates that the United States pursue any terrorist accountable for the murder of an American citizen on foreign soil. Today, Tamimi is one of 24 terrorists on the FBI’s Most Wanted List. Jordan has refused to comply with its 1995 Extradition Treaty with the US.

Although the US had charged Tamimi under the law in 2013 (and sealed those charges for four years), the Jordanian courts ruled that Tamimi would not be handed over to the FBI because “the treaty was invalid.” Arnold Roth responds, “This is a fabrication: the treaty is invalid because Jordan made it invalid.”

The Roth family has been campaigning and lobbying US officials since 2017, demanding justice for their daughter. Yet, according to Arnold, the US is making no attempts at making this happen while “Israel is playing a quiet role in encouraging the Americans not to press Jordan or put them in a position where they are pressured to hand over Tamimi.”

Time and again, the Roth family has been told that this case is a “priority” for the American government, yet “officials” also claim that handing over Tamimi would destabilize Jordan and the entire Middle East. Arnold points out that in the past, Jordan has extradited terrorists charged by the United States.

It has been 10 years since the charges against Tamimi were filed, and Jordan is no closer to handing her over than it was from day one. Tamimi is roaming as a free woman, without needing to hide or live in secret. As Israelis, we accept that terrorism is a reality, but we cannot accept when politicians, judges and other leaders let a terrorist walk away without paying for her crimes.

Israel has already failed the Roth family; we cannot allow the US to do so as well. We, especially Israeli Americans, are morally obligated to use our voices and demand that Ahlam Tamimi is back where she belongs: behind bars.
New York’s New Untouchables
More then ten years ago, then-New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg boasted of his unique courage in confronting his city’s Ḥaredim in a regulatory fight over circumcision, asking rhetorically, “Who wants to have 10,000 guys in black hats outside your office, screaming?” Avi Schick sees this as the beginning of a trend whereby state and local politicians don’t simply endorse policies to which Orthodox Jews object, but deliberately choose policies aimed at interfering with their religious practices:

In October 2020, just as the harshest pandemic restrictions were being eased, Governor Cuomo created gerrymandered districts covering Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods where houses of worship were subject to severe limitations on attendance. Churches in those zones were also affected, but the governor openly declared that his target was “these ultra-Orthodox communities, who are also very politically powerful.”

Only Orthodox Jews are targeted for harsh treatment and simultaneously described as (too) politically powerful. The message is that they deserve what they get.

Most recently, New York and its most powerful media institution have unleashed dangerous rules and rhetoric aimed at religious schooling. Yeshivas have been educating students in New York for more than 120 years, and the laws governing private schools have been on the books even longer. That history signifies deep satisfaction with the yeshiva system, but it is dismissed because, as the New York Times wrote, those “who might have taken action have instead accommodated a ḥasidic voting bloc.”

I don’t believe that New York’s mayors and governors are anti-Semites. But the New York we inhabit at the moment reflects the convergence of the nanny state and the secular state. There is little deference to individual or parental autonomy, and even less respect for religious activity. The result is government limitations on circumcision, prayer, and religious education.
There is no such thing as an Israeli ‘settler’ in the West Bank
According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a settler is, “a person who arrives, especially from another country, to a new place in order to live there and use the land.” A settlement, according to vocabulary.com, is, “a colony or any small community of people.”

However, these definitions take on negative connotations when it pertains to Israel and Israelis. Even Israeli media have headlines such as, “Settlers arrested after deadly clash in Palestinian village.”

Various biblical texts refer to Israel as a “land flowing with milk and honey.” This description is in stark contrast to Mark Twain’s observations in 1867 that Israel (then called Palestine) was a desolate and barren country in both people and vegetation.

It was only after the start of the aliyah movement in the late 1800s, when many Jews joined their fellow Jews who had maintained a continuous presence in the Jewish homeland, did the land begin to bloom again with people and agriculture. The phrase “a land flowing with milk and honey” can be applied both in reality and metaphorically.

Jews meet the UN definition of indigenous people. Therefore, they are not “settlers,” and the places they live are not “settlements.” Which raises the rhetorical question: Why are there “Arab villages” but “Jewish settlements?”

Why are Jews settlers if they are indigenous people?
One unfortunate reason is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word Yishuv. The root of this word is shuv, to return. According to Wikipedia, the term Yishuv came into use in the 1880s to denote the body of Jewish residents in the Land of Israel, and became the word to describe the Jewish population of Israel prior to the establishment of the modern State in 1948.

