Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, July 21, 2024

BDS celebrates alleged cancelling of Blond:ish concerts in Lebanon and Egypt - because she expressed sadness at dancers in Israel being slaughtered

The Reddit BDS group says that Blond:ish had two upcoming concerts in Lebanon and Egypt canceled because of pressure by anti-Israel activists. They are still on her own webpages as of this writing.)

According to their announcement, this is this letter she posted right after October 7 as evidence of her Zionism and reason for her to be on their blacklist:

These past days have been the heaviest of nightmares for so many. This situation hit too close to home on many levels. My heart goes out to everyone affected by this unjustifiable tragedy, and every day that innocent lives are taken by this conflict. My prayers are with all the victims and their families, and for the kidnapped dancers to be returned home safely.
I can't even begin to imagine the pain and fear you're going through right now, and the trauma. I'm praying for better and brighter days, for peace and freedom between Israel & Palestine.
We, as members of the dance community who frequently attend parties and live in this world, were put under attack in Israel at a peaceful festival by a terrorist group that barbarically took the lives of innocent humans. Do you understand that this could have happened to any of us, meaning you and me?
We are now not safe from these threats. I hope we can find common ground to work from. A terrorist organization created carnage,- murder, rape, kidnapping of babies, children, and dancing with the dead. This barbarism can never be justified. Humanity has taken a dark turn, and innocent lives on both sides are being lost due to political and terrorist agendas that many of us do not understand.
I want to make it very clear that while I stand with Israel against the Hamas attacks, it does not equate to supporting violence towards innocent Palestinian civilians, who have been losing their lives due to this horrific conflict. One thing I learned this week, is people ARE NOT their governments, and as a dance community, I hope we can remain unified, even stronger than ever. It's important that we don't remain silent. Let's unite in our condemnation of these specific acts of terror.
We dance together worldwide, transcending differences in agendas, religion, ethnicity, race, color, sexual orientation, size, and shape. The most important thing now is taking action in our communities, as music has always been the greatest connector since the beginning of time, which is now being tested in the most horrific ways.

This letter expressing sadness at innocent lives being lost and innocent people being kidnapped is considered a reason to be boycotted!

I'm not even certain Blond:ish posted this. I cannot find it on her Instagram. I saw it was posted by a different band called The Collektives on October 13.

It doesn' t matter - the main accusation against Blond:ish by BDS itself is her supposedly being against a terrorist attack on music lovers.

BDS proves yet again that it does not support peace. it does not support Palestinians. It does not support Gaza. It has only one aim: the murder of Jews with impunity.

While BDS was mainly protesting her calling people who murder Jews terrorists, a musician in Egypt gave an additional reason to cancel her planned concert there: because she is a lesbian.

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!

07/20 Links: IAF strikes Houthi targets in Yemen; The Left’s Self-Defeating Israel Obsession; Natasha Hausdorff's immediate response to ICJ Advisory Opinion

From Ian:

John Spencer: Vilifying Israel's Use of 2,000-Pound Bombs Only Ends Up Costing More Lives

This week, Israel very likely killed the long-time head of Hamas's military, Mohammed Dief, with multiple 2,000-pound bombs. This comes directly after United States announced it was lifting the restriction on 500-pound bombs shipments to Israel but keeping a block on larger diameter munitions to include 2,000-pound bombs. In his press conference on the issue, President Joe Biden laid out his rationale. "I have not provided them 2,000-pound bombs," President Biden said. "They cannot be used in Gaza or any other populated area without causing great human tragedy and damage."

President Biden's remarks reflect the conventional wisdom about these powerful weapons. Like all conventional wisdom, it is at least in part misguided and unfair. To be sure, the war in Gaza has been incredibly destructive, and thousands of Palestinians have tragically been killed. Unfortunately, widespread destruction and high civilian casualty rates are common in urban warfare. And in Gaza, the numbers are as high as they are because Hamas has cynically dug itself in beneath densely populated areas.

The penetration depth of a 2,000 pound bomb, depending on the kind and whether it must go through concrete, is believed to be from 16 feet to more than 30 feet. Hamas's military wing is hidden in more than 400 miles of tunnels, some as deep as 200 feet underground. And to Israel's north, Hezbollah, like Hamas, has spent years digging tunnels deeper and deeper to protect what is believed to be an arsenal of over 100,000 rockets, missiles and drones. Southern Lebanon is referred to as the "Land of Tunnels" due to the miles of deep buried underground networks.

Israel has used its 2,000-pound bombs against what it assessed to be military targets in bunkers and tunnels, even while knowing that there would be unavoidable civilian casualties—just as the United States has done in its past wars.

Some weapons experts and veterans have recently claimed that the United States has rarely used 2,000-pound bombs. That's simply not true.

During the first Gulf war, the United States dropped more than 16,000 2,000-pound bombs on Iraqi targets. During the opening month of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, it dropped more than 5,000 of these bombs in Baghdad, a city of over 5 million residents at the time and other urban areas. The U.S. dropped four of the bombs on just one building in a residential neighborhood in Baghdad, after receiving intelligence reports that some senior Iraqi officials, possibly including Saddam Hussein and his two sons, were there.

The current debate over the use of 2,000-pound bombs is part of a much larger fight over the use of all bombs in urban areas. It can be traced back years to the creation of a massive human rights advocacy coalition, led by Human Rights Watch, established in 2011. This coalition sought to have all bombs, missiles, artillery, and mortars banned from use in any urban area, termed "populated areas," no matter the context, situation, or even if a military was able to evacuate all the civilians from the area.

The war on bombs was eventually titled "explosive weapons in populated areas" (EWIPA). A political declaration was crafted whereby nations would commit to restrict or ban their forces from using all of these weapons in urban warfare. To date, 87 countries have endorsed the political declaration committing to adopt and implement national policies and practices to reduce civilian harm in urban warfare by restricting or refraining from the use of explosive weapons in populated areas.

The unhappy reality is that urban warfare is inherently destructive—and also unlikely to end any time soon. As a scholar of urban warfare, I have concluded and presented to the United Nations that banning bombs and artillery in urban warfare would perversely result in more destruction, not less. Restrictions on the use of bombs in cities sucks the fight into cities from rural areas. And once in the city, if the attacking army is deprived of those weapons, defenders engage in protracted block-by-block street fights that lead to mass destruction and thousands of lost lives. Without bombs or artillery, urban battles become bloody sieges. And this drags out war.

Australian investigation into WCK strikes expected to back Israel's official response

Following an IDF strike on the World Central Kitchen aid truck, which killed seven international aid workers in April, the Australian government opened an investigation into the incident in which an Australian citizen was killed.

In addition to the Australian citizens, citizens from Poland, Canada, the UK, and the US were also killed in the strike.

As a result, the Australian government appointed retired Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin to serve as Special Adviser to the Australian Government on Israel's response to the Israel Defense Forces strikes.

