Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, March 12, 2024

03/12 Links Pt2: The WWII ‘lessons’ that wouldn’t have saved a single Jew; Hollywood Jews are like turkeys for Christmas; The Holiday from History Is Over

From Ian:

The WWII ‘lessons’ that wouldn’t have saved a single Jew

Antisemites like Ken Roth, ‘as-a-Jews’ like Jonathan Glazer, and even non-antisemites like US President Joe Biden are lecturing Israel on the lessons Israel should learn from the Holocaust and the Second World War, but their ‘lessons’ would have prolonged the war, left Hitler in power, and led to more Jews being murdered in gas chambers.

There’s a lot that can be learned from the Holocaust and World War II as a whole. There are lessons in the bravery of some and the cowardice of others. There is so much to be learned from how Hitler was allowed to start another World War and commit a crime so great a new word had to be developed to describe it, "genocide", as well in how he was finally defeated.

People seem to love to try to apply these lessons to Jews and the Jewish State, Israel, especially in the aftermath of the Hamas massacre of October 7, the worst massacre committed against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. But the lessons they want Israel to learn would not have stopped World War II or saved a single one of the six million Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.

On Sunday, during the Academy Awards, Writer/director Jonathan Glazer used his acceptance speech for best international picture to attack Israel using the supposed “lessons” of the Holocaust and even “renounced” his Jewishness.

“Our film shows where dehumanization leads, at its worst,” Glazer said. “Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel, or the ongoing attack on Gaza, all the victims, this humanization, how do we resist?”

How fitting that the film for which Glazer won his award, “Zone of Interest,” is a Holocaust film in which the actual victims of the Holocaust, the Jews, never appear. He has joined the ranks of the ‘as-a-Jews,’ those supposedly Jewish people for whom Judaism is nothing more than a means to attack or erase the 99% of the Jewish people who don’t think Jews should let themselves be slaughtered.

Former Human Rights Watch Director Ken Roth, the man who almost single-handedly transformed that NGO from a respected defender of human rights into an antisemitic cesspool obsessed with denying Israel’s right to not let its civilians be murdered, invoked the Holocaust on Sunday while criticizing Israel’s left-wing president.

“The Holocaust teaches no one's rights are secure unless everyone's are, but Israeli Pres. Herzog faces protests today for spreading the opposite message by saying there are no "uninvolved civilians" in Gaza, suggesting Palestinian rights are dispensable,” Roth wrote on X.

It is no secret that Roth believes that Israeli and Jewish lives are dispensable, just as so many did before and during World War II.

Hollywood Jews are like turkeys for Christmas

One cannot help but compare Glazer to Marius von Mayenburg, whose play Nachtland is having a short run in London. Nachtland tells the story of Nicola and Philipp, German siblings who find a painting by A. Hitler in their father’s attic. In an effort to find a Nazi provenance for the painting so that they can sell it for a fortune, the family’s past associations with Martin Bormann are revealed. It is up to Philipp’s Jewish wife Judith to make the moral case for why the family should not be making money from the blood of dead Jews.

Nicola brings up the Palestinians in order to tell Judith to ‘learn from the lessons of history’.

‘Isn’t it surprising that the Jews of all people should know better than to ‘erect camps, build walls and kill innocents’, she declares.

Judith retorts: ‘If you think you can talk about Israel and point fingers as if it has nothing whatsover to do with Germany, then (…) I’m not going to do your homework for you, and I can’t give you absolution …with your vain perpetrator cult…look it up yourself, al-Husseini, Arafat, Ahmed Yassin, the Hamas charter.”

Interestingly enough, these words, written before the 7 October Hamas massacre, were cut out of the script on the night I saw Nachtland. The director clearly thought that, spoken against the background of the current Israel-Hamas war, they would prove too controversial for some in the audience. But they are in the playtext.

Marius von Mayenburg knows what Jonathan Glazer could not be bothered to find out: that there there is a direct link between the Holocaust, the Palestinian Nazi collaborator Haj Amin al Husseini and the Nazi-inspired Muslim Brotherhood, whose Gaza branch – Hamas – was founded in 1987 by Ahmed Yassin.

Like turkeys voting for Christmas, the Hollywood glitterati who sport their Free Palestine pins and abjure their Jewishness have no idea that they are actually supporting a form of antisemitism that would murder them – as Jews – if it could.

It takes a non-Jewish German to have the moral clarity that Glazer and Co so clearly lack.

Latest EoZ cartoons and memes

Still about a week behind, check out my Twitter for the latest!

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!

Those Pushing For Diplomacy Between Israel And Hamas Forget The Secret Ingredient (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

When people argue that Israel and Hamas need to negotiate and make peace, they sometimes draw comparisons between Hamas and the IRA:

Yes, they have to negotiate w/ Hamas. Just like the Brits had to negotiate with the IRA in Northern Ireland in the 1990s. The IRA were terrorists. They almost killed Margaret Thatcher once. But negotiation was necessary for durable peace. Have to do it in Israel now & end the war https://t.co/3WblyxUcfB
— Zane (@zanealb04) March 8, 2024

It is not an unexpected sentiment.

Those negotiations led to the Good Friday Agreement in 2001, where the Irish Republican Army agreed to begin disarming. It was an amazing achievement.

CNN interviewed Secretary of State Colin Powell and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Powell praised the agreement, saying it "shows what can happen when one remains persistent and is determined to solve what appear to be intractable problems." Midway through the press conference, the topic of Israel came up.

The final question was, "Secretary Powell, does the situation in Northern Ireland not show us all that negotiations is really the only way forward in all of these situations?" Israel was not mentioned, but it clearly was on everyone's mind.

Powell responded:

what we have seen in Northern Ireland in the last 24 hours, which culminates a process that took many, many years long to get to this point, is an example of what can be achieved when people of good will come together, recognize they have strong differences -- differences that they have fought over for years -- but it's time to put those differences aside in order to move forward and to provide a better life for the children of Northern Ireland.

Very...tactful. He praised both the participants and the diplomatic process in general.

But Straw got in the last word:

It also has to be said that, before that happened, there had to be a change of approach by those who saw terrorism as the answer. And that approach partly changed because of the firmness of the military and police response to that terrorism. And if there had not been that firm response by successive British governments and others to the terrorist threat that was posed on both sides, we would not have been able to get some of those people into negotiation, and we'd not be marking what is a satisfactory day in the history of Northern Ireland today.