The Hebrew word Yishuv translates to “community” in the form of towns, population, inhabitants, neighborhoods, villages, etc.
Today, Amnesty International tweeted this:


Amnesty is saying that banning a movie is a violation of freedom of expression. Amnesty is against all forms of censorship - the allegation that the movie promotes homosexuality does not seem to be the issue at all, just freedom of expression.

However, when Lebanon bans movies for having Israeli actors or producers, Amnesty has not said a word. Isn't that the exact same violation of freedom of expression?

Perhaps not according to Amnesty. Because they do support some boycotts - boycotts against Israel. 

Amnesty says, "Advocating for boycotts, divestment and sanctions is a form of non-violent advocacy and of free expression that must be protected."

BDS advocates boycotting the free speech of Israelis on college campuses, and its boycotters do all they can to get venues outside Israel to cancel any talk by an Israeli. Similarly, they threaten artists not to play in Israel , which is another violation of freedom of expression. 

How, exactly, is Algeria and Kuwait's boycotts of a movie for religious reasons (whether or not their objections are accurate) a violation of free speech, while Israel-haters' boycotts of movies with Israelis are an example of free speech?

In both cases, the boycotters are the ones that are trying to shut down free speech. You cannot have it both ways.  

The analogy isn't perfect - government censorship is different than people deciding to boycott on their own, which of course is their right. But Amnesty has condemned a number of countries for censoring films with LGBTQ themes, and not one word for censoring films with Israeli links. 

They are both equally guilty of violating freedom of expression, but only one upsets Amnesty. 

It sure sounds like Amnesty's concern for freedom of expression only extends to expression that they agree with. 




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!

 

 

Mohamed Salama is a regular columnist in Jordan's Ad-Dustour, a fairly well-known mainstream news site.

Lately he has been on an antisemitic kick.

On Sunday he wrote a column entitled "The Jews: .a wicked race." He doesn't even pretend to be talking about "Zionists."

In that article he writes:
The Protestant thinker Martin Luther described the Jews as a vicious race, persecuting people with usury, plunder and robbery, while the overall view of them was negative in Europe. And in the United States of America, President George Washington, the first American president, described them (i.e. the Jews) as the most dangerous  external enemy against his country.. Were they right and why?!.

Luther..is not the only one who believed that the Jews had a malicious role in the wars of Europe, in overthrowing its hegemony and in dividing it and dragging it into deep-rooted enmities. There are thinkers who believe that the first and second world wars had the Jews playing a major role in them. Palestine, and after the end of WWII they announced the establishment of their state on the land of Palestine, and the malice in both cases is related to money and their control over the financial system, which was the main center of Britain before Germany competed with it, and then France to a lesser extent. It alone is unique in its hegemony over the two parties rolling for power in the United States, which are..the Republican Party and its Democratic rival, and from within it is monopolizing the decisions that concern the entire Middle East in the hands of the Jews today..America today, like Europe almost a hundred years ago, cannot refuse to implement the interests of the Jews. .This is what the most controversial US President, Donald Trump, said a few weeks ago..and he added...that their loyalty (i.e. the Jews) is not to America but to Israel, and described them as full of treachery and betrayal..and he is now facing charges of corruption, theft, assault on the Capitol building, etc.
...Were Luther and Washington right in calling [Jews] malicious and dangerous?!
The answer is simply yes..Malice leads to bloody endings and danger threatens everyone in the Middle East..As long as Israel is in this geographical area, the cycles of open wars, violence and terrorism in all forms will not stop except with the demise of Israel once and for all.
"Anti-Zionism" and Jew-hatred, all tie up in bow.

But as powerful as the Jews are in Sundays' column, today Salama added in a new column that the Jews were about to be toppled:
The Jews of the world have reached a crushing height and immoral corruption, in which they stole the wealth of the world. Their global financial system has come to control America, and has spread corruption on the ground, so they have become, through their political, social and financial organizations, tools of sabotage and destruction..Do you see that we are witnessing their descent from the throne of economy and money, and thus from politics?!.
...The Jews of the world have reached a crushing height and immoral corruption..and the end of Israel will be with the removal of the global Jewish cover from it..in any case, the government of Netanyahu and his extremist coalition is behind the height and corruption..and will be behind its demise once and for all.
When Jordanians read these sort of insane antisemitic rants, with not a word published in any Arabic media disagreeing with the hate, how can anyone be surprised that Jordan is one of the most antisemitic countries in the world?





