Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, October 04, 2023

Haaretz disparages visitors to Mount Ebal, but its archaeological importance cannot be discounted so easily

Thousands of Israelis visited an archaeological site on Monday that to the untrained eye looks like nothing more than a mound of stones. It’s hard to put a finger on any one thing that distinguishes it from the many other sites spreading across the West Bank that feature rocks of various sizes and lack any identifying sign or explanation.

But anyone taking the trouble to listen to one of the guides there will learn that it is nothing less than “Joshua’s altar on Mount Ebal.”

That claim is subject to dispute: Many archaeologists do not believe it is an altar of any kind, certainly not Joshua’s. But that hasn’t stopped the settlers from claiming that Palestinians are doing everything to destroy an important piece of Jewish heritage.

This belittlement of the site reflects the anti-Judaism bias of the author, Hagar Shezaf, far more than reality.

It is true that some scholars dispute whether the structures on the site are altars (a larger rectangular one enclosing a smaller, earlier one built a couple of decades earlier) , and there is no way to prove that the earlier one is the actual altar described in Hebrew scripture. But even the experts most hostile to finding Biblical ties to archaeological findings agree that this was an early Hebrew religious site.

Nearly all of the charred animal bones found at the site are of kosher animals, which strongly indicates some sort of sacrificial altar. Mount Ebal was clearly an important Jewish site.

The inner altar was dated to about 1250 BCE. According to standard Jewish chronology, Joshua crossed the Jordan in 1273 BCE. That is remarkably close.

And then there is the discovery publicized last year of the "Mount Ebal curse tablet," found at the site, which researchers claim has an inscribed curse written in a palindromic way, "You are cursed by the god yhw, cursed. You will die, cursed – cursed, you will surely die. Cursed you are by yhw – cursed." It is apparently the earliest known use of the Hebrew word for God.

The writing is done in a haphazard way - right to left, left to right, and "as the ox plows." The interpretation of the text is contested by some.

But as this article by Christopher Eames at the Armstrong Institute of Biblical Archaeology summarizes:

Any significance of this discovery is not just contingent upon the nature of the text within. Interpretation of the text to one side, what we have here is clearly a defixio—an example of a typical sealed/folded thin lead tablet well known in association with curses. It was found, not coincidentally, on the biblical “mount of cursing” associated with Joshua and the early Israelites—Mount Ebal. Further, it was found at the very site identified as Joshua’s altar (among a significant quantity of animal bones—96% of which were from kosher animals, and the remaining being from “snake, tortoise, etc”).

Yes, the tablet was not found in situ, in a sealed layer during excavation—it was sifted by Stripling’s team out of the excavation dumps from the structure, left behind by the late Prof. Adam Zertal (who, together with his associate Zvi Koenigsberg, were the first to identify the altar structure, in 1983). Nevertheless, as highlighted in the article, given that 99.75% of the diagnostic pottery sherds from the dumps dated to the Late Bronze ii–Iron i periods (circa 1400–1000 b.c.e.)—and given that the Lavrion mine, from which the tablet’s lead was sourced, was also in operation during the Late Bronze Age—it follows that the tablet most logically dates to within this early, pre-monarchical period: the very time frame associated with Joshua, the conquest of the Promised Land, and the “curse” ritual upon Mount Ebal. (There’s also an additional fascinating link to Job 19:28, a passage which describes the practice of writing “with an iron pen and lead”; note that chronologically, Job is among the earliest books in the Bible.)

Particulars regarding the inscription aside (and it is, at the very least, objectively clear that there is something written on/in it), it is surely not an overstatement to say that the above facts stand alone as remarkable parallels, and from such an early period—one comparatively less highlighted in biblical archaeological research and reporting.

Any way you look at it, Jews at the time of Joshua considered Mount Ebal an important religious site and connected with curses.

The Jews who visit Mount Ebal are trying to ensure that the Palestinian Authority doesn't destroy such an important biblical site, which is in Area B and therefore officially under PA control. Given that the archaeological connection of that site to the biblical description of Mount Ebal is far more compelling than those of other pilgrimage sites (like Joseph's Tomb in Shechem) there is very good reason to work to protect and publicize Mount Ebal.

Despite what Haaretz thinks.

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!

I mentioned yesterday that Iran's Supreme Leader went back to 2012 in his speech Tuesday where he called Israel a "cancerous tumor."

But it is worth looking at the rest of his speech - because it shows the fear that the Abraham Accords has struck into Iran's leaders.

Iran has a tried and true decades-old playbook aimed at the Arab world that simply doesn't convince anyone anymore except wishful thinking Palestinians.

Some highlights:

Normalizing relations with the Zionist regime is a gamble. Betting on a losing horse is doomed to lose because the Palestinian movement is more alive and ready today than ever, and the usurping regime is dying.

This shows how much the Abraham Accords, and the prospect of Saudi-Israeli peace, frightens the Iranians. And it is meaningless - the Saudis don't need advice from Khamenei to make their own foreign policy decisions.

Those insulting the Qur'an use repeated, false claims such as freedom of speech. In countries that allow insulting the Qur'an under the pretext of freedom of speech, do they also allow attacks on Zionist symbols? How much more clearly can we prove that they are under the rule of the cruel, criminal and looting Zionists of the world?

Classic antisemitism has until recently been a sure crowd-pleaser in the Muslim world. But does anyone really believe that Jews are behind the Qur'an burnings in Sweden and Denmark? Or that those countries are controlled by "Zionists"? Or even that when Khamenei says "Zionists' he means anything other than "Jews"?

Today, this regime [Israel] is not only full of hate for the Islamic Republic of Iran, but also all the countries around it, such as Egypt and Syria and Iraq is also full of hatred and anger. The reason for this hatred and anger is the prevention of [Israel] from realizing their goal, which is to usurp the Nile to the Euphrates. They are full of hatred and anger, of course, according to the interpretation of the Qur'an, which says, "Be angry and die of this anger." They are dying, and with the help of the Lord, this verse about the usurping regime is being fulfilled.

The "Greater Israel" myth is another golden oldie. But once the Abraham Accords punctured the united Arab self-deception, the rest of the Arab world understands that a nation that wants to expand wouldn't give up land for peace.

The only person filled with anger is Khamenei, and we see what the Qur'an says about that.

The issue of Palestine and the usurpation and expulsion of a nation from their homes and torturing and killing them as the first issue of the Islamic world in the last few decades.