Before diplomacy could work, terrorism had to be defeated and those who practiced it had to reject it. And for that to happen, military force was necessary.

And terrorism still needs to be rejected. A diplomatic approach won't suffice.

Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, made this point in his Victory Project. He wrote in 2017 that Israel needs "to indicate to the Palestinians that this conflict, this war that they have been engaged in for a century, is over. And they lost. And they've got to recognize it." He describes a plan of deterrence that goes beyond tough tactics:

When Palestinian “martyrs” cause material damage, pay for repairs out of the roughly $300 million in tax obligations the government of Israel transfers to the Palestinian Authority (PA) each year. Respond to activities designed to isolate and weaken Israel internationally by limiting access to the West Bank. When a Palestinian attacker is killed, bury the body quietly and anonymously in a potter’s field. When the PA leadership incites violence, prevent officials from returning to the PA from abroad. Respond to the murder of Israelis by expanding Jewish towns on the West Bank. When official PA guns are turned against Israelis, seize these and prohibit new ones, and if this happens repeatedly, dismantle the PA’s security infrastructure. Should violence continue, reduce and then shut off the water and electricity that Israel supplies. In the case of gunfire, mortar shelling, and rockets, occupy and control the areas from which these originate.

Israel has used some of these suggestions, such as subtracting from the tax money that goes to the PA in response to Abbas's pay-to-slay program. And in light of the Hamas massacre of October 7, Israel may consider stricter measures, both in terms of Gaza and the West Bank. The measures themselves are not purely punitive. Their goal is deterrence and ultimately to show the Palestinian Arabs that they have lost.

That would be the opposite of the approach of the Dalai Lama to the terrorist attack of 9-11:

How to respond to such an attack is a very difficult question. Of course, those who are dealing with the problem may know better, but I feel that careful consideration is necessary and that it is appropriate to respond to an act of violence by employing the principles of nonviolence.

The Dalai Lama (YouTube screenshot)

And yet even here, he leaves some wiggle room for a stronger, harsher approach:

Of course, in particular instances a more aggressive approach may also be necessary.

Two years later, the Dalai Lama raised eyebrows when the New York Times reported, Dalai Lama Says Terror May Need a Violent Reply

The Dalai Lama, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and one of the world's most prominent advocates of nonviolence, said in an interview yesterday that it might be necessary to fight terrorists with violence...

He goes on to say that ''terrorism is the worst kind of violence, so we have to check it, we have to take countermeasures" and even suggests, at the time, that it was ''too early to say'' whether the war in Iraq was a mistake.

In 2009, the Dalai Lama was still saying the same thing:

The Dalai Lama, a lifelong champion of non-violence on Saturday candidly stated that terrorism cannot be tackled by applying the principle of ahimsa [non-violence] because the minds of terrorists are closed.

And if the minds of terrorists are closed, then as Jack Straw suggested, military force is necessary, and as Daniel Pipes says, you have to convince them that they have lost.

Who knows? Maybe even Biden understands that to a degree. In an interview following his State of the Union Address, Biden was asked when Hamas really wants a ceasefire:

Biden admits the futility of a ceasefire and acknowledges that Hamas will use the opportunity to rearm itself for more attacks -- before pausing and going back to attacking Israel, with an outlandish accusation that it is carpet-bombing Gaza, consistent with his unquestioning acceptance of Hamas's exaggerated number of casualties.

And if Hamas is allowed to live to fight another day -- it will.

The fact remains -- Israel will not win unless Hamas loses.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

03/12 Links Pt1: Biden’s Alienating Strategy; The Road to Ceasefire Leads Through the Rafah Offensive; What's Behind the Propaganda War Against Israel

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Biden’s Alienating Strategy

Joe Biden is used to talking to Israel-skeptics who insist their beef isn’t with the Israeli people but with their government, and claim that their resentment isn’t aimed at the Jewish state’s existence but at the lack of a Palestinian state alongside it. The problem is, those folks are gone. Or, to put it more precisely, the people protesting Biden’s support for Israel no longer rely on polite arguments. Now they come right out and say they object to Israel’s very existence.

Biden refuses to address this new reality. It’s the primary reason why his attempts to mollify his party’s base on Gaza have fallen flat. They are talking right past each other.

Biden’s MSNBC interview with Jonathan Capehart on March 10 made it clear the administration has settled on the talking point that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the problem. “In my view,” the president said, “[Netanyahu] is hurting Israel more than helping Israel by making the rest of the world—it’s contrary to what Israel stands for. And I think it’s a big mistake.”

What is the “it” here? Biden tried to explain that Bibi is not, apparently, paying enough “attention to the innocent lives being lost as a consequence of the actions taken.”

That didn’t make it any clearer, but his discussion of the war in Gaza followed this pattern: he brought it back it back to Bibi.

Vice President Kamala Harris took a more explicit route to the same destination. “I think it’s important for us to distinguish, or at least to not conflate, the Israeli government with the Israeli people,” Harris said. “The Israeli people are entitled to security, as are the Palestinians. In equal measure.”

This is the sort of thing the administration says about the Palestinians and Hamas. The moral equivalence is egregious, but another problem with it is this: Whom are they talking to? Who is the audience for this?

Vilifying Bibi was edgy a decade ago, maybe, especially as a way of saying Israel might conceivably have the right to defend itself but not this way. Today, the activists powering the pro-Hamas protest movement don’t believe and don’t claim that “the Israeli people are entitled to security.” They are, instead, saying that the Israeli people are colonizers, that decolonization is necessarily violent, and that Israel doesn’t have the right to security and self-defense from the people it supposedly oppresses.

Biden and Harris are arguing with a ghost.

Jacob Stoil & John Spencer: The Road to Ceasefire Leads Through the Rafah Offensive

Chair of Applied History at the West Point Modern War Institute; chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point

When Hamas attacked and invaded Israel, it did so knowing there would be a massive response by Israel and an operation into Gaza. It knew many Gazan civilians would die, indeed they counted on it, referring to their population as a "nation of martyrs." Hamas' hope is that repeated attacks like Oct. 7 will eventually break the will of the Israeli population. To do that, Hamas would need to survive the war.

Hamas saw that if the U.S. could be made uncomfortable enough with the continuing war, it would put more pressure on Israel to wind down operations. Hamas believes the U.S. will keep Israel out of Rafah, enabling Hamas to walk away with a strategic victory and emerge as the only Palestinian organization to defeat Israel.