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:

Palestinians: Prime Minister Shtayyeh's Straight-Faced Lies to Official US Delegations
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh has shown that he can include two lies in one short sentence.

During the meeting [with a US Democratic delegation], Shtayyeh blamed Israel for the fact that the Palestinians have not held general elections for nearly two decades. He also accused Israel of "attempting to combat the Palestinian democracy." Shtayyeh's remarks, reported by the Palestinians' official news agency Wafa, show that Palestinian leaders apparently think that many foreigners, especially Americans, are stupid enough to believe anything that comes out of their mouths.

Shtayyeh lied both when he claimed that Israel was responsible for obstructing Palestinian elections and that Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip enjoy democracy.

"The truth is Abbas canceled the elections because all credible public opinion polls showed that this month's legislative vote would have decimated the ruling clique of his Fatah party and ushered in a whole new politician configuration. This would have seen Abbas's rivals Marwan Barghouti and Nasser Al-Qidwah emerge as the new leaders of Fatah. If this scenario were to occur, a whole class of millionaires who turned the Palestinian struggle into a lucrative industry, generously funded by 'donor countries,' was at risk of losing everything. .... There is nothing that Abbas can say or do at this point to restore the people's confidence in his authority. Arguably, he never had their confidence in the first place. By canceling the elections, he has crossed a red line, thus placing himself and a few others around him as enemies of the Palestinian people, their democratic aspirations, and their hope for a better future." — Ramzy Baroud, editor of The Palestine Chronicle and author of five books,, arabnews.com, May 3, 2021.

So, evidently Abbas's decision to call off the elections really did have nothing to do with Israel. It was mainly the result of Abbas's totally justified fear that his divided Fatah faction would once again be trounced by Hamas.

Yet, Shtayyeh seems unwilling to allow the facts to get in the way of his straight-faced lies. In the past two years, Shtayyeh has been repeating his lie, that the elections were canceled because of Israel, on almost a weekly basis. He has repeated this lie to virtually every foreign dignitary or delegation he meets with, including, recently, the US Democratic Congressional delegation.
Conflicting Polls Show Arab Youth Want More Traditional Values, But Also Reform
A just-published survey suggests that Arab youth are returning to traditional values. The survey contrasts starkly with another — only partially released — poll, in which a growing number favor religious reform.

The conservative trend in the just released 15th Arab Youth Survey 2023 conducted by a Dubai-based public relations company reflects an earlier Arab Barometer poll. At the same time, those polled in the youth survey offered seemingly contradictory responses to questions.

If accurate, the trend casts a shadow over social reforms enacted by leaders such as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) and United Arab Emirates President Mohammed bin Zayed, which have enhanced women’s rights and professional and leisure opportunities, and created Western-style entertainment industries.

Bin Zayed has gone further than MBS by reducing, if not removing, restrictions on alcohol consumption and cohabitation. The Saudi crown prince is believed to want to follow suit.

Earlier this year, the Saudi Tourism Authority surprised many by announcing that LGBTQ tourists would be welcome in the kingdom.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, alongside Bahrain, recently released the “Barbie” movie, in contrast with Kuwait and Lebanon, which banned the movie because it violated religious and social norms.

It’s not clear how the release of “Barbie” and the welcoming of LGBTQ tourists sit with 54 percent of those polled in the Arab Youth survey, who emphasized the importance of religion, tradition, and family in their personal and public lives.

In a similar vein, 76 percent were concerned about the loss of traditional values and culture. Sixty-five percent overall and 72 percent in the Gulf prioritized preserving religion and tradition instead of creating a tolerant, liberal, and globalized society.

Seventy-three percent disagreed that religious values held the Arab world back. More than sixty percent wanted their country’s laws to be based on Sharia.
Israel fears UNSC may limit UNIFIL’s power to monitor Hezbollah’s hostility
Israel fears the United Nations Security Council may limit the power of its peacekeeping force to monitor Hezbollah’s military activity against Israel on the northern border with Lebanon.

The 15-member security council is slated to approve at the end of the month an annual resolution that extends the ability of its peacekeeping unit, known as the UN Interim Force in Lebanon, to operate.

In advance of that meeting, Israeli and Lebanese delegations are expected to attend the UN this week to discuss the mandate’s renewal with UNSC members.