And again, the Arab world has realized that they must do what's best for them, not sacrifice their own interests on the altar of Palestinians.

Iran's goal has been to be the undisputed leader of the Muslim world and a superpower. That dream has mostly fallen apart - they might become a nuclear power but no independent nation wants to be led by them. And at the same time, the hated Jews are gaining allies and friends that Iran had counted on as being on their side.

This is a speech of desperation and frustration at Iran's strategy for the 21st century being destroyed - and not by a fellow Muslim nation like Turkey or Egypt, but by the Jews.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

10/03 Links Pt2: Journalist Laments “Cruel” Spotlight Shone on Yaroslav Hunka, WW2 Nazi-Unit Veteran; Netflix Doc Examines How German Police Could So Easily Murder Jews

From Ian:

‘Hunka belonged to a unit that did not commit crime’: American news organisation Politico defends Canada for honouring a Nazi in its Parliament

On 2nd October, Politico published an op-ed by author Keir Giles defending Canada in the Yaroslav Hunka Controversy. Giles is the author of several books on Russia, including his latest one titled “Russia’s War on Everybody”. According to him, the Hunka controversy is an outcome of massive Russian propaganda. Giles called the whole controversy a lie; he argued that fighting against the USSR during World War II did not necessarily means that the unit was Nazi.

Giles noted that the outrage stemmed from Hunka’s association with one of the Waffen-SS units. Waffen-SS, where SS stands for Schutzstaffel (Protective Echelon), were the black-uniformed elite troops who self-described themselves as the “political soldiers” of the Nazi Party. Hunka was part of the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS that, comprised Ukrainian volunteers.

Giles argued that the history of that time is complicated. As Hunka was in a unit comprised of foreign volunteers, they were, according to him, on administrative rather than ideological grounds. However, Giles said the contention is hard to sell to the audience who “believe” the main objective of the SS was genocide.

Citing several investigations, including the Nuremberg trials, Giles said the unit Hunka belonged to did not commit war crimes or atrocities. Targeting Russia, Giles claimed that Moscow “shouts” Nazis whenever they want despite their own history of aggression and atrocities during WWII. He further argued that Russians were never tried for the alleged “war crimes” they committed during WWII, unlike Nazis.

Giles further claimed that Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center’s statement that the atrocities committed by Hunka’s unit are well-documented was false and “doesn’t seem to have any more substance than the accusation by Russia”.

Citing the 1986 Commission report on War Crimes by the Canadian government, Giles argued that famous Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal himself was found to have made broad accusations against the unit in question, and the commission found them “nearly totally useless” and “put the Canadian government to a considerable amount of purposeless work.”

CBC Journalist Laments “Cruel” Spotlight Shone on Yaroslav Hunka, WW2 Nazi-Unit Veteran

The fallout from the Yaroslav Hunka affair continues. Following the September 22 standing ovation on Parliament Hill given to the 98-year-old veteran of the First Ukrainian Division, a unit affiliated with the Nazi Waffen-SS during World War Two, condemnations from politicians, human rights organizations and the news media have been swift and widespread, and calls have grown for more concrete action against Ukrainian Nazis and memorials in their honour.

But in one recent incident, a journalist with CBC News seemingly expressed sympathy for a surprising character in the scandal: Yaroslav Hunka, a volunteer collaborator of the SS.

In the September 27 broadcast on CBC News, producer and host Natasha Fatah was asking an interviewee about the fallout from the controversy on Parliament Hill, and made the eyebrow-raising comment that Yaroslav Hunka and his family must be feeling embarrassment as a result of his appearance.

“And now this horrible series of events have happened. (Speaker of the House Anthony) Rota has lost his job, the government is again fractured on an issue, and in the meantime, the Hunka family, this man in question, is now in international spotlight. What was his role? And this is a 98-year-old man who would likely not have wanted this type of attention, so what consideration needs to be given? Because the spotlight can be so cruel. How do we manage to make sure that guests that are invited are also protected,” Fatah asked.Fatah’s question, appearing to seek sympathy for a 98-year-old who voluntarily joined a Nazi unit which was responsible for crimes against humanity during the war, displays a shocking lack of self-awareness. The victims of the scandal in Ottawa were not House Speaker Anthony Rota, and certainly not Yaroslav Hunka, but the innocent victims who perished in the Nazi genocide, including 6 million Jews, Poles, and others.

As former Member of Parliament and current CEO of the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center, Michael Levitt, told CTV News: “The Nazi units, like the one he was involved with, did not give the victims of the Holocaust, the millions of them, Jews and others, an opportunity to live their lives, have children and grandchildren and live to be 98 years old.

”In a twist of sick irony, Fatah’s comments came only two days before September 29, the beginning of the Babi Yar massacre in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev.

Over a two day period in 1941 beginning on that date, the Nazis and their Ukrainian allies brought 34,000 Jews to the Babi Yar ravine in Kiev, where they machine gunned them to death.

Almost unbelievably, Fatah’s thoughtless comments were not the only ones made by journalists in recent days, expressing sympathy for Yaroslav Hunka.

Anti-Israel media is up in arms. From Quds News:

Zaid Abdulnasser, a #Palestinian refugee from Syria who has been living in Berlin since 2017, has been notified by Germany’s Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) that his refugee status is to be rescinded.

The decision to remove Abdulnasser’s refugee status was due to what the BAMF called "extremist activities", namely his activism with the Palestinian advocacy group Samidoun, an international network of activists working to build solidarity with the Palestinian prisoners languishing in Israeli jails.

Sites like +972 have been writing about Abdulnasser for several months.

Of course, Samidoun is indeed a subsidiary of the PFLP terror group; founded by PFLP members and with comrades who continue to organize terror cells.

Which is enough reason to strip his citizenship.

But even beyond that, in an interview with Left Voice about his situation, he discusses exactly what he is trying to accomplish in Germany:

In the EU, Germany is the Zionist occupation’s largest economic partner, routinely takes part in military maneuvers with the terrorist occupying army, signed billions of dollars in arms deals that also included missile systems and nuclear submarines, and is fully involved in the Nakba of the Palestinian people by supporting the occupation at international and national levels in Germany.
This unconditional support for the occupation of Palestine is clearly based on common imperialist interests and the understanding that this European colony in Palestine is the West’s military base in the Middle East. Of course, this is being promoted as Germany’s attempt to atone for the massacre of Jews in World War II. If anything, using the sins of its Nazi history to justify supporting yet another ethnostate project shows that it has never truly learned from its history.
An organized mass Palestinian, Arab and internationalist movement will not allow these lies to continue to dominate public discourse, and the Palestinian refugees have the inner strength to pose a real challenge to the Zionist movement in Germany and shared German and Israeli interests. Since Germany is the stronghold of the Zionist movement in Europe, any success of the Palestinian struggle here will have a major impact on the entire movement. This is the true meaning of organizing the Palestinian masses in Germany, namely that they can shake the foundations of the state’s imperialist interests to their very foundations.