Biskin was chief of the Australian Defence Force from 2014 - 2018 and Chief of the Air Force from 2008 - 2011. He has significant expertise in air operations, having served as a fighter pilot at the beginning of his military career.

As part of his mission, he was required to examine several areas, including IDF policies and procedures for operational incidents and measures to prevent such incidents from happening again.

According to a report by the Australian published on Thursday, Binskin's report is "set to largely back the Jewish state’s official response to the tragedy."

Citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter, Biskin "although mistakes were made," was satisfied with the IDF's response and civilian safeguards and was "in line with those of Western counterparts including Australia."

The report has not yet been released, with the Australian saying that Biskin must first brief the government before briefing the family of Zomi Frankcom.

IAF strikes Houthi targets in Yemen in retaliation for Tel Aviv attack

Israeli Air Force jets struck Houthi terrorist targets in Yemen on Saturday following a deadly drone attack by the Iran-backed group in Tel Aviv the previous day, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed.

“From the beginning of the war, I made it clear that Israel would harm anyone who harms us,” Netanyahu said in public remarks on Saturday night. “Accordingly, earlier today, I convened the Security Cabinet and asked it to support my proposal to attack the Houthi targets in Yemen.”

The strikes, which Israel said hit several “military targets” in the port city of Hodeidah, appeared to be the first on Yemeni soil since the Houthis joined the war against the Jewish state in support of Hamas in October.

“The Israeli Air Force struck dual-use infrastructure used for terrorist activities, including energy infrastructures,” IDF Spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said.

Netanyahu said the strikes were a “direct response to the drone attack that killed an Israeli citizen and wounded several others. It also followed the Houthi’s aggression against the State of Israel since the start of the war. Over the past eight months, the Houthis have launched hundreds of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones towards Israel.”

An Israeli man was killed and four other persons were wounded at 3:12 a.m. on Friday when what the Israel Defense Forces described as an “aerial target” exploded in a residential neighborhood in central Tel Aviv. The slain man was identified as Yevgeny Ferder, 50, who immigrated from Belarus around two years ago to escape the Russia-Ukraine war.

Medics treated a woman in her 20s and a man in his 30s for shrapnel wounds at the scene before evacuating them to the hospital. Two others were wounded either by shrapnel or the shockwave of the blast.

The Houthis claimed responsibility for the attack, saying they used an advanced suicide drone dubbed “Jaffa.” Hagari confirmed that the UAV was an Iranian-made Samad-3, which was upgraded to increase its strike range.

Netanyahu said on Saturday that the retaliation against the Houthis hit targets some 1,120 miles from the Jewish state. “There is no place that the long arm of the State of Israel cannot reach,” he said.

07/19 Links Pt2: Biden’s betrayal of Israel will jump-start nuclear proliferation; America’s Unhealthy Polarization on the Hostages; Appeasement in Essen

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: A Peacekeeping Force in Rafah Would Be Built to Fail

In 2006, as Israel and Hezbollah fought the Second Lebanon War, the UN was accused of broadcasting sensitive IDF troop movements on its website. The initial defense of UNIFIL, the UN multinational forces in Lebanon, was that the IDF broadcast troop movements too and the UN wasn’t saying anything the IDF wasn’t also publicizing.

At the time, I figured there was an easy way to figure this out: Why don’t I just call the UNIFIL commander on the ground in Lebanon and ask him? So I did. And he admitted to me, on the record, with no sense of shame or wrongdoing, that the accusations were accurate. He didn’t see a problem with it.

My story got me temporarily blacklisted by the UN media office, even though it was someone in Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s office who’d given me the commander’s mobile phone number in the first place. In other words, the UN didn’t think its intervention in a war between Israel and Hezbollah was inappropriate. But it was, and the ensuing scandal blindsided the UN and offended its sense of entitlement and impunity.

The key point is this: International forces ultimately answer to their host, and they are hosted by Israel’s mortal enemies.

I thought of this story, and the long history of failed stationing of international forces throughout the Arab-Israeli conflict, when I read that the European Union has been negotiating with Israel and the U.S. to take over responsibility for the crucial Rafah border crossing. That crossing, and the tunnels underneath it, is the main artery of support keeping Hamas alive and able to start wars every few years. When Israel moved out of Gaza, Egypt cracked down on smuggling temporarily but then turn a blind eye to it.

With the IDF currently controlling the Gaza side of the crossing, Egypt has been withholding humanitarian aid to Palestinians in protest. Now EU foreign-policy chief Josep Borrell has made clear that the EU, in conjunction with figures in the Palestinian Authority, wants to take over the crossing.

According to Bloomberg, Borrell wants the crossing transferred to EUBAM, an EU agency that helped run it between 2005 and 2007, but first “the fighting in Gaza needs to stop and the issue of who governs the territory must be solved, the spokesperson said.”

But as EUBAM’s own history shows, “solving the issue of who governs the territory” isn’t the point. It’s who comes out of that process actually governing the territory that matters. After all, that issue was “solved” in 2005, which led to EUBAM’s founding. Two years later, that issue was “solved” again when Hamas took power and EUBAM was sent packing.

Seth Mandel: America’s Unhealthy Polarization on the Hostages

We are nine months into a war, and it can be easy to forget what it was like on October 7 and October 8 and October 9. Though it sounds like we’re having a debate about the Israeli military’s response, we aren’t—the people who would disrupt a Democratic convention’s attempt at praying for the hostages do not believe any Israeli military response is justified, just as they don’t believe Israeli existence is justified. We have somehow let the public debate on this issue get stuck on the question of whether Israel’s response has gone too far, as if that has any relevance at all to the fate of those murdered or kidnapped on October 7.

As I detailed last month, some of the legal complaints made by pro-Palestinian students against their universities amount to objections that the schools denounced the bloodshed of October 7. As these students see it, such a statement implies a lack of justification for Hamas decapitating a child or burning a peace activist beyond recognition. You have to balance the crimes of each side, according to these students—that is, you must balance Hamas’s crime of murder with Israelis’ seemingly equal crime of existing.

In a sane world, it would be unthinkable to oppose events for American hostages at an American political convention. But because these hostages are Jews, this country has become somewhat polarized over whether they deserve their fate. (I say “somewhat” because these progressives are outnumbered among the general population and within the Democratic Party by non-sociopaths; it’s just at Democratic Party events that—though they are still a minority—they have enough sway to impose their heartlessness on everybody else in the room.)

I have no doubt the hostages will be mentioned—prominent Democrats are among some of the hostages’ greatest advocates—but the sincerity and decency and affection we saw this week is highly unlikely to be repeated. That says something about our political culture that will long outlast this war and this election.