The UNSC is slated on Tuesday to meet with representatives from the 48 member states that contribute to the 10,500-member force.

Last year, the security council included a paragraph that bolstered UNIFIL’s independence, insisting that the peacekeeping force should have freedom of movement to such an extent that it did not need to coordinate its activity with the Lebanese army.

In paragraph 16, last year’s resolution stated that “UNIFIL does not require prior authorization or permission to undertake its mandated tasks.” It added that “UNIFIL is authorized to conduct its operation independently.”

That was followed by paragraph 17, which stated that UNIFIL could conduct “unannounced patrols.”

Lebanon pushing to require UNIFIL to coordinate its movement with Lebanese Army
Lebanon, according to diplomatic sources, is pushing for the UNSC to rescind that language in favor of text that would require UNIFIL to coordinate its movements with the Lebanese army.

Israel fears that such coordination would allow Hezbollah to know of UNIFIL’s movement in advance. It’s a situation that would hamper its ability to monitor Hezbollah’s military action against Israel and could endanger its troops.

A Lebanese military tribunal in June formally accused five members of Hezbollah and the allied Amal Movement of killing an Irish UN peacekeeper in December 2022.

The mandate is expected to be renewed. The debate is focused on whether or not UNIFIL will be given enough power to effectively operate.




Arabic media are publishing a supposed list of four Saudi demands in order for the kingdom to start negotiations to recognize Israel.

Private sources reported that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia desires strong political, economic, security and social relations with Israel that include all kinds of cooperation with friendly countries and the establishment of an unprecedented partnership in all fields.

For this, the Kingdom needs security and political guarantees before starting serious negotiations on the form of the relationship. Therefore, the Saudi National Security Council set four conditions for starting real negotiations under the auspices of the United States of America, which are:

1- The United States agrees to sell the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 50 F-35 aircraft, without banning any of the types of advanced capabilities it has, like Israel.

2- The United States of America agrees to complete the sale and construction of 5 nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes.

3- Israel's agreement to subject its nuclear reactors to be under the supervision of the Atomic Energy Commission, and agreement of a Middle East region free of nuclear weapons.

4- Israel should stop weakening the Palestinian National Authority and return to the negotiating table in order to achieve peace and stability in the region.

The only places these were published were Palestinian media, so the list is a little suspect.

Beyond that, these are pre-conditions before any negotiations, and from that perspective they seem absurd - the US giving advanced weapons in exchange for talks that could go nowhere? Israel being forced to make major concessions before any negotiations even start?

And one more thing: The Saudi National Security Council was dissolved in 2015.

This looks like a Palestinian psy-ops attempt to pressure the Saudis to demand more concessions from Israel on the Palestinian issue, as there is a real (and founded) fear among Palestinians that they will be only an incidental part of any normalization plan. 






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!

 

 



Last week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken gave out the first annual Secretary’s Global Anti-Racism Champions Awards.  

One of the awardees is Saadia Mosbah of Tunisia:

Saadia Mosbah is a Tunisian activist who has dedicated her life to fighting racial discrimination and prejudice, as well as defending the rights of Black Tunisians.  In 2013, after several unsuccessful attempts to launch an association that fights racial discrimination during President Ben Ali’s rule, she finally established Mnemty, “My Dream,” an association that endeavors to raise awareness about the value of diversity and importance of equality, to denounce racism in public spaces, ensure legal protection for all, elevate the profile of the Black population in the cultural sphere, and promote socio-economic development in predominantly black communities.  Saadia’s activism, alongside that of several human rights activists, contributed to the adoption of the law in Tunisia criminalizing racial discrimination on October 9, 2018.   For Mosbah, the law is an achievement, but incomplete, as it lacks a universal declaration that denounces all forms of discrimination irrespective of religion, language, or skin color.  
In their Arabic social media posts, the US Embassy in Tunis described the award this way:




Congratulations Saadia Mesbah for winning the Secretary of State's 2023 International Anti-Racism Champions Award.  The Tunisian activist has dedicated her life to fighting racial discrimination and intolerance and defending the rights of black Tunisians. This award is in recognition of her exceptional courage, leadership and commitment to advancing the human rights of members of marginalized racial, ethnic and indigenous communities. Let's continue to fight against systemic racism, and promote positive change in both the United States and the world.
Tunisian racists freaked out at the term "indigenous communities" - because that implies that Black people whose cause Mesbah champions are indigenous to the region.