So he is accusing Germany of terrorism and of perpetuating the Holocaust by supporting the Jewish state. And then he says his plan is to "shake the foundations" of Germany itself.

Does this sound like a loyal citizen of Germany or someone who wants to subvert and ultimately destroy Germany?

Beyond that, Abdulzaid explicitly supports terror, as this other recent interview with his other organization, "Masar Badil, the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement," makes clear:

We believe that true legitimacy is embodied in the positions of our people and their sacrifices, which are naturally expressed daily, and through embracing the line of resistance everywhere. It’s important to emphasize that the legitimacy of the resistance factions is derived from their acts of liberation and resistance themselves....We believe that true national unity is the unity of our entire people, the resistance factions, and the popular organizations around the project of liberation and return. From its inception, the Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement has called upon all resistance forces to build a broad national front that represents the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people and derives its legitimacy directly from them, just as the early Fedayeen (Palestinian resistance fighters) derived their legitimacy through their struggles, sacrifices, and defense of their people.

No Palestinian would read this as "popular resistance." The resistance factions are Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP and others.

Looks like the German government made the right call. An avowed supporter of terror should not be a citizen of Germany.

Abdulnasser will not be deported to Syria, but he will lose the benefits of being a citizen.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

In 2012, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei said, “The great powers have dominated the destiny of the Islamic countries for years and… installed the Zionist cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world...Many of the problems facing the Muslim world are due to the existence of the Zionist regime.”

This was two days after Iran's president Ahmadinejad said that Israel was an “insult to humanity” and “a cancerous tumor” and called for “a new Middle East with no trace of Americans or Zionists.”

At the time, the US condemned those insults, and the UN Secretary General issued a statement: "The Secretary-General is dismayed by the remarks threatening Israel’s existence attributed over the last two days to the Supreme Leader and the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Secretary-General condemns these offensive and inflammatory statements."

Today, Khamenei parroted what he said in 2012. According to Al Manar, he "described the Zionist entity as a cancerous tumor and said the axis of resistance and the Palestinian resistance will eradicate it."

I am wondering if Khamanei is testing the UN and the international community. He is not stupid; he knows that throwing insults like this doesn't intimidate Israel. But it could be that he is checking to see if the world is by now so inured to his threats that he can up the ante without fear of blowback.

After all, a key goal of the anti-Israel world is to make Israel into a pariah, to dehumanize the Jewish state and to eventually make any attacks on Israel appear to be moral. By pressing these buttons, it is possible that Khamenei is looking for the UN and EU to remain silent, which would be a green light for him to try something further.

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!

10/03 Links Pt1: What have the Palestinian Arabs ever done to deserve concessions?; A ‘Samuel Accord’ for Saudi Arabia and Israel; Saudi team cancels match in Iran over Soleimani bust

From Ian:

What have the Palestinian Arabs ever done to deserve concessions?

If any concessions are made to the Palestinian Arabs, and this must be a BIG IF, there must this time be a demand for reciprocal concessions and some substantial give from the them, which must be monitored and policed and, if broken in the slightest, will immediately be cancelled and withdrawn without any further negotiations. This will be and must be entirely at Israel’s discretion and applied. It is more than time to treat the Palestinians like adults and demand they act accordingly.

In short, a significant sword must be held over the Palestinian Arabs' heads with the Palestinian Arabs clearly understanding they have to comply and running in their usual cry baby routine to the United Nations, the International Criminal Court or any other world body will not help. If they break their commitments, they and the world will know about it.

It is time for the Palestinian Arabs to grow up. In all the years of fighting, terrorising, random murders and sabotaging Israel plus their “great” contribution of airline hijackings, what have they achieved? What have they built? Have they built a country in Gaza or in Area A? In reality they have built nothing. They have been spongers, parasites on the world and for various reasons, which includes anti-Semitism, Europe has endlessly financed them as has America.

As American administrations change and the Democrats take over, so laws are broken and ignored and huge funds are sent to the Palestinian Arabs, all of which have contributed enormously to Arafat dying a billionaire, Mahmoud Abbas becoming a multi-millionaire if not a billionaire with a palace in Ramallah. All the heads of Hamas et al are billionaires…. and their people continue to suffer and live in squalor and in poverty.

What is there for their male youth to do? They grow up with no other ambition than to become a terrorist. Their hormones and testosterone raging in a restrictive and backward tribal, religious and medieval culture. To the Western world the idea of being rewarded as a “martyr” with seventy two black eyed virgins is ridiculous and shows just how restricted, controlled and deprived their lives amongst their own are. Is Islamic paradise one continuous orgy? How pornographic and limited can they get?

Financing the Palestinian Arabs ad nauseum only achieves more terrorism. This has been going on far too long without any demands for civilised sensible results. What has happened to the concept of teaching a man to fish? The solution is to force the Palestinian Arabs into modernity. Force them to create and build a normal society on their own with a functioning economy and opportunity for all to make a decent living. It is beyond time they acquired themselves decent leadership and joined the civilised world.

Western youth are imbued with ambition to establish themselves, build businesses, careers, families etc. What have the Palestinian Arab youth to look forward to in their cultures, in their living areas, in Gaza? Nothing!..... Except the machoness, aggression and the madness of terrorism, joining Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, PFLP, Lion’s Den and a myriad of sub-groups all increasingly armed, sponsored, used and abused by Iran. There is nothing except death in becoming a “martyr”, no matter how much brainwashing comes from the mullahs.

So we come back to our original question, what have the Palestinian Arabs ever done to deserve concessions? Have they shown the slightest reliable promise to do anything or create anything when their sole misguided ambition is to destroy Israel, chase the Jews into the sea and then what? Go on sponging off the Europeans and Americans whilst threatening them and hating them? And when they have through their stealth invasion of Europe destroyed and turned that continent into the hell holes they come from, what then?

Jonathan Tobin: Who lost the battle to stop Iran’s nuclear quest?