Without the realistic threat of an Israeli operation in Rafah, Hamas has no reason to seek a ceasefire, and given Hamas' strategy, there can be no truly lasting ceasefire if Hamas can return to control Gaza. Hamas' unwillingness to negotiate is entirely dependent on the U.S. acting as Hamas wants.

What's Behind the Propaganda War Against Israel

What does Israel have to do to be allowed by the rest of the world to defend itself? The insistent effort by some governments, officials and much of the media in the U.S. and Europe to get the Jewish state to relent against enemies that actively seek to destroy it gives rise to the suspicion that for too many of them, perhaps Israel doesn't deserve the right to exist at all. Fortunately, Israel doesn't need the West's permission to save itself.

The president feels obliged to balance his support of Israel with a rhetorical campaign of increasingly shrill, daily denunciations of Israel's efforts in Gaza. He told MSNBC that the offensive in Gaza was "hurting Israel more than helping Israel...and I think it's a big mistake."

Even after the horrors of Oct. 7, Israel is tagged as the aggressor in the media. Israel is said to have - either recklessly or out of genocidal intent - massacred tens of thousands of innocent civilians. But in the process of extirpating Hamas it was inevitable civilians would be killed. This wasn't simply because there is "collateral" damage in any large-scale warfare, but because Hamas intended it that way. To the terror group, the propaganda value of a dead Palestinian child is as great as that of an Israeli.

From the official Palestinian Wafa news agency:

Thousands of Palestinian worshipers today evening performed Tarawih prayers in the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, despite the restrictions imposed by the Israeli occupation.

The Islamic Endowments Department said that about 35,000 worshipers performed the Tarawih prayers inside Al-Aqsa Mosque, on the first day of the holy month of Ramadan, despite the occupation’s measures.

There are so many stories in the media about how Israel makes it difficult for Muslims to worship at Al Aqsa, yet a nighttime prayer session attracts far more people than could fit in Madison Square Garden.

While the media emphasizes that Israel restricts young men from going there, that appears to only apply to West Bank Palestinians. Muslims who live in Israel, including Arab sections of Jerusalem, don't seem to have any problems getting there.

How many articles mention that?

The media spends more time talking about a couple of hundred Jews visiting their holiest site than tens of thousands of Muslims visiting (and, from the perspective of Jewish law, desecrating) the site every day.

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!

Intelligence assessments must be based on both excellent ability to gather raw data and the ability to judge that data objectively, understanding what is important and what is not. Political considerations, personal and organizational egos and other subjective factors have no place in good intel reports.

I have great respect for US intelligence capabilities and assessments. So when I saw this New York Times headline "Netanyahu’s Coalition ‘May Be in Jeopardy,’ Intelligence Report Says - The document predicted that Israel would struggle to achieve its goal of destroying Hamas in Gaza" I was concerned that perhaps there was something in the report that would show a crack in the intelligence community's objectivity.

There is, but not in the way the NYT reports it.

The report does make both those points amongst hundreds of others. And no one disagrees.

The Netanyahu coalition has always been precarious even before the war but no one has been able to put together an alternative that has more support. Anger at the Israeli intelligence failure that led to so many deaths is widespread in Israel. And no one says destroying Hamas completely would not be a struggle, especially because of its tunnel infrastructure. The report says nothing that would be out of place in any Israeli newspaper every day.

In short, the assessment is reasonable, but the NYT is trying to make it frame it like a prophecy. That is not how intelligence works. The 2023 report did not mention Hamas as a threat at all, and neither did the reports from 2022 or 2021. It isn't a crystal ball. It prepares the US for possibilities and probabilities.

However, one word in this section of the report does point to a crack in the US intelligence community's objectivity:

Both al-Qa‘ida and ISIS, inspired by the HAMAS attack against Israel, have directed their supporters to conduct attacks against Israeli and U.S. interests. The HAMAS attack is encouraging individuals to conduct acts of antisemitic and Islamophobic terror worldwide and is galvanizing individuals to leverage the Palestinian plight for recruitment and inspiration to conduct attacks. The Nordic Resistance Movement—a transnational neo-Nazi organization—publicly praised the attack, illustrating the conflict’s appeal to a range of threat actors.

Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, repeated this almost verbatim to a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday. "We have seen how [Hamas] is inspiring individuals to conduct acts of antisemitism and Islamophobic terror worldwide,” she said.

Who is conducting acts of Islamophobic terror? Where? When? Who are these vigilante terror gangs targeting Muslims in response to Hamas? Israel does not exactly have Houthi-style allies that engage in terror attacks against Muslims in solidarity with Kibbutz Be'eri.

Perhaps they are referring to attacks by hot-headed Israeli "settlers" but those are not Islamophobic and they are not worldwide. The man accused of shooting three Palestinians in Vermont is mentally ill and sympathetic to Hamas, not Israel. There are always a small number of incidents against Muslims, and they did increase somewhat after 10/7, but terror attacks?

In recent years, there has been a tendency to routinely and unthinkingly add the word "Islamophobia" after the word "antisemitism" in every context, as if the two are equivalent. They aren't. In this case, the US intelligence heads are saying that the Hamas war is inspiring terrorist acts against Muslims - and it isn't.

This reflexive addition of "Islamophobia" with every mention of antisemitism is dangerous to Jews. Antisemitism is a unique kind of hate and not a specific example of more generalized bigotry. Conflating it with Islamophobia waters down antisemitism, Jew-hatred cannot be combatted using the same tools and methods to fight racism or other kinds of hate. Putting it in the same bucket as Islamophobia helps empower antisemites.

Adding in "Islamophobia" in this assessment is politics, not intelligence. It has no place in this report. Anyone who admires the US intelligence community should be very concerned that this indicates a direction away from objectivity that could lead to disaster.

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 Farooq Taifour in Algerian newspaper El Hiwar:

International Zionism has been able to spread gigantic myths and lies to establish its entity and has begun to harness all tools and means and use all capabilities and positions of influence in the countries it has infiltrated or blackmailed their rulers and elites. These myths and lies have become an accepted reality and facts that cannot be denied or refuted, which requires us to know the sources from which it takes and borrows these beliefs, as Zionism derives its thought and beliefs, as stated in many documents and sources, from the holy books that were distorted by the Jews.