John Ware: 7 October and the Alt-Media: a critical examination

For Jews everywhere – not just Israelis – the denial that Hamas committed atrocities on 7 October has a familiar historical ring. Yet it is a fact that Hamas and their supporters have insisted their ‘fighters’ did not massacre music festival goers, or rape women, or ill-treat hostages. Direct to camera, one Hamas Politburo member after another has flatly denied that the Qassam Brigades did any such things. Also direct to camera was the evidence that they did murder unarmed civilians, sometimes sadistically, their violence immortalised by Hamas’s own body cams. which they proudly broadcast for propaganda purposes.

Outright ‘Atrocity Denialism’ in the face of irrefutable facts is the latest civilisational clash between those of us struggling to maintain the norms of society – and a growing constituency who seem beyond reason. And this clash couldn’t be more fundamental because it is about basic facts and evidence, irrespective of what one may think about Israel or the way it is conducting the war in Gaza. The mainstream media has broadly given credence to Israeli claims that Hamas committed widespread sexual abuse on 7 October. But polling shows that most British Muslims don’t believe this. Just one in four accept that Hamas engaged in murder or rape. Over the last two decades, the mainstream media has been losing the trust of British Muslims. A majority now consider the BBC to be pro-Israel. Some of that vacuum is being filled by online alternative media outlets who typically challenge narratives they say the mainstream media don’t.

In 2019, the Community Security Trust showed how UK based alt-media accounts and networks of Labour-supporting Twitter accounts promoted, endorsed and spread the idea that allegations of antisemitism against Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party were fake news. Now a number of UK and US based alt-media outlets have been aggressively trying to show that allegations of widespread rape by Hamas and other armed groups are also fake. Today in Fathom, our entire issue is given over to John Ware’s investigation of the journalistic scruples – or the lack of them – that these outlets have deployed in making their case.

07/19 Links Pt1: ICJ sips espresso while Tel Aviv coffee shops burn; The crimes of Mohammed Deif; Trump: Return hostages or face severe consequences

From Ian:

ICJ sips espresso while Tel Aviv coffee shops burn: a tale of legal myopia

Picture this: A judge in The Hague, sipping coffee and flipping through a stack of documents, while a Yemeni Houthi drone crashed into a Tel Aviv building, killing an Israeli citizen and injuring ten. They're drinking coffee while coffee shops in Tel Aviv closed due to terror. While they were drinking their espressos on Friday morning, ahead of a useless hearing, missiles were sent from Lebanon towards Israeli towns, and Hamas kept on hiding 120 Israeli hostages in their underground tunnels.

It's in this serene environment that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has declared Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem illegal under international law. ICJ judges, are you genuinely supporting a terrorist organization with this ruling?

Let’s start with the glaring omissions. The ICJ conveniently forgets the historical and legal mess that is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The West Bank and east Jerusalem, captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War—a defensive conflict, mind you—have never been sovereign Palestinian territories. But why bother with such details when you can make sweeping declarations from the comfort of The Hague? Do you prefer your judgments to be based on convenience rather than facts?

The ICJ also seems to have a selective memory regarding security concerns. Israeli settlements act as crucial buffers against the kind of aggressions that tend to happen when your neighbors aren't exactly sending you fruit baskets. Judea and Samaria have been a breeding ground for terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. Suggesting that Israel dismantle these settlements without any security guarantees is like telling someone to take off their bulletproof vest in the middle of a shootout. Do you believe Israel should compromise its security for a romantic fantasy?

And then there’s the historical connection. The Jewish ties to east Jerusalem, home to the holiest sites in Judaism, stretch back thousands of years. But the ICJ waves this off as if it’s an annoying pop-up ad. Reducing millennia of Jewish presence to a mere political squabble is an insult to history and common sense. Are you seriously that dismissive of a people’s ancient heritage?

Why is the ICJ making its opinion known now?
The timing of this opinion is as impeccable as ever. It predates the current Israel-Hamas conflict but was delivered amidst heightened tensions. It’s almost as if the ICJ wanted to pour gasoline on a fire. Funny how that works. Are you deliberately trying to escalate the situation?

The UN General Assembly’s request to the ICJ is just another chapter in its long history of anti-Israel bias. Israel gets condemned by UN bodies more often than a bad restaurant on Yelp. This consistent targeting undermines the credibility of the UN and, by extension, the ICJ. But who needs credibility when you have politics? Do you enjoy turning severe legal matters into a circus?

The ICJ’s ruling is just the latest example of the Western world’s favorite pastime: abandoning Israel when it’s most convenient. During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Western nations took their sweet time sending support while Israel faced coordinated attacks. It was only after significant casualties that aid finally showed up. Thanks a lot. Is it acceptable to delay aid until the damage is done? Then, in 2015, the West couldn’t sign the Iran Nuclear Deal fast enough, ignoring Israel’s legitimate security concerns. Prioritizing appeasement over real threats to Israel’s existence—what could go wrong? Are you comfortable with empowering regimes that openly call for Israel’s destruction?

The crimes of Mohammed Deif

Anyone relying on the mainstream-media coverage of the attempted assassination would get a grossly one-sided view of what happened. It was widely reported that Israel killed at least 90 people in what was the designated humanitarian zone of al-Mawasi, near Khan Younis. The implication here is that the vast majority of those killed in the strike were civilians. This impression would have been reinforced by pictures on television, since camera crews in Gaza are not allowed to film Hamas casualties – something that Western media outlets do not often disclose.

The Western media also typically fail to ask the most blindingly obvious questions, such as why were senior Hamas leaders hiding among civilians? And doesn’t that mean they share at least some, if not all, of the responsibility for any civilian deaths? It seems like a textbook example of Hamas using the Gazan people as human shields.

In any case, the Israeli version of events is completely different. Israel says that Hamas’s leaders were surrounded by their associates in a fenced-off area within the villa. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) had been watching the compound for weeks, waiting for Deif to turn up. When Israel did eventually launch its strikes, a large number of those killed were, in the Israeli account, Hamas terrorists.

So why has Mohammed Deif become so significant? Why has Israel made so many attempts to assassinate him? From the 1990s onwards, he was responsible for numerous lethal attacks on Israelis, including a wave of suicide bombings. He also played a key role in transforming Hamas from a small-scale terrorist outfit to a paramilitary force with land, sea and air capabilities. That made him one of the main architects of the 7 October pogrom in southern Israel, during which about 1,200 people, mostly Jews, were slaughtered.

Even those who doubt Israel’s account of its assassination attempt cannot question Deif’s murderous intent towards Jews. On 7 October, after declaring the start of ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Deluge’, Deif quoted the Koran in relation to what he called the ‘criminal enemy’ – in other words, Jews. ‘Kill them wherever you may find them’, he said.

Even when talking about Israelis living in pre-1967 Israel (that is, excluding the West Bank), he called on the Palestinian population to ‘torch the earth under the feet of the plundering occupiers – kill, burn, destroy and shut down roads’.