Kerry’s Iran collusion and Trump’s failure
Another possible scapegoat is former President Donald Trump.

Obama apologists do blame Trump for withdrawing from the JCPOA and attempting to pressure Iran to abandon its nuclear quest with sanctions and threats. They say his decision torpedoed an imperfect but still working plan to stop Iran without a viable alternative in place. That’s mistaken because the Obama deal was a failure from the start and was going to have to be replaced sooner or later.

In the end, Trump failed during his four years in office to achieve a better Iran nuclear deal or to stop their efforts altogether. But the primary blame for that failure was not his. Had Iran believed that it had no alternative but to return to the negotiating table or to face complete isolation and economic ruin, Trump’s plan would, at the very least, have had a chance to succeed.

They didn’t believe that. The reason was that they were betting on Trump being defeated in 2020 and being replaced with a Democrat who would return to Obama’s strategy of appeasement/containment. Had Biden acknowledged while running for president that the JCPOA was a sham and made clear that he would stick with pressure to get a better deal that would end the threat rather than merely kick the can down the road, Iran might conceivably have been left with no choice but to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Instead, he promised more appeasement.

Even worse than that, former Secretary of State John Kerry met repeatedly with the Iranians in 2018 and advised them to ignore Trump’s moves and “maximum pressure” campaign. He assured them that if they merely sat tight and waited for 2021, they could have everything they wanted. They took his advice and that, as much as anything, is why Iran is now only 12 days away from a bomb.

Kerry’s collusion with Iran wasn’t merely ill-advised; his actions advising an enemy of the United States to thwart government policy was arguably one of the most disgraceful actions undertaken by an American in the history of the republic. That he got away with those actions, which are close to treasonous, and subsequently received the reward of another high office as Biden’s climate czar only makes it worse. While Americans spent three years being lied to by the media and the Democrats about Trump’s supposed collusion with Russia, it was Kerry’s open collusion with Iran that should have generated outrage rather than shrugs and yawns. The “echo chamber” that Obama staffers like Ben Rhodes created in the media ensured that Iranian appeasement stayed on track even after Trump won in 2016.

Obama’s bad deal
Kerry doesn’t stand alone as the man who is most responsible for ensuring that Iran became a threshold nuclear power. Former President Barack Obama came into office determined to realign American foreign policy away from traditional allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia, and his Iran appeasement did just that. It did have the unintended consequence of bringing Israel together with the Arab states in a way that made the Abraham Accords possible. But in 2013, when Obama and Kerry began their initial secret negotiations with Iran, the international community had—thanks in part to Netanyahu’s warnings—endorsed tough sanctions. With American leadership, that could have brought Iran to its knees. Instead, the United States wound up being the ones begging Iran for a deal and abandoning sanctions.

It took 20 years of bad decisions to bring the world to the point where everyone must acknowledge that Iran has succeeded, and Israel and the West failed.

But Obama, Kerry and their foreign-policy team that embraced Iranian appeasement must bear the primary guilt for this appalling and dangerous situation. Honest histories of this debacle—assuming a future in which anti-Trump and anti-Netanyahu partisanship is no longer assumed from the academy and supposedly reputable historians—will judge them harshly. The consequences that will ensue from an Iran terrorist state that is only 12 days from a nuclear weapon are terrible, even unimaginable. In the years to follow, we will learn just how much their feckless policies, lies and collusion with Islamist murderers will cost the peoples of the Middle East and the rest of the world in blood and agony.

Caroline Glick: ‘We the People’ begin to speak

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his family packed their bags Monday night for their vacation on the Golan Heights.

The police also made their routine preparations. They set up a water cannon outside the hotel where the Netanyahus are staying to prevent leftist rioters from getting near the premier and his family.

On the face of things, the left’s insurrectionists are as strong as ever. They have unlimited funds to spend on their activities. They are guided by Israel’s most talented PR executives. They receive wall-to-wall support from 95% of Israeli media outlets. And, acting on orders from Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, the police are prohibited from enforcing the law against them.

The insurgents’ current target is religious Judaism and religious Jews.

On Sunday night, a group of leftist male bullies stormed a movie screening for ultra-Orthodox girls and women in Jerusalem to block them from watching a film without males in the room.

Haaretz reporter Yael Freidson cheered them on, writing on X/Twitter, “Neighborhood men appeared at a [film] screening that was organized for women and girls, and prevented the same-sex event from taking place. For those who didn’t understand from the events of recent weeks, the contract has been reopened.”

Freidson’s allusion to “the contract” relates to Israel’s social contract, which permits autonomy and use of public spaces for various religious and social sectors in Israel’s multicultural society. The leftist insurrection now demands that freedom of access be blocked for people who aren’t like them.

Freidson’s mention of “the contract” was also an allusion to a new political party. In August, the heads of Brothers in Arms, the insurgency’s habitually violent paramilitary force, formed a political party called “New Contract.” It will run candidates in the municipal elections scheduled for Oct. 31. The goal is to win enough seats on municipal councils to prevent mayors from forming governing coalitions or otherwise cooperating with religious parties and Likud.

At the State Department briefing yesterday, a reporter I don't recognize asked a question:

In light of UNRWA donors’ – that’s a UN agency – recent meetings at the UN, will the U.S. ask the UN to inspect and disarm UNRWA refugee camps that have become well-equipped arsenals? And I have a follow-up question.

The question and answer were a bit muddled, but it brings up a point that is rarely mentioned in the media.

All of the major Palestinian militias that have emerged over the past two years came from UNRWA "refugee" camps.

The IDF has not had to invade Jenin -but the Jenin camp. Not Nablus - but the Balata camp. Not Tulkarem - but the Nur Shams camp.

And in Lebanon, many have been killed from infighting in the Ein al-Hilweh camp.

UNRWA is not responsible for security in the camps. But the bigger question is, why do these camps exist to begin with?

There are no longer refugee camps in India and Pakistan from 14 million refugees in the 1940s. The displaced persons camps in Europe for the tens of millions of World War II refugees were closed in the 1950s.

Why do the 600,000 Palestinian refugees from 1948 still have camps?

And especially in areas under Palestinian control, why are there camps at all? It's been nearly 30 years since Oslo and Palestinian self-rule - why do they keep the camps instead of treating their own citizens equally?

Palestinians claim that they want to live in dignity. Where is the dignity of living in a cramped, crowded area ruled by masked terrorists who plant IEDs on every street corner?