Zionism formulated its thought in the record of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, where Zionism considers all the Jews of the world to be members of one nationality, which is the Israeli nationality. It aims for Jewish control over the world, as promised to them by their God, Jehovah, and the starting point for this is the establishment of their government in the Promised Land, which extends from the Nile River to the Euphrates River.

They also believe that the Jews are the excellent element that should prevail, and all other peoples are their servants. They believe that the best way to rule the world is on the basis of intimidation and violence. They call for harnessing political freedom in order to control the masses, and they say: "We must know how to offer them the bait that will trap them in our nets." They say: "The era in which power was in religion has ended, and power today belongs to gold alone, so we must collect it in our grip by every means, to facilitate our control over the world."

They believe that politics is the opposite of morality, and that it requires deceit and hypocrisy, while virtues and honesty are vices according to the custom of politics.

To establish these beliefs and policies, it has falsified history, distorted documents, and used events and crises to benefit its project and achieve its cancerous goals that must be exposed and the method used to embody them known, as mentioned in some documents, as follows:

1 - Arousing religious enthusiasm among Jewish individuals around the world for their return to the alleged Promised Land.

2 - Demolishing religions to promote Talmudic Judaism.

3 - Urging all Jews to adhere to religious teachings, worship, and Jewish rituals, and to abide by the provisions of Jewish law.

4 - Arousing the fighting spirit and religious and national fanaticism among the Jews to confront other religions, nations, and peoples.

5 - Falsifying history to claim the promise of Palestine.

6 - The destruction of man through the theories of Freud in ethics, Marx in money, Durkheim in society, and Sartre in the literature of dissolution and loss.

7 - Imposing materialism on human thought.

8 - Attempting to Judaize Palestine, by encouraging immigration from all countries of the world to Palestine.

9 - Internationalizing the Israeli entity globally, by extracting recognition from most countries in the world of the existence of the State of Israel in Palestine.

10 - Follow up and implement global Jewish political and economic plans step by step, and develop the means to quickly and accurately implement these plans, then prepare for them in the media, finance them economically, and support them politically.

11 - Unifying and organizing the efforts of Jews around the world, whether individuals, groups or institutions, and mobilizing agents and hired servants when needed to serve the Jews and achieve their interests and plans.

12 - Development of the Hebrew language and Hebrew culture.

One of the sensitive and fundamental issues that should be exposed and defamed is that these goals have become provisions in international agreements and references in educational curricula at all levels, and they have media institutions, study centers, experts, writers, media figures, intellectuals, and analysts working in them and spreading poison throughout the body. The identity and the Israelis that these people spread and promote through their various tools in the text of these episodes, it is necessary to deepen consideration of some of the myths that founded the entity and the issues with which it distorted the Palestinian cause, and at the forefront of these historical, religious, political and intellectual myths and lies: the myth of God’s chosen people, the myth of the Promised Land, the myth of a land without a people, and the myth of six million murdered in the Holocaust, the myth of antisemitism, the myth of naming the state Israel, the myth of the entity’s love for peace, and the myth of the alleged Temple, are narratives and lies built on cunning and malicious Zionist delusion.

It's interesting how each of these "scholarly" antisemites add their own spin to age-old anti-Jewish myths. The "Protocols" forgery certainly didn't encourage religious practice, nor did they call for moving to Israel, but this author has his own psychological issues and makes up his own protocols to mirror his own hate.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

03/11 Links Pt2: Feeding Their Fellow Jews to the Crocodile; McClatchy Sites Delete False Story About NJ Synagogue ‘Sale’ of ‘Palestinian Land

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Feeding Their Fellow Jews to the Crocodile

Then on Sunday, we got a pretty rough preview of what was to come. As Hollywood stars were deciding how to accessorize their outfits for the Oscars that evening, many chose—stick with me here—a bloody hand celebrating the lynching of two Jews. Mark Ruffalo, Billie Eilish, Ava DuVernay, and Ramy Youssef were among the actors who wore a pin of a bloody hand, modeled after a particularly grisly episode. In 2000, two Jews wandered into Ramallah. They were taken into Palestinian police custody, presumably to protect them from the shrieking mob trying to rip them limb from limb with their bare hands. But the mob stormed the building and did its thing, as Kamala Harris might say. One of the killers showed off his blood-drenched hands to cheers from his compatriots outside. The pin is known as the Palestinian “hand of resistance.”

Now, the defense of these fiends is that they didn’t know what the pin meant. On some level, that is believable: Eilish is 22 years old, and rose to music fame during her teen years, so it is possible that she doesn’t know much of anything.

But even in Eilish’s case, it is unlikely. As some have pointed out, a bloody red hand is pretty universal. You would not be surprised to learn that Billie Eilish Baird O’Connell comes from an Irish family, who surely are familiar with the Red Hand of Ulster. The well read among the public probably recognizes the red right hand from Milton’s Paradise Lost, in which it signifies God’s vengeance.

The bloody hand pin did not seem to bother anyone, and I suppose in that atmosphere—one in which feted industry leaders were parading around alongside a celebration of lynching Jews—Glazer’s weak-kneed grand finale was almost inevitable.

Glazer was awarded an Oscar for his film Zone of Interest, which is about a man who, as I mentioned last night, attains professional success thanks to his ability to ignore the suffering of the Jews around him. It is not, however, autobiographical. The film is about Rudolph Hess living as a Nazi commandant next to Auschwitz. Though after last night, it’s unclear whether he’s meant to be the villain or the hero of Glazer’s film.

Hess is actually a perfect subject for a discussion about Jew-devouring crocodiles, and Glazer should know why. The Nazis demonstrated their efficiency and ingenuity by devising a system in which the crocodile actually could eat all the Jews last—or at least at once. In Hess’s world, the world Glazer was rewarded for depicting, there was no need for the crocodile to take it one at a time.

John Podhoretz: I Refute His Oscar

One could say The Zone of Interest win was the Oscar way in 2024 to punch the Holocaust card, and boy did Glazer punch it. Standing aside his two producers (one of them a Russian oligarch named Len Blavatnik), and visibly trembling with what appeared to be terror, he took out a piece of paper and read out:

"Our film shows where dehumanization leads, at its worst. It shaped all of our past and present. Right now, we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation, which has led to conflict for so many innocent people. Whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza, all the victims of this dehumanization, how do we resist?"