Hamas leaders have restated this aim of murdering Jews time and again. Last month, Hamas’s Lebanon representative, Ahmad Abd Al-Hadi, said in a TV interview that, ‘If we could go back in time, we would carry out the 7 October attacks again’. Indeed, even in anti-Israel protests in London and elsewhere across the West there are some Hamas supporters who openly celebrate the atrocities of 7 October. (Deif himself was once glowingly profiled by the British leftists of Novara Media in 2014.)

Deif’s role in bringing misery to the Palestinians should also not be underestimated. Israeli retribution for the 7 October slaughter was inevitable. However, Hamas leaders felt relatively safe as they have been able to shelter in the extensive underground tunnel network developed by Deif. Ordinary Gazans are forbidden from entering these shelters. This effectively turned the civilian population into human shields on a massive scale. Ultimately, the war in Gaza could have ended long ago if Hamas leaders surrendered and released their Israeli hostages. Neither Israel nor the people of Gaza wanted this terrible conflict.

Israel’s assassination attempt was fully justified. Deif played a key part in waging a murderous war against the Jewish people, as well as in causing Palestinians untold suffering. Israel may often be smeared as a ‘genocidal’ state, but Hamas and its Islamist allies are the true force for genocide here.

Blinken asserts hostage-ceasefire deal is close, reasserts support for two state solution

Ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas are "inside the 10 yard line and driving toward the goal line," according to Secretary of State Antony Blinken who spoke Friday at the Aspen Security Institute with NPR's Mary Louise Kelly.

"We often know the last 10 yards are often the hardest," he added, noting the question now is finishing negotiating some critical details.

Blinken said the United States continues to believe that the quickest way to bring the war to an end and to bring relief to the people of Gaza who so desperately need it is through an agreement on a ceasefire and hostages.

He dodged Kelly's direct question about reports of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately sabotaging the ceasefire negotiations and carefully answered how he is dealing with the prime minister.

"I'm not focused on personalities, I'm focused on policies," Blinken said, which led to some laughter from the audience. "And we want to make sure as we go forward with anyone, whether it's our Israeli allies or anyone else, that we reach agreements on the concrete steps to be taken to move whatever it is we're trying to move forward."

Blinken said what he's hearing across Israeli society is a strong desire to "get this done" and to get a ceasefire and the hostages home.

A need for two states
When asked if the future for a two state solution is dead, Blinken replied, "not only is not that, it can't be."

Though he said there are fundamental realities that can't be escaped, that between Gaza and the West bank, there are over five million Palestinians and there are about seven million Israeli Jews.

"Neither is going anywhere," he said. "Palestinians are not going anywhere. The Jews are not going anywhere."

There has to be an accommodation that brings lasting peace and lasting security to Israelis who so desperately want it and need it, and fulfills the right to self determination of the Palestinians, Blinken said.

On Iran he said, "where we are now is not a good place," as they're likely weeks away from developing having the breakout capacity of producing fissile material for a nuclear weapon, though Iran has not developed a nuclear weapon itself.

We need to see if Iran is serious about actually pulling back, he said, adding the Biden administration has "been maximizing pressure on Iran across the board."

In this week's parasha we see the story of Balaam, tasked by Balak the king of Moab to curse the Israelites.

This Torah portion is highly unusual because the entire story - the danger to the Jews, the drama of Balak and Balaam trying to send the curse, God's turning the curse into blessings - happens with the Children of Israel unaware of what is happening.

They were saved but didn't know it.

How many times does this happen? How many plots against us are foiled?

One of the themes we hear from the "progressive" crowd is that the major physical danger to Jews in America comes from the Right. Most of the major attacks against Jews indeed have come from the far Right.

But there have been a lot of planned attacks by Muslim extremists in America that were foiled by the FBI. I once listed a number of them:

In 2018, Damon Joseph, an Islamist who called himself "Abdullah Ali Yusuf,"was caught plotting to shoot Jews at at least one Toledo synagogue. He wanted to "kill as many people as possible."

Also in 2018, a Muslim was arrested for attempting to run over two Jews outside a Los Angeles synagogue, while shouting antisemitic slurs

In 2016, a Muslim convert was arrested and later convicted after plotting to blow up a synagogue in Aventura, Florida.

In 2011, two Muslim men were arrested for trying to blow up two Manhattan synagogues. One said he hated Jews and was a supporter of Palestinians.

In 2009, four Muslim men were arrested, and ultimately convicted, of a plot to blow up four New York synagogues.

In 2005, a group of Islamists were caught trying to bomb Los Angeles synagogues along with military targets.

Since then, in 2023 a New Jersey, man named Omar Alkattoul was sentenced to 15 months in prison for threatening to attack a synagogue and Jewish people.

Other plots have been foiled as well with non-Muslims. Many do not get much news coverage. But we should be just as appreciative for surviving the plots that get stopped before they start as we are for the ones that unfortunately cause damage, injury or deaths.

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!

For decades, while much of the international community asserts that Israel is occupying Palestinian territory, Israel has regarded the territory as disputed, not occupied, whose status is to be determined through negotiations.

The ICJ ruling today that claims that Israel's occupation is illegal must first prove that the territory is occupied to begin with. And a careful look at its language shows that they are well aware that they are fudging the facts.

They give a brief history of the conflict and the borders:

The territorial boundaries of Mandatory Palestine were laid down by various instruments, in particular on the eastern border, by a British memorandum of 16 September 1922 and the Anglo-Transjordanian Treaty of 20 February 1928.

....By resolution 62 (1948) of 16 November 1948, the Security Council decided that “an armistice shall be established in all sectors of Palestine” and called upon the parties directly involved in the conflict to seek agreement to this end. In conformity with this decision, general armistice agreements were concluded in 1949 in Rhodes between Israel and its neighbouring States through mediation by the United Nations, fixing the armistice demarcation lines between Israeli and Arab forces.

...In 1964, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was created to represent the Palestinian people.

....In 1967, an armed conflict (also known as the “Six-Day War”) broke out between Israel and neighbouring countries Egypt, Syria and Jordan. By the time hostilities had ceased, Israeli forces occupied all the territories of Palestine under British Mandate beyond the Green Line (see paragraph 54 above).

...From 1967 onwards, Israel started to establish or support settlements in the territories it occupied ...

...On 15 November 1988, referring to resolution 181 (II) “which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State”, the PLO “proclaim[ed] the establishment of the State of Palestine”

Following an increase in acts of violence from the West Bank, in the early 2000s Israel began building a “continuous fence” (hereinafter the “wall”) largely in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. ... Notwithstanding the Court’s opinion in 2004, finding “[t]he construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime [to be] contrary to international law” (Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004 (I), p. 201, para. 163), the construction of the wall continued, as well as the expansion of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Magically, the territory transformed from "the territories of Palestine under the British Mandate" - to which Israel has a claim, since the 1949 armistice lines were never meant to be permanent borders - into "Occupied Palestinian Territory."