Why aren't the Palestinians in the Jenin camp all moved to live in dignity in the rest of Jenin?

These camps, ostensibly to help Palestinians, end up prolonging Palestinian suffering. And what the media refuses to report is that this is a feature, not a bug. The camps provide the media with photo-ops to show Palestinian suffering - and blaming Israel for it, without the cameras widening their views beyond the two square miles of these real open-air prisons.

Here is what Jenin looks like outside the camp. It sure doesn't look like the Jenin we see in the media.

If you care about Palestinians, you should want to see these camps dismantled. If you care more about destroying Israel than helping Palestinians, then you want the camps to stay exactly where they are, forever, to provide a never-ending supply of angry young men to be the next generation of terrorists.

And not one nation on Earth is publicly demanding the first option.

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!

Mahmoud Abbas says that America, not Israel, occupies Palestine, and Israeli women are not allowed to demonstrate with men

Mahmoud Abbas has been saying bizarre things whenever he goes off script for years.

I even saw a columnist praise him for his UN speech for not deviating from the official written script too much, because every time he does he ends up saying something spectacularly stupid.

His antisemitism and hate come through clearly when he speaks extemporaneously. That's when he says things like rabbis call to poison Palestinian wells or that Jews own actions are the reason for the Holocaust.

This latest example isn't quite as egregious but it shows that Abbas is increasingly untethered from reality.

At the “Digital Life and Creativity” forum in Ramallah today, Abbas said, “When Israel says that it is celebrating its independence day, it has gained independence from whom? Who was occupying the State of Israel so that it celebrates the anniversary of its freedom from this occupation? This is a big lie.”

He then said that "America is the one occupying Palestine."

Abbas also claimed that Palestinian women have more human rights than those in Israel, seeming to believe that the mechitza in the Tel Aviv Yom Kippur incident means that Israel believes that "women are an impure gender and it is not permissible for them to walk with men in demonstrations."

Who knew?

He then said that the success of Palestinian women in universities is in contrast to how poorly women are treated in Israel.

As we have mentioned before, the Palestinian Authority has numerous laws discriminating against women, according to the UN:

And his concern for equal rights for women can be seen in his PLO meetings, whose Executive Committee does not have a single woman member.

It is hard to know whether this is senility of simply an extension of the lies that Palestinian leaders have been addicted to over their short history, but then again, what is the difference?

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

This is from the official Palestinian Authority Wafa news agency. Not Hamas or Islamic Jihad, but the "moderate peace partners:"

Settlers desecrate the Ibrahimi Mosque and hold a concert inside it

Hundreds of settlers desecrated the Ibrahimi Mosque (Tomb of the Patriarchs) tonight and held a concert in its courtyards, under heavy protection by the Israeli occupation forces .

Our correspondent reported that hundreds of settlers organized a singing party, including Talmudic dances, inside the Ibrahimi Mosque, to celebrate the Jewish holidays, while the occupation forces imposed strict military measures in the vicinity of the Mosque and the Old Town of the city to secure these celebrations .

Our correspondent stated that the settlers stormed the sanctuary, accompanied by the occupation forces, brought in musical instruments and loudspeakers, and organized a singing concert in a flagrant violation of places of worship.

The director of the Hebron Waqf, Nidal Al-Jaabari, noted to Wafa that the occupation forces allowed their settlers to bring in musical instruments and loudspeakers in the context of imposing their complete control over the Ibrahimi Mosque and its surroundings, at a time when the Palestinians are not allowed to enter the sanctuary’s necessary supplies for maintenance and restoration....

Al-Jaabari considered that what the occupation is doing is a blatant violation of places of worship and the privacy of Muslims, which must be curbed with all force by arriving at the Sanctuary, and placing ambassadors, consuls, and all human rights and humanitarian associations in the world with a view to what is taking place inside and around it of blatant violations and attacks by force of arms .

Al-Jabari saw that the occupation wants, through continuous Judaization operations, including broadcasting images of settlers dancing inside and outside it with all comfort and reassurance...

As we've mentioned many times, there are ten days a year that the Tomb of the Patriarchs is exclusively Muslim and ten days when it is exclusively Jewish. Those days are published well in advance. Yet every time the site is under Jewish control, the Palestinian Authority reports this as if it is a brand new violation.

What about this concert?

If the Jews of Hebron wanted to hold a concert in the site it wouldn't be any different from concerts in any synagogue worldwide. They would have every right to do so. But in this case, the concert that is called a "flagrant violation of places of worship" was held outside, in a tent!

You can watch the entire 5 hour concert here:

The Palestinians want to send international human rights groups to be witness to Jews celebrating the holiday known as "the season of our rejoicing" by singing and dancing. The sight of happy Jews would presumably enrage them as much as it does Palestinians.

The Palestinian Authority officially says that not only do Jews have no rights to their second holiest spot - but they also have no rights to play music and dance outside that building!

In short, they don't want Jews to have any religious rights at all. It might be barely acceptable for Jews to pray quietly in small, dark synagogues away from where any Muslims might be irritated, but Jewish worshipers must not be seen, and Jewish celebrants must not be heard.

I tis the same energy as a Palestinian media outlet this morning saying that Jews praying at the Western Wall are "Hundreds of Israeli settlers break[ing] into the Al-Buraq wall." Jews have no rights, period.

That is the "freedom of religion" that the Palestinians would allow the Jews in their State of Palestine. Not that any Jews would be allowed to live in Hebron or the Old City of Jerusalem to begin with, of course.

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!

10/02 Links Pt2: Israel won the Yom Kippur War - there should be no debate; Asked if Roger Waters is antisemitic, Sharon Osbourne says: ‘Is the Pope a Catholic?’

From Ian:

Michael Doran: The Hidden Calculation Behind the Yom Kippur War

Controversy surrounds the issue to this day. Did administrative inefficiencies and logistical difficulties cause the delays in delivery? Or did someone actively scuttle it? Was that person Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, known to be unsympathetic to Israel? Or Kissinger? Or both? In 1976, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, who had been chief of U.S. naval operations at the time, published a memoir claiming that Kissinger sought “to bleed” Israel to make it more compliant. For Israelis of a certain age, memories of this accusation evoke strong emotions.

But the testimony of Zumwalt, who was running for Senate as a Democrat when he made the accusation, is unconvincing. Throughout the war, Nixon and Kissinger remained true to their strategy of pursuing a balance that favored Israel—slightly—while trying to avoid any precipitous moves that would spark a direct Soviet escalation.