We can, if we wish, debate the meaning of this poorly written set of sentences for a couple of seconds, or until there’s another anti-Semitic attack somewhere that is the direct result of October 7th, whichever comes first—and guess which will come first. Any way you look at it, it’s disgusting.

First, let’s take it literally and take it to mean Glazer and his producers "refute their Jewishness." Obviously this is bad, because they are refuting their Jewishness as they accept an award for a movie about the effort made 80 years ago to destroy all Jewishness. Anti-Semites are falling all over themselves to defend Glazer from the charge that he has "refuted his Jewishness." Rather, they say, he refutes that Jewishness offers a defense for Israeli actions after October 7, or for the "occupation," or for whatever argle-bargle these putrid preachers of self-satisfied vanity decide is the "root cause" of things they don’t like.

His defenders include such notable champions of Zion as the former Bernie Sanders aide cum Koch-funded scholar Matt Duss once pictured posing in a Hamas tunnel, Mehdi Hasan, the recently axed MSNBC host and Hamas apologist, the Democratic strategist Waleed Shahid, and MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, a onetime radical magazine journalist who turned out to be winsome on TV, to his immense good fortune. One of his qualities is that he loathes Israel almost as much as he loves his $5 million salary paid by the Robertses, the Jewish family that owns Comcast. It’s blood money, Chris! Give it back! Otherwise it might get into the hands of occupiers!

Hayes should know to stay out of this. Like, don’t opine on what is and what isn’t anti-Semitic, smart boy, especially after hosting Al Sharpton for years on your show, whose contributions to Jewish refutation have included rallying people against a business in Harlem that was then set on fire by one of Sharpton’s fan boys, killing seven people while Sharpton continued to skate through life by scaring Democratic politicians and eating their souls rather than the fatty foods that used to define his rotund shape.

Not to mention you can refute your Jewishness all you like, Glazer, but if a terrorist arrived at a Golders Green synagogue where your nephew was becoming bar mitzvah and decided to bomb the place, you’d be as dead as you would have been had you not "refuted" it. This is the problem: They want to kill Jews. You’re a Jew. They want to kill you. Your refutation is immaterial.

Which is to say, the issue is not whether Glazer is comfortable with his status as a Jew but rather that he is living a life of existential risk after October 7 because of it. And he should know this all better than anyone, since his movie is about how merely to be a Jew is to be subject to efforts at mass extermination.

It is the story of Jewry since the very beginning: Can this small tribe survive the world’s efforts to do it in? And how are we to understand the unimaginable miracle that it has not only survived but has returned to its homeland and turned a subsistence-level desert life into the world’s 27th wealthiest nation?

Ah, but there’s the rub for Jonathan Glazer. He doesn’t like that country, apparently. It’s a country of "occupation," and it "dehumanizes" the other apparently just as the Nazis dehumanized the Jews. Forget for the thousandth time that Israel hasn’t "occupied" Gaza since 2005, and what it’s doing now is not an "occupation"—it’s a war in which it is hunting down the enemy army of Hamas in order to destroy it.

That’s not "dehumanizing." It’s something else. It’s no more dehumanizing than the destruction of Germany to get rid of the Nazis, which I assume Jonathan Glazer supports in theory, as without it, he wouldn’t have the Oscar he can shove right up his ass forever.

Oh, it’s good Oppenheimer won, even though the real Oppenheimer was a Communist.

Jonathan Tobin: ‘As a Jew’ Oscar moment shows how woke antisemitism works

It is no small irony that the only way the mass murderers who are depicted in “The Zone of Interest” were defeated and brought to justice was by Allied soldiers and airmen who were presented with the same dilemma faced today by Israel. In 1945, as American, British and Soviet troops closed in on the last Nazi strongholds, the Germans refused to acknowledge their inevitable defeat and fought to the bitter end. As they did elsewhere, they made the Red Army fight for every street and house in Berlin. Two million German civilians were killed in Allied bombing campaigns and the conquest of the Third Reich, and as many as 125,000 were killed in the last weeks of the war in Berlin alone.

As horrible as those numbers may sound, decent people everywhere understood that the future of civilization required the defeat of the Nazis, and if that meant German civilians must die, then so be it. They knew that massive civilian casualties—far outstripping even the dubious figures supplied by Hamas of those killed in the current war—were the price that the German nation had to pay for allowing itself to be led by a genocidal movement that most of its citizens had supported so long as the Nazis were winning the war.

The Palestinians and Hamas are in a similar position today. Their ideology of hatred for Jews is hardly different from that of the Nazis depicted in Glazer’s movie. Their crimes on Oct. 7 were committed with a shameless embrace of barbarism that those who administered Auschwitz actually sought to conceal from the world. But because woke ideology deems the Palestinians to be intersectional victims and Israelis as their oppressors, fashionable opinion is adamant that the war to eradicate Hamas must stop and the Jews must be subjected to more atrocities in the future, if not killed and robbed of their homeland “from the river to the sea” as the pro-terror mobs demand.

Sadly, in 2024, there was no proud Jew who would refute and denounce Glazer later in the ceremony as Chayefsky did to Redgrave in 1978. Steven Spielberg had the chance to say something but chose to stick to his script. In contemporary Hollywood, complaints that Jews are being erased by the woke catechism that is inextricably linked to antisemitism in the new Oscar “diversity” rules going into effect for next year’s awards are ignored. It is the “as a Jew” celebrities who have the bully pulpit and those who would speak for the justice of Israel’s cause who are marginalized.

Those, like Glazer, whose efforts are aimed at helping contemporary practitioners of Jewish genocide survive and win—and do so “as Jews”—are a disgrace and deserve to be remembered throughout history with opprobrium along with the worst examples of those who betrayed their own people. They also illustrate the moral depravity of artists and intellectuals who have been captured by an ideology that enables a virulent form of antisemitism that masquerades as advocacy for human rights.

The Independent reported:

The US State Department has denied responsibility for an airdrop that reportedly killed five civilians – including two young boys – in Gaza.

A spokesperson for the department said that “every reasonable precaution” was taken with airdrops to ensure the safety of the public.

The incident reportedly occurred on Friday in the Al Shati camp west of Gaza City, according to a journalist on the scene, per CNN. At least five people were killed and 10 others injured when airdropped aid packages fell on them.

It is believed the chutes on the packages did not open properly. Muhammad Al-Sheikh, Head of Emergency Care Department at Al Shifa Medical Complex in Gaza City confirmed to CNN that five people were killed in the incident.