Saying that territory changed hands is a legal matter. One should be able to define when, exactly, the territories went from being British to becoming "Palestinian." Was it 1947? 1949? 1967? 1988? 1993? The ICJ mysteriously cannot say.

Because it has never happened.

It also does not mention the legal status of the territories between 1948 and 1967, vaguely referring to "Arab forces" as if they are Palestinian.

Interestingly, the Jordanian renunciation of any claims to the West Bank in 1988 are also not mentioned by the ICJ - because that would go against its narrative that Israel has been occupying "Palestinian territory" since 1967.

By conflating British Mandate Palestine with "Palestinian territory," the ICJ is leaving the door open to saying that Israel occupies Palestinian territory even within the Green Line.

Their reference to the PLO accepting Resolution 181 also implies that the Palestinians may have claims to the territories they rejected in 1947.

Every fact is slanted towards giving Palestinians legal rights that the court cannot say when they took effect or exactly what those territories are, publishing contradictory indications that have only one thing in common: denying a sovereign state its rights to territory it has had legal claim to since 1922 while giving maximal rights to an entity that was never a state in its history.

All this legal language does not mean this ruling has anything to do with the law.

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!

Late Wednesday, the Knesset voted overwhelmingly to reject the establishment of a Palestinian state, passing a resolution against the establishment of a Palestinian state on territory Israel controls.

“The Knesset of Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state west of Jordan. The establishment of a Palestinian state in the heart of the Land of Israel will pose an existential danger to the State of Israel and its citizens, perpetuate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and destabilize the region,” the resolution stated.

“It will only be a matter of a short time until Hamas takes over the Palestinian state and turns it into a radical Islamic terror base, working in coordination with the Iranian-led axis to eliminate the State of Israel,” it continued. “Promoting the idea of a Palestinian state at this time will be a reward for terrorism and will only encourage Hamas and its supporters to see this as a victory, thanks to the massacre of October 7, 2023, and a prelude to the takeover of jihadist Islam in the Middle East.”

The vote was 68-9.

The EU issued a statement deploring the vote.

The European Union deplores the resolution passed by the Knesset on 18 July opposing the establishment of a Palestinian state, even if part of a negotiated settlement with Israel.

There is a strong consensus in the international community that the only sustainable solution that will bring peace and security to the Middle East is the two-state solution.

The parliament of a democratic country voted to say that the establishment of a Palestinian state would pose a threat to their very existence. The EU deplored what the majority of Israelis believe.

This isn't a condemnation of Israel. It is a condemnation of the Israeli people stating their honest opinion.

The EU deplores Israeli democracy - when Israelis disagree with them.

How is this remotely acceptable?

The EU doesn't have to live with Hamas next door. It doesn't have to face the prospect of a new state being carved out of its existing territory that is literally dedicated to their destruction. It doesn't have to worry about nearly half of the people in EU borders embracing terrorism.

The Knesset language explains its reasons for the vote. Of course Hamas would take over the PA - every poll says so. Of course terrorists would regard a Palestinian state as a victory for terror - as well as a stage to embark on further attacks on Israel. It is clear that a Palestinian state would, in short order, become an Iranian outpost like southern Lebanon.

The EU cannot find anything factually wrong with the statement. Instead, it asserts that the "strong consensus in the international community" is more important than the facts. And the "experts," who are rarely correct, are more important than the people who would have to live next to a terror state funded and armed by Iran, people who have been indoctrinated to seek martyrdom for the higher cause of murdering Jews.

If the statement would have said that the EU disagrees with the Israeli position, that would be fine.People an disagree as to the best path forward. But the EU is saying that if Israel doesn't accept the EU position, if the people of Israel do not accept their unfounded premise that concessions to the Palestinians would bring peace, then Israel itself is the problem.

That goes way beyond disagreement. That is a rejection of a democratic state and its institutions.

The EU statement is based on nothing more substantive than wishful thinking and it seeks to impose on millions of Jews a decision that would imperil their lives.

It is not the first time Europe tried to endanger millions of Jewish lives against their will.

If anything is deplorable, it is this EU statement.

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!

Just another @WashingtonPost lie about Gaza fatalities

The Washington Post headline says:

Over the last week, Israel has unleashed a wave of airstrikes across the besieged Strip.... that Palestinians and humanitarian workers likened in intensity and lethality to those in the early weeks of the nine-month war.

Really? Because even Hamas disagrees.

The Hamas-run health ministry numbers claim that during the first four weeks of the war there were 9,485 killed - an average of 2,371 per week.

That is five times the number claimed by that same ministry over the past seven days: 466.

Since the humanitarian pause in November, the number of weekly deaths in Gaza has gone steadily down, even according to the Hamas authorities. Here's a chart.

The bump in the past week was entirely from Israel's airstrike aimed at the head of the Qassam Brigades, Mohammed Deif, nearly the most valuable military target in Gaza that more than justifies the apparently high death toll, according to the principle of proportionality under the laws of armed conflict as applied to every other war since the Fourth Geneva Convention was written.

But even with that airstrike, the number of fatalities this past week was less than every week of the war from October to April (excluding the humanitarian pause in November.)

The Palestinians and health workers are proven to be liars. The Washington Post embraces the lie so much that they place it in their headline.

Quoting the health workers and Palestinians saying the lie does not exonerate the newspaper. It should fact check them, and anyone who has been following the war - including the reporter Miriam Berger -would immediately know that it is a lie.

This is not an oversight. It is not a mistake. It is a consciously false attack on Israel by the Washington Post.

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!

As the world ramps up for the Paris Olympics , it makes sense to revisit the 1972 Olympics in Munich.

There have been hundreds of accounts written about 1972 Munich Olympics massacre of 11 Israeli athletes. Nearly all of them mention the kidnappers' demands to release prisoners from Israeli and German prisons, and assume that this was the reason for the terror attack.

But a description of the event by Palestinian Youth radio "Al Shabab" last year added details that Western media have not.

It says,

In early 1972, the Palestinian Supreme Council for Youth Welfare submitted a request to the International Olympic Committee to approve the participation of a Palestinian delegation in the Munich Games, but the request was rejected. At that time, Salah Khalaf, the commander of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s special security services, and Muhammad Odeh, a member of the Palestinian National Council, were thinking of carrying out a resounding operation in response to the assassinations carried out by the Israeli occupation army.

Khalaf and Awda were thinking that the operation would be a start against Mossad and its arms, but after the assassination of the Palestinian short story writer and novelist Ghassan Kanafani, who was martyred in July of the same year, the door was opened to carrying out a similar revenge operation.