By the end of the first week of the war, Nixon realized that Moscow was exploiting American restraint beyond what he could tolerate. Brezhnev had launched a massive operation to resupply the armies of Syria and Egypt, and it was obvious to Nixon that the Arab coalition had no intention of pursuing a ceasefire. These facts convinced him and Kissinger that, in keeping with their promises to Meir in 1970, they had no choice but to match any weapons system that the Soviets might introduce into the Middle East. It was necessary to demonstrate to the world that America would put its weapons into more capable hands—Israeli hands—come what may.

Nixon called Kissinger on October 14 to emphasize that the resupply must not only be effective, but massive. “We are going to get blamed just as much for three planes as for 300. . . . Henry, I have no patience with the view that we send in a couple of planes. My point is, . . . if . . . we are going to make a move, it’s going to cost us. . . . I don’t think it’s going to cost us a damn bit more to send in more.” Two hours later Nixon called back for an update. “If I contribute anything to [this] discussion, it is [this]: don’t fool around with three planes. . . . Just go gung-ho.”

And they did. A total of 550 U.S. transport planes flew to Israel over the next few weeks. At its peak, one plane landed every fifteen minutes. Within a few days, the U.S. effort had surpassed the Soviet airlift to Egypt and Syria. At the same time, the administration placed before Congress a $2.2 billion request for emergency loans and grants to Israel.

Nixon and Kissinger delivered on all previous commitments to the Jewish state, risking a confrontation with the Soviets. When the administration placed nuclear forces around the world on alert, critics accused Nixon of manufacturing the crisis to distract from Watergate. If anything, the opposite was true. Fear that the United States might look impotent due to the president’s political travails convinced Kissinger and everyone else around the president of the necessity of sending a signal of seriousness to Moscow.

In sum, Kissinger and a wounded Nixon were behaving according to their strategy, which called for demonstrating that the United States would not be cowed by Soviet moves and that regional powers, such as Egypt, could attain their aspirations only within the American camp.

To Israelis traumatized by the Yom Kippur War, and by the deaths of friends, comrades in arms, and family members, Kissinger’s view that Israel is an asset in a larger game is disturbingly Machiavellian. To this day, mention of the former secretary of state often stirs strident reactions. In the view of the Israeli left, the Yom Kippur War could have been avoided, if only Washington and Jerusalem had been more attentive to Sadat. Instead, the argument goes, the U.S. let him stew in his own juices when a territory-for-peace agreement was already available. Those who accept this view take Kissinger to task for the strategic relationship that he and Nixon developed with Meir and Rabin between 1970 and 1973. In the view of the right, meanwhile, Kissinger deliberately weakened Israel—bled it, according to Zumwalt—in order to create a balance of power with Egypt.

In truth, neither accusation is true. Kissinger was completely transparent about his intentions. At a press conference on October 12, 1973, he stated them up front: “After hostilities broke out, the United States set itself two principal objectives. One, to end the hostilities as quickly as possible. Secondly, to end the hostilities in such a manner that they would contribute to the promotion of a more permanent, more lasting solution in the Middle East.” In other words, he wanted to use the war as a tool to achieve an important American objective.

V. The Upside
This leads us to the final way in which 1973 was unlike 1967: it produced a significant political settlement. With the help of Kissinger, Jerusalem and Cairo concluded a disengagement-of-forces agreement in February 1974. It was the first direct peaceful engagement between countries after nearly a quarter of a century of hostilities. In the 50 years that have passed by since, not a single shot has been exchanged in anger between Egypt and Israel. One day, Kissinger will meet his maker, and the totality of his actions will be weighed in the balance. When that day comes, his behavior on the Day Atonement 1973 will give him much less to atone for than his critics assume.

One could, of course, arrive at a very different conclusion based on the evidence presented here. If you believe that Israel’s failure to preempt—or even to mobilize sooner—was the essential blunder of 1973, then it wasn’t Golda Meir or Israeli arrogance or the konseptzia or Ashraf Marwan that was at fault. It was Nixon and Kissinger, who restrained Israel, and thus caused the meḥdal. But such an interpretation is narrowminded in the extreme. It ignores, first, how much the failure to understand the Egyptian concept of operations was responsible for the traumatic Israeli losses in the first few days of the war. More importantly, it fails to see the significance of the strategic alliance that Nixon and Kissinger cemented with Israel. They might have restrained Israel, but in return for Jerusalem’s cooperation they provided it with the arms necessary to win the war, a security commitment that endures to this day, and a strategic alliance.

And that brings us to the most crucial fact about the Yom Kippur War: it was a joint Israeli and American victory, even if it was for Sadat a successful military operation of the kind that he had envisioned from the beginning. By simultaneously repulsing the Syrians and the Egyptians and going on to threaten Cairo and Damascus, even in the face of an overwhelming surprise attack, the IDF demonstrated that there was no way an Arab military coalition could defeat it by conventional means. Syria has remained Israel’s enemy, but it hasn’t dared to attack again. Egypt became an American and Israeli ally, and the relationship between the Jewish state and the United States emerged stronger than ever. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union’s best weapons proved to be no match for America’s.

It is true that there was no shortage of Israeli and American blunders in 1973, but there were Soviet and Egyptian blunders as well. The Jewish state may not have achieved a victory of biblical proportions as it had in 1967, but ultimately it achieved a more durable one. This was thanks to Golda Meir’s determination and the courage and resourcefulness of countless Israeli soldiers and officers, but also to Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, the greatest supporters of Israel that have ever run American foreign policy.

Mordechai Kedar: Israel won the Yom Kippur War - there should be no debate

A greater victory that the Six Day War in 1967
From a dry military point of view, and when you compare Israel’s situation at the beginning of the war to its end: among its army, leadership, and people, there is no escaping the conclusion that it was a huge victory. It could be argued that it was greater than the victory in the Six Day War in 1967 which took only a few hours to destroy the enemies’ planes.

The air forces of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, were vanquished leading the army’s path later in the war and allowing it to conquer Sinai, Judea, Samaria, and the Golan Heights, and all this in only six days.

The victory in the Yom Kippur War was the main factor that pushed the president of Egypt, Muhammad Anwar el-Sadat, to seek peace with Israel.

Sadat realized that despite the fact that Israel had been caught by surprise, that Egypt had managed to cross the Suez Canal on the first day, and that Israel had to face two fronts acting in coordination, it was able to inflict a strong defeat on both the Egyptians and the Syrians, removing them from the territories they occupied at the beginning of the war – and eventually conquering additional territories far beyond.