Tunis, Tunisia – In February, Tunisian President Kais Saied warned his country of a plan to change Tunisia’s “demographic make-up”, to turn it into “just another African country that doesn’t belong to the Arab and Islamic nations any more”.

As part of this plan, “hordes of irregular migrants from sub-Saharan Africa” had travelled to Tunisia, bringing “all the violence, crime, and unacceptable practices that entails”.

The dubious warning, which has been widely criticised and dubbed racist by human rights groups as well as by regional and international bodies, gave official approval to a mentality that has been spreading through the North African country over recent years.

It led to round-ups of Black sub-Saharan Africans, their eviction from rented properties, and African countries mobilising to repatriate their citizens.

And now, with reports of mobs forcing their way into the homes of Black migrants and refugees, attacking occupants with fists, clubs and machetes, Tunisia’s own native black population, long used to the bigotry that exists in many parts of their own society, are braced for the assault.
The US Embassy use of the word "indigenous communities" fueled the racist fears that there was some sort of plot to flood Tunisia with Black Africans and to declare them to be indigenous to the area. 

So the US Embassy caved and removed the phrase. It re-posted the item, now saying "This award recognizes her exceptional courage, leadership, and commitment to advancing human rights for marginalized communities worldwide. "

Yet this is the exact time to call out Tunisia's racism and recognize Mesbah's work to eliminate it, not to  water it down.

Even more bizarrely, the US Embassy in Tunisia page has apparently removed the entire paragraph describing her getting the award - the headline of the page includes her name along with the photo shown above, but it only lists the other awardees with the reasons for their awards, and not Mesbah. Her paragraph must have been part of that page originally, since it was copied and pasted from the State Department page.

The US Embassy in Tunisia removed the description of the Tunisian awardee! 

Does the State Department consider Black Africans to be indigenous to the region? Or are the seventh century Arab invaders the only "indigenous" people of Tunisia?





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!

 

 



Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened Israel on Monday evening in an address marking the 17th anniversary of the 2006 Lebanon war.

During the speech, he said that Hezbollah needed "a few precision missiles" to destroy a list of targets in Israel that included civilian airports, electricity generation and distribution stations, water distribution, main communication centers, infrastructure, oil and gasoline refineries, ammonia depots and the Dimona nuclear reactor.

His mention of the ammonia plants echo a 2016 threat he made where he said that a rocket strike on Haifa's ammonia storage tanks would cause tens of thousands of deaths. “This would be exactly as a nuclear bomb, and we can say that Lebanon today has a nuclear bomb, seeing as any rocket that might hit these tanks is capable of creating a nuclear bomb effect,” Nasrallah said then.

Think about this for a moment. A person who has some 150,000 missiles,  including thousands of precision missiles, and who answers to Iran, is directly threatening to attack Israeli civilians and civilian infrastructure and murdering tens of thousands. His threats check all the boxes of what terrorism is. 

Yet (as of  this writing)  there has not been a word of condemnation from human rights groups over a direct, credible threat to millions of Israeli civilians. And when Nasrallah threatened Haifa with tens of thousands of casualties in 2016, neither Human Rights Watch nor Amnesty International even mentioned it in their press releases. 

Their interest in human rights always ends when the humans are Jewish. 



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!

 

 

Monday, August 14, 2023

From Ian:

Meir Y. Soloveichik: Not Everything Is Tisha B’Av
It is with this in mind that we must approach the reaction of many when the Knesset, three days before Tisha B’Av, approved limitations on the Israeli Supreme Court. The Times of Israel immediately presented us with the remarkable headline: “Judicial overhaul opponents see parallel to Tisha B’Av, saddest day in Hebrew year.” Indeed, comparisons to the destruction of the Temple abounded. A meme with the words shisha b’av, “the sixth of Av,” was circulated on the Internet, with the comparison to Tisha B’Av being made even by prominent Israeli writers. Some Israelis announced that though they did not usually fast on the Ninth of Av, they would do so this year to mourn what the Knesset had wrought.

I do not wish to discuss the merits or flaws of the government proposal. Rather I want to make one point only: One cannot compare the tragedies of the Jewish past to a democratic vote by the Israeli Knesset, however mistaken one might believe that vote to be. To make this comparison is to recommit the sin of the spies and their audience among the Hebrews, and to repeat the error of our ancestors in the desert millennia ago. Sharing a meme with the words shisha b’av dangerously demonizes a vast part of the Israeli electorate by comparing voters to the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem. And one can react only with horror to the statement by a Jew that a vote by the Knesset is more worthy of mourning than the deaths of Jews throughout history.