They wrote the first steps and set the target, such as Israeli embassies and consulates, but this proposal was rejected; to avoid getting into problems with the countries hosting the missions, until the biggest event came, which was the Munich Olympics, to respond in kind, first to the Israeli occupation’s assassination of Palestinian figures, and second to the Olympic Committee that refused the participation of the Palestinian team.

According to this, the release of the prisoners was a secondary consideration. The main focus of the attack was to hurt Israel and Germany, Israel for assassinating terror leaders and Germany for the IOC not admitting Palestinian athletes.

As with everything the Palestinians do, the main motivation was to achieve honor and the erase shame, far more than any pragmatic considerations like prisoner releases.

This shows the Palestinian psyche. Everything they do is about honor, not justice. They don't care about human rights or human lives - but they will hijack human rights and and teach their children to value martyrdom of their own people to achieve the honor they believe they deserve.

A vicious, murderous, brutal attack was done primarily for the purpose of honor. It was true in 1972 and it was true on October 7. Palestinians say it themselves explicitly.

The West ignores this at its peril.

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!

07/18 Links Pt2: Uncover the Blood in Buenos Aires; ICJ Head Condemned Israel 210 Times as Lebanon’s UN Rep, Sided With Iran, Syria; Adidas Dumps 1972 Olympic Shoe Relaunch

From Ian:

Israel-Bashing on the Agenda for National Teachers Union

A series of anti-Israel resolutions proposed by members of the second biggest teachers union in America has other members in revolt, saying they target Jews and “libel the Jewish state.”

The resolutions before the American Federation of Teachers include calls to “halt U.S. military aid to Israel” and to “stop enabling genocide,” and include praise of pro-Palestinian protesters who faced “state-sanctioned violence.”

They accuse the Jewish state of “apartheid” and “genocide,” and criticize Israel for “scholasticide,” a term referencing the destruction of schools in Gaza. One resolution calls for the AFT to divest from the Jewish state by pulling member pensions out of companies with even tangential connections to Israel—such as Boeing and Palantir. Of the eight proposed resolutions that mention Israel, only one advocates for a “two-state solution” and the “safe return of Hamas’s hostages.”

The union, which represents 1.7 million members, will vote on the resolutions at its annual convention, which begins in Houston on July 22.

Now, a group of members is circulating an anonymous letter, hoping to convince union leaders to drop the inflammatory resolutions and “avoid the public stain of antisemitism.”

Anti-Israel resolutions from members of a teachers union are mostly symbolic and, if approved, won’t have any impact on Israel’s policy in Gaza or the West Bank. But what’s alarming is the extent to which they reflect the mindset of some teachers, said Tova Plaut, an AFT member and Jewish educator in New York City.

Plaut fears the resolutions would have a spillover effect, encouraging teachers to portray “Israel as a colonizing country that is committing genocide against the Palestinian people.” And she added the resolutions send a signal: “It’s telling their members this is what we want you to teach about.”

As Robert Pondiscio reported for The Free Press in June, this is already a problem in U.S. public schools. According to an Anti-Defamation League complaint, teachers in Fort Lee High School in New Jersey tell students that the terrorist group Hamas is a peaceful “resistance movement,” while teachers in Berkeley, California, “indoctrinat[e] students with antisemitic tropes.”

Adidas Dumps 1972 Olympic Shoe Relaunch Featuring Palestinian Model Bella Hadid After Campaign Branded ‘Antisemitic’

Adidas apologized for placing a Palestinian-American model, Bella Hadid, who has a long history of antisemitic comments, as the face of its campaign to relaunch a shoe first introduced ahead of the 1972 Olympics — during which 11 Israeli athletes were murdered by Palestinian terrorists.

“We are conscious that connections have been made to tragic historical events — though these are completely unintentional — and we apologize for any upset or distress caused,” a representative for the German shoe company told the Washington Times on Thursday.

They also announced that they will be revising the remainder of the campaign. “We believe in sport as a unifying force around the world and will continue our efforts to champion diversity and equality in everything we do,” they added.

The shoe campaign, released earlier this week, was met with outrage by members of the Jewish community and even caught the eyes of Israel’s foreign ministry.

“She and her father frequently promote blood libels and antisemitic conspiracies against Jews,” the official account for the State of Israel, run by Israel’s foreign ministry, wrote about Ms. Hadid on X.

Adidas’s apology comes after multiple Jewish advocacy groups called for the German sneaker company to drop the campaign.

Australia has a problem with Islamic sectarianism

Sectarianism is playing a growing role in Western elections. In the UK, several ‘pro-Gaza’ independents were elected in former Labour seats in this month’s General Election. All of them were supported by an organisation called The Muslim Vote (TMV), and all stood as essentially single-issue candidates. Many others supported by TMV, such as Akhmed Yakoob in Birmingham Ladywood, reeled in huge support and came close to unseating prominent Labour MPs. These races were tainted by intimidation and harassment-heavy campaigning, largely directed at Labour candidates accused of being insufficiently critical of Israel.

Throughout the campaign, TMV made no attempt to appeal to non-Muslim voters. ‘This election signals a shift – Muslim issues at the forefront’, it said on its website during the campaign. ‘We will no longer tolerate being taken for granted. We are a powerful, united force of four million acting in unison.’ This unashamedly sectarian message was also reinforced after the election. In its boastful ‘analysis’, TMV said: ‘We take one step towards the almighty, and then his help comes raining down.’

It wasn’t all good news for TMV, however. It went on to say, with palpable disappointment, that ‘many in our community still decided to vote Labour… despite the shadow of Gaza hanging over us’. The implication of this statement is hard to ignore. Muslims, apparently unique among the voting public, shouldn’t make up their own minds on political issues and vote accordingly. Instead, TMV seems to be suggesting that elections should be a competition between religions – a fight to see which faith can mobilise adherents to vote for its chosen candidate. How could anyone with the faintest understanding of history think this is desirable?

The dark shadow of religious identity politics appears to be spreading across the West. In Australia, a new campaign group has emerged, also called The Muslim Vote, which mirrors its British counterpart almost exactly. The websites of the UK and Australia chapters are essentially identical.

TMV Australia has already begun selecting candidates for next year’s federal election. These are expected to challenge at least six Labor Party seats in Sydney and Melbourne, electorates with large Muslim populations. Frontbenchers Tony Burke and Jason Clare are considered at risk, while many in the government hold dim hopes for Peter Khalil’s seat in Melbourne’s inner-north.

Like its UK counterpart, TMV Australia’s pitch is solely directed at Muslim voters. The threat to politicians who fail to march to the beat of its anti-Israel drum is also echoed:

‘We will no longer accept being taken for granted. Australian Muslims are a powerful, united force of nearly one million acting in unison. The Muslim Vote alone is capable of forcing the current government into a minority government.’

If the UK General Election is anything to go by, this sectarianism could be a recipe for stoking hatred and division in Australia’s next elections.