“We express our condolences to the families of those who were killed,” a spokesperson for the State Department said in a statement shared with media outlets. “Our understanding is that this was not a US airdrop.”

The statement continued: “As we said earlier this week, these are complex and tough missions to do because so many parameters have to be exactly right. We always learn from these incidents and try to improve.

“We take every reasonable precaution to avoid injuries, including limiting the weight of the pallets, identifying drop-zones in less-populated areas, and the sending of safety messages to the population prior to the air drop.”

There is a big difference between how this story was reported and how Israeli airstrikes that kill civilians are reported.

The basic assumption is that those dropping aid care about the lives of civilians, and Israel doesn't. Which is the fundamental blood libel of this war.

At the very least, this was a situation that showed gross negligence on the part of the aircraft that dropped the pallets. Yet no one is following up to find out who is responsible. No one is calling for an independent investigation.

There are no reporters trying to find out the names of the reported victims, or interviewing their survivors, or interviewing the injured, or interviewing witnesses. No one is asking whether the Ministry of Health is counting these people as being killed by Israel.

Interest in the story evaporated hours after it happened. The State Department statement on the difficulty of airdrops is not challenged.

No one cares when Palestinian kids are killed by anyone but Israel.

From the outset, the assumption is that Israel is acting maliciously towards civilians and everyone else is acting nobly.

Dropping bombs in populated areas and minimizing civilian damage is an order of magnitude more difficult than dropping food packages on sparsely populated areas. But unlike these airdrops, no one bothers asking the IDF to describe what they do in detail - their policies and procedures refined over years to determine the minimum payload to achieve a goal but minimize collateral damage, the skill involved in pinpoint operations, the reasons that larger bombs are sometimes used and the intended targets.

The irony goes deeper. This accident was obviously a mistake, so there should be no stigma for taking responsibility or announcing an investigation.

Yet unlike those doing the aid airdrops, Israel takes responsibility for its mistakes. Israel undertakes investigations under trying circumstances and reports back as soon as humanly possible.

Everyone assumes Israel is lying when they say they aren't responsible for an event in Gaza that killed civilians. Everyone also assumes Israel is lying even when they admit that they made a tragic mistake, because they think Israel maliciously attacks civilians.

The world should insist that whoever killed those people take responsibility and fix the mistakes that were made. No one cares. Let it happen again - so what?

Because dead Palestinians don't matter when Jews cannot be blamed. \

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!

President Biden's Ramadan message this year was all about Gaza.

It was entirely in line with what Hamas would have wanted him to say.

The sacred month is a time for reflection and renewal. This year, it comes at a moment of immense pain. The war in Gaza has inflicted terrible suffering on the Palestinian people. More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, most of them civilians, including thousands of children. Some are family members of American Muslims, who are deeply grieving their lost loved ones today. Nearly two million Palestinians have been displaced by the war; many are in urgent need of food, water, medicine, and shelter. As Muslims gather around the world over the coming days and weeks to break their fast, the suffering of the Palestinian people will be front of mind for many. It is front of mind for me.

The 30,000 number is only from Hamas. Biden's acceptance of it without any reservation is shameful.

The United States will continue to lead international efforts to get more humanitarian assistance into Gaza by land, air, and sea. Earlier this week, I directed our military to lead an emergency mission to establish a temporary pier on the coast of Gaza that can receive large shipments of aid. We are carrying out airdrops of aid, in coordination with our international partners, including Jordan. And we’ll continue to work with Israel to expand deliveries by land, insisting that it facilitate more routes and open more crossings to get more aid to more people.

Open more crossings? Kerem Shalom was enough to supply Gaza for many years. This is a Palestinian demand in order to facilitate terror attacks, not a necessity for aid delivery, which is a logistics problem and not a border problem. Biden is clueless - but again, parroting Hamas talking points.

While we get more life-saving aid to Gaza, the United States will continue working non-stop to establish an immediate and sustained ceasefire for at least six weeks as part of a deal that releases hostages.

The US didn't use the word "ceasefire" for most of the war, instead saying it supports a truce or a pause. "Ceasefire" is the word that anti-Israel protester use, and now Biden has adopted it, quite deliberately, because their threats and bullying is working.

And we will continue building toward a long-term future of stability, security, and peace. That includes a two-state solution to ensure Palestinians and Israelis share equal measures of freedom, dignity, security, and prosperity. That is the only path toward an enduring peace.

This is rewarding Hamas terror. And it is stupid.

Does any sane person really think that if there were a Palestinian state, even in every inch of the territories and Jerusalem, Hamas wouldn't be mounting terror attacks in Israel?

Look at Hezbollah. Israel withdrew from every inch of southern Lebanon - certified by the UN - but it kept the issue alive claiming there were a few square meters that belonged to them. They used that excuse to build a militia more powerful than the Lebanese army.

Hate for Israel is not based on claims of land, or "return," or "settlements," or "occupation" or "justice." It is based on pure Jew hatred and the idea that Jews having any land in the region is an affront to the honor of Arabs and Muslims worldwide.

The root cause of the conflict is, and always has been, antisemitism. And everyone knows this, because the Arabs were attacking Jand murdering Jews before "occupation" and before 1948.

Anyone who thinks that two states would bring peace, whether they are CodePink or Joe Biden, is a complete fool.

But we are not allowed to talk about Muslim antisemitism. Instead, Biden talks about...Islamophobia.

Here at home, we have seen an appalling resurgence of hate and violence toward Muslim Americans. Islamophobia has absolutely no place in the United States, a country founded on freedom of worship and built on the contributions of immigrants, including Muslim immigrants. My Administration is developing the first-ever National Strategy to Counter Islamophobia and Related Forms of Bias and Discrimination, to take on hate against Muslim, Sikh, South Asian, and Arab American communities, wherever it occurs. No one should ever fear being targeted at school, at work, on the street, or in their community because of their background or beliefs.

The only reason this "national strategy" is being drafted is because Muslims were upset at the National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism, and wanted to pretend that Islamophobia is on par with antisemitism as a threat. It isn't even close. In New York City in 2023, there were 325 antisemitic incidents counted by the NYPD - and only 26 anti-Muslim incidents, about the same as anti-transgender and much less than anti-Asian. The statistics in Chicago are similar.

That National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism pays lip service to calling delegitimizing Israel antisemitic, but none of the actions it recommends mentions Israel at all.