President Anwar Sadat understood that Israel was invincible and all Arab attempts to conquer and destroy it, past and future, were doomed to failure.

Based on this conclusion, two years after the war he opened a series of secret talks with Israel and these talks led to a historic peace treaty signed in 1979.

This conclusion is still valid today and should be clearly understood. Only an Israeli victory can bring peace because in the Middle East peace is only accepted by those who see their enemies as invincible.

Yom Kippur War declassified: A look at the war like never before

“In the early afternoon of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, on October 6, 1973, alarm sirens interrupted the silence of the fast, and the signal was given for the start of the Yom Kippur War, which has become a national trauma in Israel’s history. Although the war ended with military victories, 2,656 soldiers were killed, hundreds were taken prisoner, and over 7,200 soldiers and civilians were wounded. The fighting and its results were unbearably difficult for a country that just a few months earlier had celebrated its 25th Independence Day.”

This is the introduction to the newly declassified material from the Israel State Archives that has been posted on its website in accordance with a government decision ahead of the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War. It comprises some 3,500 files, including about 1,400 paper files, 1,000 photographs, 800 audio clips, 150 transcripts, and eight videos.

The Israel State Archives (www.archives.gov.il/en/), which is part of the Prime Minister’s Office, said it has been working for the past two and a half years on making the files that tell the story of the Yom Kippur War – on the front lines, on the home front, and in the government – accessible to the public. “For the first time, it is possible to use original documents in order to research and feel the drama and the emotions among the public, the IDF, and the leadership, comprehensively and directly,” it said. “Some of the material relays the events minute by minute and allows us to relive the feelings of those who were present at the events.” What has been declassified from the Yom Kippur War?

There are audio clips and photographs; transcripts and original files from government ministries and the military; diplomatic documents and testimonies; protocols of government and war cabinet meetings; high-level discussions and civil defense assessments; information on the home front; and much more.

This material, most of which was previously classified, has been checked and scanned, and cleared by the censor. It is now available as an archival collection of information on the war, beginning with decision-making by the country’s leadership in a time of uncertainty; the fighting on the various fronts; the Israeli home front; diplomatic contacts with Arab states; and mediation by the major powers until the 1974 Separation of Forces Agreement.

The documents provide records of deliberations between then-prime minister Golda Meir and security chiefs in the days before Syria and Egypt launched a coordinated attack on October 6, 1973. A day before, Military Intelligence Directorate chief Eli Zeira (who turned 95 this year) signaled that the intelligence establishment did not have enough information on a planned attack by the Egyptians and the Syrians. “I must say, we don’t have sufficient proof that they don’t intend to attack,” he said. “We don’t have conclusive indications that they want to attack, but I can’t say based on knowledge that they aren’t preparing.”

Chief Archivist Ruti Abramovitz said the State Archives had endeavored to show “the 360-degree story of the war,” which affected every facet of life in Israel.

The Yom Kippur War ignited a survival instinct within a young Jewish nation that wasn't expecting conflict. Fifty years on, we ask: How did the trauma of this war and events like the Holocaust come into play? pic.twitter.com/3knMGPsaGp
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) October 2, 2023

Every year, Palestinian media and the Palestinian Authority claim that when Israel closes its crossings during Jewish holidays, it is just a "pretense" for hurting Palestinians and a racist decision.

But here is how they are reporting on Egypt closing the Rafah crossing with Gaza this week to celebrate the Yom Kippur War:

The Egyptian authorities decided to close the Rafah land crossing Thursday, October 5, 2023, on the occasion of the 6th of October anniversary among the Egyptian brothers.

The General Authority for Crossings and Borders said that Thursday, October 5, 2023 is an official holiday on the occasion of the 6th of October anniversary among our Egyptian brothers, and therefore the Rafah land and commercial crossings will be closed in both directions.

When Israel closes borders for the holidays, it is because they are racist haters of Palestinians. When Egypt or Jordan close their borders from Palestinians crossing on their own holidays, they are "brothers" whose decisions make perfect sense and who must be cooperated 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!

Latest EoZ memes and cartoons

It's been a few weeks since I last posted my latest graphics....

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!

10/02 Links Pt1: High-Level Iranian Spy Ring Busted in Washington; The International Court of Justice is being manipulated to find Israel guilty

From Ian:

Lee Smith: High-Level Iranian Spy Ring Busted in Washington

In response to a Tablet email requesting comment on Malley’s and Tabatabai’s role in an Iranian spy ring, a State Department spokesman wrote: “We have seen the Semafor article, which does not presume it was a ‘spy ring,’ and we reject that characterization. Rob Malley remains on leave and we have no further comment due to privacy considerations. The Biden-Harris administration appointed Ariane Tabatabai to serve various roles in the U.S. government because of her expertise on nuclear and other foreign policy issues.” The Defense Department did not respond by press time to Tablet’s email requesting comment on Ariane Tabatabai’s role in an Iranian spy ring.

Whether the IEI is best characterized as an Iranian “spy ring” or as a “regime-directed influence operation” is a semantic question that beggars the larger question of how any responsible U.S. security official in possession of Tabatabai’s correspondence could have cleared her to enter the State Department building or the Pentagon—let alone cleared her to work as a chief of staff in the Defense Department, with direct access to the most sensitive real-time details of U.S. special forces operations.

It seems likely that by the time of her appointment to the Pentagon’s special operations office, Tabatabai’s covert activities on behalf of the Iranian regime were well known in Biden administration and intelligence circles. “The hoops you have to jump through to get a bare-bones top secret clearance even without compartments or special access programs are enormous,” says Theroux. “They grill you on your foreign contacts. Contacts with any foreign government raise more red flags than Bernie Sanders’ honeymoon. Contacts with senior officials from enemy governments, classified as non-frat governments like Russia, China, Cuba, as well as Iran, are in a different category altogether—what would normally be totally disqualifying.”

There is also the fact that, as early as 2014, as Tablet has reported, the Obama administration was spying on Israeli officials and their contacts within the United States, including U.S. lawmakers and pro-Israel activists. The fact that U.S. intelligence services routinely disobeyed guidelines preventing them from unmasking the identities of U.S. persons recorded in transcripts of foreign intelligence intercepts has been exhaustively demonstrated in a long series of U.S. government reports, Congressional investigations, and other reporting. Since Zarif’s communications and the IRGC’s communications were also collected, U.S. officials would have known about the IEI—and about the names of those working on behalf of Iran, such as Vaez and Tabatabai.