Unsurprisingly, TMV Australia has thrown its support behind rookie senator Fatima Payman, a 29-year-old Muslim senator who quit the Labor Party a few weeks ago. Earlier this month, she was indefinitely suspended by Labor for repeatedly defying the party line, by accusing Israel of genocide, voting for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and voting to recognise a Palestinian state. She even chanted ‘From the river to the sea’ in a speech in the senate.

Man At Knesset Cafeteria Refuses To Self-Serve, Claims Forced Starvation (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.
Check out their Facebook page.

Jerusalem, July 21 - A patron at the in-house diner within the Israel's national legislative compound accused the staff and other customers of depriving him of food because they will not bring the food to him at his set, even as no wait staff exists and customers take their own trays of food to tables.

The man, wearing a visitor's tag, attracted the attention of journalists, and held forth on the barbarity of the surrounding Israelis' refusal to deliver his much-needed nourishment directly to him.

"This is par for the course, what with the ethnic cleansing and mass-starvation in Gaza," he declared, referring to deprivation in a war zone where the UN and affiliated groups have failed to unload or deliver hundreds of trucks per day that Israel allows in, and have failed to prevent Hamas and other "armed groups" from hijacking the aid and selling it to those in need.

Eyewitnesses say the man entered the cafeteria at about 11:30 this morning and ordered a sandwich and a drink, but then left them on a tray at the cashier and sat down at a table seven meters away. Ten minutes elapsed before the middle-aged-looking man began yelling and hurling accusations of forced starvation.

"This is a humanitarian catastrophe!" he asserted. "The International Criminal Court must investigate!"

Human rights organizations were quick to weigh in. "The depravity of Israel's forced starvation methods are, sadly, already well established," remarked Ken Roth, the former director of Human Rights Watch. "The impunity this rogue regime enjoys cannot continue. International powers must step in to put a stop to the cruelty."

Amnesty International went even further. "Genocide. That's the only appropriate term," stated organization president Agnes Callamard. "We have Gaza Ministry of Health figures that indicate the starvation of that poor man killed at least eighty Palestinian civilians, most of them women and children. This horrific, diabolical carnage cannot continue."

Médecins Sans Frontières added, "The intentional targeting of noncombatants is a war crime."

Knesset staff and bystanders agreed with the man's invocation of Gaza. "It really is the same," commented a fellow visitor. "Except for the human shields, booby traps, missiles launched from humanitarian safe zones, genocidal rhetoric, tunnels, terrorists in civilian clothing, Iranian funding, and a bunch of other characteristics, it might be hard to tell the situations apart."

The US State Department reacted with an offer to send a floating pier to deliver the man's food.

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!

07/18 Links Pt1: Melanie Phillips: A fighting chance for the West; Iran’s Deadly Election Meddling; The New Republican Party Is Sticking with Israel; Netanyahu visits Rafah

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: A fighting chance for the West

This week, there has been a palpable feeling of tectonic plates on the move. Suddenly, the cultural elites who regard themselves as masters of the universe have paused disconcerted as they disbelievingly feel the ground cracking beneath their feet.

The impact of the failed assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, his instant reaction and the iconic picture of that reaction, cannot be exaggerated. Those few seconds have changed American politics and maybe the world.

It was obviously beyond astounding that a rifle shot failed by a few centimeters to kill Trump.

Many religious folk regard this as a miracle. They believe that, after eight years of attempts to destroy Trump politically through constitutionally improper plots, legal actions and non-stop demonization—from all of which, astonishingly, he emerged even stronger—this close brush with death demonstrates he has divine protection to fulfil the role on earth for which he has been marked out.

Among those who regard all that as nonsense, many have nevertheless been deeply impressed by the presence of mind and strength of character Trump displayed by struggling to his feet, defiantly raising his fist and mouthing “Fight!” with blood streaming down his face.

We still don’t know what motivated the young shooter, who appears to have been a troubled and apolitical misfit.

However, we have all seen the reaction from the leftist and liberal classes. While no one side has a monopoly on demonizing rhetoric, the malice of the left was breathtaking. Many bemoaned the fact that the shooter didn’t succeed in killing Trump.

Even more telling was the stunning cognitive dissonance of the liberal media. CNN said Trump’s speech had been “interrupted by the Secret Service” and that he “falls at rally.” The Washington Post said Trump had been “escorted off the stage after loud noises,” while Sky News suggested he was partly to blame for his own attempted murder just by being Trump.

These media outlets simply couldn’t process the fact that Trump had become a heroic victim.

The media was doing what the left always does: Misrepresenting reality to deny any facts that will destroy its narrative about the world. In that narrative, “right-wing” populists like Trump are responsible for everything bad in the world. They therefore can never do anything good and can never be a victim. They are a force for evil and so deserve all they get.

Seth Mandel: Iran’s Deadly Election Meddling

Of course, part of the problem here is that, for the reasons listed above, Republicans will have to be the ones to make the conversation about Iran. They cannot count on relentless media focus and investigatory zeal from the political press or the White House. In 2016 and after, it was almost impossible not to be talking about Russia. It was a riptide; you stepped into the political discourse and got pulled out into the middle of the ocean. That simply won’t happen on its own with Iran.

But it is crazy that the constant stream of Iranian meddling and murder has to be forced onto the agenda. The breadth of the Iran threat, however, also offers a path to keeping it from falling by the wayside. That’s because Iranian meddling has been so successful that China and its allies have followed its lead and refocused some of their propaganda efforts away from pro-Beijing messaging and toward anti-Israel/anti-Jewish messaging. The Iranian model has now been adopted by America’s enemies all over the world.

As I wrote in May, a bright red line was crossed when Democratic congresswoman Rashida Tlaib was a featured speaker at a massively anti-American conference connected to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a designated foreign terrorist organization. “We have to bring down this empire with one million cuts,” said one speaker, referring to the U.S. And who was that speaker? As Eli Lake pointed out, it was Manolo De Los Santos, director of the People’s Forum, a prominent Chinese propaganda outfit owned by the American-born Neville Roy Singham. The Marxist Singham made a tech fortune and became a major funder of CCP propaganda. The People’s Forum also financially supported the conference and hosted the conference’s website. The People’s Forum has been involved in the pro-Hamas protest movement from the beginning.

Iran has been behind two multi-casualty attacks on Americans since October. Its propaganda has penetrated into grade-school lesson plans. Its activist network has paralyzed universities and brought lawlessness to the streets of major U.S. cities. It may have been caught planning out the murder of a presidential candidate. And it has China’s massive soft-power reserves behind it.

And we should not stop talking about it.

The New Republican Party Is Sticking with Israel

Donald Trump’s selection of J.D. Vance as his vice-presidential nominee says much about the direction of the Republican party over the next few years. It is thus reassuring that Vance, whatever his other faults or merits, has been unreserved in his support for Israel, although he has taken pains to place this position in the context of what he presents as a Trumpist or “America-first” foreign policy. In Vance’s view the primary feature of this approach would be to abandon Ukraine and seek reconciliation with Russia—a close ally of Iran and supporter of Hamas.