This message goes against what most Israelis want. And they have a lot more skin in the game than Biden does. It is utter disrespect for Israeli democracy and Israeli self-determination.

But Israelis aren't the only ones insulted by this statement.

In all three previous Ramadan messages, Biden specifically called out the persecution against Uyghurs in China and Rohingya in what he still calls Burma. He would also mention other areas in the world where Muslims were suffering, whether from war or natural disasters.

But they were not mentioned this year.

Because people hating Israel take all the oxygen away from real human rights crises around the world. And this Ramadan message shows it very clearly.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

03/11 Links Pt1: Sinwar's Ramadan Jihad Dream: Will the "Al Aqsa Flood" Reach Jerusalem?; U.S. Gaza Aid Policy Prolongs the Return of Israeli Captives

From Ian:

Israel destroying Hamas amid international fury and skepticism

In his State of the Union address Thursday, President Joe Biden spent 90 seconds supporting Israel and blaming Hamas for the atrocities it committed on Oct. 7 as well as for the war that followed. "Israel has a right to go after Hamas," Biden said.

But then he spent 180 seconds focusing on Palestinians "under bombardment" or experiencing "displacement," and the need for a two-state solution.

He failed to mention the hundreds of thousands of Israelis under bombardment and the tens of thousands who have been displaced as a result of ongoing Hamas and Hizbullah attacks.

While Israel is under pressure to ensure humanitarian aid delivery to Palestinians, it is plowing forward in its war against Hamas.

Jacob Olidort, director of research for the Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy at JINSA, said that skepticism regarding Israel's military operation to eliminate Hamas "ignores the visceral commitment Israel has, in light of the horrors of Oct. 7, not only to eliminate the terrorists and their infrastructure in Gaza, but also to institute long-overdue deradicalization efforts" with regard to both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

Former Israeli National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat explained that Israel "cannot compromise on achieving the goals it defined for this war in full, since any failure to do so could expose Israel to an existential threat from its enemies."

"The results of the war are the only thing that can prevent this. The deterrence that crashed on Oct. 7 will not be restored if it can be argued that Israel failed to achieve its goals."

As for the day after Israel destroys Hamas, Ben-Shabbat said, "The young people of Gaza, who make up half of the population, were born into the reality of Hamas, were educated on its ideas, absorbed it in schools, mosques, squares and through its media. The young terrorists fighting us today are the same children who spent time in Hamas summer camps."

Contrary to what some in the West believe, Hamas didn't "kidnap the population" but rather won broad political support and backing from Gaza's Palestinian public, he said.

He emphasized that Israel must ensure that the demilitarization of Gaza and freedom of action for the IDF there are basic conditions in any future reality.

The Day After the Gaza War - in Israel

Since Hamas' Oct. 7 attack, Israel has found itself in a multifront war for the first time in nearly 60 years. It is fighting in Gaza, countering armed groups in the West Bank, and facing missile strikes from Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen.

Moreover, Israel must also take more far-reaching steps to avoid another Oct. 7. It must ramp up defense spending and reinforce its borders. Any arrangement for governing Palestinian areas will have to include strong provisions to prevent the emergence of a remilitarized Palestinian territory. The longer-term objective of a two-state solution is currently perceived as unfeasible and even detached from reality by most Israelis.

After five months of fighting in Gaza, the Israel Defense Forces have made impressive progress. The territory is one of the most complex combat zones in the world, with an intricate urban landscape and an enemy that is operating within the civilian population, using an extensive network of tunnels and underground facilities. Nonetheless, IDF forces have been able to dismantle the nerve centers and organizational structures of Hamas in Gaza City and Khan Yunis and significantly degrade terrorist infrastructure in other areas.

They have also established a security buffer zone between Gaza and Israeli territory to largely neutralize the immediate ground threat to the towns and villages near Gaza, allowing residents to return to their homes.

Realizing these objectives has come at a high cost to the population of Gaza, and the humanitarian situation has raised pressure on Israel to limit its operations. Yet, calls for Israel to stand down are premature. Israel cannot bring an end to the conflict in Gaza as long as Israeli hostages are held captive there.

Israel has no interest in occupying or assuming full responsibility for Gaza. But as long as Gaza remains militarized and attacks against Israeli territory persist, Israel will be compelled to maintain overriding security control. Israel's efforts to dismantle Hamas will require a long-term commitment.

WSJ Editorial: Biden Draws an Odd "Red Line" for Israel

President Biden beat up Israel's leaders in his State of the Union speech and has criticized its war strategy in Gaza with regularity. Biden wants fewer civilian casualties in Gaza, but so does Israel since the diplomatic consequences fall on the Jewish state, not on Hamas. That's why Israel has held off on its Rafah campaign until it can put together a plan to let civilians find refuge to the city's north.

Israel can't avoid a Rafah campaign if it wants to achieve its war aim of destroying Hamas. Surely Biden knows this. The U.S. didn't let ISIS retain its stronghold in Mosul in Iraq, and the siege of that city also had unintended civilian casualties.

There are costs to this White House strategy toward Israel - not least its message to Hamas and its backers in Iran that their strategy of putting civilians in harm's way is working politically. Why agree to a hostage swap if their current strategy is driving a wedge between Israel and the U.S.?

Biden's red-line threats don't help Israel or his political standing at home. The best way he can help himself politically is to let Israel win the war as rapidly as possible.

U.S. Gaza Aid Policy Prolongs the Return of Israeli Captives

The airdropping of aid to Gaza - and soon, also the special pier - will not advance the release of the Israeli captives. It will only make their release that much harder. Increasing civilian aid to Gaza provides more and more oxygen to Hamas, delays a real uprising of the residents there against Hamas, and achieves the opposite of what Biden says he desires. From Hamas' perspective, the aid gives more legitimacy for the continuation of its existence as the ruling power in Gaza and a toughening of its stance on the captives issue.

If the U.S. had a Middle Eastern mindset rather than a Western one, it would make clear that the condition for "saving the starving residents of Gaza" is the swift end of Hamas, both militarily and in civilian life, and the release of all captives. Instead, Biden puts the well-being of Gaza's residents, many of whom have been involved in terrorism over the years, before the well-being of the captives. This encourages Hamas to raise the price for their release ever higher.

In World War II against the Nazis, the Allies did not consider airdropping humanitarian aid to the German population. These are new standards set specifically for Israel, and a distortion of any logic aimed at defeating an enemy like Hamas. The U.S. itself has never acted this way in its wars.