In arguing that the memories of Tisha B’Av obligated him to protect the physical well-being of the Jewish state, what Begin was also implying was that in the story of Israel, some—though not all—of what the Romans had wrought had been undone by the rise of the State of Israel and the miracles that followed. The Temple is not yet rebuilt, and hatred of the Jews still festers, but a rebuilt, united Jerusalem stands under Jewish sovereignty. If those who suffered in the events marked on the Ninth of Av would have been shown images of our own age—a united Jerusalem featuring a Jewish government, a Judean desert in bloom, and Jewish homes rebuilt throughout the Holy Land—they would have rejoiced at this vindication of Jewish yearnings. And if they would have been told that during all this, the parliament of the Jewish state would then vote to limit the ability of a Supreme Court to pronounce administrative decisions as “unreasonable,” their awe would not be diminished by an iota, no matter the flaws or virtues of this vote.

And so it must be stressed—though as I type these words, I still cannot believe that it must be stressed—that however much one might disagree with the Israeli coalition’s agenda, it is not Tisha B’Av. It is not the Holocaust. It is not the destruction of the Temple. It is not the expulsion from England, or Spain. It is not the auto-da-fé. It is not the massacres of the Crusades. To argue otherwise is to desecrate the memory of the martyred and the murdered, the exiled and the expelled, those who died with faith in the future of Jerusalem on their lips, and who would react with wonder at the miracles of our age.
Obama’s Calculated Tolerance of Black Anti-Semitism
I believe Sheila Miyoshi Jager’s account; she has nothing to gain by such a story, while the calculating Obama, determined to leave her because he was sure that as a white woman, she would be a political liability as his wife, made sure in his own memoir, Dreams of My Father, to leave out the Cokely episode, including his failure to condemn Cokely for his charge that “Jewish doctors” were deliberately committing “genocide” on “black babies.” This variant on the medieval blood libel about Jews killing Christian children so as to use their blood in making matzos, was a charge so explosive that it could well have resulted in murderous attacks by credulous African-Americans on Jewish doctors. When Sheila Miyoshi tried to convince Obama to denounce Cokely, he refused. He had decided that if he condemned Cokely, he would lose more support among black antisemites than he would gain in Jewish support. Clearly, Obama did not share the anguish of Jews at such charges, an updated version of the medieval blood libels. He was perfectly willing to pass over in silence Cokely’s disgusting and absurd charge of “genocide” by “Jewish doctors” of “black babies.” Sheila Miyoshi was appalled at Obama’s indecent political calculus, and told David Garrow so; that, she said, was her reason for the breakup. Obama, ever the calculating arriviste, determined to rise high, felt no need to reassure Jews that he stood with them. Instead, his silence about Steve Cokely’s charge suggested he had no interest in condemning even the worst antisemitic charges if to do so might hurt him with a black electorate that was also predominantly antisemitic.

Obama’s betrayal of a longstanding American commitment to veto all anti-Israel resolutions at the UN Security Council, when instead of a veto he had Samantha Power abstain from voting on UN Security Council Resolution 2334, that declared Israeli settlements in the West Bank, where a half-million Israelis lived, to constitute a violation of international law, was bad. An American veto would have killed the resolution. With the Americans not vetoing it, UNSC 2334 passed by a vote of 14-0. But Obama had done worse than that, when as a thrusting young Chicago politician he refused to do the right thing; he never denounced Steve Cokely for his extreme antisemitism, reflected in his charge that “Jewish doctors” practiced “genocide” on “black babies.” Obama’s tolerance of the worst kind of antisemitism was then, and remains, a form of antisemitism.
Antisemitism Still Haunts the European Left
Why the double standard? Why identify and condemn antisemitism from the right but not from within the left’s own ranks?