Together with the recitation of a prayer for the release of Israeli hostages at the Republican National Convention, Vance’s positions are evidence of what David Weigel recently termed the “new anti-Israel right’s failure to launch.”

To the extent there’s been a debate over Israel within the right, it overlaps significantly with a separate internal fight over whether to purge fringe activists who have expressed anti-Semitic or white nationalist views. A study of voter opinion by the political scientist Michael Tesler found opposition to Israel aid within the GOP was heavily concentrated among voters who also view Jewish people unfavorably.

But the movement has gotten no serious traction inside the GOP. One reason: good, old-fashioned negative polarization. The Israel question divides Democrats, not Republicans. . . . The anti-war movement is overwhelmingly organized by left-wing activists whom Republicans already dislike, especially on campus. . . . That disgust has strengthened the already-robust Republican support for Israel, which has long united both religious conservatives and national-security hawks.

“A few years ago, any candidate—Republican or Democrat—could get on stage and say, ‘I stand with Israel’, and it was an automatic applause line,” said Sam Markstein, the Republican Jewish Coalition’s national political director. “These days, if you did that as a Democrat, you’d be booed.” Markstein predicted that his party wouldn’t budge: “Republicans know Israel must be given the time, space, and support it needs to win this war of good versus evil—Democrats, unfortunately, have totally lost the plot.”

It’s notable, as an aside, how much Weigel absorbs the distorted language and thinking of so much reporting on Israel: the war begun by Hamas is “Israel’s war”; the passage above refers to those calling for Israel’s annihilation as the “anti-war movement”; and the continuation of the conflict depends largely on whether the U.S. pressures Israel to “end” the war, presumably something distinct from winning it.

In the State Department announcement I previously mentioned, there is something possibly even more alarming than the insult to Israel.

After giving its weak legal basis for banning Elor Azaria, it says:

The steps to impose visa restrictions on an additional group of individuals in the West Bank are being taken under the visa restriction policy Secretary Blinken announced in December 2023, pursuant to Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The Blinken announcement on December 5 was open to a great deal of interpretive latitude:

Today, the State Department is implementing a new visa restriction policy targeting individuals believed to have been involved in undermining peace, security, or stability in the West Bank, including through committing acts of violence or taking other actions that unduly restrict civilians’ access to essential services and basic necessities. Immediate family members of such persons also may be subject to these restrictions.

According to Israel haters, the very existence of Jews on their ancestral homelands of Judea and Samaria is inherently restrictive to Palestinian lives - they take up space, they drink water, they have the right to freely travel through Area A.

This announcement was not only for the tiny number of Jews who pro-actively attack Palestinians, but all Jews in what the world pretends are "Palestinian lands". There is nothing in this language that limits the application of this rule to literally any Jew in the territories or Jerusalem - and arguably, even Jews inside the Green Line can be accused by a malicious administration of limiting the rights of Arabs to do whatever they want whenever and wherever they want as long as they claim they are "essential services and basic necessities."

To some Palestinians, the right to wantonly kill Jews is considered a basic necessity.

A look at Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.does not instill any confidence that this rule would be applied judiciously:

An alien whose entry or proposed activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is inadmissible.

This is so broad, it can give any Arab state the ability to veto any Jew from entering the United States by claiming that such entry would hurt US relations with that state.

There is an exception in clause (ii) for officials, and another exception in clause (iii) that is no exception at all:

An alien, not described in clause (ii), shall not be excludable or subject to restrictions or conditions on entry into the United States under clause (i) because of the alien's past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations, if such beliefs, statements, or associations would be lawful within the United States, unless the Secretary of State personally determines that the alien's admission would compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest.

A Secretary of State who doesn't like some or all Jews could easily decide to exclude them from entering the United States as long as they can claim that it would hurt US foreign policy. And anything could hurt US foreign policy if a foreign nation decides it would.

There are no safeguards whatsoever on applying these broad rules.

When US policy is absolutely certain that Jews living in Judea are the major obstacle to peace, this gives them the legal right to ban them, whether they do anything or not.

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

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The US State Department on Wednesday announced that it was imposing visa restrictions on former IDF sergeant Elor Azaria for his role in the 2016 killing of an injured terrorist in Hebron, which they called "a gross violation of human rights.”

The terrorist, Abdel Fattah al-Sharif, stabbed and injured an IDF soldier Video shows that as the terrorist was laying on the ground, Azaria, who is a medic, shot him in the head even though there was no apparent further danger from the attacker.

Some people defend Azaria, accepting his contention that he was afraid that the terrorist had a suicide belt and that he could reach for a knife. None of those sound convincing to me: from all evidence both on video and from the trial afterwards, it looks like Azaria decided to kill the terrorist after he posed no more threat.

Even assuming Azaria's guilt, the State Department announcement is a gross insult to Israel.

The press release says, "Promoting accountability and justice for any crimes, violations, and abuses committed against Palestinians and Israelis is essential to a stable, just, and enduring calm in the West Bank and the region. We once again call on the government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority to hold accountable anyone responsible for violence in the West Bank and reiterate that we will not hesitate to take our own actions to promote accountability."

Azaria was held accountable for his actions. He was tried, found guilty of manslaughter, sent to prison, and had his rank demoted to private.

The press release implies that Israel's actions to punish Azaria are not adequate and the US needs to instruct Israel on what accountability means.

This is condescending and insulting.

Moreover, it looks like the State Department overstepped its own rules. The announcement says,

This public designation is made under Section 7031(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2024 (Div. F, P.L. 118-47). Azaria, as a former IDF sergeant, qualifies as a foreign government official under Section 7031(c).

A military sergeant is considered a government official? That is rarely the case, if ever. The term "official of foreign governments" typically refers to higher-ranking individuals who have significant decision-making authority or represent their government in an official capacity. This usually mean ministers, heads of state, ambassadors, and other senior government officials.

In the military, it would refer to higher ranking officers with significant responsibility, not a non-commissioned officer like a sergeant.

Before yesterday, no one would ever think a sergeant qualifies as a "foreign government official" under Section 7031(c).

This sure looks like the State Department wass shoe-horning its own rules into a situation that they were never meant to apply to, in its desire to teach Israel a lesson of "accountability." Which makes this even worse.

And it is hard to escape the conclusion that it is no coincidence that this announcement was made on the same day that Bloomberg reported:

President Joe Biden’s latest gambit to stabilize his reelection bid has been a veer to the left, looking to bolster progressive support by floating ambitious new proposals to erase medical debt, cap rent increases and impose sweeping new restraints on the Supreme Court.

It is a ham-handed attempt to show that the US is tough on Israel and even-handed in the conflict in an election year.

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!