Theroux suggests that a range of U.S. authorities would have likely known about Malley’s involvement with the IEI as well—and that Malley would have been well aware of what they knew. “When I was on the National Security Council, the National Security Agency would call to alert me when my name had popped up in a conversation among bad actors,” Theroux recalls.

The facts of Malley’s involvement with the IEI and its agents are likely to have been old news within the Biden administration; the impending publication of the IEI emails is likely the reason why Malley was put on leave in April and had his security clearances suspended. As news of emails and their impending publication circulated in Washington, the administration moved him to the sidelines before Republican officials had the chance to demand his head on a spike.

Why an Iranian operative is still at the Pentagon, especially in a job which gives her daily access to classified information that puts the country’s most sensitive military operations at risk, is another matter entirely. “The optimistic reading,” says Theroux, “is that they were watching her to see what she does and the FBI has her apartment all teched up. But to be an optimist you have to believe the FBI is clean, rather than see this as a huge counterintelligence failure. Though, of course, it’s not a failure if they were complicit.”

So far, however, the evidence points to a less optimistic reading: The Biden administration allowed Malley to push an Iranian agent into sensitive national security positions because she was best equipped to carry out the administration’s own policy—to appease a terror regime with American blood on its hands. Because the number of American officials who want to be responsible for protecting Iran’s nuclear weapons program is limited, the White House went outside the federal bureaucracy for someone who was well-connected to the regime, and would relish the job of advancing its interests—an Iranian spy.

Congress needs to demand the Biden White House make Malley and Tabatabai available to testify immediately. It must also press to interview the security officials who buried evidence of Tabatabai’s covert activities, putting her in a position to endanger the lives of American civilians and special forces operators. It’s time to find out why the interests—and now the personnel—of the Iranian “death to America” regime intersect so frequently with those of America’s own ruling party.

The International Court of Justice is being manipulated to find Israel guilty

Centuries of libels have resulted in a situation in which conclusions blaming Jews for misfortunes are readily drawn, and false allegations against them are credulously accepted. In modern times, prejudice against the Jewish people has been directed against Israel as the world’s only Jewish state.

This prejudice has been compounded by the successful exploitation of UN bodies by members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and their allies in developing countries to focus, to an utterly disproportionate extent, on criticism of Israel.

The questions asked of the ICJ presuppose that Israel is denying the Palestinian people their right to self-determination. But will the Court be told that according to a 2021 opinion poll by the Palestinian news agency SHFA, 93% of Jerusalem’s Arabs would prefer a continuation of Israeli rule of the united city? And will it be mentioned that the Palestinian leaders have not held a general election since 2006?

They complain that Israel has aimed at altering the demographic composition of Jerusalem. Will anyone observe that the Arab proportion of Jerusalem’s population has increased from 26% to 39% since 1967?

The current process calls to mind medieval disputations, in which there could only be one verdict, that the Jews are guilty. Now, like then, our representatives are faced with a difficult decision: should they try to dispute the masses of falsities, which might give more credibility to the phony process, or simply denounce it as a travesty?

In the security barrier case, Israel argued that the ICJ should not give an opinion and did not address the facts to any great extent. Its arguments were rejected.

But someone should tell the ICJ and the world that it has been presented with a pack of lies. If the Court endorses the false and distorted information, it will promote racist hostility and violence against Israel and Jewish people around the world and make peace more difficult to achieve.

Netanyahu's speech at the UN General Assembly - what he didn't say

He did not mention the word Hamas once. Yet up to half the Palestinian population lives in the Gaza Strip under the pernicious governance of the Hamas organization. How could the two-state solution – the concept of a sovereign Palestine living alongside a sovereign Israel – be a practical possibility when Hamas, and those Palestinians outside Gaza who subscribe to its philosophy, regard the whole area “from the river to the sea” (that is, from the Jordan to the Mediterranean) as Arab territory to which Israel has no right? The prime purpose of Hamas, its very raison d’être, is to eradicate Israel altogether and ensure that no Jews remain in the area.

The 2002 Arab Peace Plan, to which Saudi Arabia still subscribes, was conceived before Hamas was of any major significance, and well before it had seized control of Gaza and virtually kidnapped a great mass of the Palestinian people. Netanyahu did not ask the world why so little thought has been given to the practical hurdles on the path to achieving its much-advocated two-state solution.

Since Hamas would never be a signatory to such a deal, Gaza would be excluded from the arrangement. What sort of sovereign Palestine could it be, shorn of half the Palestinian population? In short, Netanyahu could have provided world opinion with some home truths, among them that the prerequisite to achieving a genuine two-state solution is the disempowerment of Hamas.

Another word that did not pass Netanyahu’s lips was “apartheid” – the charge used to tar Israel by bodies like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International and a whole host of anti-Israel groups and individuals. He could have provided the world with a brief lesson on the total lack of ethnic, racial, or religious discrimination of any kind within the sovereign state of Israel – and demonstrated with facts and figures the increasingly successful integration of Israel’s Arab population into the social, political and judicial structure of the state.

On September 9, Milad Munther al-Rai was shot dead by Israeli forces in the Arroub camp, north of Hebron. He was throwing Molotov cocktails at the IDF troops.

According to Defense for Children International, he was 15 years old and shot for no reason. Others say he was 16.

Palestinian media were filled with articles about how Milad was just a child, with a "dewy" singing voice he inherited from his father and his love for playing football even though the camp had no fields.

While his body was wrapped with the Islamic Jihad flag, I didn't see any official report from the terror group claiming him as a member, perhaps because the propaganda value of him being regarded as an innocent child was much higher than portraying him as a heroic fighter.

But three weeks later, when Islamic Jihad is publishing its accomplishments for the month, Milad Munther al-Rai has now transformed into that mujahid.

In a press release listing its "accomplishments" during September, Islamic Jihad listed six members as mujahadeen martyrs during that month including Milad:

Martyr mujahideen Milad Munther al-Ra’i (16 years old) from Al-Aroub camp in the city of Hebron was killed during confrontations with the occupation forces on September 9th.

Yet even today, there is not a word of condemnation from "human rights groups" about Palestinian groups recruiting child soldiers, a violation of international law, despite proof that many child soldiers have been killed this year alone.

Because they don't want to dilute their consistent anti-Israel messaging by saying anything bad about terrorists.

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!