A large part of the answer sheds light upon a problem for the left not just in France, but in Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom—the other countries covered by the ADL report—as well. In essence, antisemitism is not seen as a pernicious ideology targeting Jews as the root of the world’s ills, but rather as an instrument to be deployed in political conflicts. If antisemitism comes from a source that you would have no truck with anyway—in this case, an organization that believes fervently that Catholic doctrine should lie at the foundations of law and public policy—then there is no hesitation in condemning it, particularly when, as was true with the Civitas episode, there is no mention of Zionism or the State of Israel. But if antisemitism comes from an ally, like Corbyn, then you are duty-bound to deny it and dismiss it as a smear. In such an environment, any analytical consistency and certainly any attempt to point out the glaring overlap between far-left and extreme-right antisemitic tropes—dual loyalty, financial clout, disproportionate political and cultural influence—becomes impossible.

While the ADL report highlights the differences between the four countries under the microscope, there are also some key commonalities. “In all four countries, the two dominant findings were that antisemitism was used in anti-Israel contexts and in anti-capitalist contexts,” it observed. “In anti-Israel contexts, antisemitic themes included (1) accusations that Jewish cabals control politics and media and prevent either criticism of Israel or support for Palestine; (2) Holocaust trivialization as a means of arguing that Palestinians are no less victims today than Jews were during the Holocaust; (3) equating Israel with the Nazi regime, thus demonizing Israel; (4) accusations of antisemitism are in bad faith and employed to silence criticism of Israel. In anti-capitalist contexts, antisemitic themes included (1) Jewish control of financial markets; (2) Jewish obsession with money; and (3) Jewish exploitation of workers.”

The point, however, is that large swathes of the European left are either incapable of recognizing these themes as antisemitic, or they believe that the upsurge in hatred against Jews is solely a result of Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians. “They have learnt nothing from what happened to them in Europe. Nothing,” ranted Tariq Ali, a British far-left leader, at an anti-Israel rally in May 2021. “Every time they bomb Gaza, every time they attack Jerusalem—that is what creates antisemitism. Stop the occupation, stop the bombing and casual antisemitism will soon disappear.”

Ali did not spell out the lesson that he believes the Jews should have learned from the Nazi era, but the implication of his words is that they are receiving their just desserts for dispossessing the Palestinians. And that their choice now is to either give in—and thereby suddenly and miraculously banish antisemitism from public discourse, or to carry on fighting and accept antisemitism as an inevitable consequence. Until this mode of thinking is banished from the left, Jews will have little reason to trust its representatives, even on those occasions when they do condemn antisemitism.
Haaretz reports:

Saudi Arabia’s appointment of its first ambassador to the Palestinian Authority, who will also serve as consul general to Jerusalem, was not coordinated with Israel, and Israeli diplomatic figures are struggling to gauge its implications for the efforts to normalize relations with the kingdom.

Senior Israeli officials said Sunday that Riyadh’s weekend announcement that the Saudi Ambassador to Jordan, Nayef bin Bandar Al-Sudairi, will henceforth also serve as the kingdom’s nonresident ambassador to the Palestinian Authority and consul general in Jerusalem, created facts on the ground for Israel and was not preceded by a dialogue between the countries on the issue.

The only Israeli official to comment Sunday on the Saudi announcement was Foreign Minister Eli Cohen, who stated in an interview with Radio 103FM that Israel “will not allow the opening of any kind of diplomatic mission.”

His remark is based on Israel’s official policy for decades of not permitting the opening of diplomatic missions in Jerusalem, with the exception of those that operated in the city before 1948 in the western part and before 1967 in East Jerusalem. Since Saudi Arabia is not planning at this stage to establish a new diplomatic mission in the city, the appointment does not violate Israeli policy.
So if Saudi Arabia had no consulate before 1948 in Jerusalem, Israel wouldn't allow one now. 

However, al-Sudari then tweeted a photo of a Saudi consulate in Jerusalem from 1947! The signs indeed say "Saudi Arabian Consulate of Palestine."


Under the guidance of His Majesty the late King Abdul Aziz bin Abdul Rahman in 1947, Uncle Abdulaziz bin Ahmed Al-Sudairy sponsored the opening of the Saudi Consulate General in Jerusalem (Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood).
Indeed, there was a Saudi consulate in Jerusalem, since about 1940. Here is a Palestine Post article that mentions it and the consul general's name in January 1945.



They aren't asking for a consulate at this point, but if Israel's official policy listed above is accurate, then things might get interesting - and not just vis a vis the Saudis, but also the Biden administration as well that wants to open up a consulate for Palestinians in Jerusalem as well. Even if Israel allows the Saudis to do this in some fashion as part of the deal for normalization, it would have a hard time saying "no" to the US. 





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