The same flawed Western logic applies to the issue of the month of Ramadan and Israel's entry into Rafah. Instead of making it clear that Israel, with American backing, will not hesitate to turn Ramadan from the "glorious month of Islamic victories" into the month of its defeat, the U.S. has opted to be considerate of Muslim sensitivities.

Many Lebanese hate Hezbollah. They need to get louder.

People who claim to want a ceasefire in Gaza are silent about a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. There are no rallies in the West, and few if any op-eds. The "peace" crowd doesn;'t seem to care much about peace in Lebanon and Israel.

This is despite the fact that a full war would be far more devastating to both sides than the five months of the Gaza war has been.

It is almost as if they really don't care about peace.

But there are people who do: the citizens of Lebanon, who most emphatically do not want to be sucked into a war between Hezbollah and Israel.

Last month, I wrote that the only way to avoid a war between Israel and Lebanon is if the Lebanese people loudly and publicly protest against Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is sensitive to public opinion and pretends that it is "defending Lebanon." If the people reject that argument and demand that it stops putting the entire country in danger, that is how Hezbollah can de-escalate and still maintain its "honor" which is what is driving its attacks on Israel.

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center has compiled a list of statements by prominent Lebanese politicians as well as social media activists opposing Hezbollah's actions since October 7:

Gebran Bassil, the chairman of the Free National Movement in Lebanon, said his party opposed Lebanon’s being responsible for the “liberation of Palestine” because that was the Palestinians’ responsibility. ...He also stated that his party opposed the use of Lebanon as a base from which to attack Israel, and that by itself Lebanon was unable to pay the price of obtaining the Palestinians’ rights on behalf of all Arabs.

Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces Party, said Hezbollah’s highest national interest concerned Iran, not Lebanon (Lebanese Forces X account, January 26, 2024). The Lebanese Forces Party said in an official statement that ...Hezbollah’s real goal in fighting was not to destroy Israel, but to fully control Lebanon (Lebanese Forces Party Facebook page, February 22, 2024).

On February 20, 2024, The Phalanges, a party headed by Samy Gemayel, published a statement accusing Hezbollah of giving Israel reasons to attack in south Lebanon. Moreover, Hezbollah’s theory, that attacks from Lebanon would divert Israel from its activities in the Gaza Strip, had borne no fruit and harmed Lebanon.

Lebanese civilians living in the towns and villages near the border were quoted as criticizing Hezbollah for attacking Israel from within their communities. They claimed attacks near their homes put them in danger, pushing them to abandon their homes and leave the area free for Hezbollah. Some of the residents claimed that some of the rockets that hit the villages in south Lebanon were actually launched by Hezbollah.

One social media personality juxtaposed photos of Gaza today with Lebanon in 2006, sarcastically saying "both Hamas and Hezbollah claimed victory."

But this criticism has not made it into the mainstream media. And that is how Hezbollah wants it.

Only a public demonstration in Beirut or preferably in the south, a demonstration that cannot be ignored, will move Hezbollah to act, in the name of doing what the Lebanese demand.

Hezbollah doesn't fear Israel. Like all Islamist groups, it doesn't care about how much damage a war would do to Lebanon as long as they can kill Jews and claim victory. But it does fear the Lebanese people who can expose its hypocrisy in claiming to defend them.

The people do not want a war. They need to realize, after decades of Hezbollah effectively ruling them, that they have the power to stop a war.

And the international media that also claims to want to avoid war must step up with publicizing the Lebanese people's desires to stop Hezbollah from its military escalations.

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!

To the @NYTimes, rioting in the Temple Mount isn't "provocative." But security measures to stop violence are.

In The New York Times, Raja Abdulrahim writes about Israel's keeping the Temple Mount safe for all people during Ramadan, which she characterizes as "restrictions."

This one sentence that volumes.

Some of the most provocative episodes have been raids into the Aqsa compound by baton-wielding police forces firing tear gas and sponge-tipped bullets who have clashed with Palestinians throwing stones and setting off fireworks.

Which started first, the raids or the rioting?

Last year, it was young Palestinian men who refused to leave the compound according to an agreement signed by the Waqf. They specifically stayed there overnight in order to block Jews from visiting the site. They stockpiled banks of fireworks and stones and blockaded doors.

The New York Times never reported about the agreement. It has a theme that all violence is initiated and planned by Israeli security, and it will ignore any facts that disagree with that theme.

The anti-Israel bias suffuses this article. For example, the Muslim claims about the site are accepted as true, the Jewish claims are just claims:

Every Friday, Yousef visits Jerusalem’s Old City to pray at Al Aqsa, the third holiest site for Muslims and part of the compound sacred to Jewish people, who call it the Temple Mount.

...Many Palestinians say their access to Al Aqsa compound has become increasingly restricted in favor of Jews, who consider the Temple Mount the most sacred place in Judaism.

Al Aqsa is claimed, as established fact, to be the third holiest place for all Muslims - even though Shiites have traditionally seen Karbala and Najaf as pilgrimage sites ahead of Jerusalem in importance. (Some also believe that the Al Aqsa mosque mentioned in the Quran is in the heavens, not Jerusalem.

But Jews only "consider" the Temple Mount to be the holiest place in Judaism.

Beyond that, security measures at holy sites are only considered onerous when Jews are involved.

Seth Frantzman once compared the security measures in place between the Temple Mount and other religious holy sites. The Kaaba in Mecca has "5,000 CCTV cameras and over 100,000 people employed to provide security during the annual Hajj" as well as electronic screening devices around all of Mecca, where every non-Muslim is banned. St. Peters Square in Rome, which used to be open, now has thousands of police, checkpoints and metal detectors, and even nuns can be searched. He found similar security measures in Buddhist and Sikh holy places.

And all of them are in place because of specific fears of Muslim terrorism.

Here's the NYT photo of Muslims who could not enter the Temple Mount on Friday and prayed on a sidewalk outside the walls instead.

All young men. And no harassment from police for an unauthorized gathering in a public street blocking pedestrian traffic.

Freedom to pray is important, but it is not more important than security. Framing the very reasonable and universal requirement for safety and security as being anti-Muslim restrictions by Jews is false and slanderous.

It is Muslim terrorism and Muslim rioting that prompt these security measures to begin with, not Islamophobia nor Jewish supremacism.